See also: IRC log
<Tom> Tom notes this is telecon #57 of Semantic Web Deployment
PROPOSED to accept minutes of the Jan 22 telecon:
http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html
ACCEPTED
Guus: Tom and I discussed
schedule
... officially charter ends April.
... WG should be done (with a majority of the work) by the
summer
... RDFa and SKOS at least at Candidate Rec. Should have moved
beyond Last Call
... Majority of work before the summer. It's fair to make that
clear to WG participants
... Need to discuss schedule with intercoordination
group.
... Review of SKOS issues on agenda.
... Discussing mainly RDFa and SKOS as these are Rec
track.
... Also Recipes/Vocab Management. What are the realistic goals
in the
... time span?
ACTION: Chairs to put schedule review on agenda. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action24] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Guus to schedule to discussion on the notation (syntax) used in SKOS examples in Reference and Primer in two weeks time, i.e. on 29 January [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph get SKOS WD published [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action03] [DONE]
See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0177.html
Guus: Ian Jacobs called for exclusions. Usual process on publication of working draft.
ACTION: Alistair to solicit feedback via mailing lists on WD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action22] [CONTINUES]
Alistair: Sent mail to the list. Comments welcome.
ACTION: Alistair to add editorial note linking ISSUE-44 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action01] [DROPPED]
Guus: SKOS Issues. 20 minutes reviewing issue list.
<Ralph> SKOS issues
Ralph: Quite a few raised issues that should maybe be opened.
Guus: Issue 26. Relationship
between labels. Open.
... Bit worrying that we haven't been able to close this
one.
Antoine: Proposal that was
accepted (Label Relation by Alistair)
... but since have received mail commenting on it. Acceptable
for the moment, but way to
... do this is to keep it open as late as possible.
... Can't really propose anything else. Should get new feedback
on
... this soon.
Guus: Leave open and await
comments.
... Issue 27. Annotation on Labels. Similar to 26?
Antoine: Could be, but there are
no examples of simple annotation on labels. Similar
... pattern could be used.
Guus: Keep 26 & 27
linked.
... 31. Open. Alistair?
Alistair: All of the questions in
this issue are answere in the
... current WD, with the notion of certain graphs being not
consistent.
... so current WD answers this. What's the process?
Guus: Point to current WD as resolution (making specific reference to the document and version)
ACTION: Alistair to write a resolution for ISSUE 31 (citing current WD) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action06]
Guus: Issue 32
ConceptSchemeLabellingInteractions
... This has been raised. Should we open it?
ConceptSchemeLabellingInteractions [issue 32]
Alistair: This is about whether or not two concepts in a scheme can have the same
Alistair: preferred label in the
same language. If you're using SKOS for Thesaurus, this
is
... useful, but not necessarily generally applciable.
... Was discussed in previous WD.
Guus: Is this in the Use Cases?
Antoine: yes, if you consider that some Use Cases are thesaurus Use Cases.
Guus: Pragmatic based on use cases or postpone.
Ralph: Doesn't seem crucial for SKOS to restrict this.
Alistair: Can't generally restrict this as some concept schemes allow it.
Guus: Propose that Alistair
considers Closing the issue by not making a commitment
... and addin a note.
Antoine: In the current primer. There is a note about this. [quotes document]
Guus: Suggest Antoine cut and paste text as resolution.
Issue 32 is opened with Antoine owner.
ACTION: Antoine to propose resolution to Issue 32 based on text from the primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action07]
Issue 35: Rules and Conformance
RulesAndConformance [issue 35]
Alistair: Current SKOS Reference
doesn't state any rules explicitly, but
... does talk about things that can be entailed from others
things.
Guus: This issue then isn't really relevant at the moment.
ACTION: Sean to propose postponing Issue 35. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action08]
Issue 37: SKOS Specialisation
Alistair: Place holder in current SKOS Reference Appendix
Antoine: And something in the primer.
<ed> section 4.8 of the Primer also
Guus: Propose to delay this for
now. Don't have to open yet.
... 38 Postponed, 39 Closed.
... 40 (Concept Co-ordination) a bit tricky.
ConceptCoordination [issue 40]
Guus: When do we need to open this? Is there a good time and who will be issue owner?
Antoine: Propose not to do it now.
Alistair: No time like the present to open it.
Alistair: Don't mind making a
proposal.
... SKOS could go to rec without this feature.
ACTION: Alistair to make a proposal for Issue 40 (Concept Coordination) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action09]
Guus: Issue 41 Use lang tags in examples
Antoine: We can close this with the SKOS primer
Guus: This is not a technical
issue. This is an action.
... Can we delete issues?
Ralph: Can close and say it's not a technical issue.
Guus: Need to be careful as we can only finish if all the issues were they're closed or postponed.
Alistair: yes originally and issue raised on old SKOS core guide. No longer applicable.
Guus: Any objections to closing this?
Ralph: Alistair should take an action to respond to original query.
ACTION: Alistair to respond to original query regarding Issue 41 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action10]
Ralph: Will mark as pending
Guus: 44 Closed
... Issue 45 NaryLinksBetweenDescriptorsAndNonDescriptors
Issue 45 NaryLinksBetweenDescriptorsAndNonDescriptors
Alistair: We could say this is
out of scope. Or we could say that it can be done via
extensions to SKOS
... or we could try and do it ourselves. Cheapest is to declare
out of scope/postpone.
Ralph: I'm ok to postpone
Guus: But there are Use Cases that make
use of this
... would not be willing to postpone at ths point in time.
Antoine: could be solvable once Issue 40 is done. Can postpone if we decide to do nothing for 40.
[move onto next action]
Guus: What was this action?
Alistiar: at F2F went with decision for n-ary relations. Guus was to consider whether we needed alternatics
Guus: Propose we drop it and return on ISSUE 26.
ACTION: Guus to write up the issue [of Label Resource] and add to the issue list. [recorded in [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action11] [DROPPED]
ACTION: Alistair and Guus to prepare material for next week on Concept Schemes vs OWL Ontologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action10] [WITHDRAWN]
Alistair: Do we have an issue that we're trying to resolve here?
Guus: Related to issue
resolutions w.r.t concept scheme containment that we had
... discussed. In particular whether you can consider an OWL
ontology that only containts instnaces as an ontology.
Alistair: Issue 36 is closed, so
do we still need to have a discussion and do we still
need
... additional text?
Guus: yes, I think so.
Alistair: This action is now
transforming.
... writing text for which document?
Antoine: influences both.
Ralph: If it's informative, put it in the primer.
Alistair: Not clear what more needs to be said for the reference.
Guus: Is this currently covered on the primer?
Antoine: Something, but it needs checked.
<ed> Primer, Section 3.3
ACTION: Alistair and Guus to check the text in the primer on relationship between Concept Schemes and OWL Ontologies. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action13]
action 12 is actually dropped
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/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action09] [CONTINUES]
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] [CONTINUES]
Alistair: Current SKOS Ref says nothing about isDefinedBy. If it should be different, Ralph please raise issue.
Guus; SKOS Primer comments from RIF
Antoine: Comments from Quentin
and Margherita.
... Answered apart from some possible typos.
Guus: Postpone discussed to next week. Anything to track here?
Antoine: Made some answers, positive feedback from Quentin. Waiting from Margherita.
<aliman> I'm confused, comments at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0150.html are from Margherita, what does "RIF" stand for?
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/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action06] [CONTINUES]
Guus: Drafting text right now.
Guus; New editors draft is out. Ed and Diego have actions to review it.
<ed> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20080125/
scribe: When would it be wise to
put this on the agenda?
... Is Feb 12th feasible?
Ed: Yes.
Diego: Almost finished.
Guus: Co-ordination with XHTML
group.
... Ralph, please bring this up at the next telecon.
Ralph: is this proposed as Last Call?
Guus: yes, I'm treating this as LC.
Ralph: Encourage all WG
participants to look at the document. We're now saying "We
think
... we're done".
Guus: No opening issues after this.
<Zakim> Tom, you wanted to suggest we give Ralph an action, including the words "Last Call" - for the record
Tom: Suggest we action Ralph (including words Last Call).
<ed> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0179.html
Ed: RDFa folks are suggesting this as Last Call
ACTION: Ben to distribute RDFa syntax draft to reviewers by Monday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action10] [DONE]
ACTION: Ed to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action13][CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph confirm with the RDFa Task Force that the current RDFa Syntax document is the Last Call candidate and note that SWD WG plans to put that resolution on its 12-Feb agenda [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action19]
ACTION: Diego to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action12] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> 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]
<ed> ooops, that email was from Guus not Ben :)
ACTION: Ben to prepare the email to request the decision for publishing on Feb 5th [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-minutes.html#action18] [DROPPED]
ACTION: Ben to prepare the email to request the decision for publishing on Feb 12th [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action24]
Guus: Approved last week publication of document
Ralph: It's in the webmaster queue.
ACTION: Diego to solicit feedback via mailing lists on WD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action22] [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/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] [CONTINUES]
Guus: Need to consider realistic
schedule for bringing this to WG Note.
... when is the point when this is what we'll say about the
subject.
Ralph: Will have to se how many
comments we get. Content negotation handling
... unless we get significant comments, I suspect we're
done.
Guus: How far can we push this in lifetime of group?
Elisa: New editor's draft hopefully by close of play tomorrow.
Guus: Also needs to be part of
our scheduling discussion.
... AOB?
adjourned