- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2002 18:56:56 +0000
- To: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0016.html Transcript: http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2002-11-01 http://www.w3.org/2002/11/01-rdfcore-irc.txt New action items: ACTION 2002-11-01#1 emiller: to get editors of concepts to make changes outlined in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0001.html as requested and publish ACTION 2002-11-01#2 emiller: arrange publication of syntax with DaveB ACTION 2002-11-01#3 frankm: Discuss overlap between primer & concepts doc with concepts' editors. ACTION 2002-11-01#4 daveb: review syntax section of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#5 danbri: review schema section of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#6 stevep: review all of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#7 bwm: review all of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#8 Patricks: review datatypes section in primer ACTION 2002-11-01#9 patH: look at reification section in primer ACTION 2002-11-01#10 bwm: Ask i18wg to review the datatype-lang form. ACTION 2002-11-01#11 DanC: Create test cases for non-datatyped/simple literals ACTION 2002-11-01#12 bwm: ask JanG about state of testcases wd ACTION 2002-11-01#13 DanC: review schema draft ACTION 2002-11-01#14 danbri: Contact jjc/gk to ask them to review schema draft ACTION 2002-11-01#15 bwm: review schema draft ACTION 2002-11-01#16 danbri: team contact for publishinging LBase note 1. Scribe: Next week's scribe is Mike Dean, with help from Aaron 2: Roll Call Participants: Dave Beckett (scribe) Dan Brickley Dan Connolly Jos de Roo Pat Hayes Frank Manola Eric Miller Brian McBride (chair) Steve Petschulat Patrick Stickler Aaron Swartz Regrets: Jeremy Carroll Jan Grant Graham Klyne 3. Review agenda No AOB raised. 4: Next telecon 8th Nov 2002, same time 5: Minutes of 2002-10-25 telecon http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0386.html APPROVED 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions ACTION: 2002-10-25#1 jjc ACTION: 2002-10-25#2 bwm ACTION: 2002-10-25#5 jjc ACTION: 2002-10-25#10 DanC All DONE 7: Confirm Status of Withdrawn Actions ACTION: 2002-10-25#8 JosD All DONE 8: Doc Schedule Brian reminded people of the agreed schedule: 01/Nov Agree to publish concepts doc and and syntax doc Primer ready for review Schema ready for review Test cases ready for review 08/Nov Agree to publish Primer, Schema and Test cases concepts doc and syntax doc published Model theory ready for review 13/Nov Email confirmation of publication of MT 15/Nov at the latest - Primer, Schema, MT and Test cases published See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0320.html 9: Concepts Doc 2002-10-25#7 DanC review concepts doc DONE 2002-10-25#8 JosD review concepts doc 2002-10-25#6 PatH review concepts doc WITHDRAWN Reviews: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0564.html The meeting noted that neither of the editors of the document was present and discussed publishing. There were two reviews from Brian, DanC. PatH did some reviewing with comments similar to Brian, not published - happy that the doc is ready, saw no showstopper problems. Review of the critical comments from DanC given in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0001.html The working group agreed with DanC's comments and those changes should be made. The other modifications at editors discretion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0320.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0490.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0564.html Document title change at editors discression. ACTION 2002-11-01#1 emiller: to get editors of concepts to make changes outlined in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0001.html as requested and publish RESOLVED: to publish concepts and abstract syntax doc 10: Syntax Document Reviews: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0564.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0555.html Discussion of reviews. DaveB happy to add a note to section 2 that says in case of dispute, the later parts of the document take prescedence over section 2. DanC has some reservations with this, happy to address this later. DaveB agrees to make the changes listed in the agenda: o a statement that any conflict between section 2 and the more formal sections of the spec, section 2 loses. o a disclaimer in section 2 saying that whilst the substance is not expected to change much, it is new text that is likely to undergo substantial editorial revision. o changes in response to other review comments at editors discretion. Proposal to publish is agreed. ACTION 2002-11-01#2 emiller: arrange publication of syntax with DaveB 11: Primer 2002-02-25#17 EricM Ensure primer has appropriate description of use of rdf:value DONE 2002-04-19#16 danbri review effect of containerMembershipProperty superproperty on primer CONTINUED 2002-05-03#4 em liase with danbri to ensure primer and schema stay in sync over the isDefinedBy issue CONTINUED 2002-08-23#1 DanC review primer text and propose alternative that clarifies status of Alt WITHDRAWN 2002-09-13#5 FrankM update primer to reflect datatype concensus DONE Discussion of new draft proposed for publication and actions above. Frank had added a new description of rdf:value, needs help with this to check it. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0605.html Frank asked all reviewers to make notes where there is overlap with other documents and write suggested changes notes if needed. Suggestions for words in the primer status section to reflect this were made by danbri: we might say "The WG acknowledge that their is some overlap between the normative specs and the primer, and in particular solicit feedback from reviewers on the partitioning of content between these documents" ACTION 2002-11-01#3 frankm: Discuss overlap between primer & concepts doc with concepts' editors. Call for reviewers. DanC has already contributed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0608.html ACTION 2002-11-01#4 daveb: review syntax section of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#5 danbri: review schema section of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#6 stevep: review all of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#7 bwm: review all of primer ACTION 2002-11-01#8 Patricks: review datatypes section in primer ACTION 2002-11-01#9 patH: look at reification section in primer and Eric noted this isn't exclusive, other WG members should read this if possible. Discussion of the RDF in HTML section, DanC has a critical comment in that we aren't encouraging people to do that. The Issue: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf and original decision http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0294.html Discussion to be taken to email. 12: Model Theory 2002-02-25#18 bwm ensure model theory updated to reflect semantics of rdf:value 2002-06-17#4 patH Update the model theory to specify that rdfs:isDefinedBy is an rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:seeAlso. 2002-09-13#4 PatH to update model theory to cover 4 to reflect datatype consensus All CONTINUED PatH estimates it will be available for review Wed 6 earliest, likely Fri 8 Nov. Brian noted if necessary the group will try to get an agreement to publish by email (as noted in the schedule http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0320.html ) Dissussion of the Issuettes in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0581.html Issuette all1: To label or not to label nodes. Discussion to remove labelling phrase. DaveB noted the syntax WD already has changed to this. FrankM asked for a clarification of describing nodes in a *picture* of a graph and it was agreed using labelling nodes with URi-refs there is OK. In the RDF graph however, the nodes are URIs (etc.) DECISION: use the nodes are URI-refs notation, subject to confirmation/objections from jjc/gk Issuette all2: lang tags on datayped literals. After discussion, the issue is not reopened. ACTION 2002-11-01#10 bwm: Ask i18wg to review the datatype-lang form. Issuette mt3: What do old style literals denote Discussion of denoting themselves or the union of (string, (string, lang)) form and if string is an xsd:string. This wasn't felt necessary to require. DanC asked that the strings be compatible with xsd:string; satisfyable, but not guaranteed, not rule it out/in. DECISION: non datatype literals are the union of (strings and pair of (string, lang tag)). It is not specified if the strings are the same as xsd;string or not. ACTION 2002-11-01#11 DanC: Create test cases for non-datatyped/simple literals Issuette Schema1: Whats in the class rdf:Literal? DECISION: all datatype values are members of rdfs:Literal Issuette mt1: List semantics. The WG previously decided there were no list semantics. After discussion, there was no consensus on a change. For discussion. Issuette mt2: Datatypes in the semantics. Discussion of the way that the semantics are built up and what layers are base. This ended up with rdf, rdf+RDFS with datatypes. 13: Testcases 2001-10-26-#1 bwm make a test case to illustrate set/bag decision 2002-02-25#9 JanG Ensure test cases for rdf:foo added to test cases WD 2002-04-05#5 Jeremy write test cases for rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces 2002-04-19#14 danc do entailement test case for container with rdfs:contains 2002-04-19#18 jan produce test case for rdfs-subClassOf-a-Property 2002-06-07#3 JanG Fold in the consensus test cases and bring back the rest to the group 2002-06-07#4 JanG Update the test case problems reported by JeremyC and DaveB 2002-05-31#3 JanG Update test case document with tests for parseType collection 2002-09-13#6 Jan create testcase to reflect datatype concensus 2002-09-20#1 jjc Produce test case domain and range. 2002-10-11#1 janG add test cases from msg Oct/0098 All CONTINUED ACTION 2002-11-01#12 bwm: ask JanG about state of testcases wd 14: Schema 2002-06-17#1 danbri Update RDFS spec to reflect resolution of rdfms-seq-representation 2002-06-17#5 danbri Update the schema spec to reflect the resolution of rdfs-isDefinedBy.2002-06-17#6 danbri Add to the schema document a comment clarifying the relationship between the idea that there is exactly one namespace or schema associated with a property and the rdfs:isDefinedBy property. 2002-06-17#7 danbri Update the schema spec to account for editorial issues listed under rdfs-editorial. 2002-06-18#1 danbri republish the current rdf schema to the current rdf schema uri 2002-07-12#6 danbri try to move sec 5 to schema doc 2002-09-13#3 Danbri update schema to cover 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, 5 to reflect datatype concensus All CONTINUED danbri reports working on a new draft, ETA Monday 4 November. Call for reviewers ACTION 2002-11-01#13 DanC: review schema draft ACTION 2002-11-01#14 danbri: Contact jjc/gk to ask them to review schema draft ACTION 2002-11-01#15 bwm: review schema draft 15: LBase Document Propose approve publication as a note. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Oct/0046.html The group agreed to see this as an RDF Core spin-off document rather than a working group output, a useful document for discussion. DECISION: approved to publish lbase note ACTION 2002-11-01#16 danbri: team contact for publishinging LBase note The meeting closed.
Received on Sunday, 3 November 2002 13:59:53 UTC