AtomOWL and SIOC integration

fell...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 23, 2010, 2:37:58 PM3/23/10

to atom-owl

Hi,

I just dig out some of some old code I wrote 4 years ago related to
AtomOWL . Since then, I have not followed up the progress of this
spec. I like to touch base with this mailing list to see what is the
status of the specification. Is it dead, deprecated and still use
around ? I would be interested to know some use cases how it is used.
I do not see much activities on the AtomOWL mailing list, however I
saw some mentions on the SIOC web site (related to the use
awol:Content in SIOC). There is some similarities between both
specification. An interesting post I have seen is the one posted by
OpenLink http://sioc-project.org/node/211, which defines awol:Feed as
a subclass of sioc:Forum and awol:Entry as subclass of sioc:Post. At
the same time sioc defines a property sioc:feed that related a
resource (forum, site,..). I would like to know how Feed and Entry
should be handled and integrated with SIOC. Do you agree that
aowl:Entry been a subclass of sioc:Post ? Is there more alignment
(harmonization) work needed between SIOC and AtomOWL ?

Best regards
Stephane Fellah

Story Henry

unread,

Mar 23, 2010, 2:46:28 PM3/23/10

to atom...@googlegroups.com

Hi Stephane,

I have not looked at it for a long time now, as I have been working mostly on http://esw.w3.org/Foaf%2Bssl .

Since then the atom spec has evolved a lot, and I am not sure where all the additions to it have gone to. It did not seem interesting enough to pursue.

On 23 Mar 2010, at 19:37, fell...@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I just dig out some of some old code I wrote 4 years ago related to
> AtomOWL . Since then, I have not followed up the progress of this
> spec. I like to touch base with this mailing list to see what is the
> status of the specification. Is it dead, deprecated and still use
> around ? I would be interested to know some use cases how it is used.
> I do not see much activities on the AtomOWL mailing list, however I
> saw some mentions on the SIOC web site (related to the use
> awol:Content in SIOC). There is some similarities between both
> specification. An interesting post I have seen is the one posted by
> OpenLink http://sioc-project.org/node/211, which defines awol:Feed as
> a subclass of sioc:Forum

What do you think? The Atom Owl spec is closely defined to be what atom says. Ie, we were not trying to invent anything new, just try to express the concepts from atom.

> and awol:Entry as subclass of sioc:Post.

That seems ok off the hat, though I have not been following sioc as much as I really should.

> At
> the same time sioc defines a property sioc:feed that related a
> resource (forum, site,..). I would like to know how Feed and Entry
> should be handled and integrated with SIOC. Do you agree that
> aowl:Entry been a subclass of sioc:Post ? Is there more alignment
> (harmonization) work needed between SIOC and AtomOWL ?

Really it's up to you to decide. The Atom Owl spec really wants to just say what Atom xml says, but in RDF. Everything else should be done outside. So if you see things that could be improved let me know.

> Best regards
> Stephane Fellah
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "atom-owl" group.
> To post to this group, send email to atom...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atom-owl+u...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atom-owl?hl=en.
>

Toby Inkster

unread,

Mar 23, 2010, 2:59:05 PM3/23/10

to atom...@googlegroups.com

On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 11:37 -0700, fell...@gmail.com wrote:
> OpenLink http://sioc-project.org/node/211, which defines awol:Feed as
> a subclass of sioc:Forum and awol:Entry as subclass of sioc:Post.

I'd say sioc:Container and sioc:Item are closer matches.

--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:ma...@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>

Stephane Fellah

unread,

Mar 23, 2010, 8:31:54 PM3/23/10

to atom...@googlegroups.com

I would agree that sioc:Container and sioc:Item are better because more specific.

However I see an Entry in a feed acting more like a proxy to a specifc Item type (Blog, Photo, Activity..etc).

For example, a Post on CNN may be represented as follow:

[] a atomOwl:Entry,sioc:Post ;

atomOwl:id <http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/03/23/iran.taliban/index.html?eref=rss_topstories> ;

atomOwl:title [ atomOwl:text "U.S.: Taliban fighters training in Iran" ] ;

atomOwl:summary [ atomOwl:html """Iran is helping train Taliban fighters within its borders, .....""" ] ;

atomOwl:link

[ a atomOwl:Link ;

atomOwl:rel <http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/alternate> ;

atomOwl:to

[ a atomOwl:Content ;

atomOwl:src <http://rss.cnn.com/~r/rss/cnn_topstories/~3/nqV0PUajdCI/index.html>

]

] ;

atomOwl:published "2010-03-23T18:52:35Z"^^xsd:dateTime;

atomOwl:updated "2010-03-23T18:52:35Z"^^xsd:dateTime ;

]

This means that Entry may not need to be a subclass of Item. I am just wondering what is the best approach.

Best regards

Stephane

Toby Inkster

unread,

Mar 24, 2010, 2:49:31 AM3/24/10

to atom...@googlegroups.com

On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 20:31 -0400, Stephane Fellah wrote:
> I would agree that sioc:Container and sioc:Item are better because
> more specific.

I suggested sioc:Container and sioc:Item precisely because they're
*less* specific than sioc:Forum and sioc:Post -- the latter two would
only be reasonable mappings in the case where the Atom document being
represented is a feed of posts from a forum, whereas sioc:Container and
sioc:Item are so vague and non-specific that they're pretty much always
going to be appropriate.

> However I see an Entry in a feed acting more like a proxy to a specifc
> Item type (Blog, Photo, Activity..etc).
> For example, a Post on CNN may be represented as follow:

> [] a atomOwl:Entry,sioc:Post ;

Yep - that's fine, and is consistent with atomowl:Entry being a subclass
of sioc:Item.

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward