From aldo.bucchi at gmail.com Thu Dec 2 07:32:06 2010 From: aldo.bucchi at gmail.com (Aldo Bucchi) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 03:32:06 -0300 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? Message-ID: Hi, Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp Thanks! A -- Aldo Bucchi @aldonline skype:aldo.bucchi http://aldobucchi.com/ From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 2 10:39:38 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:39:38 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Exposing information about which products you own at Web Scale Message-ID: <58596C6E-D749-4F03-A6D0-4736B9195108@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear all: Many shopping sites provide recommendations based on your past purchases. For example, Amazon suggest books related to books or book topics from previous purchases. The main problem of such recommendations is that they are limited to what you previously bought in that particular store. If you buy stuff from multiple sites, the current site cannot take into account what you bought from the other ones, which limits the quality of the recommendations. Since long, GoodRelations has provided a simple yet extremely powerful mechanism for making information about what you previously bought or own to multiple shopping sites. So you can expose data about ALL products that you own to ALL shopping sites that you want to be aware of those for recommendations. That is exactly the cross-site product ownership info that services like e.g. http://shwowp.com are providing, but with GoodRelations, you can do that at Web scale. Here is a recipe of how it works in GoodRelations: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelationsOwns Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 2 11:28:37 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 11:28:37 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Aldo, Not directly an answer to your question, but: In GoodRelations, we use ISIC as a datatype property, http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasISICv4 , because replicating standardized numbering schemes is usually difficult due to maintenance and legal issues. Martin On 02.12.2010, at 07:32, Aldo Bucchi wrote: > Hi, > > Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? > http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp > > Thanks! > A > > -- > Aldo Bucchi > @aldonline > skype:aldo.bucchi > http://aldobucchi.com/ > From kidehen at openlinksw.com Thu Dec 2 13:20:12 2010 From: kidehen at openlinksw.com (Kingsley Idehen) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 07:20:12 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4CF78EFC.3090202@openlinksw.com> On 12/2/10 5:28 AM, Martin Hepp wrote: > Hi Aldo, > Not directly an answer to your question, but: In GoodRelations, we use > ISIC as a datatype property, > > http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasISICv4 , > > because replicating standardized numbering schemes is usually > difficult due to maintenance and legal issues. Aldo, Live specimen from URIBurner: http://uriburner.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jarltech.de%2Fgoodrelations.rdf%23Jarltech&p=57 Note: &p takes you to a specific description page for a specific entity :-) Kingsley > > Martin > > On 02.12.2010, at 07:32, Aldo Bucchi wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? >> http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp >> >> Thanks! >> A >> >> -- >> Aldo Bucchi >> @aldonline >> skype:aldo.bucchi >> http://aldobucchi.com/ >> > > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen From aldo.bucchi at gmail.com Thu Dec 2 17:32:10 2010 From: aldo.bucchi at gmail.com (Aldo Bucchi) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 13:32:10 -0300 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Martin, On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Martin Hepp wrote: > Hi Aldo, > Not directly an answer to your question, but: In GoodRelations, we use ISIC > as a datatype property, > > ?http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasISICv4 , > > because replicating standardized numbering schemes is usually difficult due > to maintenance and legal issues. Aha! I am starting to understand the rationale behind your decision ;) Having said that, internally, we do need to create a dataset because we need the relations between categories, labels, etc. We are using it to fill this predicate. > > Martin > > On 02.12.2010, at 07:32, Aldo Bucchi wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? >> http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp >> >> Thanks! >> A >> >> -- >> Aldo Bucchi >> @aldonline >> skype:aldo.bucchi >> http://aldobucchi.com/ >> > > -- Aldo Bucchi @aldonline skype:aldo.bucchi http://aldobucchi.com/ From kidehen at openlinksw.com Thu Dec 2 17:50:03 2010 From: kidehen at openlinksw.com (Kingsley Idehen) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 11:50:03 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4CF7CE3B.9050702@openlinksw.com> On 12/2/10 11:32 AM, Aldo Bucchi wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Martin Hepp > wrote: >> Hi Aldo, >> Not directly an answer to your question, but: In GoodRelations, we use ISIC >> as a datatype property, >> >> http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasISICv4 , >> >> because replicating standardized numbering schemes is usually difficult due >> to maintenance and legal issues. > Aha! I am starting to understand the rationale behind your decision ;) > > Having said that, internally, we do need to create a dataset because > we need the relations between categories, labels, etc. Aldo, Make your own data space (internal or public) by populating our own Named Graphs with said data. You can take the Microsoft Access dump, re-org the SQL data if need be, zap it through the RDF Views Wizard (using ODBC connection to Access) and you're set re. RDF based Linked Data Space. You get the picture.... Kingsley > We are using it to fill this predicate. > >> Martin >> >> On 02.12.2010, at 07:32, Aldo Bucchi wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? >>> http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp >>> >>> Thanks! >>> A >>> >>> -- >>> Aldo Bucchi >>> @aldonline >>> skype:aldo.bucchi >>> http://aldobucchi.com/ >>> >> > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen From aldo.bucchi at gmail.com Thu Dec 2 18:01:57 2010 From: aldo.bucchi at gmail.com (Aldo Bucchi) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 14:01:57 -0300 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? In-Reply-To: <4CF7CE3B.9050702@openlinksw.com> References: <4CF7CE3B.9050702@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > On 12/2/10 11:32 AM, Aldo Bucchi wrote: >> >> Hi Martin, >> >> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Martin Hepp >> ?wrote: >>> >>> Hi Aldo, >>> Not directly an answer to your question, but: In GoodRelations, we use >>> ISIC >>> as a datatype property, >>> >>> ?http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasISICv4 , >>> >>> because replicating standardized numbering schemes is usually difficult >>> due >>> to maintenance and legal issues. >> >> Aha! I am starting to understand the rationale behind your decision ;) >> >> Having said that, internally, we do need to create a dataset because >> we need the relations between categories, labels, etc. > > Aldo, > > Make your own data space (internal or public) by populating our own Named > Graphs with said data. > > You can take the Microsoft Access dump, re-org the SQL data if need be, zap > it through the RDF Views Wizard (using ODBC connection to Access) and you're > set re. RDF based Linked Data Space. So you noticed there is a MsSQL dump :) My real problem is not doing this part, I do it often. The question was aimed at taking advantage of network effect. 1. If it is done, don't do it again 2. Reuse IDs which will eventually align my dataset with another datasets. For example, someone will add images to these categories, and my apps will benefit from that with a simple "import". I think Virtuoso's RDF Views are best ( in fact, crucial ) when dealing with a live dataset which is stored in an RDBMS and being operated on by other apps. Like sugar CRM for example. > > You get the picture.... > > Kingsley >> >> We are using it to fill this predicate. >> >>> Martin >>> >>> On 02.12.2010, at 07:32, Aldo Bucchi wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? >>>> http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> A >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Aldo Bucchi >>>> @aldonline >>>> skype:aldo.bucchi >>>> http://aldobucchi.com/ >>>> >>> >> >> > > > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > President& ?CEO > OpenLink Software > Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen > > > > > > -- Aldo Bucchi @aldonline skype:aldo.bucchi http://aldobucchi.com/ From kidehen at openlinksw.com Thu Dec 2 18:17:01 2010 From: kidehen at openlinksw.com (Kingsley Idehen) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 12:17:01 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] ISIC as Linked Data? In-Reply-To: References: <4CF7CE3B.9050702@openlinksw.com> Message-ID: <4CF7D48D.6020906@openlinksw.com> On 12/2/10 12:01 PM, Aldo Bucchi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: >> On 12/2/10 11:32 AM, Aldo Bucchi wrote: >>> Hi Martin, >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Martin Hepp >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Aldo, >>>> Not directly an answer to your question, but: In GoodRelations, we use >>>> ISIC >>>> as a datatype property, >>>> >>>> http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1#hasISICv4 , >>>> >>>> because replicating standardized numbering schemes is usually difficult >>>> due >>>> to maintenance and legal issues. >>> Aha! I am starting to understand the rationale behind your decision ;) >>> >>> Having said that, internally, we do need to create a dataset because >>> we need the relations between categories, labels, etc. >> Aldo, >> >> Make your own data space (internal or public) by populating our own Named >> Graphs with said data. >> >> You can take the Microsoft Access dump, re-org the SQL data if need be, zap >> it through the RDF Views Wizard (using ODBC connection to Access) and you're >> set re. RDF based Linked Data Space. > So