12:58:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #vmtf
12:58:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/07/05-vmtf-irc
12:59:14 <Ralph> Meeting: SWBPD VM Task Force
12:59:21 <Ralph> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Jul/0003.html
13:00:55 <aliman_scribe> aliman_scribe has joined #vmtf
13:02:17 <Zakim> SW_BPD(VMTF)9:00AM has now started
13:02:24 <Zakim> +??P2
13:02:35 <Zakim> +Ralph
13:02:48 <Ralph> zakim, ??p2 is Alistair
13:02:48 <Zakim> +Alistair; got it
13:03:21 <Zakim> +Tom_Baker
13:03:28 <Zakim> +Danbri
13:03:48 <Ralph> Regrets: Libby
13:06:35 <Ralph> Topic: Basic Principles for Managing an RDF Vocabulary
13:06:48 <danbri> new version,   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/principles/20050705
13:10:54 <Ralph> Chair: Tom
13:11:22 <Ralph> rrsagent, please make logs world-visible
13:11:54 <cgi-irc> cgi-irc has joined #vmtf
13:12:15 <danbri> hi tom
13:12:16 <Ralph> cgi-irc is TomB
13:12:20 <cgi-irc> hi!
13:12:42 <tbaker> hi again
13:13:42 <Ralph> Tom: an important function of this note would be to explain good practice for putting a document at term URIs
13:13:48 <Ralph> ... i.e. when you click on a term
13:13:57 <Ralph> ... does Dublin Core do this 'right'?
13:14:06 <Ralph> ... am willing to take an action to fix if not
13:14:20 <danbri> danbri@fireball:~$ HEAD http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title
13:14:20 <danbri> 200 OK
13:14:20 <danbri> Connection: close
13:14:20 <danbri> Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:14:09 GMT
13:14:20 <danbri> Accept-Ranges: bytes
13:14:21 <danbri> ETag: "8d809e-3ad8-4210b8e2"
13:14:23 <danbri> Server: Apache/1.3.28 (Unix) mod_jk/1.1.0
13:14:25 <danbri> Content-Length: 15064
13:14:27 <danbri> Content-Type: text/plain
13:14:29 <danbri> Last-Modified: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:42:42 GMT
13:14:33 <danbri> Client-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:14:25 GMT
13:14:35 <danbri> Client-Peer: 132.174.1.71:80
13:14:37 <danbri> Client-Response-Num: 1
13:15:51 <aliman> http://livehttpheaders.mozdev.org/
13:16:27 <Ralph> [[
13:16:27 <Ralph> homer% HEAD -S http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title
13:16:27 <Ralph> HEAD http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title --> 302 Found
13:16:27 <Ralph> HEAD http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces#title --> 200 OK
13:16:27 <Ralph> Connection: close
13:16:28 <Ralph> Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:15:50 GMT
13:16:30 <Ralph> Accept-Ranges: bytes
13:16:32 <Ralph> ETag: "8d809e-3ad8-4210b8e2"
13:16:34 <Ralph> Server: Apache/1.3.28 (Unix) mod_jk/1.1.0
13:16:36 <Ralph> Content-Length: 15064
13:16:38 <Ralph> Content-Type: text/plain
13:16:40 <Ralph> Last-Modified: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:42:42 GMT
13:16:42 <Ralph> Client-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:15:55 GMT
13:16:44 <Ralph> Client-Peer: 132.174.1.71:80
13:16:46 <Ralph> Client-Response-Num: 1
13:16:48 <Ralph> homer% 
13:16:50 <Ralph> ]]
13:16:57 <Ralph> DanBri: TAG would prefer 303 See Also rather than 302 Found
13:17:40 <Ralph> s/Also/Other/
13:18:14 <danbri> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3
13:18:31 <danbri> 10.3.3 302 Found
13:18:40 <danbri> ralph: resource resides temp at different uri
13:18:43 <danbri> ...for 302
13:18:53 <danbri> 303 says, can be found under a different URI and SHOULD be retrieved using a GET method on that resource
13:19:50 <tbaker> Danbri: send note to PURL developer list, ask whether
13:20:03 <tbaker> they would consider making 303 an option.
13:20:30 <aliman> I'm just going to restart mozilla after install live http headers
13:20:44 <tbaker> Ralph: is there a reason to ask them to make 303 an option, or
13:20:51 <tbaker> maybe just ask them to change it?
13:21:02 <tbaker> Is there a reason for staying with 302?
13:21:18 <aliman> aliman has joined #vmtf
13:21:57 <Ralph> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3.3
13:21:58 <Ralph> [[
13:21:58 <Ralph> 10.3.3 302 Found
13:21:58 <Ralph> The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection might be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. 
13:21:59 <Ralph> ]]
13:22:02 <tbaker> ACTION: Danbri, contact PURL developers
13:23:35 <tbaker> Al: should we be saying "return rdf/xml"
13:24:01 <tbaker> Ralph: strictly speaking, the way RDF schema is served up,
13:24:11 <tbaker> it is a text document with lots of angle brackets.
13:24:17 <Ralph> Alistair: should dublincore.org return something other than Content-Type: text/plain ?
13:25:02 <danbri> if we make HTML available too, then what is "http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces#title" the URI of?
13:25:14 <danbri> q+ to reopen that can of worms
13:26:12 <aliman> http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core
13:26:23 <tbaker> Al: does the TAG resolution preclude us from content-negotiating on a hash URI?
13:26:39 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to reopen that can of worms
13:26:45 <tbaker> Given that every term in SKOS Core vocabulary on this base.
13:27:07 <Ralph> DanBri: because DC is redirecting to ...#title some of the issues go away
13:27:17 <Ralph> ... the meaning of #frag is relative to the media type
13:27:30 <tbaker> Danbri: still left with ugly business of content negotiation on hash thing
13:27:46 <tbaker> Danbri: if only RDF, no problem. 
13:27:47 <Ralph> ... in an application/rdf+xml document we can say Title means whatever we want
13:28:06 <Ralph> ... but if there is also an HTML document there, then we're stuck with #Title meaning something specific in HTML
13:28:46 <Ralph> Alistair: I wrote once before that #URIs must _not_ content negotiate
13:28:47 <tbaker> Al wrote: "hash URIs must not support content negotiation"
13:29:01 <aliman> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SkosDev
13:29:09 <tbaker> Was that a tenable position?
13:30:40 <tbaker> Ralph: could take less extreme position:
13:31:03 <tbaker> that if you serve an HTML document, it must not use any of the RDF concepts as IDs
13:31:19 <tbaker> Al: it must not overload any of the secondary []
13:31:43 <danbri> q+ to suggest purl for DC might redirect to a URI without a #, maybe?
13:31:49 <tbaker> Ralph: All IDs using the HTML document should refer to HTML fragments
13:31:57 <tbaker> and should not overlap with RDF terms
13:32:09 <Ralph> perhaps the first 'should' is a 'must'
13:32:12 <Ralph> (to HTML validate)
13:32:13 <tbaker> s/should/must/
13:32:56 <tbaker> Al: peeling a banana with tweezers
13:33:13 <danbri> ack danbri
13:33:13 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest purl for DC might redirect to a URI without a #, maybe?
13:34:42 <Ralph> DanBri: e.g. what if all DC terms redirect to http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces
13:35:13 <Ralph> ... in practice, currently dublincore.org returns the same document for all DC terms anyway
13:35:20 <danbri> http://rdfweb.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/xmlns.com/htdocs/foaf/0.1/.htaccess
13:35:28 <danbri> RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Person http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
13:35:28 <danbri> RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Agent http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
13:35:28 <danbri> RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Project http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
13:35:28 <danbri> RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Image http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
13:35:28 <danbri> RedirectTemp /foaf/0.1/Document http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
13:35:32 <danbri> etc
13:37:01 <tbaker> Ralph: we need to find an answer to Alistair's content negotiation question
13:37:03 <danbri> ralph: we should address this q of conneg, since users would 
13:37:14 <tbaker> When users (as opposed to tools) use URIs, different representations
13:37:15 <danbri> ...benefit from being able to see something useful in their browsrs
13:37:27 <tbaker> That is a very common question users have.
13:38:26 <tbaker> Al: everyone still treats HTTP servers as file servers
13:38:30 <berva> berva has joined #vmtf
13:38:43 <Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to ask the semantics of http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces#title
13:42:59 <Ralph> Ralph: http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces is something like a namespace document or an RDF schema but it's not necessarily either one as it doesn't appear at the namespace URI
13:43:07 <aliman> tbaker: title of http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces is ...
13:43:09 <Ralph> ... but we may find it useful to have a role name for this document
13:43:18 <aliman> <dc:title xml:lang="en-US">The Dublin Core Element Set v1.1 namespace providing access to its content by means of an RDF Schema</dc:title>
13:43:26 <aliman> I don't like that at all
13:44:21 <danbri> "Dublin Core Element Set vocabulary description"?
13:44:45 <aliman> actual RDF statement is (<http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> dc:title 'The Dublin Core Element Set v1.1 namespace providing access to its content by means of an RDF Schema')
13:45:25 <danbri> q+ to suggest less is more "Dublin Core Element Set" or similar
13:45:37 <aliman> +1 on danbri
13:47:39 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest less is more "Dublin Core Element Set" or similar
13:47:41 <aliman> 'An RDF Vocabulary Description Document?'
13:48:06 <aliman> q+ to ask bout historical URIs cf redirect URIs
13:48:43 <Ralph> DanBri: shortening the title to "The Dublin Core Element Set" might reduce some confusion
13:49:08 <aliman> cf. {<http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core> dc:title 'SKOS Core Vocabulary'}
13:49:24 <Ralph> Tom: we thought about that, as the title looks confusing when displayed by browsers, but we worried that making the change might lose some information
13:49:51 <danbri> FOAF has: <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" dc:title="Friend of a Friend (FOAF) vocabulary" dc:description="The Friend of a Friend (FOAF) RDF vocabulary, described using W3C RDF Schema and the Web Ontology Language." dc:date="$Date: 2005/07/05 15:36:26 $">
13:50:09 <tbaker> Ralph: suggests holding off on changing title
13:50:18 <danbri> q+ to note the dc:description can carry more info
13:50:39 <tbaker> First we need to understand the model and convey that somewhere (not in the title)
13:50:55 <aliman> http://dublincore.org/2003/03/24/dces#title
13:51:00 <Zakim> aliman, you wanted to ask bout historical URIs cf redirect URIs
13:52:11 <Ralph> Tom: there's a URI that is an anchor in an HTML document ...
13:52:12 <tbaker> http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/history
13:52:55 <tbaker> http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/history/#contributor-003
13:53:16 <Ralph> Tom: this usage is not a high-profile one and could be changed
13:53:55 <aliman> tom: these URIs are anchors in an html document
13:54:38 <Ralph> Tom: the history document is currently missing a change note
13:55:14 <Ralph> ... the URI functions as a URI for a description of a term at a specific point in time
13:55:41 <aliman> q+ to peel a banana
13:56:46 <Ralph> q+ to pull on the peel re: history document
13:57:22 <Ralph> Tom: we don't give http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/history/ a very high profile as we think it might confuse users
13:57:38 <Ralph> ... we thought about putting this in RDF but we were not sure what the requirements were
13:58:06 <Ralph> ... we were aware that good practice might evolve but we wanted to capture the information somewhere
13:58:14 <danbri> FOAF index.rdf is under CVS control, http://rdfweb.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/xmlns.com/htdocs/foaf/0.1/index.rdf
13:58:18 <Ralph> DanBri: do you have history elsewhere, e.g. in CVS?
13:58:24 <danbri> ...but not exposed very easily to RDF processors
13:58:27 <danbri> eg. sparql
13:58:29 <Ralph> Tom: all of the RDF schemas are still in the Web
13:59:07 <Ralph> q+ to note that this 'how to version vocabularies' question is an open issue for VM and/or PORT
14:00:14 <danbri> ack danbri
14:00:14 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to note the dc:description can carry more info
14:00:36 <Ralph> DanBri: looking at how the FOAF namespace document describes itself ...
14:01:11 <tbaker> Danbri: in dc, push detail into dc:description?
14:01:11 <Ralph> ... the dc:description has some of the things that the Dublin Core document puts into its dc:title
14:01:26 <Ralph> ... e.g. the phrase "providing access via ..."
14:01:43 <tbaker> danbri: short, snappy title (DC Namespace), then put versioning
14:01:50 <tbaker> information into dc:description
14:01:57 <aliman> SKOS Core 		<dc:description xml:lang="en">An RDF vocabulary for encoding simple concept schemes such as thesauri and subject heading lists.</dc:description>
14:02:41 <Zakim> aliman, you wanted to peel a banana
14:02:55 <danbri> (ok seems i misunderstood ralph; agreement it could go into dc:description)
14:03:04 <tbaker> al: DC has the beginning of tight management system for RDF vocabulary
14:03:05 <Ralph> Alistair: DC has the beginnings of what looks like a configuration management system
14:03:10 <tbaker> we should build on that.
14:03:22 <tbaker> But questions: those URIs that point to anchors in versioning history document:
14:03:38 <tbaker> If each identifies the description of a term at a given point in time,
14:03:57 <tbaker> then fine to use.  But if they identify version, then could not do
14:04:04 <tbaker> content negotiation.
14:04:19 <tbaker> Patrick S things bad to URIs to versions of a term, but good to
14:04:26 <tbaker> give URIs to descriptions of a term.
14:04:57 <tbaker> Al: not "historical version of term".
14:04:59 <Ralph> Tom: we are giving URIs for versions of a description of a term
14:05:21 <Ralph> Ralph agrees this is a subtle and important distinction
14:05:22 <tbaker> Danbri: we are telling stories here...
14:05:37 <tbaker> -- one term and we are saying things about it at different times
14:05:56 <tbaker> In early RDF schema spec, I encouraged: if you changed it, 
14:06:07 <tbaker> you have something new... new schema.... etc
14:06:21 <tbaker> Ralph: the threashold is very community-sensitive
14:06:35 <tbaker> Tom: That is the point of the DCMI namespace policy
14:07:11 <tbaker> Ralph: interpret patrick's caution as being against implicitly relying on some sort of URI similarity to convey semantics
14:07:59 <tbaker> Ralph: even in RDF, original 1999 namespace, and current one, differ in subtle ways, but chose not to change for practical reasons
14:09:00 <Ralph> s/not to change/not to change the names (i.e. URIs) of the terms/
14:09:02 <tbaker> Danbri: "we altered the semantics of the terms"... -- to correspond to "what the semantics actually are" (authorial intent, deployment)
14:09:38 <Ralph> DanBri: different interpretation is 'we changed the description to better describe the real semantics of the property'
14:10:06 <berva> berva has left #vmtf
14:10:40 <danbri> ralph: i trust that the dc community has the right body of expertise to get these things right
14:11:02 <danbri> ...when a description can be clarified to match some notion of the 'true semantics' vs when there is enough difference to merit a new name
14:11:35 <tbaker> Danbri: fine for DC-length vocabularies.  But in DL-type vocabularies...
14:12:02 <tbaker> Ralph: Some of that perspective may be driven by application behavior.
14:12:38 <tbaker> Danbri: DC community focuses on prose definitions.  OTher communities focus on inferencing structures.
14:13:09 <tbaker> Ralph: But RDF core (and others) had practical problem...
14:13:42 <Ralph> [acking myself just to preseve my thoughts]
14:13:44 <Ralph> ack me
14:13:44 <Zakim> Ralph, you wanted to pull on the peel re: history document and to note that this 'how to version vocabularies' question is an open issue for VM and/or PORT
14:20:03 <Ralph> adjourned
14:20:05 <Zakim> -Tom_Baker
14:20:07 <Zakim> -Alistair
14:20:09 <Zakim> -Ralph
14:20:14 <Zakim> -Danbri
14:20:15 <Zakim> SW_BPD(VMTF)9:00AM has ended
14:20:16 <Zakim> Attendees were Ralph, Alistair, Tom_Baker, Danbri
15:36:20 <Ralph> zakim, bye
15:36:20 <Zakim> Zakim has left #vmtf
15:36:22 <Ralph> rrsagent, bye
15:36:22 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item:
15:36:22 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Danbri, contact PURL developers [1]
15:36:22 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/05-vmtf-irc#T13-22-02