Re: To use or not to use recommended metadata in a W3C ontology ?

I'm very sorry, I thought it was tomorrow.

Le mar. 7 févr. 2017 à 22:35, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu> a
écrit :

> We are all on the call Maxime, why not join us?
>
>
> On 02/07/2017 01:12 PM, Maxime Lefrançois wrote:
>
> Hi Armin,
>
> We're not at all discussing whether we should import something in sosa,
> just the list of "annotation properties" that could be declared in the sosa
> ontology.
>
> So if I do count Phil's comment as a +1, and Ghislain as a  +0
>
> that's 2-1 in favour of using voaf and vann for now.
>
> Kind regards,
> Maxime
>
> Le mar. 7 févr. 2017 à 21:52, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> a
> écrit :
>
> Can I just remind that we made a decision earlier to not import anything
> in SOSA. That was the reason why we are supposed to drop the SKOS import.
> So close to the conference call I can’t dig out the exact time we made that
> decision, but I will look for it later.
>
> On 8/2/17, 7:49 am, "Krzysztof Janowicz" <janowicz@ucsb.edu> wrote:
>
>     Sure, that is fine. There are many use cases and perspectives and I am
>     only reporting on the one I know; see also the list below of provo-o
> etc.
>
>     On 02/07/2017 12:45 PM, Phil Archer wrote:
>     > Ahem...
>     >
>     > https://www.w3.org/ns/dqv.ttl
>     > https://www.w3.org/ns/dcat.ttl
>     > https://www.w3.org/ns/duv.ttl
>     >
>     > All use voaf and vann because we want them to show up in LOV :-)
>     >
>     > On 07/02/2017 20:35, Ghislain Atemezing wrote:
>     >> Re visibility and reusing ontologies….
>     >>> Le 7 févr. 2017 à 21:01, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu> a
>     >>> écrit :
>     >>>
>     >>> At least not in my experience working with them. If they see that
>     >>> 'xyz' is used in an ontology they are going to use, then they would
>     >>> like to find out what xyz is and if they find out that it is an
>     >>> ontology that has been created years ago by a private person and
>     >>> that there is no support for it and no other major player is using
>     >>> said ontology, they will be unhappy.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> I am afraid, they will certainly only use schema.org
>     >> <http://schema.org/> in the next years :)
>     >>
>     >> Best,
>     >> Ghislain
>     >> --------------------------------------------
>     >> Ghislain A. Atemezing, Ph.D
>     >> R&D Engineer SemWeb
>     >> @ Mondeca, Paris, France
>     >> Labs: http://labs.mondeca.com <http://labs.mondeca.com/>
>     >> Tel: +33 (0)1 4111 3034 <01%2041%2011%2030%2034>
>     >> Web: www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com/>
>     >> Twitter: @gatemezing
>     >> About Me:  https://w3id.org/people/gatemezing
>     >> <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
>     Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
>     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
>
>