W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2005

Re: missing bit of RDF for XML people

From: Stefano Mazzocchi <stefanom@mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 10:19:24 -0500
Message-ID: <420240FC.2030400@mit.edu>
To: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Frank Manola wrote:
> You don't necessarily need a *blank* predicate.  You just need a 
> "standard" predicate (standard for somebody!) that means "is related to" 
> (in some way that you haven't identified further).  Using this, you'd 
> write something like:
>   subject        predicate          object
>  country  - ex:isRelatedTo --> "Canada"
>  country  - ex:isRelatedTo --> city  - ex:isRelatedTo --> "Montréal"
>  country  - ex:isRelatedTo --> city  - ex:isRelatedTo --> "Toronto"
>  country  - ex:isRelatedTo --> city  - ex:isRelatedTo -->
>  "Vancouver"

I strongly believe this would be one step forward and five steps 
backwards. The above might be valid RDF but it's completely useless: 
throw it into a triple-store and it feels just like a lot of noisy bNodes.

I would much rather have some sort of declarative 'semanticsheet' 
(produced by the data makers or by some 'semantic annotators') that 
makes the information implicitly encoded in the xpaths explicit:

country/text() -> dc:title
country/city -> geo:city

but this is only half of the puzzle, since the URI identification of the 
nodes is still missing.

[BTW, this is part of my research work on the RDFification of data for 
the SIMILE project, the above 'semanticsheet' could be easily translated 
into XSLT]

Stefano Mazzocchi
Research Scientist                 Digital Libraries Research Group
Massachusetts Institute of Technology            location: E25-131C
77 Massachusetts Ave                   telephone: +1 (617) 253-1096
Cambridge, MA  02139-4307              email: stefanom at mit . edu
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2005 15:19:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:55 UTC