Skip to topic | Skip to bottom

RDFTM.ConCall20050401r1.9 - 16 Feb 2006 - 11:43 - StevePeppertopic end

Start of topic | Skip to actions

Minutes of 2005-04-01 meeting


  • Planning the Guidelines
    • Discuss about requirements first and then TOCs
    • Tutorial on RDF and TM: let's do it, but short: 1/2 page on each + pointers.
    • Do we need use cases? * Should requirements (and use cases?) be a separate document? Let's write them and then decide to move them out
    • Should there be authoring guidelines? Adopt wherever possible and provide ours for what's missing? --- No point discussing this now. let's discuss requirements first.
  • Responding to SRN & co.
    • TMRM not particularly relevant. The task force is about achieving interoperability between data expressed as RDF or Topic Maps. TMRM has no model or syntax and consequently no data to make interoperable. Large amounts of Topic Maps data exists in forms defined by TMDM and XTM 1.0 and this, along with RDF data, is the subject of the TF's work.
    • In order to promote discussion based on a stable draft, there will be no changes to the survey in the next few weeks. A new draft may appear in the May/June timeframe based on discussions on the SWBPD list and at the WG3 meeting in Amsterdam (May 22-25).
    • FV: Changes not to the survey, but maybe to the TF charter
    • An answer should be drafted that reflects the consensus of the editors.
  • Papers:
    • Steve's submissions (eXtreme Markup, XTech conference)
      • SP to change title and abstract and 1st section for XTech
      • SP waiting for instructions on submissions
      • SP will submit an extended abstract of a paper that describes a complete translation approach for Extreme.
    • Survey extension for submission to a journal (ACM Computing Surveys ?)
      • VP & FV to extend the introductory part to explain things about SW to a more general audience
      • VP & FV to add discussion items for not considering discussion items (such as TMRM and OWL and RDF semantics) as they have been
    • Area of the wiki where to record the motivation of each decision taken during the definition of the mapping rules, and all the alternative solutions considered and discrded (with motivation). At the end of the work this document will be the starting point for a second paper to be submitted to another journal. A shorter version can be also submitted to a conference.
      • Everybody to systematically contribute


  • Garshol, Gessa, Pepper, Presutti, Vitali


  1. SP: To write an email on his idea of closeness of guided vs. unguided translation (DONE)
  2. LMG: Also an e-mail on item 6 on completeness: is it a MUST or a SHOULD?
  3. FV: To write a proposal answer to Newcomb trying not to upset him
  4. All: Add new requirements by April 14th
  5. FV + SP: Fix the account on the wiki (DONE)
  6. SP: Move the TOC on the wiki (DONE: RDFTMInteroperabilityGuidelines)
  7. LMG: Put the existing test cases on the wiki
  8. VP (with help of NG & LMG): Have a look at the use cases (see: RequirementsUseCases - work in progress)
  9. NG (with help of VP & LMG): Have a look at the test cases

Next conCall:

Wed 20th April, 17:00

Additional Info

ISO topic maps meeting in Amsterdam: May 22-25

-- ValentinaPresutti - 01 Apr 2005
to top

You are here: RDFTM > MinutesOfConferenceCalls > ConCall20050401

to top

Copyright © 1999-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding Fabio's Wiki? Send feedback