Available formats: content-negotiated html turtle (see SIOC for the vocabulary)
Back to channel and daily index: content-negotiated html turtle
These logs are provided as an experiment in indexing discussions using IRCHub.py, Irc2RDF.hs, and SIOC.
| 00:21:41 | <Shepard> | CaptSolo: sioc:topic or sioc:about? but I get the feeling I'm missing something about the problem :) |
| 00:22:45 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: not necessarily (re missing) |
| 00:22:55 | <CaptSolo> | well, we don't know details |
| 00:23:04 | <CaptSolo> | sioc:topic 'd be my first pick |
| 00:23:10 | <Shepard> | charles2: welcome back :) |
| 00:23:18 | <CaptSolo> | have to figure when 'd we use sioc:about |
| 00:23:27 | <CaptSolo> | ah, charles2 is here again :) |
| 00:23:49 | <charles2> | howdy CaptSolo |
| 00:25:48 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: you might have received my email reply re. questions asked here |
| 00:25:59 | <charles2> | CaptSolo thanks for the message earlier. I am trying to extend tabulator firefox extension to support distributed microblogging and I was trying to figure out how I should represent a message that is intended for someone or about them |
| 00:26:00 | <CaptSolo> | provided i got the right email address for you |
| 00:26:12 | <CaptSolo> | wow, interesting! |
| 00:27:24 | <Shepard> | wasn't there a proposed "recipient" or something similar? |
| 00:27:56 | <charles2> | its pretty fun. The best I came up with was to use the reply_of to say that it is intended for a person and then i determine that if it is a microblogpost, it is a reply to a message, and if it is to a user it is a message intended to be for someone ( like the twitter @ mention) |
| 00:28:01 | <Shepard> | charles2: if it's really about a person then I'd go for sioc:about |
| 00:29:14 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: might be good to discuss on the mailing list |
| 00:29:20 | <CaptSolo> | to see what other suggestions people have |
| 00:29:35 | <CaptSolo> | (unless you need just a "quick and dirty" solution) |
| 00:30:17 | <charles2> | I'd be interested in playing around with it :) Its for my undergrad research project so more learning is better. |
| 00:30:49 | <CaptSolo> | and you can experiment / look at different ways to do it then :) |
| 00:31:17 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: it's just that i am uncertain now if sioc:about is a good solution for this |
| 00:31:42 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: yes, there was a proposed recipient property, but i don't see it in the ontology |
| 00:32:55 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: the recipient property would be best fit for indicating whom the messages is intended for |
| 00:33:12 | <CaptSolo> | (if it existed. but we will need to add it sooner or later) |
| 00:33:19 | <Shepard> | I really love sioc:about btw, it's a very flexible property with many use cases and I've even created sub-properties of it for stuff in my uni project :) |
| 00:33:33 | <charles2> | :D |
| 00:33:41 | <CaptSolo> | here is some old discussion re recipient http://sioc-project.org/node/232 |
| 00:34:05 | <CaptSolo> | (a copy of mailing list posts, should have same conversation on official SIOC-Dev archives too) |
| 00:34:23 | <CaptSolo> | addressed_to and has_recipient were proposed |
| 00:34:52 | <CaptSolo> | in fact, i wonder how can email and mailing list messages be fully represented in SIOC w/o such a property |
| 00:35:05 | <CaptSolo> | should ask Wikier what were they using (if anything) |
| 00:35:30 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: sounds interesting re. subproperties and uses of sioc:about |
| 00:35:44 | <CaptSolo> | super-generic properties FTW? |
| 00:36:05 | <Shepard> | yep! |
| 00:36:20 | <CaptSolo> | ah, sioc:about is indeed a cool property |
| 00:37:03 | <Shepard> | I think this is an important principle in ontology design: if you see something that you think might be a problem in other areas as well, then make you solution as generic as possible so that it can be re-used elsewhere |
| 00:37:17 | <CaptSolo> | can be used to e.g. link together a post and RDF data extracted from it (from RDFa, etc) |
| 00:37:53 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: an extreme would be to create an over-generic super-property that can be used for anything |
| 00:38:04 | <Shepard> | heh |
| 00:38:09 | <CaptSolo> | x:any_kind_of_relation |
| 00:38:21 | <CaptSolo> | heh, we've got sioc:related too :D |
| 00:38:37 | <CaptSolo> | and sioc:links_to (which is quite specific though, compared with the rest of properties mentioned here) |
| 00:39:06 | <CaptSolo> | generic properties make ontology more reusable |
| 00:39:14 | <Shepard> | well, an example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/programmes/2009-04-17.shtml#genre - as much as I like the programmes ontology, properties like genre or tag are just general things that are neeed everywhere and so they shouldn't be restricted to programmes |
| 00:39:29 | <CaptSolo> | but - not sure what is the semantics of a microblog post |
| 00:39:43 | <CaptSolo> | from the message we can say for sure that a nick is mentioned in a message |
| 00:40:14 | <CaptSolo> | (perhaps SMOB has more detailed info on this, i am considering twitter / identi.ca for the moment) |
| 00:40:30 | <Shepard> | there's also sioc:links_to :) |
| 00:40:31 | <CaptSolo> | and we can also infer that a message is in a reply to someone |
| 00:40:51 | <CaptSolo> | though this inference i a bit shaky |
| 00:40:57 | <Shepard> | oh, you mentioned links_to already |
| 00:41:24 | <CaptSolo> | e.g. twitter broke replies (#fixreplies) and now some people work around it by putting some chars in front of the nich |
| 00:41:29 | <CaptSolo> | s/nich/nick |
| 00:41:35 | <CaptSolo> | such as ".@CaptSolo" |
| 00:42:13 | <CaptSolo> | but, ok, assuming we know something is a reply to somebody else, we would ideally have this has_recipient property |
| 00:42:19 | <CaptSolo> | might be a subproperty of sioc:about |
| 00:42:40 | <charles2> | so the problem i saw was that if the microblogs are truly distributed, I need to somehow embed the recipient. Right now I have reply_of then (once i get the uri deferencing to work without making my fan go crazy) figure out whether the reply is to a user or to a microblog post |
| 00:42:42 | <CaptSolo> | if we just know that a message mentions someone's nick, how would we express that in SIOC? |
| 00:43:03 | <CaptSolo> | it is not really about the person, strictly speaking it just mentions a person |
| 00:44:04 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: from domain/range of http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/#term_reply_of you'd see it is a relation between items |
| 00:44:20 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: not entirely correct to use it b/w an item and a person or a user |
| 00:44:39 | <Shepard> | unless you see yourself as an item :) |
| 00:44:54 | <Shepard> | "post me, baby!" |
| 00:45:00 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: indeed, in the distributed scenario info about a recipient 'd be valuable to have |
| 00:45:06 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: hehe :D |
| 00:45:21 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard: they might be defined as disjoint. can't remember now. |
| 00:46:32 | <charles2> | but is a User a person? A person holds a User right? |
| 00:46:50 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: btw, sioc uses inverse properties, that is, it has relations in both directions |
| 00:47:23 | <CaptSolo> | which might be seen as a bit redundant as you could express the same knowledge using just one of them |
| 00:47:50 | <charles2> | actually i found it rather useful–at least when i was trying to figure out what was going on in tabulator |
| 00:47:53 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: in the pair has_reply / reply_of the former is used more |
| 00:48:18 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: useful to have inverses? |
| 00:48:44 | <CaptSolo> | how do they help debug / track what is going on in tabulator? |
| 00:48:56 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: a person hold a user account |
| 00:49:34 | <CaptSolo> | Shepard++ /me still laughing about the "post me, baby!" :D |
| 00:50:22 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: see if you want to use has_reply instead |
| 00:50:55 | <Shepard> | ;) |
| 00:51:35 | <charles2> | CaptSolo: is has_reply appropriate? I have a MicroblogPost which contains the text itself and links to the user / microblogpost it replies to |
| 00:56:03 | <charles2> | if i understand correctly has_reply points to something which has replied to the item in question? |
| 01:09:36 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: that is the tricky bit, and a reason why we have inverses |
| 01:10:05 | <CaptSolo> | because people think of different names for relation depending on its direction |
| 01:10:24 | <CaptSolo> | while you could use the same property and just reverse its operands |
| 01:11:34 | <CaptSolo> | if X is a mblogpost that links to another microblogpost Y it replies to, then |
| 01:12:07 | <CaptSolo> | how do you currently express that relation? |
| 01:13:58 | <charles2> | CaptSolo: currently i have a microblog X and in it i replies to another post Y |
| 01:28:29 | <CaptSolo> | charles2: how would that relation look in RDF? |
| 01:31:13 | <charles2> | CaptSolo: oh sorry, unexpected visit from a friend. one sec |
| 01:35:58 | <charles2> | http://pastebin.com/d2c98c3eb |
| 01:36:52 | <charles2> | all of the users and posts are in one file at the moment for simplicity |
| 01:37:08 | <charles2> | so #p1 is another post |
| 01:48:57 | <CaptSolo> | the <#Michael> part is not correct re what we talked about before |
| 01:49:04 | <CaptSolo> | but putting that aside... |
| 01:50:03 | <CaptSolo> | so there is #s1 sioc:reply_of #p1 |
| 01:50:25 | <CaptSolo> | which translates as "s1 is a reply to p1" |
| 01:50:55 | <CaptSolo> | now, it will look different in the "tree-like" structure that you used |
| 01:51:08 | <CaptSolo> | but you could express the same relation also as |
| 01:51:21 | <CaptSolo> | #p1 sioc:has_reply #s1 |
| 02:03:06 | <charles2> | CaptSolo: cool :) thanks for explaining |
| 02:04:05 | <charles2> | oh so, if i wanted to put the #p1 sioc:has_reply #s1 I would have put that under #p1, correct? |
| 02:15:08 | <CaptSolo> | yes |
| 02:15:27 | <CaptSolo> | the relation is inverse so object and subject swap places |
| 02:16:09 | <CaptSolo> | ok, later. time to sleep. |
| 02:19:45 | <charles2> | alright |
| 02:19:53 | <charles2> | thanks for all the help! :) |
| 15:34:47 | <charles2> | CaptSolo: I just realized something. Currently I have a User that has a microblog post. What i can, and probably should do, is have a Microblog have the Microblog posts, then use the reply_of to point to the microblog. |
| 15:40:32 | <charles2> | that relation could represent the equivalent of @ replies |
| 15:41:30 | <charles2> | It would be interesting to know how SMOB does it |
Back to channel and daily index: content-negotiated html turtle