W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > August 2004

Proposed minutes of SWBPD-WG telecon 2004-08-19

From: Natasha Noy <noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:55:34 -0700
Message-Id: <A473C632-F243-11D8-88D1-000A958B5C28@smi.stanford.edu>
To: swbp <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment WG telecon, 19 August 2004, 
1800 UTC

Agenda:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Aug/0072.html

IRC log:
http://www.w3.org/2004/08/19-swbp-irc

New Action Summary:
ACTION: Ralph to contact Bernard regarding Topic Maps TF
ACTION: Ralph find e-mailed f2f responses and impersonate them into the 
straw poll
ACTION: David to ask on the mailing list whether there is an interest 
to generate a formal response to DanC note

Continued Actions:
ACTION: Alan to respond to guus' document on qualified cardinality 
constraints
ACTION: Ralph do an analysis of which WG participants have been able to
attend at which meeting time.
ACTION: Jeremy to review XSD FNO and SCD documents.
ACTION: Jeremy to add XSD FNO and SCD documents to TF reference list.
ACTION: Jeremy to check semantics on DAWG use of XSD in abstract query 
model.


Chair: David Wood
Scribe: Natasha Noy

1. ADMINISTRIVIA

Role call:
Present: David Wood, Ralph, Andreas Harth, Tom Baker, Tom Adams, Mike 
Uschold, Gary Ng, Alistair Miles, Natasha Noy, Deb McGuinness
Regrets: Brian, Alan, DanBri, Libby, Jos, Guus, Evan, Steve Pepper

Agenda amendments:

None proposed.

PROPOSED: To accept minutes of 5 August.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Aug/0057.html
RESOLVED.

PROPOSED: Next telecon for 2 September  1430 UTC, to last 60 minutes
RESOLVED.

NOTE the later time for the telecon due to the conflict with the 
telecon for WG chairs

F2F Location:
Straw poll at  http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35495/2ndf2f/
Open until August 25.

2. ACTION ITEM REVIEW

ACTION ralph & guus to set up straw poll as web form for location of 
next
done (http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35495/2ndf2f/)

ACTION TomA to add links from last telecon to tutorials page
done, but have not committed changes yet

ACTION Alan to respond to guus' document on qualified cardinality 
constraints
continued

ACTION TomA get MINDLAB to write description of urchin for APDTF weblog
done

ACTION Ralph to link ADTF blog from WG page
done (ESW weblog linked at 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/#Tasks under ATDF)

ACTION Ralph do an analysis of which WG participants have been able to 
attend at which meeting time.
continued

ACTION Jeremy to review XSD FNO and SCD documents.
continued

ACTION Jeremy to add XSD FNO and SCD documents to TF reference list.
continued

ACTION Jeremy to check semantics on DAWG use of XSD in abstract query 
model.
continued

3. TF Updates

3.1 OEP

Continuing discussion on OEP notes on the mailing list

3.2 PORT

Link with update posted by Alistair

3.3 WordNet

no one from the TF present

3.4 XML Schema datatypes

no updates (no one from the TF present)

3.5 Vocabulary management (TomB)

Tom will post an updated draft of the TF description
The update will be in the form of a straw poll of TF members to 
determine how likely the members are to agree on the scope; to 
determine which items are in scope or out of scope. Tom will post it 
next week with the goal to get it rolling by the end of the month

3.6 HTML (Ben):

TomA was on the telecon 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Aug/0075.html
The telecon minutes were posted to the list.
David thinks it's an important TF and would like to encourage 
participation.
There is a poll on the next TF meeting (proposed date: September 7th)
there are no responses yet. There is enough time to get more 
participation
Ralph and Ben had a conversation with Tomaso on teh formality of the WG 
communication
Ralph: We would like to see them have a more formal reference to this 
TF in their charter
David: Ben has done as much as he could do to get the TF started, 
arranging a telecon, etc. it is in our hands to respond to his email
The XHTML TF will conduct its discussions in 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/

3.7 ADTF

no one is here from the TF

3.8 Tutorial page (TomA)

needs to commit the updates

4 AOB

4.1 TF on Topic Maps and RDF

Ralph: Ontopia (http://www.ontopia.net/) has recently joined W3C. They 
are one of several commercial companies heavily involved in topic maps. 
They joined W3C with the hope that this WG will be interested in 
discussing the relationship between TM and SW
Some contributions from TM folks on public-esw-thes@w3.org
Steve Pepper from Ontopia was very keen on getting the TF that will 
look at interoperability of TMs and RDF started
Bernard has written papers on this topic
It would be good GRDDL people involved -- they have relevant technology
(http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/ Gleaning Resource Descriptions from 
Dialects of Languages (GRDDL))
ACTION: Ralph to contact Bernard regarding Topic Maps TF

4.2 Response to the DAWG request
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Aug/0061.html
Ralph: do we want to generate a WG response?
David would like to see some discussion on the mailing list (if there 
is no siginificant discusccion, perhaps there is not much interest?)
Ralph: we can do the TF model, asking for people who can contribute 
some time to this over the next couple of weeks
ACTION: David to ask on the mailing list whether there is an interest 
to generate a formal response to DanC note

4.3 Units and measures
Deb: there was a proposal to do a note on units and measures
Natasha thinks that Guus has signed up for that (but not entirely sure)
Deb is willing to contribute but warns that it could be a very large 
amount of work to do it well units and measures is a specific request 
from the Device Independence Working Group
Deb: my interpretation of the original request is to do a survey of 
existing ontologies (and that is already a very large task)
developing an ontology is a much bigger task.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jul/0108.html 
Re: DIWG Requests Guidance on Ontologies for Units [DWood 2004-07-23]
Ralph: Postulating that there is at least one ontology of units, is it 
clear how one would write RDF instance data using that ontology
Deb: yes, should be reasonably clear
David: not so sure that it would be so easy
Deb: there are two different issues: (1) how much do you need to model? 
and (2) if someone already has a representation, is it straightforard 
how to represent this in OWL
Natasha: Perhaps we can have a note that avoids the issue of what a 
good ontology for units and measures is, postulating some simple one 
("suppose that's what you have") and presenting how you would use it in 
OWL/RDF
Natasha, Deb: we're happy to help with a note on how to use an ontology 
of units with RDF/OWL but we don't have time to lead this
David encourages Deb to raise this issue on the mailing list again to 
see if we can get an IEO note on representing units
Received on Friday, 20 August 2004 00:55:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:39 UTC