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

RE: [ADTF] draft task force description

From: McBride, Brian <brian.mcbride@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 15:55:04 +0100
Message-ID: <E864E95CB35C1C46B72FEA0626A2E808031A9A68@0-mail-br1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>, public-swbp-wg@w3.org

First of all, I appologise to Libby because, through other distractions, I
haven't been able to be as useful to her on this as I intended.  The
comments below I had thought I had sent to her, but I messed up the email
address.


> TEMPLATE Task Force Description
> 
> NAME Applications and Demos

I think what I had been suggestion before had morphed the Applications and
Demos task force into an Examples and Illustrations task force.  I have no
objection to applications and demos per se, but to me Applications and Demos
need running code and I'm not sure where the code comes from.

> 
> [ADTF]
> 
> STATUS: draft
> 
> COORDINATORS:
> Libby Miller University of Bristol
> 
> MEMBERS
> 
> TBA
> 
> OBJECTIVES
> 
> * To help ground the decisions made in other taskforces in code

Again, I have no objection to this, but I'm not sure who will write the
code.  Maybe the other task forces?  Illustrative onotologies and instance
data however is perhaps more tractable.

> 
> DELIVERABLES
> 
> Short, illustrative documents showing methods of implementing other
> taskforce decisions via usecases, including (pseudo-?) code and where
> possible, online demonstrations. The documents will also link to
> existing applications and tools in the area.
> 
> 
> For example
> 
> in THES: http://www.w3.org/2004/03/thes-tf/mission
> objective:
> "Document strategies for representing Thesaurus-like content 
> using RDF/OWL"

Are THES willing to produce example thesaurus/instance data?  Running code?


I was wondering if the WNET task force would be willing to commit to example
instance data as well as the WNET encoding in RDF.

I believe JJC has already said he expects the XSCH WG to produce examples.

How about OEP?  There are examples in the classes as property values doc
already.  Interestingly these examples overlap the thesaurus area.  I'm
wondering about some coordination between the task forces, i.e. might there
be examples in common.

[...]

> 
> Notes
> - ADTF should be independent of the TF it is documenting - a 'second
> opinion' akin to Brian's testing role for the taskforce
> - ADTF should track the decisions as they occur and perhaps 
> try to keep
> discussions concrete by trying to implement them(?)


I hadn't thought of it quite like that, but I like the way Libby puts this.
It kinda suggests that this task force are acting as surrogate users for the
documents.

> 
> Issues
> - real code or pseudo-code? if real, which library? several libraries?

I wonder if we can persuade tool developers to create illustrations based on
our data but using their tools.

> - duplication with what the other taskforces intend to do?

Right.  I'm not sure if this task force should produce examples directly or
whether the other task forces should.

Maybe the thing to do is to pick some of the current work, I'd suggest WNET
and Classes as Property Values and see what makes sense for them.

Brian
Received on Thursday, 27 May 2004 10:55:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:38 UTC