- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 10:33:36 -0500
- 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/ 2005-09-06T14:30Z for times in major cities around the world... http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=30&month=08&year=2005&hour=14&min=30&sec=0 tel:+1.617.761.6200 code:7333 supplementary IRC chat:irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg log to appear:http://www.w3.org/2005/09/06-dawg-irc scribe: Kendall regrets: SteveH welcome Rachel Yager, representing FSTC record for review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0320.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/att-0320/Aug30.html next meeting: 13 Sep. scribe volunteer? note the following done without discussion: ACTION: EricP to change contact email to dawg-comments and call for review in IETF DONE in 1.480 ACTION: EricP to respond to "External storage" comment DanC accidently did it continue the following without discussion: ACTION: LeeF to draft WSDL 1.1 for SPARQL thingy with AndyS and Elias ETA 9 sep ACTION: DanC to ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2 SPARQL protocol stuff, once both are available comments on agenda? It's based on http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/ 1.480 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/ 1.63 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues 1.98 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/lc-status-report.html 1.22 2. comment: Query forms should be resources, not operations BM and KC don't seem to have reached consensus. Hmm. 2005-09-05T00:36:22Z from distobj http://www.w3.org/mid/20050905003622.GR17056@markbaker.ca 3. comment: SPARQL Protocol: inconsistent parameter names http://www.w3.org/mid/43130E85.6040707@aduna.biz Did anybody get back to the commentor? 4. Toward Protocol Last Call ACTION KC: update protocol spec to show that SPARQL services that export HTTP bindings must export the HTTP binding in this SPARQL protocol spec; likewise for SOAP ACTION: KendallC to add editorial note to protocol spec showing that our WSDL is not kosher and it depends on their final decision. ACTION: KendallC, to relax the query-result type to allow "equivalent serialization" [salt to taste] and leave out the whttp:outputSerialization param, note the conflict with the current WSDL spec, and take the risk that we'll have to come back if they say no ACTION: KC to make conneg explicit in c. CONSTRUCT with simple RDF dataset and take accept: out elsewhere 5. BASE IRI resolution comment ACTION: ericP to send [OK?] message to Bjoern. 6. issues#valueTesting : "language tag issues" http://www.w3.org/mid/431338a1.225522296@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de 7. issues#valueTesting: handling type "error"s regarding Bug: "A value disjunction that encounters a type error on only one branch will return the result of evaluating the other branch." http://www.w3.org/mid/B27E3100-A366-496F-AC9A-A0E5257C3F80@w3.org we have... ACTION: DaveB to make 'XXI'^^:romanNumeral = 21 and points nearby into test cases (or ask questions in email). which is done in that it illustrates the issue nicely... http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.rq http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.n3 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman-result.n3 now... which way does the answer go? like Dave's test materials (1 result), or like the LC spec (0 results)? 8. issues#sort, comment ORDER with IRIs http://www.w3.org/mid/431b3915.225638015@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de I lost track... I'd like to establish who has the ball on this. 9. Recent SPARQL QL comments Let's take a look at these and see how many should involve the whole WG vs. just the editors and/or chairs. Barstow's comment in particular is one where I misjudged... * Comments on SPARQL: Querying the Dataset * 2005-08-30T19:01:08Z from jagannathan.srinivasan * Comments on SPARQL: Semantics of queries involving named graphs * 2005-09-01T01:47:14Z from jagannathan.srinivasan * Some typos in WD * 2005-09-01T08:07:52Z from Olivier.Corby * Comments on last-call SPARQL draft 20050721, section 2 * 2005-09-01T11:27:51Z from GK * 2005-09-01T12:33:53Z from connolly * Comments on SPARQL Query Language for RDF (21 July 2005 version) * 2005-09-01T17:12:32Z from Art.Barstow * 2005-09-01T18:01:57Z from connolly * Example Errors * 2005-09-02T23:17:29Z from RRLevering 10. Toward SPARQL CR ACTION: DanC to investigate having CVS commits send to the WG list request for CR needs - documentation that dependencies are discharged - we haven't closed the loop with XQuery - documentation of outstanding dissent - Network Inference's objection to the BRQL strawman rather than something XQuery-based is still outstanding. 11. Protocol Testing ACTION: EliasT to draft test for WSDL 2.0 mime type restriciton in output serializatin ACTION EliasT: establish consistency between protocol examples and tests 12. WSDL last call ACTION: KC to work with WSDL WG on describing POST binding with application/x-form-encoded in WSDL 2 ACTION: KC to work with WSDL WG on moving "style" from interface to binding -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 5 September 2005 15:33:45 UTC