Minutes of AWWSW telecon Tues 2010-04-13

http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-awwsw-minutes.html

and below in plain text.

                ---------------------
[1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                                 AWWSW

13 Apr 2010

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-awwsw-irc

Attendees

   Present
          TimBL, Michael_Hausenblas, David_Booth, Jonathan_Rees

   Regrets
   Chair
          Jonathan_Rees

   Scribe
          dbooth

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Doodle Poll
     * [5]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <mhausenblas> heya dbooth

   hi

   [6]http://doodle.com/qcygav3k8ctmht

      [6] http://doodle.com/qcygav3k8ctmht

   plus z4

Doodle Poll

   michael: wasn't sure of the goal of the poll. find out shared
   understanding?

   jar: wanted to know what interpretation people favor
   ... wondering if the answer was obvious and i was missing somethign.
   timbl seems to have assumptions about how this works.
   ... relationship btwn resource and representations. two dominant
   theories: 1. not much relationship. 2. pretty strong relationship.
   ... tradeoff is whether you get to use a particular uri to name a
   particular thing.
   ... In option 2 you have to make up new URIs for things that you
   thought you had URIs for. But if the relationshp is loose and vague
   then you get to re-use URIs.

   dbooth: In my proposed theory it is very clear when it is okay to
   re-use a URI and when it is not. It's a matter of whether assertions
   are in conflict.
   ... The basic idea is that a URI has a set of assertions that
   constrain its proper use.

   jar: If the URI is just constrained to be a FRBR expression, then
   does that constrain GET behavior?

   dbooth: I further assume that GET responses are statements made by
   the URI owner.

   <jar> Suppose the URI declaration says: [7]http://example.org/b is a
   FRBR expression with author ... and title ... written in year ...

      [7] http://example.org/b

   <jar> Does the URI owner then have the freedom to make *arbitrary*
   GET 200 responses, or is he/she constrained by his/her own URI
   declaration?

   dbooth: A 200 response in and of itsself says that the resoruce is
   an information resoruce.

   <mhausenblas>
   [8]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2010Mar/0017.htm
   l

      [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2010Mar/0017.html

   <mhausenblas> and timbl 's answer at
   [9]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2010Apr/0004.htm
   l

      [9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2010Apr/0004.html

   dbooth: I think I'm in camp 2 ("Bob is giving out bogus
   representations"), but the description wasn't clear enough for me to
   determine whether the representations were actually in conflict with
   the facts already known about the URI, which include the URI
   declaration that Bob made to Alice in the cafe, and the implied URI
   declaration that Bob made by issuing
   ... a 200 response.

   timbl: People will draw the line in different places. Some will
   treat URIs like permalinks, and some will treat them more
   transiently. [paraphrased]

   jar: suppose you're a robot, even if you have metadata, is there any
   inference you can draw?

   <jar> timbl: Expectations vary by context (permalink vs. ?)

   <jar> timbl: If the representation says X, then the resource says X

   <mhausenblas> Michael: I always get lost in these abstract examples.
   may I propose to look into a concrete example ...

   dbooth: If the resource is essentially a function from Request x
   Time to Representations, then the response tells you one of the
   function's values.

   <jar> Example: try almost any DOI.

   <jar> any URI of the form [10]http://dx.doi.org/10.*

     [10] http://dx.doi.org/10.*

   timbl: the front page of the NY Times *has* a function, but it isn't
   a function itself.
   ... you can say sameWorkAs if you get two representations back, but
   not sameAs.

   <mhausenblas> ahm, well ... ok, has something different in mind
   (currently working on an OData - Linked Data gateway to perform
   SPARQL queries and ran into same problem)

   timbl: the ad to buy something is different than the thing itself.

