RDF Data Access Working Group Meeting, April 2004

hosted near Amsterdam by @semantics

on this page: Venue * Participants * Agenda * Minutes * Reading List
nearby: charter * public-rdf-dawg archive * logistics details * Use Cases draft * IRC logs: Thu, Fri

The goals of this meeting are to:

by Dan Connolly, chair
$Revision: 1.51 $ of $Date: 2004/05/03 15:35:26 $ by $Author: connolly $
changes since v1.36 from 15 Apr announcement


The meeting is near the Amsterdam Schipol (AMS) international airport. See logistics details from the host for exact location, hotel accomodations etc. The local contact is Dirk-Willem van Gulik +31 (0) 71 514 9564.

image details: amsTravel.n3, Makefile


meeting participants meeting participants The following members of the WG attended:

  1. Agfa-Gevaert N. V.
  2. Asemantics S.R.L.
  3. Hicks & Associates, Inc.
  4. HP
  5. Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (INRIA)
  6. Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab at the University of Maryland
  7. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (MEI)
  8. Network Inference
  9. Profium Ltd.
  10. University of Bristol
  11. University of Southampton
  12. Invited Experts
  13. W3C

Mr. Hiroyuki Sato of Information Sharing Platform Laboratories NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION (NTT) attended the meeting as an observer; he has not yet joined the WG.

See also: registration form


Thu, 22 Apr

Fri, 23 Apr

*PHONE: We intend to offer remote participation by telephone during these sessions

Presentation Materials and Meeting Records

Presentation materials are part of the meeting record, and accessible meeting records are important.

A few WG members have requested that presentation materials be available a couple days ahead of time. An easy way to submit them to the record without clogging up everybody's mailbox is to mail them to www-archive@w3.org as attachments, then find them in the archive, and send a pointer to public-rdf-dawg@w3.org.

The guidelines for email attachments are relevant:

...avoid formats that are virus prone, proprietary or platform dependent. For example, whenever possible you should use HTML instead of MS Word, PowerPoint or PDF. (Ideally, use XHTML or HTML4.)

If you must use a proprietary or platform-dependent format, please also include an alternate version in a universally readable format, such as HTML or plain text, if possible. If you cannot, then at least include a format that has widely available free viewers, if possible.

If you use powerpoint, please give us the powerpoint sources plus a PDF export plus some sort of text dump (RTF?).


See also: IRC log from Thu, IRC log from Fri.

Convene, review charter and W3C process

Roll call: see attendance above.

Connolly briefly reviewed W3C process, emphasizing that its purpose is to build community consensus to deploy new technologies. Connolly noted that changes to the charter are possible, but they involve negotation with parties outside the WG.

(not presented:formal process model diagram, with versions in.ps,.png, and.svg)

Use Cases

Connolly noted that outreach is an important function of the use cases and requirements document; for example, it would be nice to note a few use cases in a short summary of our work for the WWW2004 conference.

Each member of the WG was invited to speak briefly to their most valued use cases and the connection to their work and their constituency. see IRC log for some details.

ACTION DaveB: write up this educational metadata UC

Clark reported on the current (1.24) use cases draft: some struggles with the "benefits" heading and such.

The group discussed the balance between quality and quantity of use cases: how many do we have time to write up well? Opinions varied from 5 to 10 to 15. Some sentiment favored a small number of elaborated use cases and a larger number of short sketches. External feedback might prompt us to reconsider which use cases to elaborate.

The group discussed wasy to improve the document, including promoting the "problem description" material in the introduction.

ACTION RobS: to generate some RDF (in some form) for 5.1.1.

ACTION EricP: to generate a diagram of a query discussed in the use cases document.

ACTION Kendall: to work with Alberto on 5.1.3.

ACTION Yoshio: to write up "Kate finds an article and wants to find related programs..."

ACTION Kendall: to recast this (5.2.1. Saying things about web resources) in terms of some tool for annotating photos. (DONE in 1.25)

ACTION Kendall: to add negotiation of query lang to candidate requirements. (DONE in 1.25)

The group discussed requirements, especially their relationship to use cases that motivate them.

The discussion got into some design details about styles of query result bindings.

The group discussed requirements for support of various forms of datatyping in some depth. We began collecting straw poll data about support for various requirements.

Connolly constructed straw polls:

The results as reported by Beckett include:

    5  T
1.  8 10 5.1.1.  Finding an email address
2.  9  - 5.6.1.  Finding information about motorcycle parts
3.  8  - 5.5.1.  Finding unknown titles (media)
4.  7 12 5.1.3.  Monitoring news events
5.  7  - 5.8.1.  Avoiding traffic jams
    7  - 5.2.2.  Discovering what people say about news stories
    6  - 5.4.1.  Exploring my neighborhood

    4  7 5.2.1.  Saying things about web resources
    4  - 5.7.1.  Finding input and output documents for test cases

    2  7 5.9.1.  Ordering an x-ray
    2  - 5.8.2.  Finding the cheapest flight from Boston to Chicago
    2  - 5.3.1.  Tracking accounts and customers
    2  - 5.10.1. Find employees by group
    1  4 5.1.2.  Regularly executing a query
    1  - 5.7.2.  Describing software configurations

The straw polls do not take into account the following use cases, which had not been digested into the use cases document or, in some cases, not been written:

ACTION Kendall: to look at Yoshio's use cases.

ACTION Janne: write a use case to motivate the requirement of having queries written in RDF. (WITHDRAWN?)

The group only briefly discussed a plan for publishing the use cases and requirements document as a W3C first public working draft. The 3 month "heartbeat" requirement means we need to publish in May; May 17, the start of the WWW2004 web conference, is an interesting, if challenging, target.

On Friday morning, the editor reported some progress on updating the document (Revision 1.25 2004/04/23 08:13:40). The WG RESOLVED: kendall has done a great job.

ACTION: AndyS, EricP to review kendallC draft by 4 May telcon

As discussion of datatype constraints brought up some implementation experience with specific cases, the chair asked for a volunteer to start collecting test cases.

ACTION SteveH: to draft and maintain a list of test sketch cases, including x < y, x < 18.

As recorded in requirements straw polls, various members of the WG supported or opposed various requirements:


Insufficient Support:

Web Architecture in Brief

Connolly presented some slides on the Web Architecture document and the TAG. Blah blah blah.

Meeting Schedule

As recorded in DAWG telcon and F2F meeting decisions, after discussing various constraints, we made the following decisions:

Survey of existing technologies

The first session consistend of three 10-minute talks followed by an hour of discussion.

  1. on the use of XPointer and the HT TP "Range " header as a possible scalable and extensible RDF data access protocol by Bryan Thompson (remote)
  2. XQuery: a whirlwind tour by HowardK
  3. Using XQuery for RDF: costs and benefits of one approach by RobS


see the IRC log from Fri for some notes on discussion.

ACTION DanC: inform the TAG of the conflict between sec13.9 of the HTTP spec and TAG's recommendation on issue 7

In the second session, Kendall's Versa talk was preempted by more work on the usecases document, and Pat Hayes's DAML QL talk was posponed until Pat is available, so we had 2 short talks on implementation experience with RDQL:

  1. Implementing RDQL in Rasqal by DaveB
  2. RDQL: an implementation experience by Alberto

After a short discussion, the WG resolved to thank the hosts, with applause, and the meeting was adjourned.

Reading List

The only required reading for the meeting is:

The following reading materials are recommended to you by fellow WG members (e.g. in the 10 Apr telcon) and by the chair for meeting preparation. They are reasonably short, and you will eventually need to know this material in order to participate effectively in this WG, but since they don't directly relate to decisions on the meeting agenda, none of them is required.

Change Log

These are the changes since v1.36 from the 15 Apr announcement:

$Log: ftf1.html,v $
Revision 1.51  2004/05/03 15:35:26  connolly
added some photo links

Revision 1.50  2004/04/30 21:37:14  connolly
finished attendance
move venue above participants; moved map to venue section

Revision 1.49  2004/04/30 21:28:56  connolly
done summarizing friday

Revision 1.48  2004/04/30 19:15:16  connolly
markup fixes

Revision 1.47  2004/04/30 19:13:10  connolly
Thu minutes done-ish

Revision 1.46  2004/04/26 13:54:24  connolly
(connolly) Changed through Jigsaw.

Revision 1.45  2004/04/26 13:43:51  connolly
(connolly) Changed through Jigsaw.

Revision 1.44  2004/04/24 10:10:53  connolly
clean up "11 or 12" note

Revision 1.43  2004/04/24 10:09:47  connolly
more updates, rescued from Amaya cache

Revision 1.41  2004/04/23 11:53:05  connolly
some pointers to records so far

Revision 1.40  2004/04/22 11:40:03  connolly
links to hosting offer details

Revision 1.39  2004/04/20 14:35:57  connolly
more changelog tweaks

Revision 1.38  2004/04/20 14:34:59  connolly

revision 1.37
date: 2004/04/20 14:31:42;  author: connolly;  state: Exp;  lines: +3 -3
note times near WG members for phone sessions