- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:44:21 +0000
- To: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "RDF Core" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
These minutes posted record the meeting as I recall it, modulo Mike Dean's attendance. #g -- At 17:03 30/01/04 +0000, Brian McBride wrote: >Agenda: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2004Jan/0095.html > >Transcript: > http://www.w3.org/2004/01/30-rdfcore-irc > >swebscrape:N3:python: >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/scripts/minutes2n3.py >date: 2004-01-30 > >1: scribe - volunteer needed > >bwm selected by Zakim. > >2: Roll Call >regrets: Jeremy, PatH, DanC, JanG >present: FrankM, DanBri, bwm, Janet (part time), EMiller, DaveB, >GrahamKlyne > >3: Review Agenda >skipped > >4: Testimonial Orientation && >5: Press Release Input and Request for Reviewers > >Janet congratulated RDFCore on gettng the docs ready. Subject to the >director's decision, the plan is hold a joint announcement with WEBONT on >Feb 10 2004 under the banner of reaching a major milestone in the >development of the semantic web. > >Testimonials are an important part of the announcement. Janet presented the >material in: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2004Jan/0089.html > >as guidance for those preparing a testimonial. Details can be found in the >irc log > > http://www.w3.org/2004/01/30-rdfcore-irc > >Also: > >A key message is that the semantic web is real, not just theoretical, so >folks are strongly encouraged to include real examples of how the semantic >web is being used in their testimonials. > >There will be separate sheets of testimonials for RDF and OWL. A single >testimonial relevant to both can be put on both, or an organisation can >prepare separate testimonials for each. > >Please send all communications to both the PR team and cc Eric Miller. > >There should shortly be a draft of the W3C press release so folks understand >the context in which the testimonial will appear. > >Testimonials have not be sought from the membership in general, though that >will be done shortly. Eric has been actively soliciting support from folks >working on RDF but not on the WG. > >An example testimonial sheet can be found at >http://www.w3.org/2004/01/ccpp-testimonial and others can be found under >http://www.w3.org/Press/. > >If some organizations wish to make their own press release, W3C welcomes >that, but requests: > > - the W3C has 24 hours to check that W3C is accurately represented in the >release > - that accompanying releases are sent at least 15 minutes after the >scheduled W3C release which is 10am Eastern time, 10 Feb 2004. > - folks may be asked to delay if there are problems, e.g. in publishing >the docs > >W3C places no restrictions on who from an organisation signs a testimonial, >but recommends that someone whose name is familiar to the trade press does >so. > >Any questions should be sent to the W3T PR list and cc'd to Eric Miller. > >6: Next telecon > >To allow a telecon before 10 Feb, > >Resolved: Next telecon 13 Feb 2004 1000 Boston Time > >7: Rec Docs sanity check > >There is editorial work to do to publish the docs as recs. > >ERIC HAS WRITE LOCK ON ALL THE EDITORS DRAFTS > >A number of editorial changes have been made or in progress of being made, >including: > > - style sheets updated to REC stylesheet > - big yellow warning box about status > - copyright updated to 2004 > - links to errata and translations added > - doc status updated > - references updated > >Eric requests doc editors to verify changes to doc references. The links >should go to the shadow TR docs, the ammended text should be checked. > >ACTION: danbri review schema >ACTION: daveb review syntax >ACTION: daveb review test cases >ACTION: frank review primer >ACTION: gk review concepts >ACTION: em review model theory >ACTION: em use judgement to update IANA reference appropriately > >The WG is aware we are not updating LBase at this time. > >8: Mime type registration > >Discussion over whether to hold off until rec. > >RESOLVED to delay mimetype registration till after the documents reach REC. > >ACTION: gk inform Aaron. > >9: TAG Architecture Doc review > >No discussion. > >AOB: > >Please review the draft agenda for the SW interest group meeting at the Tech >Plenary > >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2004Jan/0188.html > >Meeting Adjourned. > >After adjournment, Danbri mentioned that he had updated the docs at the RDF >and RDFS namespaces. ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Monday, 2 February 2004 05:49:55 UTC