- From: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetilk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:26:47 +0200
- To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Dear all, Thanks, Mark for addressing my concerns, and David for following up. On Wednesday 29 March 2006 01:26, Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote: > 1. Starting from a word (not a URI), look up information related to > that word, which will give you URIs that are RDF nodes in triples. > In this usage, a URI query like > > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn/wordsense/noun/bank/ > > may be handy as an easy query mechanism. Yes, I think that would be quite interesting. > However, I don't know > whether applications would already know that they want only noun > usages of "bank". So perhaps something like > > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn/wordsense/bank/ > > would be better. Also, the language may need to be indicated, so > perhaps something like the following would work better: > > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn/wordsense/en/bank/ I do not have a clear opinion here, but there are a few such issues that needs discussing, I would imagine. > 2. Starting from a particular URI that is an RDF node in a triple, > look up related information. In this case, I don't think the > application would (or should) know to deconstruct the URI in order to > do a broader query, so I don't think the above mechanism would be > appropriate for this usage. (But please correct me if you think I'm > wrong.) I agree. Expecting applications to infer this much might be in violation of the URI opaqueness guideline of the Webarch. > BTW, one thing I notice in looking over the WordNet document[1] that > you mentioned: It seems a little odd that there are different lexical > conventions used for forming the different kinds of URIs that are > used. For example, the document shows the following NounSynset, > WordSense and Word URIs (respectively): > > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/107909067-bank-n/ > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/bank-noun-1/ > http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wn20/word-bank/ I must admit that I didn't quite understand this either. Could this lead to URI aliasing, i.e. several URIs for the same resource? > i.e., "synset/bank-noun-1" acts as a unique synset identifier. Would > that work or did I misunderstand something? It would be nice to get > rid of the arbitrary synset ID numbers if they are not needed. I agree. I didn't actually see them before I started digging into the wn database files, it is rather hard for a user to relate to them Best, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Information Systems Developer Opera Software ASA
Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2006 13:27:23 UTC