Re: [ADTF] decision on criteria for inclusion of apps and demos

hi all,

I've incorprated Ivan's brief editorial comment into the taskforce
homepage:

http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebBestPracticesTaskForceOnApplicationsAndDemos

I'm unclear how to incorprate Steve Pepper's comment because now that I
look, I can't find anywhere that we say that it is a list of
"Semantic Web Applications and Demos" per se (though it's implied).

I've done a general update of that page to reflect the recent discussions,
and if there are no objections I intend to go ahead and start promoting it
and persuading people to create DOAP files etc (and get them to put them
here: http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebDOAPBulletinBoard).

There are a few files there already, and it's clear that we will have to
pick carefully the ones we include. I think there might also be an
implicit assumption that we're looking for colourful visual apps and demos
rather than (for example) APIs - any thoughts on this?

Here's some examples I created earlier:

http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/

Libby

On Tue, 3 May 2005, Libby Miller wrote:

>
>
> I've had comments from Steve Pepper and Ivan Herman, and there were some
> discussions at the last telescon. Any more comments before I summarise
> (especially from members of the ADTF taskforce)?
>
> thanks,
>
> Libby
>
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Libby Miller wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > hi all,
> >
> > At the tech plenary in Boston, the ADTF group was given the authority to
> > decide the criteria for inclusion in the task force's list of Semantic Web
> > applications and demos. The main criteria are here:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2005/04/07-swbp-minutes#item07
> >
> > and the minutes they came from are here:
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-swbp-minutes#item03
> >
> > The plan I suggested at the f2f is on the wiki (from the 'Proposal'
> > section):
> >
> > http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebBestPracticesTaskForceOnApplicationsAndDemos
> >
> > As a group, we need to make a decision about the criteria for inclusion
> > described above (the mechanics of the proposal are a separate issue).
> >
> > I suggest we leave the matter open for discussion for a week and then if
> > necessary have a telecon on 28th, or if there's consensus there may be no
> > need.
> >
> > Speak up if you've got an opinion :)
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Libby
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

Received on Thursday, 5 May 2005 16:45:45 UTC