14:59:43 RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore 14:59:54 zakim, this will be rdfc 14:59:55 ok, AaronSw 14:59:56 em has changed the topic to: rdfcore 2002-01-31 teleconference 15:00:20 SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started 15:00:27 +??P8 15:00:32 Zakim, ??P8 is ILRT 15:00:33 +ILRT; got it 15:00:38 Zakim, ILRT has DaveB 15:00:39 +DaveB; got it 15:01:05 + +1.850.291.aaaa 15:01:14 +??P19 15:01:24 Zakim, ??p19 is bwm 15:01:25 +Bwm; got it 15:01:55 +??P20 15:02:04 +EMiller 15:02:15 Zakim, ??P20 is JosD 15:02:17 +JosD; got it 15:02:27 zakim, who is here? 15:02:28 On the phone I see ILRT, +1.850.291.aaaa, Bwm, JosD, EMiller 15:02:28 ILRT has DaveB 15:02:29 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, JosD, em, DaveB, AaronSw, bwm, DanCon, logger 15:02:54 +DanC 15:03:16 zakim, 1.850.291.aaaa is PatH 15:03:17 sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named '1.850.291.aaaa' 15:03:21 zakim, +1.850.291.aaaa is PatH 15:03:22 +PatH; got it 15:03:54 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:03:55 On the phone I see ILRT, PatH, Bwm, JosD, EMiller, DanC 15:03:55 ILRT has DaveB 15:04:09 Zakim, ILRT has JanG 15:04:10 +JanG; got it 15:04:27 +PatrickS 15:04:51 regrets DanB, FrankM, GrahamK 15:04:57 agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0230.html 15:05:11 FYI about WebOnt pubs 15:05:38 AOB from DanC 15:05:39 zakim, who is talking? 15:05:50 em, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Bwm (40%) 15:05:55 we're likely to publish all our OWL drafts Monday. NOT last call. 15:06:24 -ILRT 15:06:26 regrets for next Fri; I'll be at a TAG ftf. 15:06:29 jan volunteers 15:06:37 then killed the phone ... ;) 15:06:47 Volunteer Scribe next week: JanG 15:06:58 +??P8 15:07:02 +??P22 15:07:05 Zakim, ??P8 is ILRT 15:07:07 +ILRT; got it 15:07:15 zakim, +??P22 is jjc 15:07:16 sorry, em, I do not recognize a party named '+??P22' 15:07:17 ===== 5: Minutes of 2003-01-24 telecon 15:07:25 zakim, ??P22 is jjc 15:07:26 +Jjc; got it 15:07:28 Zakim, ILRT has DaveB,JanG 15:07:29 +DaveB, JanG; got it 15:07:35 JanG send regrets 15:07:45 minutes approved 15:07:57 =========== 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions 15:08:02 completed 15:08:19 ======== 7: Soliciting Last Call Reviews 15:08:46 em's action continued as well as danbris's 15:08:51 jang has joined #rdfcore 15:08:53 graph? 15:09:03 ========== 8: Handling last call comments. 15:09:26 ack danc 15:09:27 DanCon, you wanted to ask graph? 15:10:01 ACTION Brian put lcc application code in CVS 15:10:59 [if it hasn't been addressed yet - couldn't find it in last week's minutes - which document do we update as we go along? 15:11:01 how much editorial discretion should there be? 15:12:06 ah, that's how you do it 15:12:09 each editor keeps a list of changes 15:12:24 link back to the original message 15:12:39 q+ to ask [if it hasn't been addressed yet - couldn't find it in last week's minutes - which document do we update as we go along? 15:12:55 editors role to bring stuff back to the group 15:14:38 ack jang 15:14:39 Jang, you wanted to ask [if it hasn't been addressed yet - couldn't find it in last week's minutes - which document do we update as we go along? 15:15:17 ack danc 15:15:22 jjc: strip list in editors draft for PR and one can still look into editors draft 15:16:03 +AaronSw 15:16:41 reminds me, the mime type I-D needs renewing RSN 15:16:50 expires Feb sometime? 15:17:17 danc: these are the changes for LC and say to director they are all editorial 15:17:30 (otherwise another LC) 15:17:46 Zakim, who is here 15:17:48 JosD, you need to end that query with '?' 15:17:52 media: hm, good point 15:17:55 Zakim, who is here? 15:17:56 On the phone I see PatH, Bwm, JosD, EMiller, DanC, PatrickS, ILRT, Jjc, AaronSw 15:17:57 ILRT has DaveB, JanG 15:17:58 On IRC I see jang, RRSAgent, Zakim, JosD, em, DaveB, AaronSw, bwm, DanCon, logger 15:18:09 AaronSw: expires 21 Feb says http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-swartz-rdfcore-rdfxml-mediatype-01 15:18:36 clarification: "editorial" meaning minor, i.e. reviewers would agree "yes, my review still applies after those changes have been made" 15:21:24 process handling comments via www-rdf-comments 15:22:11 s/process/process of/ 15:22:25 no other issues 15:22:49 q+ 15:23:14 JanG: which document to update 15:23:47 bwm: new editors draft 15:24:50 DanC: not a good idea, strong preference to have them in CVS 15:25:19 my intention: to update the copy of TR document under rdfcore/TR/ as required, respond to queries with the diff. 15:25:40 ... one commit per week and the one underneath the WG directory 15:26:24 ... DanC prefers in place 15:26:54 em: published docs were modified. ensure the REAL TR documents go under the rdfcore/TR doc 15:27:12 make sure ther's an cvs up first prior to edits! 15:27:26 em: make sure to checkout first 15:27:45 ACTION: Brian to update the WG page link 15:28:15 ... to editors drafts 15:28:59 ============= 9: FAQ: Relationship to XML Family of specs 15:29:14 volunteers? 15:29:39 ... to do the update 15:29:57 http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf 15:30:54 danc, we're discussing rdf and xml, not rdf and html 15:30:55 bwm: there is a chartered deliverable 15:31:11 * provide an account of the relationship between RDF and the XML family of technologies (particularly Schemas and Infoset/Query) 15:32:41 from charter http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter 15:33:21 this will be continued 15:33:33 ========== 11: Comments Review 15:33:52 I don't think danc-01 is ready for WG discussion. I'd prefer to continue negotiating with the editor. 15:34:15 I thought we were discussing danc-02 ? 15:34:56 sorry, yes, danc-02 isn't ready for WG discussion. 15:35:27 ======== 11: Comments Review 15:35:55 this is item 10, JosD 15:36:29 Time: 15:36:31 10:00:00 Fri Jan 31 2003 in America/New York duration 60 minutes 15:36:32 which is equivalent to 15:36:34 15:00:00 Fri Dec 31 2003 in Europe/London 15:36:35 Phone: +1-617-761-6200 (Zakim)#7332 15:36:37 irc: irc.w3.org #rdfcore 15:36:39 1: Scribe Jos this week 15:36:41 2: Roll Call 15:36:42 3: Review Agenda 15:36:44 4: Next telecon 07 Feb 2003 15:36:45 Volunteer Scribe 15:36:46 5: Minutes of 2003-01-24 telecon 15:36:48 See: 15:36:49 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0207.html 15:36:52 6: Confirm Status of Completed Actions 15:36:53 ACTION: 2003-01-17#6 ericM 15:36:55 publish the last call WDs and Lbase Note 15:36:56 ACTION: 2003-01-24#1 jjc 15:36:57 Send msg to I18N asking for relevant LC review 15:36:59 see: 15:37:00 uh oh 15:37:01 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0113.html 15:37:02 ACTION: 2003-01-24#2 bwm 15:37:04 Send msg to XML Schema WG asking for relevant LC review 15:37:06 see: 15:37:08 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0084.html 15:37:10 ACTION: 2003-01-24#3 bwm 15:37:12 Send msg to uri@w3.org asking for relevant LC review 15:37:14 see: 15:37:17 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0147.html 15:37:18 ACTION: 2003-01-24#8 patrickS 15:37:19 logger, kick JosD 15:37:19 Send msg to UAProf asking for relevant LC review 15:37:21 I'm logging. I don't understand 'kick JosD', AaronSw. Try /msg logger help 15:37:22 see: 15:37:24 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0081.html 15:37:26 ACTION: 2003-01-24#9 patrickS 15:37:28 Send msg to Open EBook Forum asking for relevant LC review 15:37:30 see: 15:37:32 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0082.html 15:37:35 ACTION: 2002-01-24#11 bwm 15:37:36 send announcement to chairs list 15:37:38 see: 15:37:40 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0176.html 15:37:43 ACTION: 2003-01-24#12 jjc 15:37:44 Send msg to XML C14N WG asking for relevant LC review 