W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2002-11-01

14:00:03 Users on #rdfcore: @logger

14:53:02 <AaronSw> zakim, this will be rdf

14:53:03 <Zakim> ok, AaronSw

14:56:27 <AaronSw> heh, that limerick is great

14:57:01 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started

14:57:03 <Zakim> +??P7

14:57:46 <bwm> Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:57:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P7

14:57:55 <bwm> Zakim, ??p7 is bwm

14:57:56 <Zakim> +Bwm; got it

14:58:37 <Zakim> +??P11

14:58:39 <Zakim> -??P11

14:58:40 <Zakim> +??P11

14:59:03 <DaveB> i've dialled in, no voice, retrying

14:59:06 <Zakim> -??P11

14:59:52 <Zakim> +??P11

14:59:52 <Zakim> -??P11

14:59:53 <Zakim> +??P11

14:59:54 <Zakim> +??P12

15:00:12 <DaveB> Zakim, ??P11 is DaveB

15:00:14 <Zakim> +DaveB; got it

15:00:36 <Zakim> -Bwm

15:01:07 <Zakim> +??P7

15:01:19 * RRSAgent is logging

15:01:22 <bwm> Zakim, ??p7 is bwm

15:01:23 <Zakim> +Bwm; got it

15:01:31 <Zakim> +EMiller

15:01:40 <Zakim> +PatH

15:01:41 <Zakim> +Manola

15:01:45 <DanC> agenda + 1Nov http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0016.html (despite subject)

15:01:46 * Zakim notes agendum 1 added

15:02:03 <Zakim> +??P15

15:02:11 <Zakim> +DanC

15:02:20 <em> em has changed the topic to: rdfcore 2002-11-01 teleconference

15:02:30 <em> zakim, ??P15 is SteveP

15:02:31 <Zakim> +SteveP; got it

15:02:38 <em> zakim, who is here?

15:02:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see DaveB, ??P12, Bwm, EMiller, PatH, Manola, SteveP, DanC

15:02:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, danbri, bwm, Zakim, AaronSw, DanC, em, DaveB, logger

15:02:47 * DanC hears a loud humm

15:03:18 <em> zakim, ??P12 is PatrickS

15:03:20 <Zakim> +PatrickS; got it

15:03:27 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean

15:03:30 <DanC> Zakim, who's talking?

15:03:40 <Zakim> DanC, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Bwm (49%), PatrickS (5%), Mike_Dean (9%), EMiller (10%), DanC (15%)

15:03:56 <em> zakim, mute bwm

15:03:57 <Zakim> Bwm should now be muted

15:04:07 <em> zakim, unmute bwm

15:04:08 <Zakim> Bwm should no longer be muted

15:04:09 <bwm> I'll redial

15:04:12 <DanC> (you can "mute bwm temporarily" btw)

15:04:12 <Zakim> -Bwm

15:04:30 <Zakim> +AaronSw

15:04:41 <em> zakim, who is here?

15:04:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see DaveB, PatrickS, EMiller, PatH, Manola, SteveP, DanC, Mike_Dean, AaronSw

15:04:43 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, danbri, bwm, Zakim, AaronSw, DanC, em, DaveB, logger

15:04:58 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: RDF Core 1Nov; chair: BrianM; scribe: DaveB

15:05:09 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:10 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Mike_Dean

15:05:13 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:14 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose AaronSw

15:05:19 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:20 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Mike_Dean

15:05:23 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:24 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DaveB

15:05:26 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:27 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DaveB

15:05:30 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:31 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose EMiller

15:05:41 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:42 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose EMiller

15:05:45 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe

15:05:46 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DaveB

15:06:01 <bwm> I'm going to change rooms - phone now dead - back shortly

15:06:23 <DanC> scribe next week: MikeD, with Aaron's help

15:06:55 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?

15:06:55 <DaveB> roll call

15:06:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see DaveB, PatrickS, EMiller, PatH, Manola, SteveP, DanC, Mike_Dean, AaronSw

15:07:17 <DaveB> regrets jang

15:07:22 <Zakim> +??P17

15:07:25 <DaveB> regrets jjc

15:07:29 <AaronSw> zakim, ??P17 is BrianM

15:07:31 <Zakim> +BrianM; got it

15:07:33 <em> zakim, ??P17 is bwm

15:07:34 <Zakim> sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named '??P17'

15:07:49 <DanC> RESOLVED: Next telecon 8th Nov 2002

15:07:50 <DaveB> danbri: you dialling in?

15:08:13 * danbri delayed; phone prob; on ym way

15:08:19 <DaveB> minutes of 2002-10-25

15:08:32 <DanC> RESOLVED: to approve http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0386.html

15:08:42 <DaveB> item 6

15:08:44 <Zakim> +EricP

15:08:55 <DaveB> all done

15:08:56 <danbri> Zakim, EricP is temporarily DanBri

15:08:57 <Zakim> +DanBri; got it

15:09:02 <DaveB> item 7

15:09:22 <DaveB> done

15:09:26 <DaveB> item 8 doc schedule

15:10:55 <DaveB> a reminder of the schedule (bwm)

15:11:00 <DaveB> any comments?

15:11:03 <DaveB> item 9 concepts doc

15:11:09 <DaveB> (no comments on 8)

15:11:13 <DaveB> propose to publish

15:11:18 <DaveB> have 2 reviews (bwm, danc)

15:11:55 <DaveB> patH did some reviewing, comments similar to bwm

15:12:11 <DaveB> DanC: can you assure docs are ready?

15:12:24 <DaveB> path: yeah, can speak to that

15:12:53 <DaveB> bwm: some problems/caveats from DanC

15:13:04 <DanC>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0001.html

15:13:32 <DaveB> DanC; think my critical comments are non controversial

15:13:42 <DaveB> (note that neither of concepts wg chairs are present)

15:14:42 <DaveB> discussing msg ... 2002Nov/0001.html

15:14:43 * danbri studies http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/att-0490/01-DatatypesAndLiterals.html (spent yesterday on plane...)

15:15:16 <DaveB> item 1 - rdf does not include rdfs

15:16:09 <DaveB> item 2 - rdf datatyping

15:16:27 <DaveB> item 3 - remove universal, use flexible

15:16:48 <DaveB> item 4 - asserted expression - make a hyperlink

15:17:30 <DaveB> item 5 - g entailing g' - note more work needed hear here, more than one type of entailment

15:17:40 <DaveB> s/hear here/near here/

15:17:49 <DaveB> above are DanC's must-fix comments

15:18:00 <DaveB> if they are fixed and detail is checked

15:18:10 <DaveB> since only did up to 2.3.3

15:18:15 <DaveB> then ok - danc

15:18:19 <DaveB> path - no showstoppers

15:18:39 <DaveB> ACTION bwm: get editors of concepts to make changes requested and publish

15:18:41 * RRSAgent records action 1

15:18:54 <DaveB> ACTIOM em: staff contact for pubing concepts

15:19:04 <DaveB> heh

15:19:13 <DaveB> revising

15:19:27 <DaveB> both actions on em

15:19:36 <DaveB> (correction)

15:19:39 <em> ACTION em: to get editors of concepts to make changes outlined in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0001.html and requested and publish

15:19:40 * RRSAgent records action 2

15:19:56 <DaveB> RESOLVED: to publish concepts and abstract syntax doc

15:20:30 <DaveB> ACTION jjc/gk title change at editors discression

15:20:45 <DanC> (that's not an action; they're not here.)

15:20:48 <DaveB> yeah

15:20:58 <DaveB> s/ACTION/note/

15:21:03 <DaveB> em: woo hoo!

15:21:13 <DaveB> item 10 syntax doc

15:21:23 <DaveB> AaronSw: can you scribe now?

15:22:20 <AaronSw> sure

15:22:35 <AaronSw> DaveB: don't have time to converse with jjc before publishing

15:22:40 <AaronSw> DanC: Are you ready to publish?

15:22:54 <AaronSw> DaveB: sorta split. want to perfect it for jjc, but other people like it fine

15:23:03 <AaronSw> DanC: anyone else propose to publish?

15:23:09 <AaronSw> DaveB: no one will do that

15:23:26 <AaronSw> Brian: jjc asked me to speak for him, he's not willing to support publication unless his issues are met

15:23:55 <AaronSw> ... rest of document must take prescedence over section 2

15:24:01 <AaronSw> ... dave, can you meet that condition?

15:24:27 <AaronSw> DaveB: could say "this is intended...latest is correct". i don't think (informative) says that strongly. some things in that section are normative.

15:24:40 <AaronSw> ... "node element" is defined there

15:25:12 <AaronSw> bwm: sounds like you're willing to make that clear?

15:25:14 <AaronSw> DaveB: fine.

15:25:24 <AaronSw> ... does that sound good to everyone else?

15:25:33 <AaronSw> DanC: I have reservations, happy to address later.

15:26:09 <AaronSw> Brian: I think jjc will not oppose publication now. Anyone willing to propose publication?

15:26:29 <AaronSw> DaveB: lots of editorial issues in sec2 and elsewhere? some substantial ones. will we approve at this stage?

15:26:57 <AaronSw> DaveB: can we publish if we change?

15:27:02 <AaronSw> DanC: oh yeah

15:27:19 <AaronSw> DaveB: publish concepts first and i can improve things

15:27:25 <AaronSw> ... but i'll make the changes in the agenda

15:27:37 <AaronSw> Brian: rest is down to editor's discretion. do what you can, but get it out

15:27:51 <AaronSw> DaveB: technical cahnges (ntriples) ignored

15:28:06 <AaronSw> daveb, frank, eric

15:28:10 <AaronSw> all propose to publish

15:28:15 <AaronSw> no objections

15:28:19 <AaronSw> team contact: eric

15:28:26 <AaronSw> ACTION eric: arrange publication of syntax with daveb

15:28:27 * RRSAgent records action 3

15:28:31 <DaveB> I'll go back to scribing, thanks eric

15:28:33 <DaveB> aaron

15:28:34 <DaveB> !

15:28:35 <AaronSw> sure

15:28:50 * em mutes a little woo hoo.. will hold back for a bit...

15:28:51 <DaveB> item 11

15:28:54 <DaveB> primer

15:28:59 <DaveB> new draft out for review

15:29:21 <DanC> oops; apologies; I didn't do it.

15:29:41 <DaveB> frankm: a desc of rdf:value is there, not sure if it s right yet :)

15:29:49 <AaronSw> em: 0225#17 is DONE

15:30:19 * DaveB hunts for hash on OSX kbd

15:30:26 <DaveB> 04-19-6 not sure

15:30:57 <DaveB> 08-23#1 got ALT in thjere

15:31:06 <DaveB> 09-13#5 DONE

15:31:19 <DaveB> got a note in beiginning of schema scection

15:31:42 <DaveB> 04-19#6 continued

15:31:52 <DaveB> call for reviewers

15:31:59 <AaronSw> zakim, mute aaronsw

15:32:00 <Zakim> AaronSw should now be muted

15:32:17 <DaveB> ACTION daveb: will look at syntax section

15:32:18 * RRSAgent records action 4

15:32:25 <DaveB> ACTIOn danbri: look at schema section of primer

15:32:45 <DaveB> ACTION stevep: review all of primer

15:32:46 * RRSAgent records action 5

15:33:15 <DaveB> danbri: q if status of docs section notes that there is some doc overlap

15:33:20 <DaveB> .. ask that team contact check this

15:33:50 <DaveB> frankm: for reviewers, also make notes where there is overlap and "change this" notes if needed

15:34:51 <DaveB> ACTION frankm: discuss overlap between primer & concepts doc with editors

15:34:53 * RRSAgent records action 6

15:34:58 <danbri> for status-s, we might say "The WG acknowledge that their is some overlap between the normative specs and the primer, and in particular solicit feedback from reviewers on the partitioning of content between these documents"

15:34:59 <DaveB> we'd like to action them to read it ;)

15:35:01 <danbri> or somesuch

15:35:08 <DaveB> ACTION bwm: review all of primer

15:35:09 * RRSAgent records action 7

15:35:24 <Zakim> +AaronSw.a

15:35:36 <danbri> em, does that SOTD blurb work for you?

15:35:43 <Zakim> -AaronSw

15:36:01 <DaveB> em: actions aren't exclusive, other WG members should read this if you can

15:36:09 <em> danbri, yes

15:36:12 <em> thanks

15:36:18 <DaveB> ACTION Patricks: review datatypes in primer

15:36:19 * RRSAgent records action 8

15:36:55 <DaveB> frankm requests patH to look at reification section

15:37:10 <DaveB> ACTION: patH look at reification section in primer

15:37:12 * RRSAgent records action 9

15:37:33 <DaveB> DanC: Note he has a critical comment on rdf-in-html section - not in that way

15:37:35 <DaveB> not encouraging at least

15:37:51 <DaveB> rather, we were not encouraging people to do that

15:38:56 <DaveB> maybe take embedding rdf-in-html issue to email

15:39:00 <DanC>http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf

15:39:14 <DanC> 9Nov decision http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0294.html

15:39:18 <DaveB> frankm: not a strong interest in that sec being there

15:39:26 <DaveB> .. has seemed to be a natural q

15:39:33 <DaveB> item 12 model thory

15:39:56 <DaveB> PatH: likely done a week today, possibly wednesday

15:40:24 <DaveB> bwm: try to get an email allowing to publish

15:40:32 <DaveB> if necessary

15:40:52 <DaveB> PatH: some issues/failures to recall what decision was ;)

15:41:08 <DaveB> DanC: decisions are a matter of record in minutes

15:41:26 <DaveB> .. ask for pointers to records, authorative source

15:41:30 <DaveB> ... either the minutes, or docs

15:41:57 <DaveB> bwm: issuets

15:42:47 <DaveB> (can somebody find bwm's msg url)

15:42:59 <DaveB> abs syntax details - labeled

15:43:48 <DaveB> change to PatH suggestion - nodes are URI-fs, literals or blanks

15:44:05 <DaveB> DaveB: syntax doc has been changed to this form

15:44:15 <DaveB> frankm: asked to clarify

15:45:07 <DaveB> frankm: when I desc pics of graphs, talking of picture using "labeled with URI-ref" nodes but in rdf, the nodes are URIs

15:45:33 <DaveB> bwm: subject to objections from jjc/gk, will go with nodes are URI-refs

15:45:48 <DaveB> DanC: happy with risk it isn't done in this draft

15:46:18 <DaveB> DECISION: use nodes are URI-refs notation, subject to confirmation/objections from jjc/gk

15:46:31 <DaveB> - do datatype literals have lang-tags

15:47:11 <DaveB> DanC: no to opening this issue for now until impl experience

15:47:20 <DaveB> PatH: need an explanation of them for MT

15:47:50 <DaveB> bwm: ignore the lang tags, they have no semantic significance. "semantic residue"

15:48:23 <DaveB> DanC: get this reviewed by i18n wg

15:48:51 <DaveB> bwm: not reopening

15:49:23 <DaveB> ACTION bwm: Ask i18wg to review the datatype-lang form

15:49:24 * RRSAgent records action 10

15:49:33 <DaveB> - non datatype literals

15:49:38 <DaveB> denote themselves

15:50:00 <DaveB> DanC: maybe union of (string, (string, lang)) ?

15:50:31 <DaveB> bwm: is that string an xsd:string ?

15:50:44 <DaveB> DanC: doesn't seem necessary to specify

15:51:01 <DaveB> as in it is a seq of unicode chars, same defn as xsd:string

15:51:10 <DaveB> ... so same value spacae

15:51:17 <DaveB> bwm: isn't that same as URIs?

15:51:46 <DaveB> PatH: could say these are moot, datatype questions which is up to how you use dataypes?

15:52:23 <DaveB> DanC: I want the strings to be xsd:string; satisfyable, not guranteed

15:52:26 <DaveB> not rule it out/in

15:53:16 <DaveB> DECISION: non datatype literals is union of (strings and pair of (string, lang tag)). Not to specify if the strings are same as xsd;string or not.

15:53:40 <DaveB> ACTION DanC: create test cases for non-datatyped/simple literals

15:53:42 * RRSAgent records action 11

15:54:38 <DaveB> - schema what's in the class rdf:Literal

15:54:45 <danbri> I'd love to know!

15:55:53 <Zakim> -AaronSw.a

15:56:39 <DaveB> DECISION: all datatype values are members of rdfs:Literal

15:56:41 <DanC> [[[

15:56:41 <DanC> The object of a statement (i.e., the property value) can be another resource or it can be a literal; i.e., a resource (specified by a URI) or a simple string or other primitive datatype defined by XML. In RDF terms, a literal may have content that is XML markup but is not further evaluated by the RDF processor.

15:56:48 <DanC> ]]] -- http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222

15:58:12 <DaveB> meeting extended for 15 minutes, no more than 30

15:58:17 <DaveB> - list semantics

15:58:40 <DaveB> bwm: we did decide a list semantics

15:58:48 <DaveB> oops

15:58:59 <DaveB> bwm: we did decide there was no list semantics

15:59:35 <DaveB> DanC: want to think about it some more since although we added it for webont, they don't seem to have an advocate that there

15:59:42 <DaveB> s/that there/for that there/

15:59:56 <DaveB> PatH: not closed containers

16:00:17 <DaveB> DanC: not a complete solution for it, but the necessary and sufficient bits

16:00:43 <DaveB> PatH: really going to go with something that has no semantic meaning?

16:01:16 <DaveB> reason for it in RDF is so to put it in the parser

16:01:48 <DaveB> PatH: isn't it wierd that rdf things are given a semantic by other WGs?

16:02:57 <DaveB> - datatypes in the semantics

16:03:28 <DaveB> DanC: two forms of entailment says WG, PatH proposed one?

16:03:36 <DaveB> PatH: old issue, can see a way around it?

16:03:39 <DaveB> s/?//

16:03:44 <danbri> re 'rdf things given semantics by other WGs': no, seems fine. More expressive languages can better describe the meaning of many rdf: and rdfs: constructs

16:03:51 <DaveB> ... can do it the way it was suggested

16:04:18 <DaveB> ... and build things up with datatypes

16:04:34 <DaveB> ... rdf, rdf+DT, rdfs ?

16:04:37 <DaveB> DanC: yeah

16:04:59 <DaveB> PatrickS: how do you do that without rdfs?

16:05:22 <DaveB> PatH: more sense to put DT in rdfs layer?

16:05:36 <DaveB> yes

16:05:56 <DaveB> item 13

16:06:22 <DaveB> testcases

16:06:58 <DaveB> ACTION bwm: ask JanG about state of testcases wd

16:07:00 * RRSAgent records action 12

16:07:05 <DaveB> DaveB: not much in ntriples ection

16:07:08 <DaveB> item 14 schema

16:07:21 <DaveB> danbri: working on new draft

16:08:00 <DaveB> danbri expects a draft on monday 4th

16:08:12 <DaveB> ACTION DanC: review schema draft

16:08:13 * RRSAgent records action 13

16:08:27 <DaveB> continued action with syncing with primer, em+danbri

16:08:45 <DaveB> ACTION danbri: Contact jjc/gk to ask them to review schema wd

16:08:46 * RRSAgent records action 14

16:08:56 <DaveB> ACTION bwm: review schema wd

16:08:58 * RRSAgent records action 15

16:09:00 <DaveB> s/wd/draft/

16:09:26 <DaveB> bwm: comments as early as poss, of course - thanks

16:09:54 <DaveB> item 15 lbase

16:10:02 <DaveB> bwm: who has reviwed it?

16:10:39 <DaveB> bwm: jjc has reviewed

16:10:57 <DaveB> PatH: jjc's comments initially didn't like it, now ok?

16:12:03 <DaveB> bwm: an rdf core spin off doc ...

16:12:22 <DaveB> ... any proposers as a useful doc for discussion

16:12:28 <DaveB> propose: DAnC, seconded DaveB

16:12:41 <DaveB> PatH: want to add text for acks to other existing work

16:12:58 <DaveB> DECISION: approved publication of lbase note

16:13:09 <DaveB> ACTION danbri: team contact for pubing lbase

16:13:10 * RRSAgent records action 16

16:15:05 <DaveB> END OF MEETING

16:15:06 <Zakim> -BrianM

16:15:08 <Zakim> -PatrickS

16:15:09 <Zakim> -SteveP

16:15:10 <Zakim> -PatH

16:15:10 <Zakim> -DaveB

16:15:11 <Zakim> -DanBri

16:15:11 <Zakim> -Manola

16:15:13 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean

16:15:21 <Zakim> -DanC

16:15:34 <Zakim> -EMiller

16:15:36 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended

17:49:44 * Zakim excuses himself; his presence no longer seems to be needed