Re: Any reason for ontology reuse?

Ok,
Thank you Kingsley. As test I searched for a property to describe
valuta (USD, Euro);

    select ?s1p as ?c1 count (*) as ?c2  where { ?s1 ?s1textp ?o1 .
?o1 bif:contains  '"Valuta"'  .?s1 a
<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Property> . ?s1 ?s1p ?s1o . }
group by ?s1p order by desc 2 limit 20  offset 0

Zero results unfortunately ;) But this says more about this particular
property than this great service ?

Greets,
Martijn

2010/12/8 Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>:
> On 12/8/10 5:52 AM, Martijn van der Plaat wrote:
>>
>> Thank you all for the detailed comments, but in my initial message I
>> didn't mean a "formal list" from an organization like the W3C or other
>> standardization bodies as some of you mentioned. I was just looking
>> for an indexing service (API) where I can find properties and classes
>> based on popularity with conservation of the decentralized approach of
>> the Web. A concept is not popular due to standardization or applicable
>> in every language and every domain perspective, but is popular because
>> it simply works or because the popularity is caused by powerful
>> organizations like Facebook,Google,etc who accepted these
>> vocabularies/ontologies in their system.
>>
>> I think the API I talk about should be included into eg. ontology
>> editors. I can imagine a simple string search possibility to find a
>> popular ontology/property/class and easily reuse it into your own
>> dataset?
>
> Here is one place to lookup Classes or Properties, with results that include
> Entity Ranking.
>
> 1. http://lod.openlinksw.com -- which also has a SPARQL endpoint so you can
> use bif:contains as part of query pattern
> 2. http://lod.openlinksw.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=load&fsq_id=191140 -- Classes
> associated with pattern: "Person"
> 3. http://lod.openlinksw.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=load&fsq_id=191141 -- Classes
> associated with pattern: "Music"
> 4.
> http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com/dataspace/dav/wiki/Main/VirtuosoFacetsWebService
> - DBMS hosted Faceted Browser Service APIs .
>
>
> Kingsley
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martijn
>>
>>
>> 2010/12/8 Martin Hepp<martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>:
>>>
>>> In general, I think that the Semantic Web must use a decentralized
>>> approach
>>> for the definition and adoption of conceptual elements, same as the Web
>>> uses
>>> decentralized, fault-tolerant approaches as a fundamental principle. So
>>> calling for standardization bodies to maintain "authoritative"
>>> vocabularies
>>> will not work at Web Scale, IMO. At least, standards bodies may be to
>>> slow
>>> to provide ontologies and ontology updates (INCOTERMS, for instance,
>>> updates
>>> it's definition of trade terms only once per decade)
>>>
>>> A few related papers:
>>>
>>> 1. Possible Ontologies: How Reality Constrains the Development of
>>> Relevant
>>> Ontologies, in: IEEE Internet Computing, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 90-96,
>>> Jan-Feb
>>> 2007
>>> PDF:
>>> http://www.heppnetz.de/files/IEEE-IC-PossibleOntologies-published.pdf
>>>
>>> 2. E-Business Vocabularies as a Moving Target: Quantifying the Conceptual
>>> Dynamics in Domains, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on
>>> Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW2008), September 29 -
>>> October 3, 2008 (forthcoming), Acitrezza, Italy, Springer LNCS, Vol.
>>> 5268,
>>> pp. 388-403.
>>> PDF:
>>> http://www.heppnetz.de/files/ConceptualDynamics-EKAW2008-CRC-final6.pdf
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> President&  CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2010 13:49:38 UTC