01:33:17 logster has joined #swhack 01:33:17 topic is: The Semantic Web: Better Pizzas 01:33:17 Users on #swhack: logster @sbp AaronSw tav|offline deltab 01:33:26 Hi! 01:33:28 Guess what I'm doing now? 01:33:29 Hi there 01:33:33 What? 01:33:44 Sheesh, this is my airport: http://larve.net/people/hugo/pictures/2001/09/15/ohare 01:33:53 Makes you want to take a train. 01:34:14 guess/yes 01:34:29 Hmmm... 01:34:41 * sbp snjoys doing this periodically 01:34:49 s/snjoys/enjoys 01:34:56 Writing in some esoteric language? 01:35:27 Nop 01:35:35 s/Nop/Nope 01:35:48 Hacking some new SW project? 01:35:55 Hosting friends? 01:36:09 Hmm: Last login: Fri Sep 14 12:23:28 2001 from richschol.lfc.edu 01:36:16 rich school? 01:36:23 the first one... but what project? 01:36:32 Trust/Proof? 01:36:33 rich school: spelt wrong 01:36:38 well... kinda 01:36:53 Give me a hint here 01:37:04 * sbp uploads his work 01:37:11 It's getting to be quite big 01:37:41 And I've only been doing it for a few hours! Probably has loads of typos... but it's good 01:38:00 it's now online... 01:38:13 Hmm, I give up. 01:38:15 Oh alright... 01:38:17 Here: http://infomesh.net/2001/swintro/ 01:38:47 Hmmph, I should've known. 01:38:54 Of course :-) 01:39:07 You always copy my good ideas! Pick the bad ones once in a while... ;-) 01:39:22 I'm getting a bit embarassed having to point people at whatIsSW all of the time; it's soooooo out of date! 01:39:37 semanticWeb-long! 01:39:41 Pffff, copy your good ideas. How many SW introductions have I written? 01:40:05 Aleph null? 01:40:12 "Pick the bad ones once in a while..." you never have bad ideas!!! 01:40:20 pardon? 01:40:31 An infinite amount? 01:40:40 an almost infinite amount 01:40:45 (A relatively small infinite amount) 01:40:51 yeah, that's it 01:41:20 where x is the largest number that will ever be conjected, I have written y introductions, where y = x+1 01:41:29 * AaronSw wonders what the larger infinite amounts are named... never got that far though 01:41:45 larger infinite amounts: herbert 01:42:09 You do know there are larger infinite amounts, don't you? 01:42:18 pointer? 01:42:47 I know that there are many types of infinity... I want to a really cool lecture about it once 01:42:50 Ohh, it's a great proof. 01:43:06 better than my x = x + 1 proof? 01:43:41 I'm not sure I saw that... is that the one that tricks folks who can't do polynomials? 01:44:00 ugh, polynomials... 01:44:10 nope, I just showed you the gist of it 01:44:39 Oh, I see. 01:44:42 No... 01:45:12 It goes like this: 01:45:43 the greatest number that will ever be conjectured is infinity, proving that infinity is a number. Proof: x is a variable representing the highest number that will ever be conjectured. y = x + 1. y is the highest number ever conjectured. y = x. x = x + 1. The only thing that satisfies x is infinity. A flawed proof... :-) 01:45:44 Assume that the set of decimals is the same sitze as the set of counting numbers. 01:45:56 So you line up all the deciml numbers in a list: 01:46:04 1) 0.112838338 01:46:09 2) 0.2489389389 01:46:11 etc. 01:46:35 Well, you can always go down the list diagonally, taking the first digit from the first number, the second digit from the second number, etc. 01:46:40 forming a new number that's not in the list 01:46:54 * sbp spots that the flaw to any proof is in the "assume that" 01:47:04 Thus the assumption leads to contradiction 01:47:15 and that makes the assumption false. 01:47:39 It's called Cantor's Diagonalization Argument. 01:47:47 cool name 01:47:52 and the solution is? 01:48:08 Well, the solution is that the number of decimals is larger than the integers. 01:48:27 but both are infinite, surely? :-) 01:48:38 Yes, but one infinite number is bigger than the other. 01:48:41 yes - but different types of inifinte 01:48:49 One is plainly bigger! 01:48:53 More: http://www.scidiv.bcc.ctc.edu/Math/diag.html 01:48:54 yup 01:49:02 yep, this is the same thing that the guy lectured us on 01:49:21 Ahh, cool. Dad keeps wanting to teach it to the 5th graders at school. 