- From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:54:39 -0400
- To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
W3C
SWBPD WG Telecon
25 Jul 2005
See also: IRC log http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-irc
Attendees
Present
Phil_Tetlow, Ralph, David_Wood, ph, Fabien, DBooth, ChrisW,
Alistair_Miles,
MikeU, Jacco, DanBri, Libby, Giorgos_Stamou, Jeremy, Jeff
Regrets
Guus_Schreiber, Tom_Baker, Natasha_Noy, Benjamin_Nguyen,
Deb_McGuinness,
Elisa_Kendall, Evan_Wallace, Jeff_Pan
Chair
DavidW
Scribe
Chris
Previous: 2004-07-11 http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html
1. Admin
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 11 July telecon:
-> http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html 2005-07-11 meeting
record
RESOLVED to accept the minutes of the 11 July telecon:
<DavidW> Next Telecon:
...Guus wanted to skip next scheduled time (in 2 weeks).
...We need to establish by end of summer targets for f2f
...and the f2f gets us near end of charter
PROPOSED next meeting 22 August
RESOLVED next meeting 22 August
2. LIAISON
<ralph> 2 requests for reviews of other docs
...web acces. initiative and sparql
<danbri> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20050721/
<danbri> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-EARL10-Requirements-20050711/
<Chris_scribe> added to agenda at end of liasons
2.1 Proposed resolution httpRange-14
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph, DavidW, and DavidB to an initial draft of TAG
httpRange-14 resolution
impact on semweb application developers [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
<Chris_scribe> agendum:
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0045.html
DBooth's thing-defined-by
proposal
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0071.html
DBooth expands on
thing-described-by
<dbooth> would like proposal to be considered
...propose we do NOT take action on http-range-14 until so
... would like more input
... my proposal is a follow-on to tags proposal
<ralph>intend to consider DBooth's thing-defined-by idea but not let that
me stop drafting words
on the httpRange-14 TAG resolution
<davidw> agree with ralph
<jjc> DBooth's t-b-d proposal is more like things that IETF does
... hence an Internet Draft may be more appropriate than a BP Note
... I think Best Practice notes should only be written about established
practices
... don't think best practice should be a proposal for a new practice
<danbri> +1 re new practice
<jjc>on http-14, inclination to stay quiet, some people seem to be able to
live with it
<danbri> people are exhausted w/ topic, lots of email and proposals.
Dbooth's proposal looks like
a value-add, but no need for it to come from a w3c group
<danbri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jul/0012.html --
http-range resolution -
should we ask purl.org to make 303 redirects possible? (DC, RSS1, ...) Dan
Brickley
...purl.org have a service that would require re-tooling to be compliant
(Danbri check I'm
getting this)
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Jul/0012.html
... [[Many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 303
... status. When interoperability with such clients is a concern, the
... 302 status code may be used instead, since most user agents react
... to a 302 response as described here for 303.]]
...still drafting language in response to tag proposal.
... [reminder to re-read the actual text of the TAG's resolution too]
...move forward with action as stands and dbooth's proposal as sep.
issues
... to be more concrete, we accept, conditional on TAG noting that a 302
HTTP response is also
acceptable (since purl.org use that, and HTTP/1.1 allows the
[searching http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#httpRange-14 for
a pointer to the
resolution, doesn't see one obvious]
2.2 XML Schema Last Call
<DavidW> XSCD doc:
<DavidW> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xmlschema-ref-20050329/
<jjc> I volunteer - I've read earlier docs.
<jjc> when's the deadline?
ACTION: jjc to review XML Schema last call [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
2.3 OMG: ODM review
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to comment on ODM [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
-- continues
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0085.html
ODM update [Elisa]
2.4 SPARQL
->
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Jul/0025.html
Last Call for
comments on "SPARQL Query Language for RDF"
<Ralph> SPARQL went to Last Call last week.
... some swbp input to DAWL/Sparql, feedback solicited
... We were asked last year to give input on subject and something else.
