[ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Sergio Fernández
Hi everybody,

after the intense discussions last weeks, this week we're coming down to
what could be a suitable approach for Commons RDF.

Summarizing, we understand that the Apache Commons project wants to keep
the communication rules as they currently are. Though we think that in
this phase of the Commons RDF project, which focuses on the API design
and actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it is better
to have a more focused community and infrastructure. Therefore we have
come to the conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and
then gradually prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the
larger Apache Commons community. So we invite everybody to join the
project in case you are interested, particularly the current module at
sandbox.

In the following days we plan to discuss the proposal with the Incubator
PMC (we already started to work on a draft http://git.io/F0hi ) with the
clear mid-term goal of coming back graduated as a Apache Commons module.
Since the path is clear, although Andy or myself could do it because we
are IPMC members, I'd like to have a Champion who is also part of the
Commons PMC, any volunteer?

We hope this is a satisfactory solution for everybody. I personally
apologize for the noised caused, but all discussions with you guys were
really good.

Cheers,

--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: [hidden email]
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Benedikt Ritter-4
Hello Sergio,

2015-01-28 17:22 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:

> Hi everybody,
>
> after the intense discussions last weeks, this week we're coming down to
> what could be a suitable approach for Commons RDF.
>
> Summarizing, we understand that the Apache Commons project wants to keep
> the communication rules as they currently are. Though we think that in this
> phase of the Commons RDF project, which focuses on the API design and
> actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it is better to have
> a more focused community and infrastructure. Therefore we have come to the
> conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually
> prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache
> Commons community. So we invite everybody to join the project in case you
> are interested, particularly the current module at sandbox.
>
> In the following days we plan to discuss the proposal with the Incubator
> PMC (we already started to work on a draft http://git.io/F0hi ) with the
> clear mid-term goal of coming back graduated as a Apache Commons module.
> Since the path is clear, although Andy or myself could do it because we are
> IPMC members, I'd like to have a Champion who is also part of the Commons
> PMC, any volunteer?
>

I've thought about getting involved in incubator several times. Sounds like
this is my chance :-)


>
> We hope this is a satisfactory solution for everybody. I personally
> apologize for the noised caused, but all discussions with you guys were
> really good.
>

I think this is a very good solution for everybody. No need to apologize.

Benedikt


>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 660 2747 925
> e: [hidden email]
> w: http://redlink.co
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Sergio Fernández
Hi Benedikt,

On 29/01/15 13:01, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> 2015-01-28 17:22 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:
>> I'd like to have a Champion who is also part of the Commons
>> PMC, any volunteer?
>
> I've thought about getting involved in incubator several times. Sounds like
> this is my chance :-)

Thanks for proposing yourself! :-)

I guess for that we'd need someone who is both Incubator PMC member and
ASF member. The fist would be easy to get, if you are interested I can
nominate you. But the second role is a bit more difficult... You can fin
further details at:

http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Champion

Cheers,

--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: [hidden email]
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Benedikt Ritter-4
Hello Sergio,

2015-01-29 14:44 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Benedikt,
>
> On 29/01/15 13:01, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
>> 2015-01-28 17:22 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> I'd like to have a Champion who is also part of the Commons
>>> PMC, any volunteer?
>>>
>>
>> I've thought about getting involved in incubator several times. Sounds
>> like
>> this is my chance :-)
>>
>
> Thanks for proposing yourself! :-)
>
> I guess for that we'd need someone who is both Incubator PMC member and
> ASF member. The fist would be easy to get, if you are interested I can
> nominate you. But the second role is a bit more difficult... You can fin
> further details at:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_
> Responsibilities.html#Champion


I've already looked into that. I'm neither member of the ASF, not member of
the incubator PMC. I think that this section applies:

"Where the Champion is not a Member of the Foundation (i.e. is an Officer
only), the Champion shall be a member of the PMC of the Sponsor."

Since the sponsor will be the incubator project, I would have to be at
least member of the PMC of the incubator project to be a champion.
Recalling the responsibilities of PMC members [1], I don't think that at
this point I have any oversight over the incubator project. So I don't
think I'm a good candidate for the incubator PMC.
So maybe it's better if someone else steps up (we have people here who meet
the necessary requirements), and I will just join the incubator commons rdf
community and help you that way.

Benedikt

[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles


>
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 660 2747 925
> e: [hidden email]
> w: http://redlink.co
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Sergio Fernández-2
On 29/01/15 15:28, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> So maybe it's better if someone else steps up (we have people here who meet
> the necessary requirements), and I will just join the incubator commons rdf
> community and help you that way.

Yes, having you in the community would be great!

Any other Commons folk that can be our champion for Incubator?

--
Sergio Fernández
Senior Researcher
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
[hidden email]
http://www.salzburgresearch.at

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Andy Seaborne
On 30/01/15 07:45, Sergio Fernández wrote:

> On 29/01/15 15:28, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>> So maybe it's better if someone else steps up (we have people here who
>> meet
>> the necessary requirements), and I will just join the incubator
>> commons rdf
>> community and help you that way.
>
> Yes, having you in the community would be great!
>
> Any other Commons folk that can be our champion for Incubator?
>

Thanks Benedikt!

        Andy

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Stian Soiland-Reyes
In reply to this post by Benedikt Ritter-4
I hope you would still feel welcome to become an unofficial mentor
(teaching us the "Apache Commons way" perhaps) even if you haven't got the
right badges (yet). :)

Other incubator projects have also had unofficial mentors - it's a good way
into Incubator PMC.

On 29 Jan 2015 14:29, "Benedikt Ritter" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Sergio,
>
> 2015-01-29 14:44 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Hi Benedikt,
> >
> > On 29/01/15 13:01, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> >
> >> 2015-01-28 17:22 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:
> >>
> >>> I'd like to have a Champion who is also part of the Commons
> >>> PMC, any volunteer?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I've thought about getting involved in incubator several times. Sounds
> >> like
> >> this is my chance :-)
> >>
> >
> > Thanks for proposing yourself! :-)
> >
> > I guess for that we'd need someone who is both Incubator PMC member and
> > ASF member. The fist would be easy to get, if you are interested I can
> > nominate you. But the second role is a bit more difficult... You can fin
> > further details at:
> >
> > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_
> > Responsibilities.html#Champion
>
>
> I've already looked into that. I'm neither member of the ASF, not member of
> the incubator PMC. I think that this section applies:
>
> "Where the Champion is not a Member of the Foundation (i.e. is an Officer
> only), the Champion shall be a member of the PMC of the Sponsor."
>
> Since the sponsor will be the incubator project, I would have to be at
> least member of the PMC of the incubator project to be a champion.
> Recalling the responsibilities of PMC members [1], I don't think that at
> this point I have any oversight over the incubator project. So I don't
> think I'm a good candidate for the incubator PMC.
> So maybe it's better if someone else steps up (we have people here who meet
> the necessary requirements), and I will just join the incubator commons rdf
> community and help you that way.
>
> Benedikt
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
>
>
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > --
> > Sergio Fernández
> > Partner Technology Manager
> > Redlink GmbH
> > m: +43 660 2747 925
> > e: [hidden email]
> > w: http://redlink.co
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> http://github.com/britter
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Sergio Fernández
On 30/01/15 14:36, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> I hope you would still feel welcome to become an unofficial mentor
> (teaching us the "Apache Commons way" perhaps) even if you haven't got the
> right badges (yet). :)

Well, I'd like to have Benedikt as actual mentor. It happened many times
that a project requests to have a mentor who is not yet an Incubator PMC
member. Then the IPMC internally votes the candidate and issue resolved.

The first step for Benedikt would be su subscribe to [hidden email]

--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: [hidden email]
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Benedikt Ritter-4
2015-01-30 15:02 GMT+01:00 Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>:

> On 30/01/15 14:36, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
>
>> I hope you would still feel welcome to become an unofficial mentor
>> (teaching us the "Apache Commons way" perhaps) even if you haven't got the
>> right badges (yet). :)
>>
>
> Well, I'd like to have Benedikt as actual mentor. It happened many times
> that a project requests to have a mentor who is not yet an Incubator PMC
> member. Then the IPMC internally votes the candidate and issue resolved.
>
> The first step for Benedikt would be su subscribe to [hidden email]


Done.


>
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 660 2747 925
> e: [hidden email]
> w: http://redlink.co
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
http://people.apache.org/~britter/
http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
http://github.com/britter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Reto Gmür-2
In reply to this post by Sergio Fernández
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> after the intense discussions last weeks, this week we're coming down to
> what could be a suitable approach for Commons RDF.
>
> Summarizing, we understand that the Apache Commons project wants to keep
> the communication rules as they currently are. Though we think that in this
> phase of the Commons RDF project, which focuses on the API design and
> actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it is better to have
> a more focused community and infrastructure. Therefore we have come to the
> conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually
> prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache
> Commons community. So we invite everybody to join the project in case you
> are interested, particularly the current module at sandbox.
>
Could you give a link to the discussion of the "we" that came to this
conclusion?

In my understanding there is the possibility of using the commons sandbox.
And we have two proposal for rdf-commons one coming from clerezza and the
other from the community on github. I also see some interests on both sides
two align the proposals. The proposal in the sandbox svn is a first attempt
of such an alignment.


