headers
Kjetil Kjernsmo | 7 Apr 2010 23:40

[foaf-dev] 2nd CfP: Hacking RDF with Perl Hackathon in Oslo, Norway, April 19th-21st 2010.

All,

We are proud to announce the first International Hacking RDF with Perl 
Hackathon in Oslo in Norway from the 19th to the 21st of April 2010. Note 
that we have moved the event to Oslo from Geilo and that it is now a pure 
Perl+RDF hacking event.

These prominent Perl hackers are leading the event:

Gregory Todd Williams is the author of RDF::Trine and RDF::Query. He is a 
Ph.D. student at the Tetherless World Constellation group at the Rensselaer 
Polytechnic Institute and a prominent member of the SPARQL Working Group, 
where he is the editor of SPARQL 1.1 Service Description.

Toby Inkster is the author of a large number of RDF-related Perl modules on 
CPAN, including RDFa parsers, HTML5 microdata parsers, FOAF+SSL 
authentication modules, etc. He is also a co- inventor of the FOAF+SSL 
protocol.

Kjetil Kjernsmo is the local organiser, and has been following the RDF 
world since 1998. He prefers to write in Perl and has a few relevant 
modules on CPAN including RDF::RDFa::Template. While a member of the 
Semantic Web Education and Outreach IG, he took the initiative to the 
Community Projects, that lead to the Linked Open Data project. He has also 
been a member of the POWDER and SPARQL WGs.

The hackathon will convene at 13:00 local time on Monday 19th of April and 
run through Wednesday 21st of April. The venue is the offices of ABC 
Startsiden with the address Sagveien 21a.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Nick Levinson | 14 Apr 2010 04:35
Picon
Favicon

[foaf-dev] FOAF 0.97 copyedits proposed, nonsubstantive

Dear Colleagues --

The following are copyedits proposed as nonsubstantive to the FOAF Vocabulary Specification, version
0.97, <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/>, as accessed Apr. 11, 2010:

--- "Note that it may be impolite to carelessly reveal someone else's chat identifier (which might also
serve as an indicate of email address)" should be "Note that it may be impolite to carelessly reveal
someone else's chat identifier (which might also serve as an indicator of their email address).",
editing "indicate" to "indicator", adding "their", and adding the period

--- "ie." each time should be "i.e.,"

--- "eg." each time should be "e.g.,"

--- "etc" each time should be "etc."

--- "a Agent" each time should be "an Agent"

--- "osbscure" should be "obscure"

--- in "Others may be more creative, writing any number of seemingly random compositions in their plan file
for people to stumble upon.", "plan file" should be "plan files".

--- in "status is a short textual string expressing what the user is happy for the general public (normally)
to know about their current activity. mood, location, etc.", the period after "activity" should be a comma

--- "(eg. buddylists, mailing list membership lists etc)" should be either "(e.g., buddylists or mailing
list membership lists)" or "(buddylists, mailing list membership lists, etc.)" ("e.g." and "etc." are
redundant, a list that includes "etc." needs a serial comma, and "etc" gets a period)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Dan Brickley | 14 Apr 2010 09:52

Re: [foaf-dev] FOAF 0.97 copyedits proposed, nonsubstantive

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Nick Levinson
<nick_levinson@...> wrote:
> Dear Colleagues --
>
> The following are copyedits proposed as nonsubstantive to the FOAF Vocabulary Specification, version
0.97, <http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/>, as accessed Apr. 11, 2010 [...]

Many thanks for this! I'll take these into account in the next
revision. Great to see it getting read so carefully :)

Dan
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Story Henry | 14 Apr 2010 11:00

[foaf-dev] fp:ping

Hi,

I would like to propose a ping relation. It is extremely common for people
to ask how does one make friends in foaf. For a long time, I thought looking
at the referrer in the logs would be enough. But that is perhaps just a bit
too minimalistic. Here we can do better. 

This is a sketch of what the relation should look like. It should be really 
simple, something that would allow a simple html form to do the job for 
human readers too. 

The access to the resource can be protected using foaf+ssl, so that one can reduce spam
opportunities, or at least filter them.

It would be defined like this

 <at> prefix fp: <http://foaf-protocols.com/ont/> . # made up name-space
 <at> prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
 <at> prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
 <at> prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .

fp:ping a rdf:Property;
    rdfs:domain foaf:Agent;
    rdfs:range xxx:POSTResource;
    rdfs:comment """
       This relation gives a way for other services to ping
     this webid when a new document is found that mentions this WebID.

       The relation relates a WebId to a collection. A new resource of
    type PingEvent can be created in that collection by POST ing a
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
Dan Brickley | 14 Apr 2010 17:21

[foaf-dev] Fwd: exploring a crowdsourced certification trust metric with svg/javascript animation


Interesting work as ever from Dan Connolly...



Begin forwarded message:

Resent-From: www-talk-Pl0VvzL1eo4@public.gmane.org
From: Dan Connolly <connolly-Pl0VvzL1eo4@public.gmane.org>
Date: 14 April 2010 17:09:21 CEST
To: www-talk <www-talk-Pl0VvzL1eo4@public.gmane.org>
Subject: exploring a crowdsourced certification trust metric with  svg/javascript animation

Some of us have been noodling around...
Open User Community Development
http://www.w3.org/2008/OUCD/wiki/Main_Page

I found a python implementation of the advogato trust metric,
but I'm struggling to get my head around it.

So I wrote a little piece of code to simulate growth of
a social network; people join, and they friend/follow/certify
others with certain probabilities. Also, with some
probability, they joined the network to exploit it
rather than to contribute; i.e. they're evil.
Evil folks sometimes certify other evil folks,
but contributors know better. The python code writes
out each step of the simulation in JSON.

Then some javascript code, using Raphael, animates it.
Contributors are blue; spammers are red.

The outcome of the trust metric calculation is a 1 or 0
after the name; it represents whether the agent is
certified or whatever.

To get the code and run it (assuming you have
both hg and bzr installed):

connolly <at> pav:~/projects$ hg clone http://bitbucket.org/DanC/socialsim/
destination directory: socialsim
requesting all changes
adding changesets
adding manifests
adding file changes
added 12 changesets with 22 changes to 13 files
updating working directory
13 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
connolly <at> pav:~/projects$ cd socialsim/
connolly <at> pav:~/projects/socialsim$ bzr branch lp:dracula
Branched 12
revision(s).                                                       
connolly <at> pav:~/projects/socialsim$ mv dracula/js dracula-js
connolly <at> pav:~/projects/socialsim$ python socialsim.py >,states.js
connolly <at> pav:~/projects/socialsim$ firefox socialpg.html

Then click "Next" to see the steps.

For screenshots of a few steps, see:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Apr/0019.html

Note how the evil red circles remain around the edges of the network and
never manage to penetrate toward the middle.

--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E


_______________________________________________
foaf-dev mailing list
foaf-dev@...
http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Story Henry | 15 Apr 2010 11:09

Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] fp:ping

On 15 Apr 2010, at 08:42, Toby Inkster wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:00:23 +0100
> Story Henry <henry.story@...> wrote:
> 
>> I would like to propose a ping relation.
> 
> Have you seen Semantic Pingback?
> 
> http://aksw.org/Projects/SemanticPingback

It seems unnecessarily complex. 

It uses RPC, when a simple HTML FORM can do. Why? RPC was cool 8 years ago
because it used XML!  Wow! The continuation of this lead to the SOAP
bubble, which seems to have vanished in the past year somehow.

So the suggestion seems to be that because blogging used RPC for ping,
one should use it too. But since every application developer knows how
to parse a POST, and only legacy blog developers need to learn the dying 
XML/RPC standard, I don't see why we should burden ourselves with it.
Neither do I understand why the linked data people are.

Or perhaps I have mised something.

If I have not, I'll repost the suggestion on the linked data 
mailing list.

Henry

> 
> -- 
> Toby A Inkster
> <mailto:mail@...>
> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
>
Permalink | Reply | 6 comments |
headers
tyler gillies | 15 Apr 2010 11:17
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] fp:ping

i am proud to say i have never used xml-rpc once in my life ;) (well maybe, but if i did, its blocked out of my memory)

the ping idea is cool. kinda reminds me of RSS's <getInputText>

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Story Henry <henry.story-34e3GNjADZTR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 15 Apr 2010, at 08:42, Toby Inkster wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:00:23 +0100
> Story Henry <henry.story <at> bblfish.net> wrote:
>
>> I would like to propose a ping relation.
>
> Have you seen Semantic Pingback?
>
> http://aksw.org/Projects/SemanticPingback

It seems unnecessarily complex.

It uses RPC, when a simple HTML FORM can do. Why? RPC was cool 8 years ago
because it used XML!  Wow! The continuation of this lead to the SOAP
bubble, which seems to have vanished in the past year somehow.

So the suggestion seems to be that because blogging used RPC for ping,
one should use it too. But since every application developer knows how
to parse a POST, and only legacy blog developers need to learn the dying
XML/RPC standard, I don't see why we should burden ourselves with it.
Neither do I understand why the linked data people are.

Or perhaps I have mised something.

If I have not, I'll repost the suggestion on the linked data
mailing list.

Henry


>
> --
> Toby A Inkster
> <mailto:mail <at> tobyinkster.co.uk>
> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>



--
Everyone Loves Tea
http://www.everyonelovestea.com
_______________________________________________
foaf-dev mailing list
foaf-dev@...
http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
tyler gillies | 15 Apr 2010 11:19
Picon
Gravatar

Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] fp:ping

<textInput> rather

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM, tyler gillies <tjgillies-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
i am proud to say i have never used xml-rpc once in my life ;) (well maybe, but if i did, its blocked out of my memory)

the ping idea is cool. kinda reminds me of RSS's <getInputText>


On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Story Henry <henry.story <at> bblfish.net> wrote:
On 15 Apr 2010, at 08:42, Toby Inkster wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:00:23 +0100
> Story Henry <henry.story-34e3GNjADZTR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> I would like to propose a ping relation.
>
> Have you seen Semantic Pingback?
>
> http://aksw.org/Projects/SemanticPingback

It seems unnecessarily complex.

