[WG-OTTO] Building our own schema site w/schema.org code

yuriy at gluu.org yuriy at gluu.org
Wed Apr 13 10:59:25 CDT 2016


It would be nice if we can avoid manual conversion. I would prefer to 
automate it.

Lets say we all agreed that it's ok for us to define schema in N3 
format. We may combine RDFLib and schemaorg projects:
1. Define in N3 (or whatever other format)
2. On git push automatically trigger re-publishing which would mean:
    a) take N3 source
    b) convert N3 to rdfa with RDFLib
    c) publish with schemaorg

https://github.com/RDFLib/rdflib
 From lib description: "The library contains parsers and serializers for 
RDF/XML, N3, NTriples, N-Quads, Turtle, TriX, RDFa and Microdata."

https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg

To make it possible we need some strong Python developer (between I'm 
Java dev).

Thanks,
Yuriy


On 2016-04-13 18:49, Janusz Ulanowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think, we shouldn't be worried in what format we want to express our
> schema. I tested Protege (tool for building worl-ontology) and I must
> say it's pretty good. It allows you to do a lot of things plus check
> for consistency. There is nice introduction on www.udemy.com - the
> course is called "Practical Knowledge Modelling" - I really recommend
> it.
> Personally I'm strongly for building our own schema/ontology - In
> thhis schema obviously we can reference to schema.org.
> 
> 
> 
> On 13/04/16 14:30, yuriy at gluu.org wrote:
>> Hi Judith,
>> 
>> Actually both you and Jeff referenced to the same project. According 
>> to
>> description of the project it consumes only rdfa-lite syntax which is
>> actually kind of html.
>> 
>> Here is core schema defined in rdfa :
>> https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/blob/sdo-deimos/data/schema.rdfa
>> Rdfa lite on w3: https://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-lite/
>> 
>> We have to discuss whether rdfa lite is ok for us to write it by hand 
>> :).
>> 
>> It's kind of static publishing while we are looking for generator that
>> can generate the site (static html/js/css) from turtle/json-ld or
>> similar syntax. So far I didn't find any.
>> 
>> Actually I may write our own if Mike confirm it.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Yuriy Z
>> 
>> 
>> On 2016-04-12 02:52, Bush,Judith wrote:
>>> See https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/wiki/AppEngine [1]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Links:
>>> ------
>>> [1] https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/wiki/AppEngine
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WG-OTTO mailing list
>>> WG-OTTO at kantarainitiative.org
>>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-otto
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> WG-OTTO mailing list
>> WG-OTTO at kantarainitiative.org
>> http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-otto



More information about the WG-OTTO mailing list