W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2002

Re: silly question about rdf:about

From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 23:46:26 -0400
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-id: <004f01c1deaf$f60cc680$0bf13044@tbp>
[Seth Russell]

> I totally agree, and thanks for saying it !
> And while we're at it why not just leave the old 'rdf:about' alone for
> people who like built-in properties in their systems and make up a new
> property name ... call it something obvious ... like for instance 'uri'.
> And while were at that, why not invent another useful property ...
> to mean 'preferred human friendly name' ... this would be like a cyc
> constant, a kif term, or a rdf:label.  The thing that is different between
> it and rdf:about (aside from the fact that it would be human user
> is that it can change (be renamed) from time to time and from system to
> system.  But in any given system at any given time it would be unique.
> a moment let's just call this new term ':named'.   Nodes so named
> would be tied to URI like this:
>     [:uri <http://foo/#Dog>;
>       :named  "Doggie"].
> We could say that in XML\RDF with:
>    <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://foo/#Dog">
>         <:named>Doggie</:named>
>    </rdf:Description>

Better watch out ... you'll have Topic Maps before you know it!  After these
name machinations, all you need are scopes and you're just about there.


Tom P
Received on Sunday, 7 April 2002 23:41:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:35 UTC