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

Re: data format for gathered information

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 16:38:27 +0100
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd0703050738v142c9969h9867328604d03356@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Leo Sauermann" <leo.sauermann@dfki.de>
Cc: "W3C SWEO IG" <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>, "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "Benjamin Nowack" <bnowack@appmosphere.com>, "Ian Davis" <Ian.Davis@talis.com>

On 02/03/07, Leo Sauermann <leo.sauermann@dfki.de> wrote:

> > I wasn't really expecting the "external" participants to be providing
> > the data in RDF/XML.
> We asked Michael K Bergman from "sweet tools"[1] to provide their data
> in RDF/XML, he loved the idea and asked: tell me which RDF vocab to use.
> Dave Beckett's list is already in RDF/RSS.

That's cool - I thought Dave's list was only in HTML.

> If we provide a RDF data format description that can be used by others
> to express their lists of resources, we can aggregate their data and
> import it to a portal, or aggregate it and provide the data as
> feed/SPARQL endpoint.

This sounds fine, my only concern was expecting the maintainers of the
lists to do an (e.g.) HTML to RDF conversion.

> > That ontology uses SKOS to define the concepts associated with
> > folksonomy tags, I thought they might be useful in this context.
> >
> I find only one scarce reference to SKOS on this page.
> http://www.holygoat.co.uk/projects/tags/#example
>
> And they don't use skos, if they had, they would have represented tags
> as Skos concepts and not with the "Tag" class,

It does both -

:Tag a owl:Class ;
  rdfs:subClassOf skos:Concept ;
  skos:definition "A natural-language concept which is used to
annotate another resource."@en ;
  rdfs:label "Tag"@en .

http://www.holygoat.co.uk/owl/redwood/0.1/tags/tags.n3

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 

http://dannyayers.com
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 15:38:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:52 UTC