W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: agenda: RDF Data Access 29 Mar (confirmed)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:26:31 -0600
To: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1112066791.32006.327.camel@localhost>

On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 21:49 -0500, Kendall Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 10:35:20AM -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> > and this one open:
> >  ACTION KendallC: to add WSDL description of protocol to editor's draft,
> > propose to WG.
> 
> Yes, this is still open. I had no 'net access from Friday morning till
> Monday afternoon, about 2 hrs ago, which limited the progress I could
> make. 
> 
> FWIW, I'm relatively happy -- pace a few details of representation in
> WSDL 2.0 (how do you spell rdf:RDF as a return type, and how can you
> have more than one possible return type) -- with the WSDL as it is for
> describing the interfaces. The HTTP bindings need to be completed,
> which I expect to do this week, and I intend to add SOAP bindings next
> week. But I think the interfaces could be discussed with an eye toward
> at least a straw poll from the WG.
> 
> > 6. privacy section for protocol spec
> > 
> > ACTION EricP: propose "privacy considerations" for SPARQL protocol
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0416.html
> > 
> > not much response... everybody agrees?
> 
> I think it's pretty good and intend it to go into the protocol draft
> ASAP. I've been concentrating on getting the WSDL right, then moving
> to draft prose around it.
> 
> > 7. issue: wsdlAbstractProtocol, fromUnionQuery
> > 
> >  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#wsdlAbstractProtocol
> > 
> > ACTION KendallC: to add WSDL description of protocol to editor's draft,
> > propose to WG.
> 
> This is repeated from above; same issue, afaik.

Right; above it's mentioned as a correction to last week's minutes;
here it's for discussion.

> 
> > progress:
> > sparql-protocol.wsdl updated Kendall Clark (Monday, 21 March)
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0382.html
> > 
> > perhaps it addresses fromUnionQuery?
> >  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#fromUnionQuery
> 
> IIRC, Andy mentioned some issue with that, but I don't recall the
> details and can't find them in email.

OK, well, meanwhile, I'm interested to know if it addresses
fromUnionQuery to your own satisfaction...

> > 8. issue: xmlAbstractSyntax
> > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#xmlAbstractSyntax
> > 
> > Note new issue, progress, discuss expectations, recruit owner?
> 
> I intended these to be progress on this issue:
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/sparqlx.xsd
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/sparqlx.rnc
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/sparqlx.rng
> 
> Hmm, that's a bit weak, actually. They *are* progress over the first
> drafts I sent to the list, in that they accord with Andy's abstract
> syntax and they are valid schema instances.
> 
> They are the same schema spelled 3 ways: XML Schema, Relax NG compact,
> Relax NG XML.
> 
> Again, sorry that I didn't respond to this agenda sooner; but with my
> home 'net access being down since Friday, and the holiday weekend, I
> wasn't able to before now.

no trouble.

> 
> Kendall Clark
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2005 03:26:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:22 GMT