IRC log of swbp on 2005-11-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:03:01 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #swbp

18:03:01 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/11/28-swbp-irc

18:03:25 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #swbp

18:03:32 [vassilis]

hi all, I was in the phone but something happened and the line was droped

18:03:37 [dbooth]

zakim, this is swbp

18:03:37 [Zakim]

ok, dbooth; that matches SW_BPD()1:00PM

18:03:40 [bwm]

bwm has joined #swbp

18:03:45 [dbooth]

zakim, who is here?

18:03:46 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, Evan_Wallace, [UMD], David_Wood, DBooth, [CWI]

18:03:49 [Zakim]

On IRC I see bwm, Zakim, RRSAgent, dbooth, raphael, vassilis, giorgos, Elisa, aliman, chalaschek, dwood

18:03:55 [vassilis]

I will try to get in again

18:03:57 [Zakim]

+ +1.613.884.aaaa

18:04:09 [dbooth]

zakim, aaaa is Gavin

18:04:09 [Zakim]

+Gavin; got it

18:04:30 [raphael]

zakim, [cwi] is raphael

18:04:30 [Zakim]

+raphael; got it

18:04:47 [Zakim]

+ +30210668aabb

18:05:20 [dbooth]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0145.html

18:05:24 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

18:05:26 [chalaschek]

zakim, [UMD] is chalaschek

18:05:26 [Zakim]

+chalaschek; got it

18:05:28 [Jacco]

Jacco has joined #swbp

18:05:35 [tbaker]

tbaker has joined #swbp

18:06:03 [jeremy]

jeremy has joined #swbp

18:06:04 [giorgos]

Problems with my phone. I am home, just returned from travel. Try to get in again

18:06:12 [Zakim]

+Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen

18:06:21 [dbooth]

zakim, load agenda from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0145.html :)

18:06:23 [Zakim]

I'm glad that smiley is there, dbooth

18:06:39 [Jacco]

zakim, mute me

18:06:39 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should now be muted

18:07:15 [gmckenzi]

gmckenzi has joined #swbp

18:07:55 [raphael]

zakim, mute me

18:07:55 [Zakim]

raphael should now be muted

18:08:09 [dwood]

zakim, who is here?

18:08:09 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, Evan_Wallace, chalaschek, David_Wood, DBooth, raphael (muted), Gavin, +30210668aabb, Jeremy (muted), Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen (muted)

18:08:12 [Zakim]

On IRC I see gmckenzi, jeremy, tbaker, Jacco, bwm, Zakim, RRSAgent, dbooth, raphael, vassilis, giorgos, Elisa, aliman, chalaschek, dwood

18:08:26 [dwood]

PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 17 Oct telecon:

18:08:26 [dwood]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0171.html

18:08:28 [ekw]

ekw has joined #swbp

18:08:29 [Jacco]

for dave: guus wull try to phone in, but will probably not make it

18:08:39 [Zakim]

+??P10

18:08:39 [dbooth]

Scribe: DBooth

18:08:45 [dwood]

thx, Jacco

18:08:57 [dbooth]

zakim, ? is TomBaker

18:08:57 [Zakim]

+TomBaker; got it

18:09:28 [Jacco]

no, i did not review them

18:09:32 [dbooth]

1. ADMIN (15 min)

18:09:53 [dwood]

PROPOSED to accept the Galway ftf minutes:

18:09:53 [dwood]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0144.html

18:09:59 [dbooth]

RESOLVED: to accept the minutes of the 17 Oct telecon: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0171.html

18:10:24 [dbooth]

s/PROPOSED/RESOLVED:/

18:10:52 [dwood]

PROPOSED next meeting 12 December

18:10:54 [dbooth]

RESOLVED: next meeting 12 December.

18:11:30 [dbooth]

Meeting: Semantic Web Best Practices WG

18:11:45 [dbooth]

Topic: 2.1 Proposed resolution httpRange-14

18:11:58 [dbooth]

s/1. ADMIN/Topic: 1. ADMIN/

18:12:25 [Zakim]

+ +1.302.107.aacc

18:12:30 [dbooth]

DWood: We had discussion on this in June and September.

18:12:31 [dwood]

Our response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0010.html

18:13:10 [dbooth]

... I want someone other than Ralph, DBooth or me to respond please. Volunteers?

18:13:32 [Zakim]

+ +44.777.582.aadd

18:13:59 [bwm]

Zakim, aadd is bwm

18:13:59 [Zakim]

+bwm; got it

18:14:36 [ewallace]

ewallace has joined #swbp

18:14:36 [dbooth]

ACTION: Elisa Kendall to review DWood message on httpRange-14 resolution: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0010.html

18:15:15 [Zakim]

+Giorgos_Stamou

18:15:27 [dbooth]

ACTION: Ralph, DavidW, and DavidB to an initial draft of TAG httpRange-14 resolution impact on semweb application developers [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action02] [DONE]

18:15:43 [dbooth]

Jeremy: Response is an improvement, thought not a consensus.

18:15:55 [dbooth]

Topic: 2.2 DAWG

18:16:21 [jeremy]

correction: while I am not compelled by the resolution, I note that there is sufficient consensus ....

18:16:36 [jeremy]

given that, response is an improvement

18:17:17 [dbooth]

ACTION: Brian to review SPARQL Last Call document recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUED]

18:18:37 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jeremy to provide a phrasing about XML Schema Datatype (XSDT) [CONTINUED]

18:19:31 [dbooth]

s/(XSDT)/(XSDT) (Jeremy to look up URI for this action)

18:19:39 [dwood]

zakim, who is speaking?

18:19:54 [Zakim]

dwood, listening for 14 seconds I heard sound from the following: Elisa_Kendall (13%), David_Wood (9%), bwm (70%)

18:20:06 [jeremy]

(I think the echo was me - sorry)

18:20:24 [dbooth]

Brian: Re bnodes. We're looking for an example couched in some of the BP work, that would illustrate a serious problem, but I've not been able to find one.

18:20:57 [jeremy]

[[I think the XSDT action was about checking that SPARQL would work with the derivative solution]]

18:21:06 [dbooth]

... Could someone else propose a suitable problem?

18:21:40 [dbooth]

... Could task force chairs identify a problem in any of their work? I.e., the problem of being able to name a bnode in a query.

18:21:52 [dbooth]

Elisa: I would have to invent something.

18:22:08 [vassilis]

vassilis has joined #swbp

18:22:28 [vassilis]

vassilis has joined #swbp

18:22:49 [dbooth]

DWood: Several people think there is an issue and it is important to resolve, but we're lacking concrete examples to prove it. If we don't supply evidence, SPARQL will not fix it.

18:23:41 [jeremy]

q+ to argue that if this is needed then model is broken ....

18:23:57 [dbooth]

DBooth: How about asking for confirmation that this is NOT a problem?

18:24:32 [dbooth]

DWood: Please act on these critical issues while we can, in spite of holiday crunches.

18:24:52 [dbooth]

Elisa: Longer description of the problem would be helpful.

18:25:11 [dbooth]

Brian: I'll try to do that in my message that I send.

18:25:22 [dbooth]

ack J

18:25:22 [Zakim]

jeremy, you wanted to argue that if this is needed then model is broken ....

18:25:24 [aliman]

remembering bnode ids between queries sounds like asking sparql protocol to be stateful?

18:25:25 [dwood]

ack jeremy

18:27:14 [dbooth]

Jeremy: If you need to identify a bnode, and cannot do it in terms of its inverse functional properties (IVPs), then that is a fault of your data model. A good example of good practice will not exhibit this problem, because nodes will be identifed by URIs or IFPs. So I think it will be difficult to come up with a convincing example.

18:27:42 [dbooth]

DWood: I disagree. We're expecting an environment in which people query other people's data sets, and will lack complete info about them.

18:28:40 [dbooth]

Topic: 2.3 OMG: ODM review

18:28:54 [dbooth]

ACTION: Elisa to send new ODM link to the WG [DONE]

18:29:06 [Elisa]

link to ODM in the message at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0164.html

18:29:11 [dbooth]

Topic: 2.4 Protocol and Formats WG request

18:29:46 [dbooth]

ACTION: Guus to arrange telecon between himself, Alistair and PFWG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/17-swbp-minutes.html#action07]

18:29:55 [dwood]

aliman: Do you have status on Guus' action to arrange a call with you and the PFWG?

18:30:03 [aliman]

i haven't heard anything yet

18:30:13 [dbooth]

s/man:/man,/

18:30:46 [dwood]

aliman, have you done anything in regard to your action regarding the WAI Protocol help to the PFWG?

18:30:59 [aliman]

no, waiting on Guus to arrange a telecon ...

18:31:00 [dbooth]

s/action07]/action07] [PENDING]

18:31:12 [dwood]

aliman, OK. We will continue both actions.

18:31:18 [aliman]

(original request from PFWG was very vague, we need to talk with them to get the specifics)

18:31:26 [aliman]

yep, continue

18:31:42 [dbooth]

ACTION: Alistair and Guus to help the WAI Protocol and ormats WG on their vocabulary [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action07] [PENDING]

18:32:01 [dbooth]

Topic: 2.5 Other

18:32:36 [dbooth]

WSDL 2.0 RDF Mapping Working Draft published: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0054.html

18:34:07 [dbooth]

ACTION: DBooth and Elisa to review WSDL 2.0 RDF Mapping: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0054.html

18:34:40 [dbooth]

Topic: 3. TASK FORCE UPDATES

18:34:59 [dwood]

ACTION on all document editor's to use the appropriate

18:34:59 [dwood]

style for editor's drafts:

18:34:59 [dwood]

http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/

18:36:44 [dbooth]

DBooth: There are templates for editor's drafts, WG notes, etc.

18:37:08 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.1 PORT - Porting Thesaurii to RDF and OWL (Alistair)

18:37:15 [dbooth]

zakim, who is on the phone?

18:37:16 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, Evan_Wallace, chalaschek, David_Wood, DBooth, raphael (muted), gmckenzi (muted), +30210668aabb, Jeremy (muted), Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen (muted),

18:37:19 [Zakim]

... TomBaker, +1.302.107.aacc, bwm, Giorgos_Stamou

18:37:36 [dwood]

aliman, can you summarize PORT's progress without being on the phone?

18:38:05 [aliman]

no progess since last telecon, except publication of 2nd WDs ...

18:38:09 [aliman]

(thanks ralph) ...

18:38:17 [aliman]

I wrote an email today (searches for link) ...

18:38:40 [dwood]

Congrats to PORT for the WDs

18:38:52 [aliman]

thanks dwood ...

18:39:01 [aliman]

email today re PORT progess and planning: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0163.html

18:39:13 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.2 OEP - Ontology Engineering and Patterns (Deb/Chris)

18:39:16 [aliman]

propose not to go for 3rd PWD before 31 jan

18:39:37 [aliman]

... for SKOS docs

18:40:30 [jeremy]

q+ to ask about duration

18:40:31 [dbooth]

Elisa: Unsure of progress on this.

18:41:04 [dwood]

ack Jeremy

18:41:05 [Zakim]

jeremy, you wanted to ask about duration

18:41:31 [dbooth]

Jeremy: Asked about duration, and the initial response did not go far enough.

18:41:54 [dbooth]

Evan: There was a second response saying we could get rid of it and make a comment.

18:42:04 [dbooth]

Jeremy: Oh, good. I didn't see that.

18:42:26 [dbooth]

DWood: I support Jeremy's comment.

18:42:48 [jeremy]

(my comment is more a spec thing: RDF Semantics say SHOULD NOT use duration)

18:43:18 [dwood]

aliman, is your action to review Qualified Cardinality note complete?

18:43:25 [aliman]

please continue

18:43:31 [aliman]

(will do this week)

18:44:53 [dbooth]

ACTION: Guus to review OWL Time note [recorded in

18:44:53 [dbooth]

[67]http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action10]

18:44:53 [dbooth]

ACTION: Alistair to review Qualified Cardinality note

18:44:54 [dbooth]

[recorded in

18:44:56 [dbooth]

[64]http://www.w3.org/2005/09/19-swbp-minutes.html#action09]

18:45:00 [dbooth]

ACTION on Chris and Alan to work with Ralph to make

18:45:02 [dbooth]

part-whole ready for publication

18:45:02 [raphael]

about the Semantic Integration note, when the document will be ready for review ?

18:45:04 [dbooth]

ACTION: Chris to move QCR note to W3C pace

18:45:06 [dbooth]

ACTION: Chris to move todo's to the changes section

18:45:08 [dbooth]

ACTION Alistair, Jeremy, Jeff to review QCR note

18:45:10 [dbooth]

DONE by Jacco:

18:45:12 [dbooth]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0042.html

18:45:14 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jeremy action to send comments to the list on

18:45:16 [dbooth]

the non-use of the duration datatype

18:45:18 [dbooth]

DONE:

18:45:20 [dbooth]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0081.html

18:45:22 [dbooth]

ACTION Evan to send note to Feng on discussion of semantics

18:45:24 [dbooth]

ACTION Guus to bring issue wrt URI space for ontologies

18:45:26 [dbooth]

to the SWCG

18:45:30 [dbooth]

ACTION Chris to ensure Feng gets signed up for the WG

18:45:32 [dbooth]

ACTION: Raphael Georgios S, Fabien, Phil to

18:45:34 [dbooth]

review Semantic Integration note

18:45:36 [dbooth]

ACTION Dan to investigate spatial relations work in SWIG

18:45:38 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.3 WordNet (Aldo)

18:46:10 [dwood]

Reviewing ACTION Alistair, Brian, Ben, Jacco, Jeremy to review WN

18:46:11 [dwood]

draft by 25 Nov

18:46:11 [dwood]

Review Caeeoll:

18:46:11 [dwood]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0081.html

18:46:33 [aliman]

re wordnet draft, can you take me off formal reviewers list (will send comments as and when I can)

18:47:05 [Jacco]

zakim, unmute me

18:47:05 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should no longer be muted

18:47:43 [Jacco]

jacco's wn review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0136.html

18:48:01 [dbooth]

ACTION: Alistair, Ben to review WN draft by 25 Nov Review Caeeoll: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0081.html [PENDING]

18:48:06 [dwood]

aliman, has your part of the above action been completed?

18:48:10 [bwm]

bwm's review http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0166.html

18:48:20 [Jacco]

with additional comment at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0149.html

18:48:23 [aliman]

no, see above comment

18:48:30 [Jacco]

zakim, mute me

18:48:30 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should now be muted

18:48:32 [dbooth]

(Jeremy, Brian, and Jacco already did their reviews)

18:48:42 [aliman]

re wordnet draft, can you take me off formal reviewers list (will send comments as and when I can)

18:48:51 [dbooth]

s/Alistair, //

18:49:05 [dbooth]

(Alistair asked to be removed from that action)

18:49:15 [dwood]

zakim, unmute jeremy

18:49:15 [Zakim]

Jeremy should no longer be muted

18:49:20 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.4 XSCH - XML Schema Datatypes (Jeremy)

18:50:25 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jeremy to prepare a new draft of XML Schema datatype prior to F2F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/17-swbp-minutes.html#action16] [DONE

18:50:34 [dbooth]

ACTION: jc explain non-montonicity and interoperability issues by email [DONE]

18:50:35 [jeremy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0080.html

18:50:50 [Zakim]

-bwm

18:51:05 [dbooth]

Jeremy: Unclear how to go forward from here.

18:51:46 [Thanassis]

Thanassis has joined #swbp

18:52:43 [Jacco]

zakim, unmute me

18:52:44 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should no longer be muted

18:52:55 [dbooth]

... If the behavior is left to the implementation, then there needs to be a well-thought-out way of coping with non-monotonicity, because it will lead to non-monotonicity.

18:53:53 [dbooth]

DBooth: That sounds to me like a good reason for not leaving it up to the implementation.

18:54:07 [thanassis]

thanassis has joined #swbp

18:54:08 [dbooth]

Jacco: Your SPARQL example is also one way of leaving it up to the implementation.

18:54:10 [Jacco]

zakim, mute me

18:54:10 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should now be muted

18:54:37 [dbooth]

Jeremy: In the SPARQL example, the semantics is not implementation defined, though the behavior is.

18:54:42 [Jacco]

zakim, unmute me

18:54:42 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should no longer be muted

18:56:04 [dbooth]

... In terms of wanting a well-defined extensibility point and coping with non-monotonicity, SPARQL allows you to make steps that are not valid under RDF semantics, and it's an app concern whether those deviations from the semantics are significant.

18:56:34 [dbooth]

Jacco: What about Jeff's proposal of mapping between the float and decimal types?

18:57:32 [dbooth]

Jeremy: I don't think I've understood his proposal well enough to comment. AFAICT, Jeff is allowing the application to choose the interpretation, and has insufficient constraints on it. One must be cautious in advocating a non-mon position.

18:58:23 [dbooth]

Jacco: I don't think Jeff wants a non-mon solution. I think Jeff is suggesting a standardized app technique to address this problem.

18:58:59 [dbooth]

Jacco: Need to ask Jeff to clarify his proposal.

18:59:15 [Jacco]

zakim, mute me

18:59:15 [Zakim]

Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen should now be muted

18:59:38 [Jacco]

yes!

18:59:53 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jacco to ask Jeff to clarify his proposal for data types (float, decimal, etc.)

19:00:04 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.5 VM - Vocabulary Management (TomB)

19:00:34 [Elisa]

Zakim, mute me

19:00:34 [Zakim]

Elisa_Kendall should now be muted

19:01:05 [dbooth]

Tom: I posted an update, focused on what we expect to achieve by the end of this charter period. Alistair suggested that the TF description should be broader. What is the purpose of the TF description? Look forward beyond January? Or focus tightly on what we can achieve before then?

19:01:47 [aliman]

(I like the OEP style TF page, suggested that for VM)

19:02:05 [dbooth]

DWood: Immediate goal is to focus the WG around deliverables we can make before the end of the charter.

19:03:42 [dbooth]

... I'd love to get the cookbook out by the end of the charter. Tightening the TF description was specifically in line with tightening expectations for deliverable by end of charter. No decision to extend the WG yet. If there's something you think the TF could accomplish in an extended WG, please let the chairs know.

19:04:10 [dbooth]

Tom: I'm comfortable focusing on the deliverable now.

19:04:56 [dbooth]

... I rewrote the TF description. If we're now looking at ideas for extending the WG, then I'd have to revise that document.

19:05:30 [dbooth]

Proposed update TF description:

19:05:30 [dbooth]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0134.html

19:05:30 [dbooth]

'HTTP Cookbook' editor's draft

19:05:30 [dbooth]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0117.html

19:06:10 [dbooth]

DWood: I agree with Alistair's comment, I like the format.

19:06:36 [aliman]

I suggest, as orthogonal to publishing the cookbook which we should aim to do before end of charter, we begin identifying and scoping future work items for VMTF ...

19:06:55 [aliman]

so could add to the VMTF page 'planned notes' section?

19:06:58 [dbooth]

... No objection to your proposed replacement text. I note the dependency on the httpRange-14 text, though it isn't listed as a dependency. What is the SKOS dependency?

19:07:29 [dbooth]

Tom: Alistair is experimenting with these recipes in the SKOS context.

19:08:14 [dbooth]

Tom: Re "planned notes", I could add something on where we see this going in the future.

19:09:01 [aliman]

I have some initial suggestions re next steps for VMTF, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0165.html

19:09:20 [dwood]

aliman, ok, noted.

19:09:50 [dbooth]

ACTION: TomBaker to add something on where we see the Vocabulary Management work going in the future.

19:10:23 [dbooth]

Tom: DBooth and Andreas voluteered for review at the F2F.

19:11:16 [dbooth]

... We want the cookbooks to be reviewed once before the end of charter, but don't see a pressing need for Note status.

19:11:41 [dbooth]

DWood: Why no move to Note?

19:11:55 [dbooth]

Tom: What would it entail and what would be gained?

19:12:20 [dbooth]

DWood: Work is more likely to survive the WG.

19:13:06 [dbooth]

Tom: Have not done a complete taste test. I want to take it back to DCI and deploy one of the variants with Dublin Core. Want to feel more confident before publishing as Note status.

19:13:33 [aliman]

According to W3C process, 'Note' implies work has ended on the given topic. This doesn't sound right.

19:13:52 [thanassis]

thanassis has joined #swbp

19:14:19 [dbooth]

DBooth: Note is not cast in stone. Not the same as a Rec. Ok to publish Note as current thinking.

19:14:44 [dbooth]

Tom: What are logistics?

19:15:05 [vassilis]

vassilis has joined #swbp

19:15:07 [dbooth]

DWood: Alistair, not correct. Note does not mean work has ended.

19:15:31 [aliman]

Can we get reviews done for the cookbook, then ask if it should go straight past WD to Note?

19:15:31 [dbooth]

DWood: Better to shoot for Note.

19:16:18 [dbooth]

Tom: So if reviewers and telecon attendees agree, then we could publishh the Note?

19:16:45 [jeremy]

q+ to discuss note versus rec and sotd

19:16:53 [dbooth]

DWood: Yes. A Rec is a standard. A Note is a way to say 'this is the best way we know right now'.

19:17:17 [dbooth]

q+ to say important for the Note to say what its status is.

19:17:46 [dbooth]

Tom: I'll report back on the next telecon.

19:17:47 [dbooth]

ack j

19:17:47 [Zakim]

jeremy, you wanted to discuss note versus rec and sotd

19:17:54 [aliman]

Re Note vs. WD for cookbook I defer to chair, whatever you think is best.

19:18:55 [thanassis]

thanassis has joined #swbp

19:19:06 [aliman]

[N.B. re meaning of 'Note': http://www.w3.org/2003/glossary/keyword/Process.rdf/?keywords=Note ]

19:19:20 [dbooth]

Jeremy: Rec has consensus level over the whole consortium. A WG Note from this WG means consensus of this WG, but no wider implication. But even that is not necessary in the note, but what *is* necessary is that the note says explicitly what the consensus status is. Notes can be published with out consensus (and say so).

19:19:29 [dbooth]

q-

19:19:33 [tbaker]

jeremy, thank you for that clarification

19:20:42 [dbooth]

DWood: Important is that first the TF has consensus on it, then ask the WG.

19:20:55 [dwood]

q?

19:21:28 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.6 HTML - Embedding RDF in HTML (Ben)

19:21:57 [aliman]

re VMTF can we get formal actions to review cookbook?

19:22:10 [dbooth]

Jeremy: Becoming clearer to the group that language tag may be an issue.

19:23:02 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jeremy write a formal description of the CURI proposal for WG consideration [CONTINUED]

19:23:02 [dbooth]

ACTION: DanBri to ask TF for sign-off on putting the draft xhtml vocab to the WG for review. [recorded in [66]http://www.w3.org/2005/09/05-swbp-minutes.html#action09] [CONTINUED]

19:23:02 [dbooth]

ACTION: Ben produce schedule for getting RDF/A editor's drafts docs ready for WG review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/11/04-swbp-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUED]

19:23:02 [dbooth]

ACTION: ben to contact alistair on use of frag id's [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/11/04-swbp-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUED]

19:23:31 [dbooth]

zakim, who is here?

19:23:31 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall (muted), Evan_Wallace, chalaschek, David_Wood, DBooth, raphael (muted), gmckenzi (muted), +30210668aabb, Jeremy (muted), Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen

19:23:35 [Zakim]

... (muted), TomBaker, +1.302.107.aacc, Giorgos_Stamou

19:23:36 [Zakim]

On IRC I see thanassis, vassilis, ewallace, gmckenzi, jeremy, tbaker, Jacco, bwm, Zakim, RRSAgent, dbooth, raphael, giorgos, Elisa, aliman, chalaschek, dwood

19:23:52 [Zakim]

-TomBaker

19:24:21 [dbooth]

Topic: 3.10 SE - Software Engineering

19:24:24 [Elisa]

Zakim, unmute me

19:24:24 [Zakim]

Elisa_Kendall should no longer be muted

19:24:45 [ewallace]

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/SE/ODSD/

19:24:46 [dbooth]

Evan: Primer doc is ready to go to WD.

19:25:01 [dbooth]

Elisa: I sent my comments this morning.

19:25:24 [Elisa]

Link to my comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0171.html

19:26:28 [jeremy]

q+ to note my comments have not been responded to ...

19:26:52 [jeremy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0086.html

19:27:30 [dbooth]

DWood: Please incorporate Elisa's comments, then on 12 December we can ask the WG for agreement to publish.

19:28:10 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jeremy Carroll to send review comments on SE Primer by 25 Nov DONE

19:28:10 [dbooth]

Jeremy's comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0086.html

19:28:24 [dbooth]

Jeremy: My comments were not addressed yet either.

19:29:07 [dbooth]

s/Elisa/Jeremy and Elisa/

19:29:22 [dbooth]

DWood: Important to address each comment, even if the response is disagreement.

