[tdwg-tag] [tdwg-content] What RDF is (Was Re: Idea for Discussion, Differentiating between "type's" of identifiers)

[Blum, Stan]

Thanks to Arlin for spotting the archiving problem!  And many thanks to
Markus for fixing and restoring the missed emails!

To return to the discussion of types of identifiers:

I think there is broad support for keeping DwC concepts independent of
technologies.  If that's accurate, then I think the next questions are:  do
we need additional specification to make DwC more usable with RDF, Semantic
Web or Linked Open Data and make everyone's lives easier?  Do names and
identifiers in DwC need to be defined more narrowly, perhaps through
something like in an applicability statement, to be used effectively in the
LoD world? 

-Stan



On 10/7/10 2:07 AM, "Markus Döring (GBIF)" <mdoering at gbif.org> wrote:

> Thanks for spotting this, Stan.
> It was a file permissions problem that Ive fixed now. Ironically all mails
> since September 11th have not been archived, but I manually copied the missing
> ones from my local mail client into the respective mailman archives and
> rebuild the whole thing. Both content and tag should be fine now. The tdwg
> announcement mailing list was never touched, so it has archived mails fine all
> the time. Here are the archive links in case anyone wants to make sure all
> mails are there:
> 
> http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/
> http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-tag/
> http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg/
> 
> Sorry for the problem.
> Markus