05-afternoon-minutes
32.7 KB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html lang='en'>
<head>
<title>Joint meeting of W3C HCLSIG and TAG -- 5 Nov 2007</title>
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/base.css">
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/public.css">
<link type="text/css" rel="STYLESHEET" href="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/minutes-style.css">
<meta content="Joint meeting of W3C HCLSIG and TAG" name="Title">
<meta content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body>
<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" alt="W3C" border="0"
height="48" width="72"></a>
</p>
<h1> - DRAFT - </h1>
<h1>Joint meeting of W3C HCLSIG and TAG</h1>
<h2>5 Nov 2007</h2>
<h2><a name="attendees">Attendees</a></h2>
<div class="intro">
<dl>
<dt>Present</dt>
<dd>Alan Ruttenberg, Tim Berners-Lee, Rhys Lewis, Jonathan Rees, David Booth, Stewart Williams, Eric Neumann, Susie Stevens, Eric Prudhommeaux, Noah Mendelsohn, David Orchard</dd>
<dt>Regrets</dt>
<dd></dd>
<dt>Chair</dt>
<dd>Stewart Williams </dd>
<dt>Scribe</dt>
<dd>Noah Mendelsohn</dd>
</dl>
</div>
<h2>Contents</h2>
<ul>
<li><a href="#agenda">Topics</a>
<ol>
<li><a href="#item01">Introduction to HCLS and topics of interest</a></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><a href="#ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<div class="meeting">
<h3 id="item01">Introduction to HCLS and topics of interest</h3>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> (Jonathan Rees) We are interested in HTTP Semantics, URI Resolution, meaning how do you get a definition etc. from a URI. By the way, the URI scheme need not be http. Is resolution deterministic?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> Are you interested in "information resources", "non-information resources", what's the difference, what are the definitions? etc.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> Yes, interested.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (aha... on the hcls list today... looking...)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> <a href="http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/">http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
We are discussing <a href="http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/">http://sw.neurocommons.org/2007/uri-note/</a>
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> ah... "sustainable" is an interesting keyword
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/hcls/">W3C Semantic Web Health Care and Life Sciences Interest Group</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> Introducing HCLS, Science Commmons:
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> More than FOAF, DBpedia?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> Not sure. Was true earlier. We want to figure out how to make the Semantic Web work.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EN:</cite> (Eric Neumann) There's a lot of life sciences data already out there on the Web, a lot of standard terminology, but only limited use of Semantic Web and URI. We're trying in this note to get people to realize what's possible, and then to use it. A lot of groups are waiting to see what we come up with.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> ("insurance policy" another acknowledgement of the social side. good.)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> I want to do this now in part to give people an insurance policy that all of this stuff will really work and scale as massive deployment happens. Need a path starting from where we are. Before HCLS there was I3C and LSID.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (whoa... groundhog day... the 1st IETF WG on URIs was called IIIR I'm pretty sure, with the III expanding much like the I3C)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> LSID's have caught on mainly in smaller communities. The LSID work is important because it solves, or at least claims to solve, 5 problems in this space. So, that sets the bar in terms of peoples' expectations for what we need to do in a more purely http-based approach. We have a database of 300 million triples.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> (Alan Ruttenberg) that's jointly hosted by HCLS and Science Commons.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> How are the conversions done? One-time?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> No, it's scripted. Intended to be sustainable and repeatable. Some of this was demonstrated at the Banff Web Conference in May. Example: this plasmid was used in the research that's behind this research article. There are actually several facts in there, and we want them all to be available for query.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> <a href="http://geneontology.org/">http://geneontology.org/</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> We want RDF to be in published papers, as an alternative or supporting means of representing information.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> The goal is eventually that all scientific knowledge is available at your fingertips. Semantic Web is the only promising technology for doing it. It's a crazy, ambitious goal.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Is it linked data?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I don't conceptualize this as data, but rather as statements: things that are true, things that have been tried. My goal is for it to work in the tabulator, indeed sometimes better than tabulator itself can handle it now.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> It's not linked data?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Heading there, but some short term issues. For example, our 303's don't currently redirect to RDF.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> SPARQL?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Yes, in fact focussing mainly on SPARQL. Our focus differs from tabulator's to some degree in our focus on scientific statements and the rigor with which they're made. Somewhat the difference between browsing and sending out an agent to, e.g. choose a medication for me. Much of the criticism or analysis you've seen for me is motivated by the need for a greater level of accuracy than is required in browsing scenarios. So accuracy of statements is very important.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> We recognize that there is a range of use cases for RDF. The spectrum runs from quick n dirty, which needs to get out quickly and may not be completely clean, to supplementary material on published articles, which needs to be very accurate. Similarly, the different consuming applications have a range of requirements for accuracy. We've focussed on a lot on where we see Semantic Web currently as being weakest.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> ericP, you wanted to mention abstraction for lsids
