- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 11:40:13 -0500
- CC: 'W3C SWEO IG' <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
Leo Sauermann wrote: > Hi SWEO, Kingsley, > > yes, the subjective aspect is important, everyone is a subject. > > Es begab sich aber da Kingsley Idehen zur rechten Zeit 02.03.2007 > 14:01 folgendes schrieb: >> I believe the SIOC community is completely open to these kinds of >> additions/enhancements to SIOC. > if SIOC needs to be enhanced or additions, then it can take a very > long time until these enhancement are agreed by the SIOC community. As > we have a tight timeline, we cannot wait for this. > > If DC/RSS/FOAF/... and the other suggested vocabularies already > contain enough classes and properties, we have enough and can start > writing a tutorial how to markup data so that it can be used for SWEO ;-) > >> >> Let's piece this all together, if we can't do it who will we expect >> the broader community to understand any of this? We need to connect >> all the shared vocabularies coherently :-) > Which classes and properties from SIOC are essentially needed beyond > the mentioned vocabularies? > please add them to the wiki page, just add a new section on SIOC. > For which information types listed in [2] do we need SIOC? > > perhaps you could give some comprehensive RDF examples how data > expressed in SIOC would look like in our case, please add some RDF > examples to the wiki page so that we can evaluate this better > > (see where there is already one example, just add more) > http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/InfoGathering/DataVocabulary > > [2] > http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/InfoGathering/ClassificationOntology > Leo, I will do just that :-) BTW - Also take a look at: http://wiki.sioc-project.org/index.php/TypesModule Kingsley > > best > Leo > > > Es begab sich aber da Kingsley Idehen zur rechten Zeit 02.03.2007 > 14:01 folgendes schrieb: >> >> Leo Sauermann wrote: >>> Es begab sich aber da Ivan Herman zur rechten Zeit 01.03.2007 09:30 >>> folgendes schrieb: >>>> Hi Uldis, >>>> >>>> as I said in my previous mail, I do not know the details of SIOC >>>> and it >>>> also seems that it is an evolving spec. That is all good. If *you* >>>> feel >>>> that it can play the role of a 'glue' (and even let the technology >>>> evolve in this direction if needed), then I have absolutely no problem >>>> with it! >>>> >>> as Uldis said, SIOC its a framework, which is beyond a vocabulary. >>> >>> Our goal is to gather information about projects and tutorials, and >>> I would focus on that goal. If the vocabulary we propose is SIOC we >>> would open a can of many more possible annotations, and we have many >>> "optional" things, beyond a minimal approach. I would go for a mix >>> of RDF vocabs that exactly capture the minimal, not less, not more. >>> >>> I think, all we need for information gathering is in foaf, rss, >>> skos, dc, doap (and the other vocabs mentioned on the wiki page) >>> already. >> Leo, >> >> The idea behind the use of SIOC in this projects is to provide >> containment (expressed in RDF) for all the FOAF, SKOS, RSS, DC, and >> DOAP that you mention above. >> >> As per usual (with me) this is a suggestion. As we progress through >> this effort I am very confident that the thinking behind SIOC will >> crystallize. It doesn't need to become an unintended distraction at >> this point. The beauty of RDF is we can agree to disagree without >> dire consequences :-) >>> >>> As Ivan Herman pointed out, >>> Dublin Core may even cover most things that are in DOAP. >>> >>> We, tech nerds being part of SWEO, are familiar with DOAP and SIOC, >>> but its definitly not comparable to the industry standard Dublin >>> Core, which people outside of SemWeb are aware of. Same with RSS, >>> there is a gazillion of RSS feeds in the world and a gazillion*n RSS >>> items. >>> There is only a handful of skos, doap, foaf, sioc on the web. (sure, >>> the auto-generated FOAF from some social websites is funny, but I >>> don't know of any application that makes real use of the foaf data >>> around, parsing the foaf files, reusing the information of your >>> friends, etc). >> Your comments are a little subjective. Also note that I don't >> understand how SIOC and Dublin Core are incompatible or how any of >> the suggestion re. SIOC imply mutual exclusivity relative to DC. SIOC >> is just about containment for instance data for these vocabularies >> (as I've already stated). >> >>> >>> Perhaps we can ask ourselves: >>> >>> Why should we use SIOC:Post if a ~gazillion of rss:Item already >>> exists to represent blog posts and developers are used to rss? >> This is a superficial issue. I already have RSS instance data in SIOC >> without issue (i.e. doesn't adversely affect RSS or SIOC). >>> >>> Why should we use SIOC:community instead of foaf:Group? >>> [http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#term_Group] >>> " This concept is intentionally quite broad, covering informal and >>> ad-hoc groups, long-lived communities, organizational groups within >>> a workplace, etc. Some such groups may have associated >>> characteristics which could be captured in RDF (perhaps a >>> |foaf:homepage <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#term_homepage>|, >>> |foaf:name <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#term_name>|, mailing list >>> etc.)." >> What's stops foaf:Group replacing sioc:Community in the worst case? >> >> I believe the SIOC community is completely open to these kinds of >> additions/enhancements to SIOC. >> >> Let's piece this all together, if we can't do it who will we expect >> the broader community to understand any of this? We need to connect >> all the shared vocabularies coherently :-) >> >> Kingsley >>> >>> best >>> Leo >>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> I. >>>> >>>> Uldis Bojars wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ivan, >>>>> >>>>> SIOC as a framework can act as the 'glue'. >>>>> I agree that if deciding to reuse an ontology we should use it for >>>>> what it >>>>> is meant for. Let me clarify some details about SIOC. >>>>> >>>>> 1) It already uses FOAF and SKOS >>>>> >>>>> SIOC re-uses FOAF to express information about persons and lets >>>>> you use SKOS >>>>> to describe categories and tags. The largest part of data >>>>> generated by a >>>>> community site is about posts (as there are more posts than there >>>>> are people >>>>> and categories) expressed in SIOC and it already acts as a 'glue' >>>>> between >>>>> FOAF and SKOS. >>>>> >>>>> Figure by John Breslin illustrating these relations: >>>>> http://sioc-project.org/node/158 >>>>> >>>>> 2) Describing everything in RDF >>>>> >>>>> People want to provide information and comments about real-world >>>>> objects >>>>> (Events, Videos, Books, Presentations, Wiki pages, CVs, ...) not >>>>> just about >>>>> forum/blog posts. People also want to be able to say that their posts >>>>> contain or are about these real-world objects. This question was >>>>> recently >>>>> discussed by the SIOC community and a decision on how to do this >>>>> within the >>>>> SIOC framework will be made within the next 2 weeks. >>>>> >>>>> SIOC was made to be generic and some of the objects (Blog posts, >>>>> Mailing >>>>> lists, Wiki pages) can be be naturally expressed as a sioc:Post. >>>>> For other objects a sioc:Post itself is not a natural choice and >>>>> there's no >>>>> need to "stretch" it. That's why we are thinking about a generic >>>>> class for >>>>> these objects that will act as an "ubrella" for all kinds of >>>>> things. It does >>>>> not need to contain actual properties to describe these things - >>>>> there are >>>>> already ontologies out there to describe Projects, Books, etc. >>>>> What we need >>>>> is a way how to talk about all these things [within sioc:Posts and in >>>>> general] and a "crystallisation point" from which to point to the >>>>> different >>>>> ontologies to use. >>>>> Some types of relations that we want to express: >>>>> - a Post contains an Object (e.g., a review) >>>>> - a Post is about an Object (e.g., an project) >>>>> - a Post is categorised as category/tag/topic X (currently >>>>> expressed with >>>>> a sioc:topic and a URI which can [optionally] be a skos:Concept) >>>>> >>>>> We have similar questions to solve, would probably come to similar >>>>> conclusions and can benefit from learning from the other. In fact, >>>>> the >>>>> Semantic Web community is like any other community who wants to >>>>> publish >>>>> information and discussions about things. >>>>> If you have suggestions how to model this information then please >>>>> send them >>>>> to SIOC-Dev list [1]. Note that when talking about a generic >>>>> "umbrella" >>>>> class it does not really matter what namespace it is in as long as >>>>> there is >>>>> one. If there is an existing vocabulary we can reuse it. >>>>> >>>>> 3) Community aspects of SIOC >>>>> >>>>> Besides expressing information about things in general there are some >>>>> community site related SIOC usage patterns that can be useful: >>>>> >>>>> Discussions / comments about the information gathered can be >>>>> expressed as a >>>>> sioc:Post + its properties. sioc:has_reply property is used to >>>>> link a post to its replies and comments. >>>>> That's where SIOC fits in naturally. >>>>> >>>>> sioc:Community is a recent addition to ontology, introduced to >>>>> describe a >>>>> collection of different things belonging to a community. >>>>> Basically, anything >>>>> (website, mailing list, people) can be a part of it. It may used >>>>> to describe >>>>> information about communities (a part of the gathered information) >>>>> in case >>>>> when a community means more than a group of people. >>>>> This concludes the introduction, hope