W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-ssn@w3.org > August 2009

RE: purpose/goals for observations ontologies

From: Kelsey, William D <william.d.kelsey@boeing.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:45:15 -0700
Message-ID: <E5BAC205209F9446A87D887C2D480DDB0B441320@XCH-NW-4V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
To: <public-xg-ssn@w3.org>
I agree that, to be successful (e.g. receive larger adoption/application,
there should be at least a minimum set of criteria used for vetting
anticipated application (use cases?).

Best Regards, 
W. David Kelsey 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Graybeal [mailto:graybeal@mbari.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 7:37 AM
To: public-xg-ssn@w3.org
Subject: purpose/goals for observations ontologies

 From past minutes and today's telecon, I could not tell if the group  
had a particular goal for reviewing and including observations  
ontologies in the discussion. (I can see everyone thought it was a  
good idea, but not what purpose they thought this would serve.)

Can someone clarify how we want to use any observation ontology that  
might be identified or created?  For example, do we know we need an  
ontology, or will it be enough just to have a list of phenomena?


John Graybeal   <mailto:graybeal@marinemetadata.org>

Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 14:46:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:03:15 UTC