- 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