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

Minutes of today -- and "informal actions"?

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:05:19 +0200
Message-ID: <4DB91FBF.8090909@few.vu.nl>
To: public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Hi everyone,

The minutes of our call today are at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/04/28-lld-minutes.html
A text version follows.
Thanks again to everyone who could make it, and Ed and Karen for scribing!

I have remark though, related to our final discussion. I recall that some participants expressed interest in reviewing parts of our report, especially on the benefits section (Hideaki and Dickson are the ones can I remember of) and contributing on the recommendations on education and training (Dickson).

We have not recorded formal actions on this. But it would be great if in the coming days anyone who showed interest in the topics of today could react to our calls for reviewers, and/or liaise with relevant section owners!
It is really crucial to leverage all the expertise the participants of our group have.

Best,

Antoine

----
    [1]W3C

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

                                 LLD XG

28 Apr 2011

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Apr/0066.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/04/28-lld-irc

Attendees

    Present
           antoine, TomB, kcoyle, emma, jeff_, Marcia, fumi, ikki,
           kosuke, edsu, DanChudnov, lukose

    Regrets
    Chair
           Tom

    Scribe
           edsu, kcoyle

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Reports on the status of the main deliverable
          2. [6]Issues
          3. [7]Available data: vocabularies and datasets
          4. [8]Relevant Technologies
          5. [9]General discussion
      * [10]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <edsu> scribenick: edsu

    <dchud> thanks TomB

Reports on the status of the main deliverable

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

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

    <kcoyle> Benefits section:
    [12]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits

      [12] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits

    <kcoyle> emma: it is important to start the report with a section of
    benefits that illustrates the value of linked data for libraries

    <kcoyle> ... started this with a review of the 42 use cases

    <emma> [13]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Benefits

      [13] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Benefits

    <kcoyle> ... started with a bullet point list, then organized in
    terms of 'benefits for whom?" -- everyone, librarians, developers,
    organizations

    <emma> [14]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits

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

    <kcoyle> ... then wrote summarizing text

    <kcoyle> ... main benefit is that everything will have a URI so it
    can be referenced and de-referenced

    <kcoyle> ... and will make it possible to pull together data

    <kcoyle> ... then benefits for different users, like researchers,
    etc.

    <scribe> scribenick: edsu

Issues

    kcoyle: we began with the use cases, and extracted from them all the
    issues and problems that were identified
    ... we brought these together and came up w/ 3 different categories:
    management, collaboration and extending of standards, library
    standards themselves

    [15]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_issues_page

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_issues_page

    kcoyle: libraries by their nature work in a stable and somewhat
    unchanging environment, and how this effects making changes to
    linked data: price, rights ... and how libraries have large amounts
    of data already, and how this needs to get translated into this new
    format
    ... that's the high level

    TomB: to elborate on this point of translation: we want to make
    reference to different design decisions that can be made in
    transation, but we don't want to go into too much detail

Available data: vocabularies and datasets

    [16]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabulary_and_Dataset

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabulary_and_Dataset

    marcia: in general we have two main parts

    marcia: metadata element sets (rdf schemas, owl ontologies)

    <TomB>
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/File:LLD-MetadataEleme
    ntSetCloudMock.png

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/File:LLD-MetadataElementSetCloudMock.png

    marcia: there is a plan that antoine will draw a picture of how
    metadata terms are reused by each other
    ... the 2nd major part includes the value-vocabularies and datasets
    ... the idea is to use the linked-open-data registered in the ckan
    to show what is relevant for library linked data
    ... value vocabularies can be used to cover entities and subject
    vocabularies
    ... most of the vocabularies are mentioned in the use cases
    ... the part we haven't finished yet is on published datasets

    <emma> LLD on CKAN : [18]http://ckan.net/package?groups=lld

      [18] http://ckan.net/package?groups=lld

    kind of interesting too:
    [19]http://semantic.ckan.net/group/?group=http://ckan.net/group/lld

      [19] http://semantic.ckan.net/group/?group=http://ckan.net/group/lld

    antoine: that's the work of william

    <marcia>
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabulary_and_Dataset

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabulary_and_Dataset

    antoine: we plan on having a specific section on vocabulary
    datasets, but we have not yet made progress on it
    ... the idea would be to start with a summary, to start with the
    most representative vocabularies/ontologies and value vocabularies
    ... e.g. for frbr there are several ones, we would identify the
    issues: when there are more than one, and when there aren't any
    ... we have been working on the side deliverable to help us identify
    the issue first

Relevant Technologies

    <jeff_>
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Relevant_Technol
    ogies

