Re: Gathering deployment experience for SWIG basic geo namespace (use of Swoogle etc...)

(sorry for the noise; re-sending due to typo in To: line! sorry...)

Dan Brickley wrote:
> Hi folks
> 
> meta-matters:
> 
> I'm sending this to the public W3C Geo XG list, bcc:'d to the Member 
> list (a pattern that puts this on the Google'able public record and 
> makes it share-able with SWIG, without exposing the Member list address 
> to spammers etc).
> 
> I encourage followups from XG members to use the same pattern. Hmm, I've 
> also added the SWIG list, semantic-web@w3.org to the cc: list. SWIG 
> members with an interest in the namespace described in 
> http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/ might want to sign up to the Geo XG's 
> public list, see http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/geo/charter and
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/geo/ -> 
> lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-geo/
> (basically, just send mail with 'subscribe' in Subject: line, to 
> public-xg-geo-request@w3.org, as with all W3C public lists).
> 
> /meta-matters
> 
> So ... I just dropped a note into the UMBC blog in response to a post 
> from Tim Finin, cc:'d. Copying it below too, since it's in the blog 
> moderation queue.  Basic idea is that it would be great to know a lot 
> more about how the SWIG basic geo namespace has actually been used in 
> publically available data.
> 
> For those who missed the announcement, there is now an incubator group 
> at W3C who are working to come up with improvements to the basic geo 
> vocab's design, based in particular on experience with the GeoRSS 
> effort. I'm very pleased to see this happen, as it brings together 
> several communities with complementary interest and expertise. It also 
> gives us a practical testbed to explore some issues around the upgrade 
> and evolution of deployed namespaces. A process not dissimilar to 
> rebuilding a ship while sailing it :)
> 
> XG members and other RDF geo implementors --- see below for a sketch of 
> the questions we might want answered w.r.t. the basic geo namespace. I'm 
> sure there must be others, especially drawing on georss experience. 
> Perhaps this thread could live in public-xg-geo, and then I'll summarise 
> into the ESW wiki somewhere if there's much to summarise...
> 
> Thanks for any thoughts!
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Dan
> 
>  From comment on 
> http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2006/07/17/semantic-web-terms-defined-and-used/ 
> 
> [[
>    1.   Dan Brickley Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
>       July 18th, 2006 at 3:40 am
> 
>       Interesting! Do you do requests? W3C has just chartered a Geo XG 
> who want to update the ad-hoc ‘basic geo’ namespace created by SW 
> Interest Group members. I’d be very interested to know more about how 
> the namespace described in http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/ has been used 
> in practice (perhaps after consulting the new XG to find out what 
> questions to ask!).
> 
>       In particular, we might want to know things like: which namespaces 
> it often co-occurs with. What other properties its classes are used as 
> domain or range of. Whether people use appropriate values (dots vs 
> commas, negative values, etc), whether literals are all plain or if folk 
> have used datatypes.
> 
>       Also given the nature of the data, I’d guess that there would be 
> significant interest in getting data dumps that could be plotted on maps 
> and so-on. But mainly I’m most interested simply in how the namespace 
> has been used. Hmm can you plot adoption/usage over time, too?
> 
>       Sorry if the request seems cheeky, but you can’t blame me for 
> asking ;)
> ]]
>

Received on Tuesday, 18 July 2006 08:07:05 UTC