Re: Ideas for a possible framework

You've cross-posted to a bunch of communities i'm not directly linked-to
and whilst i understand the context of having a community discussion; i
don't really understand what additional functionality you are attempting to
obtain via what appears to be far more complex modelling than the relative
beauty / simplicity of triples/quads.  Have you tried to build the
functional outcome that you are trying to define a solution to, using
existing linked-data systems?

It's worth nothing that the development of what is termed 'RDF' or 'Linked
Data' in its simple form; has been a work of art produced by many notable
individuals over a period that extends to decades, but moreover, embodies
close to 20 years work, patent related IP rationalisation and a great many
other complex feats 'ticked off' through a structure that may perhaps be
considered 'too simple' by the initiated. Like all good things...

Whilst i never like to suggest ideas put-forward do not have some merit in
some form (even when i can't identify it) i do wonder whether you might be
better off working with existing projects to identify how the sorts of
things you are trying to achieve; may be done achieved collaborative
efforts, with others.

Hereafter; a few pointers.

Kingsley has an array of materials online which in-turn fit into a solution
you can test.

http://www.slideshare.net/kidehen/
https://www.youtube.com/user/kidehen/videos

Some of these videos outline functionality that provides interoperability
between RDBMS and RDF.

https://github.com/solid/solid  is a project that looks to decentralise.
If you are interested in building an APP, i'm sure they'd be interested in
more helpers.  It is likely important though that you are able to develop
the app.

http://linda.epu.ntua.gr/ is a neat little tool that helps you easily remap
data (ie: CSV data) into RDF.

http://vowl.visualdataweb.org/webvowl/index.html#iri=http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/vocabs/schema/versions/2016-08-09.n3
is
an example of a tool that can help to visualise ontologies.

https://cse.google.com/ helps perform queries based on structured data.
http://lod-cloud.net/  is a bunch of structured data.

Semantic Reasoning, et.al. leads to knowledge about
https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/  which in-turn leads me suggesting
you play with http://json-ld.org/playground/  and/or
http://linkeddata.github.io/rdflib.js/example/people/social_book.html as an
old example that should help.

Beyond that;

It takes time to understand what has already been made, why it's been made
that way, and how to contribute.
https://twitter.com/WebCivics/status/492707794760392704 i use often as an
'intro' piece.

If some particular function exists that is not supported by what is made,
let us know.  However i'm really not sure what the underlying principles
are to the way in which you are trying to find purposeful means, at
present.

The 'build a solid app' strategy may be a really good way to further
demonstrate your ideas, IMHO.

hope something noted above is useful for you.

Tim. Holborn.

On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 at 03:23 Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com> wrote:

> Those sets (and classes) are my ontology. Consider like I'm reifying
> subjects, predicates, objects and triples into sets and 'calculating' its
> kinds and this allows for schema less data sources (plain RDF triple
> sources) type, relationships and behavior inference. That's why I bother
> with metamodels, because I don't rely with source data coming with an
> schema or ontology and I have to build or infer one and link and merge it
> with existing ones. Then, the metamodels allow, for example, to build a LDP
> or other protocol service from the schema less sources by means of the
> inferred metadata. The whole document explains how this is intended to be
> implemented.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sebastián Samaruga.
>
> On Oct 1, 2016 10:02 AM, "Timothy Holborn" <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Sat., 1 Oct. 2016, 10:16 pm Martynas Jusevičius, <martynas@graphity.org>
> wrote:
>
> Sebastian,
>
> I've said this before and I'll say it again: why do you need to build
> a (meta)model above RDF? Kind, SubjectKind, Dimension etc. -- why is
> all this stuff necessary?
>
> Do not attempt to extend RDF, and drop the UML/object-oriented models.
> Instead, work *within* RDF: use triples to store data, and use OWL
> ontologies, classes, properties, datatypes etc. to model your domain.
>
> Those are the only things you need. Show us your ontologies, then you
> will get better responses. You can try some of these ontology editors:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/
> http://www.cognitum.eu/semantics/FluentEditor/
>
> http://www.topquadrant.com/tools/modeling-topbraid-composer-standard-edition/
>
>
> Martynas
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > (Apologies for cross posting / over posting)
> >
> > Hi, I'm currently a software student and developer. Since I've meet
> semantic
> > related technologies development about twelve years ago I've been
> revolving
> > with the idea that a framework could be built that could ease building
> > semantic business applications as they are frameworks for Java and
> > relational databases.
> >
> > A lot of time passed. Now many big players offer solutions that somehow
> rely
> > on semantics for their work. And although this could seem strange, here
> in
> > Buenos Aires I couldn't find anyone really interested in the area, being
> in
> > academia or places I've worked in.
> >
> > So, having no one to share my thoughts with, I'm frequently publishing
> > documents to this list(s) hoping for some kind of peer's feedback. Sorry
> if
> > this aren't the right lists or I'm off topic. I send my attachment as a
> PDF
> > document. Anyone willing to comment in the original just ask me for the
> > Google Docs link.
> >
> > Note: I've sent this draft before but in a very early version state. I
> > invite anyone interested in reading to see the last section (Dashboards).
> > Maybe I'm wrong but I think there is a lot of innovation that may be done
> > regarding that subject (sorry for the poor diagrams :--)
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Sebastián Samaruga.
>
>