Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hi, On 14.03.2011 22:42, Richard Cyganiak wrote: Bob, On 14 Mar 2011, at 10:47, Bob Ferris wrote: Am 14.03.2011 11:13, schrieb Richard Cyganiak: The abandoned PhD project type of ontology or vocabulary has no community around it. Therefore, one gains very little by re-using it. ... I can only repeat myself: PhD-project-born ontologies have not to be bad per se, or? Banning them a priori is a rather prejudiced approach in my mind. How did you get from “One gains very little from re-using an abandoned PhD project ontology” to “Ontologies created in PhD projects should be banned”? Yes, sorry, maybe my interpretation was a bit harsh. However, please keep in mind: We notice that most ontologies and Web vocabularies, especially the most popular ones, are developed by academic researchers (FOAF, SIOC, Good Relations, Music Ontology, etc.) (cited from [1]) I guess, there are still some lurking jewels or rough diamonds out there. So, we have to keep or eyes and ears open, or? Cheers, Bob [1] Zimmermann, Antoine; Ontology Recommendation for the Data Publishers; ORES-2010; 2010; http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-596/paper-12.pdf
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
A huge +1! In my practical experience, Falcons is by far the best tool for finding suitable terms from existing ontologies. I hope the other tools will take note and stimulate some further competition in this area ;) Tom. On 14 March 2011 10:55, Iker Huerga iker.hue...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, These are the tools that I personally use when publishing Linked Data, both for ontologies reusing [1] and concepts identification [2] In my honest opinion are the best tools I could find for those purposes Best Regards [1] http://ws.nju.edu.cn/falcons/ontologysearch/index.jsp?query= [2] http://ws.nju.edu.cn/falcons/conceptsearch/index.jsp 2011/3/13 Dieter Fensel dieter.fen...@sti2.at Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872 -- Iker Huerga http://www.linkatu.net -- Dr Tom Heath Lead Researcher Talis Systems Ltd T: 0870 400 5000 W: http://www.talis.com/ W: http://tomheath.com/id/me
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Ranking ontologies is indeed very personal, so is ranking of laptops, bicycles and books. But people rank them all the time. My first port of call is always Amazon. Might it work to have similar ratings for ontologies and vocabularies? The home for this could be OOR. Michael On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:15 AM, Bob Ferris z...@elbklang.net wrote: Hello everybody, Am 14.03.2011 09:28, schrieb Martin Hepp: Hi Dieter: There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations: 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data. I think, we discussed this issue already sometime ago. A conclusion (at least for me) was that it is quite difficult to achieve such a ranking quite objective over a very broad range of ontologies that are available. It depends often on the complexity of the knowledge representation (level of detail) a developer likes to achieve. This is the advantage of the Semantic Web. There wouldn't never be an ontology for a specific domain that rules all use case in it well. 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that - has a broad coverage, - includes the top 25 linked data ontologies and I think, people are looking for an ontology that fit their purpose, i.e., popularity is good, however, it is in that case only a secondary metric*. A developer is primarily looking for an appropriate ontology. Not till then he/she can investigate further efforts into a comparison of available ones, if there are more than one appropriate ontology available. - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes. I don't want to take a concrete position here, however, every ontology development has somewhere its starting point and is there usually not so popular. Nevertheless, the ontology design can be a good one, too. For that reason, why should be abandon these approach and brand them as evil? I think, we should really investigate more power in enhancements of, e.g., Schemapedia. This approach seems to be a quite good one (at least from my personal experience). On the other side, something like ontology marketing/advertisement plays another important role. There are often quite good jewels out there that are badly discoverable. Cheers, Bob *) I guess, the biology community wouldn't be quite satisfied when looking at the proposed ontology charts, or? -- Michael Uschold, PhD Senior Ontology Consultant, Semantic Arts LinkedIn: http://tr.im/limfu Skype, Twitter: UscholdM
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Dieter, Thank you for raising this issue. I discovered the same problem a couple years ago, lots of data, no ontologies. Christopher has a good idea that is not hard to make good progress on. In my work with linked data, in 08-09, I needed ontologies. So I wrote a simple automated ontology-extractor. I don't remember the details, but the basic idea was: 1. create an object property or datatype property for every predicate in some triple 2. track all the individuals that are used in the subject or object of the triples, this is a starting point for domains and ranges 3. when individuals are used that are known already (e..g a person in WIkipedia), classes can be extracted, and this can further information on domains and ranges. etc. I'm sure others have done this kind of thing, and are much more sophisticated about it. I did it on a dataset to dataset basis and did not try to use it on multiple datasets, but it is quite doable. Michael On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Christopher Gutteridge c...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: That gives me quite an interesting idea.. you could do some studies with queries to find what predicates were used to link common classes, e.g. link people to documents, to places, to other people... Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 3/13/11 12:15 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter Dieter, Do you mean: I would a place where I can search for vocabularies and assess their usage across LOD datasets? Goal being reuse of existing terms re. new datasets coming into the burgeoning LOD cloud? If the above is true, the you can do the following: 1. Goto http://lod.openlinksw.com -- the live 15 Billion+ triples LOD Cloud Cache we maintain 2. Enter a text pattern (with Class, Property, or Vocabulary discovery in mind) 3. On receipt of the initial results page, use the Links in the Navigation section to filter by Type or other Attributes (so you are looking for Entities of type: Ontology or Class or Property 4. Once you find one of the Entity Types above, click on the describe link 5. At this point navigation should be obvious i.e. you can use isDefinedby to find the Ontology associated with Classes and Properties or use the inverse relations to find the Class and Properties defined by an Ontology. Hope this helps. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen -- Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248 You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/ -- Michael Uschold, PhD Senior Ontology Consultant, Semantic Arts LinkedIn: http://tr.im/limfu Skype, Twitter: UscholdM
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Here is something along that lines: http://richard.cyganiak.de/blog/2011/02/top-100-most-popular-rdf-namespace-prefixes/ On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Christopher Gutteridge c...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: That gives me quite an interesting idea.. you could do some studies with queries to find what predicates were used to link common classes, e.g. link people to documents, to places, to other people... Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 3/13/11 12:15 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter Dieter, Do you mean: I would a place where I can search for vocabularies and assess their usage across LOD datasets? Goal being reuse of existing terms re. new datasets coming into the burgeoning LOD cloud? If the above is true, the you can do the following: 1. Goto http://lod.openlinksw.com -- the live 15 Billion+ triples LOD Cloud Cache we maintain 2. Enter a text pattern (with Class, Property, or Vocabulary discovery in mind) 3. On receipt of the initial results page, use the Links in the Navigation section to filter by Type or other Attributes (so you are looking for Entities of type: Ontology or Class or Property 4. Once you find one of the Entity Types above, click on the describe link 5. At this point navigation should be obvious i.e. you can use isDefinedby to find the Ontology associated with Classes and Properties or use the inverse relations to find the Class and Properties defined by an Ontology. Hope this helps. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen -- Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248 You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hi Keith, On 14/03/11 13:18, Keith Alexander wrote: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Martin Hepp martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote: Hi Dieter: There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations: 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data. Schemacache[1] used to order results by the number of documents Sindice found it it, but this wasn't terribly effective; what we want is something more like number of individual publishers using term X rather than number of individual documents using term X. The new Sindice search frontend provides a first solution towards this problematic. Sindice allows you to group search results per domain. See [1,2] as examples. It is not yet perfect, nor optimal, but this is a first try, and this might be useful for your scenario. We are currently focussing our effort in Sindice towards what we call dataset search. The dataset/domain grouping is a first step towards this big picture. We will add additional features in the future, like a more detailled summary of the datasets, e.g., its inter-relations with other datasets. [1] http://sindice.com/search?q=foaf%3Apersonnq=fq=facet.field=domain [2] http://sindice.com/search?q=owl%3Asameasnq=fq=facet.field=domain -- Renaud Delbru
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/15/11 12:00 PM, Renaud Delbru wrote: Hi Keith, On 14/03/11 13:18, Keith Alexander wrote: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Martin Hepp martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote: Hi Dieter: There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations: 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data. Schemacache[1] used to order results by the number of documents Sindice found it it, but this wasn't terribly effective; what we want is something more like number of individual publishers using term X rather than number of individual documents using term X. The new Sindice search frontend provides a first solution towards this problematic. Sindice allows you to group search results per domain. See [1,2] as examples. It is not yet perfect, nor optimal, but this is a first try, and this might be useful for your scenario. We are currently focussing our effort in Sindice towards what we call dataset search. The dataset/domain grouping is a first step towards this big picture. We will add additional features in the future, like a more detailled summary of the datasets, e.g., its inter-relations with other datasets. [1] http://sindice.com/search?q=foaf%3Apersonnq=fq=facet.field=domain [2] http://sindice.com/search?q=owl%3Asameasnq=fq=facet.field=domain All, No golden answer (I sure someone's already made this comment). All you can do is offer access to a data space that let's the user Find what they seek via disambiguation oriented filters. Examples: 1. http://uriburner.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=loadfsq_id=81 -- Pattern: Person that may or may not be associated with a Class or Property 2. http://uriburner.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=loadfsq_id=82 -- Pattern: Person associated with a Class (explicitly) 3. http://uriburner.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=loadfsq_id=83 -- Pattern: Person associated with a Transitive Property. In all cases above, when happy click on Entity1 or EntityN (too see and access descriptions of matching entities) depending on where you're at in your quest. Of course, you can switch uriburner.com for lod.openlinksw.com and do the same thing against an even larger data set etc.. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hello Dieter! Once I asked a similar question here, maybe the answers can help you as well [1] [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Oct/0305.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Oct/0305.htmlYury On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Dieter Fensel dieter.fen...@sti2.atwrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872 -- Yury V. Katkov Laboratory of intelligent systems of the Saint-Petersburg National University of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics, Russia http://ailab.ifmo.ru
