<trackbot> Date: 03 August 2011

<ericP> gavinc, what are the contra-indications for publishing in HTML4.01 for this version?

<ericP> uncool?

<gavinc> I have no objections to publishing an HTML 4.01 document that is ALSO valid according to validator.nu

<cygri> pchampin, if nathan isn't around today, do you want to scribe?

I can scribe

<scribe> scribe: pchampin

<davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 20 July telecon:

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-07-20

RESOLUTION: accepted

<davidwood> Action item review:

<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - item

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open

open action items

david: all people having open actions are not here today

<AZ> I am but I'm not on the phone

<AZ> hmm, I completely forgot my action

<davidwood> Gavin and Eric P were speaking

<davidwood> They are the editors of the Turtle document

Turtle moving to First Public Draft

eric: problems with embedding Turtle in HTML
... especially if you want the Turtle to be copy-paste-able from the source
... (if the scribe got it right)

Ivan: could be solved in ReSpec

gavin: using CDATA does not work with non-XML-aware browsers

david: couldn't some javascript help?

gavin: I don't think we can publish a document with its content dynamically modified by javascript

ivan: I don't really care about being able to copy-paste turtle form the source; I can do that from the browser

<ericP> swallow our pride? what are we then?

eric: would make it easier to work with XSL-T as well, though

<ericP> +1 to just publishing &lt;-encoded turtle

ivan: we can have all Turtle examples as seperate files, use them to generate the spec (with &lt; encoding), and point in the spec to an archive with all the example as plain Turtle

pchampin: +1 to Ivan's proposal

eric: we should apply the solution that allows us to publish sooner

<ivan> gavin, the rdfa source: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html

FTF2 Admin

<davidwood> FTF2 Admin

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/F2F2

david: people need to edit the wikipage above to indicate whether they will attend physically, remotely, or not
... it was proposed to have videoconference link with DERI for people from europe who could not come to MIT

richard: it was proposed, but I'm not sure if that will be possible

<AndyS1> Hello

richard: should be confirmed by someone who knows more what equipment will be available on both sides

<Zakim> FabGandon, you wanted to mention discussions for having facilities for F2F meetings at WWW 2012 + 3rd F2F of RDF 1.1

<AndyS1> Oxford end was in computer lab. Worked well.

fabien: wanted to mentionned on-going discussion with WWW 2012 organizers to have FTF3 there

<ericP> MIT teleconferencing equipment

<AndyS1> Poll was: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/F2F2-EAST/

<gavinc> Yes

<gavinc> Link works

richard: I will check if the equipment pointed to by eric will work with our equipments at DERI

ivan: I think there was also an offer to host the meeting at the Lucent labs in Dublin, have to check with Chris

<cygri> ACTION: richard to check if DERI video conferencing equipment is compatible with http://tig.csail.mit.edu/twiki/bin/view/Ops/VideoConference for F2F2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/03-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-72 - Check if DERI video conferencing equipment is compatible with http://tig.csail.mit.edu/twiki/bin/view/Ops/VideoConference for F2F2 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-08-10].

RDF Concepts Editors Draft

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html

richard: I can turn it from an editor's draft to a working draft

ivan: administrative question: is it possible to publish it in the same move as the Turtle document?

david: I don't care
... I would even prefer two distinct announcements

gavin: if published separately, they can not formaly refer to each other

david: not a problem at this stage, but may be we should record an issue to remember to update the links

richard: I need to know what will be the short name, the date of the document

gavin: the webmaster will tell you when you publish the document
... I can help you in the process, just went through it

ivan: do we use the same short names as the original RDF or different ones?

richard: I think we discussed this a time ago: new short name during the development (rdf11-*) and in the end replace the original short names

ivan: the short name needs to be approved; we need to provide a short description of the document to Thomas, but he is in vacations now
... once this is done and the short name is approved, richard has to contact the webmaster

david: if we agree here, I'll call a call for consensus on the list so that everyone can express

ivan: we should record it as a resolution

<mischat> i wonder who will be updating the RDF related validators on w3.org ...

PROPOSED: move RDF-Concepts to 1st public working draft

<davidwood> +1

<ivan> +1

<AndyS1> +1 (Apache)

<cygri> +1

<gavinc> +1

<zwu2> +1

<mbrunati> +1

pchampin: +1

<MacTed> +1

<mischat> +!

<mischat> +1

<AZ> +1

<AlexHall> +1

<SteveH> +1

<ivan> RESOLVED: move RDF-Concepts to 1st public working draft

<Souri> +1

<gavinc> Turtle version: Turtle is already a reasonably settled serialization of RDF. Many implementations of Turtle already exist, we are hoping for feedback from those existing implementers and other people deciding that now would be a good time to support Turtle. There are still a few rough edges that need polishing, and better alignment with the SPARQL triple patterns. The working group does not expect to make any large changes to the existing syntax.

