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

Re: Organization types predicates vs classes

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <49099.41559.qm@web112613.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, William Waites <ww-keyword-okfn.193365@styx.org>
Cc: "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
FWIW, I believe that if you are going to tackle the issue of Organization types (predicates vs classes) in the context of Government, then you may as well pick the low hanging fruit of Privacy.  To put it another way, it is very easy to keep a Public Persona and a Private Persona separate as long as you do it at a low enough level.

This is important for continuity of the Law, and has only tangential application where the mission of Organizations ends, voluntarily or involuntarily.  Dissolution is not quite death.

To use Sandro's example, Patrick Deval has a Public Persona as well as an automatically generated Private Persona.  Note that miscellaneous "Personal Information" is not Private Information.:

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:db="http://dbpedia.org/resource/"
         xmlns:pii="http://purl.org/pii/terms/">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Massachusetts">
    <db:Governor>
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Deval_Patrick">
        <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://purl.org/pii/terms/misc" />
      </rdf:Description>
    </db:Governor>
    <db:Nickname>Bay State</db:Nickname>
    <db:Capital>
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Boston"> 
         <db:Nickname>Beantown</db:Nickname>
      </rdf:Description>
    </db:Capital>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:db="http://dbpedia.org/resource/"
         xmlns:pii="http://purl.org/pii/terms/">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Massachusetts">
    <db:Governor>
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Governor">
        <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://purl.org/pii/terms/misc" />
      </rdf:Description>
    </db:Governor>
    <db:Nickname>Bay State</db:Nickname>
    <db:Capital>
      <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Boston"> 
         <db:Nickname>Beantown</db:Nickname>
      </rdf:Description>
    </db:Capital>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

   

--- On Tue, 6/8/10, William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org> wrote:

> From: William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org>
> Subject: Re: Organization types predicates vs classes
> To: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@danbri.org>
> Cc: "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, "Linked Data community" <public-lod@w3.org>
> Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 11:33 AM
> On 10-06-08 11:48, Dan Brickley
> wrote:
> > Yes, exactly. The schema guarantees things will have
> multiple types.
> > The art is to know when to bother mentioning each
> type. Saying things
> > are an rdfs:Resource is rarely interesting. 
> >   
> 
> FWIW, I actually put (using an inferencer) rdfs:Resource
> on
> everything in [1][2] because I use the fresnel vocabulary
> to
> display things. This means I can make a generic lens like
> this,
> 
> :resourceLens a fresnel:Lens ;
>     fresnel:purpose fresnel:defaultLens ;
>     fresnel:classLensDomain rdfs:Resource ;
>     fresnel:showProperties (
>         rdf:type
>         fresnel:allProperties
>     ) .
> 
> to use as a default.
> 
> [1] http://knowledgeforge/pdw/ordf/
> [2] http://bibliographica.org/
> 
> -- 
> William Waites       
>    <william.waites@okfn.org>
> Mob: +44 789 798 9965    Open Knowledge
> Foundation
> Fax: +44 131 464 4948         
>       Edinburgh, UK
> 
> 


      
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 18:51:06 UTC

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