SWD WG -- 5 Jun 2007

<TomB> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2007/05/29-swd-minutes.html

<TomB> Edsu, welcome!

<TomB> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/Scribing.html

dialing in...

?aaaa is me

<TomB> Scribe: benadida

<TomB> Scribenick: benadida

TomB: welcome Ed Summers, new member from library of congress

Admin

EdS: doing some experiments with SKOS with Rob Sanderson (Liverpool)
... categorizing books, new journals. Awkward, PDF form, data munging, figuring out semantics from layout
... came up with simple SKOS file.
... connected with TomB, working with colleague Barbara Tillett on updating formats for library data, taxonomies.
... looking at ways to make data URL-addressable on the web
... fairly new to semweb, but have followed XML closely

<RalphS> welcome, Ed

<edsu> thanks :)

TomB: recent publication, use case document is a good place to start.
... PROPOSE to accept minutes of 5/29 telecon

RESOLVED to accept minutes of 2007-05-29 telecon

TomB: postponing discussion of f2f until next week

SKOS

TomB: comments on readability: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0079.html

Antoine: the confusion came from the last part and the names given to requirements
... commenter expected names to denote official relationships
... hopefully can be solved easily for next version

TomB: a number of links need to be made on the site, volunteer?

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0051.html

TomB: SKOS pages on wiki and w3c web site. They are not quite current, missing links to UCR.

<scribe> ACTION: Ralph to update SKOS pages to point to UCR [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/05-swd-minutes.html#action01]

<guus> [I want to say a few words about repkying to comments

TomB: no rush

Guus: a few words on replying to comments from outsiders, as this is the first time.
... if you reply to someone from outside, a number of rules.
... (1) be extremely polite
... (2) try to reply by citing the document itself
... what you remember is not necessarily what the document says
... (3) is commenter satisfied with response? Can we close the comment?
... can give some examples of good comment responses
... if a document gets no response, that's bad. Interest = comments.

<scribe> ACTION: Guus to point to typical responses that follow guidelines described in telecon [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/05-swd-minutes.html#action02]

Antoine: what if something in the mail is very wrong?

<RalphS> I second Guus' comments about the value of giving careful responses

Guus: give a careful, methodical response. The conclusion is not "do you agree," but rather "can you live with it?"

Ralph: looking at the document is indeed important, as memory != document.

TomB: very useful, thanks.

<scribe> ACTION: Alistair to fix wording on skos issues sandbox [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/05-swd-minutes.html#action03]

<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: TomB to fix wording of IssuesProcess [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/29-swd-minutes.html#action10] [DONE]

TomB: look at http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess
... added lifecycle issues mentioned last week
... if an issue is not in the tracker, it's not an issue
... issues are assigned, issues are periodically reviewed

(scribe skipping TomB's description of doc, refer to http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/IssuesProcess)

<RalphS> (Tom reviews 1.3. Life cycle of issues)

TomB: discuss on list or next week

Ralph: small question on transition from "raised" to "open"
... in this draft, "open" = actively worked on, in other WGs, it feels that open is lower threshold

Guus: if it affects the requirements, it must be recorded

Ralph: worried about issues staying in "raised" state too long. As long as we quickly cover raised issues.

Guus: OWL experience, 60 issues total, 6-7 hairy ones, 6-7 difficult. Once the hairy and difficult were resolved, remaining issues were resolved quickly.
... if we resolve the current issues, we can produce a new WD for SKOS, and then resolve remaining issues.

Ralph: my concern would be resolved if, when we move to LC, we've only address all open issues and we have no raised issues left.

Guus: when we go to LC, issue list should contain no raised or open issue
... resolved, dropped, or postponed.

Ralph: that's fine.

<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]

Jon: we haven't coordinated on issues to move
... can't say we're done with it yet

Issue-26: RelationshipsBetweenLabels (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/26)

Guus: proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0057.html
... one issue. current proposal lets you use terms as resources

(scribe getting a bit lost here, less familiar with this work.)

Guus: if we resolve this one issue, we can come to a consensus
... wordsense binds a particular term to a particular meaning
... proposal: we need to talk about relationships between terms
... discussion is whether wordsense needs a separate discussion
... would make SKOS too complex

Antoine: my comment is about refusing to use the word "term"

Guus: matter of naming.

<Antoine> my real comments on issue 26 are http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0072.html

<scribe> ACTION: Guus to rephrase current proposal, slightly revise naming based on comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/05-swd-minutes.html#action07]

Guus: we are ready to close on this if Daniel gives ok (while traveling)

<TomB> +1 I like the proposal - would be happy to bring to a vote

Guus: Antoine, could you place my proposal in the wiki, then I will edit?

Antoine: yes, by tomorrow.

Guus: (answer to question), in current SKOS, terms are more directly attached to concept, but old SKOS works ok.

<Antoine> http://www.w3.org/mid/46481A20.3080008@few.vu.nl

<TomB> ACTION: Antoine to put SimpleExtensionProposal into wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/05-swd-minutes.html#action08]

Antoine: I am pasting links to original discussions

<Zakim> Bern, you wanted to ask if we have already determined that this is a necessary requirement

Bern: was this a necessary requirement before we provided a solution to it?

Guus: we thought it was

Bern: recorded anywhere?

Guus: good question, thought it was a conclusion from Boston f2f.
... I will look this up

Antoine: an important aspect of this issue, if we don't do anything, no one will be able to represent this kind of link
... does it bring too much trouble in existing SKOS proposal, is the model really complex?

Guus: in a compromise, we cannot fully satisfy a requirement

Bern: some requirements in clarity, ease of use, may conflict

<scribe> ACTION: Guus to include a reference to the original requirements in the resolution proposal [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/05-swd-minutes.html#action09]

Issue-31: BasicLexicalLabelSemantics (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/31)

Issue-33: Grouping Construct (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/33)

<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]

SKOS test cases

<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] [DONE]

Recipes

<scribe> ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to Recipe issue 1.3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/24-swd-minutes.html#action09] [CONTINUES]

VOCABULARY MANAGEMENT

<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] [DONE]

Elisa: a bit more structure/examples can be worked on
... willing to set up a time to do this

<RalphS> scribenick: Ralphs

RDFa

Ben: RDFa telecons are on the new telecon schedule, meeting Thursdays
... yesterday there was an alpha release of FireFox Operator support for RDFa
... documents are a bit behind; working on issues
... discussing now where to define boundary between RDFa and host language

<scribe> scribenick: benadida

TomB: any remaining issues.

next telecon next week

- DRAFT -

SWD WG

5 Jun 2007

Attendees

Contents

Admin

SKOS

Recipes

VOCABULARY MANAGEMENT

RDFa

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output