28 Mar
2007
28 Mar
'07
2:47 p.m.
So I was playing with Operator the other day.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4106
to see what out microformat support looks like and it occured to me we are
missing out on one of them... Tags.
We have discussed before that we prefer categories and locales over "tags"
becasue they are less freeform. However they are our "tags" and as such we
should probably mark them up like that for microformat goodness. It would
seem the way to do this is to add rel="tag" in the <a>.
Comments, suggetions, patches?
--
Bob Walker
http://www.randomness.org.uk/
Stress Kittens: Squeeze them till they cry!
The latest tech in homicidal tendency relief.
28 Mar
28 Mar
6 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 02:47:48PM +0100, Bob Walker wrote:
So I was playing with Operator the other day.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4106
to see what out microformat support looks like and it occured to me we are
missing out on one of them... Tags.
We have discussed before that we prefer categories and locales over "tags"
becasue they are less freeform. However they are our "tags" and as such we
should probably mark them up like that for microformat goodness. It would
seem the way to do this is to add rel="tag" in the <a>.
Comments, suggetions, patches?
No objection to doing this.
Cheers - and see you all in a couple of weeks!
Dominic.
--
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)
6:02 p.m.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 06:00:13PM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
Cheers - and see you all in a couple of weeks!
"see" virtually that is - I'm offline until then.
Dominic.
--
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)
11:17 p.m.
On Wed 28 Mar 2007, Bob Walker <bob(a)randomness.org.uk> wrote:
We have discussed before that we prefer categories and
locales over "tags"
becasue they are less freeform. However they are our "tags" and as such we
should probably mark them up like that for microformat goodness. It would
seem the way to do this is to add rel="tag" in the <a>.
Bob pointed me at
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag
for further info, and it looks like it isn't this simple. The only way they
allow you to state what the tag actually _is_ (e.g. "pub",
"bermondsey") is
to have it as the final "component" of the URL that you link to. Having it
as a query parameter is no use. Having it as an additional attribute of the
<a> element is no use. Having it as some non-final component of the URL in
order to be compatible with some other scheme that also wants to have its
data as the final component of the URL is no use.
So basically - we can't do this as it stands, and even if we did decide to
rewrite all our URLs to fit in with it, we'd be locking ourselves into a
particular URL scheme which may well be incompatible with the next cool
thing to come along.
It feels rather like something that hasn't been properly thought out yet,
particularly given the valid and recent criticisms raised at
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag-feedback
Kake
29 Mar
29 Mar
1:12 a.m.
On 28 Mar 2007, at 23:17, Kake L Pugh wrote:
On Wed 28 Mar 2007, Bob Walker
<bob(a)randomness.org.uk> wrote:
Also, one might prefer RDFa or GRDDL to achieve similar goals.
I'm not expert enough to recommend one over the other, however GRDDL
does seem to be dynamic enough that it might be a low-hanging fruit to
grab for Open Guides.
Of course Open Guides already outputs actual RDF/XML, so some might
argue this whole exercise is somewhat redundant.
Daniel
We have discussed before that we prefer
categories and locales
over "tags"
becasue they are less freeform. However they are our "tags" and as
such we
should probably mark them up like that for microformat goodness.
It would
seem the way to do this is to add rel="tag" in the <a>.
Bob pointed me at
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag
for further info, and it looks like it isn't this simple. The only
way they
allow you to state what the tag actually _is_ (e.g. "pub",
"bermondsey") is
to have it as the final "component" of the URL that you link to.
Having it
as a query parameter is no use. Having it as an additional
attribute of the
<a> element is no use. Having it as some non-final component of
the URL in
order to be compatible with some other scheme that also wants to
have its
data as the final component of the URL is no use.
So basically - we can't do this as it stands, and even if we did
decide to
rewrite all our URLs to fit in with it, we'd be locking ourselves
into a
particular URL scheme which may well be incompatible with the next
cool
thing to come along.
It feels rather like something that hasn't been properly thought
out yet,
particularly given the valid and recent criticisms raised at
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag-feedback 
11:54 a.m.
