- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 17:08:12 -0800
- To: RDF-IG <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
"Sean B. Palmer" wrote: >Part of the "How to create a Semantic Web in just 10 days" series :-) ... well we're behind schedule ... well have to work faster now to catch up :O! Seriously this is a good idea .. but maybe we should narrow it a bit though ... perhaps we could try to create a Semantic Web only about the pioneers of the Semantic Web ... kind of a Semantic Web Interest Group Web. For example we should be able to agree on the kinds of nodes such a web would contain: may I suggest a very partial start of node types: - people of the semantic web - web sites of the semantic web - software tools of the semantic web - forums of the semantic web > Yes, that's the whole point! But then you have that assertion, you need it > to say <Description about="me">, and I am suggesting that we use our email > addresses as an identifier for "me". Are you intentionally attempting to keep those things you say about yourself separate from those things said about you by others? Well I don't think that's a good idea. For example, I have a project afloat to read this interest group and publish the web sites that are mentioned by its participants. So I will want to make statements about you like: <description> <rdf:type resource="http://robustai.net/rdf_commons/person/" /> <rai:email resource="mailto:sean@mysterylights.com" /> <rai:name>Sean B. Palmer</rai:name> <rai:mentions> <bag bagId="whateverId"> <li rdf:resource="http://infomesh.net/sbp/" /> <li rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/WAI/" /> </bag> </rai:mentions> </description> Now my intention would be that this information that I am publishing about you would smush into the same node with the information that you are publishing about yourself. That would be the most useful, don't you think? But if you are going to try to maintain control of everything asserted to this node, then we would need to agree to use two different nodes to refer to you ... one authored only by you .. and one authored by everyone else. I think this will only contribute to fragmentation and the tower of babel. On the other hand, I think it would be useful if you and ~only you~ would at least designate a URI for the (one and only ideal) node that represents you as a person. Once that URI is know, then we will not need to use fuzzy matching to aggregate our knowledge of you, and our representation of you would no longer need to be be anonymous. Any URI structure would do, i don't think we all need to use the same one, and I can think of none better than "mailto:sean@mysterylights.com" .. as long as we can trust that you and ~only you~ are the person that asserted that was the URI of the ideal node representing yourself. Seth Russell Still looking for a RDF parser for the win32 platform... http://RobustAI.net/MyNetwork/index.html http://robustAI.net/MyNetwork/StickeyCyberMolecules.html Http://RobustAi.net/Ai/Conjecture.htm
Received on Sunday, 31 December 2000 20:02:34 UTC