W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2003-01-17

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

14:48:29 <Aaron-lur> Aaron-lur is now known as Aar-lurk

14:48:36 <Aar-lurk> Aar-lurk is now known as ASw-lurk

14:58:18 <ericm> ericm has changed the topic to: rdfcore 2003-01-17 teleconference

14:58:25 <ASw-lurk> cough, last core cabal, cough

14:58:31 * RRSAgent is logging

14:59:11 * danbri pats aaron on the back

14:59:19 <ericm> zakim, this will be RDFC

14:59:20 <Zakim> ok, ericm, I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM already started

14:59:20 <Zakim> +EMiller

14:59:39 <ericm> zakim, who is here?

14:59:39 <Zakim> + +1.202.223.aaaa

14:59:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P17 (muted), EMiller, +1.202.223.aaaa

14:59:41 <Zakim> On IRC I see bwm, RRSAgent, gk, Zakim, DaveB, danbri, ericm, ASw-lurk, logger

14:59:43 <Zakim> +GrahamKlyne

14:59:59 <ericm> zakim, 1.202.223.aaaa is FrankM

15:00:00 <Zakim> sorry, ericm, I do not recognize a party named '1.202.223.aaaa'

15:00:09 <Zakim> +DanBri

15:00:26 <ericm> zakim, ??P17 is PatrickS

15:00:27 <Zakim> +PatrickS; got it

15:01:00 <Zakim> +??P20

15:01:01 <Zakim> +??P15

15:01:19 <Zakim> +??P21

15:01:20 <ericm> zakim, ??P20 is PatH

15:01:21 <Zakim> +PatH; got it

15:01:26 <danbri> zakim, ??P15 is JosD

15:01:26 <Zakim> +JosD; got it

15:01:30 <Zakim> +??P22

15:01:33 <danbri> zakim, ??P21 is ILRT

15:01:34 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it

15:01:39 <bwm> Zakim, ??p21 is bwm

15:01:40 <Zakim> sorry, bwm, I do not recognize a party named '??p21'

15:01:45 <DaveB> Zakim, ilrt has daveb, jang

15:01:45 <ericm> zakim, ??P22 is bwm

15:01:46 <Zakim> +Daveb, Jang; got it

15:01:46 <danbri> zakim, ILRT holds DaveB, JanG

15:01:47 <Zakim> +Bwm; got it

15:01:48 <Zakim> DaveB was already listed in ILRT, danbri

15:01:49 <Zakim> JanG was already listed in ILRT, danbri

15:01:51 <danbri> oops

15:01:52 <ericm> zakim, who is here

15:01:53 <Zakim> ericm, you need to end that query with '?'

15:01:55 <ericm> zakim, who is here?

15:01:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatrickS (muted), EMiller, +1.202.223.aaaa, GrahamKlyne, DanBri, PatH, JosD, ILRT, Bwm

15:01:57 <Zakim> ILRT has Daveb, Jang

15:01:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see JosD, bwm, RRSAgent, gk, Zakim, DaveB, danbri, ericm, ASw-lurk, logger

15:02:01 <Zakim> +??P24

15:02:17 <danbri> zakim, ??P24 is Jeremy

15:02:18 <ericm> zakim, 1.202.223.aaaa is FrankM

15:02:18 <Zakim> +Jeremy; got it

15:02:19 <Zakim> sorry, ericm, I do not recognize a party named '1.202.223.aaaa'

15:02:28 <ericm> zakim, +1.202.223.aaaa is FrankM

15:02:29 <Zakim> +FrankM; got it

15:02:52 <ericm> zakim, who is here?

15:02:53 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatrickS (muted), EMiller, FrankM, GrahamKlyne, DanBri, PatH, JosD, ILRT, Bwm, Jeremy

15:02:55 <Zakim> ILRT has Daveb, Jang

15:02:56 <Zakim> On IRC I see JosD, bwm, RRSAgent, gk, Zakim, DaveB, danbri, ericm, ASw-lurk, logger

15:03:06 <Zakim> +??P25

15:03:15 <ericm> zakim, ??P25 is SteveP

15:03:16 <Zakim> +SteveP; got it

15:03:24 <DaveB> DaveB is now known as daveb-scr

15:03:29 <daveb-scr> roll call

15:03:34 <daveb-scr> (scribe daveb)

15:03:35 <bwm> Zalim, who is on the phone?

