IRC log of dawg on 2005-04-12

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:28:08 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #dawg
14:28:08 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc
14:28:17 [Zakim]: +JeenB
14:28:21 [ericP]: zakim, aaaa is Monte
14:28:21 [Zakim]: +Monte; got it
14:28:29 [Zakim]: +DanC
14:28:52 [ericP]: zakim, Monte holds SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP
14:28:52 [Zakim]: +SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP; got it
14:28:58 [DanC]: DanC has changed the topic to: RDF Data Access http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ 12 Apr
14:29:12 [Zakim]: +??P21
14:29:31 [DanC]: Zakim, Monte holds AlbertoR, DaveB,
14:29:31 [Zakim]: DaveB was already listed in Monte, DanC
14:29:32 [Zakim]: +AlbertoR; got it
14:29:36 [HiroyukiS]: Zakim, ??P21 is HiroyukiS
14:29:36 [Zakim]: +HiroyukiS; got it
14:29:44 [Zakim]: +??P22
14:29:48 [AndyS]: zakim, ??P22 is AndyS
14:29:48 [Zakim]: +AndyS; got it
14:29:51 [Zakim]: +Kendall_Clark
14:29:59 [DanC]: Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:29:59 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Monte, JeenB, DanC, HiroyukiS, AndyS, Kendall_Clark
14:30:00 [Zakim]: Monte has AlbertoR
14:30:10 [DanC]: Zakim, Monte holds SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP
14:30:10 [Zakim]: +SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP; got it
14:30:14 [DanC]: Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:30:14 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Monte, JeenB, DanC, HiroyukiS, AndyS, Kendall_Clark
14:30:15 [Zakim]: Monte has SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP
14:30:49 [DanC]: Zakim, take up item 1
14:30:49 [Zakim]: agendum 1. "Convene, take roll, review records and agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005AprJun/0059.html" taken up [from DanC]
14:30:54 [Zakim]: +Kevin
14:31:09 [DanC]: Regrets: BryanT
14:31:19 [DanC]: Regrets: BryanT, Howard
14:31:45 [DanC]: Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:31:45 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Monte, JeenB, DanC, HiroyukiS, AndyS, Kendall_Clark, Kevin
14:31:47 [Zakim]: Monte has SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP
14:32:00 [DanC]: Scribe: DanC
14:32:17 [DanC]: -> http://www.w3.org/2005/04/05-dawg-minutes.html 5 Apr minutes
14:32:30 [DanC]: RESOLVED to approve 5 Apr minutes
14:32:41 [DanC]: next meeting: 19 Apr. scribe volunteer?
14:32:52 [DanC]: Zakim, pick a scribe
14:32:52 [Zakim]: Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose DanC
14:33:04 [DanC]: next meeting: 19 Apr. Jeen to scribe
14:33:31 [DanC]: (4 actions from the agenda continued)
14:33:55 [DanC]: agenda + graphSolutionMapping
14:33:59 [DanC]: Zakim, next item
14:33:59 [Zakim]: agendum 2. "issue: fromUnionQuery" taken up [from DanC]
14:34:31 [kendall]: No decisions made to close yet; been moved from QL to protocol.
14:34:48 [kendall]: Getting comments like 'why are from/with gone'?
14:35:36 [DaveB]: DaveB has joined #dawg
14:35:46 [DanC]: KC: protocol editor's draft refers to DataSet and describes it in WSDL...
14:35:51 [DanC]: ... but there aren't HTTP examples yet
14:36:29 [DaveB]: I can scribe now if you like...
14:37:01 [kendall]: I don't understand the comment about "expected something about background graph"
14:37:10 [DanC]: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005AprJun/0054.html Re: fromUnionQuery
14:37:20 [Zakim]: +Pat_Hayes
14:37:32 [AndyS]: Protocol doc says "The RDF dataset is a sequence of any number of URIs, each of which identifies an RDF graph."
14:37:47 [db-scribe]: discussion of background graph in protocol
14:37:58 [patH]: patH has joined #dawg
14:38:14 [kendall]: Right, that's what I understood, Andy.
14:38:23 [AndyS]: No distinguished background graph?
