<tbaker> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html

<tbaker> Scribe: rayd_

<tbaker> Scribenick: rayd_

administrative

no call last week, propose accept may 26 minutes

minutes accepted

report from summit

(sorry i missed last minute or so phone trouble, ok now)

<tbaker> Karen: LOD-LAM was barcamp-style. Rights. Technical issues.

antoine: exchanging pointers to tools, great stuff, many more people than expected

presented stuff from our group, lots of interest, noted about future work,

talk about extending from incubator to wg, not much reaction to that

tom

participated in discussions on vacabularies, approches to preservation of rdf vocabs

alignments, have alingment issues buble up; need for networking among vocab maintainers, best practices

open source tools for producing vocabularies; very good discussion. Expecting a repor t in next couple months.

too short. alot of people coming from different perspectives, brainsttorming

<edsu> +q

final report

tom: charter has been extended till sept. Emanuelle will talk about strategy, next call

<emma_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Jun/0002.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Jun/0002.html ?

recruiting reviewers from the group

sent around notes to people who can't attend calls regularly and gotten good response

we'll be seeing reviews next week or two

benefits, recommendations, issues key three sections, go out for comments from general public

then have survey sections reviewed by this group

need to recruit four reviewers from this call

two report sections, 3-4 pages each; vocab data sets, technologies.

ed

curious about whether conference was one-time or ongoing

no concrete plans for followup meeting

antoine

there were some informal proposals for followup.

antoine - organization of reviews

review to try to include as much as possible those who haven't been involved in writing process

<antoine> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0051.html

continue the action for one week and if nothing happens drop it (what action?)

emanuelle - shouldn't invest too much effort in this.

<tbaker> ACTION: Antoine and Emmanuelle to talk about strategies for getting comments at next call [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action15] [CONTINUES]

karen - idea of having a place where people can comment, that was for public review

need to announce a public review period. broader than review of individual sections. need stragegy

tom - proposing release individual sections june 10, 17 24

e.g. comments june 10-july 10

tom propose posting on those three separate weeks. no special call for review of survey oriented sections.

start review period tomorrow to july 10, will give us july 10 to early aug then move text

scribe: from wiki to html using publ rules. don't leave to last minute

tight schedule

karen - just posting on our mailing list wont reach community. lots of important people not on our list

<antoine> +1

scribe: how to do PR on this

<ww> +1 (and suggest send out to many different relevant lists)

tom - agree to general framework incl schedule and then come up with a PR plan

PR

antoine - more thanpr, need to explicitly solicit comments

<kcoyle> if they aren't on lld list, they will need another email address to send to

<tbaker> Antoine: Emma has dug up list we used for soliciting use cases - list of mailing lists.

what email to send comments to? Antoine: public list

actions

1. on three chairs come up with a draft announcement by Monday. msg to community inviting comments

(and can email chairs directly but that could be difficult to manage)

antoine - range of the review period. july 10 may be too early

emanuelle - should we first finish internal review before public

i.e. review from members will change content so we should not have public reviewing before we edit the content based on member review

antoine - can't wait

can't ask for public review with period of 2 weeks

antoine - review period until july 20

need to send email before next call; draft note to community about comment period, perhaps discuss on next call

<tbaker> ack ACTION: Co-chairs to draft message to the community about review between 16 June and 20 July - post before next call, on 16 June

review period begins June 16

<tbaker> ACTION: Co-chairs to draft message to the community about review between 16 June and 20 July - post before next call, on 16 June [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action02]

william - schema.org, rdfa. should we note that we have taken note

somewhere in the report schema.org to be acknowledged

<jeff_> I can help

william to write something up

<antoine> a thread has been started: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011Jun/0004.html

<edsu> +1 for mentioning microdata and schema.org

<jeff_> I'm here

microdata or rdfa?

<tbaker> ACTION: Jeff and William to propose text on microdata and schema.org - where in the report it should be discussed [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action03]

<edsu> +1 for evolving it

should wiki text remain frozen during comment period

<GordonD> +1 allow wiki text to evolve (nothing stands still)

<antoine> +. we just need to mention that in the call for review

<edsu> antoine: good idea

<kcoyle> maybe we should just avoid major revisions, but allow clarification of text

<antoine> +1

agree with methodology of releasing sections on three separate dates? (tom)

people will be more inclined to comment if we break it into peices because the whole thing is overwhelmingly long

karen - however we urge people to also look at the whole, to see if something is missing

similar note to that effect in each of the three threads

and a reminder as well in the wiki

<antoine> kcoyle++

benefits - karen

<tbaker> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Jun/0002.html

karen - for other lists, maybe one section per list. how do we handle that. tricky.

if discussion is generated on separate lists, some of that discussion will be lost. Need to get discussion focussed to publid lld list

antoine - just one post.

<GordonD> Suggest whoever forwards review email to another list tries to feed-back local comments to public lld list

will continue to recruit volunteers, next call

<GordonD> I can review Relevant technologies - I've had nothing to do with this section so far, so can approach with some objectivity

<antoine> GordonD++

<GordonD> I just got cut-off from Skype, won't try to reconnect

tom - particularly need reviewer for use case section

<kcoyle> maybe jodi, she did a lot of work with use cases?

<antoine> well she has already an action on that :-)

<tbaker> ACTION: Gordon to review Relevant Technologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action04]

gordon to review relevant technologies

<edsu> ww: relevant technologies seems like a good spot for microdata/schema.org discussion

<edsu> oops, too late :)

<ww> edsu: agreed

<edsu> oh, there you are :)

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: rayd_
Found ScribeNick: rayd_
Default Present: edsu, +1.614.764.aaaa, jeff_, tbaker, kcoyle, antoine, +33.1.44.78.aabb, emma, [LC], ww, GordonD?
Present: edsu +1.614.764.aaaa jeff_ tbaker kcoyle antoine +33.1.44.78.aabb emma [LC] ww GordonD?
Regrets: Kefo Kim Lars Peter Jodi Michael
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Jun/0007.html
Got date from IRC log name: 09 Jun 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html
People with action items: antoine co-chairs emmanuelle gordon jeff william

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.