petermr's blog

I’ve tried to keep politics off this blog, but I have to raise a question and use this blog to do a tiny amount to help change the world.

(How) do I vote tomorrow?

For non-UK citizens you are probably revelling in the schadenfreude of seeing the corruption scandals in the UK House of Commons. Do not revel, but read on – because what is at stake is the democracy of the world and you might be able to help.

Essentially we have discovered that our democratic system – and its decision-making – is rotten. We are in denial. And we are headless.

We are heading into the glorious future of a digital world where nearly everything is possible and where values of truth, community, altruism are held supreme. That’s what I saw perhaps 20 years ago – that electronic communications can and will change the way we work and live.

And our current way of running the world simply doesn’t work. As is so frequently said in the media “the politicians just don’t get it”. This is not about reforming the expenses rules. This is about searching for a system where ordinary people’s views matter – can be communicated in a two-way manner. Where we trust those in power to make decisions on our behalf.

There are two immediate problems, which tragically are conflated. (a) We have to change the system. We have to create a system that works for us. And we are serious. (b) and we have to vote tomorrow in the local and European elections.

This is an almost impossible situation. The European election procedure is deeply flawed – we can ONLY vote for parties. I want to vote for people, because in the future only people – not parties – can manage our governance. I don’t know how (which is why I am writing) but it is not by voting for parties.

The local council is also about people. I was more involved in local matters when I lived in suburban London and there I worked with councillors from various parties whom I treated as people. The issues were local and they responded in a local manner.

And I have a single ENUM to use to express my opinion.

public abstract static virtual enum Vote {

NULL (“do not vote. Do not go to the polling station”),

DELETE (“spoil my ballot”),

LABOUR (“I approve of the current goverment”),

CONSERVATIVE (“The conservatives will gain power anyway so I will support them to change the country. They say they will”),

LIBERAL (“the standard method of registering protest as they haven't run a government for 100 years so it's a safe protest”),

GREEN (“save the planet”),

BNP (“kick the blacks out”),

UKIP (“No to Europe. Britain is the greatest country on earth”),

JURY (“haven't a clue”),

LIBERTAS.EU (“Yes to Europe. No to an undemocratic EU”), // their words

MONSTER (“monster raving Loony party. I don't think they are standing”),

};

public Vote(String message); const=0

I can send one of about 10 messages. My program has 10 states. And it runs at the speed of 1 operation per 3-5 years or 10 nanoHertz. This is an appalling situation where in everyday life we make decisions on the order of milliHertz and our messages speed round the world at megahertz.

We have discovered dry rot (or termites) in our house. And the natural actions are to ignore it or to kick it down. And neither is sane.

I have a ghastly premonition that in the UK we shall do both. There will be mass apathy and also mass revulsion at the current governance process (not the Government, but government itself). I think on Friday we shall wake up to find we have elected a system which is utterly unacceptable. If, by any chance, we have elected the status quo (the current “main” parties in some proportion) we shall know we have missed our chance to reform. If, OTOH, we elect a ragbag of minority interests who have no political experience and are in no way representative we have to get rid of them.

Either way we shall have to go to the barricades.

The last time this happened was 2003 where 2 million people took to the streets to tell the Government not to bomb Iraq. I was one of them. They didn’t listen. That was when democracy died.

This country has a proud tradition of rising against the system when it fails. People are killed or go to jail. I have the feeling that we aren’t far from that.

SO WHAT DO I DO? PLEASE HELP ME.

The most effective thing I can do is use the Internet, and that’s what I am doing. If there is a nascent solution out there that meets my concerns it is the Internet where I shall find it. That’s why I care about Web democracy. Why mySociety is a glimpse of the webDemocratic future. Not the simple scalar sum of enums, but the multivectorial result of argued discussions.

So I am urging any readers who feel the same to share their feelings and ideas before tomorrow. I shall go to the polling station in my voting suit. I shall carry a (simple) message. I shall take pictures and put them on the blog.

WHAT SHOULD MY MESSAGE BE?

I can now reveal a very exciting development:

University of Cambridge Selects IDBS as their Data Management Provider and Commences a Significant R&D Collaboration

Guildford and Cambridge, UK, May 29, 2009 – IDBS, a leading provider of innovative data management solutions for research science, announces the formation of a strategic relationship with the Department of Chemistry at the University of Cambridge. The Department has selected IDBS’ E-WorkBook as its Chemistry Electronic Laboratory Notebook and the two organizations have begun a collaborative R&D initiative which will provide both organizations with significant cheminformatics assets and opportunities.

The Department of Chemistry at the University of Cambridge will deploy IDBS’ E-WorkBook and IDBS’ suite of chemistry technologies across its broad spectrum of research areas and will use the system as a platform for many of its ongoing national, and international collaborative programmes. IDBS and the Department of Chemistry will also set up a joint research and development effort which will play a significant role in bringing many of the most promising new cheminformatics technologies to the market through IDBS products.

The Department of Chemistry at the University of Cambridge is an internationally renowned centre of excellence in chemistry and chemical computing. It is a leader in semantic chemistry technologies and in the use and development of Chemical Mark-Up Language (CML), which represents the emerging global lexicon of chemical computing. The use and ongoing development of IDBS’ chemical technology platform through this R&D collaboration will encompass many of these important new areas, including new approaches to structure authoring, drawing and representation, annotation, context-rich chemical ontologies, polymer support and the application of the electronic workbook environment as a tool to enhance research excellence.

Neil Kipling, founder and CEO of IDBS said: “This comprehensive, long-term relationship with the University of Cambridge Department of Chemistry proves the existing strength of the E-WorkBook platform for chemistry and offers unparalleled potential for development of our chemistry technologies for the future. We are delighted to be chosen as the data management platform for the Department and to be working so closely with world leaders in cheminformatics.”

Professor Steven Ley, CBE, FRS, said of the relationship: “The professional management of chemical information is now essential in a modern laboratory. This partnership will provide the environment whereby experimental data is captured and retained in such a way that it can be searched electronically by its chemical context. It provides the opportunity to apply advanced chemical informatics methods, many of which have been developed in this laboratory, to extract chemical information. IDBS were chosen as a partner not only for the power and functionality of their software and flexibility to integrate with utilities developed at Cambridge, but also their willingness to cooperate in the development of novel solutions to underpin chemistry research programmes.”

There is a great deal I would like to say but this is a really important development for our group, the Unilever Centre and the Department of Chemistry. We’ve all realised that chemical information has to be put on a sound basis and to do that – including sustainability and engineering – requires the sort of commitment and expertise found in the commercial sector. So the Department spent time and effort to find the appropriate solution for their needs. The tie-up with IDBS has benefits for both parties. Our role, in academia, should be to try out radically new ideas, but we also need day-to-day management of the data and process.

I’ll be writing more about this later – but for now I am looking forward to our visit tomorrow to Guildford to meet our new collaborators and explore what we shall take forward.

In our CLARION proposal (JISC funded) we specifically designed an interface with a – then metasyntactic – electronic laboratory notebook provider. We can now develop the project so that we can show the full power of taking chemical and other information from the bench to a repository which – in appropriate time – will make much more science publicly available.

Google Wave (see Google Wave first reactions and links and comments) has clearly wowed a lot of people and this in itself is important. Assuming that a combination of the technology and the excitement turns it into the The Next Big Thing that in itself is world-changing. So I’ll assume that it will happen and will sweep the public face of the internet.

Nothing is really new and we can find these ideas in Ted Nelson, TimBL and others. But the added features are:

• there is an engineering company that the world believes in

• social computing has arrived

• computing is becoming pervasive (except airplanes fly and railways go through tunnels)

  These have all been foreseen but now they are here. So what does it mean for me and for chemistry?

  My understanding of GW is that it provides shareable, realtime, compound XML documents with well engineered APIs for editing, aggregation and publication (including alerts). If I’ve missed anything please say so. I have no doubt that this is revolutionary and I and Henry Rzepa have been trying to do this for 10 years in chemistry. We coined the term “datument” for a composite of text and data (The Next Big Thing: From Hypermedia to Datuments ) which I gave as a 5-minute presentation at Hypertext2003. The central point was that the information could be as large and complex as you like on the basis that it was held in XML. It could be rendered in different styles according to need and taste and interactivity but the central content was unaltered.

  I shall be most interested to see how GW holds its XML. Compound XML documents are possible using multiple namespaces and we’ve been working with Microsoft on this in Chem4Word. There we have three main languages, OOXML (the text), CML (chemistry) and MathML (maths). Add SVG for the graphics and you have the basis of a modern piece of scientific information.

  Our experience of the last 10 years is that much chemistry can be chunked into XML, most commonly molecules, reactions, spectra, crystallography and computational chemistry. CML can hold all of these and there are Open Java libraries which can manage all the basic functionality (display, editing, filtering, searching). This means that we should be able to start to play with GW.

  Note the word Open. GW is based on Open Data, Open Source and – hopefully – Open Standards (these are the least clear). I doubt very much whether the closed source found in much of chemistry can play with GW. In the virtualised or cloud environments you don’t know where you software will end up and if you have to worry about licences and binaries the impedance will kill it. Similarly the legacy formats (CDX, SD/MOL, JCAMP) cannot distribute well in such an environment whereas generic XML technology (XSLT, XML-DBs) can be found everywhere.

  The chemistry community is well-placed to take this up as long as it adopts all of the Opens. That is, however, a culture-changing requirement. Currently many players make money by creating toll gateways for data, code and integration. GW blows that away.

  So you need to start mouthing the Blue Obelisk Mantra – ODOSOS.

  What’s it going to impact most? I’ll be thinking and writing about this. But any publisher who ignores GW and does not let it into their soul will not be able to survive. Any data aggregator whose data are not truly Open will struggle against the new ways of publishing. And anyone whose code is closed will not be able to play in GW.

I’ve spent the last 80 minutes – a beautiful summer afternoon in the garden – watching the Google Wave video. Nico Adams has enthused about this to me and Cameron has been blown away.:

And my opinion is that this is absolutely game changing – it makes a whole series of problems simply go away, and potentially provides a route to solving many of the problems that I was struggling to see how to manage.

And later from Cameron:

…as I said to someone yesterday, when they write the history of the web, Thursday will be the day that email died. It may be too early to call it the day that the wordprocessor died but I guess we’ll see. I think it will clearly subsume wikis and blogs at least as separate services – there will still need to be some “public facing” approaches that may be different to what was demoed which was essentially person to person. There was no discussion of subscribing per se. But that is easily do-able.

It’s interesting actually – some people just get it and many others don’t seem to. All the translation and spell checking and clever embedding is very flash but the key revolution at the core of it seems to me to be the combining of messaging and the collaborative document. Everything else is just nice added functionality.

So why am I not feeling this epiphany – “the greatest thing since Mosaic”? There is no question the demo is impressive and critically important (although there were too many talking heads and not enough demos you could read).

It’s because I had the epiphany when Mosaic came out, 15 years ago. At that stage I walked around on air for three days. It changed my world and what I chose to do. The second epiphany was XML, – let’s say 1998 – which I was fortunate to have had a small hand in developing. XML is at the heart of Google Wave. It’s shared structured information. XML had and has the power necessary to transform the world. It’s just taken 10 years to do so.

And I’m now used to the fact that ideas take 10 years to develop, even in the incubator of the Internet and Web. In 1998 I was worried that XML-over-the-Web would be a mad rush between competitive commercial applications. I was worried about ontological warfare. I’d developed Chemical Markup Language (with Henry Rzepa) – XML for chemistry –. Adobe et al had developed Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG). I prophesied that SVG would be the killer app for XML-over-the-web. It had everything – a good spec, some lovely tools and it hit you between the eyes. So what happened? Microsoft took a different route. Adobe bought Flash and killed SVG. “The day the graphics died.”

As a reality check – a thoughtful technical piece (It’s new but not new) explains GoogleWave-as-infrastructure and mirrors my own views. Nothing is actually new. But everything can be different.

I have seen several false dawns in the last 15 years. And cases where the dawn has been deliberately obliterated. This could be different. But not because of the technology. Because of the organizations and the zeitgeist.

The critical things are:

• A central approach which is large enough to survive and which potentially can be trusted. (The trust in Google is the single biggest aspect of everything).

• Open data (and open minds). The success of GW will be based on sharing. Yes, GW has sophisticated security mechanisms but it is based on the idea (unthinkable 10 years ago) that people who have never met will share personal and important information trusted to a third party with whom they have no contract.

• Standards. GW is built on XML. XML makes the previously impossible just simply hard work. And it makes what used to be hard relatively straightforward. (I imagine they have to do a lot of engineering under the hood, with image formats, etc. )

• Open Source extensibility. Because GW is Open, people will add to it. And they will. But we shall still have to look to the fine print – what is really Open and what is simply exposed? Googlemaps are not Open – hence Openstreetmap. I’m more hopeful with Google code because they have created their Open Source site and hence imbibed the culture.

