12:39:50 RRSAgent has joined #lld 12:39:50 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc 12:40:28 zakim, this will be lld 12:40:28 ok, emma; I see INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM scheduled to start 10 minutes ago 12:41:43 Meeting: LLD XG 12:42:51 Chair: Tom, Antoine, Emmanuelle 12:43:47 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/F2F_Pittsburgh 12:44:58 rrsagent, please make record public 12:45:12 rrsagent, please draft minutes 12:45:12 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 12:50:26 Present: Emmanuelle Bermes, Tom Baker, Antoine Isaac, Karen Coyle, Jeff Young, Ray Denenberg, Marcia Zeng, Michael Panzer 12:51:20 Regrets: Jodi, Jonathan, Ross, Anette, Kim, Joachim, Andras, Asaf, Felix, Monica 12:51:28 Regrets+: Bernard, Peter 12:59:51 antoine has joined #lld 13:00:40 Present+: Lars Svensson, Gordon Dunsire, Paul Walk, 13:01:00 INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM has now started 13:01:07 +??P0 13:01:24 zakim, ??P0 is me 13:01:24 +antoine; got it 13:01:35 LarsG has joined #lld 13:04:15 Present+: Mark Van Assem, Kai Eckert, Alexander Haffner 13:06:20 Present+: Ed Summers, Martin Malmsten 13:06:28 TomB has joined #lld 13:07:45 Scribe: Lars 13:07:55 Introductions: 13:07:56 Scribe: Lars 13:08:07 scribenick: LarcG 13:08:16 19 participants 13:08:21 scribenick: LarsG 13:08:46 three more people arrive, makes it 22 13:10:25 Present+: Jon Phipps 13:11:00 mona has joined #lld 13:11:15 zakim, mona is kcoyle 13:11:15 sorry, mona, I do not recognize a party named 'mona' 13:11:22 kai has joined #lld 13:11:35 TomB: basic principles 13:12:42 ... it's not like a DC working group, guests are _not_ incouraged to participate unless they have something very specific to contribute. If necessary, guests please move to the back 13:14:15 charper has joined #lld 13:14:40 ... WiFi is not free, and we have no sponsors. TomB payed himself, we will let the hat pass around 13:14:51 ... $300 13:15:01 GordonD has joined #lld 13:15:47 ... agenda is tight, so let's go 13:15:57 Topic 1: Use Case Discussion 13:15:59 markva has joined #lld 13:16:19 ... We received 42 UseCases (that's the meaning of it) 13:16:50 jphipps has joined #lld 13:17:16 emma: We try to group UseCases 13:18:01 marma has joined #lld 13:18:02 .. it's OK to twitter about the meeting. Hashtag is #lld 13:18:36 .. UseCases at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/UseCases 13:19:46 kcoyle: There are guests who came for specific use cases. TomB will present those 13:22:33 Preparation of use case descriptions. Distribution of PostIts. Presenters please write names of the use cases they present on them 13:22:45 charper has joined #lld 13:22:48 TomB: presents 3 FAO use cases 13:22:58 .. 1) Agrovoc 13:23:18 rrsagent please draft minutes 13:23:39 paulwalk has joined #lld 13:23:51 rrsagent, please draft minutes 13:23:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 13:24:31 .. 1980 multilingual thesaurus, since 2000 an owl ontology, since 2009 SKOS 13:26:08 .. 2) FAO authority control 13:27:14 michaelp has joined #lld 13:28:24 .. description at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_FAO_Authority_Description_Concept_Scheme 13:28:42 .. 1) is at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_AGROVOC_Thesaurus 13:29:08 .. 3) AGRIS. Description at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_AGRIS 13:32:50 rayd has joined #lld 13:33:26 emma: the tree UCs fit together since they are from the same organisation. For clustering purposes, it might be better to group them differently. 13:34:31 kcoyle: One large piece of paper with the topic, and then move postIts with UC names around until we're satisfed 13:36:12 one flipchart per UC area 13:37:23 Antoine will consolicate all UC presentation slides into one presentation and upload it to the wiki 13:37:39 .. all presenters pleas mail their slides to Antoine 13:37:46 s/pleas/please 13:39:56 Jeff Young: UC Authority Data Enrichment (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Authority_Data_Enrichment) 13:40:40 .. authority data used to collocate information, need to consolidate internationally 13:41:14 .. goal: enrich authority data by linking in and out 13:41:39 .. how can we remodel the LinkedData back into MARC 13:42:33 .. how far can we re-use existing vocabularies and how much do we need to define ourselves 13:42:58 Jeff Young: UC Open Library Data (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Open_Library_Data) 13:43:49 .. Open Library has much bibliographic information from different sources (people, Amazon). It's not in MARC but key-value pairs 13:44:28 .. problems: forms of personal names not preserved, no subfield structure preserving structure of data 13:45:25 .. concepts (subject authority data) is probably more user friendly and less librarianesque 13:45:45 .. they use FRBRish structure 13:46:03 .. one goal just to present the data as LinkedData and see if it's useful 13:49:06 .. vocabularies used: owl, skos, foaf, frbr, rdvocab, dcterms 13:49:55 TomB: if UCs don't have a list of used vocabularies, we should add that to the UC 13:50:41 kcoyle: four cases with authority data 13:53:16 .. 1) AuthorClaim (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_AuthorClaim) 13:54:28 .. goal: try to identify authors and encourage authors to use the same name form in future, so that authors can find themselves in the database 13:54:38 .. vocabulary: mads 13:54:50 METS, I believe 13:55:20 3) VIAF (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Virtual_International_Authority_File_(VIAF)) 13:55:34 s/mads/METS 13:57:15 .. vocabularies viaf, owl, skos, foaf, frbr entities, frbr elements, dcterms 13:57:48 http://www.vivoweb.org/ would've been a nice use case to have in this area ... 13:57:53 .. makes sense to cluster it with Jeff's UC 13:59:04 .. i. e. UC Data Enrichment (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Authority_Data_Enrichment) 13:59:44 alex: UC DNB Linked Data (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Linked_Data_Service_of_the_German_National_Library) 14:00:03 .. Service in prototypical state 14:00:31 .. topics: alignment (DBPedia, Wikipedia, VIAF) 14:01:31 .. vocabularies: rda, foaf, relationship vocab, gnd (dnb internal), 14:02:42 kcoyle: NEP: New economic paper is the same as author claim 14:02:52 Thus we have 41 UCs 14:03:38 emma: does GordonD want to cluster with Jeff (Open Library Data) 14:03:50 GordonD: three different clusters 14:04:31 .. 1) Language technology (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Language_Technology) 14:05:14 .. problem: different library communities use different terminology (access points= 14:05:53 .. no real authority control for subjects 14:07:24 .. differences include language (multilinguality), authority terminologies and notations, uncontrolled terminology (natural language) 14:08:10 .. need: link terms from different languages (singular/plural etc). Translate user input into controlled terminology 14:08:32 .. LinkedData allows term-by-term matching (if the vocabulary allows it...) 14:09:02 .. also issue with compound vs simple terms (broader/narrower, part/whole) 14:09:35 .. Translation architectures: 14:10:15 .. * one2one: translate term in vocab1 to exactly one term in vocab2 (scalability issues) 14:11:45 .. * Hub-spoke: One vocabulary as hub. Issue: What to chose as hub? Issue: semantic drift between spoke vocabularies 14:12:50 rrsagent, please draft minutes 14:12:50 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 14:13:33 .. examples: 14:14:02 .. * Vocabulary mapping framework (hub-spoke) http://cdlr.strath.ac.uk/VMF/ 14:15:16 .. * HILT (hub-spoke) using DDC as http://www.d-nb.de/eng/wir/projekte/macs.htm 14:16:21 ..* s/http:.../http://hilt.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/ 14:16:56 .. HILT experimented with multilinguality and it seemed to work 14:17:43 .. * MACS (one2one) SWD, LCSH, Rameau, DDC http://www.d-nb.de/eng/wir/projekte/macs.htm 14:18:36 .. 2) UC Library Address Data (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Library_Address_Data) 14:19:12 .. libraries to publish information about themselves as linked data to allow identification, perhaps including collection-level data 14:19:40 emma; topic of morning session is to identify the clusters 14:19:51 TomB: then analyse the clusters one by one 14:20:04 .. we hear recurring themes 14:21:49 Marcia to present on Vocabulary Merging (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Vocabulary_Merging) 14:23:00 marcia: if user find things in a local service or a tag cloud 14:23:22 .. a vocabulary service to relate terms 14:24:00 .. vocab merging service to work at the back end e. g. as a super structure 14:24:32 .. sometimes actual merging, sometimes switching system 14:24:59 .. mapping of user terms (synonyms) to vocabularies 14:26:28 TomB has joined #lld 14:27:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html TomB 14:27:52 .. presentation of different projects: HILT, MACS, OCLC terminology services 14:28:51 .. UMLS metathesaurus (creating a superstructure) over 1mill concepts and 4.3 mill concept names 14:29:12 .. there concepts have unique URIs 14:30:11 antoine: who does what in this UC? What does the process look like? 14:31:38 GordonD: It's about terminology services. Black box: Service takes a user term and maps that back to a particular terminology a catalogue/community uses. It's transparent to the user: They enter a term and get a bunch of terminology back they can use in specific services. 14:31:57 marcia: It's much a silo 14:32:58 GordonD: DDC and UDC do the same thing but don't talk to oneanother, but there's rapid progress 14:33:44 .. do you need a terminology service layer to organise the LinkedOpenData 14:34:32 .. good example of statistical mapping technique in the DDC/LCSH mappings from WorldCat 14:35:22 michaelp: through consistent use of URIs we can get the whole cluster. 14:35:32 also nat'l diet library: http://id.ndl.go.jp/auth/ndlsh map their subject terms to lcsh now as linked data / skos 14:35:42 emma: interesting discussion, but we're pushing the break 14:35:55 .. postpone discussion 14:36:04 Break, 1/2 hour 14:37:57 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html LarsG 15:03:15 charper has joined #lld 15:07:56 Scribe: MichaelP 15:08:12 Gordon: UC Library Address Daata 15:08:14 Scribenick: michaelp 15:08:23 s/Daata/Data 15:09:12 GordonD: Libraries ro publish informarion about themselves for identification 15:09:28 rrsagent, please draft minutes 15:09:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 15:10:03 ... this can be subsumed under collection-level description 15:10:27 ... There is a DCMI AP for this which could be used 15:10:55 ... In a LOD environment this still has to be triplified 15:12:15 ... This type of collection-level metadata allows for pre-search filtering and inform decision of users 15:12:40 Jeff: VCard could be used for this. 15:13:07 edsu: Martin has already done this in Sweden. 15:13:45 GordonD: We have this in a DB but not as linked data. We need advice. 15:14:15 marcia has joined #lld 15:14:20 ... We want to link Sweden up with Scotland and the US. Sounds crazy, but is important for travelers. 15:14:31 ... and cross-cultural researchers. 15:15:17 Alexander: Accessibility is key here. The accessbility of e.g. digital documents is in scope here. 15:15:53 GordonD: Also availability of assistive technology is important info here. 15:16:31 UC: Bibliographic Network 15:17:21 ... Seeking the use of FRBR to bring metadata components together. 15:17:59 ... Matching and deduping is another task in large-scale aggregations. 15:18:46 ... Background issue to this cluster: data in catalogs is heterogenous. 15:19:09 ... But users want homogenous discovery interface. 15:19:49 ... Linked data help by breaking these records down into components. 15:19:55 ... Some statements will be the same. 15:20:17 ... Focus shifts from the record to the statement. 15:20:31 ... Deduping can happen at a much lower level. 15:21:31 ... We need to get to the triples from the legacy records. There is a lot of work going on in this area. 15:21:47 ... Main barriers: 15:22:15 ... Need to find identification methods. 15:22:39 ... Matching URIs, establishing equality of sub-properties. 15:23:08 ... Comparing values; Dewey numbers same as Dewey caption? 15:24:29 Jeff has joined #lld 15:24:46 TomB: Do these fit into the same category? 15:25:36 GordonD: They are all about record identification. 15:25:37 jphipps has joined #lld 15:26:06 ... But they are still multidimensional in terms of the way we have split up the topics. 15:26:18 http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Topics 15:26:29 TomB: My use cases fell into different topics. 15:27:01 emma: We doesn't have to do the clustering today. 15:27:13 s/doesn't/don't 15:27:45 TomB: If a UC has three salient topics, there should be a sticker in each category for the UC. 15:28:47 GordonD: I would leave it like it is at the moment; we can go back and look at the aspects of UCs in relation to topics later. 15:29:09 TomB: We now try to identify the key topic. We break up the aspects later. 15:30:08 kcoyle: Open Library UC has some FRBR aspects to it. 15:30:51 TomB: Ok, we place it into LLD SW Technologies category. 15:30:59 UC: Subject search 15:31:21 antoine: Better use of subject vocabs for web search. 15:31:39 ... Subjects, works, web pages about subjects and works 15:31:50 ... The case addresses all of these aspects 15:32:20 ... The scenario allows the user to select a controlled subject that the system has selected. 15:32:58 ... Requirements/Linked Data: Availability of vocabs on the web. 15:33:14 ... and use of indentifiers. 15:33:46 ... Issues: Human readable URIs 15:34:03 ... URIs patterns for real-world objects. 15:34:42 ... Also, there might a difference in the view of the concepts of the concept provider vs. the user of the info. 15:35:12 ... Another issue is the presentation of simple subjects (user-friendly) 15:35:23 ... Vocab merging is another issue. 15:36:00 ... Cluster: It is about authority data and bibliographic data. 15:37:25 Jeff: What I was trying to say in that UC is that by modeling these systems as linked data we can use web search technology like Google to do web searches with controlled vacabularies. 15:37:41 s/vacabularies/vocabularies 15:37:55 Jeff: Leveraging Google for semantic purposes 15:38:28 kcoyle: Would that put it in the Semantic Web section? 15:38:51 Jeff: Semantic Web environment 15:38:59 ... Ok 15:39:12 Antoine: UC Digital preservation 15:39:29 ... Goal is to support planning and realization of digital preservation 15:39:58 ... Two kinds of data: technical data and preservation processes and agents. 15:40:37 ... Some vocabs of interest: Preservation vocabs from LC 15:40:43 ... OAI-ORE 15:40:57 ... DOAP: Description of a project 15:41:49 ... Scenario: Finding objects based in preservation criteria, tracking checking preservation actions. 15:42:45 ... Value of LD technology: linking items, sharing data across organizations. 15:43:19 ... Two main issues: Scalability and persistence; coverage of existing vocabs incomplete. 15:44:00 ... No related UC, but the data could be used in other UCs than preservation. 15:44:23 ... Cluster: Data management? 15:44:35 emma: Non-bibliographic information? 15:45:10 ... We could cluster together with recollection, but the issue is completely different. 15:45:15 ... but the same context. 15:46:01 antione: We put this UC in non-bibliographic data. 15:46:18 s/antione/antoine 15:46:55 ... UC: Publishing 20th century press archive 15:47:28 Antoine: Provide every item of this collection a persistent identifier for citing. 15:47:30 ... General goal: provide for every item a persistent identifier. 15:48:19 ... Support the use of a standard metadata viewer. 15:48:21 marma has joined #lld 15:48:49 ... Kind of data: bibliographic data + context data 15:49:24 ... Scenarios: User interacts with the system using provided metadata 15:49:29 ... search and browse 15:49:55 just added CDL's Merritt digital repository software to the digital preservation use case, since they use linkeddata for coordination of curation services: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Digital_Preservation 15:49:55 ... User can then view the images of the pages with the standard viewer. 15:50:14 ... Also, info from other sources is pulled in for the end user. 15:50:42 thx edsu ! 15:50:46 ... There is also a back-end service side that focusses on harvesting 15:51:05 ... Value of LD technology: 15:51:12 ... Good vocabs available 15:51:39 ... Availability of external sources as LD 15:52:01 ... RDFa for machine/human publication of metadata 15:52:30 ... Vocabs: ORE, SKOS, FOAF, RDA (persons), EXIF 15:52:47 ... Issues: 15:53:02 ... Representataion of adhoc aggregations 15:53:25 ... end-user display of rich data aggregations 15:53:47 ... Capturing the order of documents. Big problem in RDF 15:54:07 ... There are only cumbersome solutions available. 15:54:31 added PRONOM as vocabulary for digital preservation http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Digital_Preservation#Related_Vocabularies_.28optional.29 15:54:38 ... Related UC: NDNP (Chronicling America), Europeana, VIAF 15:55:43 here's an example of martin's linked data for library institutions: http://libris.kb.se/resource/library/S 15:55:52 Jeff has joined #lld 15:55:58 TomB: Please squeeze in Europeana here. 15:56:38 antoine: I don't think so. It touches many different aspects of several cases. 15:56:50 TomB: Europeana is a mega-case! 15:57:19 ... Can we present NDNP now? 15:57:35 emma: We had a presentation from Ed on the telecon. 15:57:53 TomB: OK, so we just cluster it. 15:57:56 Scribe: Ed Summers 15:58:16 ScribeNick: edsu 15:58:17 Scribenick: edsu 15:58:20 :-) 15:58:30 rrsagent, please draft minutes 15:58:31 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 15:58:35 antoine: Digital Text Repositories 15:59:02 ... linking texts to authors and other contextual resources 15:59:39 ... there are somre repositories that curate at level of books, and some that will curate at different levels, portions of books, poems, etc 16:00:22 ... there was some frbr mentioned, digital editions as manifestations 16:01:03 ... linking is useful for authors, topics and to existing descriptions from external sources ; to make cataloging faster 16:01:26 ... also to enable citation 16:02:34 ... also automatic alignment tools could be of use, for suggesting links in the text to other linked data resources 16:03:32 ... linkeddata useful for adopting and sharing identifiers, and possibly for representing provenance data 16:03:56 ... related to the open library data, subject search, and bibliographic network use cases 16:03:58 jphipps has joined #lld 16:05:09 ... not sure where to fit it in precisely 16:05:22 emma: we can create a topic if necessary 16:05:45 antoine: it seems bibliographic 16:05:57 emma: it seems to be about using library data that's used elsewhere 16:06:26 antoine: ok let's put it under USE.Consuming and using library data 16:06:53 kai: Citation of Scientific Data Sets http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Citation_of_Scientific_Datasets 16:07:19 ... there is gaining interest in making data associated with research available 16:07:43 ... in some domains there are some best practices, but they aren't globally identifiable 16:08:01 ... focused on making the data citable 16:08:08 ... there are 3 use cases 16:08:22 ... 1) verification of research 16:08:31 ... 2) find publications based on a dataset 16:09:13 ... 3) reputation system to provide incentives for researchers to make their data available and citable 16:09:45 ... a citation is nothing but a link, and they want to link the data so it's relevant for Linked Data 16:09:58 ... an interesting case is if the data itself is linked data 16:10:20 ... maybe the distributed nature to it, fits linked data as well 16:10:31 ... possibly a future role for libraries: making data available 16:10:45 ... existing work in the healthcare/lifescience work 16:11:02 ... it's a cross domain problem, not very easy to define requirements 16:11:36 ... we have different roles for people that are part of the process: authors, reviewers, etc 16:11:51 ... there's no existing vocabulary for doing this 16:12:57 ... may need to link the citations in publications as well 16:13:34 antoine: there is the need to reference an article in a newspaper 16:13:43 ... in some other use cases 16:14:35 kai: i'm not sure how to classify the use case: maybe library data ; but also handling digital objects 16:14:45 antoine: is it also connected to the authorclaim case? 16:14:48 kai: yes 16:15:12 ... it relies on authority data 16:15:22 ... especially for people 16:15:38 emma: are you looking to enhance publication? 16:15:46 kai: yes 16:16:10 TomB: where are we going to put it, which category? 16:16:39 kai: is citation the main aspect, or scientific data? 16:18:04 oai-ore was kind of designed for this use case btw: http://dlib.org/dlib/october06/vandesompel/10vandesompel.html 16:18:34 kai pins the tail on Citation 16:19:08 markva: Enhanced Publications UC 16:19:24 ... aggregates of papers, chapters, datasets 16:19:42 ... contributed by the SURF foundation where they have 4 projects where the actually implemented it 16:20:21 ... fits in with what kai just presented 16:20:37 ... the've been using foaf, oai-ore, dctypes, dcterms 16:21:01 ... i have some questions about what the use case is about 16:21:10 ... are they annotating the content? 16:21:25 ... otherwise very little added on top of ORE 16:21:48 ... i think it should be clustered with citation scientific data uc 16:22:10 antoine: it also seemed kind of bibliographic too, focused on the publication 16:22:27 markva: it's focused on aggregates 16:22:36 kcoyle: kind of background information 16:22:53 markva: they have high res geological images that they would like to include 16:23:13 kcoyle: part of that is a data management issue; how do you make sure you store things and can assemble them again 16:23:24 marma has joined #lld 16:23:41 kcoyle: why don't you put it in Data Management 16:23:56 markva: Mapping Scholarly Debate UC 16:24:48 ... modelling rebutals, reactions, disagreements ; to capture evolution of thought 16:24:57 s/rebutals/rebuttals/ 16:25:13 ... the schemas are frbr like (work/manifestation) ; i wasn't able to access the schema 16:25:32 ... it would be very useful to link to the actual schemas so you can see what people have been doing 16:26:03 ... they have an implementation at bibliographica.org ; i couldn't drill down to the relationships ; wasn't clear if it is work that they would like to do, or have done 16:26:25 ... could be relevant Digital Text Repository UC 16:26:48 ... also NDNP UC, 20th Century Press Archives UCs 16:27:04 kcoyle: seems relevant to citation 16:27:18 ... the *why* of citation 16:27:37 TomB: i think there might be overlap with linking across datasets 16:28:01 kcoyle: i think in the end we'll have things in multiple places 16:29:46 antoine: we could go back to the owner to figure what vocabulary they use, since william is in the IG 16:29:57 TomB: it's 12:30 so it's lunch 16:30:50 TomB: ray, lars, emma still have to present 16:32:06 rayd: Radio Station Archive Digitization UC 16:33:05 ... current practice is that audio programs aren't often digitized, litle metadata ; the goal is to enable cross references, and search 16:33:41 ... the scenario about an archivist who is creating and annotating the digital versions 16:34:34 ... linked data is useful for subclassing dc:identifier, creating new vocabulary for interviewer, people, etc 16:35:00 ... there is little guidance for creating metaata about audio recordings, and provenance information (who created various things) 16:35:39 ... also seem ot be missing vocabulary for documenting uncertainty 16:35:43 s/ot/to/ 16:35:57 ... it all boils down to a vocabulary problem 16:36:05 ... a vocabulary for radio programming 16:36:14 kcoyle: it sounded like building an internal system 16:36:34 rayd: i didn't get that sense that it was internally focused 16:37:08 kcoyle: it is almost identical to the linkeddata discussion we had around someone from pbs who was creating vocabulary for programming 16:38:18 edsu: also the work that the bbc are doing 16:38:34 emma: LOCAH Project and Photo Museum UCs 16:38:45 ... they have a connection because they are both about archival material 16:39:04 ... the materials in archives are generally unique, in high quantities, and multiple content carriers 16:39:20 ... the challenge is to get common view of these materials, so that they can be found 16:39:34 ... they have hierarchical descriptions, contextual information is very important 16:39:48 ... ordered sequences, which are more difficult in RDF 16:40:19 ... sometimes the data is semi-structured, and there are quality issues (similar to radio archive) 16:40:56 ... they want linkeddata to provide a hub, to make it easier for users to get to the materials, and related materials via the context 16:41:10 ... linking to dbpedia, library content, library authorities 16:41:54 they used dcterms, bibo, foaf, skos, rdfs, frbr 16:42:16 emma: but the use of bibo wasn't clear, they said they just put it in there 16:42:36 ... they aren't working on converting ead to rdf, they are going back to ISAD(G) 16:43:14 ... similar to the FRBR -> RDF efforts, which aren't oriented around marc 16:43:53 ... maybe cluster with radio station archive 16:44:09 ... Recollection UC 16:44:51 ... an effort from NDIIPP to enable discovery of resources, to provide a tool to easily aggregate archives, to create descriptions of them, and to publish as linked data 16:45:07 ... could be a bit different because it is a digital archive 16:45:18 antoine: that case is quite connected to the europeana one 16:46:19 corey harper: just last week there was an interesting thread about generating OWL for EAD 16:46:27 antoine: yes, i've been involved in one of those things 16:46:45 corey harper: it's strange because it's more a document format for finding aids 16:47:37 GordonD: there was a meeting in helsinki about the archival communities search for a data model that connects up with libraries and museums 16:47:46 The thread I menteiond starts here: http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1010&L=ead&T=0&P=1910 16:49:04 s/corey harper/charper/ 16:49:23 kai: are they going to publish it as an ontology 16:49:40 GordonD: on the CIDOC/CRM site it is published as rdfs 16:49:54 ... it's an evolving supermodel across libraries/arhives and museums 16:50:09 LarsG: PODE UC 16:50:22 ... it's about pulling together linked data 16:50:34 ... wikipedia, project gutenberg 16:50:50 ... phase 1 is about frbrising, mashing library data through web service apis 16:52:05 ... 2nd phase is about finding non-fiction material via links to external datasets 16:52:21 ... marc records are very inconsistent, 40 years of doing things sort of the same way 16:52:40 ... also dewey.info is only summaries 16:53:49 ... uses frbr, dc, bibo, lexvo, geonames, foaf, skos 16:54:03 ... not really sure about what people want to use the data for 16:54:15 ... i would put it under USE 16:54:26 antoine: also related to bibliographic network 16:54:42 ... perhaps what we should do later is flag the more user oriented ones 16:55:07 TomB: ok, it's time to break for lunch 16:55:39 rrsagent, please draft minutes 16:55:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 17:00:30 -antoine 17:00:31 INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM has ended 17:00:31 Attendees were antoine 17:08:35 Zakim has left #lld 18:01:17 emma has joined #lld 18:03:50 zakim, are you here ? 18:05:25 rrsagent, please draft minutes 18:05:25 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 18:06:12 Zakim has joined #lld 18:06:40 zakim, where have you been ? 18:06:40 I don't understand your question, emma. 18:08:24 zakim, why did you leave us like that ? 18:08:24 I don't understand your question, emma. 18:08:47 zakim, this will be lld 18:08:47 ok, emma; I see INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM scheduled to start 338 minutes ago 18:09:38 markva has joined #lld 18:11:16 antoine has joined #lld 18:17:16 LarsG has joined #lld 18:21:53 INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM has now started 18:21:59 +[IPcaller] 18:22:05 zakim, IPcaller 18:22:05 I don't understand 'IPcaller', antoine 18:22:16 zakim, IPcaller is me 18:22:16 +antoine; got it 18:22:16 jneubert has joined #lld 18:23:01 rrsagent, please draft minutes 18:23:01 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html antoine 18:23:16 marma has joined #lld 18:23:24 Scribe: Martin Malmsten 18:23:37 Scribenick: marma 18:27:02 Meeting resumes after lunch 18:27:40 TomB has joined #lld 18:27:50 Jeff has joined #lld 18:31:38 jodi has joined #LLD 18:31:45 antoine: looking at vocabularies that are being used and how they can be aligned 18:32:00 kcoyle has joined #lld 18:32:05 Scribe: Jeff 18:32:14 scribenick: jeff 18:32:21 GordonD has joined #lld 18:32:23 alexander: still intend to look at requirements? 