Re: w3.org/ns/opengov

Hi Andreas, pls see inline below

On 21/08/2016 19:33, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> A somewhat belated reply from me.
>
> James and myself a few weeks ago (re-)started discussing how to proceed
> regarding the vocabularies (Popolo-LD + OParl-LD = OpenGovLD).
>
> Can you recommend other vocabularies whichme can be dereferenced and are
> best practice examples for using the w3.org (or other) namespace ?

There are lots in /ns, some better engineered than others. Best recent 
example would be https://www.w3.org/ns/csvw which is available in HTML, 
Turtle and JSON-LD (via conneg or direct linkage if you add the file 
extension).

One day I'll get around to setting up the conneg for 
https://www.w3.org/ns/dcat. mea Culpa that its' not there now but you 
can see the Turtle and RDF/XML there. The reason I highlight it 
particularly is that it's our most multi-lingual - check out the Turtle 
file for a bit of UTF-8 porn; Japanese, Greek and Arabic all in the same 
file :-)

https://www.w3.org/ns/org just gives you the Turtle, 
https://www.w3.org/ns/oa has a full set with no conneg and so on.

Which is why I point to CSVW - it's the best example but we don't 
(currently) have hard and fast rules.

>
> What governance is the minimum required by the W3C ?
> Could an experimental draft be published when James and myself agree on it ?

Good question and one that we're grappling with. It's a topic for the 
SDSVoc workshop https://www.w3.org/2016/11/sdsvoc/. If you run it in a 
CG (which covers IPR issues) and work by consensus, that's good. We'd 
really like to have a Github -> /ns space system. That's the goal, but 
there are any number of obstacles, money being only one of them.

>
> Do you have suggestions regarding specification governance in CGs in
> which only a small percentage of members is actively developing a
> specification ?


Oh crikey... I challenge you to name *any* working group of *any* kind 
in *any* standards body where the actual work is done by more than a 
small handful of people. It's always a fraction of the number of 
members. Run the system - give people a chance to comment and/or object 
- but there is no notion of a quorum. That said, one or two person pet 
projects are always a bad idea so you do need to make an effort to get 
external input.

HTH

Phil




> ---
>
> Phil Archer wrote on 2015-11-18:
>> James,
>>
>> As you may recall from his postings on this list a few weeks back,
>> Daniel Schwabe is looking into using the Popolo vocabulary. He's brought
>> my attention to your/Popolo's use of a w3.org namespace that doesn't
>> dereference, i.e. www.w3.org/ns/opengov
>>
>> We can probably help with that, i.e. we could potentially host the
>> vocabulary, but we'd need to go through a few hoops to get there. Can
>> you please fill me in on how the use of this namespace has come about?
>> Did you talk to anyone at W3C about it? I want to be helpful and support
>> the work you/this community is doing as it's clearly valuable but in
>> order to do that, we need to work together.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Phil.
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1

Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2016 10:51:53 UTC