Re: Minutes of RDFCore telecon, 2003-04-25

OOps - messed up slightly.  Last try.  Sorry for the repeated messages.

Brian

Re: Minutes of RDFCore telecon, 2003-04-25

From: Brian McBride (bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com)
Date: Wed, Apr 30 2003

     * Previous message: Frank Manola: "Re: ACTION 20030425#4 [was Re: 
timbl-03]"
     * Maybe in reply to: Jan Grant: "Minutes of RDFCore telecon, 2003-04-25"
     * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ 
attachment ]
     * Other mail archives: [this mailing list] [other W3C mailing lists]
* Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030430214209.073db698@localhost>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 21:50:15 +0100
To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, RDFCore Working Group 
<w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Minutes of RDFCore telecon, 2003-04-25



Thanks Jan for sticking to the formatting.  I'm adding a couple of changes
to help with the scraping.

Slight mods to make sure they are swebscrapable:

    o included hyphens in date as per previous practice
    o included swebscrape director line:

swebscrape:N3:python: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/scripts/minutes2n3.py

Brian


Agenda: [wrong subject]

    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0290.html
Transcript:

    http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2003-04-25

NOTE: Actions have been transcribed according to

    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0216.html

- the format is a little terse (suggest permitting multiline actions)

Roll call:
Dave Beckett
Dan Brickley
Dan Connolly
Mike Dean
Jan Grant
Pat Hayes
Frank Manola
Brian McBride (chair)
Eric Miller
Regrets: Graham Klyne, Patrick Stickler, Jos deRoo

Item 3: Review agenda.
Item 13 and 14 appear to be the same thing.

Item 4: Next telecon 2003-05-02 10:00 Boston Time
Scribe: Dave Beckett

Item 5: Minutes of 2003-04-11 with corrections
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0217.html
Approved.

Item 8: pfps-07
PatH: the fix for this has been folded into the current editor's WD:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/
PROPOSED to accept the comment and resole it as in the current
semantics draft.
Prop: PatH; Second: JanG; 0 against; 0 abstain
RESOVLED.
date: 2003-04-25

ACTION 2003-04-25#1 path send [closed] email for pfps-07

Item 9: pfps-10

This is a bugfix included in the current draft.

ACTION 2003-04-25#2 jang add test case for pfps-10 (from originating email)
    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0085.html
PROPOSED: to accept this and to close it with the fix in the editor's
working draft.
Prop PatH; Second JanG; against 0; abstain 0
RESOLVED
Additional item: On pfps-08:
PatH: we initially 'rejected' this; it's now resolved to PFPS'
satisfaction.
ACTION 2003-04-25#3 path chase pfps response to pfps-08

Item 10: timbl-03

PROPOSED: to reject timbl-03 according to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0262.html
Prop DaveB; Second JanG;
For: ILRT; Against: W3C, PatH; Abstain: FrankM, MikeD.
NOT RESOLVED.
DanC pointed out the cost would be changes to Syntax, Test Cases,
Primer(?)
ACTION 2003-04-25#4 frank figure out the cost to PRIMER of accepting timbl-03
ACTION 2003-04-25#5 danc figure out the cost to WebOnt of accepting timbl-03

Item 11: xmlsch-10
PROPOSED: to postpone this issue
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0277.html
Prop DaveB; Second DanC; Against 0; Abstain 0.
RESOLVED
ACTION 2003-04-25#6 daveb send response to xmlsch-10
ACTION 2003-04-25#7 bwm allocate postponed issue id for xmlsch-10

Item 12: xmlsch-11
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0272.html
PatH: (points out last sentence needs grammaticising)
DaveB: Only options given were accept, reject, postpone.
DanC: then we sohuld add 'clarify'
PROPOSED: to 'clarify' xmlsch-11 along the lines of DaveB's response
above
Prop DaveB; Second DanC; against 0; abstain 0
ACTION 2003-04-25#8 daveb respond to xmlsch-11

Item 13: xmlsch-12
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0274.html
With amendment: strike "sucks because".
With amendment: "the WG notes your offer of help and has asked the
coordination group to carry it forward"
PROPOSED to reject xmlsch-12 as detailed above
prop daveb; second path; against 0; abstain 0
RESOLVED
ACTION 2003-04-25#9 bwm postponed issue for xmlsch-12 (is it the same as for
-10?)
ACTION 2003-04-25#10 em carry xmlsch WG's offer of help wrt xmlsch-12 to
semantic web coordination group
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0489.html
ACTION 2003-04-25#11 daveb respond to xmlsch-12

Item 15: xmlsch-01
In JJC's absence this was skipped after a brief discussion.

Item 16: xmlsch-02/xmlsch-03
In JJC's absence this was skipped after some discussion. Nobody had a
problem with semantics importing the notion of "lexical to value mapping"
from 3.3 of concepts (renaming it for clarity if required).

Item 17: pfps-04 pfps-05 pfps-06
PatH: I've not yet written out a full proof of the closure lemma
DanC: we have the option to say, 'enough', and report to the director
that we're satisfied, although the original commenter may not be.

Meeting closed.

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112
http://ioctl.org/jan/Spreadsheet through network. Oh yeah.

     * Previous message: Frank Manola: "Re: ACTION 20030425#4 [was Re: 
timbl-03]"
     * Maybe in reply to: Jan Grant: "Minutes of RDFCore telecon, 2003-04-25"
     * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ 
attachment ]
     * Other mail archives: [this mailing list] [other W3C mailing lists]
* Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 17:09:54 UTC