- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 16:01:31 +0200
- To: Raj Singh <rsingh@opengeospatial.org>
- Cc: roBman@mob-labs.com, "public-poiwg@w3.org" <public-poiwg@w3.org>
On 4 August 2011 15:56, Raj Singh <rsingh@opengeospatial.org> wrote: > I love the "POI as a simple collection of links" data model in theory. It's very clean conceptually, and that's the way I've been thinking of the larger POI "picture" also. However, I don't think it's the best way to implement. > > I think we still need a few primitives. The only things that are in the model now that don't fit your links model are the label, some time fields, and the ___location. The label and the time fields are so natural to just stick in there. That brings us to ___location. The data URI seems awkward to me and likely to turn people off of the spec. However, I'm open to other opinions. I like it too. Seems pretty much isomorphic to RDF, btw. Can it be written out explicitly as a set of triples, eg. an unordered collection of factoids that take one of these forms: <thing1-URI> <propertytype-URI> "value " . and <thing1-URI> <propertytype-URI> <thing2-URI>. ...? If so, it should be possible to write out this datamodel using any RDF notation, store/query it in any RDF database, etc. cheers, Dan
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2011 14:02:07 UTC