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Relevant_Technologies

    <scribe> scribenick: kcoyle

    Jeff: Trying to explain linked data is a challenge -- i've written a
    few paragraphs to try to explain the relevant technologies
    ... but it's not just a question of having new tools; have to use
    domain-specific technologies, etc.
    ... the relevant technologies are allowing us to create the
    infrastructure; it's not tools, but it's about taking the data we
    have today
    ... and mapping to these new technologies; leaving our current
    infrastructure in place
    ... sees 3-4 different categories of things happening; like take
    existing relational databases and map those to technologies
    ... can store new data in new ways that aren't as hard to map as our
    old schemas
    ... use OWL-based design technologies; there are tools to help us do
    that development
    ... then there is the controlled vocabulary level, such as SKOS; not
    classes or properties, but usable vocabularies
    ... modeling question between what things are best described in OWL
    and what in SKOS
    ... much of this gets off-loaded to W3C as the keeper of RDF /
    Semantic Web standards

    <Zakim> edsu, you wanted to ask about using web frameworks and rdfa

    <TomB> Edsu: A-ha moment for me: Django tools made it easy to create
    a Website with URIs - that I could use that for publishing RDF too.

    <keven> is there any tech (or policy guidelines) can be used to keep
    the linkage in linked data (esp. the which used in the name spaces)
    more sustainable, like cache technology. For the maintainance of the
    links in linked data is quite fatal.

    <antoine> @keven: sthg like that? [22]http://dsnotify.org/

      [22] http://dsnotify.org/

    <keven> ok thanks to antonie. i'll look into that

    <TomB> ...Cobble together some RDF/XML. Karen in Open Library: Web
    publishing framework - created templates that would generate RDF.

    <TomB> ...Seems overwhelming when people discuss SW tech stack -
    "convert all your data", "you need a SPARQL endpoint" - developers
    tune out.

    <TomB> ...Legacy systems that we have. Do not have to discard to do
    something useful.

    <TomB> Jeff: In my case, played with Rails - still doing domain
    models - object-oriented classes - variables get mapped to database.
    Tried hard. Could produce RDF that way, but frustrating.

    <TomB> ...That's why I like ?DVRQ database - do in two days what I
    spent six months doing with Rails.

    <TomB> Edsu: Opposite experience.

    <TomB> Jeff: Maybe walk thru the steps I took. Compare scaffolding
    languages. Important that we be able to do with data we have. Chance
    to start to migrate.

    <TomB> Edsu: RDFa. Rails and Django.

    <TomB> Jeff: But Grails has default URI pattern. Now you're stuck.
    URIs a huge problem - designing good ones.

    <TomB> Edsu: Haven't had any trouble - optimized for defining URI
    spaces. Get you thinking about resources and how am I naming them.
    Web developers looking at this section would want to see this.

    <TomB> Jeff: Compare approaches.

    <edsu> scribenick: edsu

    keven: are there any policies for keeping the linkage in linked
    data, e.g. which namespaces are used, using cache technologies to
    help maintain links

    jeff_: caching is normally for network efficiency ; the domain not
    being supported anymore is a bit different
    ... imagine dbpedia going away ... i don't know what the answer is
    ... publishing the information in bulk can help

    <keven> thx anyway

    TomB: any more questions can be typed into IRC

    <Zakim> edsu, you wanted to mention 301

    <keven> do you have any comments on drupal used for linked data
    application?

    <marcia> ed: big search engines look at things that moves

    <keven> we plan to have a try on drupal to publish some exprimental
    biblio data

    <jeff_> The PURL server can help too. Somebody could step in.

    <marcia> ed: this is the architecture of the Web issue

    <TomB> Edsu: Do a 301 redirect when a site moves permanently to
    another location. People who care about link integrity - don't want
    to serve up dead links - part of the architecture. Link rot.
    Identifiers break. They do not give the URI enough respect.

General discussion

    <lukose> are there any guideline for representing and linking the
    "DataSet" and the "Model" used in producing the results outlined in
    a scientific publication, to the "meta-data" of the publication?

    <lukose> yes

    kcoyle: is this about the underlying data?

    <kosuke_> @keven are you using this module?
    [23]http://drupal.org/project/linked_data

      [23] http://drupal.org/project/linked_data

    <lukose> absolutely correct!

    TomB: so linking a scientific publication with the data used

    <marcia> tom: this is about linking sci publication with the data
    used to describe the publication

    [24]http://datacite.org/

      [24] http://datacite.org/

    <marcia> ... is there a standard way to link the two?

    <keven> @kosuke: yes

    [25]http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january11/starr/01starr.html

      [25] http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january11/starr/01starr.html

    <marcia> ed: someone sent a link to this article

    <emma> suggest to look at
    [26]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Cluster_Citations

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Cluster_Citations

    <TomB> Edsu: Link to D-lib article in January - looking at this
    problem. Looking at LD approaches to linking data to publications. A
    consortium that started in 2009.

    <TomB> ...Herbert van de Sompel - OAI-ORE.

