See also: IRC log
Proposed to accept minutes: http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html
Next telecon: 8th January 2008
Alistair: Hoping to have version of SKOS Reference Editor's Draft
for review by end of the week
... first draft of sections on Conceptual Resoruces, Concept Schemes
... Lexical Lables, Documentation properties, semantic relationsips
... still to do a couple of sections.
... ideally first draft by end of the week. Need to hook up with Sean over
... content and rules of thumb.
ACTION: Quentin to review Editor's draft of SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-swd-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Vit to review Editor's draft of SKOS Reference [recorded in ]http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-swd-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action02]
ACTION: Alistair and Guus write draft section in primer on relationship between SKOS concepts and OWL classes for OWL DL users [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/06-swd-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]
Alistair: Antoine has volunteered
to write something for the primer. Alistair has
... said yes please, go ahead and we can decide where it goes later.
Ed: Haven't had a lot of time to
dedicate to it. Antoine has been making
... progress. Posting links on wiki as the document unfolds.
Tom: Fine to use the wiki for
... Projected goal for draft?
Ed: Goal was to have a fair
amount for today. Realistically required stable Reference
... Antoine and Ed will hopefully knock out simple stuff this week.
Alistair: Reference as it is (in
w3 space) is not an editors draft yet, so could
... potentially change. Please look as early as possible at the content.
... Shout asap if anything doesn't make sense or looks wrong or needs addresssing.
Ed: Thinking about updating core
guide to reflect latest stuff rather than recreating new
... just change what needs to be changed
Tom: Draft is in w3 space?
Alistair: Drafting reference as HTML document within SWD CVS space.
<aliman> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/master.html -> reference master
Alistair: this is file that's
being edited live. Will create copy with datestamped URI
... once the draft is ready. Treat this URI as volatile.
Tom: Can we update deliverables page with links?
Alistair: Not sure about that -- this is pre editors draft stage.
Ralph: What are your concerns?
Alistair: None specific, but general unease
Ralph: If the status is accurate, then it's fine.
Alistair: Ok, says it has no status
Ed: Got the feeling that Antoine would like to do the same with Primer
Tom: Suggest that we keep editing
the wiki page called deliverables. Add link to the
... latest one. Then WG participants can pick up the latest versions.
<Ralph> SWD Deliverables Wiki
ACTION: Antoine to send a msg proposing a resolution for next week telecon on ISSUE-39 considering Alistair's 3 subtopics [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action07] [DONE]
Tom: To decide on this call.
Ralph: Link in minutes refers to specific version (5). Is this right?
... Any comments?
Alistair: Bit behind. Would be
happy accepting the resolution.
... will only get to grips when writing Reference.
Tom: Happy to move forward if we
feel this reflects our understanding of the problem.
... accept this as a resolution to ISSUE-39 and come back if necessary.
Alistair: whether or not we take
this as a resolution I will take the content as is and try and
... it into the Reference. If we formally resolve, would be happy to revisit.
Tom: Propose that we resolve not
to formally accept this as a solution, but
... resolve that Alistair will write this up in SKOS Reference and we will revisit this after that.
Alistair: Would it be helpful to
us to accept the resolution. Issue as it stands is broad "we
want conceptual mapping links".
... Later issues will be more specific. May help to resolve the broader issue.
Tom: Like this. Pushed grouping
into context and takes a stand on related/overlapping.
... Stake in the ground.
... Would be happy to accept a resolution closing this. But want more
... support for this from the WG!
Ed: I like the sound of closing the issue.
Ralph: No strong opinion either
way. Unclear on sub issues.
... Is the expectation that we open a new issue on grouping?
Tom: Good question. To what extent do issues #40 and #45 discuss the grouping constructs
Alistair: If we have a mechanism
for "co-ordinating" concepts, that would satisfy some
... There is some overlap between #40 and grouping constructs. Could use a co-ordination instead of AND.
... Not sure about #45 . Not sure how to model it. Not entirely at the conceptual level.
... It's related, but not sure how overlapping it is. May need to raise another issue. Bit vague....
Ralph: Happy with closing #39 if it's internal and we'll re-raise grouping if appropriate.
Alistair: Original SKOS mapping
vocab had AND/OR/NOT. Starting point for recent discussions.
... some practice. There is precedent for doing AND/OR like combinations when mapping.
Tom: In the old mapping vocab.
Issue was is mapping sufficient. Could it be simplified.
... do we have a requirement for this?
