meeting record: 2008-09-30 SemWeb Deployment WG

The minutes of today's meeting are now available:

  http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html

A text snapshot follows.

----

                         SemWeb Deployment WG

30 Sep 2008

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0049.html

   See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2008-09-16

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-irc
      [4] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html

Attendees

   Present
          Tom Baker, Ralph Swick, Guus Schreiber, Diego Beruetta, Ed
          Summers, Jon Phipps, Margherita Sini, Daniel Rubin, Sean
          Bechhofer, Alistair Miles, Antoine Isaac, Ben Adida, Jeremy
          Carroll

   Regrets
          Elisa Kendall, Simone Onofri

   Chair
          Guus

   Scribe
          Ralph

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Admin
         2. RDFa
         3. Recipes
         4. RDFa Metadata Note
         5. CURIE
         6. Vocabulary Management
         7. SKOS
     * Summary of Action Items
     _____________________________________________________

Admin

   Guus: schedule for future telecons?

   Tom: haven't created a proposal yet

   <TomB> +1 for 7 October next call

   RESOLUTION: next telecon 7 October

   scribe: Tom to chair, Ed to scribe

   Jon: I'm at risk for 7 Oct

   Antone: regrets for 7 Oct

   PROPOSED: accept [14]16-swd-minutes as minutes of previous meeting

     [14] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html

   Sean: I'd indicated my regrets for 16 Sep

   RESOLUTION: [15]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html
   accepted as minutes of previous meeting, amended to show Sean's
   regrets

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html

RDFa

   Ben: no specific update; we have to schedule the last step
   ... only minor comments received during PR; some typos
   ... I need to tweak the Primer
   ... we've had positive comments on the Primer but some recent
   comments say there's not enough in it
   ... we want to have an updated version to publish with the REC

   Ralph: It's important that WG members get their AC reps to respond
   to the Call for Reviwe

   ACTION: All to remind respective AC Reps to respond to RDFa Proposed
   Rec Call for Review [recorded in
   [16]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action01]

   Guus: schedule also says we'll publish RDFa Use Cases as WG Note

   Ben: yep, we should see if it needs any updates

   ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group
   Note [recorded in
   [17]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]

Recipes

   Guus: I think we're done here

   ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation
   [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in
   [18]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]

     [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20

RDFa Metadata Note

   Guus: was this discussed at the previous telecon?

   Diego: there's a new version in the Wiki
   ... but I haven't yet discussed this draft with Ed
   ... hope to discuss with Ed in the next few days and then have a
   version for the WG

   ACTION: Diego updates "Minimum RDFa metadata set for WG
   deliverables" draft in the wiki [recorded in
   [19]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action04]

   Ed: I read the previous draft and found a few minor things, would
   like to talk about this in a telecon; in particular, talk about the
   various vocabularies to use

   Diego: I propose that Ed and I talk about it during the week and we
   put it on the agenda for 7 October

CURIE

   ACTION: [DONE] Jeremy to send a review to XHTML2 with comments
   [recorded in
   [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html#action06]

     [20] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html#action06

   -> "[21]CURIE review from SWD WG" [22]

     [21] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0042.html
     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0014.html

Vocabulary Management

   Guus: no status change

SKOS

   Alistair: [reviews comments received]
   ... comment about disjointness of ConceptScheme and Concept
   ... hasTopConcept v. hasTopConceptOf
   ... mappings

   <aliman> [22]public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0014

     [22] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0014.html

   <aliman> [23]public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0015

     [23] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0015.html

   -> [24]Last Call Comment: S9 skos:ConceptScheme is disjoint with
   skos:Concept [issue 129]

     [24] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/129

   <aliman> [25]public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0026

     [25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0026.html

   -> [26]Last Call Comment: skos:hasTopConcept and skos:topConceptOf
   [issue 130]

     [26] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/130

   <aliman> [27]wiki/SKOS/LastCall#preview

     [27] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/LastCall#preview

   Alistair: I've linked all these messages from [28]LastCall#preview

     [28] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/LastCall#preview

   <aliman> [29]public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0037

     [29] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0037.html

   Alistair: Quentin spotted an error in an example

   <aliman> [30]public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0044

     [30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0044.html

   <aliman> [31]public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0055

     [31] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0055.html

   Alistair: several comments from Michael Schneider, I broke out into
   separate issues

   -> [32]SKOS Issues Raised

     [32] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/raised

   <aliman> 5 external last call comments

   Sean: I expect a comment from Peter Patel-Schneider about some of
   the OWL

   <Ralph> Alistair++ for entering these into tracker

   Antoine: I found another, from 28 June; from Erik Hennum of IBM

   Alistair: I was wondering whether this should be entered as if it
   were a Last Call comment

   Ralph, Guus: yes, we should include Eric's message among Last Call
   comments

   Alistair: I'll generate issues for it

   Guus: I don't see many comments from the thesaurus or representation
   fields
   ... should we extend Last Call to get more comments?

   Ralph: is the esw-thes list sufficiently represented? Could we get
   more expressions of support?

   Alistair: we could definitely get more expressions of support

   Ralph: that would be helpful

   Guus: do we have input on our features at risk?

   Alistair: yes, in particular from Kjetl

   ACTION: Alistair enter Last Call issues from Erik Hennum's 28 June
   mail [recorded in
   [33]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action06]

   Sean: we've had no comments about the namespace

   -> "[34]SKOS comment" [27]

     [34] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0103.html
     [27] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/LastCall#preview

   Margherita: I have not yet had time to update [my work] with the
   latest SKOS
   ... I might ask folk in the Fisheries Department; they have a
   glossary and other resources

   Guus: I'll ask some folk here to comment

   Ed: Clay and I are the primary Library of Congress folk working with
   SKOS right now
   ... I might be able to get a general note of support but unlikely to
   get specific comments on the namespace

   Ralph: it would be good to get a consensus from esw-thes on the
   namespace question

   Alistair: I can ask that list explicitly; I've just sent a reminder

   Guus: I am worried that we don't have enough input on the features
   at risk

   Ralph: right, folks who like what we've proposed may feel they don't
   need to comment but the opposite is true

   Jon: Ed and I have presented SKOS at CAUSE conferences, including
   noting the features at risk
   ... there have been no objections

   Guus: it would be helpful to send a mail with that

   <Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest to Ed that a note of support and
   interest from someone at LC, even just a one-liner, would be helpful

   Ed: ok, but not from me or Clay, right?

   Tom: right; better from Barbara

   Ed: dbpedia uses SKOS quite heavily in their datastore; has anyone
   approached them?

   ACTION: Ed ask dbpedia to send a message in support of SKOS
   [recorded in
   [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action07]

   Ed: I could also contact the Department of Agriculture Library

   Guus: should we formally extend Last Call or just accept comments
   until 14 October?

   Ralph: I'm happy either way

   Guus: most WGs accept comments even if they arrive late

   <JeremyCarroll> (There is no option to reject late comments .... but
   one can take the lateness into account)

   Guus: Alistair; what, in your opinion, are the major comments

   Alistair: issue 129; [36]ConceptScheme and Concept

     [36] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/129

   Sean: issue 135; [37]should the label properties be subClassOf
   rdfs:Label
   ... Michael Schneider suggests that the label properties *not* be
   sub properties of rdfs:label
   ... I recall a related comment from Bernard Vatant
   ... some tools want the subPropertyOf so they can pull the labels
   out easily

     [37] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/135

   <JeremyCarroll> (as a tool builder I am keen for all label props to
   be subPropertyOf rdfs:Label)

   Guus: [my group] depends on subPropertyOf a lot; we don't have to
   adapt our software that looks for rdfs:label

   Alistair: there might be a different way to do this in OWL2 than
   what we currently use
   ... Alan Ruttenburg sent mail recently that might be relevant

   <aliman> [38]Alan Ruttenberg links to OWL 2 annotations proposal

     [38] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2008Sep/0024.html

   <aliman> [39]OWL 2 Syntax -- Annotations

     [39] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Annotations

   ACTION: [DONE] SKOS Reference editors to send mail asking for
   feedback from users [recorded in
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action06]

     [40] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action06

   ACTION: [DONE] Sean to add a request for implementations to the mail
   asking for feedback [recorded in
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action07]

     [41] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action07

   ACTION: Alistair to update the history page adding direct link to
   latest version of rdf triple [recorded in
   [42]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
   [CONTINUES]

     [42] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01

   <aliman> sorry for no progress on that

   Guus: it would be nice to show implementations
   ... every vocabulary owner who uses SKOS to produce a compliant
   thesaurus should be considered an implementation
   ... we should find some example thesaurii that use features from our
   spec
   ... finding one or two such vocabularies for each feature would make
   a nice implementation report
   ... showing some vocabularies that use the label features would be
   good

   Jon: what's the timeframe for implementation responses?

   Guus: during Candidate Rec phase, which is typically 4-6 weeks

   Ralph: We can propose what our own Candidate Rec exit criteria are.
   Traditionally, two independent implementations. Traditionally,
   candidate rec lasts as long as it takes to get implementations.

   Jeremy: recently most groups have been very close to meeting their
   CR exit criteria before they enter CR

   Jon: We have 100+ vocabularies in the registries. Have been avoiding
   switching over these vocabularies to new namespace because may be
   messy.

   Jon: I may be able to submit some examples but it will take a while

   Antoine: do the implementations have to be publicly available?

   Ralph: we can accept an email message from an implementor describing
   their experiences, without making the code public

   Jeremy: that mail can even go to a Member- or Team-confidential list
   :)

   [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Alistair enter Last Call issues from Erik Hennum's 28
   June mail [recorded in
   [43]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: All to remind respective AC Reps to respond to RDFa
   Proposed Rec Call for Review [recorded in
   [44]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to
   Group Note [recorded in
   [45]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Diego updates "Minimum RDFa metadata set for WG
   deliverables" draft in the wiki [recorded in
   [46]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Ed ask dbpedia to send a message in support of SKOS
   [recorded in
   [47]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action07]

   [PENDING] ACTION: Alistair to update the history page adding direct
   link to latest version of rdf triple [recorded in
   [48]http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
   [PENDING] ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of
   Recipes implementations] [recorded in
   [49]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]

     [48] http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01
     [49] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20

   [DONE] ACTION: Jeremy to send a review to XHTML2 with comments
   [recorded in
   [50]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html#action06]
   [DONE] ACTION: Sean to add a request for implementations to the mail
   asking for feedback [recorded in
   [51]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action07]
   [DONE] ACTION: SKOS Reference editors to send mail asking for
   feedback from users [recorded in
   [52]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action06]

     [50] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html#action06
     [51] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action07
     [52] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action06

   [End of minutes]
     _____________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [53]scribe.perl version 1.133
    ([54]CVS log)
    $Date: 2008/09/30 16:27:49 $

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

Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 16:30:05 UTC