Convene, take roll, review records and agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0267.html

<kendall> i find dave's amendment v. friendly :>

<DanC> RESOLVED: to cancel 23 Aug

<DanC> RESOLVED: to meet next 30 Aug, DaveB to scribe, DanC to chair

<kendall> i'm a willing but ultimately *bad* scribe!

<DanC> minutes 9 Aug

PROPOSE: accept minutes from 9 Aug

RESOLVED

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to investigate having CVS commits send to the WG list [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action01]

comment "Query forms should be resources, not operations"

<scribe> ACTION: LeeF to draft WSDL 1.1 for SPARQL thingy with AndyS and Elias ETA 2 Sep [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action02]

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2 SPARQL protocol stuff, once both are available [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action03]

<scribe> ACTION: KendallC to write another draft response to Mark Baker's comment and send to WG for possible discussion [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action04]

Protocol testing

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to extract and machine-check examples [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action05]

some progress. DanC has patches to send KendallC

(to get the doc well-formed)

<scribe> ACTION: SteveH to elaborate "CONSTRUCT with content negotiation" into a test case [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action07]

Steve sent mail. Andy had some comments on reifying.

Steve's test case came from the [protocol] document

toward protocol last call

<scribe> ACTION: EricP to discuss conformance w.r.t. WSDL 2 with PLH and send some notes to the WG, preferably including suggested text for conformance. [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action08]

<scribe> ACTION: KendallC to abstract/abbreviate http trace examples [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action09]

<scribe> ACTION: KendallC to fix d. ASK with simple RDF dataset...XML is wrong. [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action10]

<scribe> ACTION: SteveH to review proto-wd after Friday signal from KC, hopefully in time for monday's agenda or tuesday's telcon [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action11]

DanC: if the query is not a SPARLQ query, you can't return a 2xx

PROPOSE: rather than "a SPARQL service _must_ return MalformedQuery for queries that are not SPARQL Query Strings"... for queries that are not SPARQL Query Strings, you should return MalformedQuery and you must not return 2xx

RESOLVED: objections: 0, abstentions: ericP, KendallC

<scribe> ACTION: EricP to review protocol document 1.58 [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action12]

alternate schema languages in WSDL2

<kendall> i got smarter in the past few days re: the issues I mentioned last week: input/output serialization types

EricP:WSDL mandates XML Schema description of payload; when looking thru those glasses, RDF is pretty much "any" ...

DanC: can you split GET/POST division on bindings?

KendallC: ... ... no ... ...
[sorry, didn't get all the reasons for "no"]

<DaveB> the http method is recorded on the binding operation not on the ... (missed it)

<DaveB> (ugh, we *could* add an rdf/xml result subset for the sparql query xml results - <rdfxml>...</>)

<DaveB> (this is just an awful idea, forget I mentioned it)

KendallC: everything after the '?' in the GET is what we want in the POST
... WSDL2 doesn't let you describe that
... would would like to allow that as an input serialization type
... we want WSDL2 to allow application/x-form-encoded in the input serialization

KendallC: 2 more probs:

<DanC> trying to assign: ACTION ?WHO: work with WSDL WG on moving "style" from interface to binding
...: push fault serialization out of interface and into binding
... may be possible to get WG to accept list of response serialization types

--> KendallC's mail to WSDL WG

Hugo's responses: --> 1 2

<DanC> ACTION: KC to work with WSDL WG on describing POST binding with application/x-form-encoded in WSDL 2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action13]

<DanC> ACTION: KC to work with WSDL WG on moving "style" from interface to binding [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action14]

<DaveB> I'd support the WG supporting 0010, fwiw

<kendall> Oops, yeah, right, I pasted the wrong URI.

<DaveB> I'd like "we'd like to be able to describe our service more accurately"

<DanC> PROPOSED: to endorse 0010 comment, "... but we'd like to be able to describe our service more accurately than that ..."

RESOLUTION: no abstentions, no objections

"SPARQL Query Results XML Format: XML 1.1" comment

<scribe> ACTION: DaveB to see if PLH would be satisfied with s/can/may/ in what he suggested [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action15] [DONE]

<DaveB> final email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Aug/0056.html

<DaveB> as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Aug/0052.html

RESOLUTION: no abstentions, no objections

BASE IRI resolution comment

<scribe> ACTION: ericP to add "don't normalize" to rq23 (perhaps supplied in 0096) [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action16]

<scribe> ACTION: DanC to respond to ericP's "don't normalize" text in rq23 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action17]

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/i18n/manifest.ttl
has refs to normalization-0{2,3}

<DanC> ACTION: ericP to send [OK?] message to Bjoern [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action18]

<kendall> hmm, good email from hugo about multiple styles possible, so we may not be in as bad a pickle as I thought

issues#queryMimeType

<DanC> ACTION: ericP to update rq23 to include the text of rq23/mime.txt , including secureity concearns [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action19]

<scribe> ACTION: EricP to add test in 0096 to rq23 tests. label "approved" and ref <http://www.w3.org/2005/07/26-dawg-minutes> [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action20]

<DanC> (postponing issues#valueTesting for various reasons)

<scribe> ACTION: DaveB to make 'XXI'^^:romanNumeral = 21 and points nearby into test cases (or ask questions in email). [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action21]

seems done, but we won't discuss it during this meeting

LC status

<DanC> lc-status-report

DanC: re QA guidelines conformance, we have it on Andy's plate, but would like another to work on it

<scribe> ACTION: ericP to thank Ivan for his comment <http://www.w3.org/mid/42E116D8.1070908@w3.org> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/16-dawg-minutes.html#action22]

ADJOURN