[Xesam] Nepomuk/Xesam future (was Re: condition of 1.0 ?)

[Roberto Guido]

On Friday 24 April 2009 17:22:08 Jamie McCracken wrote:
> at this time so xesam does not look a viable standard at the moment
>
I can accept this, the most important point is to admit it.

Next question is: would ever be Xesam a viable standard?

Proposal from Ivan (please, correct me!!!) is to fork the Nepomuk ontology and 
maintain it in a community-driven structure, defining then the common API to 
access information. Is this possible? Is this a solution? Is this in the 
interest? Would "relevant trackers" agree to apply what specified here?

What I'd like to see is to avoid a new failure as in Xesam 0.X: if a 
standardization is possible let's work to define that, otherwise close this 
project and move efforts in other directions.

-- 
Roberto -MadBob- Guido
http://claimid.com/madbob