RDFCore WG minutes for the Telecon 2001-09-14

RDFCore WG minutes for the telecon 2001-09-14

Transcript:
   http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2001-09-14
Agenda:
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0156.html

1: Allocate scribe:  Stephen Petschulat

2: Roll call

Participants:
    - Brian McBride (chair)
    - Art Barstow
    - Martyn Horner
    - Graham Klyne
    - Dave Beckett
    - Ron Daniels
    - Bill dehOra
    - Frank Manola
    - Stephen Petschulat (scribe)
    - Aaron Swartz
    - Pat Hayes
    - Jeremey Carroll
    - Jos De Roo
    - Eric Miller
    - Daniel Brickley

Regrets:
    - Sergey Melnik
    - Mike Dean
    - Dan Connolly
    - Ora Lassila

Absent:
    - Frank Boumphrey
    - Jan Grant
    - Rael Dornfest
    - Yoshiyuki Kitahara
    - Michael Kopchenov
    - KWON Hyung-Jin
    - Satoshi Nakamura
    - Guha
    - Pierre G Richard

3: Review agenda:

    No AOB

4: Review Minutes of previous meeting
with corrections:

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0120.html

APPROVED.


5: Confirm Status of Completed Actions

ACTION: 2001-08-17#9 Martyn Horner
update glosary document and collect feedback.
DONE. (still more work to do, but action is complete)

ACTION: 2001-08-24#2 Brian McBride
Respond to request for slot in technical plenary
DONE.

ACTION: 2001-08-31#1 Art Barstow
act as team contact for the purposes of gettingthe Syntax working draft
V1.23 (plus amendments) through the W3C publishing process.
DONE.

ACTION: 2001-09-07#3 Dave Beckett
Update the N-triples part of the doc
DONE.

ACTION: 2001-09-07#4 Art Barstow
Drive the publication process for test cases doc.
DONE.



6: Congratulate Art on the publication of the
                             test cases WD

See:
  http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-rdf-testcases-20010912/

Congratulations, Art!
ACTION: 2001-09-14#1 Art to announce testcases wd to rdf interest and rdf
logic mailing lists.

(action 2001-09-14#2 is reduntant with the #1 and is removed.)

7: Responding to WD feedback
goal:  agree a process for responding to WD feedback.

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0150.html

ACTION: 2001-09-14#3 Brian to produce a style guide for including issues in
docs.

Brian: responsibility of doc editors to respond to feedback. ok?
Everyone was ok with this.
Agreed to sort out the details of this and other post document procedures
on the mailing list.

8: Review progress on model theory
ACTION: 2001-09-07#1  Pat Hayes  respond to indidual comments on the
  model theory
CONTINUED.
Action: 2001-09-07#2  Pat Hayes  The publication candidate draft to be
  clearly signalled to the WG
CONTINUED.

Pat: Apologies, travel problems have lead to some delays.


9: Review progress on RDF Schema WD

DanBri: shell of a doc in place
DanBri: big piece of work is rewrite of section 3
DanBri: what to use for images (MS Word draw used last time). Any
suggestions?
SteveP: Visio
AaronS: Omnigraffle http://www.omnigroup.com/applications/omnigraffle/
em: is there a revisted date for the doc?
DanBri: lets be hopeful for wed.
DanBri: looks hopeful for Release Cand., but no guarantees


IMPORTANT DIGRESSION: Are we using bNodes for prince/anon/whatever nodes?
DECISION: The nodes formerly known as prince nodes are now and forever more
known as bNodes.


10: Discuss starting work on the primer

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0145.html

Jeremy: Will we have a flag in the header PRIMER: ?
Concensus this is a good idea.
SteveP: I'll volunteer to help out as well.

ACTION: 2001-09-14#4 Eric form primer subgroup (first cut 14th oct.)

11: The Draft Glossary
Discuss Martyn's charge into the valley of death and decide how to move
forward

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0058.html

Martyn: need to figure out role of glossary
Martyn: primer-esque (for beginners) or normative/authorative
PatH: ok to do both, careful wording
Frank: not the place to fix up all imprecisions
PatH: danger of loosely written glossaries since they are often quoted
Graham: RFCs, Recommendations, etc. imply concensus, that is why they are
quoted
em: IETF credo -- rough concensus & working code
Graham: Yes, BUT... the running code in question is presumed to be
developed from the standards documents
AaronSw: wonders whether more precise definitions might be more useful,
simple ones can be included within the running text of the primer
Seemed to be some concensus that we don't want the appearance of over
precision.
Brian: suggests Martyns glossary be used as input into the primer


12: Discuss progress on parseType=Literal
ACTION: 2001-09-07#5  Jeremy Caroll  Collaborate with Bill dehOra to
produce
analysis of the literal problem, options, pros/cons for WG consideration.

See:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Sep/0146.html

Much discussion here, not all captured adequately in the IRC log... but see
transcript. Cut short by the end of the call.


13: Next telecon - 10am Boston time, 21st September 2001.

Meeting closed.

Received on Friday, 14 September 2001 13:26:27 UTC