See also: IRC log
<Tom> Previous: http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html
Amendments to record of face-to-face in Amsterdam
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph to update face to face minutes to reflect the amendment [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action01] [COMPLETED]
PROPOSED to accept minutes of the Oct 30 telecon
resolved to accept
Next telecons: 20 Nov 1600 UTC (13 Nov is cancelled)
Next tcon on 11/20
SKOS - see
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/Deliverables#SKOS
Schedule for SKOS deliverables
see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Oct/0135.html
Month 14, Nov 2007: Editor's Draft, SKOS Reference
Month 16, Jan 2007: First Public WD, SKOS Reference
Month 17, Feb 2007: Last Call WD, SKOS Reference
Month 19, Apr 2007: Candidate Recommendation, SKOS Reference
Ralph: someone to should review deliverables
page and update summaries
... to reflect current plans
... to bring this up to date
... will someone take an action to do that
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair will to update deliverables for SKOS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/06-swd-minutes.html#action02]
Alistair: we leave option of including primer in recommendation
Antoine: should we start working on it now or never?
Allistair: should we try to keep them together?
Antoine: yes, that's my idea. We say we expect primer to be produced with reference
<Ralph> (our experience with RDFa was that it was very confusing for the community to have primer and spec get far out of sync)
Alistair: we can publish primer as working draft in Feb/Mar. We should aim for two drafts as primer. Should keep them in synch
edsu: agrees with Antoine
<edsu> dlrubin++
Tom: this should be reflected on deliverables page
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair and Guus to prepare material for next week on Concept Schemes vs OWL Ontologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]
Alistair: we haven't talked about this yet. I
posted an email on this
... we ought to have a discussion on this.
Guus: we could have a short discussion
... at F2F we discussed that SKOS is a metamodel. It models concepts that
belong in a vocabulary.
... from that perspective, SKOS concepts are from perspective of
metamodel--instances may want to be like classes
... if you want to treat them as classes (you don't do that in thesauri), you
run into problems in OWL-DL
... rationale in F2F: the metamodel issue is being addressed in OWL-DL group.
SKOS groups shouldn't make decisions
... that restrict ourselves to DL where this issue will be taken up. We
proposed to say you cannot treat them as OWL classes
... Some vocabulary owners will want to treat instances as classes. So my
answer is yes, if OWL 1.1 comes up
... with solution, then instances will be able to be treatable as classes.
<edsu> dlrubin: so you are basically saying you will defer the issue to the owl dl group to deal with?
<Tom> dlrubin: for people using DL and want to use SKOS in their OWL DL ontologies, what are the implications?
<Tom> Alistair: depends how you want to use OWL DL and SKOS in combination
<Tom> ...if just using labeling properties, not commiting either way
<Tom> dlrubin: people need to know what parts you can use
<Tom> SeanB: if you don't expect everything to be in same graph, could use annotations without messing things up
<Tom> Guus: precisely the point. Also the point of OWL 1.1 - this kind of metamodeling is unlikely to affect the reasoning because you are unlikely to want to [use both at once]
<Tom> SeanB: would not expect same logical consequences - then could use both in a principled manner
<Tom> Guus: we need to write about this in the Primer
<Tom> Al: I put down my understanding in Design Patterns for working with OWL and SKOS...
<aliman> http://isegserv.itd.rl.ac.uk/public/skos/2007/10/f2f/skos-owl-patterns.html -> Al's document about patterns for working with OWL and SKOS
Antoine: For F2F we explored patterns to link to skos concepts.
<aliman> discussion of skos:it / skos:as
Antoine: is this something of interest?
Guus: I wouldn't go that route
Antoine: are we sure there will be a solution from the group?
Guus: worst thing that will happen is OWL people would separate the graphs
Alistair: even if OWL 1.1 people reosovle
metamodel issue, there could be a community that has OWL and SKOS
vocabularies separate
... I've heard people do that. You may have situations where want to bridge
metalevel and below
Guus: we can give guidelines. I wouldn't
introduce specific vocabulary. I'd give in primer a reference
... non-normative section an example. But not introduce new vocabulary.
Alisatir: I accept that
Guus: Let's leave discussion for now. Action should be to write a section in primer that explains the issue.
Alistair: We've got two documents out there. One is my note on patterns. We can use this toward explaining the issue.
Guus: drop that action on Alistair and me.
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair and Guus to prepare material for next week on Concept Schemes vs OWL Ontologies [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action04]
--drop
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair and Guus write draft section in primer on relationship between SKOS concepts and OWL classes for OWL DL users [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/06-swd-minutes.html#action05]
<scribe> ACTION: Antoine to summarise inScheme vs isDefinedBy and decide whether or not to reopen the issue. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action03] [DONE]
<Guus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Oct/0141.html
Antoine: Some citations from SKOS guide and
reference. It's not clear whether same thing is intended.
... isDefinedBy is about description of things.
... There might be a difference between the two. Might be clearer when Ralph
gives more detail on isDefinedBy
... I propose re-opening the issue.
Guus: I agree with his analysis and support the resolution.
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph to reconstruct proposal for semantics of isDefinedBy [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/30-swd-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Tom to amend proposals to for accepting minimal relation labels [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-swd-minutes.html#action12]
<scribe> -- done - see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Oct/0137.html
<scribe> --DONE
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to post user experience reports for ISSUE-25 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/07/03-swd-minutes.html#action05]
-- Guus suggested to DROP after ftf decision on the issue, but action has been continued...
--DROP
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to write up the issue [of Label Resource] and add to the issue list. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action01] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Alistair to update semantics document to listing ways in which SKOS diverges from OWL DL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action06]
--DROP
<Ralph> Alistair: update to semantics doc will be done as part of prior action w/Guus
Tom: Teleconf now on Thurs?
... yes
<scribe> ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Ben and Michael to address comments by Tom [regarding maintenance of wiki document http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/RDFa] recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]
Ralph: I don't expect any more RDFa publications in Nov
<scribe> --DONE
RECIPES - see
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/Deliverables#Recipes
<scribe> ACTION: Guus/Tom to solicit reviewers for the Recipes document. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action08] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Dan to ask apache about conditional redirects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action07] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Diego to recast Recipe 6 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action02] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Jon to add words that acknowledge the existence of RDFa as potential mechanisms, but it's out of scope here. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action06] [CONTINUES]
<Guus> [I have to drop off to help my duagther with exam preps]
<scribe> ACTION: Jon to make changes as proposed [with regard to Issue-23] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph to come up with a URI for wiki page [for Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action04] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: TF leaders to prepare a version of Recipes for review in December [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action09] [CONTINUES]
<scribe> ACTION: Vit and Elisa to include in the document all the target sections plus an allocation of sections to people and potentially a standard structure for sections [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/08-swd-minutes.html#action07] [CONTINUES]
SWEO request for input to Semantic Web FAQ re: SKOS
see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Nov/0002.html
scribe: Anyone willing to take this on?
... Need text for this. Would be reusable in Primer
<Ralph> Ed++
edsu: I'll do it
<scribe> ACTION: Ed to write suggest some text about SKOS message for SWEO Semantic Web FAQ [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/06-swd-minutes.html#action24]
Tom: any other topics to discuss?
... Thanks everyone. Meeting adjourned.