well, meine neue heimat ist ja doch recht groovy.

heute werde ich das alte leobardenfell auspacken und in den Hertzclub gehen

https://www.hertzclub.com/gb/index_02.htm

die haben opening, wird sicher geil. stephan und michael sind auch dabei.

Michael Zeltner has pointed me again to the obvious.

Foaf grows.

www.foafspace.com/
"FoaFSpace has indexed 1550126 documents. You can search by name, nickname, instant messaging ID, or mailbox."

beta.plink.org/
"Welcome to PLINK, a new way to find friends, and friends of friends!
PLINK gets all its user data from 'FOAF' (Friend-of-a-Friend) files which anyone can add to their web site. "

what is see here is the growing of the real semantic web. not tiny semantic web, not light, the real thing. crazy. have to change the heading of my blog from "Building the Semantic Web was harder than I thought." to
"watching as the semantic web grows".

Recently I blogged about "a generic rdf browser is not possible". It was good to put this provocative, so some people thought about the idea, too.

Jamie Pitts wrote: "Leo Sauermann explained that a generic RDF browser needs a different display definition for each RDF-schema. This makes a lot of sense. I would add that browser-style applications which truly take advantage of RDF out there will also require something along the lines of a "useage template" for each useage scenario."

Danny Ayers blogged with something very practical: "From a random snippet of RDF/XML you can still infer quite a few things - what are properties, what are classes. Barest minimum is that you know something is to be treated as a resource or as a literal. That’s infinitely more that you get with arbitrary XML alone (you may know the datatype of something thanks to a schema, but even then you won’t know what the something represents)."

(and Shelley quoted this)

That is similiar to what I do in gnowsis' browser.

What I want to add is:
If you just have the information "this is a dc:title" than this is not enough. A snippet of RDF (an RDF chunk/subgraph/CBD) to render will most of the time describe one resource. And we have been building applications for many years now that do excatly this (Address books for persons, ERP for order management, photo finder for photos :-). Compiled applications, structured and immovable.
In the web scenario we use HTML to render this information and in the intranet scenario, many applications that were before compiled and client GUI are now intranet applications.

Building applications for certain purposes is a good thing and we should continue this tradition. One UI for photos, one for People, etc. The apple address book is loved by Mac-thusiasts, let them keep it. But RDF-ify it.

So I would continue writing web applications and normal C++ GUI applications BUT use RDF as data source and rendering source. "browsing" can then happen by clicking a "related" button and opening other applications. Same with the web browser.

Generic RDF rendering (as described by danny in short) is useful for NERDS but not for end users. I showed my generic rendering to test users and they couldn't make anything out of it. Well, probably I am a bad programmer ;-]

I don't want to build a generic "haystack" like architecture to force every hacker to code her/his UI in XSLT/haystack/XYZ. Keep your code, but make it RDF compatible.

so thats why I fumble around with gnowsis all the time, to see how application integration could work.

btw: 2 hours to alpha release.

ingrid und ich haben gerade die insignien der Freizeit am kamin attachiert. sehr fein geworden.





die Aufhängung besteht aus zweckentfremdeten Kleinteilen einer Vorhangstange vom Hornbach.

nebenbei hören wir die ganze zeit den Soundtrack von Udo77.

I announced an RDF browser some days ago and I have more thoughts about this issue:

A generic RDF browser is not possible.

an RDF browser is possible, but it needs stylesheets.

It cannot be made, it will not be good and it is not needed.
Explaination:

A generic RDF browser is a piece of software that will display RDF like a web-browser. You can see it, read it, click it etc. It should generate a good representation of the contents, but without any rendering instructions (like css or xslt)

XML is also not rendered in a generic way. Never. IF you see xml, it is usually rendered using an XSLT to render it as HTML. But for each XML-Schema you will need a seperate XSLT.

The same with RDF: to render RDF, you need a kind of XSLT for every RDF-Schema around. So what we need is people like Masahide Kanzaki who do great XSLTs for RDF.

And a way to use these XSLTs. They may not actually be XSLT, it also may be a kind of XForms idea. We also need to use the RDF extension for XSLT (f.e. Damians Treehugger).

So: Do not try to make a generic RDF browser. Try to render the concrete RDF example you know of. Build something like FoafNaut.