LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  July 2014

BIBFRAME July 2014

Subject:

Re: BibFrame and Linked Data: Identifiers

From:

"[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:58:56 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (47 lines)

> 1. If the document from which an assertion (s, p, o) was derived was obtained by using the IRI s as a URL, then that action provides a part of the  provenance chain. This kind of provenance information is only knowable to the party that fetched the resource.

Of course I don't disagree with this (it's the basic action of Linked Data), but I'd like to question the precise phrasing. For example, if I retrieve from:

http://example.com/resource1

the triples:

<http://example.com/resource1> dc:title "A Resource".
<http://example.com/resource1> hasAssociatedResource <http://example.com/resource2>.
<http://example.com/resource2> dc:title "Another Resource".

I would suggest that the triple <http://example.com/resource2> dc:title "Another Resource" partakes in the same provenance (as part of my retrieval action) as does <http://example.com/resource1> dc:title "A Resource".

For example, implementations of W3C's Linked Data Platform demonstrate this kind of behavior, see:

http://www.w3.org/TR/ldp/#prefer-parameters

and the description there of the defined action of the HTTP header 'Prefer: return=representation; include="http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#PreferMembership"'

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

On Jul 16, 2014, at 2:42 PM, Simon Spero <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Jul 16, 2014 12:24 PM, "Karen Coyle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > And in the thread that begins on 7/10/14 with a post by Karen Smith-Yoshimura, I believe that we demonstrate that using as subject a URI from a third part does NOT imply that the statement was made by that party. This is one of the fundamental "truths" of the semantic web - that anyone can say anything about anything (AAA), and the URI does NOT indicate provenance of the statement (triple).
> 
> Just to clarify the last part of that paragraph (which is generally correct that without any other information, the IRIs in a graph could come from a source with no connection to any IRI in the graph).
> 
> 1. If the document from which an assertion (s, p, o) was derived was obtained by using the IRI s as a URL, then that action provides a part of the  provenance chain. This kind of provenance information is only knowable to the party that fetched the resource.
> 
> The reason why this is worth calling out is that it is common if you  "follow your nose" to find assertions about some object, and because if TLS is used to retrieve the source, the identity of the person asserting the triples is known.
> 
> The IRI could be used to form the name in a named graph; so could the final URL used, if multiple redirection happened. 
> 
> 2. If an assertion is made in a form that associates the triple with a named graph name (e.g. N-Quads or Trig), the final IRI g in the quad (s, p, o, g) may serve as the subject of provenance assertions and non-repudiable digital signatures.
> 
> > On 7/16/14, 8:41 AM, Thomas Berger wrote:
> >>
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Simon 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager