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

Re: An idea I need help with, or told to stop wasting time on!

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:44:44 +0100
Message-ID: <4C0BFAAC.6080601@webr3.org>
To: Reto Bachmann-Gmuer <reto.bachmann@trialox.org>
CC: semantic-web@w3.org, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, dret@berkeley.edu
Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote:
> ops, accidentally sent too eraly
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>
>>  :me foaf:name [
>>     ex:value 'nathan' ;
>>     ex:type xsd:string ;
>>     ex:language 'en-gb' .
>>  ] .
>>
>> foaf:name has range rdfs:Literal, this still allows us to say:
> 
> :me foaf:name [
> ex:sha_1 'KLSJFS9F7S9D8F7SLADFSLKDJF98SD7' .
> ]
> 
> in this case we know about the bnode that it stands for a literal value and
> the ex:sha_1 value of that literal.
> 
> your way of specifying the type of the literal reminds me the recent
> discussion started by Henry Story:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Feb/0174.html
> 
> following this we could also say:
> 
> :me foaf:name [
>     xsd:string 'nathan' ;
>     ex:sha_1 'KLSJFS9F7S9D8F7SLADFSLKDJF98SD7' .
>  ] .
> 
> which expresses the same as:
> 
> :me foaf:name [
>     owl:sameAs 'nathan'^^xsd:string;
>     ex:sha_1 'KLSJFS9F7S9D8F7SLADFSLKDJF98SD7' .
>  ] .

so are we saying that all of these express the same:

:me foaf:name 'nathan'^^xsd:string .

:me foaf:name [
    xsd:string 'nathan' .
] .

:me foaf:name [
    owl:sameAs 'nathan'^^xsd:string .
] .

:me foaf:name [
    rdf:value 'nathan'^^xsd:string .
] .

:me foaf:name :myname .
:myname xsd:string 'nathan' .

:me foaf:name :myname .
:myname owl:sameAs 'nathan'^^xsd:string .

:me foaf:name :myname .
:myname rdf:value 'nathan'^^xsd:string .

?

I can see the rdf:value and owl:sameAs versions expressing the same, 
unsure about the xsd:string version..

what about..

:London rdfs:label [ rdf:value "London"@en, "Londres"@fr, "Лондон"@ru ].

or..

:London rdfs:label
	[ rdf:value "London"@en ] ,
	[ rdf:value "Londres"@fr ] ,
	[ rdf:value "Лондон"@ru ] .


>> And do some funkier stuff:
>>
>>  :me foaf:mbox :myemail ;
>>  :myemail ex:value <mailto:nathan@webr3.org> ;
>>     ex:sha_1 'KLSJFS9F7S9D8F7SLADFSLKDJF98SD7' ;
>>     dcterms:created '2010-06-03T15:19:35-05:00' ;
>>     dcterms:replaces :oldmail .
>>  :oldmail ex:value <mailto:oldemail@webr3.org> .
>>
>> so because of the way ex:value works, in there we have the triple:
>>
>> <mailto:nathan@webr3.org> dcterms:replaces <mailto:oldemail@webr3.org> .
>>
> ex:way seems to work the same way as owl:sameAs
> 
> ex:sha_1 to me seems to make sense with literals but not with a mailbox,
> there the foaf-approach of having a distinct property convinces me more:
> mbox point to the mailbox which is a resource typically identified by its
> mailto-uri, mbox_sha1sum by contrast point to a literal with an
> sha1-encoding of the mailto-uri of an email address of the subject. Your
> second usage of ex:sha1 ties a resource to its name which seems very
> limiting.
> 
> the statement "<mailto:nathan@webr3.org> dcterms:replaces <mailto:
> oldemail@webr3.org> ." seems however perfectly sound I don't see why this
> should need the construct with ex:value an the additional node.

cheers for the comments,

Nathan
Received on Sunday, 6 June 2010 19:52:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:27 UTC