hi stuart. i just emailed jonathan. zakim doesn't seem to know aobut our conf call today.

<jar> hello

<Stuart> don't know if we are meeting today

<Stuart> Zakim has allowed me in

<jar> neither do i. i will get on the phone and let's decide whether to meet

<Stuart> zakim this is awwsw

oh, i guess i did it too soon. zakim wasn't ready yet.

Activities proposed

jar: Two proposals: 1. Look at FRBR (... bibliographic references). 2. ABC (a followon to FRBR?) harmony.

<jar> http://metadata.net/harmony/JODI_Final.pdf

<jar> denrie

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.
... 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.

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.

dbooth: FRBR, ABC and denrie seem to be more specific than what we've put on the table.

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.

Stuart: Need Tim on the call for that, and need the scribe to capture exactly what he says on this day.
... Looking a FRBR sounds like a good idea.

<jar> http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/

Stuart: Is FRBR related to INDEX?

<Stuart> INDECS

dbooth: This sounds like a long route to get to an agreed def of IR.

<jar> dbooth: no doubt in my mind how info resource has to be defined.

<Stuart> http://www.doi.org/topics/indecs/indecs_framework_2000.pdf

jar: For journal article example, the AWWW def makes it sound like an IR, but that def is vague.
... 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.
... But dbooth's def is concrete (a function).

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.

<jar> 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

<jar> "Information resource" exists in part to support this aim.

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.

<jar> But httpRange-14, in my view, doesn't exist in order to tell you that something is an information resource.

<Stuart> 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

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.

<Stuart> Concrete example, what does the doi 10.1002/cpe.1233 (ie: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.1233) identify?

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.
... by jar's description, it sounds like he wants to denote something (a journal article) that is *not* just information.

stuart: we have the same problem with numbers. is a number an IR?

jar: seems similar to exclude journal article from the def of IR.

dbooth: I'm happy to denote my journal article as a fn, even if jar is denoting an abstract concept of a journal article.

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).

dbooth: I don't see another way of defining IR than the way either Roy or I has defined it.

jar: Maybe IR should just be defined by example. part of the goal is to bring people to understanding this issue.
... 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.

dbooth: You give something, you get something.

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.
... 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.

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.
... 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.

<Stuart> Partial genesis of the term "Information Resource" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webarch-comments/2004JulSep/0131.html

dbooth: Sounds like we need more discussion about how to choose between denoting a journal article as an IR or non-IR.

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.
... 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.

Next meeting

jar: Use FRBR as a starting point.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: dbooth
Inferring Scribes: dbooth
Default Present: Jonathan_Rees, DBooth
Present: Jonathan_Rees_(jar) David_Booth Stuart_Williams
Got date from IRC log name: 13 May 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/05/13-awwsw-minutes.html
People with action items: