Re: Social Web WG Agenda for 6 October 2015

On 10/07/2015 05:16 AM, Kevin Marks wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 7 October 2015 at 04:01, Aaron Parecki <aaron@parecki.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Melvin, I don't know if you actually read any of the discussion around
>>> the post-type-discovery proposal, but the -1 votes were not actually
>>> downvoting the algorithm's existence, they were -1s because they had
>>> clarifying questions. Since this was brought up within minutes of the end
>>> of the call, I'm not surprised to see the -1s. Anyway, there is now another
>>> week to review the document and we will discuss it on next week's call. I
>>> encourage you to join the call if you have an opinion on this.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the clarification, Aaron.  I dont have a problem with the
>> algorithm's existence.  Im sure it could be useful.  It's just not REC
>> track.
>>
>> This problem is already solved via inferencing.  IMHO not a good use of
>> time discussing whether or not to reinvent the wheel.  Just use existing
>> RECs.
>>
>>
> Can you link me to some data that shows where this particular problem is
> already solved by a REC?
You can find nice illustration of reasoning over rdfs:domain here:
* http://www.slideshare.net/EUCLIDproject/querying-linked-data/60
* http://www.euclid-project.eu/modules/course2 (video to accompany those
slides)

RDFS definition which implies an entity on which one uses property
mo:member to have type mo:MusicGroup
*
https://github.com/motools/musicontology/blob/master/rdf/musicontology.n3#L1658-L1669

Normative definition in *W3C Recommendation*
* http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_domain

Major dataset using MusicOntology
* http://linkedbrainz.org/

Received on Wednesday, 7 October 2015 09:13:13 UTC