Agenda/Logistics - Telecon May 15, 2003

Time: Thu, 15 May at 12p U.S. Eastern. 60 to 90 min.
bridge: +1.617.761.6200 then 9326#.

1. Administrivia

Chair: Hendler
Scribe: TBD  (note - JJC volunteered, but he will be presenting a 
main agenda item, so perhaps we should solicit a volunteer)

Role Call

Approve Minutes of May 8

Next telecon: May 22 is WWW Conference - should we skip or meet 
anyway (regrets at least Jim, Dan, Sandro)?

Action review:
- Guus to ping Hori about pubrules testing of XML Syntax draft
- Jim Hendler, Sandro Hawke, and Pat Hayes to review test document.
- Jim Hendler to report back on implementation feedback.
- Peter Patel-Schneider to piddle with ontology name.
- Dan Connolly to create a test for this.
- Jim Hendler and Dan Connolly to compose a response to the LC comment on
local and compound keys.
- Peter Patel-Scheider to compose a response to Jeremy's technical
issue comment.

- Pat Hayes to discuss ramifications of removing type List triples
with S and AS co-editor.
- Guus Schreiber to discuss type List triples issue with Jeremy in
more detail

- Guus Schreiber to let Brian McBride know that this issue is not
yet resolved in WebOnt.

ACTION: Patel-Schneider to work on proof for issue 5.26 B1,B2
Peter no longer prepared to specify a completion date.
ACTION JimH: notify the SemWeb CG that Rector's comment has introduced
a schedule risk
ACTION Hori: deliver pubrules-happy draft
ACTION Connolly: publish XML syntax

2.0 Last Call of Test Document
Main agenda item will be moving Test to Last Call.  Please read
Jeremy's email from [1]  and the accompanying thread(s).

3.0 Status of XMLLiteral issue
I do not think we answered Brian's question whether the RDFCore 
response to the XMLLiteral comment was satisfactory. See:

Jeremy asked us to wait until RDFCore decided on pfps08, which is 
apparently a related comment by Peter.

See also item 5 of the April 10 minutes:

4.0 Comments Discussion
We will also review some of the open comments that are not aimed at
specific documents, and see if any merit new issues or reopening old

Specific issues:
1 - Should we open/reopen placement inclusion of oneOf and hasValue in OWL DL?
(See thread on response to Martin Merry)
Currently FaCT, Cerebra and Racer do NOT implement totality of our 
current OWL DL design - does it need rethinking?

2 - Should we reopen issue of whether we need owl:class
Comments have asked if this is still needed, response required

5.0 AOB

>  [1]

Professor James Hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)

Received on Thursday, 15 May 2003 07:34:28 UTC