- From: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:14:49 -0800
- To: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- CC: WebOnt WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
I will need to leave early from tomorrow morning's telecon - about 9:45 pacific time. Is it possible to include issues impacting the overview and me earlier? I think the main one is 3.4 below. (Overview has been published and I have updated the editors draft with the list sent out by jim). thx, deborah Guus Schreiber wrote: > WEB ONTOLOGY WORKING GROUP > AGENDA/LOGISTICS > February 20, 2003 > > 1200 US East Coast > 0900 US West Coast > 1700 London > 0200 Tokyo (next day) > > Duration: 90 minutes > > PHONE INFORMATION > To use Zakim: > Dial +1.617.761.6200 > At the "enter your passcode followed by the pound key" message, > enter 9326#. > Note: When you join the telecon please state your name > > CHAT INFO > Simultaneous IRC Chat > irc:irc.w3.org (port 6665) > #webont > > Chair: Jim Hendler > Scribe: Leo Obrst > > 1) ADMIN (10-15 min) > > 1.1 Role Call > > Regrets: Klein > See list archive for last-minute regrets > > 1.2 Approval of Minutes of last telecon > > PROPOSED to accept the following as a true record of Feb 13 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0193.html > > 1.3 Agenda Amendments > > 1.4 Telecon Schedule > > Next telecon: February 27 > Scribe: TBD > > 1.5 Tech plenary > > Tech plenary page: > http://www.w3.org/2002/10/allgroupoverview.html > > - Mar 4: editor's meeting on Tuesday > > - Mar 6-7: Initial Tech Plenary Semantic Web Architecture page - > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/meetings/tech-200303/ > > ACTION cahris: speaker phone at Tech plenary on Tuesday > > ACTION Jeremy: propose to discuss social meaning at tech plenary > DONE: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0196.html > > 2. RESPONSE TO RDFCore LC (10 min) > > ACTION Guus summary review of RDF Schema doc as proposal for the WG > -> > The chairs will sned a draft response to the list with a draft WG > response, including the detailed comments of Volz and ter Horst, the > XMLLiteral issue, and the (mixed) views on the social meaning issue. > > Context: > Review by Volz of RDF Schema doc: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0064.html > Review by ter Horst of RDF Semantics doc: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0067.html > Review by Baget of RDF Concepts doc: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0176.html > > 3 ISSUETTES (45-55 min) > > 3.1 Actions wrt. resolutions > > ACTION Jeremy to add 0542 case to test suite > > Action Carroll: XMLLiteral response to RDFCore > DONE: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0194.html > > ACTION Jeremy: to produce test case for XML literal > > ACTION Guus: explain AnnototationProperty in ref > > ACTION Guus: specify in owl.owl that label, seeAlso, isDefinedBy > DONE: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0277.html > > ACTION Mike S. will update guide to discuss annotations > > 3.2 OWL DL syntax > > See: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0489.html > > Carroll's OWL Syntax doc: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0146.html > > Note from Jeremy: the differences section highlights the crucial > differences everything else is either an orthogonal issuette, a bugfix or a > trade-off. > > Response by Peter: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0161.html > > See also: threed on complex restrictions: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0266.html > > 3.3 RDF compatibility > > See: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0083.html > > Proposal to resolve by Carroll: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0086.html > > Discussion: > Patel-Schenider: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0094.html > > Relevant input: Carrol's OWL syntax note: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0146.html > > Note from Carroll wrt. the latter: In the differences section > http://sealpc09.cnuce.cnr.it/jeremy/owl-syntax/2003-12-Feb/diffs.html > under RDF Compatibility/builtin names we see this issuette relates to one > sentence of the mapping rules that excludes lots, and I instead propose > that > we allow everything unless it is prohibited by the table of urirefs > > http://sealpc09.cnuce.cnr.it/jeremy/owl-syntax/2003-12-Feb/dl-syntax.html#builtin-urirefs > > 3.4 Relation RDFS and OWL Lite > > Context: see message by Hendler: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0130.html > > See also prior discussion in October: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Oct/0310.html > > 3.5 Imports and entailments > > Context: Carroll's message: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0014.html > > ACTION: Ian to get Sean to generate syntax checker test case for imports > (i.e., on failure assume doc is OWL-FULL) > DONE: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0207.html > > ACTION Jos: send negative experience on imports to list > DONE: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0192.html > > 4. DOCUMENT STATUS (10-15 min.) > > ACTION: Massimo publish reference (continued) > > ACTION: Connolly get Tests published > DONE http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/ > > ACTION: Connolly re: security > > ACTION: Jeremy/HP review Reference > > ACTION: Jim review Reference > DONE > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0264.html > > - Planning for LC candidate documents > - For all editors: include member list in ack section > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0263.html > > 6. AOB (0-5 min.) > > -- > A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam, > http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html -- Deborah L. McGuinness Knowledge Systems Laboratory Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/index.html (voice) 650 723 9770 (stanford fax) 650 725 5850 (computer fax) 801 705 0941
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 16:11:17 UTC