W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2005

Re: Tag ontology RFC

From: Richard Newman <r.newman@reading.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:24:07 +0000
Message-Id: <aa2c64e7007953bdf4df1184bf2914a6@reading.ac.uk>
To: Seth Russell <russell.seth@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org

   That's a very interesting visualisation; thank you.
   I'm not sure that an RSS1.0 Item is the same as a Tagging; the 
intention of a Tagging is solely to capture the n-ary relationship 
between a tag, an agent, a resource, and a date (and anything else), 
which together make up a particular tagging of the resource by the 
agent. They're certainly similar in some aspects (being dated 
annotations of a resource), but I'm not sure if the semantics are 
sufficiently similar to warrant the same vocabulary.

   I'm not sure about taggedWithTag at all; I kept it in because it's 
simple, but it (being only a triple) doesn't allow us to capture 
who/when information, so you have to rely on the tag URI to capture 
some of that. Ideally we'd only use the reification, but both 
directions make some amount of sense for this simple triple.

   You might well be right about tag being the wrong way round; I 
modelled it from a usage point of view, where typically outbound links 
are more informative (i.e. "Richard is tagged with 'SemWeb'", allowing 
you to discover from a resource the tags to which it is linked), but 
conceptually the inverse is more sensible ("this Tagging links 'SemWeb' 
to Richard", finding resources from tags). In the real world you'd have 
to go both ways, so it's still up in the air.

   I'll have a further look at this in the morning (when I'm sober).


On Mar 24, 2005, at 21:23, Seth Russell wrote:

> Richard,
> It's hard for me to grok an ontology by just looking at text, so i
> mentographed it; see  http://robustai.net/folksonomy/Tag-ontology.html
> .  Then too its nice to see an example of it use used in a real
> Tagging; see
> http://robustai.net/folksonomy/aTagging.html
> You might want to compare the example with the RSS feed that you get
> back from delicious,  (see the RSS button at the bottom of the page
> for that tag).   After working with this i am pretty convinced that a
> Tagging is a RSS item.
> I think that "taggedWithTag" and "tag"  are arrows drawn in the wrong
> direction.  I suggest staying close (if not identical) to the RSS.  I
> drew the arrows that i would prefer in red.
> If you like my choce of "tags.ontology", you might tag you items with
> it and we can use del.icio.us to focus this discussion.
> Thanks for the dialogue
> Seth Russell
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:27:07 +0000, Richard Newman
> <r.newman@reading.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Danny, Seth, sw@w3:
>>    I've thrown together an early draft of a tag ontology. There's
>> nothing synset-ey in there yet (other than using SKOS ConceptSchemes),
>> but it all ties gently in with the SKOS vocab. I'd be looking to 
>> extend
>> this integration if possible.
>>    Danny, your email re the WordPress plugin was very interesting; I
>> think it follows through with this, in that you could do the 
>> following:
>> <item rdf:about=" ... ">
>>    <dc:subject>Programming</dc:subject>
>>    <tags:taggedWithTag rdf:resource="
>> ...my/personal/url/or/delicious/... /tag/programming" />
>>    <!-- or even mangle it a bit by still using dc:subject! -->
>> </item>
>> and in the tags RDF...
>> <Tag rdf:about="#programming">
>>    <tagName>Programming</tagName>
>>    <!-- whatever SKOS properties you'd like to use; it's a subclass of
>> Concept.
>>         I'd like a better way of doing names; SKOS doesn't quite work,
>> as prefLabel and
>>         altLabel don't capture the intended semantics. -->
>> </Tag>
>>    I'd love some (preferably constructive, but any kind will do!)
>> feedback from interested parties; blog it, mail me, or mail to the
>> list. Everything's on the Web:
>> RDF/XML: <http://www.holygoat.co.uk/owl/redwood/0.1/tags/>
>> "hidden" N3 version:
>> <http://www.holygoat.co.uk/owl/redwood/0.1/tags/tags.n3>
>>    The first URL should be persistent (though the ontology contents 
>> are
>> in flux, of course); the second one should stick around too.
>>    Cheers,
>> -R
> -- 
> Seth Russell
> www.speaktomecatalog.com
Received on Thursday, 24 March 2005 23:24:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:45 UTC