Re: URI note

Eric, Yes, I remember how much work was involved in writing last year's BMC-TR paper. I didn't mean we're immediately ready for writing another big paper. I'm more looking to the future. If we can establish a high quality of work/collaboration, we can then aim at writing paper(s) for submis

Re: URI note

Quoting Matthias Samwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Maybe we/you could turn it into a journal publication / review? I guess that > would cause a sudden increase of interest by HCLSIG members with an academic > background :) > It would be nice if HCLSIG can produce a paper (or more than one paper) in

Re: URI note

Maybe the URI note can be published under the next charter? Maybe we/you could turn it into a journal publication / review? I guess that would cause a sudden increase of interest by HCLSIG members with an academic background :) Sorry that I could not deliver the feedback I promised. Too many

URI note

Eric informs us that the URI note will not be published as an interest group note, the reason being that the interest group has not had a chance to discuss it in its current form and will not do so before the charter closes at the end of this month. It is close to being finished, with

Re: URI note snapshot available

Thanks for the very detailed read! I will do my best to do justice to your comments. Just to address one of your points: The reason for emphasizing non- web naming systems and de-emphasizing URIs is to say that the real goal is clear communication, and that using URIs doesn't give you any

Re: URI note snapshot available

Hi Jonathan, Comments on http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/notes/uris/ version of 28 April 2008 11:57 -0400. General thoughts: - It's been a while since I read a draft, but this looks like great progress. - Overall it feels heavy on the rationale and light on getting to the point of what to do

RE: Re: URI note snapshot available

il 28, 2008 11:01 AM > To: Jonathan Rees > Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > Subject: Re: Re: URI note snapshot available > > * Jonathan Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-25 13:08-0400] > > > > I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same location: >

Re: Re: URI note snapshot available

but should be able to read > "something", such as XML or RDF or even a binary file, yes? This is > what Jonathan's document intends to say - "useful information". > Xiaoshu >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, 28 A

Re: URI note snapshot available

ormation". Xiaoshu Mark On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:01:17 -0700, Eric Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * Jonathan Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-25 13:08-0400] I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same location: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/

Re: URI note snapshot available

esolve to a web page as well as to whatever the URI actually represents, especially when my agent can't read... Mark These are Eric's words. The URI note just says "the authors on balance advise HTTP" and gives its reason. I'm not in a good position to tell you what you should or shouldn't do. Jonathan

Re: Re: URI note snapshot available

ally represents, especially when my agent can't read... Mark On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:01:17 -0700, Eric Prud'hommeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: * Jonathan Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-25 13:08-0400] I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same

Re: Re: URI note snapshot available

* Jonathan Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-25 13:08-0400] > > I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same location: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/notes/uris/ > > If you're planning on attending the next HCLS meeting/telecon (Monday?) &

Re: Re: URI note snapshot available

* Jonathan Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-25 13:08-0400] > > I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same location: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/notes/uris/ > > If you're planning on attending the next HCLS meeting/telecon (Monday?) &

Re: URI note snapshot available

://www.deri.ie/ http://www.semantic-web.at/ - Original Message - From: "Jonathan Rees" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 7:08 PM Subject: Re: URI note snapshot available I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same location: http://www.w

Re: URI note snapshot available

I've been posting revisions to the URI note to the same location: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/notes/uris/ If you're planning on attending the next HCLS meeting/telecon (Monday?) please take a look as the meeting approaches. Otherwise, comments are welcome, but I suggest you r

URI note snapshot available

Some of you may have heard that the URI note has been revised since the last public draft last October. This is indeed the case, and its authors are working on polishing the new version. If you would like to examine a snapshot of our work it is available here: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls

uri note comments

I am reviewing revision 40: http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/40/ The points of current confusion relate to inconsistencies with the way uri's are created essentially, and as is stated the main factor for keeping things alive and well is that servers stay up with a consistent s

Re: comments on the uri note

On 06/11/2007, Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter, > > > From: Peter Ansell > > [ . .. . ] > > Suppose two people come up with slightly different, but mutually > > useful, definitions at the same time and, before an authority has > > declared them to be the same

RE: comments on the uri note

Peter, > From: Peter Ansell > [ . .. . ] > Suppose two people come up with slightly different, but mutually > useful, definitions at the same time and, before an authority has > declared them to be the same, want to use both of the definitions in > queries, and advertise them so they can be used

URI note draft for review prior to F2F

Dear HCLS, Alan and I will be presenting the HCLS "URI Note" at Friday's face-to-face. As homework in preparation for this we would like for anyone attending to look over the latest draft. It is still very much a work in progress (>60 to-do items at present count) but is

Re: comments on the uri note

raft of something. If you're one of those > people please wait a while for the dust to settle. > > On Nov 3, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Michel_Dumontier wrote: > > > Hi all, > > I read the latest URI note [1], and here are some comments: > > > > [1] http://sw.neu

RE: comments on the uri note

Jonathan, I regret not mentioning this in the first place, but thanks for the time and effort to put the note together. It makes debating it so much easier ;-) In general, I think my objections are related to philosophical recommendations that are difficult or impossible to follow. I would expec

Re: comments on the uri note

r the dust to settle. On Nov 3, 2007, at 3:02 PM, Michel_Dumontier wrote: Hi all, I read the latest URI note [1], and here are some comments: [1] http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/ Future reviewers - always please include the draft number (35, 36, etc.). Thanks for taking the

comments on the uri note

Hi all, I read the latest URI note [1], and here are some comments: [1] http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/ "A usage spec for a name is simply a graph that is designated as one that specifies when the name should and shouldn't be used" Given that RDF semantics are open