> In the following days we plan to discuss the proposal with the Incubator
> PMC (we already started to work on a draft http://git.io/F0hi )


I've no fundamental objection as having a new project with a narrower focus
than clerezza in the incubator rather than in the commons sandbox. The
crucial is that your incubation proposal mentions exclusively the github
code as starting point. At the clerezza project we have been following the
goal of a common RDF API since incubation as the first goal. We have
addressed issues that are not yet fully addressed in the github proposal
(see the other discussion on blank nodes) and we have been working as an
apache community for more than 5 years.

I'm happy to participate in this project but I would appreciate a more
neutral starting point.

Cheers,
Reto




> with the clear mid-term goal of coming back graduated as a Apache Commons
> module. Since the path is clear, although Andy or myself could do it
> because we are IPMC members, I'd like to have a Champion who is also part
> of the Commons PMC, any volunteer?
>
> We hope this is a satisfactory solution for everybody. I personally
> apologize for the noised caused, but all discussions with you guys were
> really good.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 660 2747 925
> e: [hidden email]
> w: http://redlink.co
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Sergio Fernández
Hi,

On 30/01/15 23:15, Reto Gmür wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Summarizing, we understand that the Apache Commons project wants to keep
>> the communication rules as they currently are. Though we think that in this
>> phase of the Commons RDF project, which focuses on the API design and
>> actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it is better to have
>> a more focused community and infrastructure. Therefore we have come to the
>> conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually
>> prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache
>> Commons community. So we invite everybody to join the project in case you
>> are interested, particularly the current module at sandbox.
>>
> Could you give a link to the discussion of the "we" that came to this
> conclusion?

Well, just read the threads. I'd prefer a "we" including you, but of
course I can only talk from the Commons RDF at GitHib folks. If do not
agree on that, please just put your arguments on the table, and we'll be
willing to discuss them.

> In my understanding there is the possibility of using the commons sandbox.
> And we have two proposal for rdf-commons one coming from clerezza and the
> other from the community on github. I also see some interests on both sides
> two align the proposals. The proposal in the sandbox svn is a first attempt
> of such an alignment.

Of course both project could co-live. But then at some point the Commons
PMC would have to take a decision between both components' proposals:
the one coming out from Incubator and the one from sandbox.

I'm more of the opinion that collaboration is the key for achieving the
challenge of having a Commons RDF component. But of course you're free
of following your personal path.

> I've no fundamental objection as having a new project with a narrower focus
> than clerezza in the incubator rather than in the commons sandbox. The
> crucial is that your incubation proposal mentions exclusively the github
> code as starting point. At the clerezza project we have been following the
> goal of a common RDF API since incubation as the first goal.

Because the main goal is the API itself, and that's we want to initially
contribute, having a clean codebase, both from the technical and IP
point of view.

Personally I've always seen Jena and Sesame as the real implementations.
But for sure the in-memory implementations is one of the points in the
agenda for the project. But step by step, please.

> We have
> addressed issues that are not yet fully addressed in the github proposal
> (see the other discussion on blank nodes) and we have been working as an
> apache community for more than 5 years.

Please, take aside the blank nodes discussion for now. Such single
technical detail is something would be solved later, as soon as the
scope of the project becomes clearer. Giving such level of importance
does not allow you to see the forest for the trees.

> I'm happy to participate in this project but I would appreciate a more
> neutral starting point.

I could say the same about neutrality... The current Commons RDF at
GitHub is the result of several discussions with the tool major Java
toolkits, while I can currently see at sandbox is just your personal
design out of the Clerezza adapters.

Then, I have to ask, should I include you in the proposal? See the
current draft at https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF which it's
a draft we can discuss together.

Best,

--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: [hidden email]
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Reto Gmür-2
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 30/01/15 23:15, Reto Gmür wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Sergio Fernández <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Summarizing, we understand that the Apache Commons project wants to keep
>>> the communication rules as they currently are. Though we think that in
>>> this
>>> phase of the Commons RDF project, which focuses on the API design and
>>> actively involves the developers of existing toolkits, it is better to
>>> have
>>> a more focused community and infrastructure. Therefore we have come to
>>> the
>>> conclusion that incubation is probably the best path, and then gradually
>>> prepare the Commons RDF community for working within the larger Apache
>>> Commons community. So we invite everybody to join the project in case you
>>> are interested, particularly the current module at sandbox.
>>>
>>>  Could you give a link to the discussion of the "we" that came to this
>> conclusion?
>>
>
> Well, just read the threads. I'd prefer a "we" including you, but of
> course I can only talk from the Commons RDF at GitHib folks. If do not
> agree on that, please just put your arguments on the table, and we'll be
> willing to discuss them.
>
>  In my understanding there is the possibility of using the commons sandbox.
>> And we have two proposal for rdf-commons one coming from clerezza and the
>> other from the community on github. I also see some interests on both
>> sides
>> two align the proposals. The proposal in the sandbox svn is a first
>> attempt
>> of such an alignment.
>>
>
> Of course both project could co-live. But then at some point the Commons
> PMC would have to take a decision between both components' proposals: the
> one coming out from Incubator and the one from sandbox.
>
> I'm more of the opinion that collaboration is the key for achieving the
> challenge of having a Commons RDF component. But of course you're free of
> following your personal path.
>
>  I've no fundamental objection as having a new project with a narrower
>> focus
>> than clerezza in the incubator rather than in the commons sandbox. The
>> crucial is that your incubation proposal mentions exclusively the github
>> code as starting point. At the clerezza project we have been following the
>> goal of a common RDF API since incubation as the first goal.
>>
>
> Because the main goal is the API itself, and that's we want to initially
> contribute, having a clean codebase, both from the technical and IP point
> of view.
>

