- From: Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 10:13:08 -0700
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > On 6/9/11 9:58 AM, Michael Hausenblas wrote: >> >>> For how little this matters really - i'd really advice anyone wanting >>> to produce RDFa of schema to live with it and use direct >>> http://schema.org uris as per their example in RDFa. > > URL of the example in question? > > > Kingsley >> >> +1 >> >> Cheers, >> Michael >> -- >> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow >> 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 >> >> On 9 Jun 2011, at 09:54, Giovanni Tummarello wrote: >> >>> my2c >>> >>> i would seriously advice against using triples with >>> http://schema.rdfs.org . >>> >>> That would be totally and entirely validating their claim that either >>> you impose things or fragmentation will distroy everything and that >>> talking to the community is a waste of time. >>> >>> For how little this matters really - i'd really advice anyone wanting >>> to produce RDFa of schema to live with it and use direct >>> http://schema.org uris as per their example in RDFa. >>> >>> Gio >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Would it be reasonable to use http://schema.rdfs.org rather than >>>> http://schema.org in the URIs? Essentially mirror what one might hope >>>> for schema.org to become. Then if it does become that, link the two >>>> together? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Michael Hausenblas >>>> <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Something I don't understand. If I read well all savvy discussions so >>>>>> far, >>>>>> publishers behind http://schema.org URIs are unlikely to ever provide >>>>>> any >>>>>> RDF description, >>>>> >>>>> What makes you so sure about that not one day in the (near?) future the >>>>> Schema.org URIs will serve RDF or JSON, FWIW, additionally to HTML? ;) >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Michael >>>>> -- >>>>> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> On 7 Jun 2011, at 08:44, Bernard Vatant wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all >>>>>> >>>>>> Something I don't understand. If I read well all savvy discussions so >>>>>> far, >>>>>> publishers behind http://schema.org URIs are unlikely to ever provide >>>>>> any >>>>>> RDF description, so why are those URIs declared as identifiers of RDFS >>>>>> classes in the http://schema.rdfs.org/all.rdf. For all I can see, >>>>>> http://schema.org/Person is the URI of an information resource, not of >>>>>> a >>>>>> class. >>>>>> So I would rather have expected mirroring of the schema.org URIs by >>>>>> schema.rdfs.org URIs, the later fully dereferencable proper RDFS >>>>>> classes >>>>>> expliciting the semantics of the former, while keeping the reference >>>>>> to the >>>>>> source in some dcterms:source element. >>>>>> >>>>>> Example, instead of ... >>>>>> >>>>>> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://schema.org/Person"> >>>>>> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class"/> >>>>>> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Person</rdfs:label> >>>>>> <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">A person (alive, dead, undead, or >>>>>> fictional).</rdfs:comment> >>>>>> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://schema.org/Thing"/> >>>>>> <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://schema.org/Person"/> >>>>>> </rdf:Description> >>>>>> >>>>>> where I see a clear abuse of rdfs:isDefinedBy, since if you >>>>>> dereference >>>>>> the said URI, you don't find any explicit RDF definition ... >>>>>> >>>>>> I would rather have the following >>>>>> >>>>>> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://schema.rdfs.org/Person"> >>>>>> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class"/> >>>>>> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Person</rdfs:label> >>>>>> <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">A person (alive, dead, undead, or >>>>>> fictional).</rdfs:comment> >>>>>> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://schema.rdfs.org/Thing"/> >>>>>> <dcterms:source rdf:resource="http://schema.org/Person"/> >>>>>> </rdf:Description> >>>>>> >>>>>> To the latter declaration, one could safely add statements like >>>>>> >>>>>> schema.rdfs:Person rdfs:subClassOf foaf:Person >>>>>> >>>>>> etc >>>>>> >>>>>> Or do I miss the point? >>>>>> >>>>>> Bernard >>>>>> >>>>>> 2011/6/3 Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://schema.rdfs.org >>>>>> >>>>>> ... is now available - we're sorry for the delay ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Bernard Vatant >>>>>> Senior Consultant >>>>>> Vocabulary & Data Integration >>>>>> Tel: +33 (0) 971 488 459 >>>>>> Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> Mondeca >>>>>> 3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France >>>>>> Web: http://www.mondeca.com >>>>>> Blog: http://mondeca.wordpress.com >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> > > > -- > > 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, 9 June 2011 17:14:06 UTC