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

RE: agenda: RDF Data Access 9 Nov

From: Howard Katz <howardk@fatdog.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 07:33:37 -0800
To: "RDF Data Access Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JMEJKDCPGHHIANHOMPDBKEEHCGAA.howardk@fatdog.com>

Belated regrets.
Howard

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org
 > [mailto:public-rdf-dawg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Alberto Reggiori
 > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:04 AM
 > To: RDF Data Access Working Group
 > Subject: Re: agenda: RDF Data Access 9 Nov
 >
 >
 >
 > regrets for today's telecon - I am in Norway far away from a fix /
 > cheap phone line till next monday
 >
 > Alberto
 >
 >
 > On Nov 8, 2004, at 11:10 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:
 >
 > > 1. Convene, take roll, review agenda
 > >
 > >  RDF Data Access Working Group
 > >  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
 > >  Tuesday 2004-11-09 9:30am-11:30am/14:30-16:30 UTC
 > >  Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference 7333 ("RDFD")
 > >  supplementary IRC chat: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
 > >    log to appear: http://www.w3.org/2004/11/09-dawg-irc
 > >
 > > scribe: Dave Beckett
 > > regrets: Steve Harris at ISWC
 > >
 > > Next meeting: Tuesday 2004-11-16 at 14:30 UTC,
 > >  provided a chair and scribe emerge
 > >  regrets: DanC for 16 Nov, 23 Nov, 30 Nov
 > >
 > > PROPOSE: to accept as a true record:
 > >
 > > propose to continue these without discussion:
 > > ACTION DanC: owner of issue 'yes or no questions' (pending protocol
 > > doc)
 > > ACTION AlbertoR: owns issue 'DESCRIBE'
 > > ACTION: SteveH is willing to adapt his testing infrastructure to
 > > generate input/output RDF/XML and typed nodes into manifest file
 > >
 > >
 > > 2. Use Cases
 > >
 > > ACTION Eric to ask Kendall to put X509 policy use case into UC&R
 > >
 > > done-ish:
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0205.html
 > >
 > > advice to the editor?
 > > editor's inclination?
 > >
 > >
 > > 3. ftf 4
 > >
 > > 19-20 January 2005 Espoo, Finland
 > >
 > > Janne points to some directions and requests a registration form
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0211.html
 > >
 > >
 > > 4. ftf 5
 > >
 > > ACTION EricP: find logistics re F2F5 at tech plenary in Boston March
 > >   28 Feb - 4 Mar (2 days).  Some WG preference to Mon/Tue of that week.
 > > some progress:
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0185.html
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0144.html
 > >
 > > Note WBS form on tech plenary scheduling nightmare
 > >  http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34786/TP05prep/results
 > >
 > >
 > > 5. Protocol, Interoperability Demonstration Services
 > >
 > >  A present for Guy Fawkes night Seaborne, Andy (Friday, 5 November)
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0220.html
 > > and following
 > >
 > > ACTION KendallC: write a protocol document draft
 > >
 > > ACTION KendallC: expose our walking tour data to SPARQL querying
 > > clients
 > >   ETA before F2F4
 > >
 > >
 > > 6. SPARQL update, issues
 > >
 > > note progress in recent draft
 > >  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/ v1.128 2004/11/08 15:27:14
 > >
 > > ACTION EricP: supply definitions for SELECT (vars ordered or not?) ala
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0151.html
 > >
 > > ACTION PatH review SPARQL def'ns post-publication
 > >
 > > ACTION: AndyS to write a test cases which use ? and $ in the same query
 > >
 > > Chair would like to talk about the public comments list a bit,
 > > esp. re spreading the load.
 > >
 > >
 > > 5. SOURCE Issue
 > >
 > > ACTION DaveB: Update the source section 9, add more formal links,
 > > update the examples, try to think about extra constraints as EricP
 > > proposed (SOURCE ?s and ?s only in in SELECT). Look at various
 > > people's source test cases.
 > >
 > > progress:
 > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
 > > 0241.html
 > >
 > >
 > > 6. Disjunction issue
 > >
 > > ACTION Simon: explain how much of disjuction can be done with
 > > optionals, nested or otherwise.
 > >
 > > Note I have accepted Steve's regrets, but these seem nearby:
 > >
 > > ACTION SteveH: own (i.e. propose resolution to) disjunction issue
 > > ACTION SteveH: owns issue 'nested optionals'
 > >
 > >
 > > --
 > > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
 > > D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
 > >
 > -
 > Alberto Reggiori, Senior Partner, R&D @Semantics S.R.L.
 > alberto@asemantics.com  www.asemantics.com
 > Milan Office, milano@asemantics.com,   +39 0332 667092
 >
 >
 >
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2004 15:33:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:21 GMT