Re: How "valid" is to use a term marked as "unstable" for a data publisher/consumer?

+Cc: Leigh Dodds, for old time's sake On 20 July 2016 at 09:45, Ghislain Atemezing wrote: > Hi all, > > [ Apologize if this question has been answered before in this group. ] > > Recently, I was working on a project where we were just reusing existing > terms for

new W3C CSV on the Web specs, now at Candidate Recommendation stage - please implement!

Hi! Short version: Please see http://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/4830 for the Candidate Recommendation specs from W3C's CSV on the Web group - https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Main_Page Long version: These are the 4 docs, Model for Tabular Data and Metadata on the Web—an abstract model for

Spec review request: CSV on the Web

The CSV on the Web Working Group [1] has just published a new set of Working Drafts, which we consider feature complete and implementable. We particularly seek reviews from Web Security, Privacy, Internationalization and Accessibility perspectives at this time. A request has also been sent to the

Re: How to avoid that collections break relationships

On 25 March 2014 15:52, Markus Lanthaler markus.lantha...@gmx.net wrote: please let's not talk about hash URLs etc. here, ok? So, please. Let's try to focus on the problem at hand. As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving http-range-14 or URNs

Re: How to avoid that collections break relationships

On 26 March 2014 04:26, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: On Mar 25, 2014, at 11:29 AM, Markus Lanthaler markus.lantha...@gmx.net wrote: On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:00 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: Seems to me that the, um, mistake that is made here is to use the same property schema:knows for both

Re: Schema.org v1.0e published: Order schema, Accessibility properties

://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_schema.html Regards, Pierre-Yves. Awesome on both fronts re., schema.org version 1.0e and LOV's cool delta page! Kingsley Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche. On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote: Schema.org version

Re: List membership - more women

On 24 June 2013 10:34, Isabelle Augenstein i.augenst...@sheffield.ac.ukwrote: Hi Dominic, I only joined the list a few months ago, so my observations might be inaccurate, but - Overall, most discussions on the list seem to be rather philosophical (What is Linked Data? Does Linked Data

Re: The Great Public Linked Data Use Case Register for Non-Technical End User Applications

On 24 June 2013 14:31, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 6/24/13 2:14 AM, Michael Brunnbauer wrote: Hello Kingsley Idehen, On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 05:32:00PM -0400, Kingsley Idehen wrote: We don't need a central repository of anything. Linked Data is supposed to be about

Are Topic Maps Linked Data?

Just wondering, Dan

Re: The Great Public Linked Data Use Case Register for Non-Technical End User Applications

On 23 June 2013 23:46, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 6/23/13 5:36 PM, Barry Norton wrote: Are you confusing Linked Data and Linked Open Data? Of course not! Web-like structured data enhanced with explicit entity relationship semantics enables serendipitous discovery

Re: Linked Data discussions require better communication

On 20 June 2013 18:54, Giovanni Tummarello giovanni.tummare...@deri.org wrote: My 2c is .. i agree with kingsley diagram , linked data should be possible without RDF (no matter serialization) :) however this is different from previous definitions i think its a step forward.. but it is

Re: Monitoring subscribers on the list

On 18 June 2013 15:43, Barry Norton barry.nor...@ontotext.com wrote: Does anyone know if the number of subscribers on the list can be monitored? I have a limited degree of monitoring, for the EUCLID project, through the RSS feed and Web scraping, but I'm struggling to measure: 1) what

Re: CFP: Data In Web Search (DISH) Workshop - 13th May 2013, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Just to let you know, the Workshop papers deadline is extended until March 4th 2013. Please don't ask me what time of day on March 4th! --Dan On 9 January 2013 18:22, Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote: [I don't often crosspost to 3 W3C lists, but I think this will be an important event

Linked Data RDFa

With RDFa maturing (RDFa 1.1, particularly Lite), I wanted to ask here about attitudes to RDFa. I have acquired the impression somehow that in the Linked Data scene, people lean more towards the classic 'a doc for the humans, another for the machines' partitioning model. Perhaps this is just a

Re: Breaking news: GoodRelations now fully integrated with schema.org!

