Re: Telecon points

> > * List the issues
> 
> This is a sticking point. I think the list is not short, and not clean 
> or easy to state. And even if short, then *very* not easy to sort out.

So I listed the issues I saw; no one has yet said how well they match
the issues they see; there has been one complaint that listing issues
is a bad idea.  

> > * State, or have Tim state, "Tim's solution", succinctly.

It's a nice idea, but I'm afraid we'll have to draw it out in
discussion.  Tim's stated it a few times, but never completely enough
for everyone.  Personally, I'm happy with his presenting and arguing
for bits as they are relevant to discussing particular issues.

> I would like to get clear on the "use of a URI in RDF implies 
> commitment to the ontology". I think that's a fine topic for the first 
> telecon and given the electrons spilt already a meaty enough task. (I 
> even tried framing an issue on it! :))
> 
> I would also be happy discussing Peter's document.
> 
> I would like a chair, and have proposed Sandro as chair for the first 
> telecon.

That works for me.

Anyone have any other agenda items to propose?   

      -- sandro