- From: Jean-Marc Vanel <jmvanel@free.fr>
- Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:43:08 +0100
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, Jean Marc VANEL <jean-marc_vanel@effix.fr>
- Message-ID: <38C4B30B.41F4C85F@free.fr>
David Megginson <david@megginson.com> write on 2000-02-25 :
Unfortunately, it's not about triples. The only way to
discover the
true RDF data model is to reverse-engineer it from the XML,
and it
turns out that there are at least six components (not three)
in each
statement:
subject
subjectType (global id, local id, URI pattern)
predicate
object
objectType (literal text, literal XML markup, reference)
objectLang
These are not simply syntactic artifacts -- it's information
that
*must* be exposed through any RDF API ...
There's yet another very important item that is implicit in any RDF set
of descriptions: it's the locutor. I mean by locutor the individual or
organisation who makes these descriptions. But we don't have direct
access to the locutor, except by a possible dc:Creator property. But in
turn a dc:Creator property points to a name, possibly not unique, or to
a mail adress or home page, possibly obsolete. This subject on the
identity, uniqueness, persistence of a resource could take us far
away... The obvious design solution is that the locutor IS the URL (not
URI here!) where our RDF set of descriptions appears in.
So if a Web site S1 says about someone:
<looks>ugly</looks>
And another Web site S2 says about the same person:
<looks>handsome</looks>
My RDF application can decide, with a knowledge of which of locutors S1
and S2 is trusted most.
--
<person>
<firstName>Jean-Marc</firstName>
<lastName>Vanel</LastName>
<project>Worlwide Botanical Knowledge Base -
making botany available on Internet
<a href="http://wwbota.free.fr/" >site</a>
</project>
<a href="http://jmvanel.free.fr/>home page</a>
<a href="mailto:jmvanel@free.fr">mail (eventually put "wwbota" in
subject to route your mail in relevant folder)</a>
</person>
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2000 14:32:47 UTC