See also: IRC log
RESOLVED to accept the minutes of the April 7 telecon
RESOLVED next telecon 5 May, 1700 UTC, Ralph to chair if necessary; regrets from David & Jeremy
general actions, two both marked done
ACTION: Guus to organise straw poll on f2f location [DONE]
ACTION: Ralph investigate what action may be taken when an interested participant has been unable to get a response from his AC Representative [DONE]
Jeremy: might want to consider if we want to make a WG comment on SCD doc
David: tough since no one has read it, discuss under action item
ACTION: Chairs to discuss the httpRange-14 issue at the coordination level [CONTINUES]
2.1 httpRange-14 liason discussion has been had at CG level, but still deadlocked
2.2 ODM review
ACTION: Guus to review OWL metamodel [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Deb to go over OWL metamodel and provide a summary [CONTINUES]
(althought Pat Hayes comment addressed some of Deb's points)
2.3 XML Schema Component Designators
Jeremy posted review just before call
ACTION: jjc to review XML schema LC draft [DONE]
<Ralph> XML Schema Component Designators Review [Jeremy 2005-04-21]
ACTION: jeff to review XML schema LC draft [CONTINUES]
Jeremy: I suggested a WG response that was
positive.
... one comment we might want to make regarding namespace bindings
Ralph: I suggest that Jeremy post his review to both WGs as his own review
Jeremy: agree
ACTION: jeremy post personal review to XSCD doc
3.10, SE
Phil: we're pretty close to second version of note for WG consideration, probably within next three weeks
3.1 PORT
Alistair:SKOS core and docs, Tom Baker asked
how SKOS Core is managed, and how that relates to W3C process and managing
docs
... Current process model is editors can change it at any time
... So the current version of SKOS core can be out-of-sync with published WG
note
... Meeting in Berlin Zoo last week
... suggested different SKOS
management process model that fits in with W3C process dor publishing
docs
... After publication of WD by WG, SKOS Core is frozen, but possible changes
are recorded
... any then with a new WD the changes agree by WG get rolled in to SKOS Core
and new WD
Ralph: I saw small group of developers around
SKOS and turning it into more formal W3C like process
... this is a change for the SKOS community
... may they be expecting to make more frequent changes?
... doing a diff on two versions of an editors draft should be able to be
correlated with e-mail
... so that changes are owned by the WG through the e-mail
Alistair: more informal version of DCMI usage
board
... key change being proposed is that changes won't actually be implemented
until SWBPD WG approves WD
Ralph: key change is move from informal process as the current SKOS community may expect to a more formal process
Alistair: most people in SKOS community would like SKOS core to be more stable
Tom: confusion between editors draft and public WDs
Ralph: WG is free to modify namespace doc
between versions of WDs
... but important to align expectations of community with expectations of
WG
Alistair: from meeting with Tom, it would be good to have a W3C process for maintaining vocab
Ralph: as PORT TF asks WG to publish notes, the WG assumes ownership of vocab
Alistair: ownership of SKOS should be open community which anyone can contribute to it
Jeremy: the OWL and RDF test cases had a
similar issue with Working Drafts being published but the test case
repository being changed in-place
... when the editor's drafts differed from the latest Working Draft, it was
often because the test respository had changed
Alistair: Tom was not happy with the test cases model
3.2 OEP
<Ralph> OEP TF home (lists all editor's drafts)
Deb and Chris report ...
[part-whole] update from Natasha's note on April 14
classes as values is now published note
specified values note is ready to go
n-ary relations is still being revised
with n-ary relations several requests to pick a pattern, and provide an RDF vocab for the pattern
then the vocab would need to be at a namespace doc etc etc
Chris: applications that want higher -arity
relations would like a way to translate to and from RDF's binary relations
... a vocabulary accepted by most applications would facilitate this
David: given the current state of the SemWeb, I have no trouble calling this 'best practice' rather than 'research'
Ralph: is the OEP TF in a position to propose such a vocabulary?
Chris: yes, we have something nearly ready to put in the document
David asks Deb if she is happy with this.
Deb: I don't mind haven't a standard vocab, as long as documented well
Ralph: question of whether this becomes a
formal rec is separate
... I encourage the TF to propose a vocabulary for converting between binary
and n-ary relations
two other editors draft part/whole
guus wrote note on QCRs a year ago ... but now recovered
Alan has agreed to take over editing QCRs note once part whole note is WD
Chris asks Ralph about Gerry Hobbs and ISI AC rep
Ralph is expecting resolution any day soon
ACTION: Ralph re-ping ISI AC Rep
3.3 Wordnet
ACTION: Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description [CONTINUES]
Alistair has looked at datamodel and met with ISO group on temrinology
lots of overlap between ISO view, SKOS, and wordnet
ACTION: Alistair e-mail group about ISO contact; Laurent Romary
Chris: Aldo has spoken about this community. Aldo attended some meeting with them
<aliman> Other TC37 contact: Alan K. Melby
3.4 XML Schema datatypes
ACTION: Ralph help Jeff and Jeremy with XML Schema Datatype publication request [DONE]
<Ralph> The document transition was requested on 11 April
ralph claims action is done, but the document transition request fell down a crack
ACTION: Ralph get XML Schema Datatype transition request unstuck
Jeremy: I have not yet considered Ashok's review; will send a polite to respond to him acknowledging the review
ACTION: jeremy polite reply to ashok setting expectations
3.5 Vocabulary management (TomB)
Alistair: we had a chat last week
3.6 RDF-in-HTML (Ben)
ACTION: DanBri help write an rdf schema for the additional xhtml2 namespace elements [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Gavin find out from his community and contacts if they have use cases [CONTINUES]
Ralph: still awaiting XHTML2 LC WD
Jeremy:from what I can tell there does not seem to be a lot of enthusiasm in HP for GRDDL. HP not opposed to GRDDL moving forward but not enthused either
Gavin:(earlier) got expressions of support for
GRDDL within Adobe, w.r.t. XHTML1
... will write this in mail
3.7 ADTF (Libby)
Libby: not much to report
... e-mail discussion on-going
Chris: if one of the criteria is that it has to be RDF or OWL, didn't we have to change title to avoid question of scope of Semantic Web
David: we should be defining scope of SW but
this is probably a CG issue not a TF issue
... eric would like TM to be in SW, WG perhaps not so keen
... in practice dealing mostly with RDF and OWL
<Ralph> [I think David's "we" referred generally to W3C or the community, not specifically SWBPD]
David: can we link to lots of RDF data
Ralph: let's not go there
... if there is cool data out there, hopefully it is found from cool
application on our page
ChrisW: note http://swoogle.umbc.edu/
Libby: Bob de charm is collecting data as david discusses; http://www.rdfdata.org/
David: also ontaria; cobranded W3c/darpa
3.8 RDFTM (Steve)
ACTION: pepper to change reference to RDF semantics [DONE]
current status was published on March 29
3.9 Tutorial Page
jeff and Ben absent, but write access sorted out now
ACTION: Jeff to talk with Benjamin to propose a process for submission of FAQ questions [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph add Note category to WG home page