- From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@semsol.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 10:50:52 +0200
- To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
- Cc: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Hi Mark, using a Wiki + commenting is a nice approach indeed. Thanks for the pointer. Cheers, Benji On 07.05.2009 20:40:16, Mark Birbeck wrote: >Hi Benji, > >Picking up on one point: > >> If I had anything to conclude, then I'd say that we could benefit from >> some use-case-centric education site where you can pick a use case (not >> a vocab!) and get examples illustrating the combination of possible >> RDF schemas to encode the use case ("simple address book", "people >> with multiple addresses", "social network contacts", ...). Each example >> could mention alternative terms or approaches, and maybe SPARQLy >> mappings between the different vocabs. It would help us, is probably >> nice for beginners, and it would also show that the existence of >> overlapping vocabs with slightly different focus or interpretation >> of a source domain/format doesn't mean "fundamentally flawed approach" >> which we often hear from those centralization lemmings. > >During the course of putting together some vocabularies for RDFa >projects I'm working on, I created a Google Code project called >'argot-hub' [1] which seems to take some steps along the path you are >describing. > >I've used the term 'argot' to describe a collection of terms for a >particular purpose. They don't necessarily all belong to the same >vocabulary, but by grouping them together, it makes it easier for >people to get a handle on the terms that they might use in a >particular context. > >All of the current argots are simple wiki pages, but for the most >recent argot I'm working on (for a new project), I've used OWL and >SKOS, embedded in HTML via RDFa. > >My main reason for this is that users need to be able to check their >use of the argots, beyond just seeing if they have the RDFa correct, >and the best way I could think of to do that was to use OWL. >(Actually, the best way I could think of was to use RIF, and after >spending many happy hours trying to find my way around the RIF >specifications, I concluded -- hopefully correctly -- that I can >derive RIF rules from OWL. So my first step would appear to be to code >up the argots using OWL.) > >A by-product of using RDFa in HTML to specify the argots is of course >that I can transform the documents into the same kind of wiki pages >that I have now. > >Obviously it's early days, and the argots on the site so far are those >that relate to the UK government RDFa projects I've been working on >(covering job vacancies and government consultations), but I'd welcome >any suggestions on how the argot idea in general can progress. Also, >now that I'm using SKOS and OWL, I'm sure there is a lot of best >practice that I can follow, so any pointers there would also be >useful. > >It hopefully goes without saying that if anyone wants to actually add >some argots I'd be more than happy to work to make that happen. > >Regards, > >Mark > >[1] <http://argot-hub.googlecode.com/> > >-- >Mark Birbeck, webBackplane > >mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com > >http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck > >webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number >05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street, >London, EC2A 4RR) >
Received on Friday, 8 May 2009 08:51:26 UTC