- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 13:54:10 -0400
- To: public-swd-wg@w3.org
The minutes of today's Semantic Web Deployment Working Group telecon
are now available as
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html
Thanks to Alistair for scribing.
A text snapshot follows.
----
SWD WG
05 May 2009
[2]Agenda
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009May/0007.html
See also: [3]IRC log, previous [4]2009-04-21
[3] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-irc
[4] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html
Attendees
Present
Tom Baker, Ralph Swick, Alistair Miles, Ed Summers, Guus
Schreiber, Sean Bechhofer
Regrets
Antoine Isaac, Diego Berrueta, Margherita Sini
Chair
Tom
Scribe
Alistair
Contents
* Topics
1. ADMIN
2. SKOS
* Summary of Action Items
_____________________________________________________
ADMIN
tomb: RESOLVED accept minutes of last weeks call
... next call, in 2 weeks. i will be away
guus: i'll be here
tomb: next call on 19th May
SKOS
tomb: lcsh is back online, thanks Ed
ed: thanks for your help
<Ralph> yay Ed! & LC!
tomb: Clay is away today, but will come back for one of our final
calls, so we can congratulate him too
edsu: lcsh.info uris will redirect to new uris, 301
... put a blog at lcsh.info, comments are still there. now added a
note to the page, about new service, and about permanent redirect
for new uris.
ralph: permanent redirect is reasonable
edsu: will leave it up to jan 1 2010, then turn it off. so people
who made assertions using those uris, hopefully checking they're
still ok. so how long do you give people to notice it's moved?
ralph: interesting case study. I'd like to talk with you more about
this case, Ed
tomb: issue of id=concept ... is #concept an anchor in a document,
or what? is it really a non-issue as m hausenblaus said?
... there needs to be an explanation in place. dan (brickley) makes
a good point, two standards coming out of this wg, any subtleties
about using together, we should write them up and publish.
edsu: what happened as a result of dan/michael email, we changed id
in xhtml to something different, so #concept not used in rdfa at
all.
<Ralph> [9]id="concept" - non-issue? [Michael Hausenblas' mail]
[9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009May/0003.html
tomb: non-issue for lcsh?
edsu: yes. came up before with lcsh.info. wasn't a resolution then
either. would be nice to have something to point at. document
michael pointed to in wiki didn't cover the exact issue.
tomb: no i don't think it did either.
... is this sufficiently important to write a paragraph about? or
let it drop for now?
ralph: have we opened in tracker?
tomb: no, should we? late in game to be writing new things.
ralph: i like idea of writing a paragraph, summarising our feelings.
so recording in tracker is good place to not use it.
... not suitable for specifications, e.g. primer.
aliman: maybe could go in primer?
tomb: if someone could volunteer to post something to list, then
could use that to open issue in tracker.
<Ralph> [10]DanBri's raising the question (or issue)
[10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009May/0000.html
tomb: really only need two or three sentences. even just leaving in
tracker as resolution to issue would be a bare minimum, leave behind
a record.
... any volunteers?
ralph: i'd use danbri's message 0000 to open issue, then discussion
following that.
<edsu> +1 for using danbri's message
ralph: i'll open the issue now.
edsu: is this issue, for rdfa more generally? reservation about
putting in the primer, not specific to skos primer.
aliman: earlier i meant rdfa primer.
<edsu> +1 for RDFa Primer # i'm not just trying to get out of work
:)
ralph: yes, more rdfa question than skos question.
tomb: can we ask rdfa group to come up with a statement?
edsu: their response will be, they felt they already addressed the
issue in that wiki document.
tomb: i don't see the answer in that wiki document. also good to
have more permanent record.
ACTION: ralph to raise issue-214 with rdfa tf [recorded in
[11]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action01]
tomb: SKOS Reference - W3C Candidate Recommendation (2009-03-17) -
CR period ended 30 April
... how many comments?
aliman: do you mean implementation submissions?
sean: i only see one open CR comment, bunch of raised ones which are
skos implementations.
<Ralph> [12]issue 214; "id='concept'"
[12] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/214
aliman: there were a couple of comments from xx barclay, will put
them in tracker and draft responses.
ACTION: Tom repost his label proposal, dropping the word 'concept'
[recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action01] [DONE]
[13] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action01
[14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0076.h
tml
[14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0076.html
ACTION: Sean update labels in the SKOS Rec draft per resolution of
21-April [recorded in
[15]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action07] [DONE]
[15] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action07
<TomB>
[16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0105.h
tml
[16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0105.html
tomb: namespace documents. there were some issues brought up on
list. who do we list as contributor?
seanb: in namespace document?
tomb: we have a namespace document, which redirects via conneg
either to html or rdf.