On 8 November 2012 22:43, Guha g...@google.com wrote: Thank you Martin for the great collaboration. Look forward to more. And on our side, it was really Dan Brickley who did the work. Thank you Dan. Well in fact it was Cenk Gazen who did the hard and interesting work on the schema.org side

Re: ANN: WebDataCommons.org - Offering 3.2 billion quads current RDFa, Microdata and Miroformat data extracted from 65.4 million websites

On 17 April 2012 18:56, Peter Mika pm...@yahoo-inc.com wrote: Hi Martin, It's not as simple as that, because PageRank is a probabilistic algorithm (it includes random jumps between pages), and I wouldn't expect that wayfair.com would include 2M links on a single page (that would be one

Re: ANN: WebDataCommons.org - Offering 3.2 billion quads current RDFa, Microdata and Miroformat data extracted from 65.4 million websites

How about adding a disclaimer line to the webdatacommons.org site like Note that the many database-backed sites contain a huge long tail of rarely-visited, rarely-linked pages (e.g. product catalogues), but which increasingly contain useful structured data. It is best not to assume that this

Re: See Other

On 28 March 2012 14:24, David Wood da...@3roundstones.com wrote: Hi Dan, On Mar 27, 2012, at 21:30, Dan Brickley wrote: On 27 March 2012 20:23, Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote: I'm curious as to why this is difficult to explain.  Especially since I also have difficulties

Re: {Disarmed} Re: See Other

On 28 March 2012 14:28, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: I can't find any apps (other than mine) that actually use this. Searching: Sindice: http://sindice.com/search?q=http://graph.facebook.com 40 (forty) results Bing: http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22http://graph.facebook.com/%22

See Other

On 27 March 2012 20:23, Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote: I'm curious as to why this is difficult to explain.  Especially since I also have difficulties explaining the benefits of linked data.  However, normally the road block I hit is explaining why URIs are important. Alice:

Re: Annotating IR of any relevance? (httpRange-14)

On 26 March 2012 08:51, Giovanni Tummarello giovanni.tummare...@deri.org wrote: Is annotating IRs is of *any value practical and role today* ? Anything of value and core interest to  wikipedia, imdb, bestbuy, bbc, geonames, rottentomatoes, lastfm, facebook, whatever. is a  NIR. We are

Re: Annotating IR of any relevance? (httpRange-14)

the shape a consensus should take. So I've been trying to drag FRBR into this conversation for some years now, http://www.frbr.org/2005/07/05/dan-brickley-and-the-w3c ... but not because it (or Indecs, CRM etc., which also have their charm) is good/better/best, ...rather to assert that different models

Re: The Battle for Linked Data

On 26 March 2012 16:49, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: So What is Linked Data? I think this can be defused: 'Linked Data' is the use of the Web standards to share documents that encode structured data, typically but not necessarily using a graph data model. Considerations --- It's

Re: The Battle for Linked Data

On 26 March 2012 19:16, Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote: On 26 March 2012 16:49, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: So What is Linked Data? I think this can be defused: 'Linked Data' is the use of the Web standards to share documents that encode structured data, typically

Re: The Battle for Linked Data

On 26 March 2012 20:13, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 3/26/12 2:16 PM, Dan Brickley wrote: I think this can be defused: 'Linked Data' is the use of the Web standards to share documents that encode structured data, typically but not necessarily using a graph data model

Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

On 25 March 2012 11:03, Michael Brunnbauer bru...@netestate.de wrote: Hello Jeni, On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 10:13:09AM +0100, Jeni Tennison wrote: I agree we shouldn't blame publishers who conflate IRs and NIRs. That is not what happens at the moment. Therefore we need to change something.

Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

On 25 March 2012 20:26, Tim Berners-Lee ti...@w3.org wrote: On 2012-03 -24, at 00:47, Pat Hayes wrote: I am sympathetic, but... On Mar 23, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Dave Reynolds wrote: The proposal is that URI X denotes what the publisher of X says it denotes, whether it returns 200 or not.

Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

2012/3/23 Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com: 2012/3/23 Giovanni Tummarello giovanni.tummare...@deri.org 2012/3/23 Sergio Fernández sergio.fernan...@fundacionctic.org: Do you really think that base your proposal on the usage on a Powder annotation is a good idea? Sorry, but IMHO

Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

On 23 March 2012 14:33, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: On Mar 23, 2012, at 8:52 AM, Jonathan A Rees wrote: I am a bit dismayed that nobody seems to be picking up on the point I've been hammering on (TimBL and others have also pointed it out), that, as shown by the Flickr and Jamendo

Re: Change Proposal for HttpRange-14

On 24 March 2012 17:36, Dave Reynolds dave.e.reyno...@gmail.com wrote: However, the data is not always under our complete control and there is no universal agreement on what default fragment to use. Leaving us either having to maintain mapping tables or try multiple probes (when asked for

Re: ANN: Sudoc bibliographic ans authority data

On 7 July 2011 23:17, Yann NICOLAS nico...@abes.fr wrote: Bonjour, Sudoc [1], the French academic union catalogue maintained by ABES [2], has just been released as linked open data. 10 million bibliographic records are now available as RDF/XML. Examples for the Sudoc record whose internal

survey: who uses the triple foaf:name rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:label?

Dear all, The FOAF RDFS/OWL document currently includes the triple foaf:name rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:label . This is one of several things that OWL DL oriented tools (eg. http://www.mygrid.org.uk/OWL/Validator) don't seem to like, since it mixes application schemas with the W3C builtins. So

Re: Correct Usage of rdfs:idDefinedBy in Vocabulary Specifications with a Hash-based URI Pattern

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Martin Hepp martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote: Dear all: We use rdfs:isDefinedBy in all of our vocabularies (*) for linking between the conceptual elements and their specification. Now, there is a subtle question: Let's assume we have an ontology with

Re: Next version of the LOD cloud diagram. Please provide input, so that your dataset is included.

On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Anja Jentzsch a...@anjeve.de wrote: Hi all, we are in the process of drawing the next version of the LOD cloud diagram. This time it is likely to contain around 180 datasets altogether having a size of around 20 billion RDF triples. For drawing the next

Re: Predicate for external links on dbpedialite.org?

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Nicholas Humfrey nicholas.humf...@bbc.co.uk wrote: Hello, I have added external links to dbpedialite, for example see Berlin: http://dbpedialite.org/things/3354 Is there a better predicate to use than rdfs:seeAlso? I am not sure if it is correct because the

Re: Solving Real Problems with Linked Data: Verifiable Network Identity Single Sign On

On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Q: What about OpenID? A: The WebID Protocol embraces and extends OpenID via the WebID + OpenID That's an unfortunate turn of phrase. The intent I assume is to suggest that there are ways in which the two approaches

Re: Subjects as Literals

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Hi Sampo. I venture in again... I have much enjoyed the interchanges, and they have illuminated a number of cultural differences for me, which have helped me understand why some people have disagree with things that seem

Re: RDF Extensibility

2010/7/6 Jiří Procházka oji...@gmail.com: On 07/06/2010 03:35 PM, Toby Inkster wrote: On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 14:03:19 +0200 Michael Schneider schn...@fzi.de wrote: So, if     :s lit :o . must not have a semantic meaning, what about     lit rdf:type rdf:Property . ? As, according to what

Re: Subjects as Literals

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: [...] This is the canonical way to find it's meaning, and is the initial procedure we should use to arbitrate between competing understandings of its meaning. Whoo, I doubt if that idea is going to fly. I sincerely hope not.

Re: PRISM data on the LOD cloud?

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Hammond, Tony t.hamm...@nature.com wrote: Hi Kingsley: Kill me with the PDF URL :-( I think we could have been a tad more gracious here. This kind of remark only serves to alienate the well intentioned. You know, it's not actually (yet) a crime to put out a

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

[snip] This is the second time in a few hours that a thread has degenerated into talk of accusations and insults. I don't care who started it. Sometimes email just isn't the best way to communicate. If people are feeling this way about an email discussion, it might be worth the respective

An RDF wishlist

(rejigged subject line) On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: Pat, I wish you had been there.  ;) I have very mixed views on this, I have to say. Part of me wanted badly to be present. But after reading the results of the straw poll, part of me wants to completely

Re: destabilizing core technologies: was Re: An RDF wishlist

Hi Patrick, On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Patrick Durusau patr...@durusau.net wrote: Dan, Just a quick response to only one of the interesting points you raise: It's clear that many workshop participants were aware of the risk of destabilizing the core technologies just as we are gaining

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Jeremy Carroll jer...@topquadrant.com wrote: I am still not hearing any argument to justify the costs of literals as subjects I have loads and loads of code, both open source and commercial that assumes throughout that a node in a subject position is not a

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote: On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 17:10 +0100, Nathan wrote: In all honesty, if this doesn't happen, I personally will have no choice but to move to N3 for the bulk of things, and hope for other serializations of N3 to come along. RIF

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

(cc: list trimmed to LOD list.) On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Cut long story short. [-cut-] We have an EAV graph model, URIs, triples and a variety of data representation mechanisms. N3 is one of those, and its basically the foundation that

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: The sequence went something like this. TimBL Design Issues Note. and SPARQL emergence. Before that, RDF was simply in the dark ages. It's only simple if you weren't there :) You mean you didn't see me lurking

Re: The Ordered List Ontology

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: On Jun 30, 2010, at 6:45 AM, Toby Inkster wrote: On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:54:20 +0100 Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote: That said, i'm sure sameAs and differentIndividual (or however it is called) claims could probably make

Re: ANNOUNCE: lod-announce list

On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Angelo Veltens angelo.velt...@online.de wrote: Hi, Ian Davis schrieb: Hi all, Now we are getting a steady growth in the number of Linked Data sites, products and services I thought it was time to create a low-volume announce list for Linked Data related

Re: Organizations changing status

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:17 PM, William Waites william.wai...@okfn.org wrote: On 10-06-07 23:03, Emmanouil Batsis (Manos) wrote: b) what happens when organizations change legal status? I'm not certain but I don't think this ever really happens. In practice the old organisation ceases to

Re: Organization types predicates vs classes

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:21 PM, William Waites william.wai...@okfn.org wrote: On 10-06-08 04:27, Todd Vincent wrote: By adding OrganizationType to the Organization data model, you provide the ability to modify the type of organization and can then represent both (legal) entities and (legally

Re: Organization ontology

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Peristeras, Vassilios wrote: Hello all, I have the feeling that we are (at least partly) reinventing the wheel here. There have been several initiatives drafting generic models and representations for

Re: Slideshare.net as Linked Data

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Paul Groth pgr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I've wrapped the Slideshare.net API to expose it as RDF. You can find a blog post about the service at [1] and the service itself at [2]. An interesting bit is how we deal with Slideshare's API limits by letting you

Re: Why should we publish ordered collections or indexes as RDF?

2010/6/3 Haijie.Peng haijie.p...@gmail.com: [Apologies for cross-posting] Why should we publish ordered collections or indexes as RDF? is it necessary? On the Web, very little is 'necessary'. But some things can be useful. Indexes and summaries can help software prioritise, and allow larger

Re: Organization ontology

On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Stuart A. Yeates syea...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Dave Reynolds dave.e.reyno...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 17:06 +1200, Stuart A. Yeates wrote: On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Dave Reynolds dave.e.reyno...@googlemail.com

Re: Organization ontology

On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 3:07 PM, William Waites william.wai...@okfn.org wrote: On 10-06-03 09:01, Dan Brickley wrote: I don't find anything particularly troublesome about the org: vocab on this front. If you really want to critique culturally-loaded ontologies, I'd go find one that declares

Re: UK Govt RDF Data Sets

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Jeni Tennison wrote: Kingsley, On 15 Apr 2010, at 23:19, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Do you have any idea as to the whereabouts of RDF data sets for the SPARQL endpoints associated with data.gov.uk? [...] One thing

Fwd: backronym proposal: Universal Resource Linker

around the concept of 'linkage', I think it'll go a long way towards explaining what we're up to with RDF. Thoughts? Dan -- Forwarded message -- From: Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org Date: Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:52 AM Subject: backronym proposal: Universal Resource Linker To: u

Re: Fwd: backronym proposal: Universal Resource Linker

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote: Wonder what would happen if we just called them Links? I think that would confuse people. And would put stress just on the point where SemWeb and HTML notions of link diverge. An HTML page can have two (hyper-)links, a

Re: backronym proposal: Universal Resource Linker

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Ian Davis m...@iandavis.com wrote: When talking to people who aren't semweb engineers then i use URL/URI/link interchangeably. I don't think it matters because the 1% that care will look it all up and get the distinction and the rest will just get on and use

Re: UK Govt RDF Data Sets

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Ian Davis li...@iandavis.com wrote: Kingsley, You should address your question directly to the project organisers, we're a technology provider and host some of the data but it is not up to us when or where the dumps get shared. My understanding is that

Re: twitter's annotation and metadata

+cc: Ed Summers On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Chris Sizemore chris.sizem...@bbc.co.uk wrote: the main problem is gonna be the cognitive dissonance over whether a tweet is an information or non-information resource and how many URIs are needed to fully rep a tweet... so, who's gonna

Re: DBpedia hosting burden

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Daniel Koller dakol...@googlemail.com wrote: Dan, ...I just setup some torrent files containing the current english and german dbpedia content: (.. as a test/proof of concept, was just curious to see how fast a network effect via p2p networks). To try, go to 

Re: DBpedia hosting burden

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Ian Davis wrote: When you use the term: SPARQL Mirror (note: Leigh's comments yesterday re. not orienting towards this), you open up a different set of issues. I don't want to revisit SPARQL and SPARQL extensions

Re: DBpedia hosting burden

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Ian Davis wrote: When you use the term: SPARQL Mirror (note: Leigh's comments yesterday re. not orienting towards this), you open up a different set of issues. I don't want to revisit SPARQL and SPARQL extensions

Re: DBpedia hosting burden

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: Some have cleaned up their act for sure. Problem is, there are others doing the same thing, who then complain about the instance in very generic fashion. They're lucky it exists at all. I'd refer them to this

XMP RDF extractors?

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Leigh Dodds leigh.do...@talis.com wrote: Hi, Yes. PDF: http://patterns.dataincubator.org/book/linked-data-patterns.pdf EPUB: http://patterns.dataincubator.org/book/linked-data-patterns.epub Something of a tangent but this reminds me, what's the latest on RDF

Re: XMP RDF extractors?

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Pierre-Antoine Champin swlists-040...@champin.net wrote: Even more tangent, but when I read in detail the XMP spec last year (in relation to the Media Annotation WG), I came to two conclusions: - XMP specifies RDF at the level of the XML serialization, which is

Re: KIT releases 14 billion triples to the Linked Open Data cloud

But I love it :) Do the numbers include dates? Dan On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Matthias Samwald samw...@gmx.at wrote: Hi Denny, I am sorry, but I have to voice some criticism of this project. Over the past two years, I have become increasingly wary of the excitement over large numbers

Re: KIT releases 14 billion triples to the Linked Open Data cloud

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote: Hi Denny: Without spooling your All Fools' Day joke: I think it is a dangerous one, because there is obviously a true core in the expected criticism. I think that without any need, you give outsiders

Re: Should dbpedia have stuff in that is not from wikipedia - was: Re: A URI(Web ID) for the semantic web community as a foaf:Group

[snip] Couple of almost-independent points - Re DBpedia, I share a concern that the Wikipedia turned into a database product remain fairly clearly defined, even though the RDFization naturally includes a bit of creativity. However even that has subtleties - there are the different language

Re: SKOS, owl:sameAs and DBpedia

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote: Hello! We are in the process of rolling out some links to DBpedia over in BBC Programmes. However, we are facing a small issue. We use our own categorisation scheme based on SKOS, and then want to add some sameAs

Re: SKOS, owl:sameAs and DBpedia

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote: Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs? see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus I'm running out of excuses for not

Re: Improving Organization of Govt. based Linked Data Projects

On 21 Mar 2010, at 12:47, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Hi Kingsley, I am right with you - finding stuff is hard. But I do think we could make it easier for all of us. Just the esw wiki alone requires me to put every set I create into a bunch of places 10 years ago, looking for

Re: head/@profile needed in HTML 5? GRDDL in Linked Data community?

