Re: [Platypuswiki-users] Re: [platypus] Unique identifier for a statement...

[Laurian G. <la...@gm...>]

Hello,

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 18:35:46 +0200, Stefano Emilio Campanini 
[...]
> >>In Platypus, when we create a refication we put the new resource (the
> >>refified triple) in the namespcace "reifications", so the URI is
> >>something like this: reifications:_086yskjf (reification+_CRC(s,p,o)).
> >>I consider this " reifications:_086yskjf" as the ID/URI of the triple,
> >>isn't it?
> >I won't add semantics to the URI, in this case using a schema for
> >identifying reified statements, if your sha1(statement) is in the
> >system, then is reified.
> >>If a triple isn't reificated? what is it's ID/URI?
> >same, but if you don;t have its sha1 ID in the index, you may assume
> >is not reified, at least not in the system :)
> >It would be dangerous to change the ID of a statement just to mark
> >that is reified, and won't be interoperable.
> Yes...
> Following the Playtipus Way  we have to permit to create a page (XHTM)
> that describe the statement as for others resources. So, we need a
> namespace or a better way (We have to invent it) to save the "index.rdf"
> and the "index.html" describing it as other Wiki resources.
> Do you think it is useful for the user reificate a triple and describe
> it using a wiki page?

yes, we may consider the wiki page as an human readable explanation of
the reification...

> I propose that way:
> * All Wiki triples are in an implicit way reificated (only in the index)
> and its URI is as your proposal (new URI("urn", "sha1:" +
> Base32.encode(sha1digest), null)  ....

You mean are in an implicit way identified bu the proposed URI scheme...

> * If a user wants to create a wiki page that describe a triple we have
> to save RDF reification (s, o, p etc...)  and the page. Where we can
> save the page? For the moment they are saved under "reification"
> namespace/dir.

Would be ok, for the sake of microcontent.

> We add some semantics to the triple .. yes ... but ... the user create
> it intentionally, using the one determined Wiki Installation. I found
> the adding of this semantics not well but not so bad.
> So, I suggest to permit the user to save it in any other namespace
> selecting it.

hmmm, why not `under' the current resource? :)
for /foo/bar we have the refication wiki page under /foo/bar/reified?
 
Cheers,
-- 
Laurian Gridinoc
Chief Developer
GRAPEFRUIT DESIGN
www.gd.ro