RE: Group Note FPWD is done

Hello Owen,

 

I agree with you and disagree at the same time :-)

I think it is an issue of balance: 

It is completely unfeasible to predefine all the semantics that you need
and persuade everyone to follow the derived specs.

At the same time, it is feasible to create a minimum of common language,
a thin semantic layer to avoid huge integration effort later. Which
means that I personally buy the slogan "Little semantics goes a long
way" (Jim Hendler, as far as I know).

This is in my opinion how the (semantic) web is evolving (see Dublic
Core, SKOS, FOAF, SIOC as examples). Small specs that people can easily
buy and use instead of heavy ontologies where you need PhDs to implement
(e.g. Cyc, DOLCE, OWL-S, WSMO).

 

Best regards,

Vassilios

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Owen Ambur
Sent: 02 March 2009 23:16
To: 'eGov IG'
Subject: RE: Group Note FPWD is done

 

Jose, I'd like to see this section rewritten:

http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/Group/docs/note#Semantics 

 

It is not necessary to agree upon the semantics in advance.  So long as
the

definitions of the elements are documented, machine intelligence can be

applied to foster understanding of the differences.  It may also be
possible

to infer the semantics of the elements based upon the kinds of data that

actually occur between the tags.

 

Owen 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org]

On Behalf Of Jose M. Alonso

Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 5:09 AM

To: eGov IG

Subject: Group Note FPWD is done

 

All,

 

It has been a very intense weekend. Some of us, namely Kevin, John and  

me have been working until the very last minute on developing the  

final draft. We have worked on the document until yesterday night,  

then called it done.

 

Final document is a snapshot of the current Editor's Draft [1] and we  

are requesting publication on March 10; comments will be welcomed  

until April 26.

 

Thanks John, Oscar, Daniel and Owen for providing content for the  

document. Very special thanks to Kevin for bearing with me over the  

last couple days and a great editorial work.

 

I think the document is quite solid but no doubt that with the help of  

others it could be greatly improved, so do not hesitate to send  

comments or offering authoring help.

 

Cheers,

Jose.

 

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/Group/docs/note

 

--

Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>    W3C/CTIC

eGovernment Lead                  http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/