- From: Dr. Francis MUGUET <muguet@ensta.fr>
- Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 23:09:53 +0200
- To: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Dear Sandro > > Would this be any different, functionally, from having a whitelist? it would tend towards the same functionality, but not with the same efficiency. Politically, having a "list", whether white or black is hard to sell to Civil Society, it does not seem politically correct, and it would raise suspicion concerning the control of the list. > Someone could run an organization, "The Semantic Web Site > Certification Authority" or some such, and the organization would > provide (on a website, of course) a list of all certified URLs. The W3C has been following a little this path with the certification of HTML code, with a little logo, but this does seem to have been followed much by web sites. Concerning web browsers, we are witnessing that Microsoft with IE7 is "openly" defying the W3C http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5813897.html > > I guess the difference is in branding and momentum -- if you can get a > gTLD that would focus attention on the organization, and focus is > important for an effort like this. Yes. > I suggest that if you want to > proceed with this plan, you start off with the whitelist approach, and > once you have a proven track record, then perhaps you apply for a > gTLD. In normal circumstances, and without political leverage, this would have been a wise advice, but, during a window of oppurtinity that is going to close on November 16, we have a unique chance to propose this solution to the world with a non-zero chance that it could be adopted as a recommendation of the WSIS, ie at the UN level, above ICANN. It would not mean that ICANN would necessarily follow the recommendation but the political pressure would be intense, personnally, I believe that ICANN is not going to oppose the idea, but on the contrary support it, while it is fighting now for its own survival. But, I am not going to propose the overall governance of the SWgTLDs to be only in the hands of ICANN but in a multi-stakeholder partnership where ICANN could keep an operational role, and where the W3C would be welcome as a certification authority of RDF/OWL and future development of the SW concepts. For each specific extension, concerned stakeholders will be included. This is not going to be a commercial operation. The secret weapon that is not detailled yet on the site is the .EQUI extension. This is conceived for a worldwide equitable marketplace. The price of the domain name is going to be less expensive for developping countries, and would include, besides, an online tutorial, a couple of hours of hotline for them. I spoke of the concept with a few african diplomats, they were enthusiastic. Best regards Francis -- ------------------------------------------------------ Francis F. MUGUET KNIS/ENSTA Pôle de Développement pour l'Information Scientifique "Réseaux de la Connaissance et Société de l'Information" Scientific Information Development Laboratory "Knowledge Networks & Information Society" (KNIS) ENSTA 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19 Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82 muguet@ensta.fr http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet mirror http://www.muguet.org MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals Associate Publisher http://www.mdpi.org http://www.mdpi.net muguet@mdpi.org muguet@mdpi.net World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS) Civil Society Working Groups Scientific Information : http://www.wsis-si.org chair Patents & Copyrights : http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair Financing Mechanismns : http://www.wsis-finance.org web UNMSP project : http://www.unmsp.org WTIS initiative: http://www.wtis.org ------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 7 October 2005 21:00:35 UTC