[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gzz] Space in RDF structure
From: |
Benja Fallenstein |
Subject: |
Re: [Gzz] Space in RDF structure |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Mar 2003 16:05:01 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021226 Debian/1.2.1-9 |
Asko Soukka wrote:
Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
As for how to view swad-chart, I would recommend going to the SWAD
(root) node,
file:/home/connolly/w3ccvs/WWW/2000/01/sw/swad-chart#SemWeb01
Hmm... I still wasn't patient enough to find it. What should I write to
"Goto URI" command?
Sorry, it's not in README yet. Select it from the View menu or type Ctrl-G.
This gives you a view closer to the one seen in the actual graph.
Waiting for that, since I still don't even know what is that graph all
about :) ...else than nice looking maze.
Oh, haven't you seen the image rendering of it? It is linked in
different formats (SVG, PNG, ps) from here:
http://www.w3.org/2000/01/sw/
The PNG version is here:
http://www.w3.org/2000/01/sw/swad-chart.png
Secondly, I think that having 'default properties' really goes against
the philosophy of RDF (IMHO). Well, you can use e.g. rdf:seeAlso if you
just want to specify an associative relationship, but a 'generic'
relationship that says nothing but, "these two nodes are related
*somehow* but we don't tell you how (not even whether it's relevant to a
human or not, etc.)"-- that doesn't sound useful.
Well, I'm still heading for a tool for creating notes on lectures or from
books,
Sure. That's what I'm heading for, too.
after I first buy that high-end Apple G5 Laptop.
Heh, what does that have to do with it? :-) (Oh, you probably just don't
have a laptop yet... ok :) )
All relations
I do myself _are_ relevant for me.
Sure. And to express that, they should be represented by an associative
relationship like seeAlso, not by a relationship without a meaning.
Since mind mapping is above all a
method for makin notes, I don't want to stop specifying exact property for
each word I add.
Sure.
And what is difficult to implement, the
spatiality matters.
I think this is the critical point, and I guess I simply don't
understand what you mean here.
To me, it seems that the connective structure matters-- X is related to
Y, Y is related to Z. I guess I don't really know what you mean by 'the
spatiality matters' and how you want to archieve it.
So, on default the notepad applitude would use "unnamed" default
properties.
I guess you could mean the same thing as I here-- like rdf:seeAlso, or a
hypothetical mindmap:related. Of course, these wouldn't really be
unnamed, but they would be a generic "X associated with Y by a human"
relationship.
But you speak in the plural. The above seems to be only a single
relationship; how can you distinguish between multiple forms of "is
related to"? I mean, you could distinguish between different kinds of
relationships, but as far as I understand that's exactly what you do
*not* want to do. So why more than one property?
Those properties are also used to preserve spatial structure.
This I don't understand, again.
If user wants to use more exact properties for some relations,
the default properties are still used to show the structure, but the more
exact one is used to name the relation...
Again agreed.
Probably should first see such Loom views
that shows bigger context.
I'm looking forward to that too :-)
But after 0.1.
- Benja