- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 17:26:53 +0100 (BST)
- To: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
RDFCore WG 2001-06-07 Teleconference minutes Transcript: http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2001-06-08 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jun/0086.html Roll call: Participants: - Art Barstow - Dave Beckett (.5 scribe) - Dan Brickley (chair) - Brian McBride (chair) - Jos De Roo - Bill dehOra - Mike Dean - Jan Grant (.5 scribe) - R.V. Guha - Pat Hayes - Ora Lassila - Frank Manola - Eric Miller - Stephen Petschulat - Aaron Swartz Regrets: Martyn Horner, Graham Klyne Review Agenda: - Jos De Roo: would like some discussion on the containers, reification issues for AOB if time. Minutes of the last meeting: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jun/0008.html with correction http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jun/0050.html Confirm following actions completed: D1: Dan Brickley send analysis (#rdf-container-syntax-ambiguity and #rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema)to rdfcore-wg list DONE. D2: Brian McBride edit the errata per the resolutions above; i.e. those regarding #rdf-ns-prefix-confusion. [ArtB to work with Brian to get Brian write access to the errata and to determine a strategy for maintaining the appropriate documents.] DONE. ACTION: JUN-01-01-#3: Jos: review the test cases for rdfms-empty-property-element DONE. ACTION: JUN-01-01-#4: DaveB: review the test cases for rdfms-empty-property-element DONE. ACTION: JUN-01-01-#7: Jan: summarize what XML-Base might do for RDF. DONE. ACTION: JUN-01-01-#8: DanC: send a note to the WG that points out the bug in the spec regarding aboutEach DONE. Review status of following actions: A1: Dan Brickley: Solicit RDF feature usage info from Guha and report back to the group. DONE. A4: Guha: re #rdfms-reification-required: Present analaysis to list for discussion. CONTINUES. ACTION: JUN-01-01-#1: Martyn: create test cases rdfms-resource-semantics CONTINUES. ACTION: JUN-01-01-#2: FrankM: create tests case for reification. CONTINUES. (Frank reports these as under development) ACTION: JUN-01-01-#5: Eric: investigate a test case repository for the WG. The repository must facilitat WG members adding and modifying test cases. CONTINUES. (Eric reports team access to repository in place) ACTION: JUN-01-01-#9: Ora: send a note to the WG that describes how aboutEach is being used and how it was implemented CONTINUES. Issues discussion: Issue #1 http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-empty-property-elements Owner: Jan Grant Consensus that the test cases are OK. RESOLUTION: the consolidated test cases represent RDFCore's decision on this; the issue can be closed once those test cases are all in one place. AP: 2001-06-08#1: Jan: Consolidate, renumber and repost test cases. Issue #2 http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-containers-syntax-ambiguity http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema Owner: Dan Brickley Some discussion about the behaviour of various RDF implementations with regard to (re-)numbering container members. The consensus seemed to be that RDFMS did not preclude an RDF implementation from handling partial descriptions of containers. Aaron: pointed out this didn't resolve the open syntax issues. AP: 2001-06-08#2: Dan Brickley: write this up in more detail for the list AP: 2001-06-08#3: Brian McBride: pick up on the syntax issues now the model details have been clarified. Issue #3 http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about Owner: Aaron Swartz Aaron: summarised earlier email discussing this http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jun/0019.html Aaron: Leaning towards proposal #2 Dave Beckett: third proposal: much code seems to treat rdf:ID and rdf:about as effectively synonyms. The triples generated would be the same. AP: 2001-06-08#4: Brian McBride to write up this third proposed interpretation CONTINUES. Issue #4 http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-xml-base Owner: Jan Grant Discussion revolved around whether admitting this to RDFMS was in scope; their were concerns about versioning requirements since new documents using xml:base would produce different output on older parsers. Pat: making RDF malleable in the face of future changes to XML:Base is not a good thing. AP: 2001-06-08#5: Eric: to talk to the XLM Processing Workshop about RDF requirements from XML:Base CONTINUES. (Take to email) Review of updated issues list document: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/ AP: 2001-06-08#6: ALL: comments to list Date of next meeting: One week, 2001-06-15. (The phone number to be advised, but it should remain constant until September) -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk Unfortunately, I have a very good idea how fast my keys are moving.
Received on Friday, 8 June 2001 12:27:40 UTC