Minutes telecon 26th July 2002 from Jeremy Carroll on 2002-07-26 (w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org from July 2002) (original) (raw)

Minutes of RDF Telecon July 26th 2002

Chair: Eric Miller Scribe: Jeremy Carroll (with assistance from Dave and Jan)

SUMMARY

DECISIONS

DECISION rdf:ID matches the same as XML IDs. DECISION The WG agree the modified proposal of msg July 0080

We plan to consider the new document (title still unknown) (editors) for publication as a WD next meeting.

ACTIONS

ACTION ericm Chase minutes of telecon of 19th July 2002. ACTION danbri Circulate a document re Lbase by Wednesday 31st July. ACTION jjc Update test case from colon in ID e-mail. ACTION dave Update syntax document to bring rdf:ID into line with xmlid ACTION jjc Create test case with number at start of ID. ACTION daveb to update syntax doc to reflect nodeID ACTION jjc to produce nodeID test cases ACTION daveB to update rdfms-names-use to reflect rdf:nodeID ACTION gk Release new draft of doc for Tuesday. ACTION ericm Review new document. ACTION danbri Review new document, particularly section 2.3. ACTION jos Review new document, particularly section 2.3. ACTION frank Review section 2.3 of new document . ACTION ericm Solicit more reviewers for new document on WG e-mail.

DETAILS

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0155.html IRC log below.

1: Volunteer scribe

Jeremy

2: Roll Call

Present: Eric Miller Dave Becket Jan Grant Frank Manola Steve Petchulat Dan Brickley Jeremy Carroll Graham Klyne Jos de Roo Mike Dean

Regrets: Brian McBride Dan Connolly Pat Hayes

Patrick Stickler is on holiday

3: Review Agenda

No change, but changed under item 7.

4: Next telecon Aug 2nd 2002

5: Review minutes of 2002-07-19 teleconference

no minutes yet

IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc

Appears that Patrick agreed to write up minutes.

ACTION ericm Chase minutes of telecon of 19th July 2002.

6: Status of Action Items

[[ ACTION: danbri, eric Identify who owns the publishing next steps and responsibilities for LBase Note context: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc.html#T14-13-49 ]] ACTION danbri Circulate a document re Lbase by Wednesday 31st July.

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

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 ]] continued.

[[ (Proposed Closed)

ACTION: 2002-06-28#2 bwm get editors together, review contents of documents ]]

Jeremy asserted that he attended a telecon that was this meeting; the action is closed.

1. rdf:ID / rdf:node proposal

Agenda discussion split this into:

7a) rdf:ID

Dave: the issue is that xml id and rdf id are different. Propose to make them the same.

On some readings of M&S this makes RDF more restrictive in that XML IDs cannot begin with numbers.

DECISION: rdf:ID matches the same as XML IDs.

Abstention: Mike Dean.

ACTION jjc Update test case from colon in ID e-mail. ACTION dave Update syntax document to bring rdf:ID into line with xmlid ACTION jjc Create test case with number at start of ID.

7b) rdf:node

Proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0080.html

Discussion, followed by minor mods to the proposal, and unaminous decision.

The changes to the proposal were that

• rdf:node is replaced by rdf:nodeID.
• the value of rdf:nodeID must match the same as rdf:ID (which is the same as XML IDs).

There was also discussion about whether applications had to store these IDs; the relationship to NTriple IDs.

A substantive point was whether two new attributes or one should be used. Eric argued that each new attribute adds a significant pedagogical cost, and hence that one was better than two.

DECISION The WG agree the modified proposal of msg July 0080

Carried unaminously (vocally).

ACTION daveb to update syntax doc to reflect nodeID ACTION jjc to produce nodeID test cases ACTION daveB to update rdfms-names-use to reflect rdf:nodeID

1. New Document

http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-basics/2002-07-25/Overview.html

Graham talks through new document. see also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0159.html

Eric: the section 2.3 needs active review.

Eric asked if this is ready to go out as a WD, and pointed out that the schedule is tight. Graham said yes, Jeremy nearly.

ACTION gk Release new draft of doc for Tuesday.

The plan is to try and OK its release as a WD next Friday.

Reviewers. DaveB has already reviewed the document. ACTION ericm Review new document. ACTION danbri Review new document, particularly section 2.3. ACTION jos Review new document, particularly section 2.3. ACTION frank Review section 2.3 of new document . ACTION ericm Solicit more reviewers for new document on WG e-mail.

1. rdfns-assertion

Not discussed, except for emphasis on reviewing section 2.3

1. Procedure for determining reserved vocabulary

Skipped

1. Schedule and Process to Last Call

Eric: dependency on datatypes is a problem.

1. Datatypes

Proposed as main theme for next week.

IRC LOG

13:00:05 logger_1 has joined #rdfcore 13:00:05 <irc.w3.org> Users on #rdfcore: @logger_1 13:27:22 em has joined #rdfcore 13:27:38 em has changed the topic to: rdfcore teleconference - 2002-07-26 13:48:16 Zakim has joined #rdfcore 13:48:22 RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore 13:48:24 * RRSAgent is logging 13:48:32 agenda +Volunteer scribe 13:48:33 * Zakim notes agendum 1 added 13:48:41 agenda +Roll Call 13:48:42 * Zakim notes agendum 2 added 13:48:52 Agenda +Review Agenda - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0155.html 13:48:53 * Zakim notes agendum 3 added 13:49:04 agenda + Next telecon Aug 2nd 2002 13:49:05 * Zakim notes agendum 4 added 13:49:28 agenda +Review minutes of 2002-07-19 teleconference - (no minutes but log http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc) 13:49:29 * Zakim notes agendum 5 added 13:49:42 agenda +action item status 13:49:43 * Zakim notes agendum 6 added 13:49:55 danbri has joined #rdfcore 13:50:00 agenda +rdf:ID / rdf:node proposal - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0080.html 13:50:01 * Zakim notes agendum 7 added 13:50:14 ilrt has joined #rdfcore 13:50:18 agenda +New Document - http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-basics/2002-07-25/Overview.html 13:50:19 * Zakim notes agendum 8 added 13:50:31 agenda +rdfns-assertion 13:50:32 * Zakim notes agendum 9 added 13:50:42 agenda +Procedure for determining reserved vocabulary 13:50:43 * Zakim notes agendum 10 added 13:50:57 agenda +Schedule and Process to Last Call 13:50:58 * Zakim notes agendum 11 added 13:51:01 agenda +datatypes 13:51:02 * Zakim notes agendum 12 added 13:51:21 ilrt2 has joined #rdfcore 13:51:22 * em we have to figure out how to get rdf agenda's into rrsagent.... 13:54:41 * em heads for much needed coffee... back in a few 13:55:42 * danbri too 13:55:51 * danbri sympathising w/ boston timezone ;-) 13:56:08 gk-scribe has joined #rdfcore 13:56:16 gk-scribe is now known as gk 13:57:12 * em thanks gk for his excellent prep work 13:57:43 zakim, list conferences. 13:57:44 I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM, WAI_EOWG()8:30AM 13:57:53 zakim, this is SW_RDFCore. 13:57:54 sorry, em, I do not see a conference named 'SW_RDFCore.' 13:57:57 zakim, this is SW 13:57:58 ok, em 13:58:05 zakim, who is here? 13:58:06 On the phone I see EricM 13:58:07 On IRC I see gk, ilrt2, ilrt, danbri, RRSAgent, Zakim, em, logger_1 13:58:27 * gk dialling... 14:00:45 +??P3 14:01:01 +Manola 14:01:02 +??P11 14:01:09 ilrt is now known as DaveB 14:01:13 ilrt2 is now known as jang 14:01:20 * gk GK, just joined (??P11 ?) 14:02:57 zakim, who is here? 14:02:58 On the phone I see EricM, ??P3, Manola, ??P11 14:02:59 On IRC I see gk, jang, DaveB, danbri, RRSAgent, Zakim, em, logger_1 14:03:02 * danbri dialing 14:03:25 zakim, don't pick me! 14:03:26 I don't understand 'don't pick me!', jang. Try /msg Zakim help 14:03:56 zakim, exempt.add(danbri,'wrists hurt') 14:03:57 I don't understand 'exempt.add(danbri,'wrists hurt')', danbri. Try /msg Zakim help 14:04:26 +??P13 14:04:32 +DanBri 14:04:40 zakim, +??P13 is jjc 14:04:41 sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named '+??P13' 14:05:02 zakim, ??P13 is jjc 14:05:04 +Jjc; got it 14:05:06 +??P12 14:05:08 connolly has joined #rdfcore 14:05:22 * connolly is a little slow booting up; reviews agenda... 14:05:32 DaveB is now known as DaveB-scr 14:05:37 agenda? 14:05:38 * Zakim sees 12 items remaining on the agenda: 14:05:39 * Zakim 1. Volunteer scribe [from em] 14:05:40 * Zakim 2. Roll Call [from em] 14:05:41 * Zakim 3. Review Agenda - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0155.html [from em] 14:05:43 * Zakim 4. Next telecon Aug 2nd 2002 [from em] 14:05:44 * Zakim 5. Review minutes of 2002-07-19 teleconference

• (no minutes but log http://www.w3.org/2002/07/19-rdfcore-irc) [from em] 14:05:47 * Zakim 6. action item status [from em] 14:05:48 * Zakim 7. rdf:ID / rdf:node proposal - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0080.html [from em] 14:05:51 * Zakim 8. New Document - http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-basics/2002-07-25/Overview.html [from em] 14:05:53 * Zakim 9. rdfns-assertion [from em] 14:05:54 * Zakim 10. Procedure for determining reserved vocabulary [from em] 14:05:56 * Zakim 11. Schedule and Process to Last Call [from em] 14:05:58 * Zakim 12. datatypes [from em] 14:06:11 jjc scribe 14:06:14 zakim, who is here? 14:06:15 On the phone I see EricM, ??P3, Manola, ??P11, DanBri, Jjc, ??P12 14:06:15 (daveb doing for now) 14:06:16 On IRC I see connolly, gk, jang, DaveB-scr, danbri, RRSAgent, Zakim, em, logger_1 14:06:46 gk is here 14:06:53 stevep is here 14:06:58 daveb and jan are also here 14:07:02 zakim, ??P11 is GK 14:07:04 +GK; got it 14:07:05 rollcall complete 14:07:09 review agenda 14:07:25 item 4 14:07:43 donm, 2 august 14:07:50 jjcscribe has joined #rdfcore 14:07:57 reg bwm (holidaY0 jos
  14:08:08 I am on now. 14:08:18 reg danc 14:08:19 regrets josd 14:08:24 DaveB-scr is now known as DaveB 14:08:28 [excuse poor trying, imac ketbroad] 14:08:39 Minutes Last Telecon 14:08:53 Patrick agreed to do minutes but they are missing 14:09:09 ACTION ericm Chase minutes of last telecon 14:09:20 Current record is IRC log 14:10:30 +Mike_Dean 14:10:46 ACTION danbri versus LBase 14:11:04 dan will circulate something before Wednesday 14:11:37 This will be a note coming out of the WG discussion 14:12:32 ACTION: jang update test cases - continued 14:12:34 * RRSAgent records action 1 14:12:50 ACTION: eric Look into why jang ... continued 14:12:51 * RRSAgent records action 2 14:13:47 2002-06-28# closed 14:13:55 Because close 14:14:56 +??P15 14:15:17 Jos joined 14:15:20 Agenda item 7 14:15:23 regrets were from PatH 14:16:01 New agenda item 7a rdf:ID 14:16:08 jjc: 14:16:17 my take is that xml NS production is the correct one 14:16:24 ie, a ns name, without the colon 14:16:34 djb: we've been over this, can't we decide it? 14:16:36 Oh., em, Agenda request: Namespaces 1.1 LC review. 14:16:38 dave: anyone object? 14:16:49 frankm: what's the issue again? 14:16:50 ok, danbri so noted 14:16:57 NCName 14:16:58 ::= 14:16:58 (Letter | '') (NCNameChar)* 14:16:58 An XML Name, minus the ":" */ 14:16:59 agenda +Namespace 1.1 14:17:00 * Zakim notes agendum 13 added 14:17:00 jjc: test case sent to wg the other day... just looking for it 14:17:30 daveb: the issue is that xml id and rdf id take different sets of characters 14:17:33 they shold be the same 14:17:39 then xml schema can validate it 14:17:44 em: objections? 14:17:58 re aggendum 13, see Namespaces 1.1 LC plan: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2002JulSep/0040.html (need W3C Member passwd) 14🔞07 decision: this is obvious, we should do this? 14🔞32 jjc points to message 0148 from this month 14:19:24 xml id and rdf id in the syntax take differetn set of charcater 14:19:30 I propose that we make them the same 14:19:39 and then we can use w3x xsl to validate it. 14:20:00 mike: issues with some tools: ids can't begin with numbers? 14:20:06 currently allowed by rdf, not xml 14:20:11 daveb: that's the change 14:20:28 miked: rdf is becoming more restrictive here, right? 14:20:32 mike: rdf is becoming more restrictive 14:20:53 consider ssn or zip code 14:21:05 * connolly thought rdf IDs had to start with letters all along 14:21:16 q+ 14:21:17 * Zakim sees Em on the speaker queue 14:22:22 connolly: was ambiguous, as jjc explaining on the telcon 14:22:28 can't find ptrs to more just this sec 14:22:50 Abstentions: miked 14:23:00 Proposal carried. 14:23:10 ACTION jjc update test case 14:23:15 * connolly thinks it's kinda silly, not to mention very painful, that XML IDs have to start with letters 14:23:24 (jjc: can you split test cases so one thing tested rather than two?) 14:23:41 ACTION dave update syntax 14:23:53 mdean has joined #rdfcore 14:23:54 * connolly wonders what proposal carried 14:23:57 JosD has joined #rdfcore 14:24:14 ACTION jjc include test case with numeric ID 14:24:20 connolly: the three lines I typed higher up "xml id ..." up to "validate it" 14:24:21 * gk DanC: proposal to limit RDF IDs to same form as XML IDs, I think 14:24:54 item 7b 14:25:03 jjc has simple proposal for rdf:node 14:25:09 doesn't address all aspect sof the syntax 14:25:18 * connolly is happy to see the coin officially flipped, for IDs 14:25:21 but it solves the bulk of the roundtripping problem 14:25:28 a number of choicepoints highlighted in the email... 14:25:35 ..we could discuss those here... chair? 14:25:46 em: want to get this finished. 14:25:56 that being said, don't know if people consider this a no-brainer 14:26:08 one choice-point seems obvious, the rest less so 14:26:28 chair's position was not to reopen at this time, but if a slam-0dunk then reopen and finish it 14:26:31 this= rdf:node idea? 14:26:33 is this a slam dunk? 14:26:37 yes 14:26:38 yes 14:26:45 (yes to danbri) 14:26:48 (not agreeing, replying to danbri) 14:26:57 * danbri nods, just checking 14:27:02 jjc: there is a proposal 14:27:06 * danbri tring to fix www-rdf-comments mail thing for jang 14:27:09 which is moderately long but is complete, I think 14:27:23 that we add the file-scope identifier for a blank node as an attribute 14:27:33 we can label subject or object with such an attribute. 14:27:39 that's about it 14:27:44 danbri, please do not deal with the comments thing - please focus on the meeting at hand 14:27:44 (rdf:node is what rdf:ID should've been) 14:27:49 em: comments? 14:27:53 * danbri done 14:28:02 frank: question: concerning the use of xml strings as blank-node identifiers? 14:28:16 jjc: i could have been more restrictive tthan just @xml strings@ 14:28:32 daveb; coincidentally, the ntriples IDs are also xml ids 14:28:46 frank: how do you distinguish it as a blank node id? 14:28:53 danbri: a new attribute for it 14:29:15 daveb: shouldn't look like a uri 14:29:25 should look like rdf:id 14:29:33 jjc: ntriples is us-ascii, 14:29:42 we should allow id's as e-acute, etc. 14:29:55 danbri: ntriples is just a test format 14:30:10 jjc: there's no reason why these have anything to do with ntriples identifiers 14:30:18 it's just another syntax 14:30:30 if the id's don't survive roundtripping because they just label a blank node... 14:30:36 not a problem 14:30:44 em: what's the risk if we don't have this? 14:30:57 jjc: there are real users who really want to write rdf/xml that they've read in 14:31:03 in a programmatic sense 14:31:16 and at some point they need blank node ids to do that in certain circumstances 14:31:24 if they assign a uri then the meaning has changed 14:31:31 they might do something nonstandard 14:31:44 in jena, we're feeling increasing pressure to do something nonstandard 14:31:50 which we'd rather not do 14:32:09 