W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Is it best practices to use a rdfs:seeAlso link to a potentially multimegabyte PDF?, existing predicate for linking to PDF?

From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:17:20 +0000
To: Phil Archer <phil.archer@talis.com>
Cc: Vasiliy Faronov <vfaronov@gmail.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Peter DeVries <pete.devries@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org
Message-ID: <1294665441.31359.59.camel@ophelia2.g5n.co.uk>
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 08:55 +0000, Phil Archer wrote:
> I'd be happy enough to see greater granularity for rdfs:seeAlso. I
> have a use case where I want to say something like "the <uri> has been
> minted recently by a source that is not authoritative but that, if
> widely adopted, could become so. Either way, it's worth noting that he
> and I are talking about the same thing" - and rdfs:seeAlso doesn't
> really cover that nuance! 

@prefix dc:   <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix uri:  <http://purl.org/NET/uri#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd:  <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .

<foo> rdfs:seeAlso <http://example.com/bar> .
<http://example.com/bar> uri:identifier [
	uri:literal "http://example.com/bar"^^xsd:anyURI ;
	dc:issued "2011-01-08"^^xsd:date ;
	u:policy _:ExampleDotComUriPolicy ;
	u:assigned_by <http://example.com/alice#me>
	] .
_:ExampleDotComUriPolicy
	rdfs:comment
	  "These URIs are not authoritative, but may become so."@en .

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Monday, 10 January 2011 13:18:16 UTC

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