Re: Drafting a wiki page for collecting DQV implementations/reuses

Hi Nandana,

Thanks for the suggestion!
Actually as far as we're monitoring implementations of DQV as a vocabulary, if we need to extend it would be about which features of the voc have been implemented. I/e. if an implementation is complete/partial, like at the 'vocabularies' part at [2]. I'm not arguing that we should do it now, let me be clear :-) But in case this happens one day, we'd rather leave some space in the wiki page for it ;-)

Cheers,

Antoine

[2] https://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html

On 16/06/16 10:10, Nandana Mihindukulasooriya wrote:
> Dear Riccardo,
>
> Thanks for starting the implementations wiki page. In the LDP WG [1], we collected few more details such as License, Language, Platform for the tools. However, if we don't want the wiki to have a lot of details,  the current structure looks good.
>
> Best Regards,
> Nandana
>
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/LDP_Implementations
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Riccardo Albertoni <albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it <mailto:albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it>> wrote:
>
>     Dear All,
>     As discussed with Jeremy,
>     I have started a wiki page [1] for collecting the  existing DQV's
>     implementations. The page contains two tables, the first is for
>     collecting  portals, ontologies, and tools reusing DQV, the second is
>     for papers which cite/refer to DQV.
>
>     Before  adding  the missing instances of  tools, papers,   Do you
>     think that there are other details or kind of artifacts, we should
>     consider?
>
>     Let me know if you have any suggestions.
>
>     Thanks,
>     Riccardo
>
>     [1] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DQV_implementations
>
>     On 14 June 2016 at 09:59, Debattista, Jeremy
>     <Jeremy.Debattista@iais.fraunhofer.de <mailto:Jeremy.Debattista@iais.fraunhofer.de>> wrote:
>      > Hi Riccardo,
>      >
>      >> Said that,  your comment reveals that this design choice  can  be misunderstood,  Do you think  we should add a note or a sentence to  make our point clearer?
>      >
>      > Yes I think a note would make this clearer :)
>      >
>      >
>      >> Collecting  the DQV implementations  is a good idea, but I am not sure we should list them  in the  DQV Document.  Very soon,   we are supposed  to have the final DQV vote,  and after the last vote, we are not allowed to update the document anymore.
>      >> Then the risk is to leave out  many of the implementations that are still in progress.
>      >>
>      >> What do you think about  having the implementations collected in a   the w3c DWBP wiki page?  A wiki page   can be easily maintained  after the vote and  I guess we are allowed to refer to such a  page from the DQV document.
>      >
>      > Perfect, we can start with the wiki page and maybe make a link in the DQV page pointing to it.
>      >
>      > Cheers,
>      > Jer
>
>
>
>     --
>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Riccardo Albertoni
>     Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico Magenes"
>     Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
>     via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA
>     tel. +39-010-6475624 <tel:%2B39-010-6475624> - fax +39-010-6475660 <tel:%2B39-010-6475660>
>     e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it <mailto:Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it>
>     Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/
>     LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni
>     www: http://www.imati.cnr.it/
>     http://purl.oclc.org/NET/riccardoAlbertoni
>     FOAF:http://purl.oclc.org/NET/RiccardoAlbertoni/foaf
>
>

Received on Friday, 17 June 2016 13:18:32 UTC