you noticed there is a MsSQL dump :) > My real problem is not doing this part, I do it often. > > The question was aimed at taking advantage of network effect. Yes, and how do you take advantage of the network effect without a Linked Data Space? Of course your desired effect could be Intranet or Internet scoped. > 1. If it is done, don't do it again > 2. Reuse IDs which will eventually align my dataset with another > datasets. For example, someone will add images to these categories, > and my apps will benefit from that with a simple "import". > > I think Virtuoso's RDF Views are best ( in fact, crucial ) when > dealing with a live dataset which is stored in an RDBMS and being > operated on by other apps. Like sugar CRM for example. SugarCRM (easy map via RDF Views), SalesForce.com (via our Cartridge which maps to our on eCRM ontology), our own eCRM (which has had its own Ontology for eons), all end up as foundation for powerful Linked Data Data Spaces (public or private). Thus, make the data space, and experience the network effect you seek :-) Kingsley >> You get the picture.... >> >> Kingsley >>> We are using it to fill this predicate. >>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> On 02.12.2010, at 07:32, Aldo Bucchi wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Is there any ISIC Linked Data Dataset out there that you know of? >>>>> http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp >>>>> >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> A >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Aldo Bucchi >>>>> @aldonline >>>>> skype:aldo.bucchi >>>>> http://aldobucchi.com/ >>>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> Kingsley Idehen >> President& CEO >> OpenLink Software >> Web: http://www.openlinksw.com >> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 2 21:14:38 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 21:14:38 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Structured e-commerce data: Helping your customers vs. helping your competitors Message-ID: <4145C9B9-B94E-4646-97BD-D5F93336AEEE@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear all: I recently tried to reply to a blogpost that was critical of using Google's Rich Snippet functionality. Since I think my arguments may be of general relevance, I post them here, too: Hi XYZ, I think you are overly pessimistic about the potential of exposing structured data regarding your products or services. Clearly, while informing potential customers you are also making it easier for your competitors to analyze you. However, please keep in mind the following aspects: 1. Not being visible with all the details of your offer is always worse than being visible for both your potential customers and your competitors; nowadays, you can never survive by shying away from the public but just by having a different value proposition than your competition. 2. Structured data, e.g. GoodRelations in RDFa, helps keeping your value proposition intact when publishing it on the WWW. Instead of being reduced to just the price tag, the many ways in which you are different from your competitors remain accessible for search engines and novel recommender systems - e.g. stock availability, warranty, payment and delivery methods, or product features. 3. It is fairly easy for your competitors to analyze you even if you do not publish your offer data in RDFa. They can simply hire staff in low-labor countries or go via Amazon's Mechanical Turk service that will collect and consolidate what's on your Web page anyway. But your prospective customers cannot go that route, so you are putting much more friction on the matchmaking with potential clients than protecting yourself against your competition. So it is really about helping search engines to help prospective customers to find you. Best wishes Martin Hepp From steven.forth at gmail.com Thu Dec 2 22:42:36 2010 From: steven.forth at gmail.com (Steven Forth) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 16:42:36 -0500 Subject: [goodrelations] Structured e-commerce data: Helping your customers vs. helping your competitors In-Reply-To: <4145C9B9-B94E-4646-97BD-D5F93336AEEE@ebusiness-unibw.org> References: <4145C9B9-B94E-4646-97BD-D5F93336AEEE@ebusiness-unibw.org> Message-ID: Thanks Martin Do you also have this up on a website somewhere? Steven On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Martin Hepp wrote: > Dear all: > > I recently tried to reply to a blogpost that was critical of using Google's > Rich Snippet functionality. Since I think my arguments may be of general > relevance, I post them here, too: > > > Hi XYZ, > I think you are overly pessimistic about the potential of exposing > structured data regarding your products or services. Clearly, while > informing potential customers you are also making it easier for your > competitors to analyze you. However, please keep in mind the following > aspects: > > 1. Not being visible with all the details of your offer is always worse > than being visible for both your potential customers and your competitors; > nowadays, you can never survive by shying away from the public but just by > having a different value proposition than your