IRC log of swd on 2008-06-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:49:42 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swd
14:49:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/03-swd-irc
14:49:49 [TomB]
rrsagent, bookmark
14:49:49 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2008/06/03-swd-irc#T14-49-49
14:49:59 [TomB]
zakim, this will be swd
14:49:59 [Zakim]
ok, TomB; I see SW_SWD()11:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
14:50:07 [TomB]
Meeting: SWD AG
14:50:11 [TomB]
Chair: Tom
14:50:47 [TomB]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0001.html
14:52:01 [TomB]
Regrets: Margherita, Sean, Diego, Antoine, Guus, MichaelH, Vit, Simone
14:52:33 [TomB]
Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/05/27-swd-minutes.html
14:52:50 [TomB]
rrsagent, please make record public
14:59:15 [Zakim]
SW_SWD()11:00AM has now started
14:59:15 [edsu]
edsu has joined #swd
14:59:16 [Zakim]
+MrLuserSkype
14:59:37 [edsu]
:)
15:00:09 [TomB]
zakim, MrLuserSkype is me
15:00:09 [Zakim]
+TomB; got it
15:00:26 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #swd
15:01:00 [Zakim]
+Ralph
15:01:01 [Zakim]
-Ralph
15:01:01 [Zakim]
+Ralph
15:01:52 [Zakim]
+Elisa_Kendall
15:03:36 [Zakim]
+[LC]
15:03:41 [TomB]
Scribe: Elisa
15:03:42 [Ralph]
zakim, lc is Ed
15:03:43 [Zakim]
+Ed; got it
15:04:30 [aliman]
aliman has joined #swd
15:06:01 [Zakim]
+??P55
15:06:12 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p55 is Alistair
15:06:12 [Zakim]
+Alistair; got it
15:07:33 [edsu]
+1
15:08:01 [aliman]
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/Reference/Planning
15:08:06 [Elisa]
Considering pushing this week's agenda to next week due to low turnout
15:08:11 [Ralph]
Topic: SKOS Reference publication?
15:08:42 [Elisa]
Alistair: all of the content is there
15:09:14 [Elisa]
Alistair: we need roughly 1/2 day to make a few minor changes, add schema files, and that's it
15:10:11 [Elisa]
Alistair: there are a couple of issues in the schema files that Sean sent, inconsistencies, that may have been due to transforms or tools
15:10:34 [Elisa]
Alistair: when I was using triplet before, I got some weird behavior that I wasn't able to pin down
15:10:53 [Ralph]
s/triplet/tripler/
15:11:02 [Elisa]
Alistair: the problems were minor, so I just need another 1/2 day to get the files together and send them to Ralph
15:11:26 [Elisa]
Tom: let's do that on the list then ... we did decide last week that the changes had been incorporated
15:11:42 [benadida]
benadida has joined #swd
15:11:48 [Elisa]
Tom: whether we need to wait until next week or can do that earlier, let's wait until the files are posted and then take a decision online
15:12:02 [benadida]
Hi all, unfortunately I can only join via IRC today.
15:12:04 [Elisa]
Ralph: do we have a resolution to publish?
15:12:45 [JonP]
JonP has joined #swd
15:12:45 [Elisa]
Tom: yes, if you look at the 5-27 minutes, at the end of the SKOS section, the discussion was to publish the draft without formal review
15:12:49 [Elisa]
Ralph: yes
15:13:15 [Elisa]
Tom: I would propose that that also means that we could take the decision online and wouldn't need to wait for the next telecon
15:13:24 [Elisa]
Ralph: I concur with that
15:13:49 [Elisa]
Tom: we could close issue 83, but I think the call is too small, so I don't see any other items on which we could make significant progress this wee
15:14:07 [Elisa]
I suggest that we resolve to use this agenda as the starting point for next weeks call
15:14:31 [Elisa]
Tom: unless anyone has issues on which we think we could make progress with such a small call
15:14:56 [Elisa]
Ralph: what I'm wondering - do you know where Jon is making updates where stuff is fixed?
15:15:11 [Elisa]
Ed: He seems to be pushing them through CVS
15:15:18 [JonP]
I am
15:15:40 [Elisa]
Ralph: I'm not seeing all of the changes
15:15:53 [Ralph]
Jon, is there an updated .html document?
15:16:24 [Elisa]
Ralph: because some of the changes you had suggested consistently used the same domain name ...
15:16:35 [Elisa]
Ed: alot of the things I was pointing out had to do with the files
15:16:51 [Elisa]
Ed: I did have a question about ... he was using mydomain in one of the examples
15:16:55 [Ralph]
Jon, e.g. 'yourdomain' vs 'example.com'
15:17:02 [aliman]
q+ on skos to ask about URI dereference behaviour
15:17:05 [Elisa]
Ralph: that was one of the questions I wanted to raise
15:17:08 [JonP]
There haven't been any updates to the html since we posted the last draft
15:17:14 [Ralph]
(W3C pubrules prefers either w3.org or example.com)
15:17:17 [JonP]
...trying to get on the call
15:17:33 [Elisa]
Tom: I wanted to talk about some of the things that might continue after the working group ...
15:17:37 [aliman]
q+ to ask about URI dereference behaviour for skos concepts, schemes etc.
15:17:57 [Elisa]
Tom: as a question to Ralph, what are the opportunities, resources available to ...
15:18:09 [Zakim]
+Jon_Phipps
15:18:28 [JonP]
zakim, Jon_phipps is me
15:18:31 [Zakim]
+JonP; got it
15:18:37 [Elisa]
Tom: as far as use of wikis is concerned, support for mailing lists, what are the options
15:19:01 [Elisa]
Ralph: if the working group wants to ask for or Sponsor a skos interest list, I don't have a feeling either way
15:19:18 [Elisa]
whether that's valuable or not ... we can certainly host those lists and the wiki as well
15:19:41 [Elisa]
if we can, snapshot the state of the working group, not necessarily freeze it, but make the point the working
15:19:51 [Elisa]
group reached clear for a couple of years from now
15:20:11 [Elisa]
I would prefer generally that we establish a separate set of skos wiki pages
15:20:16 [Elisa]
Alistair: that would be nice
15:20:30 [Elisa]
Tom: maybe the current wiki pages could be frozen
15:20:51 [Elisa]
Ralph: the esw wiki will at some point be migrated over to ...
15:21:15 [Elisa]
to Ralph, so the current difference in wiki platforms will eventually go away
15:21:23 [Elisa]
single digit number of months
15:21:52 [Elisa]
Tom: back to recipes ...
15:22:26 [Elisa]
Ralph: I did write an email shortly before the telecon -- it's useful for us to be careful about consistency
15:22:40 [Elisa]
Ralph: that's why I asked if the updates you're making are visible somewhere
15:22:54 [Elisa]
Ralph: if the served example files are being updated somewhere
15:23:13 [Elisa]
Jon: it's enough of a pain to update everything that I'm staying with the last date where I can
15:23:29 [Elisa]
I think I only changed one small thing in that document and that was a date
15:23:58 [Elisa]
I haven't changed the example.org changes until you can do a review of the document
15:24:48 [Elisa]
Ralph: I guess I'd like, if you would create a 2008-06-xx.html document, the dates can be inconsistent
15:25:15 [Elisa]
Jon: I haven't actually changed anything in the document since the draft that I put up, almost all of the changes I can think of are in
15:25:29 [Elisa]
Ralph: so the only thing you can think of is the yourhost ...
15:25:59 [Elisa]
Jon: what's the process at this point? does this need to go thru any additional review?
15:26:24 [Elisa]
Ralph: if Ed and I say that this is ok, then the working group should be ok with it
15:27:04 [Elisa]
Jon: if I make the change and put up the document, it's ok to reference the 2008-04 examples, without having to change all of the dates
15:27:14 [Elisa]
Ralph: yes
15:27:25 [Ralph]
(for an updated editor's draft)
15:27:28 [Elisa]
Jon: I just have to make the one change to the document and repost it.
15:28:14 [TomB]
ack aliman
15:28:14 [Zakim]
aliman, you wanted to ask about URI dereference behaviour for skos concepts, schemes etc.
15:28:41 [Elisa]
Alistair: I was just looking ahead at the skos issues, there is one on the URI dereference behavior, and I was wondering
15:28:55 [Elisa]
if anyone had any ideas about how to resolve this relatively painlessly
15:29:10 [Elisa]
Alistair: perhaps we can resolve this to a recipes example
15:29:26 [Elisa]
Ralph: I definitely thought we would go in the direction of working to a recipe
15:29:44 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/86 issue-86; SkosURIDereferenceBehaviour
15:29:58 [Elisa]
Alistair: 6 is the extended configuration for dereferencing to a concept
15:30:16 [Elisa]
Ralph: I don't necessarily think we should resolve to that one ...
