meeting record: 2007-10-30 SWDWG

The record [1] of this week's SWD telecon is ready for review. Text  
copy below.






                                 SWD WG

30 Oct 2007



    See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2007-10-23



           Ralph Swick, Ed Summers, Justin Thorp, Elisa Kendall, Antoine
           Isaac, Alistair Miles, Jon Phipps, Sean Bechhofer, Guus
           Schreiber, Deigo Berrueta, Tom Baker, Daniel Rubin, Clay

           Dan Brickley, Vit Novacek, Simone Onofri, Quentin Ruel




      * [5]Topics
          1. [6]Admin
          2. [7]SWD review of "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"
          3. [8]SKOS
          4. [9]Vocabulary Management
      * [10]Summary of Action Items


    PROPOSE to accept the minutes of the F2F with

    ...amendments from Antoine
    ... Additional amendment from Alistair
    ... We make no statement either way about whether skos:Concept is
    disjoint or not disjoint with owl:Class
    ... and from Tom


    RESOLVED to accept the minutes with the above amendments

    <scribe> ACTION: Ralph to update face to face minutes to reflect the
    amendment and capture attendees[recorded in

    PROPOSED to accept minutes of the Oct 23 telecon:




SWD review of "Cool URIs for the Semantic Web"

    Guus: Nothing to track here for this telecon
    ... comments have gone to SWEO group. For the moment,
    ... we can be silent on this.

    Ralph: We're done with that task. Can remove from agenda.


    <Ralph> [16]




    Guus: The minutes capture the interpretation.

    <aliman> s/transitive/functional/

    Ralph: We're happy that it's not functional?

    Guus: Yes, there may be examples where it's not.

    Ralph: Context of that discussion were w.r.t the semantics of
    ... recently had a discussion in a separate group about semantics of
    ... would be nice to have even stronger semantics for isDefinedBy

    <aliman> I remember TimBL saying something like that about
    isDefinedBy in the context of the tabulator

    Ralph: is this group interested in going further with this?

    Guus: Can't do this -- we'd need to define our own property

    <aliman> TimBL wanted to avoid having to make unecessary HTTP

    Ralph: Would be acceptable for this group to suggest what the
    semantics of
    ... isDefinedBy are.
    ... if they wished to

    <aliman> +1 possibly useful interpretation, especially for large
    vocabularies -- typical for SKOS

    Guus: If this isn't inappropriate, it might be useful

    ACTION: Ralph to reconstruct proposal for semantics of isDefinedBy
    [recorded in

    Alistair: Two separate issues
    ... stronger semantics for isDefinedBy could be useful to reduce
    HTTP call overhead
    ... also whether or not we think of inScheme as functional. Is it
    reasonable to think of concepts in
    ... more that one scheme. If so, forks discussion as inScheme and
    isDefinedBy go in different directions

    Guus: propose we put this on the agenda once we have Ralph's message

    Jon: Disagree with some of the decisions we're making.
    ... But don't have supporting evidence, but things "feel wrong".

    Guus: We haven't actually made decisions yet.

    Alistair: Jon refers to e.g. decision to deprecate inScheme and use
    isDefinedBy instead

    Jon: Yes

    Alistair: Justification is that copncepts get used in different

    Guus: Discussion in Amsterdam are that current semantics of
    isDefinedBy are the same as inScheme

    Alistair: What do we mean by Ralph's interpretation?
    ... do we simply mean functional?

    Guus: Rationale in going from inScheme to isDefinedBy was that
    semantics of
    ... inScheme seemed to be the same as isDefinedBy. So go for a
    general non-SKOS solution

    Ralph: circular argument. isDefinedBy has such loose semantics, so
    such a claim seems unsatisfying

    Quote was: isDefinedBy may be used to indicate an rdf vocab in which
    a resource is described

    Jon: Is a concept scheme the same as an rdf vocabulary?

    Guus: If we have evidence from use cases, we simply reopen the

    Jon: It's not whether or not it works, it's about concept scheme ==
    rdf vocabulary

    Alistair: Made a statement about SKOS concept schemes and OWL
    ontologies, but no
    ... statement about "RDF Vocabularies".

    Guus: Is this different because it would allow linking to an OWL
    vocabluary rather than a concept scheme

    Jon: Wording of isDefinedBy talks about rdf vocabularies.

    Antoine: Can see a problem. Original guide says that inScheme is a
    link between concept and concept scheme
    ... scheme it's part of. No requirement that it has to give a
    meaning. isDefinedBy we'd expect
    ... some *definition*

    <aliman> From


    <aliman> "The choice to leave the formal semantics of
    skos:ConceptScheme undefined has been made to allow different design
    patterns to be explored for using SKOS in combination with more
    formal languages such as OWL, and for using SKOS with query
    languages such as SPARQL.

    <aliman> For example, interpreting skos:ConceptScheme as a sub-class
    of owl:Ontology would be consistent with the SKOS semantics. This
    would also be consistent with using owl:imports to make logical
    import statements between SKOS Concept Schemes.

    <aliman> Interpreting skos:ConceptScheme as a sub-class of the class
    of named RDF graphs would also be consistent with the SKOS
    semantics. This would also be consistent with using the name (URI)
    of a SKOS Concept Scheme in SPARQL queries as the name of an RDF
    graph, to establish, for example, the provenance of a semantic
    relationship between two SKOS Conceptual Resources."

    <aliman> Except for the semantic condition stated above, the formal
    semantics of skos:ConceptScheme are undefined.

    Alistair: talks through definition
    ... this allows use of owl:imports rather than defining a new import
    ... wanted to find solutions to problems without trying to redefine
    or invent our own solutions

    Guus: We should reopen the issue regarding inScheme, but not w.r.t.
    ... rather the choice of skos:inScheme and rdfs:isDefinedBy

    Alistair: Several different flavours of inScheme.

    Guus: Solution might be that someone proposes that we leave inScheme
    as a subproperty of isDefinedBy

    Ralph: Don't see how that helps. What's the range?
    ... understand the range of isDefinedBy to be RDF vocabulary
    (whatever that is)

    Guus: And range of inScheme is conceptScheme?

    Ralph: Concept scheme doesn't necessarily describe concepts. It's a
    grouping of concepts.

    Alistair: We never really got into this much detail.
    ... didn't get into the whether things were defined. Used language
    like concepts "participate" ina scheme

    Ralph: Where, as a user, should I find a definition for a concept?

    Alistair: derefence the URI

    Sean: confused now about derefencing URI and isDefinedBy

    <Elisa> If it's at all helpful, the "formal" definition of a
    "concept system" from ISO 1087 is "a set of concepts structured
    according to the relations among them". This doesn't necessarily say
    that a concept system is an ontology, but is somewhat stronger than
    a simple collection of concepts.

    Alistair: If you're using slash namespace, get lots and lots of
    ... if you have an isDefinedBy then you don't need to get it every

    Ralph: That's an operational argument. Given a property URI, how do
    you find the namespace within which that
    ... property is defined.

    Alistair: Why can't you dereference a property URI?

    Ralph: You can. Not clear where in a chain of redirects you
    encounter the namespace
    ... can make some guesses.

    Jon: Can somebody explain why we're not defining a concept scheme as
    a collection?
    ... then use rdfs:member

    Ralph: Does that satisfy the use cases?

    Jon: Not certain.

    Alistair: Reason why we might not go there is that some people think
    of statements to be part of a concept scheme.
    ... included that in original wording.

    Guus: We have to round up this discussion.
    ... For OWL ontologies, we never explicitly defined containment.
    ... Reluctant to open a can of worms. However, we do need to
    ... continue this discussion. Will someone reopen the issue?
    ... on inScheme vs isDefinedBy.

    <aliman> It would be great Jon could point to some use cases re.
    potential issues with inScheme

    ACTION: Antoine to summarise inScheme vs isDefinedBy and decide
    whether or not to reopen the issue. [recorded in

    Guus: For next week would like to discuss Concept Schemes vs OWL

    <Ralph> [likely regrets from me for next week, due to W3C big
    meeting week]

    ACTION: Alistair and Guus to prepare material for next week on
    Concept Schemes vs OWL Ontologies [recorded in

Vocabulary Management

    Elisa: Vit and Elisa working on editors draft.

    Elisa: trying to get front matter in and organise things.
    ... Have posted an editors draft that pulls together everything from
    the wiki
    ... but didn't pull in stuff from Best Practies WG.
    ... Have now posted a first editors draft that captures what was in
    the wiki, boiler plate things,
    ... italicised sections for comments.
    ... Want to go back to original idea for saying what we're going to
    talk about here
    ... is identification of versions rather than version management.

    <Ralph> [22]


    <Ralph> [23]Vocab Management editors' draft


    <Ralph> [I will add a citation to that on the WG home page]

    Elisa: Additional food for thought in research items. Bottom line is
    that there is something up there
    ... fills in some of the blanks. Worth looking at the outline to see
    if there are topics that should be
    ... addressed but are not, e.g. provenance.
    ... schedule is to iterate one more time over next couple of weeks
    and integrate feedback.
    ... After that we'll be ready for internal review.
    ... Need another couple of weeks before internal review.

    Guus: telecon next week, no telecon in two weeks.

    Meeting adjourned

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: Alistair and Guus to prepare material for next week on
    Concept Schemes vs OWL Ontologies [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: Antoine to summarise inScheme vs isDefinedBy and
    decide whether or not to reopen the issue. [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: Ralph to reconstruct proposal for semantics of
    isDefinedBy [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: Ralph to update face to face minutes to reflect the
    amendment [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for
    RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Tom to amend proposals to for accepting minimal
    relation labels [recorded in


    [PENDING] ACTION: Ben and Michael to address comments by Tom
    [regarding maintenance of wiki document
    [30]] recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Ben to update RDFa schedule in wiki
    [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Dan to ask apache about conditional redirects
    [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Diego to recast Recipe 6 [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Guus to post user experience reports for ISSUE-25
    [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Guus/Tom to propose joint decisions for reviews
    for major [RDFa] steps/transition requests. Informal agreement about
    working drafts. [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Guus/Tom to solicit reviewers for the Recipes
    document. [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Jon to add words that acknowledge the existence of
    RDFa as potential mechanisms, but it's out of scope here. [recorded
    in [39]]
    [PENDING] ACTION: Jon to make changes as proposed [with regard to
    Issue-23] [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default
    behavior" [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Guus to write up the issue [of Label Resource] and
    add to the issue list. [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Alistair to update semantics document to listing
    ways in which SKOS diverges from OWL DL [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph to come up with a URI for wiki page [for
    Recipes implementations] [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of
    Recipes] [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: TF leaders to prepare a version of Recipes for
    review in December [recorded in
    [PENDING] ACTION: Vit and Elisa to include in the document all the
    target sections plus an allocation of sections to people and
    potentially a standard structure for sections [recorded in


    [DONE] ACTION: Antoine to formulate 3 resolutions for Amsterdam
    topic Concept Semantics posted to the list. as a basis for amending
    meeting record. [recorded in
    [DONE] ACTION: Antoine to list decisions made about concept scheme
    [recorded in
    [DONE] ACTION: Guus to post an interpretation of the Amsterdam
    discussion of isDefinedBy [recorded in


    [End of minutes]

     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [51]scribe.perl version 1.128
     ([52]CVS log)
     $Date: 2007/10/31 00:32:54 $


Sean Bechhofer
School of Computer Science
University of Manchester

Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2007 11:16:38 UTC