CG: Charter Purpose Statement & introductory notes

Hi All,

I've had a read of the initial documentation about the inception of the
group and as discussed elsewhere, i think it's important to ensure we're
building the CG based on principles rather than a product. (which i'm sure
was the underlying intent).  I've attached a google doc[2] (please feel
welcome to request edit access to it, but comments are fine also).  I
haven't put alot of thought into it yet; however one of my considerations
is whether we should be sticking to RDF rather than simply XML (including
of course, rdf/xml).

schema.org (and OGP http://ogp.me/ ) are amongst the many RDF Ontologies
that exist on the web, some of which can be found here:
http://lod-cloud.net/

One of the most important plugin i've been using recently is:
http://osds.openlinksw.com/  - which helps people see the 'web of data'.

Herein; some important distinctions exist between "linked data" (or RDF)
which is part of the semantic web stack; and XML.  I propose we focus on
schema tools for RDF[3] which includes a bunch of serialization formats[4].

One of the 'to do items' will be to update existing wiki pages that
currently has outdated references on them.  I've found it quite difficult
to find useful tools and have certainly found this part of the frustration
when people in senior positions tell me that they were unaware the
'semantic web' was relevent nowadays.  I think if we're able to help with
accessibility and descriptions / discovery for tooling; we'll both be able
to improve opportunities and circumstances in a number of different ways.

ie: pages to be updated;
- https://www.w3.org/wiki/SemanticWebTools
- https://www.w3.org/wiki/Ontology_editors (to a lesser degree).

Really quickly; with respect to other tools,

- http://linda.epu.ntua.gr/ which relates to https://github.com/LinDA-tools
- http://protege.stanford.edu/
- http://json-ld.org/playground/
- https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool
Other examples include word press ones like:
https://wordpress.org/plugins/lh-tools/ &
https://wordpress.org/plugins/lh-rdf/

We likely need to make a list of tools, the language / purpose of the
tools, etc.

MEETINGS
Do we want to have regular Tele Conf / IRC meetings?  I have found in the
Web Payments / Credentials teams meetings have in-turn forced people to
keep a schedule.  If interest exists, let us know and we'll see what we can
do.  In many cases, services like Gitter can also offer an alternative that
may work better for people world-wide in different timezones.  Implication
is that we'll need to think about a github location, which i think is very
doable.

RE: HANS PROJECT
The group was instigated by Hans Polak[5] who was inspired by his own
project.  IMHO, we should figure out how to publish ideas on different
levels to help forge the means for these sorts of projects to get
under-way.  We may find other W3 opportunities as we do these tasks; and i
for one,

(IN CONCLUSION)
I am pleased this group has been created. The amount of frustration and
time it takes, even with some rather incredible support from W3 experts in
past; to both find the tools, figure out the flaws, opportunities and
benefits of tools; and indeed, educate others about them.

I hope in future, It'll become far easier as we're simply able to flick
links whilst encouraging more and more people, to get involved with the
linguistics of ontology, schemas and www service support & design.

If we can get onto resolving the attached summary about the formation of
the CG, i'm happy to follow-up with the W3 contact and get the page
modified.

Any questions, ever, please do not hesitate to get in touch with me
directly.


Timothy Holborn
skype: sailing_digital



[1] https://www.w3.org/community/schema-gen/
[2]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-ukwFmcdGs6SwfaMz2RrfFQvG6o2PD8NfFreDAbri-A/edit?usp=sharing

[3] https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework
[5] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-schemaorg/2017Feb/