00:00:35 <ericP> [discussion of 3.7 Limited Datatype Support]
00:01:44 <ericP> robS: are we talking about strings or data type representations?
00:03:19 <ericP> RESOLVED: accpet "4.8 Literal Search" as a DO
00:03:26 <ericP> abstentions from ericP and robS
00:09:53 <Yoshio> q+ to ask what do we mean "a subset" in requirement 3.7 Limited Datatype Support
00:10:21 <Yoshio> s/do we mean/we mean/
00:10:33 <Yoshio> s/mean/mean by/
00:11:14 <Yoshio> q-
00:13:47 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
00:20:34 <Yoshio> q+ to ask if we don't have any problem when we apply path expression to RDF which the basic structure is not trees but meshes, even with loops
00:22:18 <Yoshio> s/which the/whose/
00:22:55 <ericP> [discussion of BRQL]
00:23:49 <ericP> robS: we don't have to adopt BRQL. prefer that we start with XQuery.
00:24:07 <ericP> ... builds on existing specs...
00:24:35 <Yoshio> by pathe expression I mean path-expression-based language like XQuery
00:25:29 <ericP> kendall: starting with an XQuery engine isn't sufficient for everyone
00:25:40 <ericP> ... no implementation in Python
00:25:46 <kendall> no,  it isn't *possible*  for everyone
00:26:27 <ericP> robS: not asserting that it's simple
00:27:11 <ericP> ... can't say we've impelemented the RDF query layer
00:27:15 <ericP> simon: we need a spec in front of us to work with
00:27:39 <ericP> danc: [gives history, back to query workshop]
00:28:02 <ericP> ... sounds like an argument to pause for a while.
00:29:59 <ericP> robS: going wtih an RDF-only query languge, NI will suffer
00:30:10 <ericP> jeff: the semweb in general will suffer
00:30:52 <ericP> simon: does that follow from not adopting XQuery, a language for querying hierarchical documents?
00:31:18 <ericP> ... the RDF stack is more similar
00:31:36 <ericP> jeff: not saying that out of the box, it's a solution
00:32:17 <ericP> kendall: it's not XQuery vs. start from scratch.
00:34:35 <ericP> robS: XQuery took a long time because they were designing a language that would be easy to write
00:35:09 <ericP> howard: i think it was the complexities of XQuery that made the spec so big.
00:35:57 <ericP> robS: the RDF query langs have crappy presentation over good calculus
00:37:50 <ericP> s/calculus/algebra/
00:52:39 <Yoshio> Hmm aren't we just looking at BRQL as ONE of candidates for the strawman?
00:52:59 <ericP> yes
00:53:16 <Yoshio> I think we're going to look into XsRQL or N3QL as well
00:59:03 <Yoshio> what is the definition of the word algebra? is it different from calculus?
00:59:20 <DanC_jam> good question, Yoshio. I'm actually not certain.
00:59:41 <Yoshio> (I don't know the definition of calculus, either, ;))
01:01:26 <Yoshio> and what's the difference from data model?
01:02:05 <Yoshio> As the data model, what we have is RDF (obvious?)
01:02:35 <Yoshio> I think it's quite different from that of XML (a tree like document model)
01:05:20 <Yoshio> * we have reached to a consensus that we are not likely to have a consensus easily
01:29:05 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #dawg
04:32:07 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dawg
05:36:18 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #dawg
16:21:11 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dawg
16:22:40 <SimonR> Considering the ebXML UC.
16:23:17 <DanC_jam> 6 Jun rev of ebXML http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0032.html
16:24:14 <DanC_jam> Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:26:20 -0400
16:26:56 <JosD> JosD has joined #dawg
16:27:34 <howardk> howardk has joined #dawg
16:31:18 <HiroyukiS> HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG
16:32:50 <SimonR> RobS: The drill-down mentioned in the UC is in the description logic domain rather than in basic RDF.
16:33:05 <DaveB> I wonder if it's time to think about defining terms.  A triple pattern is ....  A graph pattern is a cnjunction of triple patterns.  etc.
16:34:01 <AndyS> +1
16:34:12 <kendall> seems relatively undangerous
16:34:48 <SimonR> I think we've reached a point where a formal, abstract model of what a query is will be useful, and there's general agreement that this is the case.
16:43:13 <ericP> agenda request: winter f2f schduling and spring tech plen -- ask if "the next 2-4 weeks" is sufficient notification to schedule our winter f2f.
16:43:47 <kendall> heh, reschedule :>
16:43:58 <SimonR> Issue with drill-down is that querying for what counts as a direct descendant in a hierarchy rather simply a descendant in a hierarchy.  To do this would require being able to query to non-existence of any intermediate points in the hierarchy.
16:45:17 <SimonR> (...rather than simply...)
16:47:05 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/2004/07/15-dawg-irc has been chacl'd
16:49:10 <DanC_jam> regrep tc http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=regrep
16:49:50 <JosD> RIM 2.5 http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/documents/2.5/specs/ebrim-2.5.pdf
16:57:12 <AndyS> Discussing :: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/att-0087/_DAPD_PaperMain.pdf
17:03:13 <SimonR> ebXML use case motivates interactive browsing; Kendall feels that 2.10 already implies interaction browsing, but some disagreement that this is clearly implied.
17:03:55 <SimonR> ACTION: Kendall add ebXML UC
17:04:52 <SimonR> ACTION: RobS write email to Farrukh
17:05:19 <DanC_jam> 1.5 Relationship to XQuery http://www.w3.org/2003/12/swa/dawg-charter#XQueryBinding
17:09:48 <SimonR> EricP: Describes a UC involving querying the Edgar database and integrating XML and RDF sources into the one query.
17:19:10 <DanC_jam> ... exploration of XQuery/RDF query integration scenarios: is loose coupling sufficient? is there motivation for anything more than string concatenation to make up queries, and XML to return results?
17:21:25 <ericP> example FA query: http://www.w3.org/2001/11/13-RDF-Query-Rules/#XQueryFA
17:22:02 <DaveB-lap> DaveB-lap has joined #dawg
17:30:10 <SimonR> Break at 10:30 until 10:45.
17:46:47 <HiroyukiS> HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG
17:50:49 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/2004/07/16-FA/
18:00:43 <DanC_jam> Zakim, this is dawg
18:00:43 <Zakim> ok, DanC_jam; that matches SW_DAWG(f2f)2:00PM
18:00:52 <DanC_jam> Zakim, who's on the phone?
18:00:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see RobS
18:01:00 <DanC_jam> Zakim, RobS is temporarily MeetingRoom
18:01:00 <Zakim> +MeetingRoom; got it
18:02:01 <AndyS> Resuming ...
18:02:42 <DaveB> DaveB has joined #dawg
18:02:44 <howardk> FYI: code for traversing a possibly cyclic foaf:knows network in XsRQL: http://www.fatdog.com/CyclicFoafs.html
18:03:55 <Zakim> + +17907aaaa
18:04:06 <DaveB-lap> that's me
18:04:12 <DanC_jam> Zakim, aaaa is DaveB
18:04:12 <Zakim> +DaveB; got it
18:09:53 <DanC_jam> AndyS tweaks title page... author/editor stuff...
18:10:38 <Yoshio> what's the URI?
18:10:49 <DaveB-lap> editing http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
18:11:17 <Yoshio> thank you, dave
18:12:06 <DaveB-lap> w00f
18:13:43 <DaveB-lap> BARQ?
18:15:33 <Yoshio> BBQ :)
18:19:15 <DanC_jam> DanC gave editorial input on TOC and argued against SOURCE
18:19:36 <DanC_jam> (slightly longer version is recorded by AndyS in the live copy)
18:25:00 <TomAdams> TomAdams has joined #dawg
18:34:45 <DanC_jam> ACTION: Jos: explain log:includes to inform the discussion of SOURCE (nee provenance)
18:35:15 <DaveB-lap> the SOURCE thing could be an extension point
18:35:50 <DaveB-lap> I kinda like the way that algae allows it (triple) {foo:bar} where they are extensions, annotations of the triple, kinda
18:36:18 <kendall> triple facets, i keep calling them.
18:36:54 <DaveB-lap> ptr to jos's test http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0037.html
18:36:59 <DanC_jam> jos refers us to example 2 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0037.html
18:42:01 <DanC_jam> DaveB: I like the the way that algae does it [optionals] too. [pointer, please?]
18:42:26 <DaveB-lap> I was saying I like the way the result triples are built up
18:42:30 <DaveB-lap> in algae, and here
18:42:46 <DanC_jam> ACTION AndyS: explain DESCRIBE design implicit in BRQL spec
18:42:53 <DaveB-lap> if it means lessspecial features in the language, great
18:43:20 <DanC_jam> a pointer to the relevant algae docs would be nice, daveb.
18:43:27 <DaveB-lap> looking
18:44:14 <DaveB-lap> algae2 result sets description: http://www.w3.org/2004/05/06-Algae/#resultSet
18:51:18 <DanC_jam> ACTION DanC: explain evolution of log:semantics/log:includes from uri-is-graph to uri-is-doc in cwm, to inform discussion of SOURCE
18:51:41 <DaveB-lap> I'm willing to take an action to explain the two uses of redland contexts I see most.
18:52:02 <DanC_jam> very well, dave. pls write the action
18:52:43 <DaveB-lap> ACTION DaveB: explain the main uses seen for redland contexts with respect to the provenance
18:53:15 <DanC_jam> (I just discovered http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/ .)
18:53:39 <DaveB-lap> yeah, they use the 4th item as something else, but they recently changed. from bnode|uri to just allowing a uri
18:58:56 <Yoshio> q+ to clarify if NOT operator can have  multiple triples as operands
19:00:51 <Yoshio> q-
19:00:56 <DaveB-lap> Yoshio: as I understand it, no
19:02:07 <JosD> Re nested optionals see also test case in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0737.html
19:04:05 <Yoshio> q+ to ask the meaning of DISTINCT
19:04:53 <DaveB-lap> Yoshio, as I recall we based it on SeRQL - duplicate triples are removed from the output graph
19:05:08 <DaveB-lap> or duplicate binding resutls
19:05:09 <Yoshio> Yes, but is it optional?
19:05:28 <DaveB-lap> if not given, you may get duplicates
19:05:57 <Yoshio> Hmm, I'm not sure what's the use of having duplicates
19:06:45 <DaveB-lap> it's a performance thing partially
19:07:02 <DaveB-lap> the server (or something) can filter it for the end user
19:07:29 <DaveB-lap> see SeRQL manual for lots of this http://www.openrdf.org/doc/users/ch05.html
19:07:39 <Yoshio> Thank you, I'll check it
19:07:54 <Yoshio> q-
19:07:54 <AndyS> http://jena.hpl.hp.com/~afs/DAWG/Tests/dawg-tests.n3
19:08:03 <DanC_jam> ^ a test manifest
19:08:56 <DanC_jam> DanC: what test coverage do we have?
19:09:09 <DanC_jam> A: for RDQL, a test suite that some developers are happy with. For other BRQL features, a start.
19:10:17 <Yoshio> BTW, where are ericP, Simon, Kendall and Rob?
19:11:01 <DanC_jam> ACTION Jos: discuss test suite documentation and maintenance with Steve, EricP, AndyS, ...
19:13:56 <kendall> Yoshio: I had to use the phone for a second. My boss called, wanted to know what was going on. :>
19:14:16 <DanC_jam> Jos: in the case of bindings, results can just be a list
19:14:19 <Yoshio> welcome back, kendall, nice to have you again :)
19:14:27 <DanC_jam> AndyS: need the names too. [explains why...]
19:15:38 <DaveB-lap> q+ agenda for after lunch?  f2f page isn't updated
19:15:40 <Yoshio> what do you mean by "need the names too", Andy, I think I missed your comment
19:16:21 <kendall> Yos: thanks :>
19:16:42 <DaveB-lap> q+ to ask about the agenda for after lunch?  f2f page isn't updated for day2
19:17:15 <DanC_jam> (my mind hasn't been updated either)
19:17:45 <DaveB-lap> q-
19:19:30 <Yoshio> * After lunch? Dessert! :)
19:21:02 <kendall> a cuppa!
19:31:22 <DanC_jam> (discussion of editorial structure)
19:33:34 <Yoshio> From my own experience, it was very good that I could find the Concepts and Abstract Syntax document for RDF as a separate document
19:35:01 <Yoshio> It helps me to understand clearly that RDF/XML is just one way of serialization (wrong?)
19:35:28 <DaveB-lap> we clearly needed  that since peoplw ere confused seeing the XML as the RDF
19:36:22 <Yoshio> Yes, one of the members of INTAP Semantic Web Committee is one of them
19:39:03 <DanC_jam> agenda + strawman ql
19:39:09 <DanC_jam> agenda + protocols
19:39:17 <DanC_jam> agenda + bookmarking requirement/objective
19:44:37 <DanC_jam> agenda + toward a 1 Aug requirements/use cases update. recruit reviewers
19:47:23 <TomAdams> zakim, who is on the phone?
19:47:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see MeetingRoom, DaveB
19:47:51 <Zakim> -DaveB
19:47:52 <Zakim> -MeetingRoom
19:47:52 <Zakim> SW_DAWG(f2f)2:00PM has ended
19:47:53 <Zakim> Attendees were MeetingRoom, +17907aaaa, DaveB
19:51:24 <DanC_jam> $Revision: 1.86 $ of $Date: 2004/07/15 23:57:06 $ http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
19:51:25 <DanC_jam> saved
20:08:29 <DanC_jam> Zakim, agenda?
20:08:29 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
21:34:27 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #dawg
21:34:57 <kendall> kendall has joined #dawg
21:36:21 <DanC_jam> DanC_jam has joined #dawg
21:36:41 <Yoshio> Yoshio has joined #dawg
21:38:22 <afs> afs has joined #dawg
21:40:20 <afs_> afs_ has joined #dawg
21:41:08 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/2004/07/16-FA/
21:41:25 <SimonR> SimonR has joined #dawg
21:47:35 <HiroyukiS> HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG
21:47:52 <DanC_jam> agenda + UC&R publication update, pending updates
21:48:04 <DanC_jam> agenda + Strawman Syntax
21:48:09 <DanC_jam> agenda + Protocols (GetData), etc.
21:49:11 <JosD_scribe> =========== discussing UC&R proposed text changes
21:49:28 <JosD_scribe> expected next publishing date aug 1
21:50:15 <JosD_scribe> going document order and then new ones? no, go through Kendall's todo list
21:51:25 <JosD_scribe> ... walking through Kendall's list
21:53:42 <JosD_scribe> ... finished  the list
21:53:56 <JosD_scribe> === bookmarkable queries
21:54:24 <JosD_scribe> suggested text:
21:54:31 <DanC_jam> on 3.8 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0098.html
21:56:26 <JosD_scribe> DanC: hope to make that testable
21:57:09 <JosD_scribe> no objections; astaining 1 (SimonR)
21:58:51 <JosD_scribe> RESOLVED: adopt  suggested text in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0098.html as objective 4...
22:00:57 <JosD_scribe> === XQuery compatible surface syntax
22:01:30 <JosD_scribe> EricP will project the 2 examples
22:03:04 <DanC_jam> query syntax proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0091.html
22:04:50 <JosD_scribe> (takes some tome to boot the projector :))
22:05:01 <JosD_scribe> s/tome/time
22:06:02 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/2004/07/16-FA/
22:11:22 <JosD_scribe> discussing http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0091.html
22:17:27 <JosD_scribe> quting from the message "Therefore, NI proposes that a new requirement be considered by this group: The query language shall have an XQuery compatible concrete language syntax"
22:17:41 <JosD_scribe> s/quting/quoting
22:18:49 <JosD_scribe> RobS: "XQuery compatible concrete language syntax" is syntax plus more??
22:19:35 <JosD_scribe> RobS: suggesting "srface syntax"
22:20:36 <JosD_scribe> s/srface/surface
22:22:28 <JosD_scribe> straw poll shows that support as requirement is 1 and about 4 as an objective
22:29:15 <JosD_scribe> EricP: copy wording from charter - Eric now gives some background...
22:30:47 <JosD_scribe> ... produce a binding for XQuery
22:32:33 <JosD_scribe> DanC: propsed req "syntax we choose should exploit people knowledge of SQL"
22:32:40 <DanC_jam> s/req/objective/
22:32:47 <DanC_jam> 1 or 2 in support, per straw poll
22:34:06 <JosD_scribe> disculling http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/att-0091/DAWG_req_proposal.pdf
22:34:24 <JosD_scribe> s/disculling.discussing
22:41:52 <JosD_scribe> after discussion no shift in positions
22:44:36 <AndyS> . ACTION: SimonR Track the work of the WG to keep a current, discussable XQuery syntax document
22:46:10 <DanC_jam> write a document discussing tradeoffs with adapting XQuery to do [...?]
22:46:55 <DanC_jam> ACTION: write a document discussing tradeoffs with adapting XQuery as an RDF query language
22:47:15 <AndyS> Action on SimonR
22:47:53 <JosD_scribe> === requirement on disjunction
22:48:35 <AndyS> http://www.w3.org/2004/Talks/tp-robie/Overview.html
22:48:36 <Yoshio> * what kind of hats are we wearing now?
22:48:57 <DanC_jam> on disjuction... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0085.html
22:50:15 <JosD_scribe> stated as requirement, appeals to 4 to 5
22:50:40 <Yoshio> appeals to Yoshio, too
22:52:51 <DanC_jam> ACTION RobS: help kendal find supporting use cases for disjuction
22:53:01 <Yoshio> q+ to ask if we take disjunction of matching pattern, will it reduce the number of the match?
22:57:08 <JosD_scribe> Yoshio: ask if we take disjunction of matching pattern, will it reduce the number of the match?
22:57:27 <JosD_scribe> DanC: it is Q2 V Q1
22:59:34 <AndyS> q+ On last clause of req - unclear on ASK queries implication
22:59:51 <AndyS> q+ to ask On last clause of req - unclear on ASK queries implication
23:00:37 <DaveB> I'd like to know if there is complexity when optionals & disjunction are used together.
23:01:00 <DaveB> well, I bet there is, but can it be explained
23:01:31 <AndyS> Maybe optionals is actually the disjunction effect but done in a different way.
23:02:22 <JosD_scribe> AndyS: On last clause of req - unclear on ASK queries implication
23:03:33 <JosD_scribe> DanC proposes his test case of last night
23:04:46 <DanC_jam> "The query language must include the capability to restrict matches on a
23:04:47 <DanC_jam> queried graph based on a disjunction of graph patterns, at least one of
23:04:47 <DanC_jam> which must be satisfied"
23:05:49 <ericP> annotea use case: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0247.html
23:05:54 <JosD_scribe> RESOLVED disjunction as requirement
23:05:54 <ericP> (RobS)
23:06:15 <JosD_scribe> no objections, 1 abstention (JosD)
23:06:47 <Yoshio> I'm happy with the disjunction being adopted as a requirement, but I fell more clarification in its wording
23:06:59 <Yoshio> s/fell/feel/
23:07:17 <Yoshio> s/clarification/clarification needed/
23:07:59 <DanC_jam> ACTION Kendal: draft revision, toward updating our public WD, delivery ~next wed.
