- From: Howard Katz <howardk@fatdog.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 14:50:41 -0700
- To: "RDF Data Access Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi all, No feedback or corrections on last week's minutes? It's hard to believe I did such a perfect job of it. In fact, I know I didn't. I didn't catch the name of whoever offered to scribe tomorrow. Can somebody let me know so I can amend the formal record? Thanks, Howard > From: Howard Katz [mailto:howardk@fatdog.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 2:38 PM > To: RDF Data Access Working Group > Subject: Minutes of RDF DAWG telcon 2004-05-25 for review > > Minutes of RDF DAWG telcon 2004-05-25 for review > > RDF Data Access WG telcon > 2004-05-25 14:30 UTC > > Agenda > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0447.html > > IRC log > not currently available online. attached. > > > AGENDUM: 1. Convene, take roll, review record, agenda > > Present: Dan Connolly, Howard Katz, Kevin Wilkinson, Janne > Saarela, Andy Seaborne, Kendall Clark, Yoshio Fukushige, Daniel > Krech, Farrukh Najmi, Jean-Francois Baget, Eric Prud'hommeaux, > Tim Berners-Lee, Bryan Thompson > > Next meeting: 2004-06-01 15:30 UTC > scribe: [HOWARD: somebody volunteered for this. Who?] > > > Minutes of RDF DAWG telcon 2004-05-11 for review > From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk> > Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 20:42:21 +0100 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0385.html > > as amended 12 May 2004 16:39:14 -0500 in > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0386.html > > [ACCEPTED as a true record of our last meeting] > > > ACTION DanC: inform the TAG of the conflict between sec13.9 of the HTTP > spec and TAG's recommendation on issue 7 > > [DONE, pointer not yet available due to problems with the archive] > > > AGENDUM: 2. Use Cases & Requirements Draft > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/UseCases > v 1.89++ > > ACTION AndyS, DanielK, BryanT: Review UseCases as of 2004-05-14 > preparing to report to the DAWG at 2004-05-25 telcon. > > Andy: > "I would be happy to publish this version[1.74] as our working > document." [1] > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0414.html > Bryan: > "Excellent work! I would vote to release this version (per-or post any > editorial changes based on final comments) as our first working > draft." [2] > [2] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0461.htm > > DanC: we seem to have lots of support for publishing > Kendall: doc has been stable for a week, in good shape quality-wise > DanC: Bryan's review [2] was thorough > > Bryan: I would vote this document up > Kendall: title has been changed as per DanC's request > EricP: is available through Saturday to handle publishing mechanics > Kendall: proposes finishing by Thursday > EricP: regrets for June 1 > DanC: will try to finish by 31may but no bets, CVS still having > difficulties > > PROPOSED to publish > "DAWG Use Cases and Requirements" > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/UseCases > as a W3C Working Draft > (after light editorial fixes agreed by Kendal > and DanC|EricP such as spelling out DAWG in > the title, plus elaborated > Status Of This Document and any other changes > required by W3C publishing rules). > > Kendall: title has been changed > > [RESOLVED: to publish] > > Yoshio: will discussion continue on document issues after publication? > DanC: certainly. best way to initiate discussion is to submit > proposed text. > DanC: primary purpose of this version is to invite outside > feedback. Those with substantive suggestions are invited to join > the wg. we'll need to get more careful on last call. > > DanC: who's subscribed to the comments list? > EricP: currently just Kendall > DanC: we're obliged to respond to comments. If substantive, the > entire wg should discuss them. > Kendall: if comments are minor, I'll handle them, otherwise pass > them on the group > DanC: be polite to commenters. Say thank you! > DanC: people are invited to subscribe, but it's not required. > EricP: confirms that people can subscribe by mailing > public-rdf-dawg-comments-request w/ Subject: subscribe > > AGENDUM: 3. Additional Use Cases > > Kendall: queries what to do with Nick Gibbons new uc > DanC: let's take up after publication of the uc doc > > ACTION DaveB: write up this educational metadata UC > [continues] > > ACTION: Kendall: consider the larger comments from Brian and > Yoshio post-publication > > AGENDUM: 4. Requirements > > [NOTA: <Zakim> says 'agendum 4. "Requirements" taken up [from DanC_]"' > HOWARD doesn't know what this means] > > AGENDUM: Have any proposals achieved consensus recently? > > Andy felt Human Readable Syntax had done so > DanC requested deferral as one main proponent not present > > AGENDUM: Refine requirements by evaluating designs? > > DanC called for volunteers. should require 1-2 weeks, you should > not be an author of the design you review. Three at bats: > > ACTION: AndyS to review SeRQL > ACTION: Bryan Thompson to review joseki > ACTION: EricP to review RDQL > > Kendall: recently spammed language survey can be borrowed from > > AGENDUM: 5. Test materials > > ACTION SteveH: to draft and maintain a list of test sketch cases, > including x < y, x < 18. > [some progress made; continues] > > AndyS: happy we are publishing! > Kendall: yes > > Adjourned > > Next meeting 2004-06-01 14:30 UTC > >
Received on Monday, 31 May 2004 17:50:20 UTC