IRC log of swd on 2008-02-05
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:58:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #swd
- 15:58:29 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc
- 15:58:36 [Ralph]
- Meeting: SWD WG
- 15:58:40 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #swd
- 15:58:46 [Ralph]
- zakim, this will be swd
- 15:58:46 [Zakim]
- ok, Ralph, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started
- 15:58:52 [Ralph]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:58:52 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see ??P21, Tom_Baker
- 15:59:04 [Clay]
- Clay has joined #swd
- 16:00:01 [edsu]
- edsu has joined #swd
- 16:00:11 [seanb]
- seanb has joined #swd
- 16:00:24 [Zakim]
- +??P11
- 16:00:32 [dlrubin]
- rrsagent, make record public
- 16:00:40 [dlrubin]
- Chair: Guus
- 16:00:50 [dlrubin]
- scribenick: dlrubin
- 16:00:52 [aliman]
- zakim, ??P11 is aliman
- 16:01:05 [Zakim]
- +aliman; got it
- 16:01:11 [guus]
- guus has joined #swd
- 16:01:13 [Zakim]
- +Antoine_Isaac
- 16:01:21 [Zakim]
- +[LC]
- 16:01:24 [Clay]
- zakim, LC is Clay
- 16:01:29 [Zakim]
- +[LC.a]
- 16:01:37 [Zakim]
- +??P44
- 16:01:44 [edsu]
- zakim, LC.a is edsu
- 16:01:47 [Zakim]
- +Rodrigo
- 16:01:51 [Zakim]
- +Clay; got it
- 16:01:52 [berrueta]
- zakim, Rodrigo is me
- 16:02:11 [seanb]
- zakim, ??P44 is seanb
- 16:02:13 [guus]
- [i'm looking for a scibe volunteer]
- 16:02:18 [Zakim]
- +edsu; got it
- 16:02:24 [Zakim]
- +berrueta; got it
- 16:02:28 [dlrubin]
- I am scribing for the first 50 min today
- 16:02:40 [Zakim]
- +seanb; got it
- 16:02:43 [guus]
- thanks, Daniel
- 16:03:00 [Zakim]
- +Ralph
- 16:03:10 [guus]
- [my operator doesn't answer, hope to be there soon]
- 16:03:22 [Ralph]
- zakim, ??p21 is DLRubin
- 16:03:34 [Zakim]
- +DLRubin; got it
- 16:03:44 [Zakim]
- +??P57
- 16:03:57 [Ralph]
- zakim, ??p57 is Margherita
- 16:04:09 [Zakim]
- +??P58
- 16:04:11 [Zakim]
- +Margherita; got it
- 16:04:19 [Ralph]
- zakim, ??p58 is Guus
- 16:04:45 [Zakim]
- +Guus; got it
- 16:05:10 [dlrubin]
- topic: Admin
- 16:05:11 [Ralph]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0006.html
- 16:05:34 [Ralph]
- Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html
- 16:05:44 [Ralph]
- scribenick: dlrubin
- 16:05:46 [guus]
- zakim, who is here?
- 16:06:21 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see DLRubin, Tom_Baker (muted), aliman, Antoine_Isaac, Clay, edsu, seanb, berrueta, Ralph, Margherita (muted), Guus
- 16:06:53 [guus]
- regrets: Vit, Ben, Michael
- 16:06:54 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see guus, seanb, edsu, Clay, Zakim, RRSAgent, dlrubin, aliman, Antoine, Marghe, berrueta, Ralph
- 16:07:24 [dlrubin]
- guus: welcome
- 16:07:30 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED to accept minutes of the Jan 29 telecon:
- 16:07:30 [dlrubin]
- http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html
- 16:07:42 [dlrubin]
- ...accepted
- 16:07:47 [dlrubin]
- ...Next telecon: 12 February 2008 1600 UTC
- 16:08:04 [dlrubin]
- Upcoming telecons and scribes -
- 16:08:04 [dlrubin]
- http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/ScribeDuty
- 16:08:16 [dlrubin]
- guus: ACTION: Chairs to put schedule review on agenda. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action24]
- 16:08:38 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Chairs to put schedule review on agenda. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action24]
- 16:08:46 [dlrubin]
- --continued
- 16:09:04 [dlrubin]
- TOPIC: SKOS
- 16:09:11 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
- 16:09:31 [dlrubin]
- guus: which triple notation we will use in our docs
- 16:09:46 [dlrubin]
- ...see if we can reach concensus on this.
- 16:10:08 [dlrubin]
- Alistair: I prefer using Turtle in the ref
- 16:10:14 [dlrubin]
- ...it is most readable
- 16:10:33 [dlrubin]
- ...alternative would be N triples.
- 16:10:40 [dlrubin]
- ...this follows RDF semantics
- 16:10:54 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-turtle-20080114/ "Turtle - Terse RDF Triple Language"
- 16:10:55 [dlrubin]
- ...In primer, would be nice to see alternative presentations
- 16:11:08 [dlrubin]
- guus: I have preference for same notation in both docs
- 16:11:12 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-n3-20080114/ "Notation3 (N3): A readable RDF syntax"
- 16:11:30 [dlrubin]
- seanb: I'm agnostic. I prefer more human-readable syntax, like Turtle
- 16:11:36 [dlrubin]
- guus: Ntriples too?
- 16:11:39 [dlrubin]
- seanb: yes.
- 16:12:03 [dlrubin]
- Antoine: I don't mind either choice
- 16:12:22 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-turtle-20080114/#sec-diff-ntriples "Turtle Compared To N-Triples"
- 16:12:38 [dlrubin]
- guus: We recently had new document on Turtle
- 16:13:28 [dlrubin]
- guus: my preference is Turtle. We used it in best practices too
- 16:13:41 [dlrubin]
- ...I propose the referene and primer use Turtle notation
- 16:14:04 [dlrubin]
- Ralph: we don't need syntax extensions
- 16:14:14 [dlrubin]
- ...Turtle is a subset of N3
- 16:15:38 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:15:38 [dlrubin]
- DONE
- 16:15:46 [dlrubin]
- --done
- 16:16:12 [dlrubin]
- --PROPOSED
- 16:16:42 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED: We will use Turtle syntax as defined
- 16:16:51 [Ralph]
- http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-turtle-20080114/
- 16:17:12 [Ralph]
- s/as defined/as defined in http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-turtle-20080114//
- 16:17:29 [dlrubin]
- guus: Proposal carried
- 16:17:51 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED: We will use Turtle syntax as defined
- 16:17:51 [dlrubin]
- [08:16] <@Ralph> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-turtle-20080114/
- 16:17:51 [dlrubin]
- [08:17] <@Ralph> s/as defined/as defined in http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/20 08/SUBM-turtle-20080114//
- 16:17:54 [dlrubin]
- --RESOLVED
- 16:18:03 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
- 16:18:19 [dlrubin]
- -- SKOS Reference (Alistair, Sean)
- 16:18:19 [dlrubin]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-skos-reference-20080125/
- 16:18:38 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Alistair to solicit feedback via mailing lists on WD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action22]
- 16:18:38 [dlrubin]
- DONE: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0206.html
- 16:18:43 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:18:48 [Ralph]
- RESOLVED: SKOS documents will use Turtle syntax as defined in http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/20 08/SUBM-turtle-20080114/
- 16:18:51 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
- 16:19:15 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Alistair to make a proposal for Issue 40 (Concept Coordination) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action09]
- 16:19:18 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUED
- 16:19:26 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Alistair to respond to original query regarding Issue 41 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action10]
- 16:20:03 [dlrubin]
- rrsagent, please draft minutes
- 16:20:03 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html dlrubin
- 16:20:31 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:21:00 [Ralph]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0192.html issue 41 [Alistair 29-Jan]
- 16:21:11 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Antoine to propose resolution to Issue 32 based on text from
- 16:21:11 [dlrubin]
- the primer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action07]
- 16:21:13 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:21:22 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED resolution:
- 16:21:22 [dlrubin]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0193.html
- 16:21:59 [dlrubin]
- Antoine: Recommends SKOS user to use prefLabel as unambigous means to identify concepts
- 16:22:11 [dlrubin]
- guus: I propose to accept the resolution
- 16:22:48 [dlrubin]
- Alistair: We have usage conventions. This is a use convention in which there are cases we wouldn't follow them
- 16:22:59 [dlrubin]
- ...Most classification systems have non-unique labels
- 16:23:21 [dlrubin]
- ...sounds like we expect people to follow convention--people might not follow the usage convention
- 16:23:30 [dlrubin]
- ...There are exceptions to the rules
- 16:24:02 [dlrubin]
- Marghe: This is important to consider the language
- 16:24:07 [Ralph]
- q+ to note MUST vs SHOULD
- 16:24:17 [dlrubin]
- ...We may have two prefLabel reference for same language
- 16:24:50 [dlrubin]
- guus: I think the resolution is ok
- 16:25:05 [dlrubin]
- Margherita: Can we identify a concept?
- 16:25:16 [dlrubin]
- ...through a URI?
- 16:25:23 [dlrubin]
- guus: yes we can
- 16:25:41 [dlrubin]
- guus: I'm not sure what to do with Alistair's remark
- 16:26:41 [dlrubin]
- Ralph: I'm not persuaded that Antoine's language is inappropriate or confusing
- 16:27:04 [dlrubin]
- Alistair: I would like another paragraph saying "however, there are cases where we expect people won't follow this convention"
- 16:27:36 [dlrubin]
- ...SKOS data model only captures some things.
- 16:28:09 [dlrubin]
- ...We expect people to follow use conventions not captured in skos data model
- 16:28:27 [dlrubin]
- ...there are exceptions where people will diverge from practice
- 16:28:46 [dlrubin]
- ...we expect some usage conventions people will follow always and some they'll want to diverge
- 16:28:58 [Ralph]
- Ralph: many other W3C Recommendations use the IETF conventions of MUST and SHOULD. We could use this in the SKOS specifcation, which would make the intend clear, but as we're not currently doing that in the document it could be a lot of work to revise the document.
- 16:29:00 [dlrubin]
- ...saying SKOS data model doesn't enforce doesn't bring this out
- 16:29:51 [dlrubin]
- Alistair: We can say this is good practice--I don't want people to think that if they break this, they aren't following skos
- 16:30:21 [dlrubin]
- ...we should have a paragraph illustrating when people will diverge from the convention--exceptions to the rule
- 16:30:36 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2119.html RFC 2119 "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"
- 16:30:44 [dlrubin]
- guus: Suggestion to editors of primer to consider this. But I think resolution is ok
- 16:31:17 [dlrubin]
- Alistair: There are usage conventions that we could bring out
- 16:31:26 [dlrubin]
- ...we could consider using keywords in relation to those
- 16:31:37 [dlrubin]
- Ralph: would be lots of work to have doc use keywords
- 16:32:12 [dlrubin]
- guus: I'd like to propose to accept the resolution
- 16:32:32 [dlrubin]
- Antoine: ok
- 16:32:32 [Ralph]
- Ralph: others in W3C will tell us we SHOULD use the RFC 2119 keywords :)
- 16:32:41 [dlrubin]
- guus: proposing to resolve issue 32
- 16:33:25 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED resolution:
- 16:33:25 [dlrubin]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0193.html
- 16:33:28 [dlrubin]
- --RESOLVED
- 16:33:39 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED resolution:
- 16:33:39 [dlrubin]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0193.html
- 16:33:48 [dlrubin]
- PROPOSED resolution:
- 16:33:48 [dlrubin]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0193.html
- 16:33:58 [dlrubin]
- RESOLVED:
- 16:34:13 [dlrubin]
- PRESOLVED: ISSUE-32 resolved per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public /public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0193.html
- 16:34:26 [dlrubin]
- RESOLVED: ISSUE-32 resolved per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/ Public /public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0193.html
- 16:34:30 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
- 16:34:44 [aliman]
- /me :)
- 16:34:50 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:35:29 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:36:35 [seanb]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0013.html
- 16:36:43 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Sean to propose postponing the issue. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action08]
- 16:37:07 [Guus]
- Guus has joined #swd
- 16:37:19 [dlrubin]
- Sean: The skos core guide includes reference to rules, which is not clear what these rules are
- 16:37:29 [dlrubin]
- ...current working draft doens't include reference to rules
- 16:37:37 [dlrubin]
- ...I propose we postpone the issue
- 16:38:10 [dlrubin]
- Ralph: seconded
- 16:38:15 [dlrubin]
- guus: resolved
- 16:38:32 [dlrubin]
- RESOLVED: Sean to propose postponing the issue. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action08]
- 16:38:55 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/35 issue-35
- 16:39:04 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:39:12 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUES
- 16:39:26 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:39:35 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUES
- 16:39:44 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:39:50 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUES
- 16:40:01 [dlrubin]
- Topic: SKOS Primer
- 16:40:10 [dlrubin]
- RIF comments:
- 16:40:10 [dlrubin]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0150.html
- 16:40:29 [dlrubin]
- Antoine: over past week, we tried to address comments from people
- 16:40:47 [dlrubin]
- ...regarding relations between OWL classes and skos concepts
- 16:40:54 [dlrubin]
- ...new version tries to address this
- 16:41:29 [dlrubin]
- ...There are a few to-dos for the document
- 16:41:43 [dlrubin]
- ...Two important comments, we want advice on...
- 16:41:50 [dlrubin]
- ...first is getting examples
- 16:42:14 [dlrubin]
- ...do we do this now?
- 16:42:30 [dlrubin]
- guus: We should have range of examples
- 16:42:48 [aliman]
- +1 on range of examples
- 16:42:51 [dlrubin]
- ...We should add a complete case study
- 16:43:06 [dlrubin]
- ...No need for one consistent example through the primer
- 16:43:11 [dlrubin]
- ...opinions?
- 16:43:28 [dlrubin]
- ...Don't worry about it in this version.
- 16:43:36 [dlrubin]
- ...In terms of graphs--done by hand?
- 16:43:42 [dlrubin]
- Alistair: yes
- 16:43:56 [dlrubin]
- Antoine: this takes lots of time
- 16:44:03 [dlrubin]
- ...better if we do this in later version
- 16:44:29 [dlrubin]
- guus: you might try a tool to generate the graph
- 16:45:13 [dlrubin]
- Margherita: There is no need for the graph
- 16:45:44 [dlrubin]
- guus: with this input, don't let this block publication of the working draft
- 16:46:10 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:46:12 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:46:32 [dlrubin]
- Topic: SKOS implementations
- 16:46:58 [dlrubin]
- Topic: RDFa
- 16:47:08 [dlrubin]
- RDFa Syntax draft ready for review:
- 16:47:08 [dlrubin]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0176.html
- 16:47:16 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Ed to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action13]
- 16:47:18 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:47:21 [Ralph]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0014.html "review of current draft of 'RDFa syntax" [Ed 5-Feb]
- 16:47:42 [dlrubin]
- ACTION: Diego to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action12]
- 16:47:44 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:48:14 [Ralph]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0197.html "review of current draft of 'RDFa syntax'" [Diego 29-Jan]
- 16:48:15 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:48:22 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUES
- 16:48:32 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:48:48 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUES
- 16:48:58 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:49:36 [dlrubin]
- --CONTINUES
- 16:49:39 [dlrubin]
- 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]
- 16:50:22 [dlrubin]
- --DONE
- 16:50:37 [dlrubin]
- dlrubin has left #swd
- 16:50:38 [Zakim]
- -DLRubin
- 16:50:47 [Ralph]
- scribenick: ralph
- 16:51:02 [berrueta]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0001.html
- 16:51:13 [Ralph]
- Ralph: I also confirmed during the RDFa call that the XHTML2 WG understands that we intend to put the question on RDFa Last Call on 12 Feb
- 16:51:28 [Ralph]
- ACTION: Diego to solicit feedback via mailing lists on
- 16:51:28 [Ralph]
- WD [recorded in
- 16:51:28 [Ralph]
- http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action22]
- 16:51:37 [Ralph]
- -- done
- 16:51:57 [Ralph]
- ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14]
- 16:51:58 [Ralph]
- -- continues
- 16:52:07 [Ralph]
- 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]
- 16:52:10 [Ralph]
- -- continues
- 16:52:33 [Ralph]
- Topic: Vocabulary Management
- 16:52:48 [Ralph]
- 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]
- 16:52:50 [Ralph]
- -- continues
- 16:53:40 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/Vocab/principles-20080204 4-Feb Editor's Draft
- 16:54:07 [Ralph]
- Ralph: Elisa sent me a new editor's draft
- 16:54:14 [Ralph]
- ... did anyone see mail from her? (I did not)
- 16:54:20 [Ralph]
- ... ah, but she did update the wiki
- 16:54:26 [Ralph]
- Guus: let's ask Elisa to send mail
- 16:54:52 [Ralph]
- ... I will ask her to send mail
- 16:55:07 [Ralph]
- Topic: SKOS Issues list
- 16:55:29 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues SWD issues tracker
- 16:56:18 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/46 issue 46; IndexingAndNonIndexingConcepts
- 16:56:50 [Ralph]
- Antoine: not much progress on this one but it is an identified requirement
- 16:57:13 [Ralph]
- ... the identification of things in conceptual hierarchies that may look like concepts but are not, as they can't be used alone
- 16:57:22 [Ralph]
- ... e.g. LCSH subdivisions
- 16:57:36 [Ralph]
- ... in LCSH you can augment a concept with another that adds a shade of meaning
- 16:57:54 [Ralph]
- ... sometimes you can use these alone but sometimes it has been specifically related for this qualification purpose
- 16:57:59 [Ralph]
- Guus: needs more discussion then
- 16:58:25 [Ralph]
- ... accept this as an open issue
- 16:59:01 [Ralph]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/47 issue 47; MappingProvenanceInformation
- 16:59:26 [Ralph]
- Antoine: Jonathan Rees and Alan Ruttenburg wanted this for their applications
- 16:59:34 [Ralph]
- ... to distinguish mappings according to their sources
- 16:59:54 [Ralph]
- ... we might go for a solution that resembles the concept name containment solution
- 17:00:04 [Ralph]
- ... needs more work
- 17:00:12 [Ralph]
- Guus: could indicate a possible practice
- 17:00:24 [Ralph]
- ... I'm willing to own this issue
- 17:00:47 [Ralph]
- Antoine: should be able to adapt something from concept scheme containment paragraph
- 17:01:50 [Ralph]
- s/name containment/scheme containment/
- 17:02:08 [Ralph]
- scribe: Daniel, Ralph
- 17:02:14 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
- 17:02:48 [Zakim]
- -Tom_Baker
- 17:02:48 [Ralph]
- [adjourn]
- 17:02:50 [Zakim]
- -edsu
- 17:02:54 [seanb]
- seanb has left #swd
- 17:03:01 [Zakim]
- -seanb
- 17:03:06 [Zakim]
- -Margherita
- 17:03:07 [Zakim]
- -Guus
- 17:03:08 [Zakim]
- -berrueta
- 17:04:36 [Zakim]
- -Clay
- 17:04:39 [Zakim]
- -aliman
- 17:04:40 [Zakim]
- -Antoine_Isaac
- 17:04:41 [Zakim]
- -Ralph
- 17:04:47 [Zakim]
- SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
- 17:04:49 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Tom_Baker, aliman, Antoine_Isaac, Clay, edsu, berrueta, seanb, Ralph, DLRubin, Margherita, Guus
- 17:04:50 [Antoine]
- Antoine has left #swd
- 17:04:52 [edsu]
- edsu has left #swd
- 17:04:54 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-minutes.html Ralph
- 17:06:46 [Ralph]
- zakim, bye
- 17:06:46 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #swd
- 17:06:48 [Ralph]
- rrsagent, bye
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- I see 22 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-actions.rdf :
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Chairs to put schedule review on agenda. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action24] [1]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-08-38
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [2]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-15-38
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Alistair to solicit feedback via mailing lists on WD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action22] [3]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-18-38
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Alistair to make a proposal for Issue 40 (Concept Coordination) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action09] [4]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-19-15
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Alistair to respond to original query regarding Issue 41 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action10] [5]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-19-26
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Antoine to propose resolution to Issue 32 based on text from [6]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-21-11
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [7]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-34-50
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Sean to propose postponing the issue. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/29-swd-minutes.html#action08] [8]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-36-43
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [9]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-39-04
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [10]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-39-26
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [11]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-39-44
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [12]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-46-10
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Ed to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action13] [13]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-47-16
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Diego to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action12] [14]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-47-42
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [15]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-48-15
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [16]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-48-32
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [17]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-48-58
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [18]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-49-39
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Diego to solicit feedback via mailing lists on [19]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-51-28
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [20]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-51-57
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [21]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-52-07
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- 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] [22]
- 17:06:48 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/05-swd-irc#T16-52-48