W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Call for Linked Research

From: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:52:15 +0200
Message-ID: <53D67FBF.7010704@csarven.ca>
To: Linking Open Data <public-lod@w3.org>, SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 2014-07-28 18:36, Bernard Vatant wrote:
> Hi Sarven
>
> On point 2 : Publish your progress and work following the Linked Data
> design principles. Create a URI for everything that is of some value to
> you and may be to others e.g., hypothesis, workflow steps, variables,
> provenance, results etc.
>
> For such public to be really interoperable, all this should rely on
> shared vocabularies. This important point is not obvious in your call.
> Which vocabularies would you suggest?
> Semanticscience Integrated Ontology is a god candidate for this
> http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_sio.html
> https://code.google.com/p/semanticscience/wiki/SIO

Certainly SIO it is a great candidate. But, again, it was not my 
intention to declare what should be used, whether that has to do with 
Web Science / Semantic Web / Linked Data or not. People should use 
whatever is most suitable to represent and refer to their work. They can 
make that judgement for their work better than others.

Having said that, I use and would like to suggest that people consider 
using the following:

* Semanticscience Integrated Ontology: http://semanticscience.org/
* Semantic Publishing and Referencing: http://purl.org/spar
* Provenance Ontology: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o
* Open Provenance Model for Workflows: http://www.opmw.org/ontology
* DC Terms: http://purl.org/dc/terms

If there are other great ones out there that's suitable to capture 
research material, please reply here. I've excluded some common ones 
like FOAF, VoID etc above.

-Sarven
htpp://csarven.ca/#i



Received on Monday, 28 July 2014 16:52:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:52 UTC