let's try that attachment again
04-rif-irc.txt
Description: application/scribe
Ok, so here's what I end up with from the day's discussions. It's a
fairly-small generalization from what we're talking about for RIF (that
the WG seems pretty comfortable with), to cover all (namespaced) XML.
Obviously this is quick-and-dirty write-up, but maybe it gets the idea
across.
In this particular case, I speculate DCMI thought it was
getting around that issue by using purl.org which issues a 302
instead of a 303, thinking it would be cached, but doesn't appear to
happen in my browser. If purl.org were returning a 303, the point I
make would be more
[to a much-smaller list]
Suffice to say, the new namespace URI is:
http://purl.org/NET/biol/ns#
I can't imagine many people have had time to implement it yet, given that
I only posted about it about 16 hours ago, but for what it's worth, I'll
keep the old documents at the old URI
Argh. Got 223 errors.
What kind of errors? Were they are hard to fix?
Shouldn't the formatter crush out Zakim stuff?
I've done it manually, but it's a real pain.
I don't know which Zakim stuff you mean. Sure, the formatter should do
whatever we want it to do. What do you want it
Argh. Got 223 errors.
What kind of errors? Were they are hard to fix?
Any mention of Zakim seemed to generate an error.
/me looks back through old version of the minutes on the wiki.
Ah. You (sort of understandably) included Zakim, RRSAgent, and trackbot
in the list of people
5. Eventually use the Save button on the generated version.
But not until approved, right?
No, you save it when it's ready for review. You can save multiple
times./me ponders how to make that more clear.
Well, I'm then confused as to how others
I implemented/installed OMIT: and linkifying http/issues/actions.
- s
I don't remember how much you've heard of this idea of merging RDF's
language-tagged literals into datatype literals. The idea RIF-WG and
OWL-WG are working with is a kind of hack of inventing a datatype whose
lexical space contains a string with an @ and a language tag appended.
So:
[EMAIL
All,
I don't think there is a need to continue cc'ing the comments lists
for all the WGs on this thread.
I'd like to consider this a task force of RIF, OWL, and I guess I18N, let you
guys do the work and then report back to the WGs.
OK?
Ooops, yeah. I've added www-archive to the
A mailinglist would indeed make life easier.
I did request a mailing list. I'm not sure how long it will take. The
person who used to do this (usually within the hour) left a few weeks
ago, so they may be disorganized.
-- Sandro
email address to contact for further information:
Sandro Hawke, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please send technical comments
and questions about RIF to [EMAIL PROTECTED], a
mailing list with a public archive at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/
Intended
[cc'd www-archive, in case others get interested]
[You write about perhaps using the scribe tools OWL-WG is using]
Sure, I'd be happy to have you guys as the second users. (Eric just
grabbed me in the hall to talk about it.)
Is your wiki up and running?
Where in web space do you want
http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-sparql-irc.txt
http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-sparql-minutes.html
What next? :)
I'll try to take care of it today...
- s
.
-- Sandro
Sandro Hawke wrote:
[cc'd www-archive, in case others get interested]
Great.
[You write about perhaps using the scribe tools OWL-WG is using]
Sure, I'd be happy to have you guys as the second users. (Eric just
grabbed me in the hall to talk about it.)
Is your
The problem with Member Submissions and W3C Notes is an unclear update
mechanism and a lack of maintenance. Vocabs will evolve, and I'm not
sure if the Rec model really works for them. The Note model works
even less, with the Note being published once and then generally
sticking around
:
Sandro Hawke, san...@w3.org. Please send technical comments
and questions about RIF to public-rif-comme...@w3.org, a
mailing list with a public archive at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/
Intended usage:
COMMON
Restrictions on usage
[cc www-archive]
We talked about this the other day; I don't think there was a
conclusion.
I want a way to find one or more SPARLQ end points who can answer
queries about some RDF graph, for when the graph is very large. Folks
providing large graphs may choose to provide this service; folks
Links from Tom's Talk:
Linked Open Data Cloud: http://thedatahub.org/group/lodcloud
5 Stars of Open Linked Data: http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
LOD Cloud Vocabulary Statistics:
http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/lodcloud/state/#terms
5 Stars of Open Linked Vocabularies:
what's the mime type?
@prefix alice: http://alice.example.com/foaf#.
@prefix foaf: http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/.
alice:Alice foaf:knows alice:Bob.
kind of
rationale in the documents, if possible.
-- Sandro
Jeremy J Carroll
Principal Architect
Syapse, Inc.
On Jul 11, 2013, at 5:59 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
On 07/11/2013 03:06 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
Hello
This is a formal comment on
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11
months, instead of in RDF Concepts or RDF Semantics?
I mean, we'd all like that, we're just finding it impossible to get WG
consensus on putting it in a REC.
-- Sandro
Jeremy J Carroll
Principal Architect
Syapse, Inc.
On Jul 15, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
On 07/16/2013 03:45 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
On Jul 16, 2013, at 8:39 AM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
Or this one
a rdf:DirectDataset.
GRAPH _:a { s p o }
GRAPH _:b { s p o }
GRAPH _:c { _:a _:a _:a }
GRAPH _:d { _:b _:b _:b }
does _:c = _:d ?
Nope
to do.owl:sameAs (etc) are right
there, if they want to use them.
-- Sandro
peter
On Jul 15, 2013, at 5:39 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
It follows from this dataset:
a rdf:DirectDataset.
GRAPH _:a { s p o }
GRAPH _:b { s p o }
that _:a = _:b.
On 07/26/2013 12:37 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
I slept on Eric's question for several days ….
I ended up realizing that another aspect of the current drafts that I
feel should change a bit is:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-mt/index.html#rdf-datasets
When a graph name is
On 07/26/2013 06:21 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
Ah, and I just came across some other relevant text:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-query-20130321/#namedGraphs
The |FROM NAMED| syntax suggests that the IRI identifies the
corresponding graph, but the relationship between an IRI and a
[moved to www-archive and cc Pat for now]
On 09/16/2013 08:19 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
On Sep 11, 2013, at 8:14 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
On 09/11/2013 06:21 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
This section defines a vocabulary item rdf:Graph in addition
:
On Sep 11, 2013, at 8:14 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
On 09/11/2013 06:21 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
This section defines a vocabulary item rdf:Graph in addition to those in
[RDF-SCHEMA].
This is the class of resources that are RDF graphs. If a resource in this class
is identified
On 09/17/2013 12:35 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
Some in line responses ...
On Sep 16, 2013, at 6:37 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
[moved to www-archive and cc Pat for now]
So, we could scrub the idea of having a class, and instead define a
property
Following that epiphany I had at the end of my last email, here's what
I'd love to see everyone agree on, more or less:
== Named Graphs
An RDF Named Graph is similar to an RDF Graph, but different in one
important way.Because RDF Graphs are defined as being mathematical
sets of RDF
On 09/18/2013 04:29 AM, Gregg Reynolds wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
Following that epiphany I had at the end of my last email, here's
what I'd love to see everyone agree on, more or less:
== Named Graphs
On 09/19/2013 04:01 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
On 18 September 2013 19:33, Jeremy J Carroll j...@syapse.com
mailto:j...@syapse.com wrote:
Something of an aside …
On Sep 18, 2013, at 1:29 AM, Gregg Reynolds d...@mobileink.com
mailto:d...@mobileink.com wrote:
The suggestion
On 09/20/2013 04:44 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
On Sep 19, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
So, I hereby propose we give up on all this until after we solve the
change-over-time problem for RDF.
Well, I do have other things to do in my life
Sorry Hopefully you at least
On 09/24/2013 09:38 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
Do you have a use case (involving RDF on computers) for having different
properties on different graphs (which happen to have the same triples),
and which does not involve graphs changing over time?
(jumping in here...)
Related to change over time,
On 09/24/2013 09:53 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
On 24 September 2013 14:51, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
On 09/24/2013 09:38 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
Do you have a use case (involving RDF on computers) for having different
properties on different graphs (which happen to have the same
triples
On 09/24/2013 01:07 PM, Jeremy J Carroll wrote:
On Sep 24, 2013, at 6:31 AM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org
mailto:san...@w3.org wrote:
I'm now confident that you and I (and Jeremy) agree the problem we're
trying to solve in this thread is this: people seem to want to have
different properties
On 09/24/2013 05:32 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
On 24 September 2013 19:15, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
So let's go back to that.Give me an example that shows three things: the
triples happen to be the same, the metadata must remain distinct, and there
is no change over time.As I
Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote:
On Sep 24, 2013, at 8:31 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
On 09/20/2013 04:44 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
On Sep 19, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
So, I hereby propose we give up on all this until after we solve
the change-over-time problem for RDF
with named graphs; so the smallest possible edit is
to change that section in semantics only
Jeremy J Carroll
Principal Architect
Syapse, Inc.
On Sep 27, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote:
On Sep 24, 2013, at 8:31 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
On 09/20/2013 04:44 AM, Pat
Jeremy J Carroll
Principal Architect
Syapse, Inc.
On Sep 27, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
Jeremy J Carroll j...@syapse.com wrote:
I feel that Sandro's text has asked the WG for too much and is
motivated by the insoluble use case of dealing with time.
A shorter
As Guus mentioned, we're out of time.
At this point I'm really liking Pat's plan [1] to leverage the term RDF
Source [2] to address the kinds of use cases we've been talking about,
and write a WG Note to explain how to do it and define a class of
Datasets (or Dataset Sources?) that are
Carroll
Principal Architect
Syapse, Inc.
On Oct 1, 2013, at 10:25 AM, Sandro Hawke san...@w3.org wrote:
As Guus mentioned, we're out of time.
At this point I'm really liking Pat's plan [1] to leverage the term RDF
Source [2] to address the kinds of use cases we've been talking about
David Booth da...@dbooth.org wrote:
Pat or Sandro,
Regarding this discussion:
[[
On 09/12/2013 12:33 AM, David Booth wrote:
[Let's move this discussion to www-archive@w3.org please, as it isn't
relevant to Jeremy's comment. All follow-ups there please.]
On 09/11/2013 10:32 PM, Pat Hayes
Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote:
Hi David
This is NOT an official WG response, but only an informal note to
explain some of the background thinking and discussions behind some of
the decisions we took. Please don't copy this to the public comments
list. I added Sandro to the CC list as he seems
Jeremy J Carroll j...@syapse.com wrote:
Hi Peter
thank you and the WG for the time spent considering my issue.
I am sorry that you have failed to reach a satisfactory response, and
understand the difficulties involved.
My current intent is to raise a formal objection for consideration by
the
(just testing something about the mailing list archives)
46 matches
Mail list logo
