15:02:33 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #swd
15:02:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-irc
15:02:41 <seanb> seanb has joined #swd
15:02:41 <Tom> rrsagent, bookmark
15:02:41 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-irc#T15-02-41-1
15:02:49 <Tom> zakim, this will be swd
15:02:55 <Tom> Meeting: SWD WG
15:02:55 <aliman> aliman has joined #swd
15:02:58 <Tom> Chair: Guus
15:02:59 <Zakim> ok, Tom, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started
15:02:59 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
15:03:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], Jeremy, Guus_Schreiber
15:03:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see aliman, seanb, RRSAgent, Zakim, Guus, Tom, marghe, berrueta
15:03:38 <Tom> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0062.html
15:03:47 <Zakim> +??P40
15:04:01 <Tom> rrsagent, please make record public
15:04:07 <Antoine> Antoine has joined #swd
15:04:12 <aliman> zakim, ??P40 is aliman
15:04:15 <Zakim> +??P42
15:04:31 <Zakim> +Antoine_Isaac
15:04:35 <Zakim> +aliman; got it
15:04:39 <berrueta> Zakim: ??P42 is me
15:04:42 <Tom> Margherita, you have too much background noise
15:04:47 <Zakim> +abel
15:04:58 <marghe> i try to mute myself
15:05:03 <berrueta> Zakim: abel is me
15:05:09 <Zakim> -Jeremy
15:05:27 <Zakim> +??P58
15:05:27 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
15:05:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], Guus_Schreiber, aliman, ??P42, Antoine_Isaac, abel, ??P58
15:05:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see Antoine, aliman, seanb, RRSAgent, Zakim, Guus, Tom, marghe, berrueta
15:05:31 <seanb> zakim, ??P58 is me
15:05:31 <Zakim> +seanb; got it
15:05:43 <Tom> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html
15:05:45 <berrueta> zakim, abel is me
15:05:46 <Zakim> +berrueta; got it
15:05:48 <Zakim> +Jeremy
15:06:51 <seanb> scribe: seanb
15:07:15 <seanb> Jeremy: introduced himself. 
15:07:31 <seanb> ...representing TopQuadrant. Participation mainly for CR.
15:08:07 <seanb> Guus: long telecon last time. 
15:08:17 <seanb> ...some things being revisited on the list. Also possibly
15:08:22 <Zakim> -Jeremy
15:08:23 <seanb> ...actions that are long gone. 
15:08:38 <seanb> Topic: Admin
15:08:44 <seanb> Guus: propose to accept minutes
15:08:48 <Zakim> +Jeremy
15:09:19 <seanb> ...no objections. 
15:09:31 <seanb> ...next telecon 5th Aug. Guus regrets
15:09:57 <seanb> ...Two objectives in mind for these telecons. TO get to LC for SKOS and PR for RDFa
15:10:07 <seanb> Topic: SKOS
15:10:12 <seanb> Guus: Action items.
15:10:34 <seanb> Regrets: Ed
15:10:41 <seanb> ACTION: Ed to investigate what text could be added to primer re. concept co-ordination [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/22-swd-minutes.html#action02]
15:10:44 <seanb> --continues
15:11:41 <seanb> Guus's action re primer text. Is this still required?
15:11:51 <seanb> Antoine: Can't quite recall. 
15:11:57 <seanb> 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]
15:11:59 <seanb> --continues
15:12:11 <seanb> ACTION: Alistair to check the old namespace wrt dereferencing [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action03]
15:12:15 <seanb> --done
15:12:26 <seanb> Alistair: Sent email some four weeks ago. 
15:13:09 <Antoine> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0094.html
15:13:30 <seanb> ACTION: Antoine and Ed to add content to Primer about irreflexivity [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action06]
15:13:32 <seanb> --done
15:14:23 <aliman> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0095.html email on old skos namespace dereference 
15:14:46 <seanb> ACTION: Alistar to update the history page adding direct link to latest version of rdf triple [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
15:14:49 <seanb> --continues
15:15:02 <seanb> ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to specifically flag features at risk for Last Call. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action17]
15:15:04 <seanb> --continues
15:16:04 <seanb> ACTION: Sean to draft response to comment about namespace. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action12]
15:16:05 <seanb> --done
15:16:07 <seanb> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0105.html
15:17:00 <seanb> ACTION: Sean to post comment to OWL WG re annotation requirements. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action06]
15:17:10 <seanb> --continues
15:17:34 <seanb> ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to propose a recommended minimum URI dereference behaviour [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action11]
15:17:36 <seanb> --done
15:17:53 <Zakim> -Margherita?
15:18:25 <seanb> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0004.html
15:18:32 <GuusS> GuusS has joined #swd
15:18:47 <seanb> ACTION: Guus to mail his position on issues 72, 73 and 75 to the list
15:18:51 <seanb> --dropped
15:19:31 <Zakim> +??P20
15:19:56 <seanb> ACTION: Alistair and Sean to propose text to implement the resolution of issue-72 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html#action05]
15:20:03 <aliman> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/master.html 
15:20:03 <seanb> --done
15:20:07 <marghe> zakim +??20 is Margherita
15:21:03 <seanb> Guus: Which issues to we need to discuss here. Namespace and broader/transitive
15:21:14 <seanb> ...would like to see if we need more discussion there. Also
15:21:30 <seanb> ...talk about LC schedule. When will drafts be available and reviewers.
15:21:42 <seanb> ...Discussion of namespace issue.
15:21:52 <aliman> q+
15:21:52 <seanb> ...Is there reason to review our decision?
15:22:07 <Antoine> q+
15:22:21 <seanb> Alistair: Sent an email last week. 
15:22:41 <seanb> ...Trying to think what pros and cons of each approach are. 
15:23:03 <seanb> ...-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0034.html
15:23:26 <Tom> zakim, ??P20 is Margherita
15:23:26 <Zakim> +Margherita; got it
15:23:47 <seanb> Alistair: A move to a new namespace has little upside and a lot of downside. 
15:24:07 <seanb> ...stick to old has advantages. All the existing stuff can be claimed as implementations of
15:24:28 <seanb> ...SKOS. Also tools that are there already. A new namespace means we have to wait for implementation
15:24:48 <seanb> ...plus there will be a period of time while people migrate, which could take years.
15:25:11 <seanb> ...Realistically means tool developrs have to maintain multiple implemetations. 
15:25:31 <seanb> ...Bottom line is that there is little gain from a new namespace and a cost involved. 
15:25:50 <seanb> ...Assumed that the LC would use the new namespace, but marked as "at risk". 
15:25:56 <seanb> ...Would appreciate comments.
15:26:17 <seanb> Guus: I see objections, but no need to reopen the issue.
15:26:31 <seanb> Alistair: Under what circumstances would we need to reopen the issue?
15:26:41 <seanb> Guus: if we reopen, we can't go to LC.
15:27:56 <seanb> ...saw one comment that the change in semantics requires a new namespace (Simon Spero)
15:28:29 <seanb> Alistair: unsure whether to take this comment. There may be some misunderstanding of transitive.
15:28:37 <seanb> Guus: Happy to mark it as "at risk". 
15:29:09 <seanb> Alistair; Ok
15:29:27 <seanb> Antoine: Would like to discuss ISSUE 83. Semantics of concept scheme containment
15:29:47 <seanb> ...some problems with the implementation. Alistair proposes a new property to capture the
15:29:51 <seanb> ...semantics. 
15:29:59 <seanb> Guus: This seems rather drastic at this point.
15:30:02 <Antoine> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0036.html
15:30:09 <Antoine> -> start of the thread
15:30:15 <seanb> Alistair: I think this is less drastic. 
15:30:47 <aliman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008May/0068.html
15:31:11 <Zakim> -Margherita
15:31:13 <aliman> ex:cs skos:hasTopConcept ex:c.
15:31:14 <seanb> Alistair: Email above contains resolution to the issues. Email merely states an entailment. 
15:31:15 <aliman> entails the graph:
15:31:16 <aliman> ex:c skos:inScheme ex:cs
15:31:40 <seanb> ... want to follow this entailment, but resolution doesn't state how we go about making this happen.
15:31:58 <seanb> ...Spent some time thinking and what we're trying to say is that skos:hasTopConcept has an inverse which is a
15:32:07 <seanb> ...subproperty of skos:inScheme
15:32:31 <seanb> ...Most obvious way to express this is to name the inverse and then state it explicitly. 
15:32:47 <seanb> ...if we don't name it then it requires an anonymous property. This
15:33:04 <seanb> ...could be a potential problem. Would appreciate input from Jeremy. 
15:33:29 <seanb> Jeremy: OWL2 may be about to allow anonymous properties. One issue is that it pushes
15:33:52 <seanb> ...you out of OWL DL. Can't use the anonymous property in a triple (not as predicate). 
15:34:07 <seanb> ...so in terms of describing the relationships, there's nothing particularly wrong, but implementations
15:34:27 <seanb> ...may find it difficult. Procedurally, putting in an anonymous property may cause trouble, 
15:34:43 <seanb> ...but a new property might also cause problems.
