W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2005

Re: (Fwd) Re: new Semantic Web Interest Group (SWIG) home list, se

From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 15:57:06 -0500
Message-ID: <4203E1A2.9020604@acm.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Wasn't there this approach that used URIs to identify things.....?

Dan Brickley wrote:
> Hi John,
> * John Fletcher <J.P.Fletcher@aston.ac.uk> [2005-02-04 16:33-0000]
>>There is another use of SWIG at http://www.swig.org/  which has 
>>been around since at least 2000.  It has a sourceforge download 
>>page and also a message list at swig@cs.uchicago.edu
> Thanks for the reminder. I was aware of SWIG when we renamed the 
> group, and initally tried to use "SW IG" here instead of "SWIG",
> but of course the contraction is too appealing, and people are 
> pronouncing it "Swig" rather than "S.W.-I.G.". We are also using 
> #swig as an IRC channel name, and do occasionally have a brief 
> confusion. The naming clash is unfortunate, but in a worldwide Web, 
> these things happen. I have just updated the Semantic Web 
> Interest Group homepage, http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/
> to include a paragraph,
>     (If you are looking for the [Simplified Wrapper and Interface
>      Generator] SWIG project, this may not be the SWIG for you).
> I hope that goes someway towards avoiding confusion.
>>The concern of this other SWIG is software interfacing and the 
>>software supplied is capable of generating interface code so that
>>various languages (python, perl, ruby etc) can call subroutines
>>written in C or C++.  Thus it could be a tool used in some 
>>component of Semantic Web software.
>>I am a user of it.
> It is probably most familiar to SW people via Dave Beckett's 
> Redland system, which uses it. I hope the 'real SWIG' people 
> aren't too annoyed to have another computer-related effort using 
> the same acronym.
> cheers,
> Dan
Received on Friday, 4 February 2005 20:49:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:55 UTC