it helps to clarify some >>>>> questions. >>>>> SIOC is a live project and lessons learned from describing gathered >>>>> information can also feed back into its development. Please feel >>>>> free to >>>>> send comments and ask any questions. >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://groups.google.com/group/sioc-dev >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Uldis >>>>> >>>>> [ http://captsolo.net/info/ ] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: public-sweo-ig-request@w3.org >>>>> [mailto:public-sweo-ig-request@w3.org] >>>>> On Behalf Of Ivan Herman >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:17 PM >>>>> To: Leo Sauermann >>>>> Cc: Danny Ayers; W3C SWEO IG; Kingsley Idehen; Benjamin Nowack; >>>>> Ian Davis >>>>> Subject: Re: data format for gathered information >>>>> >>>>> Leo, >>>>> >>>>> it is a bit difficult to edit, because the page should reflect >>>>> concensus... >>>>> so I prefer to comment and discuss here. >>>>> >>>>> - Using the doap, skos, etc, is obviously the way to go. Actually, >>>>> using >>>>> skos is a great idea of yours! >>>>> >>>>> - I am not sure about the usage of RSS. I have the feeling that it >>>>> is a >>>>> little bit of a misuse here. I wonder whether the full power of DC >>>>> is not >>>>> enough here; not only the core dc terms like dc:title and such that >>>>> everybody knows but, also, the dcterm vocabulary[1] I have the >>>>> impression >>>>> that those, combined with maybe some extra properties of our own >>>>> may replace >>>>> your choice of RSS. (to be checked) >>>>> >>>>> - For books and articles, I think we need something more >>>>> strucured, like >>>>> BibTeX, in order to allow for, say, more scholarly usage. The >>>>> problem is >>>>> that it is not 100% obvious how to represent bibtex in RDF, look >>>>> at my >>>>> recent blog and the comments[2]. We may have to byte the bullet >>>>> and choose >>>>> one or modify one). >>>>> >>>>> [As an aside, it was one of you guys, I think, who drew my >>>>> attention on >>>>> BibSonomy[3] which uses nice features to store bibliographical >>>>> data as well, >>>>> it is a pity that the bibtex they use is broken[2] otherwise we >>>>> could have >>>>> used it) >>>>> >>>>> - I was looking at DOAP; its description on [4] refers to "DOAP is >>>>> a project >>>>> to create an XML/RDF vocabulary to describe open source projects." >>>>> I was >>>>> wondering whether it would also be suitable to describe >>>>> non-commercial >>>>> projects, ie, where the 'open sourceness' is in DOAP. >>>>> Sure, there are references to repositories and copyrights, but I >>>>> presume it >>>>> is all right to ignore those when we talk about commercial projects. >>>>> To be checked, nevertheless... >>>>> >>>>> - Whether the core 'glue', binding all that together, should be >>>>> SIOC, as >>>>> Kingsley proposes, or something else, I am not sure. I must admit >>>>> I am not >>>>> familiar with all the details of SIOC in this sense. I am a little >>>>> bit >>>>> afraid (just like for RSS) to reuse something just because some of >>>>> the >>>>> properties and classes are around that are close to what we want, >>>>> but it is >>>>> not *really* meant for that. I know there is a fuzzy line there, >>>>> and may not >>>>> apply to SIOC (as I said, I am not sure about that one), but we >>>>> should be >>>>> careful about that. >>>>> >>>>> I am sure other issues will pop up... >>>>> >>>>> Ivan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-type-vocabulary/ >>>>> [2] http://ivanherman.wordpress.com/2007/01/13/bibtex-in-rdf/ >>>>> [3] http://www.bibsonomy.org >>>>> [4] http://usefulinc.com/doap/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Leo Sauermann wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> perhaps read the wiki-page in parallel to this email thread. >>>>>> DOAP, FOAF, etc are all mentioned there already, >>>>>> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/InfoGathering/DataVocabulary >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Benjamin, Ivan, you are free to edit the wiki page, just >>>>>> change/adapt it so that it reflects your approach, please start >>>>>> editing. >>>>>> (no edits so far, >>>>>> this is a wiki, free speech, last change wins, anything goes, like >>>>>> wikipedia) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Es begab sich aber da Benjamin Nowack zur rechten Zeit 26.02.2007 >>>>>> 11:24 folgendes schrieb: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 22.02.2007 19:55:52, Leo Sauermann wrote: >>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I see two things to face, first: >>>>>>>> Describing Information items as such, such as tools, websites, >>>>>>>> presentaitons, tutorials. This should be done using RSS 1.0, >>>>>>>> and in some cases when needed extended using DOAP, foaf, etc. >>>>>>>> This is pretty straightforward, please review and update this >>>>>>>> site