- 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