13:05:22 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql-func
13:05:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/09/15-sparql-func-irc
13:07:00 <AxelPolleres> paul, do you plan to dial in still?
13:07:42 <pgearon> yes, just dialling now
13:08:01 <AndyS> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FunctionLibrary
13:08:03 <Zakim> +pgearon
13:08:44 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FunctionLibrary#Starting_Points
13:09:08 <kasei> kasei has joined #sparql-func
13:10:22 <AxelPolleres> lee, you are very hard to understand
13:10:32 <LeeF> I'll type
13:10:48 <LeeF> low hanging fruit for me is things that already exist, are implemented, and use data types within sparql
13:10:54 <LeeF> full-text search is def. not low hanging fruit to me
13:11:02 <LeeF> coalesce/if is on the boundary of what i'd want to consider, it scares me a bit
13:11:06 <LeeF> (but is very useful)
13:13:07 <AxelPolleres> andy: getNamespace, getlocalname are pragmatic but have proven to be confusing.
13:13:07 <LeeF> I wonder if we should discuss "classes" of functions? String functions, Date/datetime functions, Math functions, URI functions, logic functions, SPARQL-specific functions ?
13:14:29 <AndyS> Good idea.
13:14:38 <AxelPolleres> Andy: we should define agreed core with a chance to be implemented widely.
13:15:08 <LeeF> I don't necessarily agree to that. I'd prefer not to add a lot of keywords
13:15:15 <AxelPolleres> keywords vs. iris
13:16:14 <LeeF> I don't think we'll be able to pull whole function libraries in, I think we'll have to be selective... 
13:16:28 <AndyS> I had: Specials (IF) // Constructed e.g. String to IRI // Library choices and library can be string, math, date/time etc
13:17:19 <AxelPolleres> AndyS: keywords only where we need to.
13:17:28 <LeeF> constructors
13:17:36 <AxelPolleres> turning strings into IRIs would be useful.
13:18:08 <LeeF> I think we should try to pick functions from just one library if possible
13:18:24 <AndyS> SQL has different evaluation
13:18:27 <pgearon> I don't see overlap as a problem, so long as namespaces are used
13:18:42 <LeeF> I think it's a little silly to standardize two substring (or whatever) functions
13:19:41 <AxelPolleres> Our take on overlaps would be to pick IRIs, not overlapping.
13:20:14 <AxelPolleres> shall we also pick a namespace for  the existing ones?
13:21:08 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: pick one namespace for the core functions. 
13:21:45 <LeeF> in Glitter I use "http://www.w3.org/2006/sparql-functions#" -- did I invent that or is that codified somewhere?
13:22:50 <AndyS> Invent I think but we coudl use that (rewrite history!)
13:23:13 <pgearon> LeeF, it gives a 404 on the W3C, so I suspect that it's not official
13:23:41 <LeeF> I must have seen it somewhere, since why would I have invented the /2006/ part of it?
13:23:41 <LeeF> hmm
13:23:48 <AxelPolleres> sqrt?
13:23:56 <pgearon> My main problem with XPath/XQuery is finding a library that implements it!  :-)
13:24:08 <LeeF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006AprJun/att-0138/sparql-function-uri.html
13:24:28 <AxelPolleres> Agreement is to start with a subset of xpath/xquery. 
13:24:30 <AxelPolleres> ?
13:24:34 <LeeF> (and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2006AprJun/0168.html )
13:24:40 <LeeF> I'm happy with that.
13:25:02 <AndyS> +1
13:26:09 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-dtb/
13:27:41 <AxelPolleres> no exact different error values in SPARQL 
13:28:56 <AndyS> && and ||
13:30:14 <AxelPolleres> Andy: our error is like a "superclass" of all the xpath/xquery errors 
13:31:37 <AndyS> We can ask for me from XQ
13:31:43 <AndyS> We can ask for one from XQ
13:32:17 <pgearon> heh
13:32:35 <pgearon> should we create a namespace for "op:"
13:33:12 <LeeF> i play a bit dirty in Glitter:
13:33:13 <LeeF> static public final String OP_NAMESPACE                         = "http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions#";
13:33:19 <AxelPolleres> Option 1: base on XPath/XQuery and invent a namespace only for those which are separate.
13:33:34 <AxelPolleres> Option 2: take our own namespace for all
13:33:54 <AxelPolleres> Option 1 caveat: no namespace for op: 
13:35:45 <AxelPolleres> ?X > ?Y
13:36:58 <AxelPolleres> is problematic... since it can boil down to different op:  functions depending on binding of ?X ?Y 
13:36:58 <AndyS> LeeF - I think I do same but I'm on the wrong machine to check.
13:37:29 <AxelPolleres> sparql:less-than
13:37:35 <AxelPolleres> >
13:38:14 <pgearon> While I'm quite happy to duplicate existing functionality in various namespaces, I don't see it as mandatory
13:38:18 <LeeF> Andy - maybe I copied you :)
13:38:38 <LeeF> Why do we define URIs for the existing operators?
13:38:44 <LeeF> s/do we/do we need to
13:39:00 <pgearon> LeeF, for completeness.... but I don't see it as essential
13:39:11 <AndyS> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#OperatorMapping
13:39:18 <pgearon> it's basically overengineering :-)  (But the W3C is good for that)
13:39:18 <LeeF> completeness is not a big (personal) motivator to me :)
13:39:40 <AndyS> It would nice because SPARQL is dynamic to have a IRI for each symbol in that table.
