See also: IRC log, previous 2008-11-18
RESOLUTION: accept minutes of the last telecon: http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ben review RDFa Use Cases and propose transition to Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/09/30-swd-minutes.html#action02]
-> meeting record: 2008-11-20 RDFa telecon
Diego: Tom sent mail about a broken reference
in the document
... should we publish an updated Note?
Ralph: did we include a link to an errata document?
Diego: the URI is still served but the document we want has moved
<Zakim> TomB, you wanted to ask if it is clear what we should cite
Tom: it's not clear what the intention of the Tag document is
-> [Recipes] Reference to httpRange-14 [Tom 2008-11-18]
ACTION: Diego write a proposal to republish Recipes with the httpRange-14 reference corrected and a link to an errata document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action02]
ACTION: Ralph post his comments on the editor's draft of the metadata note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action03]
Diego: I exchanged email with Ivan Herman
... apart from a couple of technical notes about the content, he said it
would be important to let Ian Jacobs and Dominique Hazael-Massieux know of
this work
<edsu> +1 for having them review
Ralph: I'd like the WG to produce one more
editor's draft before we ask them for their review time
... not that the document is seriously flawed but I don't think we'll get
them to review it many times
Guus: good to see the translations of RDFa Primer and Recipes
-> French translations [Ivan 2008-11-23]
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Guus to look at OWL documents for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action10]
Guus: SWD review of CURIE draft - done? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0214.html
Ralph: I think that's done and CURIE has moved on
Alistair: issues 135, 153, 175, 157, 186
... these 5 are the only issues for which we have not sent a response
Guus: we still have 34 open issues
Alistair: we have responses back from several
commentors that I haven't yet entered into tracker
... there are also several from whom we've not heard back
Guus: after a reasonable amount of time we can close the issue if we haven't heard back
Alistair: as far as I know, only one issue has ongoing discussion
Antoine: issue 160
Alistair: it appears that Doug would be satisfied with changes to the Primer; he's looking for more guidance, not a change in the spec
-> issue 160; Allowing collections in semantic relationships
Guus: you're still waiting on my input
Alistair: yes, we'd like Guus and Jeremey's implementation input
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Guus and Jeremy to give concrete implementation examples of the use of rdfs:label w/ SKOS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/07-swd-minutes.html#action10]
-> ISSUE-135 draft response [Sean 2008-11-25]
ACTION: [DONE] Sean to propose a resolution to ISSUE-135 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action06]
Guus: Sean's mail reflects the discussion we
had last week
... I agree with it; change the label properties to be subproperties of
owl:AnnotationProperty
Antoine: draft response is OK with me
Alistair: I'm not using OWL so I don't have a strong perspective on this
Guus: as an OWL Full user, I don't have any
problems anyway
... I'm fine with the change if it helps OWL DL folk
... there is a logic behind it
RESOLUTION: draft response to issue 135 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Nov/0104.html accepted
ACTION: Alistair send issue 135 response from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Nov/0104.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action08]
-> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/157 issue 157; SKOS and OWL 2 analysis
Alistair: I believe Sean was going to identify
those parts of SKOS that are outside of OWL DL
... I think Sean may be expecting Guus to respond as well
ACTION: Guus discuss response to issue 157 with Sean [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action12]
-> issue 153; SKOS namespace change question
Guus: last discussion we were moving in the direction of keeping the old namespace
Alistair: yes, I believe Sean was going to draft a proposed resolution to keep the old namespace
ACTION: [DONE] Guus to propose answer for issue 186 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/10/21-swd-minutes.html#action02]
Guus: I completed that action
ACTION: Guus send response for issue 186 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action10]
-> ISSUE 186 - draft response [Guus 2008-11-18]
ACTION: Sean to add rdf:type and rdf:Property assertions to the skos schema [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action07] [CONTINUES]
<aliman> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20081001/
-> SKOS namespace change question II
Ralph: nothing new in 175, right? Duplicate of 153
Alistair: yes, it was primarily Jeremey noting that had he been in the WG at the time he would have voted to keep the old namespace
Alistair: there was further discussion about making mappingRelation a subproperty of semanticRelation
ACTION: Alistair add an issue for Bernard's comment on mappingRelation and draft a response [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action13]
<Antoine> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Nov/0015.html
Antoine: I had a comment about part of resolution for issue 36 missing from the spec
-> issue 36; ConceptSchemeContainment
Antoine: Doug asked for pointer to the final
resolution of this issue
... and I couldn't cite it for him
Alistair: we initially suggested the use of RDF
named graphs and that we'd cite this in the references
... later, Sean thought this was out-of-scope for SKOS Reference
... and we removed a number of informational appendices, this among them
... this appendix was only a place-holder anyway
... I'd be happy for content to be added to the Primer
Antoine: there's a sentence in the Primer already mentioning possible use of RDF named graphs
Guus: we could add an example
Ralph: I'm reluctant to add examples when named graphs haven't been standardized
Alistair: could show SPARQL usage
Guus: yes, a procedural method to handle this
Antoine: I can think about some examples, perhaps not in the place where the current note appears
Guus: 1 or 2 SPARQL examples would be sufficient
ACTION: Antoine propose 1 or 2 SPARQL examples showing named graph usage [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/25-swd-minutes.html#action14]
ACTION: Ralph to report on use of RDFa metadata in Recommendations. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUES]
Ralph: We can certainly do SKOS CR with RDFa markup
Guus: next week can we be prepared to close
issues in tracker and have draft responses for the remaining 5 issues
... should we meet next week?
Alistair: I'd like to keep our momentum up
Guus: we've discussed the namespace question
[[
At Risk of Change: The relationships between the properties skos:exactMatch, skos:broadMatch and skos:narrowMatch may be changed in future versions of this specification. In particular, property chain axioms may be introduced.
]]
-- http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20081001/#L5675
Alistair: I don't recall any comments addressing this
Guus: so we should leave it as is
Alistair: agree
Guus: topConceptOf
Alistair: I don't think Kjetil objects
Antoine: issue 176 draft response
Alistair: there was confusion here; Jeremey did
comment but only on whether we should hesitate to express something not in
OWL1
... Sean just clarified that we were hesitating not because of OWL1 v. OWL2
concerns but because we couldn't reach a definitive decision about the
feature at all
<Antoine> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/163
-- issue 163
Antoine: minor editorial issue 163
<Antoine> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/164
Antoine: issue 164 implied some extensive
modifications to the Primer but Doug approved the changes we did make
... so nothing particularly substantial
... I drafted proposed responses
<Antoine> proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Nov/0074.html
RESOLUTION: accept resolution to issues 163 and 164 per Antoine's email of 18 Nov; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Nov/0074.html
RESOLUTION: Next telecon 2 Dec
[adjourned]
ACTION: [PENDING] Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]