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

agenda: RDF Data Access 9 Aug

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:25:40 -0500
To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1123518341.18971.694.camel@dirk>

1. Convene, take roll, review records and agenda

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
  2005-08-09T14:30Z

for local time in a city near you, see
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=09&month=08&year=2005&hour=14&min=30&sec=0

  tel:+1.617.761.6200 code:7333
  supplementary IRC chat:irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
    log to appear:http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc

scribe: Janne S.

  record for
review:http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0175.html

next meeting: 16 Aug
  conflicts? scribe?

note the following done without discussion:

DONE DaveB: respond to "sparqlResults namespace" comment

DONE SteveH: update test matierials to show extendedType-eq-pass-result.n3 
approved in this 2 Aug meeting

continue the following without discussion:

ACTION: ericP to add "don't normalize" to rq23 (perhaps supplied in
0096)
ACTION: EricP to add test in 0096 to rq23 tests. label "approved" and ref
http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-dawg-minutes
ACTION: ericP to send [OK?] message to Bjoern

ACTION: ericP to update rq23 to include the text of rq23/mime.txt reflect
security concearns

ACTION: DanC to follow up re optional test based on op:dateTime triple
ACTION: DaveB to to propose source test to approve
ACTION: SteveH to review the relevant test case re: IRI normalization ref
http://www.w3.org/2005/06/28-dawg-minutes#item06
ACTION: AndyS to add the above graph test cases (analagous to valueTesting
test cases) (don't expect quick delivery) ref
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf5-bos.html#item05

ACTION: DanC to investigate having CVS commits send to the WG list

ACTION LeeF: draft WSDL 1.1 for SPARQL thingy with AndyS and Elias ETA 2 Sep
ACTION DanC: ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2 SPARQL protocol stuff, 
once both are available

comments on agenda?

It's a few hours late. I gather that doesn't bother anybody too much.
Let me know if it does.


2. comment "Query forms should be resources, not operations"

DONE KC: ask Baker for clarification
http://www.w3.org/mid/20050802163011.GF17467@monkeyfist.com

Baker confirmed that's what he meant
http://www.w3.org/mid/20050802211142.GU18852@markbaker.ca


3. toward Protocol last call

ACTION Elias: elaborate "DESCRIBE with simple RDF dataset" and a few
other examples

ACTION KendallC: update http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/result2
to 
http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results#

ACTION SteveH: elaborate "CONSTRUCT with content negotiation" into a test case

ACTION EricP: discuss conformance w.r.t. WSDL 2 with PLH and send some notes to 
the WG, preferably including suggested text for conformance

ACTION AndyS: review proto-wd/ as LC candidate after signal from KC, perhaps by 9 Aug but more likely 16 Aug

seems to be in progress; see "Andy's review..." thread.

ACTION EricP: review protocol document for last call when KendallC says it's ready

ACTION SteveH: review proto-wd by 16th Aug, if not 9th Aug


4. comment "Security Considerations"

http://www.w3.org/mid/43203939.225674421@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de

I think this is sort of a "series editor" thing. I guess I should
elaborate in email, but I'm not sure I'll have time before
the telcon...


5. "SPARQL Query Results XML Format: XML 1.1" comment

http://www.w3.org/mid/1123099748.20865.18.camel@localhost

I'd like to see test cases that show how XML 1.1 interacts
with the results format.


6. "SPARQL Results Format and Unbound Variables" comment

http://www.w3.org/mid/42F4CEEB.5090306@umd.edu

This seems to be new information; perhaps designs that better
achieve our design objective...

 4.7 Bandwidth-efficient Protocol
 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-dawg-uc/#d4.7


7. "Backslashes in string literals" comment

DONE AndyS: take the "Backslashes in string literals" comment

I gather from email discussion that there are a number of design
alternatives. I'll try to enumerate them, straw poll, and decide. We'll see.


8. issues#sort

comment: "ORDER with IRIs"
http://www.w3.org/mid/431b3915.225638015@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de

and approve. If the conclusion
of the spec can't already be justfied from the text, let's fix the
text.


9. issues#valueTesting

ACTION DaveB: make 'XXI'^^:romanNumeral  = 21 and points nearby into test cases 
(or ask questions in email).


10. issues#badIRIRef

ACTION AndyS: draft language re <foo###bar> errors
ACTION AndyS: Use IRI ref not RDF URI ref as world has moved on

(those are at least in progress)


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 8 August 2005 16:25:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT