- From: <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 07:32:34 -0700
- To: "Andreas Harth" <andreas.harth@deri.org>
- Cc: public-semweb-ui@w3.org
Thanks, Andreas Just finished watching it, and have embedded it in our pages Why dont you make a video on faceted browsing if you have work done in that area? Questions (assume AB is on this list still, but anyone can answer) and some thoughts tha come to mind, 1. is there a relationship between NLReduce and CE (controlled English) 2. assuming that these tools being discussed work with unstructured information (not published on the web in rdf/owl) - does that show that 'reasoning' can be done by the tool, not requiring the content to be expressed in owl/rdf? 2a. if so, can these tools be used to create ontologies, if they provided a functionality that allows users to add, say, axioms and or translate the NL process into some level of formalised logic? (I am referring to querix, for example, which allows users to select statements such as biggest city by population vs biggest by area - if expert users could interact with a tool, by browsing the web or selected knowledge bases? - can an ontology be inferred using the reasoning of an expert user if the tool is set up to capture the inferences and match them against existing ontologies/KBases? (I am thinking how can an ontology be captured/expressed without using rdf/owl) 3. should we carry out this study (or similar ones) with interfaces in different languages, and in different countries, and see if the results are comparable? (this would come under the scope of our current interest with the global perspective) I have got more questions but they are still scrambled in my mind PDM On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 5:46 AM, Andreas Harth <andreas.harth@deri.org> wrote: > Hi, > > there's been a recent TechTalk from Abraham Bernstein > comparing four user interaction styles for Semantic Web > data [1]. Unfortunately, faceted browsing is not covered. > > Regards, > Andreas. > > [1] > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7722731037369115140&ei=jzW9SMHJFof2iQLXxpHcDA&q=abraham+bernstein&vt=lf > > > > paola.dimaio@gmail.com wrote: >> >> Hi Dan >> thanks for reply >> sorry the scope of my q is not obvious (tunnel vision from my end) >> >> Semantic Web Usability state of the art >> Basically from what I see, it is an issue - there is this list, >> there have been events like the recent workshop in Florence, people >> are paying attention to usability, but - correct me if I am wrong - >> it is still notional, in the sense that there are no 'guidelines' , >> and to some extent usability of semantic technologies is still not >> 'defined', nor there are methodologies to help developers face the >> challenges etc >> >> is it correct? can we say that the BOK in this domain is more or less >> what is on the wiki that Max is migrating to semantic wiki? >> is there a write up anywhere that we can consider reasonably complete? >> >> I am asking all this, cause I am writing a paper for our forthcoming >> workshop, and would like to start with a 'state of the art' paragraph, >> and hoping to find something (that I can agree with) to point to as >> reference. >> >> Hope its reasonably unpacked question >> cheers >> P >> >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:36 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> paola.dimaio@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Greetings all >>>> >>>> is the a a SWUI state of the art summary anywhere? (hoping I dont have >>>> to write it myself) :-) >>>> >>> >>> Can you describe what the art is that you'd like summarised? >>> >>> cheers, >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> ps. I'd consider http://mqlx.com/~david/parallax/ pretty SOTA w.r.t. UI >>> for >>> RDFish data >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > http://swse.deri.org/ > -- Paola Di Maio School of IT www.mfu.ac.th *********************************************
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 14:33:14 UTC