- From: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:17:50 +0200
- To: "Libby Miller" <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Sure, (it is actually what i have been doing, but someone was saying that I am doing it wrong so I thought I should check up on myself) I am defining what the role is of different stuff found on a web page. (so that i can render it more accessibly to the user device and preference) So for example, I may want to say, "this link has content type of a site map link", where " this link" is the subject and a xpointer to any links to contacts.html on the site, "has content type" is the predicate and a "site map link" is the object. (I can then do fun stuff like assign an access key "s" or "k" if the user is a Russian speaker, or render it as an icon of a site map -consistently across sites...) now for my check up.... The object "site map link" is not a literal, ore a URI to some definition in HTML but is actually a URI to an instances of a class (or actually a derived subclass) done in RDF Schema. This way i can define what a sitemap link is a clear and useful and extendable way. e.g. site map link, is an instance of a standard web link which is a derived class of link which is a derived class of content type. That way , if someone else is using my types, and has never heard of a sitemap link, they can know that it is a type of standard web link, so they can treat it like all other standard web links (maybe assign an access key in sequence). I can also use OWL and require of all content types at least one name and a description. So back to my triple "this link has content type of a site map link" 1, " this link" is the subject and a xpointer to any links to contactus.html on the site, 2, "has content type" is the predicate and is defined as a Property an RDF schema 3 a "site map link" is the object and is itself an instance of a subclass all defined in an RDF schema. On the other hand , my friend, (who is probably brighter then me, so I should at least entertain the possibility that he is right) is saying I should change the following: 2, "has content type" is the predicate and is defined as a CLASS in an RDF schema 3 a "site map link" is the object and should be defined in an XML restricted language. I don't want do this because I think it is less extendable. Thanks Libby, and keep well Lisa ----- Original Message ----- From: "Libby Miller" <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk> To: "Lisa Seeman" <lisa@ubaccess.com> Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 9:36 AM Subject: Re: In or out of line? > > > hi Lisa > > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Lisa Seeman wrote: > > > I have a controversial question hear (ok, maybe it is not that controversial) > > > > I am thinking of using RDF instances from schema as objects of a > triple as appose to being used as predicates. > > The reason I am doing that is because i want the objects themselves > to have clear relationships, be extendable etc . > > Could you give some specific examples of what you want to do? > > Libby >
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2004 04:19:59 UTC