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