See also: IRC log
<TomB> Meeting: SWD WG
<TomB> Chair: Tom
<TomB> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html
<TomB> Scribenick: JonP
<TomB> Scribe: Jon
RESOLUTION: to accept minutes of 22 May telecon: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html
<RalphS> Second F2F poll results
TomB: Please respond to the poll at http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/39408/f2f3poll1/?
<scribe> 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] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> 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] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> 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] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair to propose minimal fix for resolution of issue 33 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html#action09] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: chairs to open issue 31 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html#action07] [DONE]
<RalphS> ISSUE-31
<scribe> ACTION: open issue 31 in tracker for discussion next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html#action08] [DONE]
TomB: Guus sent out an email to the list WRT ISSUE-26 proposal
<RalphS> ISSUE-26: SimpleExtension proposal [Guus]
TomB: we'll return to that after a few messages from our sponsor
<scribe> 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] [DONE]
TomB: Let's move the discussion of ISSUE-33 forward until we have some time
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to Recipe issue 1.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action09] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> 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] [CONTINUES]
Elisa: We're making progress and should have something very soon
<RalphS> yes, Ed Summers, Library of Congress, has been appointed to the WG
TomB: Ed Summers from US LOC will be joining the WG -- he has an interest in SKOS as well as vocabulary management as well
Ben_Adida: Important! RDFa telecon
is moving to Thursdays 1500 UTC
... Not a whole lot to report, but if you know about the
FireFox Extension 'Operator' it will soon support RDFa
<RalphS> Next Telecon - This Thursday, 1500 UTC
Alistair: RE: SKOS Test Cases
Alistair: wants to ask Sean if he has thoughts about Test Case structure?
SeanB: Basically follow the OWL
Test Case structure, but otherwise doesn't have a lot of advice
(yet)
... might be hard to mandate how things are displayed as part
of a test case
... without making the test case application-specific
... and that might be better expressed as a best practice
recommendation rather then making it part of the specification
via a test case
TomB: We should postpone probably ISSUE-26 discussion until next week
<TomB> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0008.html
<RalphS> "Re: [SKOS] tracking SKOS issues"
<Alistair> +1
<Bernard> +1
<RalphS> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/products/3
<TomB> scribenick: aliman
RalphS: look at product page, can
only see open issues for a product...
...would it work if you could see both open and raise issues?
Antoine: if go to page with raised issues, almost all about SKOS, so perhaps ok.
RalphS: noted that before, and took an
untracked action item, to make open issues page include raised
issues.
... don't have problem with raising issue first, don't need to
propose first.
TomB: issue process page ...
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess
TomB: need to get these linked up,
RalphS: process says can raise issue directly in tracker
TomB: doesn't say have to raise issue tracker.
RalphS: change "may" to "must"
... resolved to do this?
TomB: advantage is clear.
Bernard: which doc?
TomB: IssuesProcess, paragraph 1.1
Bernard: does that mean there is alternative mechanism?
RalphS: proposing things in mail, losing track.
RESOLUTION: always add new issues by raising the issue on the tracker -- if it's not in the tracker, it's not an issue
RalphS: encourage RDFa TF to do the same.
Ben_Adida: ok
TomB: JonP: "anoint someone to be
the official watcher of the list who will have the
responsibility of adding to the tracker issues raised by
non-members"
... anyone willing to be watcher for issues on list, esp. SKOS
issues?
Antoine: I will volunteer.
RESOLUTION: Antoine will be the 'Issues Watcher'
TomB: will note that in
IssuesProcess
... JonP suggested: "add _all_ of the issues currently in the
issues sandbox into the tracker as 'raised' issues without
intermediate discussion."
Alistair: being done
TomB: JonP .. "perhaps give each issue in the tracker it's own wiki page as a child of SkosDesign (or SkosDesign/Issues?) to support the current form of wiki-based discussion???"
JonP: suggesting now we sometimes "propose" issue and sometimes "raise" issue meaning same thing. We should just "raise" issue, then decide whether OPEN, RESOLVED ...
<RalphS> +1 to Jon's suggestion
TomB: no longer talk about "proposing" an issue at all.
Bernard: is "resolved" same as "closed"?
RalphS: yes.
Bernard: lots of homonyms and synonyms, need consistent use of terms.
Alistair: been calling alternative fixes "proposals"
RalphS: in every case where there is "proposed resolution", always listed in tracker?
Alistair: don't think so.
<scribe> ACTION: TomB to fix wording of IssuesProcess [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/29-swd-minutes.html#action10]
<JonP> There's an existing Status vocabulary in Section 2.1 at http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess
RalphS: what is role of SKOS issues sandbox?
Alistair: no status, just a sandbox
Antoine: action alistair has, to move issues to tracker, is to kill the issues sand box
RalphS: agree
TomB: sounds like a good idea
JonP: sandbox was an interim measure
Antoine: yes
<scribe> ACTION: alistair to fix wording on skos issues sandbox [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/29-swd-minutes.html#action11]
TomB: haven't addressed idea of having wiki page for issues?
RalphS: every issue, or when convenient?
JonP: every issue should have a wiki page a single place to look.
RalphS: then end up with separate places to look, mailing list and wiki. But if wiki is convenient place for owner to maintain a status of issue, resolution proposals.
TomB: link wiki page to tracker issue?
RalphS: post a mail message with appropriate keyword.
Antoine: can also put reference to wiki page in description of issue.
RalphS: can also edit the issue. add note feature as well.
TomB: not clear what we do with the wiki page ... RalphS said can edit issue?
RalphS: can edit description, can also add note in tracker. Can certainly raise issue first, then post mail message pointing to wiki page.
TomB: should be in guidelines, way to add a wiki page, put it at this particular location, send message with subject line ...
RalphS: generalize that. anytime
there is a web page or mail message perhaps in public-esw-thes
list, should link it to issue thread by posting mail message,
works for anything.
... I'm reluctant to create wiki pages for every issue, might
be overkill.
daniel: discussion on mailing list?
RalphS: new issue comes up, raise it in tracker, then use issue number in mail messages.
<RalphS> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess
daniel: how to use tracker?
RalphS: see issues process.
TomB: link to tracker page,
pointed from issues process page.
... better how to link? this is summary of features, how-to
raise issues not there on top tracker page.
... helpful to have one page tutorial on tracker, in order to
raise issue in tracker, type this click that etc.
... agree with daniel, would find that helpful.
RalphS: It's the custom for each WG to
decide how to use tracker. "Raised" as different from "Open" is
unique for this WG, suggest Tom & Daniel we add to our
issues process page this tutorial information.
... It's sufficiently custom to our process.
JonP: proposing resolutions:
formal way of proposing resolutions? place where they should
go?
... problem with tracker, if had a wiki page for each issue,
would always have a place to write up proposed resolutions.
TomB: proposals can be made to
mailing list, but I see problems, with wiki page easier, e.g.
ISSUE-33 quite long, examples in boxes, could not do that in
email message. Default model these things get proposed, email
gets captured in tracker, then find proposals by having helpful
subject line.
... JonP you're thinking better to have single wiki page?
JonP: easier to find if have single index page, here are issues, here is page for each issue, here are proposals, gives structured organization around what issues are, what proposals are ...
RalphS: useful for long and complicated issues, overkill to require for every issue. When we close an issue, nice to have a mail message saying: resolution, where convenient to fit in email - end of discussion thread in tracker.
TomB: no need to make hard
decision right now, nothing to stop creating wiki pages under
SkosDesign, signal that using subject line, rely on tracker to
pick that up?
... any time we have an important doc to discuss, make clear
subject line for tracker. Jon? OK for now?
JonP:Works for me .
TomB: issues process page should emphasize use of subject line, probably try to describe pages needed for overview. Will propose something to mailing list.
RESOLUTION: Proposed resolutions to Raised Issues should be sent to the list first
Raised Issues will only get their own wiki page if the issue is complex and/or there are multiple resolution proposals (at the discretion of issue-raiser? orissue-resolver?)
Emails to the list containing resolutions to raised issues should (must?) contain the word 'Resolution' in the subject along with the Issue number
Subjects of issue-related emails should clearly what aspect of the Issue to which the email is related
<RalphS> [for example, ISSUE-33 has some "related notes" that were likely entered via the Web interface: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/33 ]
<Zakim> Alistair, you wanted to ask about external message
<Zakim> RalphS, you wanted to ask that proposals be primarily sent by email
Alistair: propose editing documents in distinct sections in the wiki, each section having its own wiki page, and including the latest draft of each section in the master page
... master draft of page would always be up-to-date
... make it much easier to propose/review new drafts of individual document sections
... in large documents
and to track changes in the wiki
e.g. http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/Semantics
RalphS: prefer to see proposed
text by email first, rather than as editor's draft of document
first ...
... although editor's can propose a whole section.
... keeping editor's drafts in the wiki is useful.
<TomB> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/Semantics/Concepts
TomB: pasted link to semantics, then link to Semantics/Concepts
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/Semantics/Concepts?action=recall&rev=2
<TomB> Alistair: in SKOS/Semantics, using the "include" feature of MoinMoin...
TomB: question whether would be able to 'include' specific revisions? (unanswered)
TomB: at top of hour, helpful discussion, will propose changes to page.
<JonP> Many thanks to Alistair for taking over scribing
TomB: adjourned meeting.