On 5/11/15 4:22 PM, Paul Houle wrote:
I think there's the issue of the data format but also the problem that<http://someorganization.org/namespace/something>might represent someorganization.org <http://someorganization.org>'s viewpoint about :something if you are lucky. On the other hand you might want to know what somebody else thinks about that "thing" -- i.e. you might want to follow a dbpedia identifier to get schema.org <http://schema.org> information on it that somebodyelse.net <http://somebodyelse.net> has compiled on the dbpedia universe.I.e. fundamentally dereferencing has to be extended to support the idea of "what does source X think about resource Y?"
That's what you get via a SPARQL Query Results URL. At the end of the day, the aforementioned URL identifies a document comprised of content that's dynamically generated from relational variables in the query body combined with solution output directives associated with select, construct, or describe query types.
There is also the need to recognize that dereferencing has created a lot of confusion.
Yes, there is still mass confusion about HTTP URI based Names :(As you know, Names have denotation and connotation duality i.e., a Name by definition has interpretation that describes its referent. Thus, Identifying anything with an HTTP URI based name implies it is interpretable on an HTTP Network.
I suspect some people have been intimidated from using RDF because they think that having names based on URLs means that they *have* to publish everything on the web.
Yes.As to the scope of HTTP Name interpretation (public or private), that should really boil down to resource access controls [1] that are also driven by entity relationship type semantics.
Links:[1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl -- Web Access Controls related Wiki
[2] http://www.slideshare.net/kidehen/how-virtuoso-enables-attributed-based-access-controls -- How fine-grained ACLs are implemented (using RDF) in Virtuoso .
Kingsley
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Kingsley Idehen <kide...@openlinksw.com <mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>> wrote:On 5/11/15 11:54 AM, Svensson, Lars wrote: Kingsley, On Saturday, May 09, 2015 12:07 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: [...] So to repeat my question in another mail: I have an entity described by a (generic) URI. You have an entity identified by a IRI in RDF. If you are adhering to Linked Open Data principles, said IRI would take the form of an HTTP URI. Then I have three groups of documents describing that entity, the first uses schema.org <http://schema.org>, the second group uses org ontology and the third uses foaf. You have an entity identified by an HTTP URI. The dual nature of this kind of URI enables it function as a Name. The fundamental quality (attribute, property, feature) of a Name is that its interpretable to meaning ie., a Name also has a dual (denotation and connotation feature) which is what an HTTP URI is all about, the only different is that denotation->connotation (i.e. name interpretation) occurs in the hypermedia medium provided by an HTTP network (e.g. World Wide Web). Net effect, the HTTP URI resolves to and document at a location on the Web (i.e, a document at a location, which is the URL aspect of this duality). OK. I have an http URI that denotes an entity. Depending on the server configuration and what accept-headers I provide, the http dereferencing function returns a document at a location. All documents are available as RDF/XML, Turtle and xhtml+RDFa. How does a client that knows only the generic URI for the resource tell the server that it prefers foaf in turtle and what does the server answer? It can do stuff like this: curl -L -H "Accept: text/xml;q=0.3,text/html;q=1.0,text/turtle;q=0.5,*/*;q=0.3" - H "Negotiate: *" -I http://dbpedia.org/resource/Analytics OK, I can see how setting the Accept-header negotiates the media type. If I understand correctly, the Negotiate-header gives the server and intermediate proxies a carte blanche to negotiate things any way they prefer. I don't see any header that tells the server what profile/shape/vocabulary the client prefers. That's about a client negotiating different types of document content using a preference algorithm which in integral to Transparent Content Negotiation. It has nothing to do with a preferred vocabulary of terms e.g., dcterms vs schema.org <http://schema.org> in regards to terms used to describe something using RDF Language bases sentences/statements. If you want an RDF based entity description, where the terms used come from a specific vocabulary, that's where you could leverage a query language e.g., SPARQL. Of course, there are those that don't want to use SPARQL which could then lead to yet another kind of "profile" relation object, but ultimately such use will only be the equivalent of ignoring the existence of "multiplication" and "division" in regards to arithmetic operations. Conclusion: if folks want to build "profile" relations for selecting RDF content constructed using terms from a specific vocabulary, that's fine too, even though its utility would simply boil down to navigating politics. HTTP/1.1 303 See Other Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 16:01:06 GMT Content-Type: text/turtle; qs=0.35 Content-Length: 0 Connection: keep-alive Server: Virtuoso/07.20.3213 (Linux) i686-generic-linux-glibc212-64 VDB TCN: choice Vary: negotiate,accept Alternates: {"/data/Analytics.atom" 0.500000 {type application/atom+xml}}, {"/data/Analytics.jrdf" 0.600000 {type application/rdf+json}}, {"/data/Analytics.jsod" 0.500000 {type application/odata+json}}, {"/data/Analytics.json" 0.600000 {type application/json}}, {"/data/Analytics.jsonld" 0.500000 {type application/ld+json}}, {"/data/Analytics.n3" 0.800000 {type text/n3}}, {"/data/Analytics.nt" 0.800000 {type text/rdf+n3}}, {"/data/Analytics.ttl" 0.700000 {type text/turtle}}, {"/data/Analytics.xml" 0.950000 {type application/rdf+xml}} Given this Alternates-header: how can a client figure out what those representations look like (except for their media type)? Your Web Browser (a client) understands text/html. A Browser and other HTTP clients apply the same content handling rules to other content types (e.g., those related to images, sound, and video etc..) . Link: <http://mementoarchive.lanl.gov/dbpedia/timegate/http://dbpedia.org/resour ce/Analytics>; rel="timegate" Location: http://dbpedia.org/data/Analytics.ttl Expires: Tue, 12 May 2015 16:01:06 GMT Cache-Control: max-age=604800 Best, Lars-- Regards,Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this -- Paul Houle*Applying Schemas for Natural Language Processing, Distributed Systems, Classification and Text Mining and Data Lakes*(607) 539 6254 paul.houle on Skype ontolo...@gmail.com <mailto:ontolo...@gmail.com> https://legalentityidentifier.info/lei/lookup <http://legalentityidentifier.info/lei/lookup>
-- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
