- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:16:29 +0100
- To: Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLFRXTichoXt0MqD+cxBLT_Scbt2MVDbdduG+izQVSy8Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 14 February 2013 17:46, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 > Looks great Two features we are lacking in some of the existing vocabs are - CORS enabled (I think even dublin core doesnt have this turned on yet) - HTTPS which can be useful for things like payments to prevent MITM > > Thanks! >
Received on Friday, 15 February 2013 17:16:57 UTC