Session Start: Fri Nov 16 14:50:31 2001 [14:50] *** Now talking in #rdfcore [14:53] *** danbri_ has quit IRC (benford.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net) [14:53] *** dajobe_1 has quit IRC (benford.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net) [14:53] *** jjc has quit IRC (benford.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net) [14:53] *** dajobe has quit IRC (benford.openprojects.net irc.openprojects.net) [14:53] *** em has joined #rdfcore [14:53] *** dajobe_1 has joined #rdfcore [14:53] *** danbri_ has joined #rdfcore [14:53] *** dajobe has joined #rdfcore [14:53] *** jjc has joined #rdfcore [14:54] *** DanC has joined #rdfcore [14:55] * em appologies in advance for delay in joining the call [14:55] * bwm noted [14:55] thanks bwm [14:56] * DanC just finished jump-starting the family van; googling to find out how long it should take to charge... http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/howto/articles/43793/article.html [14:57] * danbri_ dialing in asap [14:58] * gk on my way - wrestling with Internet access [14:58] * dajobe_1 dialled in [14:58] *** dajobe_1 is now known as jandave [14:58] *** Jema has joined #rdfcore [14:59] *** mdean_ has joined #rdfcore [15:01] -open [15:01] RDFCore WG Telecon 2001-11-16 is now open [15:01] The agenda can be found at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0485.html [15:01] Agenda item 1: Allocate scribe [15:01] -agenda next [15:01] Agenda item 2: Roll Call [15:02] danbri ? [15:02] DanBri abs, DaveB here, [15:02] FrankB abs [15:02] Jeremy here [15:02] DanC regrets [15:03] RonD here [15:03] Billdeh abs [15:03] Jos pres [15:03] Rael abs [15:03] Jan here [15:03] Martyn regr [15:03] Yoshi abs [15:03] GK here [15:03] Michael K abs [15:03] Kwon erg [15:03] Ora abs [15:04] FrankM here [15:04] Nakamura abs [15:04] Steve P regr [15:04] +danbri [15:04] Pierre R abs [15:04] Patrick Reg [15:04] *** JosD has joined #rdfcore [15:04] Aaron here [15:05] MikeD here [15:05] Guha abs [15:05] PatH here [15:05] Sergey not here yet [15:06] +DanC [15:06] Note IRC logger is currently broken; DaveB (?) will mail copy to list [15:06] Next telecon 30 Nov 2001 [15:06] -agenda 5 [15:06] Agenda item 5: Review Minutes of 2001-11-09 [15:06] See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0294.html [15:07] propose move item 6 to e-mail :-) [15:07] Minutes last meeting; APPROVED [15:07] Volume of mail traffic [15:07] +DanC [15:09] Suggest replace rdfcore with www-archive@w3.org; but mail overload isn't completely out of order at present [15:10] Chair has a problem keeping up. [15:12] Please try and use subject lines meaningfully [15:13] Discussions tend to wander; difficult to know when to change the subject line [15:13] my client doesn't grok priorty, fyi [15:14] * em priority is not consistent across email clients [15:14] Aaron suggests that message priority be raised for summaries, agendas, minutes, etc (i.e. important key WG messages rather then general discussion) [15:14] I'm especially interested in summaries from issue-owners and/or editors. [15:14] summaries++ [15:14] danbri_: feel free to use IRC for clarification discussions. [15:15] *** sergey has joined #rdfcore [15:15] +sergey [15:16] * DanC wonders if PatrickS is present [15:16] Plea from chair for all members to use good judgement in various ways suggested to contain the amount of WG list mail generated [15:16] jan's entailment mail for item 7: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0525.html [15:16] Patrick setn regrets [15:17] -agenda 7 [15:17] Agenda item 7: Status of 2001-10-19#2 JanG produce proposal on Entailment tests and test Manifest for 26/10/2001 [15:17] -agenda 8 [15:17] Agenda item 8: Status of 2001-10-19#3 Jos Create test cases for model issues resolved at f2f [15:17] Ongoing [15:18] (also item 7) [15:18] -agenda 9 [15:18] * DanC hunts for danbri's "here's my latest draft" mail... [15:19] ACTION DanBri to mail brian which schema issues have been folded into document [15:19] *** bwm has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 182 seconds) [15:20] ACTION brian, new test case from Jos to go onto next telecon agenda; Jos to provide Brian with details [15:20] *** Jema has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 181 seconds) [15:20] rdfs working copy is at http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/Schema/20010913/ (I should put $Id$ in header..) [15:20] linked from WG homepage [15:20] Primer status [15:20] Eric planning on having something by 5PM EST Monday [15:21] Model theory working draft [15:21] Currently in "deep-freeze", pending datatype discussion. [15:21] danbri, I can't find your "here's my latest RDFS draft" message in the last two months; you did send one, no? [15:22] sorry, what's "it", PatH? [15:22] RDF equivalent representations [15:24] Propose to say graph/N-triples/diagrams are (supposed to be) equivalent, and will be maintained so. RDF/XML cannot express full range, and will not be enhanced by this WG [15:25] Jeremy uneasy that representing bNodes is out of scope. [15:27] ACTION Brian, highlight design changes in issues list [15:28] oops. sorry [15:28] item 12 [15:29] rdf-equivalent-representations [15:29] RESOLVED (per agenda with one extension) [15:29] item 13 [15:29] RDF assertions; legal binding [15:30] my position: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0479.html [15:30] DanC opposes closing legal liability issue; also Aaron [15:31] *** jjc has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 181 seconds) [15:31] ACTION: Aaron to resend MIME-type proposal [15:31] aaron's draft isn't linked from http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#mime-types-for-rdf-docs [15:31] ?? it was last time I looked [15:32] ACTION GK to mail pointer to counter-position to Aaron; ask for it to be addressed [15:32] er, graham, in sending that mail message, you already have asked for that to be addressed; I'm not sure what you're asking here. [15:33] DanC: just that, I supposed. I'm think there are points there that shouldn't be overlooked [15:40] very well, graham [15:40] Aaron's original mail on mime type stuff: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001May/0003.html [15:40] item 17 [15:40] item 17 - data types [15:41] Options: U option (use URI scheme with embedded datatype+value) [15:41] S use properties to intermediate bNode [15:42] P just use rdfs:range; requires model theory updated [15:42] *** logger_2 has joined #rdfcore [15:42] * logger_2 is logging [15:42] P++ also allow literals as subject, so RDF type information can be added# [15:43] * DanC wonders if PatrickS is here again. [15:43] X - Patrixk's proposal (reify everything). [15:43] I don't think he is here [15:45] 16 questions: U/S/P/P++ x prefer/can-live-with/cannot-live-with/don't-understand [15:46] X is not included on the basis that there aren't advocates here who can explain [15:47] 9 prefer S [15:47] none prefer U [15:48] 2/3 prefer P/P++ [15:49] 3 cannot live with U [15:49] none cannot live with S (subject to compatibility issues) [15:49] 1 cannot live with P/P++ [15:50] 2 need more time to understand [15:54] GK raised concern about compatibility with CC/PP usage as key point [15:54] hear, hear... let's get feedback on S... [15:54] DanC noted Sergey's commetn that we can keep the instances, but not the schema [15:55] GK asks if the schema incompatibility can be finessed, per recent email [15:56] Frank requests some further discussion of S that addresses broader architectural issues, and effect of chosing this might have [15:56] DanC, what would be the rdf:type of the intermediate bNode? [15:56] Sergey will explain how this works; but asks for help in explaining how it fits with DAML+OIL [15:57] (Pat says it does not) [15:57] ACTION Sergey, get datatype document out ASAP [15:57] JosD, in general, there's no need to say what the rdf:type of the intermediate node in S, Jos. [15:58] ACTION Frank, clarify architectural issues and concerns he perceives with any proposal [15:59] DanC, OK but I still think we need a name for the type and the mapping... [16:00] ACTION Jeremy, raise S/P compatibility concerns with WebOnt WG [16:00] ACTION MikeD, raise S/P compatibility concerns with DAML+OIL [16:00] on AT&T, they don't cut you off. [16:00] ... (joint committee) [16:01] item 14 [16:01] Booplean property values [16:01] WG notes that rdf:type can be used to express these. [16:02] pls note that the ChocolateLover ont:complimentOf NotAChocolateLover. [16:03] Need to work on wording to be clear about this negation issue [16:05] proposed replacement sentence: 'We expect additional work on Web Ontology languages [ref] to provide more expressive constructs (such as ont:complementOf) for such purposes'. [16:07] ACTION Pat, prepare new statement of resolutuion after email discussion [16:08] ACTION Pat, publish new version of model theory with literal datatype issue elided, ASAP [16:08] ... target next Wednesday Session Close: Fri Nov 16 16:10:10 2001