IRC log of dawg on 2005-08-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:29:35 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dawg
14:29:35 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc
14:30:03 [JanneS]
thanks
14:30:08 [DanC]
Zakim, take up agendum 1
14:30:08 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Convene, take roll, review records and agenda" taken up [from DanC]
14:30:25 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:30:25 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JanneS, ILRT, DanC
14:30:26 [Zakim]
ILRT has DaveB, AndyS, ericP
14:30:48 [Zakim]
+??P6
14:31:03 [SteveH]
Zakim, ??P6 is SteveH
14:31:03 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:31:16 [Zakim]
+Kendall_Clark
14:31:39 [JanneS]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0175.html
14:31:42 [JanneS]
last week's minutes are there
14:31:44 [DanC]
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0175.html Minutes of the DAWG telecon 2005-08-02
14:32:28 [kendall]
I sent regrets for 23 August
14:33:01 [ericP]
zakim, who is here?
14:33:01 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JanneS, ILRT, DanC (muted), SteveH, Kendall_Clark
14:33:02 [Zakim]
ILRT has DaveB, AndyS, ericP
14:33:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, kendall, JanneS, DaveB, Zakim, AndyS, SteveH, ericP, DanC
14:33:49 [DanC]
KC, JanneS at risk next week.
14:33:51 [kendall]
but i'm otherwise not at risk
14:34:13 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
14:34:13 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH
14:34:22 [JanneS]
Howard and Lee have sent regrets for 16-Aug
14:34:24 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
14:34:24 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH
14:34:27 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
14:34:28 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH
14:34:34 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
14:34:34 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose JanneS
14:34:36 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
14:34:36 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose ericP
14:34:43 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
14:34:43 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Kendall_Clark
14:35:09 [DanC]
scribe: Steve or else EricP
14:35:47 [DanC]
agenda + WSDL 2 last call
14:35:53 [kendall]
zakim, mute me
14:35:53 [Zakim]
Kendall_Clark should now be muted
14:36:05 [DanC]
Zakim next item
14:36:09 [DanC]
Zakim, next item
14:36:09 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "comment "Query forms should be resources, not operations"" taken up
14:36:11 [kendall]
zakim, unmute me
14:36:11 [Zakim]
Kendall_Clark should no longer be muted
14:38:36 [Zakim]
+[IBMCambridge]
14:38:46 [JanneS]
discussion about http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2005Aug/0036
14:38:53 [DaveB]
markB's original comment http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0227.html
14:39:20 [EliasT]
EliasT has joined #dawg
14:39:43 [JanneS]
KendallC: splitting the operation into GET uri requires e.g. more intelligent clients to separate the operation from the expression to the protocol request
14:40:26 [ericP]
q+ to suggest that Mark get a round to produce a use case
14:40:55 [EliasT]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:40:55 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JanneS, ILRT, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, [IBMCambridge]
14:40:57 [Zakim]
ILRT has DaveB, AndyS, ericP
14:41:03 [EliasT]
Zakim, IBMCambridge is EliasT
14:41:03 [Zakim]
+EliasT; got it
14:41:16 [ericP]
q-
14:41:28 [JanneS]
KendallC: will formulate a response and having it circulated via WG before officially getting back to Mark
14:42:09 [kendall]
ACTION KendallC: write another draft response to Mark Baker's comment and send to WG for possible discussion
14:42:21 [DanC]
Zakim, next item
14:42:21 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "toward Protocol last call" taken up
14:42:46 [DanC]
1.57 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/proto-wd/
14:43:39 [AndyS]
(There are two k examples - first has a syntax error)
14:44:04 [AndyS]
(OK - I see why now)
14:44:11 [kendall]
yes, the first k. has an intentional...gotcha
14:44:40 [DaveB]
B.d
14:44:44 [DaveB]
pls add sub-section nos :)
14:46:03 [JanneS]
the subsection id would be 2.B.d I guess
14:50:15 [DaveB]
nit - the sparql query results in the refernece section needs date, dated url, a bit of expansion
14:51:30 [kendall]
DaveB: yep, thx, all those refs need to be fixed up
14:51:37 [DaveB]
IIRC you'll have to change (example) domains from my.other.example to something.example.{com|org|net)
14:52:00 [DanC]
no, .example is a TLD
14:55:29 [kendall]
yeah, i thought it was foo.example, for example hosts, but now I don't know :>
14:56:45 [AndyS]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.example
14:57:39 [DanC]
ACTION KC: abstract/abbreviate http trace examples
14:57:47 [EliasT]
AndyS, I think Joseki3 can only take on --data parameter.
14:57:51 [DanC]
ACTION DanC: extract and machine-check examples
14:57:55 [EliasT]
s/on/one
14:58:11 [AndyS]
I find that people don't know any % encoding (cos browsers don't require it)
14:58:13 [DanC]
. ACTION SteveH: elaborate "CONSTRUCT with content negotiation" into a test case
14:58:19 [kendall]
Ah, so .example is safe?
14:58:33 [AndyS]
Elias - --data to Joseki3? Client?
14:58:48 [EliasT]
yes. sorry. arq.
14:59:23 [kendall]
ACTION KendallC: fix d. ASK with simple RDF dataset...XML is wrong.
14:59:32 [AndyS]
Shoudl support multiple - I'll check (which version?)
15:00:02 [EliasT]
Last week CVS Head.
15:00:41 [EliasT]
I might be wrong. I'll double check if you like.
15:00:48 [AndyS]
Ah - THAT version :-) So the ARQ client only accepts one --data? i.e. one default-uri= in protocol request?
15:00:54 [EliasT]
yes.
15:01:29 [AndyS]
I'll check - you're likely to be right - plenty of chances for me to have got it wrong :-(
15:02:00 [AndyS]
arq.sparql shoudl accept multiple --data and these should get into the protocol request
15:02:13 [AndyS]
and you have it in the IRC log now :-)
15:02:23 [kendall]
who's scribing today?
15:02:24 [EliasT]
:-)
15:02:29 [JanneS]
I'm trying
15:02:30 [DanC]
ACTION SteveH: elaborate "CONSTRUCT with content negotiation" into a test case [continued/elaborated]
15:02:30 [EliasT]
JanneS I believe.
15:02:49 [EliasT]
KendallC, I can help you with the refactoring of the examples.
15:02:56 [SteveH]
note to self, break results into good and acceptable
15:03:02 [kendall]
JanneS: can you make sure all of the comments from people re: protocol spec make it into the minutes? My irc client isn't scrolling back today, and I don't want to miss any feedback.
15:03:22 [kendall]
Elias: cool. i'd appreciate the help.
15:03:23 [JanneS]
ok, I'm doing my best.
15:03:49 [JanneS]
raw data is getting logged to http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc already
15:03:58 [kendall]
oh, cool. that'll work.
15:05:35 [EliasT]
kendall, I guess we're going to need a dataset representation.
15:06:04 [EliasT]
kendall, this might do http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/test-query.n3
15:06:58 [JanneS]
KendallC: 2 things still so decide before LC: 1. how to return faults in SOAP/WSDL
15:08:06 [AndyS]
"Figure 1.3 WSDL 2.0 fragment" ==> does not agree with WSDL
15:11:21 [JanneS]
KendallC: AndyS also commented on the fact that a server even supporting SPARQL extensions may have to return fault as the SPARQL query expression may not be valid w.r.t w3c rec
15:12:22 [JanneS]
DanC: such extensions can only be semantical but not syntactical. Syntactical non-conformance with the sparql grammar MUST be faults
15:12:49 [kendall]
I know I don't want to do *that*.
15:15:11 [JanneS]
DanC: we can endorse the design where a SPARQL service may support other languages than SPARQL - or we may limit what a SPARQL service may do. (I hope I got this right)
15:17:06 [JanneS]
KendallC: from WSDL perspective the query is only a string.
15:17:16 [AndyS]
<xs:element minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="1" name="sparql-query" type="xs:string">
15:17:18 [JanneS]
DanC: did you define a SPARQL specific type in WSDL?
