IRC log of rdfcore on 2002-11-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:45:28 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore

14:45:33 [DanConn]

Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:45:34 [Zakim]

sorry, DanConn, I don't know what conference this is

14:45:35 [Zakim]

On IRC I see RRSAgent, DanConn, Zakim, AaronSw, logger

14:45:40 [DanConn]

Zakim, this will be RDF

14:45:41 [Zakim]

ok, DanConn

14:49:01 [bwm]

bwm has joined #rdfcore

14:49:16 [bwm]

morning all

14:49:28 [AaronSw]

morning

14:53:03 [jang_scri]

jang_scri has joined #rdfcore

14:53:27 [AaronSw]

already wearing the scribe hat. look at that enthusiasm!

14:53:39 [jang_scri]

look at last week's minutes :-/

14:53:48 [bwm]

G'day Jan - are you really scribing again?

14:53:51 [DaveB]

DaveB has joined #rdfcore

14:54:01 [jang_scri]

happy to, dialing in, however...

14:54:18 [jang_scri]

on a laptop with no mouse, so if someone (aaron) can paste urls into the transcipt that'll make my life easier

14:54:19 [Zakim]

SW_RDFCore()10:00AM matches both RDF and rdf

14:54:38 [AaronSw]

zakim, this is rdf

14:54:39 [Zakim]

ok, AaronSw

14:54:44 [Zakim]

-??P3

14:54:45 [Zakim]

SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended

14:54:48 [DanConn]

er... jan, did you put yourself down as scribe on purpose? I don't think a mistake in the minutes one week should count as volunteering for the next week.

14:55:13 [Zakim]

SW_RDFCore()10:00AM matches both RDF and rdf

14:55:31 [bwm]

zakim, who is on the phone?

14:55:31 [AaronSw]

zakim, who is on the phone?

14:55:32 [Zakim]

I notice SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has restarted

14:55:32 [Zakim]

On the phone I see ??P3

14:55:33 [Zakim]

On the phone I see ??P3

14:55:39 [Zakim]

+??P4

14:55:42 [Zakim]

-??P3

14:55:43 [Zakim]

+??P3

14:55:51 [jang_scri]

zakim, ??p4 is ilrt

14:55:52 [Zakim]

+Ilrt; got it

14:56:00 [jang_scri]

zakim, ilrt has jang, daveb

14:56:02 [Zakim]

+Jang, Daveb; got it

14:56:04 [bwm]

zakim ??P3 is bwm

14:56:54 [DanCon]

DanCon has joined #rdfcore

14:57:02 [Zakim]

-Ilrt

14:57:08 [DaveB]

oops

14:57:29 [bwm]

that's a rather drastic way to mute

14:57:32 [Zakim]

+??P4

14:57:36 [Zakim]

-??P3

14:57:37 [Zakim]

+??P3

14:57:45 [DaveB]

Zakim, ??p4 is ilrt

14:57:46 [Zakim]

+Ilrt; got it

14:58:48 [bwm]

zakim, who is on the phone?

14:58:49 [Zakim]

On the phone I see ??P3, Ilrt

14:59:12 [bwm]

Zakim, ??P3 is bwm

14:59:13 [Zakim]

+Bwm; got it

14:59:20 [jjc]

jjc has joined #rdfcore

14:59:24 [Zakim]

+PatH

14:59:26 [DanCon]

FYI: EricM has no network this morning, I gather

14:59:39 [Zakim]

+AaronSw

14:59:40 [jjc]

what's the meeting code?

14:59:44 [jang_scri]

7332

14:59:45 [bwm]

7332

14:59:58 [jang_scri]

gotta get up in the morning to beat me, bwm

15:00:06 [jang_scri]

early! I mean, ea

15:00:06 [bwm]

zakim, who is on the phone?

