- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:30:40 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
RDFCore teleconference: 2003-09-26
Time:
10:00:00 Fri Sep 26 2003 in America/New York duration 60 minutes +
possible 15 minute extension
which is equivalent to
15:00:00 Fri Sep 26 2003 in Europe/London
Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332
irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore
danbri to chair.
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0245.html
IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2003/09/26-rdfcore-irc
Summary of decisions:
to replace lBase material in semantics document with informative reference
Summary of actions:
JJC add nfc text to Concepts as proposed
JJC review this document to take specific account of formal objection
from I18N
DanC review jjc's revised I18N document in the context of request for
PR, looking for problems
EricM review jeremy's document for inclusion in proposal to advance
JJC draft proposal that whitespace processing is part of L2V map
PatH update semantics document to replace lbase appendix with
informative note and reference
BWM link issue list to supporting documents (such as JJC I18N issue
review)
DanBri record Karsten's dissent in rdfs spec
--swebscrape:
date:20030926
--
1: scribe
Graham volunteered
2: Roll Call
Present:
Dave Beckett
Brian McBride
Graham Klyne
Pat Hayes
Dan Brickley
Mike Dean
Dan Connolly
Jeremy Carroll
Eric Miller
Regrets:
Jos de Roo
Patrick Stickler
Jan Grant
Frank Manola
3: Review Agenda
One additional item:
request for rdf:RDF to be optional in more circumstances.
cf.
4: Next telecon 3 October 2003 1000 Boston Time
Chair?
Volunteer Scribe
[[[NOTE: the next-meeting data in the agenda was incorrect]]]
[[[No chair or volunteer scribe noted for next week]]]
5: Minutes of 19 Sep 2003 telecon
see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0213.html
No objections.
6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions
7: Confirm Status of Withdrawn Actions
8: Status of Misc Actions
See current action list 2003-09-25,
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0232.html
[[[This was a somewhat rambling discussion, with the three agenda
items run together, and the scribe had great difficulty following
what was being discussed. What follows is probably incomplete]]]
Brian noted that he will update the action list based on
comments sent to the mailing list.
Discussion of NFC action.
(cf. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0234.html
and following messages)
ACTION: JJC add nfc text to Concepts as proposed
Jeremy's text relating to I18N concerns to accompany request for PR:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/att-0259/i18n-part.html
While we were talking, the following document was made public as a formal
objection from I18N to our current design:
http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2003/rdf
ACTION: JJC review this document to take specific account of formal
objection from I18N
ACTION: DanC review jjc's revised I18N document in the context of request
for PR, looking for problems
ACTION: EricM review jeremy's document for inclusion in proposal to advance
Whitespace processing for XML schema datatypes:
Brian has had private discussions, and the short answer seems to be:
"3" and " 3 " being different isn't going to be popular.
But: if one asks is " 3 " in the lexical space of xsd:integer? Answer no.
But ask if in the context of XML, is " 3 " an integer? Answer yes.
Suggests preparing a proposal that whitespace processing is part of the
L2V mapping of XML schema datatypes.
ACTION: JJC draft proposal that whitespace processing is part of L2V map
Eric working on securing a puiblication date for LC2.
Not yet confirmed, but aiming for 10 Oct 2003.
Action continues.
Danbri working on text for abstract/status of document section
Action continues.
9: defusing semantics objections (lbase appendix)
Brian in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0242.html
Two of Peter's objections concern the translation to LBase. I'm
wondering whether we might defuse these objections by replacing the
LBase appendix with a suitably worded informative reference to the
LBase
note.
see also 'not accepteds' re semantics (pfps) summarised in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0241.html
Proposed: we do just this from danbri,
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0244.html
RESOLVED: to replace lBase material in semantics document with informative
reference
ACTION: PatH update semantics document to replace lbase appendix with
informative note and reference
(ensuring that the revised wording suitably addresses the concerns raised,
so that if there is an error in the lbase, such error doesn't contaminate
the RDF semantics.)
10: collecting objections
what exactly do we need to record w.r.t. known objections (esp I18N)
prior to LC2? See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0237.html
and nearby.
Hopefully 2 of 5 semantics objections are addressed above.
Concenring completeness of closure rules, they never have been complete
and to make them so would be a major effort at this stage.
ACTION: bwm link issue list to supporting documents (such as JJC I18N issue
review)
Concerning objection on schema, pfps-12
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-12
This was co-submitted by Karsten Tolle, who agrees the revised text is
accurate but does not like the design choice it describes.
ACTION: DanBri record Karsten's dissent in rdfs spec
11: next steps - planning for LC2
What needs to be done?
- couch in terms of refining a 'request to advance' doc
(old draft http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030331-advance.html)
and removing obstacles such that we're happy to send it.
What issues/comments do we need to respond to.
Schedule? - update after SW CG discussion this week
Discussion of issue tracking. Having separate LC issue list causes
some problems, as it can result in duplication of existing decisions.
[[[Outcome?]]]
12. AOB
Request concerning optional <rdf:RDF>
[[[Outcome?]]]
swebscrape:N3:python: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/scripts/minutes2n3.py
------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Friday, 26 September 2003 13:48:15 UTC