Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

+cc: Norm Walsh On 25/6/09 19:39, Juan Sequeda wrote: So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation, right? Just do everything in RDFa, right? We are planning to deploy soon the linked data version of Turn2Live.com. And we are in the discussion of doing the content ne

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption

Mark, And everyone knows at least one way to publish HTML, don't they? I disagree. Most people know how to enter text into a form, but they have no clue what HTML is all about, how it comes that one line of text is bigger while the other is smaller, how backlinks and permalinks are creat

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 25/6/09 19:06, Jeff Finkelstein, Customer Paradigm wrote: Martin- I agree that the .htaccess file is a big stumbling block for many people with low-cost hosting. Would a lightweight php-based application that could write to the .htaccess / create the RDF file work to solve this easily? I'

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote: If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally broken. RDF doesn't. Apache does. Many hosts do have front ends for configuring Apache, allowing redirects to b

Re: Visualization of domain and range

On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:16:36 +0100, Toby Inkster wrote: What needs to be communicated is that: [ a foaf:Agent ] foaf:holdsAccount [ a foaf:OnlineAccount ] . instead. Those triples are not actually in the ontology itself, but will be found (or at least implied) in any instance data that mak

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption

I agree, with Bernard (and also with an earlier comment of Mark's): if we are talking about widespread adoption of RDF, we need to think of who is currently creating HTML, and how they are doing it. I think we all know this, but it's easy to forget when we spend all our time on the web or

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 09:35 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: > Does every major RDF toolkit have an integrated RDFa parser already? No - and even for those that do, it's often rather flaky. Seseme/Rio doesn't have one in its stable release, though I believe one is in development for 3.0. Redland/Rapt

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 26/6/09 10:51, Toby Inkster wrote: On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 09:35 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: Does every major RDF toolkit have an integrated RDFa parser already? No - and even for those that do, it's often rather flaky. Seseme/Rio doesn't have one in its stable release, though I believe one

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Toby Inkster wrote: > Jena (just testing on sparql.org) doesn't seem to handle RDFa at all. The jena GRDDL reader handles RDFa. [1] I've started toying with writing a (direct) RDFa parser, too. Damian [1]

Re: Linked Data tech market; Data Web Servers, anyone?

2009/6/26 Aldo Bucchi : > It baiscally answers this question: how do I put my spreadsheet/table > on the web? use the column names as class descriptions, give the instances URIs. what's the problem? -- http://danny.ayers.name

RuleML-2009 REMINDER - Paper Deadline June 28th

RuleML 2009 3rd International Symposium on Rules, Applications and Interoperability November 5-7 2009, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA http://2009.ruleml.org/ co-located with the 12th Business Rules F

Re: Visualization of domain and range

Dan, Yeah, my [4] is at my threshold of tolerance for chaos in a diagram. I wanted a way to show the core of the FOAF spec in a picture, so tried (despite similar concerns to those mentioned in this thread) the style of putting domain/range directly in an instance-like style. I think this

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Dan Brickley wrote: +cc: Norm Walsh On 25/6/09 19:39, Juan Sequeda wrote: So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation, right? Just do everything in RDFa, right? We are planning to deploy soon the linked data version of Turn2Live.com. And we are in the discussion of

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: > Hi all: > > After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their > businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1], > I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of using > .htaccess are a MAJOR bo

Re: Linked Data tech market; Data Web Servers, anyone?

Danny Ayers wrote: 2009/6/26 Aldo Bucchi : It baiscally answers this question: how do I put my spreadsheet/table on the web? use the column names as class descriptions, give the instances URIs. what's the problem? There are several common problems: (1) not all tables are appropriate for this

Re: Linked Data tech market; Data Web Servers, anyone?

Guys, On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Tim Finin wrote: > Danny Ayers wrote: >> >> 2009/6/26 Aldo Bucchi : >>> >>> It baiscally answers this question: how do I put my spreadsheet/table >>> on the web? >> >> use the column names as class descriptions, give the instances URIs. >> what's the problem?

Re: Linked Data tech market; Data Web Servers, anyone?

Before: GET URI --> Doc Now: GET URI --> Partial Row ( metadata container ) or better yet SPARQL URIxURI = value and even more complex queries On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Aldo Bucchi wrote: > Guys, > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Tim Finin wrote: >> Danny Ayers wrote: >>> >>> 2009/6/26

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Toby, Toby A Inkster wrote: On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote: If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally broken. RDF doesn't. Apache does. Many hosts do have front ends for configuring Ap

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Jun 26, 2009, at 3:03 AM, Toby A Inkster wrote: On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote: If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally broken. RDF doesn't. Apache does. I should have said, if t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Melvin Carvalho wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Hi all: After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1], I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of using .htacc

CFP: 7th International Workshop on Evaluation of Ontology-based tools (EON2009)

(Apologies for multiple postings) ** ** * Call for papers * *

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Martin, > b) download RDFa snippet that just represents the RDF/XML content (i.e. such > that it does not have to be consolidated with the "presentation level" part > of the Web page. By coincidence, I just read this: Hidden div's -- don't do it! It can be tempting to add all the content

Re: Visualization of domain and range

On 26/6/09 18:22, Tim rdf wrote: [1] http://www.ifs.univie.ac.at/schandl/2009/06/domain+range_bad.png is indicating that foaf:holdsAccount rdfs:domain foaf:Agent; rdfs:range foaf:OnlineAccount . Is constraining a property with BOTH a domain and range a good design pattern? It seems rather shor

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Kingsley: So basically you think that RDF hosting will ne a new market segment with services like small RDF hosting services (same as private Web space packages), free hosting (maybe with ads included in the RDF), etc.? Martin Kingsley Idehen wrote: >Martin: >I think having a third party rela

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Mark Birbeck wrote: Hi Martin, b) download RDFa snippet that just represents the RDF/XML content (i.e. such that it does not have to be consolidated with the "presentation level" part of the Web page. By coincidence, I just read this: Hidden div's -- don't do it! It can be tempti

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Kingsley- On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > Mark: Should we be describing our docs for Google, fundamentally? I really > think Google should actually recalibrate back to the Web etc.. The correct question to ask, and the one that I believe Mark is addressing, is should w

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Kingsley: So basically you think that RDF hosting will ne a new market segment with services like small RDF hosting services (same as private Web space packages), free hosting (maybe with ads included in the RDF), etc.? Absolutely!! There's nothing like overtly or c

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Bradley Allen wrote: Kingsley- On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Mark: Should we be describing our docs for Google, fundamentally? I really think Google should actually recalibrate back to the Web etc.. The correct question to ask, and the one that I believe Ma