It uses RPC, when a simple HTML FORM can do. Why? RPC was cool 8 years ago
because it used XML!  Wow! The continuation of this lead to the SOAP
bubble, which seems to have vanished in the past year somehow.

So the suggestion seems to be that because blogging used RPC for ping,
one should use it too. But since every application developer knows how
to parse a POST, and only legacy blog developers need to learn the dying
XML/RPC standard, I don't see why we should burden ourselves with it.
Neither do I understand why the linked data people are.

Or perhaps I have mised something.

If I have not, I'll repost the suggestion on the linked data
mailing list.

Henry


>
> --
> Toby A Inkster
> <mailto:mail-0xSRQTJlU/5QSYw2qhZJOlpr/1R2p/CL@public.gmane.org>
> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>



--
Everyone Loves Tea
http://www.everyonelovestea.com



--
Everyone Loves Tea
http://www.everyonelovestea.com
_______________________________________________
foaf-dev mailing list
foaf-dev@...
http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Mischa Tuffield | 15 Apr 2010 13:05
Favicon

Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] fp:ping

Hello All, 

Am aware of some work people are doing at Southampton, where by there are proposing a RESTful interface to acquiring what they refer to as "backlinks"[1]. I am not sure if this is similar problem to what Henry is talking about, but it seems that way to me. There is a sample client [2] which makes use of the backlink service [2]. There is a paper, which describes the service, currently in the process of being published. But you can always email manuel ms8-jaJdc+oKuOm+cE1VCfRBVw@public.gmane.org to get more info. Am guessing this is similar to the foaf.qdos reverse search service I put together a while ago [3] which you can add data to via our ping service [4].

Apologies if you are trying to solve a different problem.

Mischa 

[4] http://foaf.qdos.com/ping 
On 15 Apr 2010, at 10:19, tyler gillies wrote:

<textInput> rather

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:17 AM, tyler gillies <tjgillies-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
i am proud to say i have never used xml-rpc once in my life ;) (well maybe, but if i did, its blocked out of my memory)

the ping idea is cool. kinda reminds me of RSS's <getInputText>


On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Story Henry <henry.story-34e3GNjADZTR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
On 15 Apr 2010, at 08:42, Toby Inkster wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:00:23 +0100
> Story Henry <henry.story-34e3GNjADZTR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> I would like to propose a ping relation.
>
> Have you seen Semantic Pingback?
>
> http://aksw.org/Projects/SemanticPingback

It seems unnecessarily complex.

It uses RPC, when a simple HTML FORM can do. Why? RPC was cool 8 years ago
because it used XML!  Wow! The continuation of this lead to the SOAP
bubble, which seems to have vanished in the past year somehow.

So the suggestion seems to be that because blogging used RPC for ping,
one should use it too. But since every application developer knows how
to parse a POST, and only legacy blog developers need to learn the dying
XML/RPC standard, I don't see why we should burden ourselves with it.
Neither do I understand why the linked data people are.

Or perhaps I have mised something.

If I have not, I'll repost the suggestion on the linked data
mailing list.

Henry


>
> --
> Toby A Inkster
> <mailto:mail-0xSRQTJlU/5QSYw2qhZJOlpr/1R2p/CL@public.gmane.org>
> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>



--
Everyone Loves Tea
http://www.everyonelovestea.com



--
Everyone Loves Tea
http://www.everyonelovestea.com
_______________________________________________
foaf-protocols mailing list
foaf-protocols <at> lists.foaf-project.org
http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-protocols

___________________________________
Mischa Tuffield PhD
Homepage - http://mmt.me.uk/
Garlik Limited, 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44(0)7989 199 786  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
 

_______________________________________________
foaf-dev mailing list
foaf-dev@...
http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Kingsley Idehen | 15 Apr 2010 16:20
Picon

Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] fp:ping

Toby Inkster wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:09:46 +0100
> Story Henry <henry.story@...> wrote:
>
>   
>> It seems unnecessarily complex. 
>>
>> It uses RPC, when a simple HTML FORM can do. Why? RPC was cool 8
>> years ago because it used XML!  Wow! The continuation of this lead to
>> the SOAP bubble, which seems to have vanished in the past year
>> somehow.
>>     
>
> You get the benefit of compatibility with the large installed base that
> Pingback has, and you get to reuse existing Pingback libraries and
> testing tools.
>
>   
Toby,

I think SPAM killed pingback uptake a long time ago. I really don't 
believe its widely used these day. In a sense, a FOAF+SSL enhanced 
pingback mechanism is what we could use to achieve the following:

1. Yet another FOAF+SSL utility showcase
2. Resurrect a potential viral system that is current quite dormant.

This plus WebFinger will accelerate our journey towards FOAF+SSL usage 
critical mass based on fixing broken Web 2.0 items :-)

--

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane