RE: IBIS vocab for semblogging

Hi Steve,

> Our take on this was that Claimaker dealt primarily with concepts (not the
> papers themselves).

I'm not sure, if the subject of a statement is (the URI of) a paper, then
presumably that's what's been talked about.

Anyhow, the closest thing I'm aware of to what you describe is David
Menendez's Thread Description Language [1] :

[1] http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/2002/web-threads/

My main criticism of this would be that it tries too hard to do everything
itself, rather than reusing terms from other schema (like Annotea and
probably DC). But it does include agreesWith etc.

Note that my IBIS vocab isn't set in stone, and suggestions are still
welcome ;-)

Cheers,
Danny.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cayzer, Steve [mailto:Steve_Cayzer@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 27 March 2003 16:28
> To: 'Charles McCathieNevile'; Danny Ayers
> Cc: Esw
> Subject: RE: IBIS vocab for semblogging
>
>
> To resurrect an old thread...
>
> We've started looking at ontologies for 'semantic links'. We had a look at
> IBIS, Annotea threads and Claimaker.
> Our requirement is to be able to link bibliographic blogs -
> primarily using
> 'agreesWith', 'disagreesWith'.
>
> Our take on this was that Claimaker dealt primarily with concepts (not the
> papers themselves). IBIS appears to me to take a similar line,
> making useful
> simplifications to the Claimaker model. These approaches are both good for
> 'argumentation networks'.
>
> For dealing with the items themselves (which is what we want to
> do), Annotea
> threads offer quite a useful schema. Not a perfect fit to our
> domain, since
> we are not dealing with threaded discussions, and we might want to extend
> the schema to different semantic relationships. But certainly
> good enough to
> start with. So we are looking to make threads a pluggable version of our
> semantic ontology.
>
> The reason for this rambling mail is to ask whether Danny,
> Charles or anyone
> else on the list is aware of, or would recommend, any other ontologies for
> encoding such semantic links.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
> Sent: 18 January 2003 21:45
> To: Danny Ayers
> Cc: Esw
> Subject: Re: IBIS vocab for semblogging
>
>
>
> Hi Danny,
>
> the vocabulary stuff you are looking at sounds like it is extending
> the thread vocabulary produced for Annotea (or for that matter
> the original
> Annotea vocabulary of annotation types) to allow for discussion threads
> to be tracked. This seems to me like a good idea.
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/03/thread
>
> The ability to provide user-friendly interfaces for this (such as the
> icon-selection that Amaya has for marking different types of annotation -
> see
> the help file at
> http://www.w3.org/Amaya/User/attaching_annotations/configuring_icons) is a
> promising paralell for the use of graphic RDF editors (IdeaGraph, IsaViz,
> RDFAuthor, etc)
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Danny Ayers wrote:
>
> >
> >I didn't realise Semantic Blogging was being followed up as an e-sw case
> >study, until I found the link on the new blog...
> >
> >Anyhow, one of the apps I've been working on for my Ideagraph project is
> >semantic blogging and to help with this I've started writing up a
> vocabulary
> >(RDFS) for 'Issue-Based Information Systems', the idea being to use terms
> >like 'Argument', 'Question', 'pro', 'con' within blog (and other)
> discussion
> >threads.
> >
> >http://purl.org/ibis
> >
> >Very much a work in progress, suggestions welcome.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Danny.
> >
> >-----------
> >
> >http://dannyayers.com
> >
> >"The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne." - Chaucer
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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 Thursday, 27 March 2003 11:47:34 UTC