- 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