- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 08:45:51 +0300
- To: "ext Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org, ext Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
On Apr 06, 2004, at 18:01, ext Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > We're running out of time - > > in particular - we need to agree author list, > title , keywords and abstract mnext Tuesday - which since I am leaving > early on Thursday, and Friday is a UK holiday means Thursday a.m. > (i.e. Wednesday for Pat) > > Also stuff on TriX paper for Extreme below. > > So for the paper I suggest: > > Authors: > > Jeremy J. Carroll, Christian Bizer, Patrick Hayes, Patrick Stickler > > Title: > Named Graphs, Provenance and Trust > > Areas from CFP: > http://iswc2004.semanticweb.org/CF/researchTrack.php > Languages, Tools and Methodologies for Semantic Web Data > Semantic Web Trust, Privacy, Security and Intellectual Property Rights > > (any others??) > > Keywords: > > RDF, Syndication, Provenance, > Trust, Security, Digital Signatures, > Publishing, TriX, Model Theory, Graphs > (that's probably too many - suggested changes?) > > Abstract: > > The Semantic Web consists of many RDF graphs named > by URIs. Is this a widely accepted fact? Perhaps "The Semantic Web can be viewed as consisting of many RDF graphs named by URIs." ??? > This paper discusses the syntax and semantics > of such collections of named graphs. Remove "collections of"? (organization/storage/management of actual graphs is out of scope and "collection" implies infrastructure. > This enables > improved clarity in Semantic Web > publishing, allowing publishers to communicate > assertional intent, and to sign their graphs. > Information consumers can evaluate specific graphs > using task-specific trust policies, and act on the > information from those named graphs that they accept. > OK. > > (something upbeat for the last line?) How about "This provides a foundation for consumers to establish a personal `web of trust' using a formally defined and consistently deployed framework." ??? > > > On TriX paper (Carroll/Stickler) - I don't think I am going to have > time to update it after Pat's feedback on the named graph paper - > hence I think we need to update in terms of the current draft plus > planned changes and worry about any late changes after we have > submitted it. (i.e. the version that gets reviewed may not be exactly > the version that we wish to be reviewed, but close enough). I'm OK with that. I think in any case that we've already gotten the critical points in sync. Patrick > > > > > > Jeremy > > -- Patrick Stickler Nokia, Finland patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 7 April 2004 01:49:43 UTC