|
|
If you are like me, you like to clear the decks before the start of major new projects. In Structured Dynamics‘ case, we actually have multiple new initiatives getting underway, so the deck clearing has been especially focused this time.
As a result, we have updated Sweet Tools, AI3‘s listing of semantic Web and -related tools, with the addition of some 30 new tools, updates to others, and deletions of five expired entries. The dataset now lists 835 tools. And, as before, there is also now a new structured data view via conStruct (pick the Sweet Tools dataset).
We have also updated SWEETpedia, a listing of 246 research articles that use Wikipedia in one way or another to do semantic-Web related research. Some 20 new papers were added to this update.
Please use the comments section on this post to suggest new tools or new research articles for inclusion in future updates.
Is the bibliography available in any structured formats? e.g. BibTex
The Wikipedians maintain some very similar bibliographies:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Research_Bibliography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_in_academic_studies
Have you considered keeping your list in a wiki or other collaborative environment so that it could be maintained as a group effort? If it had some support for provenance/history, that would also relieve you of having to remember to attribute the sources for the various entries.
Lastly, a minor correction – “Lexical Authorities in an Encyclopedic Corpus: A Case Study with Wikipedia” is almost certainly this blog post http://www.fran.it/blog/2005/01/lexical-authorities-in-encyclopedic.html
Hi Tom,
No, at this time, the Wikipedia stuff is not in structured form. (The Sweet Tools are.) I will likely do so, as the length is getting long (though I’m only adding increments that I periodically encounter), and I have gotten more structured for other listings as they have reached the tipping point.
If you want to create a structured version, I would gladly give you my internal wiki stuff or post links to whatever you produce.
The Wikipedia links you cite reference my listing and others have been updating based on what I find.
As for collaboration, I agree that is generally the best practice. I look to the Wikipedia listings you cite for this. But, frankly, I find many, many more than what crowdsourcing provides there. I also have no machinery on this blog site for multiple authors. Since this stuff is part and parcel for my company’s efforts, I actually want to touch every paper myself, not merely provide a compilation.
(Also, I have done collaboration with Sweet Tools via GDocs, but that has been less than stellar IMO.)
Thanks for the Bellomi link; now updated.
Hi Mike,
Please consider adding RDF.rb, a new public-domain Ruby library, to the Sweet Tools exhibit. For your convenience, here is the relevant metadata:
Description: RDF.rb is a pure-Ruby library for working with Resource Description Framework (RDF) data.
Category: IDE/Programming Environment
Primary Language: Ruby
FOSS?: Yes
URL: http://rdf.rubyforge.org/