14:38:47 [db-scribe]: there used to be two different keywords LOAD and FROM
14:39:07 [db-scribe]: for this conv, FROM for background and FROM NAMED for named graph
14:39:18 [db-scribe]: for this conversation, let's use^ (AndyS)
14:39:46 [db-scribe]: KC -had tried to reflect the design into protoocl
14:39:55 [SteveH]: q+ to propose a design without a distinguished background graph
14:40:04 [DanC]: ack steveh
14:40:04 [Zakim]: SteveH, you wanted to propose a design without a distinguished background graph
14:40:48 [AndyS]: (can't hear Steve - keeps dropping out)
14:41:20 [db-scribe]: maybe http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0440.html
14:41:23 [AndyS]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JanMar/0440.html
14:42:37 [db-scribe]: SH - idea is instead of a privelged background graph,
14:42:48 [db-scribe]: specify a set of graphs that are used if you don't use the bg grap
14:42:51 [db-scribe]: h
14:43:24 [db-scribe]: when not using the GRAPH keyword, it allows results from the lists of defaulted graphs
14:43:38 [db-scribe]: rather than just from the bg graph
14:43:39 [kendall]: wow, bad comms today
14:43:42 [AndyS]: Is this like having trusted/untrusted flag on each graph?
14:44:02 [kendall]: ah, they're in tuscany. the bastards. :>
14:44:41 [db-scribe]: 'use' and 'constrain' - use is the list of graphs to use without the GRAPH keyword
14:44:45 [db-scribe]: and constrain if you do
14:45:00 [db-scribe]: there does not have to be a background graph
14:45:10 [db-scribe]: the used grraphs are not the bg graph, they are still named
14:45:23 [kendall]: +1 for explicit better than implicit
14:45:46 [db-scribe]: SH - there are more than 1, as many as you like, explicit URIs for non-GRAPH triple matches
14:46:43 [db-scribe]: sh - background graph has no name
14:46:49 [db-scribe]: as well as being a single graph
14:46:50 [AndyS]: Seems to restrict datasets to where BG graph is also named.
14:47:07 [db-scribe]: whereas the use list of graphs allows a set of graph to be consulted
14:47:33 [AndyS]: i.e. BG graph is one of the named graphs - all union/merge issues is separable issue
14:47:38 [AndyS]: ??
14:47:52 [db-scribe]: there are 2 sets of graphs - (set of use uris) and (set of consult uris) graphs
14:48:06 [db-scribe]: the former are used without GRAPH, the latter with GRAPH name
14:48:14 [AndyS]: Test case?
14:48:41 [kendall]: fwiw, the current protocol working draft doesn't say anything about a background graph because I understand "background graph" in the QL spec to be implicit, unnamed, and in fact unnameable by a client/requester...
14:48:58 [db-scribe]: union of (set of use graphs) is the bg graph?
14:49:30 [db-scribe]: the (set of use graphs) are not merged
14:51:08 [db-scribe]: DC - (set of use graphs) merged are the bg graph and all the (use, consult) graphs are named graphs and can be refered to
14:51:13 [kendall]: +1 andy
14:51:44 [db-scribe]: SH - having problems with the bg graph having no name in a use case
14:52:03 [kendall]: zakim, mute me
14:52:03 [Zakim]: Kendall_Clark should now be muted
14:52:18 [db-scribe]: SH - case is data management of the background graph
14:52:37 [db-scribe]: dataset covers things the protocol can't specify
14:52:43 [db-scribe]: ^DC-
14:52:50 [kendall]: zakim, unmute me
14:52:50 [Zakim]: Kendall_Clark should no longer be muted
14:54:11 [db-scribe]: AS - hearing most it being impl issues
14:54:40 [kendall]: I'm interested too
14:54:57 [db-scribe]: SH - this is a new use case
14:55:14 [DanC]: ACTION SteveH: write up use case that can't be handled by current design (?)
14:55:27 [db-scribe]: ^- data management of background graph
14:56:15 [db-scribe]: DC - what keyword names...
14:56:35 [db-scribe]: KC - bg graph implicit
14:57:06 [db-scribe]: 2 sequences of uris that need recording
14:57:13 [db-scribe]: KC to think about names of params
14:57:37 [db-scribe]: DC some apps allow you to load the bg graph, some don't
14:58:15 [AndyS]: Dataset is "{ G, (u1, G1), (u2, G2), . . . (un, Gn) }" NB the first G has no URI.
14:58:48 [kendall]: (I called it the "target graph" instead of background, because that doesn't imply, to me at least, implicitness)
14:59:09 [db-scribe]: ask about where does the data go - all data into bg graph (JanneS)
14:59:22 [db-scribe]: for rasqal not quite impl (DaveB)
14:59:43 [db-scribe]: for arq can do either (AndyS) via the query language not protocol
15:00:25 [db-scribe]: how about 'data' and 'background'
15:00:50 [db-scribe]: DC - could call them trusted and untrusted
15:00:54 [db-scribe]: AS - have tried to avoid that
15:01:04 [kendall]: "background" & "foreground"
15:01:09 [kendall]: "named" & "unnamed"
15:01:14 [kendall]: "named" & "default"
15:01:32 [db-scribe]: DaveB: I wouldn't use naming for fore/backgroun distinction
15:02:01 [AndyS]: +1 to "named" and "default"
15:03:24 [db-scribe]: KC - can have this in both query and protoocl, need to have a way to handle when they don't agree
15:04:11 [db-scribe]: hmm, maybe I prefer "data" and "default" as param names
15:04:32 [db-scribe]: KC - 0 or more URIs for 2 lists - named and default
15:05:15 [db-scribe]: DC requests http example
15:05:24 [db-scribe]: of the design KC's working on
15:05:48 [DanC]: ACTION KC: draft protocol section on specifying datasets (fromUnionQuery) incl WSDL types and HTTP examples
15:06:08 [db-scribe]: EricP offers to impl
15:06:43 [DanC]: ACTION EP: try out "2 list of URIs" data sets design.
15:08:36 [db-scribe]: q+
15:08:42 [DanC]: ack db-scribe
15:10:10 [db-scribe]: about getting this in the QL also
15:13:14 [AndyS]: How about: (does not scale) #!/bin/sparql --default=URI1 --named=URI2 --named=URI3
15:13:36 [db-scribe]: passing along (data to query+query) together in a document is very handy - xquery and rdf query
15:14:10 [db-scribe]: DC - analogy with xslt also
15:14:24 [db-scribe]: DC (earlier) said this was discussed at f2f5 boston
15:14:40 [DanC]: (no, analogy with xslt does seem new)
15:15:06 [db-scribe]: KC - rdf dataset in protocol and/or query language to be pretyt compelling
15:15:16 [db-scribe]: .. need to say what happens when they disagree
15:15:22 [SteveH]: I dont care where it is specified. but I onyl want it in one place
15:15:42 [db-scribe]: kevinW - would b enice to have it in tke queyr lang
15:15:52 [db-scribe]: .. notion of subqueries, kinda harder with a protocol
15:16:10 [db-scribe]: a forward compat. point, e.g. naming result of a describe
15:16:34 [db-scribe]: SH - why would this be harder in the protocol?
15:16:37 [DanC]: (chairing thought: making decisions that don't completely close an issue is hardly worth the bother)
15:17:10 [AndyS]: For DAWG2 ... FROM CONSTRUCT or FROM DESCRIBE c.f. SQL FROM (SELECT ...)
15:17:13 [db-scribe]: KW - expressing a query as the result of another query
15:18:07 [db-scribe]: KC - would expect comments on this change
15:18:51 [kendall]: DC -- It seems "invisible" and "surprising" because it's not clear to people how to express the RDF dataset in the protocol docs.
15:19:05 [db-scribe]: SH - unahappy that the dataset appear in two places, want it in exactly 1
15:19:41 [kendall]: KC -- I don't agree with this, because the comments people have made about surprise & visibility have been comments on the query language spec. To wit, "I liked the QL better when it contained FROM/WITH."
15:20:39 [AlbertoR]: I disagree - generate an error if in both might be not good - better to allow them in both and overrride
15:20:55 [kendall]: well, they're standing next to each other, so we may not need to hear it all :>
15:21:19 [kendall]: FWIW, I'm -1, I think, on it being an error for the rdf-dataset to "be in both". If they agree, who cares?
15:21:37 [db-scribe]: SH and DB discussed it - haiving it in either is ok, having in both is an error.
15:21:47 [db-scribe]: would work, SH slightly uncomforatable
15:21:53 [kendall]: +1 Alberto's point
15:22:04 [db-scribe]: Alberto - allow both, let protocol override
15:22:11 [DanC]: it appeals to me to have the protocol override the ql
15:22:16 [db-scribe]: ... or the other way round
15:22:17 [db-scribe]: !
15:23:12 [db-scribe]: SH, EP - rather not have both -w ould confuse users if both ql+protocol had graphs specified
15:23:41 [db-scribe]: KC - error if in both and they don't agree?
15:23:52 [db-scribe]: EP - slighly scared by that
15:23:56 [AlbertoR]: the problem to me is query.sparql might generate an error if run locally (API/non-protocol) - and OK if run through HTTP/Apache for example - the user would not get that
15:23:59 [db-scribe]: ... multiple names for same resource
15:24:34 [db-scribe]: canonicalisation of sources
15:24:48 [db-scribe]: order of lists of uris?
15:24:59 [db-scribe]: EP - no reason for order to matter
15:25:03 [kendall]: "same set of strings"
15:25:05 [DanC]: options: * only in protocol * only in QL * in either, error if both * in either, QL overrides protocol * in either, protocol overrides QL
15:25:22 [DanC]: Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:25:22 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Monte, JeenB, DanC, HiroyukiS, AndyS, Kendall_Clark, Kevin, Pat_Hayes
15:25:24 [Zakim]: Monte has SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP
15:25:55 [DanC]: options: * only in protocol * only in QL * in either, error if both * in either, QL overrides protocol * in either, protocol overrides QL * in either, error if they disagree
15:26:42 [kendall]: dc: only in proto
15:26:45 [kendall]: jeen: last
15:27:18 [DanC]: HS: both
15:27:20 [kendall]: hiroyuki: "in both"
15:27:32 [kendall]: Andy: protocol overrides QL
15:27:48 [kendall]: Kendall: last, same as Jeen
15:28:14 [kendall]: Kevin: LEAVE ME ALONE!
15:28:30 [kendall]: PatH: No opinion. Why are we discussing this?
15:28:37 [kendall]: (because why would there be a clash?)
15:28:40 [DanC]: Kevin: in either. don't care how conflicts are resolved
15:29:07 [db-scribe]: SH - in either, error if used in both simultaneous
15:29:13 [kendall]: SteveH: in either, error in both
15:29:23 [kendall]: Dave: in either, don't care about conflict resolution
15:29:38 [db-scribe]: Alberto - in either, allow both
15:29:50 [kendall]: Eric: No op.
15:31:04 [kendall]: graham's point is good, if it stands
15:31:17 [kendall]: (er, that was my opinion only)
15:31:35 [db-scribe]: DaveB
15:31:42 [kendall]: Kendall
15:31:54 [ericP]: apathy rules!
15:33:32 [db-scribe]: DC - how to pick what happens when the conflic?
15:33:44 [AndyS]: Use case: have a production query which has a target in QL. Now want to test on new (different) dataset. Protocol overrides query.
15:33:50 [db-scribe]: when the query and protocol datasets conflict
15:34:03 [DanC]: ACTION AFS: add syntax to specify datasets in the QL
15:34:31 [DanC]: Zakim, next item
15:34:31 [Zakim]: agendum 3. "issue: valueTesting" taken up [from DanC]
15:34:55 [DanC]: ACTION: DaveB to work with EricP to clarify valueTesting proposal ETA 19 Apr
15:35:05 [DanC]: ACTION: HowardK to seek clarification on valueTesting w.r.t. differenced from XQuery
15:36:33 [db-scribe]: discussion of GK comment on dates in valeuTesting
15:36:40 [kendall]: zakim, mute me
15:36:40 [Zakim]: Kendall_Clark should now be muted
15:36:51 [DanC]: Zakim, next agendum
15:36:51 [Zakim]: agendum 4. "issue: punctuationSyntax" taken up [from DanC]
15:36:59 [kendall]: thx dave
15:37:19 [kendall]: zakim, unmute me
15:37:19 [Zakim]: Kendall_Clark should no longer be muted
15:38:07 [db-scribe]: I was impl the rq23 and got lost in the optional ';' and '.'s etc. near end of }
15:38:24 [db-scribe]: DC - saw no trogn supprot for reifications horthand, last week
15:38:28 [db-scribe]: .. no strong ...
15:39:19 [db-scribe]: DaveB - .'s at the end of a qname as a special case is tricky
15:39:50 [DanC]: sounds like Dave's done as much as he intended to do re his turtle investigation action
15:40:32 [DanC]: ericp seems to argue for { ex:s ex:p ex:o.boy .}
15:40:37 [DanC]: ericp seems to argue for { ex:s ex:p ex:o.boy. .}
15:40:45 [db-scribe]: yeah, where needed to resolve ambiguity
15:40:48 [DanC]: ericp seems to argue against { ex:s ex:p ex:o.boy.}
15:40:53 [AndyS]: q+ on chars in qnames (not dots)
15:40:54 [db-scribe]: and *also* editing Turtle to alllow '.'s
15:43:15 [db-scribe]: so I'm happy to align turtle with expanded qnames re xml11
15:43:37 [DanC]: PROPOSED: to not have reification syntax
15:43:48 [db-scribe]: seconded ericp
15:44:01 [db-scribe]: objections: none
15:44:15 [db-scribe]: abstain: KC, AS, PH, KW
15:44:19 [DanC]: Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:44:19 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Monte, JeenB, DanC, HiroyukiS, AndyS, Kendall_Clark, Kevin, Pat_Hayes
15:44:22 [Zakim]: Monte has SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP
15:44:41 [DanC]: abstain: KC, AS, PH, KW, JB
15:45:25 [DanC]: abstain: KC, AFS/KW, PH, JB
15:46:03 [DanC]: in favor: Dan/w3c, HiroyukiS, SteveH, DaveB, AlbertoR
15:46:21 [DanC]: so RESOLVED.
15:46:35 [DanC]: ACTION AFS: take it out
15:47:03 [DanC]: Zakim, next agendum
15:47:03 [Zakim]: agendum 5. "issue sort" taken up [from DanC]
15:47:13 [DanC]: . ACTION: PatH to review sort design
15:48:11 [db-scribe]: PH - reviewed it, it's complicated, but it would have to be
15:48:15 [DanC]: (action done to my satisfaction)
15:48:41 [db-scribe]: PH - need a total ordering
15:48:54 [db-scribe]: .. wondering about the motivation was
15:49:22 [db-scribe]: AS - made a total ordering in response to earlier PH feedback, but might have gone too far (?)
15:49:35 [db-scribe]: PH - could be simplified if a TO's not needed
15:50:34 [db-scribe]: noted that sql doesn't have this req, but requires a consistent ordering
15:50:38 [db-scribe]: in impls
15:51:27 [AndyS]: Suggest choose simpler case based on "Case 1: arbitrary consistent ordering"
15:51:27 [db-scribe]: EP - impl dep oreding only affects "getting the next 10 results" and if you switched an impl between then
15:51:50 [db-scribe]: DC- call for test case writer for ordering
15:52:23 [db-scribe]: DC about 10 cases - 6 normal cases, 4 weird things users want to do
15:53:18 [db-scribe]: JB offers
15:53:21 [AndyS]: Thanks Jeen
15:53:37 [db-scribe]: JB askes about ordering in test case results
15:53:54 [db-scribe]: AS - suggest where we case, we do the results in XML
15:54:04 [db-scribe]: which preserves the order
15:54:31 [DanC]: (aha... I didn't realize that the sort issue impacted the xml results set format spec)
15:54:44 [db-scribe]: DB - not sure if vbr xml format says orderred or not, probably follows query model.
15:55:01 [kendall]: this telcon has had a bit of everything!
15:55:13 [db-scribe]: (5 yr old interrupts play)
15:55:31 [db-scribe]: SH - if we added sorting, was proposing to add an index to the testcases of the order of the result
15:57:46 [db-scribe]: SH - would be irrelvant if there is no ORDER BY
15:57:46 [db-scribe]: ,.. correction, only there if there is an ORDER BY
15:57:48 [AndyS]: I have a corner case ... :-)
15:57:49 [db-scribe]: AS -worry about doing subgraph isomorphism vs graph isomorphism in comparing results. (scribe?)
15:57:51 [db-scribe]: SH - can 't number them if you don't have order by; must number them if there is order by
15:57:55 [db-scribe]: DC - would be a new indexProperty on the bnode with the order
15:58:09 [db-scribe]: DC - doesn't sound enough energy for sorting in group
15:58:26 [db-scribe]: SH - at present sounds like research, in favour not doing sorting
15:58:29 [DanC]: ACTION JB: write a few sort tests
15:58:36 [DanC]: Zakim, next agendum
15:58:36 [Zakim]: agendum 6. "SPARQL QL publication candidate" taken up [from DanC]
15:59:28 [DanC]: done: ACTION: DaveB to review rq23 editor's draft this week
15:59:37 [DanC]: EP and AFS ack daveb's comments and bijan's
15:59:38 [db-scribe]: EP, AS - not caught up yet
15:59:55 [db-scribe]: EP planning to bug me till I explain my comments
16:00:01 [DanC]: ACTION: PatH to internal review of rq23, starting monday
16:00:22 [DanC]: done: ACTION: AndyS to clarify 5.4 w/r/t closed world assumption
16:02:26 [db-scribe]: DC - 19Apr pub date realistic?
16:03:52 [ericP]: "editorial in the loosest possible sense": changes will be done with an editor
16:04:11 [db-scribe]: AS - only likely missing thing that's substantial is the fromUnionQuery
16:04:37 [DanC]: PROPOSED: to publish editor's best effort this week
16:04:55 [db-scribe]: (this is not a LC I assume)
16:04:55 [kendall]: zakim, unmute me
16:04:55 [Zakim]: Kendall_Clark was not muted, kendall
16:05:02 [DanC]: PROPOSED: to publish editor's best effort this week, publication date early next week
16:05:48 [db-scribe]: objections: none
16:05:52 [db-scribe]: abstentions: SH
16:06:00 [db-scribe]: resolved
16:06:00 [DanC]: agenda?
16:06:07 [Zakim]: -Kendall_Clark
16:06:08 [Zakim]: -Kevin
16:06:10 [KevinW]: KevinW has left #DAWG
16:06:18 [Zakim]: -HiroyukiS
16:06:23 [DanC]: jeen, are you in Tuscany?
16:06:28 [jeen]: nope
16:06:31 [db-scribe]: :)
16:06:54 [AlbertoR]: AlbertoR has left #dawg
16:06:56 [DanC]: ok... re scribe duties, there's a "scribe tips" link from the WG homepage to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0624.html
16:07:17 [jeen]: ok thx
16:07:36 [DaveB]: oh, are you doiing it jeen?
16:07:48 [jeen]: dave no next week
16:07:54 [DaveB]: ah, fine
16:09:43 [Zakim]: -JeenB
16:10:05 [jeen]: jeen has left #dawg
16:11:02 [Zakim]: -DanC
16:11:22 [Zakim]: -Pat_Hayes
16:11:25 [Zakim]: -Monte
16:11:58 [Zakim]: -AndyS
16:11:59 [Zakim]: SW_DAWG()10:30AM has ended
16:12:01 [Zakim]: Attendees were +39.057.584.aaaa, JeenB, DanC, SteveH, DaveB, AlberertoR, EricP, AlbertoR, HiroyukiS, AndyS, Kendall_Clark, Kevin, Pat_Hayes
16:22:56 [DanC]: Regrets+ Yoshio
16:23:06 [DanC]: RRSAgent, make logs world-access
16:28:11 [DanC]: s/ doesn't sound enough energy for sorting in group/ does sound enough energy for sorting in group
16:28:54 [DanC]: I wanted to do a poll on postponing sort, but ran out of time
16:41:49 [patH]: Yes, sorry, Dan, I maybe should have sounded less enthusiastic. In fact I am not very enthusiastic about sorting.
16:44:49 [DanC]: I'm struggling to get this WG to close issues.
16:45:17 [DanC]: we were down to 2 issues between us and a query language last call, as of the boston meeting. not only have we not closed those, we've re-opened others.
16:45:30 [DanC]: sigh.
16:47:02 [DanC]: oh well. we seem to be getting good comments
17:04:18 [AndyS]: Significant user pull - implementers have to do much work.
17:05:09 [AndyS]: "Top-10" use case is rather significant (but the chater says "select subgraph"!)
18:30:29 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #dawg
18:32:37 [DanC]: RRSAgent, bye
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: I see 9 open action items:
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: SteveH to write up use case that can't be handled by current design (?) [1]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T14-55-14
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: KC to draft protocol section on specifying datasets (fromUnionQuery) incl WSDL types and HTTP examples [2]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-05-48
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: EP to try out "2 list of URIs" data sets design. [3]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-06-43
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: AFS to add syntax to specify datasets in the QL [4]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-34-03
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: DaveB to work with EricP to clarify valueTesting proposal ETA 19 Apr [5]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-34-55
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: HowardK to seek clarification on valueTesting w.r.t. differenced from XQuery [6]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-35-05
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: AFS to take it out [7]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-46-35
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: JB to write a few sort tests [8]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T15-58-29
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: PatH to internal review of rq23, starting monday [9]
18:32:37 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/04/12-dawg-irc#T16-00-01