W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2016

Re: Ideas for a possible framework

From: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2016 14:15:34 +0200
Message-ID: <CAE35VmycEsxX9=kk=ivFGZPQmsdTVGm1qHK_6sxf8VC7sDaM6g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>, public-model@w3.org, pragmaticweb@lists.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de, public-declarative-apps@w3.org, public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
Sebastian,

I've said this before and I'll say it again: why do you need to build
a (meta)model above RDF? Kind, SubjectKind, Dimension etc. -- why is
all this stuff necessary?

Do not attempt to extend RDF, and drop the UML/object-oriented models.
Instead, work *within* RDF: use triples to store data, and use OWL
ontologies, classes, properties, datatypes etc. to model your domain.

Those are the only things you need. Show us your ontologies, then you
will get better responses. You can try some of these ontology editors:
http://protege.stanford.edu/
http://www.cognitum.eu/semantics/FluentEditor/
http://www.topquadrant.com/tools/modeling-topbraid-composer-standard-edition/


Martynas

On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com> wrote:
> (Apologies for cross posting / over posting)
>
> Hi, I'm currently a software student and developer. Since I've meet semantic
> related technologies development about twelve years ago I've been revolving
> with the idea that a framework could be built that could ease building
> semantic business applications as they are frameworks for Java and
> relational databases.
>
> A lot of time passed. Now many big players offer solutions that somehow rely
> on semantics for their work. And although this could seem strange, here in
> Buenos Aires I couldn't find anyone really interested in the area, being in
> academia or places I've worked in.
>
> So, having no one to share my thoughts with, I'm frequently publishing
> documents to this list(s) hoping for some kind of peer's feedback. Sorry if
> this aren't the right lists or I'm off topic. I send my attachment as a PDF
> document. Anyone willing to comment in the original just ask me for the
> Google Docs link.
>
> Note: I've sent this draft before but in a very early version state. I
> invite anyone interested in reading to see the last section (Dashboards).
> Maybe I'm wrong but I think there is a lot of innovation that may be done
> regarding that subject (sorry for the poor diagrams :--)
>
> Best Regards,
> Sebastián Samaruga.
Received on Saturday, 1 October 2016 12:16:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 1 October 2016 12:16:07 UTC