13:51:01 RRSAgent has joined #sparql 13:51:01 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/09/29-sparql-irc 13:51:03 RRSAgent, make logs world 13:51:03 Zakim has joined #sparql 13:51:05 Zakim, this will be 77277 13:51:06 Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference 13:51:06 Date: 29 September 2009 13:51:07 ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes 13:51:23 Chair: LeeF 13:51:28 Regrets: SimonS 13:51:47 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-09-29 13:52:03 LeeF has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-09-29 13:56:32 they will now :) 13:56:42 Not once I play my Jedi mind tricks. 13:56:48 SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started 13:56:55 +??P4 13:57:20 Zakim, ??P4 is [Garlik] 13:57:20 +[Garlik]; got it 13:57:21 +LeeF 13:57:43 chimezie has joined #sparql 13:57:58 +kasei 13:58:01 Zakim, what is the passcode? 13:58:02 the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), chimezie 13:58:03 +OlivierCorby 13:58:34 Zakim, mute me 13:58:34 kasei should now be muted 13:58:35 +Chimezie_Ogbuji 13:58:55 Zakim, mute me 13:58:55 Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted 13:59:36 Zakim, unmute me 13:59:36 Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted 13:59:46 Scribe: Chimezie 13:59:48 Scribenick: chimezie 13:59:58 +bglimm 14:00:02 zakim, who's on the phone? 14:00:02 On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm 14:00:08 bglimm has joined #SPARQL 14:00:23 +AxelPolleres 14:00:24 I can hear you 14:00:35 +??P38 14:00:47 +pgearon 14:00:49 zakim, ??P38 is me 14:00:49 +AndyS; got it 14:00:52 Zakim, mute me 14:00:52 bglimm should now be muted 14:00:56 SimonKJ has joined #sparql 14:01:28 Zakim, who is here? 14:01:28 On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon 14:01:30 On IRC I see SimonKJ, bglimm, chimezie, Zakim, RRSAgent, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, LeeF, AxelPolleres, karl, LukeWM, ivan, danbri, iv_an_ru, SteveH, kjetil, AlexPassant, kasei, 14:01:32 ... KjetilK, trackbot, ericP 14:01:40 ericP, joining us? 14:01:44 ivan, joining us? 14:01:47 iv_an_ru, joining us? 14:01:53 Zakim, mute me 14:01:53 Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted 14:02:04 kjetil, joining us? 14:02:07 zakim, dial ivan-voip 14:02:07 ok, ivan; the call is being made 14:02:08 +Ivan 14:02:18 LeeF: yes:-) 14:02:21 +EricP 14:02:22 +??P1 14:02:26 Zakim, ??P1 is me 14:02:26 +AlexPassant; got it 14:02:56 +SimonKJ 14:03:15 zakim, who's on the phone? 14:03:15 On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon, Ivan, AlexPassant, EricP, SimonKJ 14:04:12 topic: Admin 14:04:13 PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-09-22 14:04:19 + +1.617.588.aaaa - is perhaps manrique? 14:04:40 zakim, aaaa is Orri 14:04:40 sorry, LeeF, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa' 14:04:45 zakim, who's on the phone? 14:04:45 On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon, Ivan, AlexPassant, EricP, SimonKJ, manrique? 14:04:50 zakim, manrique? is Orri 14:04:50 +Orri; got it 14:05:08 minutes look fine 14:05:10 RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-09-22 14:05:40 next meeting is October 6 same time 14:06:00 LeeF:Axel to chair next week 14:06:04 I cannot make it 14:06:10 regrets for next week: bglimm, leef, and ericp at risk 14:06:11 next week (travellking) 14:06:37 speaker:anyone else making ISWC meeting? 14:06:40 s/travellking/travelling/ 14:06:55 AndyS has joined #sparql 14:07:00 good idea to meet up @ ISWC, maybe we shall collect who's there 14:07:05 s/speaker/pgearon 14:07:06 ty 14:07:16 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F2 14:08:09 LeeF: want to start putting together agenda and logistics for F2F 14:08:19 collected so far planning to go to ISWC: steveH, chime, LeeF, AxelP 14:08:27 ... need to know RSVP 14:08:44 AlexPassant, also Greg Williams 14:09:00 LeeF:All organizations need to re-join group 14:09:06 AxelPolleres, and ericP 14:09:31 topic: Liaisons 14:09:38 LeeF, do you have a list of who's not rejoined? 14:09:45 nothing from XQuery or HCLS 14:09:57 OWL is now really in PR 14:10:00 riff is meeting today, but didn't have meeting last week 14:10:00 SteveH, good question - I don't offhand but imagine ivan might be able to compile one? 14:10:08 s/riff/RIF/ 14:10:36 LeeF: Eric ask HCLS about F2F meeting at ISWC 14:10:50 ericP: probably will involve usecases for distributed query and update 14:11:35 LeeF:open actions 14:11:52 Ori: who is leading RDB2RDF? 14:11:53 topic: actions & issues 14:12:08 s/Ori/Orri 14:12:12 To Orri: Harry Halpin Staff Contact, Ahmed Ezzat HP, Michael Hausenblas DERI 14:12:14 http://www.w3.org/2009/08/rdb2rdf-charter 14:12:50 LeeF: looking at errata. Only looking at the diff 14:13:05 ... *then* merge content. 14:13:22 yes 14:13:39 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/open 14:13:48 LeeF: looked at open issues - summarizing state of issues 14:13:55 issues summary - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JulSep/0419.html 14:14:39 ... will propose to resolve some issues (perhaps next week). 14:14:46 I took a look and they looked fine. 14:15:11 q+ to report on ACTION-98 14:15:18 ack AxelPolleres 14:15:18 AxelPolleres, you wanted to report on ACTION-98 14:15:30 Zakim, unmute me 14:15:31 Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted 14:15:37 trackbot, close ACTION-98 14:15:37 ACTION-98 Ask ivan/eric whether we need to mention time permitting features in FPWD. closed 14:16:56 ACTION-78 & ACTION-79 probably should be closed (can't go further) 14:17:05 w/out something to review, etc. 14:17:20 trackbot, close ACTION-78 14:17:20 ACTION-78 Continue discussion of update= vs. query= on the mailing list closed 14:17:31 +??P43 14:17:32 LeeF: Simon and I will work into update document 14:17:35 q+ 14:17:39 Zakim, ??P43 is me 14:17:39 +KjetilK; got it 14:17:52 Zakim, mute me 14:17:52 KjetilK should now be muted 14:18:19 SteveH: investigate use of single verb 14:18:26 ... for HAVING/FILTER 14:18:49 let's talk about HAVING vs. FILTER later 14:18:50 LeeF: will discuss aggregate issue later today 14:18:53 trackbot, close ACTION-78 14:18:53 ACTION-78 Continue discussion of update= vs. query= on the mailing list closed 14:19:02 trackbot, close ACTION-79 14:19:03 ACTION-79 Continue forward with aggregates w.r.t test cases, HAVING/FILTER clause, ISSUE-35, ... closed 14:19:22 LeeF: any other action to close? 14:19:48 ... Andy asked about tracking issues in task forces 14:20:03 LeeF: Chairs will monitor and will elevate outstanding issues 14:20:30 -EricP 14:20:34 ... scalability concerns, etc.. 14:20:42 +EricP 14:21:06 ... members bring forth issues if they think they need to be raised. does that work? 14:21:07 +1 14:21:09 +1 14:21:11 +1 14:21:24 +1 (label issues with TF-XXX?) 14:21:32 we could use a prefix, like for emails 14:21:46 +1 (good idea to label) 14:22:00 topic: FPWDs 14:22:21 +Prateek 14:23:03 LeeF: (to team contacts). How do reviewers raise technical issues? What should reviewers look for towards FPWD 14:23:06 +1 14:23:10 DAWG? 14:24:02 IvanH: there is no obvious process other than general formatting, etc. nothing specific 14:24:46 to be checked technical issues, abstract, formatting 14:25:02 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ 14:25:29 Prateek has joined #sparql 14:25:32 Reviewers for query from last time: birte, Lee 14:25:37 I volunteered 14:26:05 SteveH: no mention of aggregate functions. generally rough. grammar needs cleaning up 14:26:19 LeeF: have open issue regarding exact collection of aggregate functions. COUNT, etc.. 14:27:21 AndyS: do we want to freeze that? I wanted to flesh out content 14:27:27 q+ 14:27:34 LeeF: for FPWD , I'm not concerned about a frozen version 14:28:02 ack SteveH 14:28:18 SteveH: not happy having email address on document 14:28:26 ... can I have link to a home page instead? 14:28:34 ACTION: Birte to review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ for FPWD readiness 14:28:34 Created ACTION-99 - Review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ for FPWD readiness [on Birte Glimm - due 2009-10-06]. 14:28:37 ok 14:28:39 ACTION: Lee to review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ for FPWD readiness 14:28:39 Created ACTION-100 - Review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ for FPWD readiness [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06]. 14:28:51 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.0/ 14:29:17 reviewers for SPARQL/Update: Steve, Luke, Lee 14:29:24 pgearon: was unavailable 14:29:48 I actually missed my own volunteering on reviewing Query... adding action... 14:30:01 ACTION: Axel o review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ for FPWD readiness 14:30:01 Created ACTION-101 - O review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/ for FPWD readiness [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-10-06]. 14:30:01 pgearon: I will catch up with other editor 14:30:32 ACTION: Paul to notify Steve, Luke, and Lee when /Update is ready for FPWD review 14:30:33 Created ACTION-102 - Notify Steve, Luke, and Lee when /Update is ready for FPWD review [on Paul Gearon - due 2009-10-06]. 