- From: Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 17:22:50 -0600
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi Juan, On 2/28/2016 5:08 PM, Juan Sequeda wrote: > talk about a blast from the past!!! > > RDF is a graph data model. > RDFS,OWL,SKOS are schema, ontology, taxonomy languages > SPARQL is a graph query language. I like your shorthand. Mike > > That's all I care about. That is all I talk about (if I even have to > talk about this detail). > > Got to keep it simple. > > > > -- > Juan Sequeda, Ph.D > +1-575-SEQ-UEDA > www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com> > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Natanael Arndt <arndtn@gmail.com > <mailto:arndtn@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Dear Juan, > did you find any answer to to this question? > > And is the 2007/03 Version still the current Layer Cake? > > Thank you > Natanael > > On 30 Jul 2007, at 11:42, Juan Sequeda wrote: > > > > Is there a specific document that explains the layer cake? > > > > On 7/30/07, Kathryn Blackmond Laskey <klaskey@gmu.edu > <mailto:klaskey@gmu.edu>> wrote: > > > > > > None of the pieces "go through" any other pieces. However, "proof" > > > does border on "unifying logic" as it wraps around to "rule", which > > > (I am guessing) might mean that unifying logic does have an > influence > > > in how rules and proofs "play together". (My naive guess would be > > > that rules are used in proofs, but I don't know that.) A bigger > > > concern is that "proof" doesn't even touch "ontology." That seems > > > strange to me. Also, "Query" doesn't touch "Rule." > > > > > > Absent any explanation of the diagram, though, I have no idea what > > > any of this actually means. > > > > > > Kathy > > > > > > At 11:13 AM -0500 7/30/07, Pat Hayes wrote: > > > > >Content-Type: multipart/signed; > > > protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; > > > >> micalg=sha1; > boundary="------------ms050805050601010506060202" > > > >> > > > >>Graphically, this is _almost_ equivalent to what is the most > up-to-date > > > >>for now: > > > >> > > > > >http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake.png > > > > > > > >Hmm, I wonder why the 'Proof' Tetris piece has a > > > >connection to Rule without going through Unifying > > > >Logic. That seems like a very bad decision to me > > > >:-) > > > > > > > >Pat > > > > > > > >> > > > >>which also have an SVG version: > > > >> > > > >>http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake.svg > > > >> > > > >>and a smaller png dump > > > >> > > > >>http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake-small.png > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>Ivan > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>Story Henry wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> No this is the latest > > > >>> > http://www.w3.org/2007/Talks/0130-sb-W3CTechSemWeb/layerCake-4.png > > > >>> > > > >>> The applications at the top are really important. It is they > > > >>>that will help > > > >>> create tension for the convergence of vocabularies. > > > >>> > > > >>> Henry > > > >>> > > > >>> On 27 Jul 2007, at 23:03, Juan Sequeda wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hi all > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I would like to know where I can find the current up-to-date > > > Semantic > > > >>>> Web layer cake. It seems that [1] is the most used, but > is that the > > > >>>> recent one? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Thanks! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/09/06-ecdl/slide17-0.html > > > >>>> > >
Received on Sunday, 28 February 2016 23:23:26 UTC