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20020829/

<AndyS1> http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#Status

<gavinc> When I wrote the Turtle one I was unable to find any good examples :\

ivan: Richard should write a paragraph similar to the one in the Turtle document (quoted by Gavin above) and send it to the rest of the group

<davidwood> TimBL expressed the goal of the custom paragraph this way, "Don't be afraid of being honest about the relevant techno-political situation."

david: the link pasted by Andy is correct, but does not provide much guidance

<AndyS1> Good news, this does not happen every publication cycle.

<davidwood> Introduction of RDF/XML spec doesn't explain relationship to RDF Concepts

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/72

<mischat> s/n3/ntriples/

gavin: I think the Turtle document does a slightly better job

<gavinc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#sec-parsing-triples

gavin: is that what you mean?

<davidwood> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#section-Syntax-intro

<mischat> cygri: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#sec-intro

ivan: I'm scared of touching the RDF/XML document

david: we have to align it with the terminology, though
... and to update the links

ivan: unfortunatelly

richard: some things really have to be done, including correcting some errors that have been spotted
... also, making it clear that this is just *one* syntax for an RDF graph
... though I can understand the arguments against touching the document at all

<cygri> ivan++

ivan: we can agree that any change we do is purely editorial

<mischat> is s/rdf graph/$somethingMoreModern/ considered an editorial change

<mischat> ?

david: should this be a resolution?

ivan: yes, it's probably good to have it

<ivan> PROPOSED: the working group agrees that the RDF/XML document will have to undergo a minimal, editorial change to fit into the new set of recommendations (update of references, terms, etc)

<cygri> +1

<MacTed> +1

<gavinc> +ugh

<ivan> +1

<FabGandon> +1

<zwu2> +1

<mbrunati> +1

<davidwood> +1

<AZ> +1

<SteveH> +1

<Souri> +1

<AndyS1> +1

<AlexHall> +1

<ivan> RESOLVED: the working group agrees that the RDF/XML document will have to undergo a minimal, editorial change to fit into the new set of recommendations (update of references, terms, etc)

<mischat> still thinks that s/rdf graph/XXXX/ would be nice ...

david: I don't want to open the can of worm "Graph terminology" given the remaining time

ivan: will the terminology appear in the RDF Concepts document?

david: yes

<cygri> ivan, long answer: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-multigraph

ivan: from the last emails, it seems we are reaching consensus

david: I agree, but I don't want to settle this issue in august, without some of the people that will want to be very careful about it

<davidwood> Proposal for ISSUE-12 language-tagged literals

<davidwood> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jul/0048.html

issue-12

richard: I can summarize the proposal:
... don't change the way literals with language tag work
... propose to call them 'language-tagged strings' because the old term "plain literals with language tag" does not makes sense anymore
... introduce a class rdf:LangString to allow it as rdfs:range of properties

andy: I would prefer literals with language tag to have a datatype
... with only one datatype covering all language tags

ivan: in a sense, I'm in favor with what Andy says;
... using rdf:LangString as the range of a datatype-property, if rdf:LangString is not a datatype, is strange from an user's point of view

<Zakim> cygri, you wanted to say that there are no datatype properties in rdf

<davidwood> …but the OWL and RIF WGs will be concerned with higher-level schemas

richard: I think that is a non issue; the distinction between object-properties and datatype-properties in not part of RDF

ivan: but we can't ignore it

richard: but the issue is not new, then: rdf:Literal is already a class
... I have two concerns:
... 1/ the complexity of a conceptual framework with (lexical form, datatype, language tag)
... where language tag can only be present if datatype has certain values
... 2/ abusing the notion of datatype

<AndyS1> There are numbers you can't write down already.

<Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to say that is heading to langtag = implicit datatype.

pchampin: @AndyS: are those numbers (that you can't write down) part of any xsd datatype??

david: should we revisit the datatype discussion based on the new perspective you brought (single datatype, instead of one datatype per language tag)?

<AndyS1> They are in the value space which is the number line :-)

david: we have to adjourn now; next telecon in two weeks

<SteveH> bye

<zwu2> bye

<mbrunati> bye

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/xxx/eric/
FAILED: s/n3/ntriples/
Found Scribe: pchampin
Inferring ScribeNick: pchampin

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: AZ AlexHall AndyS1 David_Wood FabGandon Ivan MacTed NickH OpenLink_Software P1 P11 P21 P4 P6 PROPOSED Scott_Bauer Souri SteveH Tony aaaa aabb aacc aadd aaee andy cygri david davidwood eric ericP fabien gavin gavinc joined mbrunati mhausenblas mischat pchampin rdf-wg richard trackbot zwu2
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 03 Aug 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/08/03-rdf-wg-minutes.html
People with action items: richard