- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:41:01 -0500
- To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, semantic-web@w3.org, Franck Cotton <franck.cotton@insee.fr>
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 17:33 +0200, Eric van der Vlist wrote: > Bernard and Dan, > > Le lundi 07 août 2006 à 16:59 +0200, Bernard Vatant a écrit : > > Dan > > > Ah... I misread your point. Indeed, in the general case, > > > lots of documents may discuss the same resource, and none > > > of them is authoritative. If DOC1#T1 and DOC2#T1 both > > > refer to France, there is no web architecture mechanism > > > for determining which is authoritative. > > > > > OK. But I don't want to have DOC1#T1 *and* DOC2#T1 as two distinct URIs > > defining France. I want one URI to define France. > > [...] > > > Sure it is. But the point is that I don't want to change the file. I > > want to publish a new one about the same entities, without deprecating > > the old one. > > I don't know if that's what Bernard would call elegant :), but what > about defining T1 in both DOC1 and DOC2 with a xml:base equal to DOC > (which means that in both DOC1 and DOC2, the identifier for #T1 is > neither DOC1#T1 nor DOC2#T1 but DOC#T1) and using a placeholder at the > address DOC#T1 with links (using rdfs:seeAlso or whatever) toward DOC1 > and DOC2? > > (Note that the mechanism can be adapted to slash URIs.) > > That keeps DOC1 and DOC2 "equally normative". Applications which want to > use them directly can do it and applications which don't have a clue > where they can find information about DOC#T1 can dereference this URI to > get a first idea where that can look. > > I see that as the equivalent of RDDL for namespace URIs: you use the URI > to publish a hint for applications that have no idea what the namespace > is about. > > Would that be acceptable for both of you? Hmm... yes, I think so. Note that what the tabulator will do is follow both seeAlso links and merge the data from DOC1 and DOC2. That seems consistent with what you intend: "equally normative". > > The last solution if this doesn't work for you could be to use either > non HTTP URIs or even anonymous RDF nodes and a > owl:InverseFunctionalProperty. Seems to be an overkill to me since in > this case we have a central authority which can define URIs but the > INSEE code is a perfect candidate for being an > owl:InverseFunctionalProperty... > > Eric -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 7 August 2006 17:41:11 UTC