W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Minutes of RDFCore telecon, 2003-04-25

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 11:39:24 +0100 (BST)
To: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0304291102430.13980-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

Agenda: [wrong subject]
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0290.html

Transcript:
	http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2003-04-25

NOTE: Actions have been transcribed according to
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0216.html
      - the format is a little terse (suggest permitting multiline actions)

Roll call:
  Dave Beckett
  Dan Brickley
  Dan Connolly
  Mike Dean
  Jan Grant
  Pat Hayes
  Frank Manola
  Brian McBride (chair)
  Eric Miller

Regrets: Graham Klyne, Patrick Stickler, Jos deRoo

Item 3: Review agenda.
  Item 13 and 14 appear to be the same thing.

Item 4: Next telecon 2003-05-02 10:00 Boston Time
  Scribe: Dave Beckett

Item 5: Minutes of 2003-04-11 with corrections
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0217.html
  Approved.

Item 8: pfps-07

  PatH: the fix for this has been folded into the current editor's WD:
	http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/
  PROPOSED to accept the comment and resole it as in the current
	semantics draft.
  Prop: PatH; Second: JanG; 0 against; 0 abstain
  RESOVLED.

date: 20030425
ACTION 20030425#1 path send [closed] email for pfps-07

Item 9: pfps-10
  This is a bugfix included in the current draft.
ACTION 20030425#2 jang add test case for pfps-10 (from originating email)
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0085.html

  PROPOSED: to accept this and to close it with the fix in the editor's
  working draft.
  Prop PatH; Second JanG; against 0; abstain 0
  RESOLVED

Additional item: On pfps-08:
  PatH: we initially 'rejected' this; it's now resolved to PFPS'
	satisfaction.
ACTION 20030425#3 path chase pfps response to pfps-08


Item 10: timbl-03
  PROPOSED: to reject timbl-03 according to
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0262.html
  Prop DaveB; Second JanG;
  For: ILRT; Against: W3C, PatH; Abstain: FrankM, MikeD.
  NOT RESOLVED.

  DanC pointed out the cost would be changes to Syntax, Test Cases,
	Primer(?)

ACTION 20030425#4 frank figure out the cost to PRIMER of accepting timbl-03
ACTION 20030425#5 danc figure out the cost to WebOnt of accepting timbl-03


Item 11: xmlsch-10
  PROPOSED: to postpone this issue
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0277.html
  Prop DaveB; Second DanC; Against 0; Abstain 0.
  RESOLVED

ACTION 20030425#6 daveb send response to xmlsch-10
ACTION 20030425#7 bwm allocate postponed issue id for xmlsch-10


Item 12: xmlsch-11
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0272.html
  PatH: (points out last sentence needs grammaticising)
  DaveB: Only options given were accept, reject, postpone.
  DanC: then we sohuld add 'clarify'

  PROPOSED: to 'clarify' xmlsch-11 along the lines of DaveB's response
	above
  Prop DaveB; Second DanC; against 0; abstain 0

ACTION 20030425#8 daveb respond to xmlsch-11


Item 13: xmlsch-12
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0274.html
  With amendment: strike "sucks because".
  With amendment: "the WG notes your offer of help and has asked the
	coordination group to carry it forward"
  PROPOSED to reject xmlsch-12 as detailed above
  prop daveb; second path; against 0; abstain 0
  RESOLVED

ACTION 20030425#9 bwm postponed issue for xmlsch-12 (is it the same as for -10?)
ACTION 20030425#10 em carry xmlsch WG's offer of help wrt xmlsch-12 to semantic web coordination group
	http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0489.html
ACTION 20030425#11 daveb respond to xmlsch-12


Item 15: xmlsch-01
  In JJC's absence this was skipped after a brief discussion.


Item 16: xmlsch-02/xmlsch-03
  In JJC's absence this was skipped after some discussion. Nobody had a
  problem with semantics importing the notion of "lexical to value mapping"
  from 3.3 of concepts (renaming it for clarity if required).


Item 17: pfps-04 pfps-05 pfps-06
  PatH: I've not yet written out a full proof of the closure lemma
  DanC: we have the option to say, 'enough', and report to the director
	that we're satisfied, although the original commenter may not be.


Meeting closed.


-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/
Spreadsheet through network. Oh yeah.
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2003 06:41:25 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:03 EDT