Dear All, In the discussion in Paris about how to preserve the source of information in a CRM instance, I pointed out that there are multiple ways to implement such a feature effectively. Non of those does interfere with the CRM contents, so there is no need to include such a feature in the standard, but in guidelines of use. One prominent mechanism is RDF reification, the most "atomic" approach, and hence the most costly. As it is a W#C recommendation, it is a standard solution. If sources are few in the scope of an application, classification by source classes may be more effective, as well as all kinds of external indices.
Here the promised literature about reification. I add also the result of a respective google search: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/ http://www.ilrt.org/discovery/2001/04/annotations/ http://nestroy.wi-inf.uni-essen.de/rdf/RDFmodel_revisited_v10.pdf best wishes, Martin -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(81)391625 | Senior Researcher | Fax:+30(81)391609 | Project Leader SIS | Email: [email protected] | | Centre for Cultural Informatics | Information Systems Laboratory | Institute of Computer Science | Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH) | | Vassilika Vouton,P.O.Box1385,GR71110 Heraklion,Crete,Greece | | Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/proj/isst | --------------------------------------------------------------Title: Google Search: RDF reification statement use
[email protected] from April 2001: Re: RDF changes
RDF API Draft
XML: RDF/Topic Maps A Semantic Web Language (Swell) RDF API Convergence RDF Annotations joint-committee Mailing List Archive: DAML and reification [topicmapmail] RDF/Topic Maps: late/lazy reification vs. early/ ...
©2002 Google |
