See also: IRC log
<tbaker> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html
<tbaker> emma, do you know who sent regrets?
<emma> Scribe: Michael
<emma> scribenick: michaelp
Emma: Minutes of last telecon accepted.
<digikim_> monica :)
<scribe> ACTION: Tom to send email to the LOD-LAM participants and create a final version of the presentation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action01] [DONE]
<tbaker> The LOD-LAM presentation is at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/File:Lldxg-summary.pptx
Emma: Open action on getting comments and reviews
Emma: Karen suggested using blog
... We need someone to setup a WordPress blog and copy parts of review
<monica> why cam we not use digress.it site?
<digikim_> kcoule +1
Karen: We have gotten no replies from the public list. Approaching single individuals more succesful.
<antoine> the principle is ok, but I'm not sure we want to centralize it!
Emma: Targetting contributers could be more efficient.
<digikim_> kcoyle: yes, I just sent the email to the two people at the national library of finland and said that you need to comment on this, to resque the world ;)
<Zakim> tbaker, you wanted to say that the chairs have approached alot of people
Karen: We don't happen to get general comments
TomB: We have sent out a lot of
mails and had gotten a very good response rate from potential
... We asked to review particular sections.
Karen: I am concerned about responses specifically from the library community.
<antoine> Aren't we going to send to http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Dissemination_Lists ?
<kcoyle> antoine, i don't think that sending to lists is going to get the attention of the people we need to reach
Emma: We have people from inside the group.
Emma: We have prepared a call for
... Ok for sending this Call for Comments on the list?
<antoine> karen: well, at least it will be a wider than the lld alone! And of course that should not prevent us from trying personal requests. It's just that I don't think we should/can centralize that
Antoine: I like the idea of
members contacting outside people personally.
... I also wanted to point out that the call would also be send to a wider audience.
Emma: Any objections to the draft of the Call?
<dvilasuero> +1 to draft call
<scribe> ACTION: Co-chairs to draft message to the community about review between 16 June and 20 July - post before next call, on 16 June [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action02] [DONE]
<Zakim> antoine, you wanted to comment on adding blog to the call
Antoine: Do we want to add a blog reference/link to the Call?
Emma: Karen, do you have a platform in mind?
Monica: I think we could host it, but have to check if it will be open to anyone.
Karen: We could use Blogspot,
... But is this gonna work? I am wondering if this would trigger specific comments.
Emma: W3C would probably not comfortable with a public plattform.
Monica: How long do we expect the blog to be accessible?
<antoine> 2 months?
Emma: Duration of the review process, 2 month.
<pmurray> I don't think we need to keep the comment blog around for a long time.
<antoine> we can just save the comments as HTML and upload them on the wiki, if we want an archive...
<pmurray> antoine: +1
Monica: We could set it up if it is not for a long period.
<dvilasuero> antoine +1
<pmurray> I think it would be useful as a short term tool, not a long term preservation of commentary.
<scribe> ACTION: Antoine and Emmanuelle to talk about strategies for getting comments at next call [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action15] [DONE]
Karen: We can split the blog up into sections that are moderated.
Emma: We need the URL for the blog before the Call for Comments can go out.
<scribe> ACTION: Monica to set up blog for comments on Monday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-lld-minutes.html#action05]
<scribe> ACTION: Jeff and William to propose text on microdata and schema.org - where in the report it should be discussed [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action03] [DONE]
Emma: We have to discuss how to
integrate comments we are receiving
... Topic for next week.
<scribe> ACTION: everyone to read http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits#.22Library_Linked_Data.22:_Scope_of_this_report and do lightweight review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action04] [DONE]
<tbaker> +1 close action
<scribe> ACTION: Jodi to send email about Scope statement [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action05] [DONE]
<scribe> ACTION: Karen to edit the Benefits section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action06] [DONE]
<tbaker> +1 - have asked
<scribe> ACTION: Tom to ask Hideaki or Dickson to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action06] [DONE]
<scribe> ACTION: Gordon to review Relevant Technologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUED]
<GordonD> OK to add Gordon to list of reviewers
<antoine> in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Library_standards_and_linked_data there are things that relate to problems
Karen: I don't really see a place for this in the report, because it doesn't really relate to problems and limitations.
<antoine> E.g. Q: How can libraries be encouraged to "free" their records?
<Zakim> tbaker, you wanted to ask if it might be folded into Available Vocabularies deliverable
Karen: I looked at the available
vocabularies, but it looked like it is not meant to be
... Should we add to it?
... A lot of what is in Library Standards is not about vocabs or data sets.
TomB: I am just wondering of the
scope of this vocab and dataset deliverable could be expanded
to accomodate what is already in there
... It would be a pity not to publish some of the discussion there.
Antoine: Would this just apply to the page/link above?
Karen: We want to expand this other page to accomodate vocabs.
<tbaker> I wasn't suggesting the pages be combined mechanically - not everything necessarily needs to be integrated into a formal deliverable
Emma: Maybe we could just freeze the two pages and identify places where we could point to them.
Antoine: Library Data Resources is about library standards. Could the vocab page point there?
<monica> maybe we can make an even stronger statement "we highly recommend that you read link for background on topic xxx"
Emma: Can we include some as issues for further discussion?
<GordonD> Before freezing the Library Data Resources page, I will update it ...
Karen: All the key issues here have gone into the issues section, just worded differently.
<scribe> ACTION: Karen and Antoine to relate Library Data Resources and Library Standards and Linked data [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-lld-minutes.html#action12]
<scribe> ACTION: Gordon and Karen to consider relation between problems and limitation section and the library resource wiki page. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minutes.html#action01] [DONE]
<scribe> ACTION: Jeff to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_recommendations_page for next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action12] [DONE]
<monica> Draft Report blog - http://blogs.ukoln.ac.uk/w3clld/ :)
<monica> I will make some cosmetic changes on Monday and start call for emails of editors
<dvilasuero> monica +1
<scribe> ACTION: Tom to ask Dickson and Guenther if they could contribute curriculum issues to the Recommendations Section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action13] [CONTINUED]
TomB: His longer comments should
go to the list.
... even if we cannot include everything in the report.
Emma: Still looking for reviewers.
<digikim_> I sent a review on the whole document, was this noticed? (should we list somewhere all review emails to keep track?)
dvilasuero: I asked cluster owners and contacted Gordon. I will send email to list per Tuesday.
Antoine: Another comment on reviews. Do we keep track of reviews in a formal manner?
<digikim_> antoine: +1
Antoine: Should we centralize the
comments, keep a list?
... W3C usually uses an issue tracker.
<dvilasuero> antoine +1
Antoine: All emails are tracked and a workflow is kept track of.
<Zakim> tbaker, you wanted to suggest that someone be responsible, for each section, for thanking reviewers and acknowledging reviews
TomB: I suggest that when people send reviews, they should be acknowledged with a personal response.
<tbaker> +1 wiki page is good enough for tracking issues
Emma: Can we continue to track the reviews on this page?
Antoine: This aslo gives some
candidate names of people who should response to reviews.
... of specific parts
Emma: We discuss next week how to handle reviews.
Emma: Thanks, meeting adjourned.