W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2006

RE: Semantic content negotiation (was Re: expectations of vocabulary)

From: Xiaoshu Wang <wangxiao@musc.edu>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:15:39 -0400
To: "'Richard Newman'" <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
Cc: "'Semantic Web'" <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000f01c6b3fb$c80dab20$0e241780@bioxiao>

--Richard,

>    I advise you to stop thinking in terms of documents; the 
> document model does not map well to the Semantic Web. It is 
> trivially easy to put some intelligence behind a URI, and I 
> have already illustrated two possible interpretations of 
> Accept-vocabulary that servers can provide, each of which 
> degrades well.

Document model is for HTTP.  And we are talking about extending HTTP, aren't
we?

>    Consider a reasoner with your mapping ontology already 
> loaded. A client requesting O1 receives the o1: triples. A 
> client requesting O2 returns map(O1, O1-TO-O2). The client 
> does not need to know how to do the mapping, nor have the 
> mapping ontology available.

>    Consider a reasoner with your mapping ontology already 
> loaded. A client requesting O1 receives the o1: triples. A 
> client requesting O2 returns map(O1, O1-TO-O2). The client 
> does not need to know how to do the mapping, nor have the 
> mapping ontology available.
> 
>    "Write it in one version and indicate the mapping 
> ontologies". The work just happens to be done on the server 
> side, where it is more likely that the mappings are known and 
> a reasoner is available.

What is your point? Isn't that what I was suggesting?  

>    I also expect a lot of data to be exposed from non-RDF 
> sources -- e.g., LDAP and relational databases. Choosing in 
> which vocabulary the information should be encoded is 
> something on which Accept-vocabulary can have a bearing, and 
> the information is not available in RDF to start with.

Let's not make the problem strays again.  We are talking Accept-Vocabulary
in RDF, aren't we?

Xiaoshu
Received on Sunday, 30 July 2006 17:16:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:11 GMT