W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2001

RDFCore minutes 2001-07-06 (for review)

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 15:19:41 +0100 (BST)
To: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0107081423510.15253-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
Draft minutes -corrections to the list, please.

RDFCore WG 2001-07-06 Teleconference minutes

Transcript:
	http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2001-07-06

Agenda:
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jul/0023.html

Roll call:

  Participants:
  - Dan Brickley
  - Dave Beckett
  - Ron Daniel
  - Jos De Roo
  - Mike Dean
  - Jan Grant (scribe)
  - Pat Hayes
  - Martyn Horner
  - Brian McBride (chair)
  - Sergey Melnik
  - Frank Manola
  - Pierre G. Richard
  - Aaron Swartz

  Regrets:
  Eric Miller, Art Barstow, Frank Boumphrey, Dan Connolly, Bill dehOra,
  Yoshiyuki Kitahara, Graham Klyne, Satoshi Nakamura, Stephen Petschulat

  Absent:
  Rael Dornfest, Michael Kopchenov, Ora Lassila, R. V. Guha

Review Agenda (any AOB):

  - Danbri is going to XML Processing workshop, asked if there were
    any messages or points of view that the WG would like communicating.
    (Lacking time, this goes to email)

Minutes of the last meeting:
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jul/0000.html
  Correction: Pat Hayes did send regrets for last week.
  ACCEPTED with correction.


Confirm following actions completed:

  ACTION: 2001-06-29#1: Brian McBride: put the container syntax online
  DONE.

  ACTION: 2001-06-29#2: Ron Daniel: (rdf:id and rdf:about used differently)
  DONE.

  ACTION: 2001-06-29#5: (appeared twice on agenda, see below)


Review status of following actions:

  ACTION: JUN-01-01-#9: Ora: send a note to the WG that describes
   how aboutEach is being used and how it was implemented
  CONTINUES. also:

AP: 2001-07-06#1 (bwm) : Brian to get in touch with Ora about this.

  ACTION: 2001-06-22#2: Brian: Write a draft on what issues are in scope,
    how are they allocated to partitions, what are the dependencies.
  DONE.

  ACTION: 2001-06-22#3: All: Post issue priorities with reasons
  DONE. (Timed out on other submissions)

  ACTION: 2001-06-22#4: Sergey: Summarize priorities that are posted
  DONE.

  ACTION: 2001-06-22#5: DanBri: Get a draft of RDFSchema to the group.
  CONTINUES.

  ACTION: 2001-06-22#7: Brian: Do a writeup of the containers proposal.
  ACTION: 2001-06-08#2: Dan Brickley: write up decision to allow partial
   descriptions of containers up in more detail for the list
  DONE.

  ACTION: 2001-06-29#3: Ron Daniel: post an email about how support of
   xml:base would generate different things in RDF/XML parsers.
  (Some brief discussion about embedded RDF)
  CLOSED.

  ACTION: 2001-06-29#4: Brian McBride: Update the
	http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-uri-substructure
   issue to add Sergey's question: Namespaces are used as an
   abbreviation in the syntax - is it syntactic sugar or part of the model?
  DONE.

  ACTION: 2001-06-29#5: Jan Grant, Eric Miller, Martin Horner:
    generate use cases and requirements for language (xml:lang) and literals.
  DONE (Martin, Eric);
  CONTINUES (Jan).


Issues discussion:


Issue #1: rdfms-literals-as-resources

  A long discussion ensued (see the transcript).
  Scribe's attempt at summary (corrections to any partisan views or
  idiom to rdfcore list, please) follows:

  - On the question "is a literal a resource"?
    Aaron: everything described by RDF is a resource. Literals are
     described. Ergo, Literals are Resources. Furthermore, Aaron
     indicated that some uses of RDF (example given was schema) needed
     to treat literals as resources.
    Pat: by positioning "resource" as meaning "any entity", leaving
     literals out is not reasonable.

    Generally, everyone expressed sympathy with this view.

  - On the question: "is a literal just a data: URI"?
    Opinion here was more divided.
    Jos and Aaron wanted to clarify the relationship between literals
     and data: URIs.
    Dave and Ron both expressed a strong opposition to any "automagical"
     replacements.

  - On the question: "do literals hold some distinguished position
     in the RDF formal model?"
    Opinions are divided as to the role literals currently play.
    Actions arose to look at the impacts of various viewpoints
     on other issues (actions listed below)

  - On the issue of data types on literals:
    Danbri: you can just indirect through an anonymous node.
    Ron: we can _already_ do that.

  Actions arising from the discussion:

  Sergey (and Dan Connolly in his absence) both stressed a pragmatic
   approach: identify the related issues and corner cases and produce
   test cases for these.
  Danbri urged to ask for implementator's experience on rdf-interest.

AP: 2001-07-06#2 (danbri) - write test cases for the RDF schema issues
   that are impacted by this.

AP: 2001-07-06#3 (sergey) - review the other issues and report which are
   impacted by a decision on this.

[The meeting was curtailed at this point due to a lack of time]

Review status on the open issues:

  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr

http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-identity-anon-resources
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-graph
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-literal-is-xml-structure
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-domain-and-range
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-domain-unconstrained
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-xml-base


Next meeting - 10am Boston time, 13th July 2001.

CLOSE


-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
perl -e 's?ck?t??print:perl==pants if $_="Just Another Perl Hacker\n"'
Received on Sunday, 8 July 2001 10:20:53 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:38:07 EDT