- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 01:30:12 -0400
- To: 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
0. Convene [1]RDF Data Access WG meeting of Tuesday, 11 September 2007 at 14:30:00 UTC + LeeF chairing + teleconference bridge: tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152 code:7333 + on irc at: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg + Scribe: @@ + Regrets: + roll call + minutes from last week [2] + next meeting 18 Sep. @@ recruit scribe, regrets? + agenda comments? 1. Review ACTION Items These actions appear DONE: ACTION: LeeF to note mf:requires of extension points when emailing out update to test suite ACTION: LeeF to update approval information on all tests approved and re-approved today Let's check on the status of the following actions: -- misc -- ACTION: ericP to poke IETF folks about registering SPARQL media types (esp. application/sparql-query) ACTION: ericP to write explanatory text saying that, like xsd:inteter and xsd:dateTime, the relative order of simple literals and xsd:strings is not defined here ACTION: ericP to answer "EBV of invalid numeric literals" email from Arjohn -- implementation report -- ACTION: ericP to have first cut of shiny implementation report by 11 Sep ACTION: Orri and Ivan to publish URL to test service along with a list of tests that aren't handled correctly yet -- tests -- ACTION: Eric+Andy to identify and collect mf:requires URIs and put in documentation ACTION: ericP, AndyS to add the mf:requires labels to the manifest namespace document -- spec -- ACTION: ericP to incorporate text to fix EBV of illformed numeric literals bug in spec ACTION: ericP to try to produce a diff from CR to current editor's draft 2. SPARQL Query Results XML Format It seems we've resolved the issue with the WSDL? Publish as CR ASAP? 3. Test suite Two issues: 3a) Ambiguity in lexical forms in Turtle data. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2007Sep/0004.html ...and responses. 3b) Malcolm Crowe suggests that open-eq-12 is incorrect. Can anyone take a look at it and agree or refute? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2007Sep/0001.html 4. Implementation Report @@ Hopeful that we'll have something to look at here and discuss 5. SPARQL Protocol I've received a smattering of responses to our solicitation for protocol implementations. I've received no notice of SOAP implementations. I'll work with Elias to see if we can test the HTTP implementations; what should we do for SOAP? [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/att-0118/04-dawg-minutes.html
Received on Monday, 10 September 2007 05:30:23 UTC