P&OE Kick Off Telco

<james> Hello Caroline

<ivan> phila?

<phila> WebEx

<renato> hi all...please call in with webex now

<magyarblip> strangely, no, i just picked a random couple of words that i didn't think anyone would use way back in the early days of the web

<victor-rodriguez> Hello all! I have been approved by my W3C AC Representative only yesterday to participate in the group.

<renato> welcome Victor

<victor-rodriguez> However I have not yet received the password to participate in the call :(ç

<renato> poe

<simonstey> ./nick <name> changes your irc nickname

<victor-rodriguez> thanks

<simonstey> poe @ victor

<renato> poe

<victor-rodriguez> already in. thanks.

<msteidl> present# msteidl

<victor-rodriguez> nick vrodriguez

<victor-rodriguez> ./nick vrodriguez

<phila> renato: Welcomes everyone

<phila> renato: Highlights, Ben Whittam-Smith as co-chair

<phila> renato: First - looking at the agenda https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Kick_off_meeting

<phila> renato: This is just the Kick off meeting, getting to know each other etc.

<phila> ... Some history, how we got here

<phila> ... And we'll talk more about logistics at the end, F2F meeting proposals.

Introductions

<phila> renato: We haver a lot of new names, not everyone knows each other etc.

<phila> renato: Introduces himself. Representing Monegraph

<phila> ... Been working in the rights management space for a long time.

<phila> benws: Introduces self, from Thomson Reuters

<phila> ... Focusses on rights management and permissioning, so this is very relevant for us

<jo> scribe: jo

phila: introduces self and says his role is to make sure that meetings run to

w3c process and make sure things run to plan, help chairs etc.

phila: goes on to talk about process etc.
... and to help people use the systems and tools and IPR management etc.

<phila> scribe: phila

<jo> … some people here today not members of group and that ok only for today

renato: Goes through list

Godfrey: I've just joined the call today. not sure who I'll be representing yet. I've been editing the LCC model
... I consulted people like DOI, Plus etc. I'll work out how I'm going to participate.

ivan: I am also on the W3C staff
... my role these days is leading the Digital Publishing Activity
... We have been running that activity for 3 years. Lots of activity there and of course rights are important there.
... May also be worth mentioning, I was Phil's predecessor in the Sem Web activity, so I know many of you that way.

james: Hello, I'm here from the Digital Catapult. We overlapp with the Copyright Hub. We use ODRL
... More interested in looking at pesonal data, IoT etc.

jo: I'm helping the Copyright Hub
... I have some previous expereince with W3C (understatement)

msteidl: I'm from IPTC, standards body for the news agencies.
... representing the Copyright Hub here

magyarblip: Patrick Johnson representing Wiley. We're produers and consumers of content. Prior to working at Wiley, I was at TR for 10 years so background in financial services.

paulj: I'm cief tech advisor to the RIAA. Work on identifiers, DOIs, ISNI, also been talking to the Copyright Hub.

SabrinaKirrane: Respresents the University of Economics in Vienna. Just moved here from Ireland whjere I was at INSIGHT Ireland (nee DERI)

simonstey: I'm the other guy from Vienna. Doing PhD in the area of policies, rights management. Focus on ODRL which I've used for a while.

smyles: Stuart Myles, director of info managemenet at Associated press. Chair of IPTC . Working with ORDL/RightsML. WE have implemented ODRL in our news feeds.
... So excited about creating an official standard.

vrodriguez: Post Doc at UPM.,Working on rights and policies for a long time. Interested in ODRL, RDF, LD etc.

CarolineB: I'm Caroline Boyd from the Copyright Hub.
... The CH is about transmitting info about rights on the Web. Using ODRL.

<simonstey> maybe muted

Brief background

renato: How we got to Memphis
... We came out of a Community Group and even that has a history that predates the group. It's been 15 years...

<renato> https://www.w3.org/2000/12/drm-ws/

renato: Back in 2001... There was a DRM workshop that W3C hosted
... That was a long time ago. Lots of actvitiy in DRM space, rights expression languages. From that began the rights framework group, but ODRL as a language continued on its own.
... Version 1.1 of ODRL was a W3C Note.

<renato> https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl/

renato: We worked on version 2 for many years
... now have version 2.1 which is the most recent major version and that's the one in use by IPTC et al.
... Then late last year, we were able to move towards the WG we're now starting.
... The proposal went throughy for the CG to become this WG.
... So there's a long history. There's a lot of work in them. So there's a strong base for this Wg to start from.
... So in that sense. we're not a normal WG. We have an existing solution.
... We're chartered to take the ODRL specs through the Rec Track with opportunities to meet new use cases and make improvements.

<Zakim> jo, you wanted to ask phil to illustrate a queue note

jo: If the queue is long, it's helpful to say what you want to talk about.

phila: To do that, type 'q+ to ask what's for lunch?' etc. Key syntax is "q+ to ..."

The charter

<renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/charter

renato: I'm hoping most people have reviewed the charter.
... That's what W3C Members have asked us to do.
... Highlights what is Out of SCope
... We are focussing on expressions of permissions and obligations, simple statements. We're not talking about enforcement mechanisms or legal jurisdictional issues.
... The List of deliverables is straightforward. It's taken from the outputs of the ODRL CG
... We can issue other documents (Notes)
... So we can/should create a use cases doc
... And we've been asked to develop a formal semantics Note
... We have a 2 year time frame. We should ebd by the end of 2017
... Some take a lot longer.
... As we're starting from a stable foundation, we should be able to make those
... Lots of milestone dates for next year for final stages of the docs
... What we'd like to do is to take the current 5 specs as they are and turn them into working drafts more or less as they are.
... So first working drafts will be pretty much what we have today.
... Its' a way to state to the communityt hat this is where we're starting from.
... So we can hope to get tpo Candidate recs next year.

<scribe> ... New use cases, new requirements etc.

UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: But the genera; idea is to get the current specs out as FPWDs
... We can spend time this year looking for new use cases
... There are dependencies anad liaisons. Ivan to keep up in touch with the DPub community
... Some requirements from I18n and privacy

<jo> phila: there are some things that all w3 specs must follow, e.g. internationalisation, accessibilty, privacy and security

<jo> … don’t think that any of that is a burden but that is what those liasion are about

<jo> … also the TAG which has the job of looking after the Web as a whole, URLs etc. Profound issues

<jo> … we may ask the TAG to consider. These things won’;t necessarily come up

<jo> … but they are there to use

<jo> phila: want to talkabout list of deliverables

<jo> … the work that was done before and during community gp, all without the formalised process

<jo> … now you can see the impact of doing that formally from the list of deliverables

<jo> … you all have extensive experience of using ODRL, but we still need to do use cases

<jo> … and the formal sematics thing comes from member feedback

<jo> … also want to talk about in scope and out of scope

<jo> … (scribe could not hear this bit)

<scribe> scribe: phila

renato: We started ttalking about ODRL as a policy language and not a rights language. So apart from the acronym, we don't actually talk about rights.

smyles: Two questions. One is - on the deliverables. What's the diff between the formal semantics and the information model and the ontology?

renato: I think the idea os to have a more mathematical model. Formal notation to express the smantics
... SO not just duties - it's maths

smyles: On DRM... speaking for AP, we have no intention to us this kind of tech for DRM. Its' about efficient advice for editors.
... But my question is that one of the things thast W3C requires is two implementations
... so I guess if that's correct, how are going to address that without it being DRM?
... Is there a 2 implementation step.

ivan: I was wondering about both of your questions smyles. I am just as puzzled about the formal semantics. If the vocab is defined in OWL, then an RDf vocab is prob suffiicient. When it comnes ot the real work
... We had a highly methematical, compliacted thing for RDF.
... For Candidate recommendation, you have to show that whatever we define is implentable.
... You usually have test cases that cover all the various features. Independent implementations etnc.
... We have had the problem before of what the heck this means whewn you have a vocabulary.
... It's not clear what an implementation means.
... A WG has the freedom to define what testing means.
... The definition needs to be good enough to satisfy the Director.
... SKOS was a major vocab of course. The WG was very prgamatic, looking at is the vocab useful and usable by diff applications.
... I have the impression that for the work here, we can define something like we did for SKOS, but we can discuss and decide for oursleves in about a year's time

<simonstey> +q

simonstey: I think it was Axel who commented on this with the intention to include not only the semantic descriptions, but also to define a conflict resolution.
... ODRL has three conflict overrides at the moment and we should define how those strategies are set.
... This should be described in a more formal way than sometehing simple like every prohibition overrides a prohibition.

renato: We'll come to a point where we need to discuss that. One option might be to make the spec more clear.

SabrinaKirrane: Adding to what Simon said, I see that Big Data Europe is interested in our work. They'll want to do automatic machine raesoning over the expression

phila: Yes, thanks - BDE is a project that is important to me and is helping to fund my time here.

Logistics

renato: We'll need anotehr poll to firm up the day and time for this call.
... So we'll put out another poll for people to fill in. Preferred days and times.
... Shall we use GMT?

ivan: If we use GMT then we need to adjust twice a year when DST starts/ends. So I think it's better to fix it in one time zone.

??: We need to be careful in March and October

<vrodriguez> Complementary to the "formal semantics", I would like to add that a testbed (or alternative mechanism) should exist to grant a POE implementation is compliant to others, at least to a minimal extent (but I think we have plenty of time to comment on this during other calls so I dont raise my hand)

ivan: so the Doodle should be dated.

<magyarblip> can we have another wg to get rid of dst?

renato: There will be a new poll next week. Easter next week. Everyone OK to meet next Thursday?

<jo> +1 to Thursday noon GMT

<magyarblip> +1

<renato> https://www.w3.org/2016/09/TPAC/

renato: Lastly, F2F meeting. WE want to meet at TPAC in September in Lisbon
... We'll be meeting on the Thursday and Friday, 22-23 Septmeber
... So please put that in your schedule, please reserve the date.

phila: TPAC is a lot of fun - you'll enjoy it (I promise)

renato: Thanks everyone
... It's going to be a funn ride ahead
... See you next week and we'll get stuck into more of the meat

<james> Thanks.