/ldif/git/nodes/ldif/ldif-singlemachine/src/main/resources/ldif/local/example/test2/mappings/ALL-to-Wiki.r2r.ttl?rev=176428845b9594e28a2f0362916de23cc821502c
[2] http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/n3/
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#def-subproperty
Sincerely,
--
Ruben Verborgh
Ghent University
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the fast and detailed reply, it's a very interesting discussion.
Indeed, there are several ways for mapping and identity resolution.
But what strikes me is that people in the community seem to be insufficiently
aware of the possibilities and performance of current
Hi Chris,
Sounds like a challenge indeed :)
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
While we have a lot of experience with reasoning, we never tried to go to the
billions. I contacted Jos De Roo, the author of the EYE reasoner, to see what
would be possible. I think we might at least be able
Hi Yang,
Great work.
I tried looking up http://dbpedia.org/resource/Tim_Berners-Lee and was happy to
see the result.
Then, I got curious what http://dbpedia.org/page/Tim_Berners-Lee would return
but unfortunately, it errors. Could you help me out?
Thanks,
Ruben
On 17 Oct 2011, at 12:41,
/call-for-papers/
Motivated for this challenge?
-
Great! Visit us at http://lapis2012.linkedservices.org/
Your deadline is March 4th, 2012.
LAPIS 2012 is organized by Craig Knoblock, Barry Norton, Ruben Verborgh,
Sebastian Speiser, and Maria Maleshkova.
LAPIS 2012
“quality
metrics for ontologies” instead of the other way round.
Any ideas?
Thanks for your help!
Best regards,
--
Ruben Verborgh
http://twitter.com/RubenVerborgh
PhD Student at Multimedia Lab — IBBT / ELIS, Ghent University, Belgium
Is your metadata trapped? http://freeyourmetadata.org/
Do your
that generates result sets. any
clues?
Best regards,
--
Ruben Verborgh
http://twitter.com/RubenVerborgh
PhD Student at Multimedia Lab — IBBT / ELIS, Ghent University, Belgium
Is your metadata trapped? http://freeyourmetadata.org/
Do your services need powerful descriptions? http://restdesc.org/
On 09 Jan
Hi there!
Linked Data and Services are never going to work together… or are they?
Your opinion is highly valued at the LAPIS workshop during the Extended
Semantic Web Conference ESWC 2012 (May 27).
Both regular (8 pages) and vision papers (4 pages) are welcome before March 9th.
Also, if you
Maria Maleshkova, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Ruben Verborgh, iMinds – Multimedia Lab – Ghent University
Thomas Steiner, Google Germany GmbH, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
Steffen Stadtmüller, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Pedro Szekely, University of Southern California
Speiser, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany
Jürgen Umbrich, DERI Galway, Ireland
María-Esther Vidal, Universidad Simón Bolívar, Venezuela
Erik Wilde, EMC, USA
Organizers
Maria Maleshkova, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Ruben Verborgh, iMinds – Multimedia Lab – Ghent University
Thomas
Dear Erik,
Congratulations on finalizing the test suite!
Please re-submit implementations reports for Turtle so you can
1. Help us push Turtle to final Recommendation status.
2. Raise public awareness of your implementation.
Here is the latest version of the EARL report for node-n3, the
Hi Gregg,
Report updated with your latest results. Note that doap:name was set to
node-n3, which is used to display the name of the project; this conflicts
with Ruben's node-n3 report; I took the liberty of changing it to EYE,
which was used in dc:title.
Thanks for pointing that out; has
Dear all,
Do we have other approaches besides RDF Forms [1] to represent hypermedia
controls in RDF?
Basically, I’m looking for any of the following:
- representing hyperlinks in RDF (in addition to subject/object URLs)
- representing URI templates [2]
- representing forms (in the HTML sense)
Hi Phil,
Thanks for the pointer. POWDER is definitely interesting and relevant,
but I’m a bit hesitant to apply regexing.
In general, I’m quite a fan of opaque URLs; that is, let the server maintain
full control.
While HTML GET forms are a level-breaker in that regard, I like the strictness
Hi Martynas,
- URI templates: Linked Data API vocabulary
https://code.google.com/p/linked-data-api/wiki/API_Vocabulary
Cool, I do like that. Have you thought about extending to RFC6570?
Do you know about usage of this vocabulary?
The one thing that I like less is the notion of endpoints.
Hi Ed,
CC: Mark Baker,
I've actually been part of the LDP group;
I fully agreed with Mark's concern on the lack of hypermedia controls [1].
LDP is based on a set of agreements, not on a set of dynamic affordances.
Would have loved to see a proposal such as this one [2] make it,
but it was then
Hi Norman,
Interesting pointer, thanks, I'm amazed to see this existed for so long!
HyTime defines a set of hypertext-oriented element types that [let] document
authors to build hypertext and multimedia presentations in a standardized
way.
The issue is probably to integrate this on the RDF
Hi Ed,
Forgot to answer this part:
I’d be interested to hear what your specific use case is.
In my research [1], I'm looking at giving machines the same affordances as
people.
Many things on today's Web cannot be done by machines due to a lack of
affordances.
While RDF allows to interpret
Hi Markus,
You probably already expected me asking this :-) Why not Hydra [1]?
Ah, there you are! Welcome ;-)
- representing hyperlinks in RDF (in addition to subject/object URLs)
hydra:Resource along with hydra:Link covers that: http://bit.ly/1b9IK32
And it does it the way I like:
Server: cloudflare-nginx
All fine at my end though so everything should work.
Not sure if it's of any help, but CloudFlare doesn't do content negotiation;
i.e., as soon as one representation is cached, it always serves that one,
regardless of any Accept headers sent by subsequent clients.
(And
Hi Kingsley,
Are words such as enables , facilitates etc.. so bad that we can no
longer make statements like:
a/ enables name to address indirection in HTML via URIs? Basically, that it
enables exploitation URI serve dually as a document name and a content access
address i.e., a
Hi Kingsley,
In my talks, I say that enabling is stronger than affording.
Do you have a link to the talk in question?
Well, it's something I always mention verbally, so enabling will not be on
the slides.
Nevertheless, here's a presentation on it for a wide audience:
Hi Kingsley
Note, Affordance doesn't show up in any of the standard dictionaries I have
access to. That said, it does have a Wiktionary entry [1], but that
particular definition doesn't actually make a case for it being immutable or
devoid of an alternative :-)
Norman's The Design of
Hi Gannon,
Are you thinking in terms of IPv4 or IPv6 ?
I'm sorry but I lost you here… how can I IPv4/6 relate to this?
Best,
Ruben
Hi Gannon,
[Sorry for the delay, your mail accidentally skipped my inbox!]
My question can be rephrased thus: Does the theoretical size of the target
audience for a distributed affordance matter ?
The audience size doesn't matter, as each user has personal preferences.
The idea is that the
Hi Luca,
Just finished reading the paper. Really great stuff. The idea of
splitting a single resourceful SPARQL request into multiple
fine-grained requests was always attractive to me and I've also
thought of something similar (http://lmatteis.github.io/restpark/). I
applaud you and your
Hi Luca,
1. Are the parameters standard? Do they have to be called
`?predicate=subject=object=`?
Good question, I'm glad you asked because the answer is no :-)
LDF clients should be entirely hypermedia-driven,
so they should not make any assumptions about URI structure.
Instead, controls to
Hi Luca,
Wouldn't it be better to *not* have the metadata return at each call
or is it necessary in order to make hypermedia clients work?
But then only specific basic Linked Data Fragment clients
would be able to access the API.
This is exactly what I want to avoid, for two reasons:
1) I
Hi Luca,
Wouldn't it be better to *not* have the metadata return at each call
or is it necessary in order to make hypermedia clients work?
