14:53:31 RRSAgent has joined #lld 14:53:31 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/02/17-lld-irc 14:53:37 rrsagent, bookmark 14:53:37 See http://www.w3.org/2011/02/17-lld-irc#T14-53-37 14:53:48 zakim, this will be lld 14:53:48 ok, TomB; I see INC_LLDXG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes 14:53:56 Meeting: LLD XG 14:53:57 kcoyle has joined #lld 14:53:58 Chair: Tom 14:54:08 rrsagent, please make record public 14:54:39 hi 14:54:40 tes 14:54:40 Previous: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/02/10-lld-minutes.html 14:54:43 yes 14:54:47 joining in a minute 14:54:47 INC_LLDXG()10:00AM has now started 14:54:54 +Jodi 14:54:59 wow, today I am the first participant :) 14:55:16 AlexanderH has joined #lld 14:55:20 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Feb/0035.html 14:55:25 marcia has joined #lld 14:55:27 Regrets: Emmanuelle, Monica, Gordon 14:55:35 Scribe: uldis 14:55:39 Scribenick: uldis 14:55:41 jeff_ has joined #lld 14:55:44 +??P6 14:55:49 Zakim, ??P6 is me 14:55:49 +uldis; got it 14:55:50 kai has joined #lld 14:56:04 antoine_ has joined #lld 14:56:09 +??P7 14:56:13 rsinger has joined #lld 14:56:16 zakim, ??P7 is me 14:56:16 +TomB; got it 14:56:32 +??P9 14:56:42 zakim, ??P9 is kai 14:56:42 +kai; got it 14:56:55 + +1.330.672.aaaa 14:56:58 +??P10 14:57:13 +[IPcaller] 14:57:17 zakim, ??P10 is kcoyle 14:57:17 +kcoyle; got it 14:57:18 zakim, IPcaller is me 14:57:18 +antoine_; got it 14:57:26 +jeff_ 14:57:35 kefo has joined #lld 14:57:37 zakim, aaaa is probably marcia 14:57:37 +marcia?; got it 14:57:40 +[LC] 14:57:41 zakim, LC is me 14:57:41 +kefo; got it 14:57:46 zakim, mute me 14:57:46 jeff_ should now be muted 14:57:54 zakim, mute me please 14:57:54 kefo should now be muted 14:58:34 pmurray has joined #lld 14:58:48 rrsagent, please draft minutes 14:58:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/02/17-lld-minutes.html antoine_ 14:58:52 zakim, LC is edsu 14:58:52 sorry, edsu, I do not recognize a party named 'LC' 14:58:53 +[LC] 14:58:58 zakim, LC is edsu 14:58:58 +edsu; got it 14:59:11 +rsinger 14:59:13 yes 14:59:25 jneubert has joined #lld 14:59:46 + +1.678.235.aabb 14:59:52 Zakim, aabb is me 14:59:52 +pmurray; got it 15:00:32 +[IPcaller] 15:00:46 zakim, IPcaller is AlexanderH 15:00:46 +AlexanderH; got it 15:00:51 + +1.415.846.aacc 15:00:55 +jneubert 15:01:04 zakim, aacc is Jon 15:01:04 +Jon; got it 15:01:45 Topic: LOD-LAM Summit: http://lod-lam.net/ - Guest: Jon Voss 15:02:19 Jon: will tell about the LOD-LAM summit. how it came about, goals. 15:02:57 ... was working on Civil War data. were pitching it as LOD for Humanities. 15:03:01 fsasaki has joined #lld 15:03:14 michaelp has joined #lld 15:03:23 ... catch-22: funding vs use cases 15:03:34 +??P33 15:03:38 Zakim, ??P33 is me 15:03:38 +digikim; got it 15:03:54 +[IPcaller] 15:04:03 ... reviewers were split in opinion. needed to define issues, define what is LOD (for the founders) 15:04:06 +jeff_.a 15:04:07 Jon: We needed to make the case to our funders. 15:04:36 ... put together a proposal. ... fundation joined. travel support, international participants. 15:04:49 ... hope to have as many as 75 people attending 15:05:08 ... goals: get all together, use open-space format (BarCamp), participants make own agenda 15:05:31 ... people experts in field, passionated. from many areas. 15:05:38 ... questions? 15:05:43 q+ 15:05:57 kcoyle: what can we do to help? 15:06:25 Jon: main thing is spreading the word. already had 56 applicants. great diversity. 15:06:42 ... also policymakers, who can open the doors to have datasets available 15:06:59 TomB: you mentioned looking for use cases. that's what LDD XG has been doing. 15:07:19 ... re benefits of using linked data, problems, bottlenecks 15:07:36 ... the timing of the summit is when our group will have published its report 15:08:05 q+ 15:08:08 Jon: that's perfect. we're trying to get a better idea of what the participants have to bring to the meeting. 15:08:12 ack kcoyle 15:08:15 ack antoine_ 15:08:49 antoine_: wondering if we could focus discussion on issues that LLD XG would have identified as open problems 15:09:12 Jon: that's something we can do at the summit. 15:09:33 ... interested in going from talking re standards to implementing them as use cases 15:09:47 q+ to ask about openness and linked data 15:10:04 ... another part of summit is to invite funders to talk re what they want to see 15:10:08 ack edsu 15:10:08 edsu, you wanted to ask about openness and linked data 15:10:28 edsu: could you comment re role of openness in the meeting? 15:10:49 ... LOD combines 2 things: linked data pattern + open access to data 15:11:02 ... how important is the openness? 15:11:28 Jon: in order to have LOD, have to have open data first 15:11:49 ... on the organizing committee people from CC, EFF, MIT -- who are working on openness 15:12:24 ... hope to have legal experts, policy makers present. to set precedents for people to release data, have it open and sharable 15:12:48 TomB: could you comment re role of the Internet Archive & the preservation aspect of linked data 15:13:15 Jon: IA is the host for this. working very closely together. they are loooking very closely at linked data. 15:13:33 antoine_: nice, i heard about some of that in http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GLAMWIKI_UK_Fri_26_11.45_BP_-_Jill_Cousins.ogg 15:13:38 ... they're very interested in being involved 15:14:08 TomB: more questions? no. thanks to Jon for joining us. 15:14:28 thanks to Jon 15:14:32 -Jon 15:14:49 Topic: ADMIN 15:15:08 q+ to ask who is planning to go at LOD-LAM? 15:15:16 RESOLVED: to accept http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/02/10-lld-minutes.html 15:15:54 TomB: checking w W3C re reserving Zakim at a very late hour (midnight) 15:15:58 midnight EST is fine here in Ireland! :) 15:16:14 ... for having a meeting dedicated to Asia-Pacific time zone 15:16:20 zakim, unmute me 15:16:20 jeff_ should no longer be muted 15:16:26 Topic: USE CASE CLUSTERS 15:16:55 jeff_: ready to let people comment re authority data 15:17:07 jodi: social uses cluster: got new use cases 15:17:18 ... have other ideas from JISC, etc that we want to look at 15:17:28 ACTION: Jeff and Alexander to curate authority data cluster for end of December [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html#action06] 15:17:29 --DONE 15:17:36 ACTION: Uldis and Jodi to create social uses cluster [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/12/16-lld-minutes.html#action03] 15:17:40 --CONTINUES 15:18:00 zakim, unmute me 15:18:00 kefo should no longer be muted 15:18:02 kcoyle: can' t exactly say where are re collection cluster 15:18:14 ACTION: GordonD and Karen to curate collection cluster [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/01/06-lld-minutes.html#action11] 15:18:17 --DONE 15:18:32 zakim, mute me 15:18:32 jeff_ should now be muted 15:18:34 ACTION: Kevin and Joachim to review content of existing clusters to see where the web service dimension could be strengthened. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/02/10-lld-minutes.html#action13] 15:18:43 yeah! :) 15:19:05 kevin: looking at combining documents. need another week to see which clusters have webservice related things 15:19:11 --CONTINUES 15:19:24 ACTION: Kevin and Joachim to review content of existing clusters to see where the web service dimension could be strengthened. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/02/10-lld-minutes.html#action13] 15:19:27 --CONTINUES 15:19:30 zakim, mute me please 15:19:30 kefo should now be muted 15:19:38 TOPIC: FINAL REPORT DRAFT 15:19:41 rrsagent, please draft minutes 15:19:41 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/02/17-lld-minutes.html antoine_ 15:19:55 TomB: we have a draft report. Jodi created draft with transclusions. 15:20:16 It is here: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportWithTransclusion 15:20:45 ... lots of sections in use case clusters that need to be consolidated into sections we haven't started yet 15:20:53 ACTION: Antoine, Emma, TomB to send a call for reviewers to the list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/02/10-lld-minutes.html#action14] 15:20:57 --DONE 15:21:08 ACTION: Jodi to replace placeholders in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReport with transclusion code [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/02/10-lld-minutes.html#action04] 15:21:12 --DONE 15:21:36 TOPIC: FINAL REPORT TOPICS 15:21:51 TomB: propose to add names to these 8 topics 15:22:09 ... 