14:56:02 RRSAgent has joined #swd 14:56:02 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc 14:56:08 rrsagent, bookmark 14:56:08 See http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T14-56-08 14:56:18 zakim, this will be swd 14:56:18 ok, TomB, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started 14:56:52 Meeting: SWD WG 14:56:55 Chair: Tom 14:57:28 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0033.html 14:57:55 Agenda+ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0034.html 14:58:37 -??P10 14:58:39 SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended 14:58:40 Attendees were 14:59:35 SW_SWD()11:00AM has now started 14:59:43 +??P17 15:00:00 aliman has joined #swd 15:00:06 +??P21 15:00:21 vit has joined #swd 15:00:26 Bern has joined #swd 15:00:50 berrueta has joined #swd 15:00:57 rrsagent, bookmark 15:00:57 See http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-00-57 15:01:01 zakim, this will be swd 15:01:01 ok, TomB, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started 15:01:04 + +0120682aaaa 15:01:23 zakim, +0120682aaaa is me 15:01:23 +Bern; got it 15:01:25 Meeting: SWD WG 15:01:27 Chair: Tom 15:01:31 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0033.html 15:01:39 Agenda+ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0034.html 15:01:49 Antoine has joined #swd 15:02:03 Previous: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html 15:02:12 +??P34 15:02:19 zakim, ??P34 is me 15:02:24 +berrueta; got it 15:02:27 Scribe: Bern 15:02:47 Regrets: Sean, Ralph, Jon, Michael 15:02:49 +??P36 15:02:52 Scribenick: Bern 15:03:02 rrsagent, please make record public 15:03:48 +??P40 15:04:20 +??P41 15:04:43 dlrubin has joined #swd 15:05:27 -antoine 15:05:56 zakim, who is on the call? 15:05:56 On the phone I see TomB, Vit, Bern, berrueta, aliman, ??P40 15:06:20 zakim, who is talking? 15:06:30 aliman, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Vit (65%), ??P40 (61%) 15:06:33 +??P29 15:06:43 zakim, ??P40 is Daniel 15:06:43 +Daniel; got it 15:06:58 -??P29 15:07:28 + +31.20.420.aabb 15:08:33 Topic: admin 15:08:56 TomB: propose we accept minutes of 15th May telecon 15:09:08 ...been through minutes and look OK to me 15:09:20 Resolved: accept minutes of 15th May meeting 15:09:43 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/39408/f2f3poll1/ 15:10:02 ACTION: TomB to start questionnaire on date for f2f -- options are weeks of Nov 4 and Nov 11 15:10:06 --done 15:10:17 Topic: SKOS 15:11:08 aliman has joined #swd 15:11:12 ACTION: Daniel to send messages to thesaurus list, Semantic Web Interest, ... requesting feedback on the new SKOS use cases document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html#action01] 15:11:14 --done 15:11:28 ACTION: Jon and Alistair: Move SKOS issues over from Sandbox to Tracker on an ongoing basis [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-swd-minutes.html#action10] 15:11:31 --continues 15:11:53 ACTION: Sean to look at the test environment supporting the SKOS semantics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html#action05] 15:11:56 --continues 15:12:08 ACTION: Alistair will look at raising the examples from the issues to test cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html#action06] 15:12:10 --continues 15:12:26 ACTION: Guus revise his ISSUE-26 proposal to account for other options [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action07] 15:12:37 --continues 15:12:42 TomB: was talking with Guus just before the call 15:13:04 TomB: expects to see output from Guus in next few days 15:13:12 http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/31 15:13:24 ...Alistair suggests we open basic lexical label sematics 15:13:41 ...suggest we open it at same time as issue 26 15:14:01 ACTION: chairs to open issue 31 15:14:39 Alistair: doesn't this issue need an owner? 15:14:54 ...meant to have its status as open, so that it's on the agenda 15:15:23 TomB: asks for volunteer to have owner of the issue? 15:15:42 Alistair: I'm willing if no one is desperately keen 15:16:05 TomB: are there any other steps that need to be taken? 15:16:29 Alistair: change the status in the tracker 15:16:53 ... I'll do that 15:17:06 ACTION: open issue 31 in tracker for discussion next week 15:17:22 TomB: issue 33--grouping constructs 15:17:24 --done 15:17:35 ...we had discussion last week, but now a 3rd proposal from Antione 15:18:03 ...goal of discussion today is to see if we have a rough concensus so that we can move towards having a proposal 15:18:22 ... to vote on in next week's call. Guus felt that we should try to move this forward 15:18:31 ...to some sort of resolution. 15:18:46 zakim, unmute me 15:18:46 Antoine should no longer be muted 15:18:48 ...calls on Antione to put forward proposal 3. 15:19:10 Antione: my proposal was based on the diagnosis that the issue comes from 15:19:26 ...fact that two axioms are contradictory 15:20:29 ...I suggested to release the axioms that define the domain and range of the relationships 15:20:45 ...and to introduce a new class that would be a superclass of concept and collection 15:21:42 bernard: familiar object-oriented pattern 15:22:03 ... gang of four pattern, have a sub-class of singular or plural 15:22:14 ... e.g. common pattern in widgetry ... 15:23:04 ... called composite pattern ... sub-class which is also a component and a collection of components ... 15:23:57 http://www.exciton.cs.rice.edu/JavaResources/DesignPatterns/composite.htm 15:24:43 Alistair: number of issues with this proposal wrt semantic relationships 15:25:14 ...in the current guide there's a rule called "collectable properties" which was supposed to 15:25:30 ...enable your to infer the direct semantic relationship links 15:25:55 ...other issues are that if you are doing query expansion, when you have 15:26:21 ...a collectin that has a node in the expansion graph, so you can artificially include 15:26:24 [collectable properties http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-guide/#seccollectable] 15:26:38 ...extra distance between the concepts 15:26:54 ...also you couldn't write an application that has no knowledge of collections 15:27:09 ...every application would have to have knowledge of collections 15:27:29 ...different to minimal fixed proposal, which means you don't need any inference rule 15:27:40 ...and doesn't need any knowledge of collections 15:28:35 Bernard: what's significance of not knowing about collections? 15:28:36 Bernard: what is the advantage of not having any knowledge of collections? 15:29:01 Alistair: really simple query expansion doesn't need any collection stuff but guaranteed to work 15:29:06 ...with SKOS data 15:29:33 ...For example, if you take a look at the XXXX metadata repository, there is no 15:29:54 ...collection stuff, but it is nevertheless a very useful platform. If we went for 15:30:15 ...Antione's proposal then an application like that would have to implement the collection 15:30:29 s/XXXX/NSDL/ 15:30:36 ...stuff--it wouldn't work without it. 15:31:05 TomB: in W3C practice the proposal that has the least impact on an existing spec is the one that gets favoured 15:31:35 ...In last week's discussion it seemed to me that we were leaning towards the 15:31:48 ...minimal fixed proposal. Does anyone want to add to that? 15:32:14 Alistair: I agree with what Guus said. I like the minimal fixed proposal because it does 15:32:33 ...the smallest fix and takes an incremental approach. We can take the approach 15:32:53 ...and then explore issues with it. If there's a problem with it, then we can take a look 15:33:14 ...at other proposals (such as the relaxing domain/range or the Bundle) 15:33:18 +1 Alistair and Guus favoring Minimal Fix 15:33:50 Antione: my worry is that in most of the situations where we have seen collections 15:34:06 ...the collections are included in the hierarchy. 15:35:21 Alistair: there's a difference between a conceptual hierarchy and a systematic display 15:35:45 ...the latter is a visual arrangement of terms, not really part of what standards people 15:36:11 would call a conceptual hierarchy. 15:36:40 ...node labels are introduced as a display convenience. 15:37:05 ...In the minimal fixed proposal, let's say you're generating a systematic display 15:37:31 such as kinds of milk. In a minimal fix, you declare a concept of milk, then goat's 15:37:54 ...milk, cow's milk and express narrower terms between them. Then itroducce a collection 15:38:21 ...say "milk by source animal". An application that gets that data can ignore the 15:38:42 ...collection data and just display the relationships between kinds of milk. 15:39:06 ...whereas an application that understands collections can ask if (say) cow's milk 15:39:17 ...a member of any collections? 15:39:48 ...and then recurse upwards, to see if the "milk by source animal" collection is also in a collection? 15:40:20 Daniel: I'm confused by what's asserted by collection membership and the siblings of a taxonomy 15:41:07 Alistair: collections are not just siblings. You could have "milk by source animal", and "milk by fat content" 15:41:35 ...if you're actually thinking about classes, then "milk by source animal" is not really a class. 15:42:04 ...in the thesaurus community, "milk by source animal" is not a concept, it's a node label 15:42:31 Daniel: but the ontology community wouldn't use this approach. 15:43:24 Alistair: the dependency of how we model this and how we migrate from thesaurus to ontologies 15:43:50 ...the primary concern for SKOS is to make sure that it is sufficient to represent thesauri and classification schemes 15:44:14 ...so that existing thesauri and classification schemes can continue to have the features 15:44:21 ...they're used to. 15:44:36 Daniel: we also have to do the same from an ontology-oriented perspective 15:45:19 Alistair: I am aware of Antione's point about the difficulty of implementing the algorithm 15:45:50 ...I explain the algorithm to follow the narrower links, then recursive collection-membership relationships 15:46:24 ...there's another standardisation group (in the UK) that's trying to write down a data model (in UML) for thesauri 15:46:51 ...this group is having a big discussion about you handle collections (aka Arrays) 15:47:05 Daniel: anticipate resolution from this group? 15:47:20 Alistair: they're influenced by how SKOS does it. 15:48:06 ...they're not hardcore data modellers. 15:48:19 ...we'd have to present it in UML for them to understand. 15:48:33 Daniel: that might be useful for us to present it anyhow. 15:49:06 Alistair: because this group is doing it as a closed group it's not that public 15:49:25 Daniel: so it presents some interesting questions about how to map from SKOS to their data model 15:49:41 Alistair: I made a suggestion. Here's the link 15:49:53 http://isegserv.itd.rl.ac.uk/blogs/alistair/archives/41 -> Initial suggestion of data model for thesauri for BS8723 15:50:14 ...the idea that I had was that we go with the minimal fixed proposal for now 15:50:30 ...which forces me to expand on the algorithm 15:50:41 +1 to go with Minimal Fix 15:50:59 ...and if it's too complication then we can change our minds. It's not the final word. 15:51:29 TomB: does anyone disagree with minimal fix? 15:51:44 Daniel: concern that we also need to address from ontology world 15:51:59 Alistair: need use cases to understand this better 15:52:20 TomB: sounds like we're moving to minimal fix with reservation that we need to understand 15:52:33 ...how ontologies map to thesauri. 15:52:48 ...so could we put minimal fix on agenda for next week. 15:53:04 Alistair: yes, then we could resolve or not next week 15:53:38 ACTION: Alistair to propose minimal fix for resolution 15:53:50 TOmb: to be talked about next week 15:54:06 s/resolution/resolution of issue 33/ 15:54:08 ...propose SKOS issue resolution process to next week 15:54:31 http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess 15:54:46 ...also want to make sure that the document on the issues process actually corrresponds to the way we are doing things 15:55:09 ...find it slightly confusing about how to see issues that are closed 15:55:45 ... beware of not losing it! 15:55:46 ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to Recipe issue 1.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action09] 15:55:52 --continues 15:56:02 ACTION: Elisa to provide outline of work to be done by Apr 17 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action11] 15:56:07 ---continues 15:56:57 -TomB 15:56:59 -Daniel 15:57:02 -aliman 15:57:02 -Antoine 15:57:05 Antoine has left #swd 15:57:08 adjourned 15:57:21 zakim, list attendees 15:57:21 As of this point the attendees have been Bern, berrueta, aliman, TomB, Vit, antoine, Daniel, +31.20.420.aabb 15:57:38 -berrueta 15:57:44 dlrubin has left #swd 15:57:57 rrsagent, please draft minutes 15:57:57 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html Bern 15:58:21 zakim, bye 15:58:21 leaving. As of this point the attendees were Bern, berrueta, aliman, TomB, Vit, antoine, Daniel, +31.20.420.aabb 15:58:21 Zakim has left #swd 15:58:31 rrsagent, bye 15:58:31 I see 11 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-actions.rdf : 15:58:31 ACTION: TomB to start questionnaire on date for f2f -- options are weeks of Nov 4 and Nov 11 [1] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-10-02 15:58:31 ACTION: Daniel to send messages to thesaurus list, Semantic Web Interest, ... requesting feedback on the new SKOS use cases document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html#action01] [2] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-11-12 15:58:31 ACTION: Jon and Alistair: Move SKOS issues over from Sandbox to Tracker on an ongoing basis [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/08-swd-minutes.html#action10] [3] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-11-28 15:58:31 ACTION: Sean to look at the test environment supporting the SKOS semantics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html#action05] [4] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-11-53 15:58:31 ACTION: Alistair will look at raising the examples from the issues to test cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/15-swd-minutes.html#action06] [5] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-12-08 15:58:31 ACTION: Guus revise his ISSUE-26 proposal to account for other options [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action07] [6] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-12-26 15:58:31 ACTION: chairs to open issue 31 [7] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-14-01 15:58:31 ACTION: open issue 31 in tracker for discussion next week [8] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-17-06 15:58:31 ACTION: Alistair to propose minimal fix for resolution [9] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-53-38 15:58:31 ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to Recipe issue 1.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action09] [10] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-55-46 15:58:31 ACTION: Elisa to provide outline of work to be done by Apr 17 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action11] [11] 15:58:31 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-irc#T15-56-02