IRC log of sparql on 2009-04-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:54:14 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:54:14 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:54:16 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:54:16 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sparql
13:54:18 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 77277
13:54:18 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
13:54:19 [trackbot]
Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:54:19 [trackbot]
Date: 28 April 2009
13:54:24 [LeeF]
s/Date:/ Date:
13:54:29 [LeeF]
Chair: LeeF
13:54:33 [cgi-irc]
cgi-irc has joined #sparql
13:54:34 [LeeF]
Regrets: Orri
13:55:01 [LeeF]
hi, who just joined via the w3c Web IRC interface?
13:55:01 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:55:09 [Zakim]
13:55:15 [AlexPassant]
Zakim: ??P34 is me
13:55:29 [SteveH]
LeeF: updated, relocating to meeting room...
13:55:38 [SteveH]
sorry, LeeF,
13:55:46 [AlexPassant]
Zakim: +??P34 is me
13:55:57 [Zakim]
13:56:00 [Zakim]
13:56:01 [Zakim]
13:56:01 [Zakim]
13:56:23 [AlexPassant]
Zakim, +??P34 is me
13:56:23 [Zakim]
sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '+??P34'
13:56:28 [AlexPassant]
Zakim, ??P34 is me
13:56:28 [Zakim]
+AlexPassant; got it
13:56:40 [AlexPassant]
wow :) thanks LeeF , needs to update my irssi config
13:56:47 [pgearon]
pgearon has joined #sparql
13:56:58 [SteveH_]
SteveH_ has joined #sparql
13:56:58 [Zakim]
13:57:00 [AndyS]
zakim, please mute ??P35
13:57:00 [Zakim]
??P35 should now be muted
13:57:05 [Zakim]
+ +049261287aaaa
13:57:06 [kasei]
Zakim, mute me
13:57:06 [Zakim]
kasei should now be muted
13:57:10 [AndyS]
zakim, please unmute ??P35
13:57:10 [Zakim]
??P35 should no longer be muted
13:57:18 [SimonS]
Zakim, aaaa is me
13:57:18 [Zakim]
+SimonS; got it
13:57:19 [AndyS]
zakim, ??P35 is me
13:57:20 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
13:57:41 [AndyS]
Good morning, Paul
13:58:03 [Zakim]
13:58:10 [Zakim]
13:58:10 [SteveH]
Zakim, ??P40 is [Garlik]
13:58:12 [Zakim]
+[Garlik]; got it
13:58:16 [LukeWM]
LukeWM has joined #sparql
13:58:20 [bijan]
zakim, ??p41 isme
13:58:20 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??p41 isme', bijan
13:58:25 [Zakim]
+ +03539149aabb
13:58:25 [SteveH]
Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH and LukeWM
13:58:26 [Zakim]
+SteveH, LukeWM; got it
13:58:27 [bijan]
zakim, ??p41 is me
13:58:27 [Zakim]
+bijan; got it
13:58:37 [Zakim]
13:58:54 [pgearon]
AndyS: Hi. Sorry, am trying to dial in
13:59:13 [Zakim]
13:59:13 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
13:59:22 [chimezie]
Zakim, passcode?
13:59:22 [Zakim]
the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), chimezie
13:59:29 [LeeF]
zakim, who's here?
13:59:29 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, ??P46, LeeF
13:59:32 [Zakim]
[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM
13:59:33 [Zakim]
On IRC I see chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, cgi-irc, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, AlexPassant, john-l,
13:59:35 [Zakim]
... KjetilK, ericP, trackbot
13:59:44 [pgearon]
I'm on the phone too
13:59:59 [LeeF]
zakim, ??P46 is pgearon
14:00:00 [Zakim]
+pgearon; got it
14:00:03 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:00:04 [Zakim]
14:00:05 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:00:07 [Zakim]
14:00:36 [LeeF]
Scribe: chimezie
14:00:41 [LeeF]
Scribenick: chimezie
14:01:15 [LeeF]
agenda + introductions
14:01:16 [LeeF]
agenda + errata
14:01:26 [cgi-irc]
Hi Lee, this is Prateek Jain from WSU
14:01:52 [SteveH]
lots of scrolling noise
14:01:53 [LeeF]
Hi Prateek, thanks - can you type "/nick Prateek" (without the quotes)
14:02:16 [kjetil]
Zakim, what is the code?
14:02:16 [Zakim]
the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), kjetil
14:02:44 [Zakim]
14:02:55 [kjetil]
Zakim, ??P60 is me
14:02:55 [Zakim]
+kjetil; got it
14:02:59 [Zakim]
+ +01212803aacc
14:03:22 [JanneS]
JanneS has joined #sparql
14:03:25 [iv_an_ru]
zakim, +0121 is me
14:03:25 [Zakim]
+iv_an_ru; got it
14:03:34 [kjetil]
Zakim, mute me
14:03:35 [LeeF]
zakim, who's here?
14:03:37 [Zakim]
kjetil should now be muted
14:03:42 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, pgearon, LeeF, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, kjetil (muted), iv_an_ru
14:03:45 [Zakim]
[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM
14:03:47 [Zakim]
On IRC I see JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, Prateek, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, AlexPassant,
14:03:54 [Zakim]
... john-l, KjetilK, ericP, trackbot
14:03:56 [Zakim]
14:04:26 [chimezie]
LeeF: we have quite a bit to cover today perhaps we can have a 90 minute call?
14:04:37 [Zakim]
14:04:40 [LeeF]
agenda -
14:04:47 [LeeF]
topic: administrative
14:04:54 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at
14:05:02 [SteveH]
I had 1 issue with the mins
14:05:46 [SteveH]
I think it was this: Eric Prud'hommeaux: it matters for portability between scripting and the bigger impls. [ Scribe Assist by Greg Williams ] ←
14:05:52 [chimezie]
LeeF: perhaps we can update the minutes after the teleconference?
14:06:34 [chimezie]
... we can approve the minutes modulo this change
14:06:45 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at, modulo change noted by SteveH
14:06:54 [LeeF]
ACTION: LeeF to talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21
14:06:54 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-10 - Talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21 [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05].
14:08:07 [chimezie]
LeeF: We will skip next weeks teleconference and resume a week from tommorow
14:08:27 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
14:08:27 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
14:08:28 [LeeF]
topic: introductions - Paul Gearon
14:09:12 [chimezie]
Paul: I was one of the original developers on Mulgara. Currently working with Neurocommons with Mulgara
14:09:37 [chimezie]
... originally working on a storage system and query over the database. Worked on first implementation of SPARQL
14:10:27 [LeeF]
open actions -
14:10:47 [chimezie]
LeeF: 3 open actions having to do with rdf:text. We will discuss this today (shortly)
14:11:05 [chimezie]
... Any additional review?
14:11:12 [LeeF]
trackbot, close action-7
14:11:12 [trackbot]
ACTION-7 Send a pointer to the mailinglist for rdf:text, when it's up to LC closed
14:11:14 [chimezie]
SteveH: I consider it discharged
14:11:16 [LeeF]
trackbot, close action-8
14:11:16 [trackbot]
ACTION-8 Review rdf:text closed
14:11:18 [LeeF]
trackbot, close action-9
14:11:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-9 Try to review rdf:text closed
14:11:25 [pgearon]
chimezie: sorry for audio quality. It's Fedora Commons :
14:11:34 [LeeF]
14:11:47 [LeeF]
topic: rdf:text
14:11:56 [chimezie]
s/Neurocommons/Fedora Commons
14:12:42 [chimezie]
LeeF: Jointly put forward by two WGs. Potentially impacts SPARQL. Andy has reviewed, so has SteveH. As a group we need to decide how to respond
14:12:56 [AxelPolleres]
q+ on status of the review.
14:13:14 [chimezie]
LeeF: Best way forward on this?
14:13:24 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
14:13:24 [Zakim]
AxelPolleres, you wanted to comment on status of the review.
14:14:02 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: Andy's comments are substantial and important cna can be addressed w/out to many changes. rdf:text should not discuss semantic equivalent besides D-entailment.
14:14:46 [Zakim]
14:14:55 [chimezie]
... We probably n eed a few mail cycles to finalized. Perhaps a short agenda item during the F2F
14:15:25 [SteveH]
+1 to having it in record
14:15:29 [chimezie]
LeeF: Can we ensure the discusdsion is mentioned on the WG list for the benefit of everyone else?
14:15:45 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: Agreed.
14:16:31 [bijan]
I'm trying to review the comments
14:16:34 [bijan]
I don't fully understand them
14:16:34 [dnewman2]
dnewman2 has joined #sparql
14:16:35 [chimezie]
LeeF: Does RIF/OWL need official responses? Anyone here have issues with Andy/SteveH speaking on behalf of the WG?
14:16:46 [bijan]
14:16:51 [chimezie]
SteveH: Andy's understanding is slightly better than mine
14:16:53 [bijan]
zakim, unmute me
14:16:53 [Zakim]
bijan was not muted, bijan
14:17:23 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: We should try to clarify the last point regarding datatypes and ??string function??
14:17:49 [chimezie]
bijan: We are either working up an official response or send a personal comment. Please clarify
14:18:11 [SteveH]
I feel that SPARQL should send an official response
14:18:12 [chimezie]
LeeF: The WG hasn't sent an official repsonse, but we have a close relationship with these groups. I'm happy with current process.
14:18:27 [chimezie]
... Not sure if anyone else wants a more formal process?