   <jar> timbl: maybe we can work at two levels? can let people be
   sloppy?

   dbooth: The difference between the ad for something and the thing
   itself is that there are different assertions that are true of them:
   if they are denoted by different URIs, there are different sets of
   assertions that constrain the resource identity of those URIs

   <jar> timbl: from one, I learn about a whale. from the other, I
   learn the price of a book

   timbl: if the background color of one is cream and the other is
   white, those are not relevant differences.

   dbooth: the background color is noise that has been added to the
   signal -- additional assertions that have been added but which are
   irrelevant

   <jar> timbl: (vary: header)

   timbl: If you know that something is a FixedResource, then you can
   know that the background color is always cream.

   <timbl> If something is a FixedResource then you can say that the
   backgorund colour is cream once you have done a GET got 200 and got
   stg with cream background.

   jar: Suppose the metadata says that an image is a particular png
   file with high resolution. It seems to me that's not sufficient to
   infer that the thing is a FixedResource.
   ... You need additional assertions to constrain the representations,
   e.g., to know that it's a FixedResource.
   ... This should be written up somewhere.

   <timbl>
   [11]http://www.subbu.org/blog/2007/12/vary-header-for-restful-applic
   ations

     [11] http://www.subbu.org/blog/2007/12/vary-header-for-restful-applications

   timbl: AWWW tries to do that

   <mhausenblas> looking at
   [12]http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-14.44 seems none is
   not allowed (?)

     [12] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616#section-14.44

   <timbl> Vary: Date would be nice

   timbl: the VARY header tells you which of the parameters you are
   sending (such as AcceptLanguage) it should consider in deciding what
   to send back.

   <jar> which conneg parameters are being taken into account in
   deciding which rep. to send back?

   <timbl> and Vary: None or Vary:

   jar: I've been in touch with someone working on momento

   <jar> memento

   <mhausenblas>
   [13]http://events.linkeddata.org/ldow2010/papers/ldow2010_paper13.pd
   f

     [13] http://events.linkeddata.org/ldow2010/papers/ldow2010_paper13.pdf

   <mhausenblas> An HTTP-Based Versioning Mechanism for Linked Data

   <mhausenblas> Fig. 3 shows the Memento HTTP Request/Response Cycle

   <timbl> Time is already in the [14]http://www.w3.org/2006/gen/ont
   ontology

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2006/gen/ont

   (more discussion of time and memento)

   <jar> Need rules like: " If the representation says X, then the
   resource says X"

   jar: We need rules like "if the representations says X then the
   resource says X", like speaksFor

   dbooth: Can we relate this back to doodle poll option 2?

   <jar> Bob is behaving badly because his reps. say things the
   resource doesn't

   <jar> e.g. they say the book costs $8.95

   dbooth: I would phrase that differently, that Bob is having badly
   because he is saying things that are in conflict.

   timbl: But it's not just that it's in conflict, it's that the rep
   doesn't say what the resource says.

   <jar> timbl: http: didn't need to address this, leaves "what the
   resource says" as an exercise to the reader

   timbl: Roy was fine with the rep of a robot being a control panel
   for it.

   <jar> ... roy was happy for the rep. of a robot to be a picture of
   the robot, or a control panel

   timbl: So it's useful to have the resource tied back into the FRBR
   vocab.

   <jar> dbooth: Want to understand further what that means - what's
   being said, what assertions?

   dbooth: So timbl is saying that it's not just a matter of Bob making
   conflicting statements, it's a matter of Bob making unauthorized
   statements?

   <jar> timbl: If I go to school and write an essay on the book - my
   report might talk about the price of the book - my essay would be
   about the wrong thing.

   <jar> Z is a representation of Moby-Dick.

   <jar> Z says price of Moby-Dick-book is $8.95.

   <jar> Therefore, Moby-Dick says price of Moby-Dick-book is $8.95.

   <jar> which is false.

   <timbl> It was a mistake for someone to give me the URI and say
   "this is the URI of Moby Dick"

   <timbl> If the representation, as parsed according to the mime type,
   and presentde, contains the information X then the resource
   arch:says X.

