IRC log of gld on 2012-12-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:55:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #gld
14:55:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:55:13 [PhilA2]
zakim, this will be gld
14:55:13 [Zakim]
ok, PhilA2; I see T&S_GLDWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
14:58:52 [PhilA2]
zakim, code?
14:58:52 [Zakim]
the conference code is 45394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200, PhilA2
15:00:19 [Zakim]
T&S_GLDWG()10:00AM has now started
15:00:26 [Zakim]
15:00:30 [PhilA2]
zakim, IPcaller is me
15:00:30 [Zakim]
+PhilA2; got it
15:00:52 [PhilA2]
15:00:54 [gatemezi]
gatemezi has joined #gld
15:00:57 [PhilA2]
chair: PhilA
15:01:03 [agipap]
agipap has joined #gld
15:01:15 [PhilA2]
regrets+ Bernadette, Richard
15:01:24 [Zakim]
15:01:28 [PhilA2]
meeting: G:D Weekly telecon
15:02:07 [makx]
makx has joined #gld
15:02:08 [agipap]
zakim, IPcaller is me
15:02:08 [Zakim]
+agipap; got it
15:02:55 [PhilA2]
15:03:32 [jmynarz]
jmynarz has joined #gld
15:03:43 [Zakim]
+ +
15:03:51 [GofranShu]
GofranShu has joined #GLD
15:03:56 [Zakim]
15:05:01 [PhilA2]
zakim, who is here?
15:05:01 [Zakim]
On the phone I see PhilA2, agipap, gatemezi, Sandro
15:05:02 [Zakim]
On IRC I see GofranShu, jmynarz, makx, agipap, gatemezi, RRSAgent, Zakim, PhilA2, MacTed, trackbot, sandro
15:05:08 [makx]
having problems getting voice connection
15:05:09 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has joined #gld
15:05:24 [Zakim]
15:05:37 [BartvanLeeuwen]
BartvanLeeuwen has joined #gld
15:06:05 [Zakim]
15:06:38 [makx]
I seem to have a similar problem from here, using voip
15:06:47 [Zakim]
15:06:57 [PhilA2]
15:07:30 [jpalmeida]
jpalmeida has joined #gld
15:07:40 [sandro]
scribe: sandro
15:07:42 [jpalmeida]
I am ipcaller
15:07:48 [Zakim]
15:07:58 [PhilA2]
zakim, IPcaller is jpalmeida
15:07:58 [Zakim]
+jpalmeida; got it
15:08:41 [PhilA2]
ORG open issues etc.
15:08:43 [DaveReynolds]
15:09:16 [sandro]
15:09:20 [PhilA2]
sandro: I haven't announced this but I've re-done the group's home page
15:09:25 [Zakim]
+ +352.
15:09:29 [GofranShu]
Zakim, mute me
15:09:29 [Zakim]
sorry, GofranShu, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
15:09:45 [GofranShu]
zakim, who is here?
15:09:45 [Zakim]
On the phone I see PhilA2, agipap, gatemezi (muted), Sandro, ??P39, DaveReynolds, jpalmeida, ??P1, +352.
15:09:47 [Zakim]
On IRC I see jpalmeida, BartvanLeeuwen, DaveReynolds, GofranShu, jmynarz, makx, agipap, gatemezi, RRSAgent, Zakim, PhilA2, MacTed, trackbot, sandro
15:10:04 [GofranShu]
Zakim, ??P1 is me
15:10:04 [Zakim]
+GofranShu; got it
15:10:07 [GofranShu]
Zakim, mute me
15:10:07 [Zakim]
GofranShu should now be muted
15:10:37 [sandro]
sandro: please look at and improve
15:10:48 [sandro]
phil: where are we on org LC comments
15:11:15 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: None of the comments have been addressed. The PROV ones are suggestions on how to use PROV -- they will require work to address.
15:11:25 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: Then a minor omission ISSUE-42
15:11:33 [jpalmeida]
15:11:38 [jmynarz]
Zakim, ??P39 is me.