    <TomB> Jeff: Hard time understanding OAI-ORE - aggregations nice,
    but what are its boundaries? How do you draw those boundaries.

    jeff_: hard to imagine what the boundaries of aggregations are in
    oai-ore and how to draw those boundaries

    antoine: i think ore could be used, but there is no standard way to
    use it to link articles to datasets
    ... i think it's still an active topic of research

    <TomB> Antoine: ORE could be used but there is no standard way to
    use it for linking articles to datasets. Still a topic of research.
    Alot of activitity about scientific data. Have not heard about
    standard ways.

    antoine: i've not heard of standard ways, but there are lots of
    things happening

    lukose: good question :)

    <kcoyle> just found this:
    [27]http://www.std-doi.de/front_content.php

      [27] http://www.std-doi.de/front_content.php

    <lukose> ok, thanks guys.... this is an interesting challange...

    <antoine> could be interesting to mention in report!

    antoine++

    TomB: perhaps you could consider mentioning it in your section?

    <jeff_> The Dryad project at UNC Chapel Hill is working on relating
    scientific publications with scientific data sets

    <marcia> D-Lib article:
    [28]http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january11/starr/01starr.html

      [28] http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january11/starr/01starr.html

    <marcia> D-Lib: isCitedBy: A Metadata Scheme for DataCite

    antoine: i think it's more of a research area

    <jeff_> [29]http://datadryad.org/

      [29] http://datadryad.org/

    edsu: might make sense to capture it as a possible vocabulary gap

    <marcia> D-Lib issue on research data:
    [30]http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january11/01contents.html

      [30] http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january11/01contents.html

    TomB: we need to have a good elevator pitch, or top-level story
    ... one problem we have is that libraries have changed technologies
    many times
    ... the movement to linked data could look like another one

    <marcia> * antoine, maybe we need to add that metadata scheme even
    though no use case

    TomB: we want to convey that there is a paradigm shift between
    record based data with statement based data

    TomB: the report is targeted at decision makers, who will be in a
    position to set policy within their organisations
    ... any final questions in the 7 minutes remaining?
    ... any comments from malaysia, china and japan on how the linked
    data idea is being perceived, and what sort of arguments do we need
    to put into place in order to convince decision makers that this is
    something they should devote some resources to

    <marcia> Tom: do you want to talk: Recommendations (Karen, Tom)
    [31]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_recommendations_
    page

      [31] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_recommendations_page

    hideaki: is it for leaders of libraries and museums?

    <kcoyle> and top level managers, no?

    TomB: yes

    <TomB> Hideaki: in Japan. To decision-makers, we often have to
    explain benefits of RDF. Prefer to have simple explanations.

    TomB++

    <lukose> my challange is in creating awareness of the LOD
    developments arround the world, to our local lib (national archive,
    national lib, etc....), so I am conducting workshops...the next
    challange is the benefits of this to the organization.

    <marcia> TomB: that is exactly what we are trying to summarize just
    3-4 pages

    <marcia> .. the benifits for different categories

    <Zakim> antoine, you wanted to comment on reviewing or contrib to
    recs

    TomB: that's why we're trying to boil down the high level benefits
    for different groups

    <keven> usually decision makers in library circle used to adopt
    turn-key solutions for them. they don't care about the linked data
    technology. so the benefit for them is important to get
    conciousness. for the techie people they need tools, tools, tools.

    <marcia> .. for librarians, developers

    <lukose> yes, I would very much like to help....

    antoine: could hideaki and lukose play a more formal role in
    reviewing the benefits? since they have to talk to decision makers
    it would be great to have them look at it

    <kcoyle> I also suspect that benefits may vary by country or
    region... so there may be benefits that we haven't identified?

    TomB: currently the benefits secition is about 2 pages, it still has
    some rough edges, but it should be ready to be reviewed by the
    teleconference next tuesday

    <keven> i'd love to take a review on this

    <marcia> TomB: the benifit section is very important and to be
    discussed next week

    TomB: since it is so crucial, it would be great if we had your help

    <marcia> .. is any of you can volunteer to review, it will be very
    helpful.

    <marcia> .. we may sign reviewers on the May 5th

    TomB: if you could comment on the mailing list which ones work and
    which ones don't ; also a review of the recommendations would be
    helpful

    <Zakim> antoine, you wanted to comment on workshops

    antoine: one specific point about workshops and education, if there
    is any experience available in the kind of topic that should be
    mentioned in such workshops, what sort of targets, it would be
    really nice, it turns out gunter may not be able to contribute

    <marcia> Antoine: workshops on education, if anyone can jump in to
    make recommendations that will be helpful

    <marcia> .. especailly if there are expereince

    <lukose> I can make some contribution on my experience in doing
    these lectures and workshops...

    <antoine> lukose++

    <marcia> *no, ed, I could not see

    <kosuke> @antoine excuse me, does "linking articles to datasets" in
    ORE mean "citation" in this topic?

    <marcia> *just try to duplicate

    kosuke: yes we did look at that in the context of citation

    <antoine> @kosuke: not sure, maybe we could discuss that by email

    kosuke: did you run across that wiki page?

    <keven> thanks for having me here

    <lukose> tq

    <emma> thx !

    <dchud> thank you!

Summary of Action Items

    [End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 08:03:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 28 April 2011 08:03:41 GMT