W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > November 2010

Re: From the DO cluster tot the Citations cluster

From: Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 15:49:19 +0000
Cc: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>, Kai Eckert <kai@informatik.uni-mannheim.de>, Asaf Bartov <asaf.bartov@gmail.com>, public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D72DF0A3-E093-43CA-9B21-446951562F5C@deri.org>
To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
Forwarding part of an earlier conversation... 

On 8 Nov 2010, at 12:56, Ed Summers wrote:

> I agree with Kai, there are certainly aspects to the Enhanced
> Publications Case Study (aka Use Case) that involve citation...but I
> can also see why you in the Digital Objects group would want to use
> it. I guess I don't understand why particular use cases need to be
> "owned" by a particular cluster...

I think the main reason is to make sure we don't lose track of any of the use cases.

> but if you are eager to use it
> please feel free to.
> I really don't have any idea what we are supposed to be doing as far
> as writing up something about the cluster. But I guess I'll wait to
> hear more instructions from the chairs. FWIW, I also don't like having
> this conversations off of the discussion list.

ccing the list. :)


> //Ed
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Great, so I'll keep shepherding EP within our cluster.
>> We also found that the scholarly debate UC (in your cluster) is not clear on
>> whether they have accomplished creating the relationships they propose, or
>> want to do it in the future. We have not found data confirming the former,
>> you might want to contact the UC owner.
>> Best,
>> Mark
>> On 05/11/2010 18:34, Kai Eckert wrote:
>>> Hi Mark and all,
>>> sorry for the late response, but I was totally busy since my return from
>>> Pittsburgh, so I had no time to think about our cluster todos yet.
>>> I agree with you, this basically reflects my problems with the proper
>>> classification of the scientific data use case. I think we should define
>>> the cluster by specific aspects and the use-cases (which in fact are
>>> more case-studies and whole scenarioes instead of use-cases, but I
>>> repeat myself ;-)) probably most of the time contain more than one aspect.
>>> So our cluster should be restricted to the pure citation aspect, and
>>> citation at least means citation of two different things: other
>>> publications and additional reference materials, like scientific data or
>>> others, as mentioned in the EP use-case.
>>> So we probably will have some use-cases in common, the scientific data
>>> use-case should also be split in this manner and handed over to you,
>>> regarding the proper description of scientific data (or maybe to someone
>>> else, this is only based on my recall of the clusters, haven't
>>> investigated them further...).
>>> Cheers,
>>> Kai
>>> Am 29.10.2010 14:47, schrieb Mark van Assem:
>>>> Hi Kai and Ed,
>>>> We from the Digital Objects cluster (Jodi, Asaf, Mark) thought it
>>>> would be useful to keep in contact with you as these clusters seem to
>>>> overlap a bit.
>>>> For example, I think that the EP UC belongs in our cluster [1], would
>>>> you agree?
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Enhanced_Publications
>>>> Best,
>>>> Mark.
Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 15:49:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:55 UTC