SWD WG -- 31 Oct 2006

<RalphS> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-minutes.html

<RalphS> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2006Oct/0054.html

Admin

TomB: roll call. encourage people to do self-intros

TomB: write a paragraph and post to list
... Motion to accept minutes from oct 24
... Seconded by Ralphs
... motion passed

Elisa: As of Monday, the OMG announced ontology definition metamodel is adopted spec

<Elisa> http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/2006-10-11 - ODM Specification

<RalphS> ACTION: Ralph consider a tutorial on scribe [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/31-swd-minutes.html#action01]

<RalphS> http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]

<RalphS> drop action 1

<scribe> ACTION: Elisa to post announcement to SWD list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/31-swd-minutes.html#action02]

<RalphS> ACTION: Ralph consider a tutorial on scribe conventions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action01] [CONTINUES]

SKOS requirements

<RalphS> ACTION: [DONE] Ralph to link to chris' telecon notes from SWD homepage [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action02]

<RalphS> ACTION: Alistair give pointers to deployed SKOS systems. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-swd-minutes.html#action06] [CONTINUES]

<RalphS> ACTION: Daniel to link his use case to SKOS draft [recorded in [19]http://www.w3.org/2006/10/24-swd-minutes.html#action01] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/31-swd-minutes.html#action06]

Daniel: I've talked with a couple of the groups I mentioned last meeting
... it's a good opportunity; there interest in contributing to the development of a standard they can use to distribute their terminologies on the Web
... they'd use SKOS if it meets all their needs
... they're currently using OWL
... how should we proceed to develop this use case?
... the WG could give them a strawman and ask for feedback

Tom: what is the current state of their terminology?

Daniel: they are currently expressing their relationships in OWL
... one group is using Protege frames but are planning to convert this to OWL

Elisa: I have another similar opportunity; I have been asked by a group working on ISO 11179 to help them put this into OWL
... they already have a lot of it in UML
... and I have some tools to convert UML to OWL
... because their work is evolving we may have the opportunity to impact it
... Bruce Bargmeyer is my contact

Tom: ISO 11179 is pretty big; it has 6 parts

Elisa: parts 2 and 3 are relevant, part 3 is what I think is the focus

Daniel: this is connected to National Cancer Institute work and is a huge opportunity

Elisa: see XMDR www.xmdr.org and look at latest UML and OWL versions
... though a bit out of sync with the document text
... they've recently sent me XMI stuff

<TomB> http://hpcrd.lbl.gov/SDM/XMDR/overview.html

-> http://www.xmdr.org/ eXtended MetaData Registry Project

Daniel: how much technical expertise is needed?

Elisa: XMI is an XML serialiaztion of MOF, a subset of UML
... they've sent me both OWL and XMI; the OWL is OWL-lite
... also, Frank Olken is now at NSF; he was also involved in 11179

<dlrubin> Link to ISO/IEC 11179: http://metadata-standards.org/11179/

<TomB> Daniel: We use the use cases to drive evolution of SKOS - make sure it supports needs of other communities. Interest in 11179: is there stuff in there that should influence the evolution of SKOS?

TomB CABig - NCI Cancer Bioinformatics Grid - metadata for clinical trials uses 11179 for terminologies for data-capture purposes. Interoperability with SKOS would be great.
... Have ISO 11179 map to SKOS - make sure SKOS is compatible.

<dlrubin> scribnick: Daniel

Elisa: Any review on SKOS compatibility would be very helpful - even informal.

<dlrubin> Elisa: any help in making skos compatible with iso 11179 would be good

<dlrubin> ACTION: Elisa to keep us posted as SKOS/iso 11179 compatibility issue evolves [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/10/31-swd-minutes.html#action07]

<dlrubin> Ralph: there is already a working draft of skos

RalphS: Looking for Alistair informal presentation earlier this year...

<dlrubin> ...we should consider that to be the strawman

RalphS: our task is to finish the SKOS WD...
... based on feedback from 11179 and others...

...the reason to to skos work in this WG, it's important to have OWL expertise involved

...it could appear that OWL and SKOS are trying to represent similar types of relationships

...we want to make sure there is enough expertise to understand what OWL subclassing and SKOS broader/narrower is doing

...people familar with OWL would be good to be involved in setting skos reqirements

Elisa: we are still a smal group. Will there be more OWL best practices people

Ralph: not necessarily. We have 15 people in the WG

...Mike is interested

...we may persuade him to stay involved