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

Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 03:56:09 +0200
Message-ID: <v2q1f2ed5cd1004021856m1ca89d4amac7c1666b75f2206@mail.gmail.com>
To: Story Henry <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
About time to do another rev of that thing? The social xg is having
another spin, might be a good time to throw it there.

I suspect most folks (yourself there mostly Henry) think this time
around it should be done minimally..?

On 3 April 2010 01:29, Story Henry <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
> On 2 Apr 2010, at 23:53, Nathan 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/*
>
> Ah is that something you found in the AtomOWL spec?
>
> Perhaps we should just give them other names, until the IETF places RDF representations
> at those locations, which I imagine could take forever.
>
> Henry
>
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nathan
>>
>
>
>



-- 
http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Saturday, 3 April 2010 01:56:43 UTC

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