- From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:17:20 +0200
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: > Hi Dan, all, > > Unfortunately I have to send regrets for the telecon today, but I look > forward to the WG either accepting the plan for the PORT/THES TF [1] or > expressing any objections so we can get a revised plan accepted as soon as > possible. > > Thanks David for your comments, and welcome too! > > In a nutshell, what I'm hoping for is to be able to launch 'SKOS-Core phase > 2 development' as soon as possible, with the full backing and involvement of > this WG, then a furious couple of months of raising issues and trying to > solve them, culminating in a couple of notes. > > With regards to the papers from Amsterdam [2] and Maryland [3] on thesauri > and semweb, I would definitely like to draw on this work and think it is > extremely valuable, but I'm not sure exactly how to fit it in initially, > primarily because it deals with 'thesauri' that are not particularly > 'thesaurus-like' (NCI and MeSH are semi-ontologies, and Wordnet is Wordnet). I suggest to use just the method part of the Amsterdam paper. The transformation steps (1a 1b 2a 2b are not specific for the examples. As a methodology veteran I think such pragmatic process support is useful for developers. Guus > > > Perhaps the proposed 'Guide to Using SKOS-Core for Thesauri' note could be > divided into a 'Quick Start' section and an 'Advanced Features' section ... > with some parts of the 'Advanced Features' section inspired by the Amsterdam > and Maryland work? > > Just as a thought for the longer-term ... with things like Mesh and NCI, we > get into the hazy world of the relationship between thesauri and ontologies, > modelling in RDF things that are half-way in between, and also the issue of > migrating thesauri to ontologies - areas that probably deserve special > attention (and their own note(s)?) > > But I feel like there are lots of basic problems for us to solve first - > like a well-documented RDF schema that can cope with all the common features > of the more standard thesauri. > > Anyway, I look forward to the outcome of today's telecon. > > Yours, > > Alistair. > > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0068.html > [2] http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/papers/Assem04.pdf > [3] http://www.mindswap.org/papers/WebSemantics-NCI.pdf > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org >>[mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dan Brickley >>Sent: 22 July 2004 12:15 >>To: Ralph R. Swick >>Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org >>Subject: Re: [ALL] proposed agenda 22 July telecon >> >> >> >>* Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org> [2004-07-21 21:25-0400] >> >> >>>6. TF UPDATES (5-15 min each) >>> >>>6.1 OEP (Deb) >>> >>>6.2 PORT (DanBri) >>> >>> FW: [PORT/THES] Concrete actions >>> From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> >>> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:26:13 +0100 >>> >> >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0068.html >> >>I agree with David [1] (welcome, David!) that Alistair's >>plan of 9 July >>looks good. I've seen no objections, and would like to confirm our >>support of the plan during this call. Although as I write the telecon >>looms, the action plan has been before the group for over a >>week now, so >>I don't believe it would be premature to ask the WG to agree to it. >> >>I propose a couple of explicit amendments which I guess would >>be covered >>anyway, but I'd like to get them recorded. Basically I am happy >>adopting the SKOS proposals as our strawman starting point, but would >>like to make sure the comments/papers from Mindlab and >>Amsterdam (sorry >>for the vague references; couldn't find URLs, digging...) get >>addressed. >> >>I am also happy using public-esw-thes@w3.org as the main list for >>working out the details for the thesaurus vocab, so long as this WGs >>list gets regular updates and we subscribe all interested WG members >>(ie. TF members) to that list. I'd be happy to handle >>practicalities of >>that. We should be able to decide the mailing list question separately >>to the question of adopting Alistair's workplan. If anyone objects to >>doing the bulk of the PORT/THES vocab design on >>public-esw-thes (a list >>populated with thesaurus experts collaborating around SKOS), now would >>be a good time to note your preference. >> >>So when we get to the PORT/THES portion of the agenda, I >>would like to >>ask that we adopt >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0068.html >>as our plan for progressing this taskforce, or record and act upon any >>objections raised during the telecon. If we do this, it should be >>possible to get moving towards Working Draft publication through the >>summer. >> >>How does that sound, folks? >> >>Dan >> >> >>[1] >>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0079.html >> > > -- Free University Amsterdam, Computer Science De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands Tel: +31 20 444 7739/7718 E-mail: schreiber@cs.vu.nl Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2004 10:17:48 UTC