- 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