- 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