W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > June 2009

Re: AWWSW telecon, Tues June 9

From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:29:44 +0100
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
CC: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C652DEE8.5586%michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
Jonathan,

I'd propose to look at both GenOnt and HTTP-in-RDF ontologies and find the
connections/grounding.

I'll be available and would like to proceed with Neologism [1], FWIW ;)

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] http://rdfs.org/ns/http-sem/

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Lower Dangan,
Galway, Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://sw-app.org/about.html
http://webofdata.wordpress.com/


> From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
> Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:20:30 -0400
> To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
> Subject: AWWSW telecon, Tues June 9
> Resent-From: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 14:21:21 +0000
> 
> We have a telecon scheduled but no clear agenda.
> 
> I think we are done with generic resources until we get input from Tim.
> 
> We could consider what we might like to have from an ontology that
> improves on genont.
> 
> We could spend some time doing a post-mortem on last week's IRW review.
> 
> We could attempt an overview of document requirements for whatever it
> is we might produce (target Dec 2009).
> 
> We might take another crack at a tools review since if someone in the
> group wanted to work on the ontology, it wouldn't be clear how to
> proceed. E.g. I might want to use Protege 4 or LSW, but wouldn't want
> to mess up others if they want to use something else.
> 
> Jonathan
> 
Received on Monday, 8 June 2009 14:30:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 8 June 2009 14:30:24 GMT