Maybe we should think about a fork called Semantic Web Mediawiki (SWM)
hehe. Seriously though this moment I'm interested in what people think
of indicating language in SMW syntax by using the ampersand character,
eg /property-name@language-code/ - would this be a too-complex change to
SMW, and can this supported by the Ask library?
I don't like property names like "Description - English" but that's all
there is in today's SMW to support wikis used by multilingual
communities -- while perfectly legal its stupidly mechanical to define
properties this way. How do people feel about any value for a type:text
property, say /Property:Description/, can be annotated with its language
such as
(1) [[Description@es::spanish-text]]
(2) {{#set:Description@es=spanish-text}}
(3) {{#ask: [[Description@es::+]]
|?Description@en=english-label|?Description@es=spanish-label}}
(4) any others?
Properties of type:code would not have this capacity of course. And this
way, RDF exports -- which from the note below have ongoing importance?
-- can properly indicate the language of a text-string. How diffiucult a
change is this? I don't see it having any worrisome perfomance problem
at all, and it would be immensely useful for multi-lingual communities.
Thanks/john
On 11/19/2013 2:03 PM, Yaron Koren wrote:
Hi John,
I just wanted to respond to one part:
Surely you're aware the community so highly esteems your
contributions to OWL specifications, that it has a directly
consequent,
unflinching & justifiable belief that SMW is a /faithful RDF
implementation/.
I don't believe this is true. To recap, what you're saying is: (a)
most users of SMW care about RDF and the like, (b) developers of SMW
are guided by SMW standards, (c) Markus's involvement in OWL makes
people think that SMW similarly is a Semantic Web-based project, (d)
as a result, SMW users/developers are going to be disappointed that it
doesn't adhere to all the RDF conventions.
I'm pretty sure none of the above are true. This is not to denigrate
any part of the Semantic Web, but I think it's safe to say that the
average SMW user is unconcerned about RDF and the like, and that the
average SMW developer views RDF as a storage/output format, not
something that guides how SMW should operate. So I'd say that you're
in the minority on this one. Not that there's anything wrong with
holding minority opinions (I've certainly been in that situation), but
I think you'd be better off arguing your case on the technical merits,
rather than on an appeal to people's expectations.
-Yaron
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and game-changing
conversations that shape the rapidly evolving mobile landscape. Sign up now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63431311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
