IRC log of swd on 2008-01-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:02:41 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swd
16:02:41 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc
16:02:43 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #swd
16:02:46 [Tom]
rrsagent, bookmark
16:02:46 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-02-46
16:02:50 [Quentin]
Quentin has joined #swd
16:02:51 [Tom]
zakim, this will be swd
16:02:56 [Tom]
Meeting: SWD WG
16:02:59 [Tom]
Chair: Guus
16:03:04 [Zakim]
ok, Tom, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started
16:03:12 [Ralph]
Ralph has joined #swd
16:03:44 [Tom]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0071.html
16:03:45 [berrueta]
scribe: diego
16:03:51 [berrueta]
scribenick: berrueta
16:04:00 [Tom]
rrsagent, please make record public
16:04:09 [Ralph]
zakim, who's on the call?
16:04:13 [Zakim]
On the phone I see no one
16:04:13 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
16:04:21 [Zakim]
On the phone I see no one
16:04:31 [Tom]
Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html
16:04:33 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Ralph, Quentin, Zakim, RRSAgent, marghe, aliman, JonP, seanb, berrueta, Tom, vit, Simone, Clay, Antoine, Guus
16:05:06 [Tom]
Regrets:
16:05:40 [berrueta]
topic: admin
16:05:40 [dlrubin]
dlrubin has joined #swd
16:05:48 [berrueta]
agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0071.html
16:06:08 [Zakim]
restarting in 2 minutes to recover bridge state
16:06:09 [berrueta]
PROPOSED to accept minutes of the Jan 8 telecon: http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html
16:06:19 [berrueta]
RESOLUTION: accepted minutes
16:06:39 [berrueta]
next telecon: 22 January 2008
16:06:46 [berrueta]
topic: skos
16:06:58 [berrueta]
ACTION: Quentin to review Editor's draft of SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-swd-minutes.html#action02]
16:07:02 [berrueta]
--done
16:07:07 [berrueta]
ACTION: Vit to review Editor's draft of SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-swd-minutes.html#action03]
16:07:09 [berrueta]
--done
16:07:23 [berrueta]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0004.html Quentin's review of SKOS reference
16:07:28 [berrueta]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0044.html Vit's review of SKOS reference
16:08:17 [berrueta]
aliman: looked at those reviews
16:08:40 [berrueta]
... neither quentin's nor vit's are about technical issues
16:08:46 [berrueta]
... mostly about wording
16:09:14 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #swd
16:09:15 [berrueta]
Guus: propose to write a new version and ask the reviewers
16:09:21 [Ralph]
zakim, who's on the call?
16:09:23 [Zakim]
sorry, Ralph, I don't know what conference this is
16:09:25 [Ralph]
zakim, this is swd
16:09:31 [Zakim]
On IRC I see dlrubin, Ralph, Quentin, RRSAgent, marghe, aliman, JonP, seanb, berrueta, Tom, vit, Simone, Clay, Antoine, Guus
16:09:34 [Zakim]
ok, Ralph; that matches SW_SWD()11:00AM
16:09:38 [Ralph]
zakim, who's on the phone?
16:09:46 [Zakim]
On the phone I see [LC], ??P19, ??P31, ??P18, Margherita_Sini (muted), ??P37, +012242aaaa, Jon_Phipps, Antoine_Isaac, Ralph, ??P43, ??P49, ??P53, ??P57, +1.617.395.aabb
16:10:24 [berrueta]
guus: send the new draft and a mail explaining how the comments by the reviewer's were addressed
16:10:36 [berrueta]
aliman: quite aggressive
16:10:41 [JonP]
zakim, Jon_Phipps is me
16:10:44 [Zakim]
+JonP; got it
16:10:45 [berrueta]
guus: you can put TODO's
16:10:52 [edsu]
edsu has joined #swd
16:11:14 [Zakim]
+[LC.a]
16:11:28 [edsu]
zakim, LC.a is me
16:11:29 [berrueta]
tom: discussion on the naming of some properties and a class that contain the word "relation"
16:11:37 [Zakim]
+edsu; got it
16:11:50 [aliman]
q+ to comment on label naming
16:12:00 [berrueta]
... suggests it might be clearer if we re-order the words
16:12:08 [berrueta]
... "relatedLabel"
16:12:22 [Antoine]
+1
16:12:39 [berrueta]
Guus: please take this into consideration for the draft
16:13:14 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p37 is Alistair
16:13:14 [Zakim]
+Alistair; got it
16:13:25 [Quentin]
Quentin has joined #swd
16:13:52 [berrueta]
aliman: i choose the previous name to make a distinction with all of the "*Label" relationships
16:14:18 [berrueta]
Guus: suggests to add a note to explain this
16:14:37 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p19 is Guus
16:14:37 [Zakim]
+Guus; got it
16:14:59 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p53 is Sean
16:14:59 [Zakim]
+Sean; got it
16:15:51 [vit]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0004.html
16:15:52 [Quentin]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0004.html
16:15:58 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
16:15:58 [Zakim]
On the phone I see edsu, [LC], Guus, ??P31, ??P18, Margherita_Sini (muted), Alistair, +012242aaaa, JonP, Antoine_Isaac, Ralph, ??P43, ??P49, Sean, ??P57, +1.617.395.aabb
16:16:02 [Ralph]
zakim, aaaa is Quentin
16:16:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Quentin, edsu, Zakim, dlrubin, Ralph, RRSAgent, marghe, aliman, JonP, seanb, berrueta, Tom, vit, Simone, Clay, Antoine, Guus
16:16:07 [Zakim]
+Quentin; got it
16:16:16 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p31 is Simone
16:16:17 [Zakim]
+Simone; got it
16:16:40 [berrueta]
aliman: quentin pointed an inconsistency between the text and the resolution at the f2f
16:17:17 [berrueta]
... we can do a quick fix
16:17:33 [Ralph]
zakim, Simone is really Diego
16:17:33 [Zakim]
+Diego; got it
16:17:56 [berrueta]
Guus: let's add pointers to the issues in the document
16:18:22 [Ralph]
zakim, aabb is Ben
16:18:23 [Zakim]
+Ben; got it
16:18:32 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair send an email to the list by the end of next week that the reviewers can agree with and then propose publishing as WD by Jan 22 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action02]
16:18:35 [berrueta]
--continues
16:19:34 [GuusS]
GuusS has joined #swd
16:20:06 [berrueta]
guus: move on into SKOS primer
16:20:14 [berrueta]
-> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/DraftPrimer Current draft of SKOS Primer
16:20:25 [berrueta]
Quentin: i sent the review today
16:20:36 [edsu]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0078.html
16:21:04 [berrueta]
Quentin: one of my comments is that we do not make any reference in the primer to the semantics
16:21:39 [berrueta]
... a use case instead of separate examples would be quite useful
16:22:37 [berrueta]
... other comments are related to the issues to be discussed later
16:23:06 [berrueta]
marghe: i plan to send my review by next week
16:23:21 [berrueta]
guus: these actions (on marghe and Quentin) were not captured last week
16:23:42 [edsu]
Quentin++
16:23:55 [berrueta]
ACTION: marghe to review the SKOS primer
16:25:05 [berrueta]
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]
16:25:08 [berrueta]
--continues
16:25:16 [berrueta]
deadline 22 Jan
16:25:35 [berrueta]
guus: move to ISSUE 36
16:25:36 [Tom]
q+ to ask about Tom's comments on Primer (in the agenda)
16:25:51 [berrueta]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0019.html Antoine on problems with closing ISSUE-36
16:26:01 [berrueta]
Antoine: last week we made a resolution about ISSUE 36
16:26:12 [berrueta]
... actually when looking at the initial wording of the issue
16:26:26 [berrueta]
... it is about linking relationships with the schema
16:26:39 [berrueta]
... so the resolution is not complete, part of the problem still exists
16:27:02 [berrueta]
GuusS: our resolution last week was an ammendment of a previous one
16:27:30 [berrueta]
... we need to track these resolutions
16:27:36 [berrueta]
... please look at the initial wording
16:27:52 [aliman]
q+ to mention I have a placeholder for ... in reference
16:28:41 [Zakim]
aliman, you wanted to comment on label naming and to mention I have a placeholder for ... in reference
16:29:29 [berrueta]
aliman: in SKOS reference we have a small note: we haven't made any commitment on this issue
16:30:05 [berrueta]
... it is implied that there will be a section showing a pattern for querying
16:30:48 [GuusS]
ack Tom
16:30:48 [Zakim]
Tom, you wanted to ask about Tom's comments on Primer (in the agenda)
16:30:48 [Antoine]
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/ConceptSchemes/MinimalProposal?action=recall&rev=1
16:31:59 [berrueta]
.. the reference has a section on SKOS and named graphs
16:32:31 [berrueta]
GuusS: to Antoine: write what you think the resolution to issue 36 should be
16:33:10 [berrueta]
Tom: discusses about the syntax of the examples
16:33:19 [berrueta]
... N3 might be more readable
16:33:28 [berrueta]
... it depends on the intended audience
16:33:52 [Ralph]
I heard Tom express concern that N3 could be _less_ readable ?
16:33:53 [berrueta]
... which components of SKOS are basic and which are advanced?
16:34:55 [berrueta]
s/N3/graphs represented as pictures/
16:35:11 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-n3-20080114/ Notation3 (N3): A readable RDF syntax
16:35:18 [edsu]
Ralph: nice!
16:35:27 [berrueta]
Tom: which document should be cited for N3?
16:35:29 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-turtle-20080114/ Turtle - Terse RDF Triple Language
16:35:44 [berrueta]
GuusS: it makes sense to use the same notation in both documents
16:35:58 [berrueta]
... unless there is a very good reason
16:36:18 [berrueta]
... many people will read first the primer and then the reference
16:37:14 [berrueta]
GuusS: i suggest to the editors to look at the pointers by Ralph
16:37:33 [berrueta]
Antoine: we need to sync with aliman and seanb
16:38:02 [berrueta]
ACTION: Guus to schedule to discussion on the notation in two weeks time
16:38:20 [berrueta]
ACTION: Antoine to track the resolutions to ISSUE 36
16:38:47 [aliman]
s/notation/notation (syntax) used in SKOS examples in Reference & Primer/
16:38:53 [berrueta]
GuusS: move to issue 44, only a few minutes for this
16:39:08 [berrueta]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0052.html This and other threads in the mailing list
16:39:48 [berrueta]
Antoine: there is some discussion on if broader/narrows should be transitive
16:39:57 [aliman]
q+ to comment on transitivity of broader
16:40:06 [berrueta]
... some people are not convinced by our decission during the f2f
16:40:55 [berrueta]
GuusS: i suggest in the reference we state that broad/narrower are not transitive, discuss the rationale, and point to a specialization in which we define a transitive broad/narrower
16:41:17 [berrueta]
aliman: there is a need for both of them in different use cases
16:41:29 [berrueta]
... this is common pattern
16:42:11 [berrueta]
... a design pattern to solve this is two have a non-transitive property and a transitive subproperty
16:42:27 [berrueta]
GuusS: i agree, i know this pattern
16:43:15 [berrueta]
... but technically it cannot be a subproperty, it leads to inconsistent semantics
16:45:30 [berrueta]
aliman: one of the rules of thumb in OWL reference is "do not mess with the vocabulary"
16:46:00 [Zakim]
+Elisa_Kendall
16:46:03 [berrueta]
... wonders if we should have rules of thumb for SKOS
16:46:17 [berrueta]
GuusS: this is a different matter, SKOS is not a language like OWL
16:46:38 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #swd
16:47:04 [berrueta]
seanb: alistair's point is that if we allow users to make assumptions about the vocabulary, we can introduce an hindrance on interoperability
16:47:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-minutes.html Ralph
16:47:37 [berrueta]
GuusS: leave this for now
16:48:02 [berrueta]
ACTION: Alistair to propose an approach to clarify which aspects of the extension module should be in scope for the candidate recommendation package. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action06]
16:48:05 [berrueta]
--continues
16:48:11 [berrueta]
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]
16:48:12 [berrueta]
--continues
16:48:18 [berrueta]
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]
16:48:19 [berrueta]
--continues
16:48:20 [Zakim]
-Margherita_Sini
16:48:28 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph to add pointer to Alistair's mail on grouping constructs as a note to resolution of ISSUE-39. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action05]
16:48:38 [berrueta]
--done
16:48:41 [Ralph]
-> http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action05 resolution of ISSUE-39
16:48:53 [Ralph]
"RESOLUTION: Accept Antoine's proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Dec/0083.html as a resolution to ISSUE-39."
16:48:56 [berrueta]
Ralph: do you agree with closing the issue?
16:49:16 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph to check whether the common interpretation of [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action10]
16:49:38 [berrueta]
--continues
16:50:01 [berrueta]
GuusS: the second action is a dup
16:50:07 [berrueta]
topic: rdfa
16:50:43 [berrueta]
ben: we hope in a couple of days we can have something for the reviewers
16:51:38 [Zakim]
-Antoine_Isaac
16:51:57 [berrueta]
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]
16:51:59 [berrueta]
--continues
16:52:03 [berrueta]
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]
16:52:05 [berrueta]
--continues
16:52:08 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ben to distribute RDFa syntax draft to reviewers by Monday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action10]
16:52:10 [berrueta]
--continues
16:52:14 [berrueta]
ACTION: Diego to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action12]
16:52:16 [berrueta]
--continues
16:52:20 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ed to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action13]
16:52:22 [berrueta]
--continues
16:53:10 [berrueta]
GuusS: if the document is available by the end of this week, we have to postpone the decission by one week
16:53:28 [Zakim]
+Antoine_Isaac
16:53:46 [Tom]
q+ to ask if there is an action on the RDFa editors to request a decision
16:54:06 [aliman]
q-
16:54:17 [berrueta]
... the decission might be scheduled for Feb 5th
16:54:21 [Zakim]
Tom, you wanted to ask if there is an action on the RDFa editors to request a decision
16:55:20 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ben to prepare the email to request the decission for publishing on Feb 5th
16:55:40 [berrueta]
topic: recipe
16:55:49 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph to review recipes document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action18]
16:55:50 [berrueta]
--done
16:55:54 [berrueta]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0062.html Ralph's review of the Recipes
16:56:00 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph see if W3C Systems Team can help with question on Apache conditional redirects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action17]
16:56:02 [berrueta]
--done
16:56:18 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14]
16:56:20 [berrueta]
--continues
16:56:30 [berrueta]
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action03]
16:56:32 [berrueta]
--continues
16:57:12 [berrueta]
jon: the reviews are great, we are working on integrating their comments
16:57:30 [berrueta]
... we are still shooting for a pre-publication next week
16:57:54 [berrueta]
... w.r.t. the comments from W3C Systems Team, not sure
16:58:27 [berrueta]
GuusS: if you can integrate ralph's and ed's comments, we are in a position to publish a new draft
16:58:44 [berrueta]
... decission in Jan 29
16:59:16 [Zakim]
-Antoine_Isaac
16:59:42 [berrueta]
ACTION: Jon and Diego to propose a decission on publishing the next Recipes draft by next week
16:59:56 [berrueta]
GuusS: make sure that the WG has the proposal
17:00:02 [berrueta]
topic: vocabulary management
17:00:28 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p43 is Vit
17:00:28 [Zakim]
+Vit; got it
17:00:52 [berrueta]
Elisa: planning to hold a call later this week and to work on our action
17:01:01 [berrueta]
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]
17:01:03 [GuusS]
zakim who is here?
17:01:04 [berrueta]
--continues
17:01:46 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p57 is Daniel
17:01:46 [Zakim]
+Daniel; got it
17:01:51 [Ralph]
zakim, [lc] is Clay
17:02:18 [Zakim]
+Clay; got it
17:02:20 [Ralph]
zakim, ??p18 is TOm
17:02:20 [Zakim]
+TOm; got it
17:02:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-minutes.html Ralph
17:03:09 [Ralph]
zakim, list attendees
17:03:09 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Margherita_Sini, +012242aaaa, Antoine_Isaac, Ralph, +1.617.395.aabb, JonP, edsu, Alistair, Guus, Sean, Quentin, Diego, Ben, Elisa_Kendall,
17:03:14 [Zakim]
... Vit, Daniel, Clay, TOm
17:03:16 [Zakim]
-Ben
17:03:18 [berrueta]
[adjourned]
17:03:21 [Quentin]
* can also stay on
17:03:26 [Zakim]
-Vit
17:03:31 [Zakim]
-Elisa_Kendall
17:03:42 [aliman]
antoine, can you call back in?
