On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote:
On 09/07/2009 00:38, Toby A Inkster t...@g5n.co.uk wrote:
On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote:
Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not
transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a
On 9 Jul 2009, at 07:44, Juan Sequeda wrote:
On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote:
Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't
put too many
LD URIs in one document.
If dbpedia decided to represent all the RDF in one document, and
then use
In message
EMEW3|b88ea541556c1ff93cb7842c018e2d08l681Q702hg|ecs.soton.ac.uk|C21D%hg
@ecs.soton.ac.uk, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk writes
Hash URIs are very valuable in linked data, precisely *because* they
can't be directly requested from a server - they allow us to bypass
the whole HTTP
Hashed URIs can bring other problems.
For example, if I have a service http://mydata.org/uri that takes a
URI and returns what it knows about the thing identified by that URI
and I pass it a hash URI, e.g. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110006281382#article
, my browser will trim #article and
On 09/07/2009 07:56, Peter Ansell ansell.pe...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/7/9 Juan Sequeda juanfeder...@gmail.com:
On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote:
snip hash URI comments
Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't put too
many
LD URIs in one
(Discussing 303-redirect services, such as http://t-d-b.org/ or
http://thing-described-by.org/ )
On Thu 09/07/09 6:12 AM , Olivier Rossel olivier.ros...@gmail.com sent:
Externalizing the 303 feature is the good idea, imo.
But such a service should also handle the content negociation
I like this! :)
However, some people will still be concerned about naming their
resources under a domain that is not theirs. That is not only a matter
of URI-prettiness, but also of relying on an external service, which may
cease to exist tomorrow.
However, this could easily be solved. All
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Pierre-Antoine
Champinswlists-040...@champin.net wrote:
However, some people will still be concerned about naming their resources
under a domain that is not theirs. That is not only a matter of
URI-prettiness, but also of relying on an external service, which
Externalizing the 303 feature is the good idea, imo.
But such a service should also handle the content negociation feature.
So the 303 may redirect to different URLs depending on the content
negociated. This makes the service more complex internally but
provides a very relevant service for RDF
DNS trickery is the ultimate step for a fully flexible architecture.
Unfortunately it requires to have some admin rights over your own
domain. Something uber difficult in companies.
A workaround would be to create a top domain name, something like
..uris (or more realistically cooluris.net), with
Google has just changed the wording of the documentation:
http://knol.google.com/k/google-rich-snippets/google-rich-snippets/32la2chf8l79m/1#
The mentioning of cloaking risk is removed. While this is not final
clearance,
it is a nice sign that our concerns are heard.
Best
Martin
Martin
On Jul 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
OK, I'll have a go :-)
Why did I think this would be fun to do on a sunny Sunday morning
that has turned into afternoon?
Here are the instructions:
And here is why I cannot follow them.
1. Create a web-accessible directory, let's say
Hi Pat,
I have checked with my system admin, and they tell me, Yes that is correct.
You cannot access your .htaccess file. You cannot modify it or paste
anything into it. Only we have access to it. No, we will not change this
policy for you, no matter how important you think you are. Although
Mark,
disclaimer: I have nothing against the RDFa solution; I just don't think
that one size fits all :)
ok, the solutions proposed here (by myself and others) still involve
editing the .htaccess. However, compared to configuring HTTP
redirections using mod_rewrite, they have two
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:13 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
The original point of this thread seemed to me to be saying that if
.htaccess is the key to the semantic web, then it's never going to
happen.
It simply isn't the key to the semantic web though.
.htaccess is a simple way to configure
On Wednesday, July 8, 2009, Toby Inkster t...@g5n.co.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:13 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
The original point of this thread seemed to me to be saying that if
.htaccess is the key to the semantic web, then it's never going to
happen.
It simply isn't the key to the
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:50 +0100, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote:
[ . . . ]
ok, the solutions proposed here (by myself and others) still involve
editing the .htaccess.
Once again, use of a 303-redirect service such as
http://thing-described-by.org/ or http://t-d-b.org/
does not require *any*
Sorry to hear that, Pat.
On 08/07/2009 14:51, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote:
On Jul 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
OK, I'll have a go :-)
Why did I think this would be fun to do on a sunny Sunday morning
that has turned into afternoon?
Here are the instructions:
And
On Wed 08/07/09 5:08 PM , Olivier Rossel olivier.ros...@gmail.com sent:
Do you mean that all deferencable URIs of a RDF document should have
their domain name to end with t-d-b.org, so their resolution leads to
the TDB server which redirects to the final location?