23:08:03 <DanC_jam> ACTION RobS: review it.
23:08:24 <DanC_jam> ACTION 10= Kendall: draft revision, toward updating our public WD, delivery ~next wed.
23:09:00 <DanC_jam> agenda?
23:09:04 <Yoshio> q?
23:09:07 <DanC_jam> Zakim, close agendum 1
23:09:07 <Zakim> agendum 1 closed
23:09:08 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
23:09:08 <Yoshio> q-
23:09:09 <Zakim> 2. Strawman Syntax [from DanC_jam]
23:09:11 <AndyS> q-
23:09:16 <JosD_scribe> now we have a plan for publishing an updated UC&R document
23:09:47 <Yoshio> q+ to ask if you feel some means to easily search for items in a collection
23:12:41 <DanC_jam> . ACTION DanC: notify Semantic Web CG of risks around the "1.5 Relationship with XQuery" scope of our charter.
23:20:35 <DanC_jam> ACTION DanC: notify Semantic Web CG of risks around the "1.5 Relationship with XQuery" scope of our charter.
23:21:01 <Yoshio> agenda?
23:21:15 <JosD_scribe> ============ strawman syntax
23:21:16 <DanC_jam> http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/ 1.11
23:23:03 <DanC_jam> 30 oct RDQL http://www.w3.org/Submission/2003/SUBM-RDQL-20031030/
23:23:54 <DaveB> the above isn't public, you likely mean http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-RDQL-20040109/
23:24:38 <JosD_scribe> who would prefer RDQL: 3
23:25:41 <JosD_scribe> who would prefer BRQL over RDQL: about 6
23:26:52 <JosD_scribe> advive from chair is that RDQL will bring us faster to REC
23:27:05 <JosD_scribe> s/advive/advice
23:29:20 <JosD_scribe> there are now issues raised in http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
23:29:54 <Yoshio> q-
23:31:08 <JosD_scribe> critical mass for support of http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/ 1.11
23:32:54 <JosD_scribe> RESOLVED: adopt http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/ 1.11 as strawman - objection NI - abstention HowardK
23:33:46 <DaveB> congrats all
23:33:47 <DanC_jam> NEW ISSUES: re CONSTRUCT: what happens when variable are not bound?
23:34:05 <DanC_jam> NEW ISSUE: BARQL 1.11 does not support yes/no queries sufficiently
23:34:26 <DanC_jam> s/BARQL/BRQL/
23:34:28 <Yoshio> q+ to ask if we're going to have other strawmen
23:35:06 <DanC_jam> ack yoshio
23:35:06 <Zakim> Yoshio, you wanted to ask if we're going to have other strawmen
23:35:18 <DanC_jam> yes, we have an action on parallel XQuery design
23:36:31 <SimonR> *sigh*
23:37:40 <DanC_jam> Kendall: if requirements settle down, I might be willing to maintain the issues list
23:37:40 <JosD_scribe> Kendall: make it easier to find the issues; Kendall is offering himself to maintain an issue list!!!
23:38:08 <JosD_scribe> ======== protocols
23:39:22 <kendall> http://tap.stanford.edu/tap/getdata.html
23:39:30 <DanC_jam> # evalutate TAP's GetData? Dan Connolly (Sunday, 4 July)  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0019.html
23:40:30 <DanC_jam> http://tap.stanford.edu/tap/getdatadetails.html
23:45:27 <kendall> dan would like getdata folks to support what we do
23:45:44 <kendall> seems unlikely since we may be more complex, and they've tried to maximize simplicity
23:47:02 <JosD> Motivation for GetData http://tap.stanford.edu/tap/motivation.html
23:49:14 <DanC_jam> cf TAP: A System for integrating Web Services into a Global Knowledge Base. R.V.Guha and Rob McCool
23:49:23 <DanC_jam> http://tap.stanford.edu/sw002.html
23:55:06 <JosD> Joseki test suite is Junit based; does graph isomorphism matching; ...