- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:38:58 +0000
- To: DAWG public list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 10:24:58AM -0500, Kendall Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 03:00:43PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote: > > > > <http://triplestore.aktors.org/rdql/> > > rdf:type dawg:HTTPQueryService ; > > dawg:closedOver <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> ; > > dawg:supportsDataType xsd:integer, xsd:float ; > > dawg:querySyntax <http://www.w3.org/Submission/RDQL/> ; > > dawg:resultFormat <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-XMLres/> ; > > dawg:usesOntology akt:support, akt:portal, akt:rdfcompat, akt:inca, > > <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/>, > > <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . > > So these will end up in the protocol document in some similar form; > but I'll need to describe the meanings of these predicates, and as I > just pointed out on the phone call, I don't really understand > dawg:usesOntology... Do you mean that the query service "understands" > (in some vague way) some or all of the terms from these vocabularies? > Or something else? No, just that it contains some data that uses terms from that ontology. I didn't mean it to imply that the sevice could reliably DESCRIBE instances in those ontologies, for example. It if will help, here are the sort of names I rejected: containsOntology (confusing, might not be true) containsDataDefinedInOntology (unwieldy) usesTermsFromOntology ("") containsDataDefinedBy ("", but actually not too bad) usesSchema (might anoy non-RDFS people) In the end I settled for usesOntology, and decided not to care too much. I dont like encouraging people to read too much into property names anyway. > > I attended a workshop on linking semnatic websites on Monday, and briefly > > described the DAWG work, including the possibility of a description such > > as this, and the idea was warmly received. > > I heard similiar good reports from this workshop, too. Basically, > "we're going to use SPARQL query and protocol". Yup. I was pleasantly supprised. - Steve
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 16:39:01 UTC