ldodds_: Play with Jena rules engine online.
ldodds_: There's an example using these rules. For background on those rules see this posting
timbl: looks like n3 from a distance and the URL ends in .n3 (which means nothing of course) but it isn't n3.
timbl: Useful mapping though
timbl: N3 rules would be e.g { ?C a rss:item } => {?C a foaf:Document}.
ldodds_: yes, sorry a typo on my part. the rules obviously aren't N3
ldodds_: There's an example using these rules. For background on those rules see this posting
timbl: looks like n3 from a distance and the URL ends in .n3 (which means nothing of course) but it isn't n3.
timbl: Useful mapping though
timbl: N3 rules would be e.g { ?C a rss:item } => {?C a foaf:Document}.
ldodds_: yes, sorry a typo on my part. the rules obviously aren't N3
jhendler: Jeff Song of Fujitsu made these slides which compare WSDL-S, OWL-S and the WSDL to RDF mapping
jhendler: they were presented in my advanced Sem Web seminar at UMCP last night
jhendler: and they're the best comparison I've seen to date
jhendler: forwarded with Jeff's permission
jhendler: they were presented in my advanced Sem Web seminar at UMCP last night
jhendler: and they're the best comparison I've seen to date
jhendler: forwarded with Jeff's permission
bblfish: Latest Atom-OWL with 2 examples
bblfish: what process do we need to follow to get this adopted as a W3C standard ontology of atom?
danbri: I'm not sure it's W3C's job to define the classes and properties semi-implicit in an IETF standard.
danbri: If the AtomPub WG were interested, could probably have an incubator group at W3C to write a Note on the issue (would need 3 W3C Members).
danbri: How is the work received by the Atom WG?
bblfish: It would make the a sparql end point possible: http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceSparqlLink
bblfish: please send suggestions to atom-owl mailing list: http://groups.google.com/group/atom-owl
bblfish: No negative feedback on atom list. No outcry. No nasty comments. I think some initial intrigued interest. Especially with the sparql end point idea.
bblfish: I have now written the missing atom-owl primer
bblfish: henry.story@sun.com for info
bblfish: what process do we need to follow to get this adopted as a W3C standard ontology of atom?
danbri: I'm not sure it's W3C's job to define the classes and properties semi-implicit in an IETF standard.
danbri: If the AtomPub WG were interested, could probably have an incubator group at W3C to write a Note on the issue (would need 3 W3C Members).
danbri: How is the work received by the Atom WG?
bblfish: It would make the a sparql end point possible: http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceSparqlLink
bblfish: please send suggestions to atom-owl mailing list: http://groups.google.com/group/atom-owl
bblfish: No negative feedback on atom list. No outcry. No nasty comments. I think some initial intrigued interest. Especially with the sparql end point idea.
bblfish: I have now written the missing atom-owl primer
bblfish: henry.story@sun.com for info
evanpro: Only works on a per-city basis at this point, no mechanism yet for marking up individual listings.
evanpro: output in RDF and HTML <meta> tags (for e.g. geourl.org).