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hello everybody, Am 14.03.2011 09:28, schrieb Martin Hepp: Hi Dieter: There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations: 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data. I think, we discussed this issue already sometime ago. A conclusion (at least for me) was that it is quite difficult to achieve such a ranking quite objective over a very broad range of ontologies that are available. It depends often on the complexity of the knowledge representation (level of detail) a developer likes to achieve. This is the advantage of the Semantic Web. There wouldn't never be an ontology for a specific domain that rules all use case in it well. 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that - has a broad coverage, - includes the top 25 linked data ontologies and I think, people are looking for an ontology that fit their purpose, i.e., popularity is good, however, it is in that case only a secondary metric*. A developer is primarily looking for an appropriate ontology. Not till then he/she can investigate further efforts into a comparison of available ones, if there are more than one appropriate ontology available. - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes. I don't want to take a concrete position here, however, every ontology development has somewhere its starting point and is there usually not so popular. Nevertheless, the ontology design can be a good one, too. For that reason, why should be abandon these approach and brand them as evil? I think, we should really investigate more power in enhancements of, e.g., Schemapedia. This approach seems to be a quite good one (at least from my personal experience). On the other side, something like ontology marketing/advertisement plays another important role. There are often quite good jewels out there that are badly discoverable. Cheers, Bob *) I guess, the biology community wouldn't be quite satisfied when looking at the proposed ontology charts, or?
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
At 00:04 14.03.2011, Bob Ferris wrote: Hello again, an issue that is strongly related to the raised concern is ontology marketing: Yes, we all can learn from Martin on this. -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 14 Mar 2011, at 09:15, Bob Ferris wrote: 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes. I don't want to take a concrete position here, however, every ontology development has somewhere its starting point and is there usually not so popular. Nevertheless, the ontology design can be a good one, too. For that reason, why should be abandon these approach and brand them as evil? The point in re-using a vocabulary or ontology is this: one joins a community of data publishers and re-users who have agreed on certain shared terms for shared concepts. The abandoned PhD project type of ontology or vocabulary has no community around it. Therefore, one gains very little by re-using it. This is why it's so important to involve multiple stakeholders from the start, and get feedback from real data owners and data users along the development process. That's the first and perhaps most important step in the process that you called “ontology marketing” elsewhere in this thread. I touched upon these issues in a recent blog post: http://richard.cyganiak.de/blog/2011/03/creating-an-rdf-vocabulary/ Best, Richard
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Am 14.03.2011 11:13, schrieb Richard Cyganiak: On 14 Mar 2011, at 09:15, Bob Ferris wrote: 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes. I don't want to take a concrete position here, however, every ontology development has somewhere its starting point and is there usually not so popular. Nevertheless, the ontology design can be a good one, too. For that reason, why should be abandon these approach and brand them as evil? The point in re-using a vocabulary or ontology is this: one joins a community of data publishers and re-users who have agreed on certain shared terms for shared concepts. The abandoned PhD project type of ontology or vocabulary has no community around it. Therefore, one gains very little by re-using it. This is why it's so important to involve multiple stakeholders from the start, and get feedback from real data owners and data users along the development process. That's the first and perhaps most important step in the process that you called “ontology marketing” elsewhere in this thread. Yes, you are absolutely right. However, not every ontology designer has the power or reputation to get valuable stakeholders on board (I think, I made my personal experience in that area* ;) ). So, I can only repeat myself: PhD-project-born ontologies have not to be bad per se, or? Banning them a priori is a rather prejudiced approach in my mind. When I have to choose an ontology, I try to initially review all available** ontologies independent whether they have their origin in a PhD project or design by a big industry consortium. Bad design decisions can be made everywhere - in the small-grouped PhD project or that one with a huge industry community behind. I think every ontology has the chance to get somehow famous, or? The ontology with huge stakeholder community in the background is damned to get popular and the little-sized-project-born ontology has the freedom to get accepted somewhere and somehow. Regarding ontology marking, I especially try to address the following issues: - the ontology shall be discoverable, even by fuzzy requests (that is why, the tagging approach that is followed by Schemapedia is a quite good one) and by general purpose search engines alá Google - the ontology specification shall be provided in as much as possible and appropriated serialization formats, e.g., RDF/N3, XHTML+RDFa, RDF/JSON, RDF/XML - the ontology shall be published with a good (interlinked) documentation, incl. illustrating examples, graphics of its structure, related ontologies, etc. (ideally everything at least available in XHTML+RDFa) - the ontology shall be evolvable by a community, incl. issue trackers, mailing lists, etc. Cheers, Bob *) No feedback is also a kind of feedback **) every ontology I can find that might be somehow appropriated to fulfil my addressed purpose somehow
