Re: Results of survey "Do controlled vocabularies matter?" from Christophe Dupriez on 2011-06-27 (public-esw-thes@w3.org from June 2011)

From: Christophe Dupriez <christophe.dupriez@destin.be>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:49:00 +0200
To: "Andreas Blumauer (Semantic Web Company)" <a.blumauer@semantic-web.at>
CC: Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, holger@topquadrant.com, public-esw-thes@w3.org
Message-ID: <4E08FACC.4070004@destin.be>
Hi Andreas,

For you and all people interested, I created the following page in the 
SKOS wiki:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/SKOS_Repository_REST_http_API
No specs for the moment but I will base my contribution on the model of 
the DSpace REST API:
https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/REST+API

Have a nice evening!

Christophe


Le 27/06/2011 14:06, Andreas Blumauer (Semantic Web Company) a écrit :
> Hi Christophe,
>
> this is great, and I agree that we should stick to SKOS terminology.
>
> Regards,
> Andreas
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     *Von: *"Christophe Dupriez" <christophe.dupriez@destin.be>
>     *An: *"Andreas Blumauer (Semantic Web Company)"
>     <a.blumauer@semantic-web.at>
>     *CC: *"Simon Cox" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, holger@topquadrant.com,
>     public-esw-thes@w3.org
>     *Gesendet: *Montag, 27. Juni 2011 10:43:41
>     *Betreff: *Re: Results of survey "Do controlled vocabularies matter?"
>
>     Hi Andreas,
>
>     I am definitively willing to implement this kind of "shortcuts" in
>     ASKOSI.org
>
>     We must then also standardize the structured result formats
>          (RDF, JSON : SparQL results? Which columns are included in
>     the result?)
>     ... and respect REST API principles ...
>
>     I would also prefer to avoid "all" and stick to SKOS terminology:
>     http://vocabulary.semantic-web.at/semweb/131/narrower
>
>     Have a nice day!
>
>     Christophe
>
>
>     Le 27/06/2011 10:19, Andreas Blumauer (Semantic Web Company) a écrit :
>     > Same with PoolParty Thesaurus Management [1]:
>     > We provide "stored procedures" and can offer a variety of
>     pre-defined SPARQL queries,
>     > which can execute queries mentioned by Simon.
>     >
>     > But this is not enough: If developers could execute at any
>     SPARQL endpoint, e.g. [2]
>     > queries like
>     >
>     >
>     http://vocabulary.semantic-web.at/PoolParty/sparql/semweb/allConceptSchemes
>     >
>     > or for any given concept, e.g. [3]
>     >
>     > queries like
>     >
>     > http://vocabulary.semantic-web.at/semweb/131/allNarrowers
>     >
>     http://vocabulary.semantic-web.at/semweb/131/allRelateds/prefLabel="foo"
>     >
>     > in a STANDARDIZED way, then developers don´t have to care about
>     anymore
>     > if the underlying technology is PoolParty, TopBraid or something
>     else AND
>     > they don´t have to learn Sparql but rather could concentrate on
>     a vocabulary´s inherent scheme&  logic,
>     >
>     > and exactly this is necessary to get things going also for
>     non-SemWebber in my opinion.
>     >
>     > If anyone is interested in defining such queries, please let me
>     know!
>     >
>     > Cheers,
>     > Andreas
>     >
>     > [1] http://poolparty.punkt.at/
>     > [2] http://vocabulary.semantic-web.at/PoolParty/sparql/semweb
>     > [3] http://vocabulary.semantic-web.at/semweb/131
>     >
>     >
>     > ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>     >
>     >> Von: "Simon Cox"<Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
>     >> An: holger@topquadrant.com, public-esw-thes@w3.org
>     >> Gesendet: Montag, 27. Juni 2011 04:49:38
>     >> Betreff: RE: Results of survey "Do controlled vocabularies matter?"
>     >> E.g.
>     >> 1. Get concept (all triples with concept as subject or object -
>     >> DESCRIBE) with prefLabel = “foo”
>     >> 2. Get concept with prefLabel in Fonglish = “foo”
>     >> 3. Get concept http://example.org/bar and all narrower concepts
>     >> 4. Get concept http://example.org/bar and all broader concepts