No, I'm not suggesting that
On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote:
Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not
transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a
hyperlink ? If that is true, then the server would not be able to
serve anything different if a browser clicked upon http://
On 09/07/2009 00:38, Toby A Inkster t...@g5n.co.uk wrote:
On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote:
Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not
transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a
hyperlink ? If that is true, then the server would not be able to
Hi Martin, all,
I would like to point to something that might be useful for RDF data
publishing. The ReDeFer RDF2HTML service
(http://rhizomik.net/redefer/) renders input RDF/XML data as HTML for
user interaction (e.g. as used in http://rhizomik.net/rhizomer/). Now,
it also embeds RDFa that
In message 4a50ad9f.9030...@champin.net, Pierre-Antoine Champin
swlists-040...@champin.net writes
PS: any IIS user volunteering to translate those recipies to IIS
configuration?
I have implemented the 303 redirection strategy in IIS, but using a
custom 404 page not found error handler. Is
Le 05/07/2009 13:54, Toby A Inkster a écrit :
On 5 Jul 2009, at 01:52, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote:
I guess a PHP version would not even require that .htaccess, but
sorry, I'm not fluent in PHP ;)
The situation with PHP should be much the same, though I suppose web
hosts might be more
We should start a repository somewhere of useful code for serving linked
data.
I agree.
(I raise my hand)
If I am not wrong, this thread has given out 4 different implementations for
serving linked data. I mentioned before that I wanted to post this on
linkeddata.org
I will work out the
OK, I'll have a go :-)
Why did I think this would be fun to do on a sunny Sunday morning that has
turned into afternoon?
Here are the instructions:
1. Create a web-accessible directory, let's say foobar, with all your .rdf,
.ttl, .ntriples and .html files in it.
2. Copy lodpub.php and
yay!! more easy-lod goodness! more incentive to get this up on
linkeddata.org this week!
do we have any volunteers for ruby?
Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student
Dept. of Computer Sciences
The University of Texas at Austin
www.juansequeda.com
www.semanticwebaustin.org
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 5:16 PM,
Le 03/07/2009 15:14, Danny Ayers a écrit :
2009/7/2 Bill Robertsb...@swirrl.com:
I thought I'd give the .htaccess approach a try, to see what's involved in
actually setting it up. I'm no expert on Apache, but I know the basics of
how it works, I've got full access to a web server and I can
2009/7/2 Bill Roberts b...@swirrl.com:
I thought I'd give the .htaccess approach a try, to see what's involved in
actually setting it up. I'm no expert on Apache, but I know the basics of
how it works, I've got full access to a web server and I can read the online
Apache documentation as well
Discussion on this seems to have died down. I've tried to follow this thread
but do not have enough SW and RDF knowledge to understand all that was said.
But I'd like to learn by being able to publish RDF versions of knowledge in a
way that is discoverable and usable by others in LOD fashion.
2009/7/2 Linde, A.E. ae...@leicester.ac.uk:
Could someone summarise this thread in a single (unbiased?) post, please?
I'll try to answer the questions, even though I've only skimmed the thread...
a) what is/are the blocks on LOD via RDF
The vast majority of publication tools and supporting
I thought I'd give the .htaccess approach a try, to see what's
involved in actually setting it up. I'm no expert on Apache, but I
know the basics of how it works, I've got full access to a web server
and I can read the online Apache documentation as well as the next
person.
So... after
Hi Bill,
Is your code to do the content negotation in RoR available somewhere?
I'm trying to come up with example code to put up (sometime soon) on the
linkeddata.org site.
Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student
Dept. of Computer Sciences
The University of Texas at Austin
www.juansequeda.com
Hi guys,
Have you looked at Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/
Peter
Juan Sequeda wrote:
Hi Bill,
Is your code to do the content negotation in RoR available somewhere?
I'm trying to come up with
Hi,
One solution for this is for someone to create and distribute a simple
to deploy Linked Data server with integrated CN that can cover common
personal ( introductory ) use cases and eventually scale to enterprise
demands.
And maybe it could even be opensource and already packaged to be
Peter Mika wrote:
Hi guys,
Have you looked at Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF
Vocabularies:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/
Peter
Ivan (as W3C rep.),
We have a W3C article titled:
Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies
Hi Tom:
Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some
great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's
not oversell it.
We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the conclusion. What I
want and suggest is using RDFa also for exchanging a bit
Hi Martin,
2009/6/29 Martin Hepp (UniBW) martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org:
Hi Tom:
Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some
great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's
not oversell it.
We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the
Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Hi Tom:
Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some
great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's
not oversell it.
We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the conclusion. What I
want and suggest is using RDFa
Hi Tom,
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Tom Heathtom.he...@talis.com wrote:
Martin,
2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org:
So if this hidden div / span approach is not feasible, we got a problem.
