SPARQL Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 21 April 2009

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-04-21
Present
Axel Polleres, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Andy Seaborne, Steve Harris, Luke Wilson-Mawer, Lee Feigenbaum, John Clark, Simon Schenk, Janne Saarela, Prateek Jain, Greg Williams, Alex Passant, Dave Newman, Kjetil Kjernsmo, Yimin Wang
Regrets
Chime Ogbuji, Bijan Parsia
Chair
Axel Polleres
Scribe
Lee Feigenbaum
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14 link
Topics
  1. Admin

  2. Liaisons

  3. introduction, Prateek

  4. feature survey

  5. XML & RDF query serializations

    1. RDF serialization of sparql queries

      initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 1/9/3

    2. XML serialization of queries (SPARQLX)

      initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 4/10/0

  6. FunctionLibrary

    initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 8/5/0

  7. FullText

    initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 6/5/1

  8. LimitPerResource

    initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 4/6/2

  9. Basic federated queries

    initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 7/4/2

  10. query by reference and parameters

<LeeF> Present: axel, ericp, andys, steve, luke, lee, john-l, simon, janne, prateek, kasei, alex, dnewman2, kjetil, ywang4
13:55:55 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:55:56 <trackbot>  Date: 21 April 2009

Trackbot IRC Bot: Date: 21 April 2009

13:56:06 <LeeF> Chair: AxelPolleres
13:56:09 <LeeF> Scribe: LeeF

(Scribe set to Lee Feigenbaum)

13:56:11 <LeeF> Scribenick: LeeF
13:56:26 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-04-21
13:56:40 <LeeF> Regrets: Chimezie, Bijan
14:02:46 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: plan today is to get through the rest of the features from the wiki and go over Web survey

(No events recorded for 6 minutes)

Axel Polleres: plan today is to get through the rest of the features from the wiki and go over Web survey

14:03:05 <LeeF> ... survey will be open for 1.5 weeks or so, to give us an idea of where to go from the F2F topic on

... survey will be open for 1.5 weeks or so, to give us an idea of where to go from the F2F topic on

14:03:10 <LeeF> topic: Admin

1. Admin

14:03:23 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14

PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14

14:03:29 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14

RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14

14:03:52 <LeeF> next meeting: one week from today, 28 Apr, will talk about F2F details

next meeting: one week from today, 28 Apr, will talk about F2F details

14:04:03 <LeeF> scribe for next meeting: Ivan M

scribe for next meeting: Ivan M

14:04:29 <LeeF> topic: Liaisons

2. Liaisons

14:04:55 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: rdf:text is basically finished, not sure when it will go to Last Call

Axel Polleres: rdf:text is basically finished, not sure when it will go to Last Call

14:05:07 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec

14:05:09 <LeeF> ... if we want to review it, it would be great

... if we want to review it, it would be great

14:05:13 <AndyS> I volunteer (not exclusively)

Andy Seaborne: I volunteer (not exclusively)

14:05:34 <SteveH_> tentative volunteer, but I can't promise

Steve Harris: tentative volunteer, but I can't promise

14:05:38 <LeeF> ACTION: AndyS to review rdf:text

ACTION: AndyS to review rdf:text

14:05:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-8 - Review rdf:text [on Andy Seaborne - due 2009-04-28].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-8 - Review rdf:text [on Andy Seaborne - due 2009-04-28].

14:05:44 <LeeF> ACTION: SteveH to try to review rdf:text

ACTION: SteveH to try to review rdf:text

14:05:44 <trackbot> Created ACTION-9 - Try to review rdf:text [on Steve Harris - due 2009-04-28].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-9 - Try to review rdf:text [on Steve Harris - due 2009-04-28].

14:05:57 <LeeF> AndyS: there will be substantive issues based on what I've seen

Andy Seaborne: there will be substantive issues based on what I've seen

14:06:29 <Zakim> + +656304aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +656304aacc

14:06:44 <LeeF> zakim, aacc is ywang4

zakim, aacc is ywang4

14:06:44 <Zakim> +ywang4; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +ywang4; got it

14:07:14 <Zakim> +??P39

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P39

14:07:15 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: RIF WG had F2F in Cambridge last week

Axel Polleres: RIF WG had F2F in Cambridge last week

14:07:25 <LeeF> ... plan is to go to LC by end of May

... plan is to go to LC by end of May

14:07:25 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??P39 is me

Alex Passant: Zakim, ??P39 is me

14:07:25 <Zakim> +AlexPassant; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AlexPassant; got it

14:07:35 <LeeF> ... will appreciate SPARQL WG reviews then

... will appreciate SPARQL WG reviews then

14:07:43 <ericP> Zakim, please dial ericP-office

Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, please dial ericP-office

14:07:43 <Zakim> ok, ericP; the call is being made

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ericP; the call is being made

14:07:45 <Zakim> +EricP

Zakim IRC Bot: +EricP

14:07:55 <LeeF> q+ to ask about 90 min. teleconference?

q+ to ask about 90 min. teleconference?

14:08:43 <LeeF> ericP: HCLS group is doing stuff with federated queries

Eric Prud'hommeaux: HCLS group is doing stuff with federated queries

14:10:37 <kjetil> ack LeeF

Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack LeeF

14:10:37 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to ask about 90 min. teleconference?

Zakim IRC Bot: LeeF, you wanted to ask about 90 min. teleconference?

14:10:50 <JanneS> I'll drop out after 60, sorry

Janne Saarela: I'll drop out after 60, sorry

14:12:04 <LeeF> topic: introduction, Prateek

3. introduction, Prateek

14:12:15 <LeeF> PrateekJain-WSU: PhD student at Wright State work wtih Amit Sheth

Prateek Jain: PhD student at Wright State work wtih Amit Sheth

14:12:23 <LeeF> ... research is in the area of query rewriting with emphasis on SPARQL

... research is in the area of query rewriting with emphasis on SPARQL

14:12:35 <LeeF> ... trying to exploit semantic relationships within a knowledge base to automatically rewrite SPARQL

... trying to exploit semantic relationships within a knowledge base to automatically rewrite SPARQL

14:13:13 <LeeF> ... interested in rdf serialization of queries and path queries

... interested in rdf serialization of queries and path queries

14:13:44 <LeeF> topic: feature survey

4. feature survey

14:13:53 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/

14:14:04 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: Each organization can fill out the survey once

Axel Polleres: Each organization can fill out the survey once

14:14:26 <LeeF> ...we will probably have around 8 features which we will aim for in the working group

...we will probably have around 8 features which we will aim for in the working group

14:14:41 <LeeF> ...the survey lists 31 features that survived the "interested for anyone" criteria

...the survey lists 31 features that survived the "interested for anyone" criteria

14:15:08 <LeeF> ...format of the survey was limited by what the WBS survey gave us

...format of the survey was limited by what the WBS survey gave us

14:15:44 <LeeF> ...options for each feature are ranks 1 - 31 and "don't mind" and "don't want"

...options for each feature are ranks 1 - 31 and "don't mind" and "don't want"

14:15:58 <LeeF> ...do not rank all features

...do not rank all features

14:16:06 <LeeF> ...rank up to the first 8 of your choices

...rank up to the first 8 of your choices

14:16:13 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

14:16:19 <LeeF> ack AndyS

ack AndyS

14:16:39 <SteveH_> q+

Steve Harris: q+

14:16:55 <LeeF> AndyS: are you going to enforce the limit?

Andy Seaborne: are you going to enforce the limit?

14:17:07 <AndyS> ack AndyS

Andy Seaborne: ack AndyS

14:17:14 <kjetil> q+

Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+

14:17:24 <LeeF> LeeF: we will ask anyone who ranks more than 8 to adjust their choices to only rank 8

Lee Feigenbaum: we will ask anyone who ranks more than 8 to adjust their choices to only rank 8

14:17:34 <LeeF> ack SteveH_

ack SteveH_

14:18:20 <LeeF> SteveH_: Don't agree with only ranking 8 - if my top 4 don't get done, i don't get to express an opinion about the bottom half of things

Steve Harris: Don't agree with only ranking 8 - if my top 4 don't get done, i don't get to express an opinion about the bottom half of things

14:18:38 <LeeF> q+

q+

14:18:52 <LeeF> q+ to say that i'd be happy with ranking more than 8, just not all 31

q+ to say that i'd be happy with ranking more than 8, just not all 31

14:21:01 <kjetil> q+ to ask if the rank algorithm can't account for people ranking all

Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+ to ask if the rank algorithm can't account for people ranking all

14:21:20 <kjetil> ack me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack me

14:21:21 <LeeF> SteveH_: voting shouldn't have any different weight just because you rank 4 vs. ranking 30

Steve Harris: voting shouldn't have any different weight just because you rank 4 vs. ranking 30

14:21:22 <Zakim> kjetil, you wanted to ask if the rank algorithm can't account for people ranking all

Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil, you wanted to ask if the rank algorithm can't account for people ranking all

14:21:23 <Zakim> +dnewman2

Zakim IRC Bot: +dnewman2

14:21:26 <LeeF> q-

q-

14:21:46 <LeeF> kjetil: if we use ranking algorithm, people can rank as many as they which

Kjetil Kjernsmo: if we use ranking algorithm, people can rank as many as they which

14:23:24 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

14:24:32 <john-l> I prefer using a ranking algorithm.

John Clark: I prefer using a ranking algorithm.

14:25:21 <LeeF> LeeF: I was concerned that organizations interested in 25 features should not be able to cast 'more' votes and influence things more than someone who casts less

Lee Feigenbaum: I was concerned that organizations interested in 25 features should not be able to cast 'more' votes and influence things more than someone who casts less

14:25:29 <LeeF> AndyS: Concerned that everyone be playing by the same rules

Andy Seaborne: Concerned that everyone be playing by the same rules

14:25:48 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: i think if we use a threshold like 12 or so we can compromise

Axel Polleres: i think if we use a threshold like 12 or so we can compromise

14:25:52 <SteveH_> LeeF, things like Condorcet don't give any advantage to ballot stuffers

Steve Harris: LeeF, things like Condorcet don't give any advantage to ballot stuffers

14:27:11 <kjetil> Here's a site we can use for the final ballot: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/civs.html

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Here's a site we can use for the final ballot: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/civs.html

14:27:25 <john-l> I propose that we have every organization rank ALL of the features, and then use a Condorcet system to eliminate all but 8-12 winners.

John Clark: I propose that we have every organization rank ALL of the features, and then use a Condorcet system to eliminate all but 8-12 winners.

14:27:35 <SteveH_> or, alternative: http://plugin.org.uk/rdf/condorcet/

Steve Harris: or, alternative: http://plugin.org.uk/rdf/condorcet/

14:28:36 <LeeF> LeeF: I'm not comfortable at all with approving a specific ranking to drive things forwards

Lee Feigenbaum: I'm not comfortable at all with approving a specific ranking to drive things forwards

14:29:10 <SteveH_> we don't need the threashold

Steve Harris: we don't need the threashold

14:29:21 <LeeF> q?

q?

14:29:29 <AndyS> ack me

Andy Seaborne: ack me

14:29:56 <LeeF> SteveH_: with condorcet you're only voting against yourself

Steve Harris: with condorcet you're only voting against yourself

14:30:25 <LeeF> ... rank the features you want in the order you'd like them and then we can analyze the data

... rank the features you want in the order you'd like them and then we can analyze the data

14:30:48 <kasei> hearing lots of interference on kjetil(?)

Greg Williams: hearing lots of interference on kjetil(?)

14:31:29 <SteveH_> for ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_Method

Steve Harris: for ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_Method

14:32:15 <ericP> no tactical voting? i quit!

Eric Prud'hommeaux: no tactical voting? i quit!

14:32:30 <LeeF> SteveH_: with Condorcet there's no advantage at all to ranking fewer or more choices, nor to ranking two things the same

Steve Harris: with Condorcet there's no advantage at all to ranking fewer or more choices, nor to ranking two things the same

14:32:43 <LeeF> kjetil: it's just about the relative preference

Kjetil Kjernsmo: it's just about the relative preference

14:34:45 <LeeF> LeeF: it's important to me that "all 1 votes" doesn't mean "everything is super important!" but instead "i don't care which of these we do, they're all equally important" - it sounds like people are on the same page about that

Lee Feigenbaum: it's important to me that "all 1 votes" doesn't mean "everything is super important!" but instead "i don't care which of these we do, they're all equally important" - it sounds like people are on the same page about that

14:35:02 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: suggested deadline for filling out the survey is May 1

Axel Polleres: suggested deadline for filling out the survey is May 1

14:35:11 <kjetil> Zakim, mute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me

14:35:11 <Zakim> kjetil should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil should now be muted

14:35:18 <JanneS> the vote page has April-28 set as the deadline

Janne Saarela: the vote page has April-28 set as the deadline

14:35:27 <ericP> i would like to propose a new voting scheme

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i would like to propose a new voting scheme

14:35:32 <ericP> it uses parameterized owl entailment

Eric Prud'hommeaux: it uses parameterized owl entailment

14:35:49 <LeeF> LeeF: encourages everyone to fill out the survey as soon as you feel ready to

Lee Feigenbaum: encourages everyone to fill out the survey as soon as you feel ready to

<LeeF> Topic: XML & RDF query serializations

5. XML & RDF query serializations

14:36:22 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/SPARQLX

-> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/SPARQLX

14:37:48 <AxelPolleres> strawman from bijan: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0089.html

Axel Polleres: strawman from bijan: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0089.html

14:38:14 <ericP> q+ to say i've had people use an XML expression of queries

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to say i've had people use an XML expression of queries

14:38:15 <AndyS> That is SPARQL algebra in XML , not SPARQL AST

Andy Seaborne: That is SPARQL algebra in XML , not SPARQL AST

14:38:38 <LeeF> ericP: i've had people use XML version of queries for debugging in conjuncgtion with XSLT, can see some use of it

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i've had people use XML version of queries for debugging in conjuncgtion with XSLT, can see some use of it

14:39:20 <LeeF> AndyS: abstract syntax need  to be formally addressed if we do pragmas

Andy Seaborne: abstract syntax need to be formally addressed if we do pragmas

14:39:24 <JanneS> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Pragmas

Janne Saarela: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Pragmas

14:40:28 <LeeF> AndyS: TopQuadrant uses an RDF serialization to store queries

Andy Seaborne: TopQuadrant uses an RDF serialization to store queries

14:40:46 <ericP> +1 to two

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 to two

14:41:01 <SimonS> +1 on two

Simon Schenk: +1 on two

14:41:14 <ericP> i'm 0 on XML and -1 on RDF ('cause it's so concentious)

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i'm 0 on XML and -1 on RDF ('cause it's so concentious)

14:41:15 <AndyS> My requirement is to get the abstraction right and do XML, JSON, another

Andy Seaborne: My requirement is to get the abstraction right and do XML, JSON, another

14:42:09 <SimonS> +q

Simon Schenk: +q

14:42:17 <LeeF> ack ericP

ack ericP

14:42:17 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say i've had people use an XML expression of queries

Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to say i've had people use an XML expression of queries

14:42:30 <LeeF> ack SimonS

ack SimonS

14:42:39 <LeeF> Prateek: we are looking at SPIN for some of our work

Prateek Jain: we are looking at SPIN for some of our work

14:42:44 <ericP> q+ to warn of contentious issues

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to warn of contentious issues

14:42:55 <LeeF> SimonS: can see use cases for RDF serialization of SPARQL, don't have any use cases for XML

Simon Schenk: can see use cases for RDF serialization of SPARQL, don't have any use cases for XML

14:43:25 <JanneS> was the motivation to query sparql via sparql?

Janne Saarela: was the motivation to query sparql via sparql?

14:43:49 <LeeF> ericP: i've seen this be contentious before - in particular the expression of a graph pattern in RDF - difficult space to work in

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i've seen this be contentious before - in particular the expression of a graph pattern in RDF - difficult space to work in

14:43:53 <LeeF> q?

q?

14:43:55 <LeeF> ack ericP

ack ericP

14:43:55 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to warn of contentious issues

Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to warn of contentious issues

14:43:56 <SimonS> kind of. Rather composing SPARQL queries at runtime from RDF data

Simon Schenk: kind of. Rather composing SPARQL queries at runtime from RDF data

14:44:00 <ericP> q-

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q-

14:44:32 <ericP>  upshot: whatever we do, we don't want people expressing their data in RDF

Eric Prud'hommeaux: upshot: whatever we do, we don't want people expressing their data in RDF

<LeeF> subtopic: RDF serialization of sparql queries

5.1. RDF serialization of sparql queries

Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 1/9/3

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 1/9/3
14:45:00 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: straw poll on RDF serialization of SPARQL queries

Axel Polleres: straw poll on RDF serialization of SPARQL queries

14:45:01 <ericP> -1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: -1

14:45:02 <SteveH_> -1, it's a minefield

Steve Harris: -1, it's a minefield

14:45:03 <AndyS> 0

Andy Seaborne: 0

14:45:03 <kjetil> 0

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 0

14:45:04 <PrateekJain-WSU> +1

Prateek Jain: +1

14:45:05 <LukeWM> -1

Luke Wilson-Mawer: -1

14:45:05 <JanneS> sounds like closure to the extreme i.e. sparql query result could be a valid sparql query

Janne Saarela: sounds like closure to the extreme i.e. sparql query result could be a valid sparql query

14:45:07 <LeeF> 0

0

14:45:07 <john-l> 0

John Clark: 0

14:45:08 <AlexPassant> 0

Alex Passant: 0

14:45:09 <kasei> 0

Greg Williams: 0

14:45:09 <JanneS> 0

Janne Saarela: 0

14:45:09 <AxelPolleres> 0

Axel Polleres: 0

14:45:12 <SimonS> 0 would be nice, but difficult

Simon Schenk: 0 would be nice, but difficult

<LeeF> subtopic: XML serialization of queries (SPARQLX)

5.2. XML serialization of queries (SPARQLX)

Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 4/10/0

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 4/10/0
14:45:39 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: straw poll on XML serialization of SPARQL queries

Axel Polleres: straw poll on XML serialization of SPARQL queries

14:45:48 <john-l> +1

John Clark: +1

14:45:49 <AndyS> 0

Andy Seaborne: 0

14:45:50 <LukeWM> 0

Luke Wilson-Mawer: 0

14:45:51 <LeeF> 0

0

14:45:52 <SteveH_> 0, could be useful, but not huge usecases for us

Steve Harris: 0, could be useful, but not huge usecases for us

14:45:52 <PrateekJain-WSU> +1

Prateek Jain: +1

14:45:53 <ericP> 0

Eric Prud'hommeaux: 0

14:45:55 <JanneS> 0

Janne Saarela: 0

14:45:56 <AxelPolleres> 0

Axel Polleres: 0

14:45:56 <kasei> +1

Greg Williams: +1

14:45:58 <SimonS> -0

Simon Schenk: -0

14:45:58 <kjetil> 0

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 0

14:46:00 <AlexPassant> 0

Alex Passant: 0

14:46:12 <LeeF> bijan is a +1 by proxy, I'm positive

bijan is a +1 by proxy, I'm positive

14:47:32 <LeeF> topic: FunctionLibrary

6. FunctionLibrary

Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 8/5/0

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 8/5/0
14:47:37 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FunctionLibrary

-> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FunctionLibrary

14:48:24 <AxelPolleres> Related here http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB

Axel Polleres: Related here http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB

14:48:51 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/

14:49:03 <AxelPolleres> http://jena.sourceforge.net/ARQ/library-function.html

Axel Polleres: http://jena.sourceforge.net/ARQ/library-function.html

14:49:31 <ericP> q+ to talk about existing extensibility

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to talk about existing extensibility

14:50:05 <LeeF> LeeF: this feature is about spending the working group's time expanding the core set of functions that query writers can expect to be interoperable between implementations

Lee Feigenbaum: this feature is about spending the working group's time expanding the core set of functions that query writers can expect to be interoperable between implementations

14:50:21 <LeeF> ericP: we did spend some time testing last time to make sure that extension functions work in a sane way

Eric Prud'hommeaux: we did spend some time testing last time to make sure that extension functions work in a sane way

14:50:23 <SteveH_> +1 to ericP

Steve Harris: +1 to ericP

14:50:41 <AndyS> Significant value.  Reuse F&O where possible.  Fix a set of functions expected everywhere - not too large to ensure universal coverage.

Andy Seaborne: Significant value. Reuse F&O where possible. Fix a set of functions expected everywhere - not too large to ensure universal coverage.

14:50:56 <SteveH_> +1 to AndyS too

Steve Harris: +1 to AndyS too

14:52:22 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: the question here is whether the WG should expand the list of built-in functions

Axel Polleres: the question here is whether the WG should expand the list of built-in functions

14:53:04 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: straw poll on working on extending function library

Axel Polleres: straw poll on working on extending function library

14:53:12 <AxelPolleres> 0

Axel Polleres: 0

14:53:13 <SteveH_> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:53:14 <kjetil> +1

Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1

14:53:14 <LeeF> =1

=1

14:53:15 <kasei> +1 but low priority

Greg Williams: +1 but low priority

14:53:16 <john-l> 0

John Clark: 0

14:53:17 <JanneS> +1

Janne Saarela: +1

14:53:17 <LeeF> +1 even

+1 even

14:53:17 <PrateekJain-WSU> +1

Prateek Jain: +1

14:53:18 <ericP> 0

Eric Prud'hommeaux: 0

14:53:20 <SimonS> 0

Simon Schenk: 0

14:53:23 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

14:53:29 <LukeWM> +1

Luke Wilson-Mawer: +1

14:53:30 <AlexPassant> 0

Alex Passant: 0

14:53:46 <kjetil> (but yeah, at the end)

Kjetil Kjernsmo: (but yeah, at the end)

14:53:49 <AndyS> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:CreatingIrisAndLiterals

Andy Seaborne: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:CreatingIrisAndLiterals

14:53:50 <LeeF> topic: FullText

7. FullText

Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 6/5/1

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 6/5/1
14:53:58 <kjetil> Zakim, unmute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, unmute me

14:53:58 <Zakim> kjetil should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil should no longer be muted

14:54:22 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FullText

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FullText

14:54:43 <LeeF> kjetil: most Web sites have search boxes... if you want to use a triple store for an application and SPARQL on top of that

Kjetil Kjernsmo: most Web sites have search boxes... if you want to use a triple store for an application and SPARQL on top of that

14:54:51 <LeeF> ... you need someway to communicate a search down to SPARQL endpoint

... you need someway to communicate a search down to SPARQL endpoint

14:54:56 <LeeF> s/someway/some way

s/someway/some way

14:55:10 <LeeF> ... we could standardize in several ways here

... we could standardize in several ways here

14:55:34 <LeeF> ... could have a function in function library

... could have a function in function library

14:55:54 <LeeF> ... could also use xpath/xquery text functions

... could also use xpath/xquery text functions

14:56:03 <SteveH_> q+ to ask about XPath fulltext v's regex

Steve Harris: q+ to ask about XPath fulltext v's regex

14:56:05 <LeeF> ... users might want to search more than just one literal

... users might want to search more than just one literal

14:56:19 <AndyS> q+ to talke about XQ full text

Andy Seaborne: q+ to talke about XQ full text

14:56:20 <LeeF> q+ to ask about xpath compared with lucene and to note potential contention

q+ to ask about xpath compared with lucene and to note potential contention

14:56:25 <AxelPolleres> q+ to ask about redundancy wrt regex

Axel Polleres: q+ to ask about redundancy wrt regex

14:56:30 <AndyS> q+ to say it's not a library function

Andy Seaborne: q+ to say it's not a library function

14:56:37 <ericP> q-

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q-

14:56:39 <LeeF> kjetil: lots of possibilities but think this is important for interoperability

Kjetil Kjernsmo: lots of possibilities but think this is important for interoperability

14:57:08 <LeeF> SteveH_: I read the xpath full text specification - more complicated than I thought it would be

Steve Harris: I read the xpath full text specification - more complicated than I thought it would be

14:57:12 <ericP> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-xpath-full-text-10-20080516/#section-ftcontainsexpr-examples xpath full text examples

Eric Prud'hommeaux: -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-xpath-full-text-10-20080516/#section-ftcontainsexpr-examples xpath full text examples

14:57:38 <LeeF> ... this is more complex than just referring to xpath spec, because there's a lot there that is xpath-specific

... this is more complex than just referring to xpath spec, because there's a lot there that is xpath-specific

14:57:49 <LeeF> ... on the other end of a scale, LIKE syntax is just syntactic sugar over regex

... on the other end of a scale, LIKE syntax is just syntactic sugar over regex

14:58:07 <AndyS> SteveH_: similarity to LIKE

Steve Harris: similarity to LIKE [ Scribe Assist by Andy Seaborne ]

14:58:26 <LeeF> ... would need to understand what we're talking about - the LIKE syntax is easy to standardize, full text feature will be a lot of work just to figure out what parts of the XPath full text doc are relevant and which aren't

... would need to understand what we're talking about - the LIKE syntax is easy to standardize, full text feature will be a lot of work just to figure out what parts of the XPath full text doc are relevant and which aren't

14:58:40 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FullText doesn't mention regex

Eric Prud'hommeaux: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FullText doesn't mention regex

14:58:52 <ericP> what uses cases does regex not support?

Eric Prud'hommeaux: what uses cases does regex not support?

14:58:57 <LeeF> kjetil: Virtuoso feels that it is harder to implement regular expressions than full text

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Virtuoso feels that it is harder to implement regular expressions than full text

14:59:01 <SteveH_> ericP, stemming for one

Steve Harris: ericP, stemming for one

14:59:15 <LeeF> AndyS: i think XQuery full text is too big, too complicated

Andy Seaborne: i think XQuery full text is too big, too complicated

14:59:24 <LeeF> ... it's important to ensure that existing tools, not just lucene, can be used

... it's important to ensure that existing tools, not just lucene, can be used

14:59:38 <LeeF> q?

q?

14:59:39 <LeeF> ack SteveH_

ack SteveH_

14:59:40 <Zakim> SteveH_, you wanted to ask about XPath fulltext v's regex

Zakim IRC Bot: SteveH_, you wanted to ask about XPath fulltext v's regex

14:59:41 <LeeF> ack AndyS

ack AndyS

14:59:41 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to talke about XQ full text and to say it's not a library function

Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to talke about XQ full text and to say it's not a library function

14:59:58 <LeeF> AndyS: this is not just a library function - it's not a restriction, since it's generative from an index

Andy Seaborne: this is not just a library function - it's not a restriction, since it's generative from an index

15:00:06 <LeeF> ... "find me all the things that match 'x'"

... "find me all the things that match 'x'"

15:00:17 <LeeF> ... "find me all the URIs of documents that contain the following string"

... "find me all the URIs of documents that contain the following string"

15:00:53 <LeeF> ... concerned that scripting engines end up with a real burden to implement this

... concerned that scripting engines end up with a real burden to implement this

15:00:56 <SteveH_> not just smaller implementations, the only impl. of XPath fulltext i've seen is huge

Steve Harris: not just smaller implementations, the only impl. of XPath fulltext i've seen is huge

15:00:56 <LeeF> ack LeeF

ack LeeF

15:00:56 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to ask about xpath compared with lucene and to note potential contention

Zakim IRC Bot: LeeF, you wanted to ask about xpath compared with lucene and to note potential contention

15:01:11 <ericP> the scripting people can be incomplete. doesn't really matter except for bragging rights

Eric Prud'hommeaux: the scripting people can be incomplete. doesn't really matter except for bragging rights

15:01:56 <kasei> ericP: it matters for portability between scripting and the bigger impls.

