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

Minutes 20th June 2003

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 20:05:01 +0200
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-id: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDOEMICBAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Summary:

Decisions:
"The value space of XML literals is a set of exclusively canonicalized XML"

New actions:
 JanG review OWL Test Cases
 jjc clarify scope of review of OWL Test Cases
 em get W3c mgmt feedback on I18N issue
 jjc Dig out cannes minutes
 danc give feedback to martin dürst


Agenda:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0134.html

IRC:
   http://www.w3.org/2003/06/20-rdfcore-irc   (403)
   http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2003-06-20

date: 20030620

============

1: scribe call for volunteer

Scribe is jeremy.



2: Roll Call

regrets: mike, patrick
present:
jjc, FrankM, bwm, DanC, JanG, DanBri
Jos EMiller GrahamKlyne
and PatH (very late - during schedule).


3: Review Agenda

AOBs added as in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0151.html
(however we ran out of time, and did not reach them)


4: Next telecon 27 Jun 2003 1000 Boston Time
Volunteer Scribe: DanC volunteered, with EM agreeing to be back-up



5: Minutes of 16 May 2003 telecon

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0199.html
approved


6: Minutes of 06 Jun 2003 telecon

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0067.html
approved


7: Confirm Status of Completed Actions

ACTION: 2003-02-07#2 jjc
ensure CONCEPTS is accurate on its use of subject/predicate/object
terminology
ACTION: 2002-02-28#10 jjc
update concepts to reflect disposition of danc-01
ACTION: 2003-03-21#6 jjc
 review concepts #section-rdf-graph in light of williams-01 and circulate
changes to WG
ACTION: 2003-03-21#7 jjc
review concetps #section-blank-nodes in light of williams-01 decision and
circulate proposed changes (if any) to the wg
ACTION: 2003-03-14#9 jjc
Check the details of the denotation of XMLLiterals in section 3.1 of
Semantics WD draft
ACTION: 2003-03-28#9 jjc
update Concepts in light of XML Schema LC review editorial comments
ACTION: 2003-03-28#15 jjc
add anchors to Concepts for def of canonicalistion, and for Impl Note
ACTION: 2003-03-28#16 jjc
update proposal on tex-01
ACTION: 2003-04-04#11 jjc
Produce a test case for tex-01
ACTION: 2003-04-11#8 jjc
editorial changes reflecting not changing namespace URI
ACTION: 2003-04-11#10 jjc
update CONCEPTS in light of decision pfps 22 pfps 23
ACTION: 2003-04-11#12 jjc
update CONCEPTS in light of decision pfps 16
ACTION: 2003-04-11#14 jjc
update CONCEPTS in light of decision williams 01
ACTION: 20030502#12 jjc
update the Concepts WD with words after discussion with PatH and GK based on
2003Apr/0368.html text
ACTION: 20030509#6 jjc
Make typed literal changes in concepts.
ACTION: 20030509#7 jjc
Review concepts to make consequential changes concerning typed
ACTION: 20030509#9 jjc
Provide anchor for rdf:XMLLiteral to Pat Hayes
ACTION: 20030509#21 jjc
Updated concepts in lite of xmlsch-02 decision
ACTION: 2003-05-16#5 daveb
respond to commenter regarding timbl-03 decision
ACTION: 2003-05-16#7 daveb
update syntax document in light of timbl-03 decision
ACTION: 2003-05-16#13 jjc
update conepts document per xmlsch-06
ACTION: 20030606#10 jjc
Ask WebOnt for clear request to RDF Core for review of OWL Test
ACTION: 20030606#11 jjc
integrate value space of xml literal.

8: Confirm Status of Withdrawn Actions

ACTION: 2002-11-22#5 jjc
check that RDF Concepts does not allow a synonym for rdf:XMLLiteral
ACTION: 20030606#7 Path
to draft vass-01 response for the wg to send

jjc noted that RDF Concepts *does* allow a synonym for rdf:XMLLiteral


9: Review of Owl test cases
ACTION JanG review OWL Test Cases
ACTION jjc clarify scope of review of OWL Test Cases




10: value space of rdf:XMLLiteral
See:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0101.html
Discussion of this item started, we then jumped to item 13, (for most of the
telecon), we then came back and completed this item.
The initial discussion presented jjc's proposed definition of value space,
duplicating:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0150

** after discussion of item 13
15:15:00 <jjcscribe> back to value space of XMLLiteral

discussion included
XML equality is not hard, rather too easy, lots of answers.
We had the requirement to have equality over XML. The specs of the
consortium that had this were the c14n specs; so that's the basis of our
design.

JJC proposes, Jos seconds:
"The value space of XML literals is a set of exclusively canonicalized XML"
no abstentions, no opposition.
RESOLVED


13: Post last call comment from I18N

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0025.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0023.html
see:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0132.html

A lot of discussion (56 minutes).

Highlights from IRC:

I18N msg treatment of parseType="Literal" should be dependent on  whether
there is XML markup (excluding entities) inside string.
DanC suggests folliowng I18N suggestion.

A change to the parser - parseType="Literal" with no embedded mark-up
generates plain literal.

Can we reject this on the grounds of lateness?

*is* XML a tree structure, or does in *encode* a tree structure

Does distinguishing XML and non-XML conflict with not distinguishing text
from an identical text?

Consider <prop parseType="Literal">foo &amp; bar </> vs <prop>foo &amp;
bar</>

danc: the I18N group has not convinced RDF Core.

I had this on an agenda with tim ...

Is this information consistent with cannes? No, it is not.

ACTION em get W3c mgmt feedback on I18N issue
ACTION jjc Dig out cannes minutes
ACTION danc give feedback to martin dürst


11: Datatypes types in concepts
No discussion.
Moved to e-mail.


12: Language identifier v language tag

The concepts editors heard a preference for "tag".


14: Schedule
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jun/0133.html

primer aims to be ready 1st July
concepts is ready
syntax is, or will be ready
schema waiting on peter a bit

discussion of completeness claim in semantics
discussion of normativity of entailment rules

no one spoke in favour of dropping the entailment rules

The chair proposed that closure rules remains in semantics doc and claim of
completeness remains.
However, no formal decision was made.



15: Responses to Owl comments
Not reached.





swebscrape:N3:python:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/scripts/minutes2n3.py
Received on Friday, 20 June 2003 14:05:27 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:58 EDT