Re: Could ISO-639 languages be defined as skos concepts?

Tom, Sue Ellen

I completely agree with Tom's last sentence below. Actually, many data 
sources organizations who have been in standby mode regarding 
publication of their data in RDF are often happy to receive proactive 
proposals of help for writing an ontology and migrating content to RDF. 
I had recently such experience with the french INSEE. My point was about 
ISO not necessarily being among those, given their publication policy. 
But seems that Sue Ellen has pointed to the right place, IETF/IANA.

If it can help to move this thing forward, I can draft a proposal for a 
SKOS representation of the language subtag registry, using some wildcard 
namespace, post it somewhere, just to show concretely that it's not a 
technical big issue.

Bernard

PS: below is extracted from a private exchange with Tom, I just realized 
we both forgot to cc to the list.

> On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 04:11:26PM +0100, Thomas Baker wrote:
>   
If iana.org were to maintain its own RDF vocabulary of its own
subtags, then I agree, maintaining it in RDF is no more (or not
much more) difficult than maintaining it in the file cited.

I had in mind the scenario of some organization _other_than_
the ISO standard maintainer trying to maintain URIs for a
"separately maintained ISO standard" (e.g., as a public
service for metadata implementers).

In other words, better to help organizations coin and
publish their own URIs than trying to work out a sustainable
organizational model for hosting those URIs elsewhere.



-- 

*Bernard Vatant
*Knowledge Engineering
----------------------------------------------------
*Mondeca**
*3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
Web:    www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com>
----------------------------------------------------
Tel:       +33 (0) 871 488 459
Mail:     bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
Blog:    Leçons de Choses <http://mondeca.wordpress.com/>

Received on Thursday, 21 December 2006 17:15:35 UTC