RE: [ALL] proposed agenda 22 July telecon

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).


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
>

Received on Thursday, 22 July 2004 10:19:50 UTC