<DanC> Scribe: EricP
RESOLVED to ammend MInutes of the 2005-03-22 RDF DAWG teleconference for review with action tracking notes and accept it as a true record
<DanC> ACTION: DaveB to consider use of xsi:dataType ala comment from Steer [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action01]
<scribe> ACTION: DanC to follow up re optional test based on op:dateTime triple [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action02]
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to pair with SteveH on making the HTML test results page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action03]
<scribe> ACTION: SteveH to to revise test manifest w.r.t. "background" and named graphs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action04]
<scribe> ACTION: DaveB to to propose source test to approve [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action05]
<scribe> ACTION: AndyS to add the above graph test cases (analagous to valueTesting test cases) (don't expect quick delivery) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action06]
<scribe> ACTION: SteveH to prepare test cases for publication as WG Note (no deadline/urgency) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action07]
ALL CONTINUED without discussion
<DanC> next meeting: 5 Apr...
<DanC> then let's do meet 5 Apr, KC to scribe.
<AndyS> Regrets for next week (April 5)
regrets 2 week hence: EricP, DaveB, SteveH
plus, AndyS, if i recall his vacation schedule
<Yoshio> I think there is considarable concern on XML serialization of the resutl (<mail> vs. <var name="mail"> issue)
We didn't discuss that due to DaveB's absence and lack of time.
<scribe> DONE: KC, AFS, EP to publish usecases 1.148 + revision to 2.18 by KC, reviewed by AFS, plus editorial fixups by KC, ok'd by EricP
<scribe> DONE: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-dawg-uc-20050325/ and http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/UseCases is back to editor's draft status 1.158
<DanC> "We invite feedback on which features are required for a first version of SPARQL and which should be postponed in order to expedite deployment of others." -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-dawg-uc-20050325/
<scribe> DONE: Kendall to To rewrite 2.18: change the title, don't motivate "update", spell "WSDL" correctly. :>
<scribe> DONE: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/UseCases 1.149
<scribe> ACTION: PatH to review sort design in 2 weeks [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action10]
<DanC> 1.278 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/
andy believes he has reached a quiescient (SP?) state
<scribe> DONE: Kevin to review sort design at earliest convenience [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action11]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0483.html
<Yoshio> quiescent
<AndyS> Google :: define:quiescent => "refers to a state of resting, inactivity or latency"
<AndyS> Also "A volcano, which is not active, but is still registering seismic activity." :-)
<thompsonbry> How could we extend from lexical comparison to achieve value comparison in a subsequent design?
Kevin: I pointed out a few issues
(consistency with distinct and a few others)
... Thought the interest was in ORDER BY and LIMIT, which is
doable with LEXICAL sort
Andy, lexical ordering doesn't neccesarily give you total ordering
Kevin: we could have a future syntax for value ordering
<Yoshio> I think the problem is that data could be gathered from various sources, where the data type are different
Andy: my pref is to go with value
ordering (what people expect)
... we can do lexical sort with str(?foo)
<thompsonbry> Andy, how does typing interact with functions to specify how a value sort will be applied?
DanC: we can also postpoine... no takers.
<AndyS> See doc : can write "ORDER BY x:func(?x)" as a (partial) ordering
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to propose to close valueTesting (bonus points for test cases, to EricP or others) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action12]
<scribe> CONTINUED. expect to meet end of month deadline
action -10
<Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to ask about !=
<DanC> (I suspect "error" is misleading terminology... "unkown" might communicate the notion better)
EricP: how do people feel about requiring explicity casts where XQuery would not require them?
[ no probs with it ]
#invocation
#StandardOperations
<Zakim> Yoshio, you wanted to ask if this applies to cases where there is no data for deciding the equality
Yoshio: how about unknown equiv in sorting?
PatH: how about we don't define it so folks don't rely on it.
<Yoshio> me: even if they are of the same data type
tx
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask if the "x"^^mytype != "y"^^mytpe test is in the test suite, and ask for a volunteer if not and to reiterate suggestion about compliance and unknown
AndyS: in SQL world, people do rely on the ordering and causes trouble
<DanC> ACTION: AndyS to propose a test re "x"^^mytype != "y"^^mytpe [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action13]
<scribe> ACTION: AndyS to clarify 5.4 w/r/t closed world assumption [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action14]
<scribe> ... pending discussion with Bob and Jess
Geoff
tx
<Yoshio> I'm for construct *
<scribe> DONE: AndyS to explain how to get a whole graph with CONSTRUCT * and GRAPH. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action15]
<kendall> long conversation sorta put me off attending to it carefully, sorry :>
<AndyS> It's not CONSTRUCT * but there is "Accessing Graphs in the RDF Dataset"
<DanC> "Accessing Graphs in the RDF Dataset" -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#construct
<scribe> DONE , above pointer
action -14
<kendall> (hmm, another reason for a getGraph in the protocol is for implementations taht don't support construct at all.)
<scribe> ACTION: DaveB to consider dots in qnames, report on impact on turtle [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action16]
AndyS: won't get rid of all the
todos by thur.
... which way do you want it?
<kendall> it's by-invitation only, so Eric's trying to be respectful of that. :>
<kendall> it was scheduled a long time ago, btw
<thompsonbry> Dan, since Andy will be pulling hair for the 31st, why don't we just back the candidate for review by another week - especially since we have one meeting canceled.
<DanC> ACTION: DanC to review editors draft (delivered 31 Mar) by 5 Apr [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action17]
<DanC> Kendall expects Bijan to review it
<DanC> ACTION: EricP to notify the WG of editors draft (or change of plans) by 31 Mar [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action18]
DanC: Andy, anything test that does not have a clear outcome is critical path
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to propose "privacy considerations" for SPARQL protocol [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action20]
<DanC> ACTION: KendallC to incorporate EricP's privacy text, salting to taste [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action19]
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#wsdlAbstractProtocol
<kendall> "wsdl interfaces" better than "abstract protocol", but -shrug-
KendallC: happy with the WSDL
except some bits of WSDL 2.0 that I don't know how to
spell
... have carefully tried to document a non-researchy
interface
<kendall> don't know how to spell *yet* :>
<DanC> "(SPARQLQuery and SPARQLDiscovery and SPARQLQueryAndDiscovery)"
<DanC> SPARQLQuery SPARQLSaddle SPARQLQS
<kendall> SPARQLQuery -> SparqlQuery; SPARQLDiscovery -> SparqlSaddle; SPARQLQueryAndDiscovery -> SparqlQS
KendallC: total of 8 interfaces
<DanC> OPTIONS: all 5 primary (total 8), 3 SPARQLQuery SPARQLSaddle SPARQLQS, other (none, something else)
KendallC: 5 primative interfaces and 3 unions of them
<kendall> 5 primary, 4 "derived interfaces
<DanC> OPTIONS: all 5 primary (total 9), 3 SPARQLQuery SPARQLSaddle SPARQLQS, other (none, something else)
<DanC> Zakim who's on the phone?
<thompsonbry> Do we have a mapping of these interfaces onto the use cases?
AndyS: interested in 3. don't know how datasets work in this proposal
<kendall> ooh, yoshio makes a good point. thanks. have a mispelling.
Kevin: nothign to say, not at boston
Yoshio: nothing to say
DanC: in favor of 3
BryanT: want to interface to create and drop graphs
EricP: 3
KendallC: pass
PatH: pass
Janne: originally wanted lots of primitives. now want minimal set. 3.
KendallC: (unpassing) i remember 3 getting the most support in BOS. Graph retrieval has support to go to its own interface.
DanC: JaceK pointed out an existing interface and the room got quiet.
tx
KendallC: not making a pitch for the derived interfaces. just thought they were a nice organisational tool.
<thompsonbry> Own what issue?
<scribe> ACTION: KendallC to own WSDL interfaces. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action21]
action -20
<JanneS> (I have to run for tonight - cheers)
<scribe> ACTION: KendallC to add WSDL description of protocol to editor's draft, propose to WG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action22]
<DanC> make sure it includes wsdlAbstractProtocol
action -21
<scribe> ACTION: KendallC to tie WSDL description (wsdlAbstractProtocol) of protocol to editor's draft, propose to WG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action23]
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#xmlAbstractSyntax
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/sparqlx.xsd
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/sparqlx.rnc
<DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/sparqlx.rng
scribe is losing connectivity
notes at risk
<DanC> # SPARQL Abstract Syntax Seaborne, Andy (Monday, 21 March) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0393.html
<DanC> sparqlx.rnc 1.6 makes sense to me, i think
KendallC: wasn't going to invest much work if it was not likely to gain support
PatH: what are the design goals of the XML serialization?
DanC: making two contrete
syntaxes makes the abstract syntax clear
... in web services, the input in defined by XS datatypes.
<AndyS> <> rdfs:seeAlso http://www.w3.org/TR/xqueryx/
[plus, i keep getting hints that my connectivity is at risk]
<AndyS> FWIW I didn't make the abstract syntax obvious because there was only one concrete syntax
BryanT: how coupled is the human syntax to the X-syntax
<kendall> oh, also, another design goal is to not worry overly about being able to roundtrip from surface syntax to xml and back -- hence, no PREFIX in the XML.
Andy: change from RDQL to N3 syntax did not impact the abstract syntax
[missing all voice now]
can i get a substitute scribe?
<DanC> ACTION: KendallC to work out remaining details in sparqlx.{rnc,xsd,rng}: expression syntax, order-by stuff [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/29-dawg-minutes.html#action24]
ADJOUNRED