W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2018

Re: Open Data Stack Exchange beta Was: renamed to Web Data Was: new semantic web stackexchange proposal opened

From: Tim rdf <timrdf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2018 07:08:23 -0500
Message-Id: <B3B3872D-0F41-4134-86E0-B92FF8BB9608@gmail.com>
Cc: Christian Chiarcos <christian.chiarcos@web.de>, David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, SW-forum <semantic-web@w3.org>
To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
+1 to adopting the Open Data stack as opposed to starting a new one.
“Open” is the first of TBL’s five stars, and after that it’s just a choice of technology for publishing/accessing/handling it.


> On Dec 9, 2018, at 6:36 AM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
> 
> It looks like there is Open Data Stack Exchange proposal that is already in Beta,
> 
>    https://opendata.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic <https://opendata.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic>
> 
> as pointed out by the Stack Exchange question:
> 
>    https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/28389/what-gap-is-the-web-data-proposal-filling-given-we-already-have-opendata <https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/28389/what-gap-is-the-web-data-proposal-filling-given-we-already-have-opendata>
> 
> It may be that is what we are looking for. 
> 
> Perhaps one could get them to extend their notion from Open Data to Web Data so that one
> can also discuss access control issues and protected data, that is privacy sensitive (which would
> still require open ontologies).
> 
> Starting a new stack exchange space requires a very big community to get together to be useful,
> so one needs to combine forces as much as possible.
> 
> 
>> On 8 Dec 2018, at 17:16, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 8 Dec 2018, at 16:32, Christian Chiarcos <christian.chiarcos@web.de <mailto:christian.chiarcos@web.de>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> very nice initiative, and I appreciate renaming it to web data. Just added by 5 questions, too. 
>>> BTW: What we should probably do (to increase the number of relevant questions) is to identify StackExchange questions that actually belong here. There are plenty of them, in webmasters, open-data, gis, softwareengineering, etc., just search for RDF, etc. ;)
>> 
>> Good idea. I have asked my 5 questions and voted 4 times (I have one vote left).
>> 
>> Here are the links to questions with those tags:
>> 
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=rdf <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=rdf>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=json <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=json>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=json-ld <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=json-ld>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=sparql <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=sparql>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=xml <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=xml>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=owl <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=owl>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=semantic-web <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=semantic-web>
>>    https://stackexchange.com/search?q=linked-data <https://stackexchange.com/search?q=linked-data>
>> 
>> It's actually a reasonable question whether a new repository is a good idea given the number
>> of questions there. It could actually indicate also that they would gain by having one repository with communities based on linked data that allow questions to be link across communities.
>> 
>> I suppose 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> Christian
>>> 
>>> Am Sa., 8. Dez. 2018 um 14:44 Uhr schrieb Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>>:
>>> I have renamed the proposal to Web Data, as a stack exchange site needs to be as wide as possible
>>> to get people from all areas to contribute expertise. After all it is the questions there that select
>>> the experts, and experts don't want to follow too many different sites.
>>> 
>>> I can only post 5 questions myself.  One needs 40 or more voted up by 10 for this to start.
>>> So if you can think of practical questions (including in XML and JSON) that you have
>>> had please post them there.
>>> 
>>> My guess is that it will be a great place for students to come to.
>>> 
>>> Henry
>>> 
>>> PS. There could be a question as to how it would help stack exchange if it used linked data.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > On 8 Dec 2018, at 10:22, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>> wrote:
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> >> On 8 Dec 2018, at 00:33, David Booth <david@dbooth.org <mailto:david@dbooth.org>> wrote:
>>> >> 
>>> >> On 12/7/18 10:18 AM, Henry Story wrote:
>>> >>> Perhaps the trick for more pragmatic answers would be to open
>>> >>>   {rdf/semweb}.stackexchange.com <http://stackexchange.com/> <http://stackexchange.com <http://stackexchange.com/>>
>>> >> 
>>> >> Good idea!  I think rdf.stackexchange.com <http://rdf.stackexchange.com/> would be best.  Will you take the lead on getting this set up?
>>> > 
>>> > I have started a proposal for a new stack exchange group
>>> > 
>>> > https://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/120833/semantic-web?referrer=8LVIlli-Jxo2REi_fi0Evw2 <https://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/120833/semantic-web?referrer=8LVIlli-Jxo2REi_fi0Evw2>
>>> > 
>>> > I have called it "Semantic Web" for the moment because in order to get a good range of experts one needs
>>> > to cast a very wide net (eg: maths.stackexchange.com <http://maths.stackexchange.com/>). RDF itself could lean people to think we are just 
>>> > dealing with a serialization format, where we want to incorporate SPARQL, reasoning, linked data publication,
>>> > OWL, libraries,  algorithms for efficiently manipulating rdf, publishing data on the web, developing ontologies, etc...
>>> > We have a wide range of experts that publish in journals, and teach students at universities under 
>>> > the semantic web heading who can help.
>>> > 
>>> > To become public we need to gather a large enough community of experts to participate, and
>>> > we need 50 interesting questions.
>>> > 
>>> > See the rules here:
>>> > 
>>> >  https://area51.stackexchange.com/faq <https://area51.stackexchange.com/faq>
>>> > 
>>> > "the goal is to come up with at least 40 questions that embody the topic's scope. When at least 40 questions have a score of at least ten net votes (up minus down), then the proposal is considered "defined.""
>>> > 
>>> > So it's really up to people here. 
>>> > 
>>> > I think a semantic web stack exchange makes sense, as the semantic web is too practical for
>>> > maths.stackexchange.com <http://maths.stackexchange.com/> and too far away from many in computer science which has both 
>>> > {cs,cstheory}.stackexchange.com <http://stackexchange.com/>. 
>>> > 
>>> > But we'll see. If we get enough people from this list, we can then spread the word through academia
>>> > and industry.
>>> > 
>>> > This mailing list could then refer to answers developed there, and as a a fallback for questions that
>>> > are difficult to ask. StackExchange tends to push people to be very clear with their questions, when 
>>> > it is sometimes that is not so easy to do.
>>> > 
>>> > Perhaps Web Data would be a more generic term even...
>>> > 
>>> > Henry Story
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> >> 
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> David Booth
>>> >> 
>>> > 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 


Received on Sunday, 9 December 2018 12:08:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:57 UTC