Re: Org. Namespace Example

I wonder whether they tried to process it using an RDF tool, because
it doesn't do what it looks like. DBpedia uses the prefix
http://dbpedia.org/resource/ for URIs, and it is not clear that
DBpedia resources actually map directly to classes anyway.

I think you need to go over some examples of how to use rdf:about,
rdf:resource, and rdf:datatype in RDF/XML before you worry about the
meaning of what you are trying to write. Maybe it would be simpler for
you to start writing out NTriples where you see each of the triples
without the XML abstraction.

The following line is the main syntax problem

<rdf:type rdf:datatype="http://dbpedia.org/page/The_commons" />

as it should be

<rdf:type rdf:resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_commons" />

or if they wanted to match the rest of the document's style

<The_commons xmlns="http://dbpedia.org/resource/" />

Cheers,

Peter

On 24 June 2010 12:03, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 'Strange' is probably the nicest thing Government Work has ever been called :)
>
> The Public Domain is not undeveloped territory, it is a domain sovereign's 'set aside' for sharing. I think that ignoring this will handicap the Semantic Web and might do worse.
>
> There are some details I wonder about:
> * Perhaps org:classification would be better than org:purpose.
> * Perhaps The Commons should be a resource rather than a datatype, although beaches do all have water next door, for example.
> * Perhaps 'Caretaker' or 'Contact Person' might be better than 'Superintendent', but all are more exact, in a customer service sense, than org:headOf.
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 6/23/10, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
>> Subject: Re: Org. Namespace Example
>> To: "Gannon Dick" <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
>> Cc: "egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, "Linked Data community" <public-lod@w3.org>
>> Date: Wednesday, June 23, 2010, 5:31 PM
>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:52:29 -0700
>> (PDT)
>> Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > An RDF/XML example for each type is below
>>
>> These examples are strange.
>>
>> Firstly, bridges and beaches are not typically considered
>> organisations.
>>
>> Secondly, you appear to be using some of the classes
>> defined by the org
>> vocabulary as if they were properties.
>>
>> Lastly, none of the URIs you're using in rdf:about,
>> rdf:resource or
>> rdf:datatype make any sense whatsoever.
>>
>> --
>> Toby A Inkster
>> <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
>> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 24 June 2010 02:20:17 UTC