- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 12:13:04 -0500
- To: public-swd-wg@w3.org
The record of today's Semantic Web Deployment Working Group telecon is now available. Thanks, Alistair, for scribing: http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html A text snapshot follows. ---- SWD WG 09 Dec 2008 [2]Agenda [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Dec/0055.html See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2008-12-02 [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-irc [4] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html Attendees Present Tom Baker, Antoine Isaac, Ralph Swick, Sean Bechhofer, Alistair Miles, Antoine Isaac, Ed Summers Regrets Ben Adida Chair Tom Scribe Alistair Contents * Topics 1. admin 2. RDFa 3. recipes 4. RDFa metadata note 5. AOB 6. SKOS 7. Issue 157 8. SKOS Implementations * Summary of Action Items _____________________________________________________ admin RESOLUTION: to accept minutes of the last telecon: [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html [15] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html tomb: next telecon 16 dec ralph: regrets for 16 dec RDFa ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUES] [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02 recipes ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15] [CONTINUES] [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15 ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] [CONTINUES] [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20 RDFa metadata note ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the metadata note [recorded in [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES] [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03 AOB ACTION: Guus to look at OWL documents for review [recorded in [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10] [CONTINUES] [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10 SKOS ACTION: Sean to add rdf:type and rdf:Property assertions to the skos schema [recorded in [21]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07] [DONE] [21] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07 seanb: in latest version of schema, looking for link <seanb> Schema is at: -> [22]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20081001/skos.rdf [22] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20081001/skos.rdf ACTION: Guus discuss response to issue 157 with Sean [recorded in [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12] [DONE] [23] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12 seanb: guus posted the draft for 157 -> [24]ISSUE-157 Draft response was Re: OWL WG LC comment for SKOS reference document] [Guus 2008-12-04] [24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Dec/0037.html ACTION: Antoine to write something in Primer wrt. ISSUE 160 [recorded in [25]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14] [CONTINUES] [25] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14 ACTION: Antoine propose 1 or 2 SPARQL examples showing named graph usage [recorded in [26]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14] [CONTINUES] [26] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14 Issue 157 Alistair: Guus wrote a [27]draft proposing to rearrange the examples ... however Peter wasn't satisfied ... Guus noted some things that OWL DL wouldn't support ... Antoine noted issues with the rearrangement as this would introduce stylistic differences between the Reference and the Primer ... Guus proposed that the OWL Full examples be collected under a caveat ... we need to find a way to resolve issue 157 [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Dec/0037.html -> [28]issue 157; Last Call Comment: SKOS and OWL 2 analysis [28] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/157 Antoine: was Peter's comment about SKOS itself? Sean: Peter's worries are not about the data model itself but about the presentation of the examples ... Peter was concerned that if we used OWL Full patterns in the examples this would encourage [more] people to use OWL Full seanb: can't stop people doing anything, but peter keen we don't use rdf:value in example antoine: people should use patterns about to be hidden, because most simple and common ones ... uncomfortable with encouragement Alistair: if this is a problem we need an alternative antoine: clear warning about OWL DL ... reference has normative value, so people won't come in to primer first ... so maybe sub-optimal seanb: we have these three examples, a literal, a blank node with rdf:value, and a URI -- you want to see all three with equal value? antoine: literal one is most common, simplest ... wouldn't use rdf:value, but means don't need URIs for notes, so could be beneficial seanb: came late, but alistair had alternative proposal to consider them as annotation properties, so then problem using them with literals and objects goes away antoine: at first glance ok with that, already something we have for labeling properties, so re-using this solution is proper way to do it ... might still be problems with use of annotation properties seanb: rdf:value is still an issue, but would solve some of the problems antoine: anything about rdf:value in OWL 2? seanb: not mentioned, has no semantics antoine: what is problem with it? tomb: where is use of rdf:value documented? mentioned in primer, in reference too? aliman: just in an example in reference antoine: in rdf