W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2003-09-12

13:00:02 Users on #rdfcore: @logger

13:16:28 <danbri> zakim, this will be RDF_Core

13:16:28 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, danbri

13:16:31 <danbri> zakim, this will be RDFCore

13:16:31 <Zakim> ok, danbri; I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM scheduled to start in 44 minutes

13:17:00 <danbri> danbri has changed the topic to: rdfcore 2003-09-12 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0153.html

13:40:21 <danbri> hi eric

13:59:14 <danbri> hi dave, brian

13:59:49 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started

13:59:50 <Zakim> +Manola

14:00:17 <Zakim> +Pat_Hayes

14:00:18 <Zakim> -Pat_Hayes

14:00:20 <Zakim> +Pat_Hayes

14:00:51 <Zakim> +??P18

14:00:57 <DaveB> Zakim, ??P18 is ILRT

14:00:57 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it

14:01:03 <DaveB> Zakim, ILRT has DaveB, JanG

14:01:04 <Zakim> +DaveB, JanG; got it

14:01:15 <DaveB> DaveB is now known as DB-scribe

14:01:18 <Zakim> +PatrickS

14:01:39 <Zakim> +??P20

14:01:47 <bwm> Zakim, ??p20 is bwm

14:01:47 <Zakim> +bwm; got it

14:01:54 <Zakim> +EricM

14:02:05 <Zakim> +??P22

14:02:12 <Zakim> -PatrickS

14:02:17 <Zakim> +DanBri

14:02:27 <Zakim> +PatrickS

14:02:28 <jang> zakim, ??p22 is jjc

14:02:28 <Zakim> +jjc; got it

14:02:44 <Zakim> +GrahamKlyne

14:02:59 <danbri> zakim, who is on the phone?

14:02:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see Manola, Pat_Hayes, ILRT, bwm, EricM, jjc, DanBri, PatrickS, GrahamKlyne

14:03:01 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB, JanG

14:03:27 <DB-scribe> meeting starts

14:03:33 <DB-scribe> 1 scribe - dave beckett

14:03:35 <DB-scribe> 2 roll call

14:03:53 <DB-scribe> s/2//

14:03:59 <DB-scribe> scribe next week - jeremy carroll

14:04:08 <DB-scribe> 2 roll call as above

14:04:09 * em would like to know (perhaps after call) what tools are being used to dig up old action items

14:04:14 <DB-scribe> 3 agenda

14:04:18 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean

14:04:27 <DB-scribe> moved item 11 to end

14:05:07 * DanC considers offering regrets

14:05:42 * DanC wonders if em or danbri have a preference about whether I dial in

14:06:19 <DB-scribe> item 4

14:06:22 * DanC figures it's worth dialing in, since there's XML Schema business on the agenda...

14:06:29 <DB-scribe> next telcon 19 sep

14:06:30 <em> DanC, i think item 12 might welcome your input

14:06:32 * DanC Zakim, call DanC-BOS

14:06:32 * Zakim ok, DanC; the call is being made

14:06:33 <Zakim> +DanC

14:06:54 <em> if you want me to bring you in then, I ... never mind your here :)

14:07:00 <DB-scribe> item 5

14:07:08 <gk> (GK queries the purpose of item 9, but is happy to leave further discussion to when it comes up.)

14:07:11 * em network seems slow

14:07:20 <DB-scribe> minutes of 2003-09-05 approved

14:07:33 <DB-scribe> item 6 actions

14:07:39 <DB-scribe> all recorded completed or withdrawn

14:07:40 <DB-scribe> item 7

14:08:59 <DB-scribe> 2002-04-05#2 continued - update to note this is a reminder to keep mime type registration process moving

14:09:24 <DB-scribe> 2002-06-18#11 cont

14:09:41 <DB-scribe> 2002-11-22#3 cont

14:09:51 <DB-scribe> 2002-11-22#4 withdrawn

14:09:55 <DB-scribe> 2002-12-06#10 cont

14:10:01 <DB-scribe> 2003-01-03#1 cont

14:10:17 <DB-scribe> 2003-01-24#14 cont

14:10:32 <DB-scribe> scribe - see danbri notes later

14:11:14 <DB-scribe> ACTION danbri: update rdf model namespace document (2003-01-03#1)

14:12:42 <DB-scribe> (jjc to update impl report to i18n object, 20030815#9 continued)

14:13:48 <DB-scribe> (action 2003-08-29#6 jang depends on item later in agenda)

14:13:55 <DB-scribe> item 8 pub status

14:14:33 <DanC> I'm not aware of any "formal announcement" mechanism. But mail to lots of fora announcing them is cool.

14:14:46 <DB-scribe> ACTION danbri: announce new docs to www-rdf-interest

14:15:04 <DB-scribe> ... with i18n issue specifically called out

14:15:07 * DanC notes RRSAgent isn't here; assumes that's by design

14:15:25 * DB-scribe thumps stupid laptop mousepad

14:15:38 <danbri> logger, pointer?

14:15:38 <danbri> See http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2003-09-12#T14-15-38

14:20:17 <danbri> q?

14:20:17 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:22:23 <DB-scribe> ACTION danbri: send a request to webont to look at our septemeber WDs

14:22:29 <DB-scribe> ... maybe suggest a date

14:22:51 <danbri> 2-3 weeks

14:23:05 <DB-scribe> i9tem 9

14:23:51 <DB-scribe> we note patrickS's objection on the grounds of backward incompat.

14:24:04 <DB-scribe> danbri supports that. bwm thinks this back incomp.at is ill-founded

14:24:26 <DB-scribe> sense the main objection is to build XML into the core of RDF

14:24:31 <DB-scribe> ^bwm

14:24:32 * DanC is curious whether this proposal has any support

14:24:42 * gk I'd need convincing of bwm's assertion ... I think his proposal breaks some of my data

14:28:08 <bwm> bwm agrees that there are problems - two clever by half being one

14:28:54 <gk> "too clever by half" -- symptomatic is that we find it hard to agree among ourselves, is confusing.

14:29:50 <DanC> that we find it hard to agree needn't relect on the design... could be entirely attributed to social tensions

14:30:06 <DB-scribe> bwm asks this be called Martin's design (unifying plain & XMl literals)

14:30:35 <DanC> from what I understand of the issue, my reaction is "ikcy" which means I'm reluctant to study it. But if jang et al find it coherent, I owe it some study.

14:31:15 <Zakim> -PatrickS

14:31:15 <DB-scribe> jjc gives example of markup (ruby) used to mix r-to-l and l-to-r text

14:31:17 <Zakim> +PatrickS

14:31:17 <gk> I18N issues: bi-directional (e.g. arabic), different symbol sets (japanese, ruby markup), veryical text?, ...

14:31:28 <Zakim> + +1.323.444.aaaa

14:31:43 <DB-scribe> +JosD

14:31:43 * Zakim wonders where JosD is

14:31:57 <em> zakim, +1.323.444.aaaa is JosD

14:31:57 <Zakim> +JosD; got it

14:32:04 <DB-scribe> pats - allowing xml markup allows a lot more

14:33:15 <gk> jjc: charmod doesn't say always use xml for markup (?).

14:33:33 <gk> I note Unicode has its own way of doing some markup.

14:34:00 <DB-scribe> danbri: should the WG spend more time in this design area?

14:34:18 <DB-scribe> no support at this time

14:34:43 <gk> I think spending more time may be needed if I18N issues look like showstoppers, but until that's clear I say stay with what we've got

14:35:08 <DB-scribe> it breaks rdf graph->rdf/xml serialization too, fwiw

14:35:21 <jang> (what gk says; very sympathetic to @too clever by half@ and I can see the BC problems that've been outlined too

14:35:53 <DB-scribe> ACTION: jjc to mention other designs in i18n proposed response

14:36:14 <DB-scribe> The chair noted no support for spedning more time on this now.

14:36:19 <DanC> (the record already notes those points, no bwm?)

14:36:23 <gk> Concerns expressed about building XML into core of RDF

14:36:33 <danbri> q?

14:36:33 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:36:46 <DB-scribe> item 10 % in RDF URIs

14:37:51 <DB-scribe> jjc: need for a change on control characters

14:38:12 <DB-scribe> jjc: mention of space in URIs, not clear if a change needed

14:38:41 * DanC q+ to suggest getting out of saying what's a URI and what's not

14:38:42 * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue

14:39:00 <danbri> q?

14:39:00 * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue

14:39:34 <DB-scribe> jjc: maybe put note about proposing errata later. daveb: no forward looking statements

14:40:08 <DB-scribe> DanC: wants to make substantive change - changing RDF URIrefs

14:40:23 <DB-scribe> ... by refering to another definition

14:40:54 <DB-scribe> jjc: need absolute uris, and thus resolving of relative ones such as against xml:base

14:41:27 <gk> I wonder if we can go part way to what Dan says: require valid URI(ref)s, but defer to other specs what they are?

14:42:01 <DB-scribe> ACTION danC: propose change rdf so that there are no syntax errors in the rdf:resource attribute etc.

14:42:11 <DB-scribe> s/propose/write email to wg to propose/

14:43:12 <DB-scribe> in absence of any advice from i18n re these wordings, need not make a change

14:43:33 <DB-scribe> ACTION jjc: respond to peter negatively against this URI change

14:45:02 <DB-scribe> removed ACTION jjc: respond to peter negatively against this URI change

14:45:13 <DB-scribe> item 11 skipped

14:45:25 <DB-scribe> item 12 " 3 "^^xsd:integer

14:45:43 <DB-scribe> PatrickS asked to strongly note his "no change" view

14:45:53 <DB-scribe> jang: find PatrickS's arguments compelling

14:46:09 <DB-scribe> and whitespace processing lives somewhere else

14:47:10 <DB-scribe> PatrickS: propose we remove the test cases since we can't work out if it's valid and they are fixing/changing this for 1.1

14:47:32 * DanC notes a horrendous breakdown in coordination here. oops!

14:47:50 <gk> I we should defer to xsd, and live with the outcome of that whatever it may be. (This is broadly in agreement with PatrickS, I think)

14:47:53 <bwm> q+

14:47:54 * Zakim sees DanC, bwm on the speaker queue

14:47:58 * DanC q-

14:47:58 * Zakim sees bwm on the speaker queue

14:49:36 <danbri> q?

14:49:36 * Zakim sees bwm on the speaker queue

14:49:40 <DB-scribe> jjc proposes to remove the fudge (only 1 choice), and keep the test case (" 3 " not valid)

14:49:43 * DanC q+

14:49:43 * Zakim sees bwm, DanC on the speaker queue

14:49:43 <DB-scribe> s/jjc/jang/

14:50:26 <DB-scribe> bwm asks if WG agreed " 3 " is not in lex space

14:50:48 <DB-scribe> path, danc object - out of scope of rdfcore

14:51:04 <bwm> q-

14:51:04 * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue

14:51:11 <danbri> ack danc

14:51:11 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:51:36 <DB-scribe> DanC: we owe the community this test but if it turns out to be wrong, it is not an error with rdf specs, the errata would be in schema specs

14:52:16 <gk> "This test case left intentionally undefined"??

14:52:40 <DB-scribe> jjc asks if xmlsch has reviewed this after the original action. No.

14:52:54 <DB-scribe> ... no response

14:53:54 <gk> q+ to ask what we will say to those folks using parsers that allow " 3 " as an int, if XS group say it's ill-formed

14:53:54 * Zakim sees gk on the speaker queue

14:53:55 <DB-scribe> ACTION DanC: ask XML Schema WG for response on xmlsch-02 issue

14:53:57 <DanC> may 0097 says jjc

14:54:07 <danbri> q?

14:54:08 * Zakim sees gk on the speaker queue

14:55:05 <gk> q-

14:55:06 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:55:13 <DB-scribe> ref http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0097.html

14:55:20 <DB-scribe> item 13

14:56:48 * DanC realizes the URI syntax error situation is an unholy nightmare... and that I'm the URI CG cochair

14:58:50 <DB-scribe> ACTION: jjc to response to pfps from proposal in 2003Sep/0143 with a few updates

14:59:04 <DB-scribe> danc: move to adjourn

14:59:12 <DB-scribe> seconded by danbri

14:59:21 <Zakim> -Pat_Hayes

14:59:22 <DB-scribe> END OF MEETING

14:59:39 <Zakim> -Manola

14:59:55 <Zakim> -bwm

14:59:57 <Zakim> -PatrickS

14:59:59 <Zakim> -JosD

15:00:00 <Zakim> -EricM

15:00:00 <Zakim> -DanC

15:00:01 <DB-scribe> note for later, jang away fri 26, fri 3rd follow

15:00:09 <Zakim> -ILRT

15:00:10 <Zakim> -DanBri

15:00:16 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean

15:00:22 <danbri> OK dave I have a lot of paper notes re the action review, I'll send to list separately.

15:00:25 <Zakim> -jjc

15:00:33 <Zakim> -GrahamKlyne

15:00:34 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended

17:21:58 * Zakim excuses himself; his presence no longer seems to be needed