15:37:46 see: 15:37:48 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0114.html 15:37:50 ACTION: 2003-01-24#13 bwm 15:37:52 Send msg to RDF interest asking for relevant LC review 15:37:54 see: 15:37:56 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Jan/0161.html 15:37:58 7: Soliciting Last Call Reviews 15:38:00 2003-01-24#4 em Send msg to David of XMLP asking for relevant LC review 15:38:02 2003-01-24#5 danbri Send msg to SVG asking for relevant LC review 15:38:04 2003-01-24#6 danbri Send msg to XHTML WG asking for relevant LC review 15:38:07 2003-01-24#7 danbri Send msg to RDF IG about LC 15:38:08 2003-01-24#10 danbri remind RSS people to send their comments to 15:38:10 www-rdf-comments 15:38:12 15:38:14 8: Handling last call comments. 15:38:17 Comments on comment tracking documents: 15:38:18 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/ 15:38:20 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/issues.rdf 15:38:22 What to do with the app source code? 15:38:24 DanC suggests editors discretion to make editorial corrections 15:38:26 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0214.html 15:38:28 Patrick suggests WG should review whether it considers issue editorial 15:39:04 JosD has joined #rdfcore 15:39:20 jang: danc just reads out the contents of jang-01 15:39:58 ACTION: to review JanG proposed text for testcases 15:39:59 bwm: accepted? 15:40:20 ok, cheers 15:40:52 [jang-01] resolved with consensus 15:41:03 ACTION: jang to create test case for jang-01 and send details to jos 15:43:30 no, Brian, we (the WG) doesn't need to decide a disposion of every comment. Only those that raise substantive issues. 15:45:01 ah... now I see what you mean by "every comment"; it's "every comment that resulted in an issue". yes, we have to decide all those. 15:45:52 ======= 11: Comments Review 15:46:45 JanG volunteers to make weekly trawl through rdf comments and check we aren't dropping any. 15:47:03 bmw: this is a big help! 15:47:25 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0170 15:47:27 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/ 15:47:51 quoting from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0128.html 15:48:19 jeremy: take e.g. reagle-01 15:49:43 DanC: 1. yes the dsign is goofy, but here are the 3 testcases 15:50:00 DanC: 2. here is a design change 15:50:31 Path: be careful here, may influence other documents 15:52:55 "oh, Jeremy's only moaning at .3dB this week. We're good to go." 15:52:57 ;-) 15:52:59 ========= 12: XML Schema 1.1 Requirements 15:53:09 q+ aside, if we sort out process would a 10-point bulletted list of "this is how we successfgully ran our LC process" be helpful to the wider w3c? 15:53:40 zakim, if you understand the nature of teh syntactic error I made then you bloody well ought to try supplying my missing punctuation. imho 15:53:41 I don't understand 'if you understand the nature of teh syntactic error I made then you bloody well ought to try supplying my missing punctuation. imho', jang 15:54:44 Jeremy: made 2 desiderata 15:55:44 Jeremy: those were made personally; asking for WG blessing; there could be a 3rd one 15:56:23 q+ to mention that meta-issue as AOB when everything else is done (as AOB, brian) 15:56:50 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Jan/0163.html 15:57:17 danc proposes to endorse the second comment in above 15:57:27 (on first class objects) 15:57:57 RESOLVED: endorse the First class objects (RQ-23) 15:59:03 ... with consensus 16:01:04 ACTION: Jeremy to report back XML Schema 1.1 Requirements RQ-23 16:01:11 -ILRT 16:01:13 -PatH 16:01:41 -PatrickS 16:01:43 -Bwm 16:02:00 -EMiller 16:02:14 meeting ADJOURNED 16:02:37 -AaronSw 16:25:22 AaronSw has left #rdfcore 16:26:43 -JosD 16:27:16 -Jjc 16:27:26 -DanC 16:27:26 SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended 17:21:15 em has left #rdfcore 19:33:42 DanCon has left #rdfcore