See also: IRC log, previous 2009-05-05
RESOLVED to accept minutes of the last telecon http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html
RESOLVED next telecon 2 June
-> editor's draft of SKOS Reference
(currently $Revision 1.8$)
Sean: editorial tweaks discussed
in mail are almost complete
... so nearly done w/Reference
ACTION: [DONE] SKOS editors to draft acknowledgements section for SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-swd-minutes.html#action01]
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action04]
ACTION: [DONE] SKOS editors to draft acknowledgements section for SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action04]
Guus: issue-214 still open
Antoine: That doesn't really concern SKOS; it's about RDFa
Ed: that was my feeling as well
-> issue 214
Ed: DanBri's comment was about something in loc.gov
Ralph: is DanBri citing something in one of our documents?
Guus: no, an LC document
Antoine: so change the tracker product to RDFa
Ralph: but if this is going to be a frequent mistake maybe we should consider adding some advice
Guus: that could go in the Primer
Ralph: yes
Guus: so we conclude this does not affect the Reference?
<Antoine> +1
[no objections]
<seanb> +1
<edsu> +1
Guus: therefore no outstanding CR comments
Sean: regarding URIs in Appendix
C
... there are references to namespace documents
... which URIs should I use?
Guus: we'll take that up in a moment
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Ralph to raise issue-214 with rdfa tf [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action01]
Ralph: I presumed we'd publish the Primer together with the Reference Proposed Rec
Guus: yes
-- UCR document
Antoine: I added some historical
notes
... and added links to the issue tracker
Guus: I suggest publishing the Use Cases as a Group Note at the same time as the Proposed Rec
<Antoine> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/usecases/ucr-20090428.html
Antoine: I added cross-references to the UCR: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/usecases/ucr-20090428.html#Candidate
PROPOSED: Publish revised SKOS Use Cases and Requirements as a Group Note at the time the final SKOS Recommendation is published
<Ralph> +1
RESOLUTION: Publish revised SKOS Use Cases and Requirements as a Group Note at the time the final SKOS Recommendation is published
-- Namespace document
Guus: what's the state of the labels in the namespace document?
Sean: discussion on the
list
... there's an HTML variant and an RDF/XML variant
... the HTML variant had a lot of additional text which I've
removed and put in an appendix
... so each variant only describes itself
... I believe the content is now OK
... the SKOS namespace document is served via content
negotiation
... what URIs should I use for the OWL DL subset and the SKOS
XL RDF/XML variant?
<seanb> Appendix C
Guus: the reference to http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos-xl in C.4. looks correct
Ralph: we've used that URI before, so OK to keep using it
Sean: what URI to use for the OWL 1 DL subset?
Guus: have we published it before?
Sean: no, but it is in the directory
Ralph: there's no particular reason why we could not use the 2008/04/skos/ space
Guus: and this is the DL version of the schema in 2004/02/skos
Sean: what should we call it?
<Ralph> skos-owl1-dl.rdf ?
Guus: fine with me
<seanb> I meant 2004/02/skos/skos-owl1-dl.rdf ??
<Guus> 2004/02/skos/owl1-dl.rdf ?
Sean: skos/owl1-dl.rdf is fine with me
Ralph: ok with me too
... it's a new RDF namespace so we'll need Director's
approval
Guus: send notice to the list when Appendix C is ready for review
ACTION: Sean send notice to the list when Appendix C is ready for review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-swd-minutes.html#action04]
-- Implementation Report
Guus: looking at the issues list,
of 29 issues 27 refer to implementations
... so I think there's ample evidence that the SKOS
specification is being implemented
Sean: I'm slightly worried that
the capture of the various constructs used in each vocabulary
is not exhaustive
... the reports were not necessarily completely explicit
... in particular, I'm not sure that ordered collections have
been implemented
... but 2 implementations do claim to use -xl
Guus: I couldn't find any details on the -xl implementations
Antoine: we do have one vocabulary that would benefit from label relations but we've not yet done it
Sean: I have an email from Simon Jupp that I could ask him to send to the list
Guus: -xl is an extension
anyway
... it's clear that the main part of SKOS, in particular the
mapping relations, is heavily used
... I don't feel the Group needs to put enormous effort into a
systematic analysis
... with 27 implementations I feel we can say we're done
Sean: I'm happy to go with that
Guus: I'm happy to write some text with my findings for the transition request
Sean: can I consider this
implementation report to be completed then?
... I'll paste the two tables into the HTML document
-> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html implementation report generated from the issues tracker
Sean: there are two additional tables generated from a Google spreadsheet
<seanb> google doc
Sean: should I paste the spreadsheet table into the implementation report?
Guus: yes
Ralph: yes
Sean: it's a hassle to do that paste so I'd like to do it only once
Guus: how about an image paste?
Ralph: no, that would be frowned on
Guus: I suggest freezing it
now
... the implementation report does not have to be
exhaustive
Sean: OK, I'll freeze and paste later today
ACTION: [DONE] Sean to look for SKOS constructs not used by current implementations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action04]
ACTION: [CONTINUES] Sean to complete implementation report by 19th [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/05-swd-minutes.html#action05]
Guus: we've met the CR exit criteria
PROPOSED to request the Director to advance the SKOS Reference to Proposed Recommendation http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/ with Appendix C edits
<Ralph> +1
[Ralph has to depart for another call]
RESOLVED to request the Director to advance the SKOS Reference to Proposed Recommendation http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/ with Appendix C edits
ACTION: Guus to prepare the request for PR [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-swd-minutes.html#action07]
Guus: once PR is requested, the WG gets out of the loop, and advisory committee vote, and the director decides
Guus: meeting is adjourned
ACTION: Ralph publish Antoine's new intermediate pages for legacy specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-swd-minutes.html#action11] [CONTINUES]
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] [CONTINUES]
ACTION: Ralph to review the revised Recipes draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-swd-minutes.html#action15] [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] [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] [CONTINUES]