We were requested by the
DAWG chair to give final feedback on how our ealier feedback was recorded.
<davidw> looks like it has grown considerably
...important stuff - we need to get a review from swbp
... it would be a shame if we didn't care...
<danbri> rdf test cases were a huge part of the rdf spec - doesn't seem to
have the same emphasis
in sparql
...might be worth some comment
...(& _deployment_, ralph?)
<jjc> test cases in webont prceeded differently than rdf
<davidw> agrees that test cases are important for encouraging
interoperability
2.5 EARL
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10/ EARL 1.0 [WD 2002-12-06]
<ralph> from web access. initiative
...earl is a way to record the evaluations of accessibility of web pages
...seems like a natural RDF app (metadata)
<aliman> See also http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Requirements/ 2005-07-11
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Requirements/ Requirements for the
Evaluation and Report Language
(EARL) 1.0 [WD 2005-07-11]
<jjc> This is a W3C Working Draft produced by the Evaluation and Repair
Tools Working Group (ERT
WG)
<aliman> See also
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10/WD-EARL10-Schema-20050711.html editor's
draft 11
july 2005
<ralph> seems appropriate for swbp to review
<Chris_scribe> ...no formal request to review, but it is possible
<jjc> i'll do it - it'll only take thirty mins
<jjc> key line:
<jjc> EARL 1.0 will be an RDF Schema as defined by the RDF Vocabulary
Description Language 1.0
Ralph: EARL was an RDF application at one time, I assume it might still be
<jjc> ACTION: jjc review EARL requirements [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
3. TF UPDATES
3.1 PORT
<scribe> ACTION: Guus ask Mark if he can review next SKOS edits [recorded
in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action04] [WITHDRAWN]
Alistair: I've contacted Mark myself
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0077.html
[PORT] review process
[Alistair]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0078.html
RE: [PORT] review process
[Alistair]
<alistair> will inform guus of dropped action
...seeking feedback on the policies for reviews described above
<davidw> seems ok, note ralph's comments
<alistair> mainly concerned that reviewers have the ability to "veto"
changes
<ralph> seemed liek proposal was asking reviewers to do the job of the TF
...see now that getting outside comments was considered reviewing
...which is fine. Main job of reviewers in SWBP is to approve next WD (or
notes)
<danbri> yup. tf lead should report substantive dissagreements to the wg,
but can advise wg to
move ahead anyway...
3.2 OEP
Chris: everyone's been on vacation
<scribe> ACTION: Guus review new n-ary relations editor's draft [recorded
in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action04]
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph review new n-ary relations editor's draft [recorded
in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action03]
-- continues
Chris: the latest editor's draft is on the OEP page and has been ready for
review
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0081.html
OEP Update from Deb
3.3 WordNet
<scribe> ACTION: Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action08]
-- continues
DanBri: I think we should consider closing this TF
3.4 XML Schema datatypes
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0058.html
Re: XML Schema Datatypes
in RDF and OWL [Dave Reynolds]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Apr/0094.html
comment: "XML Schema
Datatypes in RDF and OWL" [Frank Manola]
Jeremy: with an implementor's hat, I was part of the Jena team that
decided the xpath solution
hard to implement
... as an editor, I took the users' perspective that the xpath solution
was the better one
<scribe> ACTION: jeffp to draft a response to dave reynolds [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
3.5 Vocabulary Management
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0064.html
[VM] Telecon report -
2005-07-19 [Tom]
<davidw> do you anticipate TF taking a stand on IRIs?
<ralph> expect there to be practical issues TF can't propose solutions for
<jjc> iri spec in RFC 3987
... [the intent of the RDF Core WG was that] IRIs are usable in the
Semantic Web
-> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt IRIs
3.6 RDF-in-HTML (Ben)
<scribe> ACTION: Gavin find out from his community and contacts if they
have use cases for GRDDL
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action10]
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph suggest to XHTML TF that Jeremy's WWW2005 Talk be
turned into a document
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
[DONE]
-> http://www.w3.org/2005/07/19-swbp-minutes.html Report on 19 July
telecon
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jun/0073.html
Interest in GRDDL from
IPTC [Tom]
<danbri> The International Press Telecommunications Council --
http://www.iptc.org/
<ralph> IPRC has interest in GRDDL and embedding RDF-in-HTML,
... seems to be little interest in GRDDL in SWBP
<davidW> grddl exists as a solution.
