- From: Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:46:06 +0100
- To: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CALp38EO5aTqg=9hfO6=dc3Kci+3CY2JxFKD09Z4SxcxXPJ58yw@mail.gmail.com>
Dear all, It's my first time here, but I've been attracted to the Linked data initiative for quite a while now. A couple of weeks ago I needed to build my first RDF vocabulary. I cannot tell you how hard this process was for an RDF newbie as myself. I had to read a couple of books, and read a lot all over the web before I could get a grasp of it all. Even after understanding the linked-data context, and how the technologies involved worked, I was still left with a set of tools that I thought were pretty limited. I had to download apps, that did or didn't work. And learn various different programming APIs to generate the RDF that I wanted. I can only imagine the difficulty a non-techie person would have when trying to build a vocabulary. Another issue that I confronted when looking for existing vocabularies, was that most of the time they were created by a single entity (a group of people) that knows about the lexicon of the subject. I think this is quite limited as well. A vocabulary should be open and agreed upon a group of people. It should be community-driven. It should be crowd-sourced and validated, the same way correct answers are validated on Stackoverflow. So in a couple of days I built http://www.vocabs.org/ that does exactly this. It allows people, with very little technical experience, to start creating vocabularies (entirely through the web-interface). Not only that, but different users can then join and comment, and add new vocabulary terms. An example of this: http://www.vocabs.org/term/WineOntology (*hint* click "download" at the top). I was just wondering what the Semantic community thinks of this idea. I hope it's clear what I'm trying to achieve here, but maybe a better explanation would be here: http://www.vocabs.org/about Thanks!
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2013 22:29:11 UTC