Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Generate terms and ttl file serverside #4

Open
Haroenv opened this issue Jul 27, 2016 · 3 comments
Open

Generate terms and ttl file serverside #4

Haroenv opened this issue Jul 27, 2016 · 3 comments

Comments

@Haroenv
Copy link
Contributor

Haroenv commented Jul 27, 2016

Currently the rest of the page was made in Jekyll, so it'd be useful to generate it dynamically on the server.

My suggested workflow would be this:

  1. Move the current ttl file to a yaml or json file
  2. Put it in the _data folder on mobylink
  3. loop over the yml to create a new ttl file (at vocab.datex.org/terms/terms.ttl or /terms.ttl)
  4. loop over the yml to create a new terms page, just like the current /terms#.

This was suggested by @pietercolpaert

@djodjoni
Copy link

just bumped into this project and the initiative is cool 👍
however this approach absolutely does not make sense. Your ttl is your vocabulary which you base everything on. TTL is understandable by any Semantic and LD tool, while yml is not.
Do not generate your Vocab, generate the terms html or the yml which will do that.
In other words if I were you I would abstract from Jekyll for the terms.html generation and I would do it with Jena or any other tool with reads Models and FreeMarker or jmustache or anything else for the templating. Where my only input would be the ttl

@Haroenv
Copy link
Contributor Author

Haroenv commented Jul 27, 2016

Thanks for your input @djodjoni, we also realised that looping over yml would be counterintuitive. Because we are using Jekyll in the rest of the project (mobylink) there is some use in using a data format that Jekyll (Liquid) is able to loop over. Since Jekyll can only loop over json and yml, the decision was made not to order this Ontology in ttl, but rather in json-ld. You can see the progress for that in osoc16/mobylink#190. If you have other suggestions or ideas; feel free to let them know!

@djodjoni
Copy link

cool i see you did it just before I wrote :)
nice work ill keep an eye on it :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants