semantics -- Re: Group Note FPWD is done

Discussion now attached to ISSUE-1

J.

El 06/03/2009, a las 11:27, Peristeras, Vassilios escribió:

> 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/
>
>
>
>