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hi all, These are the tools that I personally use when publishing Linked Data, both for ontologies reusing [1] and concepts identification [2] In my honest opinion are the best tools I could find for those purposes Best Regards [1] http://ws.nju.edu.cn/falcons/ontologysearch/index.jsp?query= [2] http://ws.nju.edu.cn/falcons/conceptsearch/index.jsp 2011/3/13 Dieter Fensel dieter.fen...@sti2.at Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872 -- Iker Huerga http://www.linkatu.net
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Martin Hepp martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote: Hi Dieter: There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations: 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data. Schemacache[1] used to order results by the number of documents Sindice found it it, but this wasn't terribly effective; what we want is something more like number of individual publishers using term X rather than number of individual documents using term X. I could work this out without too much difficulty from the VoID descriptions published by CKAN[2] if more dataset descriptions listed void:exampleResources (around half of them don't), and if more VoID dataset descriptions specified the dct:publisher and dct:creator of the dataset, this would also be useful. 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that - has a broad coverage, - includes the top 25 linked data ontologies and - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes. The most useful tool for your purpose is likely http://prefix.cc/popular/all Schemacache used to be rather polluted with abandoned and toy ontologies, but in November last year I started afresh with only the namespaces registered on http://prefix.cc The search results are now much more likely to be useful, though there is still the odd bit of junk in there, and there is certainly room for improvement. [1] http://schemacache.com [2] http://semantic.ckan.net/sparql
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Keith, Could you please add a few words about SchemaCache on this wiki page: http://www.w3.org/wiki/Ontology_Dowsing#Repositories Thanks and regards, AZ. Le 14/03/2011 14:18, Keith Alexander a écrit : On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Martin Hepp martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote: Hi Dieter: There are several ontology repositories available on-line, but to my knowledge they all suffer from two serious limitations: 1. They do not rate ontologies by quality/relevance/popularity, so you do not get any hint whether foaf:Organization or foo:Organization will be the best way to expose your data. Schemacache[1] used to order results by the number of documents Sindice found it it, but this wasn't terribly effective; what we want is something more like number of individual publishers using term X rather than number of individual documents using term X. I could work this out without too much difficulty from the VoID descriptions published by CKAN[2] if more dataset descriptions listed void:exampleResources (around half of them don't), and if more VoID dataset descriptions specified the dct:publisher and dct:creator of the dataset, this would also be useful. 2. The selection of ontologies listed is, to say the best, often biased or partly a random choice. I do not know any repository that - has a broad coverage, - includes the top 25 linked data ontologies and - lists more non-toy ontologies than abandoned PhD project prototypes. The most useful tool for your purpose is likely http://prefix.cc/popular/all Schemacache used to be rather polluted with abandoned and toy ontologies, but in November last year I started afresh with only the namespaces registered on http://prefix.cc The search results are now much more likely to be useful, though there is still the odd bit of junk in there, and there is certainly room for improvement. [1] http://schemacache.com [2] http://semantic.ckan.net/sparql -- Antoine Zimmermann Researcher at: Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information Database Group 7 Avenue Jean Capelle 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France Lecturer at: Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon 20 Avenue Albert Einstein 69621 Villeurbanne Cedex France antoine.zimmerm...@insa-lyon.fr http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
I really like: http://www.bioontology.org/bioportal . Are there any RDF dumps or a SPARQL endpoint? If I have a URL for either I can get this data into our LOD cloud cache instance which will also help with discoverability etc.. We have a prototype SPARQL end point at http://sparql.bioontology.org/ It gives you access to most ontologies in BioPortal. Details on the RDF that we generate and other related information is at: http://www.bioontology.org/wiki/index.php/RDF_in_BioPortal To answer a couple of other points on the thread: BioPortal does allow users to rate and comment on ontologies (on the assumption that one size doesn't fit all). And we do list the most used ontologies (basically most accessed/downloaded). Caveat: The repository contains only ontologies relevant to biomedicine. However, the software is completely domain-independent and others (such as OOR) have installed it as repositories for other domains or domain-independent repositories. Natasha
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/14/11 11:08 AM, Natasha Noy wrote:
We have a prototype SPARQL end point athttp://sparql.bioontology.org/
It gives you access to most ontologies in BioPortal.
