IRC log of swd on 2008-07-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:02:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swd
15:02:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-irc
15:02:41 [seanb]
seanb has joined #swd
15:02:41 [Tom]
rrsagent, bookmark
15:02:41 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-irc#T15-02-41-1
15:02:49 [Tom]
zakim, this will be swd
15:02:55 [Tom]
Meeting: SWD WG
15:02:55 [aliman]
aliman has joined #swd
15:02:58 [Tom]
Chair: Guus
15:02:59 [Zakim]
ok, Tom, I see SW_SWD()11:00AM already started
15:02:59 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
15:03:09 [Zakim]
On the phone I see [IPcaller], Jeremy, Guus_Schreiber
15:03:27 [Zakim]
On IRC I see aliman, seanb, RRSAgent, Zakim, Guus, Tom, marghe, berrueta
15:03:38 [Tom]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0062.html
15:03:47 [Zakim]
+??P40
15:04:01 [Tom]
rrsagent, please make record public
15:04:07 [Antoine]
Antoine has joined #swd
15:04:12 [aliman]
zakim, ??P40 is aliman
15:04:15 [Zakim]
+??P42
15:04:31 [Zakim]
+Antoine_Isaac
15:04:35 [Zakim]
+aliman; got it
15:04:39 [berrueta]
Zakim: ??P42 is me
15:04:42 [Tom]
Margherita, you have too much background noise
15:04:47 [Zakim]
+abel
15:04:58 [marghe]
i try to mute myself
15:05:03 [berrueta]
Zakim: abel is me
15:05:09 [Zakim]
-Jeremy
15:05:27 [Zakim]
+??P58
15:05:27 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
15:05:27 [Zakim]
On the phone I see [IPcaller], Guus_Schreiber, aliman, ??P42, Antoine_Isaac, abel, ??P58
15:05:29 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Antoine, aliman, seanb, RRSAgent, Zakim, Guus, Tom, marghe, berrueta
15:05:31 [seanb]
zakim, ??P58 is me
15:05:31 [Zakim]
+seanb; got it
15:05:43 [Tom]
Previous: http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html
15:05:45 [berrueta]
zakim, abel is me
15:05:46 [Zakim]
+berrueta; got it
15:05:48 [Zakim]
+Jeremy
15:06:51 [seanb]
scribe: seanb
15:07:15 [seanb]
Jeremy: introduced himself.
15:07:31 [seanb]
...representing TopQuadrant. Participation mainly for CR.
15:08:07 [seanb]
Guus: long telecon last time.
15:08:17 [seanb]
...some things being revisited on the list. Also possibly
15:08:22 [Zakim]
-Jeremy
15:08:23 [seanb]
...actions that are long gone.
15:08:38 [seanb]
Topic: Admin
15:08:44 [seanb]
Guus: propose to accept minutes
15:08:48 [Zakim]
+Jeremy
15:09:19 [seanb]
...no objections.
15:09:31 [seanb]
...next telecon 5th Aug. Guus regrets
15:09:57 [seanb]
...Two objectives in mind for these telecons. TO get to LC for SKOS and PR for RDFa
15:10:07 [seanb]
Topic: SKOS
15:10:12 [seanb]
Guus: Action items.
15:10:34 [seanb]
Regrets: Ed
15:10:41 [seanb]
ACTION: Ed to investigate what text could be added to primer re. concept co-ordination [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/22-swd-minutes.html#action02]
15:10:44 [seanb]
--continues
15:11:41 [seanb]
Guus's action re primer text. Is this still required?
15:11:51 [seanb]
Antoine: Can't quite recall.
15:11:57 [seanb]
ACTION: Guus to write primer text re: broaderGeneric and equivalence w/r/t subclass [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/18-swd-minutes.html#action08]
15:11:59 [seanb]
--continues
15:12:11 [seanb]
ACTION: Alistair to check the old namespace wrt dereferencing [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action03]
15:12:15 [seanb]
--done
15:12:26 [seanb]
Alistair: Sent email some four weeks ago.
