July 10, 2001 Attendees: Ian Frank Mike Lynn Pat Stefan Peter Announcements: none Agenda: minutes from July 3 --correction from Ian: about the semantics discussion with Richard. --with that change .... minutes approved. observations on DAML-S (Ian, et al) a suggestion ... try to combine second breakout into a joint language / services session Ian: Made contact with the Daml-s group. Reviewed their swws paper They are rethinking their ontology and will get back to Ian. They really are getting there. Pat(?): we have to take some responsibility for the errors some people make because our walk through isn't really straightforward. confusion with domain and range... Mike: joint session would be productive? Ian: yes. real people getting together to do real things would be very useful (help them AND us) abstract wishlist focus won't lead to much that's useful. more idioms. language layers that provided useful sytactic sugar. Mike: structural change suggestions or representations changes? Ian: only the representations. language uses. Not overall top level structure. Coordination with RDF Core - Frank Discussion about various parts of Frank's email about URI's. Frank made notes of changes to be made. everyone agreed that the modified statement is a message from us to RDF Core. Send to RDF Logic. (Also RDF Core) Send it to Brian McBride he can send it to the group. draft PI Meeting Language briefing admittedly light. focusing on new stuff since most of these people were at the last pi meeting. need to fill in rules (layering?) direction we're going not specific details. fair amount of time for questions with all available to answer them. Included a slide on N3 ... to make people aware of that. Do we believe that N3 is the human readable RDF? Emphatic NO :) How do you get N3 quads to RDF triples? Ignore the context. We are talking about N2.5 not N3 ... and that could cause some confusion. N2.5 is N3 without context (without curly brackets) Develop our own human readable syntax? volunteer to do this within the next two weeks (didn't catch who it was) Perhaps we should be a little cautious on talking about N3 N3 examples .. Mike wild his around. Bullet which mentions reification ... will be dropped :) Stefan would like everyone on the committee to send him a few sentences or triples, or other, on what they think rules should be (or what they want). He will send out an email reminding everyone. draft F2F agenda layers rules Joint Committee upcoming plans/roadmap given WebOnt