danbri: ntriples are increasingly attractive because they're the only roundtrippable format 14:32:23 jjc: if we don't do this then the user community is being effectively forced to use ntriples 14:32:29 even though we don't endorse it 14:32:30 zakim, q+ rdf:node 14:32:31 I see Em, Rdf:node on the speaker queue 14:32:34 doh 14:32:39 ack em 14:32:40 * Zakim sees Rdf:node on the speaker queue 14:32:40 zakim, q- rdf:node 14:32:41 I see no one on the speaker queue 14:32:42 \frank: the roundtripping is rdf/xml -> somehitng, -> rdf/xml 14:32:49 zakim, q+ 14:32:50 I see Danbri on the speaker queue 14:33:05 I want to read rdfxml, store it, generate it 14:33:13 if blank node ids are allowed to look like uris? 14:33:29 what i have to do (i think) is adopt some nonstandard approach to store these? 14:33:38 danbri: it's inside your db implementation 14:33:42 If we adopt them, I think graph-scope IDs should be limited to N-triple allowed form, I18N not needed because its a machine notion, not human-readable. This seems simplest effective approach. 14:33:50 jjc: jena has effectively a bit on every resource indicating the label type 14:34:40 danbri: have same syntactic constraints as we do on rdf:id 14:34:50 there are few things I've really cared about as an implementor 14:34:54 this is one of those 14:34:57 I think the compelling case for this feature is to provide applications a standard way to communicate arbitrary graphs. 14:34:59 I can load, query, merge, etc. rdf 14:35:03 but I can't dump it back as a file 14:35:09 it's honestly embarrassing 14:35:35 em: unless we standardise ntriples, with i18n etc. this kind of mechanism is necessary 14:35:38 maybe rdf:nodeID ? 14:35:42 (yesses ) 14:35:45 yes, I like rdf:nodeID 14:35:56 em: I like danbri's suggestion of synchronising with rdf:id 14:36:01 This is really the continuation of our cleanup re anonymous/blank resources. 14:36:07 jjc: I'm happy with node id 14:36:17 q+ 14:36:19 * Zakim sees Danbri, Gk on the speaker queue 14:36:27 then we restrict to string syntax of rdf:id (= xml:id) 14:36:28 rdf:nodeID 14:36:39 daveb: frank - much rewriting on the primer? 14:36:45 frank: er, there will be some... 14:36:57 I'd like a clear explanation of what the change is... 14:37:05 in particular, what these node ids are going to look like 14:37:15 em: premature, i think ,without that being written up 14:37:24 er... nodeID and nodeRef? or do you use nodeID in both places? note you can't use rdf:resource to refer to these things. 14:37:28 davbe: isn't that's jjc's proposal plus the amendments we're discussing? 14:37:33 connolly: rdf:nodeID in both 14:37:36 ew 14:37:48 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0080.html 14:37:49 oh well 14:37:51 * gk DanC, I think that's a remaining choice point that I am queued to raise 14:37:56 haven't decided yet DanC 14:38:07 connolly is now known as DanC 14:38:25 (quick rummage through mailing lists...) 14:38:39 frankm: this doesn't mention what's in the primer about blank nodes 14:38:56 because we're talking about generating those ids, not explicitly identifying them 14:39:01 * em wonders who is taking the call in the playground? 14:39:11 jjc: the proposal is that the blank nodes remain blank 14:39:24 we just want to allow a file to refer to the same blank node in two places