Jeremy: IPTC seems to be concerned about bandwidth
... so the GRDDL stylesheet might be too long for them
<ralph> so rdf/a may not be a solution because of bandwidth and thus grddl
..yes, compactness of encoding is an issue for IPTC but rather than that
being an issue for GRDDL
it is a potential advantage for GRDDL over an RDF/A solution
3.7 ADTF (Libby)
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0068.html
Semantic Web Applications
and Demos [Libby]
<scribe> ACTION: Libby gives DanBri html fragment for wg homepage
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action05] [DONE]
<scribe> ACTION: DanBri update wg homepage w/ pointer to doap registry
from Libby [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action06] [DONE]
<davidw> tagging apps/demos with RDF/OWL applicability issue?
<jrvosse> libby, i've been asking jeen broekstra to make a doap profile
for openrdf.org, he
responded he was already working on one...
<libby> some technical challenges to do with Grddl/blog interoperation
3.8 RDFTM
<scribe> ACTION: Guus send email to Steve Pepper re status of new rdftm
draft [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
-- continues
3.9 Tutorial Page
Ralph: Benjamin sent regrets for today's meeting
jeffp will ping benjamin
3.10 SE TF
<scribe> ACTION: Chris and Benjamin to review SETF note [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action08]
-- continues
3.11 MM TF Proposal
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0066.html
Multimedia Annotation Task
Force Proposal [Giorgos]
<giorgos> Two work items, survey of work and best practices for annotating
multimedia documents
for SW
...have something to start with, can deliver by end of sept.
...for video, we have one more year (???), perhaps do something about
transformation (of what???)
... will start with covering abstract levels of information in MM docs
...try to classify standards into these levels (e.g. syntactic, semantic,
...)
<ralph> exciting work, share concern with chair that need to find
realistic short-term
deliverables
<jjc> Possible HP concern over overlap between TF and XG (incubator group)
- still being discussed
inside HP
DavidW: I'd like to delay formal approval of the TF until next meeting
... as Guus was instrumental
Jeremy: I've not heard any objections to this task force
<mike> How much actual best practice exists for multi-media annotation?
Ralph: a new TF does add to the WG's work load and the WG is
under-represented at today's telecon
... I'm concerned that there be critical mass of WG participants who agree
to work with this TF
Mike: are there existing practices to evaluate?
Giorgos: yes, there are practices to look at
David: hearing a lot of discussion, I judge that we need to defer a formal
decision to next
telecon
Ralph: meanwhile, feel free to use the WG mailing list to discuss the
content
Giorgos: please take this up earlier on the agenda next time
David: yes
[adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Chris and Benjamin to review SETF note [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Gavin find out from his community and contacts if they have
use cases for GRDDL
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: Guus review new n-ary relations editor's draft [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Guus send email to Steve Pepper re status of new rdftm draft
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Guus to comment on ODM [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: jeffp to draft a response to dave reynolds [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: jjc review EARL requirements [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: jjc to review XML Schema last call [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Ralph review new n-ary relations editor's draft [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Ralph, DavidW, and DavidB to an initial draft of TAG
httpRange-14 resolution impact
on semweb application developers [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
[DONE] ACTION: DanBri update wg homepage w/ pointer to doap registry from
Libby [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action06]
[DONE] ACTION: Libby gives DanBri html fragment for wg homepage [recorded
in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
[DONE] ACTION: Ralph suggest to XHTML TF that Jeremy's WWW2005 Talk be
turned into a document
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
[DROPPED] ACTION: Guus ask Mark if he can review next SKOS edits [recorded
in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/11-swbp-minutes.html#action04]
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2005 20:54:49 UTC