14:31:05 LeeF: simon and i discussed the protocol document and sent course of action to list 14:31:18 ... waiting on simon to get setup with CVS access 14:31:18 q+ 14:31:38 reviewers for http-update: simonKJ, simonS, Lee 14:31:48 reviewers for protocol-1.1: Axel Alex 14:31:53 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/protocol-1.1/Overview.xml 14:32:17 LeeF: a few areas about lack of support for XSLT 14:32:33 q? 14:32:45 ericP: need to extend the 'standard'.. 14:33:32 ACTION: Simon Johnston and Lee to notify Axel and Alex when /Protocol is ready for FPWD review 14:33:32 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Simon 14:33:32 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. sjohnsto2, sschenk) 14:33:42 ACTION: sjohnsto2 and Lee to notify Axel and Alex when /Protocol is ready for FPWD review 14:33:42 Created ACTION-103 - And Lee to notify Axel and Alex when /Protocol is ready for FPWD review [on Simon Johnston - due 2009-10-06]. 14:34:00 ack AndyS 14:34:11 AndyS: converting query 1.0 document to XML format 14:34:26 Gist of current discussion is that we're editing the docs in XML and the xml-spec XSL needs to be updated to support all the XML tags we use before we actually publish the docs 14:34:33 ericP: brought text into emacs, then did REGEX s/repl on various elements 14:34:56 ... no references 14:35:09 AndyS: how are you doing that? 14:36:01 ACTION: eric to xml-spec'ify the SPARQL Query/1.0 document 14:36:01 Created ACTION-104 - Xml-spec'ify the SPARQL Query/1.0 document [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2009-10-06]. 14:37:18 ericP: [.. gives instructions to AndyS .. for XML processing infrastructure ] 14:37:50 q+ 14:37:55 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JulSep/0416.html 14:38:04 ack SimonKJ 14:38:34 SimonKJ: What browsers should be used with that (problems in safari / chrome) 14:38:45 ericP: depends on stylesheet implementation 14:39:00 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ 14:39:05 confirmed, renders correctly in Firefox 14:40:45 I'll review formally and write email. 14:40:54 Andy, thanks 14:41:02 SteveH and kjetil, are you interested in reviewing it? 14:41:19 Zakim, unmute me 14:41:19 KjetilK should no longer be muted 14:41:58 reviewers (from last time) for http-update: member:simonKJ, simonS, Lee 14:42:47 LeeF: [ .. asks around for reviewers .. ] 14:42:54 speaker2: happy to review 14:43:10 ACTION: Andy to review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ 14:43:10 Created ACTION-105 - Review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ [on Andy Seaborne - due 2009-10-06]. 14:43:13 s/speaker2/simonKJ/ 14:43:16 q+ 14:43:17 ty 14:43:51 KjetilK: been outside of group and remembered simon and I had opposing proposals for update 14:44:01 ACTION: sjohnsto2 to review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ 14:44:01 Created ACTION-106 - Review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ [on Simon Johnston - due 2009-10-06]. 14:44:04 LeeF: hopefully review raises those issues 14:44:08 ACTOIN: kjetil to review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ 14:44:12 ACTION: kjetil to review http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ 14:44:12 Sorry, couldn't find user - kjetil 14:44:16 Zakim, mute me 14:44:16 KjetilK should now be muted 14:44:19 Zakim, unmute me 14:44:19 KjetilK should no longer be muted 14:44:30 ACTION: Lee to make sure that Kjetil reviews http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ 14:44:30 Created ACTION-107 - Make sure that Kjetil reviews http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/ [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06]. 14:44:31 chimezie, do you prefer commenst as ready or all at once? 14:44:38 Zakim, mute me 14:44:38 KjetilK should now be muted 14:44:48 I prefer all at once 14:44:56 OK - will batch 14:47:32 Zakim, unmute me 14:47:32 kasei should no longer be muted 14:47:55 sketch of service description doc: http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt 14:48:51 AxelPolleres, who were our reviewers signed up for SD? 14:49:22 kasei: format needs fleshing out. 14:49:29 Zakim, who is on the phone? 14:49:29 On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei, OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon, Ivan, AlexPassant, EricP, SimonKJ, Orri, KjetilK (muted), 14:49:32 ... Prateek 14:49:34 LeeF: any completeness issues 14:49:56 kasei: if everyone is onboard with email proposal (limiting scope of vocabulary), 14:50:20 ... only big issue is fleshed out discussion of discovery (conneg, RDFa, etc.). no missing parts, however 14:50:25 LeeF: get people reviewing 14:51:14 ACTION: sjohnsto2 to review http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) 14:51:14 Created ACTION-108 - Review http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) [on Simon Johnston - due 2009-10-06]. 14:51:24 ACTION: Axel to review http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) 14:51:24 Created ACTION-109 - Review http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-10-06]. 14:51:39 ACTION: Lee to review http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) 14:51:40 Created ACTION-110 - Review http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/sd.txt for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06]. 14:52:37 +1 to pull PP forward, didn't really have a chance to prepare on Entailment yet, my bad. 14:52:41 LeeF: happy with email responses? 14:52:49 AndyS: fine on mailing list 14:53:40 I'd like to hear from implementors 14:53:41 LeeF: any other issues beyond email dialog? 14:53:58 also, I think my vote for 2 goes from 0 to -1, I've heard scary things 14:54:09 Zakim, mute me 14:54:09 kasei should now be muted 14:54:45 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Design:EntailmentRegimes 14:54:59 There is quite a bit to do still 14:55:36 Zakim, unmute me 14:55:36 bglimm should no longer be muted 14:55:47 LeeF: AndyS asked about requirements 14:56:20 ... how do we (in timely fashion) to where we are in agreement on requirements 14:56:25 q+ to ask about SHOULD MUST or MAY 14:56:28 ... and what problem we are trying to solve 14:56:31 q- 14:56:38 ack bglimm 14:56:38 bglimm, you wanted to ask about SHOULD MUST or MAY 14:57:02 bglimm: one argument was regarding consistency tests for RDFS. inconsistent KB or RDFS graph would entail any consequence 14:57:07 ... andy suggested turning into MAY 14:57:19 ... against RDFS entailment. SHOULD is preferred 14:57:40 +q 14:57:50 AndyS: initial question is regarding what we are addressing 14:58:09 i think the usecase addressed is well motivated by current document 14:58:09 well, we want RDFS entailment and we want scalable 14:58:18 q+ 14:58:37 AndyS: are we enabling rule-based engines. what happens about lack of soundess/completeness? 14:59:20 i.e., lack of additional answers that follow from more than explicit matching (i.e., vocabulary based interpretations) 14:59:36 I think we can have something like OWL RL, but I would like to give explanations on when implementations are incomplete 15:00:04 q- 15:00:14 (will do this on the mailinglist) 15:00:16 pgearon: concerned about practical aspects of inconsistent RDF graph returning everythin 15:00:36 ... w/out sufficient bindings, alot of patterns could theoretically return infinite set (won't make much sense) 15:00:44 q+ to now still mention something. 15:00:45 -Orri 15:01:13 ... not sure how infinite set will work 15:01:29 Yes, as I understand Andy, he said that he can guarantee that he would either return some answers (which are sound) and then stop without finding the inconsistency or he finds it and then stops 15:01:37 we already require that queries are safe WRT current SPARQL 15:01:38 ack AxelPolleres 15:01:38 AxelPolleres, you wanted to now still mention something. 15:01:44 ack pgearon 15:02:04 yes 15:02:09 bglimm, no. 15:02:20 ok, explain 15:02:30 AxelPolleres: legal graphs are RDFS consistent..already prescribed. 15:02:54 AndyS: i want a list of requirements to measure design against 15:03:08 q+ 15:03:09 q+ dont' we already have requiremnts? 15:04:18 q- 15:04:25 q= chimezie 15:04:26 AndyS: we need to consider protocol implications 15:04:28 q+ chimezie 15:04:42 q+ 15:05:01 bglimm: non terminating system will seem 'okay' 15:05:13 ack chimezie 15:05:58 Yes, and one thing is that entailment regimes must say how they guarantee that a system will always return a finite set of answers 15:06:22 There is a list of 4 requirements that entailment regimes must specify 15:06:45 Yes, you can allow incomplete systems, for example 15:08:01 "The effect of a query on an inconsistent graph is not covered by this specification, but must be specified by the particular SPARQL extension." is all I find in the current spec. 15:08:09 ack ivan 15:08:25 ... but this suggests that we have to define a behavior. 15:08:25 15:08:44 bglimm: is this the case that a claim about error is not required in addition to the guarantee of safe queries? 15:08:48 ayways, I think for FPWD, it is enough to list the options. 15:09:01 ISSUE: TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the face of inconsistencies? 15:09:01 Created ISSUE-42 - TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the face of inconsistencies? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/42/edit . 15:09:06 er.. i didn't mean to scribe that in such a way 15:09:13 s/bglimm:/bglimm, 15:09:34 AndyS: talking about if we must check for inconsistency *before* answering the question? 15:09:41 I agree with Ivan 15:09:49 Ivan: valid question, need to answer it 15:09:50 ISSUE-42: Related - do you have to check a graph for consistency to deliver answers for RDFS entailment 15:09:50 ISSUE-42 TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the face of inconsistencies? notes added 15:10:10 Ivan: shouldn't be part of the document 15:10:23 AndyS: want a requirements phase/discussion 15:10:58 If we tease out error handling, expectation, safety of queries, this might clarify the discussion 15:11:40 Andy, I did send this around to get feedback. If you say that some aspect causes difficulties with certain implementation techniques that is valueable feedback, but please explain what actually is the problem, what ways do we have to solve that etc 15:12:28 I share Andy's concerns. 15:12:38 +1 15:12:57 for BGP queries solved in a top-down fashion, you aren't doing validity checking, but are answering a question against a known fact base 15:13:08 I see here the following options: the current spec just says that the effect has to be specified, it doesn't prescribe that these could be specified as implementation-dependent. Let's just summarize the options for FPWD. 15:13:08 for the records: I do share Andy's technical concerns! 15:13:57 LeeF: was suggesting we proceed in a way to better collect requirements 15:13:57 q+ 15:14:09 AndyS: happy if requirements phase is not explicit 15:14:09 q? 15:14:21 ack SteveH 15:14:54 SteveH: shares Andy's concern it is not obvious what kind of systems are being targeted by current proposal 15:15:32 bglimm: The systems will be different. I'm using OWL reasoner - different approach . if there are wording problems let me know 15:15:40 q+ 15:17:32 LeeF: first time around, specification defines answers. 15:17:50 ... then while debating technical points. arguements were based on implementation technique 15:18:33 I thought that's just what Andy has done... (?) 15:19:01 kasei, right, i think that's exactly what Andy has done 15:19:17 LeeF: i might not be able to scribe too much longer :( 15:19:26 chimezie, no prob - thanks for scribing 15:19:29 Ivan: should i as an implementor check consistency and what do I do if I find them? 15:19:34 I can take over... 15:19:51 scribe: Axel Polleres 15:20:15 90 minutes is a long time, chimezie 15:20:31 Ivan: 2 questions, a) should inconsistency always be checked b) what is to be done in case 15:20:47 LeeF: Birte can you summarize these? 15:20:47 q? 15:20:49 ack ivan 15:21:18 q+ 15:21:28 LeeF: we need more formal reviews. 15:21:42 ... what's ready to review. 15:21:54 Birte: only RDFS part ready for review. 15:22:16 LeeF: happy to wait. 15:22:40 Birte: Let's reach more agreement on RDFS first. 15:23:19 Andy & Birte discussing whether MUST->MAY is sufficient or not. 15:23:32 q+ 15:24:06 ivanherman: ready to review, but next week is difficult, question of timing. 15:24:16 ACTION: ivan to review RDFS part of http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Design:EntailmentRegimes as time permits him 15:24:16 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - ivan 15:24:16 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ivan, imikhail) 15:24:20 bglimm: if a system is doing proper RDFS consistency checking, this is at least a superset of what it needs to do in order to answer queries (even semi-niavely) 15:24:23 ACTION: ivanh to review RDFS part of http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Design:EntailmentRegimes as time permits him 15:24:23 Sorry, couldn't find user - ivanh 15:24:31 ACTION: Lee to make sure IvanH reviews RDFS part of http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Design:EntailmentRegimes as time permits him 15:24:31 Created ACTION-111 - Make sure IvanH reviews RDFS part of http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Design:EntailmentRegimes as time permits him [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06]. 15:24:47 ... another thing which should be mentioned is RIF and OWL RL. 15:24:49 I added a template section for RIF and OWL RL 15:25:02 Suggest an example with a simple case like subClassOf (editorial) 15:25:08 LeeF: agreed. 15:25:10 and D-etnailemnt 15:25:22 q? 15:25:24 -Chimezie_Ogbuji 15:25:25 ack ivan 15:26:09