Re: Semantic Web Interest Group now closed

Just one more point to add to Ralph's and Dan's points on this thread.

Keeping this list open as it is is, of course, not a problem whatsoever. As Ralph said, we thought the best is to let the community decide, and the reactions so far are pretty clear. However,

- We periodically raise the issue on what should happen with the various CFP-s, doctoral position announcements, etc. There are times when those dominate the mailing list. The last time this was discussed (I think Phil initiated this issue) there was a mild preference to let them come instead of using some existing filters used on other mailing lists at W3C. In fact, there is a filter active on the list, and that is yours truly:-): I get 4-5 such mails a week that come in as target for moderation which is done by me, and I have to use my best judgement whether those CFP-s are relevant to this list or not (roughly half of the mails are not). It is not a big deal and if the community decides that they should remain, I am happy playing the bad cop's role. But I must admit I personally find it a bit bothersome to see those mails in my mailboxes.  (Yes, I know, my life is not centered around research any more, so me being bothered is not necessary relevant…)

- As a bona fide interest group the SWIG had the possibility to publish Interest Group notes. It did not happen very often, but it did happen in the past (e.g., the microdata to RDF conversion, some vocabularies, etc.). That is not possible any more. Which means that it would still be worthwhile to set up a Community Group to replace the SWIG: that would give the possibility, if so decided, to publish CG reports with a somewhat official W3C status. (It may also give the group some extra facilities like Wiki pages.) Keeping this mailing list as 'the' list of the CG should be possible.

Thanks to all of you!


> On 15 Oct 2018, at 21:32, Ralph Swick < <>> wrote:
> On 2018-10-15 11:09 AM, David Booth wrote:
>> 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 <> 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?
> Ivan and I have been in conversation with DanBri for some time as the formal closing of the Interest Group was pending.  This specific question was part of that discussion; whether to continue the big semantic-web distribution list as a Community Group resource or use the opportunity to do some housekeeping.
> Ivan and I decided to let the community decide -- and those discussions are welcome on the list.
> And again, I can't overstate our appreciate to DanBri for his gentle facilitation of the discussions on this list, jumping in as the IG chair and list moderator only when it was critical to do so.
> -Ralph
>> 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 Booth

Ivan Herman, W3C 
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: <>
mobile: +31-641044153

Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2018 08:39:13 UTC