- From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 12:41:38 -0800
- To: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, Ghislain Atemezing <ghislain.atemezing@mondeca.com>
- Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <f66b32d6-64c3-fd6a-5f67-0db6128a770b@ucsb.edu>
On 02/07/2017 12:22 PM, Maxime Lefrançois wrote: > Just to mention: FOAF should *not* be part of that list of well > established, stable standards developed by some important organization. > Although it's a good example of very well used ontology. > But that's off topic. I fully agree. > > > Le mar. 7 févr. 2017 à 21:05, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu > <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>> a écrit : > > On 02/07/2017 11:53 AM, Maxime Lefrançois wrote: >> I don't want to debate for years, and I'm well aware that we are >> not dealing with a simple research project here, may it be from >> the EU, or from any other continent. >> >> Your arguments seem reasonable, although I could make the point >> that voaf and vann are not proposed to be *imported*. Hence >> whenever these ontologies would disappear from the web, nothing >> would break. > > Thanks. I am really not trying to play the bad guy here :-), just > pointing to a perspective that I hear all day long from government > players and the industry. For a long time, I absolutely did not > get their point and arguments but I have now simply accepted it as > a fact that my perspective as a researcher is different from their > perspective (even if I believe that they are being overly > conservative). > >> >> I'm also aware that we need to get some consensus pretty fast on >> the rest of the integration, and there is a long way to go. > > Agreed! Thanks. Let us move on to the remaining issues we have > left. I am really looking forward to having SOSA/SSN out there and > starting to collect implementation evidence. > > Cheers, > Jano > > > >> >> Anyways.That's 2 against 1 for now, I suggest in the absence of >> any mail to this thread within a few days and any change in the >> balance, I simply remove these metadata from the ontologies. >> >> I'm also aware that we need to get some consensus pretty fast on >> the rest of the integration, and there is a long way to go. >> Let's move on to the other metadata and issues ? >> >> Best, >> Maxime >> >> Le mar. 7 févr. 2017 à 20:19, Krzysztof Janowicz >> <janowicz@ucsb.edu <mailto:janowicz@ucsb.edu>> a écrit : >> >> On 02/07/2017 10:49 AM, Ghislain Atemezing wrote: >>> Hello, >>>> Le 7 févr. 2017 à 19:41, Maxime Lefrançois >>>> <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr >>>> <mailto:maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>> a écrit : >>>> >>>> The proposed integration methodology (seereadme.md >>>> <http://readme.md/>) includes the following item: >>>> >>>> - be conformant with the linked vocabulary best practices >>>> athttp://lov.okfn.org/Recommendations_Vocabulary_Design.pdf >>>> >>>> These best practices encourage among other to use >>>> vocabularies vann and voaf. >>> >>> IMHO that document is not a “Bible" :) >> >> Yes, not only is this not a 'bible', it is also that the >> industry and large government agencies operate completely >> differently than researchers and individual research >> projects. Many government and industry partners simple cannot >> use the small ontologies/vocabularies developed by students, >> postdocs, EU projects, and so forth, because they have to >> commit to offering many, many years of support for their >> customers and in many cases they are even forced by law to >> only use standardized work. Please, let us not make SOSA/SSN >> difficult to use by introducing many new properties (and the >> ontologies where they come from) for the sake of being >> perceived as innovative or what not. This is not a research >> or university project but a long-term effort to generate a >> vocabulary for many years to come. >> >> Krzysztof >> >> >>> Seriously, we can debate during years to on this but what is >>> important is that there should be enough metadata to better >>> understand and discover the ontology. >>> If for that you use ex:, vann, or voaf, I think that’s not >>> the point. >>> >>> The “Bible” might be this one >>> https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#dataVocabularies (BP 15 in a REC >>> doc ) >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Ghislain >>> >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> Ghislain A. Atemezing, Ph.D >>> R&D Engineer SemWeb >>> @ Mondeca, Paris, France >>> Labs: http://labs.mondeca.com >>> Tel: +33 (0)1 4111 3034 <tel:01%2041%2011%2030%2034> >>> Web: www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com> >>> Twitter: @gatemezing >>> About Me: https://w3id.org/people/gatemezing >>> >> >> >> -- >> Krzysztof Janowicz >> >> Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara >> 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 >> >> Email:jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu> >> Webpage:http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ <http://geog.ucsb.edu/%7Ejano/> >> Semantic Web Journal:http://www.semantic-web-journal.net >> > > > -- > Krzysztof Janowicz > > Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara > 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 > > Email:jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu> > Webpage:http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ <http://geog.ucsb.edu/%7Ejano/> > Semantic Web Journal:http://www.semantic-web-journal.net > -- Krzysztof Janowicz Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2017 20:42:13 UTC