W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2004

RE: Listing vocabularies RE: Some questions

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 07:12:40 -0500 (EST)
To: Victor Lindesay <victor@schemaweb.info>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0401130706390.17545@homer.w3.org>

I suspect you haven't a hope of ever getting all the schemas. One interesting
approach would be to collect RDF content and collect up all the terms used,
seeing if they are defined anywhere (like a traditional search engine does).

I certainly think that collecting a number of significant ones, like
SchemaWeb does already, is a useful thing. As it happens I agree that this is
at least as important for software agents as it is for people, and perhaps
more so.

The sort of use case I imagine is authoring tools, where a user wnats to
make some kind of connection and teh tool can propopse half a dozen things
that might be useful instead of inventing a new property - somewhat like a
modification of progos' schema/ontology generator that first checks to see if
it can replace a new term with a widely used one.

For the same reason, I think it is not a good practice to make use of terms
that don't have a formal schema definition, although I suspect it will happen
for a long time to come.

Cheers

Chaals

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Victor Lindesay wrote:

>
>Charles:
>> This would be give or take quite a few. Thinking for 3 minutes:
>
>Give us a chance Charles, SchemaWeb has only been going for a few weeks.
>As for coverage, I would reckon that SchemaWeb contains a very
>significant proportion of all schemas and ontologies published on the
>web in RDF/XML.
>
>Let's not delude ourselves; RDF is still a minority sport.
>
>>Which is why the task of trying to list them (and make it possible to
>search
>>for properties and classes related to some task before creating yet
>another
>>one) is at the same time very important ...
>
>I agree. But humans designing schemas are not the sole use case for
>schema portals and repositories. Schemas are also a very important part
>of the RDF technology stack and access to schemas is vital for software
>agents. Or have I misread the roadmap...
>http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic.html
>

Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe         fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 Post:   21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia    or
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 07:15:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:04 GMT