Semantic Web Interest Group IRC Scratchpad

Welcome to the Semantic Web Interest Group scratchpad generated automatically from discussions on IRC at Freenode channel #swig 2001-2018 approx by the chump bot.

Nearby: IRC logs | semantic-web list | W3C Wiki (Recent changes) | delicious swigbot

last updated at 2003-03-13 23:47
DanC: or so they claim, anyway.
DanC: this is the 2nd commercial auto-contact-sync thingy I've bumped into.
DanC: Windows only. sigh.
alberto: attempt to inline RDF/XML and N-Triples into the manifest doc
danbri: "This is a testcase repository to support interop discussion amongst RDF tool developers, hosted through W3C's RDF Interest Group as part of the Semantic Web Activity."
RDF query meet agenda 4 (I): inline document in the manifest
alberto: see Alberto's attempt to inline documents
DanC: ah... nifty... putting the letter in the blurb...
RDF query meet agenda 1 (G): Reporting back from the W3C technical Plenary
libby: see the annotated agenda for the SW architecture part and related links to logs
RDF query meet agenda 2 (F): RDF Query (and Rule) Testcase Repository
libby: what docs should we put up there; how we deal ith arguments, licensing
libby: see RDF Query (and Rule) Testcase Repository
libby: changes to the page/site should be emailed to the list
libby: RESOLVED, all contents of to be licensed under terms of
RDF query meet agenda 3 (E): Conversion tool in Java for different RDF query languages
libby: This takes a query defined in N-triples and converts to various RDF query language syntaxes
libby: see readme
libby: W3C licensed btw
libby: based on Eric Prud'hommeaux's RDF query comparison document
libby: I like it, wonder what status=true means though...
alberto: mf:status is meant to be used for things like positive/negative tests if necessary - not sure it is of immediate usage
alberto: mfstatus=false would for example mean that the mf:input/tq:queryDocument is not expressing a valid triple-pattern path or stuff like that
libby: i.e. in an hour or so.
libby: there are various clashes with other meetings, so we may have to move things around a little
libby: it'll last an hour
libby: new page for RDF query tests by Danbri
libby: Timbl's document 'Possible RDF query work'
libby: my trip report W3C tech plenary
larsbot: The published subjects document is now published officially.
larsbot: Comments requested.
dajobe: P1 - needs references to TMs, RDF, DAML, ..
dajobe: P3 PSI introduced without definition - is that Indicator or Identifier?
dajobe: P3 maybe "PSI sets" is another special term?
dajobe: compare to an rdf vocabulary/schema/set of ontology terms?
dajobe: 2.3 URIs or the resources identified by them don't need to be network retrievable
dajobe: hmm, 2.4 "However, most subjects are not resources " may be assuming resource=network retrievable (or has-a-URI). semweb defn of resource is different
dajobe: 2.4.1 "subject indicator is a resource ..." and from the title 'for humans', may be a textual definition... 2.4.2 "subject identifiers ... are resources" and for computers, unambigous. Therefore resources can be not network retrievable?
dajobe: i'm confused again, what are the identity relations for "same subject indicator" - string compare for strings?
dajobe: since it says in 2.4.2. if two topics have the same indicator, they are the same subject. And then goes on to say you should use the subject indicator's address (subject identifier) to make the two topics be about the same subject. And doesn't that mean a subject identifier is a (for computers) feature/property of a subject indicator
dajobe: 2.4.2 " The address of a subject indicator is called a subject identifier." but there is also something else called a 'subject address' !
dajobe: sorry, I'm giving up now
Created by the Daily Chump bot. Hosted by PlanetRDF.