15:30:28 [Elisa]
Ed: you can imagine someone opting for a simpler one
15:30:39 [Ralph]
s/that one/recipe 6 in particular/
15:30:44 [Ralph]
LCSH
15:30:50 [Elisa]
Alistair: what do you do for LCSH?
15:31:29 [Elisa]
Alistair: they have a way of working around doing 303s but still being able to dereference each URI
15:32:05 [aliman]
http://lcsh.info/123456#concept
15:32:49 [Elisa]
Ralph: how much trouble would I be causing to ask for a write-up for this ...
15:33:26 [Elisa]
Ed: it was originally done using one of the recipes, but this simplified the server side code ... I would be happy to write it up, but it would probably need some time to put it together
15:33:45 [aliman]
... wherer http://lcsh.info/123456 is directly negotiable
15:34:54 [Elisa]
Alistair: from what I understand, I think its ok, but you do have to be a little bit careful, as there is a primary URI, but the risk is that if you serve html content, and if that had an anchor in it for your concept ...
15:35:04 [Elisa]
you could end up with a conflict ...
15:35:41 [Elisa]
Ed: I've been trying to make sure that the html references do have an anchor with concept, so maybe this is an issue
15:36:02 [edsu]
http://lcsh.info/sh85118553#concept
15:36:08 [Elisa]
Ralph: when I do an http get on an URI which is a subject heading, it's something that has (see example)
15:36:28 [Elisa]
if I do an http get on that, the server may not respond with a 200, as the subject heading is not a document
15:36:53 [Elisa]
Alistair: I'm not sure that's true, because you can't do an http get on that directly, you need to do that on the primary URI
15:38:04 [Elisa]
Ralph: this is exactly the point you made about the difference between the html and rdf version, and in this particular design, the server can't say 303 for a concept, because it doesn't know you asked for a concept
15:39:08 [Elisa]
Ralph: it creates additional confusion if the html document has anchors called concept and the rdf has ids called concept ...
15:40:11 [Elisa]
this means that the TAG will think that the LCSH approach is broken ...
15:40:56 [Elisa]
Ed: I definitely understand the issue of having the hash URI that has two different representations, I guess I was encouraging Jon to promulgate this error ... :)
15:41:43 [Elisa]
Alistair: if there was not an anchor in the html, I thought this could be considered a new recipe, ... as long as there wasn't a direct contradiction to web architecture
15:42:37 [Elisa]
Ralph: that's the difference between recipes 1 and 3 ... the crucial difference is that recipe 1 doesn't have any html and recipe 3 introduces html and a 303
15:42:46 [Elisa]
Ed: that's originally what I did ...
15:43:07 [Elisa]
Ralph: I'm afraid that doesn't work ... appreciating Alistair's attempt to massage it
15:43:08 [TomB]
http://www.openarchives.org/ore/0.9/primer.html#HTTP
15:43:37 [Elisa]
Alistair: the argument was really fine, all of the recipes are more cautious with respect to 303s
15:43:40 [TomB]
http://www.openarchives.org/ore/0.9/primer.html#Aggregation
15:44:05 [Elisa]
Ralph: it creates dragons for revisions to the vocabulary - you have to be sure not to introduce any anchors
15:44:40 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-cooluris-20080331/ Cool URIs for the Semantic Web
15:44:40 [Elisa]
Ed: in the Cool URIs document, there was feedback from the TAG ... there was something in that document that shifted in its tone at some point
15:45:15 [Elisa]
Alistair: the feedback I had from TimBL had to do with generic resources, from what I understand, Tim was saying do a 303, and then content negotiate from that point
15:45:30 [Elisa]
if you have a generic resource then you can bookmark it
15:46:00 [Elisa]
I thought back through what we have done ... you can't go back through and retrofit that to a document, you would have to publish a new document
15:46:04 [edsu]
http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~sauermann/2006/11/cooluris/
15:46:31 [Elisa]
Ed: this looks like it was the old document, but if you look at figure 4, it doesn't look like what we're doing now.
15:47:19 [Elisa]
Ed: look at figure 4, so it's in section 4.1, the hash URI section
15:47:32 [Ralph]
Ralph: the dfki version is old
15:47:40 [Elisa]
Alistair: that's interesting
15:48:13 [aliman]
The Content-Location header should be set to indicate if the hash URI refers to a part of the HTML document or RDF document.
15:48:14 [Elisa]
then you would be able to fix it by making sure that the content location header is correct
15:48:47 [Elisa]
Ed: I'm open to changing it if we have a recommendation .. I'm willing to change it appropriately, and that's the reason I put this experimental version out
15:48:55 [Elisa]
maintenance over time is definitely a big issue
15:49:33 [Elisa]
Ed: I think that was introduced in the stuff that Diego noticed
15:49:47 [Elisa]
Alistair: we've only got a recipe for the first part of 4.1 and 4.3 ...
15:50:00 [Elisa]
Ed: but you started this a long time before this came out
15:50:26 [Elisa]
Ralph: we might need to say something about this other document with additional cases
15:50:47 [Elisa]
Alistair: but the recipes document would get considerably more complicated
15:51:00 [Elisa]
Ralph: we should at least acknowledge the one more useful pattern ...
15:51:28 [Elisa]
Ed: the recipes document does point to Cool URIs. this has come up before, the potential for RDFa to deliver vocabularies
15:51:46 [TomB]
Cool URIs or "simple implementation": http://www.openarchives.org/ore/0.9/primer.html#HTTP
15:51:59 [Elisa]
If you did use RDFa to do that, you probably wouldn't be able to deliver an RDF/XML graph at the same URI
15:52:02 [TomB]
q+ to mention OAI ORE example
15:52:19 [TomB]
ack TomB
15:52:19 [Zakim]
TomB, you wanted to mention OAI ORE example
15:52:20 [Elisa]
Ralph: it will be awhile before we can recommend best practices around this
15:52:58 [Elisa]
Tom: I just wanted to quickly point out that ... if you click on the link to the OAI ORE example, it looks like they have two ways of implementing
15:53:37 [Elisa]
using the Cool URIs or using a resource aggregation ... but that's intended to resolve to the information resource, not to use the 303 redirect
15:54:11 [Elisa]
I mention this because OAI ORE on the one hand, LCSH on the other ... these are two implementations people will look at for best practices
15:54:25 [Elisa]
it would be good to make sure that the right precedences are set for these and documented
15:54:54 [Elisa]
Tom: could you take an action, Ed, to write a note to the list ... its worth trying to nail it down and try to get the
15:54:59 [Elisa]
reasoning nailed down
15:55:20 [Elisa]
Action: Ed to write up the rationale behind the dereferencing behavior for LCSH
15:55:32 [Elisa]
Ed: and Alistair can respond
15:55:54 [Elisa]
Tom: I think that's going to be one of the implementation examples for SKOS, so we need to make sure everything is in place
15:56:00 [Elisa]
for doing the right thing for the recipes
15:56:06 [edsu]
aliman++
15:56:12 [edsu]
# for bringing that issue up
15:56:15 [Ralph]
zakim, list attendees
15:56:15 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been TomB, Ralph, Elisa_Kendall, Ed, Alistair, JonP
15:56:16 [Elisa]
Tom: meeting adjourned
15:56:23 [Ralph]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
15:56:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/03-swd-minutes.html Ralph
15:58:29 [Zakim]
-Elisa_Kendall
15:58:30 [Zakim]
-Ed
15:58:30 [Zakim]
-Ralph
15:58:32 [Zakim]
-JonP
15:58:32 [Zakim]
-Alistair
15:58:44 [edsu]
edsu has left #swd
15:59:02 [TomB]
TomB has joined #swd
15:59:05 [Ralph]
[Ralph will copy the ACTIONs from last meeting to this record]
15:59:18 [TomB]
Ralph, did we do please list attendees?
15:59:26 [Ralph]
yes
15:59:26 [Zakim]
-TomB
15:59:28 [Zakim]
SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
15:59:30 [Zakim]
Attendees were TomB, Ralph, Elisa_Kendall, Ed, Alistair, JonP
16:00:03 [Ralph]
zakim, bye
16:00:04 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #swd
16:00:06 [Ralph]
rrsagent, bye
16:00:06 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/03-swd-actions.rdf :
16:00:06 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ed to write up the rationale behind the dereferencing behavior for LCSH [1]
16:00:06 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/03-swd-irc#T15-55-20