Yeah, much as I'm a fan of whatever.com/tags/tag style URLs, I'd
second Kake's discomfort with having to buy into a particular URL
scheme. It works fine if you're starting from scratch and can't muster
any more semantics, but I reckon the OpenGuides can do better ;)
As suggested, one option is to exploit the existing RDF/XML
"infrastructure", and expose categories and locales as "tags" using
Richard Newman's tag ontology [1]. I've used this myself and it works
pretty well. Using the whole-hog approach of expressing "who tagged
what with what and when" might be a bit tricky, because if you edit an
entry that I placed in the Wolverton locale, who did the tagging? me?
both of us? and when? I'm not sure if this degree of provenance data
is held in the db or not.
Anyway, there is a simpler approach using that same ontology, that
achieves what rel-tag does, but just does it "properly" ;) Something
like this would do the job:
ex:obj tags:tag [ tags:associatedTag tag:great , tag:interesting ] .
...perhaps with another statement to give each tag a label. (this code
comes from the third grey box from the bottom of [1], if that makes
sense).
Cheers,
Tom.
[1] http://www.holygoat.co.uk/projects/tags/
On 29/03/07, Daniel Alexander Smith <daniel(a)pling.net> wrote:
On 28 Mar 2007, at 23:17, Kake L Pugh wrote:
On Wed 28 Mar 2007, Bob Walker
<bob(a)randomness.org.uk> wrote:
Also, one might prefer RDFa or GRDDL to achieve similar goals.
I'm not expert enough to recommend one over the other, however GRDDL
does seem to be dynamic enough that it might be a low-hanging fruit to
grab for Open Guides.
Of course Open Guides already outputs actual RDF/XML, so some might
argue this whole exercise is somewhat redundant.
Daniel
--
OpenGuides-Dev mailing list - OpenGuides-Dev(a)lists.openguides.org
http://lists.openguides.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openguides-dev
We have discussed before that we prefer
categories and locales
over "tags"
becasue they are less freeform. However they are our "tags" and as
such we
should probably mark them up like that for microformat goodness.
It would
seem the way to do this is to add rel="tag" in the <a>.
Bob pointed me at
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag
for further info, and it looks like it isn't this simple. The only
way they
allow you to state what the tag actually _is_ (e.g. "pub",
"bermondsey") is
to have it as the final "component" of the URL that you link to.
Having it
as a query parameter is no use. Having it as an additional
attribute of the
<a> element is no use. Having it as some non-final component of
the URL in
order to be compatible with some other scheme that also wants to
have its
data as the final component of the URL is no use.
So basically - we can't do this as it stands, and even if we did
decide to
rewrite all our URLs to fit in with it, we'd be locking ourselves
into a
particular URL scheme which may well be incompatible with the next
cool
thing to come along.
It feels rather like something that hasn't been properly thought
out yet,
particularly given the valid and recent criticisms raised at
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag-feedback
3:36 p.m.
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Using the whole-hog approach of expressing "who
tagged what with
what and when" might be a bit tricky, because if you edit an entry
that I placed in the Wolverton locale, who did the tagging? me?
both of us? and when? I'm not sure if this degree of provenance data
is held in the db or not.
You can get it out of the database, e.g.:
node name | version | category | username
-----------------------------+---------+----------------------+--------------
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 2 | Korean Food | bob
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 3 | Korean Food | Kake
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 1 | Restaurants | Claudia
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 2 | Restaurants | bob
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 3 | Restaurants | Kake
This means that Claudia added Assa and tagged it as a restaurant, then Bob
added the Korean Food tag. It also means that Bob agrees (or, at least,
doesn't disagree) with Claudia that it's a restaurant, and that Kake agrees
with both Bob and Claudia that it's a restaurant serving Korean Food.
(You can get the dates of the edits too, I just didn't bother in this extract.)
(I talked with zool about this many years ago - in a way, an edit that doesn't
remove a category or locale is a "vote" for that category/locale being
correct. We were wondering if we could use this in some way to "define" the
extent of a locale - as in, if 20 people agree that a point is in Bermondsey,
then it probably is. I don't think we have enough contributors for this to
work, but theoretically it's a nice idea.)
Here's the SQL, linewrapped for readability; the "substring" stuff was just
to make the output fit in 80 characters.
london=> select substring(node.name from 1 for 27) as "node name",
content.version,
substring(mc.metadata_value from 1 for 20) as "category",
mn.metadata_value as "username"
from content
inner join node on (content.node_id=node.id)
inner join metadata as mn on (content.node_id=mn.node_id
and content.version=mn.version
and mn.metadata_type='username')
inner join metadata as mc on (content.node_id=mc.node_id
and content.version=mc.version
and mc.metadata_type='category' )
order by node.name, mc.metadata_value, content.version;
Kake
3:40 p.m.
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Daniel Alexander Smith <daniel(a)pling.net> wrote:
Of course Open Guides already outputs actual RDF/XML,
so some might
argue this whole exercise is somewhat redundant.
My interest in this is mostly along the lines of "if I can make my
thing talk to your thing without much trouble on my part or yours,
then I'd like to". I know we can always say "hey, just grab our
RDF/XML and extract the data yourself", but that's yet another step
that someone has to take in order to cooperate with us. I think we
should be trying to make it easier for other people to cooperate with
us, where we can do that without making any major changes or locking
ourselves into a single way of doing things.
Kake
3:52 p.m.
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't understand everything on that page (I don't suppose there's a
simpler explanation for non-RDF people anywhere? As in, _really_
simple, for Dummies) but I do like that they seem to agree with me on
the difference between a tag and a category. That is, I think a
category is a consensus thing (as in OpenGuides) or a dictated thing
(as in, say, the Dewey Decimal system or something like that), whereas
a tag is an individual thing - "The goal of this ontology is to model
the relationship between an agent, an arbitrary resource, and one or
more tags." (where an "agent" is an individual person)
So:
OpenGuides category + username of person who first added it
gives an approximation of
tag + agent
but it's an approximation only because the person will have been
affected by the consensus view of which categories are appropriate on
that particular guide.
Kake
4:10 p.m.
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
ex:obj tags:tag [ tags:associatedTag tag:great ,
tag:interesting ] .
The above line is an example of my Dummy-like status in this respect -
I have no idea what language that is or how it should be used. Help?
Kake
4:37 p.m.
On 29/03/07, Daniel Alexander Smith <daniel(a)pling.net> wrote:
Of course Open Guides already outputs actual RDF/XML,
so some might
argue this whole exercise is somewhat redundant.
But bandwagon-jumping is fun!
--
Earle Martin
http://downlode.org/
http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/
4:46 p.m.
On 29/03/07, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
pretty well. Using the whole-hog approach of
expressing "who tagged
what with what and when" might be a bit tricky, because if you edit an
entry that I placed in the Wolverton locale, who did the tagging? me?
both of us? and when? I'm not sure if this degree of provenance data
is held in the db or not.
I think it's a waste of time to start going down this route before we
have any kind of logins sorted out. It's useless data if you can't
rely on it, and given that we have no way to prevent or even detect
username spoofing, I certainly wouldn't rely on it for anything.
--
Earle Martin
http://downlode.org/
http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/
4:56 p.m.
On 29/03/07, Kake L Pugh <kake(a)earth.li> wrote:
This means that Claudia added Assa and tagged it as a
restaurant, then Bob
added the Korean Food tag.
I'm glad that the list has finally come around to agreeing with me
that our categories are, in fact, tags.
--
Earle Martin
http://downlode.org/
http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/
30 Mar
30 Mar
12:45 p.m.
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> ex:obj tags:tag [ tags:associatedTag tag:great ,
tag:interesting ] .
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Kake L Pugh <kake(a)earth.li> wrote:
The above line is an example of my Dummy-like status
in this respect -
I have no idea what language that is or how it should be used. Help?
crschmidt explained on IRC that this is "turtle", a shorthand for RDF.
So my next question is - is there anywhere that's using this stuff?
As a consumer, I mean. Tom's link had some examples of people
_producing_ it, but is there anywhere I can go and look to see it in action?
Kake
12:58 p.m.
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 12:45:42PM +0100, Kake L Pugh wrote:
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath
<tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
After talking to Kake on IRC, I realized here she didn't mean 'turtle',
but instead the tags ontology described in the previously mentioned
links.
