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>
[Fwd: Ontology suggestions needed]
Hi Kingsley -
Thanks for the responses, CCing to list...
Talk soon,
John.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Ontology suggestions needed
Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 11:48:28 -0700
From: kidehen
To: John Breslin
References: <465B09F4.7070400@deri.org>
John,
On May 28, 12:57 pm, John Breslin wrote:
> Hi all -
>
> Thanks for all your recent comments both on and offlist.
>
> A few more ontology suggestions we need your help with.
>
> (1)
>
> We have sioc:topic which can link Sites, Forums, Posts etc. to resources
> that are topics of those documents or containers... (Also,
> unfortunately we did not use foaf:topic as the domain is a Document,
> which some of the SIOC classes are not). We can also use dc:subject for
> free text. But what if we want to say that a particular Post describes
> a book or is about two books, perhaps something like sioc:about or
> sioc:describes is needed.
Why not Tag (via SKOS) the post for this purpose? The rest of the
specificity should be in the content of the post (i.e. content
structure).
A Post about a book could be a "Book Review" or a Post that mentions
the Book. If it is a "Book Review" then a sioc:Item subclass for
"Reviews" should be adequate. If it's a Post that mentions a book then
"sioc:related" should suffice. Otherwise, just Tag the post.
>
> (2)
>
> We plan to add Category and Tag classes to the sioc:types module to help
> with classifying the above sioc:topics for import/export. Suggestions
> welcome.
>
Exactly!
> (3)
>
> We want to add has_part/part_of as subproperties of the corresponding
> DCMI terms (hasPart/isPartOf AFAIR).
>
> (4)
>
> I am of the opinion that a Community is NOT a subclass of Space. A
> Space is where data resides, but a community extends beyond mere data.
>
Community is Data.
Data is atomic when dealing with Networks, really.
A Community is one representation of Data in specific context (be it
your AddressBook, Blogroll, Boardscape etc..). A Community is a type
of Data Space.
The conceptual partitioning here ultimately aids and simplifies URI
dereferencing. If you don't have a conceptual starting point for
traversing graphs you end up with an extremely expensive graph route
traversal and route construction.
A single URI should expose:
1. Communities
2. Conversations across communities
3. Types of conversations (Blog Posts & Post Comments, Mailing List
Posts, Wiki Articles and Talk Pages etc..).
If a Community isn't a Data Space then what does it become? How does
this make the cost of URI dereferencing (aka Graph Traversal) more
effective etc?
Note, the depth and breadth of URIs is what ultimately determines the
value of a URI. There will be URIs and URIs on the Semantic Data Web.
I hope SIOC provides a mechanism for coherent construction of rich
URIs (rich is expressed in depth and breadth of Linked Data).
> (5)
>
> We still need a way to recommend to people looking at the SIOC Types
> module what kind of vocabularies can be used for Items contained in
> particular Container subclasses. For example, to say that in a
> sioct:AddressBook - that you could use JohnsAddressBook (of type
> sioct:AddressBook) container_of John (of type foaf:Person or foaf:Agent)
> - without having to define millions of subproperties of container_of to
> link things, because these are only suggestions (someone may choose to
> put something else into their AddressBook). Ideas needed :-) This is
> related to an idea we had for a Related Ontologies ontology [1].
>
I think being able to dereference the Schema / Ontology is a starting
point. Ultimately, RDF Authors (direct or indirect) will lookup
dereferencable ontologies and use this as an unobtrusive mechanism for
"Term ReUse". If I can dereference the SIOC Types Modules I can
actually demonstrate the point by adding it to:
http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen/index.vspx?page=&id=1203 .
Which also means it would play well in our SPARQL QBE Tool (which will
ultimately include RDF Authoring capability since it is actually
inspired by RDF Author: http://rdfweb.org/people/damian/RDFAuthor/Tutorial/Tutorial1/).
Kingsley
> [1]http://wiki.sioc-project.org/index.php/SuggestedOntologiesOntology
>
> At the moment we'll just have something like:
>
> rdfs:label="Address Book">
> Describes a collection of personal or organisational
> addresses.
>
>
> rdfs:label="Describes a single person, group or organisation."/>
>
>
> That seeAlso could be replaced by something more descriptive like...
>
>
>
> rdf:resource="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#container_of"/>
>
>
>
> or:
>
>
>
> rdf:resource="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#has_container"/>
>
>
>
> Something similar could exist for properties that you want to use to
> relate to classes ("useAsProperty" with a suggestedDomain and a
> suggestedRange).
>
> Thanks, looking forward to hearing from you,
>
> John.
>
> --
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
2007-06-05T14:46:01+01:00
2007-06-05T14:46:01+01:00