IRC log of dawg on 2007-03-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:21:06 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #dawg

14:21:06 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/03/13-dawg-irc

14:21:13 [LeeF]

zakim, this will be DAWG

14:21:13 [Zakim]

ok, LeeF; I see SW_DAWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes

14:21:29 [LeeF]

Meeting: RDF DAWG Weekly

14:21:34 [LeeF]

Chair: LeeF

14:21:36 [LeeF]

Scribe: EricP

14:21:39 [LeeF]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0146.html

14:21:45 [LeeF]

Regrets:

14:21:50 [LeeF]

agenda + convene

14:22:06 [LeeF]

agenda + review action items

14:22:15 [LeeF]

agenda + unexpected/auto DISTINCT

14:22:25 [LeeF]

agenda + normative and informative parts of rq25

14:22:33 [LeeF]

agenda + open issues

14:22:37 [LeeF]

agenda + last call

14:23:30 [AndyS]

SPARQL/Update :: a draft proposal for comment :: http://jena.hpl.hp.com/~afs/SPARQL-Update.html

14:24:06 [jeen]

jeen has joined #dawg

14:24:32 [AndyS]

Two editors :-) and we have a need for this soon

14:26:06 [LeeF]

zakim, code?

14:26:06 [Zakim]

the conference code is 7333 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), LeeF

14:26:26 [Zakim]

SW_DAWG()9:30AM has now started

14:26:33 [Zakim]

+[IBMCambridge]

14:26:42 [LeeF]

zakim, IBMCambridge holds LeeF, EliasT

14:26:42 [Zakim]

+LeeF, EliasT; got it

14:26:55 [Zakim]

+PatH

14:27:20 [Zakim]

+??P31

14:27:24 [AndyS]

zakim, ??P31 is me

14:27:24 [Zakim]

+AndyS; got it

14:27:27 [Zakim]

+??P30

14:27:38 [SimonR]

Zakim, ??P30 is me

14:27:38 [Zakim]

+SimonR; got it

14:27:42 [ericP]

Zakim, please dial ericP-office

14:27:42 [Zakim]

ok, ericP; the call is being made

14:27:44 [Zakim]

+EricP

14:29:34 [Zakim]

+Orri_Erling

14:30:33 [ericP]

ericP has changed the topic to: RDF Data Access Working Group weekly telecon — agenda http://www.w3.org/mid/OFF7EA9239.E611D26C-ON8525729B.001BB7B3-8525729B.001D2E9A@us.ibm.com

14:30:57 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

14:31:02 [jeen]

Zakim, [IPcaller] is me

14:31:02 [Zakim]

+jeen; got it

14:32:33 [LeeF]

SteveH, are you going to be able to join us today?

14:32:42 [SteveH]

LeeF, yes

14:32:42 [EliasT]

EliasT has joined #dawg

14:33:18 [Zakim]

+SteveH

14:33:52 [SimonR]

Zakim, who's on the phone?

14:33:52 [Zakim]

On the phone I see [IBMCambridge], PatH, AndyS, SimonR, EricP, Orri_Erling, jeen, SteveH

14:33:54 [Zakim]

[IBMCambridge] has LeeF, EliasT

14:33:54 [LeeF]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0146.html

14:34:08 [LeeF]

zakim, who's speaking?

14:34:20 [Zakim]

LeeF, listening for 12 seconds I heard sound from the following: AndyS (7%), jeen (86%)

14:34:42 [jeen]

Zakim, mute me

14:34:42 [Zakim]

jeen should now be muted

14:34:58 [LeeF]

zakim, who's speaking?

14:35:10 [Zakim]

LeeF, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds

14:35:44 [LeeF]

minutes from 6 mar: http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html

14:36:11 [ericP]

-> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes minutes from 2007-03-06

14:36:50 [jeen]

minutes look fine to me (sorry I wasn't there)

14:36:53 [EliasT]

Second

14:37:13 [ericP]

PROPOSED: approve minutes from 2007-03-06 as a true record of the last meeting

14:37:16 [ericP]

APPROVED

14:37:53 [ericP]

next meeting: 2007-03-20T14:30Z, scribe: EliasT

14:38:15 [LeeF]

zakim, take up agendum 2

14:38:16 [Zakim]

agendum 2. "review action items" taken up [from LeeF]

