[rdfweb-dev] advocating use of rdf:ID/rdf:aboutattributesonfoaf:Person tags

Martin L Poulter M.L.Poulter at bristol.ac.uk
Mon Aug 18 16:14:37 UTC 2003


Jim and others, forgive a non-developer asking for a bit of
clarification. Are you objecting to the _internal_ use of rdf:IDs? For
example, some FOAF files use this idiom:

<Person rdf:ID="myself">
	<name>Martin Poulter</name>
	<mbox rdf:resource="mailto:m.l.poulter at bristol.ac.uk"/>
</Person>
<Person rdf:ID="libby">
        <name>Libby Miller</name>
        <mbox rdf:resource="mailto:libby.miller at bristol.ac.uk"/>
</Person>
<wn:Document
rdf:about="http://www.vts.rdn.ac.uk/tutorial/interneteconomist">
   <dc:title>Internet Economist</dc:title>
   <dc:contributor rdf:resource="#myself" />
   <dc:contributor rdf:resource="#libby" />
</wn:Document>

... as an alternative to specifying the mailbox or sha1sum each time I
want to refer to an individual. This has big advantages in terms of
readability of the FOAF, especially if there are lots of documents and
co-depictions to be described. When I RDF-validate the file, even the
triples are more humanly readable, which is a marginally more satisfying
validation. As a side-effect, this creates URIs for myself and Libby,
but I need not use these and I can see that it would be inadvisable to
use them in other documents.

So, does this idiom create problems? I realise this is more an RDF issue
rather than a FOAF issue, but it's something that anyone making FOAF
files could do with a clear statement on.

-- 
Dr Martin L Poulter    Senior Technical Researcher, ILRT, Bristol, UK
Research interests: Philosophy of belief and Bayesian inductive logic

Home Page: http://www.weird.co.uk/martin/                                 
for Cult Concern FAQ + WEIRD (not WIRED) + "Bob" in the UK + Automated Love
+ Scientology Criticism + Sexual Politics + Helena Kobrin's Legal "Ethics".

Community blog: http://www.weird.co.uk/blog/




More information about the foaf-dev mailing list