Comments for Ivan’s private site

Comment on Experiences of LOD publication by danbri

danbri — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 13:00:30 +0000

“Best practices are seen as rules.”, … yes I’ve seen this happen more than a few times. Enthusiastic experts can easily make cautious adopters feel really dumb, or draw them into one of our tedious perma-threads around hash, slash and 303s…

Comment on SemTech2010 & co. by Ivan Herman

Ivan Herman — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 07:36:31 +0000

It was the Open Ontology Repository Initiative. The slides are on line.

Comment on SemTech2010 & co. by martijn van der plaat

martijn van der plaat — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:12:03 +0000

Hi ivan,

Intersting to read your impression of semtech2010. Can you tell me more about the ontology hosting and management. In the form of project website/article/ etc?

Greets,
Martijn

Comment on SemTech2010 & co. by Stephane Croisier

Stephane Croisier — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:58:54 +0000

Just a comment on oData and RDF. I never really understood the goal of oData vs the new OASIS CMIS 1.0 standard. BTW: CMIS 2.0 will perhaps include some improved support for semantic and data model (http://wordofpie.com/2010/06/15/cmis-2-0-the-next-generation/). Perhaps the start of merging traditional CMS and Semantic Web technologies. Take a look at the UE-funded IKS project (http://www.iks-project.eu/) as they are also working on the same topic aka semantization of existing CMS.

Cheers,
Stephane

Comment on RDFa API draft by Jacek

Jacek — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 16:16:03 +0000

A longer discussion indeed. I wish I could be there when it happens…

Comment on RDFa API draft by Ivan Herman

Ivan Herman — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 13:19:05 +0000

Ah, I understand. The current structure certainly allows for a generic GRDDL parser and it is indeed a good idea to make that explicit in the documentation. Whether it should be a requirement… that is a longer discussion…

Comment on RDFa API draft by Jacek

Jacek — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:43:29 +0000

Ah, I suspected I was being cryptic. In plain words, just like there could be an hCard parser, there could also be a generic GRDDL parser (which could, for some pages with the right headers, replace vocabulary-specific extra parsers). In fact, it could even accompany the RDFa parser for default processing (required or recommended for conformance) so the triple store would immediately contain triples “gleaned” through GRDDL.

Hope I’m making more sense now…

Comment on RDFa API draft by Ivan Herman

Ivan Herman — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 04:17:32 +0000

Jacek, to be honest, I do not understand your question…

Comment on RDFa API draft by Jacek

Jacek — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 21:28:03 +0000

Did someone say document.data.createParser(“GRDDL”,store).parse()?
Can that be at least a SHOULD for conformance, please?

Comment on Self-documenting vocabularies using RDFa by woddiscovery

woddiscovery — Fri, 28 May 2010 18:56:10 +0000

Very good! That would be one more then for the list of vocabs [1] we listed in our ISWC2008 RDFa tutorial

Cheers,
Michael

[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/Talks/1026-ISCW-RDFa/RDFa-ISWC08.html#%2871%29