+1 on all of Tom's responses.
But, should we also consider populating http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/
with this data?
Bridget
On 07/09/2014 11:31 AM, Tom Elliott wrote:
> Please see responses seriatim
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 6:10 AM, Gabriel Bodard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> 1. If this list is, or could be expanded to be, a general list of
>> vocabularies, do we need the term "RDF" in the title? (Even though
>> many of the entries will be at least partly represented in RDF.)
> +1 on removing RDF from the title
>
>> 2. Would you be willing to help us populate this list with more links
>> to resources, standards, ontologies and other authorities?
> yes
>
>> 3. If you think this would be useful (and the appropriate venue) would
>> you like to add sections and structure to this document that you would
>> like to see populated with more vocabularies, even if you do not know
>> what they are yet? (I have started this task with a couple of lists of
>> kinds of vocabulary I think would be useful—text and object data
>> [category, material, object type], and person data [occupations,
>> relationships].)
> yes
>
>
> Tom Elliott, Ph.D.
> Associate Director for Digital Programs and Senior Research Scholar
> Institute for the Study of the Ancient World (NYU)
> http://isaw.nyu.edu/people/staff/tom-elliott
|