Re: Deprecating owl:sameAs

> On 1 Apr 2016, at 14:01, Sarven Capadisli wrote: > > There is overwhelming research [1, 2, 3] and I think it is evident at this > point that owl:sameAs is used inarticulately in the LOD cloud. > > The research that I've done makes me conclude that we need to do a massive >

Re: Ontology to model access control

> On 16 Dec 2015, at 10:40, Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > > Why not use W3C ACL ontology? http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebAccessControl yes, we already have at least 4 or 5 implementations of WebAccessControl. Even though WebAccessControl mostly described in terms of WebIDs it

Re: Beginning work on an official Web Access Control spec.

Hi Andrei, Thanks for bringing this up. I myself have implemented the Web Access Control spec Scala in the application https://github.com/stample/rww-play I will hopfully be putting a server online in the next month running that code for people to try out. The WebAccessControl

Re: Beginning work on an official Web Access Control spec.

On 17 Oct 2013, at 15:09, Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote: I'd been interested in this topic for many years, and would love to help out. Actually each community group does have access to a W3C issue tracker: http://www.w3.org/community/rww/track/ Telcons I'm not sure

Re: rel=meta or rel=acl ? was: Web Access Cntrl Spec?

On 10 Aug 2013, at 14:40, Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote: As registration of rel=meta has already begun, it's up to supporters of rel=acl to join the process and try and achieve consensus. I suppose you were referring to this e-mail by Mark Nottingham dated 10 January

rel=meta or rel=acl ? was: Web Access Cntrl Spec?

On 10 Aug 2013, at 00:18, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: When talking about this with Alexandre Bertails he thought that rel=meta was not the right relation and that rel=acl would be more correct. Yes. It will be fixed. We need to get those who have implementations to

Re: rel=meta or rel=acl ? was: Web Access Cntrl Spec?

On 10 Aug 2013, at 14:40, Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 August 2013 14:23, Andrei Sambra andrei.sam...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Melvin Carvalho melvincarva...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 August 2013 10:56, Henry Story henry.st

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 10 Aug 2013, at 17:50, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 8/9/13 8:34 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: The protected resource will show you where the acl (meta) data is with the header rel=meta I thought the consensus was: rel=acl I guess, we are just going to have to support

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

it. On Aug 10, 2013 12:07 PM, Henry Story henry.st...@bblfish.net wrote: On 10 Aug 2013, at 17:50, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 8/9/13 8:34 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: The protected resource will show you where the acl (meta) data is with the header rel=meta I thought

rel=acl or rel=meta was: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 10 Aug 2013, at 19:33, David Booth da...@dbooth.org wrote: On 8/9/13 8:34 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: The protected resource will show you where the acl (meta) data is with the header rel=meta I thought the consensus was: rel=acl I guess, we

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 9 Aug 2013, at 14:25, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: In addition to the above, note that IE doesn't support keygen/. We had to make a .NET equivalent of a signed applet to create what (on the surface) looks like the normal keygen/ flow. IE, supports an equivalent Browser

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 9 Aug 2013, at 13:47, Norman Gray nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk wrote: Henry, greetings. [replying only on public-lod] Bit of an essay, this one, because I've been mulling this over, since this message appeared a couple of days ago... On 2013 Aug 8, at 16:14, Henry Story wrote: On 7

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 9 Aug 2013, at 16:45, Norman Gray nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk wrote: Henry, hello. I don't have much more to add here, because I can't fundamentally add much more than assertion, but I have a couple of brief responses. On 2013 Aug 9, at 14:41, Henry Story wrote: I don't have an easy

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 9 Aug 2013, at 16:50, Henry Story henry.st...@bblfish.net wrote: On 9 Aug 2013, at 16:45, Norman Gray nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk wrote: Henry, hello. I don't have much more to add here, because I can't fundamentally add much more than assertion, but I have a couple of brief responses

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

only on public-lod] Bit of an essay, this one, because I've been mulling this over, since this message appeared a couple of days ago... On 2013 Aug 8, at 16:14, Henry Story wrote: On 7 Aug 2013, at 19:34, Nick Jennings n...@silverbucket.net wrote: 1. Certificate Name: maybe there could