Natasha,
Would you have a sample SPARQL query for getting at the ontology data?
I tried:
select distinct ?y where {?y a ?x} limit 10
No results.
Do I have to scope to a specific Name Graph etc?
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/14/11 11:08 AM, Natasha Noy wrote: We have a prototype SPARQL end point athttp://sparql.bioontology.org/ It gives you access to most ontologies in BioPortal. Details on the RDF that we generate and other related information is at: http://www.bioontology.org/wiki/index.php/RDF_in_BioPortal Ignore last comment. I'm reading the Wiki now re. examples :-) -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/14/11 12:41 PM, David Shotton wrote: Our Semantic Publishing and Referencing Ontologies (SPAR; http://purl.org/spar/) may be of tangential relevance. Do you have URLs for these ontologies where data format is one of: RDF/XML, N-Triples, Turtle, N3 etc? -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
The latest versions of some of them are: - CiTO: http://sempublishing.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/sempublishing/CiTO/2011-02-24-cito-2_0.owl - FaBiO: http://sempublishing.sourceforge.net/fabio/rdf I believe the authors will make these links available from the documentation pages very soon: - CiTO: http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/cito - FaBiO: http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/fabio Best Paolo On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.comwrote: On 3/14/11 12:41 PM, David Shotton wrote: Our Semantic Publishing and Referencing Ontologies (SPAR; http://purl.org/spar/) may be of tangential relevance. Do you have URLs for these ontologies where data format is one of: RDF/XML, N-Triples, Turtle, N3 etc? -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/14/11 2:10 PM, Paolo Ciccarese wrote: The latest versions of some of them are: - CiTO: http://sempublishing.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/sempublishing/CiTO/2011-02-24-cito-2_0.owl See: http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.org%2Fspar%2Fcito%2Fcites - FaBiO: http://sempublishing.sourceforge.net/fabio/rdf See: http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.org%2Fspar%2Ffabio%2FExpression In both cases, you can see that rdfs:isDefinedBy relations are missing, and as a result navigating the ontology is a little suboptimal due to an inability to pivot to the ontology itself and then view it holistically. Just add the missing triples, revisit the links above, and see the effect I describe :-) Kingsley I believe the authors will make these links available from the documentation pages very soon: - CiTO: http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/cito - FaBiO: http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/fabio Best Paolo On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 3/14/11 12:41 PM, David Shotton wrote: Our Semantic Publishing and Referencing Ontologies (SPAR; http://purl.org/spar/) may be of tangential relevance. Do you have URLs for these ontologies where data format is one of: RDF/XML, N-Triples, Turtle, N3 etc? -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web:http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Bob, On 14 Mar 2011, at 10:47, Bob Ferris wrote: Am 14.03.2011 11:13, schrieb Richard Cyganiak: The abandoned PhD project type of ontology or vocabulary has no community around it. Therefore, one gains very little by re-using it. ... I can only repeat myself: PhD-project-born ontologies have not to be bad per se, or? Banning them a priori is a rather prejudiced approach in my mind. How did you get from “One gains very little from re-using an abandoned PhD project ontology” to “Ontologies created in PhD projects should be banned”? Best, Richard When I have to choose an ontology, I try to initially review all available** ontologies independent whether they have their origin in a PhD project or design by a big industry consortium. Bad design decisions can be made everywhere - in the small-grouped PhD project or that one with a huge industry community behind. I think every ontology has the chance to get somehow famous, or? The ontology with huge stakeholder community in the background is damned to get popular and the little-sized-project-born ontology has the freedom to get accepted somewhere and somehow. Regarding ontology marking, I especially try to address the following issues: - the ontology shall be discoverable, even by fuzzy requests (that is why, the tagging approach that is followed by Schemapedia is a quite good one) and by general purpose search engines alá Google - the ontology specification shall be provided in as much as possible and appropriated serialization formats, e.g., RDF/N3, XHTML+RDFa, RDF/JSON, RDF/XML - the ontology shall be published with a good (interlinked) documentation, incl. illustrating examples, graphics of its structure, related ontologies, etc. (ideally everything at least available in XHTML+RDFa) - the ontology shall be evolvable by a community, incl. issue trackers, mailing lists, etc. Cheers, Bob *) No feedback is also a kind of feedback **) every ontology I can find that might be somehow appropriated to fulfil my addressed purpose somehow
