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

Re: Content negotiation: Why always redirect from non-information resource to information resource?

From: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 09:35:46 +0000
Message-ID: <2uGlbsUypVYLFwiw@light.demon.co.uk>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: Christoph LANGE <ch.lange@jacobs-university.de>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Vyacheslav Zholudev <v.zholudev@jacobs-university.de>, Florian Rabe <f.rabe@jacobs-university.de>
In message <4B605247.6030201@openlinksw.com>, Kingsley Idehen 
<kidehen@openlinksw.com> writes
>> And that mixing and matching Linked Data, Topic Maps and full-text 
>>XML  (etc.) can potentially take us to some exciting new places.  (But 
>>then  that's hardly news.  I remember discussing the value of URNs for 
>>this  sort of purpose some time around 1994.)
>I agree, and I am simply saying: Topics are Things too, and they can 
>exist in EAV/CR model relationship graphs.

Sure.  Has anyone actually tried that: storing assertions in a triple 
store, but treating them as a "virtual Topic Map"?  It's an approach 
which might yield benefits - and there are possibly paradigms other than 
Topic Maps which could usefully be virtualized on top of triple-store 
data.

>I think we are exhibiting semantic pedantry here based on our 
>individual world views, which is fine, since this is really what this 
>whole gig is supposed to facilitate :-)

Not just semantic pedantry, Kingsley, fun though that is ;-)  My 
inclusion, above, of full-text XML adds, I think, another dimension to 
this debate.

In all of this clever flattening of heterogeneous data onto the level 
playing field which is RDF, we are enabling information retrieval: the 
answering of questions.  And that's fine.  The information that is 
flowing around and available to us in this context is all RDF: simple 
assertions.  However, the user who originally asked the question might 
not be satisfied with this type of information: they might want a story, 
not facts.  Where does the story come from?

If each subject of discourse (whose URI we already know) can be 
delivered as full-text XML via the standard 303 redirection mechanism, 
that gives us one way of grabbing the full story in machine-processible 
form, and including whatever parts of it are relevant in our responses 
to questions.

Best wishes,

Richard
-- 
Richard Light
Received on Thursday, 28 January 2010 09:37:25 UTC

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