On Thursday 08 March 2007 12:40:54 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: > 2007/3/8, Sebastian Trüg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Wednesday 07 March 2007 21:13:19 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: > > > From a technical standpoint I think rdf and ontologies are great, but > > > > from > > > > > an application developers viewpoint they seem overly complex for most > > > > tasks > > > > > I could think of. Most things can be done if you just know a list of > > > metadata fields to query. > > > > The thing is that in Nepomuk we do much more than just local search. The > > main > > focus is more on creating relations between resources and exploiting > > these relations for the benefit of the user. RDF and ontologies provide a > > lot of power in this area. > > Yes, I am not doubting that rdf and ontologies are the right solution for > your targets. I just think that they are too complex for what the current > aim of the wasabi project is (not that this is bad in any way). > > > Another concern is that a full sematic framework raise the bar for > > > > > implementations. It should be possible to have real simple > > > > implementations > > > > > of the specs - or atleast provide a good portion of the functionality > > > > via a > > > > > simple implementation (fx. a daemonless service spawned by dbus > > > > activation > > > > > on each call). > > > > That is true. But one could think of a simple mapping from the > > full-fledged > > version to a simple key-based variant which makes up the wasabi metadata > > fields. When searching certain fields nobody wants to enter the full URI > > of > > some metadata type or element. > > Yes, I was thinking along thoswe lines too. > > > Actually each RDF property and class is supposed to have a human readable > > > label. This label is not necessarily unique but it would probably suffice > > for > > a simplified query interface. Thus, the API could support the usage of > > the full type and property URIs and the mapping from the simple labels. > > The question was raised a whle back whether we should have > internationalized keywords for searching, Ie "type:music hendrix" should be > written as "type:musik hendrix" in the Dansih locale for instance. Whether > or not to translate the actual query language like the "type" selector is > another (but related) matter. Unfortunately this has not received much > discussion. > > I think it would be great to have as much internationalization as possible, > but I have not given it a whole lot of thought I must admit. > > > Also, embedded devices should be able to implement the Wasabi specs (or > > > > > again - the essential parts atleast). I must admit I have no idea on > > > the feasibility of this - it might not be a problem at all. > > > > > > The ideal solution would be to allow a full fledged semantic framework > > > underneath it all, but expose apis that does not require developers to > > > > know > > > > > about rdf and ontologies. There could be a "semantic api" or some > > > > optional > > > > > extensions to the current apis to allow usage of the full semantic > > > sweetness. > > > > we could even think of wasabi as being the "simple" standard which maps > > to the > > full-fledged semantic information. In the end it is most important that > > the > > information can be reused. > > Agreed. Ideally the current apis+specs would be a subset of a full semantic > solution. If this where the case if would be easier for apps to use > whatever was available.
> So I take it as you didn't find a spot-on candidate language either..? right. :) > The problems with sparql and rdfq is that they are not designed to do > "fuzzy searches" in the broader sense of the words - ie that queries match > using stemming, levenstein distance, transliterated diacritics, or word > proximity, stuff that you find in many modern indexers. > > Again it would be really nice if the nepomuk query language could be a > super set of the Wasabi query language. I *think* this could be possible > because the current wasabi query language proposal is actually very close > to rdfq ( http://www.w3.org/TandS/QL/QL98/pp/rdfquery.html). This is exactly what I thought the workshop would be good for. Sadly not many have replied yet apart from you. Let's hope they will... _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
