W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > April 2006

RE: [WNET] new proposal WN URIs and related issues

From: Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:04:19 +0200
To: "Mark van Assem" <mark@cs.vu.nl>, "SWBPD list" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Cc: "Jan Wielemaker" <wielemak@science.uva.nl>, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>, "Guus Schreiber" <guus@few.vu.nl>
Message-ID: <FOEHKIENIPCJNPNFKGJNGEFHCLAD.pepper@ontopia.net>

* Mark van Assem
|
| I have been having a private discussion with Ralph Swick and Jan 
| Wielemaker concerning the WN URIs. On Guus' advice I'd like to 
| summarize/replay part of this discussion to obtain comments on our 
| conclusions. Ralph and Jan, please correct and/or add to this mail.

I would say that you have made the right decision in removing
the trailing slash and consolidating the namespaces. But I agree
with Jan that you should go the whole hog and put everything in
a single namespace. The local identifiers don't look especially
pretty -

 [1] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/synset-bank-noun-1
 [2] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/wordsense-bank-noun-1
 [3] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/word-bank
 [4] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/schema-participleOf

- but they don't need to. (In fact one could even question
whether they shouldn't just all be numeric identifiers...)

I'm interested to know what these URLs will resolve to. I
would like to see them resolve to the *human-readable* content
of WordNet (see suggested content below).

Why human-readable content and not a CBD [1]?

Because you want these identifiers to be useable by *anyone*,
right, not just practitioners of RDF? If you only return RDF,
you are creating an enormous barrier for everyone in information
management who is willing to put effort into marking up his or
her information (or classifying it, if you will), but who can
not yet handle RDF. You want those people to use your
identifiers as well, right? So make sure that they resolve
to something *anyone* can read.

By all means make the RDF of WordNet itself available as well,
but make sure that people interested in your identifiers,
rather than the assertions WordNet makes about the subjects
they denote, are able to take advantage of your work.

Steve

[1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/CBD/

--
Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>
Chief Strategy Officer, Ontopia
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3
Coordinator, W3C RDF/TM Task Force
Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps 1.0)


--------

For [1] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/synset-bank-noun-1


Title:    "WordNet 2.0 -- synset -- bank -- #1"
Content:  depository financial institution, bank,
          banking concern, banking company
          + links to 'wordsense-bank-1' and 'word-bank'

--------

For [2] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/wordsense-bank-noun-1

Title:    "WordNet 2.0 -- wordsense -- bank (n) -- #1"
Content:  (a financial institution that accepts deposits and
          channels the money into lending activities)
          "he cashed a check at the bank"; "that bank holds the
           mortgage on my home"
          + links to 'synset-bank-1' and 'word-bank'

--------

For [3] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/word-bank

Title:    "WordNet 2.0 -- word -- bank"
Content:  List all senses, definitions, and examples as at
          http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?o2=&o0=1&o7=&o5=&o1=1&o6=&o4=&o3=&s=bank


--------

For [4] http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/schema-participleOf

Title:    "WordNet 2.0 -- schema -- participleOf"
Content:  Definition of this property.
Received on Tuesday, 18 April 2006 18:04:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:19 UTC