> Personally I've always seen Jena and Sesame as the real implementations.


They sure are two of the best and most popular triplestore arounds,
nevertheless an API should map the standards to Java, not concrete
implementations. That's what clerezza wants to do, and if that's your goal
we should join our forces.


> But for sure the in-memory implementations is one of the points in the
> agenda for the project. But step by step, please.
>
Fully agree. Clerezza is NOT about providing inmemory imlementations.


>
>  We have
>> addressed issues that are not yet fully addressed in the github proposal
>> (see the other discussion on blank nodes) and we have been working as an
>> apache community for more than 5 years.
>>
>
> Please, take aside the blank nodes discussion for now. Such single
> technical detail is something would be solved later, as soon as the scope
> of the project becomes clearer. Giving such level of importance does not
> allow you to see the forest for the trees.
>

I think it is the most important difference between the two proposed APIs.
Or what else do you criticize in the clerezza core RDF API?




>
>  I'm happy to participate in this project but I would appreciate a more
>> neutral starting point.
>>
>
> I could say the same about neutrality... The current Commons RDF at GitHub
> is the result of several discussions with the tool major Java toolkits,
> while I can currently see at sandbox is just your personal design out of
> the Clerezza adapters.
>
Out of the clerezza adapters?

The API is the API in use in clerezza for >5 years, with some changes we
discussed at clerezza to accommodate the changes that came with RDF 1.1 and
with some renamings to make the names more intuitive. For the renaming
inspiration have also been taken from your proposal.

The fact that the clerezza project as well as third parties could provide
adapters for various triplestores exposing other APIs is an indication that
the API is suitable.



> Then, I have to ask, should I include you in the proposal? See the current
> draft at https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF which it's a draft
> we can discuss together.
>

Sure, add me to the list. If there is a possibility we should avoid
duplication between clerezza and this project, I don't think the use cases
are so different that we need two APIs.


Cheers,
Reto

>
> Best,
>
>
> --
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 660 2747 925
> e: [hidden email]
> w: http://redlink.co
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ALL] [RDF] Commons RDF approach

Sergio Fernández
Hi,

On 03/02/15 18:55, Reto Gmür wrote:
>> Personally I've always seen Jena and Sesame as the real implementations.
>
> They sure are two of the best and most popular triplestore arounds,
> nevertheless an API should map the standards to Java, not concrete
> implementations. That's what clerezza wants to do, and if that's your goal
> we should join our forces.

Well, for me the main motivation behind this simple library is revise an
historical incompatibility issue in the Java world. In particular,
commons RDF aims to provide a type-safe, non-general API that covers RDF
1.1.

The simple implementation in-memory is something that has been
discussed, and we already have a prototype. So I see Clerezza providing
another implementation, just like Jena or Sesame will do, that would be
great indeed.

>> Please, take aside the blank nodes discussion for now. Such single
>> technical detail is something would be solved later, as soon as the scope
>> of the project becomes clearer. Giving such level of importance does not
>> allow you to see the forest for the trees.
>
> I think it is the most important difference between the two proposed APIs.

Then it's a good point for further discussion, as many other aspects
will be.

>> I could say the same about neutrality... The current Commons RDF at GitHub
>> is the result of several discussions with the two major Java toolkits.
>
> The API is the API in use in clerezza for >5 years, with some changes we
> discussed at clerezza to accommodate the changes that came with RDF 1.1 and
> with some renamings to make the names more intuitive.

Well, we cannot compare the usage of that API in comparison with Jena or
Sesame, we have to be honest about that. We designed the API based on
the experience and backgrounds from developers of both libraries (Andy
and Peter, I'm just a 'facilitator'), but I'm sure yours is valuable too.

>> Then, I have to ask, should I include you in the proposal?
>
> Sure, add me to the list.

Nice to have you on board! Just added your name to the current draft at
Incubator's wiki: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CommonsRDF

Cheers,

--
Sergio Fernández
Partner Technology Manager
Redlink GmbH
m: +43 660 2747 925
e: [hidden email]
w: http://redlink.co

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]