LD Patch - call for implementation

(sorry for cross-posting) Hi all, the Linked Data Patch Format [1] (LD Patch) is now a Candidate Recommendation, and has an extensive Test Suite. We are now welcoming implementations. The instructions for submitting implementation reports are available [3], and the reports will be published here

Re: Is the same video but in different encodings the owl:sameAs?

Hi, if I was to knitpick, I would argue that the @id attribute in HTML identifies a fragment of the HTML document, hence not precisely a video ; for example, the " element" has exactly one parent element (e.g. an enclosing or ), which is not true of the video itself (that could be embeded in mult

Re: Is the same video but in different encodings the owl:sameAs?

Hi Thomas, On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Thomas Steiner wrote: > Hi again, > > Thanks for your reply, Kingsley. > > > denotes one entity. > > denotes another. > well, it is actually up to the owner of the namespace to decide what those two

Re: Post-doc position in Lyon

Erratum : this post-doc position is meant to start in the *autumn 2013* (i.e. next september/october) not 2014... pa On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Pierre-Antoine Champin < pierre-antoine.cham...@liris.cnrs.fr> wrote: > (Sorry for cross-posting) > > This proposal

Post-doc position in Lyon

ument engineering/Knowledge engineering, Semantic Web and associated technologies. They should be fluent in English (written and spoken). French speaking skills would be a plus. For more information and to apply, contact: - Pierre-Antoine Champin - Benoît Encelle - Yannick Prié Related

Re: [HTTP-range-14] Hyperthing: Semantic Web URI Validator (303, 301, 302, 307 and hash URIs)

Hi, when I try , it tells me that it identifies an information resource, while I'm claiming this is a person (as states the RDFa in the document at [1]). Apparently, Hyperthing only recognizes RDF/XML for the moment; any plan to support Turtle and/or

Re: Quick reality check please

+1 ! pa On 04/08/2011 06:15 PM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: > On 8 Apr 2011, at 14:11, Ian Davis wrote: >>> With the second issue it's not so clear what to do about it. It's >>> a question of good practice, and I'm not aware of any document where that >>> recommendation could be easily added. >> >>

Re: Possible Idea For a Sem Web Based Game?

o have clearer ideas on the subject... :) -- thanks for the links by the way. I'll keep an eye on that. pa On 12/15/2010 12:39 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: On 14 December 2010 22:21, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: Hi, this is fun, but we have to ask ourselves: what is the added value of RDF

linked data about the W3C?

Hi, is there any linked data published about the W3C? Semantic Radar does not see any on their webpages. It is a shame, because I would like to get some statistics about the members, and I'm condemned to manually go through the 324 links of [1]. Talking about eating one's own dog food :-P

Re: CoIN: Composition of Identifier Names

Here are my 2¢ about the opacity of resources. First, let me point out that, contrary to what is often believed/claimed (and I plead guilty of having done so), URI opacity is *not* a constraint of the REST architectural style, at least as defined by Fielding in his thesis [1]. Then, AFAIK, the ma

Re: XMP RDF extractors?

Even more tangent, but when I read in detail the XMP spec last year (in relation to the Media Annotation WG), I came to two conclusions: - XMP specifies RDF at the level of the XML serialization, which is *ugly* (emphasis on *ugly*). Furthermore, it makes it unsafe to use standard RDF/XML serializ

Re: Announce: Linked Data Patterns book

Wonderful. Any PDF version available? pa On 06/04/2010 16:10, Leigh Dodds wrote: > Hi folks, > > Ian Davis and I have been working on a catalogue of Linked Data > patterns which we've put on-line as a free book. The work is licensed > under a Creative Commons attribution license. > > This is

Re: A question - use 301 instead of 406?

s code should (or at least could) be 200 rather than 406, right? :-) I guess this is because of that hypdrid status of RDF (regardless of its serialization), being somewhere between data and metadata. pa On 24/03/2010 09:06, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: > Hi Hugh, > > interesting sugg

Re: A question - use 301 instead of 406?

Hi Hugh, interesting suggestion; I have also been frustrated with dbpedia URIs in the adress bar, which you have to (or forget to) change when you want to feed them to an RDF agent... However, 406 seems to be the most appropriate answer to give. Falling back to 301 in too many different situation

Re: A "sameas" widget for Firefox

Hi all, This is a cool stuff, indeed. I think an interesting use case would be to "dig" into a link to use its href URI instead of its text. Because let's face it, the web contains much more links with human-readable labels than plain URIs in the body of a page... I'm affraid my poor knowledge o

Re: Conneg representation equivalence

On 11/03/2010 23:55, Nathan wrote: > Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: >> On 11/03/2010 11:04, Toby Inkster wrote: >>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 02:24 +, Nathan wrote: >>>> If I have multiple representations of a resource which I consider >>>> equal, let&#

Re: Conneg representation equivalence

On 11/03/2010 11:04, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 02:24 +, Nathan wrote: >> If I have multiple representations of a resource which I consider >> equal, let's say one of each of the following: RDF+XML, RDF+N3, SVG >> >> Then should all three representations be considered equivalen

Re: [fresnel] Re: Fresnel: State of the Art?

On 02/02/2010 16:20, Leo Sauermann wrote: > * you won't find anything else that really fits RDF because of the > "subclass/multiclass/missing properties/too many properties" dynamics > you have in RDF. Templating languages are not good for this, also > fresnel data can spread and grow on the web li

Re: Content negotiation: Why always redirect from non-information resource to information resource?

On 27/01/2010 12:02, Christoph LANGE wrote: > Dear all, > > thanks for your helpful replies. I will summarize with a few comments. > > Of course the conceptual difference between a non-information resource and an > information resource is clear to me; I was rather concerned about how relevant

Re: Content negotiation: Why always redirect from non-information resource to information resource?

On 27/01/2010 03:45, Peter Ansell wrote: > Disambiguating everything is a pipe dream IMO. I agree with that. Note also that HTTP makes a difference between a *resource* (identified by a URI) and the *entity* retrieved when GETting the URI, which is a mere *representation* of the resource. >From

Re: [Ann] LESS - Content Syndication based on Linked Data

Interesting :) You may be interested in having a look at http://champin.net/t4r/demo which can be used in a simiar fashion. The main difference is that T4R mixes the query in the template, while you are separating the SPARQL query from the presentation. I have plans to allow T4R templates to ap

Re: Ontology modules and namespaces

Hi Simon, basically, I agree with you: having a single namespace makes the ontology easier to use, even if the terms are described in separate modules. More generally, there is not reason why the "physical" splitting into modules should necessarily result in a "logical" splitting into different n

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

I like this! :) However, some people will still be concerned about naming their resources under a domain that is not theirs. That is not only a matter of URI-prettiness, but also of relying on an external service, which may cease to exist tomorrow. However, this could easily be solved. All w

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

Mark, disclaimer: I have nothing against the RDFa solution; I just don't think that one size fits all :) ok, the solutions proposed here (by myself and others) still involve editing the .htaccess. However, compared to configuring HTTP redirections using mod_rewrite, they have two advantages:

Re: 303 vs. Content-Location / Was Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption

ltiViews. Your script works as expected, issuing a 303. pa Le 05/07/2009 21:38, Hugh Glaser a écrit : On 05/07/2009 20:39, "Pierre-Antoine Champin" wrote: Nice one :) works fine for me (tested on http://liris.cnrs.fr/~pchampin/tmp/ns). Thanks - great to get the feedback. An inte

303 vs. Content-Location / Was Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption

that apache default does not put the correct MIME type on rdf files, but that is a separate issue, and it makes no difference that the 303 happened. Best Hugh On 05/07/2009 01:52, "Pierre-Antoine Champin" wrote: Le 03/07/2009 15:14, Danny Ayers a écrit : 2009/7/2 Bill Roberts: I

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

ctives to the .htaccess. pa PS: any IIS user volunteering to translate those recipies to IIS configuration? Le 05/07/2009 13:54, Toby A Inkster a écrit : On 5 Jul 2009, at 01:52, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: I guess a PHP version would not even require that .htaccess, but sorry, I

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

Le 05/07/2009 13:54, Toby A Inkster a écrit : On 5 Jul 2009, at 01:52, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: I guess a PHP version would not even require that .htaccess, but sorry, I'm not fluent in PHP ;) The situation with PHP should be much the same, though I suppose web hosts might be

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

we can provide with the script, the more useful it will be. So feel free to propose other ones. enjoy pa #!/usr/bin/env python # EasyPub: easy publication of RDF vocabulary #Copyright (C) 2009 Pierre-Antoine Champin # #EasyPub is free software: you can redistribute it and/or

Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Le 24/06/2009 08:21, Danny Ayers a écrit : As far as I'm aware we don't yet have an easy templating engine for RDFa, so I suspect having that as the source is probably a good choice for typical Web applications. you may be interested in Tal4Rdf, a template system for RDF that can produce HTML/

Re: http://ld2sd.deri.org/lod-ng-tutorial/

Le 23/06/2009 23:06, Ian Davis a écrit : On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Dan Brickley mailto:dan...@danbri.org>> wrote: On 23/6/09 11:01, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: And Michael, please be frank - there is a tendency in the LOD community which goes along the lines o

Re: Common Tag - semantic tagging convention

Le 18/06/2009 16:46, Alexandre Passant a écrit : I just reply to an e-mail from Toby on the topic on the commontag ml. Since the archives are not yet public, let-me repost my point about the mappings here. "A Tag in common tag is a tag a seen in Newman's ontology. My understanding of Newman's

Re: Dereferencing a URI vs querying a SPARQL endpoint

> Peter > > [1] http://qut.bio2rdf.org/pageoffset1/links/taxon:9606 > [2] http://qut.bio2rdf.org/pageoffset2/links/taxon:9606 > [3] http://qut.bio2rdf.org/pageoffset3/links/taxon:9606 > > 2009/5/21 Pierre-Antoine Champin : >> I would expect that a DESCRIBE query to the SPARQL endpoint return what >> I get when dereferencing the URI. >> >> pa

Re: Dereferencing a URI vs querying a SPARQL endpoint

I would expect that a DESCRIBE query to the SPARQL endpoint return what I get when dereferencing the URI. pa Daniel Schwabe a écrit : > Dan and Hugh, > let me be more specific. > I'm not really advocating that only *one* direction should be returned > (or even both directions). > I am asking a

Re: Domain and range are useful Re: DBpedia 3.2 release, including DBpedia Ontology and RDF links to Freebase

Ian Davis a écrit : > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 4:02 AM, Tim Berners-Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > > On 2008-11 -17, at 11:27, John Goodwin wrote: >> [...] >> I'd be tempted to generalise or just remove the domain/range >> restrictions. Any thou