14:18:31 [iv_an_ru]
IMHO a personal comment is enough.
14:19:00 [chimezie]
bijan: There is some fatigue there. Want to make it light-weight.
14:19:41 [chimezie]
... not sure how D-entailment would help or what the substantive impact is regarding the suggested changes
14:19:50 [chimezie]
... want to understand the changes well enough
14:19:51 [SteveH]
14:19:53 [AndyS]
q+ to ask about the results format
14:19:56 [LeeF]
ack bijan
14:20:00 [LeeF]
ack SteveH
14:20:05 [iv_an_ru]
14:20:27 [chimezie]
SteveH: The changes are substantitive. It will probably cause another last call
14:20:30 [LeeF]
ack AndyS
14:20:30 [Zakim]
AndyS, you wanted to ask about the results format
14:20:38 [chimezie]
AndyS: Trying to avoid any chance of a last call for rdf:text
14:20:49 [bijan]
14:20:55 [SteveH]
that's good
14:21:15 [chimezie]
... there should be a section specifically on SPARQL added
14:21:29 [chimezie]
... wouldn't be unhappy about framing as clarification
14:21:30 [SteveH]
if that's true, agreed
14:21:35 [SteveH]
but it wasn't my understanding
14:21:47 [AndyS]
I don't see that Axel's proposed change addresses the Q's on functions.
14:21:57 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: Change from D-entailment to equivalence. Don't think it implies a new last call
14:22:48 [AxelPolleres]
q+ suggestion
14:22:54 [AndyS]
Change is semantic equive to D-entailment (note there is notone singleD-entailment)
14:23:11 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
14:23:37 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: Fine with putting suggestion on Wiki page and decide next week ?
14:23:53 [chimezie]
AndyS: Would appreciate replies to my email (which included examples)
14:24:22 [chimezie]
... Fine with putting it on Wiki page but it is not subsititute for discussion around the issue(s)
14:25:03 [kjetil]
14:25:09 [LeeF]
ack suggestion
14:25:13 [chimezie]
... We still aren't discussing result set format
14:25:24 [chimezie]
LeeF: AxelP can you take a look at this?
14:25:27 [bijan]
14:25:30 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: Sure
14:25:31 [AndyS]
ack AndyS
14:25:36 [LeeF]
ack bijan
14:26:07 [chimezie]
bijan: It might be the case that wee disallow rdf:text in results. Some entailment regimes might want to do differently
14:26:32 [chimezie]
AndyS: It is viable to say it is analagous to RDF graph exchange
14:26:58 [chimezie]
bijan: if rdf:text takes off, we will have to revise anyways at some point
14:27:34 [LeeF]
topic: face to face
14:27:45 [LeeF]
zakim, who's here?
14:27:45 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, pgearon, LeeF, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), Ivan, kjetil (muted), iv_an_ru, JanneS,
14:27:48 [Zakim]
... PrateekJain-WSU, dnewman2
14:27:48 [Zakim]
[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM
14:27:49 [Zakim]
On IRC I see dnewman2, JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, Prateek, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF,
14:27:52 [Zakim]
... AlexPassant, john-l, KjetilK, ericP, trackbot
14:27:53 [chimezie]
LeeF: Confirm attendance (in person versus on phone)
14:27:57 [LeeF]
wiki page
14:28:24 [kjetil]
Zakim, unmute me
14:28:24 [Zakim]
kjetil should no longer be muted
14:28:31 [chimezie]
Zakim, unumte me
14:28:31 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'unumte me', chimezie
14:28:37 [kasei]
I'll be in cambridge next week.
14:28:43 [chimezie]
Zakim, unmute me
14:28:43 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
14:28:54 [chimezie]
I will not be there in person, *may* be able to participate on phone (not sure)
14:28:56 [Zakim]
14:29:36 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
14:29:36 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
14:30:46 [chimezie]
LeeF: Timing of F2F.
14:30:57 [chimezie]
... an hour earlier?
14:31:47 [chimezie]
... Let us make it an hour earlier
14:32:27 [LeeF]
face to face will be 7 - 3 EDT 12 - 8 Bristol time, break each day at 11:30 ET
14:32:53 [chimezie]
LeeF: I put on the agenda a rough goal for the F2F
14:33:09 [chimezie]
... don't want to spend the entire time debating features but to begin the deep dive
14:33:30 [kjetil]
Zakim, mute me
14:33:30 [Zakim]
kjetil should now be muted
14:33:39 [chimezie]
... Perhaps we split the 2 days into 4 half-day blocks. In one of those we discuss deliverables, etc.
14:33:56 [chimezie]
... in the other 3, start diving into features we have consensus on already (by today possibly)
14:34:49 [chimezie]
... This way we can hit the ground running (WRT to features and our process)
14:35:37 [chimezie]
... Also want to discuss a naming convention
14:35:43 [chimezie]
... input/feedback?
