Your description sounds quite close to what we had in
mind. The high level
group is manifesting quite well, the domain groups are planned as pilots
for selected domains (e.g. Law or Mobility).
I lost a bit the overview on the data classification. We might auto-link
or crowdsource. I would need to ask others, however.
We are aiming to create a structure that allows stability and innovation
in an economic way - - I see this as the real challenge...
Jolly good show,
Sebastian
On 11 March 2015 20:53:55 CET, John Flynn <jflynn12(a)verizon.net> wrote:
This is a very ambitious, but commendable, goal. To map all data on the
web to the DBpedia ontology is a huge undertaking that will take many
years of effort. However, if it can be accomplished the potential payoff is
also huge and could result in the realization of a true Semantic Web. Just
as with any very large and complex software development effort, there needs
to be a structured approach to achieving the desired results. That
structured approach probably involves a clear requirements analysis and
resulting requirements documentation. It also requires a design document
and an implementation document, as well as risk assessment and risk
mitigation. While there is no bigger believer in the "build a little, test
a little" rapid prototyping approach to development, I don't think that is
appropriate for a project of this size and complexity. Also, the size and
complexity also suggest the final product will likely be beyond the scope
of any individual to fully comprehend the overall ontological structure.
Therefore, a reasonable approach might be to break the effort into smaller,
comprehensible segments. Since this is a large ontology development effort,
segmenting the ontology into domains of interest and creating working
groups to focus on each domain might be a workable approach. There would
also need to be a working group that focus on the top levels of the
ontology and monitors the domain working groups to ensure overall
compatibility and reduce the likelihood of duplicate or overlapping
concepts in the upper levels of the ontology and treats universal concepts
such as space and time consistently. There also needs to be a clear,
and hopefully simple, approach to mapping data on the web to the DBpedia
ontology that will accommodate both large data developers and web site
developers. It would be wonderful to see the worldwide web community
get behind such an initiative and make rapid progress in realizing this
commendable goal. However, just as special interests defeated the goal of
having a universal software development approach (Ada), I fear the same
sorts of special interests will likely result in a continuation of the
current myriad development efforts. I understand the "one size doesn't fit
all" arguments, but I also think "one size could fit a whole lot" could
be
the case here.
Respectfully,
John Flynn
http://semanticsimulations.com
*From:* Sebastian Hellmann [mailto:hellmann@informatik.uni-leipzig.de]
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 11, 2015 3:12 AM
*To:* Tom Morris; Dimitris Kontokostas
*Cc:* Wikidata Discussion List; dbpedia-ontology;
dbpedia-discussion(a)lists.sourceforge.net; DBpedia-Developers
*Subject:* Re: [Dbpedia-discussion] [Dbpedia-developers] DBpedia-based
RDF dumps for Wikidata
Dear Tom,
let me try to answer this question in a more general way. In the future,
we honestly consider to map all data on the web to the DBpedia ontology
(extending it where it makes sense). We hope that this will enable you to
query many data sets on the Web using the same queries.
As a convenience measure, we will get a huge download server that
provides all data from a single point in consistent formats and consistent
metadata, classified by the DBpedia Ontology. Wikidata is just one
example, there is also commons, Wiktionary (hopefully via DBnary), data
from companies, DBpedia members and EU projects.
all the best,
Sebastian
On 11.03.2015 06:11, Tom Morris wrote:
Dimitris, Soren, and DBpedia team,
That sounds like an interesting project, but I got lost between the
statement of intent, below, and the practical consequences:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Dimitris Kontokostas <
kontokostas(a)informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
we made some different design choices and map wikidata data directly into
the DBpedia ontology.
What, from your point of view, is the practical consequence of these
different design choices? How do the end results manifest themselves to
the consumers?
Tom
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dive into the
World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the
conversation now.
http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________
Dbpedia-developers mailing list
Dbpedia-developers(a)lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-developers
--
Sebastian Hellmann
AKSW/NLP2RDF research group
Insitute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) and DBpedia Association
Events:
* *Feb 9th, 2015* 3rd DBpedia Community Meeting in Dublin
<http://wiki.dbpedia.org/meetings/Dublin2015>
* *May 29th, 2015* Submission deadline SEMANTiCS 2015
* *Sept 15th-17th, 2015* SEMANTiCS 2015 (formerly i-SEMANTICS), Vienna
<http://semantics.cc/>
Venha para a Alemanha como PhD:
http://bis.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/csf
Projects:
http://dbpedia.org,
http://nlp2rdf.org,
http://linguistics.okfn.org,
https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt
<http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt>
Homepage:
http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
Research Group:
http://aksw.org
Thesis:
http://tinyurl.com/sh-thesis-summary
http://tinyurl.com/sh-thesis
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.