- From: エリクソン トーレ <t-eriksson@so.taisho.co.jp>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:28:54 +0000
- To: "'William Waites'" <ww@styx.org>
- CC: "melvincarvalho@gmail.com" <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, "kidehen@openlinksw.com" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
> 差出人: William Waites [mailto:ww@styx.org]
> 送信日時: 2013年6月19日 21:03
> <t-eriksson@so.taisho.co.jp> said:
>> I would be interested in seeing some linked data that is
>> incompatible with RDF while still adhering to rules like using
>> global identifiers and typed links.
>
> @prefix ex: <http://example.org/>
> @prefix u: <http://example.org/units>
>
> ex:distance ex:earth ex:moon 381550 25150 u:km.
>
> This relation has a typed link (ex:distance) between two
> non-informational resources (ex:earth, ex:moon). It has a distance that
> has units as well as a datatype, and a +/- uncertainty thrown in for good
> measure. I could even imagine the ex:distance predicate to be
> self-describing in the usual way, defining its arity and the meaning and
> type of its arguments.
>
> I think this can quite sensibly be called Linked Data and whilst with
> sufficient contortions (reification, abuse of datatypes, perhaps
> anonymous or parametrised predicates) it can be shoehorned into RDF, it
> really doesn't happen naturally or obviously enough that it could be
> called "compatible" in my opinion.
Let the abuse begin!
[ a ex:Distance;
ex:object ex:earth, ex:moon;
rdf:value "381550\u00b125150 km"^^u:measurement
}
ex:Distance rdfs:comment "Distance between two objects"@en .
u:measurement rdfs:comment "Datatype describing a measurement with error, followed by an SI unit"@en ;
xsd:pattern "[0-9]+\u00b1[0-9]+\\s\\S+" .
(Ab)using RDF I was able to (barely) document my semantics directly in turtle.
Where is the semantics and syntax of your example described? Your data might be linked,
but as a prospective consumer of it I'm feeling a bit lost :-)
Tore
PS I always longed for bnode predicates for cases like this...
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 02:00:42 UTC