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:55 PM, Dan Connolly conno...@w3.org wrote: The proposal from the editors and chairs it that it is not needed; i.e. not cost-effective. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0794.html Dan B., your message suggests (without actually saying so) that

Re: Colors

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: Does anyone know of URIs which identify colors? Umbel has the general notion of Color, but I want the actual colors, like, you know, red, white, blue and yellow. I can make up my own, but would rather use some already out there,

Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Damian Steer d.st...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: Historical aside: On 17/02/10 11:20, Hugh Glaser wrote: More recently I have also badged as Web of Data; See [1], since 1998 :-) It's been used fairly regularly since then, although I'd highlight [2] as a

Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data

On 17 Feb 2010, at 18:14, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: On Feb 17, 2010, at 6:37 AM, Dan Brickley wrote: ... . RDF was originally standardised as a metadata system, a mechanism for finding stuff ... whether that stuff was photos, videos, HTML pages, excel spreadsheets, SQL databases

Re: The status of Semantic Web community- perspective from Scopus and Web Of Science (WOS)

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Ying Ding dingy...@indiana.edu wrote: Hi, If you are interested to know the Semantic Web: Who is who from the perspective of Scopus and Web Of Science, recently we conduct a bibliometric analysis in this field

Re: DBpedia-based entity recognition service / tool?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Georgi Kobilarov georgi.kobila...@gmx.de wrote: Hi Matthias, So you're asking for the perfect entity recognition service, applicable to the easy domain of scientific texts? Sure, I developed one in my spare time, it's much better than OpenCalais, I was just too

Can anyone help with an XSLT GRDDL conversion of Open Packaging Format (OPF) into RDF/XML Dublin Core

Hi all http://www.idpf.org/2007/opf/OPF_2.0_final_spec.html#AppendixA defines a Dublin Core-based XML metadata format used for ebooks. This is very nice but a little disconnected from other Dublin Core data in RDF. It would be great to have some XSLT to explore closer integration and use of

Re: Question about paths as URIs in the BBC RDF

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Ross Singer rossfsin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have a question about something I've run across when trying to parse the RDF coming from the BBC.  If you take a document like: http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/72c536dc-7137-4477-a521-567eeb840fa8.rdf notice

Re: ISBNs, owl:sameAs, etc

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 4:47 AM, Daniel O'Connor daniel.ocon...@gmail.com wrote: Psst, Chris, Tobias - any chance of RDFBookMashup rendering 'owl:sameAs urn:isbn:12434567' ? I might see if I can glue freebase's 1.8 million or so ISBNs onto rdfbookmashup. It's probably common knowledge, but

Re: Creating JSON from RDF

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Richard Light rich...@light.demon.co.uk wrote: In message c74badc3.20683%t.hamm...@nature.com, Hammond, Tony t.hamm...@nature.com writes Normal developers will always want simple. Surely what normal developers actually want are simple commands whereby data

Re: Creating JSON from RDF

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Jeni Tennison j...@jenitennison.com wrote: Richard, My opinion, based on the reactions that I've seen from enthusiastic, hard-working developers who just want to get things done, is that we (the data.gov.uk project in particular, linked data in general) are

Re: Creating JSON from RDF

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Dave Reynolds dave.e.reyno...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi Jeni, [Rest of post snipped for now, I'll respond properly later. Seems like we are on sufficiently similar wavelengths that it is just a matter of working the details.] I don't know where the best place

Re: Need help mapping two letter country code to URI

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Aldo Bucchi aldo.buc...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I found a dataset that represents countries as two letter country codes: DK, FI, NO, SE, UK. I would like to turn these into URIs of the actual countries they represent. ( I have no idea on whether this follows an

Re: temporary URLs on Second Life

On 20/7/09 11:01, Danny Ayers wrote: Second Life objects to become HTTP-aware : http://www.massively.com/2009/07/08/second-life-objects-to-become-http-aware/ cool, right? well not exactly, it uses shortlived-by-design URIs: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LSL_http_server Well, we can't have

Re: Dons flame resistant (3 hours) interface about Linked Data URIs

On 10/7/09 12:23, Juan Sequeda wrote: Steve is right. If I am not wrong, when TBL gave his talk at CERN for the 20th aniversary of the web, he said that he was amazed that people were hacking HTML by hand. He never expected it. Now... we are the geeks doing RDF, conneg, linked data by hand...

