IRC log of grddl-wg on 2007-05-30

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:46:12 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #grddl-wg
14:46:12 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc
14:47:35 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #grddl-wg
14:48:16 [jjc]
Zakim, please list teleconferences
14:48:16 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'please list teleconferences', jjc
14:48:28 [jjc]
Zakim, please list conferences
14:48:28 [Zakim]
I see IA_XHTML2()10:00AM, WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM, I18N_TS()10:00AM, SEC_WSCWG()3:00AM, SW_SWEO()10:00AM active
14:48:31 [Zakim]
also scheduled at this time are MM_MMI(dialog)11:00AM, Team_W3M()8:00AM, HTML_Forms()11:00AM, SW_GRDDL()11:00AM, XML_Core()11:00AM
14:48:57 [jjc]
Zakim, this is GRDDL
14:48:57 [Zakim]
jjc, I see SW_GRDDL()11:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be GRDDL".
14:49:05 [jjc]
Zakim, this will be GRDDL
14:49:05 [Zakim]
ok, jjc; I see SW_GRDDL()11:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
14:52:06 [jjc]
agenda+ Convene GRDDL WG meeting of 2007-05-30T11:00-0400
14:52:19 [jjc]
agenda+ Test Cases and Error handling
14:53:02 [jjc]
agenda+ GRDDL in XML-pipeline, #issue-base-param
14:53:13 [jjc]
agenda+ Implementation Report, toward PR request
14:53:21 [jjc]
agenda+ Primer
14:53:30 [jjc]
agenda+ Advocating
14:53:33 [FabienG]
FabienG has joined #grddl-wg
14:53:48 [jjc]
agenda+ public-grddl-comments auditing
14:54:05 [jjc]
agenda+ [Adjourn?] GRDDL Vocabulary
14:54:13 [jjc]
zakim, what is the agenda
14:54:13 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'what is the agenda', jjc
14:54:33 [jjc]
agenda?
14:54:46 [chimezie]
Zakim: passcode
14:55:38 [Zakim]
SW_GRDDL()11:00AM has now started
14:55:46 [Zakim]
+Chimezie_Ogbuji
14:55:51 [jjc]
Meeting: GRDDL WG
14:55:58 [jjc]
Chair: Jeremy
14:56:01 [jjc]
Scribe: Fabien
14:56:43 [jjc]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007May/0087
14:56:53 [jjc]
ScribeNick: FabienG
14:57:30 [Zakim]
+??P16
14:57:40 [jjc]
Zakim, ??PI6 is me
14:57:40 [Zakim]
sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named '??PI6'
14:57:45 [jjc]
Zakim, ?PI6 is me
14:57:45 [Zakim]
sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named '?PI6'
14:57:49 [jjc]
Zakim, PI6 is me
14:57:50 [Zakim]
sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named 'PI6'
14:57:54 [jjc]
Zakim, P16 is me
14:57:54 [Zakim]
sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named 'P16'
14:57:58 [jjc]
Zakim, ??P16 is me
14:57:58 [Zakim]
+jjc; got it
14:58:35 [jjc]
regrets: DanC, Simone, Danny, Harry
15:00:13 [Zakim]
+ +049238aaaa
15:00:17 [john-l]
john-l has joined #grddl-wg
15:00:48 [rreck]
rreck has joined #grddl-wg
15:00:55 [FabienG]
zakim, aaaa is FabienG
15:00:55 [Zakim]
+FabienG; got it
15:01:31 [Zakim]
+ +1.216.445.aabb
15:01:39 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
15:01:41 [john-l]
Zakim, aabb is me
15:01:42 [Zakim]
+john-l; got it
15:01:59 [jjc]
Zakim, IPCaller is Ron
15:02:03 [rreck]
+Ipcaller is me
15:02:10 [john-l]
Zakim, [IPCaller] is rreck
15:02:16 [Zakim]
+Ron; got it
15:02:16 [rreck]
thanks
15:02:32 [Zakim]
sorry, john-l, I do not recognize a party named '[IPCaller]'
15:02:35 [jjc]
Zakim, Ron is really rreck
15:02:56 [FabienG]
Zakim, who's here?
15:03:04 [Zakim]
+rreck; got it
15:03:06 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Chimezie_Ogbuji, jjc, FabienG, john-l, rreck
15:03:14 [Zakim]
On IRC I see rreck, john-l, FabienG, Zakim, RRSAgent, jjc, chimezie, DanC
15:04:05 [jjc]
next agendum
15:04:30 [jjc]
PROPOSED: to approve Minutes of GRDDL WG meeting, 23rd May 2007 as a true record
15:04:36 [jjc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007May/0050
15:04:52 [jjc]
Chime seconds
15:05:00 [jjc]
so RESOLVED
15:05:39 [jjc]
(decision on next meeting to be taken at end)
15:05:40 [FabienG]
decide later if next conf next week is needed
15:05:44 [jjc]
next agendum
15:06:29 [jjc]
three ACTIONS done
15:07:02 [FabienG]
JJC: Embeded RDF 4 is embeded is implemented and implementations pass the tests
15:07:03 [jjc]
PROPOSED to approve #embedded-rdf4
15:07:07 [chimezie]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl-tests/#embedded-rdf4
15:07:26 [chimezie]
wrong Base URI..!
15:07:27 [jjc]
(i,.e. with the test URL from the test directory)
15:07:30 [john-l]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/grddl-tests#embedded-rdf4
15:07:56 [jjc]
so RESOLVED
15:08:40 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/pendinglist#error1
15:08:49 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/pendinglist#error1 input file
15:08:55 [jjc]
is a test case for errors
15:10:02 [FabienG]
JJC: this test over specifies ...
15:10:04 [jjc]
(john tries test)
15:10:10 [FabienG]
John: not tested yet
15:10:54 [FabienG]
JJC: this test starts to produce triples and then fails.
15:11:15 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/broken4.xsl
15:11:23 [jjc]
is the transform that produces some triples
15:12:15 [john-l]
GRDDL.py passes the single test in <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/pendinglist>.
15:12:58 [FabienG]
JJC: I will abstain rather than vote against but I don't like it because it over specifies the behaviour
15:13:51 [rreck]
its kind of hard to hear
15:14:36 [chimezie]
so we need an explicit (yes, this resolves our issues) to close the comment?
15:14:42 [chimezie]
i.e., it's mostly a process issue?
15:15:44 [FabienG]
chimezie: we should discuss more on the list.
15:16:25 [FabienG]
JJC: we have adequate answers from the group.
15:17:19 [Zakim]
+Murray_Maloney
15:17:45 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/pendinglist#error1 is the current discussion
15:18:01 [chimezie]
from XSLT specification:
15:18:03 [chimezie]
[[
15:18:05 [chimezie]
If the terminate attribute has the value yes, then the XSLT processor should terminate processing after sending the message.
15:18:07 [chimezie]
]]
15:18:51 [FabienG]
JJC: if a transform fails the produced triples should be discarded
15:22:18 [chimezie]
PROPOSED to approve test (with URI) http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/grddl-tests#error1
15:22:29 [chimezie]
input: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/withErrors
15:22:40 [rreck]
i second
15:22:42 [chimezie]
output: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/one.rdf
15:22:50 [jjc]
jeremy abstains
15:23:03 [FabienG]
fabien concurs
15:23:33 [chimezie]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:23:33 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Chimezie_Ogbuji, jjc, FabienG, john-l, rreck, Murray_Maloney
15:23:35 [jjc]
So APPROVED
15:24:05 [jjc]
ACTION: chime to update test editors draft with #error1
15:24:25 [jjc]
ACTION: john to produce new EARL output including #error1
15:24:30 [jjc]
ACTION: jjc to produce new EARL output including #error1
15:24:39 [FabienG]
ACTION: john to update result page
15:25:10 [FabienG]
ACTION: jeremy to email back to the working group
15:25:25 [jjc]
next agendum
15:26:02 [jjc]
Maybe it's a bug in the above sheets.]]
15:26:06 [jjc]
from Dave Beckett
15:26:28 [FabienG]
see my message http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007May/0069.html
15:27:14 [chimezie]
ACTION: chimezie update test spec to indicate approval for #embedded-rdf4
15:28:21 [chimezie]
i assumed that was included with my action on #error1
15:28:28 [john-l]
Just checking. :)
15:30:05 [jjc]
discussion about base in RDF ...
15:30:12 [jjc]
Rdfa
15:32:23 [FabienG]
I the RDFa2RDFXML is producing triples with relative URIs when there is no parameter specified
15:32:39 [jjc]
ACTION: jjc to e-mail Dave Beckett with not a bug in the spec, but maybe in some stylesheets
15:33:09 [jjc]
continued actions:
15:33:20 [jjc]
# ACTION: DanC to remove base param from online GRDDL service and home2rss.xsl
15:33:20 [jjc]
# ACTION: HH to remove or clarify base param in eRDF transformation
15:33:20 [jjc]
# ACTION: jjc to write text about base-uri, which may become normative.
15:33:41 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/base
15:33:42 [john-l]
ACTION: DanC to remove base param from online GRDDL service and home2rss.xsl [CONTINUED]
15:33:53 [john-l]
ACTION: HH to remove or clarify base param in eRDF transformation [CONTINUED]
15:33:55 [chimezie]
i recall a continued action (which blocks the test case doc from going PR) to cross reference tests to GRDDL mechanisms by section
15:34:05 [john-l]
ACTION: jjc to write text about base-uri, which may become normative. [CONTINUED]
15:34:26 [FabienG]
ACTION: Fabien to clarify purpose of uri param in RDFa2RDFXML.xsl [DONE]
15:35:52 [FabienG]
issue-dbooth-9a: GRDDL should be usable in a messaging pipeline http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0069
15:36:20 [jjc]
Zakim, who is calling?
15:36:20 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, jjc.
15:36:25 [jjc]
Zakim, who is talking?
15:36:36 [Zakim]
jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: jjc (40%), rreck (82%)
15:36:47 [rreck]
sorry
15:39:05 [jjc]
[[
15:39:06 [jjc]
Hence, the spec
15:39:06 [jjc]
should be clear that the lack of a base URI is only a problem if it is
15:39:06 [jjc]
needed (to resolve a relative URI) but not present.
15:39:07 [jjc]
]]
15:39:10 [jjc]
David Booth
15:40:07 [FabienG]
JJC: David says the lack of a base URI should be a problem only for relative URI.
15:40:25 [chimezie]
it seems to me that rfc39XX covers the case where there is no URI associated with the input document
15:40:49 [chimezie]
either the containing context provides it, or the application provides it (the outermost ring)
15:41:17 [FabienG]
JJC: the source is not part of RDF
15:41:29 [jjc]
RFC 3986, section 5.1.4 application provides default base URI
15:42:11 [FabienG]
Murray: I have a resource and I extract statements A B and C from it
15:43:05 [FabienG]
Murray: these statements should be "somewhere"
15:43:45 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-contexts is a postponed issue about contexts
15:43:46 [FabienG]
Chime: base is used only to resolve the relative URIs not to locate the resource.
15:45:40 [jjc]
[[
15:45:42 [jjc]
Subject to security considerations below and local policy as expressed in its configuration, given a URI I of an information resource IR, and an XPath node N for a representation of IR, a GRDDL-aware agent should:
15:45:46 [jjc]
]] grddl spec
15:47:02 [chimezie]
the dereference operation happens here: ?IR log:uri [ fn:doc ?R ].
15:47:19 [FabienG]
JJC: the context of a triple is a postpone issue and outside the scope of this group
15:50:38 [FabienG]
Chime: providing a default base URI shouldn't be a big problem
15:51:05 [john-l]
s/Chime/john-l/
15:51:58 [FabienG]
ACTION: Chime to respond to David on issue-dbooth-9a: GRDDL should be usable in a messaging pipeline http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0069
15:52:31 [jjc]
(and also 9c Base URI should only be required if needed)
15:52:49 [FabienG]
issue-dbooth-9c: Base URI should only be required if needed http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0074
15:53:00 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_result
15:53:00 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_merge
15:53:00 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_rdfxbase
15:53:00 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_profiletrans
15:53:00 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#rule_txprop
15:53:01 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#GRDDL_aware_agent
15:53:03 [jjc]
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#agt_obl
15:54:05 [FabienG]
JJC: in the pipeline example if you have to give a URI it would have to be a default one.
15:55:46 [john-l]
[[ the problem is that it *fails* to define results in terms of representations ]] -- #issue-dbooth-9a
15:55:56 [FabienG]
Murray: after three steps in the pipeline you don't have the URI anymore
15:56:48 [jjc]
[[
15:56:50 [jjc]
If F and G are GRDDL results of IR, then the merge [RDF-MT] of F and G is also a GRDDL result of IR.]
15:57:23 [DanC_lap]
DanC_lap has joined #grddl-wg
15:58:22 [FabienG]
Murray: all information resources have a URI
15:58:45 [FabienG]
... no URI means it is not an information resource
15:59:00 [chimezie]
"" rdf:type foaf:Person
15:59:51 [FabienG]
wouldn't reification be another mechanism too?
16:01:26 [chimezie]
"" :isTheContextOf <..rdfStatement URI..>
16:01:53 [FabienG]
Although the triples and their reification are not really linked...
16:02:32 [rreck]
i agree with that statement
16:02:42 [FabienG]
Murray: it is important to have that URI available all along the process
16:04:15 [FabienG]
JJC: the base URI can come from a lot of sources / mechanisms
16:04:29 [chimezie]
practically speaking the URI is only valuable for resolving relative URIs, (empty URI references can be used to make statements about the containing document, but this is different from making statements about provenance)
16:06:59 [rreck]
chimezie: you mean the baseURI, correct?
16:07:20 [FabienG]
JJC: too big change to be made at this point.
16:08:54 [rreck]
otherwise provenance would be inferred
16:08:55 [chimezie]
rreck: i mean the URI from where the XML concrete syntax was dereferenced (fetched) from - which sometimes is the same as the BaseURI if no BaseURI is specified within
16:09:19 [rreck]
yes, i was inprecise
16:09:22 [rreck]
im
16:11:22 [jjc]
agenda next
16:11:26 [jjc]
next agendum
16:12:04 [FabienG]
ACTION: chimezie to start an index of tests by normative assertion (proxy for feature) [CONTINUE]
16:12:19 [FabienG]
ACTION: HarryH to start an index of tests by issue (not urgent; due 30 May) [CONTINUE]
16:12:31 [FabienG]
ACTION: HH to ask Dom to check his XSLT against current GRDDL tests [CONTINUE]
16:12:41 [FabienG]
ACTION: john-l add link from report to spec explaining multiple results and not applicable relationship [DONE]
16:12:55 [jjc]
next agendum
16:13:09 [FabienG]
ACTION: danja to review primer [CONTINUE]
16:13:20 [FabienG]
ACTION: jjc to review primer [CONTINUE]
16:13:29 [jjc]
next agendum
16:13:31 [FabienG]
ACTION: john-l to draft an Excel spreadsheet primer section [CONTINUE]
16:13:34 [jjc]
next agendum
16:13:56 [john-l]
Zakim, take up item 6
16:13:56 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "Advocating" taken up [from jjc]
16:14:20 [FabienG]
ACTION: HH to e-mail GRDDL Logo contest announcement - semantic web at w3.org. (pending SWEO coordination) [CONTINUE]
16:14:29 [john-l]
Zakim, take up item 7
16:14:29 [Zakim]
agendum 7. "public-grddl-comments auditing" taken up [from jjc]
16:16:43 [jjc]
ACTION: jjc to clarify to discussion participants on RDFa that it is not formal comments
16:17:25 [FabienG]
JJC: Dave Booth comment issue-dbooth-10: Does an XML namespace necessarily imply semantics? http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0072
16:17:26 [jjc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0081
16:17:33 [jjc]
[[ I am satisfied with the WG's response.
16:17:33 [jjc]
]]
16:18:43 [FabienG]
JJC: Dave Booth issue-dbooth-3: Ambiguity in an XML document's intended GRDDL results http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0078
16:20:20 [FabienG]
Murray: you cannot impose on someone to ingnore an XInclude in a document.
16:20:37 [FabienG]
... noone has the authority to do it
16:22:15 [jjc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0086
16:22:45 [john-l]
[[ That begs the question. GRDDL doesn't have the authority because we chose not to give it that authority. There are other choices we could have made. ]] - Dan in <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0086.html>
16:23:46 [FabienG]
Murray: the decision was that we work on XPath node set
16:25:36 [FabienG]
Murray: we should not reopen the issue
16:25:57 [FabienG]
JJC: I agree we should not reopen it.
16:28:32 [chimezie]
it seems that he is motivated both by having a 'complete' rendition (which we don't compute) and in giving some precedence in a 'default' XML processing pipeline (which it seems - to me - GRDDL has no authority to mandate)
16:28:39 [FabienG]
Murray: If you want to guarantee you have the right answer you can run everything yourself (e.g. xinclude)
16:29:09 [FabienG]
Murray: I can talk to him on the phone.
16:31:14 [FabienG]
Murray: prefer somebody else to send the formal response.
16:32:01 [FabienG]
RESOLVED: not to reopen the issue.
16:33:28 [jjc]
suggested proposal (not from me) "We resolve not to make changes in response to DBooth-3, and not to reopen the faithful infoset issue"
16:33:36 [rreck]
i have to go now. bye.
16:33:56 [Zakim]
-rreck
16:35:08 [Zakim]
-Murray_Maloney
16:35:32 [jjc]
inquorate!!
16:35:58 [FabienG]
ACTION: Murray to phone/msg Dave Booth
16:36:23 [jjc]
Adjourned by lack of numbers
16:36:23 [Zakim]
-Chimezie_Ogbuji
16:36:27 [Zakim]
-jjc
16:36:32 [Zakim]
-john-l
16:37:30 [FabienG]
rrsagent, set logs world-visible
16:37:33 [jjc]
rrsagent, please list actions items
16:37:33 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'please list actions items', jjc. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:37:56 [jjc]
rrsagent, show actions
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
I see 22 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-actions.rdf :
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: chime to update test editors draft with #error1 [1]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-24-05
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john to produce new EARL output including #error1 [2]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-24-25
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jjc to produce new EARL output including #error1 [3]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-24-30
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john to update result page [4]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-24-39
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jeremy to email back to the working group [5]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-25-10
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: chimezie update test spec to indicate approval for #embedded-rdf4 [6]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-27-14
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jjc to e-mail Dave Beckett with not a bug in the spec, but maybe in some stylesheets [7]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-32-39
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DanC to remove base param from online GRDDL service and home2rss.xsl [CONTINUED] [8]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-33-42
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: HH to remove or clarify base param in eRDF transformation [CONTINUED] [9]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-33-53
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jjc to write text about base-uri, which may become normative. [CONTINUED] [10]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-34-05
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Fabien to clarify purpose of uri param in RDFa2RDFXML.xsl [DONE] [11]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-34-26
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Chime to respond to David on issue-dbooth-9a: GRDDL should be usable in a messaging pipeline http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0069 [12]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T15-51-58
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: chimezie to start an index of tests by normative assertion (proxy for feature) [CONTINUE] [13]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-12-04
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: HarryH to start an index of tests by issue (not urgent; due 30 May) [CONTINUE] [14]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-12-19
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: HH to ask Dom to check his XSLT against current GRDDL tests [CONTINUE] [15]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-12-31
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john-l add link from report to spec explaining multiple results and not applicable relationship [DONE] [16]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-12-41
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: danja to review primer [CONTINUE] [17]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-13-09
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jjc to review primer [CONTINUE] [18]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-13-20
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: john-l to draft an Excel spreadsheet primer section [CONTINUE] [19]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-13-31
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: HH to e-mail GRDDL Logo contest announcement - semantic web at w3.org. (pending SWEO coordination) [CONTINUE] [20]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-14-20
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: jjc to clarify to discussion participants on RDFa that it is not formal comments [21]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-16-43
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Murray to phone/msg Dave Booth [22]
16:37:56 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-irc#T16-35-58
16:38:47 [chimezie]
DanC: I'm at a loss as to what protocol WG members follow with the comments list. I've tried to communicate to DBooth the conversations that led up to the resolution.
16:39:33 [Zakim]
-FabienG
16:39:34 [Zakim]
SW_GRDDL()11:00AM has ended
16:39:35 [Zakim]
Attendees were Chimezie_Ogbuji, jjc, +049238aaaa, FabienG, +1.216.445.aabb, john-l, rreck, Murray_Maloney
16:40:00 [jjc]
RRSagent, publish the minutes
16:40:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-minutes.html jjc
16:40:42 [DanC_lap]
chimezie, the safe way to relay WG discussions in the comments list is to point to them and/or excerpt them. when you paraphrase, you take risks.
16:40:55 [jjc]
RSSagent, make logs world readable
16:41:20 [FabienG]
jcc: it is already done.
16:41:30 [FabienG]
see http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-minutes.html
16:42:02 [FabienG]
I'll do the edits and post the result to the list.
16:42:19 [jjc]
(it hasn't done a good job ... :( )
16:42:39 [DanC_lap]
in particular, chimezie, if you use new words to justify the spec, those words might be a paraphrase of things the WG discussed, but they also might be new arguments, which are out of order unless the issue is re-opened.
16:43:09 [FabienG]
Indeed, the content section is not right...
16:43:21 [jjc]
i need to go too - bye
16:43:33 [FabienG]
bye
17:51:07 [chimezie]
DanC_lap: problem with this case in particular (faithful-infoset) is that the minutes dont fully capture the dialog and that context is all we have to justify not reopening the issue
18:01:25 [DanC_lap]
well, yes, I can see how that might be a problem. But I continue to ask that you don't argue the issue unless/until the chair re-opens the issue
18:03:13 [chimezie]
if I can't argue the issue (especially while attempting to stay consistent to the WG consensus) I do not see the purpose in having a comments list. In particular I was just assigned an action to respond to David Booth today on a particular issue, where does that leave me?
18:20:06 [DanC_lap]
is your action to point Booth to some existing records?
18:39:46 [chimezie]
that's okay , Dan.
18:40:38 [chimezie]
my action is to respond to his pipeline argument which says that GRDDL should be about representations not IR and by being a bout the latter only, it excludes his pipeline argument (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0069.html)
18:41:15 [chimezie]
frankly, I think I'm going to have to either respond to him in public-grddl-wg or ask that my action be dropped as there is not an appropriate forum for a response
18:41:32 [chimezie]
s/pipeline argument/pipeline usecase
18:46:40 [FabienG]
FabienG has left #grddl-wg
19:02:54 [DanC_lap]
yes, I'd prefer that you took that discussion to public-grddl-wg
19:03:06 [DanC_lap]
rather than responding directly to the commentor
20:45:23 [DanC_lap]
DanC_lap has joined #grddl-wg