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

Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?

From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 22:46:29 +0200
Message-ID: <h2gcf8107641004031346j5d6cd9efua5acc47f24e4297c@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Michael,

that's great! If [2] were to be updated with that [1] (i.e. officially
containing RDFa about these URI:s), and would be 303:d to from [3]
(along with anything under that URL), this would be all we need. I
know it hasn't happened for years, but sometimes a nudge at just the
right time may be all it takes..

If not, would you consider updating your interim solution to describe
URI:s under [1]? I mean, since [2] currently uses the real IANA URI:s
(i.e. the "unsanctioned" ones) and those, as Danny cautioned, could
end up e.g. being resolved to documents, breaking semantics (as well
as not being discoverable).

I did a manual (well, vim-macro:ed) conversion of [3] into RDF/XML,
but had to leave to eat easter eggs at my sister's and entertain her
kids. :) It's located at [4] now, and quite similar to the data in
[1]. Note that I do consider [1] much more interesting.

(That said, if anyone would like me to make e.g. an XSLT for turning
[4] into something like [1], just say the word.)

Best regards and happy easter!
Niklas

[1]: <http://purl.org/NET/atom-link-rel>
[2]: <http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml>
[3]: <http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/>
[4]: <http://bitbucket.org/niklasl/tripleheap/src/tip/iana-link-relations.rdf>


On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Michael Hausenblas
<michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote:
>
> Nathan, Phil, All,
>
>> 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?
>
> Yes. Use [1] ...
>
> My motto is: acting rather than talking. So, I took [2] as a starting point
> - which is already in nice XHTML format - and manually added some RDFa.
> After an hour I ended up with [1] (though, to be fair, two Wii games with
> the kids and consuming some Easter eggs also took place in that hour).
>
> So, [1] is really a sort of an interim solution (though, in the distributed
> data world I do expect much more of such fixes) and I encourage Phil, who is
> an editor of [2] to use the template from [1] at the 'official' location.
>
> Happy Easter! (and back to Wii games, for now ;)
>
> Cheers,
>      Michael
>
> [1] http://purl.org/NET/atom-link-rel
> [2] http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
>
> --
> Dr. Michael Hausenblas
> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
> Ireland, Europe
> Tel. +353 91 495730
> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
> http://sw-app.org/about.html
>
>
>
>> From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
>> Organization: webr3
>> Reply-To: <nathan@webr3.org>
>> Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 00:14:16 +0100
>> To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?
>> Resent-From: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
>> Resent-Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 23:14:54 +0000
>>
>> 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 Saturday, 3 April 2010 20:47:23 UTC

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