SIOC Specification update - v1.08
We have updated the SIOC Specification:
- removed deprecated properties
* changed links to SIOC project pages to http://sioc-project.org
Properties deprecated are created_at, modified_at, description,
subject, title.
Deprecation of these properties was decided on the mailing list and
#sioc earlier and is now implemented. Motivation - existing properties
(e.g., from Dublin Core) that can be used to describe this information,
removing redundancy.
For each of these properties owl:versionInfo in the ontology namespace
[1] describes details, e.g., what properties to use instead. External
properties to be used with SIOC are listed in the SIOC Specification
section "External Classes and Properties" [2].
[1] http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#
[2] http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/#sec-external
Best,
Uldis
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SIOC-Dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sioc-dev-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sioc-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
- Login to post comments
This resource is supported by Science Foundation Ireland under grant number SFI/02/CE1/I131 (Líon) and SFI/08/CE/I1380 (Líon 2) at the Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway.
Syndicate
Implementation of the SIOC v1.08 ontology in Talk Digger
Hi guys,
I just updated the implementation of the SIOC ontology in Talk Digger[1]. The
new implementation should reflect all the recent discussions you had on the
mailing list.
A good example could be found here [2]. It is probably one of the more complete
examples of the SIOC implementation into Talk Digger.
Also, I added a foaf:Document instance. It have a direct concequence on
PingtheSemanticWeb.com. Why? Because each “SIOC” document on Talk Digger, will
be archived in both “SIOC” and “FOAF” sections of PingtheSemanticWeb[3].
Okay, I’ll re-explain how PTSW is working. If it find an instance of a FOAF,
SIOC, or DOAP class in a RDF document, it will include them in one (or more) of
the associated list. Considering that each Talk Digger conversations’ RDF
document has both FOAF and SIOC classes instantiated, each document will be
archived under the SIOC and FOAF sections. This is not intuitive and it seems a
bug, but when I think about it, it is what we need. That way, if a crawler asks
for FOAF data, it will receive the links to these RDF documents as well. They
don’t represent a Person, but a Document, personally I think it is okay, but am
I right?
So, it would be appreciated if you could check my new implementation of the
SIOC ontology (v1.08) on Talk Digger, and if you could give me your opinion
about PTSW’s comportment.
[1] http://www.talkdigger.com
[2] http://www.talkdigger.com/conversations/3spots.blogspot.com
[3] http://pingthesemanticweb.com
Thanks,
Take care,
Salutations,
Fred
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SIOC-Dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sioc-dev-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sioc-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---