So GW potentially provides everything I have been waiting for for 10 years. An integrated infrastructure, with sufficient tools to make rapid progress. That relieves me from the burden of organising input, parsing, workflow, storage, dissemination. And concentrating on what I really want to do which is to build chemically intelligent systems. Bobby Glen and I put this idea forward 8 years ago as an eScience grant proposal “The world wide molecular matrix”. It was perhaps naive and optimistic in places and the 2002-zeitgeist would anyway have killed it. (The grant didn’t get past the middleware weenies who were looking for “Grid stretch” – a meaningless term which ensured the funding went to infrastructure based on the rather arrogant idea that academia knew how to build world-beating middleware).

GW has shown that it can build middleware and interactiveware better better better than academia.

So let’s turn to what we really should be doing – building chemistry based on a universal public information infrastructure. On the pillars of the Blue Obelisk – Open Data, Open Source, Open Standards. The Blue Obelisk has got most of the components – and we need componentware as well as applications. I haven’t looked into GW (though we have been using GWT). I suspect it’s not as trivial as it looks to use. GWT took us some time, and Google moves in an industry where developers can be hired in large teams. (I remember at an Xtech (XML) meeting 2 years ago at a session on SVG on mobiles – one company developer: “We didn’t need much resource – 10 developers for 3 years was sufficient”. I turned bright green.

The key thing is collaboration. The BO has shown that if we work together we get a good mixture of complementarity. GW might be the next impetus – I don’t know. But I am sure that if we keep developing componentware – CDK, Jmol, OpenBabel, JUMBO, OSCAR/OPSIN, etc. we’ll end up being ideally suited for the next wave.

And if that is GoogleWave, fine. If not we’ll recognize it when it comes.

I’m conscious as I write that we are also working with Microsoft on Open Source chemistry – with C# and WPF. How does that fit in? Or doesn’t it. I don’t know, but – as we are thinking of poets Laureates in the UK these days – lines of Tennyson spring to mind:

The old order changeth
,
yielding place to new,

And God fulfills himself in many ways,

Lest one good custom should corrupt the world

Last Year’s Science Blogging:

Peter Murray-Rust, Cameron Neylon, Richard Grant, Timo Hannay 

Taken from http://www.flickr.com/photos/londonmatt/2818037115/#DiscussPhotowithout permission and with thanks.

I am delighted to hear about this year’s Science Blogging conference. Last year was really great – a superb introduction by Ben Goldacre destroying yet another hydra head on the pseudoscience monster. Lots of targeted discussions, followed by a panel.

I am really impressed by the quality and impact of the scientific blogosphere. An ou tstanding example was one blogger (I think it was Grll scientist) who was invited but who was in the USA. Her readers clubbed together and found the transatlantic fare – I certainly couldn’t count on that.

I felt guilty at last year’s event because I’d stopped blogging a few months earlier so I felt a sham. I could, however, contribute knowledgeable on the session about not feeling guilty about not blogging! And at the end we knocked together ideas about how we could promote blogging. We suggested a prize for any young scientists who convinced a senior scientist to blog. Timo and colleagues came up with a very generous prize which was a trip to SciFoo. I can’t promise that it will happen this year but why don’t you go out and do it anyway.

Blogging matters to science and science should take it seriously. One area where it is almost unique is the immediacy and power of any whistleblowing on bad science , bad ethics etc. So when Proteomics (Wiley) published a paper promtoing creationism or when Elsevier published fake journals the blogosphere made sure that people knew all about it in hours.

So come. It’s great fun. If you haven’t been to the RI it’s fantastic – worth the trip for the lecture hall alone. I can feel the great scientists, Davy, Faraday looking down.

Building on the success of last year’s Science Blogging 2009: London conference, we’d like to announce that Science Online London 2009 will take place on Saturday August 22, 2009 at the Royal Institution of Great Britain in London. We hope that you can attend.

 

We decided to change the name of the conference this year to reflect the wide range of science-related activities occurring online today. This year’s programme will include sessions on blogging and microblogging, online communities, open access, new teaching and research tools, author identifiers, etc.

 

Registration will soon open on the conference website: http://www.scienceonlinelondon.org. You can now sign up to receive email alerts on the site.

 

There will probably be a registration fee to cover the costs. Exact amount tbc, but likely to be in the range of £10.

 

Suggest sessions/topics

We need your ideas for sessions and speakers: panel discussions, keynote speakers, demos, etc. Volunteer yourself as a speaker or suggest others you’d like to hear from. Please post your ideas to the conference’s Nature Network forum, Friendfeed group, or email them to topics@scienceonlinelondon.org.

