Hi Nadja,

Of course, thanks for the pointer. Yes, I'd agree that 19788's ontology be closely reviewed for inclusion. 19788:2 standardizes the  Dublin Core properties, the same I recommend for [[wikidata]] provenance data, the same slated for the [[wikidata]] ontology. But more to your point is that the entire ISO corpus would fit really well if it were viewed as a topic map whose topics and sub-topics can be referenced from [[wikidata]] artifacts such as property definitions.

To me, [[wikidata]] is an opportunity to bring technical communities togethr, not so much an opportunity to create a new one. Your note is a great example of this.

Thanks - john

On 13.06.2012 13:22, Nadja Kutz wrote:

John McClure wrote: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_Maps gives links to iso/iec 13250"

???

There seems to be a misunderstanding. I was having rather the meta descriptions of general ISO items in mind, not the description of a topic map per se. (and apart from that I thought wikidata wanted to use RDF ? )

The ISO site is rather cryptic and most of it is not accessible (see e.g. http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/open/jtc1sc36) however I understood sentences (see http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=50772) like:

"ISO/IEC 19788-1:2011 provides principles, rules and structures for the specification of the description of a learning resource; it identifies and specifies the attributes of a data element as well as the rules governing their use. The key principles stated in ISO/IEC 19788-1:2011 are informed by a user requirements-driven context with the aim of supporting multilingual and cultural adaptability requirements from a global perspective.

ISO/IEC 19788-1:2011 is information-technology-neutral and defines a set of common approaches, i.e. methodologies and constructs, which apply to the development of the subsequent parts of ISO/IEC 19788."

as that the ISO is in the process of turning parts of their database into a machine-readable standard format. So I assumed that 

the "identification of a data element" for learning ressources could be sort of planned to be extendend to all of  (or already have?) their standards, which reaches from screw threads

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51386

over mathematical symbols

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=31897

to copper alloys

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_tc_browse.htm?commid=47228

If that would be the case then companies etc.  could link and conform to standards (here for example an unlinked reference 

to a DIN standard for 

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wärmeleitzahl in a product for insulation: http://isofloc.de/index.php?technische-daten)

That is especially companies could be interested in promoting parts of their technical data in a ISO standartized format (which makes the comparision of technical data of products easier)

so for example crawlers could collect products which set out certain technical specifications. Organizations could

link easier to companies which conform e.g. to social standards etc.

So when I wrote that Wikidata could eventually base their data on the ISO standards then I meant that it

would make sense to have a structural correspondence

between ISO standards and definitions (or e.g. standards from the DIN http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsches_Institut_f%C3%BCr_Normung or other similar organizations)  and the wikidata ontology, because wikidata would for materials etc. anyways have an entry for the corresponding standards.

Friedrich Roehrs wrote:"1c. You're arguing over CHF 200 -- which extraordinarily-cheaply and

fundamentally PROTECTS the MWF from copyright infringement suits? Can
the SNAK architecture provide that reassurance to the MWF community?"

I don't know what you mean by that. As you can see in the ISO links:

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=31895

each item alone costs something in that range.