15:03:48 <bwm> Zakim, who is on the phone?

15:03:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatrickS (muted), EMiller, FrankM, GrahamKlyne, DanBri, PatH, JosD, ILRT, Bwm, Jeremy, SteveP

15:03:50 <Zakim> ILRT has Daveb, Jang

15:03:58 <danbri> zakim, jjc is Jeremy

15:03:59 <Zakim> sorry, danbri, I do not recognize a party named 'jjc'

15:04:07 <danbri> zakim, Jeremy is jjc

15:04:08 <Zakim> +Jjc; got it

15:04:31 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean

15:04:40 <ericm> regrets from Guha, ericm is proxy

15:04:50 <daveb-scr> regrets aarong, no proxy

15:04:56 <daveb-scr> aaron

15:05:22 <ericm> ASw-lurk, is your position to abstain on the last call vote?

15:05:26 <ASw-lurk> yes

15:05:38 <daveb-scr> item 3 review agenda

15:05:42 <daveb-scr> no aob

15:05:45 <daveb-scr> item 4 next telcon

15:05:45 <ericm> thanks, just confirming

15:05:53 <daveb-scr> jang scribe 24th jan

15:05:57 <daveb-scr> item 5 minutes

15:06:05 <daveb-scr> approved with fix, patricks was present

15:06:13 <daveb-scr> item 6

15:06:25 <daveb-scr> completed actions approved

15:06:26 <daveb-scr> item 7

15:06:29 <daveb-scr> primer - lcc

15:06:37 <daveb-scr> 3 reviews, no showstopper issues reported

15:06:52 <daveb-scr> bwm: any critical comments , such as from pfps?

15:06:53 <daveb-scr> frankm: no

15:07:33 <danbri> agenda url: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0109.html

15:07:42 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean

15:08:08 <danbri> mdean?

15:08:16 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean

15:08:20 <daveb-scr> bwm: respond to pfps giving their status, will respond during LC period

15:08:25 <ericm> welcome back Mike_Dean! :)

15:08:33 <daveb-scr> frankm: got extensive comments, will send a brief ack shortly

15:08:53 * DanConn tries to decide whether to join

15:08:54 <mdean> thanks - i got a new phone for xmas and haven't worked out all the features yet :-)

15:08:57 <daveb-scr> ACTION frankm: send a brief ack to pfps indicating status of primer responses

15:08:58 * RRSAgent records action 1

15:09:08 <danbri> zakim, mute danbri

15:09:10 <Zakim> DanBri should now be muted

15:09:22 <daveb-scr> ericm notes above action 1 must be done before going to LC, if we decide to publish

15:09:31 <daveb-scr> frankm promises to do ACTION 1 today ;)

15:10:20 <daveb-scr> bwm: no changes required for LC

15:10:24 <daveb-scr> group acks

15:10:25 <danbri> zakim, unmute danbri

15:10:26 <Zakim> DanBri should no longer be muted

15:10:27 <daveb-scr> item 8 schema wd

15:10:34 <daveb-scr> s/wd/lcc wd/

15:10:39 <daveb-scr> danbri - happy with status

15:10:56 <daveb-scr> jan, jos, daveb - happy with the changes proposed

15:11:09 <daveb-scr> no other external critical comments raisaed

15:11:25 <daveb-scr> patricks - rdf:XMLLiteral was defined as a datatype, is that in schema or concepts?

15:11:35 <daveb-scr> bwm - that was in semantics, IIRC?

15:11:51 <daveb-scr> patricks - if it is in schema, should be fixed there

15:12:03 <daveb-scr> josd - I said this should be added in my comments

15:12:48 <daveb-scr> jjc - pfps noted there is no defn of literal strings, lang tags in rdf docs (on wowg list)

15:13:12 <daveb-scr> patH - Q on terminology of XML lang tags or lang tags.

15:13:51 <daveb-scr> ACTION bwm: check that it is clear that rdf:XMLLiteral is a URI or a datatype

15:13:52 * RRSAgent records action 2

15:13:55 <jjc> jjc^pfps noted ... in rdf schema doc (not all the docs)

15:14:17 <daveb-scr> jjc - not clear strings are unicode strings - I see as editorial

15:14:32 <daveb-scr> ... and lang tags - also minor

15:15:03 <daveb-scr> bwm: given changes outlined and ACTION2, anything required for LC schema?

15:15:25 <daveb-scr> group acks that lC schema is ok

15:15:41 <daveb-scr> item 9 concepts

15:15:42 <gk> q+ to raise issue of definition of literals in Concepts, and use in Semantics

15:15:43 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

15:15:50 <daveb-scr> bwm: all changes done?

15:16:06 <daveb-scr> gk: all last week changes from have been done and uploaded (confirms bwm)

15:16:32 <daveb-scr> gk: uneasy about discussion of literals and defn re cc/pp ....

15:17:24 <daveb-scr> gk: combination of reading (concepts, semantics, xsd) cannot work out if a plain literal without lang tag is a member of value space of xsd:string datatype

15:17:44 <daveb-scr> gk: xsd:string defn is quite clear though

15:18:06 <daveb-scr> bwm: we've said that a plain literal with no lang tag denotes just the string

15:18:18 <daveb-scr> gk: if that is the intent, happy wth that to be fixed in LC

15:18:32 <daveb-scr> jang: not clear in one spot of doc, but several bits in total show what's going on

15:19:03 <daveb-scr> jjc: in concepts the syntactic form is not this, might need some tweaking in semantics (agrees PatH)

15:19:20 <daveb-scr> bwm: suggest it is an editorial fix

15:20:35 <daveb-scr> jang: sec 6.5 does say this ...

15:21:26 <daveb-scr> jang confirms, it is 4.5 of concepts http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/#section-Graph-Literal

15:21:38 <daveb-scr> lots of discussion

15:22:44 <daveb-scr> PatrickS: another doc could discuss futher xsd datatypes in rdf, not needed for rdf specs

15:23:12 <gk>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#section-Graph-Literal

15:23:26 <daveb-scr> gk corrects me, yes 6.5 of LCWD

15:23:31 <gk> .. is section of concepts LCC describing literals

15:23:43 <daveb-scr> jjc: could be polished more

15:24:03 <daveb-scr> mdean: people are askiung about relationship between literal and string

15:24:11 <daveb-scr> bwm: we have to answer it

15:24:22 <daveb-scr> jang: shall we propose a test case for last call?

15:24:42 * JosD thinks so

15:24:58 <daveb-scr> bwm: we should be as clear as we can about the denotation of a plain literal, find out later how it relates to xsd:string

15:25:24 <daveb-scr> mdean: that is acceptible, and is critical

15:25:29 <daveb-scr> ... for us to be answered

15:26:05 <daveb-scr> JosD: has a test case in msg 0100 yesterday

15:26:41 <daveb-scr> bwm: we don't know the answer yet, mostly 'cos we don't understand xsd datatypes enough

15:27:11 <daveb-scr> jos's thread with test case starts http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0099.html

15:27:16 <gk> I think XSD definition of string is quite clear; see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0084.html

15:27:29 <daveb-scr> jos withdraws requirement for new test case now

15:27:35 <daveb-scr> item 10 syntax

15:28:23 <daveb-scr> daveb-scr: still having discussion with pfps on comments with issues, nothing critical i seen

15:28:30 <daveb-scr> daveb-scr: nothing new and critical

15:28:32 <daveb-scr> bwm: done

15:28:36 <daveb-scr> item 11 test cases

15:28:45 <gk> (We agreed that clarification of literals in Concepts is editorial, to be done during last call. I heard.)

15:28:45 <daveb-scr> gone some pending test cases

15:29:03 <daveb-scr> either we approve them or leave till LC process

15:29:07 <daveb-scr> bwm: what are pending?

15:29:39 <daveb-scr> bwm: weren't they approved last week

15:29:47 <daveb-scr> jang: ok

15:29:52 <daveb-scr> bwm: approved, done here

15:29:58 <daveb-scr> item 12 semantics doc

15:30:05 <daveb-scr> bwm: has shipped an updated version

15:30:57 <daveb-scr> ACTION jang: item 11, update test cases zip file for w3 LCCWD, today

15:30:59 * RRSAgent records action 3

15:31:32 <daveb-scr> ... item 12 ...

15:31:39 <daveb-scr> PatH: still offline, catching up

15:32:21 * gk thinks we need to wait for PatH to catch up

15:33:19 <daveb-scr> discussion of semantics comments

15:36:33 <daveb-scr> people try to work out what PFPS problems are with semantics, various people try to interpret them

15:36:42 <daveb-scr> jjc, josd don't see his comments as critical

15:37:02 <daveb-scr> jjc: semantics may yet need more polishing than other docs

15:37:20 <danbri> danbri: perhaps we could note this in the Status section

15:37:24 <danbri> brian: that would be good

15:37:33 <danbri> (or words to that effect, i think)

15:39:06 <daveb-scr> bwm: I see that there is a difference in the perspective on the class of errors; we see no critical errors (such that we see no need for a futher LC WD)

15:39:35 <daveb-scr> jjc: proposes danbri propose words for semantics LC status section to note about further polishing

15:39:38 <daveb-scr> jos, path: agree

15:40:03 <daveb-scr> ACTION danbri propose words for semantics LC status section to note about further polishing needed - 1 sentence please

15:40:22 * danbri gets onto that

15:40:23 <daveb-scr> bwm: wg agreeed to publish lCWD without change except for above status change?

15:40:24 <daveb-scr> done

15:40:33 <daveb-scr> item 13 lbase

15:40:46 <daveb-scr> danbri: pubrules read, 1 change to change ref to new rdfs and rdf docs etc.

15:40:52 <daveb-scr> s/read/ready/

15:41:25 <daveb-scr> danbri: want me to reference upcoming LCWD urls or latest urls?

15:41:59 <daveb-scr> PatH: lbase sec in rdf semantics is newere, needs cutting and pasting into lbase

15:42:29 <Zakim> -SteveP

15:42:31 <daveb-scr> ACTION danbri: copy the lbase rdf schema tables from the latest version in rdf semantics

15:42:32 * RRSAgent records action 4

15:43:05 <daveb-scr> that is, copy from rdf semantics into the lbase. I think that was clearer

15:43:12 <daveb-scr> bwm: confirms lbase will be pubbed with these other wds

15:43:19 <daveb-scr> item 14 last call entrance critera

15:44:13 <daveb-scr> ericm: gives LC process overview

15:44:54 <daveb-scr> ... WG believes this is pretty much ready for a REC

15:45:36 <daveb-scr> ... we are the polishing stage and formally addressing comments - "we think we are done"

15:47:05 <daveb-scr> bwm: do we meet the criteria?

15:47:13 <daveb-scr> no disagreements

15:47:16 <daveb-scr> item 15 last call vote

15:47:21 <ericm> zakim, who is here?

15:47:22 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatrickS (muted), EMiller, FrankM, GrahamKlyne, DanBri, PatH, JosD, ILRT, Bwm, Jjc, Mike_Dean

15:47:23 <daveb-scr> bwm: proposal to publish all last LCWDs

15:47:23 <Zakim> ILRT has Daveb, Jang

15:47:24 <Zakim> On IRC I see DanConn, mdean, jjc, JosD, bwm, RRSAgent, gk, Zakim, daveb-scr, danbri, ericm, ASw-lurk, logger

15:48:00 <daveb-scr> ... publishing ASAP (might be today) with a last call ending 21 feb 2003

15:48:03 <daveb-scr> (see agenda for details)

15:48:15 <bwm> zakim, who is onthe phone?

15:48:16 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, bwm.

15:48:22 * danbri defers to ericm re W3C's vote

15:48:37 <daveb-scr> nokia: yes

15:48:40 <daveb-scr> w3c: yes

15:48:52 <daveb-scr> mitre: yes

15:49:11 <daveb-scr> invited expert gk: yes

15:49:20 <daveb-scr> invited expert PatH: yes

15:49:26 <daveb-scr> agfa: yes

15:49:29 <daveb-scr> HP: yes

15:49:37 <daveb-scr> invited expert MikeD: yes

15:49:42 <daveb-scr> University of Bristol/ILRT: yes

15:50:01 <daveb-scr> proxies

15:50:10 <daveb-scr> IBM proxy (via em): yes

15:50:22 <daveb-scr> rephrasing

15:50:24 <danbri> (that was Guha, btw;)

15:50:44 <daveb-scr> IBM: yes (proxied by em)

15:50:53 <daveb-scr> .. for guha

15:51:33 <daveb-scr> iwa/hwg: abstain (proxied via bwm for AaronSw)

15:52:07 <daveb-scr> bwm: decided, we go to last call

15:52:37 <daveb-scr> --

15:52:46 <daveb-scr> ericm: congrats, woo hoo!

15:52:53 <gk> q+ to ask if issue tracking is sorted yet

15:52:54 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

15:53:07 <daveb-scr> ericm: from process ... now actions to staff contact to take docs and pub them .

15:53:24 <daveb-scr> ... will be some minor mods - date for last call reviews in status of each doc

15:54:02 <daveb-scr> ACTION ericm: publish the last call wds (+lbase)

15:54:04 * RRSAgent records action 5

15:54:34 <danbri> q+ to propose Text for Semantics LC Status section: "The Working Group notes that this Last Call Working Draft completes the group's design of the formal Semantics for RDF, however it may still need some editorial polishing and clarification following last call."

15:54:35 * Zakim sees Gk, Danbri on the speaker queue

15:55:05 <daveb-scr> ericm: national holiday in US monday, so might be Tues

15:55:27 <daveb-scr> [what holiday?]

15:55:38 <danbri> martin luther king day, i think.

15:56:04 <daveb-scr> [yeah, birthday]

15:56:18 <daveb-scr> ericm: comms team are forewarned

15:56:30 <daveb-scr> ... eta tues, wed at latest

15:56:51 <daveb-scr> PatH: cann I try get an updated lbase by then?

15:57:45 <daveb-scr> CLARIFICATION: Lbase is included in above action 5 to pub

15:58:41 <daveb-scr> ericm: we are not obliged to include comments right now into pubs, certainly when responding later

15:58:56 <daveb-scr> PatrickS: maybe post to rdf-comments to note this?

16:00:21 <bwm> ack danbri

16:00:23 <Zakim> Danbri, you wanted to propose Text for Semantics LC Status section: "The Working Group notes that this Last Call Working Draft completes the group's design of the formal Semantics

16:00:24 <Zakim> ... for RDF, however it may still need some editorial polishing and clarification following last call."

16:00:26 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

16:00:46 <daveb-scr> group acks danbris' sentence, closes his action

16:00:52 <bwm> ack gk

16:00:54 <Zakim> Gk, you wanted to raise issue of definition of literals in Concepts, and use in Semantics and to ask if issue tracking is sorted yet

16:00:54 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

16:01:49 <daveb-scr> q+ jang

16:01:50 * Zakim sees Jang on the speaker queue

16:03:12 <daveb-scr> discussion with frankm about more editorial changes, spellings to primer

16:03:30 <daveb-scr> q- jang

16:03:31 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

16:04:04 <daveb-scr> jang: asks where new post-lcwds are editied,changed

16:04:07 <daveb-scr> bwm: AOB?

16:04:12 <daveb-scr> END OF MEETING

16:04:16 <Zakim> -FrankM

16:04:16 <gk> DanBri, how would the MT system work as an issue-collating tool?

16:04:19 <Zakim> -JosD

16:04:23 <Zakim> -PatrickS

16:04:24 <Zakim> -EMiller

16:04:26 <Zakim> -ILRT

16:04:27 <Zakim> -Bwm

16:04:28 <Zakim> -Jjc

16:04:43 <Zakim> -DanBri

16:04:43 <danbri> zakim, drop DanBri

16:04:44 <Zakim> sorry, danbri, I do not see a party named 'DanBri'

16:04:47 <Zakim> -GrahamKlyne

16:05:00 <danbri> gk, possibly, but it isn't really targeted at such thinks. BugZilla might be better.

16:05:27 <Zakim> -PatH

16:05:29 <gk> OK, just a passing thought

16:05:31 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean

16:05:33 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended

16:11:54 <danbri> RRSAgent, pointer?

16:11:55 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2003/01/17-rdfcore-irc#T16-11-54

16:12:29 <danbri> I've made logs public.