1) What to do with the use cases themselves? 15:22:26 q+ 15:22:50 ... cluster texts include scenarious = intermediate steps. what should we do with them. put in the final report (e.g. appendix) 15:23:16 ... thinking re appendix w one-line summary of use cases and bullet points from scenarios 15:23:37 ... q: is this a good idea? 'd like someone to volunteer. 15:23:48 ack kcoyle 15:24:23 kcoyle: sent an email before meeting. use cases should not be in the document. we are not certain they cover important LOD issues 15:24:56 ... we need to discuss those issues - the fact lib cataloging uses text, net data. large amount of this info already out there. no support from big institutions. 15:25:26 TomB: how should we handle use cases? agree they are not part of the report itself. 15:25:37 ... or are you saying use cases are deficient? 15:25:40 @kcoyle: isn't this issue related to "problems and limitations"? 15:25:50 kcoyle: an appendix listing use cases ++ 15:26:09 ... we must extract info from them to put in the report. what the use cases tell us about the environment 15:26:35 ... report has to extract those important issues 15:26:47 ... the appendix = some info we drew our conclusions from 15:27:31 q+ to ask about editors for the document 15:27:44 TomB: task is not difficult. to look at how to make an appendix. 15:27:53 ack antoine_ 15:27:53 antoine_, you wanted to ask who is planning to go at LOD-LAM? 15:28:23 antoine_: some things can be independent from use cases 15:28:35 kcoyle: don't know. we have not had a discussion re the big issues. 15:28:42 I think we know a lot about the issues, even though we haven't formally discussed 15:28:45 ... what is group's thinking re this? 15:29:03 (this was also an interesting part from the youtube video Tom sent yesterday -- a good discussion of issues) 15:29:03 antoine_: we should put a placeholder in the report re this 15:29:14 s/should put/have 15:29:18 ack edsu 15:29:18 edsu, you wanted to ask about editors for the document 15:29:19 browseability and visualization, particularly, are issues we may not have much discussed 15:29:46 edsu: agree w kcoyle. we have not talked re big issues. 15:30:16 ... have concerns re concentrating only on use cases. 15:30:17 +1 to whole-document editors 15:30:45 ... need to identify editors for the [whole] document. they can then propose how they want to see the report. 15:31:00 ... legacy data is one of important topics, as kcoyle wrote 15:31:02 isn't what ed is talking about finding editors for http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReport#Problems_and_limitations , specifically? 15:31:05 q+ 15:31:08 ack TomB 15:31:54 TomB++ : complexity of the whole is making it hard to understand what's important 15:31:58 @TomB: can we start with point #5? Seems popular :-) 15:32:11 @antoine: what is point #5? 15:32:19 it's problems and limitation 15:32:23 TomB: 1) was re moving details of use cases into an appendix. to help us to focus on big issues. 15:32:26 and i do think we need to start there 15:32:47 TomB: 5) Getting a start on Problems and Limitations (section 1.5) 15:32:51 ah, points from the review list. Thanks! :) 15:33:17 ... need someone to read problems / limitations part of use cases and propose how to merge them 15:33:54 i don't think this is a one-person task. i think it's a task for the whole group 15:34:04 q+ 15:34:09 I think there's already a good start on this, from what Karen did with summarizing the problems/limitations from the (archives?) cluster. 15:34:23 ... trying to break up tasks. anything we don't need in the final report can be moved to a "parking lot". 15:34:41 ... aim to have a document that has the analytical parts, not the details 15:35:04 I can read problems/limitations of the use cases and see what the common ones are. I don't know about 'proposing how to merge them' 15:35:08 ... volunteers? 15:35:17 ... proposed that chairs assign volunteers. 15:35:24 q+ to ask about editors 15:35:33 ack kcoyle 15:35:53 kcoyle: you 're trying to work from details up 15:36:06 ... some of use willing to work from top (main issues) down 15:36:23 The previous 'dimensions' page might be a good way to look at the limitations and problems. 15:36:23 ... hard to work from details because i don't understand the context 15:36:30 ... you are starting with details. 15:36:33 +1 15:36:40 ... why don't we start w the report, add details as needed 15:36:58 ... not happy with the existing document. 15:37:16 ... start with thinking re what we want to have in the report 15:37:25 ... before starting writing 15:37:40 ack edsu 15:37:40 edsu, you wanted to ask about editors 15:37:55 q+ about top-down vs. bottom-up 15:38:23 edsu: on last call i was against the transclusion. TomB, kcoyle both right. a question of a work approach. 15:38:36 ... would like to have people own an action to write this document 15:38:47 ... and for them to take 1st pass at writing something 15:38:48 q+ 15:38:49 ... then iterate 15:39:05 ... and bring in detailed content later. 15:39:20 ack jodi 15:39:26 ... starting from individual pieces and trying to merge them together can make the report fragmentary 15:39:49 TomB: these tasks were on assumption of consensus re starting to work on the long document 15:40:04 ... happy to start w a short document and add things in 15:40:47 ... could ask people to read all manuscripts, extract key ideas (benefits, limitations, relevant technologies) 15:41:09 ... willing to act as an editor for the document as a whole 15:41:15 ... but it's a big task. 15:41:22 we all have to generate ideas -- the group 15:41:26 ... who will generate ideas for big picture items 15:41:36 ... need people to step up 15:41:38 ack jodi 15:41:54 jodi: re approaches top-down vs bottom-up 15:42:23 ... was horrified re results of transclusion. a lot of information there. more info in people's heads. 15:42:38 ... by stripping it down we may loose parts that are interesting, important 15:42:46 ... can we work from both directions at once? 15:43:06 q+ to clarify that "topic curators" should not limit themselves to things they read in the raw draft 15:43:47 ... need a very rough draft at the executive summary 15:44:01 ... a good place to start. each has some main messages in mind. 15:44:42 ... not ignore what we have, but jumpstart discussion by putting together some text 15:44:53 jodi++ : begin with a type of lengthy abstract. outline base points of longer report, develop more detailed document from the executive report 15:44:55 a? 15:44:57 q? 15:44:59 ... must have the grand message from the group 15:45:06 ack TomB 15:45:06 TomB, you wanted to clarify that "topic curators" should not limit themselves to things they read in the raw draft 15:45:11 +1 for starting w/ executive summary, and then see what else is needed 15:45:20 TomB: starting with the executive summary = interesting idea 15:45:22 or at least a list of issues 15:45:32 +1 for getting text we can react to 15:45:33 ... we need a text that we can react to 15:45:50 (maybe that's the problem with the curated use cases -- there's no "argument" being made, just description) 15:46:13 ... would like people to see take ownership of topics (e.g. 5) problems and limitations) 15:46:22 q+ 15:46:44 ... propose to learn from what we have, but also to put down things we have in our head 15:47:06 ack kcoyle 15:47:23 ... writing exec summary as a first step can be useful (though usually done last) 15:47:42 kcoyle: propose all to put main 5 issues into email 15:47:47 kcoyle: love that idea 15:47:58 ... then discuss those groups of issues and see where we go from that 15:48:00 Issues in the line of http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/TopicsDiscussed ?? 15:48:02 kcoyle: great idea! 15:48:18 ... use email for discussion. start without structure. 15:48:39 ... just list 5 main things we have seen come out from our work 15:49:11 TomB: propose distincion b/w things we see as most important and things [maybe not most important] that are of concern to us 15:49:31 ... lot of richness may come from ideas which are not most important but which we find a interesting 15:49:51 s/distincion/distinction/ 15:50:17 TomB: are any of the 8 points that we can salvage and start with the brainstorming approach? 15:50:26 ... opinions? 15:50:28 Is there objection on the other points? 15:50:40 ... .silence. 15:50:40 +1 to calling on people :) 15:50:46 why? 15:50:51 can we assume there's no objection? 15:50:56 ... jodi? 15:50:59 or ambivalence? 15:51:39 Uldis: +1 brainstorming approach 15:51:55 jodi: we could salvage some points, but there's something vivid and lively re brainstorming 15:52:08 TomB: this could be a good way to get to the next step 15:52:36 TomB: what all thing re proposed brainstorming approach? 15:52:45 ... kai +1 15:52:52 ack marcia 15:52:54 yes 15:52:57 marcia: +1 15:53:06 zakim, unmute me 15:53:06 jeff_ should no longer be muted 15:53:28 antoine_: +1 we try it. still think we must consider the other points. 15:53:51 +1 15:54:03 ... look at relevant technologies and other things we don't need extensive brainstorming on 15:54:03 +1 to looking at a few other points as well 15:54:03 zakim, unmute me 15:54:03 kefo should no longer be muted 15:54:07 we could identify parts that we could do now 15:54:13 TomB: agree re that 15:54:23 zakim, mute me 15:54:23 jeff_ should now be muted 15:54:29 jeff_: agree re starting from executive summary as a start 15:55:19 zakim, unmute me 15:55:19 kefo was not muted, kefo 15:55:25 zakim, mute me 15:55:25 kefo should now be muted 15:55:27 kefo: along the way we will identify problems and limitations. things like 4) re analysis of library standards will find natural home. 15:55:33 edsu: +1 15:55:51 rsinger: like the idea. but how are we gonna manage 100+ points people will come up. 15:55:55 ... especially in email. 15:55:56 agree that management of this is challenging -- but I think that makes this more useful rather than less 15:56:09 kcoyle++ 15:56:15 TomB: can cluster them quickly in email. 15:56:25 I think broad topics will rise to the top 15:56:33 kcoyle offered to organize them 15:56:49 pmurray: nothing to all 15:57:01 s/all/add 15:57:04 ack jneubert 15:57:07 AlexanderH: concern re management of collected info 15:57:31 jneubert: +1 15:57:44 digikim: ... 15:57:50 ack fsasaki 15:58:00 fsasaki: ... 15:58:09 ah sorry - doing n+2 other things while listening 15:58:13 -AlexanderH 15:58:24 I will start the email so there is something to follow-up on 15:58:39 I would urge people to look at topic list and minutes of Pittsburgh for ideas/preparation. 15:58:46 thanks, mp 15:58:52 kcoyle++ 15:59:05 TomB: ACTION: everyone (on the call and off) to send email message in the next week about important issue 15:59:17 TomB: kcoyle offered to kick it off 15:59:24 link to topic list and minutes for Pittsburgh: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/F2F_Pittsburgh 15:59:40 put on our thinking caps 15:59:41 -Felix 15:59:44 bye 15:59:45 -kai 15:59:46 -jeff_ 15:59:46 thanks, this was quite useful! 15:59:47 -kcoyle 15:59:48 -kefo 15:59:49 -pmurray 15:59:49 -Jodi 15:59:49 I think Pittsburgh had some great big picture discussions, 15:59:51 -edsu 15:59:52 [adjourned] 15:59:55 -rsinger 15:59:56 ACTION: everyone (on the call and off) to send email message in the next week re brainstorming on important issues 16:00:04 -jneubert 16:00:09 -michaelp 16:00:10 -marcia? 16:00:12 pmurray has left #lld 16:00:19 zakim, list attendees 16:00:19 As of this point the attendees have been Jodi, uldis, TomB, kai, +1.330.672.aaaa, kcoyle, antoine_, jeff_, marcia?, kefo, edsu, rsinger, +1.678.235.aabb, pmurray, AlexanderH, 16:00:22 ... +1.415.846.aacc, jneubert, Jon, digikim, [IPcaller], Felix, michaelp 16:00:23 jodi has left #LLD 16:00:33 rrsagent, please draft minutes 16:00:33 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/02/17-lld-minutes.html antoine_ 16:00:55 zakim, who is on the call? 16:00:55 On the phone I see uldis, TomB, antoine_, digikim 16:01:19 -digikim 16:02:02 sorry - had an other meeting at the same time and tried to follow both - didn't work out that well :) 16:02:57 -uldis 16:03:19 digikim: say at it is -- you were asleep :D 16:03:33 uldis: ...but I wasn't ;) 16:03:59 digikim: got proof ;) 16:04:07 ... just kidding 16:04:12 :) 16:04:25 uldis has left #lld 16:10:39 -antoine_ 16:10:40 -TomB 16:10:40 INC_LLDXG()10:00AM has ended 16:10:42 Attendees were Jodi, uldis, TomB, kai, +1.330.672.aaaa, kcoyle, antoine_, jeff_, marcia?, kefo, edsu, rsinger, +1.678.235.aabb, pmurray, AlexanderH, +1.415.846.aacc, jneubert, Jon, 16:10:44 ... digikim, [IPcaller], Felix, michaelp 16:42:39 michaelp has left #lld 18:29:48 Zakim has left #lld