... some inresolved issues, one is who to attribute as contributor.
... another is what it's scope should be, re owl dl.
<Ralph> skos.rdf currently says:
<Ralph> [[
<Ralph> <owl:Ontology
rdf:about="[17]http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core">
[17] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core
<Ralph> <dct:title xml:lang="en">SKOS Vocabulary</dct:title>
<Ralph> <dct:contributor>Dave Beckett</dct:contributor>
<Ralph> <dct:contributor>Nikki Rogers</dct:contributor>
<Ralph> <dct:contributor>Participants in W3C's Semantic Web
Deployment Working Grou
<Ralph> p.</dct:contributor>
<Ralph> ]]
seanb: in reference document, don't have any explicit
acknowledgments of contributions.
aliman: no we don't, but maybe an oversight.
tomb: i don't see ack.
... often at end of sotd?
ralph: it moves around, editors'/group choice. current preference at
end of doc.
...new website design encouraging at end of doc.
seanb: in owl docs, came after references.
ralph: content is entirely up to wg to decide. location is alongside
references.
ACTION: skos editors to draft acknowledgements section for SKOS
Reference [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action04]
tomb: in this case, previous wgs and swad-europe, plus input from
public-esw-thes, nice to acknowledge.
seanb: do we want list of all in wgs?
... might include people who didn't make a contribution.
<Ralph> [19]example of new Recommendation style (frontmatter w/
acknowledgements in an appendix)
[19] http://beta.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-emma-20090303/
tomb: also no-shows.
... i'm happy to name groups who made contribution
seanb: i'll post some draft text, but needs more acknowledgment for
swd because where most of work has gone on.
tomb: owl dl prune? not clear how that was resolved. how do we point
to it, and what is status?
seanb: status is, it's something i've generated.
Alistair: as I thought about this, I returned to what the OWL WG
asked us to say about the RDF schema
... i.e. that the RDF schema is a normative subset of the SKOS
datamodel
... I thought in more detail about what this might really mean and
how it informs the DL prune
... I talked with Antoine but we didn't reach a clear consensus
... I deliberately avoided using 'informative' and 'normative'
labels when I wrote the first bits of the spec; I was just trying to
describe the semantics
... on the face of it, the DL prune just seems to be another subset
... if the OWL Full schema is normative and the OWL DL schema is
informative, what is this actually saying?
tomb: if one is informative, another is normative, can we point both
from skos namespace?
Alistair: I'd have no problem citing the OWL DL prune from the
namespace document
aliman: i'm fine with link from skos namespace document to owl dl
prune.
Tom: in the HTML document?
Alistair: yes
tomb: so html variant of namespace document would link to owl dl
prune?
aliman: yes
Ralph: and an rdfs:seeAlso triple in the RDF document
seanb: useful to have it somewhere. people have been asking for it.
Alistair: no objection to giving the DL prune a high profile with
such links
... the only question I have is what the official status of the DL
prune might be
tomb: we have an implicit proposal, to consider the regular [owl
full] rdf schema as normative, and to consider the owl dl prune as
informative, and reference them both from the html document with
hyperlinks and from the rdf schema with seeAlso.
<Ralph> +1
tomb: is everyone more or less in agreement.
Alistair: not to open a can of worms, I have no objection to the
statement but it's not clear to me what such a statement means
tomb: another issue is, there is a document called "skos ... rdf
schema" which is confusing
... because it's obviously an html document. alistair proposed "skos
namespace document" which seems straightforward.
... then text could include link to the owl dl prune in addition.
... but a user dereferencing uri wouldn't get conneg.
... question of normative/informative, we need to give this document
here some attention. don't really want a discussion of normative vs.
informative.
ralph: i wonder if both documents aren't really informative, because
full thing is described in skos reference.
Alistair: Peter Patel-Schneider pointed out in an early comment that
we did not cite a normative machine-readable representation
... from that point of view I'm happy to say the OWL Full schema is
normative
ralph: i'm ok with saying the OWL Full schema is normative.
tomb: i think we should just resolve it.
PROPOSED: that the skos (reference?) namespace document dereference
by content negotiation to the html expression (variant?), which
includes a link to the informative owl dl prune, and to the rdf
expression (variant?) with rdfs:seeAlso link to owl dl prune.
tomb: i like "skos namespace document", i think it's clearer
PROPOSED: that the skos namespace document dereference by content
negotiation to the html variant, which includes a link to the
informative owl dl prune, and to the rdf variant, which includes
rdfs:seeAlso link to owl dl prune.
seanb: what to put in skos namespace document? i.e. informative vs/
normative.
