See also: IRC log
-> previous meeting 2005-04-21 [subsequent to the telecon, a presentable version was published]
Benjamin: I will be attending by irc only unless I need to talk then will call back
PROPOSED to accept http://www.w3.org/2005/04/21-swbp-irc as record of 21 April telecon
ChrisW: let's wait on considering record of previous meeting
Ralph: I offered to the scribe to turn the irc log into clear minutes
RESOLVED next telecon 19 May
ACTION: Ralph add Note category to WG home page [DONE]
Ralph: Has everyone here submitted their data on straw poll on next f2f location?
<tbaker> not sure - will check...
<aliman> me not contributed ...
httpRange-14
ACTION: Chairs to discuss the httpRange-14 issue at the coordination level [CONTINUES]
XML Schema Last Call
ACTION: jeremy post personal review to XSCD doc [DONE]
-> XML Schema Component Designators Review
ACTION: jeff to review XML schema LC draft [CONTINUES]
Ralph: "The Last Call comment period is expected to end 26 April 2005. "
Jeff: can we still send comments?
Ralph: you can always send comments
Jeff: I'll try to write comments next week
ODM Review
Elisa: I posted all feedback received to date
-> [ODM] Summary of feedback on the ODM Revised Submission (2005-01-10 version)
Elisa: all of this feedback has been posted on
the ODM site also
... I need any additional feedback by middle of next week at the latest; we
have a 30 May deadline for next revision
ACTION: Alistair to think about machine-readable change policies [CONTINUES]
Alistair: need to have policies in human-readable form first :)
<aliman> [PORT] Proposals for Public Working Draft
RESOLVED to publish SKOS documents as First Public Working Draft
ACTION: Ralph help Alistair with publication process for SKOS documents [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/05-swbp-minutes.html#action06]
Alistair: part of SKOS management process requires us to maintain a public link of proposed changes
<danbri> (some dialog on the chairs and w3c-tools list... I'm not sure of state of the art)
Ralph: "exit" is one issues management tool used by several WGs
[post-meeting note: other WG issues tracking tools exist, as cited by the Working Group Tools index]
<danbri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-tools/ "This list is for discussion of tools maintained by W3C, or by Working Froup members, which are intended to be useful in managing Working Group business."
Chris: not a lot of progress
... final version of Specified Values note is awaiting work from me
ACTION: Ralph re-ping ISI AC Rep [DONE]
Chris: Jerry Hobbs finally appointed to the
WG
... OWL Time is essentially written, so should be quick to get ready
Mike: I finished a thorough read of n-ary values note
... got many comments to Natasha
ACTION: Aldo to propose an update the Wordnet TF description [CONTINUES]
ACTION: alistair e-mail group about ISO contact [CONTINUES]
Alistair: put TC37 contacts in irc already
ACTION: Ralph get XML Schema Datatype transition request unstuck [DONE]
ACTION: jeremy polite reply to ashok setting expectations [DONE]
-> Re: Review of XML Schema Datatypes in RDF and OWL
-> Tom's report: [VM] Vocabulary Management update
Tom: Alistair has proposed a streamlined
outline for a VM Note
... we proposed to limit the scope to RDF vocabularies; e.g. Dublin Core,
FOAF, and SKOS
... and not cover WordNet and Published Subjects
... propose a VM TF telecon on 12 May at SWBPD time (1700 UTC)
<aliman> i'm ok with that time
Ralph: telecon this week; HTML TF meeting record
ACTION: DanBri help write an rdf schema for the additional xhtml2 namespace elements [CONTINUES]
DanBri: I'm still awaiting a public Working
Draft before I write this
... I would like to know the namespace for the RDF/A vocabulary
... what happens to these triples?
ACTION: Gavin find out from his community and contacts if they have use cases [CONTINUES]
Tom: I will have to reconstruct mail I sent
regarding GRDDL on behalf of the Dublin Core community
... Guus says he saw it
... generally, the reaction was "gee that could be nice" but there was not a
strong reaction either way
... got feedback from three people
<libby> Re: [ADTF] decision on criteria for inclusion of apps and demos
Libby: no objections to current
criteria proposal
... so we'll try it out
... Wiki page exists for DOAP files
... getting a lot of submissions of API
... these are not "colorful" -- do we need more colorful submission?
Ralph: APIs are useful to developers but I'd
like to see some flashy stuff good for demos
... things that can be run out of the box
<libby> http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebDOAPBulletinBoard
Libby: I have created a couple of bookmarklets
to help people quickly blog demos
... helpful if people put things on the mailing list as well
<libby> (see http://esw.w3.org/topic/SemanticWebBestPracticesTaskForceOnApplicationsAndDemos and ask me for help / passwords for the weblog)
(no representatives present)
ACTION: Jeff to talk with Benjamin to propose a process for submission of FAQ questions [DONE]
Benjamin: Jeff accepted my proposal
<BenjaminNguyen> http://www-rocq.inria.fr/~bnguyen/swbpd-faq.ps
Tom: can we have PDF please?
Ralph: how about HTML?
Benjamin: this is not the final version, please look at the content
Phil: several TF members have been busy [with
other matters]
... expect to have some document for review in the next couple of weeks
... Jeff is helping
Jeff: Elisa contributed some comments on a
draft
... we need someone who is a domain expert from ASE to help us
... talking with Evan about an ISWC workshop
... talked with Chris about invited talks for workshop, Chris volunteered to
solicit speakers from ASE
... we have a workshop Web site and will send a call for participation
Ralph: what is the connection between the workshop and this WG?
Chris: the Workshop is a reason to do the work of the SE TF
Phil: helps us focus on what the TF wants to do
Ralph: does a document that does not cover ASE make no sense? can't you publish something useful without it?
Phil: the sense is that it would be worthwhile to include ASE
Chris: the TF is responding to a WG consensus that including ASE would be useful
Evan: there is a fear that folk in the ASE community would feel we learned nothing from their experience
Mike: there's no harm in publishing a note that is explicit about saying "there is a really important area that has not been covered and we think it should be covered"
Phil: the TF may be being overly cautious as this could be a provocative area
Ralph: it's useful to get some framework published and see if this attracts more participation
Mike: it's also possible that there is no "best practice" yet in this area
<ekw> SWESE Wkshp page
<ekw> CFP will go out very soon