14:35:47 [SteveH]
+1, happy
14:35:50 [chimezie]
Sounds like a reasonable agenda to me
14:35:54 [AndyS]
14:35:54 [LukeWM]
sounds ok to me
14:35:56 [pgearon]
14:35:57 [kjetil]
14:35:57 [Prateek]
14:35:58 [AxelPolleres]
14:35:59 [AlexPassant]
14:36:06 [iv_an_ru]
14:36:07 [bijan]
+1 to the organizational majesty of lee
14:36:07 [SimonS]
14:36:27 [chimezie]
LeeF: Questions about logistics?
14:36:32 [kjetil]
Zakim, unmute me
14:36:32 [Zakim]
kjetil should no longer be muted
14:36:50 [JanneS]
14:36:51 [chimezie]
kjetil: Car pool from HP labs?
14:37:03 [AndyS]
14:37:17 [chimezie]
SteveH: I'm going by car, but it is quite small
14:37:28 [iv_an_ru]
I'm sorry, I had to escape right now.
14:37:33 [Zakim]
14:38:08 [kjetil]
Zakim, unmute me
14:38:08 [Zakim]
kjetil was not muted, kjetil
14:38:13 [kjetil]
Zakim, mute me
14:38:13 [Zakim]
kjetil should now be muted
14:38:15 [AndyS]
Suggest aim to be at HPL 11:30am for setup.
14:38:16 [LeeF]
ack JanneS
14:38:38 [chimezie]
JanneS: ??HP?? providing a teleconference #?
14:39:09 [AxelPolleres]
should be the same teleconf facility... to be clarified by eric, I guess.
14:39:20 [ivan]
14:39:43 [AxelPolleres]
andy: normal phone in the room as "fallback"
14:39:53 [chimezie]
... (conversation continues regarding logistics) ...
14:40:03 [LeeF]
ack ivan
14:40:28 [chimezie]
ivan: We should not have a problem with Zakim
14:40:28 [LeeF]
ACTION: LeeF to work with Ivan, ericP to reserve zakim for face to face days
14:40:28 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-11 - Work with Ivan, ericP to reserve zakim for face to face days [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05].
14:40:39 [LeeF]
ACTION: LeeF to work with EricP to procure a phone for the Cambridge, MA location
14:40:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-12 - Work with EricP to procure a phone for the Cambridge, MA location [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05].
14:40:41 [AxelPolleres]
we shall request zakim for both days, eric should get the physical phone, that should work.
14:40:54 [chimezie]
... prefer to use/have Zakim
14:41:02 [LeeF]
topic: feature survey
14:41:16 [LeeF]
feature survey -
14:41:31 [LeeF]
feature survey results -
14:41:49 [SteveH]
q+ to ask about public/private-ness
14:41:53 [SteveH]
14:42:03 [chimezie]
I wasn't able to decipher priority order from that page
14:42:20 [chimezie]
LeeF: Inclincation to have votes on this survey be public, but wanted to run it by group 1st
14:42:24 [chimezie]
... concerns?
14:42:26 [kjetil]
+1 on public
14:42:36 [SteveH]
+1 from me
14:42:40 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: have votes on featue survey be public
14:42:50 [SteveH]
raw data:
14:42:50 [AndyS]
chimezie, it was opaque with new results it's clear - may need to reload browser (I had caching weirdnesses)
14:42:59 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: have votes on feature survey be public
14:43:05 [iv_an_ru]
+1 for public votes
14:43:26 [AxelPolleres]
14:43:45 [AndyS]
Does the TTL record the "don't wants"?
14:43:59 [chimezie]
SteveH: Rendering of another file.
14:44:05 [SteveH]
14:44:36 [chimezie]
... Process of taking the .ttl page, ran an algorithm to produce a graph
14:44:56 [chimezie]
... people should verify validity. The javascript is visible as well
14:45:11 [chimezie]
... SVG file captures the ???? relationships
14:45:24 [LeeF]
14:45:37 [LeeF]
14:45:54 [chimezie]
... Condorcet method looks for pair-wise comparison of every feature voted for and counts how many times feature appear in each vote
14:45:54 [AxelPolleres]
14:46:32 [chimezie]
... can get loops ..
14:46:53 [SteveH]
???? = beats
14:47:04 [chimezie]
LeeF: one way of interpreting results
14:47:14 [chimezie]
... this was suggested as a good way to look at this
14:47:27 [chimezie]
... it is not quite cut and dry as appears in diagram
14:47:47 [chimezie]
... do we have consensus on the popular features? For example, Agg functions are at the top
14:48:58 [SteveH]
note, my condorcet code doesn't take don't want into account, treats it as won't car
14:49:01 [chimezie]
... AggregateFuncs & Update are the two with consensus importance
14:49:30 [LeeF]
14:49:56 [chimezie]
... Subselects are not top choice, but 11 WG members put it within top 10 ranking. 6 WG members put it in top 3
14:50:15 [chimezie]
LeeF: Propose there is consensus on these 3 at least
14:50:46 [chimezie]
I agree that these seem to represent consensus
14:50:46 [pgearon]
14:50:47 [SteveH]
I support that idea
14:50:48 [kjetil]
Zakim, unmute me
14:50:48 [Zakim]
kjetil should no longer be muted
14:50:48 [AlexPassant]
14:50:50 [Prateek]
14:50:51 [ivan]
14:50:52 [AndyS]
I support these features
14:50:53 [kjetil]
14:50:54 [AxelPolleres]
14:50:55 [LukeWM]
me too
14:51:58 [chimezie]
LeeF: Hold off on making them requirements for further conversation
14:52:20 [AndyS]
Agree not going to "required" until results are fully in.
14:52:38 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: The SPARQL WG adopt AggregateFunctions, Subselects, and Update as three deliverables (either required or time-permitting) for the second phase of the group
14:52:42 [SteveH]
14:52:50 [kjetil]
14:52:55 [AndyS]
14:52:58 [ivan]
14:52:58 [AxelPolleres]
14:52:59 [Prateek]
14:52:59 [JanneS]
14:53:01 [pgearon]
14:53:03 [SimonS]
14:53:14 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: The SPARQL WG adopt AggregateFunctions, Subselects, and Update as three deliverables (either required or time-permitting) for the second phase of the group
14:53:56 [kjetil]
Zakim, mute me
14:53:56 [Zakim]
kjetil should now be muted
14:54:06 [chimezie]
LeeF: would like to (for F2F) solicit volunteers for more design details. If you can give survey on designs, please let the Chair know
14:54:13 [chimezie]
14:55:29 [chimezie]
LeeF: discussion on features with little support but for which we have champions who should discuss why or why not these should be included
14:55:34 [kjetil]
Zakim, unmute me
14:55:34 [Zakim]
kjetil should no longer be muted
14:56:31 [chimezie]
... there was discussion that limit per resource could be handled by subselects (which is currently a high-priority feature)
14:57:17 [chimezie]
kjetil: Now with subselects it is a small thing to implement. It is extremely important feature because alot of cases we want to list the resources and limit them so we don't get too many solutions
14:57:31 [SteveH]
q+ to talk abut FOAF
14:57:33 [chimezie]
... The main selling point is that RDF is suited for heterogenous data
14:58:00 [LeeF]
ack SteveH
14:58:01 [chimezie]
... would like to hear from those who don't want it
14:58:02 [Zakim]
SteveH, you wanted to talk abut FOAF
14:58:32 [chimezie]
SteveH: This is a feature that is needed quite a bit with FOAF in exactly this case: trying to find up to 3 foaf:names and don't want to be overwhelmed with results
14:58:36 [SimonS]
q+ to say I am fine with subselects, but do not want explicit syntax
14:58:45 [chimezie]
... prefer subselect aggregate behavior rather than specific syntax in case we get it wrong
14:59:46 [chimezie]
SimonS: Time-permitting feature anyways. The ORGs that need it, if we do the whole work to specify the syntax, would that be acceptable to WG?
15:00:03 [SteveH]
my ord needs it for frefernce
15:00:06 [SteveH]
15:00:18 [SimonS]
wasn't me
15:00:28 [AxelPolleres]
q+ to ask about surface syntax
15:00:29 [chimezie]
LeeF: Concerned with org-specific spec'ing
15:00:35 [AndyS]
15:01:28 [chimezie]
... I feel it would be wise to wait and see if impl. add syntax even with the other features
15:01:34 [LeeF]
ack SimonS
15:01:34 [Zakim]
SimonS, you wanted to say I am fine with subselects, but do not want explicit syntax
15:01:35 [chimezie]
... that would make a stronger case for standardization
15:01:54 [chimezie]
SimonS: I don't like introducing specific syntax, but happy with subselects addressing this issue
15:01:56 [SteveH]
+1 to SimonS
15:02:06 [chimezie]
... makes sense to build into feature we standardize eventually
15:02:17 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
15:02:17 [Zakim]
AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about surface syntax
15:02:32 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: Do we want to subsume such things under surface syntax?
15:02:50 [chimezie]
... avote against surface syntax speaks generally about things like this
15:03:18 [AndyS]
SurfaceSyntax is a bit of a catch-all. I'm wary of putting too much in it.
15:03:28 [chimezie]
LeeF: There doesn't seem to be overwhelming support
15:04:02 [chimezie]
kjetil: We might want to come back to this after discussion on surface syntax
15:04:38 [chimezie]
LeeF: if we accept surface syntax we need a strict definiition
15:04:59 [chimezie]
... to me it is any feature that can be re-written with identical semantics w/out the new syntax
15:05:52 [Zakim]
15:05:58 [chimezie]
LeeF: SPARQL/OWL and Parameterized Inference there is confusion on how they are related
15:06:41 [chimezie]
bijan: We have extensibility point on semantics of additional answers. We have a number of implementations
15:07:02 [chimezie]
... it would be nice to converge on SPARQL syntax / semantics. Have alot of users who want it that move to higher expressivity
15:07:29 [chimezie]
... a separate document and can envision more regimes , so this can be a 'starter'
15:07:32 [AxelPolleres]
Bijan, could you paste a link to the BGP extension proposed?
15:07:52 [chimezie]
... it's relation to parameterized inference is that it gives us more regimes to parameterized. Don't need p-inference to make use of SPARQL/OWL.
15:08:05 [chimezie]
... independent on how you indicate semantics
15:08:28 [chimezie]
LeeF: It would be helpful to address priority
15:08:30 [pgearon]
15:08:36 [chimezie]
... there are 2 ORGs that don't want this
15:08:45 [LeeF]
ack pgearon
15:08:58 [AxelPolleres]
q+ to further explain disambiguation of ParamInference and SPARQL/OWL
15:09:13 [chimezie]
pgearon: Don't want to see it, because it could bring the server to its knees
15:09:26 [chimezie]
LeeF: This would not be compulsory (and it's own document)
15:09:32 [AndyS]
q+ to ask about WG Notes
15:09:39 [ivan]
15:09:40 [chimezie]
bijan: compulsory only for systems that *want* to support this
15:10:02 [LukeWM]
15:10:03 [bijan]
s/to support OWL sensitive query/
15:10:13 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: I agree with Bijan. They are complementary. SPARQL/OWL discusses one entailmemnt regime, p-inference is about requesting (in a query) for a certain entailment regime
15:10:18 [bijan]
s/to support this/to support OWL sensitive query/
15:10:33 [bijan]
RDFS should fall out of it, yes
15:10:42 [chimezie]
... do we want to increment up from simple entailment (RDFS, etc..)
15:11:08 [chimezie]
... do we want the WG to work on whether it is requested , do we want the WG to specify advertization of entailment regime (service description)
15:11:13 [LeeF]
ack AndyS
15:11:13 [Zakim]
AndyS, you wanted to ask about WG Notes
15:11:18 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
15:11:18 [Zakim]
AxelPolleres, you wanted to further explain disambiguation of ParamInference and SPARQL/OWL
15:11:42 [chimezie]
AndyS: WG notes? Not confortable with WG members doing paralle work being injected later into REC track
15:11:56 [pgearon]
+1 for the WG to specify advertising entailment regime (and optional features in general)
15:12:06 [chimezie]
... nervous about 'compulsory' implies tests to distinguish if services meet levels of compliance
15:12:19 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #sparql
15:13:12 [AndyS]
AndyS: Was picking up on the point Lee made about REC track.
15:13:17 [chimezie]
LeeF: great point. Something like SPARQL/OWL (which is orthogonal to main query language) is appropriate for a specification that is reviewed as a REC track or Note
15:13:30 [chimezie]
... SPARQL/OWL is appropriate for this
15:13:36 [chimezie]
bijan: Was thinking about REC track
15:14:11 [chimezie]
... I have been tasked to write this up anyways. Want to force CR on implementations to force convergence
15:14:16 [JanneS]
(sorry gotta run home) - hear you next week
15:14:26 [Zakim]
15:14:37 [chimezie]
AndyS: If we put it on REC track we have a finite amount of time to discuss issues
15:14:47 [chimezie]
bijan: Agreed. We don't have to decide until late in the game
15:15:11 [chimezie]
... willing to do work with possible outcome of a Note. If we can make it with reasonable amount of effort, it wouldn't preclude a REC doc
15:15:21 [chimezie]
... a Note is better than nothing
15:15:28 [LeeF]
15:16:19 [AxelPolleres]
15:16:20 [chimezie]
ivan: do we plan to do anythign at all with rules. If everything goes as planned, by the time this SPARQL is a REC we ill have RIF as a REC
15:16:30 [AndyS]
If SPARQL/OWL, be great for a RDFS (RDFS++) Note as well.
15:16:33 [chimezie]
... something should say how SPARQL relates to RIF.. we should be careful
15:16:45 [chimezie]
+1 with Ivan about isolating SPARQL from other standards
15:17:00 [pgearon]
15:17:09 [chimezie]
Zakum unmute me
15:17:14 [LeeF]
ack ivan
15:17:16 [chimezie]
Zakum, unmute me
15:17:31 [chimezie]
Parematerized inference does give an extension point to RIF as described in the Wiki
15:17:40 [LeeF]
chimezie, thanks, you are right
15:17:48 [AndyS]
zakim, unmute chimezie
15:17:49 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
15:17:55 [SteveH]
but arguable not an appropriate one...
15:18:11 [AxelPolleres]
+1 to ivan
15:18:16 [LeeF]
15:18:20 [LeeF]
ack LukeWM
15:18:31 [chimezie]
zakim, mute me
15:18:31 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
15:18:47 [chimezie]
LukeWM: don't know that much about OWL, haven't had much experience with it, mostly a matter of priority
15:18:59 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
15:19:23 [chimezie]
AxelPolleres: RIF+RDF graphs complies well with entailment regimes for SPARQL
15:20:19 [chimezie]
... they should go together
15:20:24 [bijan]
q+ to ask if this is how we mean to go on as opposed to the language groups doing them themselves
15:20:27 [chimezie]
LeeF: Time is the primary caveat
15:20:32 [SteveH]
I suspect that RIF and OWL raise slightly different issues
15:20:44 [bijan]
SteveH: for sure
15:21:03 [chimezie]
... doing one of these will be a good way to test the current extension point
15:21:15 [LeeF]
ack pgearon
15:21:54 [chimezie]
pgearon: Rules are: rule-based query and rulesets that generate statements (falls into area of update)
15:22:25 [chimezie]
zakim, unmute me
15:22:25 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
15:22:48 [LeeF]
chimezie: I think there is an overlap between what SPARQL/OWL and parameterizedinference are tryingto achieve
15:22:54 [LeeF]
... important to spell out more clearly than we currently do
15:23:16 [LeeF]
... better to do one or the other than nother
15:23:29 [LeeF]
... important as we do more expressive querying of the semantic web
15:23:46 [SteveH]
I don't like conflating ParameterisedInference and SPARQL/OWL
15:23:50 [LeeF]
ack bijan
15:23:50 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to ask if this is how we mean to go on as opposed to the language groups doing them themselves
15:23:58 [SteveH]
they are really quite different
15:24:18 [chimezie]
bijan: perhaps WGs and community can do this
15:24:24 [ivan]
15:24:32 [SimonS]
SteveH +1
15:24:36 [chimezie]
This argument applies to OWL as well as RIF , BTW (having this done in separate communities)
15:25:00 [ivan]
15:25:05 [AxelPolleres]
+1 to that OWL and RIF did already a lot of pre-work in these regards and it shouldn't be so difficult as some expect.
15:25:30 [ivan]
15:25:34 [chimezie]
SteveH: one is about querying store with inference capability and the other is about for this query , use this set of features
15:25:52 [chimezie]
The difference is that in once case you are being specific about the 'feature' in the other, the feature is open ended
15:25:56 [chimezie]
zakim, unmute me
15:25:56 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji was not muted, chimezie
15:26:43 [SteveH]
q+ (again sorry)
15:26:48 [LeeF]
chimezie: RDF clinical data - want to derive variables for reporting to external agency - reporting requirements come after the fact - makes sense to write constraints for how to derive variables and then include that as parameter to the query
15:28:04 [chimezie]
ivan: if we forget RIF for a moment, we have various ways to add inference (RDF, OWL2, RDFS, etc..)
15:28:27 [chimezie]
... a finite list. Not really parameterized. With RIF we have something else. A well0defined way to define rules
15:29:09 [SimonS]
q+ the (RDF, OWL2, ...) case is not that different if you consider ontologies as parameters analogous to rulesets
15:29:28 [LeeF]
ack SteveH
15:29:31 [LeeF]
ack ivan
15:29:34 [SimonS]
15:29:37 [chimezie]
SteveH: different point. Prior was working on rule-based query engines.
15:29:45 [chimezie]
... didn't require syntax extension
15:30:09 [Zakim]
15:30:13 [chimezie]
... the concern is regarding the proposed syntax. Doesn't cover this usecase . Use services instead of rules
15:30:27 [chimezie]
... the community therefor doesn't have enough consensus
15:30:40 [bijan]
It seems that people are confusing defining an entailment/generation regime with the task of assigning such a regime to a particular BGP
15:31:19 [AxelPolleres]
q+ why just FROM is not so easy.
15:31:29 [chimezie]
the latter is needed in either case
15:31:32 [AxelPolleres]
15:31:35 [AxelPolleres]
15:31:46 [AndyS]
+1 to SteveH - need parts of query, not just overall
15:31:52 [bijan]
Why a rule set instead of an arbitrary extra graph?
15:32:07 [chimezie]
i.e., specifying a regime is only useful if you can 'use' it explicitely. I think of this latter part as the common ground between both
15:32:43 [bijan]
chimezie, sure (though you can do it with endpoints), but they are distinct.
15:33:55 [chimezie]
LeeF: not sure where are . Perhaps continue on mailing list?
15:34:00 [chimezie]
... pick it up during F2F
15:34:04 [chimezie]
... adjorn for today
15:34:10 [bijan]
Cheers to Lee for noble chairing
15:34:30 [bijan]
Cheers to chime for scribing the maddness
15:34:31 [SteveH]
thanks Lee, Chimezie
15:34:34 [Zakim]
15:34:37 [AxelPolleres]
thanks all! see you next week
15:34:37 [Zakim]
15:34:38 [Zakim]
15:34:40 [AlexPassant]
15:34:43 [Zakim]
15:34:44 [Zakim]
15:34:45 [pgearon]
Thanks everyone
15:34:46 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has left #sparql
15:34:49 [Zakim]
15:34:56 [Zakim]
15:34:57 [chimezie]
do you need me to generate minutes, etc..?
15:35:15 [LeeF]
chimezie, no I'll take care of it
15:35:22 [chimezie]
15:35:35 [Zakim]
15:35:41 [Zakim]
15:35:46 [Zakim]
15:35:55 [Zakim]
15:38:00 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has left #sparql
15:39:51 [kasei]
kasei has left #sparql
15:40:55 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, dnewman2, in SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM
15:40:59 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:41:00 [Zakim]
Attendees were john-l, AlexPassant, kasei, +049261287aaaa, SimonS, AndyS, +03539149aabb, SteveH, LukeWM, bijan, AxelPolleres, LeeF, pgearon, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, kjetil,
15:41:03 [Zakim]
... +01212803aacc, iv_an_ru, JanneS, PrateekJain-WSU, dnewman2
15:53:51 [SteveH_]
SteveH_ has joined #sparql
15:53:59 [LukeWM]
LukeWM has joined #sparql
16:05:21 [ivan]
ivan has left #sparql
16:40:02 [SimonS]
SimonS has left #sparql
17:19:45 [LeeF]
for anyone's edification, here's what i do to make the minutes
17:20:07 [LeeF]
(not sure if anyone can do this or not)
17:20:10 [LeeF]
17:20:20 [LeeF]
2: choose SPARQL, "Use this group"
17:20:50 [LeeF]
3: in the "Copy RRSAgent IRC Log to Wiki Chatlog", make sure we've got the correct date and lcick "Copy IRC Log"
17:21:29 [LeeF]
4: follow the link to the new wiki page for the raw minutes ( in this case)
17:21:37 [LeeF]
5: hand edit the minutes to do the following:
17:22:04 [LeeF]
5a: remove cruft
17:22:49 [LeeF]
5b: :%s/ivan/ivanh (vim)
17:25:51 [LeeF]
5c: add a line like this near the beginning:
17:25:53 [LeeF]
<LeeF> Present: Lee, Alex, Axel, Andy, iv_an_ru, IvanH, chimezie, john-l, lukewm, steveh, dnewman2, bijan, kjetil, prateek, kasei, Simon, pgearon, Janne
17:26:10 [LeeF]
(goal is to list all participants in a way that is unambiguous with respect to )
17:26:38 [LeeF]
5d: manually (grr) do any s/.../... substitutions while cleaning up mnutes a la normal
17:27:54 [LeeF]
5e: make sure there are sane '<Person> topic: foo' lines scattered about
17:30:56 [LeeF]
5f: add '<Person> summary: foo' lines below topics where useful
17:36:34 [LeeF]
6: click "preview nicely formatted version" near the top
17:36:45 [LeeF]
(this brings me to )
17:37:07 [LeeF]
7: in some cases, there will be errors in pink boxes - go back and fix the wiki minutes source and re-generate the preview
17:37:40 [LeeF]
8: enter comment / description of changes and click 'Save for Review/Approval'
17:37:51 [LeeF]
9: send link to WG
17:37:54 [LeeF]
10: ???
17:37:56 [LeeF]
11: profit!
17:40:55 [ericP]
good plan
17:43:10 [LeeF]
17:43:12 [LeeF]
17:43:16 [LeeF]
you got some actions in this meeting this morning
17:43:30 [LeeF]
'ACTION: ericP to solve world hunger'
17:49:26 [ericP]
17:49:28 [ericP]
17:51:39 [LeeF]
do little thin rectangles really solve world hunger?
17:52:11 [LeeF]
can you reserve zakim all day for next wednesday and thursday (May 6th and 7th)? we'll need it from 7am - 3pm (maybe later, i guess) our time
18:07:07 [LeeF]
18:37:04 [ericP]
18:37:33 [ericP]
i'm in pretty deep right now so it may wait 'till monday
19:52:34 [iv_an_ru]
iv_an_ru has joined #sparql
22:52:55 [pgearon]
pgearon has joined #sparql