- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:18:52 +0200
- To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
- Cc: public-lld@w3.org
On 13 April 2011 14:50, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > First, let me just say I'm a big fan of the simplifications that you > and Thom are proposing ... they are clearly a big improvement. But I > am wondering about the foaf:focus pattern that you are promoting. > > I know I've said this before privately in IRC to various people, but > it's probably worth asking aloud here. Is it really necessary to use > URIs to distinguish between the thing itself, and the concept of the > thing? As a loose rule, I see value in the latter when the thing figures in some SKOS scheme, either to be mentioned alongside other related entities (also indirectly as concepts) or so that person_123_as_politician, person_123_as_parent, person_123_as_author could be distinguished as different topics. There is value in that, both for using those topic URIs to characterise information, but also to talk in more detail about skills/expertise. Someone might be a world export on "President George Bush snr. as a manager". I tend to see your question as a variant on "why both using SKOS RDF to describe concepts of thing, when I could just describe the world directly in RDF?". That's a fair question. I find http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-skos-reference-20090818/#L1045 still a useful overview... Dan
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 13:24:33 UTC