- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:04:18 +0000
- To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Cc: public-awwsw@w3.org
I'll be at telecon. Since I was in a Linked Data mood, I added the ever-controversial "nonInformationResource" and "documentatonResource/associated description" to the list of terms, but note they are towards the *bottom* of the list. I mostly agree with JAR's changes up till now. Quick reminder: 1) We really SHOULD give the HTTP in RDF people a review. They just need a place to stick a "Resource" class and to stop using rdf:Alt, and I imagine there we do have consensus that there will be a "resource" class, no? Or not? Perhaps discuss this. 2) Note that I did a brainstorm with Valentina Presutti and we did a "top-down" modelling of the problem, which we wrote down in a quick paper [1] with a draft ontology[2]. Sorry, haven't had time to turn paper into HTML and make ontology better yet, but here it is nonetheless. Maybe look at it briefly just to get an idea that an OWL-DL ontology for this stuff *is* possible, although I'm sure I'm wrong in the details. [1]http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin/homepage/notes/eswc2009.pdf [2]http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/ont/web/irw.owl. Jonathan Rees wrote: > > Agenda: Continue with http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswVocabulary. Look > for next use cases (e.g. more server misbehavior). React to > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2008Dec/0018.html . > > Jonathan > >
Received on Tuesday, 6 January 2009 13:04:53 UTC