Hugh Glaser wrote:
Thanks Tom.
Er, yes.
I was puzzled by the suggestion that I might duplicate the RDF in the page that
did a simple html rendering of the underlying RDF I was trying to publish.
I would have thought that this is actually a Bad Thing, rather than a Good
Thing.
And if we are talking about an RDF browser (as our pages are, albeit with a
clean URI that doesn't have the browser URI in it), getting it to include the
RDF as RDFa or whatever is even stranger; after all
http://demo.openlinksw.com/rdfbrowser2/?uri%5B%5D=http%3A%2F%2Fos.rkbexplorer.com%2Fdescription%2Fosr7000000000017765
doesn't include the substantive RDF as RDFa, (or have a link rel to
http://os.rkbexplorer.com/data/osr7000000000017765 for that matter) which would
be the equivalent.
Hugh,
I knew this was coming.
Please practice what I say and not the current state of our user agents :-)
I prefer to make suggestions that go beyond what we've implemented. Yes,
of course, I advocate "dog-fooding" but I also have to deal with the
realities of development and product release cycles etc..
Our agents will be fixed in line with my suggestions, for sure.
My key point is this: we are a community of knowledgeable folks who
need to take on the the burden of unobtrusive injection of RDF into the
Web. We cannot expect this to happen outside the community at this
stage. Using HTML as the vehicle for RDF exposure is a big deal and
offers immense value. RDFa is a major contribution to the whole RDF
exposure puzzle, and this is one area where it's value is crystal clear
(imho).
Kingsley
On 14/07/2008 09:55, "Tom Heath" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen
Sent: 12 July 2008 21:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: public-lod@w3.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Ordnance Survey data as Linked Data (RE: How do
you deprecate URIs? Re: OWL-DL and linked data)
Kingsley Idehen wrote:
I also forgot to mention obvous use of RDFa in the HTML doc
which broadens the range of rdf aware user agents tha
commence RDF discovery from HTML
Question: is it worth creating a duplicate RDF graph by using RDFa in
HTML documents, when there is also RDF/XML available just one <link
rel=".../> away, and at a distinct URI? Doesn't this RDFa + RDF/XML
pattern complicate the RDF-consumption picture in general if we assume
agents will want to do something with data aggregated from a number of
sources/locations, i.e. doesn't it increase the cost of removing
duplicate statements by creating more in the first place? Does it not
also complicate the picture of making provenance statements using named
graphs, if the subject of the triple could be both an HTML document and
an RDF graph?
Dunno the answers to these questions, but interested to hear what people
think.
Tom.
--
Tom Heath
Researcher
Platform Team
Talis Information Ltd
T: 0870 400 5000
W: http://www.talis.com/platform
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO
OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
