W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > October 2006

meeting record: 2006-10-24 SWD telecon

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 23:23:30 +0200
Message-ID: <453FD5D2.5090102@few.vu.nl>
To: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

The [1]record of yestersday's SemWeb Deployment WG telecon is ready for review.
A text copy follows below.  

[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-minutes.html

Topics
1. [5]Admin
2. [6]SKOS Requirements
3. [7]RDF in XHTML
4. [8]Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies

Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Daniel to link his use case to SKOS draft [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[PENDING] ACTION: Alistair give pointers to deployed SKOS systems.
   [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action06]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph consider a tutorial on scribe conventions
   [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[PENDING] ACTION: ralph to link to chris' telecon notes from SWD
   homepage [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action02]

The next telecon is scheduled for Tuesday, 31 October, 1500 UTC


Antoine

-----------------------------------------------------------------------



                                SWD WG

24 Oct 2006

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0047.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Antoine, seanb, Elisa_Kendall, Ralph, Ben_Adida, Bernard,
          Daniel, Tom_Baker

   Regrets
          Diego, Fabien, Alistair, Guus, Daniel

   Chair
          Tom

   Scribe
          Antoine

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Admin
         2. [6]SKOS Requirements
         3. [7]RDF in XHTML
         4. [8]Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies
     * [9]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________



   <RalphS> Previous: 2006-10-17
   [10]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html

     [10] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html

   <TomB> Agenda for today:
   [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0047.h
   tml

     [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0047.html

Admin

   TomB: accept minutes previous meeting

   scribe: minutes accepted

   TomB: action on scribe conventions, next week

SKOS requirements

   Sean: description of Cohse project
   ... using owl ontologies to find documents associated to concepts
   ... simple NLP to find expressions matching terms of vocabularies
   ... providing links between docs and concepts
   ... using ontology structure (hierarchy) to help navigation
   ... we have realized that using OWL ontologies for navigation
   navigation is not optimal
   ... thesaurus structure (broader/narrower) would be better
   -> [12]Sean's use cases

     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0044.html

   Sean: so replacing skos-like vocabularies, wrapping them up with
   simple services
   ... like synonyms, relationship retrieval would be useful.
   ... This use case fits pattern A: use vocabularary for retrieval,
   but also query the voc itself
   ... not necessarily a full RDF repository
   ... using a SKOS-like scheme on top would be relevant

   Bernard: I am confused by the word "index", rather use "annotation"

   RalphS: agree with Bernard re: discomfort with "index" - not sure
   "annotation" solves the problem... BT/NT jumps out as big benefit -
   easy to explain to people.

   Bernard: Are there other examples of uses of relations, than
   broader/narrower?

   Sean: related term could be useful

   Bernard: less-precise BT/NT much better fit to the relationships we
   want to use for navigation than RDFS/OWL subClass

   Sean: they are useful to access thesaurus

   TomB: discussion should be postponed until we are more numerous

   Sean: Question: is my document appropriate for a use case
   description?

   TomB: yes

   <TomB> Antoine: Qst about use cases.

   <TomB> ...Can we provide abstract use case?

   <TomB> ...Should the data referred to in the use case be public?

   <TomB> RalphS: We should consider real-example use cases where data
   is not necessarily available. Like the level of detail of Sean's
   document.

   <TomB> Bernard: SUN Microsystems ontology is not available - one of
   the use cases is Unified Product Taxonomy. Others are public-domain.

   <TomB> RalphS: could you describe that in general terms?

   <TomB> Bernard: When project started, there was a description -
   details are not public.

   <TomB> RalphS: Level of detail we need to drive design of SKOS - we
   can do that without having...

   Daniel : some stuff mentions in the use case can be published.

   ... it is actually important that some data is published!

   <RalphS> [13]Daniel's use cases

     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0041.html

   Daniel: terminologies were developped that could be used in computer
   services
   ... huge effort of knowledge creation in these cases
   ... goal is too create a large library of termonologies
   ... accessible for integration in various applications

   Sean: one selling point of skos: semantic relationships to tie
   together concepts in a loose way
   ... is it relevant for the biology cases?

   Daniel: tension btw terminologies (loose) and ontologies (rigorous,
   formal) - there is no easy answer re: best solution - if SKOS can
   support both communities that would be ideal.

   Daniel: tradeoff between precision and recall - SKOS not appealing
   if doesn't accommodate need of some for crisp, formal semantics

   Daniel: BT/NT very high-level - need more specific types of
   relationships
   ... more useful for reasoning services

   Daniel: in anatomic models there are loosely defined links
   ... important communites are looking forward to adopt standards like
   dublin core and skos
   ... communities for functional genomics - consortium of researchers
   - basic biological research data - high-level ontology to subsume
   experimental investigation.

   Ralph: Daniel, the first two cases would be interested in more
   precise semantics. Are there specific applications?
   ... what would motivate the need for more precise semantics?

   Daniel: some communities are using classification to recognize
   inconsistencies
   ... they want to create more 'intelligent' services
   ... e.g. reasoning application which uses FMA

   Ralph: what is the level of eagerness of these communities to follow
   swd schedule?

   ... what is our time window of opportunity?

   Daniel: they want standards
   ... we're doing their work so timing is great

   TomB: acknowledge Sean and Daniel

   SeanB: Is there a gray area between scruffy and neat? some migration
   path
   ... from application neeeding simple knowledge
   ... to application needing rich formal semantics

   Sean: Even uses of subsomption can help

   Ralph: it might be interesting to extend on Daniel's examples
   refering to the SKOS draft
   ... use cases should point to things that work well
   ... and to things that need more attention

   <scribe> ACTION: Daniel to link his use case to SKOS draft [recorded
   in [14]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-minutes.html#action01]

RDF in XHTML

   Ben: everyone interesting in RDFs is invited to participate

   <RalphS> [15]meeting record: 2006-10-23 RDF-in-XHTML TF telecon

     [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0046.html

   Ben: goal is to make RDF work as XHTML1.1 module
   ... 2 documents: RDFa syntax (more formal) and RDFa primer

   <RalphS> [16]editor's draft RDFa syntax document

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/syntax/

   <RalphS> [17]editor's draft RDFa primer

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/primer/

   ... create chunk of html self-contained wrt metadata
   ... next steps: reification + containers
   ... target is 4/6 weeks for next working drafts

   Ben:Many people would not want to get involved in huge level of
   technical detail

   ... but continuing copying important documents is useful
   ... to get feedback

   RalphS: additional information that would be useful to have with
   SKOS use cases and schedule expectations for UC&R

   Ben: about the documents issued by last TF
   ... they should get feedback from the WG

   RalphS: an HTML WG shares these work items
   ... the charter for that group is still underway ... there could be
   some re-scheduling to match

   RalphS:could some of Daniel's use cases both apply to SKOS and RDFa?
   ...Involving HTML documents with embedded metadata?

   Daniel: could be. No immediate example now

Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies

   -> Postponed

   <RalphS> [18]Recipes Working Draft - comments from May 2006 TomB
   2006=10-24]

     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0049.html

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Daniel to link his use case to SKOS draft [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-minutes.html#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Alistair give pointers to deployed SKOS systems.
   [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action06]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph consider a tutorial on scribe conventions
   [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: ralph to link to chris' telecon notes from SWD
   homepage [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action02]

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action06
     [21] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action01
     [22] http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action02

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version 1.127
    ([24]CVS log)
    $Date: 2006/10/25 16:40:10 $

     [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 25 October 2006 21:23:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:26 GMT