Re: {Disarmed} RWW-Play was: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

in An initial implementation of Linked Data Basic Profile does a 404. On 9 Aug 2013, at 18:09, Henry Story henry.st...@bblfish.net wrote: On 9 Aug 2013, at 18:55, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Thanks. I've looked at quite a bit of this stuff, but still don't see where the ACL document

Editing a Web Access Contrl Spec? Was: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

On 9 Aug 2013, at 19:34, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote: On 8/9/13 12:55 PM, Hugh Glaser wrote: Thanks. I've looked at quite a bit of this stuff, but still don't see where the ACL document gets stored and used. As per my setup [1] the ACLs reside in a document. Of course,

Re: Simple WebID, WebID+TLS Protocol, and ACL Dogfood Demo

with Henry Story about this during the OHM2013 conference, because at one time I had inadvertently 3 different WebID certs in my browser, when I would visit a WebID enabled site, I'd have no idea which one to choose, they were all the same Nick Jennings ... ... He suggested that I give them

Re: FOAF Editor - was Re: WebID Frustration

On 7 Aug 2013, at 13:08, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Norman, hello. Very interesting. Yes, I think that works. I think I had got mislead into thinking the issuer was significant - especially as the one I created calls itself Key from my-profile.eu, but of course I could

Re: WebID Frustration

On 6 Aug 2013, at 22:17, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: *Conclusion* So, as a mac user, the pages I found most useful were https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/posts/62pFBxAm7Ev to generate the cert and https://webid.turnguard.com/WebIDTestServer/debug to check I had it

Re: WebID Frustration

On 6 Aug 2013, at 23:41, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Thanks Henry. Actually, I tried both of those before posting. On 6 Aug 2013, at 22:08, Henry Story henry.st...@bblfish.net wrote: On 6 Aug 2013, at 22:17, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: *Conclusion* So

Qwiki was: Google Knowledge Graph Experiment

By the way, there are some other projects like http://www.qwiki.com/ that clearly do work semantically, and offer some of the features touted by google. Henry On 18 May 2012, at 09:36, Ivan Herman wrote: On May 18, 2012, at 06:51 , Eric Franzon wrote: Ivan, Actually, some modest

Re: Qwiki was: Google Knowledge Graph Experiment

. There is a community group started on this http://www.w3.org/community/philoweb/ Adam On 18 May 2012 10:03, Henry Story henry.st...@bblfish.net wrote: By the way, there are some other projects like http://www.qwiki.com/ that clearly do work semantically, and offer some of the features

WebID, Linked Data and Commerce

of the developments in the linked data space. I look forward to your feedback. Henry Story Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/

Fixed was: WebIDs and Content-Location

. without being cluttered with lots of references to the working directory. On 2012-04 -13, at 08:54, Henry Story wrote: I have an issue about canonicalisation (de-relativisation?) of URLs. cwm and rapper don't return the same results, though cwm agrees with http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator

Philosophy of the Social Web talk given at the Institut Télécom in Paris

Hi, a month or so ago I gave a talk on the Philosophy of the Social Web at the Institut Télécom in Paris. It is geared towards engineers giving them an overview of the Social Web and how Linked Data and WebID can be used to build much larger social networks than any we have hitherto seen

WebIDs and Content-Location

I have an issue about canonicalisation (de-relativisation?) of URLs. cwm and rapper don't return the same results, though cwm agrees with http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/ What is the full URL for the rdf:ID=me in the XML returned below? Is it - http://vmuss13.deri.ie/foafprofiles/hada#me as

Re: WebIDs and Content-Location

There was a discussion on #swig on this. http://chatlogs.planetrdf.com/swig/2012-04-13.html I am not sure yet what the result of that is. (I'll need to work through it more carefully) Henry On 13 Apr 2012, at 14:54, Henry Story wrote: I have an issue about canonicalisation (de

Re: WebIDs and Content-Location

and get @prefix : # . :a :p 123 . without being cluttered with lots of references to the working directory. On 2012-04 -13, at 08:54, Henry Story wrote: I have an issue about canonicalisation (de-relativisation?) of URLs. cwm and rapper don't return the same

Re: Interesting GoogleTalk about Named Content Networks

Thanks. I saw this talk a few years ago (3 or 4) and found it very interesting. Looking at it one needs to I think both not to try to re-invent TCP/IP as Van Jacobson explains, but also keep a mind open about how much of this can in fact be done with HTTP. He seems to suggest the future should be

