What it means now, or at any point in time, must be inclusive to new
in-development or in-use things, other wise it will never mean anything
else later down the line.
If you want it to mean a very specific set of things at any one time, then
take Linked Data down the standardization path and give
On 6/21/13 7:28 PM, David Booth wrote:
On 06/21/2013 01:06 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
All,
Situation Analysis (for additional context):
There are two versions of Design Issues documents [1][2] from TimBL
where the primary topic is Linked Data. Both documents a comprised of
four bullet points
It took me quite a while to understand this fully. IMHO, it is really
worth digesting. I think it also sheds light on how to approach some of
the topics raised in the last week.
[[
*The Test of Independent Invention*
There's a test I use for technology which the Consortium is thinking of
On 6/21/13 8:02 PM, David Booth wrote:
On 06/21/2013 10:25 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 6/21/13 10:15 AM, David Booth wrote:
[ . . . ]
The only sensible interpretation of the stars is that they indicate
milestones of progress *toward* Linked Open Data -- *not* that there
are five levels of
On 6/21/13 7:03 PM, Nathan Rixham wrote:
Linked Data is a moving target, it's not Linked Data 1.0, 1.1, 2.0
etc, it's a set of technologies which make it easy to have machine
readable data that is interlinked on the web.
If Linked Data is built on HTTP currently, then the media types used
On 6/21/13 9:25 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
As I read it, Kingsley (and TimBL) are arguing that Linked Data is a two dimensional axis with 4
steps/principles on one axis and 5 stars on the other. In contrast, why do
other people assume that Linked Data must be binary yes or no? I may be reading
Trump it? That IS RDF, Kingsley! You keep using the word 'denote', but I
sometimes wonder whether you understand what a mathematical denotation is...
I really think these threads need to end.
Cheers,
Barry
- Reply message -
From: Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com
To:
On 6/21/13 9:41 PM, ora.lass...@nokia.com wrote:
existing thread, and also for probably saying things other folks have
already brought up]
I have worked on RDF and systems using RDF for over 15 years now (and on
RDF's non-Web predecessors before that). The most important thing I have
learned is
On 6/21/13 10:11 PM, David Wood wrote:
On Jun 21, 2013, at 17:44, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 6/21/13 3:06 PM, David Wood wrote:
Hi Kingsley,
I really [1] hate to get drawn on this, but I think that Tim made it rather
clear with his revised Design Issue document that
On Jun 22, 2013, at 09:24, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 6/21/13 10:11 PM, David Wood wrote:
On Jun 21, 2013, at 17:44, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 6/21/13 3:06 PM, David Wood wrote:
Hi Kingsley,
I really [1] hate to get drawn on this, but I think
Kingsley,
On 6/22/13 9:22 AM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
I am sure you know I am not advocating reinvention of anything.
I am advocating the principle of independent invention [1] whereby the
concepts denoted by Linked Data , Semantic Web, and RDF are the
focal point
Why are there so few useful linked data applications for general non technical
users that provide functions that people need to support and enhance their work
and which operate over large amounts of data owned by different organisations
with a high degree of semantic interoperability and
It’s pretty easy to write an XSL stylesheet to convert “records” into RDF/XML,
and then write a little M/R job to run the XSL against a big bulk of records to
boil it down.
The intellectual challenge is the semantic mapping of idiomatic data into RDF
vocabulary terms.
Jeff
From: Dominic
Excerpts from Ora.Lassila's message of 2013-06-22 15:38:25 +:
Take JSON, just as an example. You can syntactically encode many of the
structures we might need to do Linked Data using JSON, but JSON lacks the
stuff you need higher up the stack. So you add that -- for example, invent
a
So publishing linked data is easy but creating applications that make use of it
is a completely different kettle of fish and very difficult, particularly in
the way I described.
My assumption is that the linked data community is keen to create these user
applications and not consign linked
We as a community can solve the semantic interoperability issue by reusing
existing RDF vocabularies as much as possible. Take Schema.org, for example, as
a good starting point.
Jeff
From: Dominic Oldman [mailto:do...@oldman.me.uk]
Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 12:56 PM
To: Young,Jeff (OR);
On 22 June 2013 18:56, Dominic Oldman do...@oldman.me.uk wrote:
So publishing linked data is easy but creating applications that make use
of it is a completely different kettle of fish and very difficult,
particularly in the way I described.
My assumption is that the linked data community is
Hi Dominic,
Good question.
