[open-linguistics] Call for ideas about organisational structure for OWLG until April 12th
hellmann at informatik.uni-leipzig.de
Tue Mar 26 18:33:23 UTC 2013
Thanks for this email. It is quite long, but well worth reading it, as
it is a good analysis.
I came up with a more refined list of responsibilities and also a list
of expected results to check, whether the person is taking his/her
responsibilities serious. I think, we should demand some reliable
commitment, but keep the tasks minimal, so not to overburden the people.
I see the difference between our views much clearer now. Probably, both
is the best, to have individual discipline, as well as a fixed group of
people who motivate and coordinate contribution.
"Admin" is too technical, I would rather go for "curator" for
content-focussed tasks or coordinator, if it is used with "with" as in
"coordinates with OKFN", e.g. for reporting.
Here is my incomplete list:
Please refine, this is just a first shot. It is focused on managing our
resources and it certainly neglects the issues raised by Christian.
However, imagine, if we, as a group, were to produce all the things in
the expected results column. I would be very proud of our community.
All the best,
Am 26.03.2013 13:28, schrieb Christian Chiarcos:
> Dear all,
> first of all, thanks to Sebastian and Jonathan for their summaries.
> As for Sebastian's list, I would like to add one additional issue,
> that is
> - *Aggregate and facilitate communication*: one or few persons who
> keep track of what is going on, who feel responsible to make sure that
> there is something going on at all, who should be addressed if issues
> arise that pertain to the OWLG as a whole, and who redistribute this
> information through the website/blog, the mailing list and at the telcos.
> Of course this covers some of the tasks that Sebastian mentioned,
> which are however, much more specific, and actually, somewhat
> orthogonal to this task. Maybe we should distinguish between
> responsibilities for concrete tasks and the responsibility to maintain
> an overview to make sure the group works as whole. I felt the latter
> was somewhat missing since the second half of last year.
> Technically, this would be what a coordinator would be supposed to do,
> but as here are several communities involved, that normally don't come
> together at all, it would be recommendable that we appoint *several
> people* to this role that interface with their specific communities,
> say, the Semantic Web community, typology, and NLP/computational
> linguistics (so far, these have been most active, but suggestions for
> additional fields and candidates welcome). The main obligation would
> be to participate in *every* telco, and every possible meeting, and to
> stay in close contact with the other to keep up with the developments
> in case a telco/meeting is missed.
> The number of people should not be too high, say, five at most, as
> telcos with 10 or more participants (we have had some fluctuation
> there) tend to be increasingly impractical.
> Actually, we had a very similar, but informal structure before, during
> and after LDL, and it worked pretty well for a while, just that
> without formal responsibilities, we stopped having telcos and meetings
> since the MLODE workshop, when people got occupied with more concrete
> tasks such as converting data sets, preparing data set descriptions
> and publishing their results. Actually, this was a consequence of our
> success, because the number of active people substantially increased
> and we had to specialize, loosing global coherence a little out of
> sight. Appointing a few people to compensate this natural
> particularization process seems necessary to keep the group working.
> From a terminological point of view, I would prefer not to use
> hierarchy-loaded terms like "chair" or "coordinator", because we like
> to stay open to everyone who is interested in participating, but
> rather talk about "administrators", as this job also should come with
> some technical responsibility (inseparable from the general task to
> "facilitate communication"), such as mailing list administration
> (aside from OKFN people currently Sebastian Hellmann and me) or web
> site administration (aside from OKFN people currently Steve Moran,
> Sebastian Hellmann and me).
> All the best,
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:50:52 +0100, Sebastian Hellmann
> <hellmann at informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
>> Dear OWLG group,
>> you can find the minutes of our telco here: http://okfnpad.org/OWLG
>> In the telco, we concluded that we need an organizational structure
>> for our group. The main rationale is that there seems to be a lot of
>> activity on the one hand, but there seems to be a lack of information
>> and coordination. Many of the tasks and todos are neither handled nor
>> kept track of and the group effort is stagnating.
>> Here are the main issues, we are trying to tackle with an
>> organisational structure for the group:
>> - how do we keep the web site up to date? (including blog posts)
>> - who schedules telcos?
>> - who can people ask, if they want to organize an OWLG workshop?
>> - how do we organize a procedure for issuing letters of support?
>> - ....
>> The Open Knowledge Foundation does not have any requirements for
>> working group structures, so we are free to choose our own way. Also
>> there doesn't seem to be any best practice. We therefore would like
>> to ask you to make proposals on how to organize this group. The need
>> is certainly obvious, as we seem to be stagnating.
>> Please post any problems, issues, wishes or proposals to this list
>> until April 12th, so we can discuss this problem and make an informed
>> all the best,
Dipl. Inf. Sebastian Hellmann
Department of Computer Science, University of Leipzig
Projects: http://nlp2rdf.org , http://dbpedia.org
Research Group: http://aksw.org
More information about the open-linguistics