Re: Implementation evidence - Producers

I cannot speak for the whole group either, but similar to the feedback from some of my co-editors, the intention of our modelling choices in SOSA was that the core will eventually be “absorbed” into schema.org for maximum impact. I think with proper attribution as was done with GoodRelations there shouldn’t be any concern from the working group. However, I will ask to put that on the agenda for our last SDW general meeting.

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 10:19 am
To: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>
Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation evidence - Producers


I'd be happy to explore that, but it would be good to have some (even informal) encouragement from the SDW WG that this would be a welcome development. We did something similar with a DCAT-based Dataset design a while ago and it seems that we inadvertently caused some frustration as it was seen as a fork. It would be a pity to try to adopt a design based on SOSA (or SOSA/SSN) and for that to be seen in a similar way. Do you think the WG would welcome such an effort?

Dan

On 7 June 2017 at 00:37, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au<mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>> wrote:
Hi Dan,

SSN http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/ is now in rec-track and we are to collect implementation evidences in the next 4 weeks. In fact, we need to show demonstrated use in at least two producer implementations and two consumer implementations, with producer implementations, according to our interpretation of the Director’s words meaning that there needs to be two ontologies that extend each term of SOSA/SSN.

You indicated earlier in the working group that you would likely take the simple SOSA core and integrate all or parts of it in Schema.org. Would that be something you could kick off in the next 4 weeks with maybe a Change request to schema.org<http://schema.org>?

Cheers,
Armin