W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-linked-json@w3.org > February 2015

Re: Resolving vocabulary URIs?

From: Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 21:09:19 -0600
Message-ID: <CACvcBVoRxsAV7nbVHxQF3QfMe=3p=1AyiayqvaYH6EdhPpiX-g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nathan Ridley <axefrog@gmail.com>
Cc: public-linked-json@w3.org
The presentation is here:


-Brent Shambaugh

Website: bshambaugh.org

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>

> Nathan,
> My idea of "follow your nose" or I guess "follow the trail" ( as you
> described ) could be found by browsing around dbpedia. For example see:
> http://dbpedia.org/page/Berlin . To me, the linked open data cloud is
> just about browsing from one piece of linked data to another. It is not
> about semantics. True, it does allow you to keep things up to date, and
> keep track of the naming of things across applications. I don't know if it
> helps, but I put together a presentation about linked data and webpayments.
> Linked data and JSON-LD was a necessary introduction.
> -Brent
> -Brent Shambaugh
> Website: bshambaugh.org
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Nathan Ridley <axefrog@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I am new to the list, so my apologies if this has been covered earlier,
>> or elsewhere. I couldn't find an answer, in any case.
>> The context of a document references the URI of one or more vocabularies.
>> My understanding is that this whole idea of linked data allows the web to
>> be machine readable by smart clients, however I'm generally seeing that the
>> referenced vocabulary URIs (schema.org in particular) just go to the
>> site's home page, which is not machine readable in any standardized way.
>> So, given that most types ultimately drill down to basic data types
>> (string, date, integer, etc.) I have assumed that I would be able to look
>> at a JSON-LD document and "follow the trail" back to machine-readable
>> sources that would give me enough standardized information that I can then
>> generate an appropriate representation, without technically having had to
>> know anything about that vocabulary in advance. Is this the idea, but which
>> has yet to be realised? I'm trying to build a small sample reference client
>> using JSON-LD and Hydra, and the lack of machine-readability in the
>> response from a vocabulary URI is making me think I have to decide what
>> vocabularies I want to support and maintain a copy of each on my own
>> server, such that the client can look there instead for the exact
>> definitions of each type.
>> Any guidance on this would be appreciated.
>> thanks,
>> Nathan Ridley
>> --
>> *Google*: axefrog@gmail.com
>> *Skype*: axefrog
>> *Twitter*: @NathanRidley
>> *Website*: http://axefrog.com / http://nathanridley.com
>> *Phone: *+61 (0) 475 072789
Received on Friday, 13 February 2015 03:09:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:18:43 UTC