15:34:55 <seanb> Guus: But other things are not stated in the data model.
15:35:09 <seanb> Alistair: There are two constraints expressed as prose, but there is no way to do that in 
15:35:38 <seanb> ...RDF or OWL. Here, it *is* possible to do it. 
15:36:02 <seanb> ...Would avoid complication of anonymous properties.
15:36:21 <seanb> Guus: Only require inverse of hasTopConcept or inScheme.
15:36:30 <seanb> ...topConceptOf would do the trick.
15:36:40 <seanb> Alistair: Called it topConceptInScheme in Ref.
15:36:46 <seanb> Guus: awful name!
15:37:01 <seanb> Alistair: Subjective view. Not really worried about the naming.
15:37:33 <seanb> Jeremy: is the intention to document the relationship within OWL. Could one include this in 
15:37:44 <seanb> ...a separate file with a seeAlso.
15:37:56 <seanb> Alistair: If we can do it without jumping through hoops, why not do it?
15:38:30 <seanb> Guus: Surprised that other constraints can be expressed in RDF.
15:38:48 <seanb> Alistair: All but two current. Would be three with this one. 
15:38:58 <seanb> Guus: WHat's the problem with three rather than two?
15:39:07 <seanb> Alistair: For this one, we could do it.
15:39:20 <seanb> Guus: But only at the cost of new vocabulary. 
15:39:41 <seanb> Alistair: But non-standard semantics is also costly.
15:40:02 <seanb> Antoine: Can't see why my axiom is not valid OWL
15:40:14 <seanb> Alistair: Entailments that follow are not valid RDF.
15:40:38 <seanb> Jeremy: There is a bug with RDF (ter Horst). Significant problems and adding an anonymous
15:40:54 <seanb> ...property would exercise that bug. Would advise against it. 
15:41:12 <seanb> Antoine: That's the argument I was looking for.
15:41:28 <seanb> Antoine: Also assume a bug in the OWL specification then. 
15:41:44 <seanb> Jeremy: There is a need for a bug fix. But will not be done any time soon.
15:41:51 <seanb> Guus: We're not going there.
15:42:14 <seanb> Jeremy: Cost of new predicate vs. non-standard. New predicate is cheaper.
15:42:55 <seanb> ...preference would be to say nothing. 
15:43:26 <seanb> Guus: small cost with a small group. 
15:43:58 <seanb> Sean: preference for new predicate. 
15:44:14 <seanb> Guus: Suggest that Reference Editors make a proposal for this. 
15:44:32 <seanb> ...Will reopen ISSUE 83, but expect a proposal to close with a new property. 
15:44:41 <seanb> Alistair: Do we need to open the issue>
15:44:50 <seanb> Guus: yes, need documented rationale. 
15:45:07 <seanb> ...alternative is to open new issue and immediately propose closing it. 
15:45:13 <seanb> ...That might be better. 
15:45:24 <seanb> ...for me topConceptOf would be an appropriate name.
15:45:49 <seanb> ..Propose a new issue which is then closed. 
15:46:11 <seanb> ACTION: Alistair to open issue relating to topConceptOf and propose a resolution. 
15:46:24 <seanb> Guus: Any more w.r.t content?
15:46:29 <seanb> Antoine: happy
15:47:06 <seanb> Guus: Margherita reviewed, but reviewed the old draft. 
15:47:13 <seanb> ...chance for a new draft next week?
15:47:34 <seanb> Alistair: Think so. Resolutions to things are done. Need to mark at rsik and some editorial stuff.
15:47:59 <seanb> Guus: Earliest possible for LC decision is August 19th. 
15:48:30 <seanb> ...problem for Guus as on holiday. Could review but only in next two days.
15:48:39 <seanb> Alistair: Have to finish this week. 
15:48:56 <seanb> Guus: Could do it if it's there by Friday. 
15:49:17 <seanb> Alistair: Could provide a link which will be pretty much the version we publish. 
15:49:41 <seanb> Guus: Can expect cmments by the 12th, one week for discussion and a decision about LC
15:49:46 <seanb> ...on the 19th. 
15:50:28 <seanb> ...would be preferable if at the same point we have a primer draft consistent with the Reference.
15:50:46 <seanb> Antoine: Feasible apart from action on co-ordination. 
15:51:11 <seanb> ...Version of the primer for the 19th?
15:51:29 <seanb> Guus: Would also like to take a decision about publishing primer on 19th.
15:51:44 <seanb> ...agenda item for next week will be scheduling.
15:52:22 <seanb> ...also need to discuss LC period given that 
15:52:33 <seanb> ...publishing will take a few days. 5-6 week period is appropriate. 
