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

Re: minutes of telecon 10-28

From: Deborah L. McGuinness <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:39:02 -0800
Message-ID: <4185AFD6.7050507@ksl.stanford.edu>
To: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
CC: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
one comments on the notes.
"Units and Measures: editor candidate likely to be rejected by W3C as WG 
This will need f2f discussion.  A lot of requests for this note, need to
determine how to move forward.  This will be the principle item 
discussed at
f2f during the OEP section (during telecon)."

it would be useful to me to understand what would make w3c reject an 
editor candidate and also what the w3c stance is for having authors of 
notes not be members of swbp.
i took 2 action items in previous telecons at what appeared to be group 
consensus to contact 2 people on different notes to potentially take a 
lead role in getting notes out where no working group member had 
volunteered.  i need to understand what my response should be now that i 
have contacted each person, have received favorable responses, and now 
need to respond.


Christopher Welty wrote:

> W3C Semantic Web Best Practices & Deployment Working Group
> Minutes of telecon for
> 28 October 2004, 1400 UTC
> Duration: 60 -90 min
> IRC Log: http://www.w3.org/2004/10/28-swbp-irc#T14-12-43
> Chair:  Guus Schreiber
> Scribe: Chris Welty
> Guest: Dan Chang, IBM (joins at 1430 UTC for agenda item 4 (ODM)
> Please note that SWBP&D WG telecons are for attendance by members and
> invited experts only.
> 1. ADMINISTRIVIA (10 min)
> Roll call
> Attendees:  
> (phone) Guus_Schreiber, ChrisW, Libby_Miller, TomAdams, Evan_Wallace, 
> Jeremy, Alan_Rector, Tom_Baker, Gary_Ng, MarcoNanni, DanChang
> (irc) RalphS, DWood
> RESOLVED: to accept the minutes of the Oct 14 telecon:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0086.html
> plus 2 corrections: regrets Tom Baker and Marco Nanni
> RESOLVED: cancel next telecon Nov 11 1600 UTC (cancel due to ISWC in 
> Japan)
> Guus and Jeremy remind WG of W3C Policy wrt off-list discussions:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0146.html
> Guus reports that today's mailing list messages have not appeared in 
> the archive.
> 2. ACTION ITEM REVIEW (10-15 min)
>    ACTION: jjc make a first sketch of short guideline note for using 
> xml schema datatypes (in rdf/owl) [13] [COMPLETED]
>    ACTION: chrisW ask main author or representative to join a telecon 
> or f2f via phone [18] [COMPLETED]
>    ACTION: deb to taking lead on ?closing roles? (missed exactly 
> what,sorry) [24] [COMPLETED]
>    ACTION: al send update of this message to indicate docs we shoudl 
> read before f2f by 25th oct [25] [COMPLETED]
>    ACTION: BenB read ODM documents [2] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: gary ng review ODM [7] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: Ralph to ask WG for feedback on requirement to embed 
> RDF/XML markup in an XHTML document  [9] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: danbri circulate links for his existing feedback/review to 
> dawg [12] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: philT look at garyng's message, see what actions if any 
> this wg shoudl take [20] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: chrisw approach sophia about units and measures 
> particpating [21] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: guus to note on numeric ranges after the xml datatypes TF 
> has finished [23] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: libby to make that note into a document to read for the f2f 
> by 25th oct [28] [CONTINUED]
>    ACTION: guus send jeremy pointer about numeric ranges and XMLS [13]
>    ACTION: jjc to send around pointers on HTML TF [14]
>    ACTION: libby to send pointers to list in preparation for f2f [15]
> Draft agenda:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0094.html
> Change start times?
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0092.html
> Telecon time change to 16:14-18:00
> Second day moved to account for heavy traffic.  Starting at 9:30.
> See Evan's message:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Sep/0044.html
> Update:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0087.html
> Dan Chang of IBM joins telecon.
> Guus: status of xml presentation syntax: a note and not part of 
> recommendation
> DanC: originally thought to use DL as core of metamodel, but have 
> decided not to
> Dan: for revised submission, ODM will have metamodel(s), UML profiles, 
> metamodel mappings
> Dan: also XML schemas
> Dan: currently design is based on ontology definition languages like 
> RDF, OWL, topic maps
> Dan: "modeling" needs served by UML
> Dan: metamodel for RDFS, OWL (which extends RDFS metamodel), topicmap
> Dan: metamodel for SCL, and ER as well
> Guus: is it possible, e.g. for something in ER metamodel to have 
> mappings to other metamodels?
> Dan: yes. We use OWL full as the core, with mappings in/out to the others
> Dan: also a mapping from OWL Full to UML
> Dan: team members for topic maps Lewis Hart from at&t
> Gary: Why these languages, and languages that are out of scope?
> Dan: RFP only talks about OWL DL, and "probably" should address 
> others, and defines ontology as a spectrum
> Dan: group added SCL and topic maps, and ER, for some reasons
> guus: express is also a useful language from the STEP community
> Dan: yes - there has been some communication but it came too late for 
> this version
> Dan: deadline from OMG extended to January
> AlanR: why backing off from DL?
> Dan: OWL Full anchor point for mappings
> Dan: mainly because OWL Dl is a subset of OWL full
> Gary: concerned that mapping from OWL Full to OWL DL may not be 
> straighforward
> Dan: intend to use "OCL constraints" to distinguish between OWL DL and 
> OWL Full
> AlanR: certain mappings to OWL Full will not reduce smoothly to OWL DL
> Alanr: OWL DL is not the standard DL description, as it does not have 
> qualified cardinality constraints
> Dan: ODM team not the best one to address that
> Jeremy: will the UML <-> OWL mappings be useful for legacy migration 
> of UML models of systems to OWL?
> Dan: Main purpose of mappings is to use UML tools to model and 
> generate OWL, RDF, topic maps...
> Dan: But another purpose is to leverage existing UML models, so, yes
> Dan: people interested in that should look at our proposal and give us 
> feedback
> ChrisW: suggests that SCL would be the better choice for "anchor" 
> point than OWL Full - that's waht SCL was designed for.
> Dan states that mapping will be done in tables for January
> Dan: mappings will be expressed using OMG's QVT spec
> Guus asked about how the metamodel may effect the profile
> Dan: properties will become stereotype MOF associations
> Dan: we use class construct to define "user defined" properties
> Dan: subclass are MOF meta associations
> Dan: by end of Nov., first complete draft by end of Nov.
> guus: we will schedule some time in advance to work on that
> Dan: the OMG process will allow more time, maybe another year, to 
> refine after Jan., and interact
> Group thanks Dan Chang for his participation and cooperation.
> See thread starting with:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0114.html
> THis agendum moved to f2f due to time.
> 6. TF UPDATES (5-10 min each)
> All TF leaders: please also reflect on status of FTF goals:
> Background: Guus' proposals:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Aug/0109.html
> 6.1 OEP (Deb), Chris)
> Web page:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/
> Chris breifly summarizes state of TF, as shown on web page.
> Units and Measures: editor candidate likely to be rejected by W3C as 
> WG member.
> This will need f2f discussion.  A lot of requests for this note, need to
> determine how to move forward.  This will be the principle item 
> discussed at
> f2f during the OEP section (during telecon).
> 6.2 PORT (Alistair)
> Ftf documents
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0115.html
> 6.3 WordNet (Aldo)
> no progress at the moment
> Improtant to have something for f2f.
> 6.4 XML Schema datatypes (Jeremey)
> Note sketch:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0152.html
> jeremy has produced a draft note for f2f discussion
> guus: relation between OEP numeric ranges note and XMLS datatypes
> action: guus send jeremy pointer about numeric ranges and XMLS
> 6.5 Vocabulary management (TomB)
> draft and various other documents available for f2f discussion
> Tom: draft indicates what contributions people can make. Would like to 
> make it a wiki and have WG members follow guidelines to make 
> contributions.
> Tom: seeking feedback on outline or process. Need some guidance on 
> putting in wiki
> Messages from Tom:
> Time line:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0147.html
> Draft:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0148.html
> Outline:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0149.html
> Roles TF members:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Oct/0150.html
> 6.6 HTML (Ben)
> Like WN also close to finishing but haven't produced f2f info
> jjc: telecon last fri, another 2morrow,
> jjc: discuss latest metadata module
> ACTION: jjc to send around pointers on HTML TF
> 6.7 ADTF (Libby)
> libby posts link to latest work
> http://bender.ilrt.bris.ac.uk:8080/web/servlet/Entry?action=v
> libby: using DOPE very easy to add
> ACTION: libby to send pointers to list in preparation for f2f
> 6.8 Tutorial Page (TomA)
> TomA some links coming, including ISWC
> guus: tutorial page not on f2f agenda. Should we consider it?
> TomA: i wont be at f2f, will post questions to list
> 7. AOB
> Meeting adjourned at 15:38

 Deborah L. McGuinness 
 Co-Director Knowledge Systems Laboratory 
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241 
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020 
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   
Received on Monday, 1 November 2004 03:39:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:40 UTC