<sandro> guest: David Wood
15:03:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see AZ, davidwood, Guus_Schreiber, cygri, ww (muted), [Garlik], Peter_Patel-Schneider, AlexHall, [Sophia]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see AZ, davidwood, Guus_Schreiber, cygri, ww (muted), [Garlik], Peter_Patel-Schneider, AlexHall, [Sophia] ←
15:03:37 <Zakim> [Garlik] has SteveH, mischat
Zakim IRC Bot: [Garlik] has SteveH, mischat ←
15:03:41 <Zakim> +??P37
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P37 ←
15:03:50 <pchampin> zakim, ??P37 is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??P37 is me ←
15:03:50 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pchampin; got it ←
15:04:10 <SteveH> scribenick: SteveH
(Scribe set to Steve Harris)
15:04:22 <SteveH> scribe: SteveH
15:05:33 <SteveH> Guus: minuites
Guus Schreiber: minuites ←
15:05:40 <SteveH> ... any objections....
... any objections.... ←
15:06:04 <SteveH> Resolved: accept minutes of last meeting
RESOLVED: accept minutes of last meeting ←
15:06:18 <SteveH> ... no actions pending review, open action items:
... no actions pending review, open action items: ←
15:06:30 <SteveH> ... options for issue 15
15:06:55 <SteveH> cygri: it's related to graphs stuff, we should refactor it
Richard Cyganiak: it's related to graphs stuff, we should refactor it ←
15:07:06 <SteveH> ... start progress over again
... start progress over again ←
15:07:21 <SteveH> Guus: it's on an agenda item
Guus Schreiber: it's on an agenda item ←
15:07:28 <SteveH> ... lets close this action, and see
... lets close this action, and see ←
15:07:55 <SteveH> ... 3rd action is on Sandro "start conversation on reservings"/
... 3rd action is on Sandro "start conversation on reservings"/ ←
15:08:22 <SteveH> [it might be .well-known]
[it might be .well-known] ←
15:08:52 <SteveH> cygri, it's whether we approach the IEFT now, or wait
cygri, it's whether we approach the IEFT now, or wait ←
15:09:09 <SteveH> Guus: can someone add a note saying what it means
Guus Schreiber: can someone add a note saying what it means ←
15:09:17 <SteveH> davidwood: I'll add something
David Wood: I'll add something ←
15:09:43 <cygri> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-Graph-Literal
Richard Cyganiak: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-Graph-Literal ←
15:09:48 <SteveH> cygri: ...about literals ^
Richard Cyganiak: ...about literals ^ ←
15:09:52 <davidwood> Thanks. My recent status change seems to have left me unable to edit the wiki.
David Wood: Thanks. My recent status change seems to have left me unable to edit the wiki. ←
15:10:39 <SteveH> Guus: nearing time when europeans will go on holiday
Guus Schreiber: nearing time when europeans will go on holiday ←
15:11:00 <SteveH> ... several ways - we can tke a break, or meet every week with a small group, or do telecons every 2 weeks over summertime
... several ways - we can tke a break, or meet every week with a small group, or do telecons every 2 weeks over summertime ←
15:11:06 <SteveH> ... happy to accept other points
... happy to accept other points ←
15:11:20 <cygri> trackbot, close ACTION-25
Richard Cyganiak: trackbot, close ACTION-25 ←
15:11:20 <trackbot> ACTION-25 Write up the different options re ISSUE-15 closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-25 Write up the different options re ISSUE-15 closed ←
15:11:22 <Zakim> +PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH ←
15:11:29 <SteveH> davidwood: we have one week where we know lots of people will be absent
David Wood: we have one week where we know lots of people will be absent ←
15:11:37 <SteveH> Guus: does 2 weeks sound fine?
Guus Schreiber: does 2 weeks sound fine? ←
15:11:48 <ww> +1 every two weeks
William Waites: +1 every two weeks ←
15:12:17 <cygri> SteveH: sparql keeps running through the summer, lots of americans on the group
Steve Harris: sparql keeps running through the summer, lots of americans on the group [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
15:12:20 <davidwood> +1 to 2 weeks
David Wood: +1 to 2 weeks ←
15:12:22 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
15:12:40 <SteveH> Guus: suggest we do every 2 weeks, back to normal on 3rd week of aug
Guus Schreiber: suggest we do every 2 weeks, back to normal on 3rd week of aug ←
15:12:47 <SteveH> Guus: I will propose a schedule
Guus Schreiber: I will propose a schedule ←
15:13:00 <SteveH> ACTION: Guus to propose schedule
ACTION: Guus to propose schedule ←
15:13:00 <trackbot> Created ACTION-55 - Propose schedule [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-55 - Propose schedule [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:13:24 <SteveH> ACTION-55: schedule for meetings over the summer that is
ACTION-55: schedule for meetings over the summer that is ←
15:13:24 <trackbot> ACTION-55 Propose schedule notes added
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-55 Propose schedule notes added ←
15:13:28 <PHayes> Um..sorry Im late...why are we changing the schedule?
Patrick Hayes: Um..sorry Im late...why are we changing the schedule? ←
15:13:34 <Zakim> +Kingsley_Idehen
Zakim IRC Bot: +Kingsley_Idehen ←
15:13:45 <MacTed> Zakim, Kingsley_Idehen is OpenLink_Software
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, Kingsley_Idehen is OpenLink_Software ←
15:13:45 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software; got it ←
15:13:54 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:13:54 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:13:58 <SteveH> Guus: SPARQL last call WD
Guus Schreiber: SPARQL last call WD ←
15:13:59 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:13:59 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:14:09 <AlexHall> PatH, because Europeans are about to go on holiday.
Alex Hall: PatH, because Europeans are about to go on holiday. ←
15:14:20 <PHayes> Ah.
Patrick Hayes: Ah. ←
15:14:23 <SteveH> ... decided that we will have personal reviews from members + review on behalf of RDF WD
... decided that we will have personal reviews from members + review on behalf of RDF WD ←
15:14:40 <SteveH> ... actions were not recorded
... actions were not recorded ←
15:14:49 <pchampin> zakim, unmute me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, unmute me ←
15:14:49 <Zakim> pchampin should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: pchampin should no longer be muted ←
15:15:06 <SteveH> pchampin: haven't had time to look into it
Pierre-Antoine Champin: haven't had time to look into it ←
15:15:28 <SteveH> Guus: it's proper behaviour for us to respond quickly
Guus Schreiber: it's proper behaviour for us to respond quickly ←
15:15:42 <SteveH> ACTION: pchampin to review SPARQL LC WD document
ACTION: pchampin to review SPARQL LC WD document ←
15:15:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-56 - Review SPARQL LC WD document [on Pierre-Antoine Champin - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-56 - Review SPARQL LC WD document [on Pierre-Antoine Champin - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:16:09 <SteveH> ACTION: Guus to contact Yves R. re. SPARQL reviews
ACTION: Guus to contact Yves R. re. SPARQL reviews ←
15:16:09 <trackbot> Created ACTION-57 - Contact Yves R. re. SPARQL reviews [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-57 - Contact Yves R. re. SPARQL reviews [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:16:44 <SteveH> Guus: Lee F. suggested we organise a short telecon to discuss graph terminology
Guus Schreiber: Lee F. suggested we organise a short telecon to discuss graph terminology ←
15:18:14 <SteveH> davidwood: would be in the contxet of coord group
David Wood: could be in the contxet of coord group ←
15:18:20 <SteveH> s/would/could/
15:18:49 <SteveH> Guus: message of 16th May
Guus Schreiber: message of 16th May ←
15:19:00 <SteveH> ... 15th May in US
... 15th May in US ←
15:19:31 <SteveH> ACTION: Guus to organise telecon with SPARQL WG on graph terminology
ACTION: Guus to organise telecon with SPARQL WG on graph terminology ←
15:19:31 <trackbot> Created ACTION-58 - Organise telecon with SPARQL WG on graph terminology [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-58 - Organise telecon with SPARQL WG on graph terminology [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:19:44 <pchampin> of course
Pierre-Antoine Champin: of course ←
15:19:57 <SteveH> Guus: pchampin, would be nice if you could take into account discussion of string literals
Guus Schreiber: pchampin, would be nice if you could take into account discussion of string literals ←
15:20:12 <SteveH> Status of documentation
Status of documentation ←
15:20:32 <SteveH> Guus: concepts document, it's in mercurial
Guus Schreiber: concepts document, it's in mercurial ←
15:20:43 <SteveH> ... I assume that most of the respec problems have been fixed
... I assume that most of the respec problems have been fixed ←
15:20:45 <cygri> RDF Concepts, editors draft: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html
Richard Cyganiak: RDF Concepts, editors draft: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html ←
15:20:57 <SteveH> ... I suggest to reuse old templates
... I suggest to reuse old templates ←
15:21:14 <SteveH> cygri: one way to start would be take a copy of HTML files, especially header
Richard Cyganiak: one way to start would be take a copy of HTML files, especially header ←
15:21:19 <SteveH> ... you have to make some obvious changes
... you have to make some obvious changes ←
15:21:27 <SteveH> ... then insert the current content as published
... then insert the current content as published ←
15:21:47 <SteveH> Guus: I did that already for the primer
Guus Schreiber: I did that already for the primer ←
15:21:59 <SteveH> ... would be best is we started adding docs to repo
... would be best is we started adding docs to repo ←
15:22:25 <ww> i tried writing a spec with respec.js attempting to put the vocabulary in rdfa inside it. didn't work very well...
William Waites: i tried writing a spec with respec.js attempting to put the vocabulary in rdfa inside it. didn't work very well... ←
15:22:28 <PHayes> I have to say, this whole process is utterly alien to me and I really have not even begun hjow to install the necessary software. As I have no idea what it is doing, I dont know how to know if I ge it right.
Patrick Hayes: I have to say, this whole process is utterly alien to me and I really have not even begun hjow to install the necessary software. As I have no idea what it is doing, I dont know how to know if I ge it right. ←
15:23:34 <SteveH> PHayes: I'll learn how to do it, but it will take me a while
Patrick Hayes: I'll learn how to do it, but it will take me a while ←
15:24:10 <SteveH> Guus: Richard sent a doc with shortnames for docuemnts, seems obvious
Guus Schreiber: Richard sent a doc with shortnames for docuemnts, seems obvious ←
15:24:20 <SteveH> ... but why is it turtle, not rdf-turtle
... but why is it turtle, not rdf-turtle ←
15:24:24 <SteveH> cygri: either would be ok
Richard Cyganiak: either would be ok ←
15:24:35 <SteveH> Guus: we have rdf- infront of all of them
Guus Schreiber: we have rdf- infront of all of them ←
15:24:53 <SteveH> davidwood: I propose to make that change
David Wood: I propose to make that change ←
15:25:11 <AZ> \me +1 to rdf- for all documents
Antoine Zimmermann: \me +1 to rdf- for all documents ←
15:25:46 <SteveH> cygri: we should have a page (on the wiki) about the documents
Richard Cyganiak: we should have a page (on the wiki) about the documents ←
15:25:53 <SteveH> ... I could create
... I could create ←
15:26:18 <SteveH> ACTION: cygri to create page on wiki about documents and editing
ACTION: cygri to create page on wiki about documents and editing ←
15:26:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-59 - Create page on wiki about documents and editing [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-59 - Create page on wiki about documents and editing [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:26:58 <SteveH> Guus: will try for early Turtle draft, relatively little work, but work needs to be done
Guus Schreiber: will try for early Turtle draft, relatively little work, but work needs to be done ←
15:27:15 <SteveH> ACTION Guus to discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP
ACTION Guus to discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP ←
15:27:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-60 - Discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-60 - Discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:27:36 <SteveH> Guus: will attempt to report back next week
Guus Schreiber: will attempt to report back next week ←
15:27:59 <PHayes> +1 to david
Patrick Hayes: +1 to david ←
15:28:11 <SteveH> davidwood: can we leave the telecon slot open
David Wood: can we leave the telecon slot open ←
15:28:19 <SteveH> [general agreement]
[general agreement] ←
15:28:44 <SteveH> Guus: content issues
Guus Schreiber: content issues ←
15:29:13 <SteveH> ... as far as I can see the main changes to concepts are graphs TF issues, have to reach consensus, but lots of open issues
... as far as I can see the main changes to concepts are graphs TF issues, have to reach consensus, but lots of open issues ←
15:29:25 <SteveH> ... wondering if its useful to do review next week
... wondering if its useful to do review next week ←
15:29:42 <SteveH> ... is someone willing to prepare that discussion
... is someone willing to prepare that discussion ←
15:30:02 <davidwood> +1 to refocus discussion on graphs
David Wood: +1 to refocus discussion on graphs ←
15:30:08 <SteveH> ... about 10 issues open, propose we start discussing next week
... about 10 issues open, propose we start discussing next week ←
15:30:19 <SteveH> ... re. concepts doc
... re. concepts doc ←
15:30:31 <PHayes> Unfortunately this particular week is impossible for me, or I would volunteer. Good idea.
Patrick Hayes: Unfortunately this particular week is impossible for me, or I would volunteer. Good idea. ←
15:30:32 <pchampin> +1
15:31:03 <SteveH> ... issues are well documented, so should review issues, and assign actions
... issues are well documented, so should review issues, and assign actions ←
15:31:05 <cygri> +1 to reviewing the issues + deciding on actions
Richard Cyganiak: +1 to reviewing the issues + deciding on actions ←
15:31:15 <SteveH> ... one issue is being tacked by telecon
... one issue is being tacked by telecon ←
15:31:36 <SteveH> ... we were close to consensus in last discussion
... we were close to consensus in last discussion ←
15:31:54 <SteveH> ... next week 30 mins minimum for review of status of graphs issues
... next week 30 mins minimum for review of status of graphs issues ←
15:32:18 <SteveH> ... last 5 postponed issues
... last 5 postponed issues ←
15:32:44 <SteveH> ... ISSUE-58
15:32:57 <SteveH> ... david proposes we should close it as it's archaic
... david proposes we should close it as it's archaic ←
15:33:03 <pfps> +1
15:33:05 <SteveH> +1, close it
+1, close it ←
15:33:07 <PHayes> agreee close
Patrick Hayes: agreee close ←
15:33:07 <pchampin> +1
15:33:08 <AlexHall> +1
15:33:15 <AZ> +1 close
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 close ←
15:33:19 <cygri> +1 close
Richard Cyganiak: +1 close ←
15:33:35 <SteveH> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-58, as being archaic.
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-58, as being archaic. ←
15:33:39 <SteveH> by consensus
by consensus ←
15:33:58 <SteveH> ISSUE-59
15:34:21 <SteveH> Guus: "RDF XML syntax can't represent arbitrary graphs"
Guus Schreiber: "RDF XML syntax can't represent arbitrary graphs" ←
15:34:25 <pfps> +10 to not upgrade RDF/XML to do this
Peter Patel-Schneider: +10 to not upgrade RDF/XML to do this ←
15:34:34 <SteveH> +1 to close
+1 to close ←
15:34:40 <pfps> +1 to *close*
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to *close* ←
15:34:48 <AZ> +1 to close
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 to close ←
15:34:49 <AlexHall> It's already noted in the specs
Alex Hall: It's already noted in the specs ←
15:34:52 <AlexHall> +1 to close
15:34:57 <pfps> q+
15:35:14 <pfps> q-
15:35:19 <PHayes> propose we leave this open for now, until we consider rdf/xml. No need to close it.
Patrick Hayes: propose we leave this open for now, until we consider rdf/xml. No need to close it. ←
15:35:25 <davidwood> +1 to close
David Wood: +1 to close ←
15:35:26 <cygri> ISSUE-59?
15:35:26 <trackbot> ISSUE-59 -- Revisit "The RDF/XML syntax can't represent an an arbritary graph structure" -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-59 -- Revisit "The RDF/XML syntax can't represent an an arbritary graph structure" -- raised ←
15:35:26 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/59
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/59 ←
15:36:45 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:37:15 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
15:37:25 <pfps> I don't see a possible future in which RDF/XML changes to represent all graphs.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't see a possible future in which RDF/XML changes to represent all graphs. ←
15:37:30 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
15:37:48 <PHayes> OK, 0 from me.
Patrick Hayes: OK, 0 from me. ←
15:38:03 <pchampin> q+
15:38:10 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
15:38:24 <pfps> q+ to say that Richard is confused
Peter Patel-Schneider: q+ to say that Richard is confused ←
15:38:27 <MacTed> silly phone system....
Ted Thibodeau: silly phone system.... ←
15:38:34 <pchampin> g-
15:38:37 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
15:38:38 <pchampin> q-
15:38:39 <PHayes> richard has a good point. THis may be a non-issue due to an old clerical error.
Patrick Hayes: richard has a good point. THis may be a non-issue due to an old clerical error. ←
15:38:41 <cygri> issue description here: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-syntax-incomplete
Richard Cyganiak: issue description here: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-syntax-incomplete ←
15:38:45 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:38:45 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:38:48 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:38:48 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:38:58 <pchampin> q+ to understand who's confused
Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+ to understand who's confused ←
15:39:49 <SteveH> ACTION: pfps to check whether ISSUES-59 is still pertinient (may be obsolete)
ACTION: pfps to check whether ISSUES-59 is still pertinient (may be obsolete) ←
15:39:49 <trackbot> Created ACTION-61 - Check whether ISSUES-59 is still pertinient (may be obsolete) [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2011-06-15].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-61 - Check whether ISSUES-59 is still pertinient (may be obsolete) [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2011-06-15]. ←
15:40:04 <ww> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0163.html <-- actions to add nodeID recorded
William Waites: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jul/0163.html <-- actions to add nodeID recorded ←
15:40:09 <pchampin> q-
15:40:14 <SteveH> ISSUE-60?
15:40:14 <trackbot> ISSUE-60 -- Revisit "Defining the interpretation of fragment identifiers in RDF embedded in other document formats" -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-60 -- Revisit "Defining the interpretation of fragment identifiers in RDF embedded in other document formats" -- raised ←
15:40:14 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/60
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/60 ←
15:40:28 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:40:35 <SteveH> Guus: propose to continue
Guus Schreiber: propose to continue ←
15:40:49 <cygri> ISSUE-37?
15:40:49 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- Handling of fragment identifiers in RDF embedded in other document formats -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-37 -- Handling of fragment identifiers in RDF embedded in other document formats -- raised ←
15:40:49 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/37
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/37 ←
15:41:22 <SteveH> cygri: things like RDFa make this question more important, so this should be considered
Richard Cyganiak: things like RDFa make this question more important, so this should be considered ←
15:41:39 <SteveH> Guus: we have an issue already, so we can close 60, redir to 37
Guus Schreiber: we have an issue already, so we can close 60, redir to 37 ←
15:42:09 <SteveH> ... can someone add a link to 37, and close 60?
... can someone add a link to 37, and close 60? ←
15:42:19 <pfps> I'll do it, instead of my other action.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'll do it, instead of my other action. ←
15:42:21 <cygri> +1 to close and redirect to ISSUE-37
Richard Cyganiak: +1 to close and redirect to ISSUE-37 ←
15:42:41 <PHayes> FWIW, re. issue 59, the 26 july 2000 wg minutes say that this issue is "removed from the WG's issue list", not "postponed".
Patrick Hayes: FWIW, re. ISSUE-59, the 26 july 2000 wg minutes say that this issue is "removed from the WG's issue list", not "postponed". ←
15:42:48 <SteveH> RESOLVED: by consensus to close ISSUE-60 and redirect to ISSUE-37
RESOLVED: by consensus to close ISSUE-60 and redirect to ISSUE-37 ←
15:43:17 <pfps> go it
Peter Patel-Schneider: go it ←
15:43:21 <pfps> got it
Peter Patel-Schneider: got it ←
15:43:23 <PHayes> OK
Patrick Hayes: OK ←
15:43:29 <SteveH> Guus: looks like ISSUE-59 was an admin error
Guus Schreiber: looks like ISSUE-59 was an admin error ←
15:43:45 <SteveH> ISSUE-61?
15:43:45 <trackbot> ISSUE-61 -- Revisit "An XML literal without markup, e.g. "foo" should denote the same thing as the plain literal "foo"" -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-61 -- Revisit "An XML literal without markup, e.g. "foo" should denote the same thing as the plain literal "foo"" -- raised ←
15:43:45 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/61
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/61 ←
15:44:15 <pfps> I don't think that Issue-12 talks about XML literals now.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't think that ISSUE-12 talks about XML literals now. ←
15:44:19 <SteveH> I don't believe that "foo" is a legal XMLLiteral, is it?
I don't believe that "foo" is a legal XMLLiteral, is it? ←
15:44:51 <SteveH> "<foo />" is legal, I think
"<foo />" is legal, I think ←
15:44:59 <PHayes> +1 Steve.
Patrick Hayes: +1 Steve. ←
15:45:51 <SteveH> Guus: prefer not to close it with the current text, quite sure that we will close it with the statement that it's misguided
Guus Schreiber: prefer not to close it with the current text, quite sure that we will close it with the statement that it's misguided ←
15:45:58 <PHayes> I dont understand this issue? Was it to make "foo"^^^rdf:XMLLIteral be identical with something else? If so, what?
Patrick Hayes: I dont understand this issue? Was it to make "foo"^^^rdf:XMLLIteral be identical with something else? If so, what? ←
15:46:16 <AZ> Close it but do not mention Issue-12
Antoine Zimmermann: Close it but do not mention ISSUE-12 ←
15:46:21 <PHayes> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
15:46:36 <SteveH> Guus: propose to close the issue stating that the statement is not true
Guus Schreiber: propose to close the issue stating that the statement is not true ←
15:46:51 <AZ> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
15:46:57 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
15:47:17 <AZ> "foo"^^^rdf:XMLLIteral owl:differentFrom "foo"
Antoine Zimmermann: "foo"^^^rdf:XMLLIteral owl:differentFrom "foo" ←
15:47:30 <SteveH> Guus: more discussion?
Guus Schreiber: more discussion? ←
15:47:51 <SteveH> propose to close issue-61 stating that the answer should be no
propose to close ISSUE-61 stating that the answer should be no ←
15:47:57 <pchampin> +1
15:47:59 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
15:48:01 <AZ> +1 use pfps proposal
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 use pfps proposal ←
15:48:02 <pfps> +1
15:48:02 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
15:48:13 <SteveH> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-61 stating that the answer is "no"
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-61 stating that the answer is "no" ←
15:48:29 <PHayes> Why do I keep thinking 'augean'?
Patrick Hayes: Why do I keep thinking 'augean'? ←
15:48:39 <SteveH> ISSUE-62?
15:48:39 <trackbot> ISSUE-62 -- Revisit "The test cases manifest format has a semantic error" -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-62 -- Revisit "The test cases manifest format has a semantic error" -- raised ←
15:48:39 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/62
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/62 ←
15:48:56 <SteveH> Guus: propose to continue this issue, and look again when we're working on testcases
Guus Schreiber: propose to continue this issue, and look again when we're working on testcases ←
15:49:04 <SteveH> ... leave it open
... leave it open ←
15:49:06 <PHayes> +1 to doing nothing.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to doing nothing. ←
15:49:10 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
15:49:13 <AZ> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
15:49:36 <SteveH> ISSUE-12?
15:49:36 <trackbot> ISSUE-12 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-12 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open ←
15:49:36 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12 ←
15:50:12 <SteveH> Guus: there's a thread about this, it appears we're close to consensus
Guus Schreiber: there's a thread about this, it appears we're close to consensus ←
15:50:22 <SteveH> ... would like discussion about things we don't have consensus about
... would like discussion about things we don't have consensus about ←
15:50:28 <SteveH> ... plan for resolution next week
... plan for resolution next week ←
15:50:29 <PHayes> I think we need a better name for rdf:LanguageTaggedLIteral
Patrick Hayes: I think we need a better name for rdf:LanguageTaggedLIteral ←
15:50:49 <SteveH> PHayes: I think we're close to consensus, what about alt. proposal about using datatypes
Patrick Hayes: I think we're close to consensus, what about alt. proposal about using datatypes ←
15:51:26 <SteveH> ... about only remaining thing we're still debating is what we're calling this datatype, and how best to explain it so it doesn't sound complicated
... about only remaining thing we're still debating is what we're calling this datatype, and how best to explain it so it doesn't sound complicated ←
15:51:38 <SteveH> Guus: it's important to spend time on naming
Guus Schreiber: it's important to spend time on naming ←
15:52:08 <SteveH> PHayes: there's on more issue, there's 2 ways to present it, the new datatype
Patrick Hayes: there's on more issue, there's 2 ways to present it, the new datatype ←
15:52:26 <ww> so "chat"@fr -> "\"chat\"@fr"^^rdf:LTR ??
William Waites: so "chat"@fr -> "\"chat\"@fr"^^rdf:LTR ?? ←
15:52:43 <SteveH> ... one is to retain the current model sctrictly, but we have to use PlainLiteral device in abstract syntax, to include both parts in one string, easy, but ugly(?)
... one is to retain the current model sctrictly, but we have to use PlainLiteral device in abstract syntax, to include both parts in one string, easy, but ugly(?) ←
15:52:57 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:53:14 <pfps> q-
15:53:17 <SteveH> ... or would could bite the bullet and treat it like its a datatype, but it takes a pair, the extension is trivial, some people things it's complex, but I don't agree
... or would could bite the bullet and treat it like its a datatype, but it takes a pair, the extension is trivial, some people things it's complex, but I don't agree ←
15:53:27 <SteveH> q?
q? ←
15:53:32 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
15:54:17 <SteveH> cygri: there are several ways to handle connection between abs. syntax and semantics, one was is to leave PLs as they are, and say that rdf:LTS is not actually a DT, but a class
Richard Cyganiak: there are several ways to handle connection between abs. syntax and semantics, one was is to leave PLs as they are, and say that rdf:LTS is not actually a DT, but a class ←
15:54:32 <SteveH> ... of all <string, langtag> pairs
... of all <string, langtag> pairs ←
15:54:39 <SteveH> ... worht considering, or do people object
... worht considering, or do people object ←
15:54:47 <SteveH> PHayes: that's a viable option too
Patrick Hayes: that's a viable option too ←
15:55:01 <SteveH> ... if you look how they get used, it's only used as a classname
... if you look how they get used, it's only used as a classname ←
15:55:06 <SteveH> ... or a token
... or a token ←
15:55:34 <SteveH> ... we can just say that (something) without saying it's a DT
... we can just say that (something) without saying it's a DT ←
15:55:44 <SteveH> cygri: it seems that it's the least painful way
Richard Cyganiak: it seems that it's the least painful way ←
15:55:59 <ww> q+
William Waites: q+ ←
15:56:03 <SteveH> ... it might be a bit cleaner to do it with a DT, but we still have three things
... it might be a bit cleaner to do it with a DT, but we still have three things ←
15:56:15 <SteveH> ... seems to cause oposition from implementors
... seems to cause oposition from implementors ←
15:56:19 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
15:56:25 <SteveH> ... maybe it would be a good option
... maybe it would be a good option ←
15:56:25 <Guus> +1 for Richard's option
Guus Schreiber: +1 for Richard's option ←
15:56:49 <PHayes> As long as it can be treated as a 'type' in SPARQL :-)
Patrick Hayes: As long as it can be treated as a 'type' in SPARQL :-) ←
15:56:52 <SteveH> ... two more things, may still be disagreement, there's ....
... two more things, may still be disagreement, there's .... ←
15:56:54 <ww> zakim, unmute me
William Waites: zakim, unmute me ←
15:56:54 <Zakim> ww should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: ww should no longer be muted ←
15:57:29 <SteveH> ww: this proposal seems like a half measure, intriduces an extra 3rd thing, and cant use rdf machiney to model langs, which we might want to do
William Waites: this proposal seems like a half measure, intriduces an extra 3rd thing, and cant use rdf machiney to model langs, which we might want to do ←
15:57:38 <SteveH> ... we should leave open the possibility
... we should leave open the possibility ←
15:57:44 <PHayes> Which proposal is Ww referring to?
Patrick Hayes: Which proposal is Ww referring to? ←
15:57:48 <SteveH> ... having a tuple-space with datatype means we cant do that
... having a tuple-space with datatype means we cant do that ←
15:57:58 <SteveH> cygri: i'm confused
Richard Cyganiak: i'm confused ←
15:58:19 <SteveH> ww: dt with string,lang pairs means the lang is disconnected
William Waites: dt with string,lang pairs means the lang is disconnected ←
15:58:35 <SteveH> ... there should be a DT for LTS, with subtypes, for every language
... there should be a DT for LTS, with subtypes, for every language ←
15:58:42 <SteveH> ... leave the door open for modelling that
... leave the door open for modelling that ←
15:58:48 <SteveH> ... abolish langtags
... abolish langtags ←
15:58:48 <PHayes> q
Patrick Hayes: q ←
15:58:52 <PHayes> +q
Patrick Hayes: +q ←
15:58:58 <SteveH> cygri: can't follow that
Richard Cyganiak: can't follow that ←
15:59:00 <Guus> ack ww
Guus Schreiber: ack ww ←
15:59:02 <SteveH> ... what is the proposal
... what is the proposal ←
15:59:21 <Guus> ack PHayes
Guus Schreiber: ack PHayes ←
15:59:37 <SteveH> ww: langtags abolished, strings are strngs, subsets of the sets of all strings that are strings in particular languages, subtypes of the string datatype
William Waites: langtags abolished, strings are strngs, subsets of the sets of all strings that are strings in particular languages, subtypes of the string datatype ←
15:59:40 <PHayes> I dont htink that our users will tolerate our bainishing lang tags on literals.
Patrick Hayes: I dont htink that our users will tolerate our bainishing lang tags on literals. ←
15:59:44 <pchampin> that does not work; language are orthogonal to strings
Pierre-Antoine Champin: that does not work; language are orthogonal to strings ←
16:00:10 <SteveH> PHayes: there is a sizeable user population that demanded them with passion, can't get rid of them
Patrick Hayes: there is a sizeable user population that demanded them with passion, can't get rid of them ←
16:00:18 <SteveH> ... inc. the 23c i18n group
... inc. the 23c i18n group ←
16:00:36 <SteveH> ww: not saying remove the function, just make it a kind of DT
William Waites: not saying remove the function, just make it a kind of DT ←
16:01:00 <SteveH> [sounds like ww is describing langtags as datatypes option]
[sounds like ww is describing langtags as datatypes option] ←
16:01:10 <ww> SteveH: yes
Steve Harris: yes [ Scribe Assist by William Waites ] ←
16:02:27 <SteveH> ww: get rid of langtags yes, but map them to dts(?)
William Waites: get rid of langtags yes, but map them to dts(?) ←
16:02:46 <SteveH> ... want to make languages a tree of datatypes
... want to make languages a tree of datatypes ←
16:02:56 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
16:03:08 <cygri> q-
Richard Cyganiak: q- ←
16:03:11 <SteveH> PHayes: any proposal that removes langtags from syntax of RDF wont''t fly
Patrick Hayes: any proposal that removes langtags from syntax of RDF wont''t fly ←
16:03:12 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
16:03:24 <SteveH> ww: will write proposal to list
William Waites: will write proposal to list ←
16:03:43 <ww> zakim, mute me
William Waites: zakim, mute me ←
16:03:43 <Zakim> ww should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: ww should now be muted ←
16:03:54 <SteveH> cygri: some discussion is needed re. preference of different contrcete syntax forms
Richard Cyganiak: some discussion is needed re. preference of different contrcete syntax forms ←
16:04:09 <SteveH> ... e.g. in NTriples would now have two options, "foo", "foo"^^xsd:string
... e.g. in NTriples would now have two options, "foo", "foo"^^xsd:string ←
16:04:23 <SteveH> ... there are different tradeoffs in different formats
... there are different tradeoffs in different formats ←
16:04:38 <SteveH> ... in NTriples is good that there's not much syntax variation
... in NTriples is good that there's not much syntax variation ←
16:04:55 <SteveH> ... would make things harder if I find both in the wild
... would make things harder if I find both in the wild ←
16:05:12 <SteveH> ... should we say that one SHOULD, MUST or SHOULD NOT use one of these forms
... should we say that one SHOULD, MUST or SHOULD NOT use one of these forms ←
16:05:22 <pchampin> q+
16:05:23 <SteveH> ... or allow each spec to do it's own thing
... or allow each spec to do it's own thing ←
16:05:35 <SteveH> ... I think I disagree with AndyS about some format issues
... I think I disagree with AndyS about some format issues ←
16:05:44 <SteveH> [what]s AndyS's position?}
[what]s AndyS's position?} ←
16:05:53 <PHayes> +1 to getting all this VERY CLEAR, for sure.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to getting all this VERY CLEAR, for sure. ←
16:05:59 <SteveH> Guus: shortest form is usally preferable
Guus Schreiber: shortest form is usally preferable ←
16:06:08 <SteveH> +1 to VERY CLEAR
+1 to VERY CLEAR ←
16:06:41 <SteveH> cygri: AndyS says that authors SHOULD use the shortest form, in SPARQL results I would really like to be able to know whether the strings are going to have the DT or not
Richard Cyganiak: AndyS says that authors SHOULD use the shortest form, in SPARQL results I would really like to be able to know whether the strings are going to have the DT or not ←
16:06:47 <SteveH> +1 to cygri
+1 to cygri ←
16:06:57 <PHayes> Richard, you are shooting Andy in the foot here.
Patrick Hayes: Richard, you are shooting Andy in the foot here. ←
16:07:02 <SteveH> cygri: so a SHOULD isn't string enough to me
Richard Cyganiak: so a SHOULD isn't strong enough to me ←
16:07:20 <SteveH> ... in turtle I don't see the need
... in turtle I don't see the need ←
16:07:26 <pchampin> s/string enough/strong enough/
16:07:43 <SteveH> ... would like to see a stronger statement
... would like to see a stronger statement ←
16:07:43 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
16:07:50 <pchampin> ack me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: ack me ←
16:08:00 <PHayes> Everyone wants the query language to be both semantically transparent and also sensitive to the smallest lexical detail. Cant have it both ways, guys.
Patrick Hayes: Everyone wants the query language to be both semantically transparent and also sensitive to the smallest lexical detail. Cant have it both ways, guys. ←
16:08:20 <SteveH> pchampin: I agree for need for regularity, but maybe there are differences
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I agree for need for regularity, but maybe there are differences ←
16:08:28 <SteveH> ... NTriples I see 3 alternatives
... NTriples I see 3 alternatives ←
16:08:36 <SteveH> ... allow both, bad idea
... allow both, bad idea ←
16:08:57 <SteveH> ... keep shortest one, best of three, but some iregulariy, string literals must be treated in special way
... keep shortest one, best of three, but some iregulariy, string literals must be treated in special way ←
16:09:02 <PHayes> How much legacy RDF is there out there that uses one and not the other? Do we ahve a choic eot not allow both?
Patrick Hayes: How much legacy RDF is there out there that uses one and not the other? Do we ahve a choic eot not allow both? ←
16:09:04 <pfps> I'm feeling very weirded-out by all this SPARQL stuff. RDF is supposed to be about *meaning*, not syntax, not even abstract syntax!
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm feeling very weirded-out by all this SPARQL stuff. RDF is supposed to be about *meaning*, not syntax, not even abstract syntax! ←
16:09:07 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
16:09:10 <SteveH> ... enforce xsd:string, but breaks a lot of existing NTriples
... enforce xsd:string, but breaks a lot of existing NTriples ←
16:09:27 <SteveH> ... for the sake of back-compat we have to keep shortest form
... for the sake of back-compat we have to keep shortest form ←
16:09:32 <PHayes> Yes, pfps, but querying is all about syntactic matching. You betcha.
Patrick Hayes: Yes, pfps, but querying is all about syntactic matching. You betcha. ←
16:09:53 <PHayes> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
16:10:09 <SteveH> Guus: users typically use the shortest form, but sparql query uses the DT form
Guus Schreiber: users typically use the shortest form, but sparql query uses the DT form ←
16:10:26 <pfps> Well, not as far as I am concerned. Querying is about retrieving meaning. (As opposed to straight entailment, which is simpler.)
Peter Patel-Schneider: Well, not as far as I am concerned. Querying is about retrieving meaning. (As opposed to straight entailment, which is simpler.) ←
16:10:27 <SteveH> I would be -1 to SPARQL using the long form, that's a lot of bytes
I would be -1 to SPARQL using the long form, that's a lot of bytes ←
16:10:56 <SteveH> pchampin: I would be in favour of MUST for NTriples and SPARQL res, but not others, but not sure which form is best
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I would be in favour of MUST for NTriples and SPARQL res, but not others, but not sure which form is best ←
16:11:29 <SteveH> ... both would break some existing data, most reg. form is with the datatype
... both would break some existing data, most reg. form is with the datatype ←
16:11:31 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
16:11:33 <PHayes> pfps, so listen to Richard. He wants to make queries which distinguish a from b when a = b is *necessary*. Any why not? Hos code has to handle the suyntax, not the meaning.
Patrick Hayes: pfps, so listen to Richard. He wants to make queries which distinguish a from b when a = b is *necessary*. Any why not? Hos code has to handle the suyntax, not the meaning. ←
16:11:38 <SteveH> ... explicit is better than implicit
... explicit is better than implicit ←
16:11:54 <SteveH> ... there are a lot of plain literals out there
... there are a lot of plain literals out there ←
16:11:55 <ww> less typing, more clarity and consistency - make developers lives easy as possible.
William Waites: less typing, more clarity and consistency - make developers lives easy as possible. ←
16:12:08 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
16:12:12 <SteveH> cygri: for back compat we have to keep both forms valid
Richard Cyganiak: for back compat we have to keep both forms valid ←
16:12:24 <ww> +1 cygri
William Waites: +1 cygri ←
16:12:25 <SteveH> ... we cant say that any forms would now be invalid in NTriples
... we cant say that any forms would now be invalid in NTriples ←
16:12:28 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
16:12:37 <Guus> +1 for not using MUST
Guus Schreiber: +1 for not using MUST ←
16:12:40 <SteveH> ... when parsing both forms are valid, but when serialising, only use one form,
... when parsing both forms are valid, but when serialising, only use one form, ←
16:12:48 <pchampin> +1, enforced regularity would break backward compatibility
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1, enforced regularity would break backward compatibility ←
16:13:03 <pchampin> +1 about distinguishing old stuff/new stuff
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1 about distinguishing old stuff/new stuff ←
16:13:07 <SteveH> PHayes: I agree with Richard, there's so much stuff out there, can't make it illigal
Patrick Hayes: I agree with Richard, there's so much stuff out there, can't make it illigal ←
16:13:33 <SteveH> ... one meaning can be expressed two different ways, the tool should treat them as equivalent
... one meaning can be expressed two different ways, the tool should treat them as equivalent ←
16:13:52 <Guus> 2 min left
Guus Schreiber: 2 min left ←
16:13:54 <SteveH> ... is results sensitive to the way the query is stated
... is results sensitive to the way the query is stated ←
16:13:56 <ww> +1 for tools treating them equivalently (and probably normalising them to w/ datatype internally)
William Waites: +1 for tools treating them equivalently (and probably normalising them to w/ datatype internally) ←
16:14:29 <ww> +1 for fewer bytes on the wire
William Waites: +1 for fewer bytes on the wire ←
16:14:50 <PHayes> +1 to SteveH.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to SteveH. ←
16:15:02 <SteveH> SteveH: the long form is less efficient
Steve Harris: the long form is less efficient ←
16:15:13 <SteveH> ... even though it's easier to canonicalise to
... even though it's easier to canonicalise to ←
16:15:15 <pchampin> well, you are trading bandwith for (slight) code complexity
Pierre-Antoine Champin: well, you are trading bandwith for (slight) code complexity ←
16:15:31 <pchampin> you're just moving the inefficiency somewhere else :)
Pierre-Antoine Champin: you're just moving the inefficiency somewhere else :) ←
16:15:33 <SteveH> Guus: is someone willing to look at cygri's proposal
Guus Schreiber: is someone willing to look at cygri's proposal ←
16:15:41 <PHayes> LOL
Patrick Hayes: LOL ←
16:15:53 <ww> pchampin: not only bandwidth - developers who look at it don't want to see extraneous cruft
Pierre-Antoine Champin: not only bandwidth - developers who look at it don't want to see extraneous cruft [ Scribe Assist by William Waites ] ←
16:16:16 <SteveH> Guus: next week re restart graphs discussion
Guus Schreiber: next week re restart graphs discussion ←
16:16:25 <SteveH> ... hopefully can set a dte for graphs naming discussions
... hopefully can set a dte for graphs naming discussions ←
16:16:29 <cygri> ww, pchampin: by same argument, N-Triples should write 6 for "6"^^xsd:decimal
Richard Cyganiak: ww, pchampin: by same argument, N-Triples should write 6 for "6"^^xsd:decimal ←
16:16:31 <Zakim> -PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH ←
16:16:34 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
16:16:35 <Zakim> -AlexHall
Zakim IRC Bot: -AlexHall ←
16:16:36 <AZ> bye
Antoine Zimmermann: bye ←
16:16:37 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
16:16:42 <pchampin> +1 cygri :)
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1 cygri :) ←
16:16:43 <Zakim> -AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ ←
16:16:45 <Zakim> -[Sophia]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[Sophia] ←
16:17:14 <pchampin> bye all
Pierre-Antoine Champin: bye all ←
16:17:17 <Zakim> -pchampin
Zakim IRC Bot: -pchampin ←
16:17:18 <ww> cygri: that wouldn't be the end of the world, but agree there is a slippery slope
Richard Cyganiak: that wouldn't be the end of the world, but agree there is a slippery slope [ Scribe Assist by William Waites ] ←
16:17:27 <SteveH> trackbot, end meeting
trackbot, end meeting ←
16:17:27 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←
16:17:27 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.540.898.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, +3539149aabb, SteveH, mischat, davidwood, Peter_Patel-Schneider, cygri, ww, AZ, +1.443.212.aacc, AlexHall,
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been +1.540.898.aaaa, Guus_Schreiber, +3539149aabb, SteveH, mischat, davidwood, Peter_Patel-Schneider, cygri, ww, AZ, +1.443.212.aacc, AlexHall, ←
16:17:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
16:17:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot ←
16:17:29 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> I see 6 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-actions.rdf :
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 6 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-actions.rdf : ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus to propose schedule [1]
ACTION: Guus to propose schedule [1] ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-13-00
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-13-00 ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pchampin to review SPARQL LC WD document [2]
ACTION: pchampin to review SPARQL LC WD document [2] ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-15-42
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-15-42 ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus to contact Yves R. re. SPARQL reviews [3]
ACTION: Guus to contact Yves R. re. SPARQL reviews [3] ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-16-09
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-16-09 ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Guus to organise telecon with SPARQL WG on graph terminology [4]
ACTION: Guus to organise telecon with SPARQL WG on graph terminology [4] ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-19-31
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-19-31 ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> ACTION: cygri to create page on wiki about documents and editing [5]
ACTION: cygri to create page on wiki about documents and editing [5] ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-26-18
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-26-18 ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pfps to check whether ISSUES-59 is still pertinient (may be obsolete) [6]
ACTION: pfps to check whether ISSUES-59 is still pertinient (may be obsolete) [6] ←
16:17:29 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-39-49
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/08-rdf-wg-irc#T15-39-49 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe