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

RE: URN as namespace URI for RDF Schema (run away... run away... ;-)

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 16:03:05 +0300
Message-ID: <1E4A0AC134884349A21955574A90A7A50A1DD9@trebe051.ntc.nokia.com>
To: <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: <T.Hammond@nature.com>, <leo@gnowsis.com>, <mdirector@iptc.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>


> > Also, exactly why would an agent want to always get the
> > entire ontology (think CYC, Wordnet, etc.) just to find out
> > what a few *specific* term mean? A parallel would be having to
> > download an entire mirror of a website to access a single page of
> > that website after downloading the whole shabang. Yes, for
> > tiny websites accessible via fast network connections, that
> > could work, but it certainly wouldn't scale.
> 
> It's really a hard problem.  Given a term in wordnet or cyc, what
> really does the naive client want transmitted?  

Actually, I consider it a really simple problem, if you
approach it using the appropriate methodology ;-)

Use a PURI to denote each term.

Use RDF statements to relate the terms to each other, and
to group the terms into vocabularies, subvocabularies.

Provide representations of the terms and vocabularies
via their primary URIs.

The representation of a term will lead to the representation
a subvocabulary, or several at differing levels, up to
the top level vocabulary, which will provide the whole
enchilada.

Now, if you use SURIs, yes, it's a *HUGE* problem.

;-)

Patrick
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2004 13:03:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:09 GMT