13:52:20 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #swbp
13:52:32 <RalphS> Meeting: SWBPD WG
13:52:39 <RalphS> Chair: Guus Schreiber
13:52:39 <Benjamin> Benjamin has joined #swbp
13:52:52 <Benjamin> Good afternoon.
13:53:05 <RalphS> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jun/0034.html
13:53:32 <RalphS> zakim, this will be swbpd
13:53:32 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, RalphS
13:53:34 <RalphS> zakim, this will be swbp
13:53:34 <Zakim> ok, RalphS; I see SW_BPD()10:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
13:54:02 <danbri> hi folks
13:54:51 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe has changed the topic to: SWBPD WG telecon 2004-06-10 agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jun/0034.html
13:55:08 <RalphS> Previous: 2004-05-27 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004May/0149.html
13:57:21 <danbri_scribe> (I think some actions may have been lost in the agenda/minutes/agenda trail...)
13:58:26 <jacco> jacco has joined #swbp
13:58:45 <Zakim> SW_BPD()10:00AM has now started
13:58:52 <Zakim> +Ralph
13:59:03 <Zakim> +[CWI]
13:59:05 <Zakim> -Ralph
13:59:06 <Zakim> +Ralph
13:59:14 <RalphS> zakim, CWI is Guus
13:59:14 <Zakim> +Guus; got it
14:00:31 <libby> libby has joined #swbp
14:00:55 <guus> guus has joined #swbp
14:01:10 <Zakim> +??P7
14:01:42 <aliman> aliman has joined #swbp
14:01:47 <Zakim> +??P9
14:01:53 <Zakim> +??P10
14:01:58 <RalphS> zakim, ??p9 is Benjamin
14:01:58 <Zakim> +Benjamin; got it
14:02:04 <RalphS> zakim, ??p10 is Alistair
14:02:04 <Zakim> +Alistair; got it
14:02:19 <guus> zakim, ??P7 is Alan
14:02:19 <Zakim> +Alan; got it
14:02:21 <RalphS> zakim, ??p7 is Alan
14:02:21 <Zakim> I already had ??P7 as Alan, RalphS
14:02:29 <jhendler> jhendler has joined #swbp
14:02:40 <Zakim> +[CWI]
14:02:53 <Zakim> +Natasha_Noy
14:02:53 <RalphS> zakim, CWI is Frank
14:02:55 <Zakim> +Frank; got it
14:03:05 <Natasha> Natasha has joined #swbp
14:03:07 <Zakim> +[UMD]
14:03:15 <jhendler> zakim, [umd] is jimh
14:03:16 <Zakim> +jimh; got it
14:04:49 <guus> zakim, who is here?
14:04:49 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph, Guus, Alan, Benjamin, Alistair, Frank, Natasha_Noy, jimh
14:04:51 <Zakim> On IRC I see Natasha, jhendler, aliman, guus, libby, jacco, Benjamin, RRSAgent, RalphS, Zakim, danbri_scribe
14:04:53 <Zakim> +JosD
14:05:04 <RalphS> Guus: trying the Web irc interface for the first time; it appears to work nicely, especially for those behind a firewall
14:05:24 <Zakim> +??P19
14:05:34 <JosD> JosD has joined #swbp
14:05:35 <Zakim> +??P21
14:05:37 <Zakim> +DanBri
14:05:49 <guus> zakim, ??p19 is Brian
14:05:49 <Zakim> +Brian; got it
14:05:51 <RalphS> zakim, p21 is Jeremy
14:05:51 <Zakim> sorry, RalphS, I do not recognize a party named 'p21'
14:05:53 <danbri_scribe> zakim, DanBri is temporarily Redland
14:05:53 <Zakim> +Redland; got it
14:05:56 <RalphS> zakim, ??p21 is Jeremy
14:05:56 <Zakim> +Jeremy; got it
14:06:00 <danbri_scribe> zakim, Redland holds DanBri, Libby
14:06:00 <Zakim> +DanBri, Libby; got it
14:06:08 <jjc> jjc has joined #swbp
14:06:42 <RalphS> -> http://www.w3.org/2001/01/cgi-irc Web/CGI irc interface
14:06:43 <Zakim> +??P22
14:06:56 <RalphS> zakim, ??p22 is Tom_Baker
14:06:56 <Zakim> +Tom_Baker; got it
14:07:06 <bwm> bwm has joined #swbp
14:07:21 <danbri_scribe> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:07:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph, Guus, Alan, Benjamin, Alistair, Frank, Natasha_Noy, jimh, JosD, Brian, Jeremy, Redland, Tom_Baker
14:07:23 <Zakim> Redland has DanBri, Libby
14:08:05 <danbri_scribe> scribe: danbri
14:08:13 <danbri_scribe> guus: see web-based irc
14:08:14 <RalphS> Scribe: DanBri
14:08:20 <danbri_scribe> ...for thoese w/ firewall problems
14:08:45 <danbri_scribe> regrets: see list
14:08:53 <danbri_scribe> propose accept brian's minutes from last time
14:09:05 <RalphS> Regrets: Gary_NG, David_Norheim
14:09:08 <danbri_scribe> <RalphS>	Previous: 2004-05-27 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004May/0149.html
14:09:13 <danbri_scribe> ...with two ammendments
14:09:21 <danbri_scribe> danbri; 2nd'd.
14:09:42 <danbri_scribe> no oppositions; resolved 2004-05-07 + 2 amendments are a fair record
14:09:55 <danbri_scribe> next meeting: June 24th
14:10:11 <RalphS> regrets for 24 June from Guus, DanBri
14:10:18 <danbri_scribe> jjc: offers to scribe
14:10:32 <danbri_scribe> agenda review: no AOB/ammendments
14:10:33 <RalphS> yes, I expect to be available to chair
14:10:36 <danbri_scribe> Action review:
14:10:47 <danbri_scribe> Ralph add to the WG home page a note informing the public that they
14:10:47 <danbri_scribe> are free to write to the WG mailing list and to use the string "comment:" in
14:10:47 <danbri_scribe> their subject
14:10:49 <danbri_scribe> DONE.
14:10:58 <danbri_scribe> ...also to top page of mail archive (a prev action from mar f2f).
14:11:16 <RalphS> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/#FreqLinks1
14:11:21 <danbri_scribe> ...see draft specs bit of doc
14:11:57 <RalphS> also added to mail archive; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/
14:12:06 <danbri_scribe> DONE: bwm Propose amendments to the classes as values note.
14:12:10 <jhendler> ... should also make sure that our "status of this document" sectiion will include the "whre to respond"
14:12:27 <danbri_scribe> DONE: Ralph get advice on using WG Note vs. Working Draft for early SWBPD
14:12:27 <danbri_scribe> documents.
14:12:40 <danbri_scribe> ..advise: a strong advise to use the Working Draft process.
14:12:45 <danbri_scribe> Also to see updated pubrules page.
14:12:54 <danbri_scribe> ...there has been a change in definition to what 'rec track' means
14:13:22 <danbri_scribe> ...any doc that we seek feedback on we should do as a WD, noting intended end-result in Status section (eg. "We expect this to end up as a Note").
14:13:36 <danbri_scribe> guus: we dicuss this further under 3. 
14:13:46 <danbri_scribe> DONE:  guus to provide description of process for publishing notes
14:13:53 <danbri_scribe> DONE: ralph remind TF leaders they can use intermediate weeks, between WG
14:13:53 <danbri_scribe> telecons, for TF telecons.
14:14:07 <aditya> aditya has joined #swbp
14:14:20 <danbri_scribe> DONE: guus to discuss with Jim Hendler how to push this forward.
14:14:27 <danbri_scribe> (this was the WRLD TF)
14:14:41 <danbri_scribe> Ado Prepare summary of Wordnet proposal document, and send to
14:14:41 <danbri_scribe> Christian after review by the WG.
14:14:48 <RalphS> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jun/0002.html Task Force telecons (Ralph, Thursday, 3 June)
14:14:48 <danbri_scribe> s/Ado/Aldo/
14:15:21 <danbri_scribe> bwm: haven't seen the doc yet but there was an updated tf description
14:15:25 <danbri_scribe> ...assume note the same
14:16:02 <libby> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebBestPracticesTaskForceOnApplicationsAndDemos?action=show
14:16:05 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: Aldo prepare summary of Wordnet proposal doc, and send to Christian after review by WG.
14:16:32 <danbri_scribe> CONTINUED: libby update task force description
14:16:39 <Zakim> +??P24
14:16:52 <danbri_scribe> COMPLETED: libby complete template for applications from the 2003 SW challenge
14:16:53 <libby> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jun/0046.html
14:17:11 <libby> http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/cat_applications_and_demos.html
14:17:26 <danbri_scribe> 'we might need to change this slightly, but not bad. the TF description needs further work'
14:17:26 <RalphS> zakim, ??p24 is Mike_Uschold
14:17:26 <Zakim> +Mike_Uschold; got it
14:17:51 <danbri_scribe> CONTINUED: guus complete template for Finish museums example
14:17:58 <danbri_scribe> CONTINUED: danbri complete template for FOAF
14:18:07 <danbri_scribe> CONTINUED: ralph complete template for Annotea
14:18:17 <danbri_scribe> CONTINUED: libby complete template for web conference photo applications
14:18:24 <jjc> q+ to discuss ip implications
14:18:26 <danbri_scribe> 3. WG publication process
14:18:28 <danbri_scribe> ==============
14:18:39 <danbri_scribe> guus: brian and I discussed the process for this (re WD/Note/etc).
14:19:10 <danbri_scribe> ...origianlly we thought WD was REC-track only, but there are now other outcomes (eg. Note)
14:19:36 <danbri_scribe> jim: how do we express 'this is WD that we no longer thing should go to REC'?
14:19:38 <Tbaker> Tbaker has joined #swbp
14:19:49 <danbri_scribe> RalphS: we could publish it as a Note 
14:19:57 <jjc> QAH is an example
14:20:03 <danbri_scribe> [or a WD w/ a SOTD suggesting new end-state as Note? --danbri thought]
14:20:25 <danbri_scribe> guus: main thing i take from thread w/ brian... is how do we understand notion of consensus in a non-rectrack wg?
14:20:35 <danbri_scribe> brian: i was suggesting we don't discuss it too much in the abstract
14:20:46 <danbri_scribe> ...in your reply, although u used diff words, i think we had a similar sense
14:20:51 <jjc> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qa-handbook-20040510/ is QAH 
14:21:11 <danbri_scribe> ...ie that a "can't live with this" attitude is less likely in this WG than in normative recs [such as RDFCore's and OWL's]
14:21:13 <danbri_scribe> RalphS: yup
14:21:15 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: yep
14:21:23 <danbri_scribe> guus: I'll rephrase the proposal
14:21:23 <danbri_scribe> q?
14:21:47 <danbri_scribe> jjc: two things to say. one: QA Handbook is an eg of such a WD with an intent to become a WG Note
14:21:53 <RalphS> [I realize I should have replied to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jun/0025.html -- will do so later]
14:22:00 <danbri_scribe> ...they sasy in the status that there'll be a Last Call WD before it goes to Note
14:22:23 <danbri_scribe> ...also: concern that there has been some discussion in HP re Intellectual Policy issues. The Patent Policy takes 1st WD as a significant milestone.
14:22:33 <Zakim> jjc, you wanted to discuss ip implications
14:22:35 <danbri_scribe> On HP's reading we find it unclear quite how it'd work (here)
14:23:06 <danbri_scribe> ...this is actually generic issue across W3C so we won't make a fuss here, but Patent Policy group should be aware of issue
14:23:16 <danbri_scribe> ...that WDs are preferred outcomes even for non-RECtrack
14:23:50 <danbri_scribe> RalphS: as I reviewed the materials I realise I should have replied to Brian. I was also confused on this point. Current version of pubrules clarifies this a bit. I'll send a mail message that explains the clarification as I understand it.
14:24:24 <danbri_scribe> ...essentially the WD we publish tat states we intend it to end as a Note... the IPR licensing requirements of the PP comes into play only for docs intended to go to REC
14:24:35 <danbri_scribe> So that bit of language is the key to stop the PP being triggered
14:24:36 <bwm> brian is happy.  Ralph replying here is fine.
14:24:36 <danbri_scribe> jjc: ok
14:24:40 <danbri_scribe> guus: glad to hear it
14:25:10 <RalphS> -> http://www.w3.org/2004/02/02-pubrules.html Publication Rules
14:25:17 <danbri_scribe> brian: I don't need to be in critical path
14:25:26 <jacco> jacco is back, frank has left
14:25:35 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: Guus to revise WD/Note process proposal for Jun24 meeting
14:25:45 <RalphS> pubrules clarifies how the Status Of This Document in a WD invokes -- or not -- the Patent Policy
14:25:53 <danbri_scribe> TaskForces
14:25:55 <danbri_scribe> =========
14:25:57 <danbri_scribe> cross-tf issues
14:26:16 <danbri_scribe> guus: Ralph has circulated a TF template, should make it easier to drop them into the Web
14:26:44 <danbri_scribe> RalphS: great that ppl are archiving these in the mail archives, but really want to get them a single updatable url
14:27:11 <jacco> zakim, Frank is jacco
14:27:11 <Zakim> +jacco; got it
14:27:22 <danbri_scribe> libby: question. re apps/demos tf, we have deliverables but not aiming at a note [re-reads]. oh that's fine.
14:27:27 <Tbaker> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Apr/0025.html
14:27:32 <danbri_scribe> guus: tom's comments on tf list...
14:27:41 <danbri_scribe> ...its our list of things we want to do or have completed. a living list.
14:28:00 <danbri_scribe> tom: see my msg in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Apr/0025.html
14:28:11 <danbri_scribe> ... I look at good pracice in SW re management of a vocabulary
14:28:23 <danbri_scribe> ...i'm interested in understanding good practice for declaring and managing a simple vocabulary
14:28:30 <danbri_scribe> ...policies for URIs as term identifiers
14:28:48 <danbri_scribe> ...DCMI has a namespace policies. Persistence. Institutional commitment. Versioning of terms. Forming URI strings.
14:29:10 <danbri_scribe> ...it'd be helpful to have some sort of point of reference from SW community, hopefully in line with what we're [DCMI?] doing
14:29:18 <danbri_scribe> ...2nd set of issues is re versioning terms and term-sets
14:29:41 <danbri_scribe> ...we've evolved a defacto process, would like to see those move towards a point of ref from sw community
14:29:55 <aliman> I also think recommendations for change management would be a great thing for the WG to look at
14:29:55 <danbri_scribe> ...comparision w/ way docs are versioned on w3c website [tr page]
14:30:00 <danbri_scribe> +1
14:30:10 <danbri_scribe> ...also sw 'etiquette'
14:30:12 <aliman> ... (of RDF vocabs)
14:30:21 <danbri_scribe> ...eg our creation of subproperties
14:30:32 <danbri_scribe> ...dcmi subpropertying work from library of congress
14:30:36 <danbri_scribe> ...who is asserting what about what
14:30:44 <danbri_scribe> ...sort of communication channels should be followed
14:30:55 <danbri_scribe> ...4th: in documenting a vocabulary
14:31:06 <danbri_scribe> ...when we add a term to dcmi termset... we update a site, and schema
14:31:09 <jjc> Zakim, who's on the call?
14:31:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph, Guus, Alan, Benjamin, Alistair, jacco, Natasha_Noy, jimh, JosD, Brian, Jeremy (muted), Redland, Tom_Baker, Mike_Uschold
14:31:11 <Zakim> Redland has DanBri, Libby
14:31:15 <danbri_scribe> ...changes rippple through a number of different types of documentation
14:31:33 <danbri_scribe> ...would be good for diff sw vocabs to have consistent approach
14:31:41 <danbri_scribe> ...simple guidelines of good practice for how one does this
14:32:01 <danbri_scribe> q+ to say yes please! how much time have you got...
14:32:23 <danbri_scribe> ...[missed] namespace policy and other things associated w/ managing a vocab
14:32:34 <libby> +1 on reuse of vocabs guidence
14:32:52 <danbri_scribe> tom: also in another context i'm working on a description of how dcmi approaches the q of versioning terms
14:32:58 <danbri_scribe> ...dcmi already has a namespace policy
14:33:11 <danbri_scribe> ...so we have two current stakes in the ground
14:33:24 <bwm> bwm thinks its great to have a customer telling us what he needs
14:33:27 <libby> +q to note pointer to some faqs from image workshop related to tom's point
14:33:36 <libby> q+ to note pointer to some faqs from image workshop related to tom's point
14:33:36 <danbri_scribe> [I think btw foaf and dcmi approaches v close; foaf approach based on dc experience]
14:33:47 <danbri_scribe> guus: we discussed this at kickoff meeting
14:33:54 <danbri_scribe> ...grouped some of these under style conventions
14:35:17 <Zakim> danbri_scribe, you wanted to say yes please! how much time have you got...
14:35:39 <jhendler> come on, FOAF only has a few million users -- why should we use that as an example :->
14:36:03 <libby> http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2004/06/07/2004-06-07.html#1086615887.400193
14:36:07 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: foaf approach came from dcmi, and we're discussing similar approaches (to versioning) re skos
14:36:12 <danbri_scribe> ack libby
14:36:12 <Zakim> libby, you wanted to note pointer to some faqs from image workshop related to tom's point
14:36:27 <RalphS> DanBri: SWBPD is a good place to pull together implementation experiences from various places
14:36:36 <bwm> q+
14:36:43 <danbri_scribe> libby: i'll post ptr to discussion in image context, and also yes i'd be involved
14:36:59 <aldo> aldo has joined #Swbp
14:37:00 <aliman> up for looking at change management
14:37:03 <danbri_scribe> guus: who would want to be in such a Style Conventions TF? (refined to addresss these)
14:37:12 <danbri_scribe> jim: i don't really think it is style conventions
14:37:16 <libby> interested in reuse question
14:37:20 <danbri_scribe> guus: rename
14:37:30 <danbri_scribe> jim: vocab management
14:37:36 <danbri_scribe> guus: rename to vocab management 
14:37:43 <danbri_scribe> speaker? Alan?
14:37:57 <Natasha> */ yes, Alan
14:38:03 <libby> http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2004/06/07/2004-06-07.html#1086615887.400193 <- faqs fromn image workshop about some of these practical considerations
14:38:10 <danbri_scribe> ...a lot experience in medical contexts. large vocabs. i'd hope to contribute esp re medical community
14:38:11 <Tbaker> I like vocabulary management" better than "style conventions"
14:38:34 <danbri_scribe> jim: same as thesaurus/port TF?
14:38:38 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: its different
14:38:44 <danbri_scribe> guus: quite diff but similar issues
14:38:59 <RalphS> I also think that "Vocabulary Management" better captures the intent of Tom's work
14:39:07 <danbri_scribe> +1
14:39:27 <danbri_scribe> guus: I propose s/Style Conventions/Vocabulary Management/ to include Tom's issues from mail
14:39:29 <danbri_scribe> no objections
14:39:32 <danbri_scribe> RESOLVED
14:39:53 <danbri_scribe> guus: who would merge this w/ porting?
14:40:03 <danbri_scribe> jim: let me take that off, we can think about it later
14:40:08 <danbri_scribe> guus: who'd be interested?
14:40:19 <RalphS> ACTION: Ralph add 'Vocabulary Management' to WG home page list of Task Forces under discussion to start
14:40:22 <danbri_scribe> q+ to ask where "# vs /" is in scope (suggest it is, and a large work item)
14:40:25 <Tbaker> I would prefer to start after summer.
14:40:27 <aliman> I would
14:40:35 <libby> libby would be
14:40:51 <danbri_scribe> libby, natasha, danbri (after skos is out), al, alan, jim, tom, ...
14:41:09 <danbri_scribe> guus: 7 is a good sign
14:41:12 <danbri_scribe> coordinator?
14:41:41 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: Tom would be natural, but don't want to push u into it...
14:41:42 <RalphS> [Ralph interested, though has committed to XML datatypes as well]
14:42:13 <danbri_scribe> tom: [...] good nxt step might be a conference call
14:42:14 <danbri_scribe> q?
14:42:29 <danbri_scribe> tom: concerned that we scope it tightly to some achievable objectives
14:42:35 <danbri_scribe> ...have my own gut feeling
14:43:02 <danbri_scribe> ack bwm
14:43:04 <danbri_scribe> q?
14:43:08 <Zakim> danbri_scribe, you wanted to ask where "# vs /" is in scope (suggest it is, and a large work item)
14:43:51 <RalphS> DanBri: # vs / seems arcane and boring, but it comes up often
14:43:55 <RalphS> Guus: that's a nasty one
14:44:06 <Tbaker> Is "what does the namespace URI 'resolve to'" in scope...?
14:44:09 <RalphS> DanBri: I'd like this TF to at least summarize the problem
14:44:23 <danbri_scribe> guus: ok let's proceed w/ telecon
14:45:12 <danbri_scribe> June17? July1? for an initial discussion about scoping some work in this area.
14:45:29 <danbri_scribe> tom: if it is tightly scoped and we have a reasonably good sense of what it is trying to achieve
14:45:42 <danbri_scribe> ...i coould picture myself leading it, w/ some assistance from a veteran
14:45:52 <danbri_scribe> ...but couldn't commit right now without such a scoping meeting
14:45:54 <danbri_scribe> jjc: ok fine
14:46:07 <danbri_scribe> alan: i couldn't make 17th
14:46:28 <aliman> i can't make either on the phone - maybe make 17th on IRC
14:46:30 <danbri_scribe> Natasha: i can live w/ the earlier one
14:46:51 <RalphS> Tom: propose 17 June at 1400 UTC for telecon to discuss scope of Vocab Mgmnt TF
14:46:52 <danbri_scribe> proposal: June17th, ~45 mins+, this timeslot 
14:47:04 <danbri_scribe> s/this timeslot/1400 utc/
14:47:24 <danbri_scribe> jim: will be announced on mailing list, but not a full wg telecon
14:47:40 <danbri_scribe> tom: so process over next week to discuss scoping ideas on call
14:47:44 <RalphS> ACTION: Ralph get 17 June VOCAB telecon reservation
14:47:45 <danbri_scribe> guus: exactly :)
14:49:07 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: libby, natasha, danbri, al, alan, jim, tom, send thoughts/comments re scoping of Vocab management TF work
14:49:33 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: tom send revised notion of prev posting proposing a scope for vocab management TF
14:50:12 <RalphS> Topic: World View TF
14:50:28 <danbri_scribe> jim: I propose dissolution of the World TF
14:50:30 <aldo> yes I am looking at the irc
14:50:34 <danbri_scribe> ...we don't need the 'why' but the 'how'
14:50:57 <danbri_scribe> q+ to note that there are "how" Qs that are inscope for World, as he understood it
14:51:10 <jjc> q+ to ask for time
14:51:20 <danbri_scribe> guus: i support this idea
14:51:31 <danbri_scribe> ...initial discussion of what an onto was dissapeared once we started it
14:52:21 <bwm> danbri: i remember there was a question about explaining rdfs, owl lite 
14:52:34 <bwm> ... i keep getting questions about that
14:52:39 <danbri_scribe> ack danbri_scribe
14:52:39 <Zakim> danbri_scribe, you wanted to note that there are "how" Qs that are inscope for World, as he understood it
14:52:42 <bwm> jim: we don't know the answer
14:52:42 <danbri_scribe> ack jjc
14:52:42 <Zakim> jjc, you wanted to ask for time
14:53:03 <danbri_scribe> jjc: a procedural point. in HP there was some support for this TF. I'd like to consult HP folks first.
14:53:17 <danbri_scribe> Jim: [earlier] we could still write articles etc. Many of these Qs ppl on't have answers too
14:53:18 <bwm> +1 to we have too much going on at present
14:53:31 <RalphS> [I am more comfortable putting the World View TF on hold]
14:53:37 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: fine. a different better reason but fine. i agree w/ shutdown or hold.
14:53:40 <RalphS> [agree on prioritization of resources]
14:53:52 <danbri_scribe> jim: (to jjc) we can put it on hold rather than close down
14:54:25 <danbri_scribe> mike g: maybe we could do same thing as w/ vocab management... start to scope out the work possibilities
14:54:28 <danbri_scribe> ...i could chair a telecon
14:54:36 <danbri_scribe> jim: my concern is that energy is better spent elsewhere
14:54:53 <danbri_scribe> mike: what we just heard here, is that it isn't clear just what the tf is/was about
14:55:04 <danbri_scribe> ...proposing spending an hour of interested parties' time
14:55:24 <RalphS> s/mike g/mike u/
14:55:45 <danbri_scribe> [...]
14:56:04 <danbri_scribe> guus: a lot of pressure to produce nice practical results
14:56:07 <RalphS> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004JanMar/0143.html WRLD TF description
14:56:11 <danbri_scribe> ...things that are easy to get out, howto type of things
14:56:30 <danbri_scribe> action: jim to message to list proposing the WORLD TF goes on hold
14:57:16 <danbri_scribe> RalphS: Folks without IRC, dial 41# to be put on a queue by Zakim
14:57:25 <danbri_scribe> zakim, help
14:57:25 <Zakim> Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot for more detailed help.
14:57:27 <Zakim> Some of the commands I know are:
14:57:28 <Zakim>  xxx is yyy       - establish yyy as the name of unknown party xxx
14:57:30 <Zakim>                     if yyy is 'me' or 'I', your nick is substituted
14:57:32 <Zakim>  xxx may be yyy   - establish yyy as possibly the name of unknown party xxx
14:57:34 <Zakim>  I am xxx         - establish your nick as the name of unknown party xxx
14:57:36 <Zakim>  xxx holds yyy [, zzz ...] - establish xxx as a group name and yyy, etc. as participants within that group
14:57:38 <Zakim>  xxx also holds yyy - add yyy to the list of participants in group xxx
14:57:40 <Zakim>  who's here?      - lists the participants on the phone
14:57:42 <Zakim>  who's muted?     - lists the participants who are muted
14:57:44 <Zakim>  mute xxx         - mutes party xxx (like pressing 61#)
14:57:46 <Zakim>  unmute xxx       - reverses the effect of "mute" and of 61#
14:57:48 <Zakim>  is xxx here?     - reports whether a party named like xxx is present
14:57:50 <Zakim>  list conferences - reports the active conferences
14:57:51 <Zakim>  this is xxx      - associates this channel with conference xxx
14:57:52 <Zakim>  excuse us        - disconnects from the irc channel
14:57:53 <Zakim> I last learned something new on $Date: 2004/06/10 15:40:16 $
14:58:36 <danbri_scribe> Wordnet TF
14:58:37 <danbri_scribe> ========
14:58:44 <danbri_scribe> guus: Aldo not here
14:58:58 <danbri_scribe> ...Brian sent mail and some work on the conversion
14:59:05 <danbri_scribe> (aldo's on irc, not phone?)
14:59:17 <danbri_scribe> brian: I took Guus' translation and make it into RDF/XML
14:59:22 <danbri_scribe> ...I only did the RDFS part of it
14:59:26 <danbri_scribe> ...didn't get to the OWL part of it
14:59:46 <danbri_scribe> ...also started a draft note as a wrapper for a diagram i made for the schema
14:59:53 <danbri_scribe> ...i wrote the note then wondered if we'd produce a note
15:00:03 <danbri_scribe> ...do we need this?
15:00:26 <danbri_scribe> ...some folks might want the ontology but not the note
15:00:41 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: an ontology witohut accompanying prose not so useful [so yes pls]
15:00:49 <danbri_scribe> guus: some detaisl need discussion, eg re word/sense
15:00:59 <danbri_scribe> q+ to ask aliman's view re relation to skos structures
15:01:20 <danbri_scribe> guus: [missed proposal]
15:01:25 <CGI495> CGI495 has joined #swbp
15:01:27 <danbri_scribe> ...something re discussing multilingual aspects
15:01:28 <Zakim> -jimh
15:01:57 <danbri_scribe> guus: propose call on 14:00 July 1st? to discuss wordnet, detailed tech re as-is conversion into rdf
15:02:08 <danbri_scribe> danbri_scribe: if i can make it i'll be there
15:02:10 <danbri_scribe> jjc: interested too
15:02:17 <danbri_scribe> guus: we coould get outsiders involved
15:02:36 <danbri_scribe> guus: i'd like a wordnet expert there
15:03:03 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: Guus invite at least 1 wordnet domain expert to a July1st meeting
15:03:11 <bwm> q+
15:03:27 <aldo> I agree on July 14th, but I expect to get more drafts in advance, possibly with the help of other TF members ...
15:04:29 <Zakim> +PatH
15:04:33 <jjc> july 1
15:04:35 <CGI495> I just got this to work - thanks to Guss's suggestion.  I see a "Say" button which I expect will get his message printed. I do not see a way to get on the queue.
15:04:42 <danbri_scribe> aldo, we are talking about 1st not 14th?
15:04:44 <danbri_scribe> 14:00 is 2pm
15:05:04 <RalphS> 1400 UTC
15:05:35 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: guus arrange for telecon for july 1st 1400 UTC 60mins on step1 'as is' conversion of Wordnet to RDF/OWL (brian, jjc, guus, danbri, ?aldo, ...)
15:05:35 <CGI495> This is Mike Uschold, not sure where CGI495 came from.
15:05:54 <danbri_scribe> (sorry if i missed any intended attendees; it is open to all of us ...)
15:06:24 <patH> patH has joined #swbp
15:06:38 <danbri_scribe> aldo, we'll proceed with July1st proposal
15:06:38 <danbri_scribe> q?
15:08:16 <danbri_scribe> action: ralph to create a dir for the wordnet tf's ongoing work and give access to brian, ...
15:08:16 <danbri_scribe> ACTION: ralph to create a dir for the wordnet tf's ongoing work and give access to brian, ...
15:08:16 <danbri_scribe> ack danbri_scribe
15:08:16 <Zakim> danbri_scribe, you wanted to ask aliman's view re relation to skos structures
15:08:17 <danbri_dna> danbri_dna has joined #swbp
15:08:21 <aldo> uh sorry, ok for July 1st 2pm
15:08:55 <RalphS> that's July 1 1400 UTC
15:09:20 <danbri_dna> aldo: i think best to do as-is first, solo, then compare with skos afterwards
15:09:23 <danbri_dna> ACTION: ralph to create a dir for the wordnet tf's ongoing work and give access to brian, ...
15:09:39 <MikeU> MikeU has joined #swbp
15:10:31 <bwm> q?
15:10:40 <RalphS> [both 17 June and 1 July telecons are now in the telecon calendar; http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#D20040617 ]
15:10:46 <danbri_dna> danbri_dna: my reply to brian http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004Jun/0011.html is as far as i've got re roadmap on thes/port and wordnet stuff
15:10:55 <danbri_dna> XML Schema TF 
15:10:56 <danbri_dna> ========
15:11:07 <danbri_dna> RalphS: ...some small progress
15:11:33 <danbri_dna> ...new charters will have more explicit language re involvement
15:11:53 <danbri_dna> jjc: [missed pt re telecon attendance]
15:12:05 <danbri_dna> ...jjc attending xml schema telecon?
15:12:24 <danbri_dna> so Ralph's old action continues, ie. that they continue to ask for a volunteer
15:12:47 <RalphS> XML Schema meets Thursdays, Jeremy: http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_1080
15:13:00 <danbri_dna> ACTION: jjc try to attent an XML Schema WG telecon
15:13:14 <danbri_dna> jjc: agreement that this is the critical next step
15:13:15 <RalphS> oh, Fridays also: http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_734
15:13:49 <danbri_dna> guus: a joint proposal better than us proposing an answer to them, ideally
15:13:58 <danbri_dna> OEP TF
15:14:00 <danbri_dna> =====
15:14:04 <danbri_dna> ...classes as values
15:14:14 <danbri_dna> guus: Natasha made a 4th version
15:14:34 <danbri_dna> Natasha: brian and i discussed a version offlist, now a version after that
15:14:53 <danbri_dna> ...brian at one point suggested a single version should be proposed [?]
15:15:14 <danbri_dna> brian: i think ... given that a WD is hopefully imminent, we could ask for feedback on designs
15:15:22 <danbri_dna> ... haven't studied natasha's response yet
15:15:31 <danbri_dna> ... approach 2 feels to me like a modelling error
15:15:52 <danbri_dna> ... concern that 1st pub from a BPD WG not having a BP to recommend might be odd
15:16:12 <danbri_dna> Natasha: re approach i think is best, 4 of the DL alternatives, led me to believe to think we can't recommend a single approach
15:16:19 <danbri_dna> brian: it'd be good if we could
15:16:33 <RalphS> [the original text of my XML Schema action was "Ralph to talk with the chair of the XML Schema WG to invite them to join the XSCH TF"
15:16:35 <danbri_dna> q+ to note that having 1 prefeerred form in later WD could be good
15:16:36 <RalphS> -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004May/0002.html
15:16:37 <RalphS> ]]
15:16:45 <guus> q?
15:16:54 <Zakim> danbri_dna, you wanted to note that having 1 prefeerred form in later WD could be good
15:17:09 <MikeU> I would like to get on the queue, how can I do that?
15:17:28 <danbri_dna> guus: this is more or less ready to go as a WD
15:17:30 <jjc> you say "q+2
15:17:37 <jjc> sorry "q+"
15:17:43 <danbri_dna> Natasha: some discussion on list about appendices
15:17:50 <danbri_dna> ...am still myself using subjects as examples
15:18:12 <danbri_dna> ...changing the running example changes flavour of the note
15:18:12 <aliman> +q to comment on using dc:subject for the classes as values note
15:18:22 <danbri_dna> MikeU: re multiple alternatives vs a single bp...
15:18:31 <danbri_dna> ...q is there an advantage to a single approach?
15:18:33 <aliman> q+ to comment on using dc:subject for the classes as values note
15:18:47 <danbri_dna> ...if 4 or 5 variants, could make for interop difficulties?
15:18:51 <patH> q+
15:19:24 <danbri_dna> brian: natasha, you didn't like my dramatic switch of the example. fair enough. my concern is use of dc:subject...
15:19:35 <danbri_dna> ...perhaps if we swtich to game parks, and species they contain
15:19:38 <danbri_dna> q+ re dc:subject
15:19:43 <danbri_dna> crap
15:19:54 <danbri_dna> q- dc:subject
15:19:57 <danbri_dna> q- re
15:20:08 <Zakim> aliman, you wanted to comment on using dc:subject for the classes as values note
15:20:19 <danbri_dna> alistair: i wanted to avoid confusion w/ dc subject and the thesaurus area
15:20:46 <RalphS> DanBri: even stronger, dc:subject has confusing usage
15:20:52 <danbri_dna> ack path
15:20:55 <guus> ack pat
15:21:20 <danbri_dna> patH: responding to mike... if everyone did agree on a common form, sure would be good, but there is no clear candidatre amongst the several alternatives...
15:21:30 <danbri_dna> ...and if this is a problem,  it'll recur in several areas
15:21:43 <danbri_dna> MikeU: if no clear winner and ... we should choose arbitarily
15:21:55 <danbri_dna> patH: no, we shouldn't try to lay down an arbitrary law
15:21:59 <aliman> q+ re levels of notes
15:22:05 <danbri_dna> ...all it'll do is annoy people
15:22:20 <aliman> q+ on levels of notes
15:22:28 <danbri_dna> [his=danbri's]
15:22:30 <danbri_dna> +1 to pat
15:22:59 <danbri_dna> Natasha: [re moving fwd] I'd like to postpone publication process and do 1 more cycle changing the example
15:23:06 <aliman> q+ to comment on levels of notes
15:23:16 <danbri_dna> guus: i want 1 wd out before the summer
15:23:21 <danbri_dna> ...we only have 4 notes out
15:23:30 <danbri_dna> ...classes/values has been most heavily discussed
15:23:34 <danbri_dna> n-ary some discussion
15:23:38 <danbri_dna> ...other two not so much
15:23:51 <danbri_dna> guus: are we going for an initial WD for some of these?
15:24:04 <danbri_dna> my pref would be for  a WD with not just c-as-v but also for eg n-ary
15:24:23 <danbri_dna> Natasha: re n-ary, probably have a new version in a few days
15:24:34 <danbri_dna> ...which'll address most of comments, be rather non-controversial
15:24:58 <danbri_dna> Alan: we've had a question about whether to include material on classes as well as individuals
15:25:11 <danbri_dna> ...am concerned that classes level stuff gets put out
15:25:21 <danbri_dna> ...by time it goes out the two should be together
15:25:37 <danbri_dna> patH: these could go out 1 at a time, but with a common title structure, suggesting a series
15:25:52 <danbri_dna> ...later on could be integrated into an html multi-doc with a common entry point
15:25:57 <danbri_dna> ...like tag findings
15:26:06 <danbri_dna> [supportive noisees from ? ralph, others]
15:26:10 <danbri_dna> RalphS: its up to us to pick the titles
15:26:27 <danbri_dna> guus: each time we publish a small thing, have to send announce for public review etc
15:26:52 <danbri_dna> RalphS: another way to implement pat's approach is as sections of 1 larger doc
15:27:01 <danbri_dna> guus: that could work
15:27:30 <danbri_dna> danbri; seems back2 front starting w/ split up doc. break up 1 as it gets unwieldy.
15:27:42 <danbri_dna> guus: to get done before summer, we'd need a decision next time
15:28:20 <danbri_dna> Natasha: would be good to have 3 or 4 notes 
15:28:27 <danbri_dna> guus: owl db schema a possible?
15:28:43 <danbri_dna> guus: we have to make a decision next time to publish as a 1st bundle
15:29:12 <danbri_dna> ...natasha can propose when ready
15:29:31 <danbri_dna> ...then we'd nominate reviewer(s) to check it within wg then decide whether to publish directly or after review
15:29:41 <danbri_dna> ...for each of the 4 notes i'd like someone to take action to be reviewer
15:29:48 <danbri_dna> ...and say i propose to publish or not
15:29:56 <danbri_dna> [someone got the definitive list of 4?]
15:30:19 <danbri_dna> Natasha: will do nary relations, classes as properties
15:30:41 <danbri_dna> guus: qual cardinality restritions ... will take action
15:30:51 <danbri_dna> alan: i'll do qcr
15:30:56 <danbri_dna> guus: i'll do lists of values
15:31:00 <danbri_dna> [did i get that right?]
15:31:05 <danbri_dna> qcr may go in 2nd bundle
15:32:03 <danbri_dna> ...all actioned to propose for publication before next telecon
15:32:18 <danbri_dna> ACTION: danbri write the actions properly
15:32:26 <danbri_dna> Thes PORTing TF
15:32:26 <danbri_dna> ========
15:32:40 <danbri_dna> aldo: propse we do a schema for standard thesauru
15:33:00 <danbri_dna> guus: did you take a look at the maryland and amsterdam work?
15:33:09 <danbri_dna> s/aldo/alistair/
15:33:43 <danbri_dna> alistair: migration is important but i think we should allow for structures that are outside trad stds too
15:34:19 <danbri_dna> ADJOURNED
15:34:22 <Zakim> -Brian
15:34:23 <Zakim> -Alan
15:34:23 <danbri_dna> rssagent, bye
15:34:24 <Zakim> -JosD
15:34:24 <Zakim> -Natasha_Noy
15:34:26 <Zakim> -Tom_Baker
15:34:29 <Zakim> -jacco
15:34:30 <Zakim> -PatH
15:34:32 <Zakim> -Jeremy
15:34:34 <Zakim> -Mike_Uschold
15:34:36 <Zakim> -Benjamin
15:34:40 <Zakim> -Ralph
15:34:44 <Zakim> -Alistair
15:34:44 <Natasha> Natasha has left #swbp
15:34:49 <Zakim> -Guus
15:34:52 <Zakim> -Redland
15:35:11 <Zakim> SW_BPD()10:00AM has ended
15:35:12 <Zakim> Attendees were Ralph, [CWI], Guus, Benjamin, Alistair, Alan, Natasha_Noy, jimh, JosD, Brian, Jeremy, DanBri, Libby, Tom_Baker, Mike_Uschold, jacco, PatH
15:39:21 <RalphS> rrsagent, bye
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> I see 14 open action items:
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Aldo prepare summary of Wordnet proposal doc, and send to Christian after review by WG. [1]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-16-05
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus to revise WD/Note process proposal for Jun24 meeting [2]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-25-35
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ralph add 'Vocabulary Management' to WG home page list of Task Forces under discussion to start [3]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-40-19
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ralph get 17 June VOCAB telecon reservation [4]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-47-44
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: libby, natasha, danbri, al, alan, jim, tom, send thoughts/comments re scoping of Vocab management TF work [5]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-49-07
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: tom send revised notion of prev posting proposing a scope for vocab management TF [6]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-49-33
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: jim to message to list proposing the WORLD TF goes on hold [7]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T14-56-30
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus invite at least 1 wordnet domain expert to a July1st meeting [8]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-03-03
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: guus arrange for telecon for july 1st 1400 UTC 60mins on step1 'as is' conversion of Wordnet to RDF/OWL (brian, jjc, guus, danbri, ?aldo, ...) [9]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-05-35
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ralph to create a dir for the wordnet tf's ongoing work and give access to brian, ... [10]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-08-16
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ralph to create a dir for the wordnet tf's ongoing work and give access to brian, ... [11]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-08-16-1
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ralph to create a dir for the wordnet tf's ongoing work and give access to brian, ... [12]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-09-23
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: jjc try to attent an XML Schema WG telecon [13]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-13-00
15:39:21 <RRSAgent> ACTION: danbri write the actions properly [14]
15:39:21 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/06/10-swbp-irc#T15-32-18