I'm looking to store some metadata in Docbook (V5) XML files. Specifically, links to various resources related to the article in question. I've found the <info> and related elements, but they do not quite fit my purpose.
Is there any way to store free-form metadata in a Docbook file? I really just want key/value pairs stored at the article level.
Thanks,
Kent
The whole set of Dublin Core is allowed in V5.
But if it's not inside , you will need to modify DB5 and create a variant, it's not insurmountable and described in Ch5 of The Definitive Guide (http://www.docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/ch05.html)
Lech
Related
I am starting to learn Azure dev-ops. You can configure your Azure-pipelines with yml. I was just wondering why did Microsoft go with yml. This could have been done with json as well. Just curious as to why not use a format that is quite popular?
YAML is not as common as JSON, but it is also a popular and awesome data serialization language. The design goal of JSON is to be simpler and be universally usable. In contrast, the design goal of YAML is to provide a good human-readable format and give/provide support for serializing arbitrary native data structures. So this has increased the readability of the YAML files.
YAML official website shows the design in YAML format and it is easily readable for anyone visiting the site. On the other hand, if it was displayed in JSON format, the webpage would be useless.
JSON is a superset of YAML format. It means that we can parse JSON using a YAML parser. However, in practical scenarios, this parsing may rise problems, but it is theoretically possible.
I think Microsoft wanted the data to be easily human-readable and simple, so they selected YAML!
YAML is in a better position to be able to explain to you what the script is doing. The reason for this is that YAML is sold as a “human friendly” data serialisation language. JSON and XML are also data serialisation languages, but they weren't so much created with a focus on readability. After all, JSON doesn’t natively support comments (You'd have to use JSONC for that, or another implementation of JSON that supports comments).
YAML positions itself as a “human-readable data-serialisation” language. So the intent is clear - to make it easy to read and write structured data. This is an excerpt from this blog, you can refer to it.
I want to do preprocessing of docs(wsdl files) using mallet in Eclipse. I want to generate feature vectors and perform classification using mallet and MaxEntropy. I am new in using mallet, Can anyone guide me in this regard.
Thanks
If you're referring to Web Services Description Language, I don't know of any specific workflows or packages designed for those documents. I suspect that you might want to create a set of features that combines text (from web service descriptions) and more "categorical" features, like URLs or URL patterns.
The way I would approach this problem is to create a separate package that reads WSDL files and writes out a file in a format that Mallet expects. This adapter could be written in whatever language you are most comfortable with. It would read all the files, get a parsed XML tree for each, extract text and certain other features, and output a file in Mallet's preferred tab-delimited, one-doc-per-line format.
I am looking for some kind of specification, documentation, explanation, etc. for .stp/.step files.
It's more about what information each line contains instead of a general information.
I can't seem to figure out what each value means all by myself.
Does anyone know some good readings about STEP files?
I already searched google but all I got were information about the general structure instead of each particular value.
The structure of STEP-File, i.e. the grammar and the logic behind how the file is organized is described in the standard ISO 10303-21.
ISO 10303 or STEP is divided into Application Protocols (AP). Each AP defines a schema written in EXPRESS. The schemas are available on the Internet: the CAX-IF provides some, STEPtools has some good HTML documentations.
The reference of the AP schemas is hosted on stepmod.
I'm looking to pull some data out of the pickled signatures of classes stored on disk, but not loaded in the jvm.
Getting hold of the byte array stored in the ScalaSignature is easy enough via ASM, it is however less than clear how it should be interpreted.
The closest I can find to a description of the format is
http://www.scala-lang.org/old/sid/10
Which doesn't describe it at all.
Does a better resource exist, or is my only option to delve into the source?
In answer to my own question I've now found this, dated 2008, which looks to provide a good overview :-
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.214.5115&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Would be interested in any more recent documents.
First off, I'm trying to define database tables with attributes from Schema.org, eg., for example I have a table named "JobPosting" that more or less has the same attributes as those defined in http://schema.org/JobPosting (baseSalary, etc.,), same goes for another table named "Organisation"
I have recently come across dbpedia.org (http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Organisation), the schema details seem to be much more richer, but I'm am confused as to:
Is dbpedia.org ontology an extension of those listed in schema.org?
Are dbpedia.org schemas recognized by major search engines (as those from schema.org)
What's the difference between Microdata and RFDs?
I'm going a little stir crazy trying to find the details...I couldn't find any comparisons vis-a-vis dbpedia.og vs schema.org.
Schema.org is one of countless vocabularies (resp. ontologies). The DBpedia Ontology is another one. Both vocabularies are independent of each other. Another vocabulary, related to your example, would be The Organization Ontology.
Which search engines recognize which vocabularies is a question without a definite answer. Search engines might recognize vocabularies without documenting it, or they might not recognize some (parts of) vocabularies although their documentation says otherwise. On top of that, all this might change daily.
You asked for the difference between Microdata and RFDs RDFs, but it’s likely that you mean RDFa in this context. Both are syntaxes which can be used to annotate content with the help of vocabularies. See my answer about differences between Microdata and RDFa.
(RDFS is "just" another vocabulary which can be used to describe vocabularies.)
I will try to answer all your questions, with understandable explanations.
Is dbpedia.org ontology an extension of those listed in schema.org?
No, it's not. There are countless ontologies available online, and any of them can be used combined, or alone, as long as their namespace (i.e. https://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/ for SKOS or http://rdfs.org/sioc/spec/ for SIOC) is a valid URI.
Are dbpedia.org schemas recognized by major search engines (as those from schema.org)?
dbpedia schemas are as good as any other, and, as stated in the answer for the first question, it really doesn't matter which ontology you decide to use, as long as it best fits your content.
You can even create your own ontology in OWL-RDF.
What's the difference between Microdata and RFDa (not RDFs)?
The only difference between these 2 attribute sets is the way they're written, while they both do the same thing.
Other information:
RDFs stands for Resource Description Format Schema, and it's a format used to write the ontologies, together with OWL
OWL stands for Web Ontology Language, and it was created especially for writing ontologies
RDFa stands for Resource Description Format in Attributes, and it's an attribute set used to create structured data mapped on the existent HTML code
Microdata is an attribute set used to create structured data mapped on the existent HTML code