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Dear Paolo and Kingsley, I believe the authors will make these links available from the documentation pages very soon: - CiTO: http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/cito - FaBiO: http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/cgi-bin/lode/req.py?req=http:/purl.org/spar/fabio As Paolo said, in the webpage obtained by accessing any of the SPAR ontologies via browser through their proper (P)URLs (http://purl.org/spar/fabio, http://purl.org/spar/cito, etc.) you can now find a new link under the definition term Other visualization called Ontology source. Clicking on it, you can obtain the source of the ontology directly within the browser. Obviously, by means of content negotiation, when you are using an ontology editor, such as Protégé and the NeOn Toolkit, you can directly use the common URLs (http://purl.org/spar/fabio, http://purl.org/spar/cito, etc.) to obtain the RDF/XML of these ontologies. Regards, S. Silvio Peroni, Ph.D. student Department of Computer Science University of Bologna, Bologna (Italy) +39 051 2094871 sper...@cs.unibo.it – http://palindrom.es/phd
data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
To the best of my knowledge there isnt anything that one could call modern, updated out there. something modern and credible would be actual data + social backed (votes, comments, etc) . . as said in the past we in Sindice we'd be delighted to provide the data part if anyone wanted to coordinate the rest. Something based on pure data analysis will be made available shortly anyway. Gio On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Dieter Fensel dieter.fen...@sti2.at wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hi Dieter, there are several threads on SemanticOverflow that are dealing with this topic, e.g., this one [1] Cheers, Bob [1] http://www.semanticoverflow.com/questions/1039/where-can-i-find-useful-ontologies Am 13.03.2011 17:15, schrieb Dieter Fensel: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/13/11 12:15 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter Dieter, Do you mean: I would a place where I can search for vocabularies and assess their usage across LOD datasets? Goal being reuse of existing terms re. new datasets coming into the burgeoning LOD cloud? If the above is true, the you can do the following: 1. Goto http://lod.openlinksw.com -- the live 15 Billion+ triples LOD Cloud Cache we maintain 2. Enter a text pattern (with Class, Property, or Vocabulary discovery in mind) 3. On receipt of the initial results page, use the Links in the Navigation section to filter by Type or other Attributes (so you are looking for Entities of type: Ontology or Class or Property 4. Once you find one of the Entity Types above, click on the describe link 5. At this point navigation should be obvious i.e. you can use isDefinedby to find the Ontology associated with Classes and Properties or use the inverse relations to find the Class and Properties defined by an Ontology. Hope this helps. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Please try http://schemapedia.com/ and see if it meets your needs. On 13 Mar 2011 16:23, Dieter Fensel dieter.fen...@sti2.at wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
That gives me quite an interesting idea.. you could do some studies with queries to find what predicates were used to link common classes, e.g. link people to documents, to places, to other people... Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 3/13/11 12:15 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter Dieter, Do you mean: I would a place where I can search for vocabularies and assess their usage across LOD datasets? Goal being reuse of existing terms re. new datasets coming into the burgeoning LOD cloud? If the above is true, the you can do the following: 1. Goto http://lod.openlinksw.com -- the live 15 Billion+ triples LOD Cloud Cache we maintain 2. Enter a text pattern (with Class, Property, or Vocabulary discovery in mind) 3. On receipt of the initial results page, use the Links in the Navigation section to filter by Type or other Attributes (so you are looking for Entities of type: Ontology or Class or Property 4. Once you find one of the Entity Types above, click on the describe link 5. At this point navigation should be obvious i.e. you can use isDefinedby to find the Ontology associated with Classes and Properties or use the inverse relations to find the Class and Properties defined by an Ontology. Hope this helps. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen -- Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248 You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Dear Kingsley, the context of my question is the following. The are of Ontologies had encountered a severe paradigm shift though LOD. In the old days you had plenty of design methodologies to develop Ontologies based on first principles from scratch (despite the fact that there was some verbal hand waving on reuse). Then Ontologies became populated by data. In the end it was always not really easy to explain what their difference was compared to a traditional data schema approach. Often it felt like in the tale of the The Emperor's New Clothes With LOD the data are suddenly the driving force. When published they are used to collect some ontological pieces here and there. It is obviously not a trivial task to select this pieces properly and it calls for new design guidelines to form these combined ontology snippets. What you propose is indeed somehow what I am looking for. However, your proposal is a bit procedural and not very much declarative and explicit. Probably I missed the fact that Yahoo failed but I still wonder, whether specific data repositories can be extracted, maintained, and made explicit. In this case, they would be data schema repositories. It would require some manual effort but it may not even be hard to figure out a business model for it around education and consultancy? Many greetings, Dieter At 18:47 13.03.2011, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 3/13/11 12:15 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter Dieter, Do you mean: I would a place where I can search for vocabularies and assess their usage across LOD datasets? Goal being reuse of existing terms re. new datasets coming into the burgeoning LOD cloud? If the above is true, the you can do the following: 1. Goto http://lod.openlinksw.comhttp://lod.openlinksw.com -- the live 15 Billion+ triples LOD Cloud Cache we maintain 2. Enter a text pattern (with Class, Property, or Vocabulary discovery in mind) 3. On receipt of the initial results page, use the Links in the Navigation section to filter by Type or other Attributes (so you are looking for Entities of type: Ontology or Class or Property 4. Once you find one of the Entity Types above, click on the describe link 5. At this point navigation should be obvious i.e. you can use isDefinedby to find the Ontology associated with Classes and Properties or use the inverse relations to find the Class and Properties defined by an Ontology. Hope this helps. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.comhttp://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehenhttp://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Hello again, an issue that is strongly related to the raised concern is ontology marketing: I think, personal advice is still the best one here. It's horrible to find appropriate ontologies month after intensive searches, because they are hidden well in our universal information space. I suggest to work on a guide for ontology marketing or something like that, because is crucial to establish more easily shared understanding. (quote from an comment to an answer on SemanticOverflow [1]) Cheers, Bob [1] http://www.semanticoverflow.com/questions/2623/ontology-to-use-for-querying/2630#2630
RE: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
Dieter, There are many vocabulary/ontology repository efforts currently, though not just for linked data. You might look at BioPortal, for the biomedical community: http://www.bioontology.org/bioportal. There is the Open Ontology Repository (OOR), which is still emerging: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository, and a number of other mostly early ontology repositories, most of which have briefed at the OOR sessions. Thanks, Leo -Original Message- From: semantic-web-requ...@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dieter Fensel Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 12:16 PM To: Linked Data community; semantic-web Subject: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/13/11 6:44 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear Kingsley, the context of my question is the following. The are of Ontologies had encountered a severe paradigm shift though LOD. In the old days you had plenty of design methodologies to develop Ontologies based on first principles from scratch (despite the fact that there was some verbal hand waving on reuse). Then Ontologies became populated by data. In the end it was always not really easy to explain what their difference was compared to a traditional data schema approach. Often it felt like in the tale of the The Emperor's New Clothes Yes. The problem (as I've experienced it) is that people weren't able to read ontologies due to a dearth of tools. Imagine this sequence: 1. Someone announces a new ontology for a discourse realm 2. Postulates about its virtues. Problem (back in the day) is that you had raw RDF/XML (or some other format) and no instance data on the ABox side. With LOD the data are suddenly the driving force. When published they are used to collect some ontological pieces here and there. It is obviously not a trivial task to select this pieces properly and it calls for new design guidelines to form these combined ontology snippets. What you propose is indeed somehow what I am looking for. However, your proposal is a bit procedural and not very much declarative and explicit. Hmm.. I listed some steps instead of saying: 1. Go to the query UI and use it to perform faceted navigation over the URIBurner or LOD data spaces 2. Go to the SPARQL endpoint and perform a SPARQL query. You don't get more declarative than #2 :-) Probably I missed the fact that Yahoo failed but I still wonder, whether specific data repositories can be extracted, maintained, and made explicit. In this case, they would be data schema repositories. It would require some manual effort but it may not even be hard to figure out a business model for it around education and consultancy? Once folks are able to stumble across an ontology, read it, and even explore across the TBox and ABox dimensions, life gets much easier. Training gets much easier, uptake gets much easier, and most of all: value proposition articulation becomes easier on the part of the pitcher and fun on the part of the pitch recipient (current and future customers). Links: 1. http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=loadfsq_id=79 -- saved Ontology search with a list of Ontology URIs 2. http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/fct/facet.vsp?cmd=loadfsq_id=80 -- ditto with results filtered by Attributes 3. http://uriburner.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpurl.org%2Fgoodrelations%2Fv1p=12003lp=12002op=12001prev=gp=12003 -- GoodRelations with effect of TBox and ABox navigation re. follow-your-nose pattern 4. http://uriburner.com/PivotViewer/?url=http%3A%2F%2Furiburner.com%2Fc%2FDPXHL6%23%2524facet0%2524%3DreliesOn%26%2524view%2524%3D2 - VOAF 5. http://uriburner.com/PivotViewer/edit.vsp?url=http%3A%2F%2Furiburner.com%2Fc%2FDPXHL6%23%2524facet0%2524%3DreliesOn%26%2524view%2524%3D2%26%24tab%24%3D0%26%24zoom%24%3D2 - SPARQL Query behind the PivotViewer page . Kingsley Many greetings, Dieter At 18:47 13.03.2011, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 3/13/11 12:15 PM, Dieter Fensel wrote: Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter Dieter, Do you mean: I would a place where I can search for vocabularies and assess their usage across LOD datasets? Goal being reuse of existing terms re. new datasets coming into the burgeoning LOD cloud? If the above is true, the you can do the following: 1. Goto http://lod.openlinksw.com -- the live 15 Billion+ triples LOD Cloud Cache we maintain 2. Enter a text pattern (with Class, Property, or Vocabulary discovery in mind) 3. On receipt of the initial results page, use the Links in the Navigation section to filter by Type or other Attributes (so you are looking for Entities of type: Ontology or Class or Property 4. Once you find one of the Entity Types above, click on the describe link 5. At this point navigation should be obvious i.e. you can use isDefinedby to find the Ontology associated with Classes and Properties or use the inverse relations to find the Class and Properties defined by an Ontology. Hope this helps. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web:http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen -- Dieter Fensel Director STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Austria http://www.sti-innsbruck.at/ phone: +43-512-507-6488/5, fax: +43-512-507-9872 -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO
Re: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories
On 3/13/11 7:24 PM, Obrst, Leo J. wrote: Dieter, There are many vocabulary/ontology repository efforts currently, though not just for linked data. You might look at BioPortal, for the biomedical community: http://www.bioontology.org/bioportal. There is the Open Ontology Repository (OOR), which is still emerging: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository, and a number of other mostly early ontology repositories, most of which have briefed at the OOR sessions. Thanks, Leo Leo, I really like: http://www.bioontology.org/bioportal . Are there any RDF dumps or a SPARQL endpoint? If I have a URL for either I can get this data into our LOD cloud cache instance which will also help with discoverability etc.. Same goes to Ian re: http://schemapedia.com/ . Do you have a dump or a SPARQL endpoint? All: we are soon going to release RDF dumps and pre-configured Virtuoso instances for URIBurner, LOD, and other data spaces we've been constructing. Some of you may already have seen the DBpedia+BBC releases [1]. Links: 1. http://www.openlinksw.com/dataspace/kide...@openlinksw.com/weblog/kide...@openlinksw.com%27s%20BLOG%20%5B127%5D/1656 -- DBpedia+BBC pre-configured Virtuoso instance for you own data center setup 2. http://www.openlinksw.com/dataspace/kide...@openlinksw.com/weblog/kide...@openlinksw.com%27s%20BLOG%20%5B127%5D/1657 -- ditto via Amazon EC2 AMI + EBS Snapshot . Kingsley -Original Message- From: semantic-web-requ...@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dieter Fensel Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 12:16 PM To: Linked Data community; semantic-web Subject: data schema / vocabulary / ontology / repositories Dear all, for a number of projects I was searching for vocabularies/Ontologies to describe linked data. Could you please recommend me places where to look for them? I failed to find a convenient entrance point for such kind of information. I only found some scattered information here and there? Thanks, Dieter -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
