E.g. the URI:<http://phildawes.net/phil> gets translated into the symbol ‘phil’, and the statement:

phil tag http://phildawes.net/phil

(This tags the symbol ‘phil’ with the URI). The JAM*VAT aggregator uses the ‘tag’ property to help manage identity between graphs. ‘Tag’ in JAM*VAT fulfils a similar role to a tag in del.icio.us - i.e. another symbol that can be used to categorise the target.

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/HTTP-URI.html

section 2.5 - Extra info with URI:

“Effectively, the URI scheme has now failed to identify anything by itself.”

This issue and others have since then not been addressed, although context was forced in RDF store implementation and semantic patched on RDF/XML with Named Graphs.

As a data model for the Semantic Web, RDF triple is just broken, it is too simple.

Have a look a:

http://laurentszyster.be/blog/public-names/

and

http://laurentszyster.be/blog/public-rdf/

then tell me what you think.

I’ve read your pages, but I’m afraid I’m not sure if I understand what you are getting at.

Am I correct in thinking that you want to replace a URI with a string of associated words. Systems then disambiguate the meaning via the connected set of words?

e.g. 5:apple,8:computer ?

Also, why bother with the netstring numbers? - for the sake of simplicity, why not (apple,computer) or something?

Because articulated text is not made of sequence of byte strings, but like you understood as *sets* of text. For instance, the sentence:

Steve Jobs is the creator of the Apple Computer

may be articulated (considering “the”, “is” and “of” as
articulators and with CRLF added for readability) as the Public Name:

15:
5:Steve,
4:Jobs,
,
19:
5:Apple,
8:Computer,
,
7:creator,

Sorted sequence of netstring effectively represent the three sets of text:

((Steve, Jobs) creator (Apple, Computer))

and actually preserve the semantic between those sets expressed by the original text articulation.

Public Names have many other interesting properties: they can be used as URI, can be used to build fast indexes and can encode any 8-bit byte strings.

Graph
Context (or collection of statements)
Statement
Identifiers (URIs)
Literals

voila, you have RDF-Lite (clearly distinguished from the SW). Now the syntax for repsenting such a subset would also be much simpler, but an orthogonal issue to the underlying model.

When thinking about the general direction my (rather slow moving) Semantic Tagging stuff should head into, it became obvious pretty quickly that moving from facet-value-pairs to RDF-like subject-property-object-triples is the direction of choice. Vapou…