W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ddwg@w3.org > March 2007

Meeting Summary - 12 March 2007

From: Rotan Hanrahan <rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:12:09 -0000
Message-ID: <D5306DC72D165F488F56A9E43F2045D3E42068@FTO.mobileaware.com>
To: <public-ddwg@w3.org>

[Weekly conference call, 12 Mar 2007.] Defining Device Descriptions. Editor for the formal ontology. OMA Liaison. Requirements on wiki. Details follow:

[DD Definition] There was considerable debate in this week's call regarding the role of "ontology" in the definition of a "Device Description". For some, an ontology may be inferred, or could be created, in support of the concept of Device Description, but this does not mean that a formal ontology document has to exist. For others, the use of "ontology" in defining the concept of Device Description implies that an instance of a formal ontology exists. It is also recognised that in the context of the W3C, mention of "ontology" generally implies RDF. Eventually the attendees reached an agreed position where the glossary definition of "Device Description" would use the phrase "formal definition". It is hoped that this term will embrace those who would work with Device Descriptions from an RDF perspective, and others who may be less inclined towards RDF but nevertheless have good reason to work with machine readable information. A full text will be put to the group during the week, and if approved will be forwarded for consideration in the DI Glossary.

[Ontology Editor] Having reached a (likely) agreement on the meaning of Device Description, the group agreed a process to deal with the practical issue of creating a formal definition (an RDF/OWL representation of the ontology in support of the Core Vocabulary). The group has already agreed to use Protégé as a tool to assist in the creation of RDF/OWL (because working visually is usually easier than working with raw XML). Unfortunately, Protégé does not support "team editing". Nevertheless, the tool is easy enough to use that a single person could merge team contributions on their behalf. Therefore, the group has agreed to use Protégé individually to investigate the ontology evolution, but to contribute to a central version via text in emails on the list, which will be managed by a volunteer. (Rhys is first to step forward.) For more complex contributions, the group might consider an XML-diff approach, though this could be challenging for RDF due to multiple possible serialisations.

[OMA Liaison] The OMA has sent a liaison statement to the group. Some related documents are also expected soon. When all documents have been received, they will be discussed by the group.

[Requirements] The wiki now contains a version of the DDR Requirements, which will be reviewed and evolved towards a stable final version.

[New Actions] (ACTION-14) Jo to summarize the proposal for compromise definition of device description.

[New Resolutions] To record contributions to ontology via text in mailing list

Pontus Carlsson (Drutt)
Rafael Casero (SATEC)
Anders Ekstrand (Drutt)
Jose Manuel Cantera Fonseca (Telefónica)
Rodrigo Garcia (CTIC)
Rotan Hanrahan (MobileAware)
Cedric Kiss (W3C)
Rhys Lewis (Volantis)
Nacho Marin (CTIC)
Jo Rabin (dotMobi)
Kevin Smith (Vodafone)
Andrea Trasatti (M:Metrics/WURFL)
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2007 09:12:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:00:13 UTC