14:20:33 RRSAgent has joined #dawg 14:20:34 logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-dawg-irc 14:20:40 zakim, this will be dawg 14:20:40 ok, LeeF; I see SW_DAWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes 14:20:51 Meeting: DAWG Weekly 14:20:54 Char: LeeF 14:20:56 Scribe: ericP 14:21:01 Regrets: kendallclark 14:21:27 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/0210.html 14:21:38 agenda+ Convene 14:21:44 agenda+ Review ACTION Items 14:21:51 agenda+ Test suite process 14:21:59 agenda+ rq24 status and timetable 14:27:59 sdas2 has joined #dawg 14:29:42 zakim, code? 14:29:42 the conference code is 7333 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), LeeF 14:30:02 SW_DAWG()9:30AM has now started 14:30:09 +[IBMCambridge] 14:30:13 zakim, IBMCambridge is me 14:30:13 +LeeF; got it 14:30:24 +sdas2 14:31:37 +??P2 14:31:39 zakim, ??P2 is me 14:31:39 +AndyS; got it 14:32:47 just a sec, still on another call 14:32:51 2 mins 14:33:14 +SimonR 14:34:52 +??P6 14:35:12 zakim, ??P6 is me 14:35:12 +ericP; got it 14:35:53 Eric, we can't hear you on the phone. 14:36:10 zakim, who is on the phone? 14:36:10 On the phone I see LeeF, sdas2, AndyS, SimonR, ericP 14:36:47 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/att-0211/12-dawg-minutes.html 14:38:28 agenda? 14:38:38 zakim, take up agendum 1 14:38:38 agendum 1. "Convene" taken up [from LeeF] 14:39:18 next meeting: 2 Jan 14:39:36 I'll volunteer. 14:39:50 next scribe: SimonR 14:40:19 zakim, next agendum 14:40:19 agendum 2. "Review ACTION Items" taken up [from LeeF] 14:41:20 ACTION: KendallC to close formsOfDistinct issue [CONTINUED] 14:41:31 ACTION: KendallC to remember that the wee, lost filter tests should be put [CONTINUED] 14:41:47 ACTION: PatH to change the entailment section around to talk about SPARQL first, then more general conditions in a normative appendix [CONTINUED] 14:42:10 ACTION: ericP to seek clarification on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2006Nov/0004 [CONTINUED] 14:42:27 Jeen on the test suite process: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/0205.html 14:42:28 ACTION: EricP to sort out some string literal thing for the operator table [ed: this action is about text for simple literals and xsd:string and text for RDFterm-equal] [CONTINUED] 14:42:46 ACTION: Jeen propose test suite process (not do it all). [DONE] 14:43:08 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/0205 -> Jeen's proposed test suite process 14:43:52 ACTION: LeeF to review rq24-algebra [DONE] 14:44:12 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/0206 -> LeeF's review of rq24 algebra 14:44:27 zakim, take up next agendum 14:44:27 agendum 3. "Test suite process" taken up [from LeeF] 14:45:23 LeeF: we have lots of unapproved tests that are not distinguished from those next to outdated ones 14:46:18 ... we discussed CR exit criteria where we had at least two implementations that implemented each SPARQL "feature" 14:46:58 ... assuming still need this, we need to record up front what the set of "features" is 14:47:18 ... then assign tests some set of features 14:48:08 SimonR: what do when we have more than one right answer 14:48:45 ericP: One way to handle it is to avoid tests with more than one answer 14:49:50 SimonR: what about a graph with inference capabilities 14:50:56 LeeF: those tests fall under either SPARQL extensions, or the closed graph is known 14:51:06 +1 14:51:12 +1 14:51:45 AndyS: want to only test things in SPARQL. not focus on extension points 14:52:22 ... would like to put your [ericP's] classified extended SPARQL queries in the back of the queue 14:53:02 ... don't want extra-core features on the critical path 14:53:30 LeeF: if i were doing the tests, i would prefer explicit classification 14:54:07 I'm not complaining about focusing on non-extended SPARQL or only tests which permit only a single correct answer. I'm just checking that we're doing this deliberately and consciously. 14:54:22 Very deliberately :-) 14:56:28 ericP: i want to make sure that test be able to have more than one feature 14:56:37 ... propose that we annotate tests with features 14:57:03 SimonR: we already have URIs for features from the document section headings 14:57:13 ericP: reasonable thesis, but needs testing 14:57:33 LeeF: reluctant to make such a decision without Jeen 14:57:42 Zakim, next agendum 14:57:42 agendum 4. "rq24 status and timetable" taken up [from LeeF] 14:58:07 LeeF: re protocol test suite, Elias says "no worries" 14:58:27 s/want to only test/want test core SPARQL first/ 14:58:35 agenda+ test reporting format (to EARL or not to EARL) 14:58:52 -ericP 14:58:57 mince! 14:59:05 zakim, who's speaking? 14:59:16 LeeF, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: LeeF (54%) 14:59:27 +??P6 14:59:32 -LeeF 14:59:36 sorry :) 14:59:41 zakim, code? 14:59:41 the conference code is 7333 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), LeeF 15:00:13 +[IBMCambridge] 15:00:16 i heard lots of hiss, then got booted. assumed hiss must of been my leave music 15:00:50 Lee's rq24 algebra review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/0206.html 15:01:04 LeeF: main points: 15:01:16 ... 2 snaps up 15:01:27 ... need connections to grammar 15:01:42 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq24-algebra.html v1.24 15:01:45 ... soln modifiers could be more explicitly tied to concrete syntax 15:02:25 ... as a reviewer, endorse adoption into rq24 15:02:53 AndyS: Jeen said he may find time for comments, but no commitment 15:03:24 Souri: hope to review by Jan 9 15:03:45 ACTION: Souri to review http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq24-algebra by 9 Jan 2007 15:04:20 LeeF: any words from Pat re rq24-algebra? 15:04:35 AndyS: said it looked OK a couple weeks ago. 15:05:07 LeeF: i know of no major issue stumbling block decisions 15:05:19 ... need: 15:05:38 ... Souri's review 15:05:51 ... PatH's entailment text 15:07:00 ... decision on algebra around mid Jan 15:07:13 ... merge into rq24 15:07:39 ... need end to end reviews from WG 15:08:08 ... would like LC WD decision around 1st week of Feb 15:08:22 ... want a short-as-possible LC, then CR 15:08:35 ... then back to CR 15:08:56 ... then test suite work and exit criteria 15:09:05 . 15:09:09 q+ to ask if that makes LC content assumed to be CR content? 15:09:22 ACTION: LeeF to pester PatH about entailment text 15:10:15 LeeF: will review outstand issues and hope that the new rq24 will address those issues 15:10:41 ... for example, FredZ's issues from the end of the summer 15:10:50 ... will ask Elias to do the same with the protocol doc 15:11:30 ... 2 months ago there were 3 small issues which raised no pulses during a WG meeting 15:11:47 ... would like all (3) to go to LC/CR at the same time 15:12:40 ... any thoughts on issues that i haven't address? 15:13:04 HP supports that outline plan. 15:13:05 ... speak now or forever hold your peace^H^H^H^H^H^H^H still welcome to raise in the future 15:13:12 ack AndyS 15:13:12 AndyS, you wanted to ask if that makes LC content assumed to be CR content? 15:13:40 AndyS: you expect the LC and the CR are as close as possible? 15:14:04 LeeF: yes, as close to byte-wise as the comments will allow 15:14:36 AndyS: summary above indicates the test suite work is serial. can do that stuff in parallel 15:15:35 Zakim, next agendum 15:15:35 agendum 5. "test reporting format (to EARL or not to EARL)" taken up [from LeeF] 15:17:48 http://www.w3.org/2001/03/earl/ 15:18:49 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006OctDec/0009 -> pretty EARL pics from an Algae run 15:19:19 ericP: I'd like to suggest we use EARL as a reporting vocabulary for the results of implementation test runs 15:20:36 SimonR: What about the XUnit [ed: is that right?] XML format? There are a lot of existing tools that we could use for that. 15:20:42 SimonR: (I think EARL would be cool) speaking as devil's advocate, what about XUnit? 15:21:02 AndyS: are they solving the same problem? 15:21:33 SimonR: report results of runs of tests 15:22:19 NUnit for .net, JUnit for java 15:22:26 DUnit for DAWG! 15:22:42 SPUnit for SPARQL! 15:22:44 ok, sorry, i'm done. 15:23:37 ACTION: SimonR to look at .Unit 15:23:48 .+Unit? 15:25:00 -sdas2 15:25:01 ADJOURN 15:25:05 Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to everyone from the UK 15:27:05 -[IBMCambridge] 15:27:06 -SimonR 15:27:07 -ericP 15:27:07 -AndyS 15:27:08 SW_DAWG()9:30AM has ended 15:27:09 Attendees were LeeF, sdas2, AndyS, SimonR, ericP, [IBMCambridge] 15:27:11 AndyS has left #dawg 15:27:26 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 15:27:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/12/19-dawg-minutes.html ericP 15:27:43 RRSAgent, please make log world-visible 15:27:46 YES! 15:27:47 thanks for scribing, ericP! 15:27:56 my first time getting both correct!!! 15:28:09 welcome 15:28:10 clearly a christmas present from the bots 15:28:26 if (user == ericP || cmd.isCorrectCommand()) doCorrectCommand(); 15:29:35 if (user == ericP || cmd.isCorrectCommand()) date == 2006-12-19 ? doCorrectCommand() : messWithEricPzHead(); 15:29:57 hah! 15:50:28 patH has joined #dawg 15:50:49 hey, are we having a telecon now? 15:52:31 was 9:30-10:30 EST 15:52:33 We aren't. It was 90 mins ago! 15:53:13 Oh. Whooops. Im in Ca, so that was 6.30 am here. Sorry 15:54:03 We continued your action item. 15:54:34 Ahh; well, Eric did an admirable job taking minutes, so a quick perusal should catch you up to date. 60,000 foot summary: I'd like to get WG reviews and decisions on spec. text such that we can put out last call working drafts of our specs in the beginning of Februryar, with an eye towards re-entering CR soon after that. 15:55:11 ok lee 16:05:39 AndyS has joined #dawg 17:34:06 Zakim has left #dawg