See also: IRC log
<RalphS> Previous: 2005-09-05 http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes
RESOLUTION: to accept the minutes of the 5 September telecon:
<bwm> probable regrets from Brian for 03 Oct - will be on train
RESOLUTION: next meeting 3 October.
<RalphS> ACTION: Ralph create a registration page for the November f2f [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action01]
[Done after the meeting: registration page]
F2F Preparation: Trying to find a sponsor for the dinner. Volunteers?
Guus: Please book now!
<dwood> ralphs: +1 on more work re httpRange-14
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph,
DavidW, and DavidB to an initial draft of TAG
httpRange-14 resolution impact on semweb application developers [DONE]
<scribe> ACTION: jjc to review XML Schema last call [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action03]
<RalphS> [I'm reviewing the context of JJC's action in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action02 ]
<RalphS> I'm happy considering this action DONE
Guus: There were requests from DanC for review from the SWBPD WG. Volunteers?
<bwm> I could take a pass at it - though note the editor sits close to me
<dwood> I volunteeer - I've been reading it anyway
Ralph: Had some discussion about UNSAID and source. Chris and Deb offered input on them. Have they looked at current SPARQL work?
Chris: I looked at part, not all. There are a couple of IBM folks on the WG.
<scribe> ACTION: DavidWood and Brian to review SPARQL Last Call document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action04]
<Zakim> Jeremy, you wanted to mention IRIs
<scribe> ACTION: Jeremy to brief the WG on use of IRIs in SPARQL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action05]
<RalphS> 14 September 2005: SPARQL Protocol
for RDF - Last Call Ends 14 October 2005
<dwood> Please note that the SPARQL last
call is for the *protocol* (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/).
This is not to be confused with the query language (although I think it
<ChrisW> re: sparql comment from dwood - I only looked at the query language, never the protocol
<ChrisW> ...however, PatH has been involved
Guus: There was a specific request for people to look at some problems they have.
<RalphS> (SPARQL Query Results XML Format and SPARQL Query Language for RDF LC both ended 1 Sep)
<scribe> ACTION: jjc review EARL requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/07/25-swbp-minutes.html#action05] [PENDING]
Guus: Volunteers? (No response)
Ralph: Folks who have looked at porting taxonomies to the SemWeb might be able to help.
Alistair: This is the first I've heard of it. I'll have to look first.
Chris: I don't think we should be consultants to people who want to build vocabularies on the SemWeb.
Ralph: We wouldn't want a floodgate of requests for help, but this is another W3C WG, is asking us to comment on their work-in-progress with respect to best practice, and so is very much in the spirit of our charter. I don't think the material in the existing OEP notes is relevant to them -- the OEP work is much more advanced.
<ChrisW> I also said - swbp had a lot of material in the form of notes that could help this group
Jeremy: From external perspective, all W3C publications reflect what the W3C says, so if other groups say bad things it reflects badly on W3C as a whole. So even if we don't want to, we need to pay attention to what others say.
<RalphS> Ralph: the EARL work may eventually need what OEP has written but they're not yet there
Alistair: This WG is creating a taxonomy? (Yes) And they want advice on how to develop that? (Yes)
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair and Guus to help the WAI Protocol and Formats WG on their vocabulary [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action07]
Guus: Need to consider what work should continue, and in what form, after the end of this WG charter expires.
Guus: I saw something from the OAP TF. Others?
<Jeremy> (XSCH: I've not considered this yet)
Alistair: I hope by the time of the F2F we will have the revise WD of the SKOS core spec and the revised WD of the guide reflecting changes to date. Also proposals regarding SKOS Core and OWL. By end of charter, hope to have 3rd public WD (after review in OAP TF).
Q: Should this be a break out session or part of full session?
Guus: I prefer it to be in the primary session.
Alistair: Fine. At the F2F I'd like to discuss a list of proposals/issues relating to the SKOS/OWL relationship.
Guus: Multimedia TF?
Giorgos: Want to discuss the second deliverable for the TF, and the deliverable for the next year: the main budget for next year.
Guus: Goals for this F2F? Deliverables?
Giorgos: First deliverable will be finished; discuss the second.
Guus: Decision on publishing the first deliverable at F2F? And date for 2nd deliverable?
Guus: All documents to be discussed need to be
available 1 week before the F2F.
Valentina: We started again to work (Steve was ill). Didn't discuss yet about F2F goals, but I'll post email to the list about goals and I'll be there at the F2F.
<RalphS> [good to have RDFTM presence here on the WG telecon; thanks, Valentina]
<Zakim> Jeremy, you wanted to talk about SW and W3C
Guus: Wordnet TF?
<bwm> Do we have a plan beyond the f2f?
Guus: Can bring data model RDF/OWL version to F2F. I'll post to the list.
Jeremy: I'll consider this and email the list.
<RalphS> [JJC was commenting re: XML Schema Datatypes]
Guus: Vocabulary management?
Alistair: Suggest that Tom and I write up what we've done and submit that.
... TF needs to make clear what they can realistically achieve in the short term, and how to close this work.
Ralph: TF is in limbo. Haven't managed to have
a telecon in quite a while. I continue to think we have a plan that is
executable, and could propose to shift the burden back to the HTML WG, but
I'm not optimistic about that being effective.
... This WG should continue to need to participate. Should not have a plan to close the TF until HTML2 is in Last Call that meets our needs. WE have outstanding issues with no recorded progress.
Guus: What about producing a simple guideline note based on Jeremy's WWW conference talk?
Ralph: That could help.
<Jeremy> Jeremy moans ...
Jeremy: That's nice feedback, but not nice to have another action. I'd be happy to be a supporting player.
Ralph: Need to get our TF reconvening.
Guus: We have too many TFs in limbo. Need to
clear that by the F2F.
Libby: Discussed about whether to transfer to IG. I'll follow up with email.
<Jacco> jeremy, could steven pemberton write up your talk as a rdf-a note?
Guus: Goals For F2F?
... Tutorial Page?
<Valentina> I apologize, I have to leave the telecon.
<Valentina> Goodbye to all :)
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to ping Benjamin and Jeff about the Tutorial Page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action08]
Guus: SE TF?
<ChrisW> "ODA" note
Phil: Two definites: It would be good to decide about publication of ODA Note. Second: Transfer of this discussion into SWIG.
Guus: By next telecon, DavidW and I will try to
have a draft agenda for the F2F.
... Should also think about what should happen after Feb 1: Continue in IG? Elsewhere? Special WG of its own? Etc.
... By next telecon every TF should have an opinion on this. E.g., SKOS has been mentioned a number of times as a candidate for Rec track work.
... GRDDL work is less clear, because it isn't clear who would work on it.
F2F logistics: http://sw.deri.org/2005/07/swbpd/
<ChrisW> what is the first deliverable?
Giogos: We set up home page of TF, working on
the first deliverable. Have requests from others to participate.
... Some W3C members who are not WG members want to join the TF.
Guus: That's their right.
Giorgos: Excellent. And for W3C members who are not yet a member of this WG?
Guus: The need to be proposed by their AC rep. We said TF size should be 4-8. You expect more?
Ralph: People joining a TF need to be part of
the WG as a whole.
... and participate in these teleconferences.
Giorgos: To be a co-author of a deliverable?
Ralph: They need to be appointed to the WG by the AC rep, for Intellectual Property rights reasons.
Guus: Jane Hunter applied for Invited Expert
status, given her circumstances, that might be granted.
... It would be good if she can join. She intends to make her new employer a member. Quite different from the Motorola case.
<RalphS> [Raphael speaking]
Raphael: We are gathering experience in MM technologies -- the encoding in MPEG7 and others. I'll email by the end of this week.
<aliman> [PORT] also presented and gave a
tutorial on SKOS Core at DC2005 last week ... tutorial at
... presentation at
<Zakim> aliman, you wanted to say a couple of words on PORT
<aliman> [PORT] feedback at DC2005 on SKOS was overwhelmingly positive!
Chris: We'll need 3 docs reviewed: Qualified Cardinality Restrictions; OWL Time; Semanantic Integration. Goal was an editor's draft by the F2F, ready for WG review.
<Jacco> i'll have to leave - sorry (I've got baby crying :-)
<aliman> I could review the 'semantic integration' note?
Chris: Might have Qual Card note ready earlier.
<RalphS> OEP home page
Chris: OWL Time content is ready, but needs to be formatted into W3C Note format, so it's ready for WG review.
<raphael_troncy> I have read also the 'semantic integration' note and I will send comments on the list soon ...
Chris: Semantic Int note should be ready for review for the F2F. Maybe the Qual Card note.
Ralph: I only see a bulleted list.
<RalphS> Chris: follow the 'documentation' link from the OEP page
Chris: I need to make it point to the documentation page.
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair to review Qualified Cardinality note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action09]
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to review OWL Time note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action10]
<Jeremy> I'm interested in time, but too overloaded
<RalphS> [I will likely read the Time note out of interest too, but don't want to commit to a review at this time]
<dwood> Brian left about 30 minutes ago
<scribe> ACTION: Jeremy to ask HP folks about reviewing Semantic Integration note, which will be ready for review near the F2F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action11]
<Gary> [I am likely to read all three notes, but cannot commit to a review at this time]
<scribe> ACTION: Libby to review OWL Time note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action12]
Natasha: As far as OEP is concerned, we're done.
Guus: That's on my to do list.
... Expect an update of Mark's document on Wordnet.
<ChrisW> that was, Natasha: as far as OEP is concerned, the n-ary notes is done, just waiting for guus
<aliman> [Adding some additional notes re PORT] ... I've written up PORT/SKOS goals at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0079.html
Nothing to add.
Nothing to add.
Nothing to add..
<libby> (we're maintaining this http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebDOAPBulletinBoard but not http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/ in adtf)
<scribe> ACTION: DanBri to clarify rules for IG to propose new mailing lists for its TFs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action10] [PENDING]
Guus: Main topic of upcoming F2F agenda will be on what work to continue.