Much like Renato, I also don't see the problem with multiple namespaces:
if you take Dan's message to its logical conclusion, then everything on
the Semantic Web should be in a single namespace. In fact, namespaces
provide modularization, because addresses are not only relevant to
Persons but
Hi all:
Harry, Renato, and I will meet on Monday, June 1, 2009, at 6.00 p.m. in
the lobby of the ESWC conference hotel for the respective f2f meeting.
Anybody who is on site and available is of course invited to join.
Best
Martin
Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Hi all:
Why don't we organize a
One good idea would be to have one of our invited speaker sessions
be to clear up the current vCard RDF situation. We could also invite
the PortableContacts people and people invovled in the new VCard IETF
activity. Ideally, I'd like to see vCard harmonized with FOAF+newVCard
On 18 May 2009, at 21:28, Harry Halpin wrote:
What I would like to see: A simple version that would be similar to
Norm's work that would be easier to SPARQL, and a complex version
based on Renato's work that let one use the various RDF containers,
with Renato, Norm, and myself editing, and a
On 14/5/09 02:03, Renato Iannella wrote:
On 12 May 2009, at 18:39, Dan Brickley wrote:
If others amongst you will be there, why don't you get together and try
to make some progress there? I suggest the Social Web XG as a mechanism
for tracking this effort, even if the document surfaces as a
And of course, since yesterday, we have to take Google's vcard ontology
into account:
http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/rdf.xml
Cheers,
Peter
Harry Halpin wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Renato Iannella ren...@nicta.com.au wrote:
On 12 May 2009, at 18:39, Dan Brickley wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Peter Mika pm...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
And of course, since yesterday, we have to take Google's vcard ontology into
account:
http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/rdf.xml
And the rest of their ontologies into account, but they look like
straightforward subset of the
Hi all:
Why don't we organize a vocabulary management task-force meeting at
ESWC in Crete? I think many of you indicated already that they will attend.
I guess we should have at least 3 - 4 hours or an open-end working
dinner ( I prefer the first).
Here is a doodle poll for it:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Peter Mika pm...@yahoo-inc.com
wrote:
And of course, since yesterday, we have to take Google's vcard
ontology into
account:
http://rdf.data-vocabulary.org/rdf.xml
Oh Dear - yet another one!
And the rest of their ontologies into account, but they look
On 15 May 2009, at 01:50, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote:
Why don't we organize a vocabulary management task-force meeting
at ESWC in Crete?
We should ping the SWIG and SWXG groups as well - but as a vCard/RDF
ad-hoc meeting...
Harry - can u do that?
Cheers... Renato Iannella
NICTA
On 12 May 2009, at 18:39, Dan Brickley wrote:
If others amongst you will be there, why don't you get together and
try
to make some progress there? I suggest the Social Web XG as a
mechanism
for tracking this effort, even if the document surfaces as a SWIG
Note,
since SWXG meets regularly
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Renato Iannella ren...@nicta.com.au wrote:
On 12 May 2009, at 18:39, Dan Brickley wrote:
If others amongst you will be there, why don't you get together and try
to make some progress there? I suggest the Social Web XG as a mechanism
for tracking this effort,
On 12/5/09 01:41, Renato Iannella wrote:
Can we move forward on the idea of creating a W3C vCard/RDF Interest
Group Note (that merges the W3C Member submission and the An Ontology
for vCards) as a task of the Semantic Web Interest Group?
BTW, I will be at the ESWC in Heraklion in a few weeks,
Hi All,
Unfortunately I won't be there in Heraklion, but I would encourage you
to get together there... The difficult part seems to be
social/organizational/political arrangement, not the technology itself.
Best,
Peter
Dan Brickley wrote:
On 12/5/09 01:41, Renato Iannella wrote:
Can we
At 10:39 AM 5/12/2009 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote:
On 12/5/09 01:41, Renato Iannella wrote:
Can we move forward on the idea of creating a W3C vCard/RDF Interest
Group Note (that merges the W3C Member submission and the An Ontology
for vCards) as a task of the Semantic Web Interest Group?
...
... I
Hi Renato, Tim,
I completely agree with Renato and wanted to emphasize that my original
email was not meant in any way to diminish the importance of the earlier
work he did on vCard in RDF or to say that the new note is perfect. In
fact, the last Social Web camp gave Harry, Dan, and myself a
At 12:22 PM 5/11/2009 +0200, Peter Mika wrote:
... I wouldn't mind seeing the W3C to become the organization
where ontologies are developed in a collaborative fashion
and hosted in a long term,
I'd like W3C to be *one of* the organizations that do this. That is,
I wouldn't advocate for an
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Ralph R. Swick sw...@w3.org wrote:
At 12:22 PM 5/11/2009 +0200, Peter Mika wrote:
... I wouldn't mind seeing the W3C to become the organization
where ontologies are developed in a collaborative fashion
and hosted in a long term,
I would be very interested in
The problem with Member Submissions and W3C Notes is an unclear update
mechanism and a lack of maintenance. Vocabs will evolve, and I'm not
sure if the Rec model really works for them. The Note model works
even less, with the Note being published once and then generally
sticking around
Can we move forward on the idea of creating a W3C vCard/RDF Interest
Group Note (that merges the W3C Member submission and the An Ontology
for vCards) as a task of the Semantic Web Interest Group?
BTW, I will be at the ESWC in Heraklion in a few weeks, so maybe an
opportunity to discuss
On 11 May 2009, at 13:19, Tim Berners-Lee wrote:
This process has not been done in a an RDF Calendaring group, as
there has not been apparent energy from the community (so far) for a
WG to be formed.
It was just done under an Interest Group.
Hence a bunch of community drafts, no working
21 matches
Mail list logo
