- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:38:32 +0200
- To: Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@istc.cnr.it>
- Cc: Jorge Gracia <jgracia@fi.upm.es>, public-ld4lt@w3.org
- Message-Id: <57159C66-F26E-4AD1-96D7-EA3DFF03B661@w3.org>
Fine by me, let’s see what others say. - Felix Am 30.04.2014 um 14:11 schrieb Aldo Gangemi <aldo.gangemi@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 13:39:03 UTC