Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-artifact

[Rex Brooks <rexb@starbourne.com>]

Hi Manos.

I was thinking of attempting to build the Topic Map, XMLS and RDFS 
separately, but simultaneously, as we go through this process of 
examining and evaluating the xml schema elements. That is mostly 
because the XML Schema is what we settled on pursuing long ago now.

Since it appears that it is going to proceed more slowly than I 
thought as each element opens up arenas of discussion such as we have 
seen in the first three elements: address, artifact and bodyLocation. 
I don't expect to even attempt any kind of finality for any of these 
elements in this first pass through the straw man schema. What I am 
looking for is a first working draft level of understanding and 
codification. That doesn't mean that we can't actually come up with a 
working recommendation specification with it, just that it will 
always be open to revision and extension.

Basically, what I am trying to do is to pull together some active 
discussions and keep us moving forward, at least in the sense of 
proceeding through a method of looking at what we have and what we 
turn up in this pass. I'm hoping to inspire our subcommittees, me 
included, to start looking more closely at what these application 
areas really need in the Base Primary XML Schema and I am hoping we 
can perhaps continue to pull in more interest, some of which I hope 
will be interested in joining you in the RDF Schema effort, and as we 
spoke about a while back, some of that interest may spring from the 
Topic Maps effort.

I'm doing a lot of hoping here, but we have actually attracted a few 
new participants lately, and I would like to maintain some momentum 
through the summer vacation/conference season.

I have a thought that might help this. Could you arrange, maybe just 
before and then after the Semantic Web Conference, a chat to discuss 
what that activity is attempting?

We can hold it on your schedule, and I will be there regardless of 
whether anyone else does. It might also be good for our folks to get 
an idea of what a truly international effort actually entails, in 
terms of real time collaboration. This is also an ongoing goal or 
objective for me personally. Maybe someday we can actually get away 
from an America-centric, or even Euro-centric viewpoint and achieve a 
Human-centric viewpoint. When we were doing this kind of thing 
through Sandy Ressler's About.com site for the Web 3D Consortium's 
Content Development Working Group, there were times when we actually 
had Australia, Europe, Hawaii, and both East and West Coast US live 
simultaneously, so I know it is possible.

Anyway, I hope your classes finish well for you, and I hope to chat 
with you again soon.

Ciao,
Rex

At 12:36 PM +0300 5/24/02, Emmanuil Batsis (Manos) wrote:
>Rex Brooks wrote:
>
>>   If I could get Manos to explore it as a way to build a Topic Map 
>>of Associations for our xml elements, it would probably also be 
>>useful for helping build an RDF Schema as we go along.
>
>
>Maybe, maybe not. IMHO, it would be better to build it in a familiar 
>structure first; that would be RDF(S). Using a topic map may be a 
>really good idea, but the overhead would probably supersede it's 
>offerings at this point as far as I'm concerned.


--