Chris, aren't you subscribed to the users list? Your messages aren't visible there.
That's one of my indirect questions...
BTW: it's everything but mine standard;-) The schema.org metadata is widely used, supported from all major search engines and under the hood of the w3c consortium.
Sounds like we're similar here. If you believe you can pursuade the developer community to adopt your standard, than that's great.
That's one of my indirect questions...
BTW: it's everything but mine standard;-) The schema.org metadata is widely used, supported from all major search engines and under the hood of the w3c consortium.
I'm a far more jaded person and presume nobody would care at all if I tried to do this.
To be honest perhaps some existing ontology system could just be used. There's a few with web interfaces.
Let me look.
If there's something easier, let me know.
Holger
On Jan 13, 2017 06:00, holger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hmm, my english skills leave me here;-) A kind of ontology is what I was aiming too. Not a date but data - in the sense of "information".
Did you get me wrong here or do I get you wrong...
Things like "audioInterfaceType" (jack, alsa...) and "audioPluginInterfaceType" (lv2, ladspa...) as well as applicationCategory (DAW, Effekt, Notation...) and all we find important would be extractable and searchable. (And Google and other search engines might make things more searchable as well...)
Holger
13. Januar 2017 14:40 Uhr, "Chris McKenzie" <kristopolous@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb:Also this is all arguably just props up anb insufficient solution.For me at least, the only reason I care about the date is that it's the best *indirect* indicator of whether something say, works with jack or lv2 or what have you.An ontology that would be far more useful than the indirect reporting of a date would be to (and some of this is done on the site)list the types of inputs (midi, jack, etc) and outputs of a programWhether they are meant for low latency "live" performances or notList what kind of plugin standards the thing works withInclude, if possible, similar programs that may be more difficult or less difficult to learn, for people of various dedication and skill.The "ontology" part of this is important because ideally there could be a "web app" where you could string your stack together of different applications.These could also be used for demonstration purposes to help other people understand the various ways things can fit together.Because in practice, at least I have spent a lot of time in trying to learn what some software is good at, what it does for me, and how I could possibly connect it with everything else.These things are relatively simple to communicate but currently as far as I know, isn't happening.On Jan 13, 2017 5:19 AM, Chris McKenzie <kristopolous@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interesting idea. There's potentially a far quicker execution of it that doesn't need a buy in from everyone.You take all the repo links for the projects and then have a script that pulls them say twice a month. Then with a little git or svn magic you can find out if a newer release has been tagged and when it came out.Also you can piggy back on apt repos for other thingsapt-cache show XxxGenerally has a pretty good description if the wiki is lacking along with an up to date website.So I'm pretty sure some basic parts can be readily scripted within a few hours. There's various models I can think of so the autopopulation is useful and there when you need it but doesn't necessarily clobber human created content.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