 

Sponsors

We need sponsors! If you or your organization would like to be a sponsor, please email sponsor@scienceonlinelondon.org. You can also suggest organizations you think we should approach.

 

Hosts

The event is co-hosted by Nature Network (Nature Publishing Group), Mendeley and the Royal Institution of Great Britain.

 

Start the networking and spread the word!

You’ll find groups for the conference on Nature Network, Twitter (tag: #soloconf_09)

and Friendfeed.

 

Please also blog/Twitter/etc about the event (if you haven’t already!) to help us spread the word. Attached is our logo for you to repost on your blogs. And forward this message to your friends and colleagues!

 

~ The Organizers

 

Matt Brown / Nature Network, Martin Fenner / Hannover Medical School,
Richard P. Grant / F1000, Victor Henning / Mendeley, Corie Lok / Nature Network and Jan Reichelt / Mendeley

————–
Corie Lok
Senior Editor, Nature Network;

25 First Street, Suite 104
Cambridge, MA   USA    02141

Tel.: 617-475-9220
Email: c.lok@boston.nature.com
Website: http://network.nature.com and http://network.nature.com/hubs/boston
Profile: http://network.nature.com/people/U66E7CD1A/profile
Blog: http://network.nature.com/hubs/boston/blog

Pursuing the issue of Net Neutrality I have got a document from Malcolm Harbour through my MEP:

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 3:30 PM, VAN ORDEN Geoffrey <geoffrey.vanorden@europarl.europa.eu> wrote:

Dear Mr Murray-Rust,

Thank you for your email about Net Neutrality.  I have taken the liberty of asking my colleague Malcolm Harbour about your query and he has sent me the attached question and answer sheet. 

I do hope this goes some way to answering your question.

Kind regards,

Geoffrey Van Orden MEP

PMR: The document is called “Myths Vs Facts “ and does not appear to have any address or other attribution. I would be grateful for any comments on Mr Harbour’s contribution. (Harbour was a rapporteur for (or rather against) the Net Neutrality recommendation).

I have cut out the section relating to the Internet – other sections referred to BEREC. If I interpret just the words below it would appear that the EU is not going to impose restrictions but that it isn’t going to stop member states doing so. And if you live in France, bad luck.

Myths Vs Facts

 The Telecoms Package and Your Rights on the Internet – the key questions:

1) Does this new Package threaten the freedom of the internet, by allowing big telecoms operators to block or discriminate against content, and my ability to access the services and content I want (net neutrality)?

No.  The ISP provides a commercial service to customers and in principle free to structure that offering as they deem best.  They will of course take customer demand into account.  This means that they can currently for example block access to any site they want, or restrict access to applications, if they deem that to be commercially attractive.  They can also offer different bandwidths, price packages etc.  They can continue doing so also in the future.  The situation is comparable to a bookseller – a bookseller does not have to offer every book available in print. 

The possibility for ISPs to decide what to offer their customers is not changed by the Package.  However, the Package will require ISPs to inform their customers of any such restrictions, so that you can choose whether to use another ISP. 

If an ISP has a dominant position and abuses it, competition rules apply and can be used by the Commission or national authorities to address the situation.   

As between you and your Government, any measures taken by a Member State to limit your access to services and content, for example by forcing ISPs to block access, have to respect your fundamental freedoms.

2) How are my rights as a citizen on the Internet safeguarded? Does this whole package affect my freedom to access and use information?

The fundamental rights of all citizens, whether as internet users or in any other capacity, are protected by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.  That Convention for example safeguards freedom of expression, and the right to hold and impart information.  It also provides for judicial remedies.  The Package affirms that these fundamental rights also apply in the field of electronic communications.

3) This proposal has been drafted by the French Government to enable it to impose HADOPI?

No. Amendments that would have facilitated HADOPI were all rejected.  These issues are a matter for national law, and not addressed in the Telecoms Package.  The Package does however restate and reinforce that fundamental rights apply and have to be observed by Member States also in the context of internet usage. 

4) Will I be banned from the Internet if I am caught downloading illegal copyright material from the Internet, such as films and music?

No. The reports that the proposals are going to lead to this are scaremongering. The legislation does not propose this.

5) What has caused all this scaremongering?

