W3C

SemWeb Deployment WG

30 Sep 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log, previous 2008-09-16

Attendees

Present
Tom Baker, Ralph Swick, Guus Schreiber, Diego Beruetta, Ed Summers, Jon Phipps, Margherita Sini, Daniel Rubin, Sean Bechhofer, Alistair Miles, Antoine Isaac, Ben Adida, Jeremy Carroll
Regrets
Elisa Kendall, Simone Onofri
Chair
Guus
Scribe
Ralph

Contents


Admin

Guus: schedule for future telecons?

Tom: haven't created a proposal yet

<TomB> +1 for 7 October next call

RESOLUTION: next telecon 7 October

scribe: Tom to chair, Ed to scribe

Jon: I'm at risk for 7 Oct

Antone: regrets for 7 Oct

PROPOSED: accept 16-swd-minutes as minutes of previous meeting

Sean: I'd indicated my regrets for 16 Sep

RESOLUTION: http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html accepted as minutes of previous meeting, amended to show Sean's regrets

RDFa

Ben: no specific update; we have to schedule the last step
... only minor comments received during PR; some typos
... I need to tweak the Primer
... we've had positive comments on the Primer but some recent comments say there's not enough in it
... we want to have an updated version to publish with the REC

Ralph: It's important that WG members get their AC reps to respond to the Call for Reviwe

ACTION: All to remind respective AC Reps to respond to RDFa Proposed Rec Call for Review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action01]

Guus: schedule also says we'll publish RDFa Use Cases as WG Note

Ben: yep, we should see if it needs any updates

ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]

Recipes

Guus: I think we're done here

ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]

RDFa Metadata Note

Guus: was this discussed at the previous telecon?

Diego: there's a new version in the Wiki
... but I haven't yet discussed this draft with Ed
... hope to discuss with Ed in the next few days and then have a version for the WG

ACTION: Diego updates "Minimum RDFa metadata set for WG deliverables" draft in the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action04]

Ed: I read the previous draft and found a few minor things, would like to talk about this in a telecon; in particular, talk about the various vocabularies to use

Diego: I propose that Ed and I talk about it during the week and we put it on the agenda for 7 October

CURIE

ACTION: [DONE] Jeremy to send a review to XHTML2 with comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html#action06]

-> "CURIE review from SWD WG" [Jeremy 2008-09-22]

Vocabulary Management

Guus: no status change

SKOS

Alistair: [reviews comments received]
... comment about disjointness of ConceptScheme and Concept
... hasTopConcept v. hasTopConceptOf
... mappings

<aliman> public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0014

<aliman> public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0015

-> Last Call Comment: S9 skos:ConceptScheme is disjoint with skos:Concept [issue 129]

<aliman> public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0026

-> Last Call Comment: skos:hasTopConcept and skos:topConceptOf [issue 130]

<aliman> wiki/SKOS/LastCall#preview

Alistair: I've linked all these messages from LastCall#preview

<aliman> public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0037

Alistair: Quentin spotted an error in an example

<aliman> public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0044

<aliman> public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0055

Alistair: several comments from Michael Schneider, I broke out into separate issues

-> SKOS Issues Raised

<aliman> 5 external last call comments

Sean: I expect a comment from Peter Patel-Schneider about some of the OWL

<Ralph> Alistair++ for entering these into tracker

Antoine: I found another, from 28 June; from Erik Hennum of IBM

Alistair: I was wondering whether this should be entered as if it were a Last Call comment

Ralph, Guus: yes, we should include Eric's message among Last Call comments

Alistair: I'll generate issues for it

Guus: I don't see many comments from the thesaurus or representation fields
... should we extend Last Call to get more comments?

Ralph: is the esw-thes list sufficiently represented? Could we get more expressions of support?

Alistair: we could definitely get more expressions of support

Ralph: that would be helpful

Guus: do we have input on our features at risk?

Alistair: yes, in particular from Kjetl

ACTION: Alistair enter Last Call issues from Erik Hennum's 28 June mail [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action06]

Sean: we've had no comments about the namespace

-> "SKOS comment" [Erik Hennum 2008-06-27]

Margherita: I have not yet had time to update [my work] with the latest SKOS
... I might ask folk in the Fisheries Department; they have a glossary and other resources

Guus: I'll ask some folk here to comment

Ed: Clay and I are the primary Library of Congress folk working with SKOS right now
... I might be able to get a general note of support but unlikely to get specific comments on the namespace

Ralph: it would be good to get a consensus from esw-thes on the namespace question

Alistair: I can ask that list explicitly; I've just sent a reminder

Guus: I am worried that we don't have enough input on the features at risk

Ralph: right, folks who like what we've proposed may feel they don't need to comment but the opposite is true

Jon: Ed and I have presented SKOS at CAUSE conferences, including noting the features at risk
... there have been no objections

Guus: it would be helpful to send a mail with that

<Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest to Ed that a note of support and interest from someone at LC, even just a one-liner, would be helpful

Ed: ok, but not from me or Clay, right?

Tom: right; better from Barbara

Ed: dbpedia uses SKOS quite heavily in their datastore; has anyone approached them?

ACTION: Ed ask dbpedia to send a message in support of SKOS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action07]

Ed: I could also contact the Department of Agriculture Library

Guus: should we formally extend Last Call or just accept comments until 14 October?

Ralph: I'm happy either way

Guus: most WGs accept comments even if they arrive late

<JeremyCarroll> (There is no option to reject late comments .... but one can take the lateness into account)

Guus: Alistair; what, in your opinion, are the major comments

Alistair: issue 129; ConceptScheme and Concept

Sean: issue 135; should the label properties be subClassOf rdfs:Label
... Michael Schneider suggests that the label properties *not* be sub properties of rdfs:label
... I recall a related comment from Bernard Vatant
... some tools want the subPropertyOf so they can pull the labels out easily

<JeremyCarroll> (as a tool builder I am keen for all label props to be subPropertyOf rdfs:Label)

Guus: [my group] depends on subPropertyOf a lot; we don't have to adapt our software that looks for rdfs:label

Alistair: there might be a different way to do this in OWL2 than what we currently use
... Alan Ruttenburg sent mail recently that might be relevant

<aliman> Alan Ruttenberg links to OWL 2 annotations proposal

<aliman> OWL 2 Syntax -- Annotations

ACTION: [DONE] SKOS Reference editors to send mail asking for feedback from users [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action06]

ACTION: [DONE] Sean to add a request for implementations to the mail asking for feedback [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action07]

ACTION: Alistair 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] [CONTINUES]

<aliman> sorry for no progress on that

Guus: it would be nice to show implementations
... every vocabulary owner who uses SKOS to produce a compliant thesaurus should be considered an implementation
... we should find some example thesaurii that use features from our spec
... finding one or two such vocabularies for each feature would make a nice implementation report
... showing some vocabularies that use the label features would be good

Jon: what's the timeframe for implementation responses?

Guus: during Candidate Rec phase, which is typically 4-6 weeks

Ralph: We can propose what our own Candidate Rec exit criteria are. Traditionally, two independent implementations. Traditionally, candidate rec lasts as long as it takes to get implementations.

Jeremy: recently most groups have been very close to meeting their CR exit criteria before they enter CR

Jon: We have 100+ vocabularies in the registries. Have been avoiding switching over these vocabularies to new namespace because may be messy.

Jon: I may be able to submit some examples but it will take a while

Antoine: do the implementations have to be publicly available?

Ralph: we can accept an email message from an implementor describing their experiences, without making the code public

Jeremy: that mail can even go to a Member- or Team-confidential list :)

[adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Alistair enter Last Call issues from Erik Hennum's 28 June mail [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: All to remind respective AC Reps to respond to RDFa Proposed Rec Call for Review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Diego updates "Minimum RDFa metadata set for WG deliverables" draft in the wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Ed ask dbpedia to send a message in support of SKOS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action07]
 
[PENDING] ACTION: Alistair 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]
[PENDING] ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
 
[DONE] ACTION: Jeremy to send a review to XHTML2 with comments [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-swd-minutes.html#action06]
[DONE] ACTION: Sean to add a request for implementations to the mail asking for feedback [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action07]
[DONE] ACTION: SKOS Reference editors to send mail asking for feedback from users [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/02-swd-minutes.html#action06]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/09/30 16:27:49 $