[Fwd: 2nd CFP: ISWC'09 workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2009)]

I don't normally forward conference CFPs, but it seems it would be useful to build some links with this community. Aw crap, can't believe I typed that. But you know what I mean... Dan Original Message Subject:2nd CFP: ISWC'09 workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2009)

Re: tutorial on Music and the Web of Data

On 1/7/09 17:51, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Linked Music Data or Linked Open Music Data, either provides a clear moniker for a music oriented Linked Data Space on the Web :-) It does rather suggest the music files are up there too. And I wouldn't complain if they were... :) Dan

Re: how do I report bad sameAs links? (dbpedia - Cyc)

On 30/6/09 13:33, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Dan Brickley wrote: (I was reminded about the SW bug tracker after posting this; good idea) http://sw.opencyc.org/2008/06/10/concept/Mx4rv8L0_JwpEbGdrcN5Y29ycA says it is owl:sameAs dbpedia:Spaced And DBpedia reports the same. They're both wrong

how do I report bad sameAs links? (dbpedia - Cyc)

http://sw.opencyc.org/2008/06/10/concept/Mx4rv8L0_JwpEbGdrcN5Y29ycA says it is owl:sameAs dbpedia:Spaced And DBpedia reports the same. They're both wrong! The DBpedia page is about a television situation comedy show; the Cyc page is about a freeware computer game. cheers, Dan

Re: Visualization of domain and range

Interesting discussion! On 25/6/09 14:15, Simon Reinhardt wrote: Hi Bernhard Schandl wrote: [1] http://www.ifs.univie.ac.at/schandl/2009/06/domain+range_bad.png [2] http://www.ifs.univie.ac.at/schandl/2009/06/domain+range_better.png I like this. The former has several problems anyway: you

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 26/6/09 10:51, Toby Inkster wrote: On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 09:35 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: Does every major RDF toolkit have an integrated RDFa parser already? No - and even for those that do, it's often rather flaky. Seseme/Rio doesn't have one in its stable release, though I believe one

Re: http://ld2sd.deri.org/lod-ng-tutorial/

On 22/6/09 23:16, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Yves Raimond wrote: Ontology modularization is a pretty difficult task, and people use various heuristics for deciding what to put in the subset being served for an element. There is no guarantee that the fragment you get contains everything that

Re: http://ld2sd.deri.org/lod-ng-tutorial/

On 23/6/09 09:33, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Hi Dan: I think Alan already gave examples this morning. An ontology can contain statements about the relationship between conceptual elements - classes, properties, individuals - that (1) influence the result to queries but (2) are not likely

Re: http://ld2sd.deri.org/lod-ng-tutorial/

[snip] Yup, re owl:imports, I enthusiastically added it to the FOAF spec when some OWL WG insider suggested it was the right thing to use, and dutifully removed it when someone (I forget who in both cases - quite possibly same person!) a few years later told me it had fallen from fashion

Re: Common Tag, FOAF and Dublin Core Re: Common Tag - semantic tagging convention

On 18/6/09 13:31, Bernard Vatant wrote: Rob, Danny (and Dan) ... why not use simply dc:creator and dc:date to this effect? Right. dc:date would seem a good choice, though I reckon foaf:maker might be a better option than dc:creator as the object is a resource (a foaf:Agent) rather than a

Re: Common Tag, FOAF and Dublin Core Re: Common Tag - semantic tagging convention

On 18/6/09 15:07, Thomas Baker wrote: On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:49:56PM +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: Well I actually meant dcterms:creator when I wrote dc:creator, sorry. So you can link your personal tags to your foaf profile, for example. And it's consistent even for tag:AutoTag, since

  1   2   >