Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?

Nathan wrote:
> 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
>
>
>   
Don't use "sameAs", this is where owl:equivalentClass and 
owl:equivalentProperty come in handy.


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen       
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen 

Received on Saturday, 3 April 2010 00:52:42 UTC