Geo ontology needs
Is GeoPriv constructing relationship and featuretype ontologies?
John Goodwin of OS expressed concern about establishing geospatial ontologies best practices along with the ontology proposals
Suggestion to ask Jo Walsh about the ontology construction / RDF definition
Discussing now the RDFa problem - elegant but invalid
Other options for tagging HTML in terms of both scraping methods and in terms of ontology extraction. For example, would it be good to use <object> for access by browser plug-ins (Openlayers plugin?) Should we advocate <span> or <div> tags because they're valid XHTML, even as a hack?
Or is <meta> , <link> cleaner although not currently schema-valid? What would give maximum, well, ubiquity.
Schuyler: I would like to make sure we keep thing simple, and then scale up, as timbl suggested
Joshua:: Yes, but one of the design challenges is to make it a good foundation for those who want to build on it. An initial problem is expressing "simply" something which encompasses both GeoRSS Simple and GeoRSS GML It appears there is no inherently good way to do this. As with XML Schema, we just have to define both serializations and then state in a comment that they are equivalent.
Schuyler: what do you mean by "not inherently good"? You mean, expressing GeoRSS Simple in a way that it appears to be a subset of GeoRSS GML?
Joshua: Either that or expressing GeoRSS Simple as a contraction, a shorthand for GeoRSS GML.
[End of minutes]