W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: TMAP : Action : Draft message to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:49:31 +0000
Message-ID: <4050524B.4080009@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
Cc: SWBPD <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

stylistically this is more formal than I would have made it, but that's no 
big deal ...

I am not entirely comfortable with the word 'endorsed' used twice - I am 
not at all sure that any of our WG Notes constitute endorsement by the W3C. 
My understanding is that the Rec track process is for that.

Suggest the following changes:

1) delete sentence

But this work has never been endorsed by any of relevant standard 
organizations (W3C and ISO).

(Or alternatively replace 'endorsed' by 'followed through')

2) modify
  endorsed by both W3C and ISO.
   potentially jointly published by both W3C and ISO.


Bernard Vatant wrote:

> As decided during Cannes meeting, below is a draft message proposal to be
> sent by SWBPD WG to the standard body in charge of Topic Maps standard,
> namely ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3.
> See http://www.isotopicmaps.org for more information about this WG.
> The message is specific, but my view is that it could be used as a
> 'template' for dealing with other groups, organizations or communities,
> when we think their work is relevant to the SW, and would like to trigger a
> process of collaboration.
> <draftMessage>
>>From :
> 	whoever@w3.org
> 	on behalf of W3C Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment WG
> To : ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3
> 	James David Mason, Chair	mxm@y12.doe.gov
> 	Steve Pepper, Convenor  	pepper@ontopia.net
> Gentlemen
> The new W3C Working Group 'Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment' [1]
> has put Topic Maps on the list of (many) legacy and technologies that it
> would like to be made
> interoperable with the Semantic Web infrastructure and languages.
> For those technologies, the SWBPD WG purpose is to identify and promote
> best practices for interoperability.
> The intended process needs to involve participation of qualified experts,
> assuming organizations and communities of users have expressed interest in
> the Semantic Web initiative.
> Relevant preliminary work has been made in recent years in the TM
> community, including various proposals for TM-RDF mapping. But this work
> has never been endorsed by any of relevant standard organizations (W3C and
> ISO).
> This message is intended to trigger a process in this direction, provided
> you agree on :
> - A common declaration of interest in collaboration at the organizational
> level, respectively W3C SWBPD and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3. ( Consider this
> declaration is made from our side through the present message. )
> - Definition of a task force, including people proposed by ISO/IEC
> JTC1/SC34/WG3 as invited experts.
> This task force would have as first objective to deliver a Technical Note
> on best practices for TM-SW interoperability, endorsed by both W3C and ISO.
> We are looking forward for a positive feedback.
> Regards
> ...
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/
> </draftMessage>
> Remarks:
> - A TM-RDF workshop mentioned by DanBri during Cannes meeting
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/events/2004-tmrdf/
> could it be used as a place to kick-off this process ?
> - The most relevant expert in RDF-TM interoperability is AFAIK Lars Marius
> Garshol
> See : "Living with topic maps and RDF"
> http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/tmrdf.html
> - Some personal contribution can be found in the paper
> "Ontology-driven topic maps" I will present next month at XML Europe
> http://www.idealliance.org/europe/04/call/xmlpapers/03-03-03.91/.03-03-03.h
> tml
> Thanks for your attention
> Bernard Vatant
> Senior Consultant
> Knowledge Engineering
> Mondeca - www.mondeca.com
> bernard.vatant@mondeca.com
Received on Thursday, 11 March 2004 06:51:44 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 11 March 2004 06:51:46 EST