Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?

Ed,
 
> Would it be hard to remove the empty literal assertions? e.g.

Fixed now. Dunno why I had it there in the first place ;)

> It's interesting that the latest efforts to create a Link Relation
> Registry seem to be intentionally avoiding publishing machine readable
> data for the registry [1]. I was wondering if Mark Nottingham's
> efforts to revamp link relations might present a good opportunity for
> us to lobby the IETF to start publishing a bit of RDFa for the link
> relations registry...

Agree! Let's lobby :)


Cheers,
      Michael

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html



> From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 09:37:49 -0400
> To: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Using predicates which have no ontology?
> Resent-From: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 13:38:22 +0000
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> Would it be hard to remove the empty literal assertions? e.g.
> 
> --
> <http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/alternate> a awol:RelationType ;
>      rdfs:label "alternate" ;
>      dcterms:dateAccepted "" ;
>      dcterms:description "" ;
>      rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.iana.org/go/rfc4287> .
> --
> 
> It's interesting that the latest efforts to create a Link Relation
> Registry seem to be intentionally avoiding publishing machine readable
> data for the registry [1]. I was wondering if Mark Nottingham's
> efforts to revamp link relations might present a good opportunity for
> us to lobby the IETF to start publishing a bit of RDFa for the link
> relations registry...
> 
> //Ed
> 
> [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-09#appendix-A
>

Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 13:16:42 UTC