- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 00:01:00 +0000
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- CC: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Kingsley, As a describer of other people's WebPages and entities and the inferred relationships between them, I use those existing terms frequently. In my worldview, though, I would be inclined to use the new Schema.org terms only on WebPages that I publish. Time will tell if that pattern actually emerges, I suppose. Jeff > On May 8, 2015, at 6:12 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > >> On 5/8/15 12:05 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote: >> Also note that Schema.org will have a solution in their next release: >> >> http://sdo-gozer.appspot.com/mainEntityOfPage >> http://sdo-gozer.appspot.com/mainEntity >> >> Jeff > > Jeff, > > They already have: > > 1. schema:about -- Property > 2. schema:url -- Property > 3. schema:WebPage -- Class > > Kingsley >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Martynas Jusevičius [mailto:martynas@graphity.org] >>> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 11:58 AM >>> To: Svensson, Lars >>> Cc: Kingsley Idehen; public-lod@w3.org >>> Subject: Re: Profiles in Linked Data >>> >>> I think foaf:primaryTopic/foaf:isPrimaryTopic of is a good convention for linking >>> abstract concepts/physical things to documents about them. >>> We use it extensively in our datasets. For example: >>> >>> <some/resource#this> a bibo:Book ; >>> foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf <some/resource/dcat> , <some/resource/premis> . >>> >>> <some/resource/dcat> a foaf:Document ; >>> foaf:primaryTopic <some/resource#this> . >>> >>> <some/resource/premis> a foaf:Document ; >>> foaf:primaryTopic <some/resource#this> . >>> >>> Hope this helps. >>> >>> Martynas >>> graphityhq.com >>> >>>> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de> wrote: >>>> Kingsley, >>>> >>>>> Hope this live example helps, in regards to understanding the issue >>>>> at hand. Basically, what a document describes is distinct from the >>>>> shape and form of its content. >>>> We're totally on the same page here, but I need a way to negotiate the shape >>> and the form of the description and that must in some way refer back to the >>> entity it describes. >>>> Lars >>>> >>>> Still trying to understand > > > -- > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > Founder & CEO > OpenLink Software > Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com > Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen > Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about > LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen > Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this > >
Received on Saturday, 9 May 2015 00:01:44 UTC