13:39:44 <AndyS> :-)
13:39:57 <pgearon> but that's my point... it would be "nice"
13:40:01 <pgearon> not essential
13:40:04 <LeeF> right, but.... so? :-)
13:40:13 <LeeF> right!
13:40:16 <LeeF> not going to do that :)
13:40:23 <LeeF> ?foo(?bar)
13:40:25 <AndyS> ?var(?a, ?b, ?c)
13:40:28 <pgearon> I'd like it, but I don't see it as essential
13:40:41 <LeeF> no no, not interesting at all :)
13:40:47 <pgearon> Andy: That'd be so cool
13:40:56 <pgearon> I've already been talking with people about doing that in Mulgara :-)
13:40:56 <AxelPolleres> -1 to that... looks suspicious.
13:41:07 <LeeF> pgearon, stop that
13:41:08 <LeeF> :)
13:41:16 <AndyS> eval(?func, ?a, ?,?c)
13:41:28 <pgearon> LeeF, I'm not kidding. Have been seriously considering
13:41:53 <LeeF> yes, that's the part that worries me
13:42:02 <LeeF> ;)
13:42:42 <AxelPolleres> In RIF we have that... special keyword External( ... ) to delimit externally evaluated functions/predicates
13:42:56 <pgearon> I don't know that eval is needed. So long at the namespace for an "unknown" function leads me to something
13:44:48 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE: shall we allow variables in function position?
13:45:19 <LeeF> I'm very much against that, seems way beyond the scope of what we set out to do
13:45:22 <pgearon> just don't forbid it, and I can work with it as a valid extension :-)
13:45:35 <LeeF> No, no agreement there
13:45:38 <LeeF> IF might need one
13:45:42 <AndyS> -1
13:45:46 <LeeF> IF might need one
13:45:51 <AndyS> -1 to ?var()
13:46:09 <pgearon> I don't want to see a new keyword. Just a namespace that must (?) be implemented
13:46:38 <pgearon> something like sparql:
13:46:43 <LeeF> pgearon +1
13:46:54 <pgearon> duplicate functionality into that namespace
13:47:32 <AxelPolleres> so, we put ALL core functions into the core namespace?
13:48:31 <AxelPolleres> +1 to keep all core in our namespace.
13:49:05 <AxelPolleres> paul: sparql functionality in terms of 3 different namespaces sounds messy.
13:49:47 <LeeF> I guess I don't really care about the URIs. I'm much more interested in which functions we adopt
13:49:52 <AxelPolleres> ... the one namespace could be the standard namespace.
13:49:57 <pgearon> "defined as part of the core library". I like that way of putting it
13:50:08 <AxelPolleres> AndyS: we already allow other namespaces.
13:50:13 <AndyS> -1 to namespace : +1 to LeeF
13:50:18 <pgearon> just a reminder: we're 10 minutes out from the SPARQL call
13:51:28 <AxelPolleres> let's continue at this slot next or in two weeks?
13:51:28 <pgearon> I won't be available next week, but fine for 2 weeks
13:51:36 <AxelPolleres> I will try to summarize the status.
13:51:46 <AndyS> What actions will eb competed by then?
13:52:43 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel to look over andy's core set.
13:53:07 <LeeF> AndyS++++
13:53:20 <pgearon> +1 for Andy's suggestion of defining a set of functions (eg. 5 string functions)
13:53:40 <pgearon> This is orthogonal to the namespace issue. I'm happy with it
13:53:51 <AxelPolleres> Andy: my interest in the libary is that it is available everywhere. small set that everyone has would be a big step forward.
13:54:02 <AxelPolleres> +1
13:54:31 <pgearon> Looks like we have consensus on defining a set of functions
13:55:29 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: to mail result of previous acttion to list and ask who supports what
13:55:41 <Zakim> -LeeF
13:55:43 <pgearon> Thanks everyone
13:55:45 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
13:55:47 <kasei> kasei has left #sparql-func
13:55:48 <Zakim> -pgearon
13:55:58 <Zakim> -AndyS
13:56:00 <Zakim> Team_(sparql-func)13:02Z has ended
13:56:01 <Zakim> Attendees were AndyS, +3539149aaaa, AxelPolleres, LeeF, pgearon
13:56:45 <AxelPolleres> THanks!
13:56:45 <AxelPolleres> BTW: anyone knows *where* these actions are tracked or whether they are at all?
13:57:01 <AxelPolleres> I assume I can use the normal SPARQL action tracker?
13:58:00 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public
13:58:12 <AndyS> RRSagent puts them in the minutes
13:58:22 <AndyS> trackbot is the wiki thing
13:58:26 <LeeF> If you want to use the regular sparql tracker, you'll need to port them yourself 
14:00:04 <AndyS> AndyS has left #sparql-func
14:02:36 <AxelPolleres> yup
14:05:06 <AxelPolleres> :-) thanks all!
14:06:40 <AxelPolleres> RIF: Axel still following up, LC comments closed, going to Cand. Rec ... ah, ivan reporting already ;-)
14:07:20 <AxelPolleres> wrong window, oops. ignore.
14:14:37 <pgearon> pgearon has left #sparql-func
14:19:19 <AxelPolleres> member:rrsagent, make public minutes
14:19:29 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make public minutes
14:19:29 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make public minutes', AxelPolleres.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
14:19:32 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has left #sparql-func
15:32:00 <Zakim> Zakim has left #sparql-func