W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Yet another problems with URIs and reference

From: Andrea Splendiani <andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 09:26:13 +0000
Message-ID: <339406657519699@jngomktg.net>
To: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi, thanks for your answer.

A quotation is indeed an interesting solution. However, if I understand it
correctly (maybe not!) this implies using a literal. 
If (as far as I remember this is the case) I cannot predicate on a literal,
then I would be forced to use a URI for it (a blank node with a literal as a
property won't be feasible in my case).
So basically this leads to a 2 URIs scheme. Or am I missing something ?

Re:
> The notions of "lifecycle", "state", and such are illusory.  What
> changes are people's minds, not the URI.  The state is properly
> predicated of some individual or collective consciousness, for example:
Sure, the URI doesn't change. But "lifecycle", "state" and such are in fact
state of the community respect to the URI. At some point... they hae to be
written down.

best,
Andrea Splendiani

Il giorno 11/nov/2011, alle ore 03.16, Paul Tyson ha scritto:

> On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 14:29 +0000, Andrea Splendiani wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have a curiosity/problem/request for suggestions which is loosely
related
>> to the Referee/Referred identification.
>> 
>> In my case, I need to predicate on a URI, intended as an identifier.
>> 
>> So (keeping canonical example), I can have:
>> 
>> http://xx/Berlin 		This is the URI of the thing per se.
>> http://xx/web/Berlin	Points to a web representation
>> http://xx/data/Berlin	Data representation
>> 
>> Now I can predicate in all these documents on http://xx/Berlin referring
to
>> the actual city.
>> 
>> But I need to predicate on "http://xx/Berlin" intended as an identifier:
in
>> my case, this goes through cycles of approvals and states. In practice I
>> would need to tell whether my URI is approved, reserved, invalid! and so
>> on...
>> These are clearly not properties of the city of Berlin!
>> 
>> How is this case usually approached ? In principle, it should be quite
>> common.
>> 
>> What I was considering (in order of preference):
>> 
>> 1) perhaps some as hoc extension of OWL (annotations). At the end this is
an
>> overgrown versioning mechanism
>> 2) creating a dichotomy between "identifiers objects" and "identifiers
>> codes". This could make some sense in my case as identifiers come as
codes
>> that inherit some 'unconvential' semantics.
>> 3) ignoring the distinction and putting it relegating to the semantics of
>> relations (a bit like 1, in the end, but dirtier)
>> 4) ignore informations on URIs on the web (delegating it to some internal
>> engine). This may be a last resort solution.
>> 
>> Any idea ?
>> 
> ´╗┐Another option is to use a quoting mechanism.
> 
> ex:BracketedTerm a rdfs:Class .
> ex:termInBrackets a rdf:Property ;
>  rdfs:domain ex:BracketedTerm .
> 
> The notions of "lifecycle", "state", and such are illusory.  What
> changes are people's minds, not the URI.  The state is properly
> predicated of some individual or collective consciousness, for example:
> 
> ex:AnApprover ex:approves [a ex:BracketedTerm;
>  ex:termInBrackets   "http://xx/Berlin"^^xs:anyURI;
> rdfs:comment "URI representing the city of Berlin." ] .
> 
> Regards,
> --Paul
> 
>> ciao,
>> Andrea
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Andrea Splendiani
>> Senior Bioinformatics Scientist
>> Centre for Mathematical and Computational Biology
>> +44(0)1582 763133 ext 2004
>> andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Andrea Splendiani
Senior Bioinformatics Scientist
Centre for Mathematical and Computational Biology
+44(0)1582 763133 ext 2004
andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 09:27:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:46 GMT