- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:27:19 -0400
- To: Paul Houle <ontology2@gmail.com>
- CC: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>, public-lod@w3.org, semantic-web@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4CADF4E7.8060001@openlinksw.com>
On 10/7/10 11:56 AM, Paul Houle wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Martin Hepp > <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > <mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>> wrote: > I've got mixed feelings about "snippets" vs "fully embeded RDFa". > For the most part I think systems that use snippets will be more > maintainable, but I've seen cases where fully embedded RDFa fits very > well into a system and there may be cases where the size of the HTML > can be reduced by using it -- and HTML size is a big deal in the real > world where loading time matters and we're increasingly targeting > mobile devices. > The RDFa issue that really bugs me is that a linked data URI can > be read to signify a number of different things. Consider, for instance, > http://dbpedia.org/resource/Rainbow_Bridge_(Tokyo) > <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Rainbow_Bridge_%28Tokyo%29> > (i) This is a string. It has a length. It uses a particular subset > of available characters > (ii) This is a URI. It has a scheme, it has a host, path, might > have a # in it, query strings, all that; a number of assertions can > be made about it as a URI > (iii) This is a document. The URI resolves to a Resource at the address (URL): <http://dbpedia.org/page/Rainbow_Bridge_(Tokyo)>, that's projected/presented via a browser to users as a Document. > We can assert the "content-type" of this document (or at least one > version we've negotiated), we can assert it's charset, length in > bytes, length in characters, particular subset of available > characters used, number of triples asserted directly in the > document, the number of triples we can infer by applying certain > rules to this in connection with a certain knowledgebase, and on and on > (iv) This is about a wikipedia article (some wikipedia articles don't > map cleanly to a named entity) > (v) This is about a named entity <http://dbpedia.org/page/Rainbow_Bridge_(Tokyo)> is a Descriptor Resource associated with an Entity that has an HTTP URI based Name. > The more I think about it, the more I it bugs me, and it's all the > worse when you've using RDFa and you've got HTML documents. Only if you don't share the view points I've just added :-) > For instance, you could clearly see > http://ookaboo.com/o/pictures/topic/28999/Beijing > as a signifier for a city. Some people would make the assertion that > dbpedia:Beijing owl:sameAs ookaboo:topic/28999/Beijing. > and that's not entirely stupid. On the other hand, it's definitely > true that > ookaboo:topic/28999/Beijing is sioc:ImageGallery. > Put something true together with a practice that's common and you get > the absurd result that > dbpedia:Beijing is sioc:ImageGallery. Hopefully my response clears this all up, at least a little :-) -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Thursday, 7 October 2010 16:27:54 UTC