Talk:Simple Knowledge Organization System

(Things are different now) History too detailed?

edit

The main content of the SKOS description was quite old, so I replaced it. But based on how old that material was, it would probably be helpful if someone validated every link in the document.

I also felt like the History was too detailed, but I didn't have enough insight to edit it down. See next comment which seems related.

--metaJohnG (talk) 22:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

Too many details of work in progress?

edit

It may be a bit problematic to include so many details of the work in progress because of Wikipedia:No original research but I'm not deeply enough involved in the English Wikipedia. I consider the Quick Guide to Publishing a Classification Scheme on the Semantic Web that I wrote not NPOV enough to include in the article. -- Nichtich 07:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

  • Maybe you are too scrupulous. Concerning Wikipedia:No original research, all references given are public, so there is nothing original in the article body itself. And neutrality, well, a W3C working draft is what it is, but there again it's only a reference, nothing is included in the article body itself. I try to be as exhaustive as possible with references. universimmedia 12:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Batch of copyedits

edit

Have just swept through quickly, making a number of very minor copy edits to make the article read a little better. Sometimes I rewrote phrases and ideas I didn't entirely understand as expressed, so feel free to revert or clarify further.

Well done to the contributors for filling it out to this point.

--Huge Bananas 01:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

Editing footnotes

edit

If a footnote is outmoded, what is the update procedure?

24 SWOOP A Hypermedia-based Featherweight OWL Ontology Editor, developed by Mindswap - Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab Semantic Web Agents Project.

The SWOOP editor is now open source located here:

--jwalling 02:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply