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

Re: Natural Keys and Patterned URIs

From: Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 09:44:06 -0700
Message-ID: <v2je9447a401004100944u5fb184b5p797aed3b67f716ca@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
Ah, never mind. I think I found the answer... Literal Key. Perhaps the
other patterns should mention this and include Literal Key in the
"Related" section?


On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com> wrote:
> (Thanks for the patterns book, BTW. I am finding them helpful and
> thought-provoking.)
>
> re: Natural Keys and Patterned URIs - I am wondering about the
> potential trade-offs between "manufacturing" a resource URI following
> a "known algorithms" vs. "finding" a resource URI by querying a "known
> relationship".
>
> e.g. say there is a URI for a specific auto. A natural key could be
> based on its vehicle identification number (VIN), and so
> "manufactured".
>
> Or the URI could be meaningless, or at least unknown, and the URI
> could be "found" from a known "VIN" relationship in the ontology...
> ?car <VIN> "xyz"
>
> Even if the URIs are meaningful, patterned, or natural, I kind of tend
> to want to find them from relationships rather than manufacture them.
>
> Are there known pro's and con's either way?
>
> Thanks
>
Received on Saturday, 10 April 2010 16:44:38 UTC

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