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

Re: New use cases still discussed in Pittsburgh?

From: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:17:46 -0400
To: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
Cc: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20101012141746.GA4020@octavius>
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 03:11:23PM +0200, Mark van Assem wrote:
> It seems you're worried about promising too much, but on the other hand 
> willing to facilitate such discussions on the public mailling list?

Antoine gets it exactly right by distinguishing between
"individual" contributions on a public mailing list, where
discussion on the general topic of library linked data --
even discussion not directly related to LLD XG business --
is encouraged, as opposed to "group" contributions.

In order to respond to a request for advice "as a group",
we would need to discuss responses as a group, for example as
agenda items on telecons.  Given our charter responsibilities,
we do not have the time to do that, nor would it make
sense to delegate to our members by saying that anyone
responding to a question on the list is responding "in the
name of LLD XG".  In that sense, LLD XG is not proactively
"facilitating" discussion on public-lld, simply encouraging
it to happen -- and benefitting from the high concentration
of experienced practitioners on the list, both members of
the XG and non-members.

Tom

> 
> Mark
> 
> On 12/10/2010 15:00, Antoine Isaac wrote:
> >Hi Mark,
> >
> >
> >>>In other words, the XG is not set up to answer questions or
> >>>offer advice, but to analyze requirements, survey the state
> >>
> >>Not even informally?
> >>
> >>I think this is why these people would like to interact with us. To show
> >>us what they've done and ask if this is the way to go, or ask advice
> >>about problems they're facing.
> >>
> >>If we want to stay in touch with communities the actual problems and
> >>solutions are the easiest thing to communicate about.
> >>
> >>I could include one or two sentences about that we don't offer
> >>ready-made solutions, but are able to discuss a bit with them and point
> >>to possible solutions or other researchers working on the topic?
> >
> >
> >I think it's a matter of considering what we are doing as a group and
> >what we do individually. Individual participants are of course welcome
> >(and encouraged!) to be involved in any discussion they want, providing
> >advice, staying in touch or establishing first contacts with the various
> >communities they're dearly interested in.
> >
> >But we as a group are "only" chartered to seek facilitation for such
> >discussions. Which we will do crucially by "charting the landscape" of
> >the LLD cases, issues and solutions, and thinking about what kind of
> >initiative/support action is needed in the near future to facilitate
> >further LLD adoption. But also by having set up a public wiki, and the
> >public-lld community list, i.e., spaces where the discussions mentioned
> >above can start. This is however quite different from setting up some
> >kind of consultancy committing to give advice (even informal) to
> >everyone that requests it ;-)
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Antoine
> >
> >

-- 
Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 14:18:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 12 October 2010 14:18:31 GMT