Re: [freew3:25] Re: Linguistic Semantic Web gTLDs & meetings in Geneva

Dear Daniel

>Some comments. Unfortunately, I won't have much time in the next few weeks to 
>spend on this new initiative.
>- Metadata can be stored anywhere at anytime: in the document inline, in the 
>protocol (e.g. http) request, in a third party server, so the idea of 
>reserved/sponsored dns tld seems overly restrictive to me.
There is no question to restrict the use of metadata.
On the contrary, starting from "safe havens",
use of metadata could be spread further.

it must be understood that the enforcement of an ontology, or
a specific set of interoperable ontologies, within a gTLD,
is simply the consequence of the need to communicate
at a semantic level : ie. to build a semantic network

The Web is built upon the enforcement at a procedural level
with HTML ( although Microsoft find itself strong enough
to defy the acid test and the W3C ).
Is the W3C going to highlight this point at the IGF ?
I hope so, because I did so during the WSIS,
but with limited success since I was almost alone to do so.
What has been done at the procedural level must be
done at the semantic level.
What is proposed is a governance proposal in order
to agree on a set of ontologies within
specific areas so that semantic "networks" can be operationaL
If there other governance proposals in that direction,
that would be interesting to hear.

The time is propitious with the rise of M2M ( Machine to Machine)

>- W3C has been involved in WSIS from day 1, in particular for the Web 
>Accessibility Initiative. Not just me but also Judy Brewer and Danny Weitzner.
It is true that Tim Berners Lee  participated to some ceremonial events
before the WSIS in Geneva, and I guess also in Tunis.
In fact, during the first phase of the WSIS, after Prepcom2,
, I had some  exchange of mails with Tim Berners Lee urging the W3C
to participate.
It is fair to say that the W3C was not much involved in the negotiations
ie the PrepComs, when the texts are voted.
The W3C was not involved in the WGIG. ( )
To me, it seems ridiculous to discuss ( if not decide)
 about the Internet and tbe Web
without the W3C being involved.
Now, the W3C has become recently quite involved, as  you can see :
Daniel Dardailler has done a magnificent job.

>- We're not much in the light wrt UN/WSIS/IGF for 2 main reasons: the issues of 
>open standards,
it is hot, too hot to handle,
as with  interoperability which is now in the Tunis texts
thanks in part to my own efforts.
Much more could have been achieved if there had been more
people with technical knowledge and willing to fight.

> ipr, official recognition of non-gov blessed specification, etc, 
>aren't very hot in these circles yet.
Please check
and all the fights of Free Software activists.

>- And second: our std policy resources are spread very thin already.
Yes,  you told me in Geneva about the situation, I understand,
 but  this is terribly important.
Completely wrong decisions can be taken, mostly because of

> Just to 
>give you an idea, there's only me to go to an ICANN board f2f in L.A., to the 
>IGF in Geneva, and to a UN/CEFACT meeting, in Geneva as well, all in the same 
>week. And I am currently in sick leave after knee surgery :)
Your heroic efforts were noticed coming with a leg in bad shape,
,and you must be thanked for your dedication

Best regards


>Dr. Francis MUGUET wrote:

Francis F. MUGUET  Ph.D
World Tour of the Information Society (WTIS)

UNMSP project :

World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
Civil Society Working Groups
Scientific Information :  chair
Patents & Copyrights   : co-chair
Financing Mechanismns  : web

Scientific Information Developement Laboratory :
Knowledge Networks and Information Society
32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE
Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19  Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82

MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
Associate Publisher

Received on Friday, 5 May 2006 20:47:43 UTC