01:49:34 Why not? 01:49:54 No reason, just times never seem to work out 01:50:12 Bummer 01:51:05 Where'd you hear the proof, deltab? 01:51:23 Dad taught it to me on the kitchen counter when I was six or something, I remember it vividly. 01:51:41 wow, neat 01:51:45 of Cantor's diagonal argument? In a book by Martin Gardner 01:52:05 Cool. He has some great books. 01:52:20 We jokingly call him Marvin Gardens around the house. ;-) 01:53:07 Have you done anything about transcendialism with large numbers yet? 01:56:52 Marvin Gardens? 01:57:01 From Monopoly. 01:57:13 oh, American Monopoly 01:57:20 Oh, is it different in the UK? 01:57:30 Of course! We have British places 01:57:44 * AaronSw didn't realize the American places were all that American 01:57:44 Park Lane, Mayfair, Old Kent Road 01:58:15 The Strand, Bond Street, Regents Street, Kings Cross Station, Electric Company... er 01:58:25 Pall Mall, and so on 01:58:27 Well, we have an Electric Company! 01:58:32 yes :-) 01:58:59 Wow, 18 messages... where did they come from? 01:59:06 So, how old are you, deltab? 01:59:31 a decade your senior 01:59:48 Wow, old man :-) 01:59:50 24 on Monday 02:00:04 Wow, I would have guessed older. Happy unbirthday! 02:00:54 Another brit, I'd guess? 02:00:57 yes 02:01:06 Birmingham 02:01:08 Ha, we're teaming up 02:01:37 Hmm, I guess 24 is rather old. All so far away, it seems. 02:03:34 So, what shall I do with swintro? 02:04:13 Hmmz 02:04:18 * sbp wonders if a more appropriate question might have been "where shall I stick it?" 02:04:23 Wish you'd help improve semanticWeb-long 02:04:58 I think it's a good base level introduction 02:05:25 What'd you think of that other overview piece you pointed me to yesterday? 02:05:34 note how swintro says nothing about shared meaning on the same level that you do. I'd tell people to read semanticWeb-long before they read swintro 02:05:40 what overview piece? 02:05:56 Oh that... too out of date 02:06:12 The diffuse one, out of date already? 02:06:37 yeah, well out of date. But like all SW primers, it covers a different aspect of the SW 02:06:53 * AaronSw considers merging swintro with semanticWeb-long 02:07:04 it's slightly more broad... it covers many things that I don't really consider to be a part of the Semantic Web 02:07:15 What I really wanted to do was to break up semanticWeb-long into a bunch of in-depth pieces on each layer. 02:07:35 I think that the value of semanticWeb-long is that it can be explained to a mother 02:07:57 And target audience for swintro? 02:08:09 [ :disjointFrom :Mother ] . 02:08:12 :-) 02:08:34 forAll or forSome? 02:08:35 no, more for people who've already read a few piles of crap about RDF and the Semantic Web 02:08:42 and are just a bit baffled 02:08:58 forSome: it's an anonymous node 02:09:02 * AaronSw skims it -- ahh, i see 02:09:10 the class of people which aren't Mothers 02:09:26 That's what I was asking: all non-Moms or just some? 02:09:30 yep, it's a bit more involved. It's not really a primer; more of an essay 02:09:38 Hmm... not sure 02:09:56 You and Morbus need to get together and form the rant squad 02:10:15 I think you're right. It only rants a little bit though, towards the bottom 02:10:42 especially under "Intertingling" 02:10:45 Hmm, it needs a style sheet. 02:10:58 s/Intertingling/Intertwingling 02:11:00 of course 02:11:04 Speaking of stylesheets, did you see the one on http://www.w3.org/QA/ ? 02:11:10 I just put it online to show you 02:11:19 yes, I noticed the QA stylesheet... 02:11:22 QA: I love it. It might be good for the validator. 02:11:39 what about it? (no graphical browser) 02:11:57 takes ages to load though! (comparatively) 02:12:05 I just think it's pretty, nice clean text, sort of dashed-line separators. 02:12:29 Nice gray and blue color scheme 02:47:45 Hmm: "antireligious (and that includes astrology, homeopathy, and marriage.) ", http://kbs.cs.tu-berlin.de/~jutta/me/whois.html 02:48:44 he he he 02:48:45 [[[ 02:48:46 No more of those slam your dick in the door and still not feel anything condoms. 