Re: RDFa + RDF/XML Considered Harmful? (was RE: Ordnance Survey data as Linked Data)

Tom Heath wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-lod-request@w3.org 
>> [mailto:public-lod-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen
>> Sent: 12 July 2008 21:43
>> To: afraz.jaffri@tiscali.co.uk
>> Cc: public-lod@w3.org; semantic-web@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Ordnance Survey data as Linked Data (RE: How do 
>> you deprecate URIs? Re: OWL-DL and linked data)
>>
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>
>> I also forgot to mention obvous use of RDFa in the HTML doc 
>> which broadens the range of rdf aware user agents tha 
>> commence RDF discovery from HTML
> 
> Question: is it worth creating a duplicate RDF graph by using RDFa in
> HTML documents, when there is also RDF/XML available just one <link
> rel=".../> away, and at a distinct URI? 

I think so. Having inline data opens up some novel possibilities, like 
the cut 'n paste stuff [link temporarily escapes me. bengy? ].

> Doesn't this RDFa + RDF/XML
> pattern complicate the RDF-consumption picture in general if we assume
> agents will want to do something with data aggregated from a number of
> sources/locations, i.e. doesn't it increase the cost of removing
> duplicate statements by creating more in the first place? Does it not
> also complicate the picture of making provenance statements using named
> graphs, if the subject of the triple could be both an HTML document and
> an RDF graph?

If the xml and html versions are supposed to be the same information 
presented differently via content negotiation then all seems well. 
However it does seem like rdfa could be prone ambiguity around this, 
since one often describes the html document containing the rdfa. In that 
case putting the xml at the same uri is troublesome, although perhaps 
not fatally so.

If you're doing something like Ivan did in [1] I suppose we might want 
something to indicate that resource X is derived from Y. FRBR has (more 
than enough) machinery to express that. Ideally that would sit in the 
link rel. Maybe we can do that already?

> Dunno the answers to these questions, but interested to hear what people
> think.

This is my nearest substitute for thinking on a Monday morning,

Damian

[1] 
<http://ivanherman.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/setting-up-an-rdfa-with-apache/>

Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 09:45:19 UTC