>     >> 5. Get concept with prefLabel in Fonglish = “foo” and all narrower
>     >> concepts
>     >> 6. Etc ...
>     >> i.e. pre-rolled queries which use the SKOS properties.
>     >> Reusable SPARQL queries might be part of a solution.
>     >> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
>     >> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Holger
>     >> Knublauch
>     >> Sent: Monday, 27 June 2011 9:11 AM
>     >> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
>     >> Subject: Re: Results of survey "Do controlled vocabularies matter?"
>     >> What aspects of SPARQL would such a standard layer include? We and
>     >> our customers are heavily using SPARQL in the context of SKOS, and
>     >> we have published a SPARQL-based constraint checking library [1]
>     >> using the W3C Member Submission SPIN [2]. This will validate the
>     >> various SKOS-specific integrity constraints and has been integrated
>     >> with TopQuadrant's Enterprise Vocabulary Net (EVN) solution [3].
>     >> SPIN also makes it easy to encapsulate reusable SPARQL queries into
>     >> so-called templates. These templates are basically parameterized
>     >> queries that have a URI and arguments. Compare to stored procedures
>     >> in SQL. It would be straight-forward to build and publish such a
>     >> template library for SKOS, if someone here has a list of queries
>     >> that they like to ask repeatedly.
>     >> Cheers,
>     >> Holger
>     >> [1] http://topbraid.org/spin/skosspin
>     >> [2] http://spinrdf.org/
>     >> [3] http://www.topquadrant.com/solutions/ent_vocab_net.html
>     >> On Jun 27, 2011, at 10:34 AM,<  Simon.Cox@csiro.au>  wrote:
>     >> “ a "standard" layer encapsulating Sparql especially designed for
>     >> SKOS based systems
>     >> might help in this situation. ”
>     >> +1
>     >> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
>     >> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Andreas
>     >> Blumauer (Semantic Web Company)
>     >> Sent: Sunday, 26 June 2011 4:36 PM
>     >> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
>     >> Subject: Results of survey "Do controlled vocabularies matter?"
>     >> Hello all,
>     >> we are happy to announce that the results of the survey titled
>     >> "Do controlled vocabularies matter?" are available now.
>     >> A short write-up and also the link to the report can be found here:
>     >>
>     http://blog.semantic-web.at/2011/06/26/thesaurus-based-search-engines-will-become-main-stream-in-the-near-future/
>     >> The report itself was published on issuu:
>     >>
>     http://issuu.com/andreas_blumauer/docs/survey_do_controlled_vocabularies_matter_2011_june
>     >> We would be happy to receive comments from the community on this.
>     >> As an interesting outcome it can be stated, that people working on
>     >> controlled vocabularies
>     >> seem to have put aside scepticism about the semantic web finally.
>     >> On the other side the whole semantic web cake has not been digested
>     >> yet:
>     >> E.g. only a few people from the vocab-community deal with Sparql,
>     >> which brings me to the conclusion
>     >> that a "standard" layer encapsulating Sparql especially
>     designed for
>     >> SKOS based systems
>     >> might help in this situation.
>     >> Any activities going on in this area?
>     >> Best wishes,
>     >> Andreas
>     >> ** Semantic Search Online Demo: http://bit.ly/semantic_search
>     >> ** LOD2 - Creating Knowledge out of Interlinked Data -
>     >> http://lod2.eu/
>     >> | Andreas Blumauer, Managing Director
>     >> | Semantic Web Company GmbH
>     >> | Lerchenfelder Guertel 43/5
>     >> | A - 1160 Wien, Austria
>     >> | Tel +43 1 402 12 35 27
>     >> | Mob +43 676 9 234 16 2
>     >> COMPANY INFORMATION
>     >> | http://www.semantic-web.at/ | http://www.i-semantics.at/ |
>     >> | http://blog.semantic-web.at/
>     >> PERSONAL INFORMATION
>     >> | mailto:a.blumauer@semantic-web.at | skype:blumauerpunkt | Blog:
>     >> | http://ablvienna.wordpress.com
>     >
>     >
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 27 June 2011 21:49:25 UTC