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

RDFCore WG minutes for the telecon 2001-09-28

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 13:18:30 +0100
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <28979.1001938710@tatooine.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

RDFCore WG minutes for the telecon 2001-09-28

Transcript:
   http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2001-09-28
Agenda:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0409.html

1: Allocate scribe:  Dave Beckett

2: Roll call

Participants:
    - Eric Miller (part of time)
    - Brian McBride (chair)
    - Art Barstow
    - Dave Beckett
    - Jeremy Carroll
    - Ron Daniel
    - Mike Dean
    - Bill deHora
    - Jos De Roo
    - Pat Hayes
    - Martyn Horner
    - Graham Klyne
    - Ora Lassila
    - Frank Manola
    - Sergey Melnik
    - Stephen Petschulat
    - Aaron Swartz

Regrets:
    - Daniel Brickley
    - Dan Connolly
    - Jan Grant

Absent:
    - Frank Boumphrey
    - Rael Dornfest
    - Yoshiyuki Kitahara
    - Michael Kopchenov
    - KWON Hyung-Jin
    - Satoshi Nakamura
    - Pierre G Richard
    - R.V. Guha


3: Congratulate Pat on the publication of the Model Theory WD

    See http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-rdf-mt-20010925/

    Pat was duly congratulated

ACTION 2001-09-28#1: Brian McBride
    Ask Graham Klyne to propose resolution of
    http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-identity-anon-resources


4: Review Agenda

    No AOB


5: Next telecon - 10am Boston time, 12th October 2001.

    DECIDED: Meet at same time, TWO weeks hence.


6: Review minutes of previous meeting:

    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0326.html

    APPROVED


7: Confirm Status of completed actions

    CONFIRMED DONE


[Scribe note: item 8 discussed later]


9: Cycles in subPropertyOf
 
RESOLVED (unanimously):

  Deleting the restriction prohibiting cycles of subPropertyOf
  properties.  The meaning of a cycle of subPropertyOf properties is
  an assertion that the properties involved in the cycle have the
  same members.  A more formal specification of the meaning is given
  in the model theory.


  Propose:  Approve the test case for this issue as given in:
    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0362.html

  Discussion showed that there needed to be a review of these
  test cases before approval.

ACTION 2001-09-28#3: Jos DeRoo
    Review test cases in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0362.html 

ACTION 2001-09-28#4: Art Barstow
    Review test cases in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0362.html


10: Tidying up broken Test cases
  rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/test0007.rdf
  rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/test0008.rdf
  rdfms-empty-property-elements/test011.rdf
  rdfms-empty-property-elements/test012.rdf

  See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0322.html
    --  A proposal for entailment tests, Jos DeRoo


ACTION 2001-09-28#5: Dave Beckett
   Fix errors in
   http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/test0007.nt
   as reported by Jeremy Carroll in
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0294.html

[Scribe note: 0008.rdf deleted after ACTION 2001-09-28#8, so does not
need fixing]

Discussion of additional problems with test0004.rdf in container tests.

ACTION 2001-09-28#6: Jeremy Carroll
  Re-post problem found in
  http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema/test004.rdf

ACTION 2001-09-28#7: Jan Grant
  Correct 
  http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-empty-property-elements/test011.rdf
  http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-empty-property-elements/test012.rdf
  by removing xml:base

ACTION 2001-09-28#8: Art Barstow
  Delete following test cases after removal of rdf:abouteachprefix:
  http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/test0008.rdf
  http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/test0008.nt

ACTION 2001-09-28#9: Art Barstow
  Investigate best W3 practice in deleting test cases such as leaving
  a blank file there so as not to break the published URI

Discussion of moving test cases postponed since Jan Grant absent,
awaiting proposal on manifest for test cases.


11: Discuss Entailment tests proposal

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0322.html

Discussion of this, but depends on the manifest proposal.  The basic
idea is one or more input files, one output file and for an
inferencing system, the output file should be true given the input
file(s).  Jos noted the need for a distinction between entailment in
rdf and in rdfs.  Pat Hayes and Jeremy Carroll agreed this should be
explicit and more specifically it is important to be machine readable.

RESOLVED: There should be two types of entailment test - rdf and rdfs
and this difference must must be recorded in a machine readable form.

RESOLVED: We will not represent the current set of syntactic tests as
entailment tests.

Discussion of the proposal and using N3.  Jos explained it was just
for scribing purposes.  Brian asked it to be based on RDF/XML or
N-Triples.

Art Barstow agreed this was fine to move this work into the next test
cases WD.  Discussion of updating WDs and managing the currently
edited draft, pointing to it from public plasses.

ACTION 2001-09-28#10: Art Barstow
   Talk to Eric Miller and Dan Connolly to investigate how to use
   editors drafts and the process of updating documents

ACTION 2001-09-28#11: Art Barstow
   Add Jos's entailment tests to the test cases WD (editors draft)


12: Discuss Test Manifest Strawman

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0404.html

Jan Grant away, postponed.


13: Discuss parseType=Literal Proposal
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0341.html

Jeremy Carroll: Ended up doing more than just this and tried to
decided what an RDF literal is, equality of literals etc.  Unsure
what to do in light of feedback, such as split issue up or rephrase
in terms of other XML stadanrds.

Discussion of how to split it up and trying to avoid some things such
as char string normalisation.  Proposal from Brian to split the
literal issue (not URI character normalisation).

ACTION 2001-09-28#12: Jeremy Carroll
  Separate out the character encoding issues from language ones in
  the literal [parseType=Literal] Proposal

Discusion of proposal being rather large, need splitting into smaller
chunks possibly labelled by issue so that review can be done,
includign effect on existing code.  Noted Jan Grant's thoughts
http://ioctl.org/rdf/literals

Is a literal (unicode string, lang), (unicode strign, uri), (unicode
string, type)?  Brian asked we not get into this since related to
data types; put this on hold for a bit, start up some activity with
datatypes.  Consensus to do this.

ACTION 2001-09-28#13: Sergey Melnik
   Own the rdfs-xml-schema-datatypes issue

Graham Klyne notes reservations on literals as resources.  Discussion
on whether this has been decided: still under discussion according to
issues list at this date (2001-10-01).  The Model Theory is agnostic
on this at present.


8: Primer Sub-group Report

Eric Miller: Had 7 people in meeting, agreed a common aproach and
background, how to structure the primer.  Including "elevator speech"
- explaining RDF in <n> minutes.  Initial pleasing response and good
start.  Will be getting professional technical writer to help out.

Meeting notes http://www.w3.org/2001/09/rdfprimer/meetingnotes-20010927


MEETING CLOSED.

  Next meeting in TWO week: 10am Boston time, 12th October 2001.


[ Scribe note:
  ACTION 2001-09-28#2 was skipped due to bad driving of meeting
  assistant; it is split into ACTION 2001-09-28#3 and 2001-09-28#4
]
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 08:18:35 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:40:55 EDT