Desert Museum use case in N3 Re: use cases

Golda,

The data web is most appropriate for data, things which can be  
processed and re-used in various ways, as they have fairly well-define  
meanings.   Your example has a bunch of "maybe indicates" sort of  
things.  Given that disclaimer,
here is one way of going about what you want.

see below.. I'll use N3.


On 2008-02 -03, at 09:43, Golda Velez wrote:

>
> Hello again -
>
> I guess my question about subclassing vocabularies that I don't  
> maintain was
> either too clueless or too complex - so, here is a simpler question.  
> I'm
> working on an article for Linux Journal that will be titled  
> something like
> 'Are We There Yet?  Semantic Technologies for the Web  
> Developer'  (it was
> originally just about RDFa, but we've expanded the scope some).
>
> Say I want to express in RDF a statement like the following:
> ---------------------
> "The Az Sonora Desert Museum serves shade grown-coffee, which supports
> ecological diversity as per Win-Win Ecology by Mike Rosenzweig."
> ---------------------

@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/>.
@prefix ex: <ont#>.   # @@ write ontology




:wwe   dc:title "Win-Win Ecology"; dc:creator [ foaf:name "Mike  
Rosenzweig" ].

#Read, wwe has a title ... and has a creator which has name Mike ...:
#(Use cwm to convert that into RDF/XML if that is easier to read fro  
you)

#I'd note that that book has a URI in the mashup, which we could have  
used.
# Or we can just say

<http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bookmashup/books/0195156048>
  =  :wwe .


#Now the museum.  We'll need new ontology terms I'll put in ex:  
namespace.

:asdm  foaf:name " Az Sonora Desert Museum".
:sgc   foaf:name "Shade-Grown Coffee".

{ :asdm  ex:serves  :sgc } ex:accordingTo  :wwe.

# There are various "accordingTo" type verbs one can define
#----------------------------------

#Also, we believe

:sgc a ex:ProEcologyProduct.
:wwe a ex:TrustedSource.

# Then I would personally use a rule

@forAll :business, :product, :source.
{ :source a ex:TrustedSource.
   { :business ex:serves  :product }  ex:accordingTo  :source.
   :product a ex:ProEcologyProduct.
} =>  {:business a ex:FavoredBusiness}.

# Running these rules with cwm --think will produce:
#     :asdm     a ex:FavoredBusiness

>
> I can use wikipedia or other authoritative URIs for the entities and  
> concepts
> like the Desert Museum, shade-grown coffee, ecological diversity,  
> and the
> book.

Indeed

>  The question is which vocab's to use for the verbs - serves,  
> supports,
> and 'as per' -

The domain-specific verbs you may have to invent.
you might find ontologies of food.
Algorithm: Spend a limited amount of time looking for people who have  
already defined terms in the area. then do your own for te missing  
ones. Later, if you find more ontologies, build links between them.

>  and can I use reification or do I have to invent a tortured
> class that owns its own caveats?  bagID would seem useful for this  
> but its
> deprecated?
>

Avoid reification.   Do use nested graphs, as in N3.

The file above:

http://www.w3.org/2008/02/03-eco/a.n3

The same in rdf -- after inference, without the rules
$ cwm a.n3 --think --rdf --data > b.rdf

Hope this helps


Tim BL