Re: Introducing Vocabularies of a Friend (VOAF)

I can't help but feel that calling it VOAF is just going to muddy the 
waters. "Friendly vocabularies for the linked data Web"
doesn't help clarify either. It's cute, but I strongly suggest you at 
the very least make this 'tag line' far more clear. Frankly calling 
something 'voaf' when people will hear it mixed in with 'foaf' is just 
making the world more confusing. I had a lot of confusion until I found 
out the "SHOCK" vocab people were talking about was spelled SIOC.

One other minor suggestion;
Vocabulary 
<http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/browser/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mondeca.com%2Ffoaf%2Fvoaf%23Vocabulary#http://www.mondeca.com/foaf/voaf#Vocabulary> 
? rdfs:subClassOf 
<http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/browser/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2F01%2Frdf-schema%23subClassOf#http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf> 
? void:Dataset 
<http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/browser/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Frdfs.org%2Fns%2Fvoid%23Dataset#http://rdfs.org/ns/void#Dataset>

might be a mistake because void:Dataset is defined as "A set of RDF 
triples that are published, maintained or aggregated by a single 
provider." ad it may be that you would want to define non RDF vocabs 
using this. I see no value in making this restriction.


On 17/01/11 15:26, Stephane Fellah wrote:
> Bernard,
>
> Thanks for your answer. Another question I was wondering: Can we 
> extend the VOAF ontology to describe SKOS taxonomies ? Does this 
> question make sense to you ?  In the case of SKOS, we have only the 
> notion of concepts not classes and properties.
>
> Regards
> Stephane Fellah
>
> On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Bernard Vatant 
> <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Stephane
>
>     2011/1/15 Stephane Fellah <fellahst@gmail.com
>     <mailto:fellahst@gmail.com>>
>
>         Sounds very interesting initiative. Based on my understanding,
>         I think it should be possible to write a tool that read any
>         OWL document and generate a VOAF document. 
>
>
>     Indeed I've been thinking along those lines. The current dataset
>     is handcrafted as a prototype should be, but I'm indeed thinking
>     now about ways to generate the VOAF description automagically from
>     the OWL or RDFS files. Devil is in the details, though. Some
>     information you can't really get by conventional parsing of the
>     graph, such as which namespaces are used, to populate the
>     voaf:reliesOn property. Those you can get by ad hoc syntactic
>     scripts, but vocabularies are published using a variety of syntaxes.
>
>         May be Swoogle could be a good starting point, but not sure
>         how the API can provide the list of ontology namespaces
>         through the REST API. 
>
>
>     I don't know either, but I'm sure someone will find a way :)
>
>         The imports section would corresponds to the imports
>         statement. The tools would count the number of classes and
>         properties in the ontology namespace. It would be interesting
>         to aggregate all this information and see which vocabularies
>         have the most influence using SNA algorithms.
>
>
>     You are welcome to play along those lines. I think there are a lot
>     of opportunities and things to discover. This is just the
>     beginning of the story.
>
>     Best
>
>     Bernard
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Bernard Vatant
>     Senior Consultant
>     Vocabulary & Data Engineering
>     Tel:       +33 (0) 971 488 459
>     Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
>     ----------------------------------------------------
>     Mondeca
>     3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
>     Web: http://www.mondeca.com
>     Blog: http://mondeca.wordpress.com
>     ----------------------------------------------------
>
>

-- 
Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248

/ Lead Developer, EPrints Project, http://eprints.org/
/ Web Projects Manager, ECS, University of Southampton, http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/
/ Webmaster, Web Science Trust, http://www.webscience.org/