W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > March 2001

Re: Index of URI Schemes in Notation3

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 18:16:26 -0000
Message-ID: <005201c0acb2$fa1af240$a62f7ad5@z5n9x1>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: <uri@w3.org>, <danbri@w3.org>
> The 1000 point offer was for something that I could
> generate schemes.html from using cwm and XSLT.

Right, here's "Take 2" of the URI schemes in N3:-

     http://infomesh.net/2001/03/schemes/
     - An Index of WWW Addressing Schemes (in Notation3)

The previous attempt (Take 1) is now available at:-

     http://infomesh.net/2001/03/13/schemes/

> I'd like you to take my jumble of metadata about schemes
> and documents and to separated it into

I've tried to incorporate all of your suggestions into the new
document:-

1) Instead of using arbitrary nodes, I'm now using the specifications
themselves as the subject (where there's a specification available),
and then hanging properties off of that node.
2) All information is now "de-jumbled" into proper triples so that no
important information is hidden in comments.
3) The <> information has been updated.

>  :rfc rdfs:subPropertyOf dc:identifer.
>  :specifies rdfs:subPropertyOf dc:subject.

I had to invent a couple more on the same lines as :specifies, namely
":reserves" and ":uses". I also added "dc:title rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdfs:label ." and a few other relationships (see later).

>   :schemeName rdfs:domain :URIScheme.

D'oh!

>   :schemeName a daml:UnambiguousProperty.
>   :schemeName rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt>

I added these too... I think rdfs:isDefinedBy is O.K. to use in this
context - it's just a generic definition, it doesn't constrain the
nature of that definition (that would be left to sub properties of
rdfs:isDefinedBy).

> By the way... your N3 transcription claims that I'm
> its author, which is not so; I think what you meant was
> that I wrote X, you wrote Y, and Y is a transcription
> of X:

Yes... but it was about 3AM, and my logic was something like "you
wrote the original, I converted it to this, that'll do" :-) In fact,
saying "x XHTML=>N3 transformed an XHTML document compiled by y at z"
is a lot more accurate, I agree, so I've updated the N3 to reflect
that fact.

> Also... foaf:name is a handy concept; surely there's
> a standardized version of it somehwere, no?

In fact,

   @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#> .
   @prefix swag: <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
   swag:name = foaf:name .

Where the swag: NS rdfs:isDefinedBy
http://purl.org/swag/termsplayground or something like that. I think
that foaf:name is useful enough to warrant addition to the schema...
DanBri, are you out there?

> Isn't there a p3p property
> you could use?

Ugh... I'd much prefer to use FOAF in this case... it's just more
natural for me to use. I've changed some of the properties over to p3p
namespaced ones, and kept some intact as FOAF.

For some reason, the N3 wont parse on CWM... something about duplicate
objects, but it doesn't give a line number (hmph). All other syntax
errors have been ironed out...
The only other problem is that now some of the rdfs:seeAlso arcs hang
on in thin air, because we're not using arbitrary nodes for the scheme
names. Apart from these niggles, I don;t see why it isn't now possible
for you to do a:-

     (N3) =CWM=> (XML RDF) =XSLT=> (XHTML)

transformation. Is there anything else that needs adding?

Well, that's half the day gone, but it was worth it :-)

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2001 13:18:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:29 GMT