RE: working around the identity crisis

Hi Patrick, all,

Patrick wrote:
> Consider:
> 
> The URI http://swdev.nokia.com/test/foo identifies a concept "Foo". 
> 
> The URI http://swdev.nokia.com/test/foo.html identifies a document
> which provides information about the concept.
> 
> Both share the same representation (i.e. resolving either of the
> above URIs will result in the same octet stream).
> 
> However, the relationship between those two resources, that 
> the first shares the representations of the latter, are defined
> in terms of the property http://sw.nokia.com/WebArch-1/resolvesAs
> rather than conneg.

I made a proposal on the public-esw-thes@w3.org mailing list a few weeks ago
for a property with identical (I think) semantics to the 'resolvesAs'
property you describe above, to be part of the SKOS Core vocab [1].  The
actual name suggested was http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#resolveTo
although I wasn't sure if (a) that was the best name for it or (b) whether
it was a useful thing.

This property was also suggested as a superprop for the
'skos:subjectIndicator' property which is currently in SKOS Core.  The idea
was that 'skos:resolveTo' points you to some sort of document, and
'skos:subjectIndicator' points to you a document which qualifies as a
published subject indicator as defined by OASIS (i.e. guarantees to provide
a complete and unambiguous description of the 'subject' i.e. resource in
question). 

I would very much like to know:

(1) Do you think it is worth putting such a property in SKOS Core, or should
we just use the 'resolvesAs' prop from your nokia namespace?

(2) If you do think it's worth adding something to SKOS Core, what's the
best idea for a local name?

(3) Does the property hierarchy described above seem sensible, or not?

Thanks,

Alistair.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/spec/

 

> 
> When direct resolution fails, the SWS looks to see if any such
> relationship is defined, and if so, redirects to the related
> resource.
> 
> In essence, it is a form of implementation of the PURL concept,
> but independent of the notion of 'download location' or the like, 
> but is defined generically in terms of the relationships between
> resources and their web accessible representations.
> 
> And of course, there's no reason why this resolvesAs approach
> cannot be used in conjunction with conneg and other methods,
> depending on the particular needs of the system and what offers
> the greatest utility for specific cases.
> 
> --
> 
> There are also a few interesting things to note about
> http://swdev.nokia.com/test/foo.html:
> 
> * It is an information resource (see the metadata description)
> 
> * Its entire substance is included in the representation returned
>   (as the creator of both, I assert that this is true)
> 
> * There is additional information included in the representation
>   returned which is not part of the substance of the information
>   resource (try to guess which bits are part of the information
>   resource and which bits are 'extra', I bet you can't ;-)
> 
> Anyway, just thought I'd offer that alternative perspective...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Patrick
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of ext Miles, AJ
> > (Alistair)
> > Sent: 14 November, 2004 19:20
> > To: 'www-rdf-interest@w3.org'
> > Subject: working around the identity crisis
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Sorry, reposting this with a more sensible title - a 
> discussion about
> > working around the 'identity crisis' for http uris:
> > 
> > http://esw.w3.org/topic/SkosDev/IdentityCrisis
> > 
> > Would very much like to know what folks think of this.  Have 
> > I just managed
> > to redescribe some emerging consensus, have I misunderstood 
> > anything, should
> > I go away and read more?
> > 
> > I wanted to say also that I am acutely aware that alot of 
> > people have spent
> > a lot more time thinking and writing about this than I have.  
> > I'm really
> > just trying to understand this problem space, and get to a 
> > place were I can
> > effectively explain the issue (and the options) to other people.
> > 
> > Responding to Patrick:
> > 'If you have a URI that identifies a concept, and 
> > dereferencing that URI in
> > a browser results in some web page displayed in that browser, 
> > that does not
> > mean that the URI has been used to identify two things, the 
> > concept and
> > the web page (document).'
> > 
> > I think that puts very concisely the fundamental point I was 
> > trying to make.
> > I probably didn't need to say any more than this.  
> > 
> > Responding to Daniel:
> > 'A good solution, but I still prefer the notion of using XSLT to
> > transform the RDF/XML definition of a concept into a human friendly
> > HTML page about it.'
> > 
> > I agree that, as a matter of good practise, any alternate 
> content-type
> > representations of the same concept need to be synchronised.  
> > One way of
> > achieving this would be to use an RDF/XML description as 
> the reference
> > point, and using XSLT to generate an HTML representation.   
> > 
> > Yours,
> > 
> > Alistair.
> > 
> > ---
> > Alistair Miles
> > Research Associate
> > CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> > Building R1 Room 1.60
> > Fermi Avenue
> > Chilton
> > Didcot
> > Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
> > United Kingdom
> > Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
> > Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
> > 
> > 
> > 
>

Received on Monday, 15 November 2004 15:24:38 UTC