W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2002

Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2002-07-26

From: Eric Miller <em@w3.org>
Date: 25 Jul 2002 20:41:52 -0400
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1027644114.20462.2248.camel@birch>

10:00:00 Fri Jul 26 2002 in America/New York

which is equivalent to
15:00:00 Fri Jul 26 2002 in Europe/London

Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332
irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore

1: Volunteer scribe

2: Roll Call

3: Review Agenda

4: Next telecon Aug 2nd 2002

5: Review minutes of 2002-07-19 teleconference 

hmm.... no minutes seem to be available but I find


which indicates jang scribed? (please confirm)

6: Status of Action Items

Proposed Closed Items

Open Items

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: danbri, eric 
Identify who owns the publishing next steps and responsibilities for
LBase Note
context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc.html#T14-13-49

ACTION: jang 
update test cases in light of bugs</dd>
context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-34-20

ACTION: eric
Look into why jang gets dropped on rdf-comments list and fix problem
context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-35-21

ACTION: bwm 
to identify applications needed and get a schedule for them
context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-54-10

have a good holiday
context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-03-20

Unknown Items

(Proposed Closed)

ACTION: 2002-06-28#2 bwm
get editors together, review contents of documents


7) rdf:ID / rdf:node proposal

The chair was keen that we avoid too much discussion. I would like to
highlight the choicepoints.
]] --

I'm keen on this as well - review choicepoints and be prepared to

a follow-up useful for establishing my view as well

This chairs position was to not reopen the issue at this time, but to 
indicate that if a slam dunk proposal was submitted to the WG, then I
would not be opposed, provided it did not delay us.
]] - 

8) New Document 

A new draft of 'Resource Description Framework (RDF): Overview and
Abstract Data Model' is available at:


Graham to do quick intro; Graham if you have specific issues that need
to be addressed by individuals/editors, please be prepared to discuss
this as well.

Graham, in particular see next agenda item.

9) rdfns-assertion


I'm frankly confused if this issue is open or not, but I think this
issue is addressed in Graham's document but still needs review -

There was some discussion at the f2f of the assertion issue against a 
background of social aspects of RDF deployment (in discussions in/after
the  telecon prior to the F2F, the omission of any discussion of the
social environment of RDF deployment had been noted).  Section 2.3 of
the new RDF document resulted from this.  Assertion is covered at
sub-section 2.3.4  (and still needs review/discussion).
]] -

If I am wrong I'm happy simply to have this noted and skip over this :)

10) Procedure for determining reserved vocabulary

ACTION:2002-06-28#1  jjc  write a message about possible bug in guha's


From last week, as we have not made a decision on this, WG please be
prepared to do so.

11) Schedule and Process to Last Call


I'd like to present Brian with a present when he returns from a
well-deserved vacation.

12) Datatypes

err.. Any suggestions on how to proceed here?

This agenda *really wanted to be* produced by Jema, the Jena WG

eric miller                              http://www.w3.org/people/em/
semantic web activity lead               http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/
w3c world wide web consortium            http://www.w3.org/
Received on Thursday, 25 July 2002 20:41:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:14 UTC