incubator-stanbol-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Enrico Daga (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (STANBOL-3) Clearly defined Stanbol vocabularies
Date Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:03:06 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STANBOL-3?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13012037#comment-13012037
] 

Enrico Daga commented on STANBOL-3:
-----------------------------------

Anyone knows which was the final decision (if any) about the base identifier for Stanbol ontologies/vocabularies?

If 2 or 3 are too complicated (number 2 requires a working domain while 3 requires a discussion
within the whole Apache), could we go on with 1 for the incubating period?

If so, which could be the process of publishing ontologies? I propose to have them in an svn
brnch and then setup a redirect from the stanbol website. 


> Clearly defined Stanbol vocabularies
> ------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: STANBOL-3
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STANBOL-3
>             Project: Stanbol
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Enrico Daga
>
> The Stanbol software uses some RDF vocabularies with an active role in the code (the
code refer to these vocabularies).
> For instance, FISE uses a vocabolary for Enhancement description, KReS uses a vocabulary
for managing ontologies and rules.
> Stanbol vocabularies should:
> - be refactored when moving to stanbol using some common namespace
> - be distributed in a well-formed RDF (which means also well-documented)
> - be collected and versioned in a common svn branch (separated from the one of the software
code)

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message