W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Focus of this mailing list

From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 20:31:19 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+iVYz_Ocw06sUcgCv=oC_O3i8-FSpnJtLq+TMV3X-dSw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@few.vu.nl>, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, Public Vocabs <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 12 June 2012 20:09, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:

> Hi Dan, all:
>
> To me, it becomes unclear whether the focus of this mailing list is
> - mainly the open discussion about extending schema.org as a Web-scale
> vocabulary, or
> - a broader forum for debating conceptual modeling issues at large.
>
> I think that the schema.org sponsors should articulate the scope of the
> work on schema.org and this mailing list. Otherwise, it will become a
> time-consuming and fruitless effort. We should not try to develop a single,
> consensual world ontology in here. Such is doomed to failure.
>
> Here is a quick and obviously preliminary sketch of guidelines for
> assessing the relevance of future extensions for discussion:
>
> - There is data available that will be published for consumption by search
> engines and crawlers and for which the owners agree with the usage by third
> parties.
> - A minimum of two big (e.g. Fortune 500 company or major NGO)
> organizations will use the extension for publishing data.
> - At least 100 smaller sites can be expected to adopt the extension within
> two months.
> - The total number of types in schema.or remains below 1,000.
> - The total number of properties per type in schema.org remains below 25
>
> This email is not meant to offend anybody. But I would like to stress that
> for developing a Web vocabulary proposal, there is no need to involve a
> very broad audience of potential users in the stages of designing the
> model. Just take 2 - 5 collaborators and a few potential adopters, codify
> the proposal, and sent the URI of the proposal for review. There are lots
> of other forums for general questions related to modeling the world, e.g.
>
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/
> http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Main_Page
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/ (kind of dead since 2006)
>
>
> I fear that there are may people currently subscribed to the forum how are
> mainly interested in extending schema.org for articulating their site
> information to search engines and other clients. The community may loose
> the important potential adopters if the majority of traffic on this mailing
> list is for a very small audience only.
>

+1

I'm mainly a lurker on this list.  I do enjoy the schema.org discussions,
but growing diversity is, I think, a good thing.


>
> Best
>
> Martin Hepp
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> martin hepp
> e-business & web science research group
> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>
> e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
> phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
> fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
> www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
>         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
> skype:   mfhepp
> twitter: mfhepp
>
> Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
> =================================================================
> * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2012 18:31:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 12 June 2012 18:31:50 GMT