- From: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@istc.cnr.it>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:11:08 +0200
- To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Cc: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@istc.cnr.it>, Jorge Gracia <jgracia@fi.upm.es>, public-ld4lt@w3.org
- Message-Id: <467DBA10-AF76-4D7C-AFA0-A122F031F24E@istc.cnr.it>
Google spreadsheets are easily editable by anyone. Spreadsheets can then be easily converted to RDF. Of course, I recommend a decent naming/intuition of rows and columns. Aldo On Apr 30, 2014, at 11:10:09 AM , Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote: > Hi Jorge, all, > > sorry for the late reply. The W3C infrastructure has wikis which in my experience are OK for editing a tabular representation but not ideal. So other groups are using something else for collaborative editing. Sorry, not ideal - if there are any suggestions please let me / us know. > > Best, > > Felix > > Am 28.04.2014 um 11:12 schrieb Jorge Gracia <jgracia@fi.upm.es>: > >> Hi Felix/Penny/all >> >> 2014-04-25 7:40 GMT+02:00 Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>: >> One aspect of the LD4LT group is that there are many members not knowledgable about technical details of semantic web technology. That is good IMO since the group will be a place to learn. For the concrete topic of metamodel, I am wondering whether editing the ontology directly will lead to loosing these people. In other similar exercises (= mapping existing formats using an ontology) we used a tabular representation to develop the mappings, and the ontology was just a file edited by the technical experts. See here >> >> http://www.w3.org/TR/mediaont-10/#mpeg-table >> >> I am wondering whether such an approach may make sense here too? >> >> >> That makes a lot of sense to me. @Felix: in your experience... did you edit the tabular representation in the wiki or somewhere else? >> >> >> About >> http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/ >> if you want to gather issues around the ontology development, I would create a new product here >> http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/products/new >> e.g. "META-SHARE metadata model“, and then for each discussion topic an issue >> http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/issues/new >> e.g. for this topic “how to work on the model: ontology editing vs. tabular mapping vs. …“ >> then, using the identifiers of the issues will lead to mails automatically being gathered in the tracker system. >> >> I just did that and this for above product + issue. This mail then should be listed under >> >> Thanks for this! >> >> Regards, >> Jorge >> >> https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/issues/2 >> >> Then, making an agenda for a call can be done via this link >> https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/agenda >> which shows you issues and action items. >> >> Best, >> >> Felix >> >>> I see three options here (feel free to propose others): >>> - use WebProtege (http://webprotege.stanford.edu/) >>> - use the ld4lt wiki >>> - use Github >>> Each one has its pros/cons. We can analyse them and take a decision in the next telco. >>> >>> The starting point will be the ontology already developed at Universitat Pompeu Fabra, which can be found at http://purl.org/ms-lod/MetaShare.ttl >>> >>> @Dave: do I have to register this activity as an issue in the tracking system? http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/options >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> -- >>> Jorge Gracia, PhD >>> Ontology Engineering Group >>> Artificial Intelligence Department >>> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid >>> http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/~jgracia/ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jorge Gracia, PhD >> Ontology Engineering Group >> Artificial Intelligence Department >> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid >> http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/~jgracia/ >
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:11:38 UTC