Re: Closing your Community Group?

Jason, Enayat,

Let us know when you can which group you've identified as related.
We can probably work with these groups to merge lom2ld.

Another possibility is to leave lom2ld open.

Cheers,
Coralie


On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:02:43 +0200, Haag, Jason <jhaag75@gmail.com> wrote:

> Good point. Please forgive me, there has actually been some great
> research work / activity by Enayat Rajabi:
>
> http://www.erajabi.com/Uploads/W3CDraft.html
>
> If there is real interest in moving this work to IEEE LTSC please let
> me know. I'm a member of that group. It is currently chaired by Avrron
> Barr, avronbarr@gmail.com.
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Enayat Rajabi <enayatrajabi@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 9:51 AM
> Subject: Re: Closing your Community Group?
> To: "Haag, Jason" <jhaag75@gmail.com>
> Cc: team-community-process <team-community-process@w3.org>,  
> public-lom2ld@w3.org
>
>
> According to my studies, there are already many repositories with
> thousands resources aligned their metadata to IEEE LOM. The main
> purpose of this community was to map the IEEE LOM to RDF. There are
> some works that map IEEE LOM to DC even by Dublin Core community,
> however the mapping did not consider taxonomy and hierarchical
> structure of IEEE LOM. This community group also wants to pursue the
> IEEE LTSC to publish IEEE LOM vocabularies/taxonomies online for all
> developers/researchers and so on.
>
> One possibility would be merging this group to other related groups,
> instead of closing it.
>
> Best,
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Haag, Jason <jhaag75@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't feel this group is necessary and agree it should probably be  
>> closed.
>>
>> LRMI incorporated some of the LOM elements and is already available as  
>> RDF.
>>
>> http://dublincore.org/dcx/lrmi-terms/
>>
>> If there are any LOM elements that are missing or that members of this
>> group think should be added then perhaps the more appropriate action
>> is to engage the IEEE LTSC (https://ieee-sa.imeetcentral.com/ltsc/) or
>> the DCMI (http://dublincore.org/dcx/lrmi-terms/1.1/), especially since
>> the DCMI is now the steward of the LRMI work.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Coralie Mercier <coralie@w3.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear all,
>> >
>> > Your Community Group is among the groups launched more than 6 months  
>> ago
>> > with 5 people or fewer and appears to be unused.
>> > The W3C Team proposes to *CLOSE* it in 10 days or so, per the  
>> Community and
>> > Business Group Process [1] (relevant parts quoted below), unless  
>> there are
>> > compelling arguments not to.
>> >
>> >
>> > [1] Community and Business Group Process
>> > <https://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/>
>> >
>> > Duration and Closure of a Community Group
>> > -----------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Once a Community Group has been launched, participants may continue to
>> > work indefinitely, until the Community Development Lead closes the  
>> group;
>> > see the grounds for closure.
>> >
>> > No less than ten business days before closing a group, the Community
>> > Development Lead must alert the participants. Once closed, no  
>> individuals
>> > may join, and discussions stop. However, W3C makes available  
>> information
>> > about closed Community Groups and archives of their communications.
>> >
>> > Closed Community Groups are re-opened following the creation process.
>> >
>> >
>> > Grounds for Closure of a Community Group
>> > ----------------------------------------
>> > The Community Development Lead may close a Community Group in any of
>> > following circumstances:
>> >
>> >      Chair Request. The Group Chair requests that the group be closed
>> > (e.g., as the result of a group decision, or on a certain date  
>> selected in
>> > advance by the group).
>> >      Inactivity. The number of participants drops below 3 for an  
>> extended
>> > period, or because participant activity (e.g., as measured by
>> > communications among participants) ceases for an extended period.
>> >      Agreement Violations. When, in the judgment of the Community
>> > Development Lead, the group has committed a serious violation of this
>> > policy, for instance exceeding its scope.
>> >
>> > The Community Development Lead and Chair should discuss the group’s  
>> status
>> > before the Community Development Lead initiates closure.

-- 
Coralie Mercier  -  W3C Marketing & Communications -  http://www.w3.org
mailto:coralie@w3.org +336 4322 0001 http://www.w3.org/People/CMercier/

Received on Friday, 29 April 2016 14:08:36 UTC