pearltrees html popular pearltrees search

Langages sémantiques

< web3.0 <

This is a W3C Recommendation . This document has been reviewed by W3C Members, by software developers, and by other W3C groups and interested parties, and is endorsed by the Director as a W3C Recommendation. It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited from another document. W3C's role in making the Recommendation is to draw attention to the specification and to promote its widespread deployment. SPARQL Query Language for RDF http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/

SPARQL

Microformats As recently reported by ReadWriteWeb , Google themselves reported at the Semantic Technologies conference that when Google finds data for rich snippets on pages, 94% of the time that data for rich snippets is marked up with microformats (40,091 vs. 2,514, conservatively assuming none of of those pages contain both, if they did, the 94% number would be even higher). For all of these, Google provided side-by-side examples for each snippet type in multiple formats (microformats, RDFa, microdata), which in many ways has helped to demonstrate how much simpler/easier microformats are in many respects (and some of the promise that microdata shows for more general extensibility). Photo credit: Read Write Web: Google’s Semantic Web Push: Rich Snippets Usage Growing . http://microformats.org/

http://blog.foolip.org/2009/08/23/microformats-vs-rdfa-vs-microdata/ It’s just not going to happen for HTML5 I don’t hate RDF(a). I can certainly see the appeal of the RDF model after taking the time to understand it. Microformats vs RDFa vs Microdata « Philip Jägenstedt

Web sémantique & formats standards

&lt;div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"&gt;&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"&amp;gt;&amp;amp;lt;body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"&amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;lt;body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"&amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;lt;img style="cursor: -moz-zoom-in;" alt="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/Linking-Open-Data-class-diagram_2008-10-05.png" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/Linking-Open-Data-class-diagram_2008-10-05.png" height="645" width="703"&amp;amp;amp;gt;&lt;/div&gt; http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/Linking-Open-Data-class-diagram_2008-10-05.png Linking-Open-Data-class-diagram_2008-10-05.png (Image PNG, 934x8

Topic Maps date back to 1991 and have gone a long way since then. The article A Perspective on the Quest for Global Knowledge Interchange ( PDF ) by Steve Newcomb gives a historical overview. It was published as chapter 3 of XML Topic Maps – Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web (Jack Park and Sam Hunting, eds.), 2003: Addison-Wesley. The publisher makes this chapter available free. TopicMaps http://www.topicmaps.org/

rawdatanow.freemind

Bib & SW

http://www.w3.org/TR/wordnet-rdf/ This document is a First Public Working Draft produced by the Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment Working Group , part of the W3C Semantic Web Activity . Comments on this document are encouraged and may be sent to public-swbp-wg@w3.org ; please include the text "comment" in the subject line. All messages received at this address are viewable in a public archive . This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. RDF/OWL Representation of WordNet

ResumeRDF Ontology Specification http://rdfs.org/resume-rdf/ This visual layout and structure of the specification was adapted from the SIOC Ontology Specification by Uldis Bojars and John Breslin (eds). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License . This copyright applies to the ResumeRDF Ontology Specification and accompanying documentation and does not apply to ResumeRDF data formats, ontology terms, or technology. Regarding underlying technology, ResumeRDF relies heavily on W3C's RDF technology, an open Web standard that can be freely used by anyone. Abstract

http://www.w3.org/RDF/ Resource Description Framework (RDF) / W3C Semantic Web Activity 4Suite (programming environment). Directly usable from Python 4store (triple store). 3Store (triple store). ARC RDF Store (triple store). Directly usable from PHP

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3 Notation3 (N3): A readable RDF syntax F G H K set of universal variables of F { ... } or an entire document

Resource Description Framework (RDF) Schema Specification 1.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/ This document is a Candidate Recommendation of the World Wide Web Consortium . Review comments on this specification should be sent by June 15, 2000 to . The archive of public comments is available at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments . Private comments that you wish to be visible only to the editors, working group chair, and W3C staff may be sent to . This specification is a revision of the Proposed Recommendation of March 03 1999 , incorporating editorial suggestions received in review comments .

You could read this as #pat has a #child which has #age of "4" and a #child which has an #age of "3". There are two important things to remember The identifiers are just identifiers - the fact that the letters p a t are used doesn't tell anyone or any machine that we are talking about anyone whose name is "Pat" -- unless we say "Pat". The same applies to the verbs - never take the actual letters c h i l d as telling you what it means - we will find out how to do that later. http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer Primer - Getting into the semantic web and RDF using N3

The predicate or property: creator The object or value: Larry Page The subject: http://www.google.com Now to put this into RDF syntax, we do the following: RDF Automation Ushering in Semantic Web http://www.cmswire.com/cms/web-development/rdf-automation-ushering-in-semantic-web-006005.php

http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ The OWL Guide demonstrates the use of the OWL language by providing an extended example. It also provides a glossary of the terminology used in these documents; The OWL Reference gives a systematic and compact (but still informally stated) description of all the modelling primitives of OWL; This OWL Overview gives a simple introduction to OWL by providing a language feature listing with very brief feature descriptions; The OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax document is the final and formally stated normative definition of the language; OWL Web Ontology Language Overview

http://www.lacot.org/public/introduction_a_owl.pdf Introduction à OWL Your browser must support javascript.

Sparklines Excel Add-in - TinyGraphs

SPSS, Data Mining, Statistical Analysis Software, Predictive Ana

DAML.org

Gleaning Resource Descriptions from Dialects of Languages (GRDDL