Re: In defence of 404 ...

I was reading the parallel thread on "Reifying triples", and wondered
what you would think of the following kind of solution for multiple
publication issue
Say I  have versioning files such as e.g.,
http://rdf.insee.fr/geo/publications-Commune.rdf  where I store all
versions of descriptions of resources of class geo:Commune

In this file I would have "Version" nodes with discriminating Dublin
Core properties.

_:b75056-2003      a      :Version
_:b75056-2003      dc:subject  http://rdf.insee.fr/geo/COM_75056
_:b75056-2003      dc:date   2006-07-18
_:b75056-2003      dc:source
http://rdf.insee.fr/geo/arrondissements-75-2003.rdf

_:b75056-2005      a      :Version
_:b75056-2005      dc:subject  http://rdf.insee.fr/geo/COM_75056
_:b75056-2005      dc:date   2007-03-15
_:b75056-2005      dc:source
http://rdf.insee.fr/geo/arrondissements-75-2005.rdf

One could query this file to find out which document contains the
description of the subject http://rdf.insee.fr/geo/COM_75056 which has
been published for a given date.

Thoughts?



Dan Connolly a écrit :
> On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 22:37 +0200, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
>   
>> Le mardi 08 août 2006 à 14:09 -0500, Dan Connolly a écrit :
>>     
>>> On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 19:02 +0200, Bernard Vatant wrote:
>>>       
>>>>> 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".
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>           
>>>> Yes. But it might happen that the merged data are not consistent,
>>>> although of course separately DOC1 and DOC2 should be.
>>>>         
>>> That's not what "equally normative" means to me; "equally normative"
>>> implies consistent, no?
>>>       
>> We might have two different issues.
>>
>> Short term, yes DOC1 and DOC2 will give complementary and consistant
>> descriptions of the same set of entities.
>>     
>
> Ah... good.
>
>   
>> Longer term, if we want to publish several versions of these data we
>> will have to figure out how we would like to express all that.
>>     
>
> Yes, that's an interesting puzzle.
>
>   
>>  Including
>> rdfs:seeAlso references to different versions of the same data could
>> lead to include inconsistent descriptions and I think that this is what
>> Bernard means. 
>>     
>
> In that case, I hope we can use something more refined than seeAlso
> to say "well, here's the newer version, i.e. the version I'm most
> actively supporting today, though I still stand by this old version.
> I don't promise you can use them together at the same time to
> get something sensible." and maybe the tabulator can be taught
> to discriminate.
>
>   
>> Eric
>>

Received on Wednesday, 9 August 2006 09:07:00 UTC