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

Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2003-03-14

From: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:38:36 GMT
Message-ID: <7808452.1047584398063.JavaMail.bwm@MCBRIDE-B-7>
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

Time:
10:00:00 Fri Mar 14 2003 in America/New York duration 120 minutes

which is equivalent to
15:00:00 Fri Mar 14 2003 in Europe/London

Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332
irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore

1: Volunteer Scribe


2: Roll Call


3: Review Agenda


4: Next telecon 21 Mar 2003 1100 Boston Time
We have a telecon scheduled for 18 Mar 2003, but:

  o I have another meeting I have to attend at that time
  o Turnout at this weeks extra telecon was poor
  o my request for another chair has met with no response

I propose therefore to cancel the extra telecon next Tuesday.

Volunteer Scribe



5: Minutes of 28 Feb 2003 telecon

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0053.html


6: Minutes of 11 Mar 2003 telecon

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0068.html


7: Confirm Status of Completed Actions

ACTION: 2002-11-01#16 danbri
team contact for publishinging LBase note

ACTION: 2003-02-14#3 em
set up a discussion between RDFCore and	(x)HTML, with the objective to understand each other on the subject of RDF in HTML

ACTION: 2003-02-28#1 em
schedule tuesday teleconference for rdfcore (11th and 18th)

ACTION: 2002-02-28#2 gk
respond to Vassillis

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0063.html

ACTION: 2002-02-28#3 bwm
help respond to Karsten(sp?) question wrt collections

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0328.html

see:
  http://www.w3.org/2003/02/28-rdfcore-irc#T15-49-17

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0507.html

ACTION: 2002-02-28#4 gk
follow up on the concepts implication on pfps-15

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0061.html

ACTION: 2003-02-28#6 gk
 review concepts for use of term [[namespace]]

see:
  http://lhttp//www.w3.org/2003/02/28-rdfcore-irc#T16-27-27)

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0062.html

ACTION: 2003-02-28#7 daveB
review syntax for use of term [[namespace]]

see:
  http://www.w3.org/2003/02/28-rdfcore-irc#T16-27-14

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0056.html

ACTION: 2003-02-28#8 danbri
review schema for use of term [[namespace]]

see:
  http://www.w3.org/2003/02/28-rdfcore-irc#T16-27-01

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Feb/0241.html

ACTION: 2003-02-28#9 bwm
with patH review semantics for use of term [[namespace]] 

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0094.html

ACTION: 2002-02-28#11 danc
danc to convey resolution of danc-01 issue to PatH 

see:
  http://www.w3.org/2003/02/28-rdfcore-irc#T16-39-19

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0095.html

ACTION: 2003-03-11#1 jjc
Make a proposal that abstract syntax contains canonicalized XML with comments

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0074.html

ACTION: 2003-03-11#15 bwm
 Re-post boilerplate for response to comments

see:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0096.html

ACTION: 2003-03-11#3 bwm
Move issue rdfms-assertion to postponed

see:
  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-assertion



8: XML Schema 1.1 Requirements
2003-02-14#1  daveB  respond immediately to XML Schema 1.1 with a date for
                     " we'll get back to you"
2003-02-14#2  daveB  liase with jjc to work up a response on the XML Schema
                     1.1 requirements


See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0163.html
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Feb/0078.html


9: Status on Incoming Last Call Comments
Editors please note the editorial comments from the xml schema WG.
These have not been recorded in the comments list as they can
presumably be dealt with at editors discretion.

Otherwise, is the LCC comments list uptodate?  VDL (aka schema)?


See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/#microschedule


10: Issue pfps-17,18,19,20,21
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-17
... and similar

17 is dealt with:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0503.html

and pfps has indicated that the resolution is satisfactory and for the 
other docs.

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0505.html  

Propose:

 o throughout the docs
    - the term [xml namespace] be used to refer to xml namespaces
    - the term [vocabulary] be used to refer to collections of names
      (RDF URI References]
 o the editors update their docs accordingly
 o bwm responds to pfps for all these issues



11: Issues macgregor-01, macgregor-02

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#macgregor-01
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#macgregor-02

These are now moot as indicated by suggested by jjc in
 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0040.html

Propose these are closed on the grounds the offending text has been removed.


See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


12: Issues reagle-01, reagle-02

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#reagle-01
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#reagle-02

Proposal from Jeremy:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0074.html



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


13: Issue williams-01

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#williams-01

Graham's proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0059.html  



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


14: Issue pfps-03

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-03

Pat's message:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0069.html



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


15: Issue pfps-04,pfps-05,pfps-06,pfps-07,pfps-10

  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-10

Pat's message:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0069.html

Propose:

  Accept these comments and refer pfps to the updated editors draft.

Note:  I intend to have a category of pending responses where a commentor
reserves judgement on the resolution of a comment.



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


16: Issue pfps-08

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-08

Pat's message:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0069.html



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


17: Issue qu-01

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#qu-01

Propose:

  Reject: When we discussed this we decided to allow rdf:_nnn
to be applied to resources other than containers, noting that the
original schema WG had omitted such a constraint.


See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


18: Issue qu-02

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#qu-02

Jeremy's Proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0071.html



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


19: Issue xmlsch-08

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-08

Dave's Proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0077.html

[[Summary: closed. explanation, no action]]

i.e. we respond agreeing that there are good reasons why its different,
indicating sensitivity to possible confusion and indicating the steps
we have taken to minimise such confusion.



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


20: Issue xmlsch-09

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-09

Dave's Proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0077.html

[[Summary: closed. explanation, no action]]

Jeremy's Followup:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0079.html

[[ wouldn't be surprised 
if the text could do with editorial polish on this point.]]



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


21: Issue xmlsch-10

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-10

Dave's Proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0077.html

[[closed.  we don't have to do this, out of charter ??]]

Jeremy's Followup:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0079.html




See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


22: Issue xmlsch-11

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-11

Dave's Proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0077.html

[[closed. explanation, no changes]]

Jeremy's Followup:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0079.html



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


23: Issue xmlsch-12

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-12

Dave's Proposal:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0077.html

Jeremy's Followup:

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0079.html



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/


24: Issue horrocks-01

  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#horrocks-01

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Mar/0081.html
  



See:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/



------------------------------------------------------------
This agenda was produced by Jema, the Jena WG assistant, running on Jena 2
Received on Thursday, 13 March 2003 14:38:48 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:56:13 EDT