BIBO is fairly heavily used by schema.org, as per:
That in itself might make W3C hosting an interesting option. I
believe that there would need to be a community group behind it, but
those are easy to set up.
On 3/15/18 1:58 AM, Adrian Pohl wrote:
> the Bibliographic Ontology (Bibo) has been down for several weeks now.
> As this is the second time in two years that the ontology is not
> available for some time, I think it would be best to give hosting of
> this ontology into the hands of a more stable organization. I couldn't
> think of a better fit than DCMI. I asked on the Bibo mailing list
> whether it would be ok for the creators to let DCMI take over Bibo
> hosting and they would be ok with it.
> Now the question is whether DCMI is actually interested in taking over
> Bibo hosting. Bibo has been an important ontology for representing
> bibliographic data in RDF for quite some time. Over time, it got more
> and more competition by ontologies from the library world (RDA, Bibframe
> etc.) and schema.org. Anyway, it is still used in several data sets
> (e.g. several bibliographic data sets from German library service
> centers). Also, it is already linked to DC terms, e.g. in specializing
> some of its properties (e.g. dct:contributor).
> What do you think about taking over the hosting? Is this something DCMI
> could do?
> All the best
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234 (Signal)