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

ADMIN: Minutes of the RDFCore 2003-01-31 telecon

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 23:16:23 +0100
To: "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFD961A34E.FA370B98-ONC1256CBF.0079ED1A-C1256CBF.007A5C6B@agfa.be>

Minutes of the RDFCore 2003-01-31 telecon
=========================================

agenda:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0230.html
chair:   Brian
scribe:  JosD
irc log: http://www.w3.org/2003/01/31-rdfcore-irc (also attached)
         (but between 15:36:29 and 15:39:04 I must have done something
stupid
         or there could be a copy/paste bug in/between Lotus
Notes/ChatZilla)

===============================================================================
ACTION: Brian put lcc application code in CVS
ACTION: Brian to update the WG page link to editors drafts
ACTION: jang to create test case for jang-01 and send details to jos
ACTION: Jeremy to report back XML Schema 1.1 Requirements RQ-23

RESOLVED: proposed disposition [jang-01] with consensus
RESOLVED: endorse XML Schema 1.1 Requirements "the First class objects"
(RQ-23)
===============================================================================


| Time:
| 10:00:00 Fri Jan 31 2003 in America/New York duration 60 minutes
|
| which is equivalent to
| 15:00:00 Fri Dec 31 2003 in Europe/London
|
| Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332
| irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore
|
| 1: Scribe Jos this week
|
|
| 2: Roll Call

============================================================================
present: PatH, Bwm, JosD, EMiller, DanC, PatrickS, Jjc, AaronSw, DaveB,
JanG
regrets: DanB, FrankM, GrahamK, MikeD
============================================================================


| 3: Review Agenda

AOB DanC: FYI about WebOnt pubs
          we're likely to publish all our OWL drafts Monday. NOT last call.
AOB DanC: regrets for next Fri; I'll be at a TAG ftf.


| 4: Next telecon 07 Feb 2003
| Volunteer Scribe

===============
JanG volunteers
===============


| 5: Minutes of 2003-01-24 telecon
|
| See:
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0207.html

===========================================================
APPROVED with the ammendment that JanG has sent his regrets
===========================================================


| 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-17#6 ericM
| publish the last call WDs and Lbase Note
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#1 jjc
| Send msg to I18N asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0113.html
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#2 bwm
| Send msg to XML Schema WG asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0084.html
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#3 bwm
| Send msg to uri@w3.org asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0147.html
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#8 patrickS
| Send msg to  UAProf asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0081.html
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#9 patrickS
| Send msg to  Open EBook Forum asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0082.html
|
| ACTION: 2002-01-24#11 bwm
| send announcement to chairs list
|
| see:
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0176.html
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#12 jjc
| Send msg to XML C14N WG asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0114.html
|
| ACTION: 2003-01-24#13 bwm
| Send msg to RDF interest asking for relevant LC review
|
| see:
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Jan/0161.html

=========
CONFIRMED
=========


| 7: Soliciting Last Call Reviews
| 2003-01-24#4  em  Send msg to David of XMLP asking for relevant LC review
| 2003-01-24#5  danbri  Send msg to SVG asking for relevant LC review
| 2003-01-24#6  danbri  Send msg to XHTML WG asking for relevant LC review
| 2003-01-24#7  danbri  Send msg to RDF IG about LC
| 2003-01-24#10 danbri  remind RSS people to send their comments to
|                       www-rdf-comments

=============
all CONTINUED
=============


| 8: Handling last call comments.
| Comments on comment tracking documents:
|   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/
|   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/issues.rdf
| What to do with the app source code?
|
| DanC suggests editors discretion to make editorial corrections
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0214.html
|
| Patrick suggests WG should review whether it considers issue editorial
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0229.html
|
| WG's views?
|
| Frank asks - what about comments we delayed to last call:
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0223.html
|
| Suggest:
|   Editor's have discretion as we decided above
|   Others - please send bwm email so he can register them in the lcc list
|
| Tracking Changes:
|   We need to ensure that agreed changes don't get lost.  That means a
|   list of edits for each document.  A list of changes made in each doc
would
|   also be useful for readers/reviewers of future versions.
|
|   Suggest:
|     o each doc maintains change list with id and pending/done status
|     o each response to commentor which accepts a change includes the id
of
|       the change which should be listed in ed's draft when message sent
|     o we need new editors drafts of the docs to point to from wg page
|
| www-rdf-comments
|   o is for process - not general discussion
|   o please let editors or the chairs handle comments process
|   o please keep threads together - i.e. reply to messagage
|
| Any other process issues?

Brian:  each editor keeps a list of changes and links back to the original
message
        it is the editors role to bring stuff back to the group
Jeremy: strip list in editors draft for PR and one can still look into
editors draft
DanC:   these are the changes for LC and say to director they are all
editorial
        (otherwise another LC)
        clarification: "editorial" meaning minor, i.e. reviewers would
agree
        "yes, my review still applies after those changes have been made"
JanG:   which document do we update as we go along?
Brian:  new editors draft
DanC:   not a good idea, strong preference to have them in CVS
        one commit per week and the one underneath the WG directory
Eric:   published docs were modified.
        ensure the REAL TR documents go under the rdfcore/TR doc
        make sure to checkout first

==========================================================
ACTION: Brian put lcc application code in CVS
ACTION: Brian to update the WG page link to editors drafts
==========================================================


| 9: FAQ: Relationship to XML Family of specs

Brian:  any volunteers to do the update?
        there is a chartered deliverable
        [[provide an account of the relationship between RDF and the
        XML family of technologies (particularly Schemas and
Infoset/Query)]]
        -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter

===============
to be continued
===============


| 10: Proposed Disposition of Last Call Comments
| This section of the agenda is for lcc's where there is a proposed
disposition:
|
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#danc-02
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#jang-01
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-01
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-02
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-03
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-04
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-05
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-06
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-07
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-08
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-09
| http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-10

those are actually issues and the WG has to decide every comment
that resulted in an issue

====================================================================
ACTION: jang to create test case for jang-01 and send details to jos

RESOLVED: [jang-01] resolved with consensus
====================================================================


| 11: Comments Review
| Seeking volunteer to make weekly trawl through rdf comments and check we
| aren't dropping any.
|
| Each comment thread should end in either a [closed] or have an comment id
| assigned.
|
| Comments Awaiting Editors Response
|
| Concepts:
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0154.html
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0152.html
|
| Syntax:
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0163.html
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0150.html
|
| Schema:
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0124.html
|
| Semantics:
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0159.html
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0156.html
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0137.html
|
| Test Cases:
| http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0132.html

JanG volunteers to make weekly trawl through rdf comments
and check we aren't dropping any.
the link is http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/

Jeremy: is wondering; take e.g. reagle-01
DanC:   you can either say:
        1. yes the design is goofy, but here are the 3 testcases
        2. here is a design change
PatH:   be careful here, may influence other documents


| 12: XML Schema 1.1 Requirements
|
|
| See:
|   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0163.html

Jeremy: made 2 desiderata
        those were made personally; asking for WG blessing; there could be
a 3rd one
DanC:   propose to endorse the second comment in above (on first class
objects)

================================================================
RESOLVED: endorse the First class objects (RQ-23) with consensus

ACTION: Jeremy to report back XML Schema 1.1 Requirements RQ-23
================================================================


=============================
meeting ADJOURNED at 16:02:14
=============================


14:59:43 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore
14:59:54 <AaronSw> zakim, this will be rdfc
14:59:55 <Zakim> ok, AaronSw
14:59:56 <em> em has changed the topic to: rdfcore 2002-01-31
teleconference
15:00:20 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started
15:00:27 <Zakim> +??P8
15:00:32 <DaveB> Zakim, ??P8 is ILRT
15:00:33 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it
15:00:38 <DaveB> Zakim, ILRT has DaveB
15:00:39 <Zakim> +DaveB; got it
15:01:05 <Zakim> + +1.850.291.aaaa
15:01:14 <Zakim> +??P19
15:01:24 <bwm> Zakim, ??p19 is bwm
15:01:25 <Zakim> +Bwm; got it
15:01:55 <Zakim> +??P20
15:02:04 <Zakim> +EMiller
15:02:15 <JosD> Zakim, ??P20 is JosD
15:02:17 <Zakim> +JosD; got it
15:02:27 <em> zakim, who is here?
15:02:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see ILRT, +1.850.291.aaaa, Bwm, JosD,
EMiller
15:02:28 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB
15:02:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, JosD, em, DaveB, AaronSw,
bwm, DanCon, logger
15:02:54 <Zakim> +DanC
15:03:16 <em> zakim, 1.850.291.aaaa is PatH
15:03:17 <Zakim> sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named
'1.850.291.aaaa'
15:03:21 <em> zakim, +1.850.291.aaaa is PatH
15:03:22 <Zakim> +PatH; got it
15:03:54 <bwm> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see ILRT, PatH, Bwm, JosD, EMiller, DanC
15:03:55 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB
15:04:09 <DaveB> Zakim, ILRT has JanG
15:04:10 <Zakim> +JanG; got it
15:04:27 <Zakim> +PatrickS
15:04:51 <JosD> regrets DanB, FrankM, GrahamK
15:04:57 <DaveB> agenda
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0230.html
15:05:11 <DanCon> FYI about WebOnt pubs
15:05:38 <JosD> AOB from DanC
15:05:39 <em> zakim, who is talking?
15:05:50 <Zakim> em, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the
following: Bwm (40%)
15:05:55 <DanCon> we're likely to publish all our OWL drafts Monday. NOT
last call.
15:06:24 <Zakim> -ILRT
15:06:26 <DanCon> regrets for next Fri; I'll be at a TAG ftf.
15:06:29 <DaveB> jan volunteers
15:06:37 <DaveB> then killed the phone ... ;)
15:06:47 <JosD> Volunteer Scribe next week: JanG
15:06:58 <Zakim> +??P8
15:07:02 <Zakim> +??P22
15:07:05 <DaveB> Zakim, ??P8 is ILRT
15:07:07 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it
15:07:15 <em> zakim, +??P22 is jjc
15:07:16 <Zakim> sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named '+??P22'
15:07:17 <JosD> ===== 5: Minutes of 2003-01-24 telecon
15:07:25 <em> zakim, ??P22 is jjc
15:07:26 <Zakim> +Jjc; got it
15:07:28 <DaveB> Zakim, ILRT has DaveB,JanG
15:07:29 <Zakim> +DaveB, JanG; got it
15:07:35 <JosD> JanG send regrets
15:07:45 <JosD> minutes approved
15:07:57 <JosD> =========== 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions
15:08:02 <JosD> completed
15:08:19 <JosD> ======== 7: Soliciting Last Call Reviews
15:08:46 <JosD> em's action continued as well as danbris's
15:08:51 <jang> jang has joined #rdfcore
15:08:53 <DanCon> graph?
15:09:03 <JosD> ========== 8: Handling last call comments.
15:09:26 <DanCon> ack danc
15:09:27 <Zakim> DanCon, you wanted to ask graph?
15:10:01 <JosD> ACTION Brian put lcc application code in CVS
15:10:59 <jang> [if it hasn't been addressed yet - couldn't find it in last
week's minutes - which document do we update as we go along?
15:11:01 <JosD> how much editorial discretion should there be?
15:12:06 <jang> ah, that's how you do it
15:12:09 <JosD> each editor keeps a list of changes
15:12:24 <JosD> link back to the original message
15:12:39 <jang> q+ to ask [if it hasn't been addressed yet - couldn't find
it in last week's minutes - which document do we update as we go along?
15:12:55 <JosD> editors role to bring stuff back to the group
15:14:38 <bwm> ack jang
15:14:39 <Zakim> Jang, you wanted to ask [if it hasn't been addressed yet -
couldn't find it in last week's minutes - which document do we update as we
go along?
15:15:17 <bwm> ack danc
15:15:22 <JosD> jjc: strip list in editors draft for PR and one can still
look into editors draft
15:16:03 <Zakim> +AaronSw
15:16:41 <DaveB> reminds me, the mime type I-D needs renewing RSN
15:16:50 <DaveB> expires Feb sometime?
15:17:17 <JosD> danc: these are the changes for LC and say to director they
are all editorial
15:17:30 <JosD> (otherwise another LC)
15:17:46 <JosD> Zakim, who is here
15:17:48 <Zakim> JosD, you need to end that query with '?'
15:17:52 <AaronSw> media: hm, good point
15:17:55 <JosD> Zakim, who is here?
15:17:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatH, Bwm, JosD, EMiller, DanC,
PatrickS, ILRT, Jjc, AaronSw
15:17:57 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB, JanG
15:17:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see jang, RRSAgent, Zakim, JosD, em, DaveB,
AaronSw, bwm, DanCon, logger
15:18:09 <DaveB> AaronSw: expires 21 Feb says
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-01
15:18:36 <DanCon> clarification: "editorial" meaning minor, i.e. reviewers
would agree "yes, my review still applies after those changes have been
made"
15:21:24 <JosD> process handling comments via www-rdf-comments
15:22:11 <JosD> s/process/process of/
15:22:25 <JosD> no other issues
15:22:49 <em> q+
15:23:14 <JosD> JanG: which document to update
15:23:47 <JosD> bwm: new editors draft
15:24:50 <JosD> DanC: not a good idea, strong preference to have them in
CVS
15:25:19 <jang> my intention: to update the copy of TR document under
rdfcore/TR/ as required, respond to queries with the diff.
15:25:40 <JosD> ... one commit per week and the one underneath the WG
directory
15:26:24 <JosD> ... DanC prefers in place
15:26:54 <jang> em: published docs were modified. ensure the REAL TR
documents go under the rdfcore/TR doc
15:27:12 <jang> make sure ther's an cvs up first prior to edits!
15:27:26 <JosD> em: make sure to checkout first
15:27:45 <JosD> ACTION: Brian to update the WG page link
15:28:15 <JosD> ... to editors drafts
15:28:59 <JosD> ============= 9: FAQ: Relationship to XML Family of specs
15:29:14 <JosD> volunteers?
15:29:39 <JosD> ... to do the update
15:29:57 <DanCon>
http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf
15:30:54 <AaronSw> danc, we're discussing rdf and xml, not rdf and html
15:30:55 <JosD> bwm: there is a chartered deliverable
15:31:11 <bwm>     * provide an account of the relationship between RDF and
the XML family of technologies (particularly Schemas and Infoset/Query)
15:32:41 <JosD> from charter http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter
15:33:21 <JosD> this will be continued
15:33:33 <JosD> ========== 11: Comments Review
15:33:52 <DanCon> I don't think danc-01 is ready for WG discussion. I'd
prefer to continue negotiating with the editor.
15:34:15 <DaveB> I thought we were discussing danc-02 ?
15:34:56 <DanCon> sorry, yes, danc-02 isn't ready for WG discussion.
15:35:27 <JosD> ======== 11: Comments Review
15:35:55 <DaveB> this is item 10, JosD
15:36:29 <JosD> Time:
15:36:31 <JosD> 10:00:00 Fri Jan 31 2003 in America/New York duration 60
minutes
15:36:32 <JosD> which is equivalent to
15:36:34 <JosD> 15:00:00 Fri Dec 31 2003 in Europe/London
15:36:35 <JosD> Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332
15:36:37 <JosD> irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore
15:36:39 <JosD> 1: Scribe Jos this week
15:36:41 <JosD> 2: Roll Call
15:36:42 <JosD> 3: Review Agenda
15:36:44 <JosD> 4: Next telecon 07 Feb 2003
15:36:45 <JosD> Volunteer Scribe
15:36:46 <JosD> 5: Minutes of 2003-01-24 telecon
15:36:48 <JosD> See:
15:36:49 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0207.html
15:36:52 <JosD> 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions
15:36:53 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-17#6 ericM
15:36:55 <JosD> publish the last call WDs and Lbase Note
15:36:56 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#1 jjc
15:36:57 <JosD> Send msg to I18N asking for relevant LC review
15:36:59 <JosD> see:
15:37:00 <DaveB> uh oh
15:37:01 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0113.html
15:37:02 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#2 bwm
15:37:04 <JosD> Send msg to XML Schema WG asking for relevant LC review
15:37:06 <JosD> see:
15:37:08 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0084.html
15:37:10 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#3 bwm
15:37:12 <JosD> Send msg to uri@w3.org asking for relevant LC review
15:37:14 <JosD> see:
15:37:17 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0147.html
15:37:18 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#8 patrickS
15:37:19 <AaronSw> logger, kick JosD
15:37:19 <JosD> Send msg to  UAProf asking for relevant LC review
15:37:21 <logger> I'm logging. I don't understand 'kick JosD', AaronSw.
Try /msg logger help
15:37:22 <JosD> see:
15:37:24 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0081.html
15:37:26 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#9 patrickS
15:37:28 <JosD> Send msg to  Open EBook Forum asking for relevant LC review
15:37:30 <JosD> see:
15:37:32 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0082.html
15:37:35 <JosD> ACTION: 2002-01-24#11 bwm
15:37:36 <JosD> send announcement to chairs list
15:37:38 <JosD> see:
15:37:40 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0176.html
15:37:43 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#12 jjc
15:37:44 <JosD> Send msg to XML C14N WG asking for relevant LC review
15:37:46 <JosD> see:
15:37:48 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0114.html
15:37:50 <JosD> ACTION: 2003-01-24#13 bwm
15:37:52 <JosD> Send msg to RDF interest asking for relevant LC review
15:37:54 <JosD> see:
15:37:56 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Jan/0161.html
15:37:58 <JosD> 7: Soliciting Last Call Reviews
15:38:00 <JosD> 2003-01-24#4  em  Send msg to David of XMLP asking for
relevant LC review
15:38:02 <JosD> 2003-01-24#5  danbri  Send msg to SVG asking for relevant
LC review
15:38:04 <JosD> 2003-01-24#6  danbri  Send msg to XHTML WG asking for
relevant LC review
15:38:07 <JosD> 2003-01-24#7  danbri  Send msg to RDF IG about LC
15:38:08 <JosD> 2003-01-24#10 danbri  remind RSS people to send their
comments to
15:38:10 <JosD>                       www-rdf-comments
15:38:12 <JosD>
15:38:14 <JosD> 8: Handling last call comments.
15:38:17 <JosD> Comments on comment tracking documents:
15:38:18 <JosD>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/
15:38:20 <JosD>
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/issues.rdf
15:38:22 <JosD> What to do with the app source code?
15:38:24 <JosD> DanC suggests editors discretion to make editorial
corrections
15:38:26 <JosD>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0214.html
15:38:28 <JosD> Patrick suggests WG should review whether it considers
issue editorial
15:39:04 <JosD> JosD has joined #rdfcore
15:39:20 <jang> jang: danc just reads out the contents of jang-01
15:39:58 <JosD> ACTION: to review JanG proposed text for testcases
15:39:59 <jang> bwm: accepted?
15:40:20 <jang> ok, cheers
15:40:52 <JosD> [jang-01] resolved with consensus
15:41:03 <jang> ACTION: jang to create test case for jang-01 and send
details to jos
15:43:30 <DanCon> no, Brian, we (the WG) doesn't need to decide a disposion
of every comment. Only those that raise substantive issues.
15:45:01 <DanCon> ah... now I see what you mean by "every comment"; it's
"every comment that resulted in an issue". yes, we have to decide all
those.
15:45:52 <JosD> ======= 11: Comments Review
15:46:45 <JosD> JanG volunteers to make weekly trawl through rdf comments
and check we aren't dropping any.
15:47:03 <JosD> bmw: this is a big help!
15:47:25 <AaronSw>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0170
15:47:27 <bwm> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/
15:47:51 <AaronSw> quoting from
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0128.html
15:48:19 <JosD> jeremy: take e.g. reagle-01
15:49:43 <JosD> DanC: 1. yes the dsign is goofy, but here are the 3
testcases
15:50:00 <JosD> DanC: 2. here is a design change
15:50:31 <JosD> Path: be careful here, may influence other documents
15:52:55 <DanCon> "oh, Jeremy's only moaning at .3dB this week. We're good
to go."
15:52:57 <DanCon> ;-)
15:52:59 <JosD> ========= 12: XML Schema 1.1 Requirements
15:53:09 <jang> q+ aside, if we sort out process would a 10-point bulletted
list of "this is how we successfgully ran our LC process" be helpful to the
wider w3c?
15:53:40 <jang> zakim, if you understand the nature of teh syntactic error
I made then you bloody well ought to try supplying my missing punctuation.
imho
15:53:41 <Zakim> I don't understand 'if you understand the nature of teh
syntactic error I made then you bloody well ought to try supplying my
missing punctuation. imho', jang
15:54:44 <JosD> Jeremy: made 2 desiderata
15:55:44 <JosD> Jeremy: those were made personally; asking for WG blessing;
there could be a 3rd one
15:56:23 <jang> q+ to mention that meta-issue as AOB when everything else
is done (as AOB, brian)
15:56:50 <AaronSw>
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0163.html
15:57:17 <AaronSw> danc proposes to endorse the second comment in above
15:57:27 <AaronSw> (on first class objects)
15:57:57 <JosD> RESOLVED: endorse the First class objects (RQ-23)
15:59:03 <JosD> ... with consensus
16:01:04 <JosD> ACTION: Jeremy to report back XML Schema 1.1 Requirements
RQ-23
16:01:11 <Zakim> -ILRT
16:01:13 <Zakim> -PatH
16:01:41 <Zakim> -PatrickS
16:01:43 <Zakim> -Bwm
16:02:00 <Zakim> -EMiller
16:02:14 <JosD> meeting ADJOURNED
16:02:37 <Zakim> -AaronSw
16:25:22 <AaronSw> AaronSw has left #rdfcore
16:26:43 <Zakim> -JosD
16:27:16 <Zakim> -Jjc
16:27:26 <Zakim> -DanC
16:27:26 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended
17:21:15 <em> em has left #rdfcore
19:33:42 <DanCon> DanCon has left #rdfcore
Received on Friday, 31 January 2003 17:17:04 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:55:25 EDT