- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 16:26:41 +0100 (BST)
- To: "Renato Golin" <renato@ebi.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
> Plain text for divisions can lead to spell problems (not only caps) and > the information won't be wrong, but also putting all species names in a > list is not possible. How would you address that? The same could be said for foaf:name. FOAF doesn't have a big list of name URIs that you can choose from, and nor should it. URIs are good, but literals have their place in RDF too. > In Authority you state what I got as the citation. Will you link to any > journal database or have a local citation list? Just saying "Linnaeus, > 1758" is not enough for most cases. A taxonomic authority is similar to a citation, but it's not the same. It's actually closer to a traditional namespacing mechanism. It effectively qualifies the binomial term being used, so "Homo sapiens (Linnaeus, 1758)" means "Homo sapiens, as would have been understood by Linnaeus in 1758". For a citation that is, say, a paper on the species in question, then biol:seeAlso can be used. For a citation justifying your claim that Foo is of species Bar, then you're getting into reification territory. -- Toby Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Friday, 9 May 2008 15:27:26 UTC