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> (resolution?) abstractions:
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> protocol abstraction for LSIDs
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> protocol injections for fallback resolution for b0rken links
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> (Eric Prudhommeaux) We have a couple of motivational abstractions in this paper. One is about protocols, discussing things like resolution. We also have protocol injections for fallback on how to resolve things where links are broken.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>alanr</cite>> "b0rken" intentional?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> You've told us a lot that I mostly agree with; are there questions?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DO:</cite> I'm really interested in questions of versioning.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> It's been a sore point. Everyone's wrestling with it. I could tell you what Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) is doing.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DO:</cite> We've been doing a 3 part draft on versioning in the TAG. Not done, but major pieces have been subject to repeated review.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> It would be interesting to sit down with you and go through use cases.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DO:</cite> Yes. The first document is a terminology document, the second focusses on forwards compatibility and what you have to do from the start to enable forwards compatibility.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> One of the first goals is to be able to say something about stability. E.g., I'd like to be able to say things like "this will stay the same forever"
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DO:</cite> The same?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> That's what you'd get to define. You'd be able to say what you mean by "the same". For example, part of the LSID contract is that the data portion stays the same forever. I'd like to be able to say that in RDF.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> The data portion?
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2006/gen/ont#FixedResource">http://www.w3.org/2006/gen/ont#FixedResource</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> That which is identified stays the same.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> The metadata can change.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (I wrote an N3 specification of this "same bits forever" thing he's talking about...)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> collapsefixed resource
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> Type expandloadedClass
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> Comment A resource whose representation type and content will not change under any circumstances
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I'd like to be able to say things like "This is a demo. These URIs are only guaranteed stable for 6 months."
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> "these are stable for the next 6 months, but after that, we're not promising anything" <- interesting use case
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>dorchard</cite>> Draft TAG versioning terminology: <a href="http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> Some of this is way above HTTP?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> You are saying things about resources accessed through HTTP.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>dorchard</cite>> Draft TAG versioning on forwards compatibility: <a href="http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-compatibility-strategies">http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-compatibility-strategies</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> Do you need to find all this from HTTP headers?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> You need to find it all, but how is TBD. The Architecture Group may need to figure that out.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DO:</cite> The third part of the draft TAG finding is about evolution of XML-based languages. The 2nd related topic I wanted to ask about, and I know David Booth has looked at this, is about when and why to use http-scheme URIs. Henry Thompson and I have been working on that together. Your document says "use http URIs", but didn't see link to our draft. Curious as to why?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I want to use http, but honestly am somewhat nervous about some of the issues.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>Several:</cite> We'd like to hear about that.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> An example of an issue is what to do when an http link "breaks". We think there's a community interest in restoring links even when the provider goes away. We've been working on standard rewrite rules for URIs to do this. We're getting concerns from LSID folks who say that the location independence they provide makes this less of a problem. We need metadata in lots of cases, but we're not sure you want 303 in all cases?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Do you mean 303 to something that would then go to 200?
