Re: Survey: Use of this list for Calls for Papers

+1 for publishing structured CfPs (by having guidlines as Ruben sugested)
I am not sure if Schema.org or other existing vocabularies have a suitable
schema for CfPs.
I remember, once we did an analysis of the SemWeb mailing list looking
specially for CfPs. The results showed a growing number of heterogeneous
CfPs.
I found the video of our idea for 'A Semantic Ecosystem for CfPs' at
http://videolectures.net/eswc2012_wiljes_khalili_semantic_ecosystem/
There are potentially a plenty of applications if structured CfPs are
provided!

Best,
Ali
------------------------------------------------
http://ali1k.com

Department of Computer Science &
The Network Institute,
Knowledge Representation
& Reasoning Research Group,
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
http://krr.cs.vu.nl/

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
wrote:

> Besides being the primary W3C outlet for SW related topics,
>> semantic-web@w3.org is in my feeling also the primary outlet for the
>> research community in this area. So, spreading calls for papers there is as
>> natural as using dbworld in the databases community.
>>
>> My feeling is that of we ban CfPs on this list, we cut one of the major
>> distribution channels for CfPs in our community.
>>
>
> I absolutely agree. In fact CfPs are one of the reasons why I am on this
> mailinglist.
>
> Best,
> Krzysztof
>
>
>
> On 03/30/2016 05:58 AM, Axel Polleres wrote:
>
>> Besides being the primary W3C outlet for SW related topics,
>> semantic-web@w3.org is in my feeling also the primary outlet for the
>> research community in this area. So, spreading calls for papers there is as
>> natural as using dbworld in the databases community.
>>
>> My feeling is that of we ban CfPs on this list, we cut one of the major
>> distribution channels for CfPs in our community.
>>
>> One way around that (and I am not sure myself whether I'd be in favor of
>> that or just happy with the status quo) would be to - following the example
>> of dbworld - allow CfPs only to be sent through a (captcha-protected) Web
>> form, and block/ban CfPs from individual users only, but still distribute
>> them through this list.
>>
>> just my two cents,
>> Axel
>>
>> --
>> url: http://www.polleres.net/  twitter: @AxelPolleres
>>
>> On 30 Mar 2016, at 13:21, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> A perennial topic at W3C is whether we should allow calls for papers to
>>> be posted to our mailing lists. Many argue, passionately, that we should
>>> not allow any CfPs on any lists. It is now likely that this will be the
>>> policy, with any message detected as being a CfP marked as spam (and
>>> therefore blocked).
>>>
>>> Historically, the semantic-web and public-lod lists have been used for
>>> CfPs and we are happy for this to continue *iff* you want it.
>>>
>>> Last time we asked, the consensus was that CfPs were seen as useful, but
>>> it's time to ask you again.
>>>
>>> Please take a minute to answer the 4 question, no need for free text,
>>> survey at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/1/
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Phil.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Phil Archer
>>> W3C Data Activity Lead
>>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>>>
>>> http://philarcher.org
>>> +44 (0)7887 767755
>>> @philarcher1
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Krzysztof Janowicz
>
> Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
> 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060
>
> Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
> Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
> Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
>
>
>