- From: Greg FitzPatrick <gf@medianet.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:54:47 +0100
- To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>, "Ron Daniel" <RDaniel@DATAFUSION.net>
- Cc: "Eric Hellman" <eric@openly.com>, "RDF Interest Group" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
I have been spending quite some time with two codes - ISIC rev 3 and CPC v1.0. http://www.un.org/Depts/unsd/class/website/isic3/i3_ind_a.htm Both are available at the United Nations Statistics Division. I assume that they are the property of the United Nations but I also assume that they are made available for public use. The jokes on me if I am wrong. These codes are not islands. They have relatationships, alignments and degrees of mapability to a world wide family of statistical codes such as NAICE (btw used by Biztalk), SICs, SNAs, CTUA and TUS SITC and on and on. The lines of transversion are: a. timelined, e.g. comparing economic activity of 1900 with that of 2000 b. framed, - similar activities performed in different frames e.g.. sawing trees as a gardener or sawing trees as a woodsman. c. cultured, e.g.. An office manager in Borneo - an office manager in Sweden d. languaged, e.g.. Lang=se Dirigent - Lang=en Conductor I have lengthfuly dreamed about getting these codes and all their brothers and sisters, aunts and cousins, timelined, framed, cultured and translated into a manageable schema, a veritable jungle-jim of nodes and arcs fanning out from tight precision lockups to fuzzy disintegration, but alas who will do the job?? Not you - right? And as we venture out into Europe with the SKiCal initiative... ( see SKiCal at INRIA on FEB 15 http://www.w3.org/Mobile/posdep-workshop ), we are constantly encountering projects attempting to create naming conventions out of the blue as if there were not already a barn load in existence. Even CEN, with their TC 329/WG 2 N 69, burning up EU money, as if there didn't already exist a standard for tourist activities to build upon. Or check out these guys: 20 mil ECUs down the drain http://www.caib.es/ibit/projecte/intourisme/ingles/kgeneral.html Instead of helping to standardize and metatag European tourist resources, they are building a "portal" with a proprietary naming convention and term list. Back to earth - in lieu of the future, this is what we do for now. Knowing that ISIC rev. 3 and CPC v 1.0 are (or are supposed to be) translated to every language of the United Nations... <SKiCal> ... <WHAT> <CODE system="CPC v.1">94310 Runways, vacuuming of </CODE> <TITLE>Sonnesons</TITLE>... Does anybody know a better way of providing 153 automatic translations of a very esoteric service, let me know? or <SKiCal> ... <WHO> <DIPROLE system="ISIC rev. 3">9214 ghostwriters, independent</DIPROLE> <DIPNAME>Mark Fischetti</DIPNAME>... Is not that a great start for the semantic web? Greg > -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- > Från: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]För Charles McCathieNevile > Skickat: den 21 januari 2000 00:09 > Till: Ron Daniel > Kopia: Eric Hellman; RDF Interest Group > Ämne: RE: URI equivalence, URI's for "standard" identifiers > > > But does the ISO have a trademark on the term "ISO 9000" that > means they can > stop people from using the term to refer to something that meets ISO9000 > (whatever that is)? > > Surely not. And it is a simple matter to create a scheme for > expressing that > something cvlaims to meet ISO9000 - in fact I have done something > like this > for asserting that something meets WAI guidelines. All you need > is a URI for > "so,mething" and a URI for ISO9000... > > This is a whole different question to actually assesssing that > conformance or > even knowing what ISO9000 is... > > Charles McCN > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, Ron Daniel wrote: > > Eric Hellman asks: > > > Is there any consensus in the RDF community about what URI's to use > > for standard identifiers such as ISBN, ISSN, UPC codes, or for things > > like Stock tickers, cusips, patent numbers? It's not like it would > > take much effort. > > > [Ron Daniel] The biggest problem is that such identifiers > are the intellectual property of particular standardization > and maintenance bodies. They would probably be somewhat > miffed if we start having our way with their property. > > There is an RFC that hypothesizes URN namespaces like > urn:isbn and urn:issn. But those will not be standardized > without the permission of the relevant organizations. > > > > It seems to me that > > everyone should at least agree how to say that two URI's refer to the > > same thing. > > > > > [Ron Daniel] Yes, such a thing should be developed. However, > I am not aware of any active W3C working group that could take > this up. > > One thing to keep in mind is that there are degrees of equivalence. > > Regards, > Ron Daniel Jr. > DATAFUSION, Inc. > 139 Townsend Street, Suite 100 > San Francisco, CA 94107 > 415.836.7813 fax 415.222.0150 > rdaniel@datafusion.net > > > > -- > Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) > 409 134 136 > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI 21 Mitchell Street, Footscray, VIC 3011, Australia
Received on Friday, 21 January 2000 10:55:31 UTC