- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 20:29:44 -0600
- To: DuCharme@w3.org, Bob <bob.ducharme@lexisnexis.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
>I've posted an RDF version of the IETF's listing of RFCs and associated >metadata ( <http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt> >at <http://www.snee.com/rdf/1rfc_index.rdf> I did something similar a while ago; I didn't publish the output because I didn't plan to keep it up to date, but the conversion is # $Id: rfcIndexGrok.pl,v 1.8 2001/08/16 22:28:39 connolly Exp $ # # USAGE: # # GET http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt \ # | perl rfcIndexGrok.pl >,rfc-index.rdf http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl and it seems to still work, ala: connolly@dirk:~/w3ccvs/WWW/Addressing$ make rfc-index-1630on.rdf wget ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc-index.txt 20:07:52 (397.53 KB/s) - `rfc-index.txt' saved [638939] perl ../2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl 1630 <rfc-index.txt >rfc-index-1630on.rdf > I think it makes great semantic web >metadata for several reasons, among them being the typed relationships >between RFCs (e.g. dcterms:isReplacedBy, pr:hasCorrection) and the nice >connections to the existing semantic web: the existence of several RFC >authors who have FOAF files. > > Which brings me to my question for the list: what's the best way to model > the latter? For example, what's the best RDF/XML way to indicate that "N. > Walsh" in the following entry for an RFC has a FOAF file at > <http://norman.walsh.name/foaf> http://norman.walsh.name/foaf? I don't want > to say "the creator of <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3120.txt> > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3120.txt has a FOAF file at > <http://norman.walsh.name/foaf> http://norman.walsh.name/foaf"; the resource > has more than one creator, and I want to make it clear which one has which > FOAF file. It's easier to say "a creator..." than "the creator" because (as far as I know) dc:creator is not a FunctionalProperty; i.e. <book1> dc:creator ppl:bob. <book1> dc:creator ppl:mary. doesn't mean that bob = mary. In your data, I see: <rdf:Description rdf:about='http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0001.txt'> <title>Host Software.</title> <creator>S. Crocker</creator> which suggests the creator is a 10 character string starting with S. (see http://esw.w3.org/topic/ThingsVersusTheirNames ). The way I modelled it is: :_rfc3501-1 <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator> :_MCrispin3; <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/date> "2003-03"; <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/format> "text/plain"; <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title> "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 4rev1"; rfc:author :_MCrispin3; rfc:bytes "227640"; rfc:date "March 2003"; rfc:obsoletes :_rfc2060-2; rfc:rfc "3501"; rfc:status "PROPOSED STANDARD" . :_MCrispin3 c:fullName "M.Crispin" . which still sorta cheats re rfc:status and perhaps even the dates. (My tool spits out RDF/XML, using a very primitive serializer, so I ran it thru cwm's n3 pretty-printer for this message). p.s. In your data, I see: xmlns:rfc2026='http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2026.txt' ... <rfc2026:status>UNKNOWN</rfc2026:status> That says that http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2026.txtstatus is an RDF property. The IETF owns that name, and I don't think they'd agree. The told their web server to give a 404 for that name, while the obvious way for a URI owner to acknowledge that something is an RDF property is to arrange for their web server to say so. Hmm... oops... http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfc56 is still 404 too. Better get my own house in order... Anyway... webarch sorta makes this point. The old RDF Schema spec used to; I hope the Best Practice WG picks it up again. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2005 02:29:16 UTC