02:48:52 ]]] - http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/No_20more_20condoms#1000544945-13-1 02:48:57 yeah, I read that bit too 02:49:00 heheh 02:50:03 * AaronSw considers us _Dan Connolly_ invented the _World Wide Web_ as an example. ;-) 02:50:17 [[[ 02:50:18 Any whores that don't obey these laws will have their license revoked and they won't be allowed to "practice", like a doctor. 02:50:25 ]]] - http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Prostitution#1000589523-6-1 02:50:29 example of what? 02:51:07 he he he 02:51:08 [[[ 02:51:09 Wouldn't it be cool if there were even brothel franchises, like McDonald's or Starbucks? There would even be whorehouse commercials, with Ronald McSlut, the whorehouse clown. Okay, just kidding about the last part. 02:51:12 ]]] - ibid. 02:51:26 Heh. 02:51:36 Hmm, where's that Joe Clark page that's chock full of links? 02:51:50 example: of what to do instead of click here. 02:53:56 Hmm... interesting: http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/PIN_20surprise#1000548361-12-1 02:54:44 Wouldn't work in practice 03:05:09 Have a good page about screen readers to help inform sighted people? 03:05:31 Hmm... not to hand, no 03:05:35 Ooh, http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/Browsing 03:14:28 Ah! The good ol' WAI. I'll bet that's an EO thing... 03:14:50 Hmm... Chaals last updated it 03:17:41 Gotta run 03:19:06 c'ya 03:20:41 sbp has quit 03:49:43 sbp has joined #swhack 04:01:01 Hmm, I need to syndicate this page as RSS: 04:01:01 http://kgate.virtual.net/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi?action=Browse&id=SeptemberDisaster 04:59:20 from #dotgnu 04:59:20 Ooh. I am the proud co-author of: 04:59:20 *** Now talking in #dotgnu 04:59:21 *** chillywilly has joined #dotgnu 04:59:21 *** MisterP has joined #dotgnu 04:59:21 Yo 04:59:21 yo 04:59:22 yo 04:59:24 *** crazney has quit IRC (Terminated with extreme prejudice - dircproxy 1.0.0) 04:59:26 yo-yo? 04:59:28 no 04:59:30 so? 04:59:32 dunno 04:59:38 oh? 04:59:53 thanks, I just added that 05:00:00 what are you the co-author of? 05:00:03 Swartz, A. and Hendler, J. The Semantic Web: A Network of Content for the Digital City, Proceedings Second Annual Digital Cities Workshop, Kyoto, Japan, October, 2001. 05:00:31 Ooh, wow 05:00:45 TimBL better watch out or he'll lose his job! ;-) 05:00:53 your first scientifically published paper? 05:00:59 Perhaps so. 05:01:08 It brings my Erdos number to three. 05:01:16 Which is rather impressive, better than my Dad, even 05:01:21 Erdos? 05:01:34 Paul Erdös, a famous mathematician. 05:01:44 pointer? 05:01:54 He wrote many papers and since then people have created a scheme of Erdös numbers. 05:01:59 His number is 0. 05:02:07 People who co-authored with him have 1. 05:02:09 and so on 05:02:13 ah, I see 05:02:22 so my Erdos number is 4 05:02:29 if yours is 3... 05:02:40 I think it only really counts for refereed papers. 05:02:45 But who knows. 05:03:02 we must write a refereed paper! 05:03:05 Yes! 05:03:12 Oh dear... 05:03:16 I can't bare to put it up on the web. It includes the text "click here". 05:03:20 I presume that JimH has an Erdos number of 2 then 05:03:28 Oh dear oh dear... 05:03:35 bear? bare? 05:03:45 that's one i'm actually not sure on 05:04:04 what context? 05:04:16 Other such errors are further evidence that I chat with the speaking portion of my brain and not the writing one. 05:04:27 context: above sentence: "I can't bare..." 05:04:30 yes... me too 05:05:04 Not to mention that the paper is in MS Word. :-( 05:05:21 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! 05:05:31 anyway, gotta run... 05:05:37 C'ya 05:08:33 sbp has quit 06:06:25 AaronSw has quit 07:00:15 AaronSw has joined #swhack 14:21:04 AaronSw has quit 14:21:50 AaronSw has joined #swhack 16:35:26 sbp has joined #swhack 16:36:29 [[[ 16:36:30 Note that Notation3 introduces a "context" construct, enabling one to group statements together and quantify over them using a specially designed logic vocabulary. Using this vocabulary, for example, one can express "or", using NANDs:- 16:36:30 { { :Joe :loves :TheSimpsons } a log:Falsehood . 16:36:30 { :Joe :is :Nuts } a log:Falsehood . 16:36:30 } a log:Falsehood . 16:36:32 Which can be read as "it is not true that Joe does not love The Simpsons and is nuts". I resisted the temptation to make Joe a universally quantified variable. 16:36:37 ]]] - http://infomesh.net/2001/swintro/ 16:39:56 sbp has quit 16:53:07 Oops, missed sbp. 16:53:59 Interesting way to do or... 18:39:01 tav|offline has quit 19:12:00 [GlobalNotice] Hi all. Services will be down for 15 minutes, perhaps longer. We'll take it down in about 5 minutes. Apologies for the inconvenience. 19:16:38 sbp has joined #swhack 19:27:41 sbp has quit 19:52:00 [GlobalNotice] Please bear with us all, as we reconnect services in a new configuration 19:57:30 [GlobalNotice] Okay, one more shot folks....in a few minutes....this configuration should be a bit more stable 20:03:11 [GlobalNotice] Okay folks, here goes. Expect some splitting as we attempt to connect services in a new configuration. Apologies for the inconvenience. 20:04:30 ChanServ has changed the topic to: 20:05:13 [GlobalNotice] That looks like a more reliable connection. Thanks to everyone for your patience, it looks as if we're done. 20:05:47 AaronSw has changed the topic to: Happy Birthday, Deltab! 21:29:52 sbp has joined #swhack 21:32:37 hello 21:44:08 Hi 21:44:58 Can you please review http://logicerror.com/dcrdfDraft ? 21:48:42 Looks good 21:49:13 I like the relations bit at the bottom 21:49:25 You should put those in SWAG-D. I think I already added one 21:49:55 Cool. 21:49:59 * AaronSw converts into N-Triples. 21:50:07 They need to go into one of the DC schemas, for sure. 21:50:33 yeah 21:51:17 Does it seem like I'm missing anything? 21:51:25 Am I right by taking out the rdf:Bag, Seq definitions? 21:51:57 yes, I think so. I've always thought of them as being a bit redundant... like aboutEachPrefix 21:52:46 Yeah. 21:53:05 I'm quite proud of the new draft actually -- it's much leaner than the old one and it covers just about all the necessary material. 21:53:37 Yep. What's it going to be published as? And where? DCMI I guess 21:53:57 Yes, it'll be the official DCMI DC-in-RDF draft if I'm lucky. 22:03:23 Aaron, I've added a note at the top of http://infomesh.net/2001/swintro/ 22:03:36 Telling people to read semanticWeb-long first... 22:03:37 What's it say? 22:03:40 Ahh, cool. 22:04:06 Please set the terms for its... er... "release", could ya? 22:04:19 semanticWeb-long's? 22:04:28 Well, it's in my .sig, so you can point people to it if you want 22:04:44 ah, that's the first question answered 22:05:23 the second is simply, do you mind too much if I release swintro? I'm hoping to spread it to as many people as possible, bugging the feck out of those who are subscribed to all of the lists (i.e. me) 22:05:58 Nope, I don't mind at all. 22:06:38 and the third question: is it O.K. to be released? I haven't made any startling errors or missed something out, I hope 22:07:09 Lists... I had in mind: www-rdf-interest [W3C], semantic-web [yahoo], xml-dev, humanmarkup, and possibly swag-dev 22:07:23 Well, I'm sorta in the middle of this DC thing right now... can you give me a few minutes? 22:07:27 I'm going for the mega huge spammer of the week award. Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam 22:07:31 sure, of course 22:07:31 heh 22:08:05 OK, meanwhile, go make sure my newly-added RDF/XML examples are all correct 22:08:11 O.K. 22:08:21 Thanks. 22:08:34 Comments: 22:08:45 s/semanticWeb-long/Semantic Web In Depth/ or some such 22:09:01 Heh: World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) 22:09:01 Perhaps I should rename it Semantic Web in Breadth -- it's more appropriate 22:09:05 oops 22:09:10 :-) 22:09:11 that's what i meant about checking. ;-) 22:09:12 thanks 22:09:24 in Breadth: good idea. I'll title it as that 22:10:21 tut tut: rdf:Description about 22:10:26 s/about/rdf:about 22:11:00 Hey, I copied-and-pasted the examples from the old doc! 22:11:09 vixed 22:11:11 err fixed 22:11:25 I merely said "tut, tut" :-) 22:11:44 "RDF is a generic format, which already has many parsers" 22:11:49 * sbp actually just pasted the examples one by one into the RDF validator 22:11:52 I think you mean RDF/XML above 22:11:59 RDF validator: even better! 