competition. > > 2. Structured data, e.g. GoodRelations in RDFa, helps keeping your value > proposition intact when publishing it on the WWW. Instead of being reduced > to just the price tag, the many ways in which you are different from your > competitors remain accessible for search engines and novel recommender > systems - e.g. stock availability, warranty, payment and delivery methods, > or product features. > > 3. It is fairly easy for your competitors to analyze you even if you do not > publish your offer data in RDFa. They can simply hire staff in low-labor > countries or go via Amazon's Mechanical Turk service that will collect and > consolidate what's on your Web page anyway. But your prospective customers > cannot go that route, so you are putting much more friction on the > matchmaking with potential clients than protecting yourself against your > competition. So it is really about helping search engines to help > prospective customers to find you. > > Best wishes > > Martin Hepp > > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > -- Steven Forth steven.forth at gmail.com @StevenForth -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 2 22:44:46 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 22:44:46 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Structured e-commerce data: Helping your customers vs. helping your competitors In-Reply-To: References: <4145C9B9-B94E-4646-97BD-D5F93336AEEE@ebusiness-unibw.org> Message-ID: <619EA3C6-9B8B-4F78-916E-38DC494AB2F5@ebusiness-unibw.org> Hi Steven: Yes: http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/2010-December/000292.html Note: All post to this mailing lists are archived as per the list policy and available at http://ebusiness-unibw.org/pipermail/goodrelations/2010-December/000292.html Best Martin PS: The original post failed and I mainly relayed the message here to save the effort ;-) On 02.12.2010, at 22:42, Steven Forth wrote: > Thanks Martin > > Do you also have this up on a website somewhere? > > Steven > > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Martin Hepp > wrote: > Dear all: > > I recently tried to reply to a blogpost that was critical of using > Google's Rich Snippet functionality. Since I think my arguments may > be of general relevance, I post them here, too: > > > Hi XYZ, > I think you are overly pessimistic about the potential of exposing > structured data regarding your products or services. Clearly, while > informing potential customers you are also making it easier for your > competitors to analyze you. However, please keep in mind the > following aspects: > > 1. Not being visible with all the details of your offer is always > worse than being visible for both your potential customers and your > competitors; nowadays, you can never survive by shying away from the > public but just by having a different value proposition than your > competition. > > 2. Structured data, e.g. GoodRelations in RDFa, helps keeping your > value proposition intact when publishing it on the WWW. Instead of > being reduced to just the price tag, the many ways in which you are > different from your competitors remain accessible for search engines > and novel recommender systems - e.g. stock availability, warranty, > payment and delivery methods, or product features. > > 3. It is fairly easy for your competitors to analyze you even if you > do not publish your offer data in RDFa. They can simply hire staff > in low-labor countries or go via Amazon's Mechanical Turk service > that will collect and consolidate what's on your Web page anyway. > But your prospective customers cannot go that route, so you are > putting much more friction on the matchmaking with potential clients > than protecting yourself against your competition. So it is really > about helping search engines to help prospective customers to find > you. > > Best wishes > > Martin Hepp > > > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations > > > > -- > Steven Forth > steven.forth at gmail.com > @StevenForth > _______________________________________________ > goodrelations mailing list > goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org > http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 2 23:37:39 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 23:37:39 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] PhD/PostDoc Positions in Semantic Web, Web Science, and E-Business - Deadline December 15, 2010 Message-ID: <16A9E2E2-B758-439F-A174-525A553D259F@ebusiness-unibw.org> The E-Business and Web Science Research Group (Prof. Hepp) at Universitaet der Bundeswehr in Munich, Germany invites applications for several fully funded PhD positions and one Post-doc position in the field of Semantic Web, Web Science, and E-Business Research. We are a young team of researchers with backgrounds in information systems, conceptual modeling, economics, computer science, and related disciplines. Our main goal is to find practically relevant and scientifically significant results that help coordinate human activity over the Web. A flagship example of our recent work is the GoodRelations technology for e-commerce, adopted by major Web companies like Google, Yahoo, BestBuy, Overstock.com, and