W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2002-05-17

13:01:07 Users on #rdfcore: @logger_1

13:07:36 <DaveB> DaveB has changed the topic to: RDF Core WG telecon agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/20

13:07:45 <DaveB> DaveB has changed the topic to: RDF Core WG http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002May/0052.html

14:04:40 <DanCon> regrets. apologies re ACTION:2002-05-03#7

14:07:34 <bwm> regrets from danbri, jan, danc, graham

14:07:39 <bwm> bwm here

14:07:42 <bwm> daveb here

14:07:46 <bwm> frank absent

14:07:59 <bwm> s/frank/frankb/

14:08:01 <bwm> jjc present

14:08:07 <bwm> ron presetn

14:08:16 <bwm> bill dehora absent

14:08:19 <bwm> jos here

14:08:24 <bwm> rael absent

14:08:32 <bwm> martyn present

14:08:43 <bwm> yahsi absent

14:08:51 <bwm> michawl absent

14:08:54 <bwm> kwon absent

14:09:00 <bwm> ora ansent

14:09:09 <bwm> frankm pres

14:09:14 <bwm> sato absent

14:09:21 <bwm> stephen pres

14:09:25 <bwm> pierre absent

14:09:30 <bwm> patrick - regrets

14:09:38 <bwm> aaron absent

14:09:44 <bwm> miked pre

14:09:51 <bwm> guha present

14:09:56 <bwm> path pres

14:10:03 <bwm> sergey absent

14:11:27 <bwm_> minutes approved

14:11:57 <bwm_> www20002

14:12:04 <bwm_> best ever for rdf

14:12:14 <bwm_> all the attention went to semantic web and rdf

14:12:28 <bwm_> getting a level of critiical mass

14:12:41 <bwm_> interest in sw from many of the major companies

14:12:46 <bwm_> not just a niche thing

14:17:47 <DanCon> oh... regrets from EricM and Danbri; they're on holiday.

14:19:37 <JosD> action on DaveB to own issue faq-html-compliance

14:20:08 <JosD> ========= 8: Review comments on Charmod

14:21:55 <JosD> both JeremyC and DaveB have been reviewing and commenting Charmod extensively

14:24:20 <JosD> (if I understood it well) we are not going to be compliant (Charmod is not stable)

14:24:42 <JosD> Action on Jeremy to update the comments

14:25:19 <JosD> ... making the comments on IRI draft more alligned with Dave's points

14:28:22 <JosD> ... clear (following Jeremy) that we are not going to conform to Charmod

14:29:17 <JosD> Jeremy: we dont have a processing model

14:30:46 <JosD> ========= 9: Syntax Doc: serializing b-nodes

14:33:11 <JosD> there was action:2002-04-26#11 bwm per DanBri request, add issue of serialization

14:34:22 <JosD> action on Jeremy to propose updated text to cope with this issue

14:35:07 <JosD> ============ interludium == next f2f meeting

14:35:48 <JosD> action on Brian to make web/registration page

14:41:11 <JosD> proposal is to stay at the hotel Holiday Inn (next door to HP)

14:41:20 <JosD> --> decided

14:42:05 <JosD> ========= 10: defining literal equality

14:43:13 <JosD> Pat: we should get (in the Syntax document) crystal clear when we have identity

14:44:08 <JosD> Brian: raises concerns w.r.t. abstract versus concrete syntax and where we should put it

14:45:08 <JosD> Dave: start of in the syntax document

14:46:14 <JosD> action on Jeremy (again) to propose wording for syntax document

14:46:27 <JosD> welcome to Sergey!

14:47:00 <JosD> Sergey wonders about how literals are doing...

14:47:28 <JosD> ...what does the literal denote

14:48:15 <JosD> MT: self denoting character string

14:48:49 <JosD> Pat: it is related with dt stuff

14:50:42 <JosD> Sergey will further clarify his questions via email

14:50:58 <JosD> ========= 11: daml:collection

14:51:23 <JosD> DanC is not here -- skipped

14:51:41 <JosD> ========= 12: Issue: rdfms-assertion

14:53:17 <JosD> Brian explains his exchange with TimBL who suggests that appropriate words appear in mime-type document

14:53:58 <JosD> ... and agrees that context modifies interpretation

14:55:29 <JosD> PatH: the meaning is what it is (per MT I guess) / what one DOES with it is a different matter

14:57:00 <JosD> ... i.e. believe it, deny it, question it, ...

14:57:45 <JosD> Brian: the default would be "mean it"

14:58:54 <JosD> action on DaveB to review recent PAG decision on specification and MIME types and recommend to the group

15:00:55 <JosD> ========= MEETING ADJOURNED