15:17:22 [JanneS]
KendallC: nope
15:17:39 [DanC]
"called st:query in Figure 1.0, composed of two further parts: one SPARQL query string"
15:20:07 [DanC]
PROPOSED: a SPARQL service _must_ return MalformedQuery for queries that are not SPARQL Query Strings
15:20:15 [JanneS]
AndyS: we could leave the non-sparql-query response unspecified
15:21:59 [kendall]
AndyS: i'm actually fine with it too...
15:22:02 [JanneS]
DaveB: don't know how wsdl supports this but one could enforce the behaviour if the expression is SPARQL.
15:23:06 [kendall]
in wsdl you could just add another operation to the interface
15:24:05 [SteveH]
seems like a circular argument. if the query processor is not SPARQL then it doesnt follow the spec, and it fails the may... *shrug*
15:24:55 [kendall]
a superset of foo isn't a foo?
15:25:29 [JanneS]
is anyone planning to do a subset of foo? :-/
15:25:51 [kendall]
heh!
15:27:07 [DanC]
(interesting question... what's the state of the art in interface evolution? are there best practices?)
15:29:17 [kendall]
it's tricky
15:29:33 [kendall]
though the conversatives seemed to have a small majority here, today
15:30:55 [JanneS]
DanC: conservative approach might be put on the table now... what do you all think?
15:31:57 [kendall]
Hmm, I'm switching my vote to the conservative side (for the first time, ever, I will have voted conservative!)
15:34:05 [JanneS]
no lessons to learn from HTTP 1.0 -> 1.1 :_(
15:37:07 [DanC]
PROPOSED: a SPARQL service _must_ return MalformedQuery for queries that are not SPARQL Query Strings
15:37:39 [DanC]
RESOLVED, W3C/EricP and UMD/KC abstaining
15:40:53 [DanC]
ACTION EricP: review protocol document 1.58
15:41:20 [DanC]
ACTION SteveH: review proto-wd after Friday signal from KC, hopefully in time for monday's agenda or tuesday's telcon
15:41:40 [kendall]
eek, sorry to eat so much agenda
15:41:47 [DanC]
Zakim, next item
15:41:47 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "comment "Security Considerations"" taken up
15:42:27 [kendall]
3. Policy Considerations
15:42:34 [kendall]
with security and privacy sections
15:42:48 [DaveB]
there's a section in xml res, in ietf registration
15:43:18 [DaveB]
in http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-XMLres-20050801/#mime
15:43:33 [DanC]
ACTION EricP: add "see also protocol security considerations" to rq23
15:44:19 [ericP]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#N1805C
15:44:27 [ericP]
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt
15:44:28 [kendall]
ah, interesting analogue
15:44:29 [JanneS]
KendallC: I have included the denial-of-service aspects of the protocol in the editor's draft
15:44:54 [ericP]
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#QTSyn
15:45:32 [DaveB]
(did the query lang mime type section get decided? i drafted a security considerations section in that)
15:45:33 [DanC]
ACTION 8 = EricP: add "security considerations" to rq23, incl "see also protocol security considerations"
15:45:43 [DaveB]
in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/mime.txt
15:46:13 [DanC]
(that was continued without discussion, daveb; we're not done with the queryMimeType issue... er... or maybe we did decide but there are actions pending)
15:47:13 [kendall]
I'd be happy to have that discussion in one doc or the other, with a link from the one where it isn't, to the one where it is.
15:47:20 [SteveH]
q+ to talk about multiple froms
15:47:33 [DanC]
ack SteveH
15:47:33 [Zakim]
SteveH, you wanted to talk about multiple froms
15:48:34 [JanneS]
SteveH: multiple HTTP requests need to be flagged in case of multiple FROMs allowed (IETF requirement - ref?)
15:49:18 [AndyS]
+ FROM NAMED
15:49:24 [DanC]
Zakim, next item
15:49:24 [Zakim]
agendum 5. ""SPARQL Query Results XML Format: XML 1.1" comment" taken up
15:49:39 [kendall]
yep, same deal with from & from named
15:49:50 [JanneS]
http://www.w3.org/mid/1123099748.20865.18.camel@localhost
15:50:30 [DanC]
[[
15:50:31 [DanC]
For
15:50:31 [DanC]
XML 1.1 documents, individuals can use the XML Schema as indicated in
15:50:31 [DanC]
[1].
15:50:31 [DanC]
Philippe
15:50:32 [DanC]
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-xml11schema10-20050511/
15:50:34 [DanC]
]]
15:51:00 [kendall]
Dan has become such a logical positivist! :>
15:51:13 [kendall]
the "C" in "DanC" stands for "Carnap"!
15:52:03 [DanC]
ACTION DaveB: see if PLH would be satisfied with s/can/may/ in what he suggeste
15:52:11 [DanC]
Zakim, next item
15:52:11 [Zakim]
agendum 6. ""SPARQL Results Format and Unbound Variables" comment" taken up
15:52:33 [JanneS]
http://www.w3.org/mid/42F4CEEB.5090306@umd.edu
15:52:40 [ericP]
-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#security Security Considerations
15:53:23 [ericP]
i have written a Security Considerations section and committed it in rq23 1.460
15:53:36 [JanneS]
I'll note your action item immediately done :)
15:53:54 [ericP]
who's a good boy?
15:54:27 [JanneS]
did you get your gameboy back yet? You should...
15:54:38 [kendall]
bah
15:55:33 [kendall]
I can't hear DaveB well on the phone today. Too bad.
15:56:52 [DanC]
DaveB: the present design supports consumers that want just one way to search for the binding of a variable
15:57:51 [kendall]
I think the suggestion was to change <variable...><unbound/></variable> to <variable name=""/>...
15:58:03 [SteveH]
DanC, yes, i have but ive not run figures on it
15:59:19 [kendall]
er, s/variable/binding/
16:00:21 [kendall]
giving binding an unbound attribute doesn't seem to be too hard to check xpath'ly
16:00:43 [DanC]
ADJOURN.
16:00:44 [Zakim]
-SteveH
16:00:45 [Zakim]
-EliasT
16:00:48 [Zakim]
-ILRT
16:00:50 [Zakim]
-Kendall_Clark
16:01:06 [DanC]
RRSAgent, make logs world-access
16:01:38 [Zakim]
-DanC
16:01:40 [Zakim]
-JanneS
16:01:41 [Zakim]
SW_DAWG()10:30AM has ended
16:01:42 [Zakim]
Attendees were JanneS, DaveB, AndyS, ericP, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, EliasT
16:02:11 [DanC]
kendall, you might send mail to the WG showing the not-too-hard XPaths. or ask somebody at UMD to supplement the comment with them
16:03:25 [SteveH]
the thing about bandwidth v's easy of XSLT, is that writing a hard XSLT hurts once, whereas your mobile device taking twice as long to get the results hurts for every query
16:04:13 [SteveH]
gzip helps, but its not ideal
16:16:40 [DanC]
good point, SteveH ... but... writing a hard XSLT hurts once for every new developer that picks up SPARQL
16:34:42 [ericP]
it's hard to compete with the kind of pain you can get from XSLT
17:50:26 [SteveH]
DanC, not neccesarily, as most will hack pre-written XSLT sheets, or use DOM/SAX/whatever
18:20:26 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #dawg
18:29:46 [DanC]
RRSAgent, bye
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
I see 9 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-actions.rdf :
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: KendallC to write another draft response to Mark Baker's comment and send to WG for possible discussion [1]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T14-42-09
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: KC to abstract/abbreviate http trace examples [2]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T14-57-39
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DanC to extract and machine-check examples [3]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T14-57-51
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: KendallC to fix d. ASK with simple RDF dataset...XML is wrong. [4]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T14-59-23
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: SteveH to elaborate "CONSTRUCT with content negotiation" into a test case [continued/elaborated] [5]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T15-02-30
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: EricP to review protocol document 1.58 [6]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T15-40-53
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: SteveH to review proto-wd after Friday signal from KC, hopefully in time for monday's agenda or tuesday's telcon [7]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T15-41-20
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: EricP: add "security considerations" to rq23, incl "see also protocol security considerations" [8]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T15-43-33
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: DaveB to see if PLH would be satisfied with s/can/may/ in what he suggeste [9]
18:29:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/08/09-dawg-irc#T15-52-03