I could do that, but can it be considered good practice? Other approaches are
- make my own URI scheme, for example <mydocs:name/doc1> - make my own URN NID like <urn:mydocs:doc1> but NIDs are supposed to be registered - the info: scheme has been deprecated, so I should not use <info:mydocs/doc1> I don't think RDF is providing any "best practices" suggestions or guidelines for a scenario like this, and it's pretty frustrating because not all data need to be dereferenceable and not all data need to have a universally unique ID such as ISBN or telephone number... Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 3:26 PM From: ajs6f <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Nodes without dereferenceable URIs Can you use HTTP URIs that simply don't point to an actual server? (E.g. http://lauras.namespace/blah/blah/blah) If no one tries to dereference them, it's fine if they don't work. If someone might try to dereference them, that's when you might have problems. ajs6f > On May 22, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Olivier Rossel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Don't use blank nodes. You will regret it in the long run. > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Laura Morales <[email protected]> wrote: > >> How can I deal with a RDF graph where I don't have dereferenceable URIs, >> but still need the URIs to link with other graphs? For example if I have a >> personal graph of documents that I only need to use for myself, what URIs >> should I use? >> >> Blank nodes? >> >> _:document1 >> _:document2 >> _:document3 >> >> or do I make my own URNs? >> >> <urn:mybooks:title:document1> >> <urn:mybooks:title:document2> >> <urn:mybooks:title:document3> >> >> what other solutions are available? >>
