RDFCore WG minutes for the telecon 2002-08-02 (rdf doc, datatypes) from Graham Klyne on 2002-08-02 (w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org from August 2002) (original) (raw)

RDFCore WG minutes for the telecon 2002-08-02 (rdf doc, datatypes)

Time: 10:00:00 Fri Aug 2 2002 in America/New York which is equivalent to 15:00:00 Fri Aug 2 2002 in Europe/London

Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332 irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore

Transcript: (file attached)

Summary of new actions: ACTION 2002-08-02#1, GK: make agreed changes to new doc and notify EM ACTION 2002-08-02#2, EM: get ball rolling for publication of new WD ACTION 2002-08-02#3, Guha: lead submission of new datatyping proposal, ASAP ACTION 2002-08-02#4, Jeremy: prepare test case(s) for new datatyping proposal

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Aug/0007.html

1: Allocate scribe: Graham Klyne

2: Roll call

Participants: - Eric Miller (chair) - Daniel Brickley - Dave Beckett - Frank Manola - Graham Klyne - Jeremey Carroll - Jos De Roo - Ron Daniels - Dan Connolly - Pat Hayes - Mike Dean - Guha - Sergey Melnik

Regrets/absent: - Brian McBride (chair) - Patrick Stickler - Jan Grant - Stephen Petschulat - Aaron Swartz - Frank Boumphrey - KWON Hyung-Jin - Michael Kopchenov - Ora Lassila - Pierre G Richard - Rael Dornfest - Satoshi Nakamura - Yoshiyuki Kitahara

3: Review Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Aug/0007.html

em: requests addition of lBase discussion, if time permits

4: Next telecon Aug 9 2002

(DanC notes regrets for this telecon)

5: Review minutes of 2002-07-26 teleconference

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0162.html

No comments or objections.

6: Status of Action Items

Proposed Closed Items ACTION: ericm, Chase minutes of last telecon ACTION: gk, release new doc on Tuesday ACTION: jjc, to produce test cases to reflect decision re nodeID ACTION: jjc, update test case in light of rdf:ID decision ACTION: ericm, Solicit reviews re gk's new document Agreed all completed.

Open Items:

ACTION: 2002-05-31#4 bwm add "see also" links between rdfms-containers other approaches and rdfms-seq-representation in the issues list document Continues

ACTION: danbri to circulate LBase document before Wednesday context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/26-rdfcore-irc#T14-10-46 Completed

ACTION: jang update test cases in light of bugs context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-34-20 Continues

ACTION: eric Look into why jang gets dropped on rdf-comments list and fix problem context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-35-21 Fixed, completed.

ACTION: bwm to identify applications needed and get a schedule for them context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-54-10 Continues

ACTION: bwm have a good holiday context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-03-20 Continues

ACTION: daveb update syntax in light of rdf:ID decision context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-23-41 Continues - new draft next Tuesday

ACTION: daveb update syntax doc to reflect decision re nodeID context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-51-04 Continues - new draft next Tuesday

ACTION: daveB to update rdfms-names-use to reflect rdf:nodeID context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T14-51-52 Continues - new draft next Tuesday

ACTION ericm Review gk's new document context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-00-48 Completed.

ACTION: danbri Review gk's new document context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-01-24 Completed.

ACTION: jos Partial review of gk's document (emphasis on section 2.3) context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-03-02 Completed.

ACTION: danbri Partial review of gk's document (emphasis on section 2.3) context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-03-13 Completed.

ACTION: frank Partial review of gk's document (emphasis on section 2.3) context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc#T15-04-03 Completed.

  1. New Document

Announcement: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0177.html

There has been much discussion in email. Main outstanding issues are:

Proposed that publication go ahead with all contentious text removed, or note added explaining that work is still needed.

Designing XML data to be RDF compatible as an effective way way of getting RDF adopted. Saying something about this may be appropriate, but better in the Primer.

Discussion about moving material to other documents -- will this require an additional WD before last call? Differing views.

DECIDED: to go ahead with WD publication, subject to:

ACTION 2002-08-02#1, GK: make agreed changes to new doc and notify EM ACTION 2002-08-02#2, EM: get ball rolling for publication of new WD

  1. Datatypes

Discussion of Guha's proposal to concentrate on local typing only; his basic position is that we are signally failing to make progress on "global idiom", but it would be highly unsatisfactory to publish without a way to express (say) that some given literal is a number.

Mike and Frank expressed a desire for the global idiom to be available. We believe that PatrickS (in absentia) strongly desires global idiom. DanC asked to explore going to last call without any datatyping.

Guha clarifies: proposal is to start with local idiom, allow application-specific or other layers to add global idiom; i.e. not to rule it out completely.

MikeD raises two objections: local idiom adds triple-bloat; local idiom privides noi way for schema to say that a particular data type is expected for a given property. Guha clarifies: "local idiom" means some way of specifying the type of a particular literal, not necessarily extra triples. In particular, allow literals to include things other than strings.

Jeremy: what does graph look like with local typing?

(Jeremy?): restricting ourselves to local typing is one thing, but there's also the issue of tidy vs untidy literals that still needs to be addressed.

... (more discussion of various details. General tone is supportive, other than concerns already mentioned.)

Question: can use of schema to express expected typing be consistent with local typing? Yes, but the schema-described typing would not be enforced by the model theory.

For clarity, the proposal is something like this: 10

DECIDED: Guha, Sergey, PatH, Mike, Jos will work on a new proposal to do local typing only; jjc will do a test case or two.

DaveB notes that if there are syntax changes, the final draft of syntax due next week is at risk.

MikeD reasserts that triple bloat would be a real problem (current databases c. 0.5million triples). The new proposal won't introduce new triples; still some concern about need to annotate literals with type.

ACTION 2002-08-02#3, Guha: lead submission of new datatyping proposal, ASAP ACTION 2002-08-02#4, Jeremy: prepare test case(s) for new datatyping proposal

--meeting closed--

Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>

Attachments

Received on Friday, 2 August 2002 12:59:02 UTC