W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ld4lt@w3.org > May 2014

[Minutes] LD4LT call 2014-05-15

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 11:34:13 +0200
Message-Id: <1B114939-78A4-41AD-812A-382B3BA2BB69@w3.org>
To: public-ld4lt@w3.org
and below as text. Note: I am sending out the text version since the the tracker tool monitors the mailing list; in this way the issues and actions list are automatically updated. Also, I will close the issue-2
with a link to today’s discussion.

- Felix


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

                               - DRAFT -

                                LD4LT CG

15 May 2014


      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014May/0005.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2014/05/15-ld4lt-irc


          DaveLewis, Gary, Kevin, MartinBenjamin, RobertoNavigli,
          ali, arle(IRC), asun, flati, fsasaki, john, jorge,
          maria, penny, phil, roberto, tizinao




     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]madrid meeting
         2. [6]Reaching agreement on core LR metadata ontologies,
            with META-SHARE
         3. [7]Guidelines for migrating existing LR metadata into
         4. [8]other issues + call time
         5. [9]aob
     * [10]Summary of Action Items

   <fsasaki_> scribe: fsasaki

   dave: reminder for all to join IRC during calls: go to
   [11]http://irc.w3.org , channel #ld4lt

     [11] http://irc.w3.org/

   agenda at

     [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014May/0005.html

   <daveL_> agenda:

     [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014May/0005.html

   dave going through agenda at

     [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014May/0005.html

   dave: I'll talk about last week in madrid, we had an LD4LT
   meeting - others can give their viewpoints as well
   ... then we'll discuss ongoing work on meta-share ontology
   ... then jorge, penny who provided useful info on mailing list
   - would be good to see where that work is
   ... there are a few technical issues discussed on the list. If
   there is a thread on this we mark that up as an issue


     [15] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/issues/

   <daveL_> [16]http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/

     [16] http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/

   above links gives issue list

   dave: the tracker tracks actions and issues
   ... the issue tracker gives us a way to track topics over
   several meetings, and can associate that with actions as well
   ... see e.g. issue-2 which is meta-share metamodel work
   ... we have use case and requirements as issue-1
   ... would not go through that today
   ... then there is an issue about dcat, issue-3
   ... we had last week discussion in madrid related to dcat
   ... there is an opportunity for cross over where

madrid meeting

   dave: there was LIDER meetings and MLW workshop, very
   succesfull, hosted by UPM

   about 100 people turning up

   dave: a broader set of discussions around multilingual web
   ... linked data not the only topic


     [17] http://www.multilingualweb.eu/documents/2014-madrid-workshop/

   see slides now linked from

     [18] http://www.multilingualweb.eu/documents/2014-madrid-workshop/2014-madrid-program


     [19] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/wiki/LD4LT_Group_Madrid_May_2014_Meeting

   (slides from the LIDER WS are now also linked)

   dave: felix had reached out to wikipedia translation group,
   alolita sharma came with a large team of wikimedia folks
   ... wikipedia is now trying to help people to translate pages
   ... they are looking into tools, machine translation and other
   ... they are also interested in data in other languages
   ... there is now also wikidata for creating data directly
   ... related to dbpedia which is about extracting data from
   ... anybody wants to add things about this?
   ... that was 1st day - 2nd day focused more on linked data and
   language technology
   ... we had several presentations from LIDER but also other (EU)
   ... we had discussions about data + metadata aspects of
   language resources
   ... several people from LD4LT where here, Christian Chiarcos
   from OLWG, Stelios Piperidis and Marta Villegas presenting
   about META-SHARE
   ... and many others. had good discussions
   ... had a good opportunity to talk about representations of
   language resource metadata
   ... good side discussions with EU and publications office about
   what they will do
   ... they are planning to publish parallel documents with fine
   grained identifiers - they are interested in the RDF version of
   ... these are legal text - high quality because of the domain
   ... covering many EU languages

   asun: one of the other outcomes:
   ... we need more cooperation with open knowledge foundation
   ... importance of having pure linguistic resources instead of
   having domian dependent language resources

   dave: agree
   ... we did not have Christian Chiarcos involved here so far
   ... these discussions will also continue at LREC related events
   I assume

   <MartinBenjamin> There have been some experiments with
   Wikipedia translation to Swahili that have been less than
   successful, using the Google Translate Toolkit. The biggest
   problem comes from running English articles through Google
   Translate, which is absolutely horrible for Swahili.

Reaching agreement on core LR metadata ontologies, with META-SHARE

   related issue-2


     [20] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014Apr/0011.html

   dave: had input from Jorge, thread is listed at

     [21] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/issues/2


     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014Apr/0017.html

   dave: meta-share ontology is very comprehensive already

   <MartinBenjamin> Big problem with using Wiki data is that
   things are written in wiki markup - no stable reference point
   to link anything below the article level. This is a disaster
   for trying to link Wiktionary data

   dave: issue is: how will this be transformed into an ontology
   to use in the linked data area
   ... jorge has set up a related link on the website


     [23] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/wiki/Meta-Share_OWL_metamodel


     [24] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/wiki/Meta-Share_OWL_metamodel

   jorge: in the wiki I added materials about meta-model
   description and the preliminary RDF version made by UPF
   ... we discussed - how to work on this in a collaborative
   ... I talked about several options: wiki, protege, gdocs
   ... it seems people are OK with gdocs spreadsheet
   ... I put the gdrive doc in a mode so you can share it with


     [25] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15SE4_qAqYFostmD52uKxpkCPZh1f5TrPeoXKNTlDYpQ/edit#gid=0

   jorge: wanted to check if this is suitable for everybody

   <MartinBenjamin> On the other hand, Wikipedia has a great
   hidden multilingual terms feature - interwiki links. Terms like
   "Down syndrome", or movie titles, etc, are very difficult to
   find in other languages. But if you go to the Wikipedia page
   for the topic, then follow the interwiki link to the page in
   your target language, the concept as expressed in that language
   is usually the article title or is high at the top. The problem
   again is how to exploit this a[CUT]

   jorge: if that's ok I can fill this with the current state,
   that is the ontology made at upf

   roberto: is this already populated?

   jorge: no, this is just a skeleton - if people agree I would
   add it

   dave: jorge, did you have discussions about what modules there
   might be?
   ... the current ontology e.g. has dublin core and others
   ... then there are many meta-share items
   ... did you have discussions how to reflect these in separate
   namespaces / modules?

   jorge: we just have discussed to keep the meta-share module as
   ... some part can be improved, e.g. about licenses

   penny: had some audio issues - what are you discussing
   ... I'm not an RDF expert so looking into this now
   ... we are now looking into what upf did
   ... so cutting the meta-share ontology into modules that could
   improve a lot the model

   jorge: do you have the gdrive spreadsheet in front of you - is
   it fine with you to work with this?

   penny: yes, let me check

   <daveL__> for navigating the original meta-share shcema there
   is a useful structure at:


     [26] http://www.meta-share.org/portal/knowledgebase/HomePage


     [27] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/wiki/Meta-Share_OWL_metamodel


     [28] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15SE4_qAqYFostmD52uKxpkCPZh1f5TrPeoXKNTlDYpQ/edit#gid=0

   <scribe> ACTION: jorge to fill the gdocs with the current
   meta-share items [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-2 - Fill the gdocs with the current
   meta-share items [on Jorge Gracia - due 2014-05-22].

   penny: we are already discussing some updates
   ... we should take that into account

   jorge: so you mean it would make sense to add a module for

   maria: we were thinking about adding another module for
   ... to cater for loose collections of data
   ... that should be identified by themselves
   ... we have not reached a final decision on that

   jorge: so meta-share community does not have a final consensus
   on this

   <daveL__> felix: can a stable vesion of the schema be

   felix: would it be possible to identify a version that we use
   as the basis for conversion?

   maria: version 3.0 - marta has alredy worked on converting that
   to RDF
   ... there will be a minor update around LREC

   asun: a few things related to the process:
   ... and how to record some kind of extra information
   ... during the following weeks we will raise many issues
   related to models etc.
   ... at some point we should decide: which are the core
   ... based on that we can start to extend with other terminology
   that is not in the core but also important
   ... I would suggest to make the core minimal and try to extend
   with other items
   ... I would include in the gdocs excel a new column: candidate
   vocabularies that could be re-used for representing meta-share

   jorge: agree

   asun: third comment:
   ... we should record proposal names, e.g. to know
   "computational lexicon with property has been proposed by
   ... so that we see who had made a proposal
   ... and final comment:
   ... how to relate this with W3C notes that we are writing
   ... at the moment there is no argumentation
   ... at some point it would be good to have rationale of
   decisions together with the term agreed
   ... otherwise in a conference call like this we could be in a
   recurrent way

   felix: how about having another gdocs (a word doc)

   dave: using mailing list?

   felix: sure, for discussions, but for document writing gdocs

   dave: agree

   asun: lot's of mail is ok but having the rationale documented
   in one place helps
   ... start big discussion by mail is difficult to follow

   penny: really like asun point
   ... could we have an issue tracker

   asun: we can have a column to store the discussion


     [30] https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/issues

   <tcarrasco> Emails consensus shoud be consolidated into a
   proper document - it might be appropriate to have a couple of

   felix: we could use the w3c tracker, I would volunteer to keep
   that up to date with issues that have been discussed
   ... as an output of todays discussion I'd close issue-2, the
   work approach

   penny: e.g. we said meta-share version 3.0 is stable, that is
   something to track

   jorge: in the example we could say in a column: we could just
   say "this comes from the meta-share model"
   ... for this first version most of the stuff will be authored
   by meta-share
   ... then we could add (using the same column) new things

   dave: 2nd comment: what should go into core?
   ... you have indicated that licenses would go out of the core
   ... are there other natural groupings
   ... e.g. usages, classification of resources etc.
   ... should this stay in the core?

