13:42:05 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdfcore
13:42:10 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdfcore
13:42:14 <danbri_desk> zakim, this will be RDF_Core
13:42:14 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, danbri_desk
13:42:19 <danbri_desk> zakim, this will be RDFCore
13:42:19 <Zakim> ok, danbri_desk; I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
13:54:10 <gk> gk has joined #rdfcore
13:54:36 <ericm> ericm has joined #rdfcore
13:54:37 <DaveB> DaveB has joined #rdfcore
13:55:43 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started
13:56:01 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended
13:56:26 <ericm> ??
13:56:33 <danbri_desk> short and sweet
13:56:35 <ericm> zakim, this will be RDF
13:56:35 <Zakim> ok, ericm; I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:56:47 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has now started
13:56:48 <Zakim> +GrahamKlyne
13:56:49 <ericm> ericm has changed the topic to: rdfcore sept 26 telecon - agenda @@
13:58:13 <DaveB> DaveB has joined #rdfcore
13:58:21 <Zakim> -GrahamKlyne
13:58:23 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended
13:59:14 <danbri_desk> ericm, what's up?
13:59:19 <danbri_desk> zakim, this is RDF
13:59:19 <Zakim> danbri_desk, I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be RDF".
13:59:27 <danbri_desk> zakim, this will be RDFCore
13:59:27 <Zakim> ok, danbri_desk, I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM already started
13:59:54 <ericm> zakim, who is here/
13:59:54 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is here/', ericm
13:59:56 <ericm> zakim, who is here?
13:59:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
13:59:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see DaveB, ericm, gk, Zakim, RRSAgent, danbri_desk, logger
14:00:10 <ericm> hold on folks
14:00:18 <gk> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:00:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
14:00:28 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended
14:00:34 <DaveB> !
14:00:38 <bwm> bwm has joined #rdfcore
14:00:48 <ericm> hold, on... looking into this
14:00:50 <DaveB> can we dial in?
14:01:06 <gk> I'll wait until someone else comes on the phone
14:01:19 <danbri_desk> gk, you still ok to scribe? ah yes good, thanks.
14:01:46 <gk-scribe> At this rate, it promises to be the easiest scribing job ever ;-)
14:01:50 <ericm> zakim, list conferences
14:01:50 <Zakim> I see SW_Plan()9:00AM, ARCH_Team()9:30AM, WAI_EOWG()8:30AM active
14:01:51 <Zakim> also scheduled at this time is SW_RDFCore()10:00AM
14:01:59 <ericm> zakim, this is RDF
14:01:59 <Zakim> ericm, I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be RDF".
14:02:08 <ericm> zakim, will be RDF
14:02:08 <Zakim> I don't understand 'will be RDF', ericm
14:02:14 <ericm> zakim, this will be RDF
14:02:14 <Zakim> ok, ericm, I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM already started
14:02:31 <ericm> ok, try again?
14:02:46 <DanC> DanC has joined #rdfcore
14:02:49 <Zakim> +??P13
14:02:55 <DaveB> I dialled in
14:03:04 <Zakim> +??P20
14:03:12 <Zakim> +GrahamKlyne
14:03:16 <Zakim> +PatH
14:03:26 <jjc> jjc has joined #rdfcore
14:03:41 <jjc> Zakim, who's here?
14:03:41 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ralph (muted), ??P13, ??P20, GrahamKlyne, PatH
14:03:42 <Zakim> On IRC I see jjc, DanC, bwm, DaveB, ericm, gk-scribe, Zakim, RRSAgent, danbri_desk, logger
14:03:43 <Zakim> +DanBri
14:03:48 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
14:03:54 <Zakim> -Ralph
14:04:05 <Zakim> +DanC
14:04:05 <DaveB> Zakim, ??P13 is ILRT
14:04:06 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it
14:04:12 <Zakim> +??P24
14:04:15 <DaveB> Zakim, ??p13 has DaveB
14:04:15 <Zakim> sorry, DaveB, I do not recognize a party named '??p13'
14:04:22 <DaveB> Zakim, ??P13 has DaveB
14:04:22 <Zakim> sorry, DaveB, I do not recognize a party named '??P13'
14:04:38 <bwm> Zakim, ??p24 is bwm
14:04:38 <Zakim> +bwm; got it
14:04:40 <danbri_desk> danbri_desk has changed the topic to: rdfcore sept 26 -- agenda (w/ wrong date in it) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0245.html
14:04:54 <DaveB> Zakim, ILRT has DaveB
14:04:54 <Zakim> +DaveB; got it
14:05:02 <danbri_desk> ericm, are you on the call?
14:05:17 <ericm> zakim, dial emiller-bos
14:05:17 <Zakim> ok, ericm; the call is being made
14:05:18 <Zakim> +Emiller
14:05:46 <danbri_desk> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0256.html
14:06:05 <gk-scribe> Regrets: Jos, PatrickS, JanG
14:06:06 <danbri_desk> rather, Agenda:  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0245.html
14:06:17 <danbri_desk> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:06:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see ILRT, ??P20, GrahamKlyne, PatH, DanBri, Mike_Dean, DanC, bwm, Emiller
14:06:19 <Zakim> ILRT has DaveB
14:06:50 <danbri_desk> zakim, ??P20 is jjc
14:06:50 <Zakim> +jjc; got it
14:07:31 <gk-scribe> Agenda review...
14:07:39 <gk-scribe> Question about <rdf:RDF>
14:07:48 <DanC> agenda + Question about <rdf:RDF>
14:08:11 <gk-scribe> Next telecon, agenda incorrect, *next* week
14:08:34 <gk-scribe> Item 5, last week minutes
14:08:35 <gk-scribe> OK
14:08:57 <gk-scribe> But link in agenda is incorrect (?)
14:09:08 <gk-scribe> Item 6, status compled actions
14:09:11 <DanC> agenda 1 = 26Sep http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0245.html
14:09:13 <DanC> agenda + Question about <rdf:RDF>
14:09:42 <DanC> what's wrong with the minutes pointer? are not these they? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0213.html
14:09:49 <gk-scribe> Brian will update list based on comments sent to list
14:09:57 <mdean> mdean has joined #rdfcore
14:10:13 <danbri_desk> discussion of NFC action / jjc
14:10:15 <danbri_desk> (@@url?)
14:10:32 <gk-scribe> (DanC, I'll check and correct if needed when I do the minutes)
14:10:34 <DanC> DaveB, my review of the URI control character foo turned up a bit of wierdness in rdf-syntax; did you catch that?
14:10:57 <DanC> DaveB, did you propose to accept http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0213.html as a true record?
14:10:58 <DaveB> DanC: I remember the mail, but I don't remember what was broken
14:10:59 <jjc> ACTION jjc add nfc text
14:11:08 <DaveB> 213 - yes
14:11:10 <gk-scribe> to concepts
14:12:03 <DanC> found jjc's text. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/att-0259/i18n-part.html
14:12:06 <danbri_desk> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0259.html draft3
14:12:26 <gk-scribe> I18N...  update draft for reply to I18N...
14:12:33 <jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0259
14:12:33 <DaveB> yes, jjc is discussing 259
14:14:58 <gk-scribe> Also discussion of messages that state I18N position...
14:15:54 <bwm> q+
14:17:19 <gk-scribe> This document (of JJC's) is intended to accompany request for PR, to document the WG's position and rationale
14:17:29 <danbri_desk> ack brian
14:18:28 <DanC> ACTION DanC: review jjc's document in the context of request for PR, looking for problems
14:18:39 <danbri_desk> ack bwm
14:18:41 <gk-scribe> action ericm review jeremy's document for inclusion in proposal to advance
14:19:33 <gk-scribe> Brian, process requires statement of objection, then Jeremy's document is *preparatory* work for response to such objection
14:20:16 <jjc> http://www.w3.org/International/Group/2003/rdf
14:20:46 <gk-scribe> (above URI is member access only)
14:22:01 <DanC> [[
14:22:02 <DanC> > > For the Nth time, they are already on record; we notified
14:22:02 <DanC> > > them of our 9 may decision to revise
14:22:02 <DanC> > >  http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-literal-is-xml-structure
14:22:02 <DanC> > > 
14:22:02 <DanC> > > and they let us know that no, that wasn't acceptable.
14:22:04 <DanC> > >  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0200.html
14:22:06 <DanC> ]]
14:22:36 <DanC> msg from jjc http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003May/0147.html
14:22:38 <jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-i18n-ig/2003May/0036
14:23:16 <Zakim> -DanC
14:23:26 <jjc> above is URL of msg askign for i18n comments
14:23:36 <gk-scribe> (DanC goes to get Martin online to make doc public...)
14:23:54 <gk-scribe> Semantics objections...
14:24:10 <DaveB> we asked them 28 Jan 2003 to review our specs, nothing has appeared eyet
14:24:20 <gk-scribe> bwm, need for LC2, need copy of I18N objections  (?)
14:24:51 <gk-scribe> danbri, please complete action today to approach other groups
14:26:11 <gk-scribe> jjc, poke michael wrt xmlschema feedback .. eric spoke this morning ... whitespace facet.  Short version, "3" and " 3 " being different isn't going to be popular.
14:26:57 <gk-scribe> Expecting further/fuller response from XML schema WG in next couple of days
14:27:21 <danbri_desk> zakim, who is speaking?
14:27:34 <Zakim> danbri_desk, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
14:27:39 <jjc> Zakim, who's speaking?
14:27:50 <Zakim> jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: bwm (94%)
14:28:08 <gk-scribe> Brian: ask XSWG if " 3 " in lex space of xsd:integer?  Answer no.  In the context of XML, is " 3 " an integer?  answer yes
14:29:05 <gk-scribe> Brian:  suggest prepare proposal that whitespace processing is part of L2V map.
14:29:33 <gk-scribe> (noting whitespace processing option is part of datatype specification)
14:29:41 <DaveB> IMHO's I18N's draft objection needs a lot of work, is not near complete; and contains things that can be rebutted easily
14:29:59 <gk-scribe> action jjc draft proposal along the lines indicated by brian
14:30:44 <gk-scribe> securing publication date (eric) - not complete, but currently proposing 10 October.
14:31:45 <gk-scribe> danbri, action re abstract/status of document, other stuff ... continues
14:31:58 <danbri_desk> 9: defusing semantics objections (lbase appendix)
14:32:15 <gk-scribe> Item 9, semantics objections
14:32:23 <danbri_desk> see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0242.html
14:32:33 <danbri_desk> [
14:32:33 <danbri_desk> Two of Peter's objections concern the translation to LBase.  I'm 
14:32:33 <danbri_desk> wondering whether we might defuse these objections by replacing the 
14:32:33 <danbri_desk> LBase appendix with a suitably worded informative reference to the LBase 
14:32:33 <danbri_desk> note
14:32:34 <danbri_desk> ]
14:34:01 <gk-scribe> Brian suggests removing lbase appendix, and replacing with a link.  Then errors in lbase translation then don't "contaminate" semantics.
14:34:39 <gk-scribe> danbri proposes, jjc seconded
14:35:17 <gk-scribe> approved unopposed
14:35:28 <DanC> ok, called martin, got this cleared up: http://www.w3.org/2003/09/ri434.html <- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Sep/0265.html
14:35:34 <gk-scribe> action path complete changes to semantcis and lbase documents
14:35:38 <Zakim> +DanC
14:36:33 <gk-scribe> Brian:  is wording around the lbase link fireproof
14:36:47 <danbri_desk> 10: collecting objections
14:36:48 <gk-scribe> pat will review this as part of above action
14:37:22 <gk-scribe> DanC:  I18N objection (URI above) is now public record
14:38:00 <DanC> action connolly above is revised to review jjc's draft 4, to appear
14:38:03 <gk-scribe> action jjc review draft supporting recommendation request to take account of format objection from I18N
14:38:32 <gk-scribe> Other objections?
14:38:56 <gk-scribe> Problems with semantics... hopefully 2/5 are addressed above
14:39:15 <gk-scribe> PatH:  one, agree to disagree
14:39:51 <gk-scribe> ... one have adjusted change log, still no response
14:40:45 <gk-scribe> Completeness of closure rules:  they have never been a *complete* characterization of entailment.
14:41:35 <gk-scribe> To change them now would be a major effort.
14:41:57 <danbri_desk> jjc: see bwm's msg of today for url to pfps objections
14:42:03 <DanC> ack danc
14:42:03 <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask which issue(s) jjc's document is connected to and to objections on datatypes (as cited from PR request draft) and to ask what's between the WG and a
14:42:06 <Zakim> ... decision to go to LC
14:42:21 <jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0354
14:42:52 <jjc> peter's summary of where we are at
14:42:56 <gk-scribe> How to link jjc's response document to issue list?
14:43:26 <gk-scribe> (I'd always assumed we were now working the LC issue list)
14:43:31 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-literal-is-xml-structure
14:44:18 <danbri_desk> dan, SOTD sections can point into issues doc
14:44:20 <gk-scribe> action bwm link issue list to these documents (from jjc, and another ?)
14:44:28 <danbri_desk> s/,/:/
14:45:01 <gk-scribe> danc:  what's holding up going to last call?  Why not this week?
14:45:23 <gk-scribe> danbri: need to be sure whar the objections are (?)
14:45:36 <gk-scribe> objection on schema, pfps-12
14:46:01 <DanC> bwm, if you get a chance to note the outstanding dissent under http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfs-xml-schema-datatypes , pls do
14:46:31 <danbri_desk> http://www.dbis.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de/~tolle/index_e.html - karsten tolle
14:46:31 <gk-scribe> about karsten(?) who was co-submitter:  text accurate, but doesn't like design choice
14:46:56 <danbri_desk> action danbri record karsten's dissent in rdfs spec
14:47:22 <gk-scribe> jjc:  objections going into LC we must be prepared to carry out of LC
14:48:05 <DanC> seems connected to http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-containers-formalmodel
14:48:28 <danbri_desk> 11: next steps - planning for LC2
14:48:49 <DanC> pointer which?
14:48:55 <danbri_desk> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030331-advance.html
14:49:25 <gk-scribe> " RDFCore Working Group Implementation Report, PR request - DRAFT"
14:50:03 <ericm> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/request/cr
14:50:06 <bwm> there is the aob about rdf:RDF!
14:50:19 <danbri_desk> ack
14:52:15 <gk-scribe> rdf:RF issue
14:52:50 <gk-scribe> Request to make rdf:RDF optional... it already is but requester seems to want to do so in more places.
14:53:08 <gk-scribe> q+ to say I thought the current workd was pretty flexible in this respect
14:53:14 <DanC> bwm, I recommend *not* keeping a "last call responses" thingy separate from the http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/ issues list. When comments come in, try to see which existing WG decision/issue is relevant, consider whether to re-open; if no new info, just give the commentor the existing decision rationale and ask "are you happy?"
14:53:18 <danbri_desk> ack gk-scribe
14:53:18 <Zakim> gk-scribe, you wanted to say I thought the current workd was pretty flexible in this respect
14:54:12 <jjc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0358
14:54:15 <gk-scribe> request has test case, we agree test case is not currently allowed
14:54:41 <jjc> q+ to suggest we should wait
14:55:29 <gk-scribe> Are there known document changes?
14:56:13 <gk-scribe> ... or any changes not merely editorial discretion?
14:56:19 <danbri_desk> jjc: xmlschema 02 may need wg discussion 
14:57:27 <gk-scribe> path still not clear about "this version ..." text in header
14:58:18 <DanC> ack jjc
14:58:18 <Zakim> jjc, you wanted to suggest we should wait
14:58:21 <danbri_desk> ack danc
14:58:21 <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to suggest lesson learned re issues list maintenance
14:58:29 <DaveB> so, xmlsch-02 is criticial path for our LC2 decision
14:58:56 <gk-scribe> DanC wants to recommend keeping a single issues list, even if process is tracked separately
14:59:55 <gk-scribe> Brian:  need to ensure:  we've responded to every comment, using existing issue list seems like double tracking
15:00:31 <gk-scribe> DanC:  many comments can be refered to existing decisions, hence reduce number of decisions to make
15:00:44 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
15:01:18 <gk-scribe> Time up.
15:01:19 <danbri_desk> adjourned.
15:01:23 <gk-scribe> Meeting closed.
15:01:24 <Zakim> -PatH
15:01:25 <Zakim> -jjc
15:01:26 <Zakim> -Emiller
15:02:18 <Zakim> -GrahamKlyne
15:03:22 <Zakim> -ILRT
15:03:25 <danbri_desk> zakim, drop danbri
15:03:25 <Zakim> DanBri is being disconnected
15:03:26 <Zakim> -DanBri
15:03:28 <Zakim> -DanC
15:03:29 <Zakim> -bwm
15:03:30 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended
15:03:40 <danbri_desk> rrsagent, pointer?
15:03:40 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2003/09/26-rdfcore-irc#T15-03-40
15:10:25 <ericm> ericm has left #rdfcore
15:10:51 <gk-scribe> gk-scribe has left #rdfcore
15:21:03 <danbri_desk> fixed http://www.w3.org/2003/09/26-rdfcore-irc*,access* world access
15:21:06 <danbri_desk> danbri_desk has left #rdfcore
17:25:36 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdfcore
18:55:47 <DanC> DanC has left #rdfcore