See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: DanC
AFS: I sent a correction re # of actions...
KC: I think this is the corrected version
<DanC_> minutes 18 Apr
RESOLUTION: to approve minutes 18 Apr
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.
... how about an hour earlier?
<AndyS_> I'm happy to move -1 hour.
DC: how about 9:30am Boston time, year round? [or at least over this summer]
<AndyS_> (14:30 BST(GMTDT) , 13:30 GMT)
hmm... 60, 90, or 120 minutes? weekly, every-other-week, or monthly?
<AndyS_> CET is +1 hour to that.
PatH: I lean toward frequent meetings and make them short if there's not much to do
<SteveH> as long as the mail goes out I will rememebr to dial in
PROPOSED: to meet Tuesdays 9:30am Boston time for 60 to 90 minutes, starting 16 May 2006 until further notice
<SteveH> 2nd'd
regrets ericp, afs for 16 May due to XTech
RESOLUTION: to meet Tuesdays 9:30am Boston time for 60 to 90 minutes, starting 30 May 2006 until further notice
EricP to scribe 30 May
post-hoc action added by the scribe and former chair...
<scribe> ACTION: EricP: to notify adminreq of the change in meeting time [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action01]
EricP: I expect to get this done tomorrow.
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to publish http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/json-sparql/ [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action02]
KC: I saw mail from Steve today
DanC: looked for records re:
disallowing bnodes in predicate position
... couldn't find any explicit decision to that effect
... As of 11 Nov, bnodes were in
change was made in 1.629 2006/01/30 17:38:14
patH: may have last come up under rdfSemantics issue
<Souri> suggestion from Pat to take it out
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.
<kendall> SteveH: I remember discussion of this, colleagues suggest that the restriction is somewhat confusing
<DanC_> I thnk I should edit the issues list to show that the 26 Jan decision re rdfSemantics also affects punctuationSyntax
<kendall> DanC, I'd be happy for you to do that.
SH: I'm getting feedback that prohibiting bnodes in Verb is inconvenient
EricP: there's [something involving * that the scribe didn't really catch]
AndyS: it would change the semantics...
PatH: yes, it might work, but
then it wouldn't work with OWL...
... but OWL might change in that direction too.
SH: there are approved tests that are relevant
AndyS: those tests don't test the semantics
<scribe> ACTION: AndyS to find tests with bnodes in predicates and mark them as syntax errors (and unapproved until we approve them) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action03]
<scribe> ACTION: DanC to edit http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#punctuationSyntax to show ammendment 26 Jan http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006JanMar/att-0298/26-dawg-minutes.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action04]
KC: how do we re-sync editors drafts with published TRs?
DC: well, you can ask to do an updated CR, or go back to WD, or ask for PR
<DanC_> , Test/grammar question Geoff Chappell (Thursday, 6 April)
<DanC_> (I see Andy answered him, though we haven't done the [OK?] dance. dunno if we need to.)
<kendall> ACTION: Kendall to mark valueTesting as open on issues list (i.e., to really learn how to handle issues list) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action05]
EricP: no progress; pls continue. eta 2 weeks
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to propose text and tests to add {boolean < > = != boolean} to SPARQL [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action06]
DC: my action went to Andy in the last meeting.
<AndyS_> ACTION: AndyS: to draft of open-world = tests [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action07]
<AndyS_> ACTION: AndyS to contribute a couple tests for computed-properties/virtual-prop/builtin. one using lists, and one not using lists [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action08]
yes, DONE, ACTION: EricP and Jeen to fix OPTIONAL coding
KC: still interested?
PatH: yes, still interested; no
progress yet
... ah... 2 weeks is during WWW2006, so more like 30th
<DanC_> Sven's review of RIF Use Cases
<kendall> ACTION: PatH to review RIF UC&R doc by roughly the 30th May [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action09]
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to respond to [9]Dirk on MIME type stuff [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action10]
<ericP> http://www.w3.org/mid/20060421165157.GI26709@w3.org
<scribe> ACTION: EricP to follow up on mime type requests, i.e. to ask the W3C/IETF liaison to do the registration [CONTINUES] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action11]
AFS: there's this stuff of \u escapes... ok, yes, separable from mime types
<AndyS_> experience with \u escapes
AndyS: when do escape rules apply?
<DanC_> (sounds like punctuationSyntax should get opened again around \u)
<kendall> slow chair didn't follow much of that... hope someone did :)
AFS: the layering between, e.g., \u and variable names is tricky; breaks traditional parser layering
<DanC_> (I suggest you re-open punctuationSyntax to address comments re \u escapes, KC)
<kendall> yeah, since that way I may figure out what the issue is. :>
EricP: [something that sounded like a good test case, involving \u in quoted strings]
<ericP> ASK { ?s ?p "hi \"mom\"" }
<DanC_> >>> hex(ord('"'))
<DanC_> '0x22'
<ericP> ASK { ?s ?p "hi \u0022mom\u0022" }
<kendall> Is that legal by the spec currently?
<DanC_> (regardless of what the answer is, it clearly merits a test case)
<kendall> yes
AFS: yes, the spec gives an answer here, but one that is hard to implement
PatH: indeed, I'd prefer that "hi \u0022mom\u0022" were treated as "hi "mom"" which is not cool
EricP: this makes query generation a bit harder
<AndyS_> Example: ?a\u0020x
<kendall> it's obviously open IMO! :)
KC: ok, punctuationSyntax is open.
(anybody have a pointer to a relevant message from the comments achive?)
<Souri> Question: Isn't "I said \"Hello World\"" a valid plain literal?
<AndyS_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006JanMar/0443.html
<AndyS_> #Is this comment\u0020 legal
<ericP> # \u000d SELECT ...
AFS: consider the case of writing a query with kanji characters in variable names from a us-ascii keyboard
<ericP> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#escIRI
A.6 Escape sequences in IRI references, prefixed names and variable names
<ericP> [[
<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).
<ericP> \\
<ericP> oh weak, no close bracket
DanC: note while this \u stuff looks wierd, but it's the result of a negotiation with the I18N WG
EricP: I'm more worried about backslashes in comments than [missed]
REQUEST FOR TESTCASE [ # \u000d SELECT ... ]
<scribe> ACTION: AndyS write tests for \u details [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-dawg-minutes.html#action12]
<AndyS_> NB // This is not legal Java \u because the \u is illegal
<AndyS_> NB // This is legal Java \u0020
<SteveH> bye
<kendall> Do the bots need to be dismissed?
not really; they get bored and wander off after a while
<kendall> cool