13:01:05 logger_1 has joined #rdfcore 13:01:05 Users on #rdfcore: @logger_1 13:46:42 danbri has joined #rdfcore 13:57:55 bwm has joined #rdfcore 13:58:35 Jema has joined #rdfcore 13:58:47 -hi 13:58:48 Hi. I'm Jema, the Jena meeting assistant 14:00:32 DaveB has joined #rdfcore 14:00:43 bwm, I will be joining (hopefully just a little) late. Sent mail. biab. 14:00:55 AaronSw\ has joined #rdfcore 14:01:06 Zakim has joined #rdfcore 14:01:09 zakim, this is RDF\ 14:01:12 sorry, AaronSw\, I do not see a conference named 'RDF\' 14:01:14 zakim, this is RDF 14:01:15 ok, AaronSw\ 14:01:21 AaronSw\ is now known as AaronSw 14:01:38 +??P11 14:01:40 zakim, who's here? 14:01:41 On the phone I see ??P5, AaronSw, ??P11 14:01:42 On IRC I see Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1 14:01:50 +Manola 14:01:52 zakim, ??P11 is HP 14:01:54 +HP; got it 14:01:58 zakim, ??P5 is SteveP 14:02:00 +SteveP; got it 14:02:04 zakim, HP has Jeremy 14:02:06 +Jeremy; got it 14:02:06 +??P13 14:02:13 zakim, ??P13 is ILRT 14:02:15 +ILRT; got it 14:02:17 zakim, ILRT has DaveB 14:02:19 +DaveB; got it 14:02:20 zakim, who's here/ 14:02:21 I don't understand 'who's here/', AaronSw. Try /msg Zakim help 14:02:25 zakim, who's here? 14:02:26 On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT 14:02:27 HP has Jeremy 14:02:28 ILRT has DaveB 14:02:29 On IRC I see Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1 14:02:56 jjc has joined #rdfcore 14:03:11 who knows how to tell zakim that hp=brian+jeremy? 14:03:24 zakim, who is here? 14:03:26 On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT 14:03:26 HP has Jeremy 14:03:26 ILRT has DaveB 14:03:27 On IRC I see jjc, Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1 14:03:32 Jang's here too 14:03:34 zakim, HP also has Brian 14:03:37 +Brian; got it 14:03:39 DaveB is now known as daveb 14:03:40 zakim, ILRT also has JanG 14:03:41 +JanG; got it 14:03:43 daveb is now known as dave-jan 14:03:54 zakim, who is here 14:03:55 jjc, you need to end that query with '?' 14:03:58 zakim, who is here? 14:03:59 On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT 14:03:59 HP has Jeremy, Brian 14:04:00 ILRT has DaveB, JanG 14:04:01 On IRC I see jjc, Zakim, AaronSw, dave-jan, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1 14:04:05 dave-jan is now known as db-scribe 14:04:34 zakim, who is here? 14:04:36 On the phone I see SteveP, AaronSw, HP, Manola, ILRT 14:04:36 HP has Jeremy, Brian 14:04:37 ILRT has DaveB, JanG 14:04:37 On IRC I see jjc, Zakim, AaronSw, db-scribe, Jema, bwm, danbri, logger_1 14:05:09 roll call above 14:05:26 regrets miked, rond, grahamk, patrickS 14:05:35 item 3 14:05:58 rond asks to consider ocmmenting on xpointer WDs 14:06:04 set of WDs 14:06:11 bwm: AOB 14:06:19 item 4 14:06:37 danbri? 14:07:00 donm, same time next week 14:07:01 item 5 14:07:18 still waiting for 2002-06-14 minutes 14:07:48 bwm: consider abandoning it, i.e. no minutes, no official meeting 14:07:49 ? 14:08:22 danbri emails he'll be back asap 14:09:05 action bwm: assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up 14:09:36 +Pat_Hayes 14:09:39 -action bwm: assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up 14:09:40 Jema could not parse the action command. Please separate the action holder from the action by a '/' character 14:09:44 db-scribe has quit 14:09:50 -action bwm/ assure minutes of 2002-06-14 are written up 14:09:51 Jema notes action 2002-07-12#1 14:10:00 dajobe-la has joined #rdfcore 14:10:09 oops, that's what the 'X' button does 14:10:36 This Pat Hayes sounds suspiciously like DanC. 14:10:56 daveb: email bwm with updated f2f irc logs, lost 14:11:06 confirm: patH has arrived 14:11:09 item 6 14:11:14 minutes of 2002-06-28 14:11:17 approved 14:11:39 confirming, meeting last week was called off since early on, few people around 14:11:46 item 7(that was) 14:11:47 item 8 14:11:52 done 14:11:54 item 9 14:12:03 withdrawn 14:12:32 i.e. rdfms-assertion words in new document 14:12:41 so patH action no longer needed 14:12:44 item 10 14:12:46 XMLP review 14:13:12 deadline next week 14:13:26 for comments from WG, need to have things early next week 14:13:36 * danbri back, nods, looks guilty, dials in 14:13:43 please do 14:13:58 -action bwm: remind danbri need to get this sorted for next week 14:13:59 Jema could not parse the action command. Please separate the action holder from the action by a '/' character 14:14:09 -action bwm / remind danbri need to get this sorted for next week 14:14:10 Jema notes action 2002-07-12#2 14:14:26 item 11 14:14:42 reserved vocab bug from jjc? 14:14:46 jjc: have done this 14:14:47 ptr? 14:15:22 +DanBri 14:15:22 +danbri 14:15:23 * Zakim saw DanBri just arrive 14:15:34 jjc looks for ptr 14:15:38 back to xmlp review 14:15:57 danbri: dropped the ball, 14:17:20 http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-soap12-part2-20020626/ 14:17:29 danbri: sec 2 is bit needs to focus on 14:17:32 s/sec/part/ 14:17:34 ajunct 14:18:32 deadline 19 July 2002 14:18:36 for comments 14:18:44 bwm: i ntend to approve at next telcon 14:18:46 [[ 14:18:48 Comments on this document should be sent to xmlp-comments@w3.org (public archive [14]). It is inappropriate to send discussion email to this address. Comments should be sent during the last call review period, which ends on 19 July 2002. 14:18:49 ]] 14:18:49 .. so want the comments early next week 14:19:06 jang: also will look at part 2 and try to comment 14:19:15 -action jang / review SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts 14:19:16 Jema notes action 2002-07-12#3 14:19:30 http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-soap12-part2-20020626/#datamodel [[ 14:19:31 The SOAP Data Model represents application-defined data structures and values as a directed edge-labeled graph of nodes. Components of this graph are described in the following sections. 14:19:33 ]] 14:19:41 [[ 14:19:43 3. SOAP Encoding 14:19:43 SOAP Encoding describes how to encode instances of data that conform to the data model described in 2. SOAP Data Model. 14:19:44 ]] 14:19:46 -action danbri / review SOAP Part 2: Adjuncts (and other bits) by Tuesday 16th 14:19:47 Jema notes action 2002-07-12#4 14:20:05 danbri: could we use soap encoding and transport for exchange rather than our ow 14:20:06 n 14:20:37 daveb: comment on use of soap identifiers - uris, qnames, strings 14:20:45 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0001.html 14:20:46 back to item 11 14:20:47 above: 14:20:55 -agenda 11 14:21:27 above url was jjc's message - action DONE 14:21:38 item 12 14:21:53 -agenda next 14:21:59 -hi 14:22:00 Hi. I'm Jema, the Jena meeting assistant 14:22:08 jjc: flying a kite, in jena they have repeated requests to roundtrip their rdf/xml 14:22:16 and we increasingly need to support it 14:22:24 has the WG any inclination to support it? 14:22:30 or postponed to rdf2? 14:22:45 on reflection, mistake I feel, any support for this? 14:22:53 jang: agree 14:23:10 esp if soap can encode rdf roundtrip wise 14:23:32 patH: issue roundtrip rdf/xml graph and get back same bnodes? or isomorphic? 14:23:36 jang: isomorphic 14:23:55 daveb: smaller change than others, less of a problem 14:24:09 danbri: use damlUnambigprop 14:24:33 ...as one option 14:24:46 bwm: some people say good thing, not big change, no objetions 14:24:57 jang: no back compat issue, won't break existing docs 14:25:09 danbri: getting this right would improve credibility? 14:25:14 s/?// 14:25:36 bwm: suggest that jjc make a specific proposal to WG and do yes/no 14:25:42 DanC_ has joined #rdfcore 14:26:23 -action jjc / make a specific proposal on node identifiers in rdf/xml uri for WG consideration 14:26:24 Jema notes action 2002-07-12#5 14:26:29 * DanC_ waves, having returned from the dentist. Apologies for missing the telcon without notice. 14:26:39 frankm: askes us to use node identifiers rather than "bnodes" terminology 14:26:52 jang: minimal changes to test cases? 14:26:57 jjc, pls do it with a new attribute, not some wierd URI-ish syntax in rdf:about 14:27:50 daveb: notes that change would make it poss to make xml results of test cases 14:28:08 jang: seconds DanC_ 14:28:45 jjc will bear above comment in mind 14:28:49 daveb: I don't mind 14:29:06 AaronSw: are we opening up the rest of syntax incomplete issues? 14:29:13 bwm: not this time around 14:29:21 PatH: nice try :) 14:29:25 item 13 14:29:28 phew 14:29:29 -agenda 13 14:30:19 accepted as guideline for triples 14:30:21 item 14 14:31:06 back to item 13 14:31:18 bwm: other things between dopcs that we need to agree on, from f2f 14:31:23 consistency issues 14:31:29 jjc: way that references were done 14:31:54 daveb: doc publishing format guide explains that 14:32:18 danbri: illustrations - how much do we care that we use the same graphing tools 14:32:24 ... don't care much. 14:32:29 bwm: graphing look and feel 14:32:48 PatH: using omnigraffle 14:33:00 on mac 14:33:26 * danbri too 14:33:29 jang: uris for examples 14:34:09 daveb: have to use example.org, example.com, ... 14:34:23 urls in WDs, even if just body text, have to be u sed 14:34:29 ditto for examples such as rdf/xml 14:34:39 and test cases 14:35:02 bwm: standard prefix for that too ("ex:") 14:35:16 See RFC2606 Reserved Top Level DNS Names 14:35:21 Path: want to write things that look triples, but have things that aren't such as variables that want to use for explanation 14:35:23 eg http://rfc.net/rfc2606.html 14:35:24 but are in triples syntax 14:35:31 [[ 14:35:32 To reduce the likelihood of conflict and confusion, a few top level 14:35:32 domain names are reserved for use in private testing, as examples in 14:35:32 documentation, and the like. In addition, a few second level domain 14:35:32 names reserved for use as examples are documented. 14:35:33 ]] 14:35:42 jang: should be ok, using "aaa bbb ccc." form 14:36:02 item 14 14:36:07 reviwe of proposed "model" doc 14:36:16 don't use xxx (triggers spam filters :) 14:36:35 bwm: purpose and audience of primer 14:36:47 ooh, random.example or something.test will work 14:36:49 frankM: a general introduction to RDF to msot people 14:37:10 ... has to handle a wide audience, with as few as poss assumptions about previous knowledge 14:37:24 and that was reasoning behind saying a little behind each of the documents 14:37:33 and length of explanation about graphs, triples 14:37:38 re illustrations: I've had good luck with dia lately. http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2002/07/11/2002-07-11.html#1026372465.427020 14:37:49 i.e. enough for somebody who is coming to this wants to know 14:38:24 bwm: some want a quickstart doc 14:38:38 frankm: assumes they know some things already, say XML, and graphs then you can do that 14:38:54 ... not a quickstart guide 14:39:13 sine don't want to make assumptions of who readers area 14:39:14 are 14:39:22 frank: primer is explicitly not a quick start guide because i don't want to assume the readers have the background 14:40:06 more discussion 14:40:10 new model doc: 14:40:33 jjc: current doc assumes reader wants to read a normative rdf spec and this is where they start 14:40:49 in particular sec 3 is intended to be a list of all normative stuff 14:40:58 and the complete normative statements by reference 14:41:13 and expecting a skilled reader 14:41:27 who wants to have the works and other speciifc things, including the rdf datamodel 14:41:42 PatH: it sounds like the rdf desk reference 14:42:11 frankm: seen size of physicians desk reference? 14:43:05 daveb: soap and xml schema don't ahve one of these 14:43:23 daveb: why do we have this new 20 page doc this late 14:43:30 jjc: material from different places 14:43:37 for the skilled reader as intro material 14:45:08 ... 14:45:38 fmanola: material in M&S which was explantory in nature which has exlcuded from other specs 14:45:59 ... and should be kept around, but primer was being overloaded - too long 14:46:37 .. needed a different home but end up with a kind of scrapbook 14:46:57 ... so need to fill it out to make it look more coherent 14:47:04 which tends to duplicate other stuff 14:47:14 jjc: need to make normative statements that dont' fit in other docs 14:47:41 bwm: move on 14:47:55 bwm: goal - uncomfortable with t his pointing to all other rdf specs 14:48:22 since will need updating 14:49:08 bwm: general observation - same thing being said several times, in overview and in sec 3 for e.g. saying we have a mT - repetative 14:49:19 main point - don't feel it is right this as a top pointer 14:49:29 because this is a normative spec and updating 14:50:02 daveb: I support this as a sibling 14:50:05 rather top doc 14:50:07 bwm: title 14:50:16 jjc: current title reflects this as top doc 14:50:27 then if not goal, need renaming 14:50:40 bwm: suggest as RDF - Abstract Data Model? 14:50:48 suggestion, come back later 14:51:04 -agenda 14 14:51:24 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0022.html 14:51:58 bwm: if we drop goal, then sec 3 largely goes 14:52:01 ? 14:52:07 jjc: I suspect so 14:52:56 bwm: gk suggests sec 5 some bits to schema - vocab 14:53:07 jjc: quite diff in flavour to current schema spec 14:53:34 ... and other M&S bits which normative status 14:54:02 bwm: danbri - sec5 stuff goto schema? 14:54:16 can someone post a link? 14:54:21 above 14:54:38 danbri: for describing property, classes - yeah 14:54:48 bwm: we'll try that 14:55:11 -action danbri / try to move sec 5 'model' doc stuff into schema 14:55:12 Jema notes action 2002-07-12#6 14:55:20 or if not,t ry to move it back 14:55:32 sec 6 rdf & html to primer? 14:55:35 frankm: yes 14:55:52 aha, http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-basics/2002-06-27/Overview.htm 14:56:02 was linked from above 14:56:44 path; not normative if in primer, problem? 14:56:52 frankm: well it is useful, but we don't say too much now 14:57:05 sec 6.2 this is 14:57:18 6.4 seems xml syntax 14:57:52 propose move 6.4 to syntax 14:57:59 daveb: alreayd there 14:58:34 daveb: notes sec 3.1.1 also duplicates syntax but hey, sec 3 going ;) 14:58:52 6.5 to primer 14:59:12 frankm agrees 14:59:38 --- 14:59:39 command not recognised 14:59:44 stop for now 14:59:46 review xptr spec? 14:59:49 (AOB) 15:00:16 bwm: no volunteers here 15:00:39 bwm: DONE 15:00:42 END OF MEETING 15:00:46 my concern is more whewther it comments on us 15:01:11 -DanBri 15:01:12 command not recognised 15:01:28 -close 15:01:29 The meeting is closed 15:01:30 the action/decision list has been mailed 15:02:03 -Pat_Hayes 15:02:04 command not recognised 15:04:33 there's also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-announce/ 15:05:15 -SteveP 15:05:16 command not recognised 15:16:07 jjc has quit 15:16:47 -Manola 15:16:48 command not recognised 15:16:49 -HP 15:16:50 -ILRT 15:16:50 command not recognised 15:16:51 command not recognised 15:16:51 it's too bad because the IE team doesn't want to support *+xml 15:16:54 -AaronSw 15:16:55 SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended 15:16:55 command not recognised 15:17:03 not even svg? 15:17:17 what about mac ie, diff team, isn't it? 15:17:24 anyway, later... 15:17:29 dajobe-la has quit 15:17:29 yeah, it is 15:17:46 SVG is why they don't want to support it 15:17:53 because they hand that off to the svg plugin 15:17:59 AaronSw has quit 15:22:56 Jema has quit 15:23:17 bwm has quit 15:27:04 DanC_ has quit 15:28:18 DanC_ has joined #rdfcore 15:42:15 danbri has left #rdfcore 16:21:23 * Zakim excuses himself; his presence no longer seems to be needed 16:21:23 Zakim has left #rdfcore 16:26:04 DanC_ has left #rdfcore