- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 22:53:29 -0400
- To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
The record of todays' SWBPD telecon[1] is now available for review.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html
A text snapshot of $Revision: 1.4 $ of $Date: 2005/10/04 02:51:11 $
follows:
----
SemWeb Best Practices and Deployment WG
3 Oct 2005
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0006.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-irc
Attendees
Present
Ralph Swick, Chris Halaschek-Wiener, Raphael Troncy, Alistair
Miles, David Booth, Jacco van Ossenbruggen, Jeremy Carroll,
Giorgos Stamou, Tom Baker, Gary Ng (part), Natasha Noy (part),
David Wood (part), Evan Wallace (part), Benjamin Nguyen (irc),
Guus Schreiber (irc), Chris Welty (irc)
Regrets
Phil Tetlow, Libby Miller, Deb McGuinness, Alan Rector, Jeff
Pan, Dan Brickley, Fabien Gandon
Chair
Ralph
Scribe
Ralph
Previous
[4]2005-09-19
[4] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html
Contents
* Topics
1. Admin
2. Liaisons
o SPARQL Last Call
o Protocol and Formats WG request
3. FTF Preparation and future of WG
4. TF Updates
o MM TF
o PORT
o OEP
o WordNet
o XML Schema datatypes
o Vocabulary management
o RDF-in-HTML
o ADTF
o RDFTM
o Tutorial Page
o SE TF
* Summary of Action Items
_____________________________________________________________
BenjaminN: I'm on irc only today
1. Admin
RESOLVED to accept the [24]minutes of the 19 September telecon
[24] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html
ACTION: Ralph create a registration page for the November f2f
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-irc.html#T17-13-32]
[DONE]
-> [26]Registration for Third F2F meeting
[26] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35495/ftf-3/
<Raphael> this web page needs a password to be accessed, no ?
Ralph: yes, you need your Member Access password for this form
Ralph: are there others who may wish to attend by teleconf?
DBooth: possibly remote, will know soon
Jeremy: expect to know later in the week whether I can attend in
person
ACTION: Ralph check on possibility of remote participation for f2f
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
<RalphS> Guus, any progress on finding a dinner sponsor?
<guus> MY ACTION: I can sponsor the dinner from my Knowledge Web
budget
<RalphS> Guus, thank you!
2. Liaisons
2.1 SPARQL Last Call
ACTION: Jeremy to brief the WG on use of IRIs in SPARQL [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action05] [DONE]
Jeremy: sent message "[29]IRIs" earlier today. This issue, of W3C recs
depending on earlier versions of IRI (before standard status), being
not quite compatible with the IRI standard impacts many recs
[29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0014.html
ACTION: David Wood and Brian to review SPARQL Last Call document
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action04] [DONE]
[CONTINUES]
-> [31]SPARQL Protocol Review and Comments [DWood 2005-09-20]
[31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0087.html
David's review done
DWood: my [32]comments led to a long discussion between the editors
... I didn't want to see a requirement in the SPARQL protocol for an
illegal use of WSDL 2.0
... editors were questioning ehther I was supportive or dismissive of
WSDL 2 integration
... I support WSDL 2 bindings but want them to be legal
... the SPARQL language is still in Last Call; would the WG like my
review of that as well?
... I expect DAWG would like review from SWBPD for both the Language
and the Protocol
... I think Brian intended to review the Language
[32] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0087.html
ACTION: David Wood draft SPARQL Language review on behalf of the WG
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action17]
<aliman> I skimmed David's review, seemed good but don't have nearly
enough tech savvy (or time :) to do a proper review
DBooth: I thought DavidW's review was fine
... what coordination is taking place with the WSDL folk?
DWood: it's the DAWG's task to do that coordination
... there's a not insubstantial amount of work needed to resolve the
technical issue
... I don't think this work can be done during Candidate Rec phase
Ralph: is there an alternative for DAWG to not be dependent on changes
to WSDL 2?
DWood: DAWG would have to give up some features in SPARQL Protocol
... I fear that the WSDL community is big enough that if SPARQL
protocol is non-conformant, it will lead to SPARQL not being
implemented
DBooth: the WSDL work has been going on for a long time. I was part of
it at one time. I would not expect the WG to be very receptive to
making changes at this point.
Jeremy: WebOnt completed before RDF Core WG finished
... we waited for a few months while RDF Core finished and this did
not do any harm
... it's not a bad thing for a WG to wait; didn't need to hold
telecons during that period
DBooth: I endorse David Wood's message that SPARQL should conform to
WSDL 2
DBooth: I propose that SWBPD recommend to DAWG that the SPARQL
Protocol conform to WSDL 2.0
... speaking personally, not for HP
Evan: I second the proposal
DWood: DanC [34]forwarded my message to the public-rdf-dawg-comments
list.
... there is continuing discussion under the thread "[35]WSDL
happiness" in public-rdf-dawg
[34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Sep/0077.html
[35] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0530.html
objections: (none)
in favor: Alistair, Jacco, DWood, Evan, Ralph (speaking individually),
abstain: Benjamin
RESOLVED that SWBPD recommend to DAWG that the SPARQL Protocol conform
to WSDL 2.0
ACTION: Ralph report WSDL 2.0 resolution to DAWG (after 24 hours)
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action18]
<Zakim> aliman, you wanted to ask about postponed issues for sparql
Alistair: my requirement is to get the contents of RDF Lists
... that's not in the current Language; I see the issue marked as
Postponed on DAWG issues list
... what does 'postponed' mean? how long?
Ralph: generally, I think 'postponed' means "until the next group is
chartered"
2.4 Protocol and Formats WG request
ACTION: jjc review EARL requirements [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action05] [DONE]
-> [38]Review of EARL requirements [Jeremy 2005-10-03]
[38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0020.html
Jeremy: shall I send this to PFWG as my personal comments on behalf of
the WG?
Ralph: yes
ACTION: Alistair and Guus to help the WAI Protocol and Formats WG on
their vocabulary [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
[CONTINUES]
<guus> sorry, no progress on 2.4
<aliman> guus how do you think we should approach liason with PFWG? I
read their initial message but its not very specific.
3. FTF Preparation and future of WG
(see discussion under [40]Admin above)
[41]MM TF Schedule for f2f meeting in Galway [Giorgos 2005-10-03]
[41] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0004.html
[42][PORT,OEP] SKOS f2f and end-of-charter goals
[42] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0079.html
4. TF Updates
4.0 MM TF
Giorgos: see [43]mail from Jacco -- first draft of a deliverable has
been produced
... would like to schedule 2 telecons; this Wed and 21 Oct
... would like to have 2 reviewers review a document 1 week before the
f2f
... Mike Uschold has volunteered to be 1 reviewer
[43] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0138.html
Jeremy: TF participants should read this draft before first telecon,
is Wednesday too soon?
Jacco: the idea for the Wednesday telecon is to distribute the work
Ralph: refer to [44]Teleconference How-To for telecon reservation
instructions
[44] http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/TeleconferenceHowTo.htm
4.1 PORT
Alistair: Ralph sent his review of SKOS Core proposals and we're
following up on his suggestions
<aliman> [45][PORT] update on 2nd review
[45] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0021.html
<aliman>
[46]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0079.ht
ml
[46] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0079.html
Alistair: see my [47]mail for f2f planning
[47] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0079.html
<Zakim> aliman, you wanted to ask ralph about language variants of
SKOS Core spec
Alistair: when we publish a revised SKOS WD, should we publish all the
variants or can we publish just the English version?
... it would be nice to publish all the translations as a set but I
don't speak all the languages
Ralph: publishing a WD is a great way to solicit those comments. The
Task Force should advise readers of the spec which words to consider
to be normative, however.
Jeremy: the practice in W3C is that the [US] English version is
normative
<jjc> On translations - the Ruby recommendation, which is primarily
targeted at Japanese, was published on 31st May 2001, and translation
came out 3rd August 2001. Conclusion: even when Japanese would have
been a well-motivated normative language, the rule of US English first
was followed
4.2 OEP
<ChrisW> nothing to report
<ChrisW> all actions continued
<aliman> chrisw is the QCR note ready to review?
<ChrisW> yes
<aliman> where's the version I should review?
<ChrisW> oh, wait, I take that back - QCR note is NOT ready to review
(sorry)
<aliman> ok, will wait on ChrisW to nudge me when QCR is ready
<ChrisW> ack
Natasha: we're working on Semantic Integration, may have something
ready for f2f
ACTION: GUUS to approve new version of simple part note going to first
WD [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action06]
[CONTINUES]
Natasha: waiting for Guus' comments on N-ary relations
ACTION: Alistair to review Qualified Cardinality note
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action09] [PENDING]
[49] http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action09
ACTION: Guus to review OWL Time note [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action10]
[CONTINUES]
ACTION: Jeremy to ask HP folks about reviewing Semantic
Integration note, which will be ready for review near the F2F
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action11] [DONE]
Jeremy: I've asked for a reviewer, don't yet have a response
ACTION: Libby to review OWL Time note [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action12]
[CONTINUES]
<ChrisW> OWL TIme is ready for review
<ChrisW> definitely
<Jacco> i cannot find a url for owl time in the minutes...
<Jacco> can you put up one?
<ChrisW> go to the [53]OEP web page
[53] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/
<ChrisW> all the notes & drafts are there
[54]OEP Editor's Drafts
[54] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/#edrafts
<Raphael> [55]OWL Time
[55] http://www.isi.edu/~pan/SWBP/time-ontology-note/time-ontology-note.html
<Raphael> [56]Time Zone
[56] http://www.isi.edu/~pan/SWBP/time-zone-note/time-zone-note.html
4.3 WordNet
(no representatives)
4.4 XML Schema datatypes
Jeremy: we have a working draft that presents alternatives
Jeremy: we've had a response (from HP) that one of the alternatives is
not a good choice
-> [57][XSCH] F2F thoughts [Jeremy 2005-10-03]
[57] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0010.html
ACTION: JeffP to draft a response to dave reynolds [recorded
in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
[CONTINUES]
4.5 Vocabulary management
-> [59]Tom's report on 27 Sep VMTF telecon
[59] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0012.html
TomB: we reached consensus on a deliverable to help people understand
what to serve at a namespace URI
... we expect to be able to document a common solution between Dublin
Core, SKOS, and FOAF
... this would create a nice example that others can follow
<Zakim> aliman, you wanted to mention [60]URI dereferencing stuff
[60] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0116.html
<aliman> I sent a [61]proposed URI dereferncing policy for SKOS Core
(a 'hash' RDF namespace) ...
[61] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0116.html
Alistair: I've shown [62]how to implement content-dependent redirects
in apache
[62] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0024.html
<aliman> and [63]described how to implement this policy using apache
directives ... would very much appreciate comments (i.e. do this/don't
do this) from WG
[63] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0024.html
DBooth: is this using 303 redirect?
Alistair: yes
... redirect is based on the content-type requested
... would like feedback on whether this is or is not a good idea
TomB: DCMI has a problem with 303 redirects for historical reasons, as
we depend on the purl.org service
4.6 RDF-in-HTML
-> [64]meeting record: 2005-09-27 RDF-in-XHTML TF telecon
[64] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Sep/0024.html
Ralph: the TF is discussing a proposal for a syntax that would permit
expressing both URIs and QNames within an XML attribute
ACTION: Jeremy write a formal description of the CURI proposal for WG
consideratoin [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action12]
Jeremy: the proposal also addresses the blank node issue
ACTION: Gavin find out from his community and contacts if they have
use cases for GRDDL [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action13]
[WITHDRAWN]
ACTION: DanBri to ask TF for sign-off on putting the draft xhtml vocab
to the WG for review. [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
[CONTINUES]
4.7 ADTF
Ralph: we've decided that the machine break-in at MIT was
non-destructive and intend to put the blog back on the Net.
... so for the present, there is no need to move the content
4.8 RDFTM
(no representative)
4.9 Tutorial Page
ACTION: Guus to ping Benjamin and Jeff about the Tutorial Page
[recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action08] [DONE]
<Benjamin> was this regarding an old action ?
<Benjamin> I made a post in july regarding jeff's ping
<Benjamin> status is the following
<Benjamin> page is up and I made all modifications received up till
july
<Benjamin> I have received nothing more to add since then
4.10 SE TF
(no representative)
next meeting Monday, October 17
[adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: David Wood draft SPARQL Language review on behalf of the
WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action17]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeremy write a formal description of the CURI proposal
for WG consideration
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action12]
[NEW] ACTION: Ralph check on possibility of remote participation for
f2f
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Ralph report WSDL 2.0 resolution to DAWG (after 24
hours)
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/03-swbp-minutes.html#action18]
[PENDING] ACTION: Alistair and Guus to help the WAI Protocol and
Formats WG on their vocabulary
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
[PENDING] ACTION: Alistair to review Qualified Cardinality note
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
[PENDING] ACTION: Brian to review SPARQL Last Call document
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action04]
[PENDING] ACTION: DanBri to clarify rules for IG to propose new
mailing lists for its TFs
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action10]
[PENDING] ACTION: DanBri to ask TF for sign-off on putting the draft
xhtml vocab to the WG for review.
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
[PENDING] ACTION: Guus to review OWL Time note
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action10]
[PENDING] ACTION: Guus to approve new version of simple part note
going to first WD
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action06]
[PENDING] ACTION: JeffP to draft a response to Dave Reynolds
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
[PENDING] ACTION: Libby to review OWL Time note
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action12]
[DONE] ACTION: David Wood to review SPARQL Last Call document
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action04]
[DONE] ACTION: Guus to ping Benjamin and Jeff about the Tutorial Page
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action08]
[DONE] ACTION: Jeremy to ask HP folks about reviewing Semantic
Integration note, which will be ready for review near the F2F
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action11]
[DONE] ACTION: Jeremy to brief the WG on use of IRIs in SPARQL
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
[DONE] ACTION: jjc review EARL requirements
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
[DONE] ACTION: Ralph create a registration page for the November f2f
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-irc.html#T17-13-32]
[WITHDRAWN] ACTION: Gavin find out from his community and contacts if
they have GRDDL use cases
[End of minutes]
Change History
$Log: 03-swbp-minutes.html,v $
Revision 1.4 2005/10/04 02:51:11 swick
Remove a gratuitous in-your-face URI
Revision 1.3 2005/10/04 02:43:57 swick
Clean out a bit more extraneous bits.
Revision 1.2 2005/10/03 20:20:09 swick
Cleanup for first publication
_____________________________________________________________
$Revision: 1.4 $ of $Date: 2005/10/04 02:51:11 $
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2005 02:54:15 UTC