  14:39:40 there's some push to allow blank nodes with a @global@ scope identifier. that's not the proposal 14:39:55 the playground is me ... 14:40:00 frankm: you're being allowed to explicitly specify an id for a blank node 14:40:02 right? 14:40:13 secondly: are you always required to specify an id for a blank node? 14:40:24 or are the current syntactic abbrevs still allowed? 14:40:35 hmm, rdf:nodeID seems ok for having something to point to. But how (re dan's questoin) do we point to it? 14:40:52 q? 14:40:53 * Zakim sees Danbri, Gk on the speaker queue 14:40:58 q- 14:40:59 I don't mind, rdf:resourceID/resourceRef - hmm 14:40:59 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue 14:41:15 ack gk 14:41:16 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue 14:41:18 jjc: second question: the answer is not required 14:41:31 jang: first question: no suggestion that blank node id -strings survive a roundtripping 14:41:43 The proposal doesn't mention resourceID or similar; is the proposal incomplete? 14:41:56 gk: jjc's said it's not necessary to have different names for rdf:nodeid and rdf:nodeidref 14:42:06 but is it worth having two attributes for subject and object? 14:42:21 jjc: the proposal is to use the same attribute twice 14:42:49 danbri; I've often wished rdf:about and rdf:resouce were just rdf:webid 14:42:57 jjc: it makes the striping easier to see 14:43:08 taking the opposite viewpoint is maybe perverse...? 14:43:12 I like it. 14:43:19 gk; both work technically, just from a pedagogical pov, which is better? 14:43:28 nodeid and nodeidref work for me (gk) 14:43:31 gk mentions rdf:nodeIDref 14:43:32 oh 14:43:43 jjc: my muse deserted me, i only came up with one name 14:44:35 (the "bnode" terminology is almost resurrected... but not) 14:44:52 em: is the view of the group this is (a) important, and (b) this is the way to do it? 14:45:01 decisions in then to get this into the spec, right? 14:45:16 em: this puts timescales at risk, so if we can agree... 14:45:20 and I think we have... 14:45:25 let's make the decision now, ok? 14:45:35 otherwise, this is no longer a slam-dunk 14:45:41 (frank: it's a three-point-shot) 14:45:55 jjc: my full resolution of msg 0080 14:45:59 with node replaced by nodeid 14:46:10 and nodeid attr value the same restrictions as rdf:id attr value? 14:46:37 that should be rdf:nodeID 14:46:40 Do we have separate attribute for subj/obj? 14:46:43 no 14:47:00 jjc: personally, I prefer not 14:47:04 danbri: not 14:47:37 mike: symmetry argument? 14:47:42 with resource, about? 14:48:20 jjc asks for suggestions.. nodeabout, noderef, bid, babout, etc. 14:48:28 none meet with much agreement 14:48:39 s/much/any 14:49:08 em: stick with one. it'll hurt, but big payoff 14:49:14 with two, hurts much more for the same benefit 14:49:51 zakim, who is here? 14:49:52 On the phone I see EricM, ??P3, Manola, GK, DanBri, Jjc, ??P12, Mike_Dean, ??P15 14:49:53 On IRC I see JosD, mdean, jjcscribe, DanC, gk, jang, DaveB, danbri, RRSAgent, Zakim, em, logger_1 14:50:03 yesses to the revised proposal above... 14:50:09 em asks for no's? 14:50:12 abstentions? 14:50:19 none and none, respectively 14:50:35 agreement. congrats, jeremy. 14:50:45 (the actions are in the resolution...) 14:50:57 action: daveb to update syntax doc to reflect nodeID 14:51:04 action: jjc to produce test cases 14:51:08 (on nodeID) 14:51:21 action daveB to update syntax to bring rdfid into line with xmlid 14:51:31 See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0159.html 14:51:37 [want to scribe again jjc?] 14:51:52 action daveB to update rdfms-names-use to reflect rdf:nodeID 14:53:03 Zakim has quit 14:53:22 Graham talks through new doc. 14:53:36 em: the section 2.3 needs activ review 14:53:52 (next agenda item) 14:54:29 Where Dave has suggested pointing to syntax doc we will, 14:54:40 but unclear exactly where 14:54:48 [note: could do with this living somewhere under w3-space so that TC doc can refer to it normatively... in the near future] 14:55:07 Section 4.2 fragment IDs is new material that needs atcive WG agreement 14:56:00 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0159.html points to a 404 14:56:04 [unavailable for review, out of the country next week, sorry] 14:56:47 I asked gk to post to www-archive, should be a copy there 14:57:05 Isn't that done? 14:57:19 * danbri thought he saw something there, yup 14:57:24 em: is this ready to go out as a WD? 14:57:31 gk: yes, jjc: nearly 14:57:39 gk's doc - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Jul/att-0052/01-Overview.htm 14:57:44 gk/jjc's 25/ july doc 14:57:50 (beat me to it, ta) 14:58:15 q+ 14:58:22 ACTION gk release doc on Tuesday 14:58:26 hmm, no Zakim - nevermind 14:58:52 who can review this for Friday? 14:58:52 Zakim has joined #rdfcore 14:59:07 I re-invited Zakim; don't know why it left, or whether it lost state. 14:59:10 zakim, who is here? 14:59:11 sorry, danbri, I don't know what conference this is 14:59:12 On IRC I see Zakim, JosD, mdean, jjcscribe, DanC, gk, jang, DaveB, danbri, RRSAgent, em, logger_1 14:59:24 BTW, proposed title: Miscellanea and Abstract Data Model 14:59:38 RDF MADM? 15:00:09 q? 15:00:10 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue 15:00:25 DaveB has pretty much reviewed it. 15:00:39 Are there two more? 15:00:47 [needs rdf:nodeID in section 3.7] 15:00:48 ACTION ericm Review document. 15:01:14 3.7 could be in syntax doc? 15:01:24 ACTION danbri Review document. 15:01:33 yep 15:01:50 (noting that I'm not 100% confident I'll manage it, but want to and will try my best to...) 15:02:02 em: timecheck 15:03:02 ACTION jos Partial review (emphasis on section 2.3) 15:03:13 ACTION danbri Review of section 2.3 15:03:26 ie. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Jul/att-0052/01-Overview.htm#section-Meaning 15:03:53 ACTION ericm Solicit reviews on rdf-core wg 15:04:03 ACTION frank Review section 2.3 15:05:35 em: last call scheculde - problem is datatypes. 15:07:20 bye folks, thanks. 15:07:28 Possible theme for next week is datatypes. 15:07:35 adjourned. 15:07:51 jang has quit 15:07:59 DaveB, can you point me to vocab list in syntax doc pls? 15:08:10 hold on 15:09:36 Ta .. (I lose track of where to find the latest working version) 15:10:00 mdean has quit 15:10:12 zakim, who is her5e? 15:10:13 I don't understand your question, gk. 15:10:16 zakim, who is here? 15:10:17 sorry, gk, I don't know what conference this is 15:10:18 On IRC I see Zakim, JosD, jjcscribe, DanC, gk, DaveB, danbri, RRSAgent, em, logger_1 15:10:43 zakim loststate when dropped off channel. 15:10:52 anyone know what happend? 15:11:54 3.4 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Namespace 15:11:58 is where rdf namespace defined 15:12:00 and has all the terms 15:12:10 in the editor's draft, there are expansions and updates 15:13:58 editor's draft version http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/07/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Namespace 15:14:09 with collection stuff - first, rest, nil 15:15:36 end of chat 15:15:38 DaveB has quit 15🔞06 JosD has quit 15:23:06 DanC has left #rdfcore 15:25:40 gk has quit

Received on Friday, 26 July 2002 12:33:29 UTC