Re: Pending vocabulary issues + further proceeding

From: Ryan Lee <>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 18:11:25 -0400

Emmanuel Pietriga wrote:
> Ryan Lee wrote:
>> Emmanuel Pietriga wrote:
>>> Ryan Lee wrote:
>>>> I'll point back at a workshop position paper that's due July 30.
>>>> Shall we use that as a solid target and pick dates based on that
>>>> deadline?
>>> Yes. I reread de CfP for this workshop, and I think we definitely
>>> need to submit something there. Let's consider this as our "final"
>>> deadline, knowing that verything else should be in place before then
>>> (especially the web site).
>> What are we aiming to accomplish by then?
>> - concensus on Fresnel goals
>> - finalize terms
>> - publish core ontology that's as complete in its description as possible
>> - publish Fresnel website to
>> - experience reports?
> Yes. Experience reports, I'm not sure. Would you be willing to do that?
> Anyone else?

Yes, I would.

>>>> On a different note, I checked out and compiled and am starting to
>>>> look into how to integrate Emmanuel's FSL code into my work in
>>>> progress.
>>> You mean the ANTLR-based FSL parser? I still have a lot of work to do
>>> on this. I've been busy with the VL/HCC conference and other stuff
>>> for the past few weeks, but I plan to resume work on this
>>> implementation very soon. Ryan, are you waiting for something
>>> specific on this side from me?
>> Not really; our repository examples don't work in it, but that seems
>> to be because of the PREFIX information. I presume you've thought
>> about how to take the parse tree to Jena to get a set of results back
>> and was wondering if you were going to write that bit or if I could help?
> I'm working on getting a more usable representation of the expression
> than the current AST. Once I have this, I will have to write the code
> that actually evaluates an FSL expression on a model.


> As far as this PREFIX problem is concerned, I haven't given it much
> thought yet. Did we agree on how to declare these in Fresnel? I don't
> think so.

Something else for the issues list then. I thought we had tentatively
agreed on what's in the examples, that every FSL expression would have
to carry PREFIX information with it. I don't recall if our other
alternatives were still under consideration.

Ryan Lee       
W3C Research Engineer    +1.617.253.5327
Received on Fri May 20 2005 - 22:10:14 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Aug 09 2012 - 16:40:51 EDT