14:29:12 RRSAgent has joined #dawg 14:29:17 +??P18 14:29:18 +Yoshio 14:29:20 Zakim, NickG is SteveH 14:29:20 +SteveH; got it 14:29:26 Zakim, Nick_Gibbins is SteveH 14:29:26 sorry, DanC, I do not recognize a party named 'Nick_Gibbins' 14:29:31 +??P19 14:29:37 +DanC 14:29:48 agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0133.html 14:29:51 +Kendall_Clark 14:29:59 AlbertoR has joined #dawg 14:30:15 zakim, ??P19 is SimonR 14:30:15 +SimonR; got it 14:30:32 +??P21 14:30:42 TomAdams has joined #dawg 14:30:46 Zakim, ??P21 is DaveB 14:30:46 +DaveB; got it 14:30:48 + +1.441.179.aaaa 14:30:50 DaveB, I just added you tests the the page 14:31:04 +AlbertoR 14:31:05 +44 117 =bristol 14:31:25 aloha 14:31:40 buongiorno/buonpomeriggio 14:32:05 mahalo 14:32:31 +[Tucana] 14:32:39 zakim, Tucana is TomAdams 14:32:39 +TomAdams; got it 14:33:21 Zakim, who's on the phone? 14:33:21 On the phone I see SteveH, EricP, HiroyukiS, Yoshio, SimonR, DanC, Kendall_Clark, DaveB, AndyS, AlbertoR, TomAdams 14:33:55 We have regrets from HowardK and JosDeRoo. 14:34:17 some last minute amendments http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0143.html 14:34:43 minutes 2004-10-12 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0132.html ammended to show protocol action 14:35:12 Yoshio was also absent 14:35:22 no 14:35:28 oops, yes 14:35:32 rogr 14:35:43 I also sent regrets... ;) 14:35:55 RESOLVED: to adopt 0132 + 2 ammendments 14:36:02 seconded 14:36:09 -ouch-, sorry. i'm a terrible scribe. I take an ACTION to *never* scribe again! :> 14:36:19 next meeting: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 14:36:26 Regrets for next week. Will be on a plane. 14:36:29 Zakim, pick a scribe 14:36:29 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose AlbertoR 14:36:43 TomAdams tentatively volunteers to scribe for next week. 14:36:54 AlbertoR will be the backup scribe. 14:37:18 agenda + Convene, take roll, review record and agenda 14:37:24 agenda + Publication of SPARQL design and Data Access UC&R 14:37:31 agenda + Feedback on the SPARQL design 14:37:37 agenda + Web Services Constraints and Capabilities 14:37:43 agenda + SOURCE 14:37:47 Zakim, close agendum 1 14:37:47 agendum 1 closed 14:37:48 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 14:37:49 2. Publication of SPARQL design and Data Access UC&R [from DanC] 14:37:51 F2F5 logistics and walking tour data continue without discussion. 14:37:53 Zakim, next agendum 14:37:53 agendum 2. "Publication of SPARQL design and Data Access UC&R" taken up [from DanC] 14:38:23 SPARQL is published, much rejoiced! Thanks to EricP, AndyS, Kendall and all. 14:38:34 wheee 14:38:42 Zakim, next agendum 14:38:42 agendum 2 was just opened, DanC 14:38:49 Zakim, close this agendum 14:38:49 agendum 2 closed 14:38:50 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 14:38:51 3. Feedback on the SPARQL design [from DanC] 14:38:56 Zakim, next agendum 14:38:56 agendum 3. "Feedback on the SPARQL design" taken up [from DanC] 14:41:23 Peter Patel-Schneider commented that "bound" is something procedural -- AndyS to discuss in email. 14:41:56 Peter P-S raised an issue about the definition of subgraph. 14:42:57 DanC suggests asking for a test case to clarify the subgraph issue. 14:43:01 Where is all this raising by PFPS visible? 14:43:32 patH: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0130.html is andy's reply to pfps 14:43:37 ta 14:45:37 i've been seeing a good number of delicious links re: sparql. that's a good thing, i think. 14:46:11 sparql has way more features than I want... 14:47:45 (Some parenthetical mention of tolog) 14:47:58 ref to Geoff's mail http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2004Oct/0008.html 14:48:18 . ACTION: PatH review SPARQL def'ns post-publication 14:48:28 continue that, Pat? 14:48:41 ACTION: PatH review SPARQL def'ns post-publication. CONTINUEs. 14:48:48 yep, continue. I'll scan PFPS's input as well. 14:49:04 . ACTION Dirk: provide details about DB interfaces, re '?' and '$' 14:49:20 ACTION Dirk: provide details about DB interfaces, re '?' and '$'. CONTINUES. 14:49:29 One more week on Dirk's item, or drop it. 14:50:50 AlbertoR hasn't gone through the draft yet to be able to determine whether the DESCRIBE issue is addressed by the 12Oct draft. AlbertoR expects he'll take 2-3 weeks to get to it. 14:51:23 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#describe 14:51:27 AndyS believes that there is more work to be done on DESCRIBE. AndyS intends to post to the list. 14:51:53 maybe GetData as a DESCRIBE return? 14:51:58 AndyS would like the retract the CBD suggest in section 11.3 of the WD. 14:52:45 ... because CBD is currently fluid 14:55:06 SteveH on disjunction: he's currently only happy with removing disjunction. 14:55:53 Disjunction is logically troublesome unless stated veeeery carefully. 14:55:55 AndyS is inclined to re-include disjunction. 14:57:00 end of section 5 has a nested optional example 14:57:25 TomAdam's action to send iTQL queries with examples of disjunction -- he has them prepared, but hasn't posted them to the list yet. 14:58:04 TomA will post the the list immediately! 14:58:21 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#ask 14:58:42 DanC on yes-and-no questions: he's satisfied with the current spec. 14:59:42 Kendall doesn't feel the current ASK definition is satisfactory. 15:00:24 q+ 15:01:05 What counts as the response to a yes/no query? 15:01:06 q+ to propose that this will be best handled with a protocol document on the table next to the query lang 15:01:37 ack DaveB 15:01:42 patH: An atomic boolean value, I believe. 15:02:00 OK, ta. 15:02:55 Zakim, next agendum 15:02:55 agendum 4. "Web Services Constraints and Capabilities" taken up [from DanC] 15:03:34 Zakim, take up agendum 3 15:03:34 agendum 3. "Feedback on the SPARQL design" taken up [from DanC] 15:04:31 q+ to talk about timescale 15:04:41 two example Y/N queries: Q: is there a Y/N example? A: no; Q: *now*, is there a Y/N example? A: yes, you just saw one. 15:04:57 ack ericp 15:04:57 ericP, you wanted to propose that this will be best handled with a protocol document on the table next to the query lang 15:05:30 Zakim, next agendum 15:05:30 agendum 4. "Web Services Constraints and Capabilities" taken up [from DanC] 15:05:42 TomAdams I've just posted the response to my action: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0148.html 15:05:53 Zakim, take up agendum 3 15:05:53 agendum 3. "Feedback on the SPARQL design" taken up [from DanC] 15:06:02 fwiw, since I'm in some kind of doghouse, the present SPARQL ql draft satisfies me re: PREFIX, which I was issue owner of. I'm fine with it as written. 15:06:24 F2F logistics page --> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0144.html 15:06:28 apologies, kendall. I need to get a grip now and then. 15:06:33 AndyS suggests another WD circa December, before the January meeting. 15:07:20 s/logistics page/logistics data/ 15:07:29 AndyS has done writing on value testing which he'd like to get comments upon. 15:07:43 zakim, mute me 15:07:43 Kendall_Clark should now be muted 15:07:55 AndyS is inclined to drop the UNSAID feature, based on it being procedural. 15:08:22 fwiw, our web services composition guy, Evren Sirin, wants UNSAID really badly. i've a meeting to talk to him about it. 15:08:59 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#prefixSyntax 15:09:07 Kendall - I *need* :-) an example ASAP as email to the list 15:09:20 AndyS: okay 15:09:49 I have issues with prefix 15:10:26 I missed that too 15:10:43 Query ::= PrefixDecl* ReportFormat PrefixDecl* 15:11:07 Ambiguity in the spec, if a prefix is defined multiply. 15:11:39 ACTION DaveB: illustrate prefix interaction details by example/test 15:12:19 DanC requests for all to be ready to resolve next week the PREFIX issue. 15:12:21 fine 15:12:30 W3C December holidays publishing moritorium: last request on 20-Dec, last pub: 22-Dec 15:12:55 when does it start again after the holidays? 15:12:55 Zakim, next agendum 15:12:55 agendum 4. "Web Services Constraints and Capabilities" taken up [from DanC] 15:13:28 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0145.html 15:14:18 in http://www.w3.org/2004/08/20-ws-pol-pos/#query 15:14:52 uses disjunction 15:16:20 ericP: could you say in email their requirements - conjunction now, disjunction prepared to wait for it(? is that what you said?) 15:16:42 -AndyS 15:17:18 DaveB, sure, will reply to my message 15:18:02 who is the author of? http://www.w3.org/2004/08/20-ws-pol-pos/ 15:18:12 EricP: Policies are not expressed in RDF. Neither the capabilities or the policies are in RDF. 15:18:32 zakim, unmute me 15:18:32 Kendall_Clark should no longer be muted 15:18:55 Got to go myself. If y'all want me to do anything, send email. Bye. 15:19:46 Kendall notes that the latest S 15:22:12 q+ to say something about wsdl2 and rdf 15:22:28 ack andys 15:22:28 AndyS, you wanted to talk about timescale 15:23:06 ack kendall 15:23:06 kendall, you wanted to say something about wsdl2 and rdf 15:24:22 that's WSDL describing RDF query, vs. a RDF mapping of a WSDL document. 15:24:27 foot in the door, i guess... 15:24:48 Kendall: It would be good if for every WSDL you could get a deterministic RDF graph. 15:25:08 oops, i missed that. 15:25:23 Zakim, next agendum 15:25:23 agendum 5. "SOURCE" taken up [from DanC] 15:25:52 erp, don't know what i meant by "deterministic RDF graph", so maybe that shld be ignored. :> 15:26:11 DanC: Progress on SOURCE tests, but seems to still be haggling in progress. 15:26:58 q+ tests manifest 15:27:17 q+ 15:29:04 DaveB: The current syntax contains all the syntax for named containers/SOURCE. 15:29:32 zakim, ack manifest 15:29:32 I see AlbertoR on the speaker queue 15:31:15 DanC asks whether the various different designs for SOURCE are indeed equivalent or not? 15:32:38 SteveH says he can produce a test case that would behave differently between his implementation and AndyS's. 15:32:47 Andy and I disagree about http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/#dawg-source-simple-001 15:33:17 zakim, mute me 15:33:17 Kendall_Clark should now be muted 15:33:26 that's the conformance police 15:33:31 sorry, fire engines, open windows, war on terror, etc. 15:33:32 +1 SteveH - we woudl need SELECT DISTINCT 15:35:58 Discussion about whether the current behavior in the tests -- that returning duplicate rows in a result is different from a result with just one copy of the same row. 15:38:23 ADJOURN. 15:38:23 -Kendall_Clark 15:38:33 Adjourn at 15:30Z. 15:39:15 hmm... I'd like to have a meeting just on the test harness. Should I use a weekly telcon for that? or should we do something ad-hoc? hmm. 15:40:16 -Yoshio 15:40:25 -TomAdams 15:40:39 -HiroyukiS 15:46:56 According to the actual spec, results are sets, not bags. Unless we amend it to be bags, we're just been fooled by the tabular form into thinking the duplicate rows are possible. 15:47:06 been/being 15:48:17 yes, so I want to get the test harness fixed. 15:48:18 to match. 15:49:39 I'd strongly prefer that people think of result sets as logical expressions: (($x=1 and $y=2) or ($x=3 and $y=4)) is the expanded version, and quite unambiguous. 15:51:16 -DanC 15:52:25 it's still worth saying that (($x=1 and $y=2) or ($x=1 and $y=2)) reduces to ($x=1 and $y=2), though it's quite intuitive and lots of people would understand even if you didn't say that. 15:53:16 DanC: I don't believe that's true. It has a different truth value when $x is 3 and $y is 4. 15:53:34 Oh, sorry. My mistake! :) 15:58:24 -DaveB 16:03:51 hmm SOURCE _:a FROM , _:b FROM 16:04:27 DaveB I tried that way with Andy :-) dawg:FROM - he did not buy it yet :-) 16:08:28 -SimonR 16:08:29 -AlbertoR 16:08:31 -EricP 16:08:34 -SteveH 16:08:35 SW_DAWG()10:30AM has ended 16:08:36 Attendees were Nick_Gibbins, EricP, Yoshio, SteveH, DanC, Kendall_Clark, SimonR, HiroyukiS, DaveB, +1.441.179.aaaa, AndyS, AlbertoR, [Tucana], TomAdams 16:08:44 AlbertoR has left #dawg 18:29:51 Zakim has left #dawg