semantics, listed with containers, collections etc. just gives ideas on use, no formal constraint tomb: more like a usage convention antoine: small paragraph of 7 lines, meaning can vary <Antoine> [29]http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#ReifAndCont [29] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#ReifAndCont Alistair: to make Peter happy we should look at how rdf:value is being treated in OWL2 ... suppose we made all of the properties be owl:AnnotationProperty ? ... but leave the Primer as it is Antoine, Sean: I'd be happy Sean: Guus might not be satisfied seanb: i would support that ... discussing with simon jupp, why aren't documentation props annotation props? tells a consistent story ... veering towards substantial change, I'm not sure it is. antoine: given that skos:note is for annotations, easy to defend. seanb: object properties (semantic relations), then labeling and documentation properties (annotation properties) antoine: difficult to defend doc props not as annotation props Alistair: someone might want to add an extension to SKOS that placed cardinality restrictions on some properties Antoine: complicated because there are many annotation properties in the SKOS world aliman: i can live with them as annotation props seanb: ralph, do you see this as a substantive change? more editorial? ralph: not sure ... from two viewpoints: Would any developer of a skos tool have to change their code to conform to altered version of reference? Or, likely that any existing LC comments would disagree with this proposed change? I.e. would anyone feel this is unacceptable change? seanb: difficult to say ralph: prefer to err on side of caution, if not sure, consider it substantive seanb: none of comments mention documentation properties; but maybe not mentioned because totally happy; ralph: suspect relatively few looking at OWL DL vs OWL Full differences in detail seanb: I would be happy with this change tomb: what are implications if do consider this substantive? ralph: we would need to do another last call ... formally, we don't have huge variety of choices; more than an editorial change, peter feels it's important. ... but could say, we don't consider this change invalidates any other reviews, and don't consider that skos implementers have to make changes. seanb: if happy to change to labeling props, then I'm surprised if we're unhappy to similar change to doc props. tomb: could we assert this is not substantive change, not hide problem but ... to go to another last call over this seems to far on the side of caution ralph: i agree another last call is overkill. i wouldn't want to wordsmith too finely to avoid substantive change question, just say we have made the following changes. seanb: we're still giving people option to comment, so this isn't final. ralph: purpose of this part of review process is to make sure, if somebody did look very carefully at doc props and decide exactly right, they wouldn't comment. need to make sure any reviewer who could care is on notice that changes have occurred. tomb: need to take an action? aliman: need to redraft response to peter on 157 ACTION: seanb to redraft response to peter on ISSUE-157, where skos doc props are annotation props, and rdf:value example is dropped from skos reference [recorded in [30]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action10] tomb: any objections to this? [none] <Ralph> Sean, please make sure these sorts of things are explicit in the Changes section aliman: need to approve sean's drafts on namespace issues seanb: approved and sent already tomb: so look forward to next week, we should vote next week on a resolution to request candidate rec in first week of jan, then on next day ralph will ask for extension of charter to end of april ... Need to propose to go to candidate rec on the list, so can vote at next week's call. ACTION: alistair send email with editors' draft proposed for CR before next telcon [recorded in [31]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action11] tomb: can say time has run out if no response by next week Alistair: on 157, can Sean send his revised response based on today's discussion directly to Peter? Tom: yes, that would save time PROPOSED: to respond to ISSUE-157 commenter, proposing skos documentation props are made OWL annotation properties and rdf:value example is removed from skos reference tomb: any discussion? RESOLUTION: to respond to ISSUE-157 commenter, proposing skos documentation props are made OWL annotation properties and rdf:value example is removed from skos reference seanb: i'll check with guus, what if he doesn't like it? tomb: then we have to go to list somehow Alistair: we'll make a new editors' draft incorporating all the changes we proposed to commentors ... will be contingent on Peter and Guus being willing to live with the resolution to issue 157 SKOS Implementations tomb: ask if, implementations, ed and antoine what's the status of the LoC subject headings? ... any issues to resolve there? edsu: we're both working on separate things, but kind of the same. what LC is doing, what their not doing. lcsh.info was done as an experiment by me, to get feedback on whether correct and/or useful. ... people here see it is useful, good feedback, most concerns come back to having it live at real domain in LC rather than my domain, no concerns about skos implementation details. ... antoine and I discussed things specific to LCSH, meaning to write email on