[20]http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#triples
[20] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#triples
tomb: quote language from skos reference re normative subset in the
namespace document.
... any objections to proposed text of resolution?
<Ralph> +1
aliman: i second proposal
RESOLUTION: that the skos namespace document dereference by content
negotiation to the html variant, which includes a link to the
informative owl dl prune, and to the rdf variant, which includes
rdfs:seeAlso link to owl dl prune.
tomb: antoine has done some work on primer, see links in agenda.
... implementation report?
seanb: continuing to log implementations in tracker, and have
generated html report.
<Ralph> Sean++ for recording implementations in tracker
seanb: also started table of constructs used in vocabularies, so
have a google spreadsheet, but ongoing analysis.
guus: can you post link?
<seanb> [21]implementation report
[21] http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rmQPwhMMWXxY62FinzE44Eg
guus: i did a scan of all the emails, we have 20, very good news,
anything else is a bonus, but this is good enough.
... i note some things, collections are not used in that many.
seanb: no explicit mention so far.
guus: if i look at the rest, everything is covered in the skos
namespace, correct?
seanb: yes, i think so. still have some more to review, but think
everything is covered.
guus: all the main ones are covered.
... if you go to XL, i found only one who covered it, covered older
version.
<GuuS> [22]http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/194
[22] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/194
guus: issue 194, i inspected the skos code, what they do is have one
concept "subject category", they link it to ??? which has all label
definitions.
aliman: thomas bandholtz submitted something using xl
guus: as a point of order, important for finishing the group, so ask
for 15 minute extension?
tomb: ok.
<edsu> . o O (i thought agrovoc used collections)
<Ralph> [[
<Ralph> The working groups intend to submit this document for
consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation after 1 May having
met the following criteria:
<Ralph> 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that
use features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use
SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report.
<Ralph> 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this
document have received formal responses.
<Ralph> ]]
<Ralph> -- [23]http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#status
[23] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#status
-> [24]UMTHES implementation
[24] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0032.html
-> [25]email on umthes use of skos xl
[25] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0030.html
guus: table that sean has prepared, together with description of
implementations. what you showed covers vocabularies?
seanb: yes.
guus: other angle is the services, checkers.
seanb: it's a work in progress, will try to split them apart.
guus: we need structural description of each implementation, derive
from emails, then two tables of features, one for vocabs, one for
software.
seanb: constructing the table is where the work is. other stuff is
generated off the tracker.
... if we're happy with implementation.html plus detailed table on
where vocabs and apps cover the constructs?
guus: i'm happy.
ACTION: sean to complete implementation report by 19th [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action05]
guus: will issues be closed by 19th?
[27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0030
.html
[27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0030.html
[28]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0032
.html
[28] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Apr/0032.html
ACTION: Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by current
implementations [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04]
[CONTINUES]
[29] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04
ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for legacy
specs [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11]
[CONTINUES]
[30] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11
ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group
Note [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[CONTINUES]
[31] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02
ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15]
[CONTINUES]
[32] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes
implementations] [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
[CONTINUES]
[33] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20
ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the
metadata note [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[CONTINUES]
[34] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Ralph to raise issue-214 with rdfa tf [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Sean to complete implementation report by 19th
[recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: SKOS editors to draft acknowledgements section for
SKOS Reference [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action04]
[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: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of
the metadata note [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for
legacy specs [recorded in
[40]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft
[recorded in
[41]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
[42]http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
[PENDING] ACTION: Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by
current implementations [recorded in
[43]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04]
[38] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02
[39] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03
[40] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11
[41] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15
[42] http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20
[43] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04
[DONE] ACTION: Antoine make minor edits to
[44]http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-skos-ucr-20070516/ to prepare for
publication as Group Note on 19 May [recorded in
[45]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[DONE] ACTION: Sean update labels in the SKOS Rec draft per
resolution of 21-April [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action07]
[DONE] ACTION: Tom repost his label proposal, dropping the word
'concept' [recorded in
[47]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action01] -- DONE
[48]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0076.h
tml
[44] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-skos-ucr-20070516/
[45] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action02
[46] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action07
[47] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action01
[48] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0076.html
[End of minutes]
_____________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [49]scribe.perl version 1.135
([50]CVS log)
$Date: 2009/05/05 17:52:27 $
[49] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[50] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 17:54:37 UTC