Hi All,
I second Tim's suggestions. This is a really community effort to move
this important SW component forward.
Best,
-Kei
Tim Clark wrote:
Hi All,
I think Susie is performing a valuable service which we all respect
and which may help to advance the discussion. HOWEVER...
... I STRONGLY RECOMMEND that no-one consider the Bio-RDF call Monday
as anything else than a very preliminary discussion FOR INITIAL
EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, which needs to be followed up by much more
in-depth and authoritative discussions on LSID and other identifier
schemes.
I am certain that Susie never intended the Monday call to be anything
else than that, i.e. a preliminary educational discussion.
I recommend that we in HCLS work, after the conclusion of ISMB, to
prepare a more inclusive and authoritative discussion on this topic,
with all the key players involved. We ought to aim to leverage ALL
the good work people have done in this area, LSID in
particular. Discussions on this topic that do not include - in a
well-organized way - some of the key contributors to the practice of
bioinformatics and semantic web, have to be considered
non-authoritative and therefore not a basis for making important
decisions.
Again, I am very sure Susie would share this opinion. This is just a
caution to people around the W3C but from outside bioinformatics --
who may not realize how much serious work on distributed identifiers
has been done by people who cannot participate in Monday's call -- and
whom we very much need to consult.
Best
Tim
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Clark
Director of Research Programs
Harvard University Initiative in Innovative Computing
60 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138
http://iic.harvard.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On SaturdayJul 29, 2006, at 9:25 AM, William Bug wrote:
Hi All,
I would also give a strong DITTO to the leadership Susie is providing
on this extremely important issue. Getting clarification on the pros
& cons is essential to catalyzing broader adoption of SWTech.
I would also add I'm extremely grateful to ALL the experts who've
been presenting clear arguments and information related to this
issue. It's all been extremely valuable. Susie is working very hard
to collate this information and provide this as a resource to the
community. As Alan mentioned, this will remain an ongoing and
critical debate, and it will be of value to us all to help provide a
clearing house for documentation related to to this issue on the
BioRDF Wiki pages.
The group of people listening in on this debate here on this list are
a self-selected population of technically astute folks with
implementation of SWTech on their minds - and probably on their
immediate list of TODOs, if not already on their list of previous
achievements. Most will be very knowledgeable of the general
technical issues and will be likely to dig into the details presented
on both sides of the argument. I have found all the details
extremely illuminating - especially the thorough background and
references provided by Sean and the specifics given regarding the
debates the TAG has had on this issue.
I think I can assure Carole no one here would be likely to take the
achievements of those who've implemented LSID-based systems - and ARK
and the others - lightly - or those who might, would be doing
themselves and the communities they represent a great disservice.
I look forward to Monday and the follow-up discussions both on the
list, in future TCons, and on the HCLSIG-BioRDF Wiki.
Cheers,
Bill
On Jul 29, 2006, at 8:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(who very much appreciates Susie's efforts to
coordinate)
Ditto on that!
jb
Quoting Alan Ruttenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>:
Susie shouldn't take any blame for this - The meeting is
one in a
series, is well announced, and would certainly have been
rescheduled
if, like, anyone with an interest had bothered to
request it with
adequate advance notice.
There's nothing particularly special about this meeting.
If others with
interest in the subject want a further meeting to discuss
things then
we should do that.
Regards,
Alan
(who very much appreciates Susie's efforts to
coordinate)
On Jul 28, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Carole Goble wrote:
By the way I have already lodged an objection to Susie
that to have
such a telecon when many people who actually, like, use
the stuff for,
like, real are at ISMB2006 in Brazil and will not be
able to
participate. Like Doh!
Carole
Bill Bug
Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer
Laboratory for Bioimaging & Anatomical Informatics
www.neuroterrain.org
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy
Drexel University College of Medicine
2900 Queen Lane
Philadelphia, PA 19129
215 991 8430 (ph)
610 457 0443 (mobile)
215 843 9367 (fax)
Please Note: I now have a new email - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This email and any accompanying attachments are confidential.
This information is intended solely for the use of the individual
to whom it is addressed. Any review, disclosure, copying,
distribution, or use of this email communication by others is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please notify us
immediately by returning this message to the sender and delete
all copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
