Re: RDF 1.1 Primer

On 28 November 2013 07:35, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote:
>
> On Nov 27, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Guus Schreiber <guus.schreiber@vu.nl> wrote:
>
>> Pat,
>>
>> Here is the first set of responses to your comments. The responses concern your comments on Secs. 1-5. Secs. 6+ to follow.
>>
>> Guus
>>
>> > First pass of major howlers, I will get back with more details and suggestions for
>> > replacements later.
>> >
>> > Pat
>> > ----------
>> >
>> > First para. The examples are very atypical and misleading. RDF does not do
>> > times well, and it is not mostly used for annotating Web pages or videos, and
>> > 'resources' does not mean just Webbish things.  Might be better to use some
>> > DBpedia examples right off the bat, and talk explicitly about *data* rather than
>> > annotation.
>>
>> Hmm. We were intending to include some “data” examples further-on in the document (in the RDF Data section). But I’m surprised you consider annotation to be atypical.
>
> Well, I don't think the primer should give the impression that annotation is the primary or major use. Sure it is one, but yes I do see it as slightly atypical. What proportion of all RDF triples have a webpage or document as their subject?
>
>> Of course, Yves and I are a bit biased (due to our RDF work on music, TV, musea, archives, libraries). But there is lots of RDF annotations out there. And isn’t most of DBpedia in fact annotation?
>
> Um..no. I was going to cite DBPedia as a counterxample, in fact.  Every DBpedia URI with /resource/ in it denotes a thing, not a web page, and the /info/ pages are all http-range-14 compliant HTTP redirects from the /resource/ URI. I don't see any annotations there at all. Maybe you and I mean something different by "annotation"?

This is very likely. I was involved with the early W3C Annotea
project, and talking to people about RDF and "annotations" since then
I've found it a peculiarly frustrating term to use.

* It gets used most stereotypically where there is a document, and
users are attaching information (e.g. communal editing) to sentences
and paragraphs, e.g. "Can you rephrase this to use less passive
sentence structure?"
* It gets used for cases when markup structures are used to make
machine-accessible the information already to some extent expressed in
human-facing HTML text (e.g. most Microdata/RDFa usage, 5+ million
sites)
* It gets used for when the RDF is talking about some identifiable
entity and providing more information about it (i.e. any use of RDF
that mentions something that can be joined to data elsewhere, by URI
or reference-by-description).

For this reason I've avoided the term ever since...

Dan

Received on Thursday, 28 November 2013 08:08:02 UTC