W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > July 2004

Re: rdfs:seeAlso Re: Semantic E-mail

From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 14:31:12 +0100 (BST)
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Cc: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0407101420110.24204@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>


Sorry - missed the start of this bthread, sorry if this isn't useful.

seeAlso can be used to link to more information which can be in any kind
of resource (e.g. an rdf or html document).

http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_seealso

In the foaf project we've tended to use it as a link to more information
(about a person, say) in an RDF document. We're recently been moving
towards typing these seeAlso links so as to allow harvesters to be more
selective about the links they follow, e.g.

<Person>
<name>libby Miller</name>
 <rdfs:seeAlso>
  <foaf:PersonalProfileDocument
rdf:about="http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/people/libby/rdfweb/webwho.xrdf"/>
 <rdfs:seeAlso>
</Person>

I don't think this is what you want by the sounds of it.

Libby


On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

>
> Not sure what seeAlso was intended for, but it is often used as a generic
> link by RDF crawlers. For example a number of FOAF tools will add a seeAlso
> to connect your FOAF to some more stuff, which may or may not discuss the
> same resources.
>
> Is this actually the best way to use it?
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Richard Newman wrote:
>
> >Laurian,
> >I would suggest using sameAs or equivalentProperty, if the semantics
> >are equivalent (as may well be the case for, e.g. messageIDs).
> >Similarly, use subPropertyOf if that's the actual case (as you suggest
> >for DC identifier).
> >...
> >I don't think seeAlso is really intended for this... anyone? I was
> >under the impression that it referred to another document containing
> >further description of a resource (though I may be wrong!).
> >
> >On 9 Jul 2004, at 03:55, Laurian Gridinoc wrote:
> >>
> >> When having such wide choice of partial overlapping vocabularies, what
> >> would be the best solution -- to try to use from each the most
> >> meaningful elements (mixing vocabularies), the result having a
> >> namespace soup, or to create my own vocabulary and promote partial
> >> understanding by usage of rdfs:seeAlso in its schema?
>
>
Received on Saturday, 10 July 2004 09:32:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:58 UTC