Oops, scratch my warning at the end of point 5. It shouldn't affect
the point 1 strategy at all. Like I said, httpRange-14 is confusing
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Ross Singer<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'll pile on with a with a couple of other things:
> 1. I second Ed's point about conneg:
> should probably return a 300 code with pointers to your various file
> 2. Replace dc with dcterms (http://purl.org/dc/terms/)
> 3. While Ed's point about linking to other resources would be nice,
> first I'd focus on the resources you have and can control. Rather
> than a literal for dc:creator, can you mint URIs for all of your
> authors? How about subjects?
> 4. Your URIs in your rdf:Description[@rdf:about] aren't terribly
> helpful on their own. Either give the full URI here or add an
> attribute to the tag -- that should improve things.
> 5. I think your dc:contributor tag might be running aground of
> httpRange-14 -- I'm pretty sure you didn't help Thomas More write his
> story. This, I think, is the absolute hardest thing to get right with
> RDF/LOD. A nice example of sidestepping this sort of collision is
> Toby Inkster's RDF-ification of Amazon Web Services:
> http://purl.org/NET/book/isbn/0140449108#book -- in this example, the
> 'record metadata' lives at the base URI
> (http://purl.org/NET/book/isbn/0140449108) and the real world object
> lives at http://purl.org/NET/book/isbn/0140449108#book. This way Toby
> can claim responsibility for making the data the available, but not
> assert that he had any part in creating the work itself. The two
> resources are linked to each other, but are each unique, independent
> URIs. If you do do this, though, it messes up what I said in point
> The concordances would also be really neat to see -- building off of
> WordNet would be pretty cool with all of these old texts.
> Good luck, it's great to see.
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:04 PM, Ed Summers<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Heya Eric:
>> The main thing you'd want to do would be to make sure URIs like:
>> returned something useful for both people and machine agents. The
>> nitty gritty details of how to do this can roughly be found in the
>> Cool URIs for the Semantic Web , or How to Publish Linked Data .
>> A slight variation would be to use something like RDFa  to embed
>> metadata in your HTML docs, or GRDDL  to provide a stylesheet to
>> transform some HTML to RDF.
>> The end goal of linked data, is to provide contextual links from your
>> stuff to other resources on the web, aka timbl's rule #4:
>> Include links to other URIs. so that they can discover more things. 
>> So for example you might want to assert that:
>> owl:sameAs <http://dbpedia.org/page/Utopia_(book) .
>> dcterms:creator <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Thomas_More> .
>> It's when you link out to other resources on the web that things get
>> interesting, more useful, and potentially more messy :-) For example
>> instead of owl:sameAs perhaps an assertion using FRBR or RDA would be
>> more appropriate.
>> Thanks for asking the question. The public-lod list  at the w3c is
>> also a really friendly/helpful group of people making data sets
>> available as linked-data.
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/
>>  http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer/
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl-primer/
>>  http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
>>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/