- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:18:30 -0500
- To: Phil Archer <phil.archer@talis.com>
- CC: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, public-lod@w3.org
On 1/13/11 6:04 AM, Phil Archer wrote: > Martin seems to be fighting a lone battle, but fwiw I'll add my +1 to > his comments. > +1 for Martin's comments. Assuming my other comments didn't make this obvious :-) > I do take the point that, in context, it's really nice if rdfs:seeAlso > gives a URI that provides more data in RDF and many applications will > make that assumption. But to /rely/ on that every time seems at odds > with the, AIUI fundamental notion, that a URI is an identifier and no > more. Yes, its a Super Key (in context of Linked Data), it can Lift (GET) Things up, and PUT Things down [1] . > > I'd say that if you see an rdfs:seeAlso property, sure, send an HTTP > request, but do it with a suitable accept header. If you get a 200, > great, add the data, but be ready to deal with a 406 (I've got it but > not in the format you have specified in your request). +1 Yep, as per my comments about sponging. [SNIP] Links: 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-cpojkILO0 -- Nice URI Ad. Identifiers are Identifiers, URIs re. Linked Data are just Identifiers on Steroids Kingsley > > > > Phil. > > On 13/01/2011 10:10, Martin Hepp wrote: >> Hi Nathan: >> >>> There are other ways of looking at this, remembering we're in the >>> realm of machine readable information and the context of RDF. >>> rdfs:seeAlso is used to indicate a resource O which may provide >>> additional information about the resource S - information in this >>> context being rdf, information for the machine - so we can say that >>> if O points to a resource that doesn't contain any information at >>> all (no rdf, or isn't the subject of any statements) then we've >>> created a meaningless statement, it may as well be { S rdfs:seeAlso >>> [] } >>> >>> One could easily suggest that it's good for RDF Schema properties to >>> have some use in RDF, and thus that if rdfs:seeAlso is used in a >>> statement, that it should point to some "information", some rdf for >>> the machine, otherwise it's a bit of a pointless property. >>> >>> Given the above, we could take the meaning of the sentence "no >>> constraints are placed on the format of those representations" and >>> assert that this simply means that RDF/XML is not required, and that >>> any RDF format can be used. >> >> I don't buy in to restricting the meaning of "data" in the context of >> RDF to "RDF data". If the subject or object of RDF triples can be any >> Web resource (information and non-information resource), then the >> range of rdfs:seeAlso should also include information resources (i.e., >> data) of a variety of conceptual and syntactic forms. >> >> And PDF, HTML without RDFa as well as images clearly qualify as data. >> They are also clearly machine-accessible. If you are still not >> convinced: What about CSV files or text files containing ACE >> (controlled English), or OData / GData? >> >> By the way, the problem of having to load huge amounts of data >> following rdfs:seeAlso is not limited to PDFs - even obeying Tim's >> proposal means there could be huge RDF graphs linked to via >> rdfs:seeAlso, and that is of course conceptually perfectly okay. >> >> After all, rdfs:seeAlso is not >> rdfs:linkToASmallChunkOfVeryRelatedDateInRDF ;-) Data management and >> data quality heuristics should not be solved at the conceptual level. >> If old clients employ outdated heuristics, those clients should update >> their heuristics, IMO. >> >> Best >> Martin >> >> >> On 12.01.2011, at 16:13, Nathan wrote: >> >>> Hi Martin, >>> >>> Martin Hepp wrote: >>>> For my taste, using rdfs:seeAlso is perfectly valid (yet >>>> suboptimal, because too unspecific), according to the RDFS spec: >>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_seealso >>>> Quote: "rdfs:seeAlso is an instance of rdf:Property that is used to >>>> indicate a resource that might provide additional information >>>> about the subject resource. >>>> A triple of the form: >>>> S rdfs:seeAlso O >>>> states that the resource O may provide additional information about >>>> S. It may be possible to retrieve representations of O from the >>>> Web, but this is not required. When such representations may be >>>> retrieved, ***no constraints are placed on the format of those >>>> representations***." >>> >>> >>> >>> Generally it appears to me that rdfs:seeAlso is a property for a >>> machine to follow in order to get more information, and that much of >>> the usage mentioned in this thread requires a property which informs >>> a human that they may want to check resource O for more information >>> - essentially something similar to a hyperlink in a html document >>> with no @rel value. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Nathan >>> >> >> >> >> Please consider the environment before printing this email. >> >> Find out more about Talis at http://www.talis.com/ >> shared innovation™ >> >> Any views or personal opinions expressed within this email may not be >> those of Talis Information Ltd or its employees. The content of this >> email message and any files that may be attached are confidential, and >> for the usage of the intended recipient only. If you are not the >> intended recipient, then please return this message to the sender and >> delete it. Any use of this e-mail by an unauthorised recipient is >> prohibited. >> >> Talis Information Ltd is a member of the Talis Group of companies and is >> registered in England No 3638278 with its registered office at Knights >> Court, Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, B37 7YB. >> >> Talis North America is Talis Inc., 11400 Branch Ct., Fredericksburg, VA >> 22408, United States of America. >> > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 16:19:02 UTC