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

agenda: RDF Data Access WG 7 Dec

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 12:43:16 -0600
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1102358596.5431.71.camel@dirk>

1. Convene, take roll, review records and agenda

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
  2004-12-07T14:30Z

  tel:+1.617.761.6200 code:7333
  supplementary IRC chat:irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
    log to appear:http://www.w3.org/2004/12/07-dawg-irc

scribe: volunteer, please
regrets: Farrukh Najmi

PROPOSED: to accept
 Minutes of the 2004-11-30 DAWG teleconference

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0394.html
as a true record.

next meeting: 14 Dec. scribe volunteer?

continue the following without discussion:

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.
ACTION KendallC: expose our walking tour data to SPARQL querying clients
   ETA before F2F4

comments on agenda?


2. ftf4 2005-01-19/2005-01-20 in Helsinki, Finland

* several WG members still have not filled out the ftf4 form.
  registration closes 15Dec
 => http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/dawg4ftf/


3. Test Cases

ACTION Jos: Write email about alternative result format using
collections - avoid use/mention issues

ACTION: SteveH is willing to adapt his testing infrastructure to
generate input/output RDF/XML and typed nodes into manifest file


4. Protocol

Updated DAWG variable binding results XML format
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0364.html

also "Issue with the result set format" thread


straw poll: is this design right? what to change?

Protocol draft:
   [protocol] http://monkeyfist.com/kendall/sparql-protocol/
              http://monkeyfist.com/kendall/sparql-protocol-simplex/

any implementation experience to report?


5. SPARQL SOURCE Issue

ACTION DaveB: update the dawg test repository to record or amend
tests to correspond to the
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0241.html

ACTION TomA: write email to list about how their customers are using 
named graphs

ACTION JanneS: propose text for hard failure in the protocol draft
(nearby: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0256.html )

ACTION DanC: suggest formal definitions for SOURCE
some progress: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/mathml-rules.xml
(haven't grokked optionals fully yet)

note
 Proposal: querying untrusted graphs 

 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0373.html


6. SPARQL update, issues

See http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/
 $Revision: 1.146 $ of $Date: 2004/12/06 10:04:50 $

ACTION: PatH to review editors working draft of rq23

ACTION AlbertoR: owns issue 'DESCRIBE'

"I will rework the text a little more"
 -- Alberto, 25 Nov 

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0359.html


ACTION DanC: owner of issue 'yes or no questions' (pending protocol doc)

ACTION SteveH: own (i.e. propose resolution to) disjunction issue

ACTION SteveH: owns issue 'nested optionals'

next WD: December 2004. that's now... let's discuss publication plans.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 18:42:51 GMT

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