IRC log of awwsw on 2009-01-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:58:01 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #awwsw
13:58:01 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:58:04 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #awwsw
13:58:12 [dbooth]
zakim, this will be awwsw
13:58:12 [Zakim]
ok, dbooth; I see TAG_(AWWSW)9:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:39 [Zakim]
TAG_(AWWSW)9:00AM has now started
13:58:46 [Zakim]
14:02:04 [Zakim]
14:04:49 [Zakim]
14:05:22 [jar]
jar has joined #awwsw
14:08:39 [Stuart]
Stuart has joined #awwsw
14:09:12 [Stuart]
Hello /me just dialing (having checked in an early comment on the vocab page).
14:09:39 [jar]
jar has changed the topic to:
14:09:58 [Zakim]
14:10:39 [jar]
We should finish the HTTP in RDF review:
14:13:32 [Zakim]
14:17:23 [Zakim]
14:21:31 [Zakim]
14:21:36 [hhalpin]
hhalpin has joined #awwsw
14:22:02 [hhalpin]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:22:02 [Zakim]
On the phone I see DBooth, Jonathan_Rees, Stuart, TimBL, ??P1
14:22:09 [hhalpin]
Zakim, ??P1 is hhalpin
14:22:09 [Zakim]
+hhalpin; got it
14:22:43 [dbooth]
Topic: Vocabulary page
14:22:46 [dbooth]
14:23:05 [dbooth]
Stuart: What do you mean by "subject matter"?
14:23:23 [dbooth]
jar: I mean the RDF that we want to write. I'll fix the sentence. Sorry for the confusion.
14:24:18 [dbooth]
ACTION: Jar to clear up confusion about what he means by "subject matter"
14:24:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-12 - Clear up confusion about what he means by \"subject matter\" [on Jonathan Rees - due 2009-01-13].
14:24:26 [dbooth]
jar: Rules of engagement okay?
14:24:37 [dbooth]
dbooth: Fine to start with.
14:25:13 [dbooth]
jar: Also, when you introduce a class you need to have a relation to that class, to help understand what the members are.
14:25:37 [dbooth]
ACTION: jar to add additional rule about having a relation when you add a class
14:25:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-13 - Add additional rule about having a relation when you add a class [on Jonathan Rees - due 2009-01-13].
14:26:33 [dbooth]
jar: rfc2616:Entity okay?
14:26:40 [dbooth]
dbooth: Looks good to me.
14:28:12 [dbooth]
harry: If you don't have a URI, how could you post or put something there?
14:29:16 [dbooth]
jar: Through some other protocol or API. You can also do a GET using an IP address and use that connection.
14:31:58 [dbooth]
harry: If rfc2616:Resource doesn't require a URI, then we may need another class that does have a URI, so that peopel know they can access it with HTTP, etc.
14:32:09 [dbooth]
14:33:29 [Stuart]
Hmmm Re: "For example, suppose I connect to an HTTP server that has no DNS host name, and specify a relative URI." that you have established a connection at least gives you an IP address that could be used in the authority field.
14:34:01 [dbooth]
harry: I'm okay with removing the URI requirement for the rfc2616:Resource definition, but we may want something like that later.
14:36:02 [Stuart]
In Fieldings model of the world the mapping goes from URI to resource and from resource (modelled a "time varying membership function") to representations or URI (which I take to be redirection or the like).
14:36:12 [jar]
JAR requests use cases from Harry that would benefit from modeling a has-URI/has-no-URI distinction.
14:36:28 [Stuart]
ie. by Fieldings model the identifying URI is not intrinsic to the resource itself.
14:39:31 [jar]
(TimBL: about separation of resource from its name (URI).)
14:39:50 [Stuart]
I used to have a "...these are not the resources that you are looking for..." in the sense that the resource could simply be portrayed as the things that all the respresentations obtained from the resource are representations of... ie. if it's character changes - a weather page becomes a gambling page is just a strange resource and "...not the resource you were looking for...".
14:41:30 [Stuart]
However, even though it may be poor practice allowing the mapping between URI and resources to change then the in general URI are not/cannotbe intrinsic to the resources they denote.
14:43:17 [dbooth]
jar: What about "comes from"?
14:43:46 [hhalpin]
So, for timbl: http:rfc2616=awww:Representation
14:43:48 [dbooth]
timbl: Shouldn't this be "has representation", as in AWWW?
14:44:08 [dbooth]
jar: Wanted to start with 2616 notion first, not AWWW.
14:44:31 [Zakim]
14:44:48 [Zakim]
14:47:14 [Stuart]
From 2616:
14:47:16 [Stuart]
14:47:16 [Stuart]
An entity included with a response that is subject to content
14:47:16 [Stuart]
negotiation, as described in section 12. There may exist multiple
14:47:16 [Stuart]
representations associated with a particular response status.
14:48:31 [Stuart]
FWIW: IMO rfc2616:Representations are admissable as entity bodies on requests and responses.
14:48:45 [Stuart]
14:48:55 [dbooth]
timbl: It's pointing out there may be multiple representations for a given resource -- not that conneg is a key characteristic of representation.
14:49:25 [dbooth]
harry: I think it means it *might* be subject to conneg. Otherwise we have too many defs of representation around.
14:49:45 [dbooth]
timbl: There's no way to know if conneg happened.
14:51:25 [dbooth]
dbooth: The ability to have conneg is a by-product, not the distinguishing characteristic.
14:52:58 [Zakim]
14:54:04 [Zakim]
14:57:52 [Stuart]
Ahah... TimBL has just hit upon an essential facet of a class defn that we may have missed - identity criteria, it a test for determining sameness.
14:58:06 [Stuart]
14:59:18 [dbooth]
dbooth: I'm arguing that the domain of the "comes from" property is actually rfc2616:Representation: i.e., there does not exist an rfc2616:Entity X and rfc2616:Resource R such that "X comes from R" and X is not an rfc2616:Representation.
15:00:53 [dbooth]
Topic: Next meeting
15:01:01 [dbooth]
jar: Talk about HTTP in RDF doc next time?
15:01:41 [Zakim]
15:01:54 [Stuart]
Ok... I think that there is pun going on around representation - in the sense of a relation between and entity and a resource in the sense that the given entity is said to webarch:represent the rsource and a syntactic entity that has a mime type and bits.
15:02:39 [hhalpin]
I agree Stuart.
15:02:49 [Zakim]
15:02:52 [hhalpin]
I think the punning is actually three ways.
15:02:55 [jar]
hhalpin: Let's figure out how to plug 'web resource' and 'entity' into http-in-rdf vocabulary.
15:03:15 [Stuart]
awww use representation to refer to such an entity, but I can see that that an entity in fact awww:represents a resource can only be objecivly determined by obtaining said entity in a response.
15:21:36 [Zakim]
15:24:05 [Stuart]
15:30:38 [Zakim]
15:30:41 [Zakim]
15:30:42 [Zakim]
TAG_(AWWSW)9:00AM has ended
15:30:44 [Zakim]
Attendees were DBooth, TimBL, Jonathan_Rees, Stuart, hhalpin
15:59:35 [dbooth]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:59:53 [dbooth]
Chair: Jonathan Rees
16:00:10 [dbooth]
Present: TimBL, DBooth, JonathanRees, StuartWilliams, HarryHalpin
16:00:19 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:00:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dbooth
16:29:30 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #awwsw
16:51:11 [Stuart]
Stuart has left #awwsw
16:51:46 [hhalpin]
hhalpin has joined #awwsw
17:22:18 [hhalpin]
hhalpin has joined #awwsw
19:34:14 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #awwsw
19:34:14 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:34:22 [dbooth]
Meeting: AWWSW
19:35:01 [dbooth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
19:35:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate dbooth