   maria: usages could be left out
   ... but maybe first let's have a look at the model and then
   come up with concrete suggestions

   felix: how about timeline expectations from the lider project

   asun: we try to reach agreement quite soon
   ... during LREC we will approach CLARIN + LRE map people
   ... trying to involve them in the discussion
   ... if this community building works we should reach aggreement
   by September
   ... then additional stuff could be added later

   <asungomezperez> Yes, end of July instead of September

   jorge: in the last LIDER meeting we said: we'd like to have a
   draft of the core by the end of July

   <asungomezperez> sorry .... to many dates in my head

   dave: indeed, that will encourage people to contribute to LD4LT
   ... having a bit of work done on the core will encourage people
   from industry to bring in their ideas
   ... would be good for this community group + the meta-share
   community as well
   ... would be interesting, penny, if we forward discussion to
   the meta-share community as well
   ... e.g. to see what parts in meta-share are stable / will
   evolve in the next months etc.
   ... that will influence the discussion on what should be the

   penny: agree
   ... we have plenty of ideas to improve the whole thing

Guidelines for migrating existing LR metadata into RDF

   dave: from LIDER are there any technical pointers we could
   ... we have a related LIDER work area "reference architecture"

   roberto: on the modeling aspect we could provide experience,
   e.g. about babelnet > RDF conversion
   ... at the moment there is only the slides from madrid and a
   short report

   dave: roberto, can you send that to the LD4LT list so that
   people can have a look?

   roberto: sure, will try to structure a bit more and then send
   it out

   jorge: what roberto is working on is the data conversion, but
   on the agenda there is the metadata aspect

   roberto: I could focus on the metadata aspect

   jorge: your input roberto on the data aspect we are working on
   in the bpmlod group would be great

   dave: there is the bpmlod group and the "data on the web" w3c
   best practices group people should be aware of

   tomas: that is a W3C working group

   <tcarrasco> [31]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Main_Page

     [31] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Main_Page

   <tcarrasco> Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group (DWBP

   <scribe> ACTION: roberto to send out information on
   architecture for converting (meta)data into rdf [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-3 - Send out information on
   architecture for converting (meta)data into rdf [on Roberto
   Navigli - due 2014-05-22].

other issues + call time

   dave: no discussion of other items today
   ... call time - what to do?

   tomas: slot in afternoon better for US people

   asun: agree, afternoon much better for this call for getting US
   people in
   ... thursday afternoon is good for me

   <asungomezperez> I cannot on tuesday afternoon because of

   <scribe> ACTION: dave to set up doodle poll for call time
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Error finding 'dave'. You can review and register
   nicknames at

     [34] http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt/track/users%3E.

   <tcarrasco> Multilingual Electronic Dossier (MED) -

     [35] http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/site/med

   <scribe> ACTION: david to set up doodle poll for call time
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-4 - Set up doodle poll for call time
   [on David Lewis - due 2014-05-22].

   dave: reminder - after dublin there will be locworld workshop
   ... historically XML focused, this time more linked data
   ... esp. morning of 4th june
   ... terminology and linked data will be an important topic here


   dave: thanks a lot for participaing, great participation in the
   ... people please speak up to make contribution for you and
   others, that is what the group is for
   ... thanks all, bye!

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: dave to set up doodle poll for call time
   [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: david to set up doodle poll for call time
   [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: jorge to fill the gdocs with the current
   meta-share items [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: roberto to send out information on architecture
   for converting (meta)data into rdf [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [41]scribe.perl version
    1.138 ([42]CVS log)
    $Date: 2014-05-15 09:31:33 $

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

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11
Check for newer version at [43]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/

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

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: fsasaki
Inferring ScribeNick: fsasaki
Present: DaveLewis Gary Kevin MartinBenjamin RobertoNavigli ali arle(IRC
) asun flati fsasaki john jorge maria penny phil roberto tizinao
Agenda: [44]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014May/000
Got date from IRC log name: 15 May 2014
Guessing minutes URL: [45]http://www.w3.org/2014/05/15-ld4lt-minutes.htm
People with action items: dave david jorge roberto

     [44] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ld4lt/2014May/0005.html
     [45] http://www.w3.org/2014/05/15-ld4lt-minutes.html

   [End of [46]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [46] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2014 09:34:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:16:08 UTC