W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > January 2007

[Fwd: Re: Sweet Tools website]

From: Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:05:10 +0100
Message-ID: <45B9E066.1010108@dfki.de>
To: W3C SWEO IG <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
Here the answer from Michael,

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Betreff: 	Re: Sweet Tools website
Datum: 	Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:46:38 -0600
Von: 	Michael K. Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
An: 	Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>
Referenzen: 	<45B793AA.7010704@dfki.de>

Hi Leo,

Thanks for your kind commments.  I'd be happy to help the SWEO's 
activities in any way.  See my specific responses below.

Leo Sauermann wrote:
> Dear Michael Bergman,
> Are you planning to keep the list updated or do you rather see it as a 
> static thing?

Yes, it is my intent to keep the site active for some time, until career 
stuff takes me elsewhere or the numbers get too great.  I'm now in my 
update 6.  I maintain it locally as a spreadsheet, and I posted it on 
Google hoping others may contribute as well.

> How did you pick the tools for the website? You picked Simile's Exhibit, 
> why, did you consider alternatives?

In regard to various forum comments (including on the SW tools listing 
on W3C), I earlier stated on my blog:

"I should mention that I have seen some commentary within the semantic 
Web community of the desirability of compiling “best of” or “Top X” 
tools listings for the semantic Web. While such lists have their place, 
they are no substitute for comprehensive listings. First, semantic tools 
are still in their infancy and it is premature to bestow “best of” in 
most categories. Second, many practitioners, such as me, are working to 
extend and improve existing tools. This requires more comprehensive 
listings, not narrower ones. And, last, what may ultimately contribute 
to semantic meaning on the Internet may well extend beyond semantic Web 
tools, strictly defined. An ivory tower focus on purity is not the means 
to encourage experimentation and innovation. Many Web 2.0 initiatives, 
including tagging and social collaboration, may very well point to more 
effective nucleation points for expanding semantic Web efforts than 
W3C-compliant efforts.

These are some of the reasons that I have been happy to include simple 
Firefox extensions or relatively narrow format converters for my 
listings. Who knows? You never know when and where you might find a gem! 
(And I’m not speaking solely of Ruby!)"

As for Exhibit, I'm truly blown away.  There is a nexus between the MIT 
stuff (Solvent, Piggy Bank, Timeline, Ajax, Exhibit) that I find both 
pragmatic and compelling.  I think real stuff is going to nucleate out 
of these efforts -- and that is why I chose Exhibit.

> We want to gather information about useful information resources. Your 
> list would be great as a reusable input, we thought about using an RDF 
> vocabulary and an RDF database with a SPARQL endpoint to generate a 
> website that gathers different sources.
> What format would you suggest to use?

Leo, you tell me.  I'm actively looking at this issue myself, in trying 
to decide what should be the "least-common denominator canonical data 
form."  I suspect from your standpoint that RDF + SPARQL makes the most 
sense (standards compliance, and all).  There is so much going on with 
microformats, OPML, Atom, etc.  But I'm pretty intrigued with JSON or 
GData.  I just have this general sense that simpler and easier (with 
offline converters, GRDDL?) is the way things will evolve.
> Would you be interested that we crawl your data and reuse it?

Please feel free.  Everyone in the community is making contributions.

Again, I very much support your efforts.  I'll try to do what I can in 
my little corner of the world.  Let me know if I can help further.

Thanks, Mike

> kindest regards
> Leo Sauermann
> [1] SWEO: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/


Michael K. Bergman
Web Scientist
380 Knowling Drive
Coralville, IA  52241


- DFKI bravely goes where no man has gone before -
We will move to our new building by end of February 2007.

The new address will be as follows:
    Trippstadter Straße 122
    D-67663 Kaiserslautern

My phone/fax numbers will also change:
Phone:    +49 (0)631 20575 - 116
Secr.:    +49 (0)631 20575 - 101
Fax:      +49 (0)631 20575 - 102
Email remains the same
DI Leo Sauermann       http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann 
P.O. Box 2080          Fon:   +49 631 205-3503
67608 Kaiserslautern   Fax:   +49 631 205-3472
Germany                Mail:  leo.sauermann@dfki.de
Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 11:05:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:51 UTC