Re: linked open data and PDF

this discussion is related to the workshop we are organizing. At Sepublica
http://sepublica.mywikipaper.org/drupal/ we are very much looking forward
to this kind of discussions. Those of you who are planning to attend the
ESWC2015 please consider submitting to Sepublica; we have a special
cathegory, call for polemics. We would like to invite authors to send us a
one page manuscript, 20 lines max, describing their position with respect
to new technologies supporting the publication workflow: What are the most
pressing issues to be addressed? What is their position with respect to the
overall problem? What innovation is needed? etc. Polemics authors will have
only 5 minutes to present; the format of this session is sequential, after
each presentation the next follows with no questions in between. There will
be a discussion and summary of all the issues at the end of all the
polemics session.
Deadline for polemics: April 24th 2015



On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Wow, there's a blast from the past*.
>
> --Gannon
>
> * "past" = back when URL's looked like URI's and control freaks could keep
> their domain holdings and ontologies on the same ledger.  Not for a minute
> do I think this was a good thing, and in any case no fault of GRDDL.
> --------------------------------------------
> On Wed, 1/21/15, Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: linked open data and PDF
>  To: "Norman Gray" <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>
>  Cc: "Paul Houle" <ontology2@gmail.com>, "Herbert Van de Sompel" <
> hvdsomp@gmail.com>, "jschneider@pobox.com" <jschneider@pobox.com>, "
> public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
>  Date: Wednesday, January 21, 2015, 8:52 PM
>
>  On Wed, 2015-01-21 at
>  17:16 +0000, Norman Gray wrote:
>
>  > (also it's not even really about XMP;
>  there are all sorts of ways of
>  >
>  scraping metadata out of objects and turning it into
>  something which
>  >  an RDF parser can
>  read, and from that point you can start being
>  >  imaginative.  This is of course
>  stupidly obvious to everyone on this
>  >
>  list, but it's an aha! that many people haven't got
>  yet).
>
>  GRDDL, anyone? [1]
>
>  I think the GRDDL spec was too
>  narrowly scoped to XML resources. The
>  concept is simple and ingenious, and applicable
>  to any type of resource.
>  Many years ago,
>  inspired by the then-new GRDDL spec) I built a modest
>  RDF gleaning framework for tracing software
>  requirements through
>  development and
>  testing. It gleaned from requirements documents and
>  functional specification (in MS Word format),
>  design documents (in TeX),
>  source code
>  (c++), test results (in XML), and probably also plain
>  text
>  (csv) and MS Excel.
>
>  Regards,
>  --Paul
>
>  [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-grddl-20070911/
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Alexander Garcia
http://www.alexandergarcia.name/
http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/75943.html
http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexgarciac