Re: Formal WebID Teleconf Friday February 18 2013 15:00UTC

On 18 Feb 2013, at 11:51, Andrei Sambra <andrei.sambra@gmail.com> wrote:

> Regrets, I am travelling today
> 
You are travelling today, so you can't come on Friday?

Henry

> Andrei
> 
> On Feb 18, 2013 11:45 AM, "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:
> 
> Meeting Time:
> Friday 18 February, 15:00 UTC, 16:00 Paris, 10:00 New York
> full time zone information:  http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20130208T15
> tel: +1-617-761-6200
> sip: zakim@voip.w3.org
> irc: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/%23webid
> 
> Agenda:
> 
> Meeting Minutes from last time
> ------------------------------
> 
> Vote of meeting minutes for last time
> http://www.w3.org/2013/02/08-webid-minutes.html
> 
> Actions
> -------
> 
> ACTION-47: Put forward 1 of the raised issued every 3 days approximately for discussion in view of closure
>   Proposal: close - that was dated Oct 24, 2011 . We are making progress now, but in a different way
> 
> ACTION-42: Write sparql query for ping back form http://bblfish.net/tmp/2011/05/09/
>   Proposal: close - That seems to be more of a ReadWriteWeb spec issue.
> 
> ACTION-43 Send mail and add entry to wiki page for the state of Drupal WebID component, so that others can join and help out
>   Proposal: close, there seems to be progress there http://drupal.org/project/webid
>           ( perhaps if Stephane can add the information to the right wiki page where we keep
>             info about implementations )
> 
> ACTION-58: Contact Nathan and see whether action-57 satisfies issue-18
>    Proposal: Close, I contacted Nathan a couple of times with no response. We will need to decide this for ourselves.
> 
> 
> ISSUES
> ------
> 
> - ISSUE-6: using ASN.1 formats for WebID description
>    Proposal: close or postpone. Currently we have enough with Turtle as the default representation. We don't exclude this as a representation that could be used, but it is not within our scope to define this.
> 
> - ISSUE-23: Authorized Representations and Dereferencing a WebID URI
>    Proposal: this seems to contain a number of issues. The part that says
>      "the dereferencing process be well defined" seems relevant to current debates.
>       See next ISSUE.
> 
> - ISSUE-75: dereferencing process must be well defined
>    Proposal: Open
> 
> - ISSUE-55: explore WebID URI-schema openness
>   Proposal: close
>            This was solved in the previous vote on HTTP URIs.
> 
> - ISSUE-74: revised WebID definition must be flowed through conceptual spec, removing hashURI specificity
> 
> 
> 
> Next Meeting
> ------------
> 
> Agree to next meeting
> 
> 
> Henry
> 
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/