Draft minutes from 2008-07-01 teleconference

http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-awwsw-minutes.html
and also below in plain text.

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

   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                                 AWWSW

01 Jul 2008

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-awwsw-irc

Attendees

   Present
          TimBL, JonathanRees, DBooth, StuartWilliams

   Regrets
          Noah

   Chair
          Jonathan (jar)

   Scribe
          dbooth

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswJarNotes20080630
     * [5]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________


   jar, i've just emailed amy, but we better call her for help getting
   a bridge line

   <jar> talking to ralph now

   thanks

   <jar> 'one moment'

   <jar> zakim. this will be awwsw

   <jar> dialing in now

[6]http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswJarNotes20080630

      [6] http://esw.w3.org/topic/AwwswJarNotes20080630

   jar: (Gives tim an update on discussion for the past few weeks.)

   timbl: Lots of people see a diff btwn IR and representation over
   HTTP.

   jar: Alan's view seems to be a sequence of bits w mime type, varying
   over time.

   <jar> alan would like to rule out content negotiation

   tim: we can argue over whehter IR fundamentally *is* a mapping or
   *has* a mapping, but that doesn't answer how the web works. To me
   writing rules like david has been writing, that's valuable, because
   it can be used in software.

   jar: It's one thing to say what triples tabulator should assert, and
   much harder to say what is an IR, but I'm trying to look in the
   middle: when is an RDF graph consistent w server behavior?
   ... e.g., you've asserted that 3 is not an IR. So if I have a URI
   that denotes 3, we want that to be indicated as disjoint from IR.
   ... So we want to know not only what is an IR but what is *not* an
   IR.
   ... But the AWWW doesn't give enough guidance to know whwther 3
   could be an IR.

   <jar> timbl: 3 is not an IR is more a statement of programming
   language types

   timbl: We're not doing physics, we're doing engineering. One could
   design a system in which 3 is an IR. You can write a programming
   language in which numbers are strings ... it's a question of design.
   ... Could you consider 3 to be a document in which the value is 3?
   You could do that, and it's not fundamentally inconsistent, but it's
   more complicated to program, more difficult to think about, etc.

   jar: who makes those decisions? You, me, Xiaou Shu?
   ... Those decisions need to be articulated in a waht that lets me
   know what to do.

   <jar> timbl: an ontology should be grounded in code

   timbl: We're going in the right direction by writing an ont and
   rules.
   ... But I don't expect to complete the sentence: "An IR is a ____"

   jar: Yes, you want things to be grounded in code, but the code
   doesn't know what to do with things it hasn't seen before. E.g., is
   pamphlet an IR?

   timbl: That's why we generate an ont.

   jar: We cannot enumerate every possible thing that isn't an IR.
   ... We don
   ... We don't want an engineer down the road to be surprised by timbl
   saying "3 is not an IR".

   timbl: Why do you need to enumerate them all? We build a system, and
   people connect it up.
   ... and we say "IR is not a physical object", but we don't have to
   provide something that will answer every question involving IR. That
   would take an infinite amount of time.

   jar: someone trying to connect another ont to this system, it seems
   useful to have some sort of guidance.

   timbl: i think the second gen of people using SW tech will not argue
   about it. They'll know what would happen if they did -- they've
   internalized it.
   ... When you first introduce OO programming it is strange, but the
   next time it comes easily. people won't keep going back to
   fundamentals.
   ... Because there will be such a mesh of people with such a large
   amount of understanding about it that they can ask around the
   corner.
   ... You should write something down, but you should have limited
   expectations about that. If we write it for a general audience and
   then someone comes back saying "that doesn't help me", and we would
   have to write something different for that person, or sit them down
   with lots of beers,e tc.

   jar: there are various entities that i'll have to deal with, and
   there may be millions of edge cases. And without clearer guidance
   I'll have to do 303s which seems unfortunate.

   timbl: If you're building an ont of works and concepts, there may be
   lots of ways you can go, you're doing engineering not physics.
   Deciding whehter something is an IR is deciding whether you want
   someone to be able to read it.

