====== Special Telefon Conference on November 17th ====== Presentation of Johanna Völker, held at SWPM workshop in Shanghai. ====== Participants ====== Michael, Kai, Tom Baker, Corey Harper, Ömer, Daniel, Johanna Völker ====== Minutes ====== * [16:06] http://wiki.bib.uni-mannheim.de/dc-provenance/doku.php?id=agenda * [16:06] Topic: Presentation of Johanna Völker, Mannheim University: "Towards Interoperable Metadata Provenance", held at SWPM 2010 * [16:28] http://www.slideshare.net/kaiec/towards-interoperable-metadata-provenance-5712788 Short introduction round: * [16:30] <@michaelp2> Kai: Joint paper about provenance presented at ISWC by Johanna. * [16:31] Michael: DDC Editor at OCLC * [16:32] Co-Chair of this group * [16:32] Daniel: Master Student at UPM, MAdrid * [16:32] ... Member of the Prov-XG * [16:32] ... Master in AI * [16:33] Tom: CIO of Dublin Core Metadata Initiative * [16:33] ... Co-Chair of LLD XG * [16:33] what does CIO stands for? * [16:33] Ömer: Bachelor Student of University of Mannheim * [16:33] Chief Information Officer * [16:33] thx * [16:33] Corey: Registry Community * [16:34] <@michaelp2> ... Metadata services librarian at NYU Presentation: * [16:35] SWPM Program: http://wiki.knoesis.org/index.php/SWPM-2010#Program * [16:41] <@michaelp2> Johanna: Slide 6: Shifting complexity from the data level to a metalevel. * [16:41] <@michaelp2> ... The data itself remains untouched. * [16:43] <@michaelp2> ... Slide 8: Use cases. Whenever the schema can't be touched and there is no built-in provenance support. * [16:44] <@michaelp2> ... Also: Transformation of data. Specification of source and process. * [16:46] <@michaelp2> ... Slide 9: Europeana example. All provenance information is on the basic metadata level. * [16:48] <@michaelp2> ... A new node is introduced with a new identifier (ore:Proxy, ore:Aggregation) to keep assertions about resources apart. * [16:50] <@michaelp2> ... Slide 10: Alternative view that pushes provenance info to a separate level. * [16:50] <@michaelp2> ... Slide 11: This kind of metadata prov info has to comply to some principles. * [16:54] Slide 16 looks like quads * [16:56] <@michaelp2> Agreed. On a low level, this is the requirement. Identification of a metadata statement. * [16:56] <@michaelp2> ... or set of statements. * [16:59] <@michaelp2> Michael: I would be very interested in feedback received. * [17:02] Finish work by 2013 * [17:02] <@michaelp2> Johanna: Deborah McGuiness remarked that named graph support will be part of the next RDF specs. Reification will be deprecated. * [17:04] <@michaelp2> ... A new syntax that is not XML is perhaps going to be recommended. * [17:04] ...First working draft May 2011; Final in August 2012 * [17:07] <@michaelp2> ... Deborah: Approach couldbe extended to arbitrary levels of metadata. * [17:07] Apologies, but I have to run to a meeting. * [17:07] Joanna, thank you for this - very interesting stuff. * [17:07] Bye all. * [17:07] <@michaelp2> ... Other comments: We should think about algebra in the contexts of named graphs. * [17:07] == TomB_ [6c1c6e28@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.28.110.40] has quit [Quit: Page closed] * [17:07] goodbye * [17:07] quit * [17:08] == charper [~cah10@TSD2.BOBST.NYU.EDU] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] * [17:08] <@michaelp2> ... How do semantics change when making assertions about triples in the context of named graphs. * [17:09] <@michaelp2> ... Other comments: Some people were interested in reasoning. Some were intersting in making provenance a first-class citizen in OWL. * [17:10] <@michaelp2> ... Comments from Google: model provenance in information extraction scenarios * [17:11] <@michaelp2> ... to keep track of extraction source (?) * [17:12] <@michaelp2> ... Comment from Jun: Implement on use case sooner rather than later, so we can find out if this scales, how it works, etc. * [17:14] <@michaelp2> ... Jun she highly encouraged us to take part in other standardization efforts (e.g., W3C Provenance WG) * [17:14] ... Are there known deficiencies regarding dublin core for provenance? * [17:15] <@michaelp2> Tom: Is there another level the group might address the issue? * [17:15] <@michaelp2> ... as application profile. * [17:16] <@michaelp2> ... The level of description set has to be specified (as or beyond named graphs). * [17:17] Johanna: Comments: High demand for standartiziation of vocabularies for talking about named graphs * [17:19] == TomB_ [6c1c6e28@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.28.110.40] has joined #dcprov * [17:23] Michael: Efforts on descriptions and annotation sets * [17:23] <@michaelp2> ... Deborah McGuiness said that there is no standard solution for all different application scenarios. * [17:25] <@michaelp2> Michael: We have a clear focus on metadata provenance. So we do not try to create an AP for provenance in general. * [17:27] <@michaelp2> Kai: Even after RDF has named graph supoport, there is still going to be confusion how to deal with metadata provenance. * [17:27] <@michaelp2> s/supoport/support * [17:29] <@michaelp2> ... We want to provide some guidance for people how to handle these problems in a simple way that is not necessarily coupled with RDF. * [17:30] i got kicked out :O * [17:31] <@michaelp2> Daniel: Should our recommendation be for any vocabulary or for specific vocabularies? * [17:31] * michaelp2 Try to dial in again * [17:34] Michael: Seperation of schema and metalevel data: * [17:35] Daniel: Do we give examples for the Prox-XG use cases? * [17:38] ... Question of who asserted the metadata * [17:38] <@michaelp2> ... In the news aggregator scenario, we might have a look about concurrent assertions about resources. * [17:38] <@michaelp2> ... which is metadata provenance just like the Europeana UC. * [17:40] Thank you all! You will send a report to the list? * [17:40] <@michaelp2> Kai: Thanks again, Johanna! Meeting adjourned. * [17:40] <@michaelp2> Hi Tom, yes, good idea. * [17:41] thanks johanna, nice presentation! * [17:41] godbuye all * [17:41] == DGarijo [501cac6b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.80.28.172.107] has quit [Quit: Page closed] * [17:41] You can use a log of the IRC as a rough draft.... * [17:42] <@michaelp2> We usually post minutes, but I think we shoudl get better at summarizing the discussion ... * [17:42] <@michaelp2> ... post minutes to the wiki, I mean. * [17:43] I will post the minutes as usual, but I also can write a summary based on Johannas Notes of the Feedback that we discussed today * [17:44] And we really have to bring the discussions and results to the mailing list, I admit we are not yet good at that