- From: Franconi Enrico <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 21:30:43 +0000
- To: Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com>
- CC: Axel Polleres <axel@polleres.net>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <3DFF564E-6CCA-43D7-9696-7A6BA2D1909D@inf.unibz.it>
+1 Enrico On 15 Oct 2018, at 17:36, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com<mailto:mfhepp@gmail.com>> wrote: +1 Martin --------------------------------------- martin hepp www: http://www.heppnetz.de/ email: mhepp@computer.org<mailto:mhepp@computer.org> Am 15.10.2018 um 17:27 schrieb Axel Polleres <axel@polleres.net<mailto:axel@polleres.net>>: +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<mailto: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<mailto:david@dbooth.org>> Sent: 15 October 2018 16:09 To: xueyuan; semantic-web@w3.org<mailto: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<mailto: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 Booth
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2018 21:31:09 UTC