Re: SPDY WebID

://codebits.eu/intra/s/session/220 ]] On 25 Mar 2012, at 11:19, Henry Story wrote: Hi, just found this SPDY presentation [1] from a Ruby programmer http://speakerdeck.com/u/chris/p/you-aint-spdy-ruby-nation I like one of the last slides at the end SPDY build on SSL . SPDY is now

SPDY WebID

Hi, just found this SPDY presentation [1] from a Ruby programmer http://speakerdeck.com/u/chris/p/you-aint-spdy-ruby-nation I like one of the last slides at the end SPDY build on SSL . SPDY is now in Chrome and it Firefox. I've bumped it up on my priority list as something to try out.

Re: Yahoo! patent 7,747,648 court case

How would anyone know? Given that Yahoo is a member of the W3C, it cannot affect the w3c standards, since they signed up to a no patent policy. On 13 Mar 2012, at 13:54, Melvin Carvalho wrote: You may have seen in the news facebook are getting sued for using the following patented

non blocking RDF/XML and NTriples Parser in Scala (and Java)

Hi, I have been working on getting a non blocking parsers to work. The point of that is that when you fetch RDF from the web you want to use as few resources as possible. If possible one should only use a few k of memory even for files that are 1GB long. Async parsing allows one to

redirects and relative URLs

If I dereference a URL which contains a redirect to another resource, and that resource contains relative URLs, how should the relative URLs of the returned document be completed? With the initial URL? Or with the one given in the Location header (or some other header?) of the last document?

Re: redirects and relative URLs

On 29 Jan 2012, at 14:03, John Erickson wrote: Henry asked: If I dereference a URL which contains a redirect to another resource, and that resource contains relative URLs, how should the relative URLs of the returned document be completed? With the initial URL? Or with the one given in the

White Spaces in xsd:hexBinary

The WebID incubator group has encountered a subtle RDF problem with xsd:hexBinary, and we would like some feedback on this. It is not clear yet who we should be asking here, so I have sent this out a bit widely. The WebID Protocol requires users who need a global login to publish their

Re: White Spaces in xsd:hexBinary

on the interpretation of xsd:hex. Ivan On Jan 16, 2012, at 13:22 , Henry Story wrote: The WebID incubator group has encountered a subtle RDF problem with xsd:hexBinary, and we would like some feedback on this. It is not clear yet who we should be asking here, so I have sent this out a bit

new WebID spec out

, implementation experiences and questions, Sincerely, Henry Story WebID Incubator Chair http://bblfish.net/

Re: Facebook Linked Data

On 27 Sep 2011, at 09:01, Sebastian Schaffert wrote: - I ask for http://graph.facebook.com/sebastian.schaffert and I get http://graph.facebook.com/561666514# - I ask for http://graph.facebook.com/561666514 and I get http://graph.facebook.com/561666514# - I ask for

Re: Lightweight Java RDF libraries

If you want code for which people can get an overview, you could check out Dan Connolly Scala project started a year and a half ago http://code.google.com/p/swap-scala/ I think it could do the minimum that you are looking for. It is less than 10 pages of code too written by an expert in the

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

On 23 Jun 2011, at 10:20, Michael Brunnbauer wrote: re On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:09:25AM +0200, Martin Hepp wrote: Yes, WebID is out of question a good thing. I am not entirely sure, though, that you can make it a mandatory requirement for access to your site, because if a few major

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

On 23 Jun 2011, at 12:38, Lin Clark wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Pablo Mendes pablomen...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe we should also consider that companies/universities advising people (esp. small companies) to publish Linked Data, should give them complete advice, including

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

On 23 Jun 2011, at 13:13, Michael Brunnbauer wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:32:43AM +0100, Kingsley Idehen wrote: config = { 'Googlebot':['googlebot.com'], 'Mediapartners-Google':['googlebot.com'], 'msnbot':['live.com','msn.com','bing.com'],

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

On 23 Jun 2011, at 13:27, Lin Clark wrote: Radical, no? If the Drupal RDF module takes up significantly more resources to generate its output as compared to the HTML and other renderers, then YES, it should protect itself. Instead of e-mailing every Drupal user, e-mail the Drupal RDF

WebID and client tools - was: WebID vs. JSON (Was: Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers)