The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a)
Hi Yihong:
I am a big fan of Codd's one fact in one place credo. However, in this
particular case, that principle is violated anyway, since the literal
values are often duplicated for presentation and meta-data prupolses
anyway (think of 2009-06-29 vs. June 29, 2009). Second, for dynamic
Web
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 13:30 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
If we go back a step, RDFa was carefully designed so that it could
carry any combination of the RDF concepts in an HTML document. In the
end we dropped reification and lists, because it didn't seem that the
RDF community itself was clear
Hi Toby,
Yes...of course...you are right. :)
I would say too, that reification is even more long-winded than the
example you have given! You don't have the actual statement the sky
is blue in your mark-up, so you need even more RDFa. (You only have
the statement Mark says 'the sky is blue'.)
Hi Mark,
2009/6/29 Mark Birbeck mark.birb...@webbackplane.com:
Hi Tom,
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Tom Heathtom.he...@talis.com wrote:
Martin,
2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org:
So if this hidden div / span approach is not feasible, we got a problem.
The
On Jun 28, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
On 2009-06 -25, at 13:29, Pat Hayes wrote:
On Jun 25, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata
for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator
On Jun 28, 2009, at 6:20 PM, Tom Heath wrote:
Hi Pat,
2009/6/25 Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us:
With the sincerest respect, Tom, your attitude here is part of the
problem.
Maybe, along with many other people, I am indeed still stuck in the
mid-1990s. You have permission to be as condescending as
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 01:20 +0200, Tom Heath wrote:
[ . . . ] This discussion only applies to the
303-redirect/slash URI pattern. You can avoid this completely by using
the hash URI pattern . . . .
And as a reminder, you can also use a 303-redirect service if you cannot
configure your server,
Hi Pat,
OK, yelling heard loud and clear :)
By way of concrete actions, I gave Ivan Herman a (probably unfairly)
hard time today here at Dagstuhl to 'encourage' the authors of the
Vocabs Best Practices to press on with the revision of that document
that addresses the current issues. An update of
Hi Richard,
2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de:
snip/
(On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is
that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a browser by the
average person interested in linked data publishing, MUST return something
Martin,
2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org:
So if this hidden div / span approach is not feasible, we got a problem.
The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the
human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data link to
On 2009-06 -25, at 13:29, Pat Hayes wrote:
On Jun 25, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata
for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],
I have quite some evidence that the current best
On 6/28/09 6:33 PM, Tom Heath tom.he...@talis.com wrote:
Hi Richard,
2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de:
snip/
(On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is
that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a browser by the
average
Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 6/28/09 6:33 PM, Tom Heath tom.he...@talis.com wrote:
Hi Richard,
2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak rich...@cyganiak.de:
snip/
(On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is
that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Martin Hepp
(UniBW)martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote:
So if this hidden div / span approach is not feasible, we got a problem.
The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the
human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable
Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
So if this hidden div / span approach is not feasible, we got a
problem.
The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a)
the human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data
link to the same literals, the problematic is it in
On 27 Jun 2009, at 11:25, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
What happens if you put them in one big span tree and use the
@content attribute?
view-source:http://ontologi.es/rail/routes/gb/VTB1.xhtml
--
Toby A Inkster
mailto:m...@tobyinkster.co.uk
http://tobyinkster.co.uk
On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote:
If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting
with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally
broken.
RDF doesn't. Apache does.
Many hosts do have front ends for configuring Apache, allowing
redirects to
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
is in development for 3.0.
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
Dan Brickley wrote:
+cc: Norm Walsh
On 25/6/09 19:39, Juan Sequeda wrote:
So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation,
right?
Just do everything in RDFa, right?
We are planning to deploy soon the linked data version of Turn2Live.com.
And we are in the discussion
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Martin Hepp
(UniBW)martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote:
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their
businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],
I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of using
Hi Toby,
Toby A Inkster wrote:
On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote:
If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting
with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally
broken.
RDF doesn't. Apache does.
Many hosts do have front ends for configuring
On Jun 26, 2009, at 3:03 AM, Toby A Inkster wrote:
On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote:
If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting
with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally
broken.
RDF doesn't. Apache does.
I should have said, if
Melvin Carvalho wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Martin Hepp
(UniBW)martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote:
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their
businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],
I have quite some evidence that the
Hi Martin,
b) download RDFa snippet that just represents the RDF/XML content (i.e. such
that it does not have to be consolidated with the presentation level part
of the Web page.
By coincidence, I just read this:
Hidden div's -- don't do it!
It can be tempting to add all the content
Kingsley-
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Kingsley Idehenkide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
Mark: Should we be describing our docs for Google, fundamentally? I really
think Google should actually recalibrate back to the Web etc..
The correct question to ask, and the one that I believe Mark is
Hi Martin,
On 25.06.2009, at 17:44, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata
for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],
I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of
using .htaccess are a MAJOR
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for
their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],
I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of using
.htaccess are a MAJOR bottleneck for the adoption of Semantic Web
technology.
Just some
On Jun 25, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Hi all:
After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata
for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],
I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of
using .htaccess are a MAJOR
So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation,
right?
Just do everything in RDFa, right?
We are planning to deploy soon the linked data version of Turn2Live.com. And
we are in the discussion of doing the content negotiation (a la BBC). But if
we can KISS, then all we
Juan Sequeda wrote:
So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content
negotiation, right?
No, it means content negotiation is an option, albeit a tough one when
.htaccess and Apache are ground zero.
Just do everything in RDFa, right?
Of course, if it works for your circumstances
Jeff Finkelstein, Customer Paradigm wrote:
Martin-
I agree that the .htaccess file is a big stumbling block for many people
with low-cost hosting. Would a lightweight php-based application that could
write to the .htaccess / create the RDF file work to solve this easily?
Sorry, it won't.
Giovanni Tummarello wrote:
That can then be inserted as code snippets via copy-and-paste to any XHTML
document.
Any opinions?
Great, why bother with any other solution.
even talking about any other solution is extraordinarely bad for the
public perception of the semantic web community.
Just confirming. I really want to start getting things done!
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.comwrote:
Juan Sequeda wrote:
So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation,
right?
No, it means content negotiation is an option,
On 25.06.2009, at 19:11, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Jeff Finkelstein, Customer Paradigm wrote:
Martin-
I agree that the .htaccess file is a big stumbling block for many
people
with low-cost hosting. Would a lightweight php-based application
that could
write to the .htaccess / create the RDF
Juan Sequeda wrote:
Just confirming. I really want to start getting things done!
So get going :-)
[SNIP]
I agree. I think I had this discussion with Peter Mika and Tom Heath
before. Don't take me literally but the conclusion was that RDFa is
Linked Data once it shows up in the best
Tom,
Is there a place in the ESW wiki where people can find these simple
tools/scripts to do the rewriting like the one you did and [1]. I'm sure
there must be others.
This would be a good resource to have!
[1] http://ptlis.net/source/php-content-negotiation/
The easiest pattern I've found
Hi Juan,
Not AFAICT, but feel free to search and create one if not. Wherever it
lives this would be a great resource to link to from linkeddata.org
Cheers,
Tom.
2009/6/25 Juan Sequeda juanfeder...@gmail.com:
Tom,
Is there a place in the ESW wiki where people can find these simple
As mostly, recently ;-), I agree with Kingsley - I did not want to say
that proper usage of http is bad or obsolete. But it turned out
unfeasible for broad adoption my owners of small Web sites.
For huge data sources and for vocabularies, the current recipes are
fine. But I want every single
Hi John:
We also thought of hosting meta-data for the users, but I don't like
that because I want the shop operators to feel ownership for the data:
If the opening hours expressed in RDF are wrong but on the personal Web
page of that restaurant, anybody facing closed doors will blame the
Hi Tom, all,
El 25/06/2009, a las 20:30, Tom Heath escribió:
Are you referring to the best practices at [1]? Unfortunately the
recipes in that document that use .htaccess and mod_rewrite for conneg
no longer count as best practices, precisely due to mod_rewrite and
.htaccess not being adequate
Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
As mostly, recently ;-), I agree with Kingsley - I did not want to say
that proper usage of http is bad or obsolete. But it turned out
unfeasible for broad adoption my owners of small Web sites.
For huge data sources and for vocabularies, the current recipes are
Hi Jeremy/Pat,
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Jeremy Carrolljer...@topquadrant.com wrote:
Pat Hayes wrote:
RDF should be text, in documents. One should be able to use it without
knowing about anything more than the RDF spec and the XML spec. If it
requires people to tinker with files with
Hi Kingsley,
If you are comfortable producing (X)HTML documents, then simply use RDFa and
terms from relevant vocabularies to describe yourself, your needs, your
offerings, and other things, clearly. Once you've done that, simply leave
the Web to do the REST :-)
Everything else is a
Just because it's on your server doesn't mean the visitor to the
restaurant's web page has to know that. (Does it?) Hmm, maybe that
takes us back to the .htaccess argument
I agree the shop owner has to feel ownership. So whatever solution
you choose, the shop owner has to have
85 matches
Mail list logo
