On Wednesday 06 May 2009 11:10:51 Evgeny Egorochkin wrote: > The more I look at it the more I like it: > > Ontologies can be avialable as a separate package in distributions. We > could agree to install it to some app-/environment-neutral place.
exactly. > We can have a git repo with a master branch and branches that exchange > patches with kde and gnome repos. This way we can tap into translation > infrastructure of both projects. > Also we could have a nepomuk-stable branch as well to see just how far away > we have drifted etc. sounds good. > So now ontology format and location needs to be determined. Anything > standard like rdf/xml, turtle etc is fine by me. I vote for trig as it is the only one allowing to have named graphs in the source. > As to location of the repository. It's small so can be migrated in several > minutes and we can expect that no significant number of people are going to > start pulling our repo right away. So github&co will work just fine for > now. > > On 5 мая 2009 22:15:10 Sebastian Trüg wrote: > > OK, I am convinced. > > I only want to say that my idea of a desktop ontologies package would > > also include installing ontologies such as RDF, RDFS, NAO, NRL, and PIMO. > > Basically all ontologies desktop applications need. > > > > But maybe that is no problem at all... > > > > Cheers, > > Sebastian > > > > On Tuesday 05 May 2009 18:32:15 Philip Van Hoof wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 18:49 +0300, Ivan Frade wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > Why not... > > > > > > > > * XESAM open source project that maintains three pieces > > > > - An ontology (based on nepomuk [keeping names etc.], community > > > > > > driven). > > > > > > > - An API for client applications (give it a proper name) > > > > - A query language (very probably sparQL) > > > > > > > > This makes happy the people in KDE, GNOME, freedesktop and open > > > > source fans. It is simple and understandable. Am i missing anything? > > > > > > No you are not. I think some other people might be missing things :) > > > > > > Hasn't that always been what Xesam 2.0 is (going to be) about? > > > > > > > > > Now apparently there's a request to have a more community driven > > > project structure for Xesam 2.0. Which means that for the ontology we > > > need: > > > > > > - A git repository with some accounts for some people > > > > > > - A format (I'm assuming .trig or .ttl is perfect for this) > > > > > > - Scripts for generating the website out of the git repository > > > > > > - A bug tracker so that we can irritate each other with bugs. > > > Preferably a bug tracker that is actually good (at enabling us to > > > irritate each other). Not just a @#*& trac website. > > > > > > - A procedure that we agree with Nepomuk upstream to get our Xesam 2.0 > > > ontology requirements into upstream Nepomuk. If Nepomuk upstream > > > wants this, of course. Else we just fork it. But apparently nobody at > > > Nepomuk is against letting Xesam 2.0 use Nepomuk, or against letting > > > Xesam 2.0's people help define improvements to upstream Nepomuk? > > > > > > That's great. I mean, then let's just make some agreements on how we > > > communicate change requests to Nepomuk upstream?! > > > > > > What is certain is that several projects, like Tracker, need a very > > > fast response time for their ontology changes. Which means < than a > > > week. I assume upstream Nepomuk wants to take a more restricted > > > approach and wants us to prove that our experiments work before > > > accepting said ontology changes? > > > > > > I personally hope that some time in future we'll just have a package > > > called "nepomuk-ontology-VERSION.tar.gz" instead of the directory that > > > we are shipping as part of the Tracker package [1]. Note that we have a > > > few requirements like having a load-order in the filename (much like > > > rc.d directories work). But nothing that we can't easily agree on. > > > > > > > > > Which means that for the DBus API we need: > > > > > > - Unit tests > > > > > > - The introspection XML in above mentioned git repo > > > > > > - Documentation > > > > > > And for the query language I don't think we need anything specific in > > > the repository. Except maybe the SPARQL and SPARQL UPDATE > > > specifications as part of the documentation. > > > > > > > > > [1] http://git.gnome.org/cgit/tracker/tree/data/ontologies > > > > > > > > > Looking at the list above, for example freedesktop.org provides all > > > what we need. We just need to ask. Right? > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xesam mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam _______________________________________________ Xesam mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam
