W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > January 2011

AWWSW Telecon Tuesday 2011-02-01

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 17:41:29 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTikh3D1hXPdfroW-grod+-5RCUK1Z_FHmpdEf2cQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
I think we should meet on Tuesday, which is the day on which I need to
submit TAG advance reading for the F2F (which is Feb 8-10). I could
use some help deciding what they should read and how I should spend my
F2F slot.

The last time I tried to talk to the TAG about AWWSW we all realized
(i.e. the TAG) that the TAG needs a 'remedial RDF for TAG members'
course, since most of them have the most hideous misconceptions of
what it's about. I haven't decided what to present so I don't know
whether that will be needed, but that's an option.

In response to Harry Halpin's challenge, and drawing from work that I
have felt forced to do as a subroutine of AWWSW, I've prepared a new
manuscript on httpRange-14, which I'll show to you all soon. I will
need to choose whether to talk in my F2F slot about AWWSW as a formal
ontology, or my httpRange-14 work. Maybe we can talk about this on
Tuesday (assuming I can talk myself into sending you my manuscript;
I'm shy).

I'm tempted to use my time slot on httpRange-14 instead of formal
ontology because, with the formation of the new RDF WG and with
Harry's alarm call, this situation is, I perceive, a looming crisis.
Also because in this domain the formal ontology is essentially
trivial, given any informally expressed theory that permits informal
reasoning.

It looks like we'll be taking up Larry Masinter's duri: and tdb:
ideas, as well as persistent reference, as well as registries of
various kinds, so this will be an intensely identifier-rich meeting.

In any case, at this point, we have to talk strategically and
tactically: what do we want from the TAG, especially TimBL, and what
do they need to be told?

Jonathan
Received on Thursday, 27 January 2011 22:42:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 27 January 2011 22:42:27 GMT