Re: Blank Nodes Re: Toward easier RDF: a proposal

Hugh, do you mean something like bnode.id = sha256(serialise(bnode))

On Mon, 3 Dec 2018, 22:58 Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org wrote:

> This is not directly about blank nodes, but is a reply to a message in the
> thread.
>
> I’m certainly agreeing that we should work towards common understanding of
> Thing equality.
> And addresses are a great place to start.
> In order for equality to be defined, I think that means you first need an
> idea of what an unambiguous address looks like.
>
> Having an oracle that defines what an unambiguous Thing looks like is one
> organisational structure, and it would be great if schema.org could lead
> the way.
> It particularly helps people who just want an off the shelf solution,
> especially if they have no knowledge of the Thing domain.
>
> However I (and perhaps David Booth) am after something more anarchic, that
> can function in a decentralised way (if I dare to use that term! :-) )
> For example, I might decide that I think that House Number and PostCode is
> enough.
> (UK people will know that this is a commonly-used way of choosing an
> address, although it may well not be satisfactory for some purposes, I’m
> sure.)
> That may well be sufficient for me to interwork with datasets from
> Companies House, the Land Registry and a bunch of other UK-based
> organisations, plus many other datasets.
>
> Having a simple standard way to create keys for such things facilitates
> that, without any standardisation process and all that entails in
> weaknesses and strengths of trying to get agreement on what an unambiguous
> address might look like on a world scale for all purposes.
>
> Just generating a URI, without needing to make any service calls (having
> found where they are and chosen the one you want and compromised on it,
> etc.) or anything seems to me a way of making all the interlinking so much
> more accessible for us all.
> It is even future proof:- using such a URI means that if it is about
> something new (UK postcodes change all the time :-(, and there are more
> dead ones than live ones), the oracle doesn’t tell me anything it didn’t
> have until I ask again.
> In a key-generating world, my new shiny key will slowly align with all the
> other key URIs as they get created.
>
> So yeah, all strength to anyone who wants to take on the central roles,
> but not at the expense of killing the anarchic solution, please.
>
> Cheers
>
> > On 3 Dec 2018, at 22:10, Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Cheers for agreeing William. On the topic of incomplete blank nodes
> Henry I'd give them another type, the partial address example you give I'd
> give the type AddressComponent, or something to that effect. I could be
> wrong, but it's not a valid Address if it's a blank node and no other
> information in the graph completes it.
> >
> > Anthony
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 1:56 PM William Waites <wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> > > standards like schema:PostalAddress should possibly define relevant
> > > operations like equality checking too.
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> >
>
>