Re: Time Ontology and SSN ontology published as REC, WG is done!

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 18:14:07 +0200, Joshua Lieberman  
<jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com> wrote:

> Congratulations, and special thanks to Phil and Francois for guidance  
> through the W3C labyrinth.

Indeed.

> There were certainly many challenges of alignment, scope, and  
> functionality to be overcome, but there were also some technical hurdles  
> of RDF / >OWL capabilities for distributed modular vocabularies that  
> seemed avoidable. It would be very useful, I think, to do some sort of  
> debrief on what >tools having to do with ontology membership, perhaps  
> connected to named graph management, might mitigate this in the future.

Yes. There are a number of efforts to make vocabularies, and while  
individuals often walk away with ideas about how to make it easier next  
time - or next time the underlying specs are revised - it would be helpful  
to have a written record of such thoughts.

cheers

Chaals
>
> Cheers,
>
> Josh
>
> Joshua Lieberman
> Senior Researcher
> Harvard Center for Geographic Analysis
> jlieberman@fas.harvard.edu
> +1 (617) 431 6431
>
>> On Oct 19, 2017, at 7:43 AM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello participants of the Spatial Data on the Web Working Group,
>>
>> As forwarded by Armin in previous email, the Semantic Sensor Network  
>> Ontology has been published as a final W3C Recommendation >>today, a  
>> happy ending after a bumpy journey on the standardization track:
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/REC-vocab-ssn-20171019/
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-ssn/
>>
>> But that's not the only good news for today. It so happens that the  
>> Time Ontology in OWL specification has also been published as a >>W3C  
>> Recommendation, another happy ending after a fairly long journey  
>> started more than 10 years ago:
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/REC-owl-time-20171019/
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/
>>
>> The Working Group is now officially done, yoohoo! Congratulations to  
>> everyone, chairs, editors, participants, external contributors, >>and  
>> Phil without whom nothing would have happened!
>>
>> For all things practical, you can now consider the Working Group as  
>> closed and you should all jump onto the Spatial Data on the Web  
>> >>Interest Group, who will have its first call next week:
>> https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdwig/2017Oct/0001.html
>>
>> That said, due to a shortcoming in the W3C Process, which requires the  
>> presence of a Working Group for spec maintenance, please >>note that we  
>> will most likely keep the Spatial Data on the Web Working Group alive  
>> for some time, with the expectation that it will not >>do anything on  
>> top of being the entity that publishes possible errata on the specs.  
>> The errata themselves should be discussed in the >>Interest Group.
>>
>> If all goes well, the 2018 version of the Process document will fix the  
>> issue, and the Working Group can be properly closed then.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Francois.
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Chaals is Charles McCathie Nevile
find more at http://yandex.com