W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > July 2008

RDFa + RDF/XML Considered Harmful? (was RE: Ordnance Survey data as Linked Data)

From: Tom Heath <Tom.Heath@talis.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:55:42 +0100
Message-ID: <DD5E887552496241BC701548837A282F0703C280@nemo.talis.local>
To: "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Cc: <public-lod@w3.org>, <semantic-web@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-lod-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-lod-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen
> Sent: 12 July 2008 21:43
> To: afraz.jaffri@tiscali.co.uk
> Cc: public-lod@w3.org; semantic-web@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Ordnance Survey data as Linked Data (RE: How do 
> you deprecate URIs? Re: OWL-DL and linked data)
> 
> 
> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> 
> I also forgot to mention obvous use of RDFa in the HTML doc 
> which broadens the range of rdf aware user agents tha 
> commence RDF discovery from HTML

Question: is it worth creating a duplicate RDF graph by using RDFa in
HTML documents, when there is also RDF/XML available just one <link
rel=".../> away, and at a distinct URI? Doesn't this RDFa + RDF/XML
pattern complicate the RDF-consumption picture in general if we assume
agents will want to do something with data aggregated from a number of
sources/locations, i.e. doesn't it increase the cost of removing
duplicate statements by creating more in the first place? Does it not
also complicate the picture of making provenance statements using named
graphs, if the subject of the triple could be both an HTML document and
an RDF graph?

Dunno the answers to these questions, but interested to hear what people
think.

Tom.

-- 
Tom Heath
Researcher
Platform Team
Talis Information Ltd
T: 0870 400 5000
W: http://www.talis.com/platform
Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 08:56:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:40 UTC