- From: Andrea Splendiani <andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 09:26:13 +0000
- To: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
- Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi, thanks for your answer. A quotation is indeed an interesting solution. However, if I understand it correctly (maybe not!) this implies using a literal. If (as far as I remember this is the case) I cannot predicate on a literal, then I would be forced to use a URI for it (a blank node with a literal as a property won't be feasible in my case). So basically this leads to a 2 URIs scheme. Or am I missing something ? Re: > The notions of "lifecycle", "state", and such are illusory. What > changes are people's minds, not the URI. The state is properly > predicated of some individual or collective consciousness, for example: Sure, the URI doesn't change. But "lifecycle", "state" and such are in fact state of the community respect to the URI. At some point... they hae to be written down. best, Andrea Splendiani Il giorno 11/nov/2011, alle ore 03.16, Paul Tyson ha scritto: > On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 14:29 +0000, Andrea Splendiani wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have a curiosity/problem/request for suggestions which is loosely related >> to the Referee/Referred identification. >> >> In my case, I need to predicate on a URI, intended as an identifier. >> >> So (keeping canonical example), I can have: >> >> http://xx/Berlin This is the URI of the thing per se. >> http://xx/web/Berlin Points to a web representation >> http://xx/data/Berlin Data representation >> >> Now I can predicate in all these documents on http://xx/Berlin referring to >> the actual city. >> >> But I need to predicate on "http://xx/Berlin" intended as an identifier: in >> my case, this goes through cycles of approvals and states. In practice I >> would need to tell whether my URI is approved, reserved, invalid! and so >> on... >> These are clearly not properties of the city of Berlin! >> >> How is this case usually approached ? In principle, it should be quite >> common. >> >> What I was considering (in order of preference): >> >> 1) perhaps some as hoc extension of OWL (annotations). At the end this is an >> overgrown versioning mechanism >> 2) creating a dichotomy between "identifiers objects" and "identifiers >> codes". This could make some sense in my case as identifiers come as codes >> that inherit some 'unconvential' semantics. >> 3) ignoring the distinction and putting it relegating to the semantics of >> relations (a bit like 1, in the end, but dirtier) >> 4) ignore informations on URIs on the web (delegating it to some internal >> engine). This may be a last resort solution. >> >> Any idea ? >> > Another option is to use a quoting mechanism. > > ex:BracketedTerm a rdfs:Class . > ex:termInBrackets a rdf:Property ; > rdfs:domain ex:BracketedTerm . > > The notions of "lifecycle", "state", and such are illusory. What > changes are people's minds, not the URI. The state is properly > predicated of some individual or collective consciousness, for example: > > ex:AnApprover ex:approves [a ex:BracketedTerm; > ex:termInBrackets "http://xx/Berlin"^^xs:anyURI; > rdfs:comment "URI representing the city of Berlin." ] . > > Regards, > --Paul > >> ciao, >> Andrea >> >> >> >> >> Andrea Splendiani >> Senior Bioinformatics Scientist >> Centre for Mathematical and Computational Biology >> +44(0)1582 763133 ext 2004 >> andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk >> >> >> >> >> > Andrea Splendiani Senior Bioinformatics Scientist Centre for Mathematical and Computational Biology +44(0)1582 763133 ext 2004 andrea.splendiani@bbsrc.ac.uk
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 09:27:23 UTC