+1 to keep the list up "as is" Axel -- Dr. Axel Polleres url: http://www.polleres.net/ twitter: @AxelPolleres > On 15.10.2018, at 17:20, John Leonard <john.leonard@incisivemedia.com> wrote: > > I prefer Linked Data as a term (I've never met anyone who understands what the Semantic Web is outside of people who are actually creating it whereas Linked Data is self-explanatory, at least in terms of getting over the first hurdle), but does Linked Data have close enough to the same meaning to satisfy everyone? > > > From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org> > Sent: 15 October 2018 16:09 > To: xueyuan; semantic-web@w3.org > Subject: Re: Semantic Web Interest Group now closed > > On 10/15/2018 10:49 AM, xueyuan wrote: > > This message is to inform you that the Semantic Web Interest Group > > is now closed, [ . . . . ] > > With the introduction of Community Groups we now encourage the > > participants in the IG forum to > > establish Community Groups to continue the conversations. > > Given that the semantic-web@w3.org email list has served the community > very well, I think it would be helpful for continuity if a Community > Group could take over the existing email list. Is this possible? And > if so, does this mean that we should now create such a community group? > > My one hesitation in continuing with the existing list is that the > choice of the name "Semantic Web" has long been recognized as a > marketing mistake, so perhaps it is time to say goodbye to it. "Linked > Data" is a substantially better term. > > Thoughts? > > David BoothReceived on Monday, 15 October 2018 15:27:38 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:56 UTC