+1 for publishing structured CfPs (by having guidlines as Ruben sugested)
I am not sure if Schema.org or other existing vocabularies have a
suitable schema for CfPs.
Let's not make this complicated. A simple plain text email works just fine.
On 03/30/2016 09:37 AM, Ali Khalili wrote:
+1 for publishing structured CfPs (by having guidlines as Ruben sugested)
I am not sure if Schema.org or other existing vocabularies have a
suitable schema for CfPs.
I remember, once we did an analysis of the SemWeb mailing list looking
specially for CfPs. The results showed a growing number of
heterogeneous CfPs.
I found the video of our idea for 'A Semantic Ecosystem for CfPs' at
http://videolectures.net/eswc2012_wiljes_khalili_semantic_ecosystem/
There are potentially a plenty of applications if structured CfPs are
provided!
Best,
Ali
------------------------------------------------
http://ali1k.com
Department of Computer Science &
The Network Institute,
Knowledge Representation
& Reasoning Research Group,
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
http://krr.cs.vu.nl/
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Besides being the primary W3C outlet for SW related topics,
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> is in my
feeling also the primary outlet for the research community in
this area. So, spreading calls for papers there is as natural
as using dbworld in the databases community.
My feeling is that of we ban CfPs on this list, we cut one of
the major distribution channels for CfPs in our community.
I absolutely agree. In fact CfPs are one of the reasons why I am
on this mailinglist.
Best,
Krzysztof
On 03/30/2016 05:58 AM, Axel Polleres wrote:
Besides being the primary W3C outlet for SW related topics,
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> is in my
feeling also the primary outlet for the research community in
this area. So, spreading calls for papers there is as natural
as using dbworld in the databases community.
My feeling is that of we ban CfPs on this list, we cut one of
the major distribution channels for CfPs in our community.
One way around that (and I am not sure myself whether I'd be
in favor of that or just happy with the status quo) would be
to - following the example of dbworld - allow CfPs only to be
sent through a (captcha-protected) Web form, and block/ban
CfPs from individual users only, but still distribute them
through this list.
just my two cents,
Axel
--
url: http://www.polleres.net/ twitter: @AxelPolleres
On 30 Mar 2016, at 13:21, Phil Archer <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear all,
A perennial topic at W3C is whether we should allow calls
for papers to be posted to our mailing lists. Many argue,
passionately, that we should not allow any CfPs on any
lists. It is now likely that this will be the policy, with
any message detected as being a CfP marked as spam (and
therefore blocked).
Historically, the semantic-web and public-lod lists have
been used for CfPs and we are happy for this to continue
*iff* you want it.
Last time we asked, the consensus was that CfPs were seen
as useful, but it's time to ask you again.
Please take a minute to answer the 4 question, no need for
free text, survey at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/1/
Thanks
Phil.
--
Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755 <tel:%2B44%20%280%297887%20767755>
@philarcher1
--
Krzysztof Janowicz
Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060
Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ <http://geog.ucsb.edu/%7Ejano/>
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
--
Krzysztof Janowicz
Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060
Email: [email protected]
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
