14:29:25 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: let's look at surface syntax

14:29:34 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:SurfaceSyntax

14:30:37 <AxelPolleres> ... this is about "syntactic sugar" to be definable in terms of the current spec.

14:32:39 <AxelPolleres> ... assignments, evaluated expressions partially overlap.

14:32:52 <AxelPolleres> ... scalarExpressions.

14:33:09 <ivanh> q+

14:33:20 <AxelPolleres> ... my idea is treating these at once.

14:33:20 <SteveH> q+

14:33:23 <AxelPolleres> q+

14:33:27 <LeeF> ack ivanh

14:33:45 <AxelPolleres> ivanh: these are low-priority things.

14:33:55 <LeeF> q+ to note educational / learning aspect

14:34:42 <LeeF> ack SteveH

14:34:49 <AxelPolleres> ivanh: syntactic sugar may give impression of huge changes, where there aren't

14:35:10 <AxelPolleres> steve: agree with ivanh mostly.

14:35:44 <KjetilK> q+

14:36:23 <dnewman2> +q

14:36:25 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres

14:36:27 <AxelPolleres> ... we should avoid "syntactic nightmare" extension

14:36:44 <SteveH> "syntactic nightmare" lack of extension, really

14:37:23 <LeeF> ?s :p `3 + 4`

14:37:40 <SteveH> you can't do that with a filter...

14:37:41 <LeeF> ?s :p `?o + 4`

14:37:45 <Zakim> +??P6

14:37:49 <bijan> zakim, ??P6 is me

14:37:49 <Zakim> +bijan; got it

14:37:52 <bijan> zakim, mute me

14:37:52 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted

14:38:44 <LeeF> q?

14:39:52 <LeeF> ack LeeF

14:39:52 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to note educational / learning aspect

14:40:12 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: scalar in construct could be a synt sugar subfeature of assignment.

14:40:30 <bijan> I'll note that good surface syntax can reveal optimization oppourtunities

14:40:32 <AxelPolleres> ... that is why I count it in "surface syntax"

14:40:45 <LeeF> ack KjetilK

14:41:23 <AxelPolleres> Kjetil: we shouldn't under-estimate the power of writing  things quickly.

14:41:28 <SteveH> Garlik use ?x = ... || ?x = ... a lot

14:41:55 <chimezie> We also have had numerous requests for IN support

14:42:00 <LeeF> ack dnewman

14:42:02 <AxelPolleres> ... IN is an axemaple of that.

14:42:24 <AxelPolleres> dave: from an end user perspective this is very attractive.

14:42:48 <AxelPolleres> ... aligns in certain respects with SQL. would support it.

14:43:05 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: any othe opinions?

14:43:19 <ivanh> 0

14:43:20 <KjetilK> +1 (but, yeah, lets do it at the end)

14:43:23 <bijan> 0

14:43:24 <SteveH> 0, it's too broad

14:43:25 <kasei> +1

14:43:26 <chimezie> +1

14:43:27 <dnewman2> +1

14:43:29 <SimonS> +1 agree with Kjetil and Dave, do it at the end

14:43:36 <john-l> 0

14:43:39 <LukeWM> +1 for at the end

14:43:39 <AxelPolleres> strawpoll: is work on surface syntax in general in scope of the WG?

14:43:45 <LeeF> +1 time permitting

14:43:51 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me

14:43:51 <Zakim> KjetilK should now be muted

14:43:51 <AxelPolleres> +1

14:43:53 <ywang4> +1

14:44:07 <SteveH> +1, time permitting, probably

14:44:08 <ywang4> and i think it should be a bit more

14:44:29 <AxelPolleres> (obvious and consensual surface syntax features only)

14:44:39 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

14:44:39 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted

14:44:54 <LeeF> topic: SPARQL/OWL

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 7/5/0

14:44:55 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:SPARQL/OWL

Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:SPARQL/OWL ←

14:44:58 <AxelPolleres> topic: sparql/owl

14:45:51 <AxelPolleres> bijan: a document which specifies which additional inferneces/answers on BGP patterns you should get under various OWL/OWL2 entailment regimes

Bijan Parsia: a document which specifies which additional inferneces/answers on BGP patterns you should get under various OWL/OWL2 entailment regimes ←

14:45:53 <ivanh> q+

Ivan Herman: q+ ←

14:46:15 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: would we do it for one flavor of OWL?

Lee Feigenbaum: would we do it for one flavor of OWL? ←

14:46:49 <AxelPolleres> Bijan: my goal would be conjunctive queries. tend to look on existing implementations and reflect what they DO.

Bijan Parsia: my goal would be conjunctive queries. tend to look on existing implementations and reflect what they DO. ←

14:46:52 <AxelPolleres> q+

q+ ←

14:47:14 <AxelPolleres> ... with as much OWL as they can possibly handle

... with as much OWL as they can possibly handle ←

14:48:17 <AxelPolleres> ... kaon2 supports SPARQL with non-distiguished variables, over OWL2 w/o nominals, pellet supports all of SPARQL, Hermit will support as much as KOAN2.

... 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 <chimezie> q+ about relationship with general specification of entailment

Chime Ogbuji: q+ about relationship with general specification of entailment ←

14:48:27 <chimezie> q+

Chime Ogbuji: q+ ←

14:48:37 <AxelPolleres> ... racer pro supports NRQL, overlaps greatly with SPARQL.

... racer pro supports NRQL, overlaps greatly with SPARQL. ←

14:49:09 <KjetilK> q+

Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+ ←

14:49:11 <LukeWM> q+

Luke Wilson-Mawer: q+ ←

14:49:13 <AxelPolleres> ... Quonto is an OLWLQL implementation, OWLGraph supports SPARQL.

... Quonto is an OLWLQL implementation, OWLGraph supports SPARQL. ←

14:49:23 <LeeF> ack ivanh

Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivanh ←

14:49:47 <AxelPolleres> ivanh: what is the different in semantics we are talking about?

Ivan Herman: what is the different in semantics we are talking about? ←

14:50:05 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#sparqlBGPExtend Extending SPARQL Basic Graph Pattern Matching

Lee Feigenbaum: -> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#sparqlBGPExtend Extending SPARQL Basic Graph Pattern Matching ←

14:50:20 <AxelPolleres> bijan: achievable goal is: if you turn on inference, you get more answers.

Bijan Parsia: achievable goal is: if you turn on inference, you get more answers. ←

14:50:47 <AxelPolleres> ... it is not entirely clear ore desirable. certain meta-modeling in RDF are impossible to implement.

... it is not entirely clear ore desirable. certain meta-modeling in RDF are impossible to implement. ←

14:51:09 <AxelPolleres> ... e.g. redefining rdf:type.

... e.g. redefining rdf:type. ←

14:51:49 <AxelPolleres> ... trey to restrict myself on queries that are reasonable in terms of both OWL and RDF.

... trey to restrict myself on queries that are reasonable in terms of both OWL and RDF. ←

14:52:25 <Zakim> -ywang4

Zakim IRC Bot: -ywang4 ←

14:52:35 <ywang4> gonna leave, cheers

Yimin Wang: gonna leave, cheers ←

14:52:42 <AxelPolleres> ivanh: are all queries you send to a OWL reasoner encodable in SPARQL or not?

Ivan Herman: are all queries you send to a OWL reasoner encodable in SPARQL or not? ←

14:52:44 <LeeF> take care, ywang4

Lee Feigenbaum: take care, ywang4 ←

14:52:53 <LeeF> see you next week

Lee Feigenbaum: see you next week ←

14:53:00 <AxelPolleres> bijan: standard conjunctive queries yes fully covered by SPARQL.

Bijan Parsia: standard conjunctive queries yes fully covered by SPARQL. ←

14:53:09 <ywang4> see you guys :)

Yimin Wang: see you guys :) ←

14:53:15 <AxelPolleres> ... SPARQL intuitivelty also allows asking about the SCHEMA.

... SPARQL intuitivelty also allows asking about the SCHEMA. ←

14:53:34 <AxelPolleres> ... I think we can get a reasonable fraction of that.

... I think we can get a reasonable fraction of that. ←

14:53:51 <AxelPolleres> ivanh: how much work and energy will it take?

Ivan Herman: how much work and energy will it take? ←

14:54:08 <AxelPolleres> bijan: mostly done from a paper I have, technically not difficult, transfer to spec.

Bijan Parsia: mostly done from a paper I have, technically not difficult, transfer to spec. ←

14:54:09 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres

Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres ←

14:55:04 <LeeF> ack chimezie

Lee Feigenbaum: ack chimezie ←

14:55:32 <AxelPolleres> Axel: linking,describing that on the wiki on the feature page, also that summary you gave would be extremly helpful.

Axel Polleres: linking,describing that on the wiki on the feature page, also that summary you gave would be extremly helpful. ←

14:56:30 <AxelPolleres> bijan: schema queries doable to some extent, standard syntax for that.

Bijan Parsia: schema queries doable to some extent, standard syntax for that. ←

14:57:09 <AxelPolleres> bijan: use that entailment in queries qwould be something to standardize.

Bijan Parsia: use that entailment in queries qwould be something to standardize. ←

14:57:38 <AxelPolleres> q+

q+ ←

14:58:21 <AxelPolleres> Leef: mechanism to know which entailment is "done"

Lee Feigenbaum: mechanism to know which entailment is "done" ←

14:58:23 <ivanh> q+

Ivan Herman: q+ ←

14:58:37 <LeeF> ack KjetilK

Lee Feigenbaum: ack KjetilK ←

14:59:11 <chimezie> I'm wondering whether we can afford to do both this proposal as well as something like ParameterizedInference (which seems like the general case)

Chime Ogbuji: 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 <AxelPolleres> kjetil: implementations that do simple bw-chaining, would that proposal influence them?

Kjetil Kjernsmo: implementations that do simple bw-chaining, would that proposal influence them? ←

14:59:30 <chimezie> or whether there is overlap between the two

Chime Ogbuji: or whether there is overlap between the two ←

15:00:11 <AxelPolleres> bijan: OWL has an OWL RL subprofile implementable in rules, QL implementable by rule expansion, OWL EL implementable in combination

Bijan Parsia: OWL has an OWL RL subprofile implementable in rules, QL implementable by rule expansion, OWL EL implementable in combination ←

15:00:31 <ivanh> q-

Ivan Herman: q- ←

15:00:36 <AxelPolleres> ... not sure whether this is answering your question.

... not sure whether this is answering your question. ←

15:01:12 <AxelPolleres> kjetil: would it cover to know "which profile is used by a certain engine"?

Kjetil Kjernsmo: would it cover to know "which profile is used by a certain engine"? ←

15:01:29 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me ←

15:01:29 <Zakim> KjetilK should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: KjetilK should now be muted ←

15:01:33 <LeeF> ack LukeWM

Lee Feigenbaum: ack LukeWM ←

15:01:37 <AxelPolleres> bijan: tell what you have is a separate issue

Bijan Parsia: tell what you have is a separate issue ←

15:02:03 <kasei> 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.

Bijan Parsia: 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. [ Scribe Assist by Greg Williams ] ←

15:02:31 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres

Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres ←

15:03:10 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: is bnode coreference solved?

Axel Polleres: is bnode coreference solved? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:03:20 <LeeF> bijan: persists as an open issue, think I have a reasonable solution

Bijan Parsia: persists as an open issue, think I have a reasonable solution [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:03:50 <LeeF> ... think best way to get interoperability is to treat bnodes as local names

Lee Feigenbaum: ... think best way to get interoperability is to treat bnodes as local names ←

15:04:07 <ivanh> q+

Ivan Herman: q+ ←

15:04:22 <LeeF> zakim, close the queue

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, close the queue ←

15:04:22 <Zakim> ok, LeeF, the speaker queue is closed

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, LeeF, the speaker queue is closed ←

15:05:02 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: in terms of metaqueries, would you restrict certain queries?

Axel Polleres: in terms of metaqueries, would you restrict certain queries? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:05:27 <LeeF> bijan: two possibilies. 1) might need to restrict queries. 2) restrict answers, so e.g. if ?C subclass ?D

Bijan Parsia: two possibilies. 1) might need to restrict queries. 2) restrict answers, so e.g. if ?C subclass ?D [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:05:32 <LeeF> ... you could restrict answers to atomic classes only

Lee Feigenbaum: ... you could restrict answers to atomic classes only ←

15:05:37 <LeeF> ... to avoid infinite trivial answers

Lee Feigenbaum: ... to avoid infinite trivial answers ←

15:06:33 <SimonS> +q to ask whether syntactic restrictions are possible in SPARQL1 entailment regimes

Simon Schenk: +q to ask whether syntactic restrictions are possible in SPARQL1 entailment regimes ←

15:07:13 <LeeF> bijan: algebra stays the same, it does operations on a tuple level

Bijan Parsia: algebra stays the same, it does operations on a tuple level [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:07:40 <AxelPolleres> ... only BGP.

