From: Sergio Fernández
To: SWAML-Devel
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:56:33 +0200
> So, in my opinion, SIOC is very interesting for SWAML. With respect to > the three options above, I would choose the second one. As with FOAF and > DC, there is no good reason to re-invent an ontology if there exists a > mature alternative that suits. It seems to me that only minor changes in > the SWAML code will be required to use the SIOC classes and properties. Yes, when I complete the equivalencies between both ontologies, with minor changes in SWAML I've a successful concept test with SIOC [2]. > I think it is also important to keep in touch with the SIOC developers, > probably subscribing to their mailing list, and to report your advances > to them. I subscribed to the mailing list last week, but the activity it isn't frenetic. I was talkin with Uldis Bojars, and their intent is to have the implementations list [3] (and all other submission documents) ready this week. He invite us to add SWAML on this wiki when we'll have our implementation finished. So I'll have to work very hard this week to help SIOC submission. Best regards [1] http://svn.berlios.de/wsvn/swaml/branches/swaml-with-sioc/translate.txt?op=file [2] http://swaml.berlios.de/demo/ [3] http://esw.w3.org/topic/SIOC/Implementations -- __ ___ _ _ \ \ / (_) |_(_)___ _ _ Sergio Fdez \ \/\/ /| | / / / -_) '_| GNU/LiNUX User: #298803 \_/\_/ |_|_\_\_\___|_| Web: http://www.wikier.org/ _______________________________________________ SWAML-Devel mailing list SWAML-Devel@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/swaml-devel
URI: http://swaml.berlios.de/demos/swaml-devel/2006-Sep/post-24
Link: http://swaml.berlios.de/demos/swaml-devel/2006-Sep/post-24.html
Has reply: http://swaml.berlios.de/demos/swaml-devel/2006-Sep/post-25
Previous by Date: http://swaml.berlios.de/demos/swaml-devel/2007-Oct/post-23
Next by Date: http://swaml.berlios.de/demos/swaml-devel/2006-Sep/post-25