W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 00:14:16 +0100
Message-ID: <4BB67A48.4010409@webr3.org>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
CC: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Danny Ayers wrote:
> On 3 April 2010 00:53, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Any guidance on using predicates in linked data / rdf which do not come
>> from rdfs/owl. Specifically I'm considering the range of:
>>  http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/*
> 
> Can't find a URL that resolves there

snap; but that's what rel="edit" and so forth resolves to.

see example:
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/selfDescribingDocuments.html#ATOMSection

and quote:
"If the relation-type is a relative URI, its base URI MUST be
   considered to be "http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/"
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-03.txt

obviously all the links defined by:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
(from the atom rfc)

>> such as edit, self, related etc - with additional consideration to the
>> thought that these will end up in rdf via RDFa/grddl etc v soon if not
>> already.
>>
>> Any guidance?
> 
> By using something as a predicate you are making statements about it. But...
> 
> If you can find IANA terms like this, please use them - though beware
> the page isn't the concept. You might have to map them over to your
> own namespace, PURL URIs preferred.

Would it make sense to knock up an ontology for all the standard
link-relations and sameAs them through to the iana uri's?

Best, Nathan
Received on Friday, 2 April 2010 23:14:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:26 UTC