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> Need to first be clear what LS means by 'metadata'
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I thought you didn't want everything to do 303, and that some people were advocating "#"
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>jar</cite>> something like LSID that has both GET and GETMETA
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (the 'doppleganger' is the magic of Web Architecture, to me)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Third issue is what we call the "doppelganger" issue, which has to do with the dual role of the URI in "denoting" something and providing for access to it.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>dorchard</cite>> Henry and I are working on the URNsRegistries, and so any feedback the document and the rationale embodied in the document is very welcome.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EN:</cite> Every group needs to be clear on what they mean by metadata. Typically in life sciences, metadata is that which is not explicitly part of "that data record". Annotations are often viewed as metadata. That's to some degree historical. There tends to be a notion that there's a flexible part, that changes, and it sits next to a core part that needs to be understood from the start to be immutable.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> You are 1) denoting a thing and 2) getting information about it.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Thing? You can't publish "Eric" the person.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I guess we mean the minter of the URI.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> eneumann, you wanted to illustrate life sci metadata
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> Noah, you wanted to ask about tradeoffs in making all this machine readable
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>jar</cite>> oops. not an irc pro. sorry zakim
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> Sometime an advantage of doing this is for agents t be able to help more .... to what extent did you expect htat t happen (?)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> -- Noah
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> Curious about the cost/benefit of formalizing things like "my URI is going to get stale in 6 months because it was only for a demo". Will people write automated agents that will act on this?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Well, the LSID community finds the statement of immutability important.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> That's immutability.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (it's also called 'policy', I suspect; which should remind us that W3C just issued a WS-policy REC)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> And we've heard Cool URIs Don't Change. Having a way to say "I broke that rule" seems useful.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> We in the consortium and the IETF talk a lot about protocols. When you talk about contracts, I think you mean something similar.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>jar</cite>> protocol = rules governing the way you talk (in some situation)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I think so. There's a difference of emphasis. Historically, protocols have been somewhat rigid and unextendable. You can't add a verb to HTTP.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>Several:</cite> Sure you can.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> It's perfectly reasonable to use ontologies to set out protocols, typically at a higher level than HTTP.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> There's a very close connection between definitions and protocols.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (indeed, RDF ontologies in the web are easier to update in a distributed way than centralized specs like HTTP, of course.)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> The protocol tells you what to do.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ht</cite>> <a href="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-bis-01.txt">http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-bis-01.txt</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> And the outcome. Bathroom protocol is "always use the smallest toilet paper roll, and you'll never run out of paper!"
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> You should have something at the end of a URI.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> It's good practice.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> ack
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> DanC_lap, you wanted to ask about this "community interest" in recovering from 404; sounds like eminent domain and to take issue with "all cases", given what Jonathan said earlier
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> ______________________
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>jar</cite>> semantic web protocols end with understanding. outcome is getting the right drug prescribed.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> First thing: you said you didn't have a title, but I like the word sustainable that you have in your working title. I like your reference to "insurance policy", which is a use case, which is good. The 404 stuff sounds like emminent domain. Tell me about qualities of curation.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> We're still working on that.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> The Web itself scales from informal connections between a few people, up to national libraries.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Mainly we're aiming at shared stuff.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> Be careful, a lot of important stuff is done, you know... You're asking for guidance...you seem to be on the leading edge yourselves.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> Who said we needed guidance?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> He did (pointing to AR).
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> We asked for help, not guidance :-).
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> timbl, you wanted to point out that the concept f 'contract' sounds ike what I mean by 'protocol'
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> I think we've gone a round of agreeing on a lot of stuff and philosophy. Maybe it's time to get more specific. How can we help.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Say we wanted to reimplement LSIDs, with the constraint that data portions need to be unchanging while metadata changes.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> We could come up with our own solutions without the TAG. We'll be doing the work in any case. We want to figure out how to have the most influence, and doing this with W3C seems to promote a lot of good network effects.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (conversation last summer... was fun enough for a blog item...)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (... <a href="http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/178">http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/178</a> )
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> The TAG's resolution is helpful because it gives a point of reference. So, having formal TAG resolutions is helpful in getting attention for things like this. So, if we could do 3 or 4 more such things, that would be useful.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> DanC_lap, you wanted to offer TAG review of drafts, use cases, and test cases
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> You folks already have a W3C interest group. You can publish Notes. The TAG can comment on those.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> You can give us thumbs up or thumbs down?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> Yes, if we choose to review them.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> I think Jonathan and I seemed interested in the notion of a separate Semantic Web focus group that might work more directly with you all. We can both learn from you, and bring issues that might add perspective on the Semantic Web as a whole. We'd like to see a more focussed effort by the TAG on Semantic Web.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Having other people write things, do an end of day thumbs up/thumbs down seems the wrong model. Ongoing collaboration seems better. The group seems reasonable to me. A danger is failing to focus the group sufficiently narrowly. Risk is that the group tries to do everything. One way to do it would be to take the existing draft it would bound the scope.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> It's already quite broad in scope.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> Yes, that covers a lot of the hard problems.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> There are other possible concrete goals, such as reproducing what LSID wanted using http.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> I'm attracted to trying to pick up something small. We also need to figure out what next steps will be.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> Just realized that this is in some sense the same thing as Tim's call to do a group to formalize HTTP. I think you should set up whatever's convenient. I >really< wish I had the time to be very active in it.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> This morning Dan reminded us of older work he did on formalizing HTTP in Larch.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Stuart</cite>> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2000/Talks/www9-larch/all.htm">http://www.w3.org/2000/Talks/www9-larch/all.htm</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EN:</cite> Regarding Information Resource vs Non-Information Resource: there is already an infrastructure out there for naming genes, and people use it. They will all use a standard name. They pretty much agree on being able reference the real actual (non IR) gene. We could in theory, if we had a good model, map their existing work to URIs.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (I think the outcome of the protocol we're talking about here is that people happily use each other's names.)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (a little like currency)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (so we're designing an economy.)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>jar</cite>> list of major trouble spots with URI note is here: <a href="http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG_BioRDF_Subgroup/Tasks/URI_Best_Practices/Recommendations">http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG_BioRDF_Subgroup/Tasks/URI_Best_Practices/Recommendations</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EN:</cite> Also, the chemistry folks are proposing URIs for their compounds using info: URIs. The suffixes are International Chemical Identifier strings, which has everything you need to specify the structure.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>Someone:</cite> It's like data:
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Not data: because it's not data.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Yes, but similar in that the identifier conveys that which is identified.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (hmm... data: sounds right in that it's like immediate mode addressing in assembler, but... hmm...)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> You said it has things like weight. What if they mis-estimated the weight. Does the identifier change?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EN:</cite> The INCHI changes.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Suppose I were to get inchi.org....
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (this sounds like one of the few reasonable uses of info: or tag: or the like.)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> They could have done that, but chose not to.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EN:</cite> The discussion is still ongoing. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry would be involved.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> <a href="http://www.iupac.org/inchi/">http://www.iupac.org/inchi/</a>
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> <a href="http://bio2rdf.org/geneid:15275">http://bio2rdf.org/geneid:15275</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> Interesting to ask why they've focussed on info:
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> One of the things you could do, is grab a domain and compete.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> <a href="http://www.chemspider.com/">http://www.chemspider.com/</a>
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> People don't want to compete. The id's are for the benefit of the community, not the publisher, but the community isn't organized enough to maintain the domain. Technically this is all very easy, but getting people to trust that you'll hold a domain forever is harder. Rightly or wrongly, info: is generating that trust.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> You're trusting that nobody squats on info:
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> see also chemspider: <a href="http://www.chemspider.com/InChI=1/C17H13ClN4/c1-11-20-21-16-10-19-17(12-5-3-2-4-6-12)14-9-13(18)7-8-15(14)22(11)16/h2-9H">http://www.chemspider.com/InChI=1/C17H13ClN4/c1-11-20-21-16-10-19-17(12-5-3-2-4-6-12)14-9-13(18)7-8-15(14)22(11)16/h2-9H</a>,10H2,1H3.html
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> Let's drill on this. Let's say you tried to force someone to zap the list of scheme names. IETF would appoint someone else.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> ericP, you wanted to get some hard work out of the way
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> Thought I'd ask what would be the hardest thing we could try to do in the room. One would be to mesh the terms in the document with TAG's terminology.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> TAG hasn't read the document.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> I read half the document, and the only one I objected to was "locator"
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> I just need a word for a URI has http or https, and known not to have a #.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> Is it the base for one with a #?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> No. I could change it to fragmentless, http URI...
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> The history is that "locator" and URL are criticised as being fragile against relocation of the resource.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> I struggle with Name vs URI.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> Do you have a way of pointing to metadata?
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>eneumann</cite>> s/ICI/InChI
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> There's a concern that both # truncation and 303 are both heuristics in that the server you're talking to may or may not be following best practices. We'd like to have a conversation about that. If you could know whether what you're talking to does best practices, that would help.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> Can you illustrate non-determinism?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> I get a 303. I follow it. That's unpredicatble. No defined protocol, except with prior knowledge of the server. RDF may not refer to what I was asking about.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> That's like asking about not obeying the law.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> Noah: We've been taking status code and gradually clarifying
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> ... also introducing new status codes to solve specific problems
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> ... if we'd done that for this problem, i think we wouldn't be having this conversation
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> Noah, you wanted to talk about best practice signalling
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> I think this is aggravated by the fact that we've done so much in the style of clarifying use of already-deployed HTTP status codes and headers, vs. defining new ones which any reasonable person would use only in the exact way we suggest.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> Yes, that's the crux. People have other reasons for using some of this.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DB:</cite> (David Booth) I'm intrigued at subgroup idea. Would like to know who and how.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> I'm in. But realistically time may be an issue. We were talking about protocols. I'm concerned socially and technically about a notion that we'd have a flag saying "I'm one of the subset of deployers who really implement the architecture". <br>
... The only servers sending 303's in response to GET, almost without exceptions, are doing it for semantic web reasons.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> There are other examples.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> DanC_lap, you wanted to say if, when we push on 303, we find we don't have consent of the governed, we'll have to do over and to nominate EricP to make a mailing list
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> If when we push on 303, we don't have consent of governed, we have to redo
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> FOAF has a protocol. I don't see why there shouldn't be analagous protocols for Life Sciences. We need to make sure you get for free what you can from Web Arch, and what you define is consistent.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>AR:</cite> The things we see in the Web Architecture aren't solid enough on the Web Architecture side. 303 says "See other", it doesn't say RDF should be there or what that RDF should be about. We need something you can rely on. We need a name for what you'd like to rely on.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>SW:</cite> I was thinking "this is the Web, this is a fact of life
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> But you can give names to layered protocols like GRDDL.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> Noah, you wanted to talk about rfc 2616
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (the charter of the new HTTP WG is conservative; it's not supposed to do new features, but just to clarify.)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> If 303 really means "use this only for Semantic Web to return RDF about the redirecting resource", then RFC 2616 should say that. If 303 really means a looser "see also", then we should acknowledge that getting a 303 only leaves open the possibility that you'll get the RDF you need there. That said, I also think it's crucial that the Web is a latebound, discoverable mechanism. The way you find what's out there is to interact with it. Trying to get early warning about what you'll get is just asking for hints (not always a bad thing, but I don't want to lose the ability of any HTTP resource to return any media type it likes...modulo accept headers, etc.)
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> some amount of effort in (re)defining 303 for our special case
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> teaching your server to respond with a 303
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> if 303s conflate 200s and 401s, can we live with that
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> There's some effort needed to teach servers to send 303's at the right times.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> Taken a long time.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> oh... it's purl.org servers
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> There's the issue of having decided to use new code vs. 303. I haven't heard any discussion of whether we needed status code or not. Seems to conflate 200 and 401s.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>DanC_lap</cite>> (I have a worry about OpenID's use of http 200... sorta like the hotel internet login problem.)
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>NM:</cite> (mumbles) I've always wondered whether it should have been a header.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> Yes.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> What if you ask for all of wikipedia, which is too big? I tell you you're not allowed to have it all.
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>EP:</cite> How do I tell you all that?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>TBL:</cite> RDF.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Zakim</cite>> ericP, you wanted to ask if it's harder to invent a new status code than to re-interpret 303
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>JR:</cite> Is the only action item for me to set up a meeting with Tim and David?
</p>
<p class='phone'>
<cite>DC:</cite> I think we need a mailing list. Need a name the baby contest.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>alanr</cite>> awwsw
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>timbl</cite>> public-awwsw
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Stuart</cite>> skw@hp.com
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>Rhys</cite>> rhys@volantis.com
</p>
<a name="action01"></a>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>scribe</cite>> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Alan Ruttenberg to set up biweekly teleconferences on HTTP semantics to be held alternate Tues mornings starting 13 Nov.
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>trackbot-ng</cite>> Sorry, couldn't find user - Alan
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> jar@creativecommons.org
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> alanruttenberg@gmail.com
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> skw@hp.com
</p>
<p class='irc'>
<<cite>ericP</cite>> rhys@volantis.com
</p>
<p class='phone'>
ADJOURNED
</p>
</div>
<h2><a name="ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></h2>
<!-- Action Items -->
<strong>[NEW]</strong> <strong>ACTION:</strong> Alan Ruttenberg to set up biweekly teleconferences on HTTP semantics to be held alternate Tues mornings starting 13 Nov. <br />
<br />
[End of minutes] <br>
<hr>
<address>
Minutes formatted by David Booth's
<a href="http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm">scribe.perl</a> version 1.128 (<a href="http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/">CVS log</a>)<br>
$Date: 2007/11/07 22:20:32 $
</address>
<div class="diagnostics">
</div>
</body>
</html>