W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Lens metaphor - was Re: regrets and a new spin on contexts

From: Thomas Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 21:43:29 -0400
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120430014329.GA27529@julius>
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 08:10:27AM +0100, Tom Baker wrote:
> Rather, what we're doing is acknowledging that people "see" or "interpret" IRIs
e through particular lenses.  In terms of message, the act of "seeing" or
> "interpreting" an object does not imply that the object that everyone sees is
> actually being transformed.  Maybe something along the lines of "RDF
> Interpretations" or "RDF Lenses"?
> 
> Then if the range of rdf:inherits does indeed include things like 100 pages of
> plain-text explanation, we should avoid implying that these interpretations are
> by definition importable and applicable in some sort of automatic,
> machine-processable way.  The name should leave no doubt that this is a
> documentation property.  Maybe something along the lines of or
> "rdf:interpretedUsing" or "rdf:lens"?

It occurs to me that the "lens" metaphor works for some of the 
expected use cases:

-- "corrective lens": I assert that somebody used a property the wrong way.
    Sandro's "shims" might be considered corrective lenses.

-- "magnifying lens": I assert that I am using dc:creator for "composers".

-- "historical lens": I assert that the "social meaning" of some property 
    shifted at some point in time.

As I picture it, given

    <a> rdf:lens <b>

<a> is the "context", and <b> is some kind of document.

Tom

-- 
Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org>
Received on Monday, 30 April 2012 01:44:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:04 UTC