... only BGP. ←

15:08:32 <LeeF> ivanh: do any other features affect this?

Ivan Herman: do any other features affect this? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:08:39 <LeeF> bijan: i don't think so since none of them trouch BGP matching semantics

Bijan Parsia: i don't think so since none of them trouch BGP matching semantics [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:08:56 <LeeF> ivanh: would this be a separate document?

Ivan Herman: would this be a separate document? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:08:58 <LeeF> bijan: yes

Bijan Parsia: yes [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:09:57 <LeeF> SimonS: is it possible to restrict syntax within an entailment regime?

Simon Schenk: is it possible to restrict syntax within an entailment regime? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:10:21 <LeeF> bijan: you can implement this by saying that for queries that you think are syntactically malformed you return nothing

Bijan Parsia: you can implement this by saying that for queries that you think are syntactically malformed you return nothing [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←

15:11:10 <bijan> +1

Bijan Parsia: +1 ←

15:11:11 <ivanh> 1 (with the hope it will work out:-)

Ivan Herman: 1 (with the hope it will work out:-) ←

15:11:15 <KjetilK> +1 (since it is allready almost there, and it covers the simple stuff)

Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1 (since it is allready almost there, and it covers the simple stuff) ←

15:11:16 <LukeWM> 0

Luke Wilson-Mawer: 0 ←

15:11:22 <dnewman2> +0

Dave Newman: +0 ←

15:11:23 <LeeF> zakim, who's here?

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's here? ←

15:11:23 <Zakim> On the phone I see john-l, kasei (muted), ivanh, AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, ??P24, SimonS, KjetilK (muted), Chimezie_Ogbuji, DaveNewman, bijan

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see john-l, kasei (muted), ivanh, AxelPolleres, Lee_Feigenbaum, ??P24, SimonS, KjetilK (muted), Chimezie_Ogbuji, DaveNewman, bijan ←

15:11:25 <SimonS> +1

Simon Schenk: +1 ←

15:11:26 <Zakim> ??P24 has SteveH, LukeWM

Zakim IRC Bot: ??P24 has SteveH, LukeWM ←

15:11:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see dnewman2, LukeWM, SteveH, ivanh, RRSAgent, chimezie, kasei, AxelPolleres, bijan, SimonS, LeeF, KjetilK, iv_an_ru, Zakim, trackbot, john-l, ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see dnewman2, LukeWM, SteveH, ivanh, RRSAgent, chimezie, kasei, AxelPolleres, bijan, SimonS, LeeF, KjetilK, iv_an_ru, Zakim, trackbot, john-l, ericP ←

15:11:29 <john-l> 0

John Clark: 0 ←

15:11:33 <kasei> +1

Greg Williams: +1 ←

15:11:35 <LeeF> +1

Lee Feigenbaum: +1 ←

15:11:45 <chimezie> 0 (I still don't have a grasp on the relationship between this feature and the other entailment features requests)

Chime Ogbuji: 0 (I still don't have a grasp on the relationship between this feature and the other entailment features requests) ←

15:11:46 <SteveH> 0, I like, but my org has no use for it sadly

Steve Harris: 0, I like, but my org has no use for it sadly ←

15:11:52 <AxelPolleres> 0.5 thinking that this is only solvable in cinjunciton with Param Inference and need to get clearer about the issues.

0.5 thinking that this is only solvable in cinjunciton with Param Inference and need to get clearer about the issues. ←

15:12:08 <AxelPolleres> +1 (but in principle positive... ok)

+1 (but in principle positive... ok) ←

15:12:12 <AxelPolleres> ok ok ok ;-)

ok ok ok ;-) ←

15:12:20 <chimezie> bijan: okay I will :)

Bijan Parsia: okay I will :) [ Scribe Assist by Chime Ogbuji ] ←

15:13:40 <LeeF> Encourage discussion of other features on the mailing list

Lee Feigenbaum: Encourage discussion of other features on the mailing list ←

<LeeF> Adjourned.

Lee Feigenbaum: Adjourned. ←

Formatted by CommonScribe Show Interleaved IRC Text

---

This revision (#1) generated 2009-04-08 01:08:02 UTC by 'lfeigenb', comments: 'cleaned up minutes, thanks to Axel for scribing'