Re: IRIs - proposed resolution

On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 09:01:42AM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote:
> >Unfortunately "URI" isn't "by definition" an umbrella term that includes
> >IRIs. My minimalistic edit was intended to sidestep the issue with a
> >conjunction "URI and IRI".
> 
> Originally, I thought we were going to create a definition of URI
> for our report that essentially said: when we say "URI" we mean "URI
> or IRI" -- much like we do for "Library includes archives,
> museums....". Could that wording be used?

Our postings crossed...

The text I proposed (below) addresses the URI/IRI issue by saying "In Linked
Data..." (or the longer "For the purposes of Linked Data...").  This is based
on my understanding that "for the purposes of RDF", URIs may be IRIs.

It also says "standards such as ... RDF" as we had agreed.

The rewording also drops "library world" in favor of "librarianship".

Tom

    Linked Data. "Linked Data" refers to data published in accordance with
    principles designed to facilitate linkages among datasets, element sets,
    and value vocabularies. Linked Data uses Uniform Resource Identifiers
    (URIs) as globally unique identifiers for any kind of resource --
 -> analogously to how identifiers are used for authority control in
 -> traditional librarianship.  In Linked Data, URIs may be Internationalized
 -> Resource Identifiers (IRIs) -- Web addresses that use the extended set of
 -> natural-language scripts supported by Unicode. Linked Data is expressed
 -> using standards such as the Resource Description Framework (RDF), which
 -> specifies relationships between things -- relationships that can be used for
 -> navigating between, or integrating, information from multiple sources.


-- 
Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org>

Received on Sunday, 11 September 2011 16:16:06 UTC