   <jar> FRBR would allow advertising in an 'expression'...

   <jar> Timbl: Question of how much damage is being done.

   <jar> ... Degraded copy of an image is OK...

   <jar> .. what's the damage, and the benefit. E.g., of an abridged
   copy.

   <jar> ... There will be community differences in this regard, local
   conventions.

   <jar> ... Looking for X, and finding X + advertising, is how things
   are. Benefit is economics, but there's a downside

   <jar> Are robots possible? Won't they always make mistakes about
   topics etc?

   <jar> timbl: Just keep the robots away from pages that will confuse
   them

   <jar> timbl: We should build lots of robots, and push back on sites
   that break them

   dbooth: A degraded image is like receiving a set of information that
   is a combination of (a) noise (i.e., extra, irrelevant information);
   and (b) a subset of the full information that you wanted.
   ... If we think of the idealized information as a set of assertions
   I, then the advertising on the side adds irrelevant information II
   and a lower resolution image gives you a subset S of I, so you have:
   dbooth: If we think of the idealized information as a set of
   assertions I, then the advertising on the side adds irrelevant
   information II and a lower re

   <jar> dbooth: A degraded image might be a subset of what you wanted,
   PLUS noise such as advertising

   I = Idealized information S = a subset of I (e.g., lower resolution
   image) II = Irrelevant Information (e.g., advertising added)
   Returned representation = II + S

   <jar> dbooth: A human can filter out the II part

   dbooth: And the assumption is that the receiving client is able to
   filter out II and ignore it.

   timbl: On a good day the receiving robot ignores II and on a bad day
   the robot concludes that it should buy the product that is
   advertised (because it isn't able to filter out II)

   jar: I'd like to see a lot more metadata written about Informatino
   Resources (IRs)

   timbl: A typical web app will filter out the stuff that it
   understands anyway. I encourage creativity in new protocols by
   putting extra stuff in the metadata that is handled by clients. I'd
   love to see things about access control, whether the info is public,
   etc.

   <DanC> (on a bad day the robot attributes the ad to the article
   author, i think)

   <jar> timbl: I encourage creativity in metadata... access control...
   pointers into source code control...

   jar: I'm worried about things like DOI and the bibliographic
   ontology. It would be nice to have a consistent story about when you
   can write metadat like that. But it's tempting to write metadata
   that violates the rule that we just wrote down.
   ... if you have a URI that gives 200 responses and a LINK header,
   which describes some resource. You'd like to attribute the rep to
   the resource.
   ... But we've just given plenty of examples where you will get a
   price instead of the article.

   timbl: Wonder if we should introduce a 233 that means "this is what
   you would have got from a 200"

   <DanC> (ah... I was on the wrong example)

   <DanC> (I certainly wouldn't recommend using the same URI for a book
   and an ad for the book)

   <timbl> Danc +1

   I won't be able to make April 27 either, as I'll be flying :(

   <timbl> I certainly wouldn't recommend using the same URI for a book
   and an ad for the book)

   <jar> meeting: AWWSW fortnightly

   <mhausenblas> thanks dbooth for scribing - awesome job (as usual ;)

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [15]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([16]CVS log)
    $Date: 2010/04/13 14:09:16 $
     _________________________________________________________

     [15] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [16] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
Check for newer version at [17]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/

     [17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/;/:/
Succeeded: s/Hausenblass/Hausenblas/
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: dbooth
Inferring Scribes: dbooth
Default Present: +1.216.445.aaaa, mhausenblas, Jonathan_Rees, TimBL
Present: TimBL Michael_Hausenblas David_Booth Jonathan_Rees
Got date from IRC log name: 13 Apr 2010
Guessing minutes URL: [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-awwsw-minutes.ht
ml
People with action items:

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-awwsw-minutes.html

   End of [19]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [19] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm



-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
Cleveland Clinic (contractor)

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.

Received on Tuesday, 13 April 2010 14:11:58 UTC