W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > December 2010

Re: Wiki page on Goals

From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 09:23:13 +0100
Message-ID: <4CF8A8F1.9090305@cs.vu.nl>
To: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
CC: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>

> I suggest we use the list to discuss, and that we allow


> To me, everything in linked data is a relationship.
> Even the triple "X dc:title 'On History'" is the relationship
> of "X" to a title (a string literal).  So to me, description
> is the act of relating a resource to descriptive information - or
> to other resources.  Therefore, I would put "DESCRIBE" under the
> heading "Make relationships".

I'm not clear on what DESCRIBE really means, but I would guess something 
similar as what Tom says. But it should also be clear whether this 
descriptive information is new in the LD representation or was already 
present in the original data. In the last situation, I actually think 
this goal is superfluous to those under Represent original data as RDF.

> How about "MAP-INDIVIDUALS" versus "MAP-VOCABULARIES"?  I am
> less confident about this one and have not added it to the
> wiki document.  This depends on how we decide to name things
> like "value vocabularies".

Can only decide this one when we fix our terminology...

> The group currently labeled "Find relationships", on the other
> hand, I see as being more about "using" relationships (i.e.,
> "Use relationships").  The relationships, once "made" (see
> above), are "used" to discover, suggest, search, and browse.

I agree, "use" is broader and better covers discovering and searching, 
so I have renamed that group of goals as you suggest.

> Maybe the goal is to "NAME" things with URIs.  Yes, assigning URIs
> is a general requirement, but I think it could also be a goal if a
> primary motive is to give handles to a set of things so that they
> can be the subject or object of assertions in linked data.

So your suggestion for the new goal title is "NAME"? That sounds a bit 
too generic, either "URI" or "NAME WITH URI" would be better 
abbreviations of what that goal is about.

> vocabularies", this could be "REUSE-ELEMENT-VOCABS" (which would
> fit with "REUSE-VALUE-VOCABS").

If that's the terminology we'll be using I'm fine with these renamed goals.


> Tom
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Goals
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Talk:Goals
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/
> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/
> [5] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/11/25-lld-minutes.html
Received on Friday, 3 December 2010 08:23:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:38:38 UTC