W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > March 2016

RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 22:24:56 +0000
To: <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, <phila@w3.org>
CC: <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ac42872c6e8b42ef9485355e10ff709e@exch1-mel.nexus.csiro.au>
In case my previous announcement was missed, the current state of the ISO Terminology is available as linked data here
http://registry.it.csiro.au/sandbox/iso-tc211/terms


You can see that the Base URI is not intended to be permanent.
I am in discussion with Andrew Jones (the chair of the ISO TC 211 Terminology group) about how to manage this going forward.
That will include consideration of synchronization.

Simon

From: Frans Knibbe [mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl]
Sent: Thursday, 17 March 2016 1:05 AM
To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Cc: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>; Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2



2016-02-11 12:59 GMT+01:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org>>:

[snip]

Sorry, Phil, I'm just trying to understand the opportunity and the cost.

The cost would be a small bit of work for someone to create a SKOS file (probably as turtle, RDF/XML, HTML and perhaps JSON-LD) that we would publish on w3.org<http://w3.org> somewhere (probably w3.org/2016/??/geo-glossary<http://w3.org/2016/??/geo-glossary>) - so not in /TR space. As Simon says, it's really because W3C has the infrastructure to do this easily (it's easy for us to do, I think more easy for us than OGC even).

@Linda - I don't see us writing new text around this or adapting the content at all. Just making it available in a Web-friendly way so that the BP doc can link to it where necessary.

Simon might have a student who could do it, I have a work experience lad with me in June who could do it etc.

That's all. Actually the bigger issue is making sure that TC211 is happy with us doing it - legally and relationship-wise.

Should this be seen as a one time process? If changes in the TC211 definitions occur it would be sensible to update our derived product too. Which means the procedure should be repeatable and that someone or something should monitor changes. Unless TC211 accepts responsibility for publishing the definitions in additional formats. anyway, making arrangements for future changes is probably a bit of extra work.

Regards,
Frans



Phil.



From: Linda van den Brink [mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl<mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>]
Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016 7:21 PM
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au<mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>>; phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

It would be useful, however, I have concerns (from glancing at it) that the content of this glossary is mostly oriented towards the geospatial community. We might still need to explain some of the terms in this glossary for non-spatial-experts. And a lot of the terms would never come up in our best practice or other deliverables.

Van: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>]
Verzonden: donderdag 11 februari 2016 00:30
Aan: kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au<mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au><mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au<mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>>; phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org><mailto:phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org>>; Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org><mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>; Linda van den Brink
Onderwerp: RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

... because they don't have the skills, or resources. They focus more on the content than delivery. But the content does reflect the outcome of a pretty rigorous process.

I have a student looking at it, as of yesterday, but not sure how fast that will move.

Simon J D Cox

Research Scientist

Environmental Information Infrastructures

Land and Water

CSIRO



E simon.cox@csiro.au<mailto:simon.cox@csiro.au<mailto:simon.cox@csiro.au>> T +61 3 9545 2365<tel:%2B61%203%209545%202365> M +61 403 302 672<tel:%2B61%20403%20302%20672>

    Physical: Reception Central, Bayview Avenue, Clayton, Vic 3168

    Deliveries: Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168

    Postal: Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169

people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox<http://people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox>

orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420<http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420>

researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3<http://researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3>



________________________________
From: Kerry Taylor
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2016 11:22:01 PM
To: Phil Archer; Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton); public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org><mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>; Linda van den Brink
Subject: RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2
Phil,
Why would TC211 not do it themselves?  Why us?
Although I cannot see it being very difficult.

Kerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org>]
Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016 6:51 AM
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org><mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>; Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl<mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl><mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl<mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>>>
Subject: Re: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

+ Linda

Simon,

Geonovum's Paul Janssen approached me this evening to talk about this very topic. I ended up saying that *if* this WG so desired, we could go through some cycles of liaison with TC211 to make sure everyone was happy and, if so, publish their glossary as a SKOS concept scheme in w3.org<http://w3.org> space (full credit, their doc is normative, all mistakes are ours yada yada). (All good concept schemes come with human readable HTML versions of course).

WDYT?

Phil.

On 09/02/2016 23:25, Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>> wrote:
        [42] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Glossary_of_terms


The ISO/TC 211 Glossary is also publicly available.
http://www.isotc211.org/Terminology.htm

Why not just use that?
It is currently a spreadsheet, but it has been suggested to convert into linked data resources.



-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org>]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2016 1:57 AM
To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org><mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>>
Subject: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

Minutes from today's F2F meeting are, of course, at
https://www.w3.org/2016/02/09-sdw-minutes.


The text version is pasted below.

--


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


http://philarcher.org

+44 (0)7887 767755<tel:%2B44%20%280%297887%20767755>
@philarcher1

--


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


http://philarcher.org

+44 (0)7887 767755<tel:%2B44%20%280%297887%20767755>
@philarcher1

Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2016 22:25:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:20 UTC