- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:46:45 -0500
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I have several corrections to offer... On Sat, 2004-08-28 at 11:57, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > Sincerest apologies for the lateness... > > Minutes of RDF DAWG telecon 2004-08-17 for review > > RDF Data Access WG telcon > 2004-08-24 14:30 UTC > > Agenda > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0297 > IRC log > http://www.w3.org/2004/08/24-dawg-irc#T14-28-04 > > > 1. Convene, take roll, review record, agenda > > Attendees: DaveB, Farrukh_Najmi, JanneS, HowardK, kendall, RobS, AndyS, ChrisRYvette_Hoitink, DanC, Enrico, EricP, SimonR, TomAdams, AlbertoR > > Regrets: @@@ I saw regrets from Brian Thompson. > Scribe: EricP > Scribe next time: AlbertoR > > Minutes from RDF DAWG telcon 2004-08-17 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0285 > ammended per > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0287 > ACCEPTED as the record of our previous meeting. > > Five actions were continued from last meeting without discussion: > > @@@ I copy-and-paste bug? The "5 cont without discussion" was last week. > 2. Review "Semantic Interpretation for Speech Recognition" > > ACTION EricP: read http://www.w3.org/TR/semantic-interpretation/ and let DAWG > know what, if any, dependencies there are/should be. > DONE. > > ACTION SteveH: read http://www.w3.org/TR/semantic-interpretation/ and let DAWG > know what, if any, dependencies there are/should be. > DONE. > > EricP, SteveH, and Yoshio agreed that this topic was not as relevent to > RDF as the name implied. The spec is more analogous to HTML forms (but > for speach). The spec does reference EMMA which notes that there is no > RDF query language. > > No further action -- no DAWG member was left responsible for tracking > this spec. > > > 3. SOURCE, "provenance"/data-management > > ACTION DanC: explain evolution of log:semantics/log:includes from > uri-is-graph to uri-is-doc in cwm, to inform discussion of SOURCE. > CONTINUES I meant to claim victory, and I don't recall any objection. I think the record should show this as DONE. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0309.html > ACTION DaveB: explain the main uses seen for redland contexts with > respect to the provenance. CONTINUES. again, that's done http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0305.html > ACTION DaveB: propose an way to address the SOURCE issue. > CONTINUES. Well, he took another action below; but that action is done. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0307.html > ACTION SimonR: write about the "returning bnodes from a query" issue. > CONTINUES. > > Issues: > constrain vs. merely select > bnodes SOURCES (identified or constrained by description rather than URI) > SOURCE of inferred triples > using OWL to assert provenance > cwm outputs formumae (for proofs) > > ACTION: DaveB to repropose source in both results and restrictions. > > ACTION: AndyS to (try to) compose a test case on inferred triples > > > 8 [following Zakim numbering]. BP review of UC&R > > TomA expects more discussion this week. > > RDF Data Access, XQuery, rules Dan Connolly (Monday, 16 August) > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2004Aug/0004.html > > > 5. XQuery integration requirements/objective > > ACTION SimonR: write a document discussing tradeoffs with adapting > XQuery as an RDF query language for discussion thru the September > meeting in Bristol. CONTINUES. > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf2#xqfa > > TomA hopes for attention from David Wood. No action. > > > 6. WG meeting schedule > > ACTION EricP: find out the schedule of the 2005 W3C tech plenary and > inform the WG so that we can plan ftf meetings after September. > WITHDRAWN. > > I found the date and put it on the WG homepage: > 28 February - 4 March 2005 > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/#sched > > Shall we have a ftf in Jan? Who would like to host? > > RobS offers to host. Some note that later in month is better. > Discussion continues in email. > > note also: > reconsidering teleconference time Dan Connolly (Monday, 16 August) > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0275.html > > Discussion continues in email. > > > Fill out http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/DAWGf2f3/ !!! > > ACTION: AndyS to show xmlopen slides to DAWG one or two days in advance. > > > 7. Use Cases & Requirements done? > > withdraw these? are folks still on holiday? > > ACTION: JimH, to work with Bijan to do some sort of UDDI/Web services use > case. > CONTINUES. > > ACTION: RobS write email to Farrukh about traversing a taxonomy. CONTINUES Dup; as noted below, that's done. > ACTION SimonR: continue discussing and promoting union query for UC4.5. > DONE. > > ACTION: RobS to write response to Simon's union query. > > ACTION Simon+Kendall elaborate the rel. of rules and "construct" in the UC&R > doc. > CONTINUES. > > ACTION RobS: re-play comments on 2.12 Browsing Patient Records for the WG > DONE. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0311 > > ACTION: RobS write email to Farrukh about traversing a taxonomy. > DONE. > > Kendall accepts some (untracked) UC&R updates. > > > Meeting closed: 15:35 UTC. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 30 August 2004 15:46:09 UTC