Category: Meeting summaries

Tuesday, November 25th 2008

Permalink 04:37:45 pm, Categories: Meeting summaries

Summary of Face to Face Meeting 23 - 24 october

We got a lot of work done across the 2 days but it's hard to blog the detail. The time was taken up with line by line discussion of the Primer, POWDER-S vocabulary and our 3 Recommendation Track documents. The end results should be published soon as Second Last Call versions of those documents but with a note that the WG does not expect to make a separate call for test implementations (CR phase) and instead shoot straight for Proposed Recommendation in December.
Phil ARCHER
Permalink 04:29:03 pm, Categories: Meeting summaries

Meeting Summary 6 October 2008

Following the e-mail discussion, the group formally resolved to 'drop support for arbitrary RDF' in a POWDER document. This means that attribution information must be provided in a separate file, not within the POWDER doc itself; and that descriptor sets will only have terms for which the object is a literal or an RDF resource. This means that the feature at risk flagged in the formal document has been removed. POWDER-S is unaffected. Another issue highlighted in the current (Last Call) documents is that of the range of the issuedby property. After a lot of discussion it has been resolved that the range of the wdrs:issuedby property will be defined as being a class that includes, but is not limited to, foaf:Agent and dcterms:Agent. Resolving this also made clear that a POWDER-S document is an owl:Ontology, not an owl:Thing which has implications for what can and can't be said out it. Finally, we discussed the QA requirements as they relate to the various Rec Track documents. Conformance sections to be added! Activity in the next week should take us very close to being ready to seek transition to CR for the 3 Rec Track documents. A POWDER-S processor already exists (at NCSR as part of the Quatro Project) and at least one POWDER Processor is nearly complete. The group decided at its last face to face that the CR exit criteria would be two POWDER Processors and one POWDER-S processor - so we're well on target.
Phil ARCHER
Permalink 11:30:28 am, Categories: Meeting summaries

Meeting Summary 13 October 2008

The main substantive topic of conversation today concerned the issue of whether it was right to use foaf:depiction as an annotation property in a descriptor set class (in POWDER-S) as described by Andrea. The answer is no, it isn't! Hence, it has been resolved that we will define our own term wdrs:logo. The problem does not occur with dcterms:description since, unlike FOAF, dc does not define a domain of owl:Thing for its properties. The group also noted the substantial comments received today from Michael Schneider. These will be answered in the coming days. Finally, the group had a brief discussion about plans for the transition to CR. Preparation for this is due to be completed before the face to face meeting next week at TPAC and the end of CR should fall around the end of November.
Phil ARCHER 1 comment

Friday, October 3rd 2008

Permalink 08:18:31 am, Categories: Meeting summaries

Meeting Summary 29 September 2008

No meeting this week - but we're working through the Last Call comments and should be able to resolve most, if not all, outstanding issues this coming Monday (fingers crossed).
Phil ARCHER
Permalink 08:16:26 am, Categories: Meeting summaries

Meeting Summary 22 September 2008

The meeting began with a quick review of the Outreach event at Yahoo! and the status of work on implementations (Jena extension to handle POWDER-S seems to be done and two POWDER implementations are well under way). The group's attention must now turn to getting ready to declare its work finished by the time of its next and final) face to face meeting at TPAC next month. The group began to work through the last call comments received. Various members took action items to draft responses with a couple of issues still outstanding (all flagged in the various documents). These are whether or not we will support the inclusion of FOAF/DC Terms info directly in a POWDER doc as well as more complex RDF descriptions in the descriptors. The group is generally minded to drop support for this but arguments are being made to retain them. The issue is likely to be resolved within the next week. Likewise, the issue of whether a POWDER author should be a dcterms:creator or a foaf:maker has still not been entirely resolved. Having decided to make a POWDER doc an instance of an OWL ontology, foaf:maker (which has a domain of owl:Thing) becomes problematic. The semantic heads are thinking this through and, again, we should have this resolved within the next 7 days. Meanwhile, there have been comments on the Primer and work is continuing on the XSLT.
Phil ARCHER

<< Previous Page :: Next Page >>