- From: Ian Davis <lists@iandavis.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 00:31:45 +0100
- To: Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
- Cc: Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@talis.com>, Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com> wrote: > In the Annotation publishing pattern section there is the following statement: > > "It is entirely consistent with the Linked Data principles to make > statements about third-party resources." > > I don't believe that to be true, simply because, unless users are > always using a quad model (RDF+NamedGraphs), they have no way of > retrieving that information just by resolving the foreign identifier > which is the subject of the RDF triple. They would have to stumble on > the information by knowing to retrieve the object URI, which isn't > clear from the pattern description so far. In a triples model it is > harmful to have this pattern as Linked Data, as the statements are not > discoverable just knowing the URI. > Can you elaborate more on the harm you suggest here? I don't think we need to limit the data published about a subject to that subset retrievable at its URI. (I wrote a little about this last year at http://blog.iandavis.com/2009/10/more-than-the-minimum ) I also don't believe this requires the use of quads. I think it can be interlinked using rdfs:seeAlso. Ian
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 23:32:19 UTC