14:56:59 RRSAgent has joined #swd 14:56:59 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc 14:57:03 Zakim has joined #swd 14:57:07 zakim, this will be swd 14:57:07 ok, Ralph; I see SW_SWD()11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes 14:57:44 marghe has joined #swd 14:58:15 SW_SWD()11:00AM has now started 14:58:22 +Ralph 14:58:30 Clay has joined #swd 14:59:29 Guus has joined #swd 14:59:32 +Margherita_Sini 14:59:32 +[LC] 15:00:18 +Tom 15:00:19 Antoine has joined #swd 15:00:33 +Antoine_Isaac 15:00:39 zakim, LC is Clay 15:00:44 +Clay; got it 15:00:45 edsu has joined #swd 15:01:17 +Guus 15:01:24 berrueta has joined #swd 15:01:36 rrsagent, please make record public 15:01:52 JonP has joined #swd 15:02:03 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Apr/0036.html 15:02:09 zakim, who is here? 15:02:09 On the phone I see Ralph, Tom, Margherita_Sini, Clay, Antoine_Isaac, Guus 15:02:09 On IRC I see JonP, berrueta, edsu, Antoine, Guus, Clay, marghe, Zakim, RRSAgent, aliman, seanb, Ralph 15:02:19 -> http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-swd-minutes.html previous 2008-04-01 15:02:26 +[LC] 15:02:38 +??P5 15:02:42 Zakim, LC is edsu 15:02:44 +edsu; got it 15:03:10 +Jon_Phipps 15:03:26 Regrets: Quentin, Ben, Vit, Simone 15:03:32 zaikai Jon_Phipps is me 15:03:36 +Alistair 15:03:54 zakim, Jon_Phipps is me 15:03:54 +JonP; got it 15:04:38 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Antoine_Isaac 15:04:45 +??P36 15:04:46 Scribe: Ralph 15:04:53 zakim, ??p36 is Sean 15:04:53 +Sean; got it 15:05:11 Topic: Admin 15:05:22 next telecon: 15 April 2008 1500 UTC 15:05:45 RESOLVED: http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-swd-minutes.html accepted as minutes of 1 April telecon 15:06:00 ACTION: Chairs to draft charter extension proposal for SKOS until July 1st [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-swd-minutes.html#action01] 15:06:03 -- continues 15:06:21 Guus: Tom and I agreed to do this after today (European proposal deadline today) 15:06:37 PROPOSED: to have a May 6-7 SKOS face-to-face in Washington 15:07:03 -> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/39408/FTF-May-2008-poll/results Face-to-face meeting poll results 15:07:11 Clay: we have a conference room for both days at LoC 15:07:28 ... the only issue has been determining if we can get network access for everyone 15:07:46 ... typically it's tough to get internet connectivity for visitors 15:07:55 ... I'm hoping to be able to get 15 'blessed' connections 15:08:09 Guus: connectivity is more essential for us, being a Web group 15:08:28 Clay: I think it's mostly a matter of preparing; there's pretty high visibility for this 15:09:06 Ralph: do you mean to devote the entire agenda to SKOS? 15:09:13 Guus: yes, that's what I was thinking 15:09:19 ... we could devote some time to the other tasks 15:09:35 ... my main goal was to get major decisions taken to have a clear road to a Last Call draft for SKOS 15:10:08 ... however, if Jon and Diego want an hour for recipes I'd be happy to schedule this 15:10:26 Jon: I'm inclined to think we don't need to put recipes on the f2f agenda 15:10:33 ... we're pretty close to a final draft 15:10:47 what about vocab management? 15:10:58 Ralph: perhaps an hour on Vocab Mgmnt would be useful? 15:11:06 Guus: we were hoping to finish the other tasks by 5 May 15:11:22 ... but we could schedule a total of 2 hours for other topics than SKOS 15:12:01 RESOLVED: Face-to-Face in Washington on 6 & 7 May 15:12:25 Sean: will there be dial-in facilities? 15:12:32 Clay: good question 15:12:53 Ralph++ 15:12:59 ... we can find a speakerphone 15:13:19 Ralph: no problem using W3C's bridge 15:13:35 Guus: thanks to Library of Congress for hosting 15:13:39 +nacho 15:13:45 ACTION: Guus and Tom draft an agenda for the May f2f 15:13:49 zakim, nacho is me 15:13:49 +berrueta; got it 15:13:59 Guus: can we start at 9am on Tuesday? 15:14:04 Ralph: that's late for me :) 15:14:22 ... I second starting no earlier than 8 and no later than 9 :) 15:14:40 Guus: expect to start at 0900 on Tuesday and finish by 1600 on Wednesday 15:14:57 Topic: SKOS Primer 15:15:09 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-skos-primer-20080221/ Primer editor's draft 15:15:16 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] 15:15:20 -- continues 15:15:26 ACTION: Guus to write primer text re: broaderGeneric and equivalence w/r/t subclass [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08] 15:15:27 -- continues 15:15:51 Guus: what's critical for the Primer now? 15:15:56 Alistair: it's looking pretty good 15:16:12 ... just some things I highlighted in my review, which also relate to the mapping vocabulary issues 15:16:42 ... the story we tell about concept schemes, ontologies, and levels; whether we link broadergeneric to OWL or leave them more open; this will be the difficult thing 15:16:56 Topic: SKOS Reference 15:17:12 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-skos-reference-20080125/ SKOS Reference WD 15:17:27 -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosReference20080125 comments on 25 Jan WD 15:18:05 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Mar/0087.html [SKOS] Standalone