14:38:38 [LeeF]

ACTION: EricP to add text to spec noting that ORDER BY comparisons may use extended implementations of < that operate on types beyond what's given in the operator table [DONE]

14:38:44 [ericP]

action -1

14:38:53 [LeeF]

ACTION: EricP to run the yacker tool over and annotate the existing tests [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html#action03] [CONTINUES]

14:39:01 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF or EliasT to reply to Bjoern regarding (not) POSTing application/sparql-query documents [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html#action07] [CONTINUES]

14:39:08 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to remember that the wee, lost filter tests should be put [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html#action05] [CONTINUES]

14:39:10 [LeeF]

zakim, close this agendum

14:39:10 [Zakim]

agendum 2 closed

14:39:11 [Zakim]

I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

14:39:12 [Zakim]

1. convene [from LeeF]

14:39:16 [LeeF]

zakim, close agendum 1

14:39:16 [Zakim]

agendum 1, convene, closed

14:39:17 [Zakim]

I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

14:39:18 [Zakim]

3. unexpected/auto DISTINCT [from LeeF]

14:39:21 [LeeF]

zakim, take up agendum 3

14:39:21 [Zakim]

agendum 3. "unexpected/auto DISTINCT" taken up [from LeeF]

14:39:43 [LeeF]

Eric's summary of the DISTINCT issue: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0147.html

14:39:57 [ericP]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0147 Eric's summary of the DISTINCT issue

14:43:04 [ericP]

LeeF: any epiphones?

14:43:53 [ericP]

SimonR: partial DISTINCTness available via a clever OPTIONAL clause

14:45:39 [ericP]

default keywords

14:45:39 [ericP]

1 ALL DISTINCT

14:45:39 [ericP]

2 ALL DISTINCT, LOOSE

14:45:39 [ericP]

3 LOOSE DISTINCT

14:45:39 [ericP]

4 LOOSE DISTINCT, ALL

14:45:41 [ericP]

5 DISTINCT

14:46:50 [LeeF]

zakim, who's on the phone?

14:46:50 [Zakim]

On the phone I see [IBMCambridge], PatH, AndyS, SimonR, EricP, Orri_Erling, jeen (muted), SteveH

14:46:53 [Zakim]

[IBMCambridge] has LeeF, EliasT

14:47:13 [iv_an_ru]

iv_an_ru has joined #dawg

14:48:23 [ericP]

Steve: -1 +.5 -1 +1 -1

14:48:25 [jeen]

Zakim, unmute me

14:48:26 [Zakim]

jeen should no longer be muted

14:49:04 [ericP]

Jeen: +1 0 0 0 -1

14:49:32 [ericP]

Souri: +1 0 0 0 -1

14:49:48 [ericP]

Ori: +1 0 0 0 -1

14:50:07 [LeeF]

s/Ori/Orri

14:50:18 [ericP]

ericP: +.9 0 -.5 +1 -1

14:50:30 [ericP]

s/Souri: +1 0 0 0 -1//

14:50:43 [ericP]

SimonR: 0 0 0 0 0

14:51:00 [ericP]

AndyS: +1 0 -1 -1 -1

14:51:33 [ericP]

patH: +1 +1 0 0 0

14:52:22 [ericP]

EliasT: +1 0 -1 -1 -1

14:53:35 [Souri]

Souri has joined #dawg

14:54:20 [Zakim]

+Souri_Das

14:54:22 [ericP]

LeeF: appears to be leaning towards 1

14:54:47 [ericP]

SteveH: implementing ALL easy (and done)

14:54:57 [ericP]

... but I lose a lot of performance

14:55:18 [ericP]

... may implement it, but add a LOOSE keyword

14:55:43 [AndyS]

Observation: LOOSE = ALL over an imaginary smaller dataset/graph.

14:57:42 [SimonR]

DISTINCT/ALL is sort of the difference between COUNT(PROJECT(X)) and PROJECT(COUNT(X)) -- maybe if projection wasn't tied to the SELECT clause we'd have a better way. (As always, too much change required to explore this....)

14:57:56 [ericP]

Souri: 0 +1 0 0 0

14:58:05 [patH]

Not always, I think, Andy. Because that smaller imaginary graph wouldnt give you all the real answers.

14:58:42 [AndyS]

Simon - agree - there an overly tight binding of project and expressions

14:59:11 [SteveH]

observation: noone disliked 2 explictly

14:59:24 [AndyS]

Example: 1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3 ORDER BY, LIMIT 3 => 1,1,1 ; 1,2,2 ; 1,1,2 ; 1,2,3 ??

14:59:31 [patH]

Can we do 2 but not REQUIRE that loose be supported?

15:00:15 [SteveH]

patH, an impl of LOOSE = ALL or DISTINCT is valid

15:00:29 [AndyS]

It would be the only optional feature in the spec.

15:01:09 [AndyS]

And we have no service descriptions :-)

15:04:06 [ericP]

ericP: now +1 on 2

15:04:34 [LeeF]

PROPOSE: SPARQL SELECT queries with no keyword following SELECT must return the precise cardinality of duplicate solutions specified by the algebra; SPARQL contains a @@ LOOSE keyword that allows duplicate solutions to be returned with cardinality of at least 1 and no greater than that specified by the algebra

15:04:36 [ericP]

SteveH: query modification to access functionality is fine for me

15:05:36 [ericP]

+1

15:13:26 [ericP]

afs: am reluctant introduce a new keyword for an seemingly arbitrarily selected optimization

15:15:50 [LeeF]

Option 1: by default, ALL; only keyword is DISTINCT

15:15:52 [ericP]

ericP: we have a test with counting semantics already. afs, SteveH and I passed it but with different assumptions (1 vs 2)

15:15:58 [LeeF]

Option 2: by default, ALL; add a @@ LOOSE keyword

15:16:14 [LeeF]

zakim, who's on the phone?

15:16:14 [Zakim]

On the phone I see [IBMCambridge], PatH, AndyS, SimonR, EricP, Orri_Erling, jeen, SteveH, Souri_Das

15:16:18 [Zakim]

[IBMCambridge] has LeeF, EliasT

15:16:29 [ericP]

EliasT: +1 0

15:16:36 [ericP]

patH: 0 +1

15:16:48 [ericP]

afs: +1 -1

15:16:52 [SimonR]

SimonR: 0 0

15:17:01 [ericP]

ericP: 0 +1

15:17:10 [ericP]

orri: +1 0

15:17:16 [ericP]

jeen: +1 0

15:17:22 [ericP]

SteveH: -1 +1

15:17:29 [ericP]

Souri: 0 +1

15:17:38 [LeeF]

3 and 3

15:18:27 [AndyS]

3 and 4 on +1's :: each has a -1

15:18:46 [ericP]

LeeF: share andy's concearn, but can mark it "at risk" and let implementors define

15:22:33 [ericP]

afs: i think that putting it in and marking it "at risk" is setting the default

15:27:06 [ericP]

out of connearn for Steve-like implementations, i change to: -1 +1

15:29:37 [ericP]

ACTION ericP: draft text about a LOOSE keyword and run it by w3 folks to see if we're abusing the "at risk" mechanism

15:30:03 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to seek guidance about at-risk features from the CG

15:30:08 [ericP]

LeeF: if that's acceptable, I will propose 2, otherwise propose 1

15:30:22 [LeeF]

zakim, close this agendum

15:30:22 [Zakim]

agendum 3 closed

15:30:23 [Zakim]

I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

15:30:24 [Zakim]

4. normative and informative parts of rq25 [from LeeF]

15:31:21 [ericP]

LeeF: KendallC says we should say what's informative vs. normative

15:32:08 [ericP]

... AndyS said that unless otherwise noted, numbered sections are normative and lettered appendicies are informative

15:32:32 [ericP]

... i think that 2 and 3 are informative

15:32:51 [SimonR]

SimonR has joined #dawg

15:34:38 [Zakim]

-SimonR

15:34:48 [ericP]

I just labeled 2 and 3 informative

15:36:19 [LeeF]

ACTION: ericP to mark sections 2 and 3 informative, Appendices B and D normative in the text and table of contents and 1.1 document outline

15:37:11 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#nestedOptionals nested optionals

15:37:18 [Zakim]

+??P30

15:37:27 [SimonR]

Zakim, ??P30 is me

15:37:27 [Zakim]

+SimonR; got it

15:37:41 [ericP]

LeeF: I believe that the algebra in the document addresses nested optionals

15:37:49 [LeeF]