19:30:38 [Elisa]

Zakim, mute me

19:30:38 [Zakim]

Elisa_Kendall should now be muted

19:30:43 [Zakim]

-chalaschek

19:31:15 [dbooth]

ACTION: JeffPan to check on getting Holger to join the WG [recorded in [59]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/17-swbp-minutes.html#action19] DONE

19:31:15 [dbooth]

ACTION: Jeff Pan to make sure Holger Knublauch gets signed up [PENDING]

19:31:15 [dbooth]

ACTION: Elisa Kendall to send review comments on SE Primer by 25 Nov [DONE]

19:31:15 [dbooth]

ACTION: Ralph to check if there's a formal policy issue wrt implicit endorsement [PENDING]

19:31:15 [dbooth]

ACTION: Phil Tetlow to check the copyright on the screenshots [PENDING]

19:31:17 [dbooth]

ACTION: danbri: draft a bit of text pointing to SWIG [PENDING]

19:31:17 [jeremy]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0087.html

19:31:19 [dbooth]

ACTION: Phil to make sure that an email is sent to the list about how the primer document will handle the listing of products [PENDING]

19:31:22 [dbooth]

ACTION: Guus to include publication proposal in Nov 28 agenda [PENDING]

19:31:24 [dbooth]

ACTION: phil/danbri to see how to proceed with discussion of ODA draft in the SWIG [PENDING]

19:31:26 [dbooth]

ACTION: jc send some more constructive comments on ODA draft [DONE]

19:31:47 [Zakim]

-Jeremy

19:31:55 [jeremy]

Note: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0087.html is the ODA comments

19:31:55 [aliman]

for the record ... re VMTF can we assign actions on dbooth and andreas harth to review 'HTTP cookbook' http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2005-11-18/ ... as they so kindly agreed to do a review for VMTF at the f2f :)

19:31:56 [Zakim]

-gmckenzi

19:32:00 [Zakim]

-Evan_Wallace

19:32:03 [Elisa]

Zakim, unmute me

19:32:03 [Zakim]

Elisa_Kendall should no longer be muted

19:32:04 [dbooth]

ADJOURNED

19:32:06 [Zakim]

- +30210668aabb

19:32:07 [Zakim]

-Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen

19:32:33 [dwood]

zakim, who is talking?

19:32:43 [dbooth]

Meeting: httpRange-14 resolution

19:32:45 [Zakim]

dwood, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Elisa_Kendall (81%), David_Wood (48%), +1.302.107.aacc (15%)

19:32:53 [dbooth]

zakim, temporarily mute elisa

19:32:53 [Zakim]

Elisa_Kendall should now be muted

19:32:57 [dwood]

zakim, mute aacc

19:32:57 [Zakim]

+1.302.107.aacc should now be muted

19:33:09 [Zakim]

Elisa_Kendall should now be unmuted again

19:33:11 [dwood]

zakim, mute me

19:33:11 [Zakim]

sorry, dwood, I do not see a party named 'dwood'

19:33:13 [Zakim]

-raphael

19:33:22 [dwood]

zakim, I am David_Wood

19:33:22 [Zakim]

ok, dwood, I now associate you with David_Wood

19:33:24 [dbooth]

zakim, temporarily mute dbooth

19:33:24 [Zakim]

DBooth should now be muted

19:33:25 [dwood]

zakim, mute me

19:33:26 [Zakim]

David_Wood should now be muted

19:33:34 [dwood]

zakim, unmute me

19:33:35 [Zakim]

David_Wood should no longer be muted

19:33:40 [Zakim]

DBooth should now be unmuted again

19:33:44 [dwood]

zakim, mute me

19:33:44 [Zakim]

David_Wood should now be muted

19:33:45 [Zakim]

- +1.302.107.aacc

19:33:50 [dbooth]

zakim, temporarily mute david_wood

19:33:50 [Zakim]

David_Wood was already muted, dbooth

19:34:00 [dbooth]

zakim, who is here?

19:34:00 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, David_Wood (muted), DBooth, Giorgos_Stamou

19:34:02 [Zakim]

On IRC I see ewallace, gmckenzi, jeremy, tbaker, Jacco, bwm, Zakim, RRSAgent, dbooth, raphael, giorgos, Elisa, aliman, chalaschek, dwood

19:34:08 [dwood]

Hmm. Giorgios?

19:34:12 [dbooth]

zakim, drop giorgos

19:34:12 [Zakim]

Giorgos_Stamou is being disconnected

19:34:14 [Zakim]

-Giorgos_Stamou

19:34:18 [dwood]

zakim, unmute me

19:34:18 [Zakim]

David_Wood should no longer be muted

19:34:39 [raphael]

raphael has left #swbp

19:34:55 [dbooth]

http://www.w3.org/2005/06/27-swbp-minutes.html#action02

19:35:03 [dwood]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Sep/0010.html

19:35:44 [gmckenzi]

gmckenzi has left #swbp

19:36:12 [dbooth]

DBooth: Does not addres how URI should be constructed.

19:36:42 [dbooth]

DBooth: And does not address what kind of document should be made available.

19:37:06 [dbooth]

Elisa: We did a treatment of relationship between documents and URIs.

19:38:01 [dbooth]

... How is this related to the cookbook?

19:38:58 [aliman]

I think there is a strong relationship between the httpRange-14 draft and the 'requirements' section in the cookbook: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2005-11-18/#requirements

19:39:21 [aliman]

N.B. i think the requirements section could be much better ...

19:39:48 [aliman]

possibly softer.

19:41:15 [aliman]

Note also Peter P-S comments on the 'requirements' and other aspects of the cookbook: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0125.html

19:42:25 [aliman]

On some fundamental aspects of semweb architecture we don't have consensus.

19:44:31 [dbooth]

DBooth: Two TAG-sanctioned ways of constructing URIs, hash and non-hash. With hash URIs, the meaning is dependent on the returned MIME type. If I use a hash URI to identify DBooth the person, then I cannot serve HTML to describe me (with a 2xx) response or it would imply that the URI idenfies an information resource.

19:46:32 [dbooth]

... This makes hash URIs inappropriate as general idenfiers.

19:46:38 [aliman]

N.B. recipes in the cookbook use *conditional redirects*, rather than content negotiation per se, to avoid any possible ambiguity or inconsistency arising from semantics implied by MIME type.

19:50:38 [tbaker]

(will cite in revised TF description)

19:58:42 [dbooth]

http://thing-described-by.org?http://dbooth.org/2005/dbooth/#foo

20:05:42 [tbaker]

quit

20:05:54 [tbaker]

tbaker has left #swbp

20:06:52 [dbooth]

DBooth: We note that when a hash URI does a 303-redirect, then some browsers append the fragid to the new URI, and some do not.

20:07:37 [dbooth]

DWood: Need to say what is the impact of the httpRange-14 issue to Sem Web community.

20:08:49 [dbooth]

DBooth: Another way to look at it: What guidance should be given to the Sem Web community in light of the TAG's decision?

20:09:09 [dbooth]

Elisa: Do tools support 303 URIs?

20:10:31 [dbooth]

... The other issue: How should tools generate URIs?

20:13:07 [dbooth]

Safari, Konquerer and Amaya 8.5 strip the fragid when doing the 303 redirect.

20:14:02 [dbooth]

Also IE 6 strips the fragid.

20:14:55 [dwood]

Error 400: Bad Request - Query string is not an absolute URI

20:14:55 [dwood]

The query string you supplied was not recognizable as an absolute URI.  It needs to be an absolute URI. 

20:14:58 [dwood]

For help, see How to Mint a URI Using thing-described-by.org.

20:15:01 [dwood]

(Under IE 5.2 for Mac)

20:16:25 [dbooth]

That error message is from thing-described-by.org, because the query string was escaped improperly.

20:16:51 [dwood]

But, if you strip the %20 (space) from http://thing-described-by.org?http%20://dbooth.org/2005/dbooth/#foo then it strips the #, just like Safari, Konqueror, W3M

20:17:01 [dbooth]

Netscape, Firefox keep the fragid when the 303 redirect is done.

20:21:35 [Zakim]

-Elisa_Kendall

20:29:47 [dbooth]

ACTION: DBooth to reply to DWood's email.

20:29:58 [Zakim]

-David_Wood

20:30:00 [Zakim]

-DBooth

20:30:01 [Zakim]

SW_BPD()1:00PM has ended

20:30:02 [Zakim]

Attendees were Elisa_Kendall, Evan_Wallace, Giorgos_Stamou, David_Wood, DBooth, +1.613.884.aaaa, raphael, +30210668aabb, chalaschek, Jacco_van_Ossenbruggen, Jeremy, TomBaker,

20:30:04 [Zakim]

... +1.302.107.aacc, +44.777.582.aadd, bwm, gmckenzi

20:51:42 [dbooth]

zakim, bye

20:51:42 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #swbp

20:52:02 [dbooth]

rrsagent, draft minutes

20:52:02 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/11/28-swbp-minutes.html dbooth

20:52:39 [dbooth]

rrsagent, make log public