This would be particularly useful. Unfortunately I have a university conflict during the call so it would be useful to determine if there is input required in advance of the call. thanks, Deborah Jie Bao wrote: > Can we add pending issues of QRG to the agenda? Some of the discussion > may effect other documents as well. > > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Talk:Quick_Reference_Guide#May_5.2C_2009 > > Jie > > 2009/5/5 Héctor Pérez-Urbina <hector.perez-urbina@comlab.ox.ac.uk>: > >> Hello, >> >> This is a preliminary version of this week's teleconference: >> >> 1. Admin >> * Roll call >> * Agenda amendments? >> * PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (29 April) >> * Action items status >> o Pending Review Actions >> o Due and overdue Actions >> + Action 333 Review NF&R / Rinke Hoekstra >> + Action 335 Talk with owlapi people about >> strict rdf/xml parsing / Bijan Parsia >> 2. Documents and Reviewing >> * LC Working Drafts >> o rdf:text LC comments and responses >> o OWL LC comments and responses >> * First Public & Ordinary Working Drafts (reviews and/or status) >> o QRG >> o NF&R >> o Primer >> o Overview >> o Manchester Syntax >> o DRE (aka N-ary) >> * Handling references >> 3. Implementation and Test Cases >> * Progress on tool support, e.g., for "species validation"? >> * Progress report >> * Approving "validated" test cases >> o Comments/objections? >> * Syntactic tests >> o Wanted? needed? possible? >> 4. Features "At-Risk" (just a reminder) >> * owl:rational support >> * rdf:XMLLiteral support >> 5. Additional other business >> >> Regards, >> >> Héctor >> >> >> > > > >Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 02:07:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 6 May 2009 02:07:00 GMT