- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 13:30:46 +0100
- To: SWBPD list <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi here are the WNET TF minutes for the second half of the telecon on 8th July. A bit rough ... IRC http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-swbp-irc (commencing 15:09:56) Present: Ralph, Guus, Alistair, DanBri, Aldo, jeremy, brian, PatH Actions: ACTION Jeremy: literal format / 118N issues ACTION Guus: IDs for word senses pros and cons ACTION Aldo on Synset URIs in relation to versioning We worked through some of the issues in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/wordnet_2.rdf 1) How to ensure that an RDFS processor can process this correctly and also be sure a DL processor can also process it correctly. Postponed 2) Use of XML literal rather than xsd:String. Where might we need to allow XML markup? e.g. glossary entry, lexical form? I18N have been asked, but no response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-i18n-ig/2004Jul/0001 Options: XMLLiteral, plain literal, or xsd:string 10) IDs for word senses? Discussion about whether word senses needed URIs or not. Summary: URIs are useful but not a drop-dead requirement 11) concatenated names for synsets? Possible synset URIs like http://example.com/..../syn_234242_Some_Friendly_Text_here where _Some_Friendly_Text is a concatenation of word senses 12) synset URIs and versioning? Synset IDs are not preserved across versions.
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2004 08:31:04 UTC