Experimental IRC log swig-2008-09-15

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.

01:20:02<MFen>anyone using rdfalchemy?
01:22:02<earle>http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/HTML_5_Won_t_Be_Ready_Until_2022DOT_Yes__2022DOT
01:22:15<earle>A:|HTML 5 Won’t Be Ready Until 2022. Yes, 2022.
01:22:20<earle>A:facepalm.
01:27:05<earle>A1:[facepalm|http://bostonist.com/attachments/boston_michael/picard-facepalm.jpeg]
01:27:18<earle>grr, syntax.
01:27:22<earle>A1:+[facepalm|http://bostonist.com/attachments/boston_michael/picard-facepalm.jpeg]
01:32:20<dorian>ha what
01:33:03<dorian>earle: is there a relatively sane breakdown of the respective statuses of html5 and xhtml2?
01:33:26<dorian>more specifically, has the latter gone the way of the betamax
01:33:32<dorian>or is there still interest in it
01:34:44<earle>to be honest, I've really been trying to avoid the whole issue in the time-honored ostrich fashion
01:35:05<dorian>ah
01:35:08<dorian>yeah
01:35:10<MFen>maybe we can get them to agree to a compromise. xhtml5
01:35:18<earle>I liked xhtml 2, dammit
01:35:22<dorian>i do too
01:35:40<earle>see, now I'm even using past tense. HOPE HAS DIED
01:35:49<dorian>what i'm particularly interested in it for is like an origin markup vocabulary
01:35:57<MFen>see my proposal above. it has the advantage of both an X prefix and a large version number
01:36:01<earle>actually, maybe this latest development will be a shot in the arm for xhtml2.
01:36:12<earle>MFen: ooh, you cynic.
01:36:24<dorian>even if the public-facing vocabulary is something else
01:36:41<MFen>the only question is am i cynical ENOUGH?
01:37:11<dorian>xhtml2 strikes me as being potentially very effective to store markup internally somewhere
01:37:26<dorian>i.e. some arbitrary backend
02:36:15<kasei>I'm not sure the facepalm is really fair to the html5 timeline... the reasoning hixie gives for the timeline seems rather sensible to me.
02:54:28<MFen>any rdflib users?
02:55:00<MFen>i'm trying to figure out why there's no friggin way to parse a string, rather than a file
03:01:09<dajobe>http://www.webfoundation.org/
03:01:09<phenny>dajobe: 05 Sep 21:19Z <kidehen> tell dajobe what happened to <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/kidehen@openlinksw.com/blog/?id=1430> re. PlanetRDF? I've checked by RDF feed and don't see anything broken
03:01:11<phenny>dajobe: 05 Sep 21:20Z <kidehen> tell dajobe did validation at: http://tinyurl.com/5gq5gq
03:01:12<phenny>dajobe: 06 Sep 00:42Z <kidehen> tell dajobe how does <http:razor.occams.info/blog/> get on PlanetRDF?
03:01:18<dajobe>B:|World Wide Web Foundation
03:01:36<dajobe>B:WWWF not WWF. definitely not WWE
06:40:38<RKlyne>MFen: You can use a StringIO object...
11:10:18<duck1123>can anyone point me to any articles/blog posts on why reification is bad?
11:17:33<shellac>duck1123, I think the primer may have something...
11:17:57<swh>duck1123: reification, or the RDF Reification mechanism? They're different things
11:18:03<shellac> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#reification
11:23:42<duck1123>I believe just the rdf reification mechanism
11:24:30<shellac>you might also try poking around http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/
11:24:32<RKlyne>duck1123, http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Reify.html
11:33:08<danbri>duck1123, try http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.w3c.semantic-web/2355 and http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#Reif
11:33:40<danbri>"In sum: the meaning of the reification is that a document exists containing a triple token which means whatever the first graph means.Note that this way of understanding the reification vocabulary does not interpret reification as a form of quotation. Rather, the reification describes the relationship between a token of a triple and the resources that triple refers to. The reification can be read intuitively as saying "'this piece of RDF talks about th
14:28:06<Knud>Is there a commonly used property for short labels?
14:28:13<Knud>E.g., "ISWC2008" as opposed to the longish "7th International Semantic Web Conference"
14:28:25<Knud>not rdfs:label, that seems to be too general
14:28:32<Knud>*generic
14:30:48<ldodds>foaf:name?
14:31:38<Knud>hm
14:31:58<ldodds>the domain is owl:Thing so fairly generic
14:32:07<ldodds>but a bit more specific than label :)
14:32:42<mhausenblas>something like foaf:nick but for !foaf:Person, hm?
14:33:01<Knud>yes, that was what I was about to say
14:33:11<mhausenblas>no. sorry. dunno :D
14:33:30<Knud>xyz:nick or xyz:acronym or xyz:abbreviation or something like that
14:33:39<mhausenblas>ACTION is sorry for being soooo stupid. I owe you a beer Knud ;)
14:33:45<Knud>hehe
14:34:02<Knud>we can have that beer at ISWC
14:34:08<mhausenblas>... in Karlsruhe. Just to make the context crystal clear