PROPOSED that the current algebra of rq25 addresses http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#nestedOptionals

15:37:57 [ericP]

AndyS: I think it does

15:38:09 [ericP]

APPROVED

15:38:23 [ericP]

ACTION: LeeF to close nested optionals issue

15:38:36 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#bnodeRef bnodeRef

15:39:00 [ericP]

LeeF: I believe that the current draft addresses this

15:39:05 [ericP]

patH: yes

15:39:17 [LeeF]

PROPOSED that the current treatment of bnode labels in rq25 addresses http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#bnodeRef

15:39:29 [AndyS]

And we aren't proposing the first part (exposing the labels in results)

15:39:31 [ericP]

APPROVED

15:39:45 [ericP]

ACTION: LeeF to close bnodeRef issue

15:40:13 [ericP]

ACTION: PatH to investigate closing the entailment issue

15:40:16 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#openWorldValueTesting open world issues

15:41:10 [AndyS]

Example: "xyz"@en > "abc"@en

15:41:35 [ericP]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq25#operatorExtensibility 11.3.1 Operator Extensibility

15:42:07 [LeeF]

"""

15:42:07 [LeeF]

Extended SPARQL implementations may support additional associations between operators and operator functions; this amounts to adding rows to the table above.

15:42:07 [LeeF]

"""

15:42:30 [AndyS]

Example: "xyz"@en = "abc"@EN

15:42:36 [AndyS]

Example: "abc"@en = "abc"@EN

15:43:35 [Zakim]

-Souri_Das

15:43:39 [SimonR]

(Say, weren't language tags case-sensitive...?)

15:43:58 [ericP]

"abc"@en = "abc"@EN

15:43:59 [LeeF]

I think RDF C&AS says they are case insensitive

15:44:26 [ericP]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq25#func-RDFterm-equal 11.4.10 RDFterm-equal

15:44:36 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/rq25#func-RDFterm-equal

15:45:44 [LeeF]

"Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by [RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase."

15:46:04 [LeeF]

"Note: The case normalization of language tags is part of the description of the abstract syntax, and consequently the abstract behaviour of RDF applications. It does not constrain an RDF implementation to actually normalize the case. Crucially, the result of comparing two language tags should not be sensitive to the case of the original input."

15:46:31 [LeeF]

from -> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-Literal-Equality RDF C&AS

15:46:38 [ericP]

{ "abc"@en = "abc"@EN } => { "abc"@en = "abc"@en }

15:49:04 [LeeF]

"""

15:49:05 [LeeF]

11.3.1 Operator Extensibility

15:49:05 [LeeF]

15:49:05 [LeeF]

Extended SPARQL implementations may support additional associations between operators and operator functions; this amounts to adding rows to the table above. No additional operator support may yield a result that replaces any result other than a type error in an unextended implementation. The consequence of this rule is that extended SPARQL implementations will produce at least the same solutions as an unextended implementation, and may, for some queries, produce more

15:49:07 [LeeF]

"""

15:49:28 [ericP]

[[

15:49:29 [ericP]

SPARQL language extensions may provide additional associations between operators and operator functions; this amounts to adding rows to the table above. No additional operator may yield a result that replaces any result other than a type error in the above table. The consequence of this rule is that SPARQL extensions will produce at least the same solutions as an unextended implementation, and may, for some queries, produce more solutions.

15:49:36 [ericP]

]]

15:50:01 [ericP]

""No additional operator may yield a result that replaces any result other than a type error in the above table.""

15:51:51 [LeeF]

PROPOSED that the text in 11.3.1 Operator Extensibility in rq25 addresses http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#openWorldValueTesting

15:51:59 [ericP]

+1

15:52:23 [ericP]

APPROVED: AndyS and patH abstaining

15:52:41 [ericP]

ACTION: LeeF to close openWorldValueTesting issue

15:53:42 [ericP]

LeeF: anyone intending to submit further reviews?

15:54:00 [ericP]

patH: insofar as my action entails a review of section 12, yes

15:55:50 [Zakim]

-PatH

15:55:52 [Zakim]

-Orri_Erling

15:55:53 [Zakim]

-jeen

15:55:58 [Zakim]

-SimonR

16:04:02 [Zakim]

-[IBMCambridge]

16:04:10 [Zakim]

-SteveH

16:05:01 [LeeF]

RRSAgent, stop