13:01:18 RRSAgent has joined #awwsw 13:01:18 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/05/13-awwsw-irc 13:01:28 zakim, this is awwsw 13:01:28 sorry, dbooth, I do not see a conference named 'awwsw' in progress or scheduled at this time 13:03:35 Stuart has joined #awwsw 13:05:32 hi stuart. i just emailed jonathan. zakim doesn't seem to know aobut our conf call today. 13:07:04 jar has joined #awwsw 13:07:09 hello 13:07:34 don't know if we are meeting today 13:07:42 Zakim has allowed me in 13:07:49 neither do i. i will get on the phone and let's decide whether to meet 13:07:51 zakim this is awwsw 13:08:00 zakim, this is awwsw 13:08:00 ok, Stuart; that matches TAG_(AWWSW)9:00AM 13:08:09 zakim, who is here 13:08:09 Stuart, you need to end that query with '?' 13:08:12 zakim, who is here? 13:08:12 On the phone I see ??P7 13:08:13 On IRC I see jar, Stuart, RRSAgent, Zakim, dbooth, trackbot-ng 13:08:17 +Jonathan_Rees 13:08:18 oh, i guess i did it too soon. zakim wasn't ready yet. 13:08:53 +DBooth 13:11:19 Topic: Activities proposed 13:12:29 jar: Two proposals: 1. Look at FRBR (... bibliographic references). 2. ABC (a followon to FRBR?) harmony. 13:12:35 http://metadata.net/harmony/JODI_Final.pdf 13:12:41 Meeting: AWWSW 13:12:43 Chair: Jonathan Rees 13:13:08 denrie 13:14:10 jar: ANother is denrie, from Oboe. They think they need a decent ont for information: lab reports, clinical records, etc. So they're thinking about provadence. 13:15:05 ... Another direction is to work with what we have: make a catalog of other onts that we have so far, and then maybe we can pick a def of IR out of that. 13:16:08 Stuart: Almost like a brainstorming .... get the whole spectrum on the table, then develop relations between them, similarties, differences, etc., though not necessarily any one of them would be exactly the term we want. 13:17:30 dbooth: FRBR, ABC and denrie seem to be more specific than what we've put on the table. 13:18:21 jar: Want to be able to look at an example and decide whether it should be an IR. Is a journal article an IR? Given the answers that Tim has given, I now have my doubts. 13:18:59 Stuart: Need Tim on the call for that, and need the scribe to capture exactly what he says on this day. 13:19:33 ... Looking a FRBR sounds like a good idea. 13:19:52 http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/ 13:20:16 Stuart: Is FRBR related to INDEX? 13:21:18 INDECS 13:21:27 dbooth: This sounds like a long route to get to an agreed def of IR. 13:22:09 dbooth: no doubt in my mind how info resource has to be defined. 13:23:24 http://www.doi.org/topics/indecs/indecs_framework_2000.pdf 13:23:56 jar: For journal article example, the AWWW def makes it sound like an IR, but that def is vague. 13:24:43 ... But from what TimBl says i'm not sure. Maybe the URI from which you get the article denotes what the article served, but not the actual article. 13:26:18 ... But dbooth's def is concrete (a function). 13:27:41 dbooth: If you want to capture only the info in that article, then the function inputs are constant and it can be an IR. But if you're denoting a more abstract notion of the "the journal article", then it is NOT an IR. 13:28:35 My assessment of httpRange-14's value: It forces us to decide whether the URI denotes the document or the thing - and forbids it from denoting both 13:29:32 "Information resource" exists in part to support this aim. 13:29:48 stuart: I think a valuable outcome of the decision is that it settles the question of whether you can use http names to name arbitrary things. There was a time earlier when timbl argued that you could not if the url didn't contain a hash. The decision settled that. 13:30:17 But httpRange-14, in my view, doesn't exist in order to tell you that something is an information resource. 13:30:41 Having trouble finding concrete references to INDECS but there are plenty of mentions in the DOI Glossary: http://www.doi.org/handbook_2000/glossary.html 13:31:41 jar: the issue is that i'm looking at lots of journal articles and need to know if i'm allowed to give a 200 response. 13:32:27 Concrete example, what does the doi 10.1002/cpe.1233 (ie: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.1233) identify? 13:34:25 dbooth: if you ask "is this an IR" you're asking the wrong way around. If you want to denote something that fits into the def of IR as a fn, then it is an IR. It's a matter of choice. 13:38:00 dbooth: by jar's description, it sounds like he wants to denote something (a journal article) that is *not* just information. 13:38:20 stuart: we have the same problem with numbers. is a number an IR? 13:39:34 jar: seems similar to exclude journal article from the def of IR. 13:41:37 dbooth: I'm happy to denote my journal article as a fn, even if jar is denoting an abstract concept of a journal article. 13:42:21 jar: the intent of webarch is to allow lots of kinds of things to be IRs. and i think the intent was to admit what i'm talking about (journal article). 13:46:14 dbooth: I don't see another way of defining IR than the way either Roy or I has defined it. 13:47:14 jar: Maybe IR should just be defined by example. part of the goal is to bring people to understanding this issue. 13:48:26 ... Another way to go is to treat is as an ont issue and just use 303's for journal articles. But i don't like that because it puts up a wall between web things and journal articles. 13:48:34 dbooth: You give something, you get something. 13:50:52 Stuart: Would be useful to get to the bottom of: earlier, the majority of the TAG didn't need to maek this distinction. But one TAG member was looking at the URI to see if it started with "http:" aand having not hash and making an important artitectural decision from that, and i've never understood why. 13:51:58 ... The AWWWW was published with issue 14 left open, and intentionally phrased to permit the answer to go either way. The term IR got introduced to try to address an issue Pay Hayes raised, and introduction of the term satisfied an issue he brought. 13:53:16 jar: There's more than one issue, but not very many. One is can an http URI denote a person. Once the answer is yes, that raises a second question of whether a potato can have a representation. 13:54:12 ... Tim always dismisses this as a gray area. But to me it's not. As the SW grows you're goingn to talk more and more about information, so i see a real collision between webarch and the ont community and people who wish to talk about providence. 13:54:55 Partial genesis of the term "Information Resource" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0131.html 13:55:21 dbooth: Sounds like we need more discussion about how to choose between denoting a journal article as an IR or non-IR. 13:55:57 jar: Most people are probably going to just do what they do and won't care about this issue, but I overlap both the TAG and Science Commons. 13:56:35 ... I agree you need to ask what role IR plays in the architecture. It isn' inherently interesting. It is only interesting in its architectural role. 13:58:46 Topic: Next meeting 13:59:01 jar: Use FRBR as a starting point. 13:59:06 -??P7 13:59:09 -DBooth 13:59:10 TAG_(AWWSW)9:00AM has ended 13:59:11 Attendees were Jonathan_Rees, DBooth 13:59:37 Present: Jonathan Rees (jar), David Booth, Stuart Williams 13:59:43 rrsagent, make logs public 14:02:48 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:02:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/05/13-awwsw-minutes.html dbooth 14:57:35 rrsagent, bye 14:57:35 I see no action items