- From: Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 15:10:46 +0200
- To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>
- Cc: "Le Phuoc, Danh" <danh.lephuoc@deri.org>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
On 25/05/2016 14:47, Kerry Taylor wrote: > Last time (SSN-XG days) we (Laurent Lefort actually) built some XSLT to do it himself -- it has a lot of nice features that I haven't seen in other places although it is a little less pretty. I might be able to twist his arm... > --Kerry This is actually the approach I usually follow. E.g., this was done for LOCN. The namespace document is automatically generated from the RDF/XML (figure included): https://www.w3.org/ns/locn Personally, I think this solution is less error prone than doing it manually. Moreover, it helps validate (to some extent) the vocabulary / ontology, and identify typos. An additional advantage is that, once done, it can be used for all the vocabularies to generate HTML code compliant with TR templates. Andrea > -----Original Message----- > From: Le Phuoc, Danh [mailto:danh.lephuoc@deri.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2016 10:39 PM > To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au; Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>; phila@w3.org; janowicz@ucsb.edu; Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> > Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: LODES of cleaning up > > I tried with Parrot as well, but Parrot didn¹t generate some descriptions that current version of SSN ontology has. > > > Anyway, I think it¹s better to do it manually in the next version, it might take more effort but more manageable. > > Danh > > > > > On 25/05/2016 03:07, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote: > >>> Suggestions for "much better tools" warmly welcomed from the Group. >> >> I've started using Parrot. http://ontorule-project.eu/parrot/parrot >> Not sure if it is 'better', but I think the HTML is slightly less crufty. >> Mind you, I did the Time doco manually, as it helped me cross-check the >> embedded annotations. >> >> Simon >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kerry Taylor [mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au] >> Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2016 11:35 AM >> To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>; janowicz@ucsb.edu; Le Phuoc, Danh >> <danh.lephuoc@deri.org>; Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> >> Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org> >> Subject: RE: LODES of cleaning up >> >> Pulled and merged, thankyou Phil. >> Some of the good stuff of LODE styling has disappeared, but as we need >> a much better tool for next time, this is not a concern to me. >> >> Suggestions for "much better tools" warmly welcomed from the Group. >> >> " Two things I haven't done are" - I take that to mean they *will* be >> done by some poor W3C staffer after the FPWD is approved by SDW? >> >> Being only a "poor colonial" of British convict extract, and >> notwithstanding 3 years of on-the-job schooling at that most esteemed >> British institution of pedantry, the Oxford University Press, I am >> not trained to even parse expressions like "etymologically accurate >> orthography" . On the other hand, I think you would find my writing >> might commit that W3C sin, as I do not write "American English" unless >> I am tortured to do so. So you might indeed have some work to do. >> >> -Kerry >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org] >> Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2016 12:06 AM >> To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>; janowicz@ucsb.edu; Le >> Phuoc, Danh <danh.lephuoc@deri.org>; Armin Haller >> <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> >> Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org> >> Subject: LODES of cleaning up >> >> SSN Editors, >> >> I've been through the markup generated by LODE. Nothing wrong with it >> as such but there's an awful lot of code that doesn't do a great deal >> once you get to a doc like this. So a typical definition section now >> looks like this: >> >> <section id="h-MaintenanceSchedule" class="entity"> >> <h4 id="MaintenanceSchedule">Maintenance Schedule</h4> >> <p class="iri"> http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/MaintenanceSchedule</p> >> <p class="comment">Schedule of...</p> >> <dl class="description"> >> <dt>has super-classes</dt> >> <dd><a href="#OperatingProperty" >> title="http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/OperatingProperty">OperatingProperty</a >>> </ >> dd> >> </dl> >> </section> >> >> I've got rid of all the generated IDs (d3015 or whatever) and replaced >> them with the actual terms as IDs on the <h4 /> elements - which means >> that the frag IDs within the doc are now the actual terms. A bit of CSS >> takes care of the IRIs, decoration of the super/sub classes etc. >> >> One thing I got rid of that you might like is LODE's addition of >> superscripts for 'c' and 'op' for Class, Object property etc. Hope >> that's not a problem. >> >> I've run the doc through the validators etc. so it should be all OK now. >> Two things I haven't done are: >> >> 1. Check that the doc uses simplified English throughout (some people >> call it American English). The poor colonials really can't cope with >> etymologically accurate orthography, bless 'em. >> >> 2. Check for a bit of W3C-weirdness. For our own historical reasons, we >> always capitalise Web (I know, I know but it's house rules and all that). >> >> Obviously I have not applied any relevant OGC rules. >> >> You can see the result of my labour at >> http://philarcher1.github.io/sdw/ssn/ and, if you so wish, accept my >> Pull Request https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/262 >> >> HTH >> >> Phil. >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Phil Archer >> W3C Data Activity Lead >> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ >> >> http://philarcher.org >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> @philarcher1 > > -- Andrea Perego, Ph.D. Scientific / Technical Project Officer European Commission DG JRC Institute for Environment & Sustainability Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262 21027 Ispra VA, Italy https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2016 13:12:32 UTC