|
Re: #infrastructure New working group and practice guidelines
#infrastructure
No problem, this is to be expected as we are still evolving the
schema, and making sure our RDF is valid and implemented properly.
However, at some point soon we should get to a point where the
No problem, this is to be expected as we are still evolving the
schema, and making sure our RDF is valid and implemented properly.
However, at some point soon we should get to a point where the
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#61
·
|
|
Re: #infrastructure New working group and practice guidelines
#infrastructure
Hi Chris,
my importer is actually doing the file upload, this is the command I ran yesterday night
```bash
for f in `find ../rdf -name '*.ttl'`; do bseeder -i $f; done
```
So you do not need to
Hi Chris,
my importer is actually doing the file upload, this is the command I ran yesterday night
```bash
for f in `find ../rdf -name '*.ttl'`; do bseeder -i $f; done
```
So you do not need to
|
By
Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
·
#62
·
|
|
Serializing large LD datasets
Maybe our approach to serializing large graphs is maybe not that great. You can see the current code here - basically, we convert Python to JSON line by line, with some text mangling. It sounds (and
Maybe our approach to serializing large graphs is maybe not that great. You can see the current code here - basically, we convert Python to JSON line by line, with some text mangling. It sounds (and
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#63
·
|
|
Re: Serializing large LD datasets
Hi!
In the correspondence table group we struggled a bit when we had to move from Turtle to json-LD. We spend some time trying to figure out how to do it in JSON and ended up writing turtle. We
Hi!
In the correspondence table group we struggled a bit when we had to move from Turtle to json-LD. We spend some time trying to figure out how to do it in JSON and ended up writing turtle. We
|
By
Miguel Fernández Astudillo
·
#64
·
|
|
Re: Serializing large LD datasets
+1 for turtle format
Much easier to read and write.
+1 for turtle format
Much easier to read and write.
|
By
Agneta
·
#65
·
|
|
Re: Serializing large LD datasets
No opinion here, I trust those who have already worked hands-on on this, and their choice.
BR
Massimo
From: <main@bonsai.groups.io> on behalf of "Agneta via Groups.Io" <agneta.20@...>
Reply-To:
No opinion here, I trust those who have already worked hands-on on this, and their choice.
BR
Massimo
From: <main@bonsai.groups.io> on behalf of "Agneta via Groups.Io" <agneta.20@...>
Reply-To:
|
By
Massimo Pizzol
·
#66
·
|
|
Re: #ontology Can we come up with a better term than "Flow Object"?
#ontology
I added a table with what I could make of the existing systems, and the possible alternatives we have discussed, here:
I added a table with what I could make of the existing systems, and the possible alternatives we have discussed, here:
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#67
·
|
|
Re: BEP-0004 BONSAI knowledge management and communication strategy | open for discussion / seeking editor
I have created a bonsai.uno repo, which we need to fill out, to eventually replace the existing content of the website (this is included in BEP 4). The current website structure looks like:
Homepage
I have created a bonsai.uno repo, which we need to fill out, to eventually replace the existing content of the website (this is included in BEP 4). The current website structure looks like:
Homepage
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#68
·
|
|
Two votes - please participate!
Dear all-
1. If you haven't voted for or against BEP 1, please do it now! If not enough people participate, the proposal will automatically fail.
2. We have had a lively discussion on the terminology
Dear all-
1. If you haven't voted for or against BEP 1, please do it now! If not enough people participate, the proposal will automatically fail.
2. We have had a lively discussion on the terminology
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#69
·
|
|
#bonsamurai.github.io
Hey, I start a discussion here on the new bonsai.uno webpage.
Here is the structure suggested by Chris.
Vision (short)
Common ontology for LCA, MFA, and IE
Open data pipeline
By the community, for
Hey, I start a discussion here on the new bonsai.uno webpage.
Here is the structure suggested by Chris.
Vision (short)
Common ontology for LCA, MFA, and IE
Open data pipeline
By the community, for
|
By
romain
·
#70
·
|
|
Re: Two votes - please participate!
DCAFBE
By
Massimo Pizzol
·
#71
·
|
|
Re: Two votes - please participate!
AFDCEB
By
Matteo Lissandrini (AAU)
·
#72
·
|
|
Re: #ontology Can we come up with a better term than "Flow Object"?
#ontology
Hello,
Reading up that long email thread I wrote a summary of the different views expressed. I also summarise an article that describes another ontology for IE, rather different vocabulary, hoping it
Hello,
Reading up that long email thread I wrote a summary of the different views expressed. I also summarise an article that describes another ontology for IE, rather different vocabulary, hoping it
|
By
Elias Sebastian Azzi
·
#73
·
|
|
Re: Two votes - please participate!
ADCFBE is my current preference.
mvh
Elias
ADCFBE is my current preference.
mvh
Elias
|
By
Elias Sebastian Azzi
·
#74
·
|
|
Re: #ontology Can we come up with a better term than "Flow Object"?
#ontology
Dear all,
interesting. As part of the discussion you may want to consider also the JSON-LD format names:
http://greendelta.github.io/olca-schema/
In my view, process, flow, exchange is most
Dear all,
interesting. As part of the discussion you may want to consider also the JSON-LD format names:
http://greendelta.github.io/olca-schema/
In my view, process, flow, exchange is most
|
By
Andreas Ciroth
·
#75
·
|
|
Re: #ontology Can we come up with a better term than "Flow Object"?
#ontology
Hi all,
My philosophy on naming in ontologies revolves not on the simplicity of the terms used but on how they sound like when you talk about them in normal conversations. Does it sound awkward or
Hi all,
My philosophy on naming in ontologies revolves not on the simplicity of the terms used but on how they sound like when you talk about them in normal conversations. Does it sound awkward or
|
By
mmremolona@...
·
#76
·
|
|
5.4.19 Catch-up meeting minutes and next meeting planning
Next catch-up meeting
We will have another catch-up meeting on 12.4.19 at 15:00 CEST, and then skip the next week (19.4.19) due to Easter holidays.
5.4.19 Catch-up meeting minutes
Correspondence
Next catch-up meeting
We will have another catch-up meeting on 12.4.19 at 15:00 CEST, and then skip the next week (19.4.19) due to Easter holidays.
5.4.19 Catch-up meeting minutes
Correspondence
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#77
·
|
|
Re: 5.4.19 Catch-up meeting minutes and next meeting planning
Repo overview attachment
By
Chris Mutel
·
#78
·
|
|
Re: #bonsamurai.github.io
Maybe easier to split it up into actual URLs:
Note that the following is just one possibility, and will be changed now and in the future. Our aim is to make such changes
Maybe easier to split it up into actual URLs:
Note that the following is just one possibility, and will be changed now and in the future. Our aim is to make such changes
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#79
·
|
|
Re: Two votes - please participate!
FYI:
1. The vote on BEP 1 is trending towards acceptance; the voting will stop if two more people participate and approve.
2. We currently have 5 votes in our nomenclature discussion. Here are the
FYI:
1. The vote on BEP 1 is trending towards acceptance; the voting will stop if two more people participate and approve.
2. We currently have 5 votes in our nomenclature discussion. Here are the
|
By
Chris Mutel
·
#80
·
|