Re: See Other

Hi Dan,

On Mar 28, 2012, at 09:36, Dan Brickley wrote:

> On 28 March 2012 14:24, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com> wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>> 
>> On Mar 27, 2012, at 21:30, Dan Brickley wrote:
>> 
>>> On 27 March 2012 20:23, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I'm curious as to why this is difficult to explain.  Especially since I also
>>>> have difficulties explaining the benefits of linked data.  However, normally
>>>> the road block I hit is explaining why URIs are important.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Alice: So, you want to share your in-house thesaurus in the Web as
>>> 'Linked Data' in SKOS?
>>> 
>>> Bob: Yup, I saw [inspirational materials] online and a few blog posts,
>>> it looks easy enough. We've exported it as RDF/XML SKOS already. Here,
>>> take a look...
>>> 
>>> [data stick changes hands]
>>> 
>>> Alice: Cool! And .. yup it's wellformed XML, and here see I parsed it
>>> with a real RDF parser (made by Dave Beckett who worked on the last
>>> W3C spec for this stuff, beats me actually checking it myself) and it
>>> didn't complain. So looks fine! Ok so we'll need to chunk this up
>>> somehow so there's one little record per term from your thesaurus, and
>>> links between them... ...and it's generally good to make human facing
>>> pages as well as machine-oriented RDF ones too.
>> 
>> Bob and Alice can stop at this point, throw the RDF/XML at Callimachus, write some templates in XHTML/RDFa and be done.  They would get themeable human-oriented HTML, conneg for RDF/XML and Turtle, one URI per term, REST API CRUD, management with user accounts...
> 
> Ok, ... up for a simple challenge then?

Sure, although it seems you've changed the scenario somewhat.  It looks like you are asking me to model a taxonomy into RDF first instead of being provided with RDF.  Frankly, I'm not sure what this bit will prove other than my ability to write conversion scripts or use Google Refine.

So, I've attempted to answer your questions through a Callimachus lens.

> In http://schema.org/JobPosting we say that a "job posting" (likely
> expressed in html + microdata or for that matter html + rdfa) can have
> an occupationalCategory property, whose values are drawn from an
> existing scheme, "Category or categories describing the job. Use BLS
> O*NET-SOC taxonomy: http://www.onetcenter.org/taxonomy.html. Ideally
> includes textual label and formal code, with the property repeated for
> each applicable value."
> 
> If you dig around on that link you can find PDF and XLS files at
> http://www.onetcenter.org/reports/Taxonomy2010.html
> 
> So let's take http://www.onetcenter.org/dl_files/Taxonomy2010_AppA.xls
> ... it shows a table with pairs of codes and labels, and a kind of
> implied hierarchy.
> 
> Say we wanted those in linked data (SKOS, most likely), ... how should
> the pages and URIs look?

OK, so we convert the taxonomy into LD.  Then we associate a Callimachus template for each owl:Class in the LD.  The templates generate HTML pages for each instance.

URIs for the taxonomy entries would be created as a byproduct of the LD conversion.  They can be whatever you want.

> 
> Can we do something better than point to .xls and .pdf files?

Sure.  Point them to annotated entries for each taxonomy term in the LD, which are generated from the templates.

> what
> advice would we give the administrators of that site, for publishing
> (annual versions of...) their job taxonomy codes?

The big issue here is how the LD conversion is done.  Make the conversion repeatable so it can be easily re-run on a routine basis.  We generally use scripts for this, but there are an increasing number of ways.

> How
> would/could/should an actual job listing on a jobs site look?

That's up to the template author.  Callimachus templates are written in XHTML with RDFa/CSS/JS.  Make them look as pretty as you like.

> Would it have a real hyperlink into the taxonomy site?

It can if you like.  Why not?

> Or just a textual property?

I'd suggest annotating the taxonomy LD with rdfs:label, comment, etc.

> What kind of standard templates can be offered to make such
> things less choice-filled? How would we do the same with, say, country
> codes?

If you don't want to associate templates with owl:Classes, Callimachus also lets one associate templates by URI pattern matching [1], if you prefer.

Does that answer your question?

Regards,
Dave

[1]  http://code.google.com/p/callimachus/wiki/WebPatterns#Namespace_Instance_View

Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2012 16:17:48 UTC