until you agree: >>>>>>>> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/InfoGathering/DataVocabular >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> y >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not sure about the RSS design decision, it pretty much restricts >>>>>>> the resource types to documents, so we can't really use it as an >>>>>>> "umbrella" spec. My 2 highly redundant cents: >>>>>>> - I found DOAP to work fine for most things software, DCMI >>>>>>> provides a >>>>>>> number of handy resource type URIs[1] which could be used to >>>>>>> augment >>>>>>> doap:Version resources (e.g. dctype:Collection, dctype:Dataset, >>>>>>> dctype:InteractiveResource, dctype:Service), or owl:Ontology for >>>>>>> projects that produce vocabularies (e.g. the FOAF project) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> That was partly already there, >>>>>> please edit the wiki page so that it reflects your exact ideas, >>>>>> but I think the current version already is like you say here. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> - tags (skos:subject, or dc:subject) for more specific stuff >>>>>>> (personal >>>>>>> preference: the more fine-grained skos options) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> ok, one more for SKOS >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> - Danny's review vocab[2] for ratings/reviews >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> please add this to the wiki page! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> - a combination of the two rdf/iCal specs[3][4] (with and without >>>>>>> timezone-datatyped timestamps) for events >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> they are rather buggy and not clear which one to use, but I would >>>>>> go for the simpler (not-timezone-as-datatype-one). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Es begab sich aber da Danny Ayers zur rechten Zeit 22.02.2007 >>>>>> 20:25 folgendes schrieb: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Quick thoughts: I see the motivation re. reuse, but rather than >>>>>>> trying to use solely RSS 1.0 for the items, it might be better >>>>>>> to use more precise terms where they exist, as_well_as the RSS >>>>>>> terms, e.g. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://example.org/doc> a rss:item; a foaf:Document . >>>>>>> >>>>>> I also thought about this, but if you require from all >>>>>> participants to do that, it sucks. >>>>>> Why should anyone annotate two types if one is enough? This is >>>>>> the format we expect external data to be in, inference should add >>>>>> the additional triples. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> For the taxo stuff, SKOS sounds a very good idea generally, >>>>>>> though I wouldn't be surprised if there were existing vocabs >>>>>>> that could be used for things like "tutorial" etc. >>>>>>> I'll cc Ian, he hangs around libraries... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It might also be worth considering (perhaps redundantly again) >>>>>>> the Tag Ontology at http://www.holygoat.co.uk/projects/tags/ >>>>>>> >>>>>> SKOS covers this and more, so would rather use skos. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Danny. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ____________________________________________________ >>>>>> DI Leo Sauermann http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann >>>>>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer >>>>>> Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH >>>>>> Trippstadter Strasse 122 >>>>>> P.O. Box 2080 Fon: +49 631 20575-116 >>>>>> D-67663 Kaiserslautern Fax: +49 631 20575-102 >>>>>> Germany Mail: leo.sauermann@dfki.de >>>>>> >>>>>> Geschaeftsfuehrung: >>>>>> Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender) Dr. Walter >>>>>> Olthoff Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: >>>>>> Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes >>>>>> Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313 >>>>>> ____________________________________________________ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ____________________________________________________ >>> DI Leo Sauermann http://www.dfki.de/~sauermann >>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz DFKI GmbH >>> Trippstadter Strasse 122 >>> P.O. Box 2080 Fon: +49 631 20575-116 >>> D-67663 Kaiserslautern Fax: +49 631 20575-102 >>> Germany Mail: leo.sauermann@dfki.de >>> >>> Geschaeftsfuehrung: >>> Prof.Dr.Dr.h.c.mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender) >>> Dr. Walter Olthoff >>> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: >>> Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes >>> Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313 >>> ____________________________________________________ >>> >> >> > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Friday, 2 March 2007 16:40:47 UTC