- From: carmen <_@whats-your.name>
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:51:18 -0400
- To: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Cc: Semantics-ProjectParadigm <metadataportals@yahoo.com>
On Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 12:02:20AM +0100, Nicolas Chauvat wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 07:52:45AM -0700, Semantics-ProjectParadigm wrote: > > > We do agree with you that most CMSs are poor products in terms of software > > engineering. > > > > The next best thing does not exist yet, unfortunately. > > http://www.cubicweb.org would like to be the next best thing and is > looking for feedback and new users (it is licensed under the LGPL). > > I claim that we did our homework before going public with this > framework and correctly engineered the thing. Where do you want me to > start to try to prove that claim? Would pointing you to the blog_ and > the doc_ help to get the discussion started or would it be better to > try to tease you with a direct link to the schema_ and its OWL_ view? how about teasing with TRANSCLUSION and crackpot RANTS? http://www.coretalk.net/ > Another way to raise people's interest might be to have them use the > rdf views, like sioc_ or doap_, don't you think? Would they rather > peek at the list of components_ before they ask for new tickets in the > issue tracker_? I'm not sure where to start... :) > > .. _blog: http://www.cubicweb.org/blog > .. _doc: http://www.cubicweb.org/doc/en/ > .. _schema: http://www.cubicweb.org/schema > .. _OWL: http://www.cubicweb.org/view?vid=owl > .. _sioc: http://www.cubicweb.org/blogentry/212906?vid=sioc > .. _doap: http://www.cubicweb.org/project/cubicweb?vid=doap > .. _components: http://www.cubicweb.org/project?vtitle=All+cubicweb+projects > .. _tracker: http://www.cubicweb.org/project/cubicweb > > -- > Nicolas Chauvat > > logilab.fr - services en informatique scientifique et gestion de connaissances
Received on Monday, 23 March 2009 05:52:01 UTC