Re: Minutes for review: Aug 23 2006 15:00Z GRDDL WG meeting

I did send out the correct time, once in EST format, via e-mail [1], and
it's listed as 15:00z on the agenda, which is correct, yet I didn't even
check the local time link on the agenda [3]. So humblest apologies Chime
- I've fixed the link and so it should be fixed for future meeting, and
thanks for noticing that, just wish we could have had you at the meeting.

Chime - sorry for missing you! We've just tabled your use-case
discussion items to the meeting next week, although there was some
interest that your XML Clinical Data Use-case be included as part of a
2-part primer (the other part being either the HTML-based scheduling or
guitar?-buying use-case). If you are interested in this possibility,
definitely e-mail back. In essence, it would require working on the
example of extracting RDF from a few clinical data XML files and then
querying them via SPARQL, and seeing if this could be written up with
some running code and a readable step-by-step tutorial.

 The resolution made today was to do a re-occurring meeting at 11:00
EST/15:00Z on Wed. I'll send that out in an e-mail to the list ASAP.

[1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2006Aug/0062
[2]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2006Aug/0089.html
[3]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/weekly-agenda.html

               cheers,
                      harry

Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
>
> FYI: The link to local times for the agenda (currently) at
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/weekly-agenda.html says 3:30pm EST
> - which is when I was expecting the meeting to happen - hence my not
> being there today.
>
> I didn't see a resolution about reoccuring meeting times in the
> current minutes, so can someone please confirm what the concensus is?
>
> Chimezie Ogbuji
> Lead Systems Analyst
> Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
> Cleveland Clinic Foundation
> 9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
> Cleveland, Ohio 44195
> Office: (216)444-8593
> ogbujic@ccf.org
>
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Dan Connolly wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 17:39 +0100, Ian Davis wrote:
>>> Minutes are at:
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-grddl-wg-minutes.html
>>>
>>> Note any fixes, replying to this message (be sure to CC
>>> public-grddl-wg@w3.org)
>>
>> Thanks for getting these out right away... but...
>> I'd like scribes to do a little bit of editing on the
>> minutes between when the machine produces them and
>> when you send mail to the WG.
>>
>> The reason I suggest attaching the HTML is
>> that the rest of you aren't authorized to edit
>> http://www.w3.org/2006/08/23-grddl-wg-minutes.html
>>
>> At a minimum, take off the - DRAFT - and remove
>> the diagnostics at the bottom. But better to actually
>> read them over to make sure they make sense, and
>> correct anything that's obviously wrong.
>>
>> If it turns out that the raw minutes produced
>> by machine are sufficient for our purposes, then
>> maybe we should accept these minutes as is. But
>> my experience is that it's worth taking 10 or 20
>> minutes to clean them up a bit.
>>
>> I haven't looked at this week's record closely yet.
>> Maybe it's good enough as is.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
>> D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
>>
>>
>


-- 
		-harry

Harry Halpin,  University of Edinburgh 
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426

Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2006 17:28:00 UTC