France is considering a highly controversial law which will mean that if French citizens are caught downloading illegal content, such as copyright films and music, three times they will be disconnected from the Internet. This is called the “Three Strikes and You’re Out” rule. This would mean that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) would have to monitor internet traffic. The telecoms package has been attacked by false statements that it would adopt a similar “Three Strikes and You’re Out” approach.

6) So what does the Users´ Rights report proposals say in relation to copyright?

National authorities would, if appropriate, be able to produce generic, standardised information, which would be sent to all customers. This public interest information could cover a range of issues, including copyright, child pornography, viruses, and risks to attacks for personal security. There will be no targeting of individual customers for any particular activity and there will be no identification, spying or surveillance of any specific individuals. There is also a provision enabling national authorities to promote appropriate cooperation between ISPs and rightholders regarding lawful content.

7) What will happen if I illegally download copyright material after this legislation comes into force? Is there any way this legislation could lead to me being banned from the Internet?

There will be no change to the current situation, which means that it is up to Member States to deal with copyright issues according to their national law.

8) I am very interested in copyright and Intellectual Property. Will there be a more detailed dossier covering these issues?

Yes, the upcoming Creative Content Online consultation will explore Intellectual Property Rights in more detail.

 PMR: I need an interpreter…

I am now revitalising the CML Blog (see http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/cml/?p=36). This blog was developed to describe CML but ran into problems with the formatting under WordPress and the particualr settings and tools we had installed. The problems are, I hope, solved.

I will therefore be splitting my posts between chemistry (and especially CML) on the CML Blog and everything else (particular the fight for Openness) on this blog (http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust).

I hope these leads to a better approach for readers. The difference between European politics and the number of electrons in ferrocene is considerable and may have deterred some readers. I don’t know.

The CML blog will address questions of the design of CML, the user community, and may also act as a way to create material for static web pages. I encourage you to suggest questions as this gives me the excuse and impetus to write on specific topics. In general please use the comment fields although I shall still take queries in email.

For those who wish to follow the CML Blog add http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/cml into your feed reader. For a week or two I’ll probably reference posts from this blog.

I am delighted to have received the following letter from our MEP Andrew Duff on Net Neutrality.

Dear Mr. Murray-Rust,

Thank you for your recent letter on the EU telecoms package. I fully share your concerns about preserving a liberal regime for the internet.

I am pleased to report that it was our Liberal ALDE group in the European Parliament which was decisive in achieving a majority of MEPs for the crucial amendment, which stated that “no restriction may be imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end users, without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities … save when public security is threatened”.

The passage of this amendment meant that the telecoms package was not concluded in this Parliament at second reading. Negotiations will continue in conciliation, once the new Parliament assembles.

If re-elected, you can be sure that I will continue to be involved in these developments.

Yours sincerely,

 

Andrew Duff

 

Andrew Duff MEP

Leader, UK Liberal Democrat European Parliamentary Party (LDEPP)

Spokesman, Constitutional Affairs for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE)

President, Union of European Federalists (UEF)

European Parliament

10 G 346

60, Rue Wiertz

B-1047 Brussels

www.andrewduff.eu

www.federalists.eu

I am testing ICE+OO’s ability to author XML in a reasonably pretty fashion. Neglect this post unless you are interested in ICE-manship (which I hope many of you are).

This is some text and this is some XML

<module name="metadata" capture="os wday mon day hr min sec year host">

     Date and time (@ss)  : @s3 @s3 @s3 @i2:@i2:@i2 @14

     Host name              : @s                                 

</header>

Here is some more XML

<!-- http://www.xml-cml.org/schema#hasConcise_att -->

  <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#hasConcise_att"/>

  <!-- http://www.xml-cml.org/schema#hasConvention_att -->

  <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#hasConvention_att"/>

  <!-- http://www.xml-cml.org/schema#hasDictref_att -->

  <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#hasDictref_att"/>

  <!-- http://www.xml-cml.org/schema#hasFormalcharge_att -->

  <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#hasFormalcharge_att"/>

  <!-- http://www.xml-cml.org/schema#hasID -->

and some more

 <owl:Class rdf:about="http://www.xml-cml.org/cmlx#geom">

    <rdfs:label>geom</rdfs:label>

    <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://www.xml-cml.org/cmlx#misc"/>

    <rdfs:subClassOf>

      <owl:Restriction>

        <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasValue"/>

        <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/>

      </owl:Restriction>

    </rdfs:subClassOf>

    <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">def: directives for geometry output</rdfs:comment>

    <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">desc: needs a description</rdfs:comment>

  </owl:Class>