- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 12:43:16 -0600
- To: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
1. Convene, take roll, review records and agenda http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ 2004-12-07T14:30Z tel:+1.617.761.6200 code:7333 supplementary IRC chat:irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg log to appear:http://www.w3.org/2004/12/07-dawg-irc scribe: volunteer, please regrets: Farrukh Najmi PROPOSED: to accept Minutes of the 2004-11-30 DAWG teleconference http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0394.html as a true record. next meeting: 14 Dec. scribe volunteer? continue the following without discussion: ACTION EricP: find logistics re F2F5 at tech plenary in Boston March 28 Feb - 4 Mar (2 days). Some WG preference to Mon/Tue of that week. ACTION KendallC: expose our walking tour data to SPARQL querying clients ETA before F2F4 comments on agenda? 2. ftf4 2005-01-19/2005-01-20 in Helsinki, Finland * several WG members still have not filled out the ftf4 form. registration closes 15Dec => http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/dawg4ftf/ 3. Test Cases ACTION Jos: Write email about alternative result format using collections - avoid use/mention issues ACTION: SteveH is willing to adapt his testing infrastructure to generate input/output RDF/XML and typed nodes into manifest file 4. Protocol Updated DAWG variable binding results XML format http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0364.html also "Issue with the result set format" thread straw poll: is this design right? what to change? Protocol draft: [protocol] http://monkeyfist.com/kendall/sparql-protocol/ http://monkeyfist.com/kendall/sparql-protocol-simplex/ any implementation experience to report? 5. SPARQL SOURCE Issue ACTION DaveB: update the dawg test repository to record or amend tests to correspond to the http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0241.html ACTION TomA: write email to list about how their customers are using named graphs ACTION JanneS: propose text for hard failure in the protocol draft (nearby: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0256.html ) ACTION DanC: suggest formal definitions for SOURCE some progress: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/mathml-rules.xml (haven't grokked optionals fully yet) note Proposal: querying untrusted graphs http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0373.html 6. SPARQL update, issues See http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/ $Revision: 1.146 $ of $Date: 2004/12/06 10:04:50 $ ACTION: PatH to review editors working draft of rq23 ACTION AlbertoR: owns issue 'DESCRIBE' "I will rework the text a little more" -- Alberto, 25 Nov http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0359.html ACTION DanC: owner of issue 'yes or no questions' (pending protocol doc) ACTION SteveH: own (i.e. propose resolution to) disjunction issue ACTION SteveH: owns issue 'nested optionals' next WD: December 2004. that's now... let's discuss publication plans. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 18:42:51 UTC