See also: IRC log
<jodi> can't make it today but will keep half an eye on IRC
<emma> Previous: 2011-05-19 http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html
<kcoyle> no, not me. i haven't dialed in yet
<tbaker> me rssagent, please draft minutes
<kcoyle> that's me
<emma> Scribe: Marcia
<emma> scribenick: marcia
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/RunningAgenda
<kcoyle> sounds fine
PROPOSED: To accept http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html
Emma: any objection to the minutes of last telecon?
RESOLUTION: approved minutes from last call
Emma: check the future schedule
of agenda
... we have asked for extension
... until the end of August
... have not heard feedback
... we will have a telecom every two weeks in the Summer
... no telecom next week
... many will be at LOD-LAM next week
... LOD-LAM summit ... who is going to the summit
tom: 10 members of the LLD XG
will be there.
... no formal presentations
... may be a good opportunity to disseminate the main ideas we
have in the report, disscuss the idea of follow on W3C
community
... suggest to coordinate among ourselves to prepare each
session of the report
... 2-3 slides
... combine into one presentation. each will have that on our
laptop, ready to present some ideas
... if the idea is relevant with the break up groups, we can
present
<emma> 0m/e @Monica keep insisting on Nice, I made it finally
tom: presentation the main point,
help to see the big picture of the report, find the gaps in the
report
... important to get feedback
... suggest the 10 of us to prepare to cover each section of
the report, coordinate among ourselves.
... attend: Tom, Antoine, Karen, Jodi, Marcia, Asaf Bartov,
Kevin Ford, Uldis Bojars, Jonathan …
<scribe> ACTION: Tom to send email to the LOD-LAM participants and create a final version of the presentation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action01]
<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0055.html
<scribe> ACTION: Digikim to update the transcluded version of the report by Wed Apr 13 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/04/07-lld-minutes.html#action06] [DONE]
Emma: action is done
<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0051.html
<scribe> ACTION: Antoine and Emmanuelle to talk about strategies for getting comments at next call [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action15] [CONTINUES]
Antoine：there was a suggestion about using a system that allows to comment on each paragraphs
... found a system used by
JISC
Kcoyle: asking about time period of review
Emma: we need to get more people
in the review process
... in the group there were people involved in the edited
writing.
... may need to extend to beyond the group members
... by the end of August, try to get the comments
... try to identify one or two reviewers to particular section,
invite them, like a peer-review process
... suggestion on how to proceed
... extend to mid-August
Karen: thinking of more general
community feedback
... what the library community thinks of this
... people will feel that they are involved.
... reading report as the general content
... Maybe we should send to a number of lists and events to get people
aware
... tell people to propose to the list
<edsu> +1 # karen's suggestion to get the full report out in front of a lot of people as a draft
Karen: need to make sure they feel they are heard
Emma: need to implment a tool to be able to comment on the wiki
Karen: many people do not have account on wiki may not to bother to do that
<edsu> kcoyle: just as an aside, this #wwic (why wasn't i consulted) is a nice essay about the importance of this :) http://www.ftrain.com/wwic.html
Karen: maybe should be on the
email
... send a call, telling people to put the words about the commenting in the subject
line
<tbaker> +1 to handling comments on email, encouraging specific subject lines
Antoine: wonder if Karen see the
system I mentioned.
... it was easy to enter
... writing next to the paragraph
<edsu> antoine: which one did you find?
*ed: http://digress.it/
Karen: something like that will be good, but maybe a bit more work
<emma> JISC using the system : http://rdtfmetadata.jiscpress.org/
Antoine: one can see other people's comments together using this tool.
Karen: Jodi replied that there are tools that help to do the reviews.
<jodi> besides digress.it, there is commentpress
<jodi> http://commentpress.com
<jodi> probably others, too
<jodi> right, http://rdtfmetadata.jiscpress.org/ is using http://digress.it
Karen: those are wordpress based ones
Emma: comments on different sections -- move on
<jodi> one concern raised (by Antoine?) was they encourage paragraph-level review, over gestalt/overall review
<jodi> antoine: sorry, I'm travelling the next 3 weeks, I can't do that.
<antoine> @jodi: me too, I understand :-)
<jodi> antoine: however, my impression is that it's just a wordpress plugin, so anybody reasonably comfortable with that would probably be able to admin
<jodi> antoine: the harder questions are sociotechnical -- where do you put it (so that it's public in the long-term, doesn't disappear)
<jodi> antoine: would be bad to mint lots of non-cool URIs! :)
ACTION: everyone to read http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits#.22Library_Linked_Data.22:_Scope_of_this_report and do lightweight review [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]
<emma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0048.html
Emma: Jodi initiated the discussion
... asking for comments
Tom: reading through dataset examples ... they can also be digital resources
<kcoyle> actually, 'sound recordings' in library records can be digital
Tom: so I edited the description of them
<edsu> Tom++ # you added mp3 i guess?
<antoine> jodi: I could ask Europena, maybe...
