- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 13:38:58 +0200
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
For those of you who haven't seen the mail below yet: W3C might set up a working group next year to standardize our technologies. Phil Archer is the Data Activity Lead at W3C. On Thursday, July 03, 2014 10:21 AM, Phil Archer wrote: > Adrian, everyone > > Thanks very much for this. As ever, if we can help we will. The > barrier to setting up a chartered WG (i.e. on that can create formal > standards) is pretty high, but (I hope) not insurmountable. In > essence we need to be sure that sufficient members are committed to > participating in the WG and that the spec will be implemented. That > means we need: > > - member support (membership counts); > - implementation capacity. > > Both of which flow from the demands of multiple stakeholders. > > Now... RDF Interfaces looks like it might be in scope for something > I'm trying to cook up. The Data Activity is all about bridging > technological communities, making sure that, for example, non-SemWeb > people (I know it's hard to believe but there are such people ) can > benefit from semantics. In *that* context, I'm trying to find a path > towards a WG sometime next year that will help us move from data to > APIs, tools, frameworks etc. Markus Lanthaler's work on Hydra is > relevant, as is the Linked Data API, Linked Data Fragments and more. > > So perhaps you can help me to help you. > > Leaving aside the fact that we're stretched to breaking point in terms > of staff availability ... I'm looking for ways in which we could > establish something like a Semantic Web (or Linked Data) Access Group > - basically a group that defines a bucket full of stuff that means > even arch anti-Linked Data people will find useful and attractive. > Something that might bring SemWeb closer to Robin Berjon's vision > (http://berjon.com/web-2024/). I don't agree with his statements about > RDF, of course, but he's far from alone in his thinking. > > Do you think that might be worth pursuing? And, if so, would RDF > Interfaces fit within that?? > > Comments, positive or negative, all welcome. > > Phil. > > -- > > Phil Archer > W3C Data Activity Lead > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2014 11:39:27 UTC