W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2000

Re: New Semantic-Web List?

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:57:04 -0000
Message-ID: <000601c04e32$149c68e0$c9d893c3@z5n9x1>
To: "Dan Brickley" <Daniel.Brickley@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: "www-rdf-interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> I thought we had this discussion last week!

We did, but it was left unfinished.

> W3C have already established such a list, semantic-web@w3.org
> [...] we held back from publicising the W3C SW list because it was
> unclear how to characterise its role, if any, alongside existing lists.

I feel it would be easy define such a list: create a spin off IG from RDF
IG; SW IG - and use semantic-web@w3.org as a basis for discussion. Why not?
The SW is a subject that is potentially bigger than RDF, even if there are
ten times more discussions about RDF at the moment!

> While folk can do what they want, set up lists elsewhere etc,

[point-taken]

> I'd prefer it if we could avoid muddying the picture by having too many
> generic SW lists.

Too many? There's only semantic-web@w3.org, and that isn't even being used!
I agree www-talk is a very good mailing list: it's history is incredible,
but try poting a discussion about the SW there: you simply don't get a
reply. I really wish that people did use www-talk, but they don't. People
think of the SW as being the SW, saying "discuss it on www-talk" makes
people think "maybe this is the wrong place", even if it clearly isn't :-)

> If semantic-web@w3.org has a good use, let's use it.[...] But if it makes
> sense to the SW developer community to spread SW discussion across
> another list, semantic-web@w3.org seems as good a list as any to be
> home to that.

Well, I feel it does make a great deal of sense, and many people I have
conversed with feel the same. Can and should we start using
semantic-web@w3.org for public discussion about the Semantic Web then? I
really do feel we need an abstract and/or generic based thread discussion
forum, for when we aren't discssing RDF, but we are discussing the SW, or
when we are doing both...

Sean B. Palmer
Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2000 06:58:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:46 GMT