SIOC profile for 'sioc-project.org' A SIOC profile describes the structure and contents of a community site (e.g., weblog) in a machine processable form. For more information refer to the <a href="http://rdfs.org/sioc">SIOC project page</a> Using tags for POWDER content labels Hi all! Sorry for the cross-posting, but this is a topic that I think is in the intersection between POWDER, SIOC and SKOS, thus I would like to hear opinions from several groups. Reply-To is tentatively set to public-powderwg@w3.org, but post as you see appropriate (I guess anti-spam measures could make this nasty...) I intend to support POWDER content labels on my.opera.com, since we live with people posting nudes and stuff. Censorship is a touchy issue. However, rigid taxonomies have never been popular among users, tags are however, so I intend that people tag their stuff, and then map that tag to a POWDER description. The basic infrastructure for doing this is allready in place: http://my.opera.com/semweb/blog/2007/03/08/marrying-folksonomies-and-taxonomies However, the current interface is now rather complex: http://my.opera.com/semweb/blog/2007/03/23/complexities-of-tag-to-vocabulary-mappin to the extent where I think it would confuse many users and thus be of little value. So, this is how I imagine it done: A user has tags, modelled with SKOS concepts. Thus every tag gets a URI, http://my.opera.com/username/tag/nude for example. Then, this tag needs to be bound to a resource on one hand and a POWDER description on the other. sioc:topic comes to mind, thus sioc:topic . Since ICRA/FOSI will have created the vocabulary about nudity for us, all I want to do is to link to the description, that I hope Phil one day will create (this is just an example!): ex:means . The first obvious thing is that I don't know what predicate that should be used to link the SKOS concept to the description. However, that could be another issue for the open SKOS issue in the core guide as http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-guide-20051102/#secmodellingrdf If this approach to tag-to-URI mapping is feasible, I would be happy if something like that went into SKOS. The implementation I currently have on my.opera.com is allready a use case for this. The next problem is that I'm not linking a resource directly to a description, thus making SPARQL queries and the general model more complex. The alternative, as I see it, is to make the UI more complex on the tagging services, but I don't think that's a good approach. Thus, I think the minimum graph to link a resource to a POWDER description is sioc:topic . ex:means . and an user agent would have to understand that. I was myself hoping to get away with a single triple when I started to work on this, but as noted in my blog, it is a matter of who gets to deal with the complexity. So, is this the right balance? Note that this approach does not at all use the content grouping that the POWDER group discusses at length, it just links resource to description. Of course, for large-scale workflows, content grouping is important, but I think "the long tail" may be more comfortable with this approach. It would be very interesting if we could get del.icio.us involved, for example. Cheers, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Semantic Web Specialist Opera Software ASA --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- 2007-04-12T13:07:25+01:00 2007-05-17T09:38:37+01:00