W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2004

Agenda: RDF Data Access 27 Jul 2004

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:34:19 -0500
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1090856059.314.361.camel@dirk>

1. Convene, take roll, review record, agenda

  RDF Data Access Working Group
  Tuesday 2004-07-27 14:30 UTC
  Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 7333 ("RDFD")
  supplementary chat: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
       log to appear: http://www.w3.org/2004/07/27-dawg-irc

Scribe: Dave Beckett

roll call.

PROPOSED: to accept
 Minutes of RDF DAWG telecon 2004-07-20 for review
 Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:30:58 -0700
as a true record.

note next meeting: 2 Aug. Scribe volunteer?

I propose to continue this without discussion:

ACTION EricP: find out the schedule of the 2005 W3C tech plenary and
 inform the WG so that we can plan ftf meetings after September.

and to note this as DONE without discussion:

ACTION DanC: follow up to

agenda ammendments?

2. Test development/maintenance

ACTION Jos: discuss test suite documentation and maintenance with Steve,
EricP, AndyS, ...
some progres...

3. Web Services Directory use cases

ACTION: JimH, to work with Bijan to do some sort of UDDI/Web services
use case

ACTION: RobS write email to Farrukh about traversing a taxonomy,

4. Toward updated Use Cases and Requirements publication

ACTION Kendall: remove 4.4 User-specifiable Serialization

ACTION KendallC: draft revision, toward updating our public WD, delivery
~next wed.

hmm... I don't see much progress:

 RDF Data Access Use Cases and Requirements
 Live Draft ($Revision: 1.123 $ of $Date: 2004/06/21 15:50:39 $)

ACTION: RobS to review the document when complete.

ACTION Simon+Kendall elaborate the rel. of rules and "construct" in the
UC&R doc.

ACTION SimonR: offer a replacement for 4.5 focussed on union query.

ACTION ericP: send federation use case motivating premises (in Algae)

ACTION: TomA draft a reply to Chris Wilper and send draft to WG
mailing list.

5. SOURCE, "provenance"/data-management

cf thread 4.2 : Change "provenance" to "data management"

The discussion of the objective doesn't seem to have converged, but
meanwhile, some test cases sprung up, related to SOURCE.
We also have:

ACTION Jos: explain log:includes to inform the discussion of SOURCE (nee

ACTION DanC: explain evolution of log:semantics/log:includes from
uri-is-graph to uri-is-doc in cwm, to inform discussion of SOURCE

ACTION DaveB: explain the main uses seen for redland contexts with
respect to the provenance

6. Issue: DESCRIBE

ACTION AndyS: explain DESCRIBE design implicit in BRQL spec.
seems done...

(hmm... there's no issue marker in the "DESCRIBE" section of
  $Revision: 1.1 $ of $Date: 2004/07/20 15:21:02 $
but I thought we raised one. I can't confirm from the ftf records,

7. XQuery integration requirements/objective

ACTION SimonR: write a document discussing tradeoffs with adapting
XQuery as an RDF query language for discussion thru the September
meeting in Bristol.

ACTION DanC: notify Semantic Web CG of risks around the "1.5
Relationship with XQuery" scope of our charter.

This seems relevant:
Updated doc: Extracting information from RDF for XML processing

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 26 July 2004 11:34:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:44 UTC