Hello Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: >>>> About links, this question to Vincent: >>>> can we add some meta data to link? So we can use these links later for >>>> semantic needs? :) >>>> for example (semantic-mediawiki) http://semanticweb.org/wiki/London : >>>> [[capital of::England]] >>>> "capital of" is predicate, England is target page. >>> The answer is yes. I was about to send a proposal to modify links >>> since I have that need internally in order to support linking to images. >>> The idea is to have this new format: >>> >>> [[label>reference>property1=value1 property2 = value2...]] >>> >>> For now the "known" properties would be target and image: >>> [[label>reference>target="_new" image="myimage.png"]] >>> >>> But it supports any number of properties. >>> >>> Will that fit your use case? >> Yes, indeed it would. The only Thing is that this would not be always >> easy to understand for the average user (who will use the WYSWIG-Editor) >> But generally the above Example would translate to: >> Somewhere on a London Xwiki page: >> [[UK>United Kingdom>predicate="capital_of"]] >> (correct ?) > > The subject, London, is implied in your example. I don't think this is > good. What about: > > [[London>LondonURL>capitalOf="ukURL"]] > > but the predicate is not uniquely identified by a namespace. It would be > nice to be able to write: > > [[London>LondonURL>o:capitalOf="ukURL"]] > > where "o" is defined elsewhere, as the URI of the ontology defining the > capitalOf predicate, but I'm not sure this will be supported.
I don't think that would be supported. Since the Links you show are different in the semantics than what Vincent shows. Meaning in the London Page the above link would show to London and not to the UK. Anyway I don't see a problem that London is implied since, every fact you state on the concept page (London) should have by default the subject on the Page. Generally even prefixes are unnecessary unless you import other ontologies. As far as I see it from all the other semantic wikis (also see the mediawiki-example above) the Subject is usually implied. And not implying it would be counter-intuitive for most of the users. The fun part is that after you have those links (and even a link without a predicate can be used as a "is somehow related" default predicate) you can represent them as rdf/owl if the user states so (maybe in the http request). The links then are automatically expanded or prefixed with the configured xwiki base url. > > In your example I think you're trying to represent a triple using the link > syntax. If you are interested in searching for the capital of UK then a > better solution would be to store the triples in a knowledge base (as > objects attached to a page for instance) and then just bind the "London" > string to the London concept using the link syntax. > Yes and no. Partly because the above explanation of automatic generated rdf/owl representation, but also attaching the facts as Metadata or attached Objects is problematic. From a user perspective it is easy to forget to change the data and then you will have a data quality problem. Also it would mean that you state facts twice: once in the text with a link and another one explicitly in the object/attachment/metadata. Where it is perfectly fine to do it once: in the form of a semantic enhanced link. Take a look at the semantic wiki syntax http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki it is easy to type, implying subjects, embedded and concise. If people understand this and use this, the knowledge base will be build by itself. The only time where I see that the usage of additional metadata is useful is when somebody wants to state for instance that a is equivalent to B or more annotations that are not easily incorporated into the text. Something like the "Facts about London"-Box in http://semanticweb.org/wiki/London (albeit these are generated form the text stated facts). Nice greetings Jonas _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
