Semantic Web Interest Group IRC Scratchpad

Welcome to the Semantic Web Interest Group scratchpad generated automatically from discussions on IRC at Freenode channel #swig 2001-2018 approx by the chump bot.

Nearby: IRC logs | semantic-web list | W3C Wiki (Recent changes) | delicious swigbot

last updated at 2010-07-02 19:49
karlushi: complementary article on interpreting Ugaritic language spoken 3,500 years ago.
danbri: "Most authors of data on WWW have difficulty securely asserting authorship of their online content, since they cannot use the methods available to webmasters."
danbri: "This document specifies LOOK, a standard for creators of online content to associate their cryptographic identities with online resources over which they may have only partial control."
danbri: " In contrast to existing general purpose digital signature formats, LOOK is designed to be flexible enough to fit within constraints of existing publishing frameworks."
danbri: "A LOOK uses the XML cryptography standards specified in [W3DSIG2]."
danbri: I {LIKE} this
karlushi: "The word Friends is unhelpful"
karlushi: 4 to 6 (independent) groups of 2 to 10 "friends"
karlushi: "only 3% [of people in groups] were called friends"
timbl: foaf:knows rdfs:label "acquaintance".
karlushi: "One research study found that only 18% of users updated their profile after 24 hours of creating it, and only 12% updated after one week."
karlushi: first times are key
karlushi: "Privacy is a process of boundary management. Itʼs about controlling how much other people know about you." See
danbri: ExifTool is a platform-independent Perl library plus a command-line application for reading, writing and editing meta information in a wide variety of files.
karlushi: comments are welcome to improve it. Please Baby steps -
mischat: not semweb, but funny too ;)
danbri: Ok not particularly semweb, but quite cool
danbri: "The reason that Facebook is using an abbreviated version of RDFa is that they want to make it as simple as possible for publishers to deploy it. And the W3C is fine with this, because it has a rules standard called RIF that can convert Open Graph code into proper RDFa if needed. "
danbri: SAnnnnnnddrrrrrrooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
danbri: /me looks for PHP RIF toolkit
tobyink: my comment (gist is that OGP is proper RDFa)
danbri: The RDFa is quirky in the sense that it's classes are things we might call "MoviePage" rather than "Movie". But lots of RDF makes similar nods towards documents; eg. foaf:schoolHomepage
danbri: We might prefer URIs to be represented as such, but really I can't get worked up about that...
danbri: "This document shows how OWL 2 RL can be implemented using RIF. It provides an analysis of how to represent OWL 2 RL inference rules within RIF Core."
danbri: Described using RIF presentation syntax, which is itself described in English.
danbri: Not wanting to look at the (presumably) unpresentable real syntax, ... how does RIF's presentation syntax compare to N3?
danbri: I pretty much agree with this take
danbri: Asking a machine for making standards (W3C) what to do next, ... you're going to get a 'we should do some new standards work' answer
danbri: (Maybe I should've submitted a position paper, but I didn't have travel funding to spare to attend...)
libby: "The W3C groups still seem to believe that syntactic sugar is harmless. We suffer from spec obesity, badly. If we really want to improve RDF, then we should go, well, for a low-carb layer cake."
melvster: Federated Social Web Invites
Created by the Daily Chump bot. Hosted by PlanetRDF.