- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:13:04 -0500
- To: public-swd-wg@w3.org
The record of today's Semantic Web Deployment Working Group telecon
is now available. Thanks, Alistair, for scribing:
http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html
A text snapshot follows.
----
SWD WG
09 Dec 2008
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Dec/0055.html
See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2008-12-02
[3] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-irc
[4] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html
Attendees
Present
Tom Baker, Antoine Isaac, Ralph Swick, Sean Bechhofer,
Alistair Miles, Antoine Isaac, Ed Summers
Regrets
Ben Adida
Chair
Tom
Scribe
Alistair
Contents
* Topics
1. admin
2. RDFa
3. recipes
4. RDFa metadata note
5. AOB
6. SKOS
7. Issue 157
8. SKOS Implementations
* Summary of Action Items
_____________________________________________________
admin
RESOLUTION: to accept minutes of the last telecon:
[15]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html
[15] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html
tomb: next telecon 16 dec
ralph: regrets for 16 dec
RDFa
ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group
Note [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[CONTINUES]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02
recipes
ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15]
[CONTINUES]
[17] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes
implementations] [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
[CONTINUES]
[18] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20
RDFa metadata note
ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the
metadata note [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[CONTINUES]
[19] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03
AOB
ACTION: Guus to look at OWL documents for review [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[CONTINUES]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10
SKOS
ACTION: Sean to add rdf:type and rdf:Property assertions to the skos
schema [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07] [DONE]
[21] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07
seanb: in latest version of schema, looking for link
<seanb> Schema is at: ->
[22]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20081001/skos.rdf
[22] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20081001/skos.rdf
ACTION: Guus discuss response to issue 157 with Sean [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12] [DONE]
[23] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12
seanb: guus posted the draft for 157
-> [24]ISSUE-157 Draft response was Re: OWL WG LC comment for SKOS
reference document] [Guus 2008-12-04]
[24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Dec/0037.html
ACTION: Antoine to write something in Primer wrt. ISSUE 160
[recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14]
[CONTINUES]
[25] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14
ACTION: Antoine propose 1 or 2 SPARQL examples showing named graph
usage [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14]
[CONTINUES]
[26] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14
Issue 157
Alistair: Guus wrote a [27]draft proposing to rearrange the examples
... however Peter wasn't satisfied
... Guus noted some things that OWL DL wouldn't support
... Antoine noted issues with the rearrangement as this would
introduce stylistic differences between the Reference and the Primer
... Guus proposed that the OWL Full examples be collected under a
caveat
... we need to find a way to resolve issue 157
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Dec/0037.html
-> [28]issue 157; Last Call Comment: SKOS and OWL 2 analysis
[28] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/157
Antoine: was Peter's comment about SKOS itself?
Sean: Peter's worries are not about the data model itself but about
the presentation of the examples
... Peter was concerned that if we used OWL Full patterns in the
examples this would encourage [more] people to use OWL Full
seanb: can't stop people doing anything, but peter keen we don't use
rdf:value in example
antoine: people should use patterns about to be hidden, because most
simple and common ones
... uncomfortable with encouragement
Alistair: if this is a problem we need an alternative
antoine: clear warning about OWL DL
... reference has normative value, so people won't come in to primer
first
... so maybe sub-optimal
seanb: we have these three examples, a literal, a blank node with
rdf:value, and a URI -- you want to see all three with equal value?
antoine: literal one is most common, simplest
... wouldn't use rdf:value, but means don't need URIs for notes, so
could be beneficial
seanb: came late, but alistair had alternative proposal to consider
them as annotation properties, so then problem using them with
literals and objects goes away
antoine: at first glance ok with that, already something we have for
labeling properties, so re-using this solution is proper way to do
it
... might still be problems with use of annotation properties
seanb: rdf:value is still an issue, but would solve some of the
problems
antoine: anything about rdf:value in OWL 2?
seanb: not mentioned, has no semantics
antoine: what is problem with it?
tomb: where is use of rdf:value documented? mentioned in primer, in
reference too?
aliman: just in an example in reference
antoine: in rdf semantics, listed with containers, collections etc.
just gives ideas on use, no formal constraint
tomb: more like a usage convention
antoine: small paragraph of 7 lines, meaning can vary
<Antoine> [29]http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#ReifAndCont
[29] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#ReifAndCont
Alistair: to make Peter happy we should look at how rdf:value is
being treated in OWL2
... suppose we made all of the properties be owl:AnnotationProperty
?
... but leave the Primer as it is
Antoine, Sean: I'd be happy
Sean: Guus might not be satisfied
seanb: i would support that
... discussing with simon jupp, why aren't documentation props
annotation props? tells a consistent story
... veering towards substantial change, I'm not sure it is.
antoine: given that skos:note is for annotations, easy to defend.
seanb: object properties (semantic relations), then labeling and
documentation properties (annotation properties)
antoine: difficult to defend doc props not as annotation props
Alistair: someone might want to add an extension to SKOS that placed
cardinality restrictions on some properties
Antoine: complicated because there are many annotation properties in
the SKOS world
aliman: i can live with them as annotation props
seanb: ralph, do you see this as a substantive change? more
editorial?
ralph: not sure ... from two viewpoints: Would any developer of a
skos tool have to change their code to conform to altered version of
reference? Or, likely that any existing LC comments would disagree
with this proposed change? I.e. would anyone feel this is
unacceptable change?
seanb: difficult to say
ralph: prefer to err on side of caution, if not sure, consider it
substantive
seanb: none of comments mention documentation properties; but maybe
not mentioned because totally happy;
ralph: suspect relatively few looking at OWL DL vs OWL Full
differences in detail
seanb: I would be happy with this change
tomb: what are implications if do consider this substantive?
ralph: we would need to do another last call
... formally, we don't have huge variety of choices; more than an
editorial change, peter feels it's important.
... but could say, we don't consider this change invalidates any
other reviews, and don't consider that skos implementers have to
make changes.
seanb: if happy to change to labeling props, then I'm surprised if
we're unhappy to similar change to doc props.
tomb: could we assert this is not substantive change, not hide
problem but ... to go to another last call over this seems to far on
the side of caution
ralph: i agree another last call is overkill. i wouldn't want to
wordsmith too finely to avoid substantive change question, just say
we have made the following changes.
seanb: we're still giving people option to comment, so this isn't
final.
ralph: purpose of this part of review process is to make sure, if
somebody did look very carefully at doc props and decide exactly
right, they wouldn't comment. need to make sure any reviewer who
could care is on notice that changes have occurred.
tomb: need to take an action?
aliman: need to redraft response to peter on 157
ACTION: seanb to redraft response to peter on ISSUE-157, where skos
doc props are annotation props, and rdf:value example is dropped
from skos reference [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action10]
tomb: any objections to this?
[none]
<Ralph> Sean, please make sure these sorts of things are explicit in
the Changes section
aliman: need to approve sean's drafts on namespace issues
seanb: approved and sent already
tomb: so look forward to next week, we should vote next week on a
resolution to request candidate rec in first week of jan, then on
next day ralph will ask for extension of charter to end of april
... Need to propose to go to candidate rec on the list, so can vote
at next week's call.
ACTION: alistair send email with editors' draft proposed for CR
before next telcon [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action11]
tomb: can say time has run out if no response by next week
Alistair: on 157, can Sean send his revised response based on
today's discussion directly to Peter?
Tom: yes, that would save time
PROPOSED: to respond to ISSUE-157 commenter, proposing skos
documentation props are made OWL annotation properties and rdf:value
example is removed from skos reference
tomb: any discussion?
RESOLUTION: to respond to ISSUE-157 commenter, proposing skos
documentation props are made OWL annotation properties and rdf:value
example is removed from skos reference
seanb: i'll check with guus, what if he doesn't like it?
tomb: then we have to go to list somehow
Alistair: we'll make a new editors' draft incorporating all the
changes we proposed to commentors
... will be contingent on Peter and Guus being willing to live with
the resolution to issue 157
SKOS Implementations
tomb: ask if, implementations, ed and antoine what's the status of
the LoC subject headings?
... any issues to resolve there?
edsu: we're both working on separate things, but kind of the same.
what LC is doing, what their not doing. lcsh.info was done as an
experiment by me, to get feedback on whether correct and/or useful.
... people here see it is useful, good feedback, most concerns come
back to having it live at real domain in LC rather than my domain,
no concerns about skos implementation details.
... antoine and I discussed things specific to LCSH, meaning to
write email on the topic, basically that LCSH has sets of concepts
that are more specialised than skos:Concept, e.g. topical concepts,
geographic concepts, form/genre concepts, things specific to LC.
antoine and I discussing, i've been inclined to specialise SKOS,
whereas antoine inclined to use skos:inScheme to identify
separate...
... groupings.
tomb: also wanted to ask about other vocabs in clay's department. i
was interested to see if marc relator terms are now declared as rdf
properties? have been for past 2-3 years, but proposal to declare
smae URIs as both rdf properties and skos concepts. antoine you
discussed that with clay?
antoine: not that. specific concept scheme of relations?
tomb: i went into skos reference, it's not a contradiction to say
that a skos concept is also an rdf property... but it makes my head
spin :)
edsu: i talked to rebecca about it, better to leave definitions as
they are. if want to declare elsewhere then fine, but leave existing
ones as are and keep uris stable
tomb: proposal was to additoinally say they are also skos concepts
... nothing formally says you can't do that, but i'm wondering what
it means
edsu: potentially confusing
tomb: can have sub-property relation between uri as property, and a
broader relation between same uris
... meeting in may, rdf schema doesn't distinguish preferred labels,
so feature of skos attractive, but labeling properties are not
committed to skos concepts, so could use preflabel with properties
antoine: but problem with semantic relations, restricted to skos
concepts.
tomb: i sent a not to clay, wanted to follow up
... if using marc relator terms as implementation, need to resolve
that.
... anything else to discuss?
seanb: on topic of implementations, some work here (manchester)
simon jupp building api infrastructure for skos and an editor as
well, so can use as implementation experience
edsu: i've been emailing with simon, he's been using lcsh.info as
testbed
seanb: simon makes use of schema to drive the application, so if we
change schema he can cope with that
ralph: two action items not carried forward...
ACTION: [PENDING] Ralph to report on use of RDFa metadata in
Recommendations. [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[32] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02
ACTION: Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation examples of
the use of rdfs:label w/ SKOS [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[DROPPED]
[33] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10
tomb: meeting adjourned
Tom:we dropped that action re: rdfs:label last week
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: alistair send email with editors' draft proposed for
CR before next telcon [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action11]
[NEW] ACTION: seanb to redraft response to peter on ISSUE-157, where
skos doc props are annotation props, and rdf:value example is
dropped from skos reference [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[PENDING] ACTION: Antoine propose 1 or 2 SPARQL examples showing
named graph usage [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14]
[PENDING] ACTION: Antoine to write something in Primer wrt. ISSUE
160 [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition
to Group Note [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[PENDING] ACTION: Guus to look at OWL documents for review [recorded
in [39]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of
the metadata note [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph to report on use of RDFa metadata in
Recommendations. [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft
[recorded in
[42]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of
Recipes implementations] [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
[36] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14
[37] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14
[38] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02
[39] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10
[40] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03
[41] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02
[42] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15
[43] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20
[DONE] ACTION: Guus discuss response to issue 157 with Sean
[recorded in
[44]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12]
[DONE] ACTION: Sean to add rdf:type and rdf:Property assertions to
the skos schema [recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07]
[44] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12
[45] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07
[DROPPED] ACTION: Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation
examples of the use of rdfs:label w/ SKOS [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10]
[46] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10
[End of minutes]
_____________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [47]scribe.perl version 1.133
([48]CVS log)
$Date: 2008/12/09 17:11:27 $
[47] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[48] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2008 17:13:32 UTC