Thomas Baker wrote:-
[...]
> From your description of SWAG, I think we all picture such
> systems ideally as particular views on an open and semantically
> coherent metadata environment.

Yes, this is the aim. However, practise rarely follows theory, and there
are indeed many problems to be faced when working on anything that can be
described as "open and semantically coherent"; not least of these is
decentralization. For example, you write:-

[...]
> Doing this effectively presupposes a shared sense of grammar, and
> the grammar for DCMI must evolve compatibly with other grammars
> of the Semantic Web.

This is true. The DCMI has set out one of the most important gramamrs of
all semantically (Dublin Core), as there was a great need for
bibliographical indexing in an SW environment. Therefore, DCMI has the
privaleged position of "recognition", although this is something that the
SW should eventually not require. In other words, it is not the creation of
vocabularies which carries the greatest importance, rather it is how we use
them. One of the aims of SWAG is to provide information on using
vocabularies semantically, and the prerequisite for that is sharing of data
in a decentralized Web system. It is my hope that by working cooperatively,
DCMI, W3C, SWAG, and many more groups like us can achieve these aims.

As to Aarons question:-

> how do we move forward together?

I suggest that we make sure that our work remains interoperable, which I'm
sure it will anyway. It would also make sense to share work where
appropriate, and keep each other updated as to significant developments in
either project. I welocme any further suggestions, and how we can best go
about enhancing this cooperative spirit.

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
SWAG WG Member
@prefix : <http://infomesh.net/2001/01/n3terms/#> .
[ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] has :homepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/>;
:worksOn <http://purl.org/swag/> .