W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw@w3.org > November 2002

Re: Deliverable 12.1.1

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 10:59:59 -0500 (EST)
To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
cc: public-esw <public-esw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0211051051570.21769-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Dave Reynolds wrote:

>
> The first deliverable in WP 12.1 (open demonstrators - selection of
> demonstrators) is now due and I've just uploaded our report to the web site.

Nice work!

> It is currently at:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/open_demonstrators/hp-applications-selection.html
> Please let me know if this is the right place or whether it should be moved to
> conform to some naming convention.

In http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/ we've put each of the other
deliverables in a directory named after the short name for the
deliverable. Makes cross-linking from other indices a bit easier.

If you could copy yours into a 'chosen_demos_rationale_report'
subdirectory, that would be good. I can clean up the other directories if
you have any difficulty doing so (remind me, how are you editing the
site? jigedit? cvs?).

> As noted earlier we actually made some informal notes on quite a few (~60)
> existing and proposed semantic web applications in RDF format[*]. The appendix
> of this report contains a formatted version of this raw data. Putting the data
> in the same document made it a bit large so we've separated the appendix out
> into a separate document. Please let me know if you think this is not
> appropriate and would prefer some different formatting scheme.

Seems OK to me.

> Feedback on the report itself is welcome too!

One tiny thing that jumped out from a quick skim: s/Wiener/Winer/

I do like the idea of focussing on weblog-style apps. Is nicely nearterm,
potential for mass uptake, network effects etc...

> What is our procedure for reviewing/accepting deliverables?
> I assume uploading to the web site was OK given our open-source stance but I
> don't want to subvert whatever "due process" we have/intend to have.

There's something of a watch-this-space where better process should live.
Checking works in progress into the site is fine...

Dan

> [*] We'd be happy to have the RDF files (currently one file per entry) and
> associated schema public but (a) I wasn't sure on where that sort of stuff
> should go on the site layout

A subdirectory of the reports dir would be fine. For other misc things,
just create a dated directory in the .../sw/Europe/YYYYMM/etc/ tree, eg
sw/Europe/200211/appsurvey-data/

	and (b) it might be better to do that along with a
> web form to allow more contributions to be added but doing that well would quite
> a bit of work.

Yup
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 11:00:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:12 GMT