18:32:39 rrsagent, please draft minutes 18:32:39 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 18:32:41 antoine: yes, look at requirements first 18:33:00 hi! I'll just be popping in while I'm online this weekend. :) 18:33:12 antoine: do the vocabularies we have do what we want and where are the gaps? 18:33:58 alexander: requirements should include sparql and protocol into the discussion? 18:34:24 antoine: focus on vocabularies first and then talk about other requirement issues 18:34:28 marcia has joined #lld 18:34:44 kai has joined #lld 18:35:20 antoine: gordon wrote document about library standards and linked data 18:35:44 antoine: but start first with use cases and look at vocabularies they're using 18:36:43 antoine: start with with bibliographic data vocabularies 18:37:14 bib networks 18:37:22 http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Use_Case_Bibliographic_Network 18:37:24 -> Use Case Bibliographic Network 18:37:32 gordon: 18:37:43 vivo and frbrcore 18:37:56 s/vivo/bibo 18:38:37 gordon: concerns of frbrcore, including modeling mistakes 18:38:51 charper has joined #lld 18:39:15 karen: but it was the earliest and frbrer is only around 3 weeks 18:39:29 emma: but frbrcore is being used outside the library community 18:40:08 tomb: is persistence of frbrcore a concern? 18:41:05 gordon: ifla frbrer can be trusted with persistence. unlike frbrcore 18:41:39 dianeH: persistence and ownership is critically important exp. for larger libraries 18:42:04 ... not willing to invest in ontologies they don't trust 18:42:31 edsu: I'm willing to trust frbrcore, but it's behind the scenes 18:42:35 +1 with dianeH's statement 18:42:46 karen: frbrcore was published before FRBR was cooked 18:43:11 jphipps has joined #lld 18:43:36 kcoyle: encourage groups dragging their feet to realize people want to use these ASAP 18:44:08 antoine: what about bibo? is there a relationship with FRBR? 18:44:41 kcoyle: bibo is more about academic articles and citations 18:44:55 ... and journal articles 18:46:02 bibo uses frbrcore, dc, and a mashup of other vocabularies with some additions 18:46:29 bibo and frbr could be derived from the same underlying data 18:47:15 edsu: bibo is concrete and intuitive and that's a useful thing 18:47:48 karen: looking a bibo, they don't include frbr 18:48:40 mpanzer: they're more interested in a citation perspective 18:49:19 martin: casual users will be attracted to bibo 18:49:47 martin: mapping between frbr and bibo is a useful thing 18:50:06 gordon: true. Who's responsible for dealing with this mapping? 18:51:16 antoine: the LLD XG wiki could be used to list vocabularies and maintain links between them 18:52:07 TomB: LLD XG could provide guidelines for others to maintain links to vocabularies rather than expecting to to be managed centrally 18:53:11 kcoyle is right (i was wrong) bibo doesn't use frbr at all 18:53:13 tom: mapping relationships between different vocabularies that are constantly evolving is a complex process 18:54:55 corey: the expertise in this room can help explain how others can connect their vocabularies to otheres 18:55:53 gordon: the issues of cross relationships becomes a problem of institutional agreements and politics 18:56:32 looks like bibo uses: dcterms, foaf, vann, owl, skos, event, prism 18:56:49 gordon: who could manage these: IFLA, W3C and ... 18:57:06 ... DCMI 18:57:06 ... and dcmi 18:57:17 exactly ;-) 18:58:00 gordon: cultural shift that needs to happen to open world movement/assumption. It's a foreign idea still 18:58:18 Gordon: cultural shift - orgs rooted in 20th century - open movement - something completely foreign as paradigms. It suits everyone's interest to move into that for the future, because failed in the past. 18:58:53 edsu: an opportunity to create a process for things to incubate elsewhere and then be adopted and developed by major organizations. 18:59:18 major organizations need to be more open to foreign models 18:59:25 NISO has this problem 18:59:50 NISO has a process to move projects from somebody's garage to a managed space 19:00:45 TomB and Harry Halpin's paper: http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS10/paper/view/1140 19:00:49 TomB: vocabulary developers partner with cultural memory organizations and national libraries. Partnership where the organization takes over long term 19:01:20 ... this creates a level of trust without imposing too much early bureaucracy 19:02:19 emma: could the major organizations take the initiative to encourage and nurture promising vocabularies 19:02:47 one triple, one vote? 19:03:18 marma: after minimisation? :P 19:03:22 mpanzer: Simply using a vocabulary is an endorsements, but it's still not curation 19:03:40 Ed thanks Antoine for opening up the can of worms :-) 19:04:09 it's an important can of worms though :-) 19:04:15 antoine: keep track of links from vocabularies to use cases and vice versa 19:05:31 jeff: we can create a database of two way linking 19:06:14 edsu: I'm keeping a tally, but the links would be useful 19:07:07 ACTION; champion of each use case owner should send links to vocabularies 19:07:18 ... to Paul 19:07:55 rayd has joined #lld 19:08:34 http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Vocabularies 19:08:48 here's the tally i made of vocabs mentioned during the presentations this morning: http://gist.github.com/642570 19:09:35 michaelp has joined #lld 19:10:39 ACTION: for each use case champion: on the Vocabularies page, link to each URL use case that uses it 19:11:23 rrsagent, please draft minutes 19:11:23 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 19:12:51 antoine: continue to look at use cases... 19:13:13 TomB: identification and deduplication 19:13:21 Gordon: no vocabularies listed 19:13:46 TomB: Regional catalog/vocabularies 19:14:00 gordon: bibo, FRBR, etc. 19:14:12 s/that uses it/that uses it - see http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2005\/Incubator\/lld\/wik\i/Vocabularies/ 19:14:13 ... RDF 19:14:22 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html TomB 19:15:37 gordon: problems and limitations: lack of political will, ownership, rights, finding synonymous identifiers, lookup service for bibliographic items 19:15:56 paulwalk has joined #lld 19:16:51 Data NDNP skos, foaf, rda 19:17:37 s/Data NDNP/Data BNF 19:17:42 emma? rrsagent doesn't seem to be generating the minutes correctly, but the irc log seems complete - http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc 19:18:24 gordon: frbrizatoin is a concern because it makes assumptions in the underlying data 19:18:40 antoine: the data needs to be enriched 19:19:11 gordon: this may be more of an assumption than a reality. Is it a mistake to mix and match vocabularies? 19:20:24 antoine: there are perceptions that specific vocabularies are psychologically difficult to embrace. 19:20:56 kcoyle: what's the goal of identifying vocabularies listed in the use case. What the purpose? 19:21:27 antoine: the purpose is to identify the issues and concerns of using vocabularies 19:22:14 gordon: are we imagining difficulties and issues because of the vocabularies are or are not being used? 19:23:05 TomB: persistence, mapping, is good. Scope and limitations may not be so important 19:23:43 ... If the ontologies are slow to publish URIs, is that a clue to complexity and uncertainty? Bounded/unbounded concerns may be a problem. 