- From: John Goodwin <John.Goodwin@ordnancesurvey.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:52:05 +0100
- To: "Chris Wallace" <Chris.Wallace@uwe.ac.uk>, <public-lod@w3.org>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
Chris Wallace wrote: Thanks for the feedback Chris... > Thanks John for this resource - It inspires me to help my students to do a similar data collection > exercise in Bristol! Something tells me that students won't need too much encouragement in collecting the data :) > 1) The resource URI eg. http://www.johngoodwin.me.uk/pubs/id/pub1 > is not humanly readable. Is this considered to be a problem? For example DBPedia would be I think >be less valuable with system-generated resource ids, even though natural resource ids require a >mechanism for disambiguation. I think most tools use the rdfs:label to show a more humanly readable version. > 2) The pub name has been re-formatting to catalogue order, but pub names are proper nouns and I'd >be laughed at if I asked the way to "Alexandra, The". Perhaps both forms could be included with a >different tag for the catalog format if it is not computable from the natural name. Yes fair point. They were left this way mainly because of my own laziness. > 4) I feel uncomfortable with the non-uniform representation of the address - partly with domain >specific-tags pub:street and pub:postcode, partly with a company-specific (and non-humanly decipherable) >URI. I know that this is a can of worms e.g. http://xml.coverpages.org/namesAndAddresses.html#eccma and >I can't find a suitable address vocabulary but this mixture doesn't look very satisfactory. This was a problem. I actually looked around for a suitable address ontology, but couldn't find one. Most ontologies for address I found were for people rather than places. If this was a work project I probably would have taken more care over the address, but as it was an experiment on my own time I couldn't really be bothered :/ Sorry! > 5) pub:dateSurveyed: isn't this just the date at which the description was authored (if not when >it was entered into this format) i.e. dc:date To be honest I can't remember what the date was - I took it from my friends website as they collected the data. Being tea total I didn't aid in the data collection exercise :) > 6) Generally , these seem such general properties of any place that I'm surprised that any local >vocabulary is needed at all, given that no data is actually domain specific (like a list of beers >served). Agreed really. If anyone does find any useful address ontologies I may well change the RDF. > This case study seems a great example of the issues in vocabulary and resource reuse. It would be >interesting to compare the different solutions which different analysts would use to represent this data. >Perhaps something like it would be a good exercise for the Oxford VoCamp? Yes. Sadly I can't make that as I'll be elsewhere. John . This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice. Thank you for your cooperation. Ordnance Survey Romsey Road Southampton SO16 4GU Tel: 08456 050505 http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk
Received on Monday, 28 July 2008 12:52:46 UTC