Put differently, one could say:
“Why don't we just remove the search box from all Google and Yahoo pages?
Everybody knows you just need to type in
Hi Luca,
But imho as a community we have to strike a balance
between how much boilerplate we can put on developers hands
and how much automation we can achieve with that.
We can use libraries to avoid boilerplate.
An HTML form is the standard way
to represent hypermedia controls in HTML.
somewhat related to this direction there is a good project I'd like to see
integrated on sparql endpoints and linked data api in general:
https://helloreverb.com/developers/swagger
The difference between Swagger and Hydra
is that Swagger proposes a contract in advance.
That would be like
Dear all,
Sorry for hacking the discussion, but I think we should keep the discussion
goal-focused.
So let's therefore see what we want to achieve:
1. Having a way for clients to find out the members of a specific collection
2. Not breaking the RDF model while doing so
A solution that satisfies
Hi Peter,
This is why I started by saying the focus of the discussion should be on what
we want to achieve.
With my proposed solution, it is achieved.
Furthermore, this solution allows you to add any metadata you might like;
a Hydra client just wouldn't need it (even though others might).
Right
/people/markus foaf:knows [ hydra:memberOf /people/markus/friends ].
means “Markus knows somebody who is a member of collection X.
But that's not what this says. It says that Markus knows some entity that is
related by an unknown relationship to some unknown other entity.
Well,
Peter,
Please, let's get the discussion back
to what we want to achieve in the first place.
Right now, the solution is being evaluated
on a dozen of other things that are not relevant.
Proposal: let's discuss the whole abstract RDF container thing on
public-lod@w3.org,
and solutions to make
In actuality, defining things like owl:sameAs is indeed extending RDF.
Defining things in terms of OWL connectives also goes beyond RDF. This is
different from introducing domain predicates like foaf:friends. (Yes, it is
sometimes a bit hard to figure out which side of the line one is
Hi Markus,
Check that collection X to find out if Markus knows more of them.
That second sentence is where this approach loses its appeal for me. IMO, it
doesn't really suggest to go and check collection X to find out if Markus
knows more of them. Of course, you can always do, but why
What then is RDF for you?
The Resource Description Framework.
It is a framework to describe resources,
and this includes predicates.
Anybody can define predicates the way they want,
otherwise RDF is useless to express semantics.
For example, do you consider N3 to be RDF?
No, quantification is
Hi Kingsley,
How about making an RDF document that describes LDF? Producing such a
document would make its value proposition clearer. This approach is also a
nice case of Linked Data dog-fooding e.g., the basis for the most basic LDF
utility example using an RDF document as the data
Hi Peter,
Ok, I describe ex:BaseballPlayer as
ex:BaseballPlayer owl:equivalentClass _:x .
_:x owl:intersectionOf ( ex:Person [ owl:onProperty ex:plays; owl:hasValue
ex:Baseball ] )
Is this RDF?
Yes.
Should all consumers of RDF understand all of this?
Yes, depending on your
: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=iswc2014dev
Learn more at http://iswc2014.semdev.org/ and follow @SemWebDev.
See you at ISWC2014!
Ruben Verborgh
SemWeb developer
Dear SemWeb developer,
This is your chance to show your work to the world!
There are 6 ways in which you can participate
in the official ISWC2014 Developers Workshop:
1. You can submit a 4–6 page development paper
to tell us about SemWeb software you've written.
2. You can submit a short
When
do people need to refer to the document or the representation of the
animal zebra?
If we want to differentiate between
I like the zebra;
I don't like the document about the zebra.
Or more real-world examples:
a document about Barack Obama has a different creation date
than Barack
But why do they need to be on the same domain?
They don't need to be.
Several parties on
different domains can represent information about the animal zebra.
They just seem like different things to me.
They are, indeed.
