- From: Bob Ferris <zazi@smiy.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:21:17 +0100
- To: public-lod@w3.org
Hi Carsten, On 2/22/2012 12:02 PM, Carsten Keßler wrote: > Dear LODers, > > we are currently working on a project for the United Nations Office > for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Geneva to > develop a Humanitarian Exchange Language (HXL). Some information about > the project is available at https://sites.google.com/site/hxlproject/. > > One of the core components of HXL will be an RDF vocabulary to > annotate the data that are exchanged between humanitarian > organizations. The current draft is available at > http://hxl.humanitarianresponse.info. It is far from complete, but I > think it already shows where we want to go with this. Any feedback on > the vocabulary draft is very welcome, of course. At a first glance, your ontology looks very interesting and well designed. > > The aspect we are currently working on is a metadata section that will > include classes and properties to state who has reported a certain > piece of information, when it was reported, whether it was approved > (and at which level), and so forth. The current idea is to create > named graphs that can be described by these metadata elements. I'd > like to hear your comments on this approach, since this will lead to a > situation where we can have the same triple in several named graphs > For example, graph A with all data reported on Januar 20, 2012 by an > OCHA information officer in Suda, graph B with all data approved by > the OCHA regional office on January 21, and graph C with all data > approved by OCHA in Geneva on January 22. The rationale is to be able > to query based on these metadata elements via SPARQL, e.g., "give me > all figure about refugess in Sudan from January 2012 approved by OCHA > Geneva". Note that the regional office may only approve some of the > triples originally reported, and OCHA Geneva may only approve a subset > of those approved by the regional office. So basically we need to be > able to attach those metadata elements to every single triple. > > We will probably run into a situation where we can have the same > triple in 10–20 graphs at the same time. Likewise, we will have a > pretty large number of named graphs in our store, and I'd like to know > whether you think this approach is problematic (e.g. in terms of query > performance), and whether you see an alternative approach? I investigated some thoughts on this topic as well in the past. This is also a topic of the current RDF WG Graphs TF (See [1]). I think, you exactly pointed out the problems with duplicated triples and single triple named graphs. So there might be the (rather old) need for statement identifiers, i.e., a URI (or maybe also a bnode) for identifying a single triple and to be able to describe external context information. You can find my proposal at the RDF WG comments mailing list, see [2]. Cheers, Bo [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2011Jan/0001.html
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2012 11:21:58 UTC