Regards,
--
Christopher Schmidt
Web Developer
> ex:obj tags:tag [ tags:associatedTag
tag:great , tag:interesting ] .
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Kake L Pugh <kake(a)earth.li> wrote:
The above line is an example of my Dummy-like
status in this respect -
I have no idea what language that is or how it should be used. Help?
crschmidt explained on IRC that this is "turtle", a shorthand for RDF.
So my next question is - is there anywhere that's using this stuff?
As a consumer, I mean. Tom's link had some examples of people
_producing_ it, but is there anywhere I can go and look to see it in action?
2:39 p.m.
Thanks Chris, for jumping in and clarifying, on both counts. Apologies
Kake and others for my kinda cryptic example.
So, the question is, "is anyone actually consuming tag data described
using this ontology, and if so where can I see it in action?" Have I
got that right?
The simple answer is no, not really. Mainly because tagging tends to
be seen as a Web2.0 thing, and ontologies as a Semantic Web thing.
Consequently Web2.0 people don't think of exposing tag data in RDF
(using this or any other ontology), hence things like rel-tag, and
Semantic Web people don't have much tagging data in their own apps
that they can readily expose in RDF. Revyu is one exception (although
we only produce right now, not consume). This is starting to change,
with things like Flickr machine tags being a big step along the path
(I gather, but haven't explored them much), but still right now the
short answer is 'no'.
However, as with many things where the OpenGuides are ahead of the
curve, a 'no' answer is not a reason to not do it ;) The biggest
effort that's looking into these issues of tag sharing across services
(with a view to making it easier to actually do something meaningful
and useful with the data) is TagCommons <http://tagcommons.org/>,
which will hopefully yield more movement in this general direction.
RDF-based solutions have some decent traction in this group.
So, assuming other people are interested and prepared to commit the
programming effort, I'd say lets just do it, and work out the
consuming applications later. I'm sure others will follow the same
path in due course.
What dya reckon?
Cheers,
Tom.
On 30/03/07, Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt(a)crschmidt.net> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 12:45:42PM +0100, Kake L Pugh
wrote:
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath
<tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
After talking to Kake on IRC, I realized here she didn't mean 'turtle',
but instead the tags ontology described in the previously mentioned
links.
Regards,
--
Christopher Schmidt
Web Developer
--
OpenGuides-Dev mailing list - OpenGuides-Dev(a)lists.openguides.org
http://lists.openguides.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openguides-dev
> ex:obj tags:tag [ tags:associatedTag
tag:great , tag:interesting ] .
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Kake L Pugh <kake(a)earth.li> wrote:
The above line is an example of my Dummy-like
status in this respect -
I have no idea what language that is or how it should be used. Help?
crschmidt explained on IRC that this is "turtle", a shorthand for RDF.
So my next question is - is there anywhere that's using this stuff?
As a consumer, I mean. Tom's link had some examples of people
_producing_ it, but is there anywhere I can go and look to see it in action?
2:46 p.m.
On Fri 30 Mar 2007, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So, the question is, "is anyone actually
consuming tag data described
using this ontology, and if so where can I see it in action?" Have I
got that right?
Quick answer (longer one later): yes, that's it! But not in the sense
of "nobody wants it so it's not worth it", more in the sense of
"it'd
be great/useful/motivating to have somewhere we could check out if
we'd done it properly and usefully". Like with the Disco thing, which
was very useful for seeing what was missing in our RDF. (Or, as an
analogy, writing CSS is much more fun these days since browsers
actually support it, and so I can see my mistakes/a return on my hard
work instantly.)
Kake
2:47 p.m.
Cool, that's great news that the data is there. From the point of view
of modelling this process, I guess I'd argue that each new tag added
by a person represents "that person tagging the thing with a certain
tag", but that "an edit by person B that leaves in place a tag X added
by person A", does not represent an instance of "person B tagging the
thing with tag X". This level of pickiness may be a bit anally
retentive however.
On the upside, this process (as you point out with the Bermondsey
example) does provide a very neat way of establishing the possible
trustworthiness of tagging statements. Something along the lines of
"if more than X people have edited a node and left in place the
category/tag Y, then we're confident to a degree Z that this is the
case" may be possible. Obviously still open to spamming of confidence
levels, but better than nothing :)
Tom.
On 29/03/07, Kake L Pugh <kake(a)earth.li> wrote:
On Thu 29 Mar 2007, Tom Heath
<tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Using the whole-hog approach of expressing
"who tagged what with
what and when" might be a bit tricky, because if you edit an entry
that I placed in the Wolverton locale, who did the tagging? me?
both of us? and when? I'm not sure if this degree of provenance data
is held in the db or not.
You can get it out of the database, e.g.:
node name | version | category | username
-----------------------------+---------+----------------------+--------------
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 2 | Korean Food | bob
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 3 | Korean Food | Kake
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 1 | Restaurants | Claudia
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 2 | Restaurants | bob
Assa, WC2H 8LH | 3 | Restaurants | Kake
This means that Claudia added Assa and tagged it as a restaurant, then Bob
added the Korean Food tag. It also means that Bob agrees (or, at least,
doesn't disagree) with Claudia that it's a restaurant, and that Kake agrees
with both Bob and Claudia that it's a restaurant serving Korean Food.
(You can get the dates of the edits too, I just didn't bother in this extract.)
(I talked with zool about this many years ago - in a way, an edit that doesn't
remove a category or locale is a "vote" for that category/locale being
correct. We were wondering if we could use this in some way to "define" the
extent of a locale - as in, if 20 people agree that a point is in Bermondsey,
then it probably is. I don't think we have enough contributors for this to
work, but theoretically it's a nice idea.)
Here's the SQL, linewrapped for readability; the "substring" stuff was
just
to make the output fit in 80 characters.
london=> select substring(node.name from 1 for 27) as "node name",
content.version,
substring(mc.metadata_value from 1 for 20) as "category",
mn.metadata_value as "username"
from content
inner join node on (content.node_id=node.id)
inner join metadata as mn on (content.node_id=mn.node_id
and content.version=mn.version
and mn.metadata_type='username')
inner join metadata as mc on (content.node_id=mc.node_id
and content.version=mc.version
and mc.metadata_type='category' )
order by node.name, mc.metadata_value, content.version;
Kake
--
OpenGuides-Dev mailing list - OpenGuides-Dev(a)lists.openguides.org
http://lists.openguides.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openguides-dev
4:02 p.m.
On Fri 30 Mar 2007, Tom Heath <tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So, the question is, "is anyone actually
consuming tag data described
using this ontology, and if so where can I see it in action?" Have I
got that right?
The simple answer is no, not really.
Could OpenGuides become a consumer?
Kake
2 Apr
2 Apr
1:31 p.m.
On 30/03/07, Kake L Pugh <kake(a)earth.li> wrote:
On Fri 30 Mar 2007, Tom Heath
<tom.heath(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, absolutely! I'm not sure if there a list anywhere of
sites/services that are exposing data with this ontology, but I can
speak for Revyu and say that yes, OpenGuides would be very welcome to
become a consumer. Presenting Revyu reviews alongside OpenGuides
entries would be a nice use case for this. Sure there are others too
using different data sources.
We don't have massive coverage of places or things/objects (yet), but
there are some relevant reviews for Milton Keynes, Bristol (if only
someone would setup the OG Bristol ;), Oxford, London, Montreal...
There are two ways to approach this. 1) get the RDF from e.g.
<http://revyu.com/tags/milton-keynes/about/rdf> for a list of all
things tagged milton-keynes (it's a bit minimal intentionally - the
rest of the information is available by looking up those URIs - but I
could add more data in there to minise the number of requests
required); or 2) do a SPARQL query against the endpoint at
<http://revyu.com/sparql/welcome> to get out any data you want in any
format you want using SQL-like queries. The endpoint is currently
fairly locked down, but shout if you want access.
HTH for starters,
Tom.
So, the question is, "is anyone actually
consuming tag data described
using this ontology, and if so where can I see it in action?" Have I
got that right?
The simple answer is no, not really.
Could OpenGuides become a consumer?
5905
days inactive
5910
days old
openguides-dev@lists.openguides.org
19 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Bob Walker -
Christopher Schmidt -
Daniel Alexander Smith -
Dominic Hargreaves -
Earle Martin -
Kake L Pugh -
Tom Heath