definitions in natural language; previous links in headers [Tom 2008-03-25] 15:18:22 Guus: my advice was to have pointers to natural language descriptions 15:18:32 [DONE] ACTION: Sean to propose a way to handle deprecated properties (updating RDF schema) [recorded in [63]http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-swd-minutes.html#action06] 15:18:44 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Apr/0032.html Deprecated SKOS Vocabulary [Sean 2008-04-07] 15:19:00 Sean: my proposal is to document the deprecated vocabulary in the spec but omit it from the RDF schema 15:19:11 ... would be nice to start with a clean schema 15:19:29 Guus: document the deprecated vocabulary in an appendix 15:19:43 Sean: we should discuss the namespace 15:20:33 +1 to sean's proposal re deprecated properties 15:20:35 Tom: is there a W3C policy on support of schemas for spec that have not yet reached REC 15:21:21 Ralph: we can -- and should prior to CR -- have a namespace document 15:21:33 Tom: the previous SKOS drafts are a legacy specification 15:22:08 Ralph: is the question about use of the legacy namespace? 15:22:20 Sean: there will be some legacy vocabulary lying around; the things we're going to deprecate 15:22:42 ... is the W3C happy about there being legacy vocabulary around that is not described in a machine readable form? 15:22:55 Tom: can you follow your nose? 15:23:34 Ralph: I think it would be considered unfriendly to remove things from the namespace 15:23:43 ... @@ deploy 15:24:47 ... I think we'd get severe push-back both architecturally and from users of the old specs if we remove things from the namespace 15:25:03 Alistair: I assumed we'd stick with the same namespace just because there's a lot of deployed data 15:25:14 Elisa has joined #swd 15:25:26 ... the deployed data would be consistent with the current spec 15:25:33 Ralph: the things we're deprecating are not used? 15:25:48 Tom: Alistair's point is that there's a lot of data the uses the existing namespace 15:26:01 +Elisa_Kendall 15:26:05 ... if there is a new namespace then a relationship between the two namespaces would need to be declared 15:26:21 ... would the old namespace disappear? 15:26:27 Ralph: if you asking if the old namespace would dissappear the answer is no 15:26:29 Ralph: the old namespace definitely won't disappear 15:26:40 Alistair: there's been some effort to put data in SKOS form 15:26:49 scribenick: edsu 15:27:16 Ralph: a lot of the data wouldn't need to change 15:27:45 aliman: a small amt of data might use some deprecated vocabulary would need to change, but the majority wouldn't have to change at all 15:28:11 Guus: i'm slightly worried about making a new vocabulary that makes data on the web invalid 15:28:21 ... i'm more in favor of using a version type link 15:28:55 Ralph: how expensive is it for us to retain the deprecated vocabulary in our namespace document? I respect the truth/beauty argument, but I wouldn't want to omit this possibility 15:29:30 aliman: i'm a bit confused: how do we deal with the deprecated vocabulary, and one that is what is the namespace for skos -- i thought we were talking about what the skos namespace should be 15:29:43 seanb: i think we're having both convos at the same time 15:30:00 Guus: if we keep the same namespace it would be better to have the old vocabulary marked as deprecated 15:30:28 ... if we move to a new namespace we stil keep the old one, but people who want to use the new vocabulary have to change the namespace vocabulary 15:30:42 Ralph: the strongest reason for moving to a new namespace is to remove the clutter 15:31:09 aliman: by creating a new namespace you are deprecating the old one 15:31:19 Guus: not entirely true, people could still use the old one 15:31:28 Ralph: could provide owl:sameAs relationships 15:31:58 Antoine: i have a question regarding a question from Simon Spero on the list, about the semantics between the new/old vocabularies 15:32:33 Ralph: would it raise actual problems, or theoretical problems? 15:33:01 aliman: implementations might have to change 15:33:36 Guus: we cannot make assumptions about what people have done, if they have used transitive they will now be in trouble ... from a maintenance point of view there is a strong case for creating a new URI for the 2nd version 15:33:53 seanb: do we have a feel for how people are using the vocabulary? 15:34:09 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-spec/ old SKOS WD 15:34:20 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-skos-reference-20080125/ old SKOS WD 15:34:45 Ralph: alistair, what's your belief about how stable people felt the old definitions were 15:35:06 +??P7 15:35:08 aliman: i think people have anticipated that things would change, because they've been asking when the REC would come out 15:35:32 [who just joined?] 15:35:33 dlrubin has joined #swd 15:35:33 ... i would also defer to Antoine, Jon and Ed on what people are doing 15:35:44 zakim, ??p7 is dlrubin 15:35:44 +dlrubin; got it 15:35:52 seanb: are they concerned with the vocabulary or just the namespace? 15:36:30 aliman: tools have been built, some are in the commercial space, it wouldn't hurt too badly to ask people to change their URIs 15:36:56 Ralph: i think we should document this and flag it, and make it part of the Last Call 15:37:25 ... from the point of view of the w3c effort, this work has been in working draft for a few years, that would be the basis of keeping the current namespace 15:37:56 ... we should acknowledge existing users however 15:38:11 Guus: i would feel uncomfortable to force people to make a change 15:38:39 Ralph: the question is what do we force them to change, to change transitive implementations or URIs 15:38:56 Guus: there's nothing deprecated about the old namespace 15:39:12 Ralph: that means tools would need to recognize both namespaces 15:39:55 ... it's feeling like the least pain is if we change the definitions of the terms in the namespace 15:40:03 Guus: whatever we do we should make it a Last Call issue 15:40:50 marghe: the advantage to having a new namespace is that we will keep in mind versioning, it may be difficult to keep track of the different changes over time, we wouldn't know when new properties are added, etc 15:41:22 Guus: this is something we can't decide on now, i think seanb's messsage raises some clear points, and we should cover this in the f2f 15:41:37 Ralph: we should adapt the VocabManagement document to suit our needs :-) 15:41:59 scribenick: Ralph 15:42:09 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] 15:42:11 -- continues 15:42:32 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Mar/0083.html 2008-03-24: questions about n-ary relations solution 15:42:40 Guus: let's come back to this 15:42:47 ... if there's time later in the telecon 15:42:57 Topic: RDFa 15:43:17 -> http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-rdfa-minutes.html 3-April telecon minutes 15:43:24 ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] 15:43:26 -- continues 15:45:23 Ralph: the TF last Thursday did make some changes to the SPEC, 1 was to change instanceof to typeof, and the other is to make a small change to the processing rules, to remove a side effect from a change that this working group recommended -- we removed some bnodes that otherwise wouldn't be there, both have implementation impact, relatively small, the TF is recommending we extend Last Call by 3 weeks, to allow for testing of processing rules 15:46:02 Ralph: i asked for the processing rules to undergo a bit more testing before we go to Candidate Recommendation 15:46:51 diego: need some time to look at the changes 15:47:01 Ralph: ideal path would've been to publish an updated working draft 15:47:10 ... that would add more than a 3 week delay 15:47:30 ... we believe we have given notice to the active implementor community, we may need to do this in a more visible way 15:48:08 ... we don't have final new language on the change to show to diego, i don't feel comfortable until we see the new language making any decision 15:48:25 Guus: i assume you are distributing a comment to that effect to the various channels 15:48:41 ... i think if you do that all is fine 15:48:54 Ralph: ok 15:49:16 Guus: it might effect our charter extension proposal, if after May 1 we might do more work that we expect 15:50:04 Ralph: we're still expecting some post deadline comments, but don't expect them to have substantive impact, one of the last ones is from Yahoo, and they are in favor of both of the proposed minor changes 15:50:22 ... we're not proposing to delay last call 15:51:37 scribenick: ralph 15:51:39 Topic: Recipes 15:51:52 ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] 15:51:57 -- continues 15:52:02 ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] 15:52:03 -- continues 15:52:25 [DONE] ACTION: Recipes editors to clarify and write some sentences for the title that spells out points Ed made for .htaccess and Apache [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action13] 15:52:43 Topic: Vocabulary Management 15:53:06 -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/Vocab/principles-20080316 VM 16 March Editor's Draft 15:53:26 Elisa: Ralph and Diego's comments were helpful 15:53:40 ... should be able to deal with these in short order 15:53:50 Diego: document seems to be in good shape; only minor changes 15:54:03 ... the way Recipes is cited 15:54:12 ... my comments should be easy to tackle 15:54:20 Diego's comments: 15:54:22 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Apr/0043.html 15:54:40 Elisa: I agree; I may want to iterate with Diego to get the language describing the relationship with Recipes 15:55:11 scribenick: edsu 15:55:50 Ralph: i think the work that's there now is good enough that it would be shame to abandon, if we publish now with @@ i think we can fill them in later 15:56:00 Guus: we need to try to keep a strict timeframe 15:56:59 Ralph: if we wrestle with the skos namespace, this is the document that should/can decide how we resolve the skos namespace, my hope has been that this issue of how to evolve namespaces would rest here, i would like to publish this as a framework where we can put our knowledge in 15:57:10 Guus: tom you have some review as well? 15:57:13 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Apr/0043.html [VM] review of March 16 editor's draft [Diego] 15:57:22 Tom: i'll have