Dear Chris,
Max Schmachtenberg, Heiko Paulheim and I have crawled of the Web of Linked
Data and have drawn an updated LOD Cloud diagram based on the results of the
crawl.
That's awesome, thanks a lot!
Would there be an SVG version at some point?
I heard that at some point, people were
Hi Chris,
If we did miss something, it would be great if you could point us at what we
have missed and update your entry in the DataHub catalog [2] accordingly.
Is it possible that our MMLab dataset was not added yet?
http://datahub.io/dataset/multimedia-lab
We sent it to you on August 4th,
Hi Kingsley,
I passed http://data.mmlab.be/people/Anastasia+Dimou through our edition of
Vapour [1]
Thanks for checking this. Below is what happens on HTTP level.
Looks fine to me. Do you spot an issue here?
$ curl -H Accept: text/turtle -L http://data.mmlab.be/people/Anastasia+Dimou
-i
Hi Kingsley,
The issues arise from the conclusions.
But I don't really see issues on Vapour. Where did you find them?
Basically, the denotation (name) aspect of the term isn't associated with its
connotation (description document), via a discernible RDF relation.
Yes it is:
Hi Kingsley,
Done.
[1] http://bit.ly/vapor-report-on-linked-data-describing-anastasia-dimou
Thanks, that's great!
Ruben
Hi Mark,
Indeed. Interestingly, this use case was the first one I published as an
example of RDF Forms;
http://www.markbaker.ca/2003/10/UriProxy/
It's then probably not a coincidence that the first iteration of triple pattern
fragments
worked with the RDF Forms vocabulary :-)
%3A%2F%2Ffoo.com%2Falice . ?
Absolutely. Note that similar constructs are already present in fragment
representations:
http://data.mmlab.be/mmlab?subject=http%3A%2F%2Fdata.mmlab.be%2Fpeople%2FRuben%2BVerborgh
contains
http://data.mmlab.be/people/Ruben+Verborgh rdfs:seeAlso
http://data.mmlab.be
bnodes are Semantic Web, but not Linked Data.
If a node doesn't have a universal identifier, it cannot be addressed.
I find this comment strange.
If you mean that I can’t query using a bnode, then sure.
If you mean that I never get any bnodes back as a result of a Linked Data URI
GET, then
Dear DBpedia enthusiasts,
DBpedia is perhaps the most widely known Linked Data source on the Web.
You can use DBpedia in a variety of ways: by querying the SPARQL endpoint,
by browsing Linked Data documents, or by downloading one of the data dumps.
Access to all of these data sources is offered
Dear Laura, all,
Thanks for publishing this dataset under an open license,
this is a great example of the power of Linked Data!
We have made the dataset available as triple pattern fragments
under the following URL: http://data.linkeddatafragments.org/linkedpolitics.
This data can now be queried
Dear Laura,
As you said (in your other email) it would be good to add some info on where
this data came from. At the moment people don’t know what this dataset is
about when they access it on http://data.linkeddatafragments.org, and also we
would not mind to be acknowledged ;)
Rest
Dear SemWeb developer,
Working on something with Linked Data or SemWeb technology?
This is your chance to show it to the world!
There are 6 ways in which you can participate
in the official ESWC2015 Developers Workshop:
1. You can submit a 4–6 page development paper
to tell us about SemWeb
Hi Bianca,
In addition to Paul's answer:
There is a full text search facility, a OpenRefine compliant reconciliation
API, a sparql endpoint and a linked data fragment server all accessible (with
examples) from the home page at http://kbodata.be/.
You can easily fire SPARQL queries at the
Hi Kingsley,
While your main points are correct, I disagree with your conclusion.
I guess everything depends on what you mean with "The Semantic Web",
but if I read the article with that title, we're arguably _not_ there.
In that sense, I find it strange you use Google as an example of success.
Hi Kingsley,
Some valid points. Two quick remarks:
>> For me, the Semantic Web vision has always been about clients.
