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

Re: Question about standardization

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 12:45:31 +0100
Message-Id: <6A043816-3699-482D-B780-8CEDD73DA61B@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: public-semweb-lifesci hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
On 13 May 2009, at 11:21, Bijan Parsia wrote:
[snip]

And, to be clear, I'm not always (or typically) very good at the  
political side in practice because I'm (as should be evident) a  
grouchy person.

To try to summarize constructively, Michael:

	HCLSIG cannot, itself, standardize SBML under the current charter.
	HCLSIG can, of course, do a lot of things that make standardization  
of SBML more likely. One thing it to publicize it, evangelize it, and  
gather evidence of consensus behind it. Not only can it do these  
things for various technologies, it's arguably part of its purpose.
	Some of those things (e.g., making a W3C member submission) can be  
done even outside of HCLSIG, so if the group doesn't have the energy  
to pursue it, there are other avenues for pursuing standardization at  
the W3C.
	Standardization is expensive to you and to other people, so it's  
good to have a clear, neutrally worded case prepared (think of it as  
the first step toward standardization). It's kinda like a grant  
application. I'm not saying that you need it all worked up now, but a  
simple spiel like, "Hey, we have some commercial interested in SBML  
that would benefit from a unifying standard." helps let people start  
considering whether they think it's worth it.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 13 May 2009 11:41:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:55 GMT