them before next weeks call 15:57:31 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Apr/0030.html [VM] comments on 16 March editor's draft [Ralph] 15:57:37 scribenick: Ralph 15:58:06 Elisa: I expect to be able to return a new version quickly once I get the comments from Tom and Mark 15:58:18 Guus: I'd like explicit emails to reach consensus 15:58:22 Elisa: OK 15:58:51 ... I still hope to be able to attend the face-to-face 15:58:59 dlrubin has left #swd 15:59:08 Chair: Guus 15:59:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 15:59:31 -dlrubin 15:59:49 Meeting: Semantic Web Deployment WG 16:00:32 i/Ralph: the TF last Thursday/scribenick: edsu 16:00:47 Guus: more SKOS discussion next week, and 2 more reviews of VM 16:00:51 [adjourned] 16:00:58 -Elisa_Kendall 16:00:59 -Tom 16:00:59 -Clay 16:01:00 -berrueta 16:01:02 -edsu 16:01:02 -JonP 16:01:03 -Margherita_Sini 16:01:07 Guus: are you still there? 16:01:09 -Ralph 16:01:18 zakim, list attendees 16:01:18 As of this point the attendees have been Ralph, Margherita_Sini, Tom, Antoine_Isaac, Clay, Guus, edsu, aliman, JonP, Sean, berrueta, Elisa_Kendall, dlrubin 16:01:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:03:16 -Antoine_Isaac 16:03:39 -Sean 16:03:43 seanb has left #swd 16:03:44 -Guus 16:03:48 ed? 16:04:05 mm. what happened to ACTION: Alistair to make a proposal for Issue 40 ? 16:04:15 (was pending from last week) 16:04:24 my fault probably 16:04:26 Guus: is it possible at all for people outside the WG to attend the mtg? 16:04:54 Guus: Simon Spero is interested, he has been doing some work w/ SKOS at unc.edu 16:04:59 they have to ask permission of the chairs, but it is certainly not impossible 16:05:03 I'll carry forward all the missing [PENDING] actions, then, Guus 16:05:09 Guus: ok, i'll let him know 16:05:15 ACTION: Alistair to make a proposal for Issue 40 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-swd-minutes.html#action06] 16:05:21 Guus: thanks :) 16:05:29 ok, see you 16:05:32 ACTION: Antoine will review Alistair's proposals w/r/t the relationship between the existing solution and the extension [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action06] 16:05:57 ACTION: Alistair to review Antoine and Guus' emails to move ISSUE-71 and -74 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action09] 16:06:34 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:07:08 -- continues 16:07:34 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:07:59 JonP has left #swd 16:08:07 i/Guus: thanks/-- continues/ 16:08:20 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:08:45 disconnecting the lone participant, aliman, in SW_SWD()11:00AM 16:09:05 i/ACTION: Alistair to review Antoine/--continues/ 16:12:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:13:55 i/-- continues/--continues 16:13:57 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:14:32 --continues 16:14:35 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-minutes.html Ralph 16:15:44 zakim, bye 16:15:44 leaving. As of this point the attendees were Ralph, Margherita_Sini, Tom, Antoine_Isaac, Clay, Guus, edsu, aliman, JonP, Sean, berrueta, Elisa_Kendall, dlrubin 16:15:44 Zakim has left #swd 16:15:46 rrsagent, bye 16:15:46 I see 11 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-actions.rdf : 16:15:46 ACTION: Chairs to draft charter extension proposal for SKOS until July 1st [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/26-swd-minutes.html#action01] [1] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-06-00 16:15:46 ACTION: Guus and Tom draft an agenda for the May f2f [2] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-13-45 16:15:46 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] [3] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-15-16 16:15:46 ACTION: Guus to write primer text re: broaderGeneric and equivalence w/r/t subclass [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08] [4] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-15-26 16:15:46 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] [5] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-42-09 16:15:46 ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [6] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-43-24 16:15:46 ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [7] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-51-52 16:15:46 ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] [8] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T15-52-02 16:15:46 ACTION: Alistair to make a proposal for Issue 40 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-swd-minutes.html#action06] [9] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T16-05-15 16:15:46 ACTION: Antoine will review Alistair's proposals w/r/t the relationship between the existing solution and the extension [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action06] [10] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T16-05-32 16:15:46 ACTION: Alistair to review Antoine and Guus' emails to move ISSUE-71 and -74 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action09] [11] 16:15:46 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/08-swd-irc#T16-05-57