- From: Carsten Keßler <carsten.kessler@uni-muenster.de>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 10:17:25 +0200
- To: Eva Blomqvist <evabl444@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-emergency@w3.org" <public-emergency@w3.org>
That's a really good point, Eva. It would be great if one of them could join the group. EDXL was on my personal list anyway, I'll add it to the wiki page. - Carsten On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Eva Blomqvist <evabl444@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > With respect to the following item: > > > * Thinking outside the box: looking at standards in the domain and > data sources that are important to "talk to" (such as OGC services), > but that are not based on semweb tech > > I have previously worked with people from the US navy and other US > organizations (in the context of W3C activities), who are also heavily > involved in the OASIS standardization activity that develops the EDXL > messaging standard (XML-based) for exchanging emergency information: > https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=emergency > Several of them were really interested to explore the potential of Sem Web > technologies for extending EDXL. This could be one thing to look into. I > have also sent them the link to this community group, so perhaps they will > join us. > > Cheers, > Eva > > > On 18/6/2013 12:27 , Carsten Keßler wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> Bart, Tomi and myself have been discussing potential work items for >> the group over the last couple of days. Here's a pleminary list that >> we would like to put up for discussion: >> >> * Overview of existing ontologies, vocabularies (based on results of >> Disaster 2.0 project) >> * Discussion about required level of formalization (SKOS, RDFS, >> different OWL profiles) >> * Brainstrom about use cases where reasoning capabilities are required >> * Guidelines for alignment between existing ontologies >> * Thinking outside the box: looking at standards in the domain and >> data sources that are important to "talk to" (such as OGC services), >> but that are not based on semweb tech >> * Get in touch with maintainers of important reference lists in the >> domain to help them publish the lists in more reusable forms >> * adaption of existing workflows: how to make the move to semweb tech >> for an organization as smooth as possible (this is not an emergency >> information specific item, though) >> * reflect on the specific requirements of emergency information, >> especially timeliness – how well can we actually deal with that? >> * Collect existing use cases of SW tech in emergency management (HXL, >> IATI, MOAC, …) and assess impact >> * Identify and prioritize gaps: what specific requirements does >> emergency management have concerning semantic annotations, and which >> of these are not met by existing vocabularies yet? >> * Complexity of the models and vocabularies; assessment of the >> usability — how much effort is needed to quickly utilize such valuable >> information management resources >> * Communicating about and listing the availability of existing >> datasets about disasters >> * Discussing scenarios for use of the data >> >> If you think that anything is missing or that any of the items should >> not be in the scope of this group, please let us know. We have also >> copied the list on the wiki [1], so if you make any changes, please do >> it there. >> >> Since the summer break is coming up, we would like to leave us some >> time to discuss and prioritize these items until July 19. After that >> deadline, these items should be the basis for the further work of the >> group. >> >> Cheers, >> Carsten >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/community/emergency/wiki/Work_items >> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 08:17:56 UTC