15:11:38 [Zakim]
+jmynarz; got it
15:11:48 [sandro]
.. The jpalmeida pointed out stuff that's ISSUE-48 and ISSUE-49
15:11:55 [MacTed]
MacTed has joined #gld
15:12:00 [sandro]
.. plus the diagram
15:12:19 [sandro]
.. trying to collect the set, and before addressing them we should be clear this is the complete set.
15:12:32 [sandro]
.. jpalmeida, do you have any more comments?
15:13:04 [sandro]
jpalmeida: Do you mean issue-48 and issue-49 and the diagrams? Is that the list you're referring to?
15:13:43 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: That's what I've got so far from all our emails. Is that all of your feedback, or is there otherfeed back that isn't captured in that list.
15:14:00 [sandro]
jpalmeida: There are some questions that arise from these discussions.
15:14:10 [sandro]
jpalmeida: Is Post really a subclass of Organization?
15:14:27 [sandro]
jpalmeida: Is this the final view of the group?
15:14:53 [sandro]
jpalmeida: All subclasses of foaf:Agent, so gender, birthdate, come from foaf.
15:15:07 [sandro]
.. I see there are different views in the group.
15:15:44 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: I've stated my views. Agents optionally having birthdays doesn't cause problems.
15:16:01 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: Do you feel we have the complete set of last call comments.
15:16:24 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: Is everything you're concerns about on ?
15:16:59 [sandro]
jpalmeida: (something about birthday semantics)
15:17:05 [jpalmeida]
so what is the semantics of the gender of organizations?
15:17:11 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: The question is whether you need that to be addressed.
15:17:33 [PhilA2]
15:18:05 [sandro]
jpalmeida: If we say that Org is a subclass of foaf:Agent, then we should be able to say what it means for an Org to have a gender.
15:18:56 [sandro]
PhilA2: The question right now is whether the list of last call comments is a fair representation of the comments you've made. We'll come back to everything on that list.
15:19:19 [PhilA2]
15:19:36 [sandro]
.. so that when we've dealt with everything on that list we'll know we've dealt with every Last Call comment.
15:20:03 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: The two issues you've raised on this call are not on that list right now.
15:20:26 [jpalmeida]
15:20:38 [sandro]
jpalmeida: Yes, those two need to be on this list, too.
15:20:59 [MacTed]
MacTed has joined #gld
15:21:03 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: These require substantial discussion, so there will be no motion on Org this calendar year.
15:21:50 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: jpalmeida's comments may require a substantial change, and thus a Second Last Call
15:22:00 [sandro]
PhilA2: Aside from those two, do you think one call will be enough?
15:22:10 [sandro]
.. What do you need from the rest o fhte group
15:22:33 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: Aside from jpalmeida's issues, it's issue-42
15:22:57 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: All the others ones are editorial; no LC2 needed.
15:24:13 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: The non-trivial issues are ISSUE-45 (on RegOrg *and* Org) and the two jpalmeida talked about today. issue-42 issue-48 and issue-49 are editorial, I believe.
15:25:16 [DaveReynolds]
Issue: Should org:Organization be sub-class of foaf:Agent (consider birthday property as a test case)
15:25:16 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-50 - Should org:Organization be sub-class of foaf:Agent (consider birthday property as a test case) ; please complete additional details at .
15:25:35 [DaveReynolds]
Issue: Should org:Post be a sub class of org:Organzation
15:25:36 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-51 - Should org:Post be a sub class of org:Organzation ; please complete additional details at .
15:26:11 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: So the substantive issues, that might need an LC2 are ISSUE-45 ISSUE-50 and ISSUE-51.
15:26:13 [jpalmeida]
15:26:24 [sandro] is ORG LC Comments as of right now.
15:27:42 [sandro]
PhilA2: What about Dom's old comments tracker?
15:27:45 [sandro]
sandro: Not sure.
15:27:55 [sandro]
PhilA2: I'll take a look at how much pain would be involved
15:28:01 [sandro]
15:28:01 [trackbot]
ACTION-65 -- Dave Reynolds to update rdfs:seeAlso links on org ontology -- due 2012-04-30 -- OPEN
15:28:01 [trackbot]
15:28:03 [PhilA2]
15:29:08 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: I'll take a look next year
15:29:17 [PhilA2]
close ACTION-78
15:29:17 [trackbot]
ACTION-78 Include all updates and distribute next version of ORG vocabulary by next Thursday's meeting (4th Oct) closed
15:29:46 [PhilA2]
close ACTION-79
15:29:46 [trackbot]
ACTION-79 And bartvanLeeuwen to review the final version of the ORG vocabulary for content and typo errors before the document is released as LC closed
15:30:15 [sandro]
PhilA2: Anything the rest of the group can do on this right now?
15:30:44 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: If anyone has a reasoned argument about issue-50 and issue-51, put it on email
15:31:40 [sandro]
PhilA2: I've been looking at some of this stuff, and it's weird. Different vocabs interact in complex ways, based on how people think these things are used.
15:31:52 [jpalmeida]
So, let's record it as a bug
15:31:55 [jpalmeida]
known bug...
15:32:07 [jpalmeida]
if we don't want to address it.
15:32:17 [sandro]
sandro: should we talk about this issue-50 now, or move on...?
15:32:41 [jpalmeida]
we should probably do this on the mailing list
15:33:40 [sandro]
jpalmeida: What Phil just said -- there will be minor problems we may have to tollerate (eg gender of Org) -- that could be the case -- a problem with foaf:Agent -- and we might tolerate that because it's an optional property. But then we should at least flag this.
15:33:45 [sandro]
15:33:58 [sandro]
jpalmeida: but we could do this on the mailing list
15:34:04 [PhilA2]
ack sandro
15:34:13 [PhilA2]
It's sometimes faster to deal with on the phone
15:34:23 [gatemezi]
Definition of a gender in FOAF
15:34:25 [gatemezi]
15:34:38 [gatemezi]
It seems to me to keep it like that
15:34:41 [PhilA2]
sandro: It seems to me that this is a bug in FOAF. We can't have a normative dependency on FOAF?
15:34:55 [PhilA2]
jpalmeida: But we say it's a subclass of FOAF so we're saying something about FOAF
15:35:11 [jpalmeida]
what's the difference?
15:35:18 [PhilA2]
DaveReynolds: We don't import FOAF, we just reference it. We're not making the ontological references
15:35:19 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: We don't import foaf, we only references it. We're NOT making those ontological commitments.
15:35:30 [PhilA2]
15:35:46 [PhilA2]
sandro: If FOAF changes or goes away tomorrow, there's nothing we can do. That has to not be our problem
15:36:07 [PhilA2]
sandro: We have to just say Org is what it is and everything else is just commnet
15:36:19 [PhilA2]
sandro: Org has otbe more stable than FOAF
15:36:55 [PhilA2]
jpalmeida: Stating that something is a subclass surely implies that we should make comment on the sematics of FOAF
15:37:11 [PhilA2]
sandro: That can't be part of the spec, it can be non-normative text
15:37:57 [PhilA2]
DaveReynolds: I don't agree there's a bug in FOAF, but... we don't import FOAF. So if a consumer of ORG chose to take on to both FOAF and ORG we've shown them how
15:38:03 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: If some consumer of org takes on org and foaf, we've told them how to relate them.
15:38:07 [PhilA2]
.. if they don't our assertions won't be interesting to them
15:38:16 [sandro]
15:38:27 [PhilA2]
15:38:56 [PhilA2]
sandro: Is the sub class relationship in the human readable specs?
15:39:32 [PhilA2]
DaveReynolds: I'm not sure how you can have an ontoligy that refers to another and not be dependent on it
15:39:34 [PhilA2]
15:39:39 [PhilA2]
15:40:01 [jpalmeida]
subClass is not "any" relation
15:40:51 [sandro]
PhilA2: The idea that we can't refer to another vocab outside w3c, that doesn't really fly.
15:40:56 [jpalmeida]
it would certainly be too extreme
15:41:15 [sandro]
PhilA2: Is it normative that we say subclass of foaf?
15:42:31 [gatemezi]
@Sandro: Could it be possible to transfer a vocab, like foaf to W3C space? what could it implies?
15:42:36 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: We're not importing foaf. We're making one normative assertion, subclass of foaf.
15:42:51 [sandro]
gatemezi, it's possible, but foaf (Dan Brickley) is not willing.
15:43:55 [jpalmeida]
15:44:21 [PhilA2]
sandro: Imagine a change to the FOAF definition of foaf:Agent that affected ORG semantics badly?
15:44:31 [jpalmeida]
it's not a question of version only, because I see problems in the current version (gender bug)
15:44:32 [gatemezi]
In the spec, they said this for "gender" : ..However there are kinds of Agent to which the concept of gender isn't applicable (eg. a Group)
15:44:37 [danbri]
danbri has joined #gld
15:44:48 [gatemezi]
It applies to Org:Organization
15:44:56 [PhilA2]
sandro: Either we have to refer to a specific version of FOAF, i.e. today's version, in which case we can't fix the gender bug
15:45:40 [DaveReynolds]
The notion of gender in foaf is very open, it's applicability to non-person agents is not a bug.
15:45:47 [jpalmeida]
using the best practice on this is important, and could be a contribution of this group
15:46:00 [sandro]
PhilA2: This has implications beyond ORG of course. Sandro and I need to look into this.
15:46:03 [gatemezi]
+1 to DaveReynolds point about gender
15:46:12 [sandro]
Zakim, who is on the call?
15:46:12 [Zakim]
On the phone I see PhilA2, agipap, gatemezi (muted), Sandro, jmynarz, DaveReynolds, jpalmeida, GofranShu (muted), +352.
15:46:22 [PhilA2]
topic: RegOrg
15:46:25 [PhilA2]
15:46:37 [sandro]
PhilA2: agipap can you talk thought regorg recent work?
15:46:48 [sandro]
agipap: I tried to refine the UML diagram
15:47:07 [sandro]
.. screen shot is in the ED now.
15:47:08 [danbri]
[for related discussion re open-valued gender field in contact formats, see and nearby]
15:47:13 [sandro]
.. also added some usage examples
15:47:50 [sandro]
.. modeled some greek ministries
15:48:58 [gatemezi]
re RegOrg : seems the UML diagram very small to be easily readable..
15:49:00 [sandro]
.. my aim is to have by next call (1 wk) the spec ready for FPWD
15:49:43 [sandro]
oh, is "regorg" turning into "rov" ?
15:49:58 [sandro]
PhilA2: What about the Registered Address issue?
15:50:00 [sandro]
15:50:00 [trackbot]
ISSUE-45 -- Align treatment of registered addresses between Org and RegOrg -- raised
15:50:00 [trackbot]
15:50:18 [sandro]
PhilA2: "registered site" and then "address"
15:50:31 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: I think it's with vcard.
15:51:12 [sandro]
PhilA2: vcard is not compliant with INSPIRE, I think. So, it looks to me like Public Sector Information in the EU should not use vcard
15:52:18 [sandro]
PhilA2: vcard has one field for street address "17 Foo St", but in INSPIRE has two separate fields. Easy to go from INSPIRE to VCARD but not the other way around.
15:52:41 [sandro]
sandro: any way around that?
15:52:53 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: Maybe another vcard: property
15:53:19 [sandro]
PhilA2: in 30 mins I'm speaking to the relevant bits of the EC
15:53:44 [sandro]
PhilA2: They should be looking at this soon, and give us feedback.
15:54:08 [jpalmeida]
+1 to PhilA2
15:54:12 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: We don't want to tie things up to much.
15:54:50 [sandro]
PhilA2: personally, I don't like that org requires vcard. I'd rather loosen it; maybe our own Address class of which vcard is a subclass
15:55:12 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: That would need an LC2, but seems like it might be good enough.
15:55:35 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: There might be an interop issue -- if people use non-vcard addresses.
15:55:46 [jpalmeida]
siteAddress is optional1
15:55:54 [sandro]
sandro: So this change would break consumers that we assuming they'd find vcard there.
15:56:21 [sandro]
PhilA2: Maybe also a superpropty of address, so that existing stuff wouldn't change.
15:56:31 [jpalmeida]
good idea
15:56:54 [sandro]
agipap: maybe core location vocabulary will turn into a W3C spec?
15:57:14 [sandro]
PhilA2: It's in an W3C Community Group now
15:58:03 [sandro]
PhilA2: This group (GLD) could optionally do it. But except for gatemezi we don't have active geo people.
15:58:36 [sandro]
PhilA2: JRC trying to figure out how to make INSPIRE play better with Linked Data
15:58:48 [gatemezi]
+10 to PhilA2 comment
15:58:54 [sandro]
PhilA2: It's a tall order, though.
16:00:01 [sandro]
agipap: There are some raised issues on regorg, which will be addressed in the next version, I'm doing in the next couple of days. The new document will, I think, provide solutions.
16:00:21 [jpalmeida]
16:00:25 [sandro]
16:00:26 [DaveReynolds]
Bye all, have a good Christmas/New Year
16:00:28 [Zakim]
16:00:28 [sandro]
thanks PhilA2 !
16:00:29 [Zakim]
16:00:30 [Zakim]
- +352.
16:00:31 [Zakim]
16:00:33 [Zakim]
16:00:34 [Zakim]
16:00:36 [Zakim]
16:00:40 [sandro]
happy december, DaveReynolds !
16:00:42 [agipap]
agipap has left #gld
16:00:45 [Zakim]
16:01:13 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has left #gld
16:02:05 [sandro]
RRSAgent, make logs public
16:02:11 [PhilA2]
It needs 'a group' to agree
16:02:53 [jpalmeida]
jpalmeida has joined #gld
16:04:52 [BartvanLeeuwen]
PhilA2, yup exactly
16:04:59 [BartvanLeeuwen]
but mayne we need more showcases ?
16:06:11 [PhilA2]
yeah... the LOCADD CG should, I hope, produce that. I'm talking to JRC INPSIRE folk in 10 mins. They are, at last, ready to take that up and get moving on Linked Geosptial Data
16:08:09 [BartvanLeeuwen]
you want a link to the stuff I did ?
16:08:21 [PhilA2]
Yes please
16:08:47 [BartvanLeeuwen]
16:10:23 [PhilA2]
Thanks BartvanLeeuwen - noted
16:10:35 [PhilA2]
Might be working on a Belgian project in this space v soon too
16:11:02 [BartvanLeeuwen]
if you need some consultancy ;) and I have contact with belgium FD's as well
16:11:15 [BartvanLeeuwen]
they could be good 'drivers' for adoption
16:12:00 [PhilA2]
:-) It's via PwC/ISA Programme. Will get back to you. Got to get on the phone with JRC now
16:12:41 [BartvanLeeuwen]
okay bye & thx
16:17:03 [sandro]
16:17:03 [trackbot]
ISSUE-45 -- Align treatment of registered addresses between Org and RegOrg -- raised
16:17:03 [trackbot]
16:35:00 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, gatemezi, in T&S_GLDWG()10:00AM
16:35:01 [Zakim]
T&S_GLDWG()10:00AM has ended
16:35:01 [Zakim]
Attendees were PhilA2, agipap, Sandro, gatemezi, DaveReynolds, jpalmeida, +352., GofranShu, jmynarz
16:53:37 [PhilA2]
PhilA2 has left #gld
17:00:27 [MacTed]
MacTed has joined #gld
18:10:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #gld
20:02:13 [danbri]
danbri has joined #gld
20:05:31 [danbri]
danbri has joined #gld
21:19:26 [danbri]
danbri has joined #gld
22:48:17 [danbri]
danbri has joined #gld