- From: Graham Klyne <GK-lists@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 07:41:02 +0100
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- CC: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, public-lod@w3.org
Dan Brickley wrote: > This doc-typing idiom never got heavily used in FOAF, beyond the type > PersonalProfileDocument, which FOAF defines. Mostly we just linked > FOAF files together (initially with seeAlso and IFPs, lately using > URIs more explicitly). > > I think there are many other reasons why characterising typical RDF > document patterns makes sense, related to the frustration of dealing > with documents when all you know is "they have triples in them". We > don't have good mechanisms for doing so yet, ie. for characterising > these higher level patterns. But various folk are heading in same > direction, some using SPARQL, others OWL or XForms, or DC Application > Profile definitions.... > > Without some hints about what we're pointing at with our links, > crawlers don't have much to go on. Merely knowing that the information > at the other end of the link is "more RDF", or that it describes a > thing of a certain type, might not be enough. There are a lot of > things you might want to know about a person, or a place, and at many > different levels of detail. For apps eg running in a mobile/handheld > environment, they can't afford to speculatively download everything.. Interesting... I'm doing work at the moment with CIDOC-CRM (http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/) and its expression in OWL (http://www8.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/IMMD8/Services/cidoc-crm/versions.html). Something I've noticed is that the extension/refinement mechanism provided by CIDOC-CRM is based on what they call Types (though I think it's more like skos:Concept), so that the core properties tend be be very predictable. There are some areas where I've used new properties to capture finer-grained information, but they tend to be at the margins (e.g. putting numeric values on date-ranges) rather than in the core (e.g. this object was made in this time period). Maybe there's scope for using SKOS in a doc-typing idiom? #g
Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 07:02:15 UTC