14:34:10<mhausenblas>yeah
14:35:05<Knud>will the SW ever happen if we don't even know a generic acronym property? :O
14:35:07<scor>Knud: skos:altLabel ?
14:35:21<bengee>aharth's cfp ont had one, IIRC from confoto
14:35:22<Knud>hm, I'll have a look
14:36:06<scor>Knud: http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-primer/#secalt
14:36:20<Knud>thanks scor
14:36:25<MacTed>my first thoughts are along the lines of shortName or commonName
14:36:38<MacTed>but I don't know what ontology contains the appropriate one
14:37:34<Knud>yes, that is my problem!
14:37:59<MacTed>:-) :-/
14:38:06<bengee>http://sw.deri.org/2005/08/conf/cfp.owl
14:38:22<bengee>C:|CfP ontology by aharth
14:38:26<Knud>I guess I could use skos:altLabel, but it isn't really defined as "the acronym of something"
14:38:51<Knud>thanks bengee, I'll look at that as well
14:38:53<bengee>C: has "title": short name (e.g. SIGMOD, VLDB), subclass of rdfs:label
14:39:12<scor>Knud: true. it's defined as an alternate label of a skos concept
14:39:14<bengee>not sure if it's widely deployed, though
14:39:35<bengee>or deployed at all..
14:39:36<mhausenblas>anyone rememberPICS? IIRC they had something as well (same deployment issue, herer ;)
14:39:50<mhausenblas>.g PICS RDF
14:39:51<phenny>mhausenblas: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-pics
14:40:27<mhausenblas>whaa. forget it ;)
14:41:35<Knud>ok, the cfp:title seems to be what I mean
14:42:23<Knud>unfortunately "title" is somewhat misleading, I think
14:42:34<bengee>yeah, true
14:42:49<MacTed>oh, here's a fun exploration base... http://www.daml.org/ontologies/property.html
14:43:25<MacTed>not clear whether it's static or dynamic, nor what the ontology list is, from this page ...
14:43:49<MacTed>ah, but easy details -- http://www.daml.org/ontologies/
14:44:36<MacTed>hm. apparently far out of date, as the last submission date listed is Dec 2003
14:44:42<MacTed>that's unfortunate
14:44:42<Knud>lol
14:47:19<danbri>PICS, sure
14:47:22<danbri>RDF was PICS-NG
14:47:45<mhausenblas>good to have danbri around :)
14:48:15<danbri>-> http://www.w3.org/PICS/NG/
14:49:11<danbri>http://www.w3.org/PICS/iacwcv2.htm
14:49:20<danbri>D:|Old doc on PICS
14:49:28<MacTed>wowzers... that daml info would be so much more useful if it were given an RDFa once-over ... or if the xml version were well-formed, and therefore parseable
14:49:33<Knud>this sounds useful, but it's 11 years old
14:50:10<mhausenblas>what Knud (and FWIW /me) is after is a stable, widely deployed voc, right?
14:50:38<Knud>that would be preferable to just coining a new property that nobody else uses
14:50:55<Knud>but really, all those naming properties already make my head spin
14:51:09<Knud>foaf:name, dc:title, rdfs:label, skos:label, ... arrrrghhh
14:51:46<mhausenblas>just use owl:equivalentProperty and all is well, dear Knud :)
14:52:12<Knud>yes, if I then also use OWL reasoning
14:53:09<drrho>is there actually a way to use owl:equiv..Property, inverse, functional... without an OWL reasoner?
14:53:48<drrho>or asked another way: is there software which supports this?
14:54:10<ldodds_>if you have a rules engine then you could write equivalent rules, that would achieve the same effect without a full reasoner
14:55:06<drrho>hmmm, will have to check this with AllegroGraph....
14:55:45<drrho>btw, any opinions on AllegroGraph here?
14:56:54<MacTed>here we go -- http://sw.opencyc.org/concept/Mx4rwP336JwpEbGdrcN5Y29ycA
15:00:54<Knud>ugh
17:42:01<neo1234>hi folks
17:42:58<neo1234>Can anyone tell if the topic of semantic Web falls under Artificial Intellegience?
17:43:08<neo1234>tell me*
17:44:17<kasei>neo1234: i think you might get different answers from different people.
17:44:41<neo1234>hmm
17:44:45<kasei>parts of the semweb can probably be classified that way, but not all.
17:45:06<kasei>ot at least, that's not a lot of people's focus.
17:45:23<neo1234>the RDF and Ontogology technologies are all AI technologies no?
17:47:45<kasei>i guess you might say that (from a KR perspective).
17:48:11<neo1234>KR?
17:48:47<kasei>knowledge representation.
17:49:05<kasei>maybe someone else can give you some thoughts... I'm in the middle of a meeting right now :(
17:49:14<neo1234>ah
17:49:46<neo1234>kasei: I think I get the gist of the answer .. thanks
17:53:34<Shepard>neo1234: for the other people it just deals with data integration :)
21:18:25<renke2>Can anyone of you recommend a good single user OpenID server?
22:12:04<idickinson1>I've just been asked by a colleague for suggestions for an ontology documentation tool
22:12:10<idickinson1>sort of like javadoc for OWL
22:12:29<idickinson1>I vaguely remember something like this, but my google-fu has failed me
22:12:32<idickinson1>any ideas?
22:31:32<idickinson1>ACTION pings danbri: Hi Dan!

Back to channel and daily index: content-negotiated html turtle