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

[Ivan Frade]

Hi

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Roberto Guido <bob4mail at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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?
>

Lets use the XESAM architecture:

1) Ontologies: I propose to move to nepomuk based ontologies, maintained in
the XESAM project. so yes, it includes fork.
2) Query language: To use SparQL with the Update and some operation
extensions (wihtout that it is useless).
3) Communication protocol: No alternatives here, it is a point where we can
innovate in XESAM.

And a general reorganization of the web. I still find it confusing :)


>
> 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.
>

Everybody agrees that we need a project like XESAM, but the project must be
up-to-date. For that it needs changes in various levels:

* Coordination of the project: we have the tools and the infrastructure, but
they need a reorganization.
* Contents of the project: The 3 points i wrote above.

I hope this helps, and soon we will be discussing how to proceed with these
changes.

Ivan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xesam/attachments/20090426/7fde27a9/attachment.htm