Minting URIs is bad? (was: Re: [call for comments] voiD 1.0)

Sergio,

So you are saying, “If X doesn't appear to have a URI anywhere, then  
don't mint one, but use a blank node instead.”

I think the advantages of using URIs are well-understood and well- 
documented -- if you're not aware of the arguments, please let me know  
and I'll provide references.

You don't state any reasons against using URIs, you just say that you  
prefer not to use them. So please clarify: What do you gain by not  
introducing your own URI?

Best,
Richard


On 1 Feb 2009, at 20:36, Sergio Fernández wrote:

>
> After a short discussion with Michael by IRC about the issue he  
> pointed
> with my usage of void:target property, we got some conclusions.
>
> Basically while voID is not extended, many dataset don't have a proper
> URI. So there are two ways to refer them: URI vs Blank Node, a IFP
> property (in this case foaf:homepage) does the magic in both cases. I
> know that many people hate blank nodes, and I would like not to need  
> to
> use here, but in this case I prefer to use it and wait until the  
> dataset
> publish a proper URI.
>
> IMO this is not just interesting for voID, but the scope of this
> discussion is bigger for the whole Semantic Web in general: do we want
> to create this (artificial) URIs? What's your opinion?
>
> Cheers,
>
> [1] http://semanticweb.org/wiki/VoiD#Using_voiD
> [2] http://rdfohloh.wikier.org/about
>
> -- 
> Sergio Fernández - sergio.fernandez@fundacionctic.org
> R&D Deparment
> CTIC Foundation - www.fundacionctic.org
> Phone: +34 984 29 12 12
> Fax:  +34 984 39 06 12
> Edificio Centros Tecnológicos
> Parque Científico Tecnológico
> 33203 Cabueñes - Gijón - Asturias - Spain
>
>

Received on Monday, 2 February 2009 00:22:51 UTC