15:13:09 [Antoine]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0094.html
15:13:30 [seanb]
ACTION: Antoine and Ed to add content to Primer about irreflexivity [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-swd-minutes.html#action06]
15:13:32 [seanb]
--done
15:14:23 [aliman]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0095.html email on old skos namespace dereference
15:14:46 [seanb]
ACTION: Alistar to update the history page adding direct link to latest version of rdf triple [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/17-swd-minutes.html#action01]
15:14:49 [seanb]
--continues
15:15:02 [seanb]
ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to specifically flag features at risk for Last Call. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action17]
15:15:04 [seanb]
--continues
15:16:04 [seanb]
ACTION: Sean to draft response to comment about namespace. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action12]
15:16:05 [seanb]
--done
15:16:07 [seanb]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0105.html
15:17:00 [seanb]
ACTION: Sean to post comment to OWL WG re annotation requirements. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action06]
15:17:10 [seanb]
--continues
15:17:34 [seanb]
ACTION: SKOS Reference Editors to propose a recommended minimum URI dereference behaviour [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/24-swd-minutes.html#action11]
15:17:36 [seanb]
--done
15:17:53 [Zakim]
-Margherita?
15:18:25 [seanb]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0004.html
15:18:32 [GuusS]
GuusS has joined #swd
15:18:47 [seanb]
ACTION: Guus to mail his position on issues 72, 73 and 75 to the list
15:18:51 [seanb]
--dropped
15:19:31 [Zakim]
+??P20
15:19:56 [seanb]
ACTION: Alistair and Sean to propose text to implement the resolution of issue-72 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html#action05]
15:20:03 [aliman]
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/master.html
15:20:03 [seanb]
--done
15:20:07 [marghe]
zakim +??20 is Margherita
15:21:03 [seanb]
Guus: Which issues to we need to discuss here. Namespace and broader/transitive
15:21:14 [seanb]
...would like to see if we need more discussion there. Also
15:21:30 [seanb]
...talk about LC schedule. When will drafts be available and reviewers.
15:21:42 [seanb]
...Discussion of namespace issue.
15:21:52 [aliman]
q+
15:21:52 [seanb]
...Is there reason to review our decision?
15:22:07 [Antoine]
q+
15:22:21 [seanb]
Alistair: Sent an email last week.
15:22:41 [seanb]
...Trying to think what pros and cons of each approach are.
15:23:03 [seanb]
...-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0034.html
15:23:26 [Tom]
zakim, ??P20 is Margherita
15:23:26 [Zakim]
+Margherita; got it
15:23:47 [seanb]
Alistair: A move to a new namespace has little upside and a lot of downside.
15:24:07 [seanb]
...stick to old has advantages. All the existing stuff can be claimed as implementations of
15:24:28 [seanb]
...SKOS. Also tools that are there already. A new namespace means we have to wait for implementation
15:24:48 [seanb]
...plus there will be a period of time while people migrate, which could take years.
15:25:11 [seanb]
...Realistically means tool developrs have to maintain multiple implemetations.
15:25:31 [seanb]
...Bottom line is that there is little gain from a new namespace and a cost involved.
15:25:50 [seanb]
...Assumed that the LC would use the new namespace, but marked as "at risk".
15:25:56 [seanb]
...Would appreciate comments.
15:26:17 [seanb]
Guus: I see objections, but no need to reopen the issue.
15:26:31 [seanb]
Alistair: Under what circumstances would we need to reopen the issue?
15:26:41 [seanb]
Guus: if we reopen, we can't go to LC.
15:27:56 [seanb]
...saw one comment that the change in semantics requires a new namespace (Simon Spero)
15:28:29 [seanb]
Alistair: unsure whether to take this comment. There may be some misunderstanding of transitive.
15:28:37 [seanb]
Guus: Happy to mark it as "at risk".
15:29:09 [seanb]
Alistair; Ok
15:29:27 [seanb]
Antoine: Would like to discuss ISSUE 83. Semantics of concept scheme containment
15:29:47 [seanb]
...some problems with the implementation. Alistair proposes a new property to capture the
15:29:51 [seanb]
...semantics.
15:29:59 [seanb]
Guus: This seems rather drastic at this point.
15:30:02 [Antoine]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0036.html
15:30:09 [Antoine]
-> start of the thread
15:30:15 [seanb]
Alistair: I think this is less drastic.
15:30:47 [aliman]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008May/0068.html
15:31:11 [Zakim]
-Margherita
15:31:13 [aliman]
ex:cs skos:hasTopConcept ex:c.
15:31:14 [seanb]
Alistair: Email above contains resolution to the issues. Email merely states an entailment.
15:31:15 [aliman]
entails the graph:
15:31:16 [aliman]
ex:c skos:inScheme ex:cs
15:31:40 [seanb]
... want to follow this entailment, but resolution doesn't state how we go about making this happen.
15:31:58 [seanb]
...Spent some time thinking and what we're trying to say is that skos:hasTopConcept has an inverse which is a
15:32:07 [seanb]
...subproperty of skos:inScheme
15:32:31 [seanb]
...Most obvious way to express this is to name the inverse and then state it explicitly.
15:32:47 [seanb]
...if we don't name it then it requires an anonymous property. This
15:33:04 [seanb]
...could be a potential problem. Would appreciate input from Jeremy.
15:33:29 [seanb]
Jeremy: OWL2 may be about to allow anonymous properties. One issue is that it pushes
15:33:52 [seanb]
...you out of OWL DL. Can't use the anonymous property in a triple (not as predicate).
15:34:07 [seanb]
...so in terms of describing the relationships, there's nothing particularly wrong, but implementations
15:34:27 [seanb]
...may find it difficult. Procedurally, putting in an anonymous property may cause trouble,
15:34:43 [seanb]
...but a new property might also cause problems.
15:34:55 [seanb]
Guus: But other things are not stated in the data model.
15:35:09 [seanb]
Alistair: There are two constraints expressed as prose, but there is no way to do that in
15:35:38 [seanb]
...RDF or OWL. Here, it *is* possible to do it.
15:36:02 [seanb]
...Would avoid complication of anonymous properties.
15:36:21 [seanb]
Guus: Only require inverse of hasTopConcept or inScheme.
15:36:30 [seanb]
...topConceptOf would do the trick.
15:36:40 [seanb]
Alistair: Called it topConceptInScheme in Ref.
15:36:46 [seanb]
Guus: awful name!
15:37:01 [seanb]
Alistair: Subjective view. Not really worried about the naming.
15:37:33 [seanb]
Jeremy: is the intention to document the relationship within OWL. Could one include this in
15:37:44 [seanb]
...a separate file with a seeAlso.
15:37:56 [seanb]
Alistair: If we can do it without jumping through hoops, why not do it?
15:38:30 [seanb]
Guus: Surprised that other constraints can be expressed in RDF.
15:38:48 [seanb]
Alistair: All but two current. Would be three with this one.
15:38:58 [seanb]
Guus: WHat's the problem with three rather than two?
15:39:07 [seanb]
Alistair: For this one, we could do it.
15:39:20 [seanb]
Guus: But only at the cost of new vocabulary.
15:39:41 [seanb]
Alistair: But non-standard semantics is also costly.
15:40:02 [seanb]
Antoine: Can't see why my axiom is not valid OWL
15:40:14 [seanb]
Alistair: Entailments that follow are not valid RDF.
15:40:38 [seanb]
Jeremy: There is a bug with RDF (ter Horst). Significant problems and adding an anonymous
15:40:54 [seanb]
...property would exercise that bug. Would advise against it.
15:41:12 [seanb]
Antoine: That's the argument I was looking for.
15:41:28 [seanb]
Antoine: Also assume a bug in the OWL specification then.
15:41:44 [seanb]
Jeremy: There is a need for a bug fix. But will not be done any time soon.
15:41:51 [seanb]
Guus: We're not going there.
15:42:14 [seanb]
Jeremy: Cost of new predicate vs. non-standard. New predicate is cheaper.
15:42:55 [seanb]
...preference would be to say nothing.
15:43:26 [seanb]
Guus: small cost with a small group.
15:43:58 [seanb]
Sean: preference for new predicate.
15:44:14 [seanb]
Guus: Suggest that Reference Editors make a proposal for this.
15:44:32 [seanb]
...Will reopen ISSUE 83, but expect a proposal to close with a new property.
15:44:41 [seanb]
Alistair: Do we need to open the issue>
15:44:50 [seanb]
Guus: yes, need documented rationale.
15:45:07 [seanb]
...alternative is to open new issue and immediately propose closing it.
15:45:13 [seanb]
...That might be better.
15:45:24 [seanb]
...for me topConceptOf would be an appropriate name.
15:45:49 [seanb]
..Propose a new issue which is then closed.
15:46:11 [seanb]
ACTION: Alistair to open issue relating to topConceptOf and propose a resolution.
15:46:24 [seanb]
Guus: Any more w.r.t content?
15:46:29 [seanb]
Antoine: happy
15:47:06 [seanb]
Guus: Margherita reviewed, but reviewed the old draft.
15:47:13 [seanb]
...chance for a new draft next week?
15:47:34 [seanb]
Alistair: Think so. Resolutions to things are done. Need to mark at rsik and some editorial stuff.
15:47:59 [seanb]
Guus: Earliest possible for LC decision is August 19th.
15:48:30 [seanb]
...problem for Guus as on holiday. Could review but only in next two days.
15:48:39 [seanb]
Alistair: Have to finish this week.
15:48:56 [seanb]
Guus: Could do it if it's there by Friday.
15:49:17 [seanb]
Alistair: Could provide a link which will be pretty much the version we publish.
15:49:41 [seanb]
Guus: Can expect cmments by the 12th, one week for discussion and a decision about LC
15:49:46 [seanb]
...on the 19th.
15:50:28 [seanb]
...would be preferable if at the same point we have a primer draft consistent with the Reference.
15:50:46 [seanb]
Antoine: Feasible apart from action on co-ordination.
15:51:11 [seanb]
...Version of the primer for the 19th?
15:51:29 [seanb]
Guus: Would also like to take a decision about publishing primer on 19th.
15:51:44 [seanb]
...agenda item for next week will be scheduling.
15:52:22 [seanb]
...also need to discuss LC period given that
15:52:33 [seanb]
...publishing will take a few days. 5-6 week period is appropriate.
15:53:17 [seanb]
...end September/beginning October.
15:53:34 [seanb]
Sean: some traffic on the list about broader/broaderTransitive.
15:53:45 [seanb]
Guus: no new arguments there. No real evidence to reopen this.
15:54:09 [seanb]
Alistair: i'd agree. Concerned about how many people misunderstand this.
15:54:20 [seanb]
...not a technical problem, but perhaps some confusion with names.
15:54:33 [seanb]
...its a shame that people are misunderstanding this.
15:54:56 [seanb]
Sean: Question of education rather than technical details.
15:55:09 [seanb]
Antoine: Whatever the names, the pattern will be the same, and that's
15:55:13 [seanb]
...hard for people to get.
15:55:25 [seanb]
Guus: Will pay attention to this.
15:55:46 [seanb]
Jeremy: Is a simple example more accessible? Parent/Ancestor etc?
15:56:03 [JeremyCarroll]
JeremyCarroll has joined #swd
15:56:09 [seanb]
Sean: is the reference an appropriate place for this?
15:56:21 [seanb]
Antoine: Could put some drawings in the primer.
15:56:37 [seanb]
Alistair: Antoine's slide at the SKOS event was very clear.
15:56:59 [seanb]
Antoine: Animated.
15:57:06 [seanb]
Guus; Could make snapshots.
15:57:31 [seanb]
Guus: Parent/ancestor is already a long way towards this.
15:57:52 [seanb]
Topic: Vocabulary Management
15:57:57 [seanb]
Guus: nobody here
15:58:02 [seanb]
Topic: RDFa
15:58:05 [seanb]
Guus: nobody here
15:58:10 [aliman]
-> http://www.iskouk.org/SKOS_July2008.htm ISKO event with link to antoine's slides
15:58:15 [seanb]
Topic: Recipes
15:58:18 [JeremyCarroll]
q+ to mention need for RDFa reviewers
15:58:39 [aliman]
q-
15:59:00 [JeremyCarroll]
q- Jeremy
15:59:03 [seanb]
ACTION: Ben to prepare draft implementation report for RDFa (with assistance from Michael) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action14]
15:59:05 [seanb]
--continues
15:59:21 [seanb]
Guus: Recipes?
15:59:35 [seanb]
Diego: Document is ready to be published. Ralph has not had time
15:59:38 [seanb]
...to do it.
15:59:52 [seanb]
...will try to publish asap
15:59:54 [Zakim]
-aliman
16:00:13 [seanb]
ACTION: Ralph/Diego to work on Wordnet implementation [of Recipes implementations] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action20]
16:00:15 [seanb]
--continues
16:00:20 [seanb]
ACTION: Jon and Ralph to publish Recipes as Working Group Note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/10-swd-minutes.html#action03]
16:00:22 [seanb]
--continues
16:00:57 [seanb]
Jeremy: back to RDFa, at call on Thursday, hope to get WG approval on 19th.
16:01:13 [seanb]
...reviewers to be appointed for 5th.
16:01:32 [seanb]
Guus: Only need review for implementation report. WG should check that we've met the conditions.
16:01:40 [seanb]
...not like reviewing a regular document
16:01:59 [seanb]
Jeremy: Only major change was on Primer. HTML vs XHTML issue.
16:02:27 [seanb]
Guus: useful background
16:03:01 [Zakim]
-JeremyCarroll
16:03:02 [seanb]
Guus: next telecon 5th August, then 19th August
16:03:07 [Zakim]
-TomB?
16:03:08 [Zakim]
-berrueta
16:03:11 [Zakim]
-Antoine_Isaac
16:03:12 [seanb]
zakim, list attendees
16:03:13 [Zakim]
-Guus_Schreiber
16:03:15 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, aliman, seanb, berrueta, Margherita?, TomB?, Margherita, JeremyCarroll
16:03:16 [marghe]
marghe has left #swd
16:03:34 [seanb]
Meeting: SWD WG
16:03:40 [seanb]
Chair: Guus
16:04:12 [seanb]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0062.html
16:04:39 [seanb]
Regrets+ Ed, Vit
16:04:53 [seanb]
rrsagent, please make record public
16:05:12 [seanb]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:05:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html seanb
16:07:26 [seanb]
Previous: 2008-07-01 http://www.w3.org/2008/07/01-swd-minutes.html
16:07:33 [seanb]
rrsagent, please draft minutes
16:07:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/29-swd-minutes.html seanb
16:08:12 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, seanb, in SW_SWD()11:00AM
16:08:16 [Zakim]
SW_SWD()11:00AM has ended
16:08:21 [Zakim]
Attendees were Guus_Schreiber, Antoine_Isaac, aliman, seanb, berrueta, Margherita?, TomB?, Margherita, JeremyCarroll
16:30:45 [JeremyCarroll]
JeremyCarroll has joined #swd
16:31:14 [JeremyCarroll]
JeremyCarroll has left #swd
16:58:10 [seanb]
seanb has left #swd
18:17:56 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #swd