<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Thinking Clearly - Latest Comments in SPARQL Tutorial slides</title><link>http://clarkparsia.disqus.com/</link><description>Semantics: OWL, RDF, etc.</description><atom:link href="https://clarkparsia.disqus.com/sparql_tutorial_slides/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:00:18 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: SPARQL Tutorial slides</title><link>http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2006/08/30/sparql-tutorial-slides/#comment-1446890</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the feedback and compliments.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Two positioning points: The slides are not meant to be stand alone, and the target audience is an intensive summer school for graduate students working in the area. Now, many may just be &lt;em&gt;starting&lt;/em&gt; to work in the area, so I'll find out how well I've aimed this on Monday. (I'm also first on the billing, oy!)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I hope these ameliorate the Oedipus example. I like it because it's a great example of reasoning by cases, and, really, it's not that hard to understand. Plus, it has that nice classical flavor!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As for FOAF and SIOC (what's that?) data, I'm not so sure where you think they would have extra force. Do you mean instead of Oedipus? (But then they wouldn't illustrate the difference between distinguished and non-distinguished variables very nicely.) Or do you mean instead of my :mochi examples (which seem harmless).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It would be nice to have better integration with live demos (in fact, I almost did that with the Pellet web demo), but, in the end, for slides, it seemed a little tricky to get it right (and I was way overdue with the slides!) If I do something like this again, I'll try to play more with that.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Also, in the end, it's not really a tutorial about how to use SPARQL, but more about how to think about (only some of!) the challenges of RDF query langauges. There are loads more than I touched on, alas. The account of the semantics is woeful, indeed, in part because we don't have a good theoretical understanding nicely worked out and settled. Shocking, isn't it!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Bijan Parsia</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:00:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: SPARQL Tutorial slides</title><link>http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2006/08/30/sparql-tutorial-slides/#comment-1446889</link><description>&lt;p&gt;What about using SIOC and FOAF data for your SPARQL Examples? This will make a world of difference to the general comprehension of tutorial subject matter.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://pingthesemanicweb.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://pingthesemanicweb.com"&gt;http://pingthesemanicweb.com&lt;/a&gt; is great place to locate sample data. Ditto: &lt;a href="http://esw.w3.org/topic/SIOC/EnabledSites" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://esw.w3.org/topic/SIOC/EnabledSites"&gt;http://esw.w3.org/topic/SIO...&lt;/a&gt; .&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The Oedipus example is one of those samples that obscurs the Semantic Web comprehension process for neophytes. Its too much of a quantum leap (IMHO).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;BTW - Great Tutorial!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kidehen</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:17:45 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>