- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 16:40:32 -0400
- To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2011/03/29-awwsw-minutes.html
and below in plain text.
------------------------------------------------------------
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
AWWSW
29 Mar 2011
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/03/29-awwsw-irc
Attendees
Present
jar, DBooth, mhausenblas
Regrets
Chair
Jonathan Rees
Scribe
dbooth
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Draft document
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/latest/
* [5]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
Draft document [6]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/latest/
[6] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/latest/
jar: Still trying to learn what to do on this doc before sending for
wider review.
... heart of the doc is sec 5.5. and 5.6
[7]http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/latest/#chimera
[7] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/awwsw/issue57/latest/#chimera
michael: In the glossary, the def of "deref". Why URIs with fragIDs
are not dereferenceable? You remove the fragid and then deref.
jar: HTTP doesnt' let you put the fragid in the request, so in that
sense the URI isn't dereferenceable. Also, look at 3986 and see how
they use the term.
dbooth: need to distinguish between direct and indirect
dereferencing? Indirect is FYN.
<jar_> The fragment's format and resolution is therefore
<jar_> dependent on the media type [RFC2046] of a potentially
retrieved
<jar_> representation, even though such a retrieval is only
performed if the
<jar_> URI is dereferenced.
<mhausenblas> [[
<mhausenblas> A URI is dereferenceable if it may be used with a
standard access mechanism to retrieve information, or to perform
some other action on an associated resource ([rfc-3986] section
1.2.2). URIs possessing fragment identifiers (#) are by definition
not dereferenceable. http: URIs without fragment identifiers are
dereferenceable if some HTTP method (or equivalent) is successful
(2xx response). Some URIs belonging to some other URI schemes are
also
<mhausenblas> dereferenceable.
<mhausenblas> ]]
jar: Could clarify def in glossary.
dbooth: Sounds good. Suggest using the term "directly
dereferenceable" throughout.
jar: Another possibility is to change "URI" to "fragmentless URI"
where appropriate.
<jar_> 'slash URI' or 'fragmentless URI'
"fragid-less"
jar: "hashless"?
<mhausenblas> +1
dbooth, michael: good
jar: I can define "hashless URI" in the glossary.
dbooth: I have reservations about this trying to address protocols
other than HTTP.
jar: larry masinter is on the TAG, and he'd want to see other
schemes included.
michael: what did you mean by this in 2.2:
[[
[This use case keeps coming up (e.g. tdb:) but I don't think anyone
is seriously interested in it. Need text to admit that it's
important but not important enough to talk about.]
]]
jar: whether in the LD world, do you ever have a 303 redirect that
does not contain the URI being defined.
dbooth: [8]http://thing-described-by.org/ does cover this case.
... I think the topic maps people may do that.
[8] http://thing-described-by.org/
jar: you get different answers whether you assume that the URI
refers to the primary topic or not.
dbooth: I think this issue comes up more when the definition is
expressed in natural language -- not when it is expressed in RDF.
... If the def is expressed in RDF I don't think there is a reliable
way to distinguish between cases 2.1 and 2.2.
jar: the question is whether we need to cover case 2.2 -- whether
anyone is using this technique.
Michael: Not sure how the structure of sec 3 relates to the use
cases in sec 2.
jar: Section 3 is related to use case 2.1. It doesn't seem to use
the word "somehow" any more.
dbooth: would be helpful to make the questions explicit in the use
case, e.g., "Where should Alice publish the def?"
... sec 3.1, what does "Put the definition in the document in which
the URI occurs. " mean?
... give names to documents that are mentioned, to be clear about
which one is meant.
... The doc seems to talk both about the mechanics of how a def is
provided and obtained, and about the semantics of what a URI means,
as 5.6 talks about IRs.
jar: 5.6 needs to talk about both, to make sense.
... looking at 5.5
dbooth: Statements like "Carol can straighten this out" suggest that
there is a problem that *needs* to be straightened out. But if Ch
can both have foo:mass and have a dc:creator, then there is no
problem to be straightened out.
<jar_> DB and I have been arguing about this for years and have
never managed to communicate
And in an *application*, which is the point of doing this, a CH can
perfectly fine have both.
wow, still 404 after 12 minutes:
[9]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/29-awwsw-minutes.html
[9] http://www.w3.org/2011/03/29-awwsw-minutes.html
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [10]scribe.perl version 1.135
([11]CVS log)
$Date: 2011/03/29 20:36:32 $
_________________________________________________________
[10] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[11] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Scribe.perl diagnostic output
[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20
Check for newer version at [12]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002
/scribe/
[12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/
Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)
No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: dbooth
Inferring Scribes: dbooth
Default Present: jar, DBooth, mhausenblas
Present: jar DBooth mhausenblas
Got date from IRC log name: 29 Mar 2011
Guessing minutes URL: [13]http://www.w3.org/2011/03/29-awwsw-minutes.ht
ml
People with action items:
[13] http://www.w3.org/2011/03/29-awwsw-minutes.html
WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.
End of [14]scribe.perl diagnostic output]
[14] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
--
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/
Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.
Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2011 20:41:02 UTC