- From: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:23:48 +0100
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
> 1. Convene [1]RDF Data Access WG meeting of 2006-01-31T14:30Z > ([2]local times) > + Comments on the agenda? @@ONLY ADMIN STUFF IS READY Given last weeks rdfSemantics issue resolution I think we can approve tests rdfSemantics-001 and rdfSemantics-004 in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/rdfSemantics/manifest.n3 but not rdfSemantics-002 and rdfSemantics-003. As far as I've checked ARQ also thinks like that and cwm and euler are also happy with that. > + teleconference bridge: [3]tel:+1.617.761.6200 code:7333 > + scribe: Sergio Tessaris > o supplementary IRC chat: [4]irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg > ([5]log to appear) > + roll call > + PROPOSED: to approve [6]RDF Data Access -- 26 Jan 2006 as a > true record one RESOLVED that I miss in Eric's text is [[ 17:00:42 [DanC] PROPOSED: that SPARQL QL editor's draft 1.623 section 2.5 addresses issue rdfSemantics and is sufficient to postpone issue owlDisjunction. 17:00:49 [EnricoFranconi] +1 17:01:03 [SerT] +1 17:01:29 [DanC] RESOLVED, Hayes objecting ]] > + PROPOSED: to meet again Tue, 6 Feb; recruit scribe; confirm > chair > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ > [2] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?month=01&day=31&year=2006&hour=14&min=30&sec=0&p1=0 > [3] tel:+1.617.761.6200 > [4] irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg > [5] http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-dawg-irc > [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006JanMar/att-0298/26-dawg-minutes.html -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 30 January 2006 21:24:06 UTC