W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2010

Re: a list of companies active in the semantic technology area

From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 11:58:15 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=SMs0WAAc++Gnz4-6w080bSE18GE8WXKk5zwsd@mail.gmail.com>
To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Hugh

sounds like a good point to me,

 academically, a desperate research question emerges:
Why do semantic technologies vendors do not use RDF to describe their info-data?

Assuming many of their representatives are on this list or within the
reach of foaf networks, it should not be difficult to issue a polite
suggestion (read: tall order?)

materially it should be trivial, and by next week or early January we
should be able to assemble Dieter's list via query output

If however there are good reasons for these companies not to publish
RDF, then these reasons should be compiled in a report and analysed in
detail for clues pointing to >>rdf what's next


cheers
PDM


On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> Thanks Bob,
> I see nothing wrong with such a list - actually the opposite - I think it is great to have, and it is a service to compile such a long one.
> My comments relate more to the process.
> In the brave new world with such wonders as the Semantic Web, having decided he wanted to publish such a list (and no existing sites were suitable), Dieter would have been able to use something like Sindice to search for all companies that publish as having the right service functions (Semantic technologies, &c.), and then set up a simple aggregator that resolved the Linked Data URIs for those companies, and presented it the way he has.
> Essentially, all it would be is a list of company URIs, together with a viewer over whatever ontologies those companies were using.
> And would look very similar if he wanted.
>
> But certainly asking people to add their details to another catalogue is not very Semantic Web, or at least Linked Data.
> Much rather encourage people to at least add RDFa to their root company page or put one page of RDF at the site, and then add the ability to Dieter's stuff to harvest it.
> Perhaps someone could help Dieter generate a stub of RDF for the companies from the data he has gathered, so that the companies themselves can begin to publish RDF for Dieter's system to harvest back. Of course, if they don't, he can just publish from his own RDF.
> I know it doesn't sound like a big deal, but every little helps.
> Best
> Hugh
>
> On 21 Dec 2010, at 18:20, Bob DuCharme wrote:
>
>> I see nothing wrong with such a list, and I won't speak for Martin, but I'd be surprised if he objected to it. Ideally, people could follow pointer from this list to the various company websites and find RDFa on those sites using the Good Relations vocabulary and any other appropriate ones to tell people more about those companies. A list like this provides a good starting point for research.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> On 12/21/2010 11:07 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>> Good stuff.
>>>
>>> But I am sitting here waiting for Martin Hepp to tell us that the Good Relations stuff is the way these businesses should be publicising themselves.
>>> It is disappointing that in this field of all, we should be gathering such stuff together, either by hand, or in a Semantic Wiki.
>>> At the worst, it should be possible for this harvester to gather this information by being given RDF from the root web page.
>>> I tried doing the usual curl -i -H "Accept: application/rdf+xml" on quite a few of them (the most obvious ones), and fundamentally got 200 plus a bunch of pure html.
>>> With one exception, which gave me RDFa as well.
>>>
>>> Pretty sad, I would say, if all we can do is gather this into a web page, and then start thinking about doing something else - surely our society and technology is better than that!
>>>
>>> CHeers
>>> Hugh
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21 Dec 2010, at 12:12, Riccardo Tasso wrote:
>>>
>>> Why don't we use a semantic wiki?
>>>
>>> There are interesting properties to understand, such as the place where the company resides, the years of foundation and so on...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>     Riccardo
>>>
>>> On 20/12/2010 23:06, Michael F Uschold wrote:
>>> Dieter,
>>>
>>> This is a fabulous idea.  There is at least on major shortcoming: you forgot to include the company I work for (Semantic Arts<http://semanticarts.com/>  :-)).  I'll make sure you get an entry from us.
>>>
>>> Seriously, I'm delighted to see this happen.  I do wonder how you may attempt to draw the line that defines "semantic technology".  There will always be grayness. If it is too broad, the usefulness of this list could decrease. That could be ameliorated by a rich set of semantic technology categories, so a person could focus on a particular technology are, or ignore other ones. I.e one facet could be 'type of technology" which could include
>>>
>>>
>>>   1.  NLP, with sub-categories including sentiment analysis
>>>   2.  Triple stores
>>>   3.  Latent-semantic technology
>>>   4.  etc...
>>>
>>> I look forward to seeing this in the linked data cloud!
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Dieter Fensel<dieter.fensel@sti2.at<mailto:dieter.fensel@sti2.at>>  wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> we started to collect a list of companies active in the semantic technology area.
>>> A first draft is at http://semantic-technology-companies.sti2.at/
>>>
>>> Obviously this list is biased and severely incomplete. Also one may want
>>> to add more details on the specifics of the mentioned companies. Here is
>>> were I ask your help. Could you please post me (or to the list if you
>>> think it is of immediate general interest) any information on missing companies
>>> or important details on the ones listed. Also if you know similar initiatives
>>> please drop me a note. So please apologize for the lack of completeness but it
>>> is an invitation to jointly improve this list.
>>>
>>> In the long term we want to establish a repository of semantic technology
>>> vendors. Obviously we plan more advanced interaction and semantics
>>> for future versions of this web site. For the moment, it is only the data
>>> that matter. If you want to cooperate on the repository aspect
>>> you are more than welcome to contact me, too. Yes, we may want
>>> to "eat our own dog food" no matter how many (definitely being different)
>>> dogs we have.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your help,
>>>
>>> Dieter
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> Dieter Fensel
>>> Director STI Innsbruck
>>> University Innsbruck
>>> http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/
>>> phone: +43-512-507-6488/5
>>> fax: +43-512-507-9872
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Uschold, PhD
>>>    Senior Ontology Consultant, Semantic Arts
>>>    LinkedIn: http://tr.im/limfu
>>>    Skype: UscholdM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hugh Glaser,
>>>               Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia
>>>               School of Electronics and Computer Science,
>>>               University of Southampton,
>>>               Southampton SO17 1BJ
>>> Work: +44 23 8059 3670, Fax: +44 23 8059 3045
>>> Mobile: +44 78 9422 3822, Home: +44 23 8061 5652
>>> http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~hg/
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Hugh Glaser,
>              Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia
>              School of Electronics and Computer Science,
>              University of Southampton,
>              Southampton SO17 1BJ
> Work: +44 23 8059 3670, Fax: +44 23 8059 3045
> Mobile: +44 78 9422 3822, Home: +44 23 8061 5652
> http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~hg/
>
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 22 December 2010 10:58:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:40 GMT