RE: Listing vocabularies RE: Some questions

Frank wrote:
> On the other hand, your original response *did* say "all known 
> vocabularies (give or take a few)", which is a pretty 
> substantial claim 
> when you think about it.

Due to budget restrictions, Dr Ont's programmer Derek has to double as
SchemaWeb marketing manager. He is unfortunately, like many developers,
prone to exaggeration.

> I'd note that SchemaWeb doesn't seem to 
> mention several 
> RDF vocabularies discussed in the RDF Primer (CC/PP being one 
> of them)

Please feel free to submit any schemas whether you are an author, user
or just an interested party using the online form or email. And if any
kindly souls who have the time would like help out in maintaining and
managing the directory, please get in touch for a password to the admin.
Bear in mind however that until that $100,000 W3C grant arrives, free
blogspace on SchemaWeb Bloggers would be the only reward ;-).

> BTW:  Do your criteria for inclusion require 
> that the 
> schema be physically located in your repository, or can it be located 
> elsewhere?

SchemaWeb only offers schema information about publicly available
ontologies and schemas published on the internet. It spiders and caches
local copies of schemas to provide value added services such as the
classes and properties HTML view, the triples (in an XML format) and the
n-triples. It also uses the local cache for the SchemaWeb triples store.
This database is an RDF graph of all schemas that SchemaWeb knows of and
can be queried by software agents (and humans) for information ranging
for example from finding explicitly declared subclasses of a given
OWL/RDFS class to getting the label of an unknown term.

SchemaWeb always acknowledges the primacy of the master version of a
schema, published and controlled by the schema owners. Datestamps for
local versions are clearly marked in the HTML pages and available in
machine readable form (along with all schema meta).

Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 15:08:35 UTC