Re: SWIG agenda update

I have prepared a lightning TriX talk - see www-archive

It does not cover graph naming - which is the topic of my talk with Chris 
Bizer. Hence the TriX talk is very short - could be done in less than 5 mins.

Hence time permitting Monday morning would be good - I'll stay straight 
after lunch and drop out with the HTML folks.

Jeremy

Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:

> Time permitting, perhaps on Tuesday, I have a few slides outlining
> a DAWG strawman proposal I'd like to present...
> 
> Patrick
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org on behalf of ext Dan Brickley
> Sent:	Wed 2004-02-25 22:09
> To:	Jeremy Carroll
> Cc:	Graham Klyne; RDF interest group
> Subject:	SWIG agenda update
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org> [2004-02-23 14:32-0500]
> 
>>OK I've updated the page with a list of topics culled 
>>from proposals for talk-time folk have made. I have begun the task of 
>>allocating things to mon/tuesday morning/afternoon slots, 
>>but there's more to do there.
>>
>>See: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/meetings/tp2004#topics
>>
>>Feedback/suggestions and especially background reading links welcomed,
>>
> 
> OK, http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/meetings/tp2004#agenda is getting 
> closer to final. I've allocated topics to timeslots, so it should be clearer 
> what's when. The RDF-calendar session has been brought forward to monday am.
> 
> Detailed agenda-tweaking discussion follows. First some logistic
> points:
> 
>  * if anyone here expects to be at the Tech Plenary but hasn't registered
>    yet, please contact me ASAP since the registration forms have been
>    closed.
> 
> * if anyone is attending but still looking for accomodation, I believe 
>    the venue hotel, http://www.w3.org/2003/08/allgroupoverview.html#Venue
>    still has room allocations for W3C attendees. See URL for details.
> 
> * I have accepted all 'observer' requests for meeting attendence. As a
>    public Interest Group, the distinction between observers and quiet 
>    participants is not particularly distinct. The room has seating for 
>    35 participants plus about 35 more around the edge of room. The Tech 
>    Plenary registration system knows of 19 IG participants registered, 
>    plus ~26 observer requests.
> 
> 
> 
> Agenda issues (see http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/meetings/tp2004#agenda)
> 
> I've (after discussion with SW Coordination Group folks and Steven 
> Pemberton today, [1]) allocated 1 hour after lunch on monday for a joint 
> session with the HTML Working Group, who have just circulated a proposal 
> for RDF-in-XHTML. The monday session is intended largely for
> presentation of this work, as well as the GRDDL efforts. Further
> discussion will happen via the (proposed) SW Best Practices WG, who will 
> be addressing this topic later in the week (likely Fri AM, per [2]). 
> 
> The agenda consists largely of short topical sessions and discussion,
> with a number of "lightning talk" presentations of interesting work.
> There is currently unallocated time, so if other attendees would like to 
> give short, informal talks on an RDF / Semantic Web topic or project,
> let me know. We can leave a bit of flexibility in. 
> 
> I've tried to judge (based on mailing list and previous f2f discussion)
> which topics needed more than a 5 minutes lightning talk allocation.
> Previously we've found that lightning talks are a fun way to give a
> brief taster for a project/issue; please don't try to infer any sense of 
> implied importance from the length of the timeslots allocated. 
> 
> Jeremy, Patrick, I've included a slot for contexts/named graphs, but not yet for 
> Trix (http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2003/HPL-2003-268.html). Given
> the email discussions it generated, I'd be happy to have a lightning
> talk on that topic from you or Patrick. It relates to the RDF-in-XHTML 
> syntax proposal the HTML folks will be presenting on monday afternoon (sorry
> you'll likely miss that), so I wonder if we should fit it in monday 
> morning. If you'd like do do this, let me know.
> 
> Graham, I've included 20 mins for RDF datatyping on monday morning. I'd
> like to hear about your work on datatype-aware inference, but if you
> could include a brief overview of the new RDF datatyping machinery, I
> expect that'd be appreciated. It'd also be useful to have some
> round-the-table discussion in that slot to get a sense for how people
> are implementing this new aspect of RDF.
> 
> Janne, you asked about API discussion. I'm not sure what's best to do on
> that topic. Could you (and/or anyone else who'll be there) make a
> concrete proposal for a short session on this topic?
> 
> I don't expect the agenda to change a great deal now, but I shall
> continue fleshing out that page with materials, links and any new 
> agenda items through tommorrow. I'll also try to leave in some space 
> tuesday afternoon so we can allocate the time during the meeting
> according to the direction our discussions take. 
> 
> Thanks to everyone for their input. See some of you next week,
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2004/02/25/2004-02-25.html#1077723243.873964
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2004/03/04-SWBPD
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Sunday, 29 February 2004 04:30:41 UTC