Re: [Ann] RDFaCE: WYSIWYM RDFa Content Editor release

On 7/11/11 10:04 AM, ali khalili wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are excited to announce the first release of our
>
>         RDFaCE WYSIWYM RDFa Content Editor
> http://aksw.org/Projects/RDFaCE
>
>
> RDFaCE is an online RDFa content editor based on TinyMCE. In addition to
> two classical views for text authoring (WYSIWYG and HTML source code),
> RDFaCE  supports two novel views for semantic content authoring namely
> WYSIWYM (What You See Is What You Mean), which highlights semantic
> annotations directly inline and a triple view (aka. fact view). Further
> features are:
>
> * use of different Web APIs (<http://prefix.cc/>Prefix.cc, Sindice, 
> Swoogle) to facilitate
> the semantic content authoring process.
>
> * combining of results from multiple NLP APIs (Alchemy, Extractive,
> Ontos, Evri, OpenCalais) for obtaining rich automatic semantic
> annotations that can be modified and extended later on.
>
> For more information on RDFaCE visit:
>
>   * RDFaCE project: http://aksw.org/Projects/RDFaCE
>   * Online demo: http://rdface.aksw.org <http://rdface.aksw.org/>.
>   * Screencast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uVGbZIWYto
>   * Sourcecode: http://code.google.com/p/rdface/.
>
> I would like to thank Ontos [1], the members of AKSW research group [2]
> in particular Dr. Sören Auer as well as the LOD2 project [3] for their 
> support.
>
> Ali Khalili
> AKSW research group
>
> [1] http://ontos.com <http://ontos.com/>
> [2] http://aksw.org <http://aksw.org/>
> [3] http://lod2.eu <http://lod2.eu/>

Great Stuff!

Imagine what could have been achieved by now if we tossed Syntax wars 
aside. There a tons of HTML5 and Flash developers out there that could 
produce UI rich tools that leverage all the structured data generated by 
LOD effort.

Maybe, if we encourage the schema.org effort, this might actually 
happen, once and for all.

My permarant follows:

Separation of concerns is the key to tech success. WWW is an example 
because HTTP separates concerns. ODBC, JDBC etc.. succeeded for the same 
reasons albeit limited in areas where HTTP ups the ante e.g., separating 
data access protocol from data representation .

As I stated eons ago, in the world of ODBC you had the following profiles:

1. Users
2. ODBC compliant application developers -- higher level data access 
scoped to the ODBC abstraction layer (an interface delivered via a library)
3. ODBC data access drivers developers -- low level data access work 
based on RDBMS CLIs (basically middleware)
4. RDBMS developers.

Eventually, the Web of Linked Data (Web's Data Space dimension) while 
shake out in similar fashion (once we kill off distracting Syntax wars):

1. Users
2. Linked Data application developers
3. Linked Data drivers/cartridges/wrapper/provider developers
4. Linked Data Space/Database/Store/Server developers .

If you don't bake the cake, there are no pieces to divvy up.

Let's bake this cake once an for all, its a darn waste of time expecting 
any Linked Data deliverable to cover layers 1-4 above perfectly; in 
short, that's utterly antithetical to AWWW (at least as I understand 
it). In my eyes, this is still about WEBBY LEGO style solution 
development, the same old pursuit many of us embarked upon pre WWW 
explosion.

The AWWW has endowed the Web with many interaction and experiential 
dimensions. An information space dimension dweller will not understand 
unadulterated commentary from a data space dimension dweller let alone a 
knowledge space dimension dweller. Thus, we need to constructive 
narratives that are grounded in the comprehension dimensions of the 
target audience. If all fails, just understand that structured data on 
the Web can never be a bad thing, even if its semantic fidelity is low.

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen