- From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 20:04:43 +0200
- To: SWBPD list <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi all,
In a recent discussion I had with Kjetil [1] the option popped up of
using URIs as a means of primitive queries. The following URI in
WordNet refers to the first NounWordSense of the word "bank", which is
an RDF node in WN:
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn/wordsense/noun/bank/1/
(note that this format for WN URIs is a new proposal, not the current
proposal in the WN draft [2])
The current proposal is to return the CBD [3] of the requested RDF node.
Kjetil argued that many agents would probably like somewhat bigger
chunks of data at once, e.g. all NounWordSenses of "bank". This could
be done by returning the set of NounWordSenses with the Word "bank" on
HTTP GETs on the URI:
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn/wordsense/noun/bank/
Of course this problem could also be solved with a full SPARQL service
for WN, but it is yet unclear if we would have anything more than
static files and server URI rewrites to our disposal. Then this might
be a nice alternative - or even if we have SPARQL, just a nice
intermediate choice.
However, this second (type of) URI does not refer to any RDF node or
RDF arc. So I'm wondering whether this use of URIs is "accepted
practice" (or could become such a thing) or "should be avoided at all
costs" because the approach mixes the naming of nodes with naming sets
of nodes.
Thanks for the advice,
Mark van Assem.
[1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2006Mar/0076.html
[2]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/WNET/wn-conversion.html
[3]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/WNET/wn-conversion.html#querying
--
Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
Received on Monday, 27 March 2006 18:04:54 UTC