Re: Semantic Technology Community Platform

Dear Dave,

Sorry for the late reply. I am supervising Carmen on her Master's thesis 
of which this platform is a central part.

We appreciate your feedback, thank you! Please find my answers to your 
comments inline:

> (1) It would be normal practice to provide terms of use for such a
> platform to clarify the ownership and license terms of the collected
> data. I couldn't immediate spot them.

Good point. We have not decided which licensing is most appropriate for 
the content. We will check with our law department in the next days and 
we will provide the licence terms as soon as possible.

> (2) You don't seem to have any login validation process and thus, on the
> face of it, no provenance for the collected data. Is that correct?

Right, this is because we have not faced big issues with abuse yet. Of 
course, as this can change we have to think about appropriate ways to 
handle this (e.g. login form, IP address tracking, etc.).

> (3) How does this catalogue relate the new W3C catalogue?
>

Basically, we started with our efforts on having a directory of semantic 
technology providers and users about a year ago [1]. We started with a 
manually maintained list which - step by step - developed into the 
current community platform that is open to every organization that is 
active in the field of semantic technology. As it has only been a small 
side project from the beginning, we were a bit slow.
The W3C "Directory of Linked Data Suppliers and Deployments" is a great 
idea and it includes an important subset of the community that we also 
want to address. We have not contacted the developers and maintainers of 
the W3C directory yet, but we hope that collaboration or even alignment 
is possible.

> (4) Your fact correction process seems to only apply to the value of
> descriptive triples whereas you need a process for correcting your
> context names. For example you have a context name of "Helwett-Packard".

We don't include contexts at this stage of the development. We coin URIs 
for each new organization entry and we base the fact correction process 
on this URI. Of course, we let the users select according to foaf:name 
rather than using the URI (btw. we corrected the typo with the fact 
correction interface).


> (5) Your fact entry form currently only allows a single value for
> "Category" but the categories are not disjoint (for example "Vendor" and
> "Enterprise Applications" presumably overlap rather).

Good point. Thank you! We will adapt the system accordingly.

Thank you again for your comments,
Andreas

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Dec/0190.html




-- 
Andreas Thalhammer
PhD Student
Semantic Technology Institute
University of Innsbruck
http://www.sti2.at/

phone: +43 (0) 512 5076489
email: andreas.thalhammer@sti2.at

Received on Monday, 28 November 2011 08:36:09 UTC