We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byKatherine Underwood
Modified over 4 years ago
1 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila I Was There… – Memoirs of an RDF Working Group Member or Observations about the RDF Design Rationale Ora Lassila Research Fellow, Nokia Research Center December 2000
2 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila RDF Timeline 1997 SpringPre-WG work (e.g., PICS-NG), authors meeting @ MIT 1997 SummerM+S Working Group chartered, M+S first draft (for group review) 1997 OctoberM+S first public draft 1997 NovemberRDFS Working Group chartered 1998 AprilRDFS first draft (for group review) 1998 OctoberM+S goes to last call 1999 JanuaryM+S goes to proposed recommendation 1999 FebruaryM+S goes to recommendation! 1999 MarchRDFS goes to proposed recommendation 1999 AugustRDF Interest Group formed 1999 OctoberThe Cambridge Communiqué published 2000 MarchRDFS goes to candidate recommendation
3 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Motivation library metadata (Dublin Core) content rating (PICS) site maps some other applications…
4 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Model Ora (from PICS-NG): frame-like model Guha: understanding which statements have been asserted, and which ones have not WG charter included mandatory PICS support certain features, which cannot really be implemented in the model itself, crept in (aboutEachPrefix) Acceptance & deployment was very important just simple enough for the WWW community at large to accept and deploy not too offensive for the KR community so it could be used as a starting point for something better main challenge: managing expectations
5 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Syntax Naming (e.g., Pumpkin) S-expressions vs. XML in some sense, the choice of XML was an unfortunate one, because it leads to a lot of confusion Namespaces were deemed necessary, and consequently an XML NS spec which supports RDF needs was rammed through at W3C issues with the namespace of attributes like about Interpretation of literals XML Schema was supposed to provide primitive datatypes
6 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Details, Details, Details, … RDF is supported by a number of other standards XML URI HTTP (caching semantics) … It is important to understand that RDF takes care of a lot of dirty details which we now no longer have to worry about
7 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Type System & Ontology - RDF Schema Basic definition of Class defined as a prototype rather than a classification Metaclass issues proved to be hard ANSI X3J13 as an inspiration, but simplified class Class and class Metaclass are the same thing DisjointWith and cardinalities: discussed but eventually rejected Domain & range proved to be hard (for the WG) subPropertyOf vs. subClassOf
8 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Mysteries of Domain & Range yx pc type domainClass type Property type
9 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Other Issues Dueling press releases Netscapes love for RDF vs. Microsofts marketing message a lot of the RDF M+S work happened at the height of the so-called browser wars WG member troubles skill/experience vs. technical complexity mismatch RDFS vs. XML Schema cf. the Cambridge Communiqué RDFS still not a recommendation…
10 © NOKIA 2/12/2014 - Ora Lassila Questions? mailto:email@example.com mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org Lauren Lassila (age 3 months) finds the RDF Design Rationale a perfect bedtime story. yawn…
Presented to the ALCTS FRBR Interest Group, ALA Annual, 24 June 2011
SWOG - Semantic Web Ontology Generator Masters Defense of Dackral Scott Phillips Committee Members: Juan E. Gilbert, Ph. D. T. Dean Hendrix, Ph. D. N.
XML/RDF 2 RDF/XML Resource Description Framework Resource Property Value c:semanticweb c:author c:corby Syntaxe XML.
Natural Language Systems, Department of Informatics, University of Hamburg NATS IR in WWW Dozentin: C. Vertan Autor: M. Hoffmann RDF Resource Description.
Interoperability and semantics in RDF representations of FRBR, FRAD and FRSAD Gordon Dunsire Presented at the Cologne Conference on Interoperability and.
1 Copyright ©2007 Sandpiper Software, Inc. Vocabulary, Ontology & Specification Management at OMG Elisa Kendall Sandpiper Software
DAML Ontology Library Mike Dean OntoLog Forum 28 February
DC8: Architecture WG day 2 Architecture breakout group Sigfrid Lundberg (NetLab) Dan Brickley (ILRT/W3C)
Registry breakout group DC-8, National Library of Canada 5 October 2000.
DC2001, Tokyo DCMI Registry : Background and demonstration DC2001 Tokyo October 2001 Rachel Heery, UKOLN, University of Bath Harry Wagner, OCLC
DC Architecture WG meeting Monday Sept 12 Slot 1: Slot 2: Location: Seminar Room 4.1.E01.
Pete Johnston, Eduserv 16 October 2009 Relationship between foaf:maker & dc:creator/dcterms:creator.
Simile and the Semantic Web Draft Presentation for the W3C Technical Plenary Cannes, March 1-5, 2004.
A Proposal for Addressing Issues Related to RDF Mapping.
The Semantic Web: What, Why, and How? Ann Wrightson Principal Consultant, alphaXML Ltd
1 ICS-FORTH & Univ. of Crete SeLene November 15, 2002 A View Definition Language for the Semantic Web Maganaraki Aimilia.
Metadata vocabularies and ontologies Dr. Manjula Patel Technical Research and Development
UKOLN, University of Bath
From content standards to RDF Gordon Dunsire Presented at AKM 15, Porec, 2011.
Service Description: WSDL COMP6017 Topics on Web Services Dr Nicholas Gibbins –
© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.