Decision Mtg 24 Agenda

From Decision XG
Revision as of 14:46, 10 March 2011 by Jwaters2 (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Decision Meeting #24 Goal & Agenda

Background

The dial-in information for this week's meeting is here. The Decision Incubator Activity is intended to explore the use cases and design of a Decision Representation format (e.g. in XML, RDF, OWL…) available on the wiki along with its use by participants in testbed settings for experiments and exercises. Each meeting will be an opportunity to summarize progress & contributions to the wiki, review next steps and action items, and to review the current representation format.

Summary from the Last Meeting

At our last meeting #23, we reviewed the draft working group charter, received an update on the integration effort of the ontology components, discussed tasks for the final report and recieved updates from participants. One interesting aspect of the draft charter was the concept of including motivating use cases to help explain the working group mission in more practical terms. The use cases for decisions included a person doing research on the web and selecting among alternatives, capturing expertise, documenting collaborative decisions of a working group, recording historical decisions, and emergency management. Eva mentioned that one use case is missing, the decision state / process flow. Jeff and Eva will clean up a new version of the draft. Regarding integration of ontology components, Eva mentioned a tool for converting XML to RDF that could help bridge the gap between the XML Decision format and an RDF/OWL version. This would help to show interoperability between the formats. Regarding the final report, Aaron discussed some paragraphs that he prepared discussing the security aspects of decision-making. A security model is important because it improves information sharing by ensuring that the portions that need to be kept secure are kept secure. Security helps enforce privacy concerns as well. The modularization of the decision format allows only the portions that need to be sent to be sent, which cuts down on bandwidth and allows the decision format to be used in bandwidth-constrained environments. Piotr described updated he has made to his ontology decision components and his interest in feedback. Eva mentioned her interest in including a state-of-the-art section in the final report.


Goal for this Meeting

At this March 10, 2011 meeting of the Decision Incubator, Jeff will describe updates coming to the draft Working Group charter and our approach for moving this forward to see if the W3C staff and members are interested in supporting this transition. We will also discuss the remaining two meetings of the incubator and the final report tasks remaining. We'll go around the horn to receive updates from participants.


Agenda

The following agenda items will be discussed at the next meeting. The topic, time, summary and discussion leader are provided for each agenda item.

(0) Introductions & Agenda Overview (5 min, Jeff)

We'll briefly consider the current status and agenda items for any suggested changes.

(1) Update on Status of Draft Working Group Charter (10 min Jeff Waters)

Jeff will quickly update the group on his restructuring of the draft Working Group charter into the more up-to-date template format, similar to our own incubator charter. We'll also discuss the schedule for completing, vetting and submitting it. (The Charter would be the guiding document and initial description of the proposed Working Group. After considering any recommended changes, an initial consensus will be reached as to whether this charter is appropriate for representing the proposed effort. If so, the charter will be forwarded to the W3C staff for consideration under their normal process. References describing the process include the following: (1) The W3C Process Document. (2) Working Groups, Interest Groups and Coordination Groups which explains that every working group must have a chair, a charter, a team contact, and an archived mailing list. It also outlines participation requirements. Section 6.2.3 explains that every new charter must be submitted for review and consideration by the Advisory Committee (the primary reps from each member organization). (3) Section 5.6 Activity Proposal describes questions to consider when starting an Activity. (Section 6.2.2 says the suggestions for building support around an Activity Proposal apply to charters as well.)

(2) Tasks and Schedule for Final Report (15 min Jeff/Eva/All)

We should review the sections of the final report as shown on the front page of the wiki, update the outline with any additions/deletions, assign writers and have a complete draft by next meeting.

(3) Compiling and Integrating Ontology Components (10 min Eva/Jeff)

Eva will describe her recent activities where she is beginning to compile the various ontology components for integration into an initial decision ontology. Jeff will summarize his upcoming contributions for lightweight decision components tailored for linked open datasets.

(4) Around the Horn (15 min All)

We'll see if we can visit with each of our participants to get an update on latest activities in representing or modeling decisions, security, situation reporting, higher-level decision components or other issues relevant for decision-making.