>
> I think the "Semantic Web" has always been about "The Web" (clients and
> servers) :)
Of course—but the emphasis in the community has mostly been on servers,
whereas the
Hi Silvio,
> - old elements such "div" and "span" have been replaced by more appropriate
> and semantic-oriented elements, e.g., "section", "figure", "figcaption",
> "blockquote", "pre" and "code";
I'm happy with this decision.
It strikes me that the RASH document now
actually reads like an
Hi Nandana, all,
I wonder if it is possible to have a hybrid approach in which the
dereferenceable Linked Data resources that optionally advertise query
endpoint(s) in a standard way so that the clients can perform queries on
related data.
For me, the answer is always
Hi Frans,
> What would be the best or easiest way to do this?
Seems that RDF-Ext (https://github.com/rdf-ext/rdf-ext) is the way to go!
It supports read/write for both RDX/XML and JSON-LD.
Best,
Ruben
PS You might like the public-rd...@w3.org mailinglist, where we discuss RDF and
JavaScript.
> I encourage all RDF publishers to use one of the other standard RDF formats
> such as Turtle or JSON-LD.
+1
To be honest, even after several years in the SemWeb community,
I have to admit I still cannot read RDF/XML. It's just too complicated for me
and I don't see a point in learning it,
Dear Jürgen,
> are there any known implementations of sparql engines that are
> non-blocking and capable of handling streams?
The Linked Data Fragments client
(https://github.com/LinkedDataFragments/Client.js)
uses asynchronous iterators and is entirely stream-based.
Best,
Ruben
Hi Kingsley,
This seems great stuff—great you've done this in JavaScript.
Would it be possible to have a (restricted) demo live online somewhere?
This might make it directly accessible for people who want to test.
Best,
Ruben
Dear all,
HOBBIT [1] aims to abolish the barriers to the adoption and deployment
of Big Linked Data by providing companies with open benchmarking reports
which show the fitness of their solutions.
Are you working on a solution in the Linked Data Lifecycle,
do you require a Linked Data solution
> A simple plain text email works just fine.
Plain text works fine for me—it's just that there's too much of it right now.
Efficient CfPs that inform people with the least possible amount of words
would be an added value to a topic-specific mailing list like this.
Some common practices, like
** Fill out the Big Linked Data benchmarking survey and WIN Amazon vouchers **
Dear all,
Are you working on a solution in the Linked Data Lifecycle,
do you require a Linked Data solution
or are you innovating the Linked Data Lifecycle?
If so, we invite you to answer some questions
regarding
Dear all,
Thanks Phil for bringing up this debate.
I agree with Axel about the list being a natural place.
However, I think we need something else:
a clear guideline for efficient CfPs.
Too often, CfPs look like the braindump
of 10 different people all mixed together.
The more information it
Wait, I'm confused.
Do you mean that
owl:sameSameButDifferent owl:sameSameButDifferent owl:sameAs.
?
Best,
Ruben
Dear all,
In a recently accepted JWS article [1], we evaluated the Triple Pattern
Fragments (TPF) interface
in different ways, which includes a federated scenario (FedBench + added
complex queries):
http://linkeddatafragments.org/publications/jws2016.pdf
Especially the performance in the
on the profile.
Best,
Ruben
PS Wrote more about that here:
– http://ruben.verborgh.org/phd/ruben-verborgh-phd.pdf#page=103
– http://ruben.verborgh.org/blog/2015/10/06/turtles-all-the-way-down/
Hi,
This is a very important question for our community,
given that smart agents once were an important theme.
Actually, the main difference we could bring with the SemWeb
is that our clients could be decentralized
and actually run on the client side, in contrast to others.
One of the main
HI Krzysztof,
> this is all about finding the right balance
Definitely—but I have the feeling the balance
is currently tipped very much to one side
(and perhaps not the side that delivers
the most urgent components for the SemWeb).
> as we also do not want to have tons of 'ideas'
> papers
74 matches
Mail list logo
