- From: Christopher Gutteridge <cjg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:02:55 +0100
- To: W3C CSV on the Web Working Group <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <EMEW3|51b6f040ab9819acdd75dc1668dcb6ccq4KA3903cjg|ecs.soton.ac.uk|537C6BBF.707@>
While it's not a top priority, I see an exciting use for some of the recent provenance vocab. work. For the Tabular(CSV)->Graph(RDF) route anyhow, as it's possible to add extra triples. We may well know the URI of the source table, and the URI of the metadata document. That's provenance right there. I would suggest (not as a high priority) that a recommended RDF way to express this relationship could be included in this work. eg. The triples in the output RDF saying it was generated from source document(s) X, using metadata Y and process Z at a given time & date by an agent (the organisation/person/system making the conversion). It should be just a handful of extra triples, and optional, but it would be good to give people a standard to follow. And also URIs to reference for the process followed (the algorithms being discussed now). You can see an example of what I mean at the top of this TTL file: http://data.southampton.ac.uk/dumps/jargon/2014-05-08/jargon.ttl (ignore the http://purl.org/void/provenance/ns/ triples, that was the previous vocab we used and are now transitioning to http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#) -- Christopher Gutteridge -- http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cjg University of Southampton Open Data Service: http://data.southampton.ac.uk/ You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 09:03:40 UTC