13:46:56 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot
13:46:56 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/09/01-wot-irc
13:48:25 <kaz> Meeting: TF-LD
13:48:39 <kaz> s/TF-LD/WoT IG - TF-LD/
13:48:59 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
13:53:52 <DanhLePhuoc> DanhLePhuoc has joined #wot
13:59:43 <MariaPoveda> MariaPoveda has joined #wot
14:00:48 <zkis> zkis has joined #wot
14:01:18 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Danh_Le_Phuoc, Maria_Poveda
14:04:09 <kaz> present+ Maxime_Lefrancois
14:04:19 <kaz> present+ Michael_Koster
14:05:42 <mlefranc> mlefranc has joined #wot
14:05:49 <kaz> scribenick: mleframc
14:06:00 <DanhLePhuoc> ageda: Agenda https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_Linked_Data_and_Semantic_Processing_WebConf
14:07:17 <kaz> s/ageda/agenda/
14:07:28 <DanhLePhuoc> TOPIC: SSN-driven alignment proposal (presented by Maxime Lefrançois, Editor of SSN)
14:08:28 <kaz> ml: td pr 28
14:08:38 <kaz> ... wot td repository
14:08:45 <kaz> ... turtle document
14:08:52 <kaz> ... will go through it later
14:09:09 <kaz> ... second one is 348 on wot repo
14:09:15 <DanhLePhuoc> two PRs for last assigned to :mlefranc
14:09:24 <DanhLePhuoc> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/348
14:09:32 <kaz> ml: what version of ontology used
14:09:52 <DanhLePhuoc> and https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/28
14:09:54 <kaz> s/what/wot/
14:10:28 <kaz> ... everything has a unique identity
14:11:07 <kaz> ... w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/#SSNSystem
14:11:19 <kaz> ... sensor, actuator
14:11:22 <DanhLePhuoc> mlefranc: is comparing side by side definition of Thing from SSN and TD
14:11:32 <kaz> ... we have thing which has some interaction pattern
14:11:38 <DanhLePhuoc> and the interaction patterns proposed by both
14:12:10 <DanhLePhuoc> q?
14:12:22 <kaz> i/SSN-driven/scribenick: DanhLePhuoc/
14:13:30 <DanhLePhuoc> the Turle form of alignment of TD&SSN is proposed in https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/28
14:13:57 <DanhLePhuoc> mlefranc: this alignment will import both SSN and TD
14:14:01 <kaz> q+
14:15:02 <kaz> w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/#SSNProperty
14:15:40 <kaz> iot.linkeddata.es/def/wot/index-en.html#http://iot.linkeddata.es/def/wot#Thing
14:16:00 <MariaPoveda> q+
14:16:09 <DanhLePhuoc> ack kaz
14:17:00 <achille_zappa> achille_zappa has joined #wot
14:18:16 <DanhLePhuoc> MariaPoveda: TD is developed by VINCINTY project because it was needed to sake of time
14:18:30 <DanhLePhuoc> then it was adopted by the group
14:18:45 <DanhLePhuoc> it's some how reduced to minimal form
14:19:04 <DanhLePhuoc> q?
14:19:07 <mlefranc> q+
14:19:23 <kaz> present+ Achille_Zappa
14:19:45 <DanhLePhuoc> TD creator acknowledged there differences with SSN
14:20:20 <kaz> s/VINCINTY/VICINITY/
14:21:06 <DanhLePhuoc> kaz who is the main editors?
14:21:14 <DanhLePhuoc> MariaPoveda: me
14:21:19 <kaz> s/editors/editor/
14:21:45 <DanhLePhuoc> ack MariaPoveda
14:21:54 <kaz> (and some more contributors)
14:22:03 <DanhLePhuoc> ack mlefranc
14:23:21 <DanhLePhuoc> q+
14:24:39 <DanhLePhuoc> ack DanhLePhuoc
14:25:33 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: should alignments be part of normative or non-normative parts of the document (including examples) ?
14:25:42 <DanhLePhuoc> scribe mlefranc
14:26:14 <mlefranc> MariaPoveda: I think the TD needs to be minimal, but we do not restrict alignments to other ontologies
14:26:28 <mlefranc> ... on the other hand the one  to SSN should be standard,
14:26:44 <mlefranc> ... although maybe not directly in the ontology document
14:27:36 <mlefranc> q+
14:27:43 <DanhLePhuoc> q?
14:28:14 <DanhLePhuoc> ack mlefranc
14:28:52 <kaz> i/should alignments/scribenick: mlefranc/
14:29:04 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
14:29:08 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:29:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/01-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:29:59 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: propose ideas and votes need to be part of a WG call isn't it ?
14:30:55 <mlefranc> kaz: yes, but you can create an issue during this call, and explain it during the main call
14:31:28 <DanhLePhuoc> TOPIC: Some strategies for ontology reuse on alignment with TD (presented by María Poveda)
14:31:41 <mlefranc> topic: Some strategies for ontology reuse on alignment with TD (presented by María Poveda)
14:32:06 <mlefranc> MariaPoveda: <starting her presentation>
14:32:29 <mlefranc> ... three types of reusing ontologies:
14:32:58 <mlefranc> ... 1. import ontology (owl:import), 2. declare submodel of the ontology, 3. reuse the URIs of the ontology
14:33:27 <mlefranc> ... owl:imports is strong ontological commitment, you import all the axioms of the imported document, and  this is transitive
14:33:56 <mlefranc> ... if the ontology server of the imported ontology fails, then everything breaks
14:34:21 <mlefranc> ... you can't delete/override any of the axioms in the imported ontology
14:34:52 <mlefranc> 2. declare  submodel is copying definitions and  axioms  of another ontology,
14:35:51 <mlefranc> ... a bit more difficult to implement, more robust to ontology server failures, less robust when changes in the imported ontology occur -> they are  not propagated automatically
14:36:36 <mlefranc> ... for example in VICINITY our ontology copies the axioms and the definitions of the ssn-system module (see SOSA/SSN spec)
14:36:56 <mlefranc> ... 3. just reuse URIs of the reused ontology
14:37:48 <mlefranc> ... define your own concept, and  link it to an external concept using axioms such as rdfs:subClassOf or owl:equivalentProperty, ...
14:38:16 <mlefranc> ... foe example, VICINITY extends the  foaf:Person and defines: core:DigitalUser rdfs:subClassOf foaf:Person
14:38:36 <kaz> i/td pr 28/scribenick: kaz/
14:38:50 <kaz> i/two PRs for/scribenick: DanhLePhuoc/
14:38:52 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:38:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/01-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:39:43 <mlefranc> ... conclusions: combine 1,  2, and 3, stronger reuse when the external ontology is trustworthy (W3C > government/project > person)
14:40:02 <DanhLePhuoc> q+
14:40:17 <kaz> i/wot version of ontology/scribenick: kaz/
14:40:39 <kaz> i/is comparing side/scribenick: DanhLePhuoc/
14:40:45 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:40:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/01-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:40:57 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: would you make the TD ontology import any ontology at all ?
14:41:13 <mlefranc> ... ssn, schema.org, ...
14:41:38 <mlefranc> MariaPoveda: maybe not directly in the  TD ontology, maybe as mlefranc said: better in an external document
14:42:10 <mlefranc> ... I doubt that external ontologies (little or big) will be all implemented in TD implementations
14:43:08 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: I would suggest that we add example on how to use the  TD ontology together with external ontologies
14:45:15 <mlefranc> ... we need some better synchronization between the WG and the IG
14:45:34 <mlefranc> ... with respect to TD ontology
14:46:16 <DanhLePhuoc> TOPIC: Discuss on Ontology Alignment strategy for TD (focus on Linked Data perspective)
14:46:31 <mlefranc> MichaelKoster: in iot.schema.org we are pretty well aligned with TD,
14:46:51 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:46:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/01-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:46:57 <mlefranc> ... in both cases we need at some point to use other ontologies to describe
14:47:10 <mlefranc> ... for example how a device acts on some feature of interest, etc.
14:47:43 <mlefranc> ... so let's keep new ontologies lightweight, and encourage the reuse of other existing formal ontologies
14:48:10 <mlefranc> ... maybe in a lightweight and reduced syntax such as  JSON doc or so
14:48:35 <mlefranc> ... So: it's not so important to prevent terms  conflicting in different namespaces
14:49:08 <mlefranc> ... the point is to see how these ontologies complement each other
14:49:45 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: iot.schema.org is impressive in how it combines different vocabularies and  try to harmonize a  terminology
14:50:03 <mlefranc> ... for domain ontologies conflicting on some terms
14:51:13 <mlefranc> ... we can't prevent people from developing new ontologies, the key is to help developers navigate through all the formal models, and choose the right way to model things
14:51:43 <mlefranc> ... let's  create a taskforce with people from semweb, iot.schema.org, dev,
14:54:13 <mlefranc> MariaPoveda: question is how to coordinate the addition of new semantics in the TD ontology
14:54:34 <mlefranc> ... what would be the freedom of this taskforce
14:55:11 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: maybe just propose new use cases and make them accepted first
14:58:14 <mlefranc> kaz: basic mechanism of taskforces is that subgroup can make some decision in the taskforce call and  bring it to the next call of the whole group
14:58:26 <mlefranc> ... for approval by the whole group
15:03:46 <mlefranc> DanhLePhuoc: we haven't decided officially what we need to push to the main group, let's vote  for the existence of the alignment and the fact it must be in an external document  next week ?
15:06:37 <kaz> action: maxim to clarify the proposal for the next IG call
15:06:37 <trackbot> Created ACTION-116 - Clarify the proposal for the next ig call [on Maxim Kolchin - due 2017-09-08].
15:06:56 <kaz> x/maxim/maxime/
15:06:58 <mlefranc> wrong name --->  mlefranc Maxime Lefrançois
15:07:57 <kaz> [ adjourned ]
15:08:02 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:08:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/01-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:38:26 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
17:27:22 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
17:59:51 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot
20:20:25 <zkis> zkis has joined #wot
22:19:18 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot
22:24:06 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot