Minutes of RDF DAWG telecon 2004-07-06 for review

Minutes of RDF DAWG telecon 2004-07-06 for review

RDF Data Access WG telcon
2004-07-06 14:30 UTC


IRC: http://www.w3.org/2004/07/06-dawg-irc (not yet in place, but also  
available as  

1. Convene, take roll, review record, agenda

Attendees: Dave Beckett, Kendall Clark, Dan Connolly, Yoshio Fukushige,  
Jos De Roo, Howard Katz, Farrukh Najmi, Eric Prud'Hommeaux, Simon  
Raboczi, Hiroyuki Sato, Andy Seaborne, Kevin Wilkinson

Regrets: Tom Adams, Steve Harris, Alberto Reggiori, Janne Saarela

Regrets for upcoming face-to-face meeting: Tom Adams, Jean-François  
Baget, Dave Beckett, Dirk Colaert, Steve Harris, Pat Hayes, Jim  
Hendler, Farrukh Najmi, Alberto Reggiori, Janne Saarela, Bryan  
Thompson, Dirk-Willem van Gulik

Scribe: Simon Raboczi
Scribe for first session of the face-to-face: Kendall Clark

Minutes from RDF DAWG telcon 2004-06-29
(I don't recall or have it recorded that we ratified the previous  

Resolved: no teleconference on the 12th or 13th -- next meeting with be  
the face-to-face on the 14th.

2. ftf update

ACTION: DanC, agenda for 2nd face-to-face
(confirmed that the f2f agenda is still running late:  
DanC also observed that detailed agenda will need to be produced in  
order to make the most of the 2 hour teleconference window each day.

ACTION: EricP, check with Rob/Network Inference if 2 hours  
teleconference facility can be organized on both days at 11am-1pm PST.
(I don't recall or have it recorded that this was confirmed -- Eric,  
can you check me on this?)

3. Requirement: 3.6 Optional Match

ACTION: SimonR, advocate "3.6 Optional Match" in an eMail message

A vote to adopt requirement 3.6 was postponed (again).

4. Requirement 3.12 Streaming Results

ACTION: Kendall, update the draft following last week's approval of  
this requirement

4. Directory Service Use Cases

ACTION: Farrukh, write up ebXML registry UC

ACTION: JimH, write up UDDI/Web services use case
(JimH not present to report on this.)

5. Initial Design Poll

Poll: RDF Data Access WG: initial design  

Current poll results with 11 participants indicate RDQL/BRQL as the  
N3QL polled surprisingly strongly, leading to discussion.
AndyS and JosD didn't consider N3QL to be radically different from  
RDQL/BRQL except in syntax.
No resolution was made to adopt the initial design before the next  
(face-to-face) meeting.


SimonR expressed concerns about the XQuery-based languages using their  
flexible output capabilities to claim satisfaction of requirements 3.2  
(variable binding results) and 3.4 (subgraph results) particularly with  
respect to programmatic APIs, and agreed to discuss it with HowardK on  
the list.

ACTION: JosD agrees to send pointers to test cases to the list

AndyS suggested a documenting a formal query model; no action arose  
from this, but discussion on the topic continued after the meeting.

Meeting closed: 15:23 UTC

Received on Thursday, 8 July 2004 00:25:27 UTC