17:04:03 [Zakim]
-??P49
17:04:16 [Zakim]
-Diego
17:04:28 [edsu]
hopefully not your cube mate
17:04:35 [Ralph]
[adjourned]
17:04:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-minutes.html Ralph
17:05:52 [Zakim]
+Antoine_Isaac
17:05:55 [Zakim]
-Clay
17:06:29 [Ralph]
Topic: transitive broader [informal]
17:06:48 [Ralph]
Antoine: the idea is that transitive broader be a superproperty of broader
17:06:57 [Ralph]
scribenick: ralph
17:07:15 [Ralph]
Antoine: if we do that then statements using broader cannot be retrieved using the super property
17:07:31 [Ralph]
... the standard modelling pattern is good but we have a standardization problem
17:07:44 [Ralph]
Daniel: so there really aren't two types of 'broader'
17:07:50 [Clay]
Clay has left #swd
17:07:52 [Zakim]
-Antoine_Isaac
17:07:55 [Ralph]
... to me, there's only one kind of 'broader'
17:08:23 [Ralph]
Sean: seems to me from reading the discussion that people want to be able to query against 'broader' and get transitive closure on query
17:08:37 [Ralph]
... so there's really only one 'broader' but there's a way to query over a more general notion
17:08:43 [Ralph]
... the general notion would not be used in assertions
17:08:54 [Ralph]
Daniel: I don't see a difference between query and assertion
17:09:03 [Ralph]
Sean: there may be inferences I can draw from assertions
17:09:28 [Zakim]
+Antoine_Isaac
17:09:50 [Ralph]
Daniel: in the OWL community you make limited assertions and do a lot of inferencing
17:10:14 [Zakim]
-Antoine_Isaac
17:10:19 [Ralph]
Alistair: if transitive form is superproperty we could have a convention that we only ever assert the subproperty
17:10:28 [Ralph]
... but the superproperty is available for query
17:12:51 [Zakim]
+Antoine_Isaac
17:12:55 [Quentin]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/thes/1.0/guide/20040504/#3.9
17:14:20 [Ralph]
Guus: [worries about community usage]
17:14:31 [Ralph]
Alistair: choice of which is subproperty and which is superproperty
17:15:24 [Ralph]
... direct one could be 'broader' -- the one that people use -- which would affect existing SKOS data
17:15:42 [Ralph]
Sean: is there really an analog for the transitive closure of 'broader' in current thesauri ?
17:15:58 [Ralph]
... if I have a paper thesaurus, I don't really have a transitive closure without having to do a lot of work
17:16:06 [Ralph]
... the transitive closure is not actually represented anywhere
17:16:16 [Ralph]
Alistair: agree, but the point is the practicalities
17:16:29 [Ralph]
... in certain applications it is convenient to compute the transitive closure and then query it
17:17:00 [Ralph]
Sean: that's fine, which suggests the pattern of using direct 'broader' in assertions and a transitive 'broader' that I use in queries
17:17:44 [Ralph]
Guus: whatever we do, the transitive property should be a superproperty of the direct one else the semantics are wrong
17:18:08 [Ralph]
... the direct property: "a is a direct broader term of b", without saying anything about transitivity
17:18:24 [Ralph]
... remember that transitivity does not inherit
17:18:37 [Ralph]
Daniel: I'm worried about this confusing the community
17:18:57 [Ralph]
Guus: Sean points out that the community does not currently have this logical notion; they do it at query time
17:19:23 [Ralph]
Sean: yes, I'm suggesting non-transitive 'broader' used in assertions and a different, transitive, relation that is only used in query
17:19:42 [Ralph]
... I hope this satisfies those who want 'broader' to be transitive in some way
17:19:46 [Ralph]
Alistair: I agree
17:20:24 [Ralph]
Guus: but be clear that this is not [currently] being used in a pure logical way; it's a procedural thing
17:20:51 [Ralph]
Ed: there's an example at the end of the primer, but it doesn't follow this pattern and would need to be changed
17:21:19 [Ralph]
Quentin: the transitive version of broader and narrower should be present; we're speaking of creating knowledge organization systems so these should be taken logically
17:21:51 [Ralph]
... in some application the developer might want to use SKOS as a simple representation and might want some very simple logical inference
17:22:07 [Ralph]
... without requiring the full capabilities of OWL
17:22:21 [Ralph]
... their concept of hierarchy is a simplification of subsumption
17:22:41 [Ralph]
... this might just mean that we need to look at a SKOS extension
17:23:01 [Ralph]
... but I know there is opposition to extensions as they require additional namespaces
17:23:40 [Ralph]
Guus: if you're going to write an assertion, e.g. in a namespace document, you use 'broader' and if you want to write a query you can use 'broaderTransitive'
17:24:09 [Ralph]
Alistair: if we do have 'broaderTransitive' or 'broaderClosed' in SKOS then two of the semantic conditions in the data model become very easy to state
17:24:27 [Ralph]
... e.g. 'skos:related disjointfrom skos:broader'
17:24:44 [Ralph]
... and to assert some irreflexive relations
17:25:15 [Ralph]
... I would like to see a broaderTransitive/broaderClosed superproperty described normatively
17:25:26 [Ralph]
... rather than omitting it or leaving it to a community extension
17:25:35 [Ralph]
Antoine: agree
17:25:48 [Ralph]
Sean: agree, and it would reduce the repetition of this discussion
17:26:17 [Ralph]
Guus: any chance of getting this written up for discussion next week?
17:26:41 [Ralph]
Alistair: are you suggesting we introduce two new terms in the SKOS vocabulary and include them in the editor's draft?
17:26:52 [Ralph]
Guus: yes, in particular the editor's draft we're going to review next week
17:27:32 [Ralph]
Ralph: I'd recommend sending this to the WG in a separate email
17:27:42 [Ralph]
Sean: related to ISSUE 44
17:28:08 [Zakim]
-Daniel
17:28:12 [Zakim]
-Quentin
17:28:14 [Zakim]
-edsu
17:28:15 [Zakim]
-Ralph
17:28:17 [Zakim]
-Alistair
17:28:18 [seanb]
seanb has left #swd
17:28:20 [Zakim]
-Antoine_Isaac
17:28:20 [edsu]
edsu has left #swd
17:28:22 [Zakim]
-Guus
17:28:23 [Zakim]
-JonP
17:28:26 [Zakim]
-Sean
17:28:31 [Zakim]
-TOm
17:28:32 [aliman]
quentin: transitive version of broader should be present -- speaking of creating KOS, forcing applications to take them logically. In some systems & applications, use SKOS as simple representation, and simple inference with it (not full OWL). SKOS vocab to do thesauri, taxonomies, hierarchies, concept of hierarchy very simplification of subsumption, as broader is loose meaning. SKOS...
17:28:34 [aliman]
Al's notes ...
17:28:35 [Zakim]
SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
17:28:35 [aliman]
transitive as super ...
17:28:36 [Zakim]
Attendees were Margherita_Sini, +012242aaaa, Antoine_Isaac, Ralph, +1.617.395.aabb, JonP, edsu, Alistair, Guus, Sean, Quentin, Diego, Ben, Elisa_Kendall, Vit, Daniel, Clay, TOm
17:28:37 [aliman]
antoine: problem, all statements asserted using transitive broader cannot be retrieved by
17:28:38 [aliman]
daniel: aren't two types of broader?
17:28:40 [aliman]
sean: if use pattern (transitive super) don't use that for assertions, use for querying? people want to query against broader, and get transitive when query; assertions about direct;
17:28:42 [aliman]
daniel: assertions vs. query?
17:28:43 [aliman]
sean: assertions -- directly asserted; may be inferences I can draw.
17:28:45 [aliman]
daniel: proposing two different types of broader, confusing. agree with you, make minimal assertions, do the rest by inference, legitimate.
17:28:47 [aliman]
guus: BT standard term in thesaurus community; what people state as BT is always direct broader; so by definition, our semantics of broader, if it is equal to BT, then it needs to be not transitive, otherwise people get confused.
17:28:49 [aliman]
quentin: as a sub-property, examples described as in skos core guide?
17:28:51 [aliman]
guus: sub-property has to be direct; if do that, what we call broader, will not be same semantics as thesauri, because only assert direct one. that's only way semantics.
17:28:54 [aliman]
aliman: other way around from guus, would affect existing SKOS data; if do as guus says,
17:28:56 [aliman]
sean: analog for transitive closure of broader in thesauri? If have a paper thesaurus, don't really have transitive closure, not represented...
17:28:59 [aliman]
aliman: required
17:29:01 [aliman]
sean: to have skos:broader as direct, and introduce some new super-property as transitive closure
17:29:03 [aliman]
quentin: I would agree as well.
