IRC log of swd on 2009-04-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:01:31 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #swd

15:01:31 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-irc

15:01:35 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #swd

15:01:39 [Ralph]

zakim, this will be swd

15:01:39 [Zakim]

ok, Ralph, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started

15:01:42 [TomB]

TomB has joined #swd

15:01:43 [Ralph]

zakim, who's on the call?

15:01:43 [Zakim]

On the phone I see +003130889aaaa

15:02:01 [Zakim]

+Ralph

15:02:03 [Zakim]

- +003130889aaaa

15:02:04 [Zakim]

+ +003130889aaaa

15:02:35 [Zakim]

+ +31.20.420.aabb

15:02:35 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

15:02:44 [TomB]

zakim, IPcaller is me

15:02:45 [Zakim]

+TomB; got it

15:02:46 [Ralph]

Meeting: SemWeb Deployment Working Group

15:02:52 [Antoine]

zakim, aabb is me

15:02:52 [Zakim]

+Antoine; got it

15:03:42 [Zakim]

+??P58

15:03:44 [seanb]

zakim, ??P58 is me

15:03:44 [Zakim]

+seanb; got it

15:03:58 [Ralph]

zakim, drop aaaa

15:03:58 [Zakim]

+003130889aaaa is being disconnected

15:03:59 [Zakim]

- +003130889aaaa

15:04:35 [Ralph]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0068.html

15:04:53 [Ralph]

-> http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-swd-minutes.html previous 2009-04-07

15:05:02 [Ralph]

rrsagent, please make record public

15:05:56 [Zakim]

+ +30889aacc

15:06:12 [Ralph]

zakim, aacc is Guus

15:06:12 [Zakim]

+Guus; got it

15:06:36 [Ralph]

Chair: Guus

15:06:40 [Ralph]

scribe: Ralph

15:06:52 [Guus]

zakim, who is here?

15:06:52 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Ralph, TomB, Antoine, seanb, Guus

15:06:53 [Zakim]

On IRC I see TomB, Zakim, RRSAgent, Antoine, seanb, Guus, Ralph

15:06:54 [Ralph]

zakim, who's on the call?

15:06:54 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Ralph, TomB, Antoine, seanb, Guus

15:07:54 [Ralph]

regrets+ Diego

15:08:16 [Ralph]

Guus: I see quite a number of implementations coming in

15:08:29 [Ralph]

... we have some editing work to do [based on comment], no real obstacles

15:09:06 [Ralph]

RESOLVED: minutes http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-swd-minutes.html of previous telecon accepted

15:09:22 [Ralph]

PROPOSED: next telecon 5 May, Tom to chair

15:09:53 [Ralph]

Guus: I may have a conflict on 19 May

15:10:02 [Ralph]

Tom: I'll have regrets for 19 May

15:10:16 [Ralph]

RESOLVED: next telecon 5 May, Tom to chair

15:10:29 [Ralph]

Topic: SKOS

15:10:52 [Ralph]

Guus: I'm expecting 10 or more SKOS vocabularies plus 2 tools by 5 May

15:11:00 [Ralph]

... this should be sufficient for an implementation report

15:11:04 [Ralph]

Ralph: concur

15:11:18 [Ralph]

Guus: not clear whether the SKOS-XL features will have been implemented

15:12:04 [Ralph]

... we'll put Proposed Rec transition request on the agenda for 19 May

15:12:32 [Ralph]

... let's be sure to have all the information available on 5 May

15:13:12 [Ralph]

... issue about labels in SKOS namespace documents

15:13:34 [Ralph]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Mar/0012.html Re: [SKOS] SKOS ontology sanity-check? [Antoine 2009-3-09]

15:13:47 [Ralph]

Tom: I just posted about the label issue shortly before this call

15:14:21 [Ralph]

... since our schema will be emulated, it would be good to make it an example of good style

15:14:42 [Ralph]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0074.html Re: [SKOS] SKOS ontology sanity-check? - policy for natural language of rdfs:labels [Tom 2009-04-21]

15:14:57 [Ralph]

Antoine: on broaderTransitive ...

