RDFCore WG minutes for the Telecon 2002-07-12

RDFCore WG minutes for the Telecon 2002-07-12

  .txt attached


1: Volunteer scribe

  Dave Beckett

2: Roll Call

    - Brian McBride (chair)
    - Jeremy Carroll
    - Dan Brickley
    - Frank Manola
    - Dave Beckett
    - Jan Grant
    - Stephen Petschulat
    - Aaron Swartz
    - Pat Hayes

    - Mike Dean
    - Ron Daniel
    - Jos De Roo
    - Graham Klyne
    - Patrick Stickler

3: Review Agenda

AOB: (From Ron Daniel) WG consider commenting on XPointer WDs

4: Next telecon 19th July 2002

5: Status of Minutes of 2002-06-14 telecon

Minutes are still missing, contain some closed actions

ACTION 2002-07-12#1 bwm Assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up

DaveB to email bwm with some missing parts of f2f IRC logs.

6: Review minutes of 2002-06-28 telecon

Minutes in


7: Telecon on 5th July 2002

Chair confirmed the meeting of 2002-07-05 was called off since
there were few people around at the start of the meeting.

8: Confirm Status of Completed Actions

ACTION: 2002-05-03#10 jang
add a test case to the suite reflecting the resolution of  rdfms-duplicate-member-props


ACTION: 2002-05-31#4 bwm
add "see also" links between rdfms-containers other approaches and rdfms-seq-representation in the issues list document

ACTION: 2002-05-31#5 jos
Summarize and check parseType collection decision with WebOnt


ACTION: 2002-06-18#7 graham
prepare outline of new "model" document


CONFIRMED completed

9: Confirm Status of Withdrawn Actions

ACTION: 2002-06-07#1 PatH
draft a resolution to rdfms-assertion

CONFIRMED withdrawn - the rdfms-assertion words are in the new
document so this action is no longer needed

10: XMLP Review - status and plans


Noted that the deadline for comments this is July 19 (next telcon
date) and for WG comments to be approved, need to get things in early
next week.  DanB said that it was best to concentrate on section 2 of

ACTION 2002-07-12#2 bwm Remind danbri need to get this sorted for
next week

  [scribe note: done during meeting since danbri turned up during the meeting]

ACTION 2002-07-12#3 jang review SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts
ACTION 2002-07-12#4 danbri review SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts (and other
   bits) by Tuesday 16th 

11: Procedure for determining reserved vocabulary
ACTION:2002-06-28#1  jjc  write a message about possible bug in guha's option#2


DONE by jjc in the message

12: Representing B-nodes in the graph syntax


Discussion of this proposal, asks the WG for straw poll on support.
Some support was given - rather to use a new attribute than use
rdf:about, encouragement by bwm to get jjc to make a specific
proposal and do yes/no.

ACTION 2002-07-12#5 jjc make a specific proposal on node
  identifiers in rdf/xml uri for WG consideration

[scribe note: jjc completed this later on in

13: Document Guidelines
Propose adopt guideline for representing n-triple triples

Identify Other issues where the editors feel consistency is needed.


APPROVED proposal

Discussion of other things that need agreeing
 - the way references are done, which is already desribed by the
     W3C Manual of Style - http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/
     in http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#References
 - consistent look of illustrations (SVG and bitmaps)
   MT/PatH uses Omnigraffle, Primer/EricM+FrankM use IsaViz
   Syntax/DaveB used sodipodi.  DanC has used dia successfully.
 - use of example.org etc. domains inexamples with URIs
 - triple form "aaa bbb ccc ." used in MT where aaa etc are variables - this
   is OK and not likely to be confused with URIs

14: Review contents of proposed "model" document
Define purpose and audience of the primer

FrankM: a general introduction to RDF for most people, has to handle
a wide audience with as few as possbile assumptions of previous
knowledge.  That was the reasoning behind saying a little about each
document and the length of explanation about graphs, triples.  i.e.
enough for somebody who is coming to this cold wants to know. It is
assumed they know some things such as XML and what a graph is.

Brian: some people want a quickstart document?

FrankM: Primer is explicitly not a quick start guide because I don't
want to assume the readers have the background.

Define purpose and audience of the "model" document

JJC: The current document assumes the reader wants to read a
normative RDF spec and this is where they start. In particular,
section 3 is intended to be a list of all normative items and the
complete normative statements by reference. The audience is expected
to be a skilled reader who wants to have the complete works as well
as some specific things such as the RDF datamodel.

Review content of the "model" document


Document URL:

Discussion of this document and its purpose, duplication of other
documents and size.  The need to make some normative statements that
don't fit in other documents naturally.

Decided to drop the implication that this is a top document
and update it.  Change the title to something else
(suggestion RDF Abstract Data Model, but can come back to that)
Section 3 largely is deleted.  Section 5 material is more like
vocab that belongs in the schema WD, but may not fit naturally
into the current style.

ACTION 2002-07-12#6 danbri try to move sec 5 'model' doc stuff into schema

Suggestion to move section 6 RDF and HTML parts into the primer - 
FrankM agrees.
Move 6.4 into syntax - DaveB: already there, not needed.
Move 6.5 into primer - FrankM agrees.

discussion ran out of time

AOB: Review XPointer WDs

No volunteers.

-- begin IRC log

13:46:42 <danbri> danbri has joined #rdfcore
13:57:55 <bwm> bwm has joined #rdfcore
13:58:35 <Jema> Jema has joined #rdfcore
13:58:47 <bwm> -hi
13:58:48 <Jema> Hi.  I'm Jema, the Jena meeting assistant
14:00:32 <DaveB> DaveB has joined #rdfcore
14:00:43 <danbri> bwm, I will be joining (hopefully just a little) late. Sent mail. biab.
14:00:55 <AaronSw\> AaronSw\ has joined #rdfcore
14:01:06 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfcore
14:01:09 <AaronSw\> zakim, this is RDF\
14:01:12 <Zakim> sorry, AaronSw\, I do not see a conference named 'RDF\'
14:01:14 <AaronSw\> zakim, this is RDF
14:01:15 <Zakim> ok, AaronSw\
14:01:21 <AaronSw\> AaronSw\ is now known as AaronSw
14:01:38 <Zakim> +??P11
14:01:40 <AaronSw> zakim, who's here?
14:01:41 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P5, AaronSw, ??P11
14:01:42 <Zakim> On IRC I see Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1
14:01:50 <Zakim> +Manola
14:01:52 <AaronSw> zakim, ??P11 is HP
14:01:54 <Zakim> +HP; got it
14:01:58 <AaronSw> zakim, ??P5 is SteveP
14:02:00 <Zakim> +SteveP; got it
14:02:04 <AaronSw> zakim, HP has Jeremy
14:02:06 <Zakim> +Jeremy; got it
14:02:06 <Zakim> +??P13
14:02:13 <AaronSw> zakim, ??P13 is ILRT
14:02:15 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it
14:02:17 <AaronSw> zakim, ILRT has DaveB
14:02:19 <Zakim> +DaveB; got it
14:02:20 <AaronSw> zakim, who's here/
14:02:21 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who's here/', AaronSw.  Try /msg Zakim help
14:02:25 <AaronSw> zakim, who's here?
14:02:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT
14:02:27 <Zakim> HP has Jeremy
14:02:28 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB
14:02:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1
14:02:56 <jjc> jjc has joined #rdfcore
14:03:11 <bwm> who knows how to tell zakim that hp=brian+jeremy?
14:03:24 <jjc> zakim, who is here?
14:03:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT
14:03:26 <Zakim> HP has Jeremy
14:03:26 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB
14:03:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see jjc, Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1
14:03:32 <DaveB> Jang's here too
14:03:34 <AaronSw> zakim, HP also has Brian
14:03:37 <Zakim> +Brian; got it
14:03:39 <DaveB> DaveB is now known as daveb
14:03:40 <AaronSw> zakim, ILRT also has JanG
14:03:41 <Zakim> +JanG; got it
14:03:43 <daveb> daveb is now known as dave-jan
14:03:54 <jjc> zakim, who is here
14:03:55 <Zakim> jjc, you need to end that query with '?'
14:03:58 <jjc> zakim, who is here?
14:03:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT
14:03:59 <Zakim> HP has Jeremy, Brian
14:04:00 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB, JanG
14:04:01 <Zakim> On IRC I see jjc, Zakim, AaronSw, dave-jan, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1
14:04:05 <dave-jan> dave-jan is now known as db-scribe
14:04:34 <bwm> zakim, who is here?
14:04:36 <Zakim> On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT
14:04:36 <Zakim> HP has Jeremy, Brian
14:04:37 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB, JanG
14:04:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see jjc, Zakim, AaronSw, db-scribe, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1
14:05:09 <db-scribe> roll call above
14:05:26 <db-scribe> regrets miked, rond, grahamk, patrickS
14:05:35 <db-scribe> item 3
14:05:58 <db-scribe> rond asks to consider ocmmenting on xpointer WDs
14:06:04 <db-scribe> set of WDs
14:06:11 <db-scribe> bwm: AOB
14:06:19 <db-scribe> item 4
14:06:37 <bwm> danbri?
14:07:00 <db-scribe> donm, same time next week
14:07:01 <db-scribe> item 5
14:07:18 <db-scribe> still waiting for 2002-06-14 minutes
14:07:48 <db-scribe> bwm: consider abandoning it, i.e. no minutes, no official meeting
14:07:49 <db-scribe> ?
14:08:22 <AaronSw> danbri emails he'll be back asap
14:09:05 <db-scribe> action bwm: assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up
14:09:36 <Zakim> +Pat_Hayes
14:09:39 <bwm> -action bwm: assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up
14:09:40 <Jema> Jema could not parse the action command.  Please separate the action holder from the action by a '/' character
14:09:44 <db-scribe> db-scribe has quit
14:09:50 <bwm> -action bwm/ assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up
14:09:51 <Jema> Jema notes action 2002-07-12#1
14:10:00 <dajobe-la> dajobe-la has joined #rdfcore
14:10:09 <dajobe-la> oops, that's what the 'X' button does
14:10:36 <AaronSw> This Pat Hayes sounds suspiciously like DanC.
14:10:56 <dajobe-la> daveb: email bwm with updated f2f irc logs, lost
14:11:06 <dajobe-la> confirm: patH has arrived
14:11:09 <dajobe-la> item 6
14:11:14 <dajobe-la> minutes of 2002-06-28
14:11:17 <dajobe-la> approved
14:11:39 <dajobe-la> confirming, meeting last week was called off since early on, few people around
14:11:46 <dajobe-la> item 7(that was)
14:11:47 <dajobe-la> item 8
14:11:52 <dajobe-la> done
14:11:54 <dajobe-la> item 9
14:12:03 <dajobe-la> withdrawn
14:12:32 <dajobe-la> i.e. rdfms-assertion words in new document
14:12:41 <dajobe-la> so patH action no longer needed
14:12:44 <dajobe-la> item 10
14:12:46 <dajobe-la> XMLP review
14:13:12 <dajobe-la> deadline next week
14:13:26 <dajobe-la> for comments from WG, need to have things early next week
14:13:36 <danbri> * danbri back, nods, looks guilty, dials in
14:13:43 <dajobe-la> please do
14:13:58 <dajobe-la> -action bwm: remind danbri need to get this sorted for next week
14:13:59 <Jema> Jema could not parse the action command.  Please separate the action holder from the action by a '/' character
14:14:09 <dajobe-la> -action bwm / remind danbri need to get this sorted for next week
14:14:10 <Jema> Jema notes action 2002-07-12#2
14:14:26 <dajobe-la> item 11
14:14:42 <dajobe-la> reserved vocab bug from jjc?
14:14:46 <dajobe-la> jjc: have done this
14:14:47 <dajobe-la> ptr?
14:15:22 <Zakim> +DanBri
14:15:22 <danbri> +danbri
14:15:23 <Zakim> * Zakim saw DanBri just arrive
14:15:34 <dajobe-la> jjc looks for ptr
14:15:38 <dajobe-la> back to xmlp review
14:15:57 <dajobe-la> danbri: dropped the ball,
14:17:20 <danbri> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-soap12-part2-20020626/
14:17:29 <dajobe-la> danbri: sec 2 is bit needs to focus on
14:17:32 <dajobe-la> s/sec/part/
14:17:34 <dajobe-la> ajunct
14:18:32 <dajobe-la> deadline 19 July 2002
14:18:36 <dajobe-la> for comments
14:18:44 <dajobe-la> bwm: i ntend to approve at next telcon
14:18:46 <danbri> [[
14:18:48 <danbri> Comments on this document should be sent to xmlp-comments@w3.org  (public archive [14]). It is inappropriate to send discussion email to this address. Comments should be sent during the last call review period, which ends on 19 July 2002.
14:18:49 <danbri> ]]
14:18:49 <dajobe-la> .. so want the comments early next week
14:19:06 <dajobe-la> jang: also will look at part 2 and try to comment
14:19:15 <dajobe-la> -action jang / review SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts
14:19:16 <Jema> Jema notes action 2002-07-12#3
14:19:30 <danbri> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-soap12-part2-20020626/#datamodel [[
14:19:31 <danbri> The SOAP Data Model represents application-defined data structures and values as a directed edge-labeled graph of nodes. Components of this graph are described in the following sections.
14:19:33 <danbri> ]]
14:19:41 <danbri> [[
14:19:43 <danbri> 3. SOAP Encoding
14:19:43 <danbri> SOAP Encoding describes how to encode instances of data that conform to the data model described in 2. SOAP Data Model.
14:19:44 <danbri> ]]
14:19:46 <dajobe-la> -action danbri / review SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts (and other bits) by Tuesday 16th
14:19:47 <Jema> Jema notes action 2002-07-12#4
14:20:05 <dajobe-la> danbri: could we use soap encoding and transport for exchange rather than our ow
14:20:06 <dajobe-la> n
14:20:37 <dajobe-la> daveb: comment on use of soap identifiers - uris, qnames, strings
14:20:45 <jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0001.html
14:20:46 <dajobe-la> back to item 11
14:20:47 <dajobe-la> above:
14:20:55 <bwm> -agenda 11
14:21:27 <dajobe-la> above url was jjc's message - action DONE
14:21:38 <dajobe-la> item 12
14:21:53 <bwm> -agenda next
14:21:59 <bwm> -hi
14:22:00 <Jema> Hi.  I'm Jema, the Jena meeting assistant
14:22:08 <dajobe-la> jjc: flying a kite, in jena they have repeated requests to roundtrip their rdf/xml
14:22:16 <dajobe-la> and we increasingly need to support it
14:22:24 <dajobe-la> has the WG any inclination to support it?
14:22:30 <dajobe-la> or postponed to rdf2?
14:22:45 <dajobe-la> on reflection, mistake I feel, any support for this?
14:22:53 <dajobe-la> jang: agree
14:23:10 <dajobe-la> esp if soap can encode rdf roundtrip wise
14:23:32 <dajobe-la> patH: issue roundtrip rdf/xml graph and get back same bnodes? or isomorphic?
14:23:36 <dajobe-la> jang: isomorphic
14:23:55 <dajobe-la> daveb: smaller change than others, less of a problem
14:24:09 <dajobe-la> danbri: use damlUnambigprop
14:24:33 <danbri> ...as one option
14:24:46 <dajobe-la> bwm: some people say good thing, not big change, no objetions
14:24:57 <dajobe-la> jang: no back compat issue, won't break existing docs
14:25:09 <dajobe-la> danbri: getting this right would improve credibility?
14:25:14 <dajobe-la> s/?//
14:25:36 <dajobe-la> bwm: suggest that jjc make a specific proposal to WG and do yes/no
14:25:42 <DanC_> DanC_ has joined #rdfcore
14:26:23 <dajobe-la> -action jjc / make a specific proposal on node identifiers in rdf/xml uri for WG consideration
14:26:24 <Jema> Jema notes action 2002-07-12#5
14:26:29 <DanC_> * DanC_ waves, having returned from the dentist. Apologies for missing the telcon without notice.
14:26:39 <dajobe-la> frankm: askes us to use node identifiers rather than "bnodes" terminology
14:26:52 <dajobe-la> jang: minimal changes to test cases?
14:26:57 <DanC_> jjc, pls do it with a new attribute, not some wierd URI-ish syntax in rdf:about
14:27:50 <dajobe-la> daveb: notes that change would make it poss to make xml results of test cases
14:28:08 <dajobe-la> jang: seconds DanC_
14:28:45 <dajobe-la> jjc will bear above comment in mind
14:28:49 <dajobe-la> daveb: I don't mind
14:29:06 <dajobe-la> AaronSw: are we opening up the rest of syntax incomplete issues?
14:29:13 <dajobe-la> bwm: not this time around
14:29:21 <dajobe-la> PatH: nice try :)
14:29:25 <dajobe-la> item 13
14:29:28 <AaronSw> phew
14:29:29 <dajobe-la> -agenda 13
14:30:19 <dajobe-la> accepted as guideline for triples
14:30:21 <dajobe-la> item 14
14:31:06 <dajobe-la> back to item 13
14:31:18 <dajobe-la> bwm: other things between dopcs that we need to agree on, from f2f
14:31:23 <dajobe-la> consistency issues
14:31:29 <dajobe-la> jjc: way that references were done
14:31:54 <dajobe-la> daveb: doc publishing format guide explains that
14:32:18 <dajobe-la> danbri: illustrations - how much do we care that we use the same graphing tools
14:32:24 <dajobe-la> ... don't care much.
14:32:29 <dajobe-la> bwm: graphing look and feel
14:32:48 <dajobe-la> PatH: using omnigraffle
14:33:00 <dajobe-la> on mac
14:33:26 <danbri> * danbri too
14:33:29 <dajobe-la> jang: uris for examples
14:34:09 <dajobe-la> daveb: have to use example.org, example.com, ...
14:34:23 <dajobe-la> urls in WDs, even if just body text, have to be u sed
14:34:29 <dajobe-la> ditto for examples such as rdf/xml
14:34:39 <dajobe-la> and test cases
14:35:02 <dajobe-la> bwm: standard prefix for that too ("ex:")
14:35:16 <danbri> See RFC2606 Reserved Top Level DNS Names
14:35:21 <dajobe-la> Path: want to write things that look triples, but have things that aren't such as variables that want to use for explanation
14:35:23 <danbri> eg http://rfc.net/rfc2606.html
14:35:24 <dajobe-la> but are in triples syntax
14:35:31 <danbri> [[
14:35:32 <danbri>   To reduce the likelihood of conflict and confusion, a few top level
14:35:32 <danbri>    domain names are reserved for use in private testing, as examples in
14:35:32 <danbri>    documentation, and the like.  In addition, a few second level domain
14:35:32 <danbri>    names reserved for use as examples are documented.
14:35:33 <danbri> ]]
14:35:42 <dajobe-la> jang: should be ok, using "aaa bbb ccc." form
14:36:02 <dajobe-la> item 14
14:36:07 <dajobe-la> reviwe of proposed "model" doc
14:36:16 <danbri> don't use xxx (triggers spam filters :)
14:36:35 <dajobe-la> bwm: purpose and audience of primer
14:36:47 <AaronSw> ooh, random.example or something.test will work
14:36:49 <dajobe-la> frankM: a general introduction to RDF to msot people
14:37:10 <dajobe-la> ... has to handle a wide audience, with as few as poss assumptions about previous knowledge
14:37:24 <dajobe-la> and that was reasoning behind saying a little behind each of the documents
14:37:33 <dajobe-la> and length of explanation about graphs, triples
14:37:38 <DanC_> re illustrations: I've had good luck with dia lately. http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2002/07/11/2002-07-11.html#1026372465.427020
14:37:49 <dajobe-la> i.e. enough for somebody who is coming to this wants to know
14:38:24 <dajobe-la> bwm: some want a quickstart doc
14:38:38 <dajobe-la> frankm: assumes they know some things already, say XML, and graphs then you can do that
14:38:54 <dajobe-la> ... not a quickstart guide
14:39:13 <dajobe-la> sine don't want to make assumptions of who readers area
14:39:14 <dajobe-la> are
14:39:22 <AaronSw> frank: primer is explicitly not a quick start guide because i don't want to assume the readers have the background
14:40:06 <dajobe-la> more discussion
14:40:10 <dajobe-la> new model doc:
14:40:33 <dajobe-la> jjc: current doc assumes reader wants to read a normative rdf spec and this is where they start
14:40:49 <dajobe-la> in particular sec 3 is intended to be a list of all normative stuff
14:40:58 <dajobe-la> and the complete normative statements by reference
14:41:13 <dajobe-la> and expecting a skilled reader
14:41:27 <dajobe-la> who wants to have the works and other speciifc things, including the rdf datamodel
14:41:42 <dajobe-la> PatH: it sounds like the rdf desk reference
14:42:11 <dajobe-la> frankm: seen size of physicians desk reference?
14:43:05 <dajobe-la> daveb: soap and xml schema don't ahve one of these
14:43:23 <dajobe-la> daveb: why do we have this new 20 page doc this late
14:43:30 <dajobe-la> jjc: material from different places
14:43:37 <dajobe-la> for the skilled reader as intro material
14:45:08 <dajobe-la> ...
14:45:38 <dajobe-la> fmanola: material in M&S which was explantory in nature which has exlcuded from other specs
14:45:59 <dajobe-la> ... and should be kept around, but primer was being overloaded - too long
14:46:37 <dajobe-la> .. needed a different home but end up with a kind of scrapbook
14:46:57 <dajobe-la> ... so need to fill it out to make it look more coherent
14:47:04 <dajobe-la> which tends to duplicate other stuff
14:47:14 <dajobe-la> jjc: need to make normative statements that dont' fit in other docs
14:47:41 <dajobe-la> bwm: move on
14:47:55 <dajobe-la> bwm: goal - uncomfortable with t his pointing to all other rdf specs
14:48:22 <dajobe-la> since will need updating
14:49:08 <dajobe-la> bwm: general observation - same thing being said several times, in overview and in sec 3 for e.g. saying we have a mT - repetative
14:49:19 <dajobe-la> main point - don't feel it is right this as a top pointer
14:49:29 <dajobe-la> because this is a normative spec and updating
14:50:02 <dajobe-la> daveb: I support this as a sibling
14:50:05 <dajobe-la> rather top doc
14:50:07 <dajobe-la> bwm: title
14:50:16 <dajobe-la> jjc: current title reflects this as top doc
14:50:27 <dajobe-la> then if not goal, need renaming
14:50:40 <dajobe-la> bwm: suggest as RDF - Abstract Data Model?
14:50:48 <dajobe-la> suggestion, come back later
14:51:04 <bwm> -agenda 14
14:51:24 <dajobe-la> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0022.html
14:51:58 <dajobe-la> bwm: if we drop goal, then sec 3 largely goes
14:52:01 <dajobe-la> ?
14:52:07 <dajobe-la> jjc: I suspect so
14:52:56 <dajobe-la> bwm: gk suggests sec 5 some bits to schema - vocab
14:53:07 <dajobe-la> jjc: quite diff in flavour to current schema spec
14:53:34 <dajobe-la> ... and other M&S bits which normative status
14:54:02 <dajobe-la> bwm: danbri - sec5 stuff goto schema?
14:54:16 <AaronSw> can someone post a link?
14:54:21 <dajobe-la> above
14:54:38 <dajobe-la> danbri: for describing property, classes - yeah
14:54:48 <dajobe-la> bwm: we'll try that
14:55:11 <dajobe-la> -action danbri / try to move sec 5 'model' doc stuff into schema
14:55:12 <Jema> Jema notes action 2002-07-12#6
14:55:20 <dajobe-la> or if not,t ry to move it back 
14:55:32 <dajobe-la> sec 6 rdf & html to primer?
14:55:35 <dajobe-la> frankm: yes
14:55:52 <AaronSw> aha, http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-basics/2002-06-27/Overview.htm
14:56:02 <dajobe-la> was linked from above
14:56:44 <dajobe-la> path; not normative if in primer, problem?
14:56:52 <dajobe-la> frankm: well it is useful, but we don't say too much now
14:57:05 <dajobe-la> sec 6.2 this is
14:57:18 <dajobe-la> 6.4 seems xml syntax
14:57:52 <dajobe-la> propose move 6.4 to syntax
14:57:59 <dajobe-la> daveb: alreayd there
14:58:34 <dajobe-la> daveb: notes sec 3.1.1 also duplicates syntax but hey, sec 3 going ;)
14:58:52 <dajobe-la> 6.5 to primer
14:59:12 <dajobe-la> frankm agrees
14:59:38 <dajobe-la> ---
14:59:39 <Jema> command not recognised
14:59:44 <dajobe-la> stop for now
14:59:46 <dajobe-la> review xptr spec?
14:59:49 <dajobe-la> (AOB)
15:00:16 <dajobe-la> bwm: no volunteers here
15:00:39 <dajobe-la> bwm: DONE
15:00:42 <dajobe-la> END OF MEETING

Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 16:42:44 UTC