Minutes of RDF DAWG telcon 2004-05-04 for review

Minutes of RDF DAWG telcon 2004-05-04 for review

RDF Data Access WG telcon
2004-05-04 14:30 UTC


IRC log

1. convene, take roll, review record, agenda

Present: Howard Katz, Yoshio Fukushige, Bryan Thompson, Rob Shearer, Dan Connolly, Kendall Clark, Steve Harris, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Andy Seaborne, Pat Hayes, Kevin Wilkinson, Farrukh Najmi, Janne Saarela, Jos De Roo, Dave Beckett

Regrets: Dirk Colaert, Alberto Reggiori

Next meeting: 2004-05-11 14:30 UTC
scribe: Dave Beckett

2. record of telcon 15 Apr, Amsterdam f2f meeting

Minutes of 15 Apr teleconference
as ammended by
ACCEPTED as a true record

Record of face-to-face meeting
revision 1.51.
is supported by Dan Connolly and several others.

3. Use cases draft status

The use cases document
is now at version 1.38.

ACTION: RobS to generate some RDF for the use cases
DONE: EricP to generate a query discussed in the use cases document
ACTION: Kendall and Alberto to work on section 5.1.3 of this document
DONE: Kendall to look at Yoshio's use cases
DONE: AndyS, EricP to review draft of this document; feeback noted:

The diagrams created by Eric for this document were discussed; that they are possibly in the wrong place in the document and need a bit of svg fiddling.

Andy Seaborne pointed at that we still don't have a use case to demonstrate the "tell me about" requirement, although the Motorcycle Parts use case (section 3.2 in the latest version of the document) partially illustrates it.
Rob Shearer pointed out that Steve Harris was planning on writing up a "browser" application which would make use of "tell me about" functionality.
The Motorcycle Parts use case was discussed, with Pat Hayes concerned that it was quite ambitious and others (Dan Connolly, Rob Shearer) mentioning that the working group didn't need to completely solve every use case.

Andy Seaborne proposed creating a separate mailing list for discussion of this document, with Dan Connolly supporting the idea. There were mixed feelings on this, with Dan suggesting that the working group list be for internal working group discussion, while another list be made for comments and questions from the wider community.

ACTION: EricP to set up a public comment list, and to work with DanC to choose a name for it

Discussion turned back to the images in the use case document, with those images moved to the correct locations for version 1.39 of the document.
Dan Connolly and others questioned which diagrams were meant to represent RDF data and which were meant to represent the queries being performed against that data, and expressed a desire for a clear distinction between the two.
There was some support for the idea of illustraing the data applicable to a use case, but not attempting to show the query used in the solution.
Dan Connolly proposed moving the discussion to the mailing list, and that more discussion should take place there.

The publication schedule was discussed, based on Kendall's proposal:

This schedule leaves two more teleconferences and does not allow publication before the end of WWW.
Rob Shearer requested clarification on just what publication of such a document would mean. Publication of this document would not mean that consensus has been reached on any of the requirements within; adoption of requirements happens independently. It was suggested that it be made very clear that the document specifies only candidate requirements, and an "objectives" section was started in version 1.39 of the document for those needs on which there is less consensus.

Discussion moved to the "Date and Time" requirement, and a general discussion of datatypes, with wide support for the idea that mentioning only Date and Time in the document was probably undesirable. Dan Connolly proposed that each requirement be discussed in order.

ACTION: Andy Seaborne and Jean-François to rewrite 3.1

The "variable bindings" requirement was addressed.

ACTION: Pat Hayes to summarize query/binding experience from DQL

Pat Hayes and Bryan Thompson objected to 3.3, "extensibility", particularly the title. Other titles were proposed, including "extensible value testing".

Vote was held on this requirement (with changed title).

Objecting: Bryan Thompson
Abstaining: Rob, Janne, Eric, Jean-François
Failing to object or abstain: Howard Katz, Jos, DaveB, SteveH, Janne, Yoshio, Kendall Clark, Andy Seaborne, Pat Hayes, Kevin
ACCEPTED requirement 3.3

Bryan Thompson, Rob Shearer, and Yoshio felt the vote was premature.
Requirement 3.4 (Subgraph results) was addressed; Dan Connolly recommended moving that discussion to email.
ACTION: EricP to write up implemention experience for 3.4
ACTION: Steve Harris to express objections to 3.4

Requirement 3.5 regarding queries without a network connection was discussed.
RESOLVED: by consensus to adopt "local queries" as ammended s/not depend on the access protocol and should// 

Received on Friday, 7 May 2004 14:06:40 UTC