Marghe: Sent an email to the list
to show how grouping relationship has been used.
... realised they used them more that inexact match. But if we use the grouping, then the mapping is only one way
... which limits the mapping to be one way. Bidirectional mapping much more useful.
... Discarding them gives less precision, but provides much more useful mappings.
Tom: Propose that we resolve to
accept this but take action to clarify whether the grouping
... issues are being addressed adequately. Would make sense to close this and open more specific.
Alistair: Difficult piece of
work. What do you mean when you create mappings?
... How do you process those mappings when doing IR across different indexes? Could translate query
... or translate metadata. Depends on your operational theory of what the query means.
Alistair: Directionality becomes important
<Ralph> The message I believe Margherita was citing: RE: SKOS ISSUE-39: clarification? [Margherita, 11-Dec]
Tom: Should close #39 and do some
... decide whether it makes sense for these constructs to be in scope.
... Could distract us and make work more compicated.
... Can someone take an action and decide whether it's in scope.
... Alistair, Tom, Ed in favour
<Ralph> Antoine's proposal
RESOLUTION: Accept Antoine's proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Dec/0083.html as a resolution to ISSUE-39.
<aliman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Dec/0025.html -> alistair's mail on grouping constructs
Alistair: Wrote mail about
... started out in SKOS mapping with AND, OR and NOT. Only way to give an operational meaning is
... to treat them as query expressions. Then not mapping between concepts but query expressions.
... So first need a notion of a query. Query is out of scope for SKOS. So position I took was to
... see AND, OR and NOT as being out of scope.
... happy to take an action to state problem at higher level. Would also like Margherita to continue
... her work in this area.
Tom: Position makes sense.
Question is whether the primer needs to address the issue.
... with these constructs. If they're not in the CR, do we need a comment or footnote in the Primer? Good to
... have a position on what to do about the issue.
... Drop without comment, or say something?
Ralph: Alistair's mail addresses these issues well.
Tom: But do we need to address this in documents.
Ralph: Would be appropriate to go through all the differences between legacy and LC docs.
Tom: Good to capture the analysis that Alistair's done.
Ralph: What is the extent of
things that will be different?
... advantage of mail archive is that emails can be cited.
... Recast question: how do we remember this email message?
ACTION: Ralph to add pointer to Alistair's mail on grouping constructs as a note to resolution of ISSUE-39. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action05]
ACTION: Alistair to propose an approach to clarify which aspects of the extension module should be in scope for the candidate recommendation package. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action06] [CONTINUES]
Tom: Running out of time. Propose we declare Antoine's action as done, and put ISSUE-36 on the call for Jan 8th.
ACTION: Antoine to send a mail to the list so as to have a discussion on ISSUE-36 and isDefinedBy for next week's telecon [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action09] [DONE]
RESOLUTION: ISSUE-36 on the call for Jan 8th
ACTION: Alistair and Guus to prepare material for next week on Concept Schemes vs OWL Ontologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph to reconstruct proposal for semantics of isDefinedBy [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action02] [DROPPED]
ACTION: Ralph to check whether the common interpretation of rdfs:isDefinedBy fits the reasoning that was made in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Oct/0141.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action10]
ACTION: Guus to write up the issue [of Label Resource] and add to the issue list. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action01] [CONTINUES]
Ed: Haven't seen an updated version
Ralph: No, there's not.
... can't remember the date promised
Ed: Lots of discussion about test cases
Tom: Aim at having reviews of syntax document posted to list by Jan 4th?
Ralph: But no editors draft to review.
Tom: Ideal schedule was to decide
on LC on Jan 8th. If Diego and Ed are to review, post reviews
by Jan 4th
... then we take decision on Tuesday
ACTION: Diego to review RDFa syntax document by early January [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action12]
ACTION: Ed to review RDFa syntax document by early January [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action13]
ACTION: Ben and Michael to address comments by Tom [regarding maintenance of wiki document http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/RDFa] recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ben to update RDFa schedule in wiki http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/RDFa#RDFa_schedule [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]
Tom: No change to approve publication
Ed: Good as no time to review.
ACTION: Ralph and Ed to review recipes document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action18] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Dan to ask apache about conditional redirects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action07] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph to come up with a URI for wiki page [for Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action04] [DONE]
Jon: Editors should include language in Ralph's proposal
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Vit and Elisa to include in the document all the target sections plus an allocation of sections to people and potentially a standard structure for sections [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action07] [CONTINUES]