- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 12:04:40 +0000
- To: Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr>
- Cc: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>, public-openannotation <public-openannotation@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Raphaël Troncy <raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr> wrote: > The .xml is misleading, why not putting a .rdf or .owl (as the standard > practice by w3c)? Why not naming it 'oa' instead of 'schema'? +1 oa.owl (which content-negotiates to oa.ttl or oa.rdf) > For the final request of Ivan, getting an HTML (+RDFa) page for the spec, I > find specgen very powerful and this is then very easy to generate your HTML > version of the ontology, see https://bitbucket.org/wikier/specgen/wiki/Home > which also lists all the other alternatives. I've also found LODE very good, and a bit easier to use than specgen which I could never get to work. Could you have a go with specgen? http://www.essepuntato.it/lode/https://raw.github.com/stain/oa/master/schema.xml -- Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team School of Computer Science The University of Manchester
Received on Friday, 8 February 2013 12:05:37 UTC