Difference between revisions of "Oct. 3, 2005"
From Metadata-Registry
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
1. Commitment to Resource Description Framework (RDF) and its <b>possible</b> implications: | 1. Commitment to Resource Description Framework (RDF) and its <b>possible</b> implications: | ||
| − | * RDF servers/data stores-- | + | * RDF servers/data stores--[http://www.joseki.org/ Joseki], [http://www.openrdf.org/ Sesame], [http://idealliance.org/proceedings/xtech05/papers/04-02-04/ Kowari] etc.) |
* RDF query--[http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20041012/ SparQL] | * RDF query--[http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20041012/ SparQL] | ||
2. SKOS as "default" scheme generation | 2. SKOS as "default" scheme generation | ||
Revision as of 09:20, 3 October 2005
Agenda and Notes for Telecon, Oct. 3, 2005
This conference call needs to be sharply focused on infrastructure/technology questions
1. Commitment to Resource Description Framework (RDF) and its possible implications:
2. SKOS as "default" scheme generation
3. (Time permitting) Immediate next steps in preparation for meeting in Ithica:
- Completion of first interation of draft Use Cases
- Begin work on RDF resource modeling
- Agent class (stemming from Use Cases)
- Organizations
- Maintainers
- Registry Managers
- System Administrator
- Visitor
- SKOS (working vocabulary representation)
- Concept Schemes
- Concepts
- Descriptive
- Administrative
- Agent class (stemming from Use Cases)
