Re: temporary urn:predicates

On 2015-06-30 16:59, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> I was talking recently about barriers to producing semantic web data.
>
> Normally a predicate has to be
>
> - A URI
> - Preferably an HTTP URI
> - Preferably an existing URI
>
> This (Im told) can be a barrier for newcomers.  They have to find the
> right name for a predicate, the right URI, and then see if it's already
> used.  If not create their own vocabulary.
>
> At this point some might give up.
>
> So I was wondering how it might be possible to create a temporary URI
> that people could use as a place holder, so the software still works,
> until they think of a better name.
>
> We've all had to do this at some point, right?
>
> So I originally used to use things like:
>
> </predicate> or
> <#predicate>
>
> But that breaks down when you start using multiple documents because the
> URI is relative to the base.
>
> So I thought why not use:
>
> <urn:predicate>
>
> It seems to me local predicates are "just a name" and a urn is "just a
> name" so it would be a good match.
>
> My main concern is whether it would have collisions with the IANA registry:
>
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/urn-namespaces/urn-namespaces.xml
>
> Any thoughts?


I think for newcomers, the focus should be on declaring and defining 
clear terms (if they really have to create their own vocabs).

If a software can work with URNs, it can most likely work with HTTP or 
XYZ. Non-deferenceable HTTP URIs are still preferable to alternative 
non-deferenceable URIs due to lower maintenance, e.g., if the resource 
can be dereferenced one day. From a practical stand point, an HTTP URI 
which can't be deferenced, will still act like an URN URI.

-Sarven
http://csarven.ca/#i

Received on Monday, 13 July 2015 16:18:37 UTC