   jar: But it's a decision I'm not free to make, because when i think
   something is an IR, you come and say it is not.
   ... Suppose i want to give a URI to the meaning of a fragement of a
   doc, or for a representation. Things that are arbitrarily close to
   the border between IR and non-IR.

   timbl: If you take apart the software system, most of the things a C
   program talks about are not files.

   jar: People like to do URIs with 200 responses for all sorts of
   things, adn I cannot tell ahead of time whether they are IRs.

   timbl: If you want to model a blog, you'll have a much more fine
   grained ont than the average person.

   <jar> timbl: if you want to model a blog, you have a more fine
   grained ontology than the ordinary person

   timbl: But if you ask serious bloggers, they'll say the blog is the
   whole conceptual thing.

   jar: But i'm asking what i can use the URI for?

   <jar> dbooth: but a journal article is close to an IR too

   <jar> timbl: if you go to the handle system, the 200 you get back is
   not always the article

   timbl: journal article is an IR, it's got meaning

   <Stuart> Try: [7]http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.1238

      [7] http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.1238

   timbl: but if you go to the publisher you'll likely get a 303
   because they want to treat it as an abstract object.

   <jar> timbl: a journal article is inherently an IR

   <timbl> [8]http://example.com/fred/myarticleinccvm.ps

      [8] http://example.com/fred/myarticleinccvm.ps

   dbooth: so it sounds like you're saying that a journal article can
   *also* be something more than an IR.

   <timbl> [9]http://publisher.example.com/journals/cacm/234/45

      [9] http://publisher.example.com/journals/cacm/234/45

   <jar> timbl: the abovenamed thing may be the same work as ...

   <Stuart> Try a concrete (DOI) example...
   [10]http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.1238

     [10] http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.1238

   dbooth: So an IR is permitted to have *some* additional properties,
   but not others.

   timbl: On this call i want to write an ont, not prose about what IR
   is.
   ... e.g., IR is disjoint with RDF literals.
   ... Because there is no single upper ont that everyone has bought
   into, then the first thing we'll discuss is whether an IR can be a
   sign, then a huge discussion will ensue about what we mean by
   "sign".
   ... So I'm wary about simply giving a definition of IR. I don't
   think we can give a decision algorithm.

   jar: Alan recently brought up a nasty issue about URIs.

   timbl: The TAG wrote about that earlier. We called it a URI ladder.

   Alan's issue on URIs:
   [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2008Jun/0019.ht
   ml

     [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-awwsw/2008Jun/0019.html

   <Stuart> [12]http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt section 6, 6.1 and
   6.2

     [12] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt

   dbooth: The problem i see with trying to prohibit a resource from
   being both an IR and a Person is that that is architecturally no
   different than trying to prohibit a resource AKT from being both
   AKT1 and AKT2, i.e., the resource can simultaneously have properties
   of both AKT1 and AKT2 or both IR and Person.

   timbl: But the ont can specify IR such that it is disjoint from
   physical things.

   dbooth: Yes it can, but what is the architectural justification for
   excluding some things and not others?

   [ ran out of time ]

   ADJOURNED

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]
     _________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [13]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([14]CVS log)
    $Date: 2008/07/01 14:09:33 $
     _________________________________________________________

     [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [14] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51
Check for newer version at [15]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/

     [15] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: dbooth
Inferring Scribes: dbooth
Default Present: DBooth, +1.617.253.aaaa, TimBL, jar, stuart
Present: TimBL JonathanRees DBooth StuartWilliams
Regrets: Noah
Got date from IRC log name: 01 Jul 2008
Guessing minutes URL: [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-awwsw-minutes.ht
ml
People with action items:

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-awwsw-minutes.html

   End of [17]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm



David Booth, Ph.D.
HP Software
+1 617 629 8881 office  |  dbooth@hp.com
http://www.hp.com/go/software

Statements made herein represent the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of HP unless explicitly so stated.

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 14:16:14 UTC