IRC log of swd on 2007-06-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:52:11 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swd
14:52:11 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:52:17 [TomB]
rrsagent, bookmark
14:52:17 [RRSAgent]
14:52:22 [TomB]
zakim, this will be swd
14:52:22 [Zakim]
ok, TomB; I see SW_SWD()11:00AM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
14:52:27 [TomB]
Meeting: SWD WG
14:52:30 [TomB]
Chair: Tom
14:53:13 [TomB]
14:53:35 [TomB]
14:54:03 [TomB]
Regrets: Ralph, Daniel, Justin
14:54:17 [TomB]
rrsagent, please make record public
14:54:25 [Guus]
Guus has joined #swd
14:54:50 [Guus]
[i'm stuck here in a review meeting, with no access to a phone]
14:55:20 [Zakim]
SW_SWD()11:00AM has now started
14:55:26 [Zakim]
14:56:13 [Zakim]
14:56:14 [edsu2]
edsu2 has joined #swd
14:56:38 [berrueta]
zakim, ??P9 is me
14:56:38 [Zakim]
+berrueta; got it
14:56:51 [TomB]
Scribe: berrueta
14:56:56 [TomB]
scribenick: berrueta
14:58:41 [TomB]
zakim, who is on the call?
14:58:41 [Zakim]
On the phone I see TomB, berrueta
14:59:34 [vit]
vit has joined #swd
15:00:25 [Zakim]
15:00:53 [aliman]
aliman has joined #swd
15:01:01 [Antoine]
Antoine has joined #swd
15:01:20 [edsu]
do the caps matter at all? Edsu vs edsu?
15:01:37 [TomB]
edsu - I have no idea :-)
15:01:45 [edsu]
15:01:46 [Zakim]
15:01:58 [Zakim]
15:02:27 [Zakim]
15:03:08 [aliman]
q+ to ask for last minute addition to agenda re SKOS and POWDER linkage
15:03:18 [TomB]
ack aliman
15:03:18 [Zakim]
aliman, you wanted to ask for last minute addition to agenda re SKOS and POWDER linkage
15:03:32 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #swd
15:03:54 [seanb]
seanb has joined #swd
15:04:15 [Zakim]
15:04:24 [kjetilk]
Zakim, ??P26 is me
15:04:24 [Zakim]
+kjetilk; got it
15:04:30 [Zakim]
15:05:00 [Zakim]
15:05:22 [berrueta]
tomb: accept adding a new item to the agenda as requested by alistair
15:05:25 [berrueta]
topic: admin
15:05:40 [berrueta]
PROPOSED to accept minutes of 12 June telecon:
15:05:44 [JonP]
JonP has joined #swd
15:05:55 [berrueta]
RESOLVED: accepted minutes of 12 June
15:06:10 [berrueta]
next telecon: 26 June
15:06:19 [berrueta]
topic: skos
15:06:20 [Zakim]
15:06:44 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph to update SKOS pages to point to UCR [recorded in]
15:07:08 [berrueta]
15:07:17 [Zakim]
15:07:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.267.391.aaaa
15:07:54 [JonP]
zakim, Jon_Phipps is me
15:07:54 [Zakim]
+JonP; got it
15:08:20 [berrueta]
aliman: wording looks fine
15:08:52 [berrueta]
Antoine: sandbox is dead, some issues that were not fine worded might now dissapear
15:09:23 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair to fix wording on skos issues sandbox [recorded in]
15:09:25 [berrueta]
15:09:31 [berrueta]
ACTION: Jon and Alistair: Move SKOS issues over from Sandbox to Tracker on an ongoing basis [recorded in]
15:09:32 [berrueta]
15:10:38 [berrueta]
TomB: asks about the test cases. Any progress?
15:11:43 [berrueta]
aliman: suggest to go as per-issue basis
15:12:02 [berrueta]
... unsure about how the test cases will look like
15:12:51 [berrueta]
... there will be some entailment TC for SKOS like in OWL, but also other TC
15:13:13 [berrueta]
... we might open a new document
15:13:55 [GuusS]
GuusS has joined #swd
15:14:21 [berrueta]
seanb: it will be useful for us to have a central document that talks about how SKOS TC should be like
15:14:36 [GuusS]
15:15:10 [berrueta]
aliman: suggest to create a wiki that might serve as template for TC
15:15:18 [TomB]
+1 to Alistair's idea of setting up wiki draft with entailment test cases, etc
15:15:36 [berrueta]
TomB: volunteers to create this template?
15:15:54 [berrueta]
... in the wiki
15:17:33 [berrueta]
aliman describes the procedure to create a wiki template
15:17:56 [berrueta]
ACTION: seanb to create the template for TC in the wiki
15:18:06 [aliman]
SKOS Semantics ->
15:18:11 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair will look at raising the examples from the issues to test cases [recorded in]
15:18:14 [berrueta]
15:18:35 [berrueta]
ACTION: Guus to update proposal with issue of single vs. multiple labels for terms [recorded in]
15:18:36 [berrueta]
15:18:39 [aliman]
Template used for some sub-pages in SKOS Semantics ->
15:18:47 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair to provide details of alternative proposal [recorded in]
15:18:48 [berrueta]
15:19:14 [berrueta]
TomB: we have two alternative proposals on the table now
15:19:46 [aliman]
15:20:08 [GuusS]
Guus: I have done a small user study to compare the usability of the two proposals for Issue 26, and will report on the results later this week
15:20:45 [berrueta]
aliman presents the "Minimal label relation" proposal (Proposal four)
15:21:42 [berrueta]
aliman: new class skos:LabelRelation, labels are represented as literals, LabelRelation glues them together
15:22:15 [berrueta]
... very similar to the 1st proposal, but slightly more general
15:22:39 [berrueta]
... allows relationships between any number of labels
15:24:16 [berrueta]
... (regarding proposal 3) i sent an email asking about the multiplicity of the relationship between Labels and literals
15:26:01 [berrueta]
Antoine: i responded to alistair's mail, suggesting if two Labels have the same literal value, they should be the same
15:26:15 [GuusS]
question for Alistair: how do you handle directed relations like acronymOf?
15:26:34 [GuusS]
I guess via subproperties of labelRelated
15:26:39 [berrueta]
aliman: trying to clarify when two SKOS labels are the same thing
15:27:12 [berrueta]
aliman: to GuusS: yes
15:27:58 [berrueta]
aliman: the proposal points that extensions of the vocabulary should be used
15:28:29 [berrueta]
TomB: we should make progress on the mailing list
15:28:32 [Antoine]
my answer to Alistair ->
15:28:44 [berrueta]
... and try to make a resolution for next week
15:28:54 [berrueta]
... move forward to issue 33
15:29:11 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair to propose resolution for Issue-33 (minimal fix) [recorded in]
15:29:18 [berrueta]
15:29:24 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair to propose minimal fix for resolution of issue 33 [recorded in]
15:29:26 [berrueta]
15:30:06 [berrueta]
aliman: the content of this section reflects more or less the same as the original proposal
15:30:16 [aliman] -> section of SKOS semantics
15:31:07 [berrueta]
aliman: in the original there were some detailed examples
15:31:18 [berrueta]
... but they should be moved into SKOS Primer
15:31:25 [berrueta]
... only minor examples in SKOS semantics
15:32:28 [berrueta]
... Antoine sent an email asking for clarification of some points
15:34:34 [berrueta]
... in general, it is out of scope for SKOS to provide all the information required to layout a systematic display of the thesaurus
15:34:55 [berrueta]
... there is a default way to build a systematic display based on the SKOS data
15:35:32 [berrueta]
... the same question has appeared in a different WG
15:35:56 [berrueta]
TomB: agree that SKOS should not try to provide all this information
15:37:22 [berrueta]
... UCR might include a reference to this design decission
15:38:06 [berrueta]
aliman: UCR should say that representing this information is out of scope
15:38:27 [TomB]
s/this information/presentational information/
15:38:33 [berrueta]
... but the primer might include some hints
15:38:34 [aliman] -> Alistair's statement about presentational information and SKOS scope
15:39:54 [berrueta]
aliman: the data in SKOS is enough to generate an alphabetical display, for instance
15:40:16 [berrueta]
... but when it comes to systematical/hierarchical display, it might be not enough
15:40:22 [berrueta]
... you might need some extra data
15:40:47 [berrueta]
... but there is enough to create a default display
15:42:06 [berrueta]
... this might be a starting point to talk about what is presentational information and what is not
15:43:28 [berrueta]
... consider people by age; age ranges are captured in SKOS, but ordering is a presentational detail
15:44:58 [berrueta]
Antoine: this relates with the usage of SKOS, not only the specification
15:45:45 [aliman]
15:46:04 [berrueta]
aliman: schedule describes the actual presentation
15:46:52 [berrueta]
Antoine: please point at examples where this information cannot be represented in SKOS
15:47:18 [berrueta]
ACTION: aliman to provide examples of cases where presentational information is required
15:47:46 [GuusS]
[i'm still in a review meeting, have to drop off, sorry for missing the telecon]
15:47:53 [berrueta]
TomB: new point in the agenda about POWDER
15:48:06 [berrueta]
aliman: mail from Phil Archer about POWDER
15:48:17 [berrueta]
... POWDER is RDF vocabulary to represent content labels
15:48:35 [berrueta]
... talk about the dependency between SKOS and POWDER
15:48:51 [kjetilk]
15:48:52 [kjetilk]
15:48:52 [kjetilk]
15:49:11 [berrueta]
kjetilk describes POWDER objectives
15:50:14 [berrueta]
kjetilk: UI gives people the option to specify the predicate and the object
15:51:11 [berrueta]
kjetilk: quite different uses
15:51:29 [berrueta]
... i need a single predicate that maps to SKOS
15:52:20 [aliman]
skos:it/skos:as discussion
15:53:18 [berrueta]
aliman: some time ago, during earlier dev. of SKOS
15:53:33 [berrueta]
... linking skos:Concepts to classes in an ontology
15:53:42 [berrueta]
... danbri proposed skos:it and skos:as
15:54:11 [berrueta]
... for instance, link a skos:Concept with a foaf:Person
15:54:53 [berrueta]
... we don't have this in our UCR
15:55:39 [berrueta]
... it is up to kjetilk to do something, we don't have anything on the table
15:56:23 [kjetilk]
15:56:51 [berrueta]
TomB: doesn't look that we can do anything by this friday
15:57:17 [berrueta]
aliman: this is one of several similar UC
15:57:47 [berrueta]
... this is close with the issue of interop with OWL
15:58:30 [berrueta]
Antoine: is this related to the potential issue that i flagged this week?
15:58:37 [berrueta]
... daniel also referred to this problem
15:59:01 [berrueta]
TomB suggests putting this into next week's agenda
15:59:23 [berrueta]
TomB: somebody should summarize this in a mail to the list
15:59:32 [berrueta]
... any volunteeers?
15:59:44 [berrueta]
Antoine: i volunteer
15:59:58 [berrueta]
topic: recipes
16:00:04 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to Recipe issue 1.3 [recorded in]
16:00:06 [berrueta]
16:00:22 [berrueta]
topic: vocabulary management
16:00:45 [berrueta]
Elisa: i want to propose to talk about this next week
16:01:35 [berrueta]
... to discuss about issues with URIs, also in relation with danbri's mail
16:02:00 [berrueta]
TomB: there is some contextual information in the recipes, but vocab. management document should take a broader view
16:02:30 [berrueta]
... not sure about how to put this in the agenda
16:03:05 [berrueta]
... its a rather difficult topic to explain, see the semantic-web mailing list recently
16:03:47 [berrueta]
... it would be difficult to make progress if we use the telecons for brainstorming
16:04:05 [berrueta]
topic: RDFa
16:04:45 [berrueta]
ben: remaining issues should be solved quickly, they are not controversial
16:04:50 [Zakim]
16:04:54 [Zakim]
16:04:57 [Zakim]
16:04:58 [Zakim]
16:04:59 [Zakim]
16:05:01 [Zakim]
16:05:03 [Zakim]
16:05:05 [Zakim]
16:05:08 [TomB]
zakim, list participants
16:05:08 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been TomB, berrueta, Edsu, Vit, Aliman, Antoine_Isaac, kjetilk, Elisa_Kendall, Seanb, Ben_Adida, +1.267.391.aaaa, Clay, JonP
16:05:09 [berrueta]
TomB: adjourned
16:05:11 [Zakim]
16:05:18 [TomB]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:05:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate TomB
16:05:30 [edsu]
edsu has left #swd
16:06:02 [Zakim]
16:06:13 [Zakim]
16:06:19 [Antoine]
Antoine has left #swd
16:06:30 [Zakim]
16:06:31 [Zakim]
SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
16:06:32 [Zakim]
Attendees were TomB, berrueta, Edsu, Vit, Aliman, Antoine_Isaac, kjetilk, Elisa_Kendall, Seanb, Ben_Adida, +1.267.391.aaaa, Clay, JonP
16:58:20 [seanb]
seanb has left #swd
18:50:58 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #swd