Re: SW Best Practices WG - draft charter for discussion

Guus, this looks great. I think this could be incredibly useful.

Focus 1: Supporting initiatives for publishing ontologies looks similar
to our work on the RDF Calendar vocabulary; my only criticism is that
I think it may take longer than 2-4 months to convert some of these to
RDF, at least if a process is used similar to the RDFiCal one, namely:

- developing usecases
- roundtripping from the vocabulary to its RDF equivalent
- creating a series of testcases and mechanically generating the schema
from them
- mapping parts of the schema to other vocabularies, with illustrative
examples
- interacting with the relevant communites using email and perhaps IRC
- creating demonstrators that use the vocabulary

Not every vocabulary will be suited to this approach, but we do think it
is a good one, although it can be time-consuming.

More information about the approach is at

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/dev_workshop_report_2/#outcomes
http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal

Libby

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Guus Schreiber wrote:

>
> Graham Klyne wrote:
>
> >
> > At 09:53 12/11/03 +0900, Karl Dubost wrote:
> >
> >> Thought I'm not sure about the time-frame
> >>         The time frame is short-term, e.g.  2-4 months
> >
> >
> > I'm glad I'm not the only person to mis-read that ;-)
> >
> > (Read closely and that's the time-frame for a *task force*, not the WG.)
>
> Yes, Graham is right: the 2-4 month time frame indeed applies to task
> forces. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll make sure this gets rewritten
> in the next version.
>
> Guus
>
> >
> > #g
> >
> >
> > ------------
> > Graham Klyne
> > For email:
> > http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
> >
>
> --
> Free University Amsterdam, Computer Science
> De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
> Tel: +31 20 444 7739/7718
> E-mail: schreiber@cs.vu.nl
> Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/
>
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2003 13:22:38 UTC