Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group Teleconference

Document versioning

ms: if there's a version for the EARL vocab, what about version for the parts

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2009Jun/0085.html

saz: what happens if one of the parts changes?
... only if EARL 1.0 Schema is changed, the meaning of the EARL vocab is changed
... the EARL version is defined in the Schema document

jk: it's the EARL vocabulary which is in version 1.0 now, not the Guide or the Schema document

saz: each publication has a date, which can be used to identify a specific "version"
... the definition, of which part "versions" the EARL vocabulary in a specific version consists of, is to be put into the Conformance section of EARL Schema

RESOLUTION: a subsection in the conformance section of the Schema document defines which part versions the vocabulary consists of

saz: HTTP-in-RDF would very rarely be updated

cv: could be labelled version 1.1

ms: current version can handle HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1

saz: usually there are short names in spec URIs pointing to the latest spec version

ms: a) no version for HTTP-in-RDF because of a conflict with HTTP version; or b) label as 1.0 and add a note to the document that the HTTP-in-RDF version does not relate to a specific HTTP version

cv: label it HTTP-in-RDF 1.1

<shadi> votes: a) 1.5 b) 1.5 c) 1

RESOLUTION: HTTP-in-RDF labelled version 1.0; and add note to the document that this version is independent of HTTP versioning
... Content-in_RDF labelled version 1.0
... Pointers-in-RDF labelled version 1.0

EARL 1.0 Guide

jk: what about versioning namespace URIs?

saz: depends on changes

ms: any comments about guide? questions?

EARL 1.0 Schema

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2009Jun/0048

saz: seems to be agreement about conformance levels

RESOLUTION: adopt conformance level model proposed by saz and ms

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2009Jun/0049

saz: import part ontologies into schema ontology?

cv: and DCT and FOAF?

saz will check with Ivan about OWL imports

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2009Jun/0071

jk: HTTP-in-RDF does import Content-in-RDF

Pointers in RDF - ready for review and approval

ms: any pending issues on pointers?

saz: publish after adding version number, editing abstract

RESOLUTION: publish Pointers-in-RDF 1.0 after adding version number, editing abstract, adding owl constructors

EARL 1.0 Requirements - ready for review and approval

RESOLUTION: publish EARL 1.0 requirements after small updates

HTTP in RDF - ready for review and approval

RESOLUTION: publish HTTP-in RDF 1.0 editorial changes

Representing Content in RDF - ready for review and approval

RESOLUTION: publish Content-in RDF 1.0 editorial changes

Next and future meetings

Next meeting: Wednesday 1 July 2009