Niklas Lindström wrote:
Hi Nathan!
So let's say I run an article of content through called "Deforestation
and Competing Water Uses"
the main subjects of the article are:
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Deforestation
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Reforestation
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Soil_conservation
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Silt (siltation)
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Aberdare_Range
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Tana_River_%28Kenya%29
which is fine, they are dc:subject / foaf:topic etc
Sounds good.
but then the article is under the general topics of:
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Adaptation_to_global_warming
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Kenya
and it mentions:
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Sustainable_forest_management
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Afforestation
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Hydropower
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Municipal_water_supply
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Life_span
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Soil
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Forestry
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Plant
+ http://dbpedia.org/resource/Reservoir
From the aspect of the seeker, these "mentions" are invaluable - if I
was doing a report on issues affection reservoirs in kenya, then this
data is most valuable and thus related.
so, which ontology is most suited for this case of "mentions"? it's not
a subject or a tag, and don't want to identify the data as such as that
is misleading and could be easily misrepresented within UIs if it were.
How about dct:references <http://purl.org/dc/terms/references>?
Defined as "A related resource that is referenced, cited, or otherwise
pointed to by the described resource.", I figure it is about as
generic as any "unlabelled" hypertext link.
Best regards,
Niklas
Ah! yes, that's even better that my sioc:links_to and foaf:topic
suggestions :-)
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO
OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