15:00:07 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Bwm, Ilrt, PatH, AaronSw

15:00:08 [jang_scri]

rly in the morning

15:00:35 [Zakim]

+??P7

15:00:50 [AaronSw]

zakim, ??P7 is stevep

15:00:51 [Zakim]

+Stevep; got it

15:00:51 [Zakim]

+??P8

15:01:02 [AaronSw]

zakim, ??P8 is jjc

15:01:03 [Zakim]

+Jjc; got it

15:01:21 [Zakim]

+EricM

15:01:28 [Zakim]

+??P10

15:01:50 [Zakim]

+FrankM

15:02:12 [AaronSw]

zakim, ??p10 is patricks

15:02:13 [Zakim]

+Patricks; got it

15:02:44 [jang_scri]

we were hoping you'd be halfway up a mountain or something exciting like that, patrick!

15:03:05 [Zakim]

+DanC

15:03:24 [Zakim]

+??P12

15:03:34 [AaronSw]

zakim, ??p12 is josd

15:03:35 [Zakim]

+Josd; got it

15:03:52 [jang_scri]

jang to scribe this week

15:03:54 [jang_scri]

next week:

15:04:11 [JosD]

JosD has joined #rdfcore

15:04:17 [jang_scri]

next meeting... thanksgiving next week

15:04:28 [Zakim]

+ +1.617.253.aaaa

15:04:29 [jang_scri]

sounds like quorate next week

15:04:32 [jang_scri]

next telecon, next week

15:04:34 [jang_scri]

jjc to scribe

15:04:39 [AaronSw]

zakim, +1.61 is danbri

15:04:40 [Zakim]

+Danbri; got it

15:04:55 [jang_scri]

roll call

15:04:57 [bwm]

zakim, who is on the phone

15:04:59 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'who is on the phone', bwm

15:05:05 [bwm]

zakim, who is on the phone?

15:05:06 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Bwm, Ilrt, PatH, AaronSw, Stevep, Jjc, EricM, Patricks, FrankM, DanC, Josd, Danbri

15:05:15 [danbri]

danbri has joined #rdfcore

15:05:22 [jang_scri]

zakim, ilrt has daveb jang

15:05:23 [Zakim]

+Daveb, Jang; got it

15:05:42 [jang_scri]

regrets: mike dean.

15:05:54 [jang_scri]

agenda:

15:06:19 [jang_scri]

(jjc's range, domain move to under test cases)

15:06:30 [jang_scri]

minutes of the last meeting:

15:06:34 [jang_scri]

approved

15:06:39 [jang_scri]

completed actions:

15:06:40 [jang_scri]

all done

15:07:01 [DaveB]

jang test cases:

15:07:05 [DaveB]

working on the actions...

15:07:09 [DaveB]

... main thing is DT test cases

15:07:17 [DaveB]

... working on these

15:07:27 [DaveB]

see url in agende item 7

15:08:04 [DaveB]

jang_scri: issues are

15:08:04 [AaronSw]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0447.html

15:08:15 [DaveB]

... need to get an answer to whether lang is in or not

15:08:42 [DaveB]

bwm: what did we decide re lang component in syntactic component in literal

15:08:51 [DaveB]

DanCon: what did record show?

15:08:51 [DanCon]

which test case, jan?

15:09:15 [DaveB]

jang_scri: when not doing DT-entail, understood we had tidy nodes with

15:09:29 [DaveB]

... lang and string

15:09:46 [bwm]

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/Manifest.rdf

15:10:16 [AaronSw]

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/test004a.nt doesNotEntail http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/test004b.nt

15:10:40 [bwm]

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/test004a.nt

15:10:43 [jang_scri]

ACTION me to slap frag ids into that

15:11:12 [DaveB]

one is a premise, one a conclusion. test is a non entailment

15:11:37 [DanCon]

does { <http://example.org/foo">http://example.org/foo> <http://example.org/bar">http://example.org/bar> "10"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer">http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer> .} entail { <http://example.org/foo> <http://example.org/bar> "10"@fr^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer> .} ?

15:11:58 [DaveB]

normal rdf entailment here

15:12:02 [DaveB]

so saying lang is important here

15:12:23 [DanCon]

which part of the model theory spec is relevant, please?

15:12:36 [DaveB]

restating test004a does not rdf-entail test004b

15:12:52 [DaveB]

(will discuss dt-entail in a bit)

15:12:54 [DanCon]

http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#entail

15:13:07 [DaveB]

path quotes above

15:13:19 [DaveB]

plain literal is the pair (string, lang)

15:13:39 [DaveB]

jang_scri: 2nd half is ...

15:13:50 [DaveB]

... when you do dt-entail and have knowledge of the DT, in this case xsd integer

15:13:57 [DanCon]

which test are we talking about now?

15:14:01 [DaveB]

... then you have the entailemnt of teach other

15:14:16 [DaveB]

so, saying test004a dt-entails test004b

15:14:25 [DaveB]

language-ignored-for-numeric-types-1

15:14:29 [DaveB]

^ the test id

15:14:50 [AaronSw]

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/language-ignored-for-numeric-types-1

15:14:54 [JosD]

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/language-ignored-for-numeric-types-1

15:15:08 [DaveB]

^ above is the (404 at present) uri of the test case in discussion

15:15:12 [DaveB]

... with the dt-entailment

15:15:24 [AaronSw]

<test:datatypeSupport rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer" />

15:15:29 [DaveB]

jang_scri: the manifest lists the entailment rules

15:15:31 [AaronSw]

<test:entailmentRules rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes#" />

15:15:32 [AaronSw]

15:16:16 [DaveB]

jjc: suggests using the uri of the test in the manifest

15:16:30 [DaveB]

ACTION jang: change the test uri to point to datatypes/Manifest#test-id

15:17:27 [DaveB]

DanCon: do we need schema rules here?

15:17:33 [DaveB]

jang_scri: no, could delete that

15:17:58 [DaveB]

ACTION jang: delete schema rule from datatypes/Manifest.rdf

15:18:19 [DaveB]

PatH: defer language to the datatype authority

15:18:25 [DaveB]

such as in XSD

15:18:43 [DaveB]

jjc: concepts makes it clear that language is not important except for rdf:XMLLiteral

15:18:47 [bwm]

http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-mt-20021112/#dtype_interp

15:18:53 [DaveB]

... in Datatyping

15:19:10 [DaveB]

jjc: maybe need to tie MT to the above

15:19:42 [DaveB]

ACTION PatH: Tie MT datatype to the sec that points out language isn't important to DT entailment except for rdf:XMLLiteral

15:19:54 [DaveB]

above ACTION also to jjc

15:21:48 [DaveB]

discussion of XSD use string to value mappings, language not used

15:24:10 [AaronSw]

hm, xsd has a language tag datatype

15:24:50 [DaveB]

jjc: I couldn't work out what action you took

15:25:06 [jjc]

ACTION: jjc create example.org daattype test case showing language is not relevant.

15:25:38 [jjc]

ACTION: jjc check RDF Concepts does not allow a synonym for rdf:XMLLiteral

15:26:13 [jang_scri]

question arises about XMLLiteral "sutypes"

15:26:15 [jang_scri]

subtypes even

15:26:48 [jang_scri]

more recent drafts have a more coherent story on "what is a literal"

15:27:05 [jang_scri]

we have one special case, but that's better than the three disctinct cases we had before

15:27:38 [DanCon]

yes, another test case for subtypes of XMLLiteral, please.

15:27:40 [jang_scri]

pats: so we need some words somewhere on this

15:28:14 [jang_scri]

path: subclassof doesn't establish a relationship between DATATYPES

15:28:37 [jang_scri]

jjc: there's j borden's worries about wanting different classes of xml lits

15:29:14 [jang_scri]

path: we could say, in all cases the lang tag is passed to the dt, the dt can ignore it or not

15:30:22 [jang_scri]

jang_scri: not knowing about an example.org dt (don't put it in test case) you can catch this with an entilament

15:30:30 [jang_scri]

bwm: what about i18n guys?

15:30:42 [jang_scri]

jjc: we came to a compromise: it's in there, doesn't mean much.

15:31:06 [jang_scri]

jjc: we have a warning against confusing language with locale

15:31:14 [jang_scri]

path: a literal is a string + (optional) langtag

15:31:19 [jang_scri]

a dt lit is a simple lit + dt

15:31:41 [jang_scri]

the DT gets the whole simple literal; it can ignore part of the pair (as, we note, xsd always does)

15:32:13 [jang_scri]

pats: we can note also that xmlliteral subtypes take the lang tag

15:32:24 [jang_scri]

JosD: this is a nightmare

15:32:42 [jang_scri]

it's level-mixing, not clean, it's ugly and awkward

15:32:54 [jang_scri]

path: won't this tidy that up?

15:33:02 [jang_scri]

JosD: no, I've been folloowing that route this week.

15:33:22 [jang_scri]

if you rely on the dt and you don't know it, how can you make an inference engine make progress?

15:33:54 [jang_scri]

jjc: can we _discourage_ the use of lang tags?

15:34:09 [jang_scri]

JosD: why not define language-driven datatypes?

15:34:28 [jang_scri]

putting it in the realm of the literal isn't a good thing in my opinion

15:34:42 [jang_scri]

JosD: then I can live with status quo

15:35:03 [DanCon]

could somebody write down the proposal bwm's talking about?

15:35:09 [jang_scri]

JosD: simplification is always good

15:35:45 [jang_scri]

pats: another option: simply say that languge is a scoping issue, has no real business in any literals

15:36:03 [DanCon]

what pats is saying is tantamount to a request to re-open rdfms-literal

15:36:06 [jang_scri]

and we fix m&s by saying that xml:lang is relevant to rdf parser, but not to an application looking at the graph

15:36:11 [jang_scri]

DaveB: no

15:36:34 [jang_scri]

jjc: also disagree; there was a decision about this ages ago.

15:36:47 [jang_scri]

bwm: restates proposal

15:36:59 [jang_scri]

to relax the constrain that dts cannot take the lang tag into account in the mapping

15:37:29 [DanCon]

no, it's NOT A PAIR. strings are just strings.

15:38:15 [Zakim]

-AaronSw

15:38:17 [jang_scri]

(round table on who likes this)

15:38:32 [Zakim]

+AaronSw

15:38:53 [jang_scri]

pats: I still think having a special case with xmlliteral is a mistake...

15:39:05 [jang_scri]

ie, xmlliterals are legacy, not dt'ed literals

15:39:31 [jang_scri]

DanCon: I've sympathy for that, but we've decided on our current state: what's the new information

15:39:39 [jang_scri]

pats: conflict with subclass semantics

15:39:45 [jang_scri]

bwm: not if we do it right

15:39:58 [DanCon]

FIRST: which decision(s) do you want to reopen. THEN: what's the new information?

15:40:36 [jang_scri]

bwm: we have the entailment test as it is now, you need to know what the dts are.

15:40:49 [jang_scri]

so we DON't want an example.org dt test case

15:41:37 [jang_scri]

bwm: case ofa subclass of xmlliteral: surely a subtype of xmlliteral can take into account the

15:41:43 [jang_scri]

...

15:41:55 [jang_scri]

DanCon: let jjc write the test case, we vote next week.

15:42:13 [jang_scri]

(jjc describes proposed test case to jos)

15:43:25 [jang_scri]

path: an rdf engine can post an error if it finds a DT it doesn't grok

15:43:32 [jang_scri]

path: I used the term "reasoner"

15:44:20 [jang_scri]

ACTION danc: review the semantics document, with a view to language, not software specification

15:44:21 [DanCon]

"reasoner" does not occur in http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/

15:44:52 [jang_scri]

ACTION jjc to generate the dt test case with example.org dt

15:45:03 [DanCon]

ah; "RDF reasoner" does occur in http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-mt-20021112/

15:46:06 [DaveB]

jang_scri: other iss ue swhere you know about datatypes and their wellformedness...

15:46:07 [DanCon]

(I'm seriously considering re-opening rdfs:format, jjc; I have informed the chair)

15:46:26 [DaveB]

... whether an rdf document that contains a badlyf ormatted liter should create an rdf graph, is an error or what?

15:46:57 [DaveB]

PatH: if it is an illformed literal, rdf graph is legal but denotes a value that you know is not a literal

15:47:17 [DaveB]

jang_scri: will go back to think about this - make it a non entailment

15:47:52 [DaveB]

PatH: anotehr case is the DT clash case when it is well formedl, known to have a value but you have a range ... [lost it]

15:48:12 [DaveB]

ACTION jang: take a copy of sketch of the abvoe case re DT calashing in the MT and make a test case

15:48:34 [DaveB]

jang_scri: an XSD test - semantic-queiv-bnetween-datatypes

15:48:48 [bwm]

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/test005a.nt

15:48:55 [DaveB]

test005a.nt implies test005b.nt

15:49:11 [DaveB]

jang_scri: propose to not approve it sincfe more to do with semantics of XSD

15:49:51 [danbri]

q+

15:49:57 [jang_scri]

jjc: likes it

15:50:24 [jang_scri]

pats: what about creating a subtypes of one DT to another and using that

15:50:25 [DanCon]

??? "datatype X is a subclass of datatype Y" ??? what does PatS mean by that?

15:50:27 [bwm]

ack danbri

15:50:54 [danbri]

q-

15:51:00 [bwm]

ack dancon

15:51:02 [Zakim]

DanCon, you wanted to ask about an action to ask the I18N WG about our resolution on lang, literals, and datatypes

15:52:13 [jang_scri]

ACTION jjc: check with i18n guys on whether they';re happy with the datatypes as they are

15:52:26 [jang_scri]

bwm: I like patricks example

15:52:42 [jang_scri]

DanCon: if soneone asked about this on the comments list, we owe them an answer

15:53:31 [jang_scri]

jjc: don't argue about mail messages, argue about the spec!

15:53:49 [jang_scri]

DanCon: xsd:integer has a value space that's the integers.

15:54:36 [jang_scri]

pats: the _answer_ is yes or no, correct, but we have to say what it means to say "datatype support"

15:54:36 [jjc]

q+

15:54:38 [Zakim]

-AaronSw

15:54:55 [jang_scri]

pats: it says you have support for xsd:integer

15:55:01 [jang_scri]

and for xsd:decimal

15:55:09 [jang_scri]

but NOT for the mapping - if any - between them

15:55:27 [jang_scri]

DanCon: that's all you need?!

15:55:52 [jang_scri]

xsd schema spec doesn't refer to lexical->value mapping

15:56:02 [jang_scri]

^^path

15:56:06 [DaveB]

where did "If you know..." come from in that explanation. You don't know since XSD datatyping is not in RDF.

15:56:11 [jang_scri]

path: I'm still not persuaded about this

15:56:12 [danbri]

http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema [[

15:56:31 [danbri]

XML Schema 1.1

15:56:31 [danbri]

You can help

15:56:31 [danbri]

The XML Schema WG is currently working to develop a set of requirements for XML Schema 1.1, which is intended to be mostly compatible with XML Schema 1.0 and to have approximately the same scope, but also to fix bugs and make whatever improvements we can, consistent with the constraints on scope and compatibility.

15:56:33 [danbri]

]]

15:56:34 [jang_scri]

[scribe can't keep up with this]

15:56:39 [danbri]

q+

15:57:13 [jang_scri]

jjc: finds sections on xsd spec that deals with this.

