LLD XG -- 16 Jun 2011

<emma> Sorry I'm late !

<tbaker> no problem! I'm setting up

<emma> thx

<dvilasuero> zakim mute me

<tbaker> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html

<tbaker> emma, do you know who sent regrets?

<antoine> zakim. ??P11 is kcoyle

<digikim_> soon joining the call -- skype installs some updates... very annoying :-/

<antoine> zakin, mne is really kefo

<kefo> Clearly I'm having typing issues

<tbaker> Michael Panzer?

<kcoyle> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/ScribeDuty

Ok sure

<emma> Scribe: Michael

<emma> scribenick: michaelp

Sorry, Haven't scribed in a while ...

I am currently searching for the agenda

Agenda

Admin

<emma> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/RunningAgenda

Emma: Minutes of last telecon accepted.

<digikim_> monica :)

<emma> ACTION: Tom to send email to the LOD-LAM participants and create a final version of the presentation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action01] [DONE]

<scribe> ACTION: Tom to send email to the LOD-LAM participants and create a final version of the presentation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action01] [DONE]

<tbaker> The LOD-LAM presentation is at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/File:Lldxg-summary.pptx

Final report -- reviews

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: Open action on getting comments and reviews

Emma: Karen suggested using blog for comments
... We need someone to setup a WordPress blog and copy parts of review

<monica> why cam we not use digress.it site?

<digikim_> kcoule +1

Karen: We have gotten no replies from the public list. Approaching single individuals more succesful.

<antoine> the principle is ok, but I'm not sure we want to centralize it!

Emma: Targetting contributers could be more efficient.

<digikim_> kcoyle: yes, I just sent the email to the two people at the national library of finland and said that you need to comment on this, to resque the world ;)

<Zakim> tbaker, you wanted to say that the chairs have approached alot of people

Karen: We don't happen to get general comments

TomB: We have sent out a lot of mails and had gotten a very good response rate from potential commenters.
... We asked to review particular sections.

<emma> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportReviewerAssignments

Karen: I am concerned about responses specifically from the library community.

<antoine> Aren't we going to send to http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Dissemination_Lists ?

<kcoyle> antoine, i don't think that sending to lists is going to get the attention of the people we need to reach

Emma: We have people from inside the group.

<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Jun/0023.html

Emma: We have prepared a call for comments.
... Ok for sending this Call for Comments on the list?

<antoine> karen: well, at least it will be a wider than the lld alone! And of course that should not prevent us from trying personal requests. It's just that I don't think we should/can centralize that

Antoine: I like the idea of members contacting outside people personally.
... I also wanted to point out that the call would also be send to a wider audience.

Emma: Any objections to the draft of the Call?

<dvilasuero> +1 to draft call

<scribe> 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/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action02] [DONE]

<Zakim> antoine, you wanted to comment on adding blog to the call

<scribe> --Done

Antoine: Do we want to add a blog lreference/link to the Call?

<digikim_> (somebody is noisy)

Emma: Karen, do you have a platform in mind?

Monica: I think we could host it, but have to check if it will be open to anyone.

Karen: We could use Blogspot, etc.
... But is this gonna work? I am wondering if this would trigger specific comments.

Emma: W3C would probably not comfortable with a public plattform.

Monica: How long do we expect the blog to be accessible?

<antoine> 2 months?

Emma: Duration of the review process, 2 month.

<pmurray> I don't think we need to keep the comment blog around for a long time.

<antoine> we can just save the comments as HTML and upload them on the wiki, if we want an archive...

<pmurray> antoine: +1

Monica: We could set it up if it is not for a long period.

<dvilasuero> antoine +1

<pmurray> I think it would be useful as a short term tool, not a long term preservation of commentary.

<scribe> 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] [DONE]

Karen: We can split the blog up into sections that are moderated.

Emma: We need the URL for the blog before the Call for Comments can go out.

<scribe> ACTION: Monica to set up blog for comments on Monday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-lld-minutes.html#action05]

<scribe> 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/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action03] [DONE]

<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Jun/0026.html

Emma: We have to discuss how to integrate comments we are receiving
... Topic for next week.

"LIBRARY LINKED DATA": SCOPE OF THIS REPORT (Karen, Peter, Tom, Gordon, Jodi)

<scribe> ACTION: everyone to read http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits#.22Library_Linked_Data.22:_Scope_of_this_report and do lightweight review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action04] [DONE]

<tbaker> +1 close action

<scribe> ACTION: Jodi to send email about Scope statement [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action05] [DONE]

BENEFITS OF LINKED DATA (Ed, Emmanuelle, Ross)

<scribe> ACTION: Karen to edit the Benefits section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action06]

<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0080.html

<scribe> --DONE

<tbaker> +1 - have asked

<scribe> ACTION: Tom to ask Hideaki or Dickson to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action06] [DONE]

RELEVANT TECHNOLOGIES (Jeff)

<scribe> ACTION: Gordon to review Relevant Technologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/06/09-lld-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUED]

<GordonD> OK to add Gordon to list of reviewers

IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS TO ADOPTION (Karen, Peter, Tom, Gordon, Jodi)

<antoine> in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Library_standards_and_linked_data there are things that relate to problems

Karen: I don't really see a place for this in the report, because it doesn't really relate to problems and limitations.

<antoine> E.g. Q: How can libraries be encouraged to "free" their records?

<Zakim> tbaker, you wanted to ask if it might be folded into Available Vocabularies deliverable

Karen: I looked at the available vocabularies, but it looked like it is not meant to be comprehensive.
... Should we add to it?
... A lot of what is in Library Standards is not about vocabs or data sets.

<emma> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Library_Data_Resources

TomB: I am jsut wondering of the scope of this vocab and dataset deliverable could be expanded to accomodate what is already in there
... It would be a pity not to publish some of the discussion there.

<antoine> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Library_Data_Resources

Antoine: Would this just apply to the page/link above?

<emma> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Library_standards_and_linked_data

Karen: We want to expand this other page to accomodate vocabs.

<tbaker> I wasn't suggesting the pages be combined mechanically - not everything necessarily needs to be integrated into a formal deliverable

Emma: Maybe we could just freeze the two pages and identify places where we could point to them.

Antoine: Library Data Resources is about library standards. Could the vocab page point there?

<monica> maybe we can make an even stronger statement "we highly recommend that you read link for background on topic xxx"

Emma: Can we include some as issues for further discussion?

<GordonD> Before freezing the Library Data Resources page, I will update it ...

Karen: All the key issues here have gone into the issues section, just worded differently.

<scribe> ACTION: Karen and Antoine to relate Library Data Resources and Library Standards and Linked data [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-lld-minutes.html#action12]

<scribe> ACTION: Gordon and Karen to consider relation between problems and limitation section and the library resource wiki page. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/03/24-lld-minutes.html#action01] [DONE]

RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS (Karen, Peter, Tom, Gordon, Jodi)

<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011May/0052.html

<scribe> ACTION: Jeff to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_recommendations_page for next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action12] [DONE]

<monica> Draft Report blog - http://blogs.ukoln.ac.uk/w3clld/ :)

<monica> I will make some cosmetic changes on Monday and start call for emails of editors

<antoine> monica++

<kcoyle> monica++!

<dvilasuero> monica +1

<scribe> ACTION: Tom to ask Dickson and Guenther if they could contribute curriculum issues to the Recommendations Section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action13] [CONTINUED]

TomB: His lomger comments should go to the list.
... even if we cannot include everything in the report.

LIBRARY LINKED DATA: VOCABULARIES AND DATASETS - SEPARATE DELIVERABLE (Antoine, Jeff, Marcia, William)

Emma: Still looking for reviewers.

<digikim_> I sent a review on the whole document, was this noticed? (should we list somewhere all review emails to keep track?)

USE CASES (Daniel) - SEPARATE DELIVERABLE

dvilasuero: I asked cluster owners and contacted Gordon. I will send email to list per Tuesday.

TRANSITION TO W3C COMMUNITY GROUP

Antoine: Another comment on reviews. Do we keep track of reviews in a formal manner?

<digikim_> antoine: +1

Antoine: Should we centralize the comments, keep a list?
... W3C usually uses an issue tracker.

<dvilasuero> antoine +1

Antoine: All emails are tracked and a workflow is kept track of.

<Zakim> tbaker, you wanted to suggest that someone be responsible, for each section, for thanking reviewers and acknowledging reviews

TomB: I suggest that when people send reviews, they should be acknowledged with a personal response.

<tbaker> +1 wiki page is good enough for tracking issues

<emma> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportReviewerAssignments

Emma: Can we continue to track the reviews on this page?

Antoine: This aslo gives some candidate names of people who should response to reviews.
... of specific parts

Emma: We discuss next week how to handle reviews.

<kefo> bye

<pmurray> me Bye, everyone!

Emma: Thanks, meeting adjourned.

<dvilasuero> thank you, b

<dvilasuero> bye!

<LarsG> Bye

<AlexanderH> bye

- DRAFT -

LLD XG

16 Jun 2011

Attendees

Contents