15:15:16 [Ralph]

... the reason I omitted concept in the label as I felt the idea of "transitive concept" was unclear

15:15:43 [Ralph]

... however, if you prefer to include "concept" in the label I'll be satisfied

15:16:01 [Ralph]

... I don't see many reactions to [these labels]

15:16:16 [Ralph]

Tom: I suspect these things will find their way into displays in various ways

15:16:25 [Ralph]

... so I'd like us to think about whether they make sense in that context

15:16:42 [Ralph]

Sean: I would find "has broader concept transitive" confusing

15:16:52 [Ralph]

... sounds like "transitive" is being applied to "concept"

15:17:03 [Ralph]

... perhaps "has broader concept [transitive]"

15:17:19 [Ralph]

... not sure if it's wise to introduce punctuation in labels

15:17:40 [Ralph]

Antoine: consider "has transitive broader concept" or "has ancestor"

15:17:50 [Ralph]

s/ancestor/ancestor concept/

15:18:10 [Ralph]

... "ancestor" follows the semantics

15:18:26 [Ralph]

Guus: I prefer keeping to a very strict label approach

15:18:37 [Ralph]

... the description property is the appropriate place to explain a bit more

15:18:41 [TomB]

+1 "has transitive broader concept"

15:19:16 [Ralph]

Ralph: agree with Guus, I think labels should be very close to the property names.

15:19:48 [Ralph]

... only if we thought we really should have renamed the property would I be inclined to make the labels very different

15:19:59 [Ralph]

Tom: I wouldn't want to introduce punctuation

15:20:24 [Ralph]

Guus: I propose to keep the labels the same as the name and introduce other clarification into the description

15:20:43 [Ralph]

Tom: some labels already introduce other words; 'has', 'concept'

15:20:52 [marghe]

marghe has joined #swd

15:21:09 [Ralph]

... we're following the examples of FOAF and the legacy SKOS vocabulary by breaking the label into natural language strings

15:21:17 [Ralph]

... but introducing words that are not part of the name

15:21:51 [Ralph]

-> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-skos-reference-20090317/skos.rdf Candidate Rec schema

15:22:10 [Zakim]

+Margherita_Sini

15:22:19 [Ralph]

Tom: there was a comment that the property name 'broader' was confusing and the commenter was looking to the label to help clarify

15:22:33 [Ralph]

... so the new label was in response to that comment

15:23:10 [Ralph]

Guus: then that would only apply to 'has broader concept'

15:24:25 [Ralph]

Ralph: I'd omit words like 'has'

15:24:26 [TomB]

My comments are at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0074.html

15:24:46 [Ralph]

... as I'd expect user interfaces to handle these words

15:25:07 [Ralph]

Sean: but some properties should be described as, e.g. 'is in ...'

15:25:18 [Ralph]

... no general algorithm for deciding 'has' or 'is'

15:25:35 [Ralph]

Tom: Dublin Core always interpreted label as a human-readable name for the concept

15:25:51 [Ralph]

... so we stick close to the property name but do break it into natural language words

15:26:11 [Ralph]

... we did not, however, follow the upper/lower case conventions for properties and classes

15:27:35 [Ralph]

Ralph: my own approach has been a very lazy one; pick property names that work as labels and make the labels be identical to the property names

15:28:18 [Ralph]

... I definitely think introducing 'has' and 'is' in the label will cause us future regrets

15:28:29 [Ralph]

Tom: I disagree; we were asked to make the labels be more meaningful

15:28:38 [Ralph]

... so including 'concept' in the label helps

15:28:53 [Ralph]

Antoine: @@[scribe missed]

15:29:10 [Ralph]

Margherita: I'd like to attach labels in other languages and add synonyms

15:29:34 [Ralph]

... but it's unclear to some whether the object of the relationship is the broader concept or the subject of the relationship

15:29:44 [Ralph]

... so I'd like the label to clarify the direction of the relationship

15:30:05 [Ralph]

Guus: we should have a consistent naming scheme, so everything should be these short sentences

15:30:12 [Ralph]

... I can live with this, though I'm not used to it

15:30:20 [Ralph]

Ralph: I can live with short sentences as well

15:30:49 [Ralph]

... and anyone who finds sentences truly objectionable can add their own label properties

15:30:54 [Ralph]

Guus: exactly

15:32:00 [Ralph]

Tom: my message was not meant to make suggestions other than 'has broader transitive'

15:32:09 [Ralph]

... I like adding 'concept' to the label

15:32:17 [Ralph]

... I like 'has transitive broader concept'

15:32:27 [Ralph]

Guus: but the word 'concept' seems superfluous to me

15:32:43 [Ralph]

... e.g. 'has related match [concept]'

15:32:51 [Ralph]

Antoine: 'match' can be a noun

15:33:03 [Ralph]

Guus: adding 'concept' can be very confusing

15:33:14 [Ralph]

... adding it would make 'match' on a par with 'concept'

15:33:36 [Ralph]

... the label should not say anything about the domain and range types, just name the relationship

15:33:51 [Ralph]

... so adding 'concept' would break my rule

15:34:20 [Ralph]

... hasTopConcept is different, as it picks one of several Concepts

15:34:29 [Ralph]

... that's the only exception I see to my rule

15:34:35 [Ralph]

Tom: alternativeLabel ?

15:34:50 [Ralph]

Guus: the string becomes a Label by virtue of the relationship

15:35:25 [Ralph]

... so drop 'concept' from 'has broader concept' and 'has narrower concept'

15:35:53 [Ralph]

... and 'has broader' solves the problem Tom mentioned

15:36:03 [Ralph]

Sean: I'm happy to agree with Guus

15:36:12 [Ralph]

... I'd omit the superfluous stuff

15:36:25 [Ralph]

Antoine: I think I could be OK with Guus' suggestion

15:36:35 [Ralph]

... I haven't identified a case that would be particularly bad

15:36:51 [Ralph]

Sean: and it's not a technical deal breaker; people can provide their own labels

15:37:40 [Ralph]

ACTION: Tom repost his label proposal, dropping the word 'concept'

15:38:29 [Ralph]

PROPOSED: drop the word 'concept' from the labels 'has broader concept', 'has narrower concept', 'has related concept'

15:38:53 [Ralph]

PROPOSED: drop the word 'concept' from the labels 'has broader concept', 'has narrower concept', 'has related concept', per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0074.html

15:39:33 [Ralph]

Margherita: I agree that 'concept' is not needed

15:39:46 [Ralph]

... what's important is that these are URIs, so the URI should not have spaces

15:39:59 [Ralph]

Antoine: right, we're not changing the URI

15:40:05 [Ralph]

RESOLVED: drop the word 'concept' from the labels 'has broader concept', 'has narrower concept', 'has related concept', per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0074.html

15:41:09 [Ralph]

Guus: [to Antoine] note that Primer updates should also be ready by 19 May

15:41:21 [Ralph]

Antoine: I'll send something to Ralph

15:41:32 [Ralph]

Guus: what about Use Cases and Requirements?

15:41:56 [Ralph]

... it would be nice to clean up UCR but I don't see huge value in it

15:42:08 [Ralph]

... I'd propose to do no further work on UCR

15:42:13 [Ralph]

... happy to leave it as it is

15:42:47 [Ralph]

-> http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-ucr/ SKOS Use Cases and Requirements

15:42:53 [Ralph]

W3C Working Draft 16 May 2007

15:44:23 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html TomB

15:44:59 [Ralph]

Ralph: I'd rather republish it as a Group Note saying we don't plan any further work than to leave it as a Working Draft that eventually falls into a 'Working Drafts no longer in Development' category

15:45:08 [Ralph]

Antoine: I agree with not doing much more work

15:45:22 [Ralph]

... but the current working draft uses some identifiers that no longer mean much

15:45:36 [Ralph]

... I'd like to change the ~20 identifiers to be more current

15:46:06 [Ralph]

ACTION: Antoine make minor edits to http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-skos-ucr-20070516/ to prepare for publication as Group Note on 19 May

15:47:10 [Ralph]

[DONE] CTION: Antoine add the Vrieje Uni tool to the implementation report [recorded

15:47:10 [Ralph]

in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-swd-minutes.html#action08]

15:47:33 [Antoine]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0073.html

15:47:36 [Ralph]

[DONE] ACTION: Antoine add the Vrieje Uni tool to the implementation report [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-swd-minutes.html#action08]

15:48:11 [seanb]

-> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html

15:48:18 [Ralph]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0032.html Request for Implementation Input: SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System [Antoine 2009-04-08]

15:49:07 [Ralph]

Sean: I think we have a lot of the substance for the implementation report already in place

15:49:23 [Ralph]

Guus: by 5 May I'd like to decide what sorts of implementations we're going to include

15:49:46 [Ralph]

Sean: if things continue to come in the way they've been coming in, we should have a number of examples we can cite

15:50:02 [Ralph]

Guus: everyone please remind people to send us implementations if you know of anything

15:51:13 [Ralph]

Sean: if there's more detail needed in the implementation report than is currently in http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html, it would be good to know that sooner

15:51:47 [Ralph]

Ralph: I'll take a look. Some details about how much of the SKOS vocabulary is exercised could be useful, but that might take too much work to determine

15:52:07 [Ralph]

Guus: can we identify which features have not been used in at least 1 implementaton?

15:52:35 [Ralph]

ACTION: Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by current implementations

15:53:52 [Ralph]

[DONE] ACTION: Antoine draft intermediate pages for the legacy SKOS Core documents referring readers to the new specifications [recorded in [52]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-swd-minutes.html#action04]

15:54:03 [Ralph]

[DONE] ACTION: Antoine draft intermediate pages for http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/mapping/spec/2004-11-11.html referring readers to the new specifications [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-swd-minutes.html#action05]

15:54:21 [Ralph]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0031.html [SKOS] redirection pages for Quick Guide and Mapping Vocabulary [Antoine 2009-04-08]

15:54:55 [Ralph]

Tom: will Sean make the doc changes for the labels?

15:54:59 [Ralph]

Sean: sure

15:55:25 [Ralph]

ACTION: Sean update labels in the SKOS Rec draft per resolution of 21-April

15:55:57 [Ralph]

Guus: I propose to leave the Wikipedia page update until June

15:56:05 [Ralph]

-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_Knowledge_Organization_System Wikipedia page

15:56:09 [Ralph]

Topic: RDFa

15:56:19 [Ralph]

Ralph: @@

15:56:22 [TomB]

Ralph: TF continuing to meet

15:57:00 [TomB]

...main topic has been whether to suggest, and in what form to suggest, adding an attribute that would do the same prefix mapping as XMLNS for HTML 5 and the group has been discussing syntax of that attribute

15:57:30 [TomB]

...Agreed we would try to reach consensus on design but not update specification - leave design documented in the wiki.

15:57:53 [TomB]

...At the last meeting, suggested we suspend that discussion, even though close to consensus.

15:58:13 [TomB]

...Other developments may make this moot.

15:58:34 [TomB]

...Will probabily not continue further discussion of design.

15:58:46 [Ralph]

Topic: Recipes

15:59:31 [Ralph]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0017.html [Recipes] new editors' draft (proposed solution to ISSUE-193) [Diego 2009-04-07]

15:59:41 [Ralph]

Ralph: I'd missed Diego's message

15:59:59 [Ralph]

... if we choose to postpone this to next meeting I'll try to have my review done

16:00:16 [Ralph]

[CONTINUES] ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15]

16:00:28 [Ralph]

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

16:00:41 [Ralph]

Topic: RDFa Metadata Note

16:00:49 [Ralph]

Guus: postpone this to June also

16:01:10 [Ralph]

[CONTINUES] 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]

16:01:31 [Ralph]

Topic: WAI-ARIA request for review

16:01:49 [Ralph]

Guus: the comment deadline has passed (17 April)

16:02:50 [Ralph]

Tom: I'd posted a reply saying that the Group was not planning to do a review but individuals were welcome to post comments as they desired

16:02:59 [Ralph]

Guus: so we can drop this item

16:03:21 [TomB]

My response to Michael Cooper re: WAI-ARIA is at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2009Apr/0020.html

16:03:37 [Ralph]

Antoine: we didn't decide to publish the new intermediate pages

16:03:53 [Ralph]

Ralph: Antoine and I can do that offline

16:04:21 [Ralph]

ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for legacy specs

16:05:06 [Ralph]

Guus: I'm expecting our June telecons to discuss SKOS community outreach

16:05:19 [Ralph]

... and possibly testimonials

16:05:46 [Ralph]

Ralph: testimonials go with a Press Release, so you definitely want a Press Release?

16:05:56 [Ralph]

Guus, Tom: yes, I think a press release would be good

16:06:03 [Ralph]

Ralph: OK, I'll alert Ian Jacobs

16:06:23 [Ralph]

[adjourned]

16:06:32 [Zakim]

-Antoine

16:06:35 [marghe]

marghe has left #swd

16:06:36 [Zakim]

-Margherita_Sini

16:06:39 [Zakim]

-seanb

16:06:45 [seanb]

seanb has left #swd

16:07:17 [Zakim]

-Ralph

16:07:21 [Zakim]

-TomB

16:07:22 [Zakim]

-Guus

16:07:23 [Antoine]

Antoine has left #swd

16:07:25 [Zakim]

SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended

16:07:26 [Zakim]

Attendees were +003130889aaaa, Ralph, +31.20.420.aabb, TomB, Antoine, seanb, +30889aacc, Guus, Margherita_Sini

16:07:31 [Ralph]

rrsagent, please draft minutes

16:07:31 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html Ralph

16:08:24 [Ralph]

rrsagent, bye

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

I see 5 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-actions.rdf :

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Tom repost his label proposal, dropping the word 'concept' [1]

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-irc#T15-37-40

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Antoine make minor edits to http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-skos-ucr-20070516/ to prepare for publication as Group Note on 19 May [2]

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-irc#T15-46-06

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by current implementations [3]

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-irc#T15-52-35

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Sean update labels in the SKOS Rec draft per resolution of 21-April [4]

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-irc#T15-55-25

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for legacy specs [5]

16:08:24 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-irc#T16-04-21