Minutes for 9 January 2008 URW3 Meeting




  1. Approve minutes from previous meeting.  Note, the minutes are linked from http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/#Minutes.
  2. Review status of action items from previous meeting.
  3. Editing committee report on status of final report.
  4. Discussion of way forward on final report.
  5. Additional items, if time
    1. ISWC 2008 [21 Nov action (9)]
    2. Springer volume [21 Nov action (12)]
  6. Other business

Scribe: Mike Pool

Discussion summary:

  1. Approve minutes from previous meeting. It was noted that there was an error in the posted agenda calling for approval of previous two minutes.  The posted agenda has been corrected.

    Minutes from previous meeting were approved.

  2. Review status of action items from previous meeting

    Before reviewing the action items we welcomed Paolo Ceravolo who is interested in joining the group.

    Action 1: Ken to schedule telecons Jan 9 and every two weeks thereafter into March. Completed, see listed dates now on public and member-only Web pages.

  3. Action 2: Kathy and Peter to add citations to the reference list and link them from the fuzzy/probabilistic scenario. Kathy added several references. Mitch added a link to a paper about purchases on semantic web, under "Fuzzy, example".

    Action 3: ALL should annotate use cases or review and comment on ones already annotated. We discussed this at some length. Kathy clarified what she means by 'annotating use cases'. She meant that we should add terms from the ontology to the use case. As an example, Kathy reviewed the 'AppointmentMaking' use case. See http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/wiki/AppointmentMaking. She used named anchors so that the annotation links to the uncertainty ontology. We also had a discussion as to whether one of the types of uncertainty discussed in the example was better described as aleatory or epistemic uncertainty. Kathy will revise the annotation to show that the time required for the drive may be aleatory. We also decided to preface uncertainty annotation in the use cases with 'UncAnn' to make them easier to find. Kathy will add a page describing this preface on the Wiki.

  4. Editing committee report on status of final report:
  5. There was not much news to report from the editing committee. Kathy requested a work breakdown structure for the final report. There are a number of places in which the draft is incomplete, the sections in the final report should have dates and designated people responsible. People are supposed to be providing things but they don't know what they're providing. The editing committee should be coordinating inputs, not creating them. Authors need to provide to the editing committee one or two paragraphs describing the use case. Editing team will draft a memo to the group describing exactly what they are expecting and deadlines. The editing committee will circulate an email with a breakdown of sections, designate persons responsible and/or solicit volunteers. We can then assign unnassigned areas at the next meeting.

    We also discussed the process for reviewing and proposing changes. Should people edit the Wiki directly, add proposed changes to the body, email the original author or follow some other process? As a way to resolve this Ken will investigate and introduce some tools for issue tracking.

  6. Discuss of way forward on final report: We observed that the discussion for agendum 3 mostly resolved agendum 4. Paulo proposed that we create an action item to the effect that everyone should read and participate in the writing of the draft final report. This was rejected as being too vague, but we did decide to make the action item regarding the task breakdown of the final report more specific by having it include deadlines and ensure that before the next meeting everyone read the final report as it currently stands and the inputs still needed.

  7. Additional Items:
  8. Matthias on Springer volume:
    Matthias gave a Springer report at the last meeting. An email has been distributed containing details and planning for the Springer volume. Kathy summarized: A book will be made of papers from the URSW workshops. Authors of full length paper will be invited to submit longer papers and we're looking at inviting submissions from outside people.

    We also discussed one of the action items, (#9) from the Nov. 21, 2007 meeting, i.e., "Mitch and Claudia talk to ISWC08 PC chairs about uncertainty PC members and topics". Mitch contacted Amit Sheth again and he confirmed that they would include the theme of uncertainty reasoning into the program. Also, they would add some from our group to the Program Committee.

  9. Other Business

    We discussed who would annotate the speaker use case. Mitch agreed to do it.

    Claudia noted that "Steffen Staab agrees with the inclusion of the topic in the ISWC topic list. Moreover he will choose some of us as a PC member for ISWC 2008. I send him the urw3 member list from which he will choose."

    Our next meeting will be on January 23, 2007

    There was a discussion of some upcoming conferences that may be of potential interest. Thomas mentioned SUM 2008, paper deadline in May. Kathy mentioned c4i and FOIS, deadline in April.

Meeting was adjourned.

Action items

  1. ACTION (1): Editing team will provide an email indicating what they need and.or designating people.
  2. ACTION (2): Everyone to review final report (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/wiki/DraftFinalReport) by next meeting to become familiar again with what it looks like and what inputs are needed.
  3. ACTION (3): Kathy to do linking with references she added to the reference list.
  4. ACTION (4): Kathy will put up a page linked from 'UncAnn' to describe annotation purpose.
  5. ACTION (5): Kathy will fix the appointment use case annotation.
  6. ACTION (6): Ken will look into how to use Tracker for when editing team takes ownership of HTML version.
  7. ACTION (7): Ken will give a tutorial on issue tracking tools for the next meeting.
  8. ACTION (8): Mitch will annotate the speaker use case.