W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > August 2004

Re: [ALL] proposed agenda 22 July telecon

From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:17:20 +0200
Message-ID: <410F9E70.1030000@cs.vu.nl>
To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org



Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote:

> Hi Dan, all,
> 
> Unfortunately I have to send regrets for the telecon today, but I look
> forward to the WG either accepting the plan for the PORT/THES TF [1] or
> expressing any objections so we can get a revised plan accepted as soon as
> possible.  
> 
> Thanks David for your comments, and welcome too! 
> 
> In a nutshell, what I'm hoping for is to be able to launch 'SKOS-Core phase
> 2 development' as soon as possible, with the full backing and involvement of
> this WG, then a furious couple of months of raising issues and trying to
> solve them, culminating in a couple of notes. 
> 
> With regards to the papers from Amsterdam [2] and Maryland [3] on thesauri
> and semweb, I would definitely like to draw on this work and think it is
> extremely valuable, but I'm not sure exactly how to fit it in initially,
> primarily because it deals with 'thesauri' that are not particularly
> 'thesaurus-like' (NCI and MeSH are semi-ontologies, and Wordnet is Wordnet).

I suggest to use just the method part of the Amsterdam paper. The 
transformation steps (1a 1b 2a 2b are not specific for the examples. As 
a methodology veteran I think such pragmatic process support is useful 
for developers.

Guus

> 
> 
> Perhaps the proposed 'Guide to Using SKOS-Core for Thesauri' note could be
> divided into a 'Quick Start' section and an 'Advanced Features' section ...
> with some parts of the 'Advanced Features' section inspired by the Amsterdam
> and Maryland work?  
> 
> Just as a thought for the longer-term ... with things like Mesh and NCI, we
> get into the hazy world of the relationship between thesauri and ontologies,
> modelling in RDF things that are half-way in between, and also the issue of
> migrating thesauri to ontologies - areas that probably deserve special
> attention (and their own note(s)?)  
> 
> But I feel like there are lots of basic problems for us to solve first -
> like a well-documented RDF schema that can cope with all the common features
> of the more standard thesauri.  
> 
> Anyway, I look forward to the outcome of today's telecon.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Alistair.
>   
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0068.html
> [2] http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/papers/Assem04.pdf
> [3] http://www.mindswap.org/papers/WebSemantics-NCI.pdf
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
>>[mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dan Brickley
>>Sent: 22 July 2004 12:15
>>To: Ralph R. Swick
>>Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
>>Subject: Re: [ALL] proposed agenda 22 July telecon
>>
>>
>>
>>* Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org> [2004-07-21 21:25-0400]
>>
>>
>>>6. TF UPDATES (5-15 min each)
>>>
>>>6.1 OEP (Deb)
>>>
>>>6.2 PORT (DanBri)
>>>
>>>   FW: [PORT/THES] Concrete actions
>>>   From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
>>>   Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:26:13 +0100
>>>   
>>
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0068.html
>>
>>I agree with David [1] (welcome, David!) that Alistair's  
>>plan of 9 July 
>>looks good. I've seen no objections, and would like to confirm our 
>>support of the plan during this call. Although as I write the telecon
>>looms, the action plan has been before the group for over a 
>>week now, so
>>I don't believe it would be premature to ask the WG to agree to it. 
>>
>>I propose a couple of explicit amendments which I guess would 
>>be covered
>>anyway, but I'd like to get them recorded. Basically I am happy
>>adopting the SKOS proposals as our strawman starting point, but would
>>like to make sure the comments/papers from Mindlab and 
>>Amsterdam (sorry
>>for the vague references; couldn't find URLs, digging...) get 
>>addressed.
>>
>>I am also happy using public-esw-thes@w3.org as the main list for
>>working out the details for the thesaurus vocab, so long as this WGs
>>list gets regular updates and we subscribe all interested WG members
>>(ie. TF members) to that list. I'd be happy to handle 
>>practicalities of
>>that. We should be able to decide the mailing list question separately
>>to the question of adopting Alistair's workplan. If anyone objects to
>>doing the bulk of the PORT/THES vocab design on 
>>public-esw-thes (a list
>>populated with thesaurus experts collaborating around SKOS), now would
>>be a good time to note your preference.
>>
>>So when we get to the PORT/THES portion of the agenda, I 
>>would like to 
>>ask that we adopt
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0068.html
>>as our plan for progressing this taskforce, or record and act upon any
>>objections raised during the telecon. If we do this, it should be
>>possible to get moving towards Working Draft publication through the
>>summer.
>>
>>How does that sound, folks?
>>
>>Dan 
>>
>>
>>[1] 
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0079.html
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Free University Amsterdam, Computer Science
De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 444 7739/7718
E-mail: schreiber@cs.vu.nl
Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2004 10:17:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:39 UTC