19:24:07 ... The goal isn't to "review" these vocabularies, just to ideentify the issues 19:24:27 kcoyle: RDF vocabulares only, or are other vocabularis in scope? 19:24:51 antoine: assume that non-RDF vocabularies will be developed eventually 19:25:39 TomB: it's worth mentioning potential issues converting vocabularies into RDF 19:26:09 i can if it doesn't have to be anything but text 19:26:22 i can type, i don't remember scribe talk 19:26:35 ok 19:27:28 Scribe : Karen 19:27:35 Scribenick : kcoyle 19:27:57 library standards time is very long -- three years is a short time (frbr, etc.) 19:28:26 gordon: we may be providing a framework to encourage linking between vocab developers 19:29:05 karen has better sense of what we are doing. we can go on 19:29:57 gordon: polymas case... viaf, lcsh, rameau, linked data services of dnb, insittuto geografic nacionaol espana 19:30:17 ... igN? ebn? dbpedia 19:30:21 s/polymas/polymath 19:30:30 EDM Europeana Data Model 19:30:39 s/ebn/EDM/ 19:30:45 rrsagent, please draft minutes 19:30:45 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 19:31:14 using lcsh -- is the data set, not a metadata schema 19:31:45 is a controlled vocabulary; emma: we have them on the wiki page for vocabs 19:32:50 that is a big can of worms because of all of the semantic alignments between them. (gordon, and others) 19:33:12 ... this may be too difficult 19:33:32 edsu: disagrees, because there aren't many more than 10 in the library world 19:34:02 ... they should be kept separate, but maybe we can gt to that later 19:34:48 jeff: viaf ontology doesn't always make sense; maybe needs revision before others begin to use it 19:35:10 s/ebn?/EDM/ 19:36:10 gordon: feedback mechanism that causes ontologies to be revised 19:36:51 tom: needs for namespace policies that articulate how vocab will evolve, e.g. dc: if semantics change, will coin new uri 19:37:28 tom: needs for namespace policies that articulate how vocab will evolve, e.g. dc: if semantics change, new uri is coined 19:37:50 not clear if dbpedia/wikipedia have such a policy 19:38:19 what does stability mean on web? 19:38:53 mpanzer: most semantics are conveyed in notes fields 19:39:18 jodi has joined #LLD 19:39:59 ... do vocabs from same ontology have to be used together to have correct semantics? 19:41:59 jon: we are identifying organizational level problems for use of linked data, but are in an environment that doesn't have that commitment 19:42:39 emma: points: ownership, official and not 19:43:03 ... institutions should provide links between vocabs and curate them 19:43:19 ... barriers - some are perceived more difficult one 19:43:26 ... persistence policies 19:44:04 ... can you pick some from a vocabulary and not use whole vocabulary guidelines? 19:44:22 kc: how do you know what can stand alone? 19:44:41 jon: does it matter? 19:45:31 kc: there can be dependencies between items in vocab 19:46:27 mpanzer: ontological baggage, is not part of linked data stack 19:47:00 charper: isn't that covered by domains and ranges? 19:47:43 mpanzer: domains and ranges are only two pieces of a relationship; there can be other parts/relationships 19:47:53 ... and domains and ranges are not constraints 19:48:58 jon: we are talking about Lld, which has an existing domain model, exemplified by marc21 19:49:14 ... and marc21 is not expressed anywhere in rdf 19:50:02 tomB: we are talking about a larger environment 19:50:37 jon: we are talking about other things because we can't talk about marc21 in a linked data context 19:50:49 emma: can't, or don't want to? 19:51:05 jon: marc21 as rdf: curl -H "Accept: text/n3" http://bibliographica.org/301b111e-0dc0-5e34-a5e6-06c461d51789/57512 19:51:27 mark: what could go wrong when we use pieces from other vocabs? 19:52:09 mpanzer: if you assume everyone using ore properties provides a resource map... but not necessarily the case 19:53:22 ... linked data doesn't know about APs, doesn't know about records. our domain has highly structured data 19:53:32 ... what does linked data mean for us? 19:53:33 mpanzer: quite so, bibliographica uses ore to group together graphs... and doesn't provide a resource map 19:54:07 e.g: http://bibliographica.org/aggregate/301b111e-0dc0-5e34-a5e6-06c461d51789/57512/contributor/1 19:54:18 tomB: libraries rely on data definitions that are out of band in the lld environment 19:55:16 ... data received may not meet users' definitions; LD has formal relationships, but not a community view 19:55:49 jon: this is a significant flaw in the way we think about linked data 19:56:00 ... inld, each statement in itself makes sense 19:56:25 ... but for a complete description, may need more than one statement 19:57:01 gordon: where we started... choosing different properties from different name spaces 19:57:32 ... one issue is definitions; if they aren't absolutely precise, they will be used wrongly 19:57:53 ... meaning that definitions have to be very clear, but in library world we have many assumptions 19:58:12 ... frad has class called Person defined as "an individual" - not helpful 19:58:26 even if the definitions are very precise they will be used wrongly cf. owl:sameAs 19:58:29 ... the mark twain sam clemens problem 19:59:09 ... lassie is creator of paw print outside of grauman's chinese 19:59:24 in FOAF i read "Something is a Person if it is a person." is that much better ?! 20:00:18 gordon: vocabulary creators need guidance on creating definitions that can make sense outside of the context of the vocabulary 20:00:46 edsu: in the end, those that don't make sense won't be used 20:01:11 gordon++ 20:01:20 tomB: library community definitions are natural language concepts 20:01:33 ... LD world uses formal relationships to other terms 20:02:07 ... skos vocabulary terms were never defined in natural language 20:03:01 diane: ref. dcmi/rda task group work, and its lessons 20:03:29 ... no 'how to' guidance for building vocabularies for the web 20:04:13 ... this group is identifying some issues about what that guidance might be 20:04:18 diane's paper http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january10/hillmann/01hillmann.html 20:04:27 antoine: strongly related to concept of application profiles 20:05:03 mpanzer: w3c has recipes and best practices; that is what could come out of this group 20:05:20 ... not normative, but helping people who need to do something 20:06:08 ... could be aimed just at library data, so it is do-able 20:06:13 +1 mpanzer recipes and best practices 20:06:20 +1 to michael's suggestion for best practice docs 20:06:21 +1 20:06:45 +1 20:06:53 +1 20:07:01 antoine: let'a make this part of the deliverables discussion 20:07:09 break! 20:07:42 rrsagent, please draft minutes again 20:07:42 I'm logging. I don't understand 'please draft minutes again', emma. Try /msg RRSAgent help 20:07:49 rrsagent, please draft minutes 20:07:49 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 20:30:09 Jeff has joined #lld 20:30:49 s/LarcG/LarsG/ 20:31:15 rrsagent, please draft minutes 20:31:15 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 20:34:07 Scribe: Marcia 20:34:08 another hour for vocabularies 20:34:15 Scribenick: marcia 20:35:04 TomB: encoding vocabularies issues 20:35:26 ... how to identify the sources that control the controlled vocab. terms 20:35:45 ... this is an issue 20:37:15 ... waiting for Jon for some special issue related to MARC 20:37:49 ... differences discussed yesterday about DCAM and metadata language 20:38:21 ... community and info services case 20:38:55 charper has joined #lld 20:39:15 Gordon: Use Case Community Information Service 20:40:02 tomb: Use Case Linked Data and legacy library applications case? 20:40:57 Jeff: # Use Case Open Library Data :FRBR, RDA VOCab 20:41:55 karen: Use Case Virtual International Authority File (VIAF): 20:42:38 Jeff: there is a problem. In the VIAF, we kept adding individual elements that make sense. There is no vocabs available. 20:43:21 Gordon: future is that FDA to do all the control-related things 20:43:43 s/FDA/FRAD 20:44:19 Gordon: FRAD has a very rich properties for person. 20:44:34 ... compared for person defined by FRBR, FRAD, FOAF 20:45:32 Karen: there are properties in FOAF that library data do not use at all. 20:46:29 Alex: our database has to do a detour to link the different first name... (?) we had to add an element 20:47:10 ...link each variant first name whith corresponding last name 20:47:35 ... we had to add a bnode 20:47:37 Ed: to help library users, could libraries to be parteners to develop 20:48:42 jodi_ has joined #LLD 20:49:12 michaelP: issues of complexity. local properties are not expected to be adopted by others. Should add as FOAF sub-properties, in the future people can use the dump-down approach 20:49:14 for the record I was just relaying to Alex that danbri is looking to partner w/ people like alex and the dnb in the library community to add missing things to foaf 20:49:34 doesn't necessarily need to be The Library Community 20:49:36 +1 michaelp 20:49:54 kai has joined #lld 20:50:24 +1 charper # linking to foaf, so that library data can interoperate with the larger world of linked data 20:50:59 gordon: to distinguish different identities of people, libraries may use other data such as home address to help. 20:51:30 ... other iddues: redundant, depricated 20:51:41 s/iddues/issues/ 20:51:42 as mentioned during break: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2010Oct/0098.html - just posted - Mikael Nilsson on Thoughts on validation / documentation / abstract models in reaction to yesterday's application profile discussion 20:51:58 Expressing person name authority data as linked data doesn't necessarily mean producing triples that can act as a surrogate of the MARC data. 20:53:30 gordon: context is important to the meaning, not always carries in the definitions. 20:53:51 Gordon: authority headings is different from describing persons 20:54:32 Jeff: this is, the label is different from the concept 20:54:41 Jeff: heard more like about the label of the person 20:55:59 gordon: conversion issue 20:56:15 GordonD: models develop through feedback and eventually they converge. 20:57:05 tomB: when DC:create domain has not merged with RDF, later created dcterms:creator to assign domain range. Difficult to explain to the RDF people 20:57:43 ... heard people prefer to have property un-constained 20:58:37 s/un-constained/un-constrained/ 20:58:38 ed: yesterday's Linked Data session of Karen and Corey discussed about constrain issues 20:58:55 ...it's about ontological commitment : the more you say, the more guidance, but also constraints 20:59:13 ... may bring new problems 21:00:31 tomB: the group is carried away a little bit from LLD per se 21:00:35 TomB: feedback on DC was that it's good to make that commitment 21:01:31 not constrained the range is useful 21:01:57 Markva: not constraining the range is only OK if you have a mechanism to constraint it locally 21:02:27 mark: in some case it is good to have range constrained 21:03:21 ... has a function in recommending people what you want in ranges, either literals or URIs 21:03:46 antoine: there was a MARC ontology under construction at DERI a few years ago, but no it's gone 21:03:48 ... in context of linked data, often you want URIs, e.g. for creators 21:03:51 Antoine: none of our use case mentions the need for a MARC vocabulary 21:04:22 karen: MARC people probably has a big gap with the linked data 21:04:47 kcoyle: there is a use for MARC in RDF 21:05:00 ... the issue is to translate legacy data into other thing, one way may be marc 21:05:27 Ray: regarding MARC expressed as RDF 21:05:50 ... MADS 21:05:50 MADS and MODS were actually mentionned in Use Cases 21:05:54 jodi has joined #LLD 21:05:59 markva: is your dissertation available online somewhere? 21:06:15 markva: i was just fishing around on http://www.few.vu.nl/~mark/ 21:06:48 http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark/papers/thesis-mfjvanassem.pdf 21:06:54 emma: AACR, RDA, ISBD 21:07:09 MODS and MADS are formats 21:07:40 Jon: there was a presentation, that break MARC records into statements 21:07:57 ... explain this how data can be expressed in linked data 21:08:47 Karen: there are problems to make the MARC data into that kind of statements 21:09:14 gordon: unimarc still allign with ISBD 21:09:19 jneubert has joined #lld 21:09:25 ... some other allignments are complicated 21:09:42 ... registered ISBD in registry 21:10:08 funny to hear people talk about modelling me ;) 21:10:44 markva: thanks! 21:11:10 tomB: Use Case FAO Authority Description Concept Scheme: SKOS, RDF, FOAF, ??? 21:11:18 ... there is an issue of RDA 21:11:28 hope somebody actually reads it... 21:12:47 Alex: GND vocabulary, not registered yet, not for reuse 21:12:48 Alex: there was one vocab that did not mentioned. Not sure what's coming next-- official or not 21:13:19 ... RDA, SKOS, ??? 21:13:46 ... conncecting the headings to other vocabs. 21:14:10 ... person including academic title 21:14:29 ... map to MADS 21:15:07 ... all mapping things are working on. maybe next 6 months to work on 21:16:11 Lars: about the timeline of the LD project 21:16:46 Alex: we have the vocabulary, but did not regiter them 21:16:57 ... already has the description, document 21:17:11 tomB: this is an issue 21:17:19 registry of resitry 21:17:43 ... URIs are being point 21:17:59 ... registry become a portal and management tool, a secondary thing 21:18:43 the word 'registry' in the context of point to URIs is a problem 21:19:16 michael: you could do in your data 21:20:44 tomB: registry is problematic now. it is confusing 21:20:55 ... there are registry under registry. 21:21:09 ... has the problem with the word "to register' 21:21:25 In linked data context, "registering" in an external database is quite misleading. 21:21:43 gordon: I used term consistently, to represent your property in the registry 21:22:04 TomB: "registring" is same as coining a URI 21:22:16 Coining a URI, defining semantics and making this definition available in RDF when this URI is dereferenced is enough. 21:22:56 koren: there are people who do not know the meaning of registry, with domain name behind it 21:23:21 tomB: nothing about the registry in the sense of Diane and Jon's I do not like 21:23:30 ... the issue is the environment 21:23:31 DNB could do that without relying on an external provider. 21:23:51 ... registrying in the LD context is to coin a URI. 21:25:02 ... the URI is coined in a registry is... by using the word 'to registry' is important from vocab management point of view, but is not the sense in linked data. 21:25:21 TomB: putting something in registry is orthogonal to use in LD 21:26:04 Jon: formal official namespace registry 21:26:21 ... registration is a formalization of that namespace 21:27:27 Alex: one of the requirements is that a vocab has to have a place to be referred to, look for provoence, etc 21:28:18 michael: national libraries do not need domain names, no requirements to rely on external services 21:28:50 Alex: we have internal and external services. Human reable version and machine readable version. 21:29:27 tomB: something is resolvable is machine ...? 21:29:40 Registries are helpful if you have no easy access to a domain name / namespace. This is usually not an issue for a big library organization. 21:30:38 corey: how do you track the change of the data, should be an important issue to be discussed here 21:30:38 There is no requirements "to register" properties / vocabularies externally to make them "official". 21:31:22 antoine: what are the basic requirements, what are the most important, distinguish with others 21:31:40 tomB: move on. 21:31:48 Coining the URI is the statement that matters. 21:32:01 ... wrap up this discussion 21:32:39 ... I would like the group not use to verb 'to register' when not coin a URI 21:33:14 scribe: Lars 21:33:27 Corey: Registries provide services that are not available by just using conneg and publishing a flat RDF. 21:33:36 *ok 21:33:53 gordon: not happy to use the word 'publishing' either 21:34:27 ... to register imply some requirements 21:35:15 jon: registry is a namespace service, also for trusted vocabularies 21:35:29 ... it is more than linked data environment 21:37:08 michaelp: maintaining a URI is not a function of technology but function of an organisation (after Stu Weibel) 21:37:22 +1 to Stu Weibel 21:37:45 mantaining and persistence ... 21:37:58 +1 for moving on 21:38:01 *emma: could you have another person to scribe? 21:38:19 emma++ 21:39:12 Alexander: We have to keep this issue in mind in terms of best practices. 21:39:21 Scribe: Gordon 21:39:25 TomB: Registries good, not required. 21:39:34 Scribenick: GordonD 21:39:41 _+1 for rolling registry information into potential best practice doc 21:39:56 rrsagent, please draft minutes 21:39:56 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html emma 21:40:20 Alex: need some way to say a property is deprecated, etc. 21:40:39 Corey: Need to know of previous version, etc. 21:41:24 Karen: Let people use the technology they have 21:41:44 Karen: Best practice, not requirement 21:42:16 Karen: We need to say that versioning, etc. is a good thing, but shouldn't dictate that this is a requirement 21:43:01 All: Agree, it's best practice, and a good thing to have a registry to support important services 21:49:19 New topic: Deliverables required by May 2011 21:49:41 Emmanuelle: One report expected. 21:50:10 Emmanuelle: Discuss YouTube video this evening 21:51:03 Emmanuelle: Have captured vocabulary requirements from this afternoon's discussion ... 21:52:04 Emmanuelle: Requirements on three slides 21:59:47 paulwalk: http://172.22.172.216/topics 22:01:21 All: discussion on requirements, slides adjusted, some requirements need to be revisited and further discussed 22:01:39 marcia has joined #lld 22:02:00 Emmanuelle: Concern now is to move from use cases/requirements to deliverable 22:02:46 Antoine: Go through the components of the deliverable and identify who is interested in developing them 22:03:41 Emmanuelle: Small groups could analyze use-case clusters 22:05:00 disconnecting the lone participant, antoine, in INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM 22:05:05 INC_LLDXG(INC_LLDXG)8:30AM has ended 22:05:05 Attendees were antoine 22:05:23 Kai: For each cluster, extract scenarios, abstract from them, and develop single-action use-cases (what a use-case really is) 22:06:10 Antoine: Allows a check that these really are clusters 22:07:00 Karen: What are the clusters? 22:08:01 Zakim has left #lld 22:09:45 Emmanuelle: May be other clusters emerging from use-cases not discussed today 22:10:58 Alex: What is the deadline for completing this work? 22:11:15 Emmanuelle: By end of December 22:13:36 michaelp has joined #lld 22:13:47 rrsagent, please draft minutes 22:13:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html antoine 22:17:46 Emmanuelle: We will invite XG members not present to add their names to curation teams 22:18:02 ACTION: Karen and Emma to curate archive cluster for end of december 22:18:38 rrsagent, please draft minutes 22:18:38 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html antoine 22:18:54 Zakim has joined #lld 22:20:58 Emmanuelle: Other deliverable is relevant technology pieces, etc. 22:21:53 Antoine: Outreach and dissemination activities are in charter - some progress to this already embedded in wiki 22:22:46 Emmanuelle: Tomorrow, we should take each topic and see if it translates into deliverable 22:23:30 jodi has joined #LLD 22:25:16 Emmanuelle: If we want to create further W3C activity we should charter it 22:26:51 Antoine: We should attempt to inventory what we know is out there (in addition to output from use-case and vocabulary discussions) 22:27:21 Karen: Any inventory is a moving target, and we should acknowledge that - but inventory useful 22:28:16 antoine++ re: CKAN 22:28:40 antoine: would be good to have ww walk us through adding a package to ckan on a telecon 22:29:40 rrsagent, please draft minutes 22:29:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html antoine 22:31:05 ACTION: Kai and Ed to curate citations cluster for end of december 22:32:03 ACTION: Mark (and someone else) to curate digital objects cluster for end of december 22:32:20 ACTION: Gordon and Martin to curate bibliographic data cluster for end of december 22:32:39 ACTION: Jeff and Alexander to curate authority data cluster for end of december 22:32:55 ACTION: Antoine and Michael to curate vocabulary alignment cluster for end of december 22:33:02 rrsagent, please draft minutes 22:33:02 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-minutes.html antoine 22:34:55 rrsagent, bye 22:34:55 I see 7 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-actions.rdf : 22:34:55 ACTION: for each use case champion: on the Vocabularies page, link to each URL use case that uses it [1] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T19-10-39 22:34:55 ACTION: Karen and Emma to curate archive cluster for end of december [2] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T22-18-02 22:34:55 ACTION: Kai and Ed to curate citations cluster for end of december [3] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T22-31-05 22:34:55 ACTION: Mark (and someone else) to curate digital objects cluster for end of december [4] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T22-32-03 22:34:55 ACTION: Gordon and Martin to curate bibliographic data cluster for end of december [5] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T22-32-20 22:34:55 ACTION: Jeff and Alexander to curate authority data cluster for end of december [6] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T22-32-39 22:34:55 ACTION: Antoine and Michael to curate vocabulary alignment cluster for end of december [7] 22:34:55 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/23-lld-irc#T22-32-55