many others. Research topics for the positions: * Linked Data and the Semantic Web * Recommender Systems * Data Quality * Ontology Engineering * Economics of Semantic Technology * Social Commerce * Micropayment We offer... * a stimulating research environment with people who are working on leading edge problems of the future World Wide Web and novel E- Business scenarios, * a ?small think-tank? atmosphere, in which experienced seniors are still deeply involved in actual research, * excellent ties to the international research community, * guidance on how to publish your best findings in good conference proceedings and peer-reviewed journals , and last but not least * the supervision and continuous, timely feedback that you need to achieve great results and complete your PhD in a 3 ? 3.5 years time- frame. The salary will be according to the German TVOED E13 scheme for the PhD positions (75 ...100%, depending on profile and experience) and E14 for the post-doc position (100%). We expect... * a sincere interest in the technical, socia, or economic aspects of the World Wide Web, ideally related to E-Business, * the willingness to contribute the ?99% perspiration? (Thomas Alva Edison) that is needed to carry a great idea forward until it yields a validated result: a prototype, a statistically significant improvement, or similar, * excellent English skills in speaking and writing, and * a master?s degree or equivalent in business management, computer science, information systems, economics, or a related subject. A plus would be any of the following skills: * Conceptual modeling (in particular in UML, ER, ORM, or BPMN) * Good knowledge of the current WWW technology stack (Web architecture, XML and related technologies, Web protocols, etc.) * RDF, OWL, SPARQL expertise * Programming skills in Java, PHP, or Python, ideally with RDF APIs * Economics and Business Management * Databases * Statistics We very much appreciate if you develop prototypes or supervise the development of prototypes of your work, unless that is not applicable to your type of research question. If you have a deep interest in driving forward the World Wide Web both as a technology and tool and as a social environment, we would be happy hear from you. Please submit your application in English by e-mail (mandatory) with all documents as PDF attachments (mandatory) to martin.hepp at unibw.de, no later than December 15, 2010. Your application should include the following documents: 1. Cover letter 2. CV 3. Academic credentials 4. Title and abstract of your Master's thesis 5. List of publications (if any) For further information, see also our following Web pages: GoodRelations research project: - http://purl.org/goodrelations/ - http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations Recent publications: - http://www.heppnetz.de/publications/ Research vision: - http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/research/ Best regards Martin Hepp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Martin Hepp, Professor of General Management and E-Business Bundeswehr University Munich Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39 D-85579 Neubiberg, Germany http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/research/ From colinangel at gmail.com Fri Dec 3 02:15:45 2010 From: colinangel at gmail.com (Colin Angel) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 17:15:45 -0800 Subject: [goodrelations] Google's position on Copy and Paste Snippets aka Hidden DIVs Message-ID: Hi Martin, I was very interested in the article you co-authored a while back "RDF2RDFa: Turning RDF into Snippets for Copy-and-Paste" ( http://www.heppnetz.de/files/RDF2RDFa-TR.pdf) since I believe that the widespread adoption of RDF will at least partially depend on how easy it is to implement by the average web contributor. In addition, there are so many web sites that exist today in public and corporate environments that will never see RDFa integrated into their legacy content if it requires more than basic technical expertise to implement. Looking at the modified Google recipe you provided ( http://www.heppresearch.com/gr4google), I noticed that it uses the integrated XHTML+RDFa approach using attributes. I haven't seen anything official from Google regarding whether they would support "stand-alone" snippets, just their warning to stay away from using hidden content ( http://knol.google.com/k/google-rich-snippets-tips-and-tricks). I decided to try a "snippet" variant of your above recipe with Google and Yahoo's respective RDFa testing tools and they both parsed correctly. Google's didn't complain about hidden content, although it did when I put the review element at the end of the page. I'll have to assume though that parsing the page doesn't guarantee that a search engine will actually display the RDF content in results pages. Do you think search engines will support and display the content from so-called "hidden divs" or standalone snippets separated from the human-visible content of the page? Or is it just too easy a target for people to game the system by stuffing content into hidden RDFa unrelated to their page content much like they did with the META keywords tag? Interested in your perspective, Colin -- Colin Angel colin.angel at gmail.com Loan $25, Change a Life - Check out http://Kiva.org - a productive alternative to charity. Invest in people! - http://www.microplace.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 9 09:32:09 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 09:32:09 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] gr:owns - http://groups.google.com/group/music-ontology-specification-group/browse_thread/thread/78079360a41aa611/7cacc208166ab535 Message-ID: Hi Yves, on http://groups.google.com/group/music-ontology-specification-group/browse_thread/thread/78079360a41aa611/7cacc208166ab535 you state that >OK - after taking a quick look at: >http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/goodrelations-UML.png >It looks like there is indeed a gr:owns property - but using it on an >artist would mean it is a 'business entity' - which I am sure many >artists would disagree with :-) Note that being a gr:BusinessEntity basically just means you are a foaf:Agent who offers or consumes something. Every human being is thus a gr:BusinessEntity, and every organization. Even the pope is a gr:BusinessEntity in the sense of GoodRelations, as far as he is a human being. Even marsmen or animals sufficiently intelligent to act willfully could be considered a gr:BusinessEntity- So no musician has reason to worry about being classified as a gr:BusinessEntity. GoodRelations does not assume you want an amount of money for your offer (you can say that something is free using a gr:UnitPriceSpecification of zero EUR e.g.), nor that the compensation must be in money. In theory, you could e.g. define a class foo:NonMonetaryCompensation a owl:Class . and a property foo:compensation a owl:ObjectProperty ; rdfs:domain gr:Offering ; rdfs:range foo:NonMonetaryCompensation . and then define instances like foo:GoodKarma a foo:NonMonetaryCompensation . foo:ASmile a foo:NonMonetaryCompensation . The you can simply say foo:Offer a gr:Offering . gr:includes foo:MySong ; gr:availableDeliveryMethods gr:DeliveryModeDirectDownload . foo:compensation foo:ASmile . foo:MySong a gr:ProductOrServicesSomeInstancesPlaceholder, foo:Song . # add properties characterizing the song here The problem with using gr:owns in your case is in the fact that gr:owns says that the musician owns a certain instrument, which does not imply anything about his ability to play it. I may own a violin as an investment object. Also, someone may not own a certain instrument, yet still be an excellent performer on that type of instrument. Best Martin From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 9 11:38:58 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:38:58 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Presentation with details on BestBuy's use of GoodRelations Message-ID: <5CDEC85C-A9A3-408D-AE42-B9489AF21C6A@ebusiness-unibw.org> Dear All: I just found a great presentation by Jay Myers from BestBuy on how and why they are using GoodRelations: http://www.slideshare.net/jaymmyers/myers-jay-rev Very much recommended! Best wishes Martin Hepp -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Sat Dec 11 09:12:03 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 09:12:03 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Rich Snippets - Multiple items per page; other questions Message-ID: Dear all: Here are a few Google-specific hints regarding GoodRelations: 1. Multiple items per page ========================== Google's Rich Snippets validator complains if you define multiple gr:Offering nodes in one page. In this post, I want to show how you can handle multiple items on one page and still get your content validated by Google. Background: Since Rich Snippets should summarize the main content for a page as a whole, they don't work well for multi-item pages, at least not for now. It's possible that Google will expand their support so that multiple items on one page will be listed below the organic search results in the future, but that is speculative at this point. There is a simple solution to the problem: Instead of adding the markup to an overview page that lists multiple products, put the RDFa markup into the item pages, i.e. such pages that show the details for one single item. Most shops have such a view for each product, and if your shop hasn't, there are good SEO reasons to create one. That should do the trick. If you list related items (consumables, similar products) you could still expose those in a GoodRelations compatible way using just pointers from the main product to the related products using gr:isAccessoryOrSparePartFor, gr:isConsumableFor, or gr:isSimilarTo, but without gr:Offering data for those on the main page (there offer meta-data etc. will be inside their item pages). Note that in this case, you have to model not just the offer (gr:Offering) with the minimal GoodRelations recipe but also the product (gr:ProductOrServicesSomeInstancesPlaceholder), because the relationship is between two products, not between two offers. An example of this more granular yet Google-compliant way of modeling Rich Snippets is at http://www.heppnetz.de/rdfa4google/tc3b.html It validates in Google, see http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heppnetz.de%2Frdfa4google%2Ftc3b.html&view= 2. Identifiers / RDFa about =========================== Even if Google's original recipe does not use the RDFa attribute "about", you should use it and define new hash fragments for all key GoodRelations elements, i.e. gr:Offering, gr:BusinessEntity, gr:LocationOfSalesAndServiceProvisioninhg, and gr:ProductOrService (plus subclasses), because this makes your items much more accessible for Semantic Web applications (otherwise, entity consolidation and adding interesting link won't work or are difficult). It does not matter which text/string your use as an identifier, as long as it is unique for that particular page. Example (Bad) -------------
Hepp Research Personal SCSI Controller Card
Example (Good) --------------
Hepp Research Personal SCSI Controller Card
A full example is at http://www.heppresearch.com/gr4google Best Martin Hepp From gouadjed at eoweo.com Sat Dec 11 15:54:12 2010 From: gouadjed at eoweo.com (Ghalem Ouadjed (EOWEO)) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 15:54:12 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] beta launching time and plans specifications Message-ID: <4D039094.1010700@eoweo.com> Hello, we are now working on the launching of our new BtoB online service and we ve sheduled a beta version of it. As we are marking up our business using gr specifications for google and yahoo, we don t find a way to specify that "for now we are in beta and then it is free for the first 3 monthes", like for example a promotion we would like to see displayed in the same way that "in stock" just behinf the price information. Also we didn t find the way to marking up our "plans" informations to specify that we propose 3 modules and a specific price for each one. Last question i promise : regarding the rich snippets, Google help tell us that the data we mark up have to be seen by the bot AND the user and if we follow the good relations quick start for company (http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelationsQuickstart#Company), it seems like only the bot we ll see the datas but not the user and in the same way, what can we do if we don t want to display the contact information to the user on the homepage but only on the contact page pls? coud you pls help us to achieve our goal and enhance our usage of the goodrelations specifications pls? Thank you in advance for your time and the effort you made reading our "frenglish" :-) Best Reagards Ghalem Ouadjed Membre associ? du STI International : http://www.sti2.org/associate-members Mob : 0616674816 gouadjed at eoweo.com *| *http://blog.eoweo.com *|* http://www.viadeo.com/fr/profile/ghalem.ouadjed*|**twitter : @ghalem_ouadjed * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2758 bytes Desc: not available URL: From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 23 09:59:15 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 09:59:15 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] Fwd: a list of companies active in the semantic technology area References: <3057BADB-AE85-4406-AFFF-0C7EC47A06A7@ebusiness-unibw.org> Message-ID: This may also be interesting for subscribers of this list, in particular the query example. Begin forwarded message: > Resent-From: semantic-web at w3.org > From: Martin Hepp > Date: 22. Dezember 2010 18:28:38 MEZ > To: Semantic Web > Cc: Bob DuCharme , Hugh Glaser > Subject: Re: a list of companies active in the semantic technology > area > > Hi all: > > Apologies for my late reply, end of term season ;-) > > It is very easy to create and maintain such a directory based on > GoodRelations - actually, the following should already work pretty > well as of today : > > 1. A company describes its range of products and services using > GoodRelations, e.g. using the GoodRelations Annotator > > http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/tools/goodrelations-annotator/ > > Many SW companies have done so already, e.g. > > http://www.franz.com/goodrelations.rdf > > 2. The site informs one or more RDF repositories / crawlers of that > data, e.g. sindice.com or Ping The Semantic Web so that they can > crawl and collate the data. > > 3. Rund a query for matching companies against a suitable SPARQL > endpoint > > See an example query below. The query may not yet be perfect, > because testing them on > > http://loc.openlinksw.com/sparql > http://lod.openlinksw.com/sparql > http://uriburner.com/sparql > > currently yields an error message > > "37000 Error SQ156: Internal Optimized compiler error : dt not found > based on cname in sqlo.c:1078." > which I do not understand, so I cannot quickly spot whether it's the > query or the endpoint. > > The basic pattern would be to > - search for gr:BusinessEntities > - that make at least one gr:Offering that is related to semantic > technology. > > The latter can be expressed - approximately - by > > - checking for the words > > "semantic", "RDF", "ontolog", "OWL", "triplestore", or "linked data" > > - in the textual elements attached to the gr:Offering or > - the textual elements of a product or product model linked to that > offer via gr:includes, and also > - considering gr:Offering nodes that