Session Start: Fri Dec 13 15:00:54 2002 [15:00] *** Now talking in #rdfcore [15:00] *** Topic is 'rdfcore http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Dec/0206.html' [15:01] *** gk is now known as gk-scribe [15:02] SW_RDFCore()10:00AM matches both RDF and rdf [15:02] Zakim, this is rdf [15:03] Zakim, this is RDF [15:03] *** em has joined #rdfcore [15:03] *** Zakim has joined #rdfcore [15:03] *** RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore [15:04] * RRSAgent is logging [15:06] zakim, who is here? [15:06] sorry, gk-scribe, I don't know what conference this is [15:06] zakim, this is RDF [15:06] On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, em, gk-scribe, bwm, DaveB, danbri, logger [15:06] ok, em [15:06] Zakim, this is SW_RDFCore [15:06] this was already SW_RDFCore()10:00AM [15:06] ok, danbri [15:06] zakim, who is here? [15:06] On the phone I see ??P5, GrahamKlyne, PatH, ??P17, ??P18 [15:06] +EMiller [15:06] On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, em, gk-scribe, bwm, DaveB, danbri, logger [15:06] Excellent, thanks em! [15:06] Who is ??P5, ??P17? (we could do tests by muting each...) [15:08] zakim, who is here? [15:08] On the phone I see ??P5, GrahamKlyne, PatH, ??P17, ??P18, EMiller [15:08] On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, em, gk-scribe, bwm, DaveB, danbri, logger [15:08] zakim, who is talking? [15:08] +??P20 [15:08] zakim, who is talking? [15:08] em, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P5 (32%), PatH (19%), ??P17 (96%), GrahamKlyne (37%), EMiller (42%) [15:08] bwm, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P5 (19%), ??P17 (24%), ??P20 (35%), GrahamKlyne (40%) [15:08] zakim, ??P20 is Jeremy [15:08] +Jeremy; got it [15:08] zakim, ??p20 is jjc [15:08] sorry, gk-scribe, I do not recognize a party named '??p20' [15:08] zakim, ??P20 is jeremy [15:08] zakim, mute ??p17 [15:08] sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named '??P20' [15:08] I don't understand 'mute ??p17 ', danbri [15:08] zakim, ??P20 is jjc [15:09] sorry, gk-scribe, I do not recognize a party named '??P20' [15:09] zakim, mute ?p17 [15:09] I don't understand 'mute ?p17 ', danbri [15:09] zakim, mute ?p17 [15:09] sorry, danbri, I do not see a party named '?p17' [15:09] zakim, mute ??P17 [15:09] ??P17 should now be muted [15:09] zakim, unmute ??P17 [15:09] ??P17 should no longer be muted [15:09] zakim, ??P17 is Frank [15:09] +Frank; got it [15:09] *** jang has joined #rdfcore [15:10] zakim, who is on the phone? [15:10] On the phone I see ??P5, GrahamKlyne, PatH, Frank, ??P18, EMiller, Jeremy [15:10] zakim, mute ??P5 [15:10] ??P5 should now be muted [15:10] zakim, unmute ??P5 [15:10] ??P5 should no longer be muted [15:10] zakim, ??P5 is ILRT [15:10] zakim, ??p5 is danbri,brian,jan [15:10] +ILRT; got it [15:10] sorry, gk-scribe, I do not recognize a party named '??p5' [15:10] zakim, ILRT holds jang, dave, dan, bwm [15:10] +Jang, Dave, Dan, Bwm; got it [15:10] zakim, ??P18 is stevep [15:11] +Stevep; got it [15:11] *** jjc has joined #rdfcore [15:11] zakim, who is on the phone? [15:11] On the phone I see ILRT, GrahamKlyne, PatH, Frank, Stevep, EMiller, Jeremy [15:11] ILRT has Jang, Dave, Dan, Bwm [15:11] That Dan is DanBri [15:12] Next telecon, 10-Jan-2003? [15:12] q+ [15:12] * Zakim sees Jjc on the speaker queue [15:12] em: possible telecon next week without brian? [15:12] q- [15:12] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue [15:13] No great interest -- going for 10-Jan-2003 [15:13] JanG to scribe [15:14] +PatrickS [15:14] Agenda item 5, minutes last telecon [15:14] Note: DanC not present, MikeD was [15:14] Minutes otherwiose approved [15:15] Item 6 -- actions approved complete [15:15] Agenda Item 7: Primer [15:15] Much progres made, much work to do yet [15:16] XML good shape, Schema most intended changes made but problem with examples [15:16] (Namespaces of schemas?) [15:16] Maybe can dispense with appendices (URI/URL stuff?) [15:17] Putting in Concepts doc references [15:17] Too soon to predict completion. [15:17] Upper bound... next thursday (hopefully) [15:18] Input needed: rewording of RDF values material [15:19] Dave has suggested numbered examples; but there are very many to label [15:20] q+ [15:20] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [15:20] q+ to suggest identifying valid rdf/xml examples [15:20] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [15:20] Maybe name the ones that people will refer to? [15:21] [Most of the above is FrankM reproting progress] [15:21] ack em [15:21] Em, you wanted to suggest identifying valid rdf/xml examples [15:21] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue [15:22] Dave/Brian suggest leaving to Frank/Eric to "do what you can" -- this isn't critical. [15:23] gk referst to rdf:value in latest semantics lcwd http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes/RDF_Semantics_finalCall_1.html#rdfValue [15:23] FrankM: Need to figure what to dop with rdf:value [15:23] GK: Semantics doc now has simple description, primer might expand slightly on this [15:23] FrankM: will s/primary/main/ [15:24] (Issue closed?) [15:24] the issue was not open [15:25] Latest version is http://www.w3.org/2001/09/rdfprimer/rdf-primer-20021124.html (from agenda) [15:26] ----- [15:26] Agenda item 8 [15:26] Concepts doc [15:27] ACTION 2002-12-13, bwm: update schedule (general for all docs) [15:28] Jeremy reports... [15:29] Checking synonym for rdf:XMLLiteral is not allowed [15:29] +??P22 [15:30] *** JosD has joined #rdfcore [15:30] zakim, ??P22 is JosD [15:30] +JosD; got it [15:31] (origional disscussion - it helps if synonym not allowed as check can be applied syntactically. Current WG intent is synonym is not allowed.) [15:31] gk-scribe: jjc, did you get latest comments from me? [15:32] pat: you may want to check semantics documents your (gk) concern? [15:32] jjc posting of concepts lcwd today http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Dec/att-0053/00-rc [15:34] ACTION 2002-12-13#2, Jeremy: to revise doc to say datatype *URI* is rdf:XMLLiteral... [15:34] Discussion of whether ill-=formed datatyped literal is an error. [15:34] discussion of concepts 6.5.2 sentence [15:34] "Such a case, while in error, is not syntacticly ill-formed." [15:35] zakim, who is on the phone? [15:35] On the phone I see ILRT, GrahamKlyne, PatH, Frank, Stevep, EMiller, Jeremy, PatrickS (muted), JosD [15:35] ILRT has Jang, Dave, Dan, Bwm [15:35] Call for final reviewers. Need to ensure document is entirely read. [15:35] ACTION 2002-12-13#3, PatrickS: review concepts doc in entirety [15:36] ACTION 2002-12-13#4, JanG: review concepts doc in entirety [15:36] Timeframe for review: 10-Jan-2003 is time for final decision, so comments should be with time to react. [15:37] q+ to ask about editorial issues -- leave until last-call period? [15:37] * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue [15:38] EM: editorial comments should not delay last call publication. [15:39] em: minor editorial changes can be made after last call. Document is not yet final, just substantially complete and correct. [15:40] q- [15:40] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue [15:41] Editorial comments are OK, just don't need to apply them immediately [15:42] PatrickS: Request for comments to be separated into critical/non-critical [15:42] Brian: editors discouraged from doing editorial changes at this time [15:42] ---- [15:42] Agenda item 9 [15:42] Semantics doc [15:42] PatH reports... [15:43] All done but one figure needs redoing. [15:43] * em hass to step away for 2 min [15:43] Question: overlap between semantics and primer -- chop out? [15:44] Brian: leave it in -- minimize further changes [15:44] Call for reviewers: [15:44] * em is back [15:44] JanG, Jos [15:44] most recent version of semantics lcwd: http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes/RDF_Semantics_finalCall_1.html [15:44] ACTION 2002-12-13#5, JanG: review sematics doc in entirety [15:45] ACTION 2002-12-13#6, Jos: review semantics doc in entirety [15:45] (that's the url ending with _1) [15:45] ACTION 2002-12-13#7, Jeremy: review semantics doc in entirety [15:45] Timeframe as before [15:45] ------ [15:45] Agenda item 10 [15:46] Syntax doc [15:46] Dave reports... [15:46] Document is ready. [15:46] Possible issue? [[[something about XML spec from JanG -- can't hear]]] [15:47] that was, xml spec has a concrete answer on teh &entity; inclusion of other documents [15:47] * danbri assumes it'd be the host Infoset [15:48] * gk-scribe infoset sounds right [15:48] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002OctDec/0276.html [15:48] * danbri preferring root element of the infoset-fragment, thinking about it [15:49] This is to do with scope of NodeIds and external entity references [15:50] * gk-scribe danbri, how is infoset fragment scoped? [15:55] PROPOSE: scope nodeIds to containing document root XML element (i.e. unique root element in document infoset). [15:56] DECIDED: yes [15:56] That is, nodesId can be used across multiple embedded RDF elements in an XML document. [15:56] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Dec/att-0059/01-rc [15:56] Concepts Last Call Candidate (with agreed edits) [15:56] (whatever that mneans!) [15:57] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Dec/att-0059/01-rc [15:57] ACTION 2002-12-13#8, DaveB: apply change to syntax as noted [15:58] Call for syntax reviewers. [15:58] ACTION 2002-12-13#7, reassigned to GK [15:58] ACTION 2002-12-13#9, Jeremy, review syntax [15:59] * gk-scribe only one reviewer for syntax? [15:59] ---- [15:59] Agenda item 11 vocabulary doc [15:59] DanBri reports... [16:00] Work progresses, some delays [16:00] Surprise that literal values are subset of resources [16:00] PatH: confirm that rdf:Resource is "universal" superclass [16:01] Aiming for candidate snapshot next week. [16:01] Goal to make final decision for LC on 10Jan2003 or 17Jan2003 [16:03] PatH: would like master directory of latest versions; see agendum 14 to come [16:03] Brian will maintain the overvoew pages when new WDs (editos drafts?) are issued [16:03] ---- [16:04] Agenda item 12 [16:04] Test cases [16:04] JanG reports... [16:05] q+ to talk about danc's action item re containers [16:05] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [16:05] testcase todo list http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/todo.html [16:06] -Stevep [16:06] Jos has some minor comments [16:07] Jos will aim to validate all entailment tests over weekend [16:07] JanG: can't find approval for some test cases [16:07] http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/allTestCases.html [16:08] summary table with status of nonapproved cases included [16:08] ACTION 2002-12-13#10, Jeremy: review all unapproved test cases by 10 Jan, sooner if poss [16:08] ACTION 2002-12-13#11, DaveB: review all unapproved test cases by 10 Jan, sooner if poss [16:09] on q to provide ref to Dan'c email message relavant to his action item -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0566.html (asking "Jan, is that enough for you to make those two into eal tests? ") [16:09] (correction to 2002-12-13#10 unapproved parser tests) [16:10] ACTION 2002-12-13#12, JanG: identify specific reviewers for unapproved test cases [16:10] Brian: last call candidate for test case document includes both document and test cases? [16:11] q+ to ask if approved and unapproved test cases are in the manifiests [16:11] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [16:11] em: they seem to be [16:11] JanG: don't yet have LCC for test cases -- some additional test cases are needed (?) [16:12] I've been asking people to run their parsers against these... just checking to make sure i'm asking them the right thing [16:13] JanG: need feedback from Jos, and some other stuff, before having a LCC test cases [16:13] Brian: clarify: LCC may include unapproved tests, to be reviewed, but not tests with known errors [16:14] Manifest file is up to date as of today. Revised today (2002-12-13) [16:15] ack em [16:15] Em, you wanted to talk about danc's action item re containers and to ask if approved and unapproved test cases are in the manifiests [16:15] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue [16:16] DanC sent a message -- JanG hasn't seen that [16:16] Confiorm valid and invalid test cases are in menifest [16:16] Target for test case LCC -- next Friday (2002-12-20) [16:17] ---- [16:18] PatH: is asking about references to non-W3C web sites. [16:18] OK to keep these. [16:19] Suggested that rather than direct links from text, better link to glossary, then externally from glossary [16:19] q+ [16:19] * Zakim sees DaveB on the speaker queue [16:20] * jjc getting a cup of coffee [16:21] Jos requests no quotes in comments in test cases -- causes some software problems [16:21] -PatrickS [16:21] ---- [16:21] Agenda item 13 [16:21] Schedule [16:21] Brian reports... [16:22] LCC for model theory, concepts today [16:22] test cases, primer next week [16:22] schema 3rd Jan 2003 [16:22] Syntax today [16:23] Lastcall decision for all but schema on 10-Jan-2003; schema on 17-Jan-2003; publish all 24-Jan-2003 [16:23] ---- [16:23] Agenda item 14, publication process [16:23] Jeremy suggests... [16:23] q+ to ask quick clarification on schedule [16:23] * Zakim sees DaveB, Em on the speaker queue [16:24] q- [16:24] q+ to ask quick clarification on schedule (publish on 17th or 24th) [16:24] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [16:24] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [16:25] Passing pubrules, propose maintain all docs in CVS space with different URI but same relation as final docs. Use this to check cross-links. Then do final conversion (with script) on final publication. [16:25] q+ to clarify the 'pub team' is the staff contact [16:25] * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue [16:25] syntax lcwd updated after this telcon(!) now at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Dec/att-0225/01-rdfxml.zip [16:29] * gk-scribe it seems strange to me that we have pubrules that cannot be satisfied until the documents are published [16:30] *** jjc has quit IRC (User pushed the X - because it's Xtra, baby) [16:30] -Jeremy [16:32] So we will try jeremy's suggestion. Brian to proxy access for PatH. First, Brian will set up directory structure in RDFcore CVS area. [16:33] Also, fix publication date as (nominal) 24-Jan-2002, to avoid links changing at last minute. [16:34] s/24-jan-2002/24-Jan-2003/ [16:35] Nominal publication date will be 17-Jan-2003 [16:35] * JosD thanks JanG for the update he made to the Manifest [16:37] ACTION 2002-12-13#13, em: fix up liaison with DC architecture group for LC review coordination [16:37] ACTION 2002-12-13#13, em: fix up liaison with DC architecture group for LC review coordination [16:37] ---- [16:38] Meeting closed [16:38] *** Disconnected Session Close: Fri Dec 13 16:38:36 2002