13:51:53 RRSAgent has joined #sparql 13:51:53 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/07-sparql-irc 13:51:55 RRSAgent, make logs world 13:51:57 Zakim, this will be 77277 13:51:57 ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes 13:51:58 Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference 13:51:58 Date: 07 April 2009 13:53:41 now i just have to deal with the people doing construction or yard work or something outside 13:54:28 not sure how well that worked for the last guy that tried it :D 13:55:32 JanneS has joined #sparql 13:56:07 ivan has joined #sparql 13:56:21 SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started 13:56:28 +john-l 13:56:34 +kasei 13:56:37 Zakim, mute me 13:56:37 kasei should now be muted 13:57:19 zakim, dial ivan-voip 13:57:19 ok, ivan; the call is being made 13:57:21 +Ivan 13:57:31 ivan, can you scribe today please? 13:57:36 oh wait 13:57:37 i'll scribe 13:57:39 nevermind 13:57:53 +??P16 13:59:18 +Lee_Feigenbaum 13:59:50 regrets next week: ivan 14:00:01 +??P24 14:00:31 zakim, ??P24 has SteveH, LukeWM 14:00:32 +SteveH, LukeWM; got it 14:00:38 I can take over scribing. 14:00:48 ywang4 has joined #sparql 14:00:48 scribe: Axel Polleres 14:00:54 Scribenick: AxelPolleres 14:00:58 scribenick: Axel Polleres 14:01:06 SteveH has joined #sparql 14:01:10 topic: Admin 14:01:36 LukeWM has joined #sparql 14:01:41 zakim, who's here? 14:01:43 On the phone I see john-l, kasei (muted), Ivan, AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, ??P24 14:01:50 ??P24 has SteveH, LukeWM 14:01:55 On IRC I see LukeWM, SteveH, ywang4, ivan, JanneS, RRSAgent, chimezie, kasei, AxelPolleres, bijan, SimonS, LeeF, KjetilK, iv_an_ru, Zakim, trackbot, john-l, ericP 14:01:59 +ywang4 14:02:11 Regrets: ericP, AndyS, AlexP 14:02:49 LeeF: rearrangement on agenda, bijan joining later, so we shuffle a bit 14:02:52 PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-03-31 14:03:10 +SimonS 14:03:19 no objections. 14:03:28 RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-03-31 14:04:05 next meeting: 14-April 14:04:09 regrets next time: ivan, axel 14:04:22 LeeF: next meeting, 14th, regrets Ivan & Axel 14:04:50 ... last tleconf to discuss new features. THen we start with consensus reaching and consolidation. 14:05:05 Zakim, what is the code? 14:05:05 the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), KjetilK 14:05:08 ... pls check features to be discussed and send your thoughts! 14:05:21 topic: liaisons 14:05:42 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec 14:05:44 Axel: OWL WG and RIF WG discussing rdf:text datatype 14:05:59 + +1.479.864.aaaa 14:06:04 Zakim, aaaa is me 14:06:04 +KjetilK; got it 14:06:12 Zakim, mute me 14:06:12 KjetilK should now be muted 14:07:02 Axel: might want SPARQL WG to review last call draft 14:08:05 ACTION: Axel to send a pointer to the mailinglist for rdf:text, when it's up to LC 14:08:08 Created ACTION-7 - Send a pointer to the mailinglist for rdf:text, when it's up to LC [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-04-14]. 14:08:46 topic: Discuss features 14:09:08 LeeF: ControlOfDescribeQueries next week. 14:09:15 topic: Xproc 14:09:18 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2009Mar/0004.html 14:09:29 subtopic: Xproc 14:10:20 +Chimezie_Ogbuji 14:10:39 q+ 14:11:10 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc/ XPROC draft 14:11:54 Lee: looks like more related to RDF Core and XProc WG's. we can't do it alone. 14:12:00 +DaveNewman 14:12:03 q+ 14:12:11 ack SteveH 14:12:38 Steve: on RDF/XML, XProc is solved and no problem. 14:13:13 ack AxelPolleres 14:13:22 ...that's not what I meant 14:13:32 I meant that RDF/XML is not our problem 14:13:34 ... pipes.deri.org 14:13:55 q+ 14:13:55 dnewman2 has joined #sparql 14:14:00 AxelPolleres: DERI working on pipes tool - workflow for RDF, includes SPARQL - XML serialization, we will align with XProc 14:14:26 xsparql.deri.org 14:15:22 LeeF: Does DERI think this is something we should pursue? 14:15:42 AxelPolleres: Not in the core of our charter, would be better joint with XProc or XQuery folks, maybe people volunteering as a note 14:15:46 ack ivan 14:16:29 (those comments chairhat-offf) 14:16:38 -1 14:16:40 -1 (out of scope) 14:16:41 -1, not our problem 14:16:41 1 14:16:43 -1 14:16:44 -1 14:16:44 -1 14:16:44 -1 14:16:44 -1 14:16:46 Ivan: also think that this is not in the charter. 14:16:50 -1 out of scope 14:16:54 -1 14:16:54 sorry, mine should be -1 14:16:55 -1 14:17:04 Leef: strawpoll on Xproc?? 14:17:12 -1 out of scope 14:17:29 topic: XML literal results 14:17:30 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2009Mar/0022.html 14:17:53 subtopic: XMLLiteral in results 14:18:19 q+ to ask about XML Schema 14:18:27 LeeF: xml literals in results are currently encoded/escaped in SPARQL results. 14:18:41 ... proposed here is unescaped XML in results 14:19:11 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/0163.html EricP 14:19:53 ... probably no implementation does it right now, but probably just because it is not compliant. 14:20:06 ack SteveH 14:20:06 SteveH, you wanted to ask about XML Schema 14:20:35 q+ 14:20:47 steve: that would push us out of XML sparql result XSD. 14:21:04 Lee: we could using any content, but that's probably not helpful. 14:21:24 q+ to ask about anytype in XML schema 14:21:38 ack ivan 14:22:04 ivan: issues around schema and RDF/XML were more complex than that. 14:22:20 ... has there been a user request in this respect? 14:23:13 ack AxelPolleres 14:23:13 AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about anytype in XML schema 14:24:58 Axel: seems doable in XML Schema 14:25:19 Lee: but not very helpful, w/o a mechanism to also specify which XML schema is meant there. 14:25:20 -1, too complex 14:25:22 +1 (if the submitter can justify it further, I much prefer XML to be addressable with XPath) 14:25:26 0 14:25:27 -1 priorities 14:25:28 -1 14:25:30 -1 low priority 14:25:33 0 14:25:35 ... strawpoll on allowing unescaped XML? 14:25:35 -1 14:25:38 0 14:25:40 0 14:25:40 -1 14:25:40 0 14:26:24 Zakim, unmute me 14:26:24 KjetilK should no longer be muted 14:27:51 Kjetil: sees potential in XML in results for being XPath processable. Likes to postpone this, because we may be talking about different things here, needs clarification. 14:28:01 ... next week problematic for me. 14:28:53 s/this,/ControlOfDescribeQueries,/ 14:29:04 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0004.html 14:29:17 Zakim: mute me 14:29:21 topic: SurfaceSyntax 14:29:25 LeeF: let's look at surface syntax 14:29:34 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:SurfaceSyntax 14:30:37 ... this is about "syntactic sugar" to be definable in terms of the current spec. 14:32:39 ... assignments, evaluated expressions partially overlap. 14:32:52 ... scalarExpressions. 14:33:09 q+ 14:33:20 ... my idea is treating these at once. 14:33:20 q+ 14:33:23 q+ 14:33:27 ack ivan 14:33:45 ivan: these are low-priority things. 14:33:55 q+ to note educational / learning aspect 14:34:42 ack SteveH 14:34:49 ivan: syntactic sugar may give impression of huge changes, where there aren't 14:35:10 steve: agree with ivan mostly. 14:35:44 q+ 14:36:23 +q 14:36:25 ack AxelPolleres 14:36:27 ... we should avoid "syntactic nightmare" extension 14:36:44 "syntactic nightmare" lack of extension, really 14:37:23 ?s :p `3 + 4` 14:37:40 you can't do that with a filter... 14:37:41 ?s :p `?o + 4` 14:37:45 +??P6 14:37:49 zakim, ??P6 is me 14:37:49 +bijan; got it 14:37:52 zakim, mute me 14:37:52 bijan should now be muted 14:38:44 q? 14:39:52 ack LeeF 14:39:52 LeeF, you wanted to note educational / learning aspect 14:40:12 LeeF: scalar in construct could be a synt sugar subfeature of assignment. 14:40:30 I'll note that good surface syntax can reveal optimization oppourtunities 14:40:32 ... that is why I count it in "surface syntax" 14:40:45 ack KjetilK 14:41:23 Kjetil: we shouldn't under-estimate the power of writing things quickly. 14:41:28 Garlik use ?x = ... || ?x = ... a lot 14:41:55 We also have had numerous requests for IN support 14:41:57 ack dnewman2 14:42:00 ack dnewman 14:42:02 ... IN is an axemaple of that. 14:42:24 dave: from an end user perspective this is very attractive. 14:42:48 ... aligns in certain respects with SQL. would support it. 14:43:05 LeeF: any othe opinions? 14:43:19 0 14:43:20 +1 (but, yeah, lets do it at the end) 14:43:23 0 14:43:24 0, it's too broad 14:43:25 +1 14:43:26 +1 14:43:27 +1 14:43:29 +1 agree with Kjetil and Dave, do it at the end 14:43:36 0 14:43:39 +1 for at the end 14:43:39 strawpoll: is work on surface syntax in general in scope of the WG? 14:43:45 +1 time permitting 14:43:51 Zakim, mute me 14:43:51 KjetilK should now be muted 14:43:51 +1 14:43:53 +1 14:44:07 +1, time permitting, probably 14:44:08 and i think it should be a bit more 14:44:29 (obvious and consensual surface syntax features only) 14:44:39 zakim, unmute me 14:44:39 bijan should no longer be muted 14:44:54 topic: SPARQL/OWL 14:44:55 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:SPARQL/OWL 14:44:58 topic: sparql/owl 14:45:51 bijan: a document which specifies which additional inferneces/answers on BGP patterns you should get under various OWL/OWL2 entailment regimes 14:45:53 q+ 14:46:15 LeeF: would we do it for one flavor of OWL? 14:46:49 Bijan: my goal would be conjunctive queries. tend to look on existing implementations and reflect what they DO. 14:46:52 q+ 14:47:14 ... with as much OWL as they can possibly handle 14:48:17 ... kaon2 supports SPARQL with non-distiguished variables, over OWL2 w/o nominals, pellet supports all of SPARQL, Hermit will support as much as KOAN2. 14:48:20 q+ about relationship with general specification of entailment 14:48:27 q+ 14:48:37 ... racer pro supports NRQL, overlaps greatly with SPARQL. 14:49:09 q+ 14:49:11 q+ 14:49:13 ... Quonto is an OLWLQL implementation, OWLGraph supports SPARQL. 14:49:23 ack ivan 14:49:47 ivan: what is the different in semantics we are talking about? 14:50:05 -> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#sparqlBGPExtend Extending SPARQL Basic Graph Pattern Matching 14:50:20 bijan: achievable goal is: if you turn on inference, you get more answers. 14:50:47 ... it is not entirely clear ore desirable. certain meta-modeling in RDF are impossible to implement. 14:51:09 ... e.g. redefining rdf:type. 14:51:49 ... trey to restrict myself on queries that are reasonable in terms of both OWL and RDF. 14:52:25 -ywang4 14:52:35 gonna leave, cheers 14:52:42 ivan: are all queries you send to a OWL reasoner encodable in SPARQL or not? 14:52:44 take care, ywang4 14:52:53 see you next week 14:53:00 bijan: standard conjunctive queries yes fully covered by SPARQL. 14:53:09 see you guys :) 14:53:14 ywang4 has left #sparql 14:53:15 ... SPARQL intuitivelty also allows asking about the SCHEMA. 14:53:34 ... I think we can get a reasonable fraction of that. 14:53:51 ivan: how much work and energy will it take? 14:54:08 bijan: mostly done from a paper I have, technically not difficult, transfer to spec. 14:54:09 ack AxelPolleres 14:55:04 ack chimezie 14:55:32 Axel: linking,describing that on the wiki on the feature page, also that summary you gave would be extremly helpful. 14:56:30 bijan: schema queries doable to some extent, standard syntax for that. 14:57:09 bijan: use that entailment in queries qwould be something to standardize. 14:57:38 q+ 14:58:21 Leef: mechanism to know which entailment is "done" 14:58:23 q+ 14:58:37 ack KjetilK 14:59:11 I'm wondering whether we can afford to do both this proposal as well as something like ParameterizedInference (which seems like the general case) 14:59:17 kjetil: implementations that do simple bw-chaining, would that proposal influence them? 14:59:30 or whether there is overlap between the two 15:00:11 bijan: OWL has an OWL RL subprofile implementable in rules, QL implementable by rule expansion, OWL EL implementable in combination 15:00:31 q- 15:00:36 ... not sure whether this is answering your question. 15:01:12 kjetil: would it cover to know "which profile is used by a certain engine"? 15:01:29 Zakim, mute me 15:01:29 KjetilK should now be muted 15:01:33 ack LukeWM 15:01:37 bijan: tell what you have is a separate issue 15:02:03 bijan: based on the sparql-dl paper, it seems that you define a ast->triples conversion, but I didn't see the (presumably desirable) sparql syntax->ast conversion. 15:02:31 ack AxelPolleres 15:03:10 AxelPolleres: is bnode coreference solved? 15:03:20 bijan: persists as an open issue, think I have a reasonable solution 15:03:50 ... think best way to get interoperability is to treat bnodes as local names 15:04:07 q+ 15:04:22 zakim, close the queue 15:04:22 ok, LeeF, the speaker queue is closed 15:05:02 AxelPolleres: in terms of metaqueries, would you restrict certain queries? 15:05:27 bijan: two possibilies. 1) might need to restrict queries. 2) restrict answers, so e.g. if ?C subclass ?D 15:05:32 ... you could restrict answers to atomic classes only 15:05:37 ... to avoid infinite trivial answers 15:06:33 +q to ask whether syntactic restrictions are possible in SPARQL1 entailment regimes 15:07:13 bijan: algebra stays the same, it does operations on a tuple level 15:07:40 ... only BGP. 15:08:32 ivan: do any other features affect this? 15:08:39 bijan: i don't think so since none of them trouch BGP matching semantics 15:08:56 ivan: would this be a separate document? 15:08:58 bijan: yes 15:09:57 SimonS: is it possible to restrict syntax within an entailment regime? 15:10:21 bijan: you can implement this by saying that for queries that you think are syntactically malformed you return nothing 15:11:10 +1 15:11:11 1 (with the hope it will work out:-) 15:11:15 +1 (since it is allready almost there, and it covers the simple stuff) 15:11:16 0 15:11:22 +0 15:11:23 zakim, who's here? 15:11:23 On the phone I see john-l, kasei (muted), Ivan, AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, ??P24, SimonS, KjetilK (muted), Chimezie_Ogbuji, DaveNewman, bijan 15:11:25 +1 15:11:26 ??P24 has SteveH, LukeWM 15:11:27 On IRC I see dnewman2, LukeWM, SteveH, ivan, RRSAgent, chimezie, kasei, AxelPolleres, bijan, SimonS, LeeF, KjetilK, iv_an_ru, Zakim, trackbot, john-l, ericP 15:11:29 0 15:11:33 +1 15:11:35 +1 15:11:45 0 (I still don't have a grasp on the relationship between this feature and the other entailment features requests) 15:11:46 0, I like, but my org has no use for it sadly 15:11:52 0.5 thinking that this is only solvable in cinjunciton with Param Inference and need to get clearer about the issues. 15:12:08 +1 (but in principle positive... ok) 15:12:12 ok ok ok ;-) 15:12:20 bijan: okay I wilkl :) 15:12:26 s/wilkl/will 15:12:57 -AxelPolleres 15:13:01 -Chimezie_Ogbuji 15:13:07 bye, everyone 15:13:11 -KjetilK 15:13:12 bye 15:13:15 -john-l 15:13:17 -Lee_Feigenbaum 15:13:17 -bijan 15:13:17 -DaveNewman 15:13:19 -SimonS 15:13:19 -??P24 15:13:20 -kasei 15:13:37 lee is gone, I wanted to talk to him:-( 15:13:40 Encourage discussion of other features on the mailing list 15:14:01 +Lee_Feigenbaum 15:14:14 zakim, who's here? 15:14:14 On the phone I see Ivan, Lee_Feigenbaum 15:14:15 On IRC I see SteveH, ivan, RRSAgent, chimezie, kasei, bijan, SimonS, LeeF, KjetilK, iv_an_ru, Zakim, trackbot, john-l, ericP 15:16:30 kasei has left #sparql 15:17:07 SimonS1 has joined #sparql 15:19:12 LukeWM has joined #sparql 15:20:01 SteveH has joined #sparql 15:22:27 SimonS has joined #sparql 15:26:08 -Lee_Feigenbaum 15:26:14 -Ivan 15:26:16 SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended 15:26:18 Attendees were john-l, kasei, Ivan, AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, SteveH, LukeWM, ywang4, SimonS, +1.479.864.aaaa, KjetilK, Chimezie_Ogbuji, DaveNewman, bijan 17:08:10 bijan has left #sparql 17:29:37 SteveH has joined #sparql