22:12:14 but also make sure that they're equivalent to the ntriples version 22:13:06 """ 22:13:07 Here are the triples that this RDF produces:- 22:13:09 """ 22:13:16 You use this, where you mean <> . 22:13:25 There's no "this" in RDF/XML, so it couldn 22:13:30 't produce those triples. 22:13:56 what about 'rdf:about=""'? Well, I guess that's <> 22:13:57 And if you're going to make it look like N-Triples, might as well make it N-Triples -- get rid of that line break in the middle of the second triple. 22:14:04 yep 22:14:06 * sbp misreads what you wrote... 22:14:15 line break: oops 22:14:32 You might want to mention that the format is N-triples/n3 or whatever 22:17:46 ugh, don't use the term screen scraping! 22:17:57 Why not? I love that term! 22:18:08 It's not appropriate, cf. http://logicerror.com/screenScraping 22:18:30 It reminds me of surgeons ripping out people 22:18:32 's guts. 22:18:37 Perhaps that's appropriate... ;-) 22:18:46 lol 22:19:26 actually, it isn't NTriples because I start using prefixes later on in the document... don't want to confuse people too much, but it's a fine balance! 22:19:37 OK. 22:20:24 "Here I'm using NTriples (plus <> which isn't officially NTriples), and now I'm using a subset of N3... well, NTriples are a subset of N3, but I'm using a slightly larger subset of N3, a superset of NTriples if you like" might not go down too well :-) 22:21:00 OK, you're right. 22:21:18 Ahh, you mention nt later on -- that's fine. 22:21:26 * sbp hides... I was just tryin'ta make yer laugh 22:21:45 :-) 22:21:52 I was worried that was an actual quote! 22:21:58 He he he 22:22:09 I like my Simpsons universal quantification bit the best 22:22:19 That'll scare off the remaining 1% of your readers. ;-) 22:22:26 err, the nt/n3 thing 22:22:32 [[[ 22:22:32 Note that Notation3 introduces a "context" construct, enabling one to group statements together and quantify over them using a specially designed logic vocabulary. Using this vocabulary, for example, one can express "or", using NANDs:- 22:22:32 { { :Joe :loves :TheSimpsons } a log:Falsehood . 22:22:32 { :Joe :is :Nuts } a log:Falsehood . 22:22:32 } a log:Falsehood . 22:22:34 Which can be read as "it is not true that Joe does not love The Simpsons and is not nuts". I resisted the temptation to make Joe a universally quantified variable. 22:22:37 ]]] 22:22:56 Poor Joe. 22:23:22 He stood in the forest between two paths and took the one less funnt. 22:23:38 Hmm, they're both pretty funny. 22:23:47 Heh 22:24:08 * sbp doesn't often picture OR gates as paths in a forest 22:24:17 No? 22:24:20 oh no, an ogre! 22:24:25 no, not often 22:25:17 People are so busy these days. Work, work, work 22:25:26 No forests. 22:25:34 "use those properties in our code"? where'd this code come from? 22:26:09 Hmm, you should have named :Fido "Bruno" or something scarrier to throw people off. 22:26:10 you just... well... write it? 22:26:14 heh 22:26:20 Aw, but Fido! Fido! 22:26:22 what kind of code, tho? 22:26:27 RDF 22:26:35 Since when did RDF become code? 22:26:36 oh, in our RDF... gotcha 22:26:57 I mean, I know it's a bit hard to understand, but still... 22:27:19 well, it's one of those cases where I know what I'm babbling on about, but not many other people will 22:28:00 i.e. will know what I'm babbling on about, when there is something that I am babbling on about and that people don't get 22:28:24 Did we ever decide if :x daml:inverseOf :x made sense? 22:28:28 so many things to babble about! and nobody likes a babbler... sit up, keep happy, don't babble 22:28:40 yes, it makes sense 22:28:45 It's a reversible property 22:28:51 ok, good 22:28:51 :ReversibleProperty 22:28:58 means the same backwards as forwards 22:29:05 @prefix : ?x 22:29:19 daml:equivalentTo a :ReversibleProperty . 22:29:25 @prefix : ?x? 22:29:29 yes 22:29:35