Discussion proposal ESWC2017 workshop on Enabling Decentralised Scholarly Communication

proposal.md

Best practices for self-publishing scholarly metadata

For the ESWC2017 workshop on Enabling Decentralised Scholarly Communication, I'm proposing a discussion session on with the following topic: How to best mark up scholarly articles and webpages that we publish ourselves, in order to result in maximally useful data? I aim to discuss questions such as those I presented at LDOW2017, which include the following:

• How do we prioritize what to publish as RDF?
• What data belongs in a FOAF profile, and what data on a webpage?
• What ontologies should we use?
• Should we describe the same concepts using multiple ontologies?
• Should we reuse identifiers, mint our own, or both?
• Should we publish data in named RDF graphs?

The proposed outcome would be (a way to) a guidance document for self-publishers of scholarly metadata.

Thanks, @csarven, made it specific for self-publishing from the beginning. A thirty minute timeslot along the lines of what you write would be great!

Hey @RubenVerborgh, we're thinking of organising the schedule so that you have 10-15 minutes to introduce this topic and then we have a general discussion session following yours and Dave DR's talks along the lines of "decentralisation - why do we need third party publishers" (the inverse being related to your topic, ie. "why can't we publish this stuff ourselves") , perhaps with you and Dave at the front panel-style, for the remaining time (~30 mins). Does that sound okay to you? We can narrow down / focus the title of the discussion topic some more if that's helpful.

Well, my intention was to have something really interactive, where I say as few as possible and let everything come from the audience. So in that sense, panel-style might not be the best format, as then it's typically the panel talking. My idea was to collaboratively come up with a list of best practices, rather than defending the topic of "why self-publish".

So I don't think that's a good fit for what I have proposed, but I'm very flexible, so I can adapt to your proposal or I'm equally happy not having this topic if it doesn't fit the schedule. I'll be at the workshop in any case 😄

Oh I see, I think I misunderstood slightly.. no we can work around what you have said. We can turn the first discussion session into a proactive session as you describe, led by you, that's no problem. Seems very useful to do what you suggest and come up with a list. I'll update the discussion session title to reflect that.

Looks excellent, thanks a lot!