I like the sound of the 'compactness' of the format, but I worry that there is a lack of tools that support the format (ie browsers, mainly). It is quite nice to naturally navigate the rdf world with a standard browser. But for transfer standards, I suppose this wouldn't matter.
Kevin
Sent from my HTC
----- Reply message -----
From: "Bob Morris" <morris.bob(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Jan 24, 2010 12:08 PM
Subject: [tdwg-tag] RDF N3
To: "Technical Architecture Group mailing list" <Tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Let's make N3 be the recommended RDF representation. It is way more
compact and human readable than RDF/XML. We could even specify a
normative conversion tool if necessary.
--
Robert A. Morris
Professor of Computer Science (nominally retired)
UMASS-Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390
Associate, Harvard University Herbaria
email: ram(a)cs.umb.edu
web: http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://etaxonomy.org/FilteredPushhttp://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
phone (+1)617 287 6466
_______________________________________________
tdwg-tag mailing list
tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
________________________________
Please consider the environment before printing this email
Warning: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you receive it in error: (i) you must not read, use, disclose, copy or retain it; (ii) please contact the sender immediately by reply email and then delete the emails.
The views expressed in this email may not be those of Landcare Research New Zealand Limited. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz
Hello! Apologies for the newbie question, which I am hoping has reached the
correct list.
I'm altering the names of tables in a mark-recapture database to reflect
Darwin Core labels as part of a larger open source initiative. I need to
indicate in a new field whether a whale shark sighting (occurrence)
represents a living or deceased whale shark. Which Darwin Core field would
best represent this? A look through the terms in the Quick Reference did not
yield an immeidate match for me, but apologies if I missed the obvious. Can
you recommend an appropriate field?
Thanks in advance!
Jason Holmberg
ECOCEAN Whale Shark Photo-identification Library
http://www.whaleshark.org
Let's make N3 be the recommended RDF representation. It is way more
compact and human readable than RDF/XML. We could even specify a
normative conversion tool if necessary.
--
Robert A. Morris
Professor of Computer Science (nominally retired)
UMASS-Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390
Associate, Harvard University Herbaria
email: ram(a)cs.umb.edu
web: http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://etaxonomy.org/FilteredPushhttp://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
phone (+1)617 287 6466
Does SDD (resp. tdwg) have any best-practice about character encodings
and character sets in XML. The sad fact of life is that many printed,
and word processing, systematics and ecology documents have odd
symbols even in characters and states, e.g. the degree sign, +- sign,
the circled 'x', em-dashes, ..., which are not always rendered by
browsers.
--
Robert A. Morris
Professor of Computer Science (nominally retired)
UMASS-Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390
Associate, Harvard University Herbaria
email: ram(a)cs.umb.edu
web: http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://etaxonomy.org/FilteredPushhttp://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
phone (+1)617 287 6466
