> 差出人: William Waites [mailto:[email protected]]
> 送信日時: 2013年6月19日 21:03
> <[email protected]> said:
>> I would be interested in seeing some linked data that is
>> incompatible with RDF while still adhering to rules like using
>> global identifiers and typed links.
>
> @prefix ex: <http://example.org/>
> @prefix u: <http://example.org/units>
>
> ex:distance ex:earth ex:moon 381550 25150 u:km.
>
> This relation has a typed link (ex:distance) between two
> non-informational resources (ex:earth, ex:moon). It has a distance that
> has units as well as a datatype, and a +/- uncertainty thrown in for good
> measure. I could even imagine the ex:distance predicate to be
> self-describing in the usual way, defining its arity and the meaning and
> type of its arguments.
>
> I think this can quite sensibly be called Linked Data and whilst with
> sufficient contortions (reification, abuse of datatypes, perhaps
> anonymous or parametrised predicates) it can be shoehorned into RDF, it
> really doesn't happen naturally or obviously enough that it could be
> called "compatible" in my opinion.
Let the abuse begin!
[ a ex:Distance;
ex:object ex:earth, ex:moon;
rdf:value "381550\u00b125150 km"^^u:measurement
}
ex:Distance rdfs:comment "Distance between two objects"@en .
u:measurement rdfs:comment "Datatype describing a measurement with error,
followed by an SI unit"@en ;
xsd:pattern "[0-9]+\u00b1[0-9]+\\s\\S+" .
(Ab)using RDF I was able to (barely) document my semantics directly in turtle.
Where is the semantics and syntax of your example described? Your data might be
linked,
but as a prospective consumer of it I'm feeling a bit lost :-)
Tore
PS I always longed for bnode predicates for cases like this...