You may be interested in the unusual approach in:
* www.reengineeringllc.com/EnergyIndependence1.pdf
www.reengineeringllc.com/EnergyIndependence1Video.htm (Flash video with
audio)
www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/EnergyIndependence1.agent
On 22 Jun 2013, at 17:56, Dominic Oldman do...@oldman.me.uk
wrote:
So publishing linked data is easy but creating applications that make use of
it is a completely different kettle of fish and very difficult, particularly
in the way I described.
My assumption is that the linked data
Hi Jeff,
I assume you aren't suggesting that such tools are suitable for non-technical
users, as Dominic asked.
So you must be saying something else?
That it is pretty easy, but people don't do it?
Hugh
On 22 Jun 2013, at 17:27, Young,Jeff (OR) jyo...@oclc.org
wrote:
It’s pretty easy to write
Hugh,
Sorry, you're right. I overlooked the non-technical uses phrase in Dominic's
message.
Let me spin it a little differently, then. If you're a techie, you can use
these tools to create N-Triple data-dumps that non-techies can download and use
with Unix-style commands like grep and sort
Hi Melvin,
I wouldn't really say that Tabulator was suitable for general non technical
users.
I just clicked on the link, and apart from getting endless windows with
Couldn't set callback for redirects: TypeError: 'undefined' is not an object
(evaluating 'xhr.channel')
it is pretty opaque as to
Ah, now yer rocking!
But you didn't mention sed (and vi) :-)
On 22 Jun 2013, at 18:57, Young,Jeff (OR) jyo...@oclc.org
wrote:
Hugh,
Sorry, you're right. I overlooked the non-technical uses phrase in
Dominic's message.
Let me spin it a little differently, then. If you're a techie, you
Yes, tabular doesn't count.
I want to have the same functionality that I get from my internal relational
database systems extended to reap the benefits of the semantic web.
Do I recall articles by TBL talking about every day functionality being
injected with semantic benefits. Wasn't there a
On 6/21/13 11:42 PM, David Booth wrote:
RDF is *key* to making Semantic Web data easily machine interpretable
and combinable, because it is *the* universal data model on which the
Semantic Web is based.
I assume RDF makes data *machine interpretable* via *inference* and
*reasoning*, right ?
On 6/22/13 10:07 AM, David Wood wrote:
On Jun 22, 2013, at 09:24, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 6/21/13 10:11 PM, David Wood wrote:
On Jun 21, 2013, at 17:44, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 6/21/13 3:06 PM, David Wood wrote:
Hi Kingsley,
I really [1]
I think it well worth copying Jeff's initial response. I would be interested in
responses to it.
It’s pretty easy to write an XSL stylesheet to convert “records” into RDF/XML,
and then write a little M/R job to run the XSL against a big bulk of records to
boil it down.
The intellectual
Hi Dominic,
I'll bite. I am a newcomer to RDF, LOD, and the Semantic Web. Serializing
data to RDF has been easy for me, since it's not any different from writing
CSV or XML files.
On the other hand, knowing what predicates and classes to use has been
quite difficult. The world of ontologies
Hi,
you are hitting a good point, that is like the elephant in the room:
- the vast majority of trivial examples I see use FOAF, but I'm making a
bioinformatics app.
- there are multiple orthology predicates defined in ontologies such as the
Homology Ontology and the Sequence Ontology.
-
Hello Dominic,
RDF solves the problem of syntactic heterogeneity. The problems of schematic
and structural heterogeneity are only eased a bit and the problem of semantic
heterogeneity stays.
In order to integrate data, you still have to find data and deliberate -
for example do mappings
I find UML to be a useful tool for visualizing OWL ontologies, especially when
I encounter a new one that looks interesting. GoodRelations has a decent
example of what this approach would look like:
http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/goodrelations-UML.png
UML has its limits (e.g.
On 6/22/2013 6:11 PM, Michael Brunnbauer wrote:
Hello Dominic,
RDF solves the problem of syntactic heterogeneity. The problems of schematic
and structural heterogeneity are only eased a bit and the problem of semantic
heterogeneity stays.
+1
P.
In order to integrate data, you still have
I disagree. RDF helps discourage semantic heterogeneity by encouraging RDF
vocabulary reuse. RDF vocabularies that publish themselves as Linked Data help
even more.
Jeff
Sent via a cracked screen :-(
On Jun 22, 2013, at 9:34 PM, Pascal Hitzler pascal.hitz...@wright.edu wrote:
On
Hi Dominic
Check out http://dev.openphacts.org - click on featured applications to find
multiple apps built using semantically integrated data e.g. chembionavigator.org
Note these are apps designed for drug discovery professionals - but no hint of
triples. The apps are based on hosted and
34 matches
Mail list logo
