W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > January 2002

Re: Agenda items for the f2f

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 19:58:12 +0000
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <12421.1012420692@tatooine.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
>>>Dan Connolly said:
> On Wed, 2002-01-30 at 11:36, Brian McBride wrote:
> > Can I have suggestions please for objectives and agenda items for the 
> > upcoming face to face meeting.
> 
> Here are some ideas:

Reordering DanC's objectives first:


> Objective: get to zero open issues on M&S, i.e. 
> on syntax and model theory. Issue a last-call
> on them ASAP after the meeting. Switch
> to debug-the-test-cases mode from then on.

For syntax this requires the decisions in order to close the issues
that I will note below.

I'd hope to add more of an explanation section before Last Call WD
for how the RDF/XML syntax works, including all features so that it
wouldn't be necessary that you understood the grammar.


> Objective: get to zero open issues on RDF schema.
> (are we there already? if not, what's left?
> if so, why haven't we done a last call?)
> 
> 	[I suggest choosing one of the objectives
> 	above, not both.]

If given one vote, I choose syntax :)

> Objective: paint a picture of the end game.
> What communities are critical to the consensus
> around our specs? Have we reached them? If not,
> what else do we need to do? Where can we
> reach them? What conferences/mailing-lists/publications/etc?

+0 but I'd phrase that as:
   Get our story clear for our users
and we are not there yet for datatypes(literals), reification
and are missing a crucial WD, the primer.

From my experience in tracking what goes on with RDF
( http://ilrt.org/discovery/rdf/resources/ ) we are talking to the
right communties but we need to keep them in the loop with updates in
both directions.

Critical: XML world, Dublin Core, deployed RDF users

We particularly need to ensure we are addressing the communities our
charter mentions: XML (& XML Protocol) and Topic Maps.  The WG
membership does cover people in a range of other groups so some of
this might be going on already.


> 
> Agenda request: reification
> 	Any volunteers to come up with a pile
> 	of test cases that will help crystalize the
> 	issues?

+1
(although the *syntax* for what we currently call reification I doubt
will change at all).


> Agenda request: datatypes
> 	I think perhaps we can choose between TDL
> 	and S before the meeting, but there are
> 	zillions of little details to clean up, I think.
> 	What URI-names to use, how many, etc.
> 	whether this impacts xml:lang etc.

+1

+1 for xml:lang - not in TDL & S unless I've missed it.  I'll
                  flag this up directly in another message

> Agenda request: collections
> 	(esp. entailment stuff around bags. I have
> 	an idea I haven't written up yet...)

+1

The MT urgently needs this - collections are deployed.


> Agenda request: WebOnt update
> 	Maybe this should go on the Thursday RDF IG
> 	agenda in stead, but I'll give folks
> 	in this WG an opportunity to say "no, let's
> 	spend some of our meeting time on it."

-1 unless we have time


Dave
Received on Wednesday, 30 January 2002 15:01:23 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:44:03 EDT