15:57:30 [DanCon]

"The number of literals for each value has been kept small; for many datatypes there is a one-to-one mapping between literals and values." -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-2-20010502/#value-space

15:58:14 [jang_scri]

bwm: jjc is saying that this test case, int is derived from decimal

15:58:39 [jang_scri]

pats: when we say "datatype support", does that mean everything that that might mean..?

15:58:41 [jang_scri]

q+

15:59:26 [jang_scri]

DanCon: it's not essential to know that there's some relationship between the dt mappings

15:59:36 [jang_scri]

it's only enough to know that int 10 = decimal 10.0

15:59:36 [danbri]

more from xml schema page: [[

15:59:39 [danbri]

... If you have a schema you would like to see listed here, or if you have a set of test cases for use in software development, please send an announcement to xmlschema-dev. (If you are impatient, you may also wish to send mail to Michael Sperberg-McQueen calling his attention to your email on xmlschema-dev and suggesting your materials be added to this list.)

15:59:41 [danbri]

]]

15:59:49 [danbri]

...ie they're explicitly soliciting test cases.

16:00:36 [jang_scri]

[a scrap ensues]

16:01:12 [bwm]

ack jjc

16:02:02 [jjc]

q+

16:02:06 [bwm]

ack jan

16:02:25 [bwm]

ack danbri

16:04:14 [Zakim]

-Jjc

16:04:17 [jang_scri]

jjc breaking up, redialling

16:05:19 [em]

em has joined #rdfcore

16:05:47 [jang_scri]

jang's example: datatype 1 = natural odd numbers, datatype 2 = primes; no subtype relationship, an entailment would still hold

16:06:41 [Zakim]

+??P6

16:06:48 [jang_scri]

zakim, ??p6 is jjc

16:06:49 [Zakim]

+Jjc; got it

16:08:16 [jjc]

If you have xsd:integer then you have the fact that it is derived from xsd:deciaml.

16:09:54 [bwm]

ack jjc

16:10:18 [jang_scri]

xsd decimal 10.0 specifies the same thing as integer 10

16:10:35 [jang_scri]

pats: what is the definition of "data type support"

16:11:24 [jang_scri]

q+

16:12:04 [jang_scri]

frankm: is the distinction between datatypes and cross-datatype knowhow artificial?

16:12:13 [danbri]

em, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0538.html

16:12:31 [jang_scri]

jjc: you can't implement xsd:integer without implementing xsd:decimal, since it's part of that definition

16:12:56 [DaveB]

did we capture what was "data type support"?

16:13:02 [jang_scri]

pats: relationshipts to other dts are part of the definition of that dt

16:13:22 [jang_scri]

so scheme:integer 10 = xsd:integer 10 is NOT an entailment that we would want to sanction

16:13:28 [jang_scri]

although some application may want to provide that

16:13:47 [DanCon]

eek! please, no, let's not depend on comments in test cases!

16:14:06 [DaveB]

I assume that really meant prose in the test casses WD

16:14:17 [DaveB]

rather than # comments in a single test case

16:14:20 [jang_scri]

jang meant prose in test case wd about this

16:14:23 [Zakim]

-Stevep

16:14:51 [jang_scri]

substitute 10.0 for 1E1 in this test case...

16:15:19 [jang_scri]

pats: happy as long as there's some text about relationshipts between datatypes

16:15:33 [jjc]

Add: "Note: xsd:integer is derived from xsd:decimal."

16:15:51 [jang_scri]

jjc: add to the desc of the test case, the words above

16:16:22 [jang_scri]

jjc: the reason why it's relevant:

16:16:33 [jang_scri]

you can't implement xsd:integer without implementing xsd:decimal

16:16:38 [DanCon]

what's not quite clear to me is what this stuff means: [[

16:16:40 [DanCon]

<test:datatypeSupport rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer" />

16:16:40 [DanCon]

<test:datatypeSupport rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal" />

16:16:40 [DanCon]

]]

16:17:15 [jang_scri]

q+

16:19:14 [jang_scri]

it means: you know about xsd:integer, you know about xsd:decimal, and for any subset of {xsd:integer, xsd:decimal}, you know about the relationships that hold over that subset

16:19:42 [jang_scri]

jjc: double 10 =? integer 10

16:20:00 [jang_scri]

let's accept this simpler question, then look at the harder one - where we might well disagree.

16:20:53 [DanCon]

there are three relevant tests: (a) integer/decimal, where the subtype relation is clear and explicit. (b) hex/binary, which are specified to share a value space but not to have any subtype relationship, and (c) float/decimal, which are not specified to have the same value space.

16:21:09 [jang_scri]

yes, that sounds perfect dan

16:21:17 [jang_scri]

but I don't think we'll get agreement :-/

16:21:52 [jang_scri]

pats: how can I approve this test case without the criteria that there be a defined relationship between xsd:integer and xsd:decimal

16:22:23 [jang_scri]

frankm:

16:22:29 [DanCon]

please put the question, mr. chair

16:22:36 [jang_scri]

it seems to me that the consequence of that pats is saying ...

16:22:46 [jang_scri]

this issue is independent of specific test cases

16:22:57 [jang_scri]

we have to clarify what is meant by datatype entailment

16:23:10 [jang_scri]

then we'll answer every test case

16:25:46 [jang_scri]

path solves all our problems again :-)

16:25:53 [jang_scri]

this one is NOT APPROVED yet

16:26:29 [jang_scri]

bwm:

16:26:29 [DanCon]

which test case?

16:26:47 [danbri]

url?

16:26:58 [jang_scri]

semantic equivalence within a type

16:27:17 [jang_scri]

test003a

16:27:20 [danbri]

ta

16:27:30 [jang_scri]

test003b.nt

16:27:44 [jang_scri]

one entails the other & vice versa

16:28:27 [DaveB]

(timecheck?)

16:28:47 [jang_scri]

jang_scri: wanted to make this explicit

16:28:52 [jang_scri]

that these types are equivalent

16:29:19 [jang_scri]

although I sympathise that this might cause problems that bwm has raised

16:29:34 [jang_scri]

bwm: this test case runs in euler

16:29:37 [jang_scri]

not in cwm

16:29:46 [jang_scri]

danbri: so cwm isn't a complete reasoner.

16:29:51 [danbri]

s/danbri/danc/

16:29:54 [jang_scri]

ok, that test case stands as is.

16:29:59 [jang_scri]

time

16:30:57 [jang_scri]

ACTION just so I don't forget: turn test case names into frag IDs.

16:32:27 [jang_scri]

meeting closes

16:32:29 [danbri]

adjourned.

16:34:15 [danbri]

danbri has left #rdfcore

16:34:24 [Zakim]

-Danbri

16:34:45 [Zakim]

-PatH

16:34:46 [Zakim]

-Jjc

16:34:46 [Zakim]

-Patricks

16:34:50 [Zakim]

-Josd

16:34:53 [Zakim]

-Ilrt

16:34:54 [Zakim]

-Bwm

16:34:57 [Zakim]

-DanC

16:34:58 [Zakim]

-FrankM

16:35:04 [Zakim]

-EricM

16:35:05 [Zakim]

SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended

18:32:18 [AaronSw]

hm, what's rdfs:format?

18:32:56 [DanCon]

odd; google doesn't help find it...

18:33:03 [AaronSw]

yeah

18:33:32 [DanCon]

a low-impact datatypes proposal: rdfs:format http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0031.html

18:34:01 [AaronSw]

ooh, that would be a dream

18:34:25 [AaronSw]

i could even cover it in the primer primer

18:37:59 [DanCon]

I'm trying to figure out what's the best time/place/manner to reopen the datatypes question

18:41:12 [AaronSw]

maybe collect support offline and reopen it if it seems workable?

18:42:03 [DanCon]

something like that.

18:42:40 [AaronSw]

well, i support rdfs:format followed by the null solution

19:02:19 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #rdfcore