W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2003-05-16

13:01:02 Users on #rdfcore: @logger

13:59:49 <gk> Hi folks

14:00:17 <DaveB> hi

14:00:59 <DaveB> I'm at hp labs, we're just dialling

14:02:25 <DaveB> "Please review RDF Last Call documents" - message to i18nwg, Jan 28 2003

14:03:00 <bwm> Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0183.html

14:03:58 <reagleMIT> i'll dig

14:04:03 <reagleMIT> i'm on the call to

14:05:16 <gk> gk is now known as gk-scribe

14:05:16 <reagleMIT> ok, he's here

14:05:46 <reagleMIT> zakim help

14:05:53 <bwm> Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:05:53 <Zakim> sorry, bwm, I don't know what conference this is

14:05:54 <Zakim> On IRC I see Zakim, reagleMIT, bwm, gk-scribe, DaveB, logger

14:05:58 <reagleMIT> yes

14:06:03 <reagleMIT> (i'm bad at it's syntax)

14:06:03 <bwm> Zakim, this is RDFCore

14:06:03 <Zakim> ok, bwm

14:06:13 <bwm> Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:06:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see Joseph, PatH, GrahamKlyne, ??P11, Jeremy, Manola

14:06:20 <reagleMIT> i like python because i don't have to worry about commas and curlies :)

14:06:39 <bwm> Zakim, ??p11 is hplb

14:06:39 <Zakim> +hplb; got it

14:06:51 <bwm> Zakim, hplb is bwm, daveB

14:06:52 <Zakim> I don't understand 'hplb is bwm, daveB', bwm

14:07:11 <bwm> Zakim, hplb has bwm, daveB

14:07:11 <Zakim> +bwm, daveB; got it

14:07:18 <gk-scribe> Item 1: Jan being unavailable, GK scribes

14:07:28 <bwm> Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:07:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see Joseph, PatH, GrahamKlyne, hplb, Jeremy, Manola

14:07:29 <Zakim> hplb has bwm, daveB

14:07:38 <gk-scribe> Item 2: role call

14:07:44 <gk-scribe> As above, none others

14:08:05 <gk-scribe> Regrets: patrick, jos,

14:08:39 <gk-scribe> Guest: Joseph Reagle -- will update us on RDF in XHTML

14:08:53 <gk-scribe> Item 3: Update on embedding RDF in XML

14:09:18 <gk-scribe> Follow up from plenary earlier this year

14:09:36 <gk-scribe> Lots of solutions, but none stick

14:10:02 <gk-scribe> Joseph proposes a "task force" to get people together to forge some consensus across the communities.

14:10:28 <gk-scribe> Requirements... RDF in XHTML, and others yet to be fleshed out

14:10:43 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean

14:11:13 <gk-scribe> Goal is to recommend a solution to SWCG...

14:11:39 <gk-scribe> Couple of months, hope for sense of whether the problem is solvable

14:11:52 <gk-scribe> Mailign list is being set up

14:11:59 <Zakim> -GrahamKlyne

14:12:30 * gk-scribe dialing again

14:12:31 <Zakim> +GrahamKlyne

14:12:44 * gk-scribe did I miss anything?

14:13:03 <DaveB> joe mentions trackback in html comments

14:13:50 <gk-scribe> Big issue... what is relationship between RDF and a document?; murky issues of social meaning, etc.

14:15:02 <gk-scribe> Thinks requirmeent may be solved by complete XML composition solution. But this is not the requirement to be solved

14:15:17 <gk-scribe> Jeremy: qnames?

14:15:50 <gk-scribe> DaveB: scope of problem(s) first port of call; then maybe consider solutions?

14:16:07 <gk-scribe> DO we need to put *any* RDF in XHTML?

14:17:12 <gk-scribe> q+ to ask about scenarios

14:17:12 * Zakim sees gk-scribe on the speaker queue

14:17:39 <bwm> ack gk

14:17:39 <Zakim> gk-scribe, you wanted to ask about scenarios

14:17:40 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:18:41 <gk-scribe> bwm: any sense of how long? Joseph: no, other than assessing the problem space in a month or so

14:19:11 <gk-scribe> By then, at least should have opened some channels between metadata and hypertext communities

14:19:24 <DaveB> esw wiki on this stuff http://esw.w3.org/topic/EmbeddingRDFinHTML

14:20:41 <gk-scribe> daveb: few of RDFcore were at tech plenary, but several at WWW conf. Is it worth trying for another meeting?

14:20:50 <gk-scribe> Joseph: I'll not be there, but ...

14:21:38 <Zakim> -Joseph

14:21:41 <gk-scribe> Thanks top Joseph for coming along

14:22:01 <gk-scribe> Item 4: review agenda

14:22:03 <gk-scribe> No comments

14:22:17 <gk-scribe> item 5: next telecon 309 may

14:22:20 <reagleMIT> the draft charter for the TF: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-semweb-cg/2003May/0040.html

14:22:25 <gk-scribe> item 6: comments on minutes

14:22:29 <gk-scribe> Nine. Approved.

14:22:31 <reagleMIT> The proto-requirements: http://www.w3.org/2003/03/rdf-in-xml.html

14:22:42 <gk-scribe> Item 7: Confirm Status of Completed Actions

14:22:45 <gk-scribe> All OK.

14:23:05 <gk-scribe> Fortward to item 8:

14:23:11 <gk-scribe> pfps-08

14:23:24 <gk-scribe> (Issue list URI: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/)

14:23:59 <gk-scribe> Proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0138.html

14:24:43 <DaveB> bwm's revised doc was 0181.html

14:24:45 <gk-scribe> Hmmm... that's meeting minutes, not sure where proposal is

14:25:00 <DaveB> brian's: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0181.html

14:26:11 <gk-scribe> PFPS says:

14:26:11 <gk-scribe> I believe that there are errors in the treatment of typed literals in

14:26:11 <gk-scribe> the RDF model theory. For example, let I be an interpretation where

14:26:11 <gk-scribe> rdf:XMLLiteral and ex:bar both denote the domain element. However,

14:26:11 <gk-scribe> the typed literal "xx"^^ex:bar does not necessarily denote the same

14:26:12 <gk-scribe> thing as "xx"^^rdf:XMLLiteral because the rule for rdf:XMLLiteral uses

14:26:14 <gk-scribe> the URI reference directly, and not its denotation.

14:26:25 <DaveB> above was in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0087.html

14:26:40 <DaveB> and is issue pfps-08

14:27:05 <gk-scribe> Semantics doc editors draft, 3.4 addresses this?

14:27:26 <bwm> Propose that 3.4 in the editors draft addresses pfps-08 and we accept the comment

14:27:38 <gk-scribe> Pat proposes: Jeremy has reviewed and agrees that Semantics doc editors draft, 3.4 addresses this, amnd we accept comment.

14:28:27 <DaveB> scribing

14:28:32 <DaveB> agsinst none

14:28:37 <DaveB> abstain none

14:28:40 <DaveB> DECIDED

14:28:52 <DaveB> we approve - i.e. accept pfps-08

14:28:55 <gk-scribe> Actions arising:

14:29:12 <gk-scribe> ACTION PatH respond to Peter

14:29:28 <gk-scribe> Item 9:

14:30:54 <gk-scribe> Pat has sent comment to list

14:31:15 <gk-scribe> Resolved

14:31:28 <DaveB> pfps-01 accepted

14:31:41 <gk-scribe> Action path respond to peter

14:32:07 <gk-scribe> Item 10: pfps-03 (lbase appendix)

14:32:22 <gk-scribe> Pat proposes to not accept the comment

14:32:39 <gk-scribe> Several people have found this style easier to understand

14:33:23 <gk-scribe> (There was an ancillary comment that the LBase document has moved -- GK)

14:34:04 <gk-scribe> Private comment received in favour of putting this in a separate document.

14:35:30 <gk-scribe> Even for DAML, axiomatic semantics are most commonly cited.

14:35:41 <gk-scribe> Pat proposes, DaveB seconds

14:35:52 <gk-scribe> None against, none abstain

14:35:57 <gk-scribe> RESOLVED

14:36:12 <DaveB> pfps-03 not accepted

14:36:25 <gk-scribe> (Cite motivation is utilty of DAML axiomnatic semantcis)

14:36:43 <gk-scribe> Actions arising:

14:36:53 <gk-scribe> ACTION PatH respond to Peter

14:37:15 <gk-scribe> Item 11: pfps-05, RDF closure rules

14:37:51 <gk-scribe> Proposed to accept comment, addressed by new paragraph.

14:38:56 <gk-scribe> Proposal: in agenda (item 11)

14:39:10 <gk-scribe> Proposed: path, second GK

14:39:24 <gk-scribe> None against, none opposed

14:39:41 <gk-scribe> s/opposed/abstained/

14:41:15 <gk-scribe> Note that pfps-09 dropped off menu

14:41:24 <gk-scribe> Item 12: timbl-03

14:41:49 <DaveB> jimH response from webont http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0194.html

14:41:59 <DaveB> on whether to change rdf:List triple

14:42:59 <gk-scribe> Current rdfcore preference is to change this, but webont preference is no change.

14:44:02 <bwm> zakim, who is on the phone?

14:44:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatH, GrahamKlyne, hplb, Jeremy, Manola, Mike_Dean

14:44:04 <Zakim> hplb has bwm, daveB

14:44:37 <gk-scribe> q+ to argue in favour of the change as requested by timbl-03

14:44:37 * Zakim sees gk-scribe on the speaker queue

14:44:57 <bwm> ack gk

14:44:57 <Zakim> gk-scribe, you wanted to argue in favour of the change as requested by timbl-03

14:44:59 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:45:31 <jjc> q+ to talk aboput reification

14:45:31 * Zakim sees jjc on the speaker queue

14:46:39 <bwm> ack jjc

14:46:39 <Zakim> jjc, you wanted to talk aboput reification

14:46:40 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:46:55 <gk-scribe> GK argues in favour of change... minimize triples generated by parsers, not having some applications impose requirements on RDFcore for all

14:48:26 <gk-scribe> JJC: rdf:type triple in reification is also redundant; (one other reason... scribe missed)

14:48:43 <gk-scribe> q+ to respond to jeremy

14:48:43 * Zakim sees gk-scribe on the speaker queue

14:49:06 <gk-scribe> jjc's other reason: do want webont want

14:49:25 <bwm> ack gk

14:49:25 <Zakim> gk-scribe, you wanted to respond to jeremy

14:49:26 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:50:25 <bwm> zakim, who is on the phone?

14:50:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatH, GrahamKlyne, hplb, Jeremy, Manola, Mike_Dean

14:50:26 <Zakim> hplb has bwm, daveB

14:50:41 <gk-scribe> GK has one other argument: lists are widely used, so cost is high

14:53:03 <gk-scribe> straw poll is split evenly

14:53:11 <gk-scribe> Discussion...

14:54:10 <jjc> q+

14:54:10 * Zakim sees jjc on the speaker queue

14:54:28 <bwm> ack jjc

14:54:28 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:54:31 <gk-scribe> q+ to note arguments hinge on work for standards committees vs work for implementers and implementations

14:54:31 * Zakim sees gk-scribe on the speaker queue

14:57:30 <bwm> ack gk

14:57:30 <Zakim> gk-scribe, you wanted to note arguments hinge on work for standards committees vs work for implementers and implementations

14:57:32 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:58:18 <jjc> q+ to respond to gk

14:58:18 * Zakim sees jjc on the speaker queue

14:58:46 <bwm> zakim, who is on the phone

14:58:46 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', bwm

14:58:49 <bwm> zakim, who is on the phone?

14:58:49 <Zakim> On the phone I see PatH, GrahamKlyne, hplb, Jeremy, Manola, Mike_Dean

14:58:50 <Zakim> hplb has bwm, daveB

15:00:14 <gk-scribe> New straw poll favours removal

15:00:43 <gk-scribe> proposed pat, second gk, none against, abstain jjc, daveb, miked

15:00:58 <gk-scribe> RESOLVED accept timbl-03

15:01:06 <gk-scribe> ACTION daveb update syntax spec

15:01:21 <gk-scribe> ACTION daveb respond to commentor

15:01:45 <gk-scribe> ACTION daveb tell webont

15:02:07 <Zakim> -PatH

15:02:08 <gk-scribe> This closes the last syntax LC issue (WOHOO!)

15:02:36 <Zakim> -Manola

15:02:42 <gk-scribe> Other documents affected? schema?

15:02:49 <gk-scribe> ACTION bwm review schema for changes

15:02:55 <gk-scribe> Concepts not affected

15:03:17 <gk-scribe> Primer needs some updates

15:03:30 <gk-scribe> Test cases need updates

15:03:41 <gk-scribe> ACTION daveb update test cases

15:03:54 <gk-scribe> ACTION frank update primer

15:04:55 <DaveB> maybe action to PatH on semantics update>

15:05:03 <gk-scribe> Item 15: xmlsch-05, character sequences ("string"?)

15:05:35 <jjc>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0193.html

15:05:35 <gk-scribe> Jeremy's proposal, copied in agenda, to not accept the comment.

15:05:57 <gk-scribe> [[

15:05:58 <gk-scribe> Rationale:

15:05:58 <gk-scribe> It feels like a fairly extensive editorial change. Also in the semantic web

15:05:58 <gk-scribe> activity documents xsd:string is always refered to in its qualified form, and

15:05:58 <gk-scribe> so the possible confusion is diminsihed.

15:05:59 <gk-scribe> ]]

15:06:32 <gk-scribe> Proposed: jeremy, seconded daveb. None against, none abstain

15:06:42 <gk-scribe> RESOLVED: do not accept xmlsch-05

15:06:51 <gk-scribe> ACTION jjc respond to commenter

15:07:00 <DaveB> from textg in 0193.html

15:07:01 <jjc>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0193.html

15:07:02 <gk-scribe> Item 14: XMLsch-06, natural language data

15:07:43 <gk-scribe> Ediorial changes have been suggested on the list.

15:08:04 <gk-scribe> ^^ to JJC's proposal, copied in agenda

15:08:17 <bwm> [[

15:08:17 <bwm> A plain literal is a string combined with an optional language

15:08:17 <bwm> identifier. As recommended in the RDF formal semantics

15:08:17 <bwm> [RDF-SEMANTICS], these plain literals are self-denoting.

15:08:17 <bwm> Plain literals with a language identifier

15:08:18 <bwm> should be used only for plain text in a natural language.

15:08:20 <bwm> ]]

15:09:41 <gk-scribe> In meeting: s/should be used only/may be used/

15:09:42 <jjc> may be used for plain text in a natural language.

15:09:51 <bwm> Plain literals with a language identifier may be used for plain text in a natural language.

15:10:27 <gk-scribe> No further comments.

15:11:15 <gk-scribe> Proposed: (as above) jjc, second daveb, none against, none abstain

15:11:36 <gk-scribe> ------

15:11:39 <gk-scribe> AOB

15:12:28 <gk-scribe> Meeting closed

15:12:38 <gk-scribe> ------

15:15:55 <jjc>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0191.html

15:19:44 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean

15:27:35 <Zakim> -Jeremy

15:27:36 <Zakim> -hplb

15:27:58 <gk-scribe> xxx

15:28:02 <Zakim> -GrahamKlyne

15:28:03 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended

17:10:11 * Zakim excuses himself; his presence no longer seems to be needed