W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > April 2011

Vocabularies/dataset deliverable

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:59:53 +0200
Message-ID: <4DA557F9.2090203@few.vu.nl>
To: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Dear all,

Here is the current draft Marcia, Jeff, William and me have been assembling so far:

It is still work in progress, but we believe it gives a good idea of what we're aiming at. It's a quite straightforward implementation  of the plan at [1].

Of course we'll happily welcome every feedback. But your input would be especially appreciated on the following points:

- graphs: do you agree this can be useful and worth working on? Have you got alternative options to the ones we're exploring now?

- description grain: are our (two lines intro + references + namespace pointer) good enough for the purpose? Should we really aim at something more complete and structured, in the line of LOV Bernard has worked on [3,4]?

- coverage: should we include other items? Especially, do you think we're missing reference vocabularies (values or element sets) that are really important for our domain and not referred to in the use cases? Should that include stuff not published in RDF, or "non-official" versions?

- categorization: we are thinking of arranging together value vocabularies that are designed to handle agents, places names, and all others (topics). That could be useful for the report section, but if you have any input on whether/how it is feasible, please send it!

Finally, we of course still intend to come with a proper section for the report, including:
- pointers to the LLD cloud
- representative vocs and datasets--a mere selection of items from the separate deliverable.
- gaps, maybe with discussion on data management and publication, if not redundant with the "problems and limitations" or "recommendation" sections--perhaps we could just fit our stuff there, as we discussed last week for [2]
- work in progress *at the time of the report*, which can solve the gaps. And what should be do to fix the remaining issues--again, if not redundant with the "recommendation" section.

But we'll work it a bit later. We feel that the current gathering/description/visualization work we're doing now for the report is good for better grasping the situation, and thus to come with relevant stuff in the report.



[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Mar/0006.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabularies#Vocabulary_discussion_in_Pittsburgh
[3]  http://labs.mondeca.com/dataset/lov/
Received on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 07:58:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:57 UTC