17:29:05 [aliman]
guus: I you want to have a transitive and a direct, then transitive is always super-property. transitivity doesn't inherit
17:29:08 [aliman]
daniel: existing relations so, worried about confusing the community. How do you know which to use?
17:29:10 [aliman]
guus: sean is saying, in community, don't have logical notion. Do it at query/computation time.
17:29:12 [aliman]
sean: broader used in assertions, not transitive, then property used in query which is transitive. relatively clear statement, answers concerns of people requiring broader to be transitive.
17:29:15 [aliman]
guus: clear not being used in a logical sense; if want to get closure, have to do procedural thing; haven't seen logical use of thesauri yet.
17:29:18 [aliman]
sean: needs some careful explanation in reference and primer.
17:29:20 [aliman]
ed: in tail end of primer, example of doing it not the right way, will have to be changed.
17:29:23 [aliman]
antoine: will not be huge effort
17:29:24 [aliman]
...extension described in docs earlier, need to look at again.
17:29:26 [aliman]
guus: broader & broaderTransitive should be in spec, if write docs, use broader, if want to query, use broaderTransitive. If SKOS spec specifies broaderTransitive.
17:29:29 [aliman]
aliman: makes some conditions easier to state
17:29:31 [aliman]
guus: comes down to wording
17:29:33 [aliman]
aliman: would like to see super-property in the spec
17:29:35 [aliman]
antoine: i agree
17:29:37 [aliman]
sean: i agree
17:29:39 [aliman]
guus: i agree too ... can we have this in some short form in editor's. Two new URIs in SKOS vocabulary. Suggest broaderTransitive rather than broaderClosed
17:29:42 [aliman]
ralph: recommend separate email on this -- here's what we've done to editor's draft and why
17:29:44 [aliman]
guus: who is issue owner? temporary resolution of issue 44. I'll write it tonight.
17:29:51 [Ralph]
i/transitive as super/scribenick: aliman
17:30:12 [Ralph]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:30:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-minutes.html Ralph
17:30:18 [aliman]
did in my desktop wiki :)
17:30:44 [Ralph]
zakim, bye
17:30:44 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #swd
17:30:59 [Ralph]
rrsagent, bye
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
I see 24 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-actions.rdf :
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Quentin to review Editor's draft of SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-swd-minutes.html#action02] [1]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-06-58
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Vit to review Editor's draft of SKOS Reference [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/20-swd-minutes.html#action03] [2]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-07-07
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Alistair send an email to the list by the end of next week that the reviewers can agree with and then propose publishing as WD by Jan 22 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action02] [3]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-18-32
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: marghe to review the SKOS primer [4]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-23-55
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
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] [5]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-25-05
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Guus to schedule to discussion on the notation in two weeks time [6]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-38-02
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Antoine to track the resolutions to ISSUE 36 [7]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-38-20
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Alistair to propose an approach to clarify which aspects of the extension module should be in scope for the candidate recommendation package. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action06] [8]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-48-02
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
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] [9]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-48-11
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
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] [10]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-48-18
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph to add pointer to Alistair's mail on grouping constructs as a note to resolution of ISSUE-39. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action05] [11]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-48-28
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph to check whether the common interpretation of [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action10] [12]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-49-16
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
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] [13]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-51-57
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
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] [14]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-52-03
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to distribute RDFa syntax draft to reviewers by Monday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action10] [15]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-52-08
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Diego to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action12] [16]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-52-14
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ed to review RDFa syntax document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/18-swd-minutes.html#action13] [17]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-52-20
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ben to prepare the email to request the decission for publishing on Feb 5th [18]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-55-20
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph to review recipes document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/12/11-swd-minutes.html#action18] [19]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-55-49
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph see if W3C Systems Team can help with question on Apache conditional redirects [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/08-swd-minutes.html#action17] [20]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-56-00
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph propose resolution to ISSUE-16 "Default behavior" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14] [21]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-56-18
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-swd-minutes.html#action03] [22]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-56-30
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jon and Diego to propose a decission on publishing the next Recipes draft by next week [23]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T16-59-42
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
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] [24]
17:30:59 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/15-swd-irc#T17-01-01
17:32:34 [dlrubin]
dlrubin has left #swd