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.
| 02:25:42 | <nwalsh> | This morning I reported some problems I was having with cwm |
| 02:25:49 | <nwalsh> | DanC suggested that @forall would help |
| 02:26:01 | <nwalsh> | Anyone got a pointer to documentation for @forall |
| 02:26:08 | <nwalsh> | Several random attempts haven't worked |
| 02:27:47 | <nwalsh> | Ahhh... |
| 02:27:57 | <nwalsh> | Because it's spelled "@forAll" |
| 08:20:53 | <mahound> | hello |
| 08:26:04 | <drewp> | hi mahound |
| 09:22:12 | <danieljohnlewis> | Good Morning swiggers |
| 10:16:03 | <Wikier> | hi |
| 10:21:44 | <danieljohnlewis> | hi Wikier |
| 14:21:00 | <edsu> | cygri: ping |
| 14:21:22 | <cygri> | edsu: pong |
| 14:22:47 | <edsu> | cygri: you are richard cyganiak right? |
| 14:23:19 | <edsu> | i imagine phenny can tell me or something too :) |
| 14:23:46 | <cygri> | yes that's me ... not sure if phenny knows ;-) |
| 14:23:48 | <edsu> | cygri: edsu =~ ed summers, lurking on dbpedia list, following discussion of skos:subject with interest |
| 14:24:48 | <edsu> | cygri: i was the one asking if dc:subject had been dismissed instead of using skos:subject |
| 14:25:24 | <edsu> | umm, i mean, if skos:subject had been prefered over dc:subject |
| 14:27:43 | <cygri> | i was originally in favor of skos:subject, but am now reconsidering after a closer reading of the SKOS Core guide |
| 14:29:01 | <edsu> | cygri: i feel a bit guilty, because i mentioned how skos:subject has been intentionally left out of the latest editors draft for the skos reference |
| 14:29:22 | <edsu> | cygri: but i'm glad you cc'ed the skos lists, so that people are aware of the usage in dbpedia |
| 14:29:31 | <edsu> | cygri: since it's still kind of up in the air |
| 14:29:40 | <edsu> | cygri: from what i can tell |
| 14:32:49 | <masaka> | the idea to relate any resource and concept is ok, but that relation doesn't seem 'subject' |
| 14:35:13 | <cygri> | masaka, i tend to agree now |
| 14:35:15 | <edsu> | masaka: yeah, i'm kind of biased coming from the library-world, where resources are typically bibliographic objects |
| 14:35:45 | <edsu> | masaka: can you express why it doesn't seem that way? |
| 14:36:59 | <masaka> | ah, i'm not native English user, but 'subject' or 'topic' is not applicable to people or city etc. |
| 14:37:23 | <masaka> | i guess, it's simply dc:relation |
| 14:40:24 | <cygri> | masaka: i think dc:relation is too weak, and dc:subject suffers from the same problem as skos:subject |
| 14:41:24 | <cygri> | edsu: it's good that we have the issue out in the open now ... it's not such a big deal for dbpedia actually, because we can happily create our own property dbpedia:category or so, we do that all the time |
| 14:41:40 | <masaka> | yes, so you might define a new property as subproperty of dc:relation |
| 14:42:10 | <edsu> | cygri: i wonder, would you make it a subproperty of dc:subject like skos:subject? |
| 14:42:49 | <masaka> | i think it should not be subproperty of dc:subject |
| 14:43:25 | <edsu> | which is how skos:subject was set up in the first place :) |
| 14:44:59 | <cygri> | edsu: i think it could be a super-property of skos:subject |
| 14:45:31 | <cygri> | masaka: regarding your point that skos:subject is not necessary in SKOS ... |
| 14:45:33 | <edsu> | cygri: that would be an odd switch :) |
| 14:46:29 | <masaka> | cygri: you mean twitter message ? |
| 14:46:32 | <cygri> | ... i think that vocabularies should be well-rounded packages that cover all basic needs of a specific application, and i think that a bit of duplication with other vocabularies is not a problem ... therefore, i think skos:subject should stay in SKOS |
| 14:46:47 | <cygri> | masaka, yes |
| 14:47:09 | <edsu> | cygri: agreed |
| 14:47:41 | <masaka> | cygri: yes it could be a part of SKOS, but not essential, i thought |
| 14:48:05 | <masaka> | because, we need other terms to describe a resource anyway |
| 15:01:42 | <john-l> | What sorts of resource descriptions are we trying to make (that do not fit the semantics of `skos:subject`)? |
| 15:04:12 | <masaka> | an example discussed in dbpedia-ml is how to relate dbpedia:Tim_Berners-Lee and dbpedia:Category:Living_people |
| 15:04:34 | <john-l> | masaka: Thanks, I was trying to find the original example. |
| 15:05:07 | <john-l> | That wouldn't be rdf:type? |
| 15:06:58 | <masaka> | it could be, but it raises another problem to use wikipedia category as a Class |
| 15:08:41 | <cygri_> | john-l, the DBpedia categories are derived from the wikipedia category system, and they don't work as classes for various reasons (e.g. cycles in the hierarchy) |
| 15:09:11 | <john-l> | cygri_: Ah, thank you. |
| 15:09:33 | <john-l> | ACTION remembers reading about cycles in the WP hierarchy somewhere in the WP docs |
| 15:10:29 | <cygri_> | it's quite funny, if you start at Berlin and go up the hierarchy, you end up in categories such as “Jesus”, “Asia” and “Mexico” |
| 15:12:05 | <jaa> | Jesus is a city in Montreal |
| 15:16:30 | <john-l> | Yeah, WP categorization could definitely use a proprietary property. :) |
| 15:18:16 | <john-l> | *Some* of the WP categories seem like classes; it would be useful if WP could make some sort of distinction. |
| 15:19:11 | <john-l> | ACTION imagines URIs like .../Category:Guilds and .../Class:Cities_in_Germany |
| 15:19:27 | <masaka> | sorry john-l, what is WP ? |
| 15:19:36 | <john-l> | Apologies; I mean Wikipedia. |
| 15:19:54 | <masaka> | i see, thank you :) |
| 18:15:34 | <DanC> | ACTION waves |
| 18:15:50 | <iand> | ACTION waves |
| 18:16:02 | <HarryH> | ACTION waves |
| 18:19:03 | <DanC> | ACTION tends to a few other things for a sec... |
| 18:19:09 | <john-l> | HarryH: Good afternoon. |
| 18:19:17 | <john-l> | HarryH: Did you still need DocBook help? |
| 19:01:56 | <duck1123> | Has anyone noticed that Triplr will screw up conversion of large RDF/XML files to turtle? |
| 23:22:52 | <yvesr> | http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/programmes/ |
| 23:23:12 | <yvesr> | A: An ontology for brands/series/episodes/broadcasts/etc. |
| 23:26:17 | <yvesr> | A: Quite a lot of linked data to come, from the BBC Programmes team |
Back to channel and daily index: content-negotiated html turtle