- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:10:30 -0500
- To: public-linked-json@w3.org
- Message-ID: <51117546.2000908@openlinksw.com>
On 2/5/13 1:49 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote: > I noticed that Manu and Dave have been replacing most uses of FOAF in the > examples with Schema.org. On one hand, I find that good since probably more > people know about schema.org than about FOAF. On the other hand I find it > strange to use IRIs which do not resolve to anything useful when being > dereferenced; in fact, you'll get a 404. > > I thus wanted to hear opinions of other people in the group regarding what > we should use in our examples. Since we are talking about Linked Data and > have statements in the spec that IRIs SHOULD resolve to something useful I > think we should live what we preach and use FOAF instead. > > > Cheers, > Markus > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > > > > I encourage you to use hash URIs. You can cross reference these URIs in a manner that unveils the broader utility of Linked Data and shared vocabularies etc.. Links: 1. http://bit.ly/UydU9t -- simple SPARQL based data integration note (I even stay away from prefixes when making simple demos) . 2. http://bit.ly/Xk333m -- basic Turtle exercise . 3. http://bit.ly/VaX0zx -- Turtle tutorials collection (all of these use simple documents and hash URIs) . -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2013 21:10:52 UTC