- From: Hugh Glaser <hugh@glasers.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 20:07:12 +0100
- To: mail@frensjan.nl
- Cc: SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hi Frens Jan, Sorry to perhaps be a bit difficult here, rather than answer the question as put. I read your posting with some unease. In general: When people move from an existing application in a programming language to using RDF, it can often seem that things don't move over easily and naturally; and indeed that can be the case. Other have commented many times on this list, that RDF is neither a programming language nor a data structure description, so perhaps that is not surprising. Without the specific set of ways in which you will be using the knowledge (rather than an abstract "well I want it to be like the Java I already have"), it is hard to suggest alternatives. > This allows reconstruction of the name into a string while at the same time expressing the components of the name. So it captures the roles of the elements of a name (e.g. given names, family names) *as well as* their order (given names aren't first everywhere). Also, it allows expressing multiple names. E.g. in multiple languages / scripts. Or even aliases used in different areas of the world. Since you talk about "given names", it seems to me that you could use :givenNames "Frens Jan" More specifically, you seem to want to tread an almost impossible line of small amount of the knowledge of a person's name, without having anything extra. If you really want to be able to embrace the multi-cultural stuff of even just UK, HUN & ESP, for example, you need to think what you will do with people like Bartók Béla and our own Ivan Herman, who might also been know as Herman Ivan; José Plácido Domingo Embil; Pablo Ruiz Picasso; Sacha Noam Baron Cohen; I actually have a feeling you can get away with :givenNames :familyNames for quite a while, if you are lucky, but as I said, it will depend on the context of your application. Good luck Hugh > On 10 Jun 2021, at 18:37, Rumph, Frens Jan <mail@frensjan.nl> wrote: > > Dear Christophe, > > Thank you for the pointer. I wasn't aware of this ontology! There are some elements missing from the vocabulary, but it comes a long way. But knowing that others went down this route is somewhat reassuring. > > As for the use of blank nodes: agreed, this is not necessary. Given the inability to delete them (with SPARQL) I am steering away from them anyway. > > Best regards, > Frens Jan > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 1:08 PM Christophe Debruyne <christophe.debruyne@gmail.com> wrote: > MADS (https://www.loc.gov/standards/mads/rdf/) provides you a way to represent parts of a name using a collection. A madsrdf:PersonalName has a madsrdf:elementList that refers to a list (thus keeping order). In that list, you can have various typed resources with a madsrdf:elementValue containing the literals. > The nodes do not necessarily have to be blank. So this looks like your second approach but using a vocabulary published by the Library of Congres. > With my best regards, > Christophe > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 12:39 PM Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com> wrote: > Why is the list syntax ( ) not satisfactofy? > > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 12.07, Rumph, Frens Jan <mail@frensjan.nl> wrote: > Dear readers, > > I am investigating transitioning an application to use RDF. One roadblock is how this application models names of persons. It supports straight-forward full names as a single string, but also supports decomposed names, e.g. person X has given name *Frens* followed by a second given name *Jan* followed by the family name *Rumph*. > > Note that this is a crosspost of https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65982459/rdf-modelling-of-list-of-name-elements. I hope to get some more > > The data structure is something like: > > ```java > enum Role { > ... > GIVEN_NAME, > FAMILY_NAME, > ... > } > > record NameElement(role: Role, value: String) {} > > record AnnotatedName(NameElement... elements) {} > ``` > > in order to be instantiated like: > > ```java > var name = new AnnotatedName( > new NameElement(GIVEN_NAME, "Frens"), > new NameElement(GIVEN_NAME, "Jan"), > new NameElement(FAMILY_NAME, "de Vries") > ); > ``` > > This allows reconstruction of the name into a string while at the same time expressing the components of the name. So it captures the roles of the elements of a name (e.g. given names, family names) *as well as* their order (given names aren't first everywhere). Also, it allows expressing multiple names. E.g. in multiple languages / scripts. Or even aliases used in different areas of the world. > > I have toyed around with some RDF constructs, but none are really satisfactory: > > ```turtle > # list of strings misusing data types as tags > :frens :name ( "Frens"^^:givenName "Jan"^^:givenName "de Vries"^^:familyName ) . > > # list of blank nodes > :frens :name ( [ :givenName "Frens" ] > [ :givenName "Jan" ] > [ :familyName "de Vries" ] ) . > > # single blank node with unordered 'elements' > :frens :name [ a :AnnotatedPersonName ; > :fullName "Frens Jan de Vries" ; > :givenName "Frens" ; > :givenName "Jan" ; > :familyName "de Vries" ] . > ``` > > --- > > **Existing ontologies for HD names?** > Is there an existing ontology that covers such 'high fidelity'? FOAF and vcard have some relevant properties, but aren't able to capture this level of semantics. > > **Lists?** One major 'blocker' in migrating this approach to RDF is the notion of order that is used. If at all possible, I'd like to stay away from the List / Container swamp in RDF land ... > > I'd be grateful for any thoughts on the matter! > > Best regards, > Frens Jan -- Hugh 023 8061 5652
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2021 19:08:00 UTC