- From: Eric Miller <em@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:11:45 -0400
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
W3C RDFCore WG 2001-05-18 Teleconference Minutes Agenda: - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0084.html Participants: - Dave Beckett - Art Barstow - Brian McBride - Dan Brickley (chair) - Jos De Roo - Aaron Swartz - Frank Manola - Frank Boumphrey - Ron Daniel - Bill dehOra - Ghram Klyne - Mike Dean - Eric Miller (scribe) Regrets: - Ora Lassila - R.V. Guha - Jan Grant - Rael Dornfest ---- Agenda Discussion - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0084.html Review of Previous Action Items: -- Item: Send feedback to Guha about use of RDF features Owner: Guha Discussion: Feedback by some, but not all... Status: Continued, as owner is not on call -- Item: Update the proposed changes for this issue and add test cases to demonstrate how they worked. Owner: Dave Beckett Discussion: (see Open Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdf-ns-prefix-confusion discussion) Status: Continued -- Item: Send analysis (#rdf-container-syntax-ambiguity and #rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema) to rdfcore-wg list Owner: Ora Lassilla, Dan Brickley Status: Continued, as owner is not on call -- Item: Reword #rdfms-empty-property-elements proposal and send a new message with test cases, including one with just an ID attribute. Owner: Jan Grant Discussion: Danbri notes Jan's post to the list on this item - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0033.html Status: Continue, as owner is not on call -- Item: re #rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr: Revise analysis and post to list Owner: Dave Beckett Discussion: (see Open Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr discussion) Status: Continued -- Item: re #rdfms-reification-required: Present analaysis to list for discussion. Owner: R.V. Guha Status: Continued, as owner is not on call -- Item: Link test cases, results etc. from issues list Owner: Brian McBride Discussion: Brian not feeling especially well, was unable to address this issue... scribe hopes he feels better. Status: Continued -- Item: Do an analysis of the impact of XML Base and summarize to list. Note: Owner not on call so item discussion deferred Owner: Jan Grant Status: Continue, as owner is not on call -- Item: Contact Rael about hosting face to face at O'Reilly. Owner: Brian McBride Discussion: Eric noted that previous communication with Rael indicated that O'Reilly would indeed be willing to host this, and suggest we confirm and move forward on this. Status: Continued, as Brian will confirm. ---- Agenda Issues -- Issue: Helping WG members new to RDF come up to speed. Overview: not much discussion... seems like good thing, but don't want to slow working group down. Resolution: Danbri suggests contacting him off-list if help is needed -- Issue: Ensuring DAML issues are captured in the issue list Overview: Brian wants to make sure that the DAML issues that are being raised on other various lists are (if possible/appropriate) addressed by RDFCore open issues list Discussion: Mike Dean: The various simple DAML issues by and large on list are indeed addressed, however with there are still some issues that may need to be taken into consideration. Mike agree's to being contact point for DAML/RDFCore and will solicit Pat Hayes (and others) to try to get them to provide some concrete recommendations. Danbri notes possible technical concerns with perhaps how DAML is handling data-typing, with paticular concerns of how groups like Dublin Core are handling data-types (e.g. value of dc:creator being an Agent or a literal string) Mike Dean responds to this indicating this isn't a problem, just in this case not being able to take advantage of certain DAML capabilities. Ghram Klyne also brings up the point about that reification is yet another of these issues that DAML has raised as a potential problem Resolution: ACTION ITEM: Ghram Klyne and Frank Manola agree to summarize www-rdf-logic perspective of reification as it applies to both logic and rdf and report back to rdfcore wg ACTION ITEM: Frank Manola agrees to summarize what the the logicians (www-rdf-logic) like to see in RDF and provide references to issues regarding clarification of RDF semantics, removing the extraneous parts of RDF / modularizing RDF, etc. by early next week. -- Issue: Acquiring control of the RDF errata document Overview: Danbri requests write access to to the RDF M&S/Schema errata documents Discussion: Aaron notes that Ralph Swick has provided edits of the errata several times based on feedback from public list Eric suggests that if we can additional provide errata write access to those maintaining RDF Core lists, this would be easier for maintanence. Resolution: ACTION ITEM: Eric Miller agrees to work with chairs and provide a solution -- Issue: Past Action Item / RDF Open Issue Discussions Open Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdf-ns-prefix-confusion Discussion: DaveB reflects Dan C.'s comments about using the term "must" and suggests changes to "may" in describing solutions to this problem. General discussion forms on how the working group anticipates future decisions and the working groups attitude toward suggested decisions and effects on backward compatibility. The notion of 'deprecation' of previous work was discussed and Frank M. and Martin H. remind the group this the term 'deprecation' has a Art suggest that these changes (what ever they may be ) be reflected in a separate page so developers can easily find these issues/resolutions. General agreement on this, however, a more detailed write up on this would be needed. Ron D. notes, however, to make clear that all of decisions are subject to change until final spec is out. Resolution: General consensus was that Dave B. would re-word this to reflect this notion of deprecation in this position ACTION ITEM: Art B. to formalize his suggestion rdfcore changes be reflected in a separate page so developers can easily find these issues/resolutions -- Open Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr Discussion: Brian notes, that Dave B's analysis of this issue went to list late yesterday and suggest more time is needed for discussion. Further, he suggests this is not a closed issue, and we postpone discussion here and take this off-line for continue discussion. Resolution: Agreed to discuss this on the list -- Open Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdfms-resource-semantics Discussion: Martin H. notes that a lot of time was spent on this issue. Two different questions: 1) is a uri a pack of atoms (suggests answer is no) 2) can resources point to the same object? (suggests answer yes) Martin notes that the conversation has been dangerously close to more philosophical in nature. Frank M. suggests that what is needed is more test cases, and suggestions that whatever conclusions we come to be illustrated with test cases to ensure the distinctions we want to convey are clear. Resolution: ACTION ITEM: Martin H. agrees to provides an initial set of test cases -- Open Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdf-terminologicus Discussion: Not really enough time to effectively discussion this. Ghram doe note, however, that http://public.research.mimesweeper.com/RDF/RDFTerminologyConcepts.html might be some help to terminology ---- Meeting Adjourn ---- Raw IRC log - (to help clarify any potential confusion of the scribe's minutes) **** BEGIN LOGGING AT Fri May 18 10:01:10 2001 10:01:10 --> em (em@dhcp065-024-049-027.columbus.rr.com) has joined #rdfcore 10:02:11 --> mdean (mdean@63.219.164.68) has joined #rdfcore 10:02:26 --- mdean is now known as _mdean 10:02:32 <bwm-dan-dave> +eric 10:02:35 <bwm-dan-dave> +aaron 10:02:42 <bwm-dan-dave> +klyne 10:03:08 <ArtB> +Jos 10:03:10 <bwm-dan-dave> +jos 10:03:20 <bwm-dan-dave> +mike 10:04:52 --> AaronSw (aswartz@216.146.78.254) has joined #rdfcore 10:05:45 --> horner (chatzilla@ANice-101-2-1-161.abo.wanadoo.fr) has joined #rdfcore 10:05:48 * em agrees to scribe 10:05:48 <bwm-dan-dave> regarding minutes from last week, approved except amend re frank manola ref 10:06:46 <ArtB> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0084.html 10:07:41 <em> Issue: A1: ALL Send feedback to Guha about use of RDF features. 10:07:49 <bwm-dan-dave> regrets from ora, guha, jan grant, rael 10:08:07 <em> A2: Dave Beckett Update the proposed changes for this issue and add test 10:08:07 <em> cases to demonstrate how they worked. 10:08:24 <em> issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdf-ns-prefix-confusion 10:08:44 <em> daveb: action addressed, open for discussion 10:09:09 * em scribe raises hand 10:09:13 <ArtB> Containers: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0113.html 10:09:47 <em> A2: discussion to be postponed to end 10:09:53 <em> A4: Jan Grant reword #rdfms-empty-property-elements proposaland send 10:09:53 <em> a new message with test cases, including one with just an 10:09:53 <em> ID attribute. 10:10:07 <em> danbri: jan sumbitted to list 10:10:18 <em> daveb: missing still last point 10:10:26 <em> daveb: of action 10:10:28 AaronSw ArtB 10:10:35 <em> A5: Dave Beckett re #rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr: Revise analysis and 10:10:35 <em> post to list 10:10:50 <em> daveb: done, discussion postponed 10:10:55 <em> A6: Guha: re #rdfms-reification-required: Present analaysis to list 10:10:55 <em> for discussion. 10:11:11 <em> danbri: not completed.. danbri to poke guha 10:11:14 <em> A7: Brian McBride Link test cases, results etc. from issues list 10:11:27 <em> brian-ill: still open as not feeling well 10:11:48 <em> group wishes brian well 10:11:53 <em> A8: Jan Grant Do an analysis of the impact of XML Base and summarise to 10:11:53 <em> list. 10:11:56 <em> danbri: still open 10:12:06 <em> danbri: anyone want to help with this? 10:12:11 <em> A9: Brian McBride Contact Rael about hosting face to face at O'Reilly. 10:14:12 <em> brian: agress to continue this 10:14:30 <em> danbri: point raised... helping RDF people comming up to speed 10:15:01 * ArtB wants DanBri to justify reification :-) 10:15:04 <em> danbri: suggests contacting danbri offlist if help is needed 10:15:16 <em> 20 Ensuring DAML issues are captured in the issue list 10:15:45 <ArtB> Brian: by DAML issues, do you mean issues raised on www-rdf-logic? 10:15:55 <em> brian: wants to make sure that the DAML issues that are being raised on other lists are fully addressed by RDFCore open issues list 10:16:16 <em> mikedean: current status... simple issues by and large on list 10:16:25 <em> mikedean: lots of discussion on rdf-logic, 10:16:45 <em> mikedean: solicit pat hayes and others to take a look at this 10:17:02 <em> danbri: can you say at this stage if there are glaring inconsistenciese? 10:17:10 <em> mikedean: not really... 10:17:41 <em> danbri: technical concerns with perhaps how DAML is handling datatyping 10:17:59 <em> danbri: seems to be potential problem with groups like DublinCOre 10:18:20 <em> danbri: eg. literal as the value of dc:creator 10:18:41 <em> mikedean: (missing something here... somethink about changing damml-) 10:18:46 * AaronSw thinks that it's preferable to be clear -- authorName vs. author 10:19:35 <em> gk: question about reification 10:19:44 <em> group seems to agree 10:19:47 <AaronSw> many laughs 10:20:00 <em> danbri: reification... big issue, suggests to defer 10:20:53 <em> gk: notes simple notes that reification is yet another of these issues that DAML has raised 10:21:38 <em> danbri: gk? interested in summerizing rdf-logic? 10:21:44 <_mdean> i'm hard to hear from a hotel room in Staunton Virginia 10:21:49 <AaronSw> mike agrees to being contact point for daml/rdfcore and will try to get them to provide some concrete recommendations 10:21:59 <_mdean> here's a summary of some of the DAML/RDF issue discussion 10:22:17 <em> gk: agrees to summerize rdf_logic list 10:22:26 <em> frankm: agrees to help with this 10:22:56 <em> ACTION ITEM: gk, and frankm: agreed to summerize rdf-logic perspective and report back to rdfcore wg 10:23:32 <em> wrt reification dsicussion... summerise rdf-logic discussion 10:23:42 <_mdean> i haven't yet finished comparing the DAML concerns to the RDF issues list, but i think they capture the simple issues -- there has also been a lot of discussion (particularly this week) on www-rdf-logic dealing with higher-level issues (reification, minimalist RDF, etc.) 10:24:09 <em> as it applies to both logic and rdf 10:24:29 <em> frankb: agrees to have something (at least issues and distinctions) by nbext weel 10:24:49 * ArtB pats FrankM on the back ... 10:25:07 <em> frankb: agrees to have something by early next week 10:25:47 <_mdean> for next week's Joint Committee telecon, I'll plan to open a discussion of providing specific issues/recommendations to RDF Core 10:25:57 <_mdean> i'm willing to serve as a weekly coordination point 10:25:58 <em> danbri: "what do the ontologists want" thread 10:26:19 <em> danbri: asks jos to summarise the fact that the issue hasn;t been addressed 10:26:30 <em> frankb: ehat would the logicians like to see in rdf 10:26:57 <em> eg clarification of semantics, removing the cruft, etc. 10:27:24 <em> ACTION ITEM: frank to agree to provide references to this work 10:27:38 <em> danbri: 25 Acquiring control of the RDF errata document 10:28:15 <_mdean> also, danbri asked about the object/datatype separation for DAML properties, particularly related to Dublin Core -- if you use daml:ObjectProperty or daml:DataTypeProperty, you're limited -- if you continue to use rdf:Property [names/namespaces from memory] the value can still be either a data type (literal) or object, but you may lose some of the power of DAML 10:28:39 * AaronSw raises hand 10:29:10 <bwm-dan-dave> action on emiller: find out how to get rdfcore control of rdf errata doc 10:29:16 <bwm-dan-dave> aaron: ack'd 10:30:00 <ArtB> Errata for M&S: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/errata 10:30:23 <em> issue status: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdf-ns-prefix-confusion 10:30:33 <em> discussion:... 10:30:46 * AaronSw comments that Ralph Swick has edited errata several times based on feedback from public list 10:31:31 * em is unable to scribe for sec. 10:31:42 * em asks group to fill in here 10:32:11 * em is back 10:33:09 <em> daveb: refelcting danc point... instead of issue *nust* to this, change this to *may* 10:33:24 <em> which reflects our atticute toward backward compatability 10:33:34 <em> ArtB: are we guided by w3c process 10:33:35 <em> ? 10:33:50 <em> danbri: in charter, but this is loose provacative interpretation 10:34:10 <em> daveb: suggests keeping this as is 10:34:45 * horner raises hand 10:34:53 <em> danbri: are best judgement of the group is that we deprecate this at this time 10:35:13 <em> martinh: deprecate is a hard line, one level removed... 10:35:38 <em> martinh: advocating deprecation... just remembering this is an evolutionary concept 10:35:50 <em> frankb: deprecation means... next version is gone 10:35:50 --> GK (GK@host213-123-53-236.dialup.lineone.co.uk) has joined #rdfcore 10:36:22 <em> frankb: be very clear... if we say deprecation, its gone next version. 10:37:02 * em raises hand 10:37:30 <ArtB> Dave's last comments re ns-prefix-confusion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0110.html 10:37:56 <AaronSw> danbri: is it gone in the rec we publish or the rec after that? 10:39:10 * ArtB raises hand 10:40:17 <bwm-dan-dave> danbri: this wg anticipates making a hardline spec for eventual w3c recommendation; therefore we as a wg currently discourage the use of x, y, z constructs as our best judgement is that these things will go... 10:40:31 <em> ArtB: suggests that these changes be reflected in a seperate page so developers can easiliy find these uissues/resolutions 10:40:52 <em> ArtB: a page for resolution, a page for issues 10:41:06 * AaronSw thinks that that would be the errata page 10:41:12 * em agrees 10:41:42 * GK (testing IRC feature) 10:41:48 * em waves to gk 10:41:56 * GK waves to em 10:41:57 <em> jos: agrees to arts suggestion 10:42:25 <em> daveb: am I done? 10:42:44 <em> other than some additional prose (danbri's suggestion) 10:43:25 <AaronSw> +Ron Daniels on phone? 10:43:34 <em> ron: agrees to artb's suggestion 10:43:48 <em> ron: notes all of this is subject to change until final sepc is out 10:43:52 * AaronSw raises hand 10:44:29 <em> ACTION ITEM: artb to formalize his suggestion rdfcore changes be reflected in a seperate page so developers can easiliy find these uissues/resolutions 10:44:50 <em> Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr 10:44:55 * AaronSw lowers hand but wonders whether danbri's text lets us decide if it goes in the rec or not 10:46:19 <em> AaronSw: notes there does seem to be an issues of empty prop elements 10:46:35 <em> brian: dave's ananlysis went to list late yesterday 10:46:56 <em> brian: suggest more time is needed for disussion... suggests this is not a closed issue 10:47:24 * em requests dave to submit the url of the issue response 10:47:59 <em> danbri: suggests this be taken offline and continue discussion 10:48:14 <em> end discussion of issue... 10:49:01 <em> issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdfms-resource-semantics 10:49:09 <em> martin - owner 10:49:25 <em> martinh: spent a lot of time on this... more than expected 10:50:10 <em> martin: 2 questions - is a uri a pack of atoms (suggest answer is no), can 2 resources point to the same object (suggests answer yes) 10:50:22 <em> amrtin: suggests cutting this loose 10:50:56 * ArtB wonders if that is Bill speaking ? 10:50:58 <bwm-dan-dave> +bill (not in roll call?) 10:51:00 <em> +bill 10:51:12 <em> Bill deOra (sp? 10:51:53 <em> martin: very close to philosophical discussions... 10:52:00 <em> danbri: rathole (em agrees) 10:52:22 <em> frankb: notes that this perhaps is being too quickly suggested this is philosphy 10:52:31 <em> frankb: suggest perhaps more test cases 10:53:01 <em> frankb: suggests conclusiosn we come to illustrated with test cases to ensure distinctions we want to convey are done by terms we use 10:53:32 <em> frankb: e.g. the thing on the web that is obtained with derefencing uri amd the thing the uri denotes 10:53:49 <GK> Web-copy of the old terminologicus document is at http://public.research.mimesweeper.com/RDF/RDFTerminologyConcepts.html 10:53:56 <AaronSw> em, was that not frankM? 10:53:56 <em> danbri: as fars as issue... technically critcal, but clear rathole 10:54:05 <em> s/frankb/frankm 10:54:08 * em thanks 10:55:17 <em> general: group agres to talk about test cases rather than philosophy about this 10:55:30 <em> end discussion 10:55:40 <em> issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/Overview.html#rdf-terminologicus 10:55:44 <em> owner martin 10:56:46 <em> ACTION ITEM: martin agrees to provide test cases 10:56:51 <em> wrappup... 10:56:57 <em> danbri: other business? 10:58:26 <em> GK: notes http://public.research.mimesweeper.com/RDF/RDFTerminologyConcepts.html as perhaps help to terminoligy 10:59:05 <AaronSw> all leave 10:59:08 <-- AaronSw has quit (Gotta Run) 11:00:17 <-- horner (chatzilla@ANice-101-2-1-161.abo.wanadoo.fr) has left #rdfcore 11:07:02 <-- bwm-dan-dave (brian_mcbr@phobos.hpl.hp.com) has left #rdfcore 11:07:33 <-- GK has quit (Leaving) -- eric miller http://www.w3.org/people/em/ semantic web activity lead mailto:em@w3.org w3c world wide web consortium tel:1.614.763.1100
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 15:08:52 UTC