<kcoyle> it's just that's only obvious to librarians/catalogers :-)
<scribe> -- CONTINUES
<jodi> antoine: that would be great :)
<edsu> kcoyle: books can be electronic too :)
<scribe> ACTION: Tom to ask Hideaki or Dickson to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Benefits [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action06] [CONTINUES]
Tom: Time is too short for them
to review it within this week. I did my review and posted the results before
this call.
... invite to take a look at the section that made changes
Emma: some feedback, on broadern the general benefits of LD
Tom: oriented to URIs, emphasized
on resources are made more accessible
... Karen's points on what organizations gain from LD seemed to be
done mostly. Other comments?
Karen: It was not missing some content there, but there need to have more emphasis. People (like managers) may never heard about 'URI'... Maybe says "using LD technologies, you can get these, these, and these..."
... 'URI' may confuse people
... emphasis should be
reversed
... changing the wording --
... open the section with what you get, not with how you get it.
... not the process.
Jeff: maybe emphasize linking
<rsinger> +1 linking
<rsinger> and also identifiers
<rsinger> other than uris
Ed: agree with Karen.
... target to managers, 'URI' might be confusing.
... later in the report to talk about how to link, not at the
beginning of the report.
<kcoyle> yes, talk about identifiers, not URIs
<edsu> +1
Tom: URI is pretty central. The
concept of globally unique identifiers is central; it is important
for understanding other benefits.
... There could be changes of the wording.
Karen: good idea to talk about
identifiers
... a little bit cross to what LD is
michael: need to be
careful, though.
... the way of transforming those unique identifiers to the
URIs still need work
... be careful about the wording
Emma: maybe need other suggestions.
Ed: suggest Karen to draft, change the background.
<rsinger> sam here
<rsinger> er
<rsinger> sa,e
<rsinger> gah
<antoine> :-)
Karen: will take a stand on that
Ed: Karen: position them in the way you talked about them is good
<edsu> kcoyle++ # thanks!
<scribe> ACTION: Karen to edit the Benefits section [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/26-lld-minutes.html#action06]
<michaelp> Example for a UUID URI: urn:uuid:7673868d-231e-490d-9c4f-19288e7e668d
<ACTION: Ed to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Vocabularies_Datasets_Section next Tuesday for discussion on Thursday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action08] [CONTINUES]
Ed: need to spend more time
... In general, they are very good
... vocabularies and the links with the cases are useful
... the overview are in both documents
... the one that goes on to the report has the 'observations'
which are very good
... will email more
... one question is about the distinguishing between value
vocabularies and datasets
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Vocabularies_Datasets_Section
... is it OK to think
both
... summary of importance of linking. Very nice.
... Regarding how the linking is happening in the domain, maybe give example of some projects-- frameworks to help people to link things
... highlight some those projects.
<antoine> SILK (from LOD2)
scribe: will send email about them
<antoine> thanks, ed!
Jeff: about the definitions. Tried to come up with the words to explain that value vocabularies can be some kinds of datasets.
Antoine: there are some datasets
can be used as value vocabularies, e.g., Freebase
... will spend sometime again to write, help the
understanding
Jeff: had a point about these could be thought of datasets
Ed: might be important to emphasize that things can be fuzzy
Emma: maybe find people as targets and have them to read and review the section.
<kcoyle> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0053.html
<edsu> re: "These are classified into three main groups: metadata element sets, value vocabularies, and datasets." doesn't sound fuzzy to me
<scribe> ACTION: Karen to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Relevant_Technologies for next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action09] [DONE]
Karen: should add some types of
technologies that target to different users
... e.g., include technologies for metadata developers, not
instance creators
<tbaker> Maybe add a reference to the tool Ed mentioned - "framework to help people link things"?
Jeff: some of the things Karen listed are similar to what were listed in 'tools' section.
<tbaker> Ed, do you have a link for that?
ACTION: Antoine to review http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_issues_page for next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2011/05/19-lld-minutes.html#action11] [DONE]
<antoine> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011May/0072.html
Antoine: document is long, and I couldn't help reading the detail. I will
send email later with comments on details.
... but I like it, really well written, the 'problems' made clear
... perhaps too clear as the tone of the section is quite negative (and for good reasons)
... especially, it does not mention that some initatives happened, even if prototypes
... and some headings and sentences are quite bold (cf. Jodi's comment)
... so the section succeeds, but it makes me feel our efforts are doomed ;-)
... there could be some words changed, to instill hope
... perhaps it would be good also to connect individual issues to individual recommendations
<kcoyle> :-)
<edsu> hope++
Karen: those of us who worked on the recommendations realized to go back to the issues too.
<tbaker> kcoyle, jodi - a good place to pick up on our next call (Draft_issues)
Emma: We have reached to the end of the hour... will leave two more reviews to discuss next time.
<jodi> tbaker: sure. I'm booked out until LOD-LAM, though
Emma: close the actions that people already reported, re: reviews
<jodi> tbaker: don't feel the need to wait for me
<emma> Still to be discussed : Recommendation section and Use case report