Thanks Martin for your thoughtful reply.
I agree completely that an IDE for SMW would be measurably useful to
developers and editors (eschewing the term 'user' here, per standard MW
definition that a user is someone with 'read' privledge on a wiki, not
necessarily 'edit' privledge) for obvious reasons: faster, better,
cheaper. But let's also note that by focusing our development efforts on
SMW's core mission -- semantic queries, in large part -- then we
strengthen the long-term business case for SMW itself.
SMW Ontologies /is/ an IDE (I will use these magic words in the
future!). From Wikipedia, an "IDE normally consists of a (1) source code
editor (2) build automation tools and (3) a debugger. Most modern IDEs
have (4) intelligent code completion .... Some IDEs contain a (5)
compiler, interpreter, or both ... (6) a version control system and (7)
various tools are integrated to simplify the construction of a Graphical
User Interface. Many modern IDEs also have (8) a class browser, (9) an
object browser, and (10) a class hierarchy diagram, for use in
object-oriented software development." [footnote 1]
Let's compare this definition of an IDE to what I propose.
1. source code editor -- a 'smart textarea' is proposed to enter
template calls for storing semantic triples
2. build tools -- not needed in interpreted environs like PHP,
Javascript, Parsoid and template-script
3. debugger --templates and php code have a debug mode of output,
storing validation errors on a page
4. intelligent code completion -- the smart textarea would have this
for property values & facets selection
5. interpreter -- not an initial focus, though I envision a
topic-map-syntax interpreter at a later time
6. version control -- achieved per namespace prefixes -- eg owl: vs
owl2: -- a central idea of proposal
7. GUI builder tools -- data retrieval/formatting templates are parts
of this proposal, plus infoboxes
8. class browser -- this is the OntologyBrowser I mentioned
9. object browser -- this is the OntologyBrowser I mentioned
10. class hierarchy -- this is the sum total of the numerous ontologies
I indicated are to be installable
I want to see more than the dozen or so properties now (pitifully)
built-in to SMW; I insist on a full dictionary.
I want to make life alot easier for people crafting (semantic)
applications using SEMANTIC MediaWiki.
Hopefully my comparison clarifies that I also want to see an IDE come of
this.
thanks/john
[footnote 1] source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_development_environment - i've
added enumerators to the quote
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 1/15/2015 1:30 AM, Schneider, Martin wrote:
For now, I only want to say that all my use cases are ontology-related, so it
would be good to have better support there.
But I cannot say if the points from your message, John, are those which are of
importance.
I don't even see how this would ease building ontologies in SMW.
But then I'm rather new to this topic (both semantic knowledge engineering and
SMW).
What I am missing most is something like an IDE for SMW, like Eclipse for Java.
I'll stay tuned to this topic.
Cheers, Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA.
GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn.
Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth.
Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
