IRC log of swbp on 2005-06-27

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:58:05 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swbp
16:58:05 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc
16:58:15 [Ralph]
Meeting: SemWeb BPD WG
16:58:27 [Ralph]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jun/0075.html
16:59:13 [Zakim]
SW_BPD()1:00PM has now started
16:59:21 [Zakim]
+Guus_Schreiber
16:59:23 [Zakim]
+Evan_Wallace
16:59:24 [Ralph]
Chair: Guus
16:59:28 [Ralph]
Regrets: (none noted)
16:59:48 [Zakim]
+Ralph
17:00:29 [Zakim]
+[IBM]
17:00:39 [ChrisW]
zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
17:00:39 [Zakim]
+ChrisW; got it
17:01:21 [ekw]
ekw has joined #swbp
17:01:28 [aliman]
aliman has joined #swbp
17:01:47 [Zakim]
+Phil_Tetlow
17:02:06 [Zakim]
+Alistair_Miles (was Guest P11 7927)
17:02:07 [Zakim]
+Alistair_Miles
17:02:12 [Guus]
Guus has joined #swbp
17:03:46 [Natasha]
Natasha has joined #swbp
17:04:24 [Zakim]
+ +49.551.39.aaaa
17:04:34 [Ralph]
zakim, aaaa is Tom_Baker
17:04:34 [Zakim]
+Tom_Baker; got it
17:04:47 [Zakim]
+Elisa_Kendall
17:05:20 [Zakim]
+David_Wood
17:05:37 [Ralph]
Topic: Admin
17:05:42 [Ralph]
zakim, who's on the call?
17:05:42 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Guus_Schreiber, Evan_Wallace, Ralph, ChrisW, Phil_Tetlow, Alistair_Miles, Tom_Baker, Elisa_Kendall, David_Wood
17:06:22 [Ralph]
ScribeNick: aliman_scribe
17:06:24 [Ralph]
Scribe: Alistair
17:06:30 [aliman_scribe]
zakim, mute Alistair
17:06:30 [Zakim]
Alistair_Miles should now be muted
17:06:37 [Zakim]
+DBooth
17:07:11 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/16-swbp-minutes previous meeting 2005-06-16
17:07:21 [aliman_scribe]
guus: proposed to accept minutes above ...
17:08:09 [aliman_scribe]
... any corrections?
17:08:27 [aliman_scribe]
Elisa: second
17:08:39 [aliman_scribe]
guus: resolved.
17:08:40 [dbooth]
dbooth has joined #swbp
17:08:46 [Ralph]
[DONE] ACTION: Ralph post telecon date resolution to the list
17:09:03 [aliman_scribe]
zakim, unmute alistair
17:09:03 [Zakim]
Alistair_Miles should no longer be muted
17:09:16 [Ralph]
Topic: Liaison
17:09:48 [aliman_scribe]
2.1 Proposed resolution httpRange-14
17:10:15 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: tag found a solution that does not rely on uri string syntax at all, but relies on http result codes ...
17:10:49 [aliman_scribe]
...solution on the books for severalyears ...
17:10:49 [aliman_scribe]
...heard more support recently ...
17:11:00 [aliman_scribe]
...allow 3xx code as response for x other than a document ...
17:11:17 [aliman_scribe]
...asked coord group if there will be formal finding
17:11:32 [aliman_scribe]
...do not expect to publish a formal finding
17:11:42 [aliman_scribe]
... roy fieldings email deemed to be sufficient
17:11:48 [aliman_scribe]
...don't expect to see any more
17:12:01 [dbooth]
q+ to say that the TAG resolution still seems to leave the question of identification somewhat open
17:12:12 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #swbp
17:12:29 [aliman_scribe]
guus: do we need to take any action? explain consequences?
17:12:48 [aliman_scribe]
david: vmtf talked a bit about it, tom posted report ...
17:12:54 [Ralph]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jun/0079.html [VM] Report of 2005-06-21 telecon [Tom Baker 2005-06-27]
17:12:59 [aliman_scribe]
... thinks tom doesn't go far enough
17:13:11 [aliman_scribe]
... we should clean up after this decision
17:13:28 [aliman_scribe]
... go back to each tf, ask them to fold in best practices comments around this issue
17:13:52 [aliman_scribe]
... VM started, others should do same
17:14:00 [aliman_scribe]
guus: discuss per tf, or as general?
17:14:09 [aliman_scribe]
... hear preference for doing per tf
17:14:20 [aliman_scribe]
david: do it per tf *publication* ...
17:14:32 [aliman_scribe]
... as raised at last f2f
17:14:47 [aliman_scribe]
... cleaner for us to address piecemeal in docs, rather than as a wg note in general
17:14:58 [aliman_scribe]
guus: ok, per tf
17:15:05 [Zakim]
dbooth, you wanted to say that the TAG resolution still seems to leave the question of identification somewhat open
17:15:14 [Guus]
qw?
17:15:20 [Guus]
q?
17:15:32 [aliman_scribe]
dbooth: each tf makes its own recommendation re best practices ...
17:15:36 [aliman_scribe]
... ?
17:15:50 [aliman_scribe]
tag resolution still leaves open the recommended way to identify things
17:15:57 [aliman_scribe]
...bp should be clear about this
17:16:11 [aliman_scribe]
...not clear to me as a wg what we are recommending
17:16:19 [Guus]
ack Ralph
17:16:19 [Zakim]
Ralph, you wanted to warn TomB of muting
17:17:03 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: does wg need to make a recommendation at all re what uris to use for naming
17:17:09 [aliman_scribe]
...unless we disagree with tag
17:17:22 [aliman_scribe]
q+ to comment on uris & naming
17:17:41 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: concern about trailing slash and trailing hash ...
17:17:55 [aliman_scribe]
...tag says yes, either is fine given the right response code
17:18:07 [aliman_scribe]
...so why legislate any more about identifiers?
17:18:19 [aliman_scribe]
....can point out reasons for doing it one way or another
17:18:47 [aliman_scribe]
...take davidbooths point that wg as a whole as to what each tf is discussing
17:18:58 [dbooth]
q+ to follow up
17:19:00 [aliman_scribe]
...may need some coordination, but at this stage don't legislate
17:19:35 [aliman_scribe]
davidw: concern about not addressing it in some doc, because TAG didn't address in some document
17:19:44 [aliman_scribe]
... we don't have a canonical reference to point to
17:19:58 [aliman_scribe]
... needs to be clear to community what we're going to do about this
17:20:17 [aliman_scribe]
... vm porting wordnet rdftm tfs impacted by this decision
17:20:18 [Ralph]
[Ah, I understand DavidW's point -- that _some_ recommendation is needed. We should recommend a Best Practice for using 303 See Other]
17:20:24 [Zakim]
+??P1
17:20:34 [Natasha]
Zakim, ??P1 is Natasha
17:20:35 [Zakim]
+Natasha; got it
17:20:47 [Zakim]
dbooth, you wanted to follow up
17:20:48 [aliman_scribe]
... we can review per tf publications prior to publication
17:21:05 [aliman_scribe]
dbooth: worthwile to indicate pros & cons in a doc
17:21:17 [aliman_scribe]
...person feeling is, tag resolution not entirely satisfactory
17:21:29 [aliman_scribe]
...doesn't apply equally well to RDF and non-RDF case
17:21:45 [aliman_scribe]
...so you're dependent on what document type you're dealing with
17:21:48 [Zakim]
aliman_scribe, you wanted to comment on uris & naming
17:22:09 [Ralph]
Alistair: we should include in per-TF documentation as our role is to explain TAG resolution
17:22:38 [aliman_scribe]
phil: what are we commenting on?
17:23:00 [aliman_scribe]
... tag should come up with mechanism for resolving this issue, rahter than just saying hash or slash.
17:23:02 [Guus]
q?
17:23:46 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: this WG should write up, either endorse the use of 303 see also, or to disagree with TAG
17:23:52 [dbooth]
q+ to disagree with us not legislating more than the TAG. Our purpose is to provide Best Practices guidelines.
17:23:54 [aliman_scribe]
... and to explain how this isused in case of semweb
17:24:16 [aliman_scribe]
phil: is it best practise to bind this mechanism to the concept of resource id
17:24:22 [Guus]
q?
17:24:25 [aliman_scribe]
.... singular mechanism for ???
17:24:49 [aliman_scribe]
... are there other circumstances that should be investigated?
17:24:58 [aliman_scribe]
... or are we happy with singular soultion?
17:25:05 [Zakim]
dbooth, you wanted to disagree with us not legislating more than the TAG. Our purpose is to provide Best Practices guidelines.
17:25:19 [aliman_scribe]
dbooth: uncomfortable with not legislating more than what TAG said
17:25:28 [aliman_scribe]
...entirely appropriate to give more guidance than TAG
17:25:40 [aliman_scribe]
guus: up to level not inconsistent with TAG
17:25:54 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: meant to focus on use of particular URI syntax
17:26:07 [aliman_scribe]
... no reason for this wg to partition uri space
17:26:11 [Guus]
q?
17:26:28 [aliman_scribe]
... right we do need to explain how to apply tag view to specific semweb case
17:26:41 [aliman_scribe]
phil: identified problem of good or bad uris?
17:26:52 [aliman_scribe]
... feel that context is important.
17:27:09 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: phil's comments making this a wider problem, lets focus on smaller first
17:27:30 [aliman_scribe]
... propose specific action, this wg should draft some sort of message as part of a note,
17:27:53 [aliman_scribe]
... says 'here's how we interpret tag's solution, here's how we intepret it for semweb'
17:28:07 [aliman_scribe]
... would like to see draft of such a doc, propose one of our tfs do it
17:28:14 [aliman_scribe]
... perhaps VM?
17:28:20 [aliman_scribe]
guus: short note, couple of pages?
17:28:35 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: not formal note just yet, but we should have some formal on the record statement
17:28:49 [aliman_scribe]
... happy to leave it to some tf
17:28:56 [aliman_scribe]
...tomb?
17:29:26 [aliman_scribe]
tom: who would do that? don't want to volunteer someone.
17:29:43 [aliman_scribe]
What about danbri?
17:29:57 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: maybe between danbri and me?
17:30:11 [aliman_scribe]
davidw: 3 week special tf just to do this?
17:30:45 [aliman_scribe]
guus: propose ralph, davidb, davidw to take on an action
17:31:07 [aliman_scribe]
tom: willing to participate
17:31:52 [aliman_scribe]
davidw: should get short message from each of impacted tf leads, regarding what their issue was?
17:32:12 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: tfs don't care too much about what the solution was, although there were deployment issues
17:32:33 [aliman_scribe]
guus: propose two davids and ralph take on the action, take on feedback from others
17:32:36 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: accept
17:32:42 [aliman_scribe]
david & david: me too
17:33:55 [aliman_scribe]
ACTION: ralph davidw and davidb to an initial draft of TAG httpRange-14 resolution impact on semweb application developers
17:34:26 [Ralph]
Topic: 3.2 OEP
17:34:27 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: OEP
17:34:44 [Ralph]
zakim, please mute tom
17:34:44 [Zakim]
Tom_Baker should now be muted
17:35:01 [aliman_scribe]
chrisW: natasha alan and i had a telecon, resolved all issues for n-ary relations note and part-whole note, n-ary relations gone to review
17:35:09 [aliman_scribe]
... need another reviewer (ralph is one)
17:35:51 [aliman_scribe]
... simpe part-whole note, we have concrete actions, ready in 1 week
17:36:03 [aliman_scribe]
... spoke to jerry hobbs re owl time
17:36:07 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ralph review new n-ary relations editor's draft
17:36:12 [aliman_scribe]
... almost ready
17:36:24 [aliman_scribe]
guus: need second reviewer for n-ary relations
17:37:03 [aliman_scribe]
... timescale?
17:37:08 [aliman_scribe]
chris: asap
17:37:21 [aliman_scribe]
guus: agree to review
17:37:41 [Ralph]
ACTION: Guus review new n-ary relations editor's draft
17:37:47 [aliman_scribe]
... any use of owl restrictions note i wrote?
17:37:57 [aliman_scribe]
chris: haven't looked at it yet
17:38:15 [aliman_scribe]
guus: difference between rdfs range and owl restrictions
17:38:26 [aliman_scribe]
elisa: let's look into it
17:38:47 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: 2.2 XML Schema Compound Descriptors
17:38:55 [Ralph]
s/Compound/Component/
17:39:11 [aliman_scribe]
davidw: continue
17:39:14 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/17-swcg-minutes#item04 XSCD status from SemWeb CG telecon
17:39:29 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: it was brought up at the cg,
17:40:02 [aliman_scribe]
... last call still open, not a high priority
17:40:12 [aliman_scribe]
... we still have time to comment
17:40:43 [Ralph]
[[
17:40:43 [Ralph]
Ralph: SWBP wants to know the status of XML Schema Component Designators
17:40:44 [Ralph]
Liam: unsure, as the WG is busy with XML Schema 1.1
17:40:44 [Ralph]
... URIs for datatypes is likely to be a separate document rather than added to SCD
17:40:44 [Ralph]
... has SWBPD communicated its issue to XML Schema WG?
17:40:44 [Ralph]
... if so, feel free to ping them if you haven't had a response
17:40:46 [Ralph]
]]
17:41:18 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: jeremy & jeff concerned that our comments on uris for datatypes had not been heard or fully made
17:41:30 [aliman_scribe]
... liam said feel free to ask again
17:41:50 [aliman_scribe]
... but not a pressing matter, so still open for comments
17:42:05 [aliman_scribe]
... tag also talked about schema component designators
17:42:21 [aliman_scribe]
guus: leave liason issue on the agenda
17:42:33 [aliman_scribe]
ACTION DavidW ask about the XML Schema Component
17:42:34 [aliman_scribe]
DONE
17:42:45 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: 2.2 OMG: ODM review
17:43:32 [aliman_scribe]
... re addition of RDF graph and document model to RDF metamodel
17:43:44 [aliman_scribe]
... OMG decided to include changes, fo next revision
17:44:09 [Zakim]
-Tom_Baker
17:44:10 [aliman_scribe]
... everyone is agreed
17:44:28 [aliman_scribe]
... planning to submit one additional revision
17:44:35 [aliman_scribe]
... send out asap
17:44:59 [aliman_scribe]
... . some questions about business rules .
17:45:10 [aliman_scribe]
... agreed to ground logic in common logic
17:45:34 [aliman_scribe]
... work with pat hayes to make that happen, business rules community aligning around common logic with some extesinos possibly
17:45:47 [aliman_scribe]
... so no competition between ODM and business rules
17:46:00 [aliman_scribe]
... harry halpin
17:46:06 [Ralph]
s/harry/Terry/
17:46:13 [ekw]
Terry Halpin
17:46:22 [aliman_scribe]
guus: will also comment on ODM
17:46:30 [aliman_scribe]
ACTION: guus to comment on ODM
17:46:39 [Ralph]
Elisa: Terry Halpin is working with Pat Hayes to ground Business Rules in Common Logic
17:46:52 [Zakim]
-Natasha
17:46:53 [Ralph]
Topic: PORT
17:47:02 [Ralph]
Alistair: next SKOS review is scheduled for 17 July
17:47:14 [Ralph]
... would like two reviewers selected at the next WG telecon
17:47:36 [Ralph]
... w.r.t. httpRange-14 resolution, I tried to draft some text that could be included in SKOS Core Guide
17:47:46 [aliman_scribe]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jun/0074.html
17:47:55 [Ralph]
... says what you can/may do if you want to use http: URIs to name resources of type SKOS:Concept
17:48:05 [Ralph]
... would like comments on the text in 0074.html
17:48:18 [Ralph]
... DanBri only concerned about the role of SPARQL
17:48:23 [Zakim]
+Deb_McGuinness
17:48:33 [Guus]
q?
17:48:55 [Ralph]
... people working on US Government standards brought up an issue that they are only permitted to use W3C Recommendations in their work
17:49:13 [Ralph]
... thus possible reason to put SKOS Core on Recommendation track
17:49:31 [Ralph]
... have had multiple requests for another SKOS syntax
17:50:13 [Ralph]
Ralph: are any of these requests archived somewhere?
17:50:29 [Ralph]
Alistair: no, in private mail. requests for an XSD-constrained syntax
17:50:31 [DeborahM]
DeborahM has joined #swbp
17:51:12 [DeborahM]
hi - i joined late but am on the phone and irc - deborah mcguinness
17:51:47 [Ralph]
Alistair: Phil suggested that an XML Schema-constrained syntax for SKOS would not be a good idea
17:53:03 [Ralph]
Ralph: please ask for use cases accompanying any feature request, such as for a new syntax
17:54:09 [Ralph]
Phil: I've talked with Alistair off-line about this, will probably put the discussion into the mail archive soon
17:54:55 [aliman_scribe]
zakim, mute alistair
17:54:55 [Zakim]
Alistair_Miles should now be muted
17:55:06 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: 3.3 WordNet
17:55:17 [aliman_scribe]
guus: met with aldo in greece to move forward the data model
17:55:23 [aliman_scribe]
... hope to see some action soon
17:55:27 [Ralph]
ACTION: Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description
17:55:33 [aliman_scribe]
... asked brian to review, hope he will
17:55:48 [aliman_scribe]
... no progress yet, suggest to postpone
17:56:05 [aliman_scribe]
ACTION Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description
17:56:09 [aliman_scribe]
CONTINUE
17:56:24 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: 3.5 Vocabulary management
17:56:31 [aliman_scribe]
zakim, unmute alistair
17:56:31 [Zakim]
Alistair_Miles should no longer be muted
17:57:14 [Ralph]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jun/0079.html Report of 2005-06-21 VM telecon
17:57:51 [Ralph]
Alistair: we decided to retire DanBri's note "Some Things that Hashless URIs can Name"
17:58:09 [Ralph]
... and include in our basic principles note an explanation of how to implement the TAG's solution
17:58:53 [Ralph]
... we also took another action to contact people whose namespaces end in '/' to make sure they do redirects in the future
17:59:16 [Ralph]
... Tom has the ball to do the next round of editing
18:00:33 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: 3.6 RDF-in-HTML
18:01:26 [aliman_scribe]
guus: textual version of jeremy's presentation at ... would be great basis for a note
18:01:42 [Ralph]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2005Jun/0031.html Meeting record: 2005-06-21 RDF-in-XHTML TF telecon
18:02:14 [aliman_scribe]
guus: having jeremy's content as a note would be excellent
18:02:19 [Ralph]
ACTION: Ralph suggest to XHTML TF that Jeremy's WWW2005 Talk be turned into a document
18:02:35 [aliman_scribe]
Topic: 3.10 SE TF
18:02:58 [aliman_scribe]
Phil: jeff and I meeting wednesayt to talk about updating tf description
18:03:09 [aliman_scribe]
... and discuss next note.
18:03:35 [aliman_scribe]
guus: reviewers are chris, benjamin
18:03:48 [aliman_scribe]
ACTION: chris and benjamin to review SETF note
18:04:09 [aliman_scribe]
TOPIC: 4, AOB
18:04:21 [BenjaminNguyen]
q+
18:04:31 [aliman_scribe]
ralph: discussion about f2f in galway based on andreas suggesting derry might be willing to host it
18:04:41 [aliman_scribe]
... need to confirm that, for the dates we selected
18:04:55 [aliman_scribe]
guus: already talked about both options with andreas
18:05:01 [aliman_scribe]
... should not be a problem
18:05:09 [aliman_scribe]
ACTION: guus to contact andreas re f2f venue
18:05:55 [aliman_scribe]
guus: next telecon july 11 1700 UTC
18:05:57 [Zakim]
-Phil_Tetlow
18:05:59 [Zakim]
-Evan_Wallace
18:06:01 [Zakim]
-Alistair_Miles
18:06:02 [Zakim]
-DBooth
18:06:02 [Zakim]
-David_Wood
18:06:03 [Zakim]
-Elisa_Kendall
18:06:03 [Zakim]
-Deb_McGuinness
18:06:04 [Zakim]
-ChrisW
18:06:09 [Zakim]
-Guus_Schreiber
18:06:17 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/Guide/hosting.htm Host Guidelines for W3C Face to Face Meetings
18:06:22 [Zakim]
-Ralph
18:06:38 [Zakim]
SW_BPD()1:00PM has ended
18:06:39 [Zakim]
Attendees were Guus_Schreiber, Evan_Wallace, Ralph, ChrisW, Phil_Tetlow, Alistair_Miles, +49.551.39.aaaa, Tom_Baker, Elisa_Kendall, David_Wood, DBooth, Natasha, Deb_McGuinness
18:07:31 [aliman_scribe]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
18:07:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html aliman_scribe
18:07:53 [Ralph]
rrsagent, please make logs world-visible
18:25:00 [Ralph]
zakim, bye
18:25:00 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #swbp
18:25:02 [Ralph]
rrsagent, bye
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
I see 8 open action items:
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: ralph davidw and davidb to an initial draft of TAG httpRange-14 resolution impact on semweb application developers [1]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T17-33-55
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph review new n-ary relations editor's draft [2]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T17-36-07
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Guus review new n-ary relations editor's draft [3]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T17-37-41
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: guus to comment on ODM [4]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T17-46-30
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description [5]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T17-55-27
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph suggest to XHTML TF that Jeremy's WWW2005 Talk be turned into a document [6]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T18-02-19
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: chris and benjamin to review SETF note [7]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T18-03-48
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: guus to contact andreas re f2f venue [8]
18:25:02 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-irc#T18-05-09