W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > April 2011

Minutes 2011-04-07

From: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:57:57 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTinF6O1GV2AjWy-qtgHRUoCZoVCw0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>, public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Hi, all,

Here are the edited minutes from today's call:
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/04/07-lld-minutes.html

A text version of the transcript is included in this email.

Thanks to everybody who participated!
-Ross.


   [1]W3C

      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                LLD XG

07 Apr 2011

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Apr/0000.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/04/07-lld-irc

Attendees

   Present
          emma_, antoine, rsinger, TomB, dvilasuero, kefo, jeff_,
          pmurray, michaelp, digikim, marcia, Jonathan_Rees, ww

   Regrets
          Monica, Jodi, Ed, Ray, Gordon, Lars, Uldis, Kai, Joachim,
          Felix, Alexander

   Chair
          Emma

   Scribe
          Ross

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Admin
         2. [6]FINAL REPORT DRAFT
     * [7]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________

   <emma_> Previous: 2011-03-31
   [8]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minut
   es.html

      [8] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html

   <emma_> Scribe: Ross

   <emma_> scribenick: rsinger

Admin

   PROPOSED: To accept
   12[9]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-min
   utes.html

      [9] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html

   Asia-Pacific Telecon:

   ><TomB> will get in touch with Japanese colleagues to arrange a new
   time.

FINAL REPORT DRAFT

   Use case and requirements report, dvilasuero

   <emma_>
   [10]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Apr/0011.h
   tml

     [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Apr/0011.html

   dvilasuero: not much time to work on this
   ... followed recommendation from TomB
   ... any comments? Hints?

   <emma_> [11]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCaseReport

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCaseReport

   <antoine> -> an HTML page

   antoine: there are some templates available on the W3C site, we can
   reuse them

   TomB: I suggest we do it in the wiki and then transfer it over to
   HTML, unless your preference is editing HTML

   emma_: any comments?

   <TomB> +1 discuss now

   antoine: Sent email to the list with some comments, we can discuss
   now? Later?
   ... First, it's definitely the right direction

   <emma_> +1 for the graph :-)

   antoine: I like the graph, it's useful to have visual information of
   the process
   ... 2) We are really able to see the differences between the use
   cases, so hopefully we can get more homogeneous description between
   them
   ... some are not compatible from an editorial perspective with the
   others
   ... get the curators to come back, read the descriptions and revise
   them

   emma_: the extracted use cases?

   antoine: yes, the extracted use cases

   <dvilasuero>
   [12]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCaseReport#Extracte
   d_Use_Cases

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCaseReport#Extracted_Use_Cases

   antoine: another comment, agrovoc use case, there could be comments
   on the wording, but this is exactly what I was looking for

   dvilasuero: this is an example from TomB

   antoine: size and level of detail is perfect

   dvilasuero: everyone can go back and participate in the editing of
   this page

   antoine: small editorial comment, add links to the wiki pages

   dvilasuero: both for the use cases and the clusters?

   antoine: yes
   ... general structure, would it be more interesting to have the
   extracted use cases first?

   <marcia> +1

   dvilasuero: sounds correct

   <TomB> +1 on switching order of "extracted" use cases and individual
   use cases

   <Zakim> emma_, you wanted to ask about overlapping extracted cases

   emma_: there might be cases where there are overlaps

   antoine: do you have a specific example of overlaps?

   emma_: no specifics, but I remember some of the clusters have
   similarities

   antoine: reluctant to remove structure; useful reading guide

   emma_: if you think it's useful to keep the clusters...

   antoine: not so sure, just a gut feeling

   dvilasuero: maybe we can keep for now, and when completed we can
   revisit organization

   <Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that descriptions of the
   individual use cases include at least one pointing to the project or
   case. Wondering whether that link should be to the

   TomB: each of these descriptions point to another document, should
   that be the frozen wiki page? or directly to the project, which
   would require a little more work?

   emma_: what is your recommendation?

   <antoine> +1

   TomB: I would suggest they point to the frozen wiki pages

   <dvilasuero> +1 to tomb

   <antoine> also ensures that some description remains

   emma_: I agree, more persistence.

   <digikim> uh great, I found the _transcluded_ version of the report.
   this is much easier to check than tens of different wiki pages...
   just wondering if this transcluded version is up to date... (?)

   TomB: These pages capture the project at a particular point in time

   antoine: Terminology: some are just example cases, not actually use
   cases - not real user scenarios
   ... perhaps we should adapt the naming convention, "Contributed
   cases"?

   <marcia> Agree that this is an issue... some of them are not 'use
   cases'

   emma_: we had a lot of discussion on this and the definition of what
   was actually expected
   ... or do we want to call this a use case report?

   antoine: we can, although they may not actually be use cases
   ... a cluster is a list of use cases
   ... ok as a textual explanation of the graph

   emma_: should we just forget explanation of the process and produce
   the results?

   antoine: we should remind readers that a call had been sent, that
   this is community contribution, etc.

   emma_: dvilasuero, may want to ask on the list

   <TomB> dvilasuero, I have parked references to the use case wiki
   pages in
   [13]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCaseReport#Referenc
   es for now...

     [13] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCaseReport#References

   dvilasuero: we should describe what this graph is
   ... and have a discussion on the mailing list

   <TomB> ...for cutting and pasting...

   <marcia> There could also be some 'see also' references between
   extracted case clusters-- some have more than others and may address
   an issue can apply to another cluster.

   <digikim> antoine:
   [14]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportWithTranscl
   usion

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportWithTransclusion

   emma_: at the end of the extracted use cases, there are two clusters
   that don't have any extracted use cases

   marcia: I looked at the new use case page, very good. could there be
   some kind of references to each other?
   ... there is the digital object extracted part, but it may have
   other issues already addressed by another part
   ... archives, bibliographic data, etc.
   ... this may save time
   ... readers could be attracted by the title "Digital Objects" and
   it's sparse - if there were references to other sections, they could
   be drawn to the other cases to see the overlaps

   emma_: Agreed, this is what I was referring to with overlaps.

   dvilasuero: i want to point out, re: overlapping, I identified some
   ... social uses shared with bibliographic data cluster
   ... didn't know which cluster to put it in, so for now it is
   duplicated

   <antoine> This is for individual contributed cases, isn't it?

   emma_: so sometimes it's duplicated, sometimes it's referenced

   emma_: are we talking about the clusters? or the individual cases?
   The clusters, right?

   dvilasuero: no, the individual cases

   emma_: maybe we can just make a link in that case
   ... any other comments?

   <dvilasuero> +1 emma's suggestion

   emma_: all this about vocabularies, etc. is not going into the use
   case report, it's going into the final report, is that right?
   ... that extracted in the clusters, issues, vocabs.
   ... is that the intention?

   antoine: all the stuff extracted from the use cases should make its
   way into the final report one way or another
   ... recommendations, issues, vocabularies, separate deliverable

   emma_: just keep the extracted cases?

   antoine: should be enough to keep the links to the use case "frozen
   wiki pages"

   emma_: any more questions on the use case report?

   dvilasuero: i should have more time in the coming days, so I will
   report on the progress

   emma_: great starting point, so thank you very much
   ... we have more time, so let's go through the other sections

   <dvilasuero> I am sorry but I have to run to a meeting, Thanks
   everyone for the feedback and help :-)

   <scribe> ACTION: For Gordon and Karen to consider relation between
   problems and limitation section and the library resource wiki page.
   [recorded in
   [15]"http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-min
   utes.html#action01][CONTINUES]

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minutes.html#action01

   emma_: Executive summary, we'll write later
   ... Benefits of LD in libraries, we discussed last week

   <scribe> ACTION: Cluster owners to check the bullet-point list
   reflects their understanding and covers relevant points [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minu
   tes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html#action04

   <scribe> ACTION: edsu, emma, rsinger to create narrative text and
   add to bullet-points [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minu
   tes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html#action05

   <marcia>
   [18]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Mar/0006.h
   tml

     [18] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Mar/0006.html

   Available data (vocabularies, datasets) (Antoine, Jeff, Marcia,
   William)

   cf.
   [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Mar/0006.h
   tml

     [19] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Mar/0006.html

   ww: going to spend some time this weekend with graphviz to make some
   pictures
   ... not sure of a Library data subcloud of the LOD cloud
   ... not sure that will happen before the deadline of this document

   antoine: will continue discussion over email

   emma_: this should be up for discussion next week?

   ww: yes

   Relevant technologies (as described in #6 in
   [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Feb/0034.h
   tml)

     [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Feb/0034.html)

   <TomB> +1 pictures :-)

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex, Jeff, Martin, MichaelP elaborate on general
   purpose IT architecture for dealing with linked data with caching
   feature (short sketch for final report) [recorded in
   [21]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/10/24-lld-minu
   tes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]

     [21] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/10/24-lld-minutes.html#action04

   jeff_: Do we want a couple paragraphs of relevant technology? Right
   now we have list of things

   emma_: these will go out of date quite quickly

   TomB: it will go out of date quickly; if somebody is willing to
   write something... Concerned about a relevant technology section
   being spotty

   <antoine> perhaps just a typology of tools, with one or two
   pointers?

   <TomB> @antoine: yes, something pretty high-level...

   <TomB> ...with disclaimers that "this is not exhaustive" and a few
   pointers to sources of maintained lists

   emma_: we will add this to the agenda

   TomB: to summarize, something high level that has disclaimers being
   non-exhaustive, time-sensitive, with points to sites that keep on
   top of the situation would be great
   ... small piece

   <antoine> [22]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Category:Tool

     [22] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Category:Tool

   emma: Problems and limitations section

   <antoine> -> this is the page I was refering to

   emma: any comments?

   TomB: We had some Skype calls, another early next week
   ... made great progress, not all reflected in doc on wiki, yet. We
   have assignments among ourselves
   ... problems AND recommendations, also part of that document

   pmurray: our Skype call is on Monday, 11 AM EDT, let us know if you
   want to join

   emma_: Requirements and recommendations section

   <emma_>
   [23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011Mar/0171.html

     [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011Mar/0171.html

   <scribe> ACTION: Karen to request feedback from community on
   recommendations [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minu
   tes.html#action04] [DONE]

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minutes.html#action04

   emma_: call scheduled on the subject of requirements, on April 25th

   antoine: question for pmurray and TomB, looking at vocabulary page,
   at the deliverable - there appear to be recommendations at the
   beginning, should this go into the recommendation section?

   <antoine>
   [25]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabularies#Vocabular
   y_discussion_in_Pittsburgh

     [25] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabularies#Vocabulary_discussion_in_Pittsburgh

   TomB: I will circulate that to the group and see if we can work it
   in

   emma_: any other business?

   <digikim> yes

   digikim: easier to read the report if it's transcluded to one big
   page

   <digikim> antoine: sounds good

   <digikim> deadline?

   <scribe> ACTION: Update the transcluded version of the report
   [digikim] [recorded in
   [26]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/04/07-lld-minu
   tes.html#action06]

   emma_: no deadline for this action
   ... any other business?

   [adjourned]

   <digikim> antoine: what would be the optimal day to do a first
   update of the transcluded? ("now", "next wednesday", ...?)

   <antoine> next wednesday is good

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Update the transcluded version of the report [digikim]
   [recorded in
   [27]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/04/07-lld-minu
   tes.html#action06]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Cluster owners to check the bullet-point list
   reflects their understanding and covers relevant points [recorded in
   [28]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minu
   tes.html#action04]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Alex, Jeff, Martin, MichaelP elaborate on general
   purpose IT architecture for dealing with linked data with caching
   feature (short sketch for final report) [recorded in
   [29]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/10/24-lld-minu
   tes.html#action04]
   [PENDING] ACTION: edsu, emma, rsinger to create narrative text and
   add to bullet-points [recorded in
   [30]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minu
   tes.html#action05]
   [PENDING] ACTION: For Gordon and Karen to consider relation between
   problems and limitation section and the library resource wiki page.
   [recorded in
   [31]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minu
   tes.html#action01]

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html#action04
     [29] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/10/24-lld-minutes.html#action04
     [30] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html#action05
     [31] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/31-lld-minutes.html#action01

   [DONE] ACTION: Karen to request feedback from community on
   recommendations [recorded in
   [32]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minu
   tes.html#action04]

     [32] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minutes.html#action04

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [33]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([34]CVS log)
    $Date: 2011/04/07 19:29:06 $

     [33] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [34] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 20:00:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 7 April 2011 20:00:03 GMT