the topic, basically that LCSH has sets of concepts that are more specialised than skos:Concept, e.g. topical concepts, geographic concepts, form/genre concepts, things specific to LC. antoine and I discussing, i've been inclined to specialise SKOS, whereas antoine inclined to use skos:inScheme to identify separate... ... groupings. tomb: also wanted to ask about other vocabs in clay's department. i was interested to see if marc relator terms are now declared as rdf properties? have been for past 2-3 years, but proposal to declare smae URIs as both rdf properties and skos concepts. antoine you discussed that with clay? antoine: not that. specific concept scheme of relations? tomb: i went into skos reference, it's not a contradiction to say that a skos concept is also an rdf property... but it makes my head spin :) edsu: i talked to rebecca about it, better to leave definitions as they are. if want to declare elsewhere then fine, but leave existing ones as are and keep uris stable tomb: proposal was to additoinally say they are also skos concepts ... nothing formally says you can't do that, but i'm wondering what it means edsu: potentially confusing tomb: can have sub-property relation between uri as property, and a broader relation between same uris ... meeting in may, rdf schema doesn't distinguish preferred labels, so feature of skos attractive, but labeling properties are not committed to skos concepts, so could use preflabel with properties antoine: but problem with semantic relations, restricted to skos concepts. tomb: i sent a not to clay, wanted to follow up ... if using marc relator terms as implementation, need to resolve that. ... anything else to discuss? seanb: on topic of implementations, some work here (manchester) simon jupp building api infrastructure for skos and an editor as well, so can use as implementation experience edsu: i've been emailing with simon, he's been using lcsh.info as testbed seanb: simon makes use of schema to drive the application, so if we change schema he can cope with that ralph: two action items not carried forward... ACTION: [PENDING] Ralph to report on use of RDFa metadata in Recommendations. [recorded in [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02] [32] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02 ACTION: Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation examples of the use of rdfs:label w/ SKOS [recorded in [33]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10] [DROPPED] [33] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10 tomb: meeting adjourned Tom:we dropped that action re: rdfs:label last week Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: alistair send email with editors' draft proposed for CR before next telcon [recorded in [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action11] [NEW] ACTION: seanb to redraft response to peter on ISSUE-157, where skos doc props are annotation props, and rdf:value example is dropped from skos reference [recorded in [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/09-swd-minutes.html#action10] [PENDING] ACTION: Antoine propose 1 or 2 SPARQL examples showing named graph usage [recorded in [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14] [PENDING] ACTION: Antoine to write something in Primer wrt. ISSUE 160 [recorded in [37]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14] [PENDING] ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in [38]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02] [PENDING] ACTION: Guus to look at OWL documents for review [recorded in [39]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the metadata note [recorded in [40]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph to report on use of RDFa metadata in Recommendations. [recorded in [41]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in [42]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15] [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in [43]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] [36] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14 [37] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action14 [38] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02 [39] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10 [40] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03 [41] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02 [42] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15 [43] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20 [DONE] ACTION: Guus discuss response to issue 157 with Sean [recorded in [44]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12] [DONE] ACTION: Sean to add rdf:type and rdf:Property assertions to the skos schema [recorded in [45]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07] [44] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12 [45] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07 [DROPPED] ACTION: Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation examples of the use of rdfs:label w/ SKOS [recorded in [46]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10] [46] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10 [End of minutes] _____________________________________________________ Minutes formatted by David Booth's [47]scribe.perl version 1.133 ([48]CVS log) $Date: 2008/12/09 17:11:27 $ [47] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm [48] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2008 17:13:32 UTC