15:53:17 <seanb> ...end September/beginning October. 
15:53:34 <seanb> Sean: some traffic on the list about broader/broaderTransitive.
15:53:45 <seanb> Guus: no new arguments there. No real evidence to reopen this.
15:54:09 <seanb> Alistair: i'd agree. Concerned about how many people misunderstand this. 
15:54:20 <seanb> ...not a technical problem, but perhaps some confusion with names. 
15:54:33 <seanb> ...its a shame that people are misunderstanding this. 
15:54:56 <seanb> Sean: Question of education rather than technical details.
15:55:09 <seanb> Antoine: Whatever the names, the pattern will be the same, and that's 
15:55:13 <seanb> ...hard for people to get. 
15:55:25 <seanb> Guus: Will pay attention to this. 
15:55:46 <seanb> Jeremy: Is a simple example more accessible? Parent/Ancestor etc?
15:56:03 <JeremyCarroll> JeremyCarroll has joined #swd
15:56:09 <seanb> Sean: is the reference an appropriate place for this?
15:56:21 <seanb> Antoine: Could put some drawings in the primer. 
15:56:37 <seanb> Alistair: Antoine's slide at the SKOS event was very clear. 
15:56:59 <seanb> Antoine: Animated.
15:57:06 <seanb> Guus; Could make snapshots.
15:57:31 <seanb> Guus: Parent/ancestor is already a long way towards this. 
15:57:52 <seanb> Topic: Vocabulary Management
15:57:57 <seanb> Guus: nobody here
15:58:02 <seanb> Topic: RDFa
15:58:05 <seanb> Guus: nobody here
15:58:10 <aliman> -> http://www.iskouk.org/SKOS_July2008.htm ISKO event with link to antoine's slides
15:58:15 <seanb> Topic: Recipes
15:58:18 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to mention need for RDFa reviewers
15:58:39 <aliman> q-
15:59:00 <JeremyCarroll> q- Jeremy
15:59:03 <seanb> 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]
15:59:05 <seanb> --continues
15:59:21 <seanb> Guus: Recipes?
15:59:35 <seanb> Diego: Document is ready to be published. Ralph has not had time
15:59:38 <seanb> ...to do it. 
15:59:52 <seanb> ...will try to publish asap
15:59:54 <Zakim> -aliman
16:00:13 <seanb> ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
16:00:15 <seanb> --continues
16:00:20 <seanb> ACTION: Jon and Ralph to publish Recipes as Working Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-swd-minutes.html#action03]
16:00:22 <seanb> --continues
16:00:57 <seanb> Jeremy: back to RDFa, at call on Thursday, hope to get WG approval on 19th. 
16:01:13 <seanb> ...reviewers to be appointed for 5th.
16:01:32 <seanb> Guus: Only need review for implementation report. WG should check that we've met the conditions. 
16:01:40 <seanb> ...not like reviewing a regular document
16:01:59 <seanb> Jeremy: Only major change was on Primer. HTML vs XHTML issue.
16:02:27 <seanb> Guus: useful background
16:03:01 <Zakim> -JeremyCarroll
16:03:02 <seanb> Guus: next telecon 5th August, then 19th August
16:03:07 <Zakim> -TomB?
16:03:08 <Zakim> -berrueta
16:03:11 <Zakim> -Antoine_Isaac
16:03:12 <seanb> zakim, list attendees
16:03:13 <Zakim> -Guus_Schreiber
16:03:15 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, aliman, seanb, berrueta, Margherita?, TomB?, Margherita, JeremyCarroll
16:03:16 <marghe> marghe has left #swd
16:03:34 <seanb> Meeting: SWD WG
16:03:40 <seanb> Chair: Guus
16:04:12 <seanb> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0062.html
16:04:39 <seanb> Regrets+ Ed, Vit
16:04:53 <seanb> rrsagent, please make record public
16:05:12 <seanb> rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:05:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html seanb
16:07:26 <seanb> Previous: 2008-07-01 http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html
16:07:33 <seanb> rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:07:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html seanb
16:08:12 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, seanb, in SW_SWD()11:00AM
16:08:16 <Zakim> SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
16:08:21 <Zakim> Attendees were Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, aliman, seanb, berrueta, Margherita?, TomB?, Margherita, JeremyCarroll
16:30:45 <JeremyCarroll> JeremyCarroll has joined #swd
16:31:14 <JeremyCarroll> JeremyCarroll has left #swd
16:58:10 <seanb> seanb has left #swd
18:17:56 <Zakim> Zakim has left #swd