include objects that are > instances of subclasses of gr:ProductOrService that contain one of > these words in the class name, or in its superclasses class names. > > Nice example for a typical hybrid SPARQL query in a real world > setting ;-) > > Best > > Martin > > > # List all companies that sell/lease/maintain etc. semantic technology > > SELECT ?c ?page ?legalname WHERE > { > ?c a gr:BusinessEntity . > ?c gr:legalName ?legalname . > OPTIONAL { ?c foaf:page ?page } > ?c gr:offers ?o . > > # Now we have to check that they sell something "semantic" > # Option 1: The offering contains "semantic", "RDF", "ontolog", > "OWL", "triplestore", or "linked data" > { > { ?o ?textprop ?text . } > UNION > # Option 2: The product or product class contains one of those words > { > { > { ?o gr:includes ?product. } > UNION > { ?o gr:includesObject ?t . > ?t a gr:TypeAndQuantityNode . > ?t gr:typeOfGood ?product . > } > # The UNION pattern above is because we cannot assume that the > expansion of gr:includes is materialized in triples > # See http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelationsOptionalAxiomsAndLinks > > } > # Option 2a: The product contains one of those words > ?product ?textprop ?text . > # Option 2b: The product is an instance of a class that contains > those words in their name > ?product a ?class . > ?class rdfs:subClassOf gr:ProductOrService . > ?class ?textprop ?text . > # Also consider labels of superclasses > OPTIONAL { > ?class rdfs:subClassOf ?superclass . > ?superclass ?textprop ?text .} > } > } > # Constrain the relevant text properties > FILTER (?textprop = rdfs:label || ?textprop = rdfs:comment || ? > textprop = gr:name || ?textprop = gr:description ) > # Check for significant words > FILTER ( bif:contains(?text, "semantic") || bif:contains(?text, > "RDF") || > bif:contains(?text, "ontolog") || bif:contains(?text, "OWL") || > bif:contains(?text, "triplestore") || > bif:contains(?text, "linked data") ) > } > LIMIT 10 > > -------------------------------------------------------- martin hepp e-business & web science research group universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen e-mail: hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org phone: +49-(0)89-6004-4217 fax: +49-(0)89-6004-4620 www: http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group) http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal) skype: mfhepp twitter: mfhepp Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data! ================================================================= * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/ * Quickstart Guide for Developers: http://bit.ly/quickstart4gr * Vocabulary Reference: http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1 * Developer's Wiki: http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations * Examples: http://bit.ly/cookbook4gr * Presentations: http://bit.ly/grtalks * Videos: http://bit.ly/grvideos From martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org Thu Dec 23 12:37:24 2010 From: martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org (Martin Hepp) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 12:37:24 +0100 Subject: [goodrelations] GoodRelations for describing companies and their purpose? In-Reply-To: <4d132bcf.ca790e0a.2c8b.7ed5SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> References: <4d132bcf.ca790e0a.2c8b.7ed5SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <159A3208-6CAB-435B-8290-25D6D498D3E6@ebusiness-unibw.org> Hi Dieter, (I am copying the GoodRelations mailing list, because this question is likely of interest for a broader audience): On 23.12.2010, at 12:00, Dieter Fensel wrote: > Hi Martin, > > I was checking http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/v1#BusinessEntity > but I did not find 5-10 standard attributes for describing a company > such as: > > - name use gr:legalName or rdfs:label > - location use the W3C Geo vocab or vCard geo properties (we do not define properties already available in popular vocabs), see http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/wiki/GoodRelations_and_Geo_/_Location_Data > - uri for the URI of their web page, use foaf:page or foaf:homepage > - email address use vcard:email (or foaf) > - logo use foaf:depiction > - short abstract use rdfs:comment or gr:description (not shown in the doc, because it can be applied to any object.) > - business area typically done by modeling an offer, i.e. if you just have a lexical representation of it, just attach an rdfs:label to the gr:Offering You can also use the properties gr:hasISICv4 and gr:hasNAICS in combination with popular industry classification codes. > - major products or services see my other mail - typically done by modeling an offer, i.e. if you just have a lexical representation of it, just attach an rdfs:label to the gr:Offering. A more granular solution is to model gr:ProductOrServiceModel instances and link them to an offer via gr:includes and to link to the company via gr:hasManufacturer > - yearly turnover > this is outside the scope of GoodRelations, but there may be respective properties defined already in the DBPedia schema or in ontologies derived from XBRL. Best wishes Martin