Re: Implementation evidence - Producers

Dan,

It might help for the group to endorse a specific path or procedure for SOSA - in - schema.org <http://sosa-in-schema.org/>, perhaps adoption as opposed to derivation. It would be unfortunate if users had to specify the “W3C” or the “Schema.org <http://schema.org/>” version of a SOSA concept.

—Josh

> On Jun 8, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks - it would certainly be helpful if the WG could include some resolution in its minutes, expressing support for the idea of other schema efforts (such as schema.org <http://schema.org/>) basing their designs partially or fully on SOSA (and SSN?). From the schema.org <http://schema.org/> side we'll certainly explore this enthusiastically, but it would be nice to be officially encouraged :) 
> 
> On 7 June 2017 at 03:49, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>> wrote:
> 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 <http://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 <mailto:danbri@google.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, 7 June 2017 at 10:19 am
> To: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au <mailto:armin.haller@anu.edu.au>>
> Cc: "public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org <mailto: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/ <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
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>