15:03:19 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #swd
15:03:19 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc
15:03:37 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #swd
15:03:56 <Guus> zakim, this will be swd
15:03:56 <Zakim> ok, Guus, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started
15:04:10 <Guus> zakim, call tomb
15:04:10 <Zakim> ok, Guus; the call is being made
15:04:11 <Zakim> +Tomb
15:04:22 <seanb> seanb has joined #swd
15:04:46 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
15:04:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus_Schreiber, Jon_Phipps, Antoine_Isaac, Tomb
15:04:47 <Zakim> On IRC I see seanb, Zakim, RRSAgent, Antoine, aliman, JonP, Guus, berrueta
15:05:05 <Zakim> +??P15
15:05:20 <JonP> zakim, Jon_Phipps is me
15:05:20 <Zakim> +JonP; got it
15:06:10 <Zakim> +??P19
15:06:14 <seanb> zakim, ??P19 is me
15:06:14 <Zakim> +seanb; got it
15:06:26 <Guus> zakim, ??p19 is Sean
15:06:26 <Zakim> I already had ??P19 as seanb, Guus
15:07:03 <Antoine> scribenick: Antoine
15:08:03 <Antoine> Regrets: Margherita, Ralph, Jeremy
15:08:54 <Antoine> Guus: about last week minutes
15:09:03 <Antoine> ... there was an action for me
15:09:26 <Antoine> ... the action is don
15:09:30 <Antoine> s/don/done
15:09:49 <Antoine> Guss: next telecon
15:09:57 <Antoine> s/Guss/Guus
15:10:12 <Antoine> .. no problem with the changing time
15:10:27 <Antoine> Topic: SKOS
15:10:55 <seanb> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0222.html
15:10:57 <Antoine> Sean: I sent two lists
15:11:21 <Antoine> ... I propose that we walk through this list
15:11:24 <Antoine> Guus: fine
15:11:38 <Antoine> Sean: these are not difficult
15:11:57 <Antoine> ... Can I ask for clarification of process?
15:12:07 <Antoine> ... Is it in our power to close issues?
15:12:14 <Antoine> Guus: as quickly as you can
15:12:27 <Antoine> Sean: all responses for issues last week have been sent
15:12:36 <Antoine> ... we're waiting for answers
15:12:54 <Antoine> Guus: we can accept all the editorial changes
15:13:23 <Antoine> [Sean browsing through issues...]
15:13:31 <Antoine> Guus: let's all accept them
15:14:02 <Antoine> PROPOSED to accept the editorial changes in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0222.html
15:14:26 <Antoine> RESOLVED to accept the editorial changes in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0222.html
15:14:51 <Antoine> Guus: you can just let the commenters know about the changes
15:15:49 <aliman> guus: issues you handled
15:16:02 <aliman> antoine: yes, link in agenda, proposed a number of answers
15:16:17 <aliman> ...two involbe the primer, 4 relate to michael panzer email
15:16:31 <aliman> guus: issues proposing change to primer?
15:16:56 <aliman> antoine: yes for 2, 4 mostly clarification and suggestions to michael panzer on how to treat classification features in skos
15:17:04 <aliman> ...i did propose solutions enabling to do so
15:17:21 <aliman> ...don't want to change existing docs to make skos compatible with his cases, because too specific
15:17:27 <aliman> ...not observed them in UCR doc
15:17:38 <aliman> guus: you suggest to accept them as one set (all 6)
15:17:47 <aliman> antoine: at least first two. second list of 4
15:18:05 <aliman> sean: issues 181-186?
15:18:13 <aliman> guus: 163-164, 181-185
15:18:22 <aliman> ...discussion required
15:19:31 <Antoine> Alistair: I had quick look on some answers
15:19:42 <Antoine> ... I wonder whether others like them
15:19:53 <Antoine> ... there might be a little bit informal
15:20:12 <aliman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0197.html
15:20:19 <Antoine> ... should we really propose solutions?
15:20:36 <Antoine> ... especially about 182
15:21:07 <aliman> I faced a similar case once. We just did not represent these indexing 
15:21:08 <aliman> links at the time, but if it had been a matter of life or death I would 
15:21:09 <Antoine> ... and especially the first paragraph
15:21:10 <aliman> have used (specialization) of mapping properties, as you proposed. The 
15:21:11 <aliman> solution you propose is I think very statisfactory!
15:21:13 <aliman> Another option would be to use dc:subject (or a specialization of it) : 
15:21:15 <aliman> after all, indexing of concepts or classes by other concepts or classes 
15:21:16 <aliman> can be likened to indexing of douments (or general resources) by 
15:21:18 <aliman> concepts or classes!
15:22:40 <Antoine> Alistair: we could emphasize more on formal response
15:23:10 <Antoine> Guus: first part: our answer
15:23:16 <Antoine> ... second part: discussion
15:24:14 <Antoine> ... would be what to do.
15:24:28 <Antoine> ... it's more like a best practice response.
15:24:47 <Antoine> Guus: 163
15:24:56 <Antoine> Antoine: editorial issue
15:25:00 <Antoine> Guus: that's fine
15:27:10 <aliman> antoine: discussion of provenance, alistair comment to leavfe things open
15:27:14 <Antoine> Guus: 164
15:27:31 <aliman> I like Antoine's response to 164
15:28:18 <aliman> antoine: ability to represent some specific collections of classes in classification scheme. looks like skos:Collections, but should be included in network of semantic relationships, but not possibly in current skos. 
15:28:33 <aliman> ...answer maybe too informal
15:28:53 <aliman> guus: do same as 182, start with formal answer, then indicate what you think about best practice
15:29:11 <aliman> ...you can keep it in one mail, but make sure there is editorial distinction, mail with two parts
15:29:18 <aliman> ...formal part is ok
15:29:28 <aliman> [discussion of 181]
15:29:48 <aliman> guus: go to 183 class-topic
15:30:19 <aliman> antoine: again specific concern about classification schemes, i proposed a solution, quite informal, not sure what he means.
15:30:31 <aliman> guus: again informal
15:30:51 <aliman> antoine: i should apply same recipe. cannot get all what you say
15:30:58 <aliman> ...problem with phone
15:31:43 <aliman> guus: proposal antoine, for these four messages 181, 182, 183, 185, do splitting of formal and informal
15:32:07 <aliman> antoine: for this 183 not really clear, something to do to say doubts about what you meant? or hide that from the answer?
15:32:16 <aliman> guus: make a clear assumption about what you think he means
15:32:46 <aliman> ..I propose we approve responses to 163, 164, action antoine to write revised response 181, 182, 183, 185
15:33:04 <aliman> PROPOSED: to approve responses to 163 and 164
15:33:16 <aliman> second: alistair
15:33:22 <aliman> no objections
15:33:32 <aliman> RESOLVED: to approve responses to 163 and 164
15:33:49 <aliman> guus: discuss 184, 186
15:34:00 <GuusS> GuusS has joined #swd
15:34:03 <aliman> antoine: 184 is about notation and preflabel overlap.
15:34:32 <aliman> ...questino from michael panzer, about ability to represent alternative notations, because we can use skos:notation, skos:prefLabel, skos:altLabel ...
15:35:06 <aliman> ... i was preparing answer regarding skos:altLabel plus custom language tags solution, but same time there was discussion about use of skos:notation and skos:preflabel
15:35:22 <seanb> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0200.html
15:35:28 <aliman> ... before writing answer about 184 wanted to be sure about current policy w.r.t. skos:notation and skos:preflabel
15:35:37 <aliman> guus: relationship between them?
15:36:01 <aliman> antoine: I understood from docs skos:notation used with datatype literals; people use plain literals, use preflabel with notation language tags.
15:36:37 <aliman> ...I infer that from both docs, worded so that skos:notation applied with typed literals. then some mails starting from you [guus] saying skos:notation could be used with plain literals as well
15:36:57 <aliman> ...so overlap between object of preflabel and nontation; made idea of using properties blurred.
15:37:07 <aliman> ...so wanted clear idea on what properties should be used with.
15:37:21 <aliman> sean: discussion about this, see link above, my last thoughts on this.
15:38:11 <aliman> ...edging towards original wording, notation used with typed literal. Peter's original comment, guus points out owl spec requires applications treat unrecognised datatypes as unsupported datatypes, so we can have datatypes, revert to original wording, fit with antoine's desire
15:38:15 <aliman> guus: also my position
15:38:42 <aliman> sean: response from norman gray, happy with this notion. proposal as it stands for issue 156 (peter's comment about datatypes) we make no change
15:38:45 <aliman> guus: i agree
15:39:01 <aliman> sean: maybe slight editorial change, make reference to datatype support paragraph in owl reference
15:39:14 <aliman> guus: also what we had in mind when talked about datatypes
15:39:21 <aliman> sean: so that ticks off 156 too
15:39:31 <aliman> alistair: fine with me
15:39:39 <aliman> guus: solve your issue antoine?
15:39:44 <aliman> antoine: yes
15:40:00 <aliman> sean: will need change in working draft, revert to original wording
15:40:16 <aliman> guus: antoine wait on response until have revised wording
15:40:28 <aliman> ... 186, 
15:41:31 <aliman> antoine: this is about relation between mapping properties and semantic properties. currently broadmatch subprop of broader etc. michael panzer raised objection, did not see, disagreed with mapping links interpreted as normal structural links. discussion at last f2f, i wanted to know reaction of wg.
15:42:01 <aliman> ...personally against link between mapping and hierarchical links. ready to accept again, but wanted reflection
15:43:10 <Antoine> Alistair: I thought we were trying to follow these standards
15:43:40 <Antoine> Guus: we're not deriving the mapping relations from standard relations
15:43:59 <Antoine> ... this change would change our design
15:53:08 <aliman> guus: sufficient input to write draft response, antoine?
15:53:16 <aliman> ...comfortable with issue?
15:53:33 <aliman> antoine: no, not comfortable. I could write something, but wouldn't feel easy.
15:54:06 <aliman> guus: i'll take this one. hearing alistair's arguments, adding specifics from new british standard
15:54:18 <aliman> ...definitely see no evidence to change the design
15:54:52 <Antoine> Guus: Antoine should propose revised answers for issues 181-185
15:55:03 <Antoine> ... and me for 186
15:55:36 <Antoine> ACTION:  Antoine to propose revised answers for issues 181-185
15:55:48 <Antoine> ACTION: Guus to propose answer for issue 186
15:56:36 <Antoine> Guus: Sean, Alistair, do you have other issues ot discuss?
15:56:46 <Antoine> Sean: no
15:57:00 <Antoine> ACTION: Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation examples of the
15:57:00 <Antoine> use of rdfs:label w/ SKOS [recorded in
15:57:00 <Antoine> http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10] 
15:57:14 <Antoine> -- CONTINUES
15:57:28 <Antoine> ACTION: guus to draft revised response to ISSUE-179 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action03]
15:57:59 <Antoine> -- DROPPED
15:58:15 <Antoine> ACTION: guus to draft revised response to ISSUE-179 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action03]
15:58:30 <Antoine> -- DROPPED
15:58:37 <Antoine> ACTION: sean & alistair to respond to commenters on all issues decided today. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action04]
15:58:41 <Antoine> -- DONE
15:59:55 <Antoine> ACTION: Sean and Alistair to send answers wrt. the editorial issues resolved on 21-10-08
16:00:39 <Antoine> TOPIC: RDFa
16:01:03 <Antoine> Guus: congratulations to all RDFa people!
16:01:19 <Antoine> TOPIC: Recipes
16:01:45 <Antoine> ACTION: diego propose resolutions to remaining recipes issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action02]
16:01:51 <Antoine> -- CONTINUES
16:01:56 <Antoine> ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes
16:01:56 <Antoine> implementations] [recorded in
16:01:56 <Antoine> http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20] 
16:02:02 <Antoine> -- CONTINUES
16:02:21 <Antoine> TOPIC: AOB
16:02:48 <Antoine> Guus: OWL WG have asked for review of OWL documents
16:03:25 <Antoine> ... I will indicate that the group is small and busy with LC.
16:03:34 <Antoine> ... Are there volunteers here?
16:04:02 <Antoine> Sean: I cannot promise to do it, not much time
16:04:07 <Antoine> Alistair: mee too
16:04:49 <Antoine> ACTION: Guus to look at OWL documents for review
16:06:04 <Antoine> Guus: meeting is adjourned, we'll meet on Nov 4
16:06:09 <Zakim> -JonP
16:06:16 <Zakim> -Tomb
16:06:22 <Zakim> -seanb
16:06:27 <Zakim> -aliman
16:06:31 <seanb> seanb has left #swd
16:06:33 <Zakim> -Guus_Schreiber
16:06:36 <Antoine> zakim, list attendees
16:06:36 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, Tomb, JonP, aliman, seanb
16:07:20 <Antoine> zakim, list participants
16:07:20 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, Tomb, JonP, aliman, seanb
16:07:33 <Antoine> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:07:44 <Antoine> RRSAgent, generate minutes
16:07:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html Antoine
16:09:05 <Antoine> zakim, bye
16:09:05 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees were Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, Tomb, JonP, aliman, seanb
16:09:05 <Zakim> Zakim has left #swd
16:09:16 <Antoine> RRSAgent, bye
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> I see 10 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-actions.rdf :
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Antoine to propose revised answers for issues 181-185 [1]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-55-36
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus to propose answer for issue 186 [2]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-55-48
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation examples of the [3]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-57-00
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: guus to draft revised response to ISSUE-179 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action03] [4]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-57-28
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: guus to draft revised response to ISSUE-179 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action03] [5]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-58-15
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: sean & alistair to respond to commenters on all issues decided today. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action04] [6]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-58-37
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Sean and Alistair to send answers wrt. the editorial issues resolved on 21-10-08 [7]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T15-59-55
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: diego propose resolutions to remaining recipes issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-swd-minutes.html#action02] [8]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T16-01-45
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes [9]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T16-01-56
16:09:16 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus to look at OWL documents for review [10]
16:09:16 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-irc#T16-04-49