Hi Alessandro To did you get a chance to read Florent's latest blog http://blog.iks-project.eu/thesaurus-management-tool-linked-heritage-project/ You may also want to follow the work of the Skos-js editor that our colleague here at Salzburg Research is working on, See https://github.com/tkurz/skosjs
Thanks john On Apr 11, 2012, at 12:29 PM, Alessandro Adamou wrote: > Hi Florent, all, > > Just curious - have you been able to make any progress on using the Ontology > Manager for multi-user thesaurus management in your application? > > Should you have any questions or inquiries please do not hesitate to ask. > > Alessandro > > > On 1/19/12 2:52 PM, florent andré wrote: >> Hi Alessandro, >> >> Thanks for answers. >> >> What I clearly understand now it that all is store in the Stanbol/clerezza >> store. >> And that I can store thesauri directly via repository or via Ontonet. >> >> What is not totally clear for me now are the concepts of "spaces", "session" >> and "scope"... >> >> In my usecase I will have many users that each save one to many thesaurus : >> - user A will store thesaurus 1 (TA1) and TA2 >> - user B will store thesaurus 1 (TB1) and TB2 and ... >> >> When user C store his TC1 he will choose to map-it to one already existing >> depending on the more appropriate one. >> >> Let's say he select the TA2. >> >> So, the mapping will be done between TC1 and TA2 (and any others >> combinations can be done afterwards). >> >> So... >> >> On 01/17/2012 10:54 AM, Alessandro Adamou wrote: >> ... >>> >>>> - User will be able to map concepts from one skos to another one. >>> >>> Setting up one Session per active user, where the mappings are managed, >>> should do the trick. To obtains the entities to map from and to, you >>> could set up a "my-skos-thesaurus" scope, load SKOS in its core space >>> and the thesaurus in its custom space. >> >> ... for my user C : >> - I create a sessionC >> - I create a "C-skos-thesaurus" scope >> - Load TC1 in "C-skos-thesaurus".coreSpace >> - load TA2 in "C-skos-thesaurus".customSpace >> - then store mappings done in sessionC >> >> That's a good use of session, scope and space ? >> >>> >>> Even better, if you think you can benefit from partitioning the >>> thesaurus somehow, you can manage multiple scopes with one partition in >>> the custom space of each. This usually comes into play if you need to >>> perform some reasoning. >>> >>>> - Standard user can only modify his maps ; power users can modify all >>>> maps (latter requirement) >>> >>> Rule of thumb (which however is currently not enforced by the framework) >>> is: >>> >>> * sessions are managed by unprivileged users or client applications >>> * scopes can be read-accessed by anyone, but only privileged users or >>> Stanbol plugins should create or tamper with them. >>> >>> As a matter of fact, anyone can do anything right now because we've no >>> REST API with authentication (yet? should we?) >> >> Yep I know that, let's see what append on this subject... even without a >> framework level solution a little workaround could not be so hard to set-up. >> >>> >>>> - Skos thesauri and concept have to be dereferencables. >>> >>> OntoNet has a mechanism for "hijacking" every loaded ontology into >>> Stanbol, and creating dynamic import statements. It is mainly designed >>> for ontology collectors, but can also be applied to ontologies not >>> loaded in a scope/session. >>> >>> As for the *concepts*, there's no rewriting of entity IRIs, nor were we >>> sure to do it as logically it would open a can of worms - that is, >>> unless we add an OWL equivalence statement everytime a concept is >>> "moved", but even so all the "old" names should still be dereferenceable! >> >> Thesauri I will import don't have prior IRIs (they are in CSV). >> So I can set up them as I want and in line with the server name. >> >> Get old names is really problematic... only currents one will be >> interesting... >> Redirect from old to current with the help of modifications history could be >> really good... >> >>> >>>> I "feel" that ontonet/kres can be great help on it, I read >>>> documentation I find about (mails and [1] essentially), but can't get >>>> clear picture of what is already there and what it not for this >>>> usecase... >>> >>> More documentation is coming right these days, in the meantime I hope >>> I've given you a clearer picture. >>> >>> I'd have a few questions, too: >>> >>> * what would your mappings look like? depending on the complexity, you >>> could find Stanbol Rules to be of use too. >> >> For now (it's not clearly define though), mapping will be done with SKOS >> properties. >> >> * It's better to use rules in this case (mapping TC1 / TA2) ? >> Constraints (for now) are to be able to get : >> - original thesaurus (just TC1) >> - or the complete one (TC1 and TA2 with mappings) >> Also be able to do some reasoning on it will be great value added. >> >>> * do you have an insight on the size of your thesaurus, in an >>> entries/triples? Is it a huge, undivided bulk or would it make sense to >>> partition it? >> >> No clear idea of the size of each individuals thesaurus... The point here is >> more the amount of thesaurus... >> IMO : 15+ of not so big thesauri. >> >>> * I assume you would interact with OntoNet via the REST API, or would >>> you need to add some server-side interaction with the Java API using a >>> new OSGi bundle or so? >> >> Don't know for now, depending how I can answer to requirements... >> >>> >>> Please feel free to write to the list on my attention for further >>> inquiries. >>> >>> Alessandro >>> >> > > > -- > M.Sc. Alessandro Adamou > > Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna > Department of Computer Science > Mura Anteo Zamboni 7, 40127 Bologna - Italy > > Semantic Technology Laboratory (STLab) > Institute for Cognitive Science and Technology (ISTC) > National Research Council (CNR) > Via Nomentana 56, 00161 Rome - Italy > > > "I will give you everything, so long as you do not demand anything." > (Ettore Petrolini, 1930) > > Not sent from my iSnobTechDevice >
