- From: Renato golin <renato@ebi.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 22:46:10 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- CC: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Toby Inkster wrote: > 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. For classes, species and sub-species I agree with you, but you don't have a new kingdom every day. But again, the same problem will arise when using multiple languages... > 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". I see... "authority" seems to me as a formal specification and not only "as he understood". In that sense I could put myself as authority to all species I know about... Maybe "first described" (or something similar) could've been a better name... but that's just taste... ;) cheers, --renato
Received on Friday, 9 May 2008 21:47:31 UTC