See also: IRC log
susie would like to provide some additions
objective: to get the flyer finished during the next few weeks
bengee sent mail to the list about maybe discussing things too much, leading to a delay
susie suggests to have a flyer-only meeting
scribe: then report back to the group
... then aproach the comm team
dunja happy about proposal to move things forward that way
possible problem: forthcoming w3c semweb branding
ivan doesn't think it'll have an effect on the flyer design
basic flyer design should be ale to stay as is, maybe a/the semweb logo will be added
scribe: a color tweak might be needed/helpful
to be in line with (exact) w3c ones
there was a meeting with the comm team last week
progress is made
scribe: there'll be a general semweb branding
consisting of a logo and a color palette
... with the possibility to create tech logos w/o conflicting with the higher
level branding
flyer meeting date will be coordinated via email
no news
scribe: trying to contact/encourage additional people
leo reports
scribe: endpoint is up
... minor bug fixing going on
... no major issues, just didn't start utlizing it really
... suggests to do some tests/use cases for the portal
kingsley preaches to the converted
scribe: wonders about interface structure
... thinks the approach is right, but it's not clear who is goingn to write
the view/app layer
danja suggested to replicate the data and use a (standalone) browser like longwell
which might work, but a more light-weight (off-endpoint) solution would be more interesting/clean
leo to create some test scripts
scribe: for next sweo call (in 2 weeks)
susie mentions people who are working on a portal, suggests giving access and maintaining a list of people working with the sweo data
scribe: access is given already (via endpoint)
kidehen suggests to divide the "deliverables" with task one (access) being done, and a/many portal/s as a different activity
<leobard> all the people shold be listed here:
<leobard> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/InfoGathering/DataSources
scribe: might make sense to "outsource" the
portal creation
... might happen automatically anyway
LeeF thinks data + endpoint is not enough for effective outreach
scribe: human-oriented thingy should be available, no matter if created by sweo or third parties
<Susie> The Semantic Report portal: http://semanticreport.com/
<leobard> Ivan, they are in section "Information on Communities and Outreach Organizations"
ivan thinks wiki might be extneded with a page for people re-using the data (not DataSources)
scribe: not sure about bandwidth to create a
portal from internal sweo energies
... happy to be proven wrong
leo suggests to create a portal creation tutorial instead
<leobard> I also suggest that we, instead of writing a portal, we write the content that would live on such portal
<leobard> for example, we write guides for "beginners guide for the semantic web"
susie asks the group to think about priorities
scribe: what to focus on in the upcoming
weeks/months
... to define some (achievable) next actions
<leobard> rehi
<Susie> Leo can publish URI document as a SWEO note.
<leobard> cya
<Susie> Waiting for feeddback from Richard on the note.
<LeeF> I don't know if we want to open this can of worms, but the SW HCLS IG recently had a huge thread on URIs - do we want to solicit comments from them?
<leobard> my uri paper sums up the TAG findings regarding http-range-14, so its on safe ground. And its a tutorial. I would not consider any ohter sources besides TAG :-))
<leobard> in this URI things, there is a whole supermarket of "can of worms"
<Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to ruminate on education and outreach
<LeeF> I think we should go back to 8-character identifiers for everything - not much room to disagree on schemes there
<leobard> the linked data document is a little different. we should make one tutorial that gives the links to the best documents
<leobard> +1 to kingsley, we can tie the stuff together
<LeeF> tie the stuff together using a SW info portal?
<leobard> LeeF: portal would be cool, but I doubt we can stem that. One tutorial we write together in
<leobard> one html page should be a good start.
<leobard> kingsley, do you mean that http-range-14 is bad for doing evangelism and outreach? (hm)
<leobard> kingsley: perhaps we can add one good sentence to the "cool uris" document saying "HTTP uris are one way to identify resource, other, equally valid appraoches are urn, etc etc"