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

Re: AWWSW telecon, Tues May 26

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 19:35:30 +0200
Message-ID: <b3be92a00905241035odfd0579yb45ccf848c71b65@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Cc: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org> wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote:
>
>> While we deploy the reverse methodology of the AWWSW (We look
>> primarily at AWWW and then model in a "top-down" fashion, rather than
>> trying to model each spec and then build a "bottom-up" ontology),
>
> Actually I disagree with this. Going bottom up from various models and
> then synthesizing was exactly what I, at least, have been advocating.
> We are currently working bottom-up from one particular model, Tim's
> generic resources ontology, and this does not obviously coincide with
> what AWWW says (it only coincides in that Tim has said that his
> *intent* was that generic resource = AWWW information resource); in
> fact I haven't heard anyone in this group taking AWWW seriously except
> me, and that is not because I think it makes sense but only on the
> principle that it is a W3C recommendation and is therefore one of the
> few documents in this area with any normative potential. In any case,
> if we can understand the generic resources idea, we can then proceed
> to relate it to others; but at present I personally don't understand
> it well enough to do much of anything with it.

I'm not saying any methodology is better, but that just the approach
of me and valentina was different. We don't cover lots of things in
Gen Ont in particular.

> If you're going to work from the vocabulary page, then I guess I'd
> better scramble to align that page with the omnigraffle pictures I've
> been making.

That would be great - or even just a pointer to the URI of the latest
diagram so I can re-orient myself to the discussion would be great.

> In any case I'll try to look over your work, and to the extent it
> liberates us that will be fantastic. Does this mean you're considering
> rejoining the group?

Yes.

> Jonathan
>
Received on Sunday, 24 May 2009 17:36:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 24 May 2009 17:36:06 GMT