On 10/27/2011 6:21 PM, Peter Yim wrote:
Considering the percentage of data that Cory has in mind now residing
*on* vs *off* the web, it does not necessarily follow that this
problem belongs in the W3C either.
Over time more and more data is clearly on the Web/Internet, so
looking forward the W3C makes more sense to me than anywhere else.
I think the problem belongs to the few who care enough to push the
agenda, and a community whose members are willing to put their smarts
into tackling it.
Exactly why I suggest the W3C, there are already WGs working aspects
of the problem while the OMG cannot get an RFP out the door and
Ontolog is talking about talking about it. I have no doubt that the
Ontolog Forum might have a lot to usefully say about the matter.
However, when I suggested something as simple as owning a Wikipedia
page about the definition of 'Ontology' that raised concerns about
resources and commitment. In an area that may need standards, best
practices, reference implementations, etc. that concern doesn't bode
well wrt commitments to push the agenda to completion (my personal
opinion, of course). I'd be quite happy to be proven wrong, and the
Summits have produced some interesting results, but think for now
I'll stick with my original recommendation to Cory.
Still, I think I'd describe the Ontolog Forum more as an instigator
than a contender:-)
Managing Director and Consultant
TopQuadrant Limited. Registered in England No. 05614307
UK +44 7788 561308
US +1 336-283-0606