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

Minutes of 2003-10-03 RDFCore WG telcon

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 19:50:01 +0100
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20031003195001.41325ce9.dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>

2003-10-03 RDFCore WG meeting

Agenda:
     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Oct/0036.html

Transcript:
     http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2003-10-03

swebscrape:N3:python:http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/scripts/minutes2n3.py
date: 2003-10-03


2: Roll call
   Dave Beckett (scribe)
   Jeremy Carroll
   Dan Connolly
   Mike Dean
   Pat Hayes
   Graham Klyne
   Frank Manola
   Brian McBride (chair)
   Eric Miller
   Patrick Stickler

Regrets:
   Dan Brickley
   Jan Grant
   Jos De Roo

3: Thanks

Brian expressed thanks for all those busy helping work on the LC2
issues in public and private "they know who they are"

4: Review Agenda
AOB: DTD Validation of RDF/XML (FrankM)
AOB: XML Schema Review (EricM)

5: Next telecon 10 Oct 2003 1000 Boston Time

Chair Brian McBride


6: Minutes of 26 Sep 2003 telecon as revised

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0267.html
as revised
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0273.html
approved


7: Confirm Status of Completed Actions

All done


8: Confirm Status of Withdrawn Actions

Noted 20030926#8 withdrawn, no action needed.


9: Status of Misc Actions


10: Update on last call comments

pfps-04 and pfps-05 both on entailment merged into one last call
objection with PFPS's agreement.


11: Literals must be in NFC

Proposed: Connolly/W3C
  To change NFC MUST to SHOULD, contingent on confirmation from I18N
  WG and with some editorial discretion for the editors to take
  advice from peers.

Seconded: Carroll/HP.  Against: none:  abstain: none.


ACTION 2003-10-03#1 jjc continue NFC dicussion with I18N
ACTION 2003-10-03#2 jjc change concepts NFC MUST to SHOULD
ACTION 2003-10-03#3 daveb change syntax NFC MUST to SHOULD


12: Meeting requirements for last call.

Outstanding objections document
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/objections.html


LC1 Issue xmlsch-02

Discussion of (member only) draft comments from XML Schema WG
  http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2003/10/xmlschema.rdf.comments.responses.html#id2612457
and the whitespace processing xmlsch-02 issue.

A straw poll was held on the proposal by JJC in
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Oct/0003.html
and did not receive strong enough support for that change. 
The default of no document changes on this issue remains.

ACTION 2003-10-03#4 bwm ensure last call comment disposition is up to date


"rdf:RDF should be optional" - Mark Baker
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0358.html

  Proposal: Beckett/ILRT
      To allow rdf/xml documents to start with a nodeElement
      production in addition to rdf:RDF.

Seconded: Carroll/HP.  Against: none.  Abstain: Hayes/IHMC, Dean/BBN

ACTION 2003-10-03#5 jjc check the w3c rdf validator handles omitted rdf:RDF
ACTION 2003-10-03#6 daveb change rdf/xml syntax to allow nodeELement as root
ACTION 2003-10-03#7 daveb add test case to test allowing omitted rdf:RDF
ACTION 2003-10-03#8 frankm change primer to have an omitted rdf:RDF example


"Internal DTD Examples Invalidate the RDF/XML Documents" - Dennis E. Hamilton
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0005.html

Discussion, no new information or change seen as necessary. FrankM to
respond.
  DaveB noted http://dublincore.org/documents/2002/07/31/dcmes-xml/


"comments on 26 September version of RDF Semantics document" - PFPS
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0363.html
PatH has responded to all of these points


"RDF Semantics: partial review" - Herman ter Horst
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0373.html
PatH has adopted some wording changes to clear up things here.
JJC noted that more comments may appear as this is a partial review.

LC2 review period for other groups
web services - interested, nobody yet signed up to do the work
xml core     - met and agreed to provide responses, want 4 weeks
xml schema   - on agenda in WG meeting today, expect to say yes
htmlwg       - expect to review it, no comments on what timescale

ACTION 2003-10-03#9 ericm chase other groups on the 'heads up list' re reviews for RDF LC2 WDs

Document status and critical paths
concepts  - missing SOTD, no links scripts yet
primer    - Need to update rdf:RDF change just made and using
            non-validating XML parsers; will update by 6th Oct.
semantics - tiny further edit needed for NFC
syntax    - none


Script for links
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Oct/0049.html

ACTION 2003-10-03#10 ericm produce boiler place for RDF LC2 SOTD template. If done earlier, editors will add document-specific bits.
ACTION 2003-10-03#11 daveb work with danbri's script for fixing up internal references

Details:
  Reference urls like this (for schema):
    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-schema-20030117/
  Publication date (put this on the documents and in references):
    10 October 2003

Docs should be ready by Wednesday 8 October 2003
Change logs should be checked that they are correct and mention
non-editorial changes; ones that are visible from a test case.

A suggestion that HTML diffs from previous versions may be produced
(bwm to investigate).


Proposal: Hayes/IMWC
  Move all 6 working drafts to second Last Call

Seconded: Carroll/HP.  Against: none.  Abstain: none.


Review of critical path people/groups

primer    - want to see change made to rdf:RDF in syntax by daveb
concepts  - waiting for some i18n feedback (Martin Duerst primarily)
syntax    - none
schema    - none,  we believe it is ready and unchanged
semantics - done, path happy to get eyeballs
            JJC suggested telling reviewers looking at the current WDs
            to stop for now, thank them and note new LC2 WD out soon.

test cases - wording about negative entailment

ACTION 2003-10-03#12 daveb either work with jang to change the negative entailment test wording, or do it himself by monday 6th October


A new version of the LBase note will be published to go with the LC2
WDs with some small changes; it may be published with them if it is
ready, not critical to go that day.


Meeting closed

---

13: Handling lc2 comments.

Not reached
Received on Friday, 3 October 2003 14:51:22 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Friday, 3 October 2003 14:51:26 EDT