IRC log of dawg on 2006-05-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:27:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dawg
14:27:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:27:21 [AndyS_]
SteveH : I agree with almost all your testing email - just checking out the final few out
14:27:47 [SteveH]
AndyS_, great. I checked most of them against the spec, but some I was a bit unsure about
14:28:00 [kendall]
zakim, what conference is this?
14:28:00 [Zakim]
no conference has been selected, kendall
14:28:26 [kendall]
zakim, this will be DAWG
14:28:26 [Zakim]
ok, kendall; I see SW_DAWG()10:30AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
14:28:35 [patH]
so, are we staRTING?
14:28:45 [kendall]
heh, i'm just trying to bootup :)
14:28:52 [patH]
14:28:58 [kendall]
doing all the DanC stuff I took for granted -wink-0
14:28:59 [patH]
sorry about uppercase there.
14:29:32 [kendall]
agenda+ convene
14:29:54 [kendall]
agenda+ future meeting times
14:30:04 [kendall]
btw, i need a scribe, didn't see one in last meeting's minutes...
14:30:14 [kendall]
agenda+ JSON results format status
14:30:24 [Zakim]
SW_DAWG()10:30AM has now started
14:30:24 [Zakim]
14:30:26 [kendall]
agenda+ punctuationSyntax: bnodes in predicates
14:30:32 [kendall]
agenda+ valueTesting
14:30:38 [kendall]
agenda+ test suite maintenance
14:30:49 [kendall]
heh, that's enough for now I gather
14:31:03 [kendall]
ericP: can you scribe?
14:31:08 [Zakim]
14:31:17 [kendall]
zakim, who's on the phone?
14:31:17 [Zakim]
On the phone I see EricP, Kendall_Clark
14:31:28 [Zakim]
14:31:44 [kendall]
DanC: couldn't find it in the minutes
14:32:03 [Zakim]
14:32:06 [Zakim]
14:32:11 [AndyS_]
zakim, ??P22 is me
14:32:11 [Zakim]
+AndyS_; got it
14:32:43 [DanC]
-> minutes 18 Apr
14:32:59 [DanC]
"Lee or Jeen to scribe"
14:33:07 [Zakim]
+ +1.603.459.aaaa
14:33:20 [AndyS_]
SteveH - I agreed with the extendedType tests though - because I don't follow the spec and have an action open on it
14:33:56 [Souri]
Souri has joined #dawg
14:34:06 [AndyS_]
Andy has dialed in!
14:34:17 [DanC]
Zakim, take up item 1
14:34:17 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "convene" taken up [from kendall]
14:34:23 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:34:23 [Zakim]
On the phone I see EricP, Kendall_Clark, DanC, AndyS_, PatH, +1.603.459.aaaa
14:34:36 [DanC]
Zakim, aaaa is Souri
14:34:36 [Zakim]
+Souri; got it
14:35:22 [DanC]
ACTION EricP: get well.
14:35:56 [DanC]
Scribe: DanC
14:36:02 [DanC]
Chair: Kendall
14:36:42 [DanC]
-> minutes 18 Apr
14:37:39 [DanC]
AFS: I sent a correction re # of actions...
14:37:44 [DanC]
KC: I think this is the corrected version
14:38:07 [DanC]
RESOLVED: to approve minutes 18 Apr
14:38:17 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
14:38:17 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "future meeting times" taken up [from kendall]
14:39:16 [DanC]
KC: our scheduled time overlaps with RIF. it's not clear how much of an actual problem that is, but it's at least a potential problem.
14:39:41 [DanC]
KC: how about an hour earlier?
14:40:20 [Zakim]
14:40:29 [SteveH]
Zakim, IPcaller is SteveH
14:40:29 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:40:33 [SteveH]
Zakim, mute me
14:40:33 [Zakim]
SteveH should now be muted
14:40:40 [AndyS_]
I'm happy to move -1 hour.
14:40:45 [kendall]
zakim, mute me
14:40:45 [Zakim]
Kendall_Clark should now be muted
14:40:50 [kendall]
zakim, unmute me
14:40:50 [Zakim]
Kendall_Clark should no longer be muted
14:40:53 [DanC]
DC: how about 9:30am Boston time, year round?
14:41:14 [DanC]
(or at least over this summer)
14:41:25 [AndyS_]
(14:30 BST(GMTDT) , 13:30 GMT)
14:41:45 [DanC]
hmm... 60, 90, or 120 minutes? weekly, every-other-week, or monthly?
14:42:01 [AndyS_]
CET is +1 hour to that.
14:43:00 [DanC]
PatH: I lean toward frequent meetings and make them short if there's not much to do
14:43:21 [SteveH]
as long as the mail goes out I will rememebr to dial in
14:43:58 [DanC]
PROPOSED: to meet Tuesdays 9:30am Boston time for 60 to 90 minutes, starting 16 May 2006 until further notice
14:44:13 [SteveH]
14:44:26 [DanC]
14:44:54 [kendall]
next agendum
14:45:10 [DanC]
Zakim, take up item 3
14:45:10 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "JSON results format status" taken up [from kendall]
14:45:19 [DanC]
EricP: I expect to get this done tomorrow.
14:45:26 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
14:45:26 [Zakim]
agendum 3 was just opened, kendall
14:46:58 [SteveH]
I'm muted
14:47:41 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
14:47:41 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
14:47:41 [kendall]
zakim, unmute me
14:47:41 [kendall]
zakim, unmute SteveH
14:47:41 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "punctuationSyntax: bnodes in predicates" taken up [from kendall]
14:47:43 [Zakim]
agendum 4 was just opened, kendall
14:47:45 [Zakim]
Kendall_Clark was not muted, kendall
14:47:46 [kendall]
DanC: looked for records re: disallowing bnodes in predicate position
14:47:46 [Zakim]
SteveH should no longer be muted
14:47:48 [DanC]
ACTION: EricP to publish [CONTINUES]
14:47:48 [DanC]
Zakim, take up item 4
14:47:48 [DanC]
Topic: punctuationSyntax: bnodes in predicate
14:47:48 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "punctuationSyntax: bnodes in predicates" taken up [from kendall]
14:47:51 [DanC]
KC: I saw mail from Steve today
14:47:53 [DanC]
14:48:03 [kendall]
DanC: couldn't find any explicit decision to that effect
14:48:29 [kendall]
DanC: Latest grammar includes bnodes in predicate position
14:49:02 [DanC]
Subject: Re: more on bnodes in predicate positions
14:49:02 [DanC]
Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 17:26:36 -0500
14:49:31 [kendall]
DanC: As of 11 Nov, bnodes were in
14:49:56 [SteveH]
Zakim, unmute me
14:49:56 [Zakim]
SteveH was not muted, SteveH
14:49:57 [kendall]
patH: may have last come up under rdfSemantics issue
14:50:28 [Souri]
14:50:52 [libby]
libby has joined #dawg
14:50:59 [kendall]
hi libby
14:51:08 [kendall]
NP :)
14:52:31 [DanC]
hmm... we RESOLVED "that SPARQL QL editor's draft 1.623 section 2.5 addresses issue rdfSemantics and is sufficient to postpone issue owlDisjunction", and bnodes are out there.
14:52:58 [DanC]
change was made in 1.629 2006/01/30 17:38:14
14:53:31 [kendall]
SteveH: remembers discussion of this, colleagues suggest that the restriction is somewhat confusing
14:53:48 [DanC]
I thnk I should edit the issues list to show that the 26 Jan decision re rdfSemantics also affects punctuationSyntax
14:54:02 [kendall]
DanC: I'd be happy for you to do that.
14:54:28 [DanC]
SH: I'm getting feedback that prohibiting bnodes in Verb is inconvenient
14:54:41 [DanC]
EricP: there's [something involving * that the scribe didn't really catch]
14:55:11 [DanC]
AndyS: it would change the semantics...
14:55:31 [DanC]
PatH: yes, it might work, but then it wouldn't work with OWL...
14:55:40 [DanC]
... but OWL might change in that direction too.
14:56:24 [DanC]
SH: there are approved tests that are relevant
14:57:14 [DanC]
AndyS: those tests don't test the semantics
14:58:36 [DanC]
ACTION AndyS: find tests with bnodes in predicates and mark them as syntax errors (and unapproved until we approve them)
14:59:24 [DanC]
15:00:01 [kendall]
zakim, agenda+ comments on RIF use cases
15:00:03 [Zakim]
agendum 7 added
15:00:33 [DanC]
ACTION DanC: edit to show ammendment 26 Jan
15:00:45 [kendall]
ACTION Kendall: to mark valuetesting as open on issues list (i.e., to really learn how to handle issues list)
15:02:33 [DanC]
KC: how do we re-sync editors drafts with published TRs?
15:02:56 [DanC]
DC: well, you can ask to do an updated CR, or go back to WD, or ask for PR
15:03:02 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
15:03:07 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "valueTesting" taken up [from kendall]
15:03:30 [DanC]
EricP: no progress; pls continue. eta 2 weeks
15:03:41 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
15:03:41 [Zakim]
agendum 5 was just opened, kendall
15:03:48 [kendall]
zakim, take up next agendum
15:03:48 [Zakim]
agendum 5 was just opened, kendall
15:04:00 [ericP]
zakim, take up agendum 6
15:04:00 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "test suite maintenance" taken up [from kendall]
15:04:31 [DanC]
DC: my action went to Andy last week.
15:05:06 [AndyS_]
ACTION: AndyS: to draft of open-world = tests
15:05:33 [AndyS_]
ACTION: AndyS to contribute a couple tests for computed-properties/virtual-prop/builtin. one using lists, and one not using lists
15:05:43 [DanC]
yes, DONE, ACTION: EricP and Jeen to fix OPTIONAL coding
15:05:55 [DanC]
ACTION: EricP to propose text and tests to add {boolean < > = != boolean} to SPARQL [CONTINUES]
15:06:07 [ericP]
action -8
15:06:31 [ericP]
15:06:33 [ericP]
wrong one
15:06:41 [kendall]
zakim, next agendum
15:06:41 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "valueTesting" taken up [from kendall]
15:06:48 [ericP]
ACTION: EricP to propose text and tests to add {boolean < > = != boolean} to SPARQL [CONTINUES]
15:06:49 [kendall]
zakim, take up agendum 6
15:06:50 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "test suite maintenance" taken up [from kendall]
15:06:53 [kendall]
zakim, take up agendum 7
15:06:53 [Zakim]
agendum 7. "comments on RIF use cases" taken up [from kendall]
15:07:39 [DanC]
KC: still interested?
15:07:55 [DanC]
PatH: yes, still interested; no progress yet
15:08:37 [DanC]
ACTION PatH: review RIF use cases; eta 2 weeks
15:08:56 [DanC]
-> Sven's review of RIF Use Cases
15:09:08 [kendall]
ACTION PatH: to review RIF UC&R doc by roughly the 30th
15:09:12 [DanC]
PatH: ah... that's during WWW2006, so more like 30th
15:09:35 [kendall]
zakim, close agendum 7
15:09:35 [Zakim]
agendum 7, comments on RIF use cases, closed
15:09:39 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:09:40 [Zakim]
5. valueTesting [from kendall]
15:09:44 [DanC]
Zakim, take up mime
15:09:45 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'take up mime', DanC
15:09:49 [ericP]
15:09:50 [kendall]
zakim, close agendum 5
15:09:50 [Zakim]
agendum 5, valueTesting, closed
15:09:52 [Zakim]
I see nothing remaining on the agenda
15:09:58 [DanC]
Topic: MIME type registrations
15:10:00 [kendall]
zakim, agenda+ mime type issues
15:10:01 [Zakim]
agendum 8 added
15:10:07 [DanC]
ACTION: EricP to respond to [9]Dirk on MIME type stuff [DONE]
15:10:18 [kendall]
zakim, open agenda 8
15:10:18 [Zakim]
agendum 8. "mime type issues" taken up [from kendall]
15:10:23 [DanC]
ACTION EricP: to follow up on mime type requests [CONTINUES]
15:10:39 [AndyS_]
Nearby but different
15:11:15 [DanC]
EricP's action to "follow up" is to ask the W3C/IETF liaison to do the registration
15:11:45 [DanC]
AFS: there's this stuff of \u escapes... ok, yes, separable from mime types
15:11:49 [kendall]
AndyS: when do escape rules apply?
15:11:58 [DanC]
(sounds like punctuationSyntax should get opened again around \u)
15:12:48 [kendall]
slow chair didn't follow much of that... hope someone did :)
15:12:49 [DanC]
AFS: the layering between, e.g., \u and variable names is tricky; breaks traditional parser layering
15:13:26 [DanC]
(I suggest you re-open punctuationSyntax to address comments re \u escapes, KC)
15:13:47 [kendall]
yeah, since that way I may figure out what the issue is. :>
15:14:10 [DanC]
EricP: [something that sounded like a good test case, involving \u in quoted strings]
15:14:20 [DanC]
Zakim, mute my dog
15:14:20 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'mute my dog', DanC
15:14:45 [ericP]
ASK { ?s ?p "hi \"mom\"" |
15:14:47 [AndyS_]
zakim does not understand relative "my"
15:14:47 [kendall]
better than me trying to mute a noisy DC neighborhood!
15:15:13 [ericP]
ASK { ?s ?p "hi \u0023mom\u0023" |
15:15:21 [DanC]
>>> ord('"')
15:15:21 [DanC]
15:15:39 [ericP]
ASK { ?s ?p "hi \u0022mom\u0022" |
15:15:55 [DanC]
>>> hex(ord('"'))
15:15:55 [DanC]
15:16:12 [kendall]
Is that legal by the spec currently?
15:16:15 [DanC]
(regardless of what the answer is, it clearly merits a test case)
15:16:20 [kendall]
15:17:44 [DanC]
AFS: yes, the spec gives an answer here, but one that is hard to implement
15:18:13 [DanC]
PatH: indeed, I'd prefer that "hi \u0022mom\u0022" were treated as "hi "mom"" which is not cool
15:18:27 [DanC]
EricP: this makes query generation a bit harder
15:18:51 [AndyS_]
Example: ?a\u0020x
15:19:14 [kendall]
it's obviously open IMO! :)
15:19:27 [DanC]
KC: ok, punctuationSyntax is open.
15:19:47 [DanC]
(anybody have a pointer to a relevant message from the comments achive?)
15:20:03 [Souri]
Question: Isn't "I said \"Hello World\"" a valid plain literal?
15:20:05 [AndyS_]
15:21:12 [AndyS_]
#Is this comment\u0020 legal
15:21:20 [ericP]
# \u000d SELECT ...
15:21:43 [DanC]
(for the minutes, the comment relevant to bnodes in predicate is , Test/grammar question Geoff Chappell (Thursday, 6 April) . I suppose we've answered him, though we haven't done the [OK?] dance. dunno if we need to.)
15:22:57 [DanC]
AFS: consider the case of writing a query with kanji characters in variable names from a us-ascii keyboard
15:22:59 [ericP]
15:23:55 [DanC]
A.6 Escape sequences in IRI references, prefixed names and variable names
15:24:00 [ericP]
15:24:02 [ericP]
These escape sequences are not included in the grammar below. Only escape sequences for characters that would be legal at that point in the grammar may be given. For example, the variable "?x\u0020y" is not legal (\u0020 is a space and is not permitted in a variable name).
15:24:06 [ericP]
15:24:17 [ericP]
oh weak, no close bracket
15:25:21 [DanC]
DanC: note while this \u stuff looks wierd, but it's the result of a negotiation with the I18N WG
15:26:03 [DanC]
EricP: I'm more worried about backslashes in comments than [missed]
15:26:26 [DanC]
15:29:08 [DanC]
ACTION: AndyS write tests for \u details
15:29:22 [AndyS_]
NB // This is not legal Java \u because the \u is illegal
15:29:31 [AndyS_]
NB // This is legal Java \u0020
15:30:34 [DanC]
Zakim, pick a scribe
15:30:34 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH
15:30:47 [SteveH]
sorry, no can do
15:31:02 [DanC]
regrets ericp, afs for 16 May due to XTech
15:31:41 [DanC]
PROPOSED: to meet Tuesdays 9:30am Boston time for 60 to 90 minutes, starting 30 May 2006 until further notice
15:31:49 [DanC]
15:31:53 [DanC]
EricP to scribe 30 May
15:32:28 [Zakim]
15:32:29 [SteveH]
15:32:31 [Zakim]
15:32:32 [Zakim]
15:32:32 [Zakim]
15:32:35 [Zakim]
15:32:50 [DanC]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:32:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate DanC
15:32:54 [kendall]
Do the bots need to be dismissed?
15:33:05 [DanC]
not really; they get bored and wander off after a while
15:33:09 [kendall]
15:33:11 [DanC]
RRSAgent, stop