On 22 Jun 2011, at 16:41, William Waites wrote: [1] examples of non-WebID aware clients: rapper / rasqal, python rdflib, curl, the javascript engine in my web browser that doesn't properly support client certificates, etc. curl is WebID aware. You just need to get yourself a certificate

Re: WebID vs. JSON (Was: Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers)

On 22 Jun 2011, at 17:14, William Waites wrote: * [2011-06-22 16:00:49 +0100] Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com écrit: ] explain to me how the convention you espouse enables me confine access ] to a SPARQL endpoint for: ] ] A person identified by URI based Name (WebID) that a

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

On 23 Jun 2011, at 00:11, Alexandre Passant wrote: On 22 Jun 2011, at 22:49, Richard Cyganiak wrote: On 21 Jun 2011, at 10:44, Martin Hepp wrote: PS: I will not release the IP ranges from which the trouble originated, but rest assured, there were top research institutions among them.

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

A solution to stupid crawlers would be to put the linked data behind https endpoints, and use WebID for authentication. You could still allow everyone access, but at least you would force the crawler to identify himself, and use these WebIDs to learn who was making the crawler. This could

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

was misbehaved you could force the redirect. Henry Henry Story wrote: A solution to stupid crawlers would be to put the linked data behind https endpoints, and use WebID for authentication. You could still allow everyone access, but at least you would force the crawler to identify himself

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

of caching crawler mitigate this issue? Have someone write a well behaved crawler which allowed you to download a recent .ttl.tgz of various sites. Of course, that assumes the student is able to find such a cache. Asking people nicely will only work in a very small community. Henry Story wrote

Re: Think before you write Semantic Web crawlers

On 21 Jun 2011, at 12:23, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/21/11 10:54 AM, Henry Story wrote: Then you could just redirect him straight to the n3 dump of graphs of your site (I say graphs because your site not necessarily being consistent, the crawler may be interested in keeping information

Re: WebID and pets -- was: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 20 Jun 2011, at 02:48, Melvin Carvalho wrote: On 19 June 2011 20:42, Henry Story henry.st...@bblfish.net wrote: On 19 Jun 2011, at 20:15, Danny Ayers wrote: Only personal Henry, but have you tried the Myers-Briggs thing - I think you used to be classic INTP/INTF - but once you got

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 19 Jun 2011, at 06:05, Pat Hayes wrote: Really (sorry to keep raining on the parade, but) it is not as simple as this. Look, it is indeed easy to not bother distinguishing male from female dogs. One simply talks of dogs without mentioning gender, and there is a lot that can be said

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 19 Jun 2011, at 13:05, Hugh Glaser wrote: A step too far? Hi. I've sort of been waiting for someone to say: I have a system that consumes RDF from the world out there (eg dbpedia), and it would break and be unfixable if the sources didn't do 303 or #. Plenty of people saying they

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 19 Jun 2011, at 14:04, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Er. we use it :-) The problem with this whole Linked Data thing is that its truly Ninja tech. The killer conductor of value is the LINK. This lethal weapon applies to all dimensions of the Web: 1. Information Space 2. Data Space 3.

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 12 Jun 2011, at 14:40, Danny Ayers wrote: [snip] Aside from containing a different bunch of bits because of the encoding, sasha-photo.jpg could be a lossy-compressed version of sasha-photo.gif, containing less pixel information yet sharing many characteristics. All ok so far..? If

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 19 Jun 2011, at 18:27, Giovanni Tummarello wrote: but dont be surprised as less and less people will be willing to listen as more and more applications (Eg.. all the stuff based on schema.org) pop up never knowing there was this problem... (not in general. of course there is in

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 19 Jun 2011, at 18:58, Nathan wrote: Nathan wrote: Henry Story wrote: On 19 Jun 2011, at 18:27, Giovanni Tummarello wrote: but dont be surprised as less and less people will be willing to listen as more and more applications (Eg.. all the stuff based on schema.org) pop up never

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 19 Jun 2011, at 19:44, Danny Ayers wrote: I am of the view that this has been discussed to death, and that any mailing list that discusses this is short of real things to do. I confess to talking bollocks when I should be coding. yeah, me too. Though now you folks managed to get me

Re: Hackers - Re: Schema.org considered helpful

On 18 Jun 2011, at 13:20, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/18/11 12:16 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/18/11 8:58 AM, Henry Story wrote: The recent discussions on this list were very much about how to avoid making distinctions unless you have to (Just-In-Time Distinctions?) So why

Re: Hackers - Re: Schema.org considered helpful

On 18 Jun 2011, at 15:54, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/18/11 1:24 PM, Henry Story wrote: On 18 Jun 2011, at 13:20, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/18/11 12:16 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/18/11 8:58 AM, Henry Story wrote: The recent discussions on this list were very much about how to avoid

Re: Hackers - Re: Schema.org considered helpful

was long enough as is. It took me quite a while to put together. But all that is talk. I am back to hacking away to build some of this stuff. Henry - Original Message - From: Henry Story To: AzamatAbdoullaev Cc: semantic-...@w3.org ; public-lod@w3.org ; Harry Halpin ; adasal Sent

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle

On 17 Jun 2011, at 15:04, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: AND when they click like on a facebook comment they are saying they like the comment not the thing it is commenting on. Indeed I have had a few people on Facebook comment that they were very unhappy not being able to distinguish between what

Hackers - Re: Schema.org considered helpful

On 17 Jun 2011, at 14:51, adasal wrote: Don't expect any support from that quarter. (Well apart from a few unhelpful scraps.) The question is how can the SemWeb academic community address these issues? There is the hacker community too, btw. The academic community is looking to be way

Re: Hackers - Re: Schema.org considered helpful

in the semweb as a team, using the tools we have built to do that. It's really not difficult to do. :-) [1] video http://bblfish.net/blog/2011/05/25/ Henry Story wrote: On 17 Jun 2011, at 14:51, adasal wrote: Don't expect any support from that quarter. (Well apart from a few unhelpful

Re: Hackers - Re: Schema.org considered helpful

On 17 Jun 2011, at 19:27, adasal wrote: That said the hacker is a various beast, Indeed, hackers are not angels. But the people on this list should get back to hacking or work together with open source projects to get initial minimal working pieces embedded there. WebID is one; foaf is

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle [was Re: Schema.org in RDF ...]

On 17 Jun 2011, at 22:42, Nathan wrote: You could use the same name for both if each name was always coupled to a universe, specified by the predicate, and you cut out type information from data, such that: x-sasha :animalname sasha ; :created 2011 . was read as:

Re: Squaring the HTTP-range-14 circle

On 13 Jun 2011, at 13:41, Richard Cyganiak wrote: I want to use these URIs as identifiers in my data, and I have no intention of redirecting through an intermediate blank node just because the TAG fucked up some years ago. The TAG did not f.up as you say, and you can do what you want

Re: Subjects as Literals

On 8 Jul 2010, at 20:30, David Booth wrote: On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 11:03 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote: On Jul 6, 2010, at 9:23 PM, David Booth wrote: On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 20:45 +0200, Henry Story wrote: [ . . . ] foaf:knows a rdf:Property . Well we can dereference foaf:knows to find out what

Re: RDF Extensibility

On 8 Jul 2010, at 22:06, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote: On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: On Jul 7, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer wrote: On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Toby Inkster t...@g5n.co.uk wrote: Without knowing the definition of

Re: RDF Extensibility

On 9 Jul 2010, at 09:29, Bernhard Schandl wrote: Hi, I agree with Pat in that case, that it would just be easier not to put restrictions in the abstract rdf syntax at all, instead of complicating things all over the place. There are pragmatic reasons why sentences such as

Re: RDF Extensibility

On 9 Jul 2010, at 11:42, Jakub Kotowski wrote: Henry Story schrieb: On 9 Jul 2010, at 09:29, Bernhard Schandl wrote: Hi, I agree with Pat in that case, that it would just be easier not to put restrictions in the abstract rdf syntax at all, instead of complicating things all over

Re: RDF Extensibility

On 9 Jul 2010, at 13:25, Jakub Kotowski wrote: Henry Story wrote: No need then for any hijacking, that's just such a 70ies thing [1]. You could just follow your nose by dereferencing the namespace, or the literal type to get the meaning. We'd be back to linked data, but now

Re: Subjects as Literals

On 7 Jul 2010, at 04:23, David Booth wrote: On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 20:45 +0200, Henry Story wrote: [ . . . ] foaf:knows a rdf:Property . Well we can dereference foaf:knows to find out what it means. This is the canonical way to find it's meaning, and is the initial procedure we should

Re: Subjects as Literals

On 6 Jul 2010, at 09:19, Dan Brickley wrote: On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: Hi Sampo. I venture in again... I have much enjoyed the interchanges, and they have illuminated a number of cultural differences for me, which have helped me understand why

Re: Subjects as Literals

On 6 Jul 2010, at 14:03, Michael Schneider wrote: Toby Inkster: On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:43:17 -0500 Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: Well, nobody is suggesting allowing literals as predicates (although in fact the RDF semantics would easily extend to this usage, if required, and the

Re: Subjects as Literals

On 6 Jul 2010, at 21:57, Antoine Zimmermann wrote: I'd like to apologize in advance for being sarcastic, especially since I have really nothing against Henry... ;) Le 06/07/2010 19:45, Henry Story a écrit : This would be possible to say. The problem is that there would be no way

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

On 2 Jul 2010, at 09:39, Ian Davis wrote: On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:44 AM, Pat Hayes pha...@ihmc.us wrote: Jeremy, your argument is perfectly sound from your company's POV, but not from a broader perspective. Of course, any change will incur costs by those who have based their assumptions

Re: destabilizing core technologies: was Re: An RDF wishlist

On 2 Jul 2010, at 11:39, Patrick Durusau wrote: Good point. But the basic tools to handle data have been around for a long time. The web could only get going in the 90ies when 1) Windows 95 become (A GUI) widely deployed and relatively stable and had support for threads 2) modems

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

On 2 Jul 2010, at 11:57, Patrick Durusau wrote: On 7/2/2010 5:27 AM, Ian Davis wrote: On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Patrick Durusaupatr...@durusau.net wrote: I make this point in another post this morning but is your argument that investment by vendors = I think I just

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

On 2 Jul 2010, at 12:42, Richard Cyganiak wrote: Hi Yves, [trimmed cc list] On 2 Jul 2010, at 11:15, Yves Raimond wrote: I am not arguing for each vendor to implement that. I am arguing for removing this arbitrary limitation from the RDF spec. Also marked as an issue since 2000:

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

On 2 Jul 2010, at 12:49, Patrick Durusau wrote: Henry, On 7/2/2010 6:03 AM, Henry Story wrote: On 2 Jul 2010, at 11:57, Patrick Durusau wrote: On 7/2/2010 5:27 AM, Ian Davis wrote: On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Patrick Durusaupatr...@durusau.net wrote: I

Re: RDF and its discontents

On 2 Jul 2010, at 17:07, Paul Houle wrote: ow, if hardware cost was no object, I suppose I could keep triples in a huge distributed main-memory database. Right now, I can't afford that. (If I get richer and if hardware gets cheaper, I'll probably want to handle more data, putting me

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

On 30 Jun 2010, at 21:09, Pat Hayes wrote: For example I've heard people saying that it encourages bad 'linked data' practise by using examples like { 'London' a x:Place } - whereas I'd immediately counter with { x:London a 'Place' }. Surely all of the subjects as literals arguments

Re: Subjects as Literals

+1 to the points below. I think one should point out that rdf semantics allows them, and that in an open world they just can't be excluded. In N3 literals as subjects are often used. And the cwm repository is a good place to look for examples @prefix log: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#.

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

On 1 Jul 2010, at 16:35, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Yves Raimond wrote: Hello Kingsley! [snip] IMHO an emphatic NO. RDF is about constructing structured descriptions where Subjects have Identifiers in the form of Name References (which may or many resolve to Structured

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

Jeremy, the point is to start the process, but put it on a low burner, so that in 4-5 years time, you will be able to sell a whole new RDF+ suite to your customers with this new benefit. ;-) On 1 Jul 2010, at 17:38, Jeremy Carroll wrote: I am still not hearing any argument to justify the

Re: Show me the money - (was Subjects as Literals)

Social Web Architect http://bblfish.net/ On 1 Jul 2010, at 21:03, Tim Finin wrote: On 7/1/10 2:51 PM, Henry Story wrote: ... So just as a matter of interest, imagine a new syntax came along that allowed literals in subject position, could you not write a serialiser for it that turned