2007/5/12, Evgeny Egorochkin <<a href="mailto:phreedom.stdin@gmail.com">phreedom.stdin@gmail.com</a>>:<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Saturday 12 May 2007 00:14:55 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: > Basically we have four desktop ontologies that I know of: > > Strigi: > <a href="http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/kdesupport/strigi/src/streamanalyzer/fieldprope"> http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/kdesupport/strigi/src/streamanalyzer/fieldprope</a> >rties/ Tracker : <a href="http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/tracker/trunk/data/services/">http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/tracker/trunk/data/services/ </a> > Spotlight: > <a href="http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Carbon/Reference/MetadataAttribute">http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Carbon/Reference/MetadataAttribute</a> >sRef/index.html >Nepomuk: ? I couldn't find one... Sebastian, Jos, Phreedom? Parts of Nepomuk are still being drafted. Naturally it's RDF-based. I can ask Nepomuk if they are ok with releasing some parts of the draft, though you can consider Strigi onto a reasonable approximation of Nepomuk onto with some workarounds due to: * absense of file types(as of yet) * ban on multiple-node descriptions of files. * some extensions in situations where Strigi had to have something before Nepomuk * some files like strigi_font or strigi_trash are way to specific and will be moved out of the onto and into appropriate analyzers sometime soon. Otherwise the design ideas/criterias for Strigi onto are the same as Nepomuk and this leads to a quite predictable result. > I've looked a bit into these and I think the Strigi one is the one closest > to what I had in mind. It has received a lot of thought and seems generally > coherent. There are several minor corrections I'd like to make, but reluctant to do so until I have a critical mass of fixes and,preferably, xesam draft since this also involves analyzer code changes. Of course, I'll let you know what I'd like to have fixed and why. Also, I'm prepared to explain any and all design decisions behind Strigi/Nepomuk onto. > It would be ideal to store the ontology drafts in a VCS, but we > have none yet - I don't know if the wiki would be disastrous or not... Any > ideas on a temporary storage idea until we get a subversion module at fdo? Wiki is ok. The only way I see this working is to authorize one person to make changes to the onto. It's too small and has too many internal dependencies to allow ad-hoc editing. Changes should be proposed, discussed and only then committed. You still can use diff on wiki article contents and send patches for discussion/approval.</blockquote><div> Right. The key maintainer would still have to discuss things on the list I take it? Anyway, I would like to propose that Evgeny is our ontology-man (if he has the time (I haven't really talked to him about it)). To all you other Xesames: I can tell that Evgeny really digs this whole ontology deal. Atleast better than me :-) He is the one responsible for the Strigi ontology.  By talking to him on IRC it is clear to me that it is founded on a lot of thought and solid reasoning. On top of that it seems that he has insight into the Nepomuk world and I really think we need to be compatible with them. </div> If you are at all in doubt of his technical merits I bet you can ping him on #xesam@FreeNode... </div> Cheers, Mikkel