Eric Prud'hommeaux: it matters for portability between scripting and the bigger impls. [ Scribe Assist by Greg Williams ]

15:02:42 <ericP> kasei, i think that's an argument for then being sound, but not complete

Eric Prud'hommeaux: kasei, i think that's an argument for then being sound, but not complete

15:03:29 <kjetil> q+

Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+

15:03:34 <SimonS> q+ to say most existing implementations seem quite similar

Simon Schenk: q+ to say most existing implementations seem quite similar

15:03:48 <ericP> i was arguing that if the burden of implementation keeps some scripts from being complete, that's not a big cost. however, we'd like to see them interoperate even in their subsets

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i was arguing that if the burden of implementation keeps some scripts from being complete, that's not a big cost. however, we'd like to see them interoperate even in their subsets

15:03:59 <LeeF> LeeF: i see a strong case for interoperability here, but also see a huge amount of work to standardize this well

Lee Feigenbaum: i see a strong case for interoperability here, but also see a huge amount of work to standardize this well

15:04:15 <LeeF> AndyS: there are other things to consider as well, such as scoring of results

Andy Seaborne: there are other things to consider as well, such as scoring of results

15:04:21 <SteveH_> I don't want to see a world where we end up just standardising lucene syntax

Steve Harris: I don't want to see a world where we end up just standardising lucene syntax

15:04:32 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: seems that xpath/xquery might be too heavy for us, as opposed to aligning what existing implementations do

Axel Polleres: seems that xpath/xquery might be too heavy for us, as opposed to aligning what existing implementations do

15:04:45 <ericP> q+ to ask if lucene is a strict subset of xpath:ftcontains

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to ask if lucene is a strict subset of xpath:ftcontains

15:04:46 <AndyS> ack to SteveH_ -- starting point only

Andy Seaborne: ack to SteveH_ -- starting point only

15:05:12 <SteveH_> ericP, it's not no

Steve Harris: ericP, it's not no

15:05:25 <LeeF> q?

q?

15:05:31 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres

ack AxelPolleres

15:05:31 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about redundancy wrt regex

Zakim IRC Bot: AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about redundancy wrt regex

15:05:33 <LeeF> ack kjetil

ack kjetil

15:06:08 <ericP> we'll have a hell of a fight if we want to standardize a non-xpath function if there's an xpath function nearby

Eric Prud'hommeaux: we'll have a hell of a fight if we want to standardize a non-xpath function if there's an xpath function nearby

15:06:10 <AndyS> Maybe good to add some clear syntax to make it easier to understand for query writers

Andy Seaborne: Maybe good to add some clear syntax to make it easier to understand for query writers

15:06:17 <JanneS> (I need to leave, will be voting -1 for the full fledged proposal with XQuery and XPath Full Text 1.0, +1 if we add some syntactic sugar to ease interoperability with Lucene type of implementations)

Janne Saarela: (I need to leave, will be voting -1 for the full fledged proposal with XQuery and XPath Full Text 1.0, +1 if we add some syntactic sugar to ease interoperability with Lucene type of implementations)

15:06:25 <ericP> burden will be on us to prove that it's not covered by subsetting ftcontains

Eric Prud'hommeaux: burden will be on us to prove that it's not covered by subsetting ftcontains

15:06:44 <AxelPolleres> q-

Axel Polleres: q-

15:07:12 <LeeF> SimonS: most implementations I know are very close to or based on Lucene - that seems to be what people want

Simon Schenk: most implementations I know are very close to or based on Lucene - that seems to be what people want

15:07:17 <LeeF> ... syntax extensions are similar as well

... syntax extensions are similar as well

15:07:25 <SteveH_> or, what implemetors found it easiest to build

Steve Harris: or, what implemetors found it easiest to build

15:07:29 <JanneS> (uh, BasicFederatedQuery deserves the protocol extensions is my +1 for both, no comment on LimitPerResource yet) - bye

Janne Saarela: (uh, BasicFederatedQuery deserves the protocol extensions is my +1 for both, no comment on LimitPerResource yet) - bye

15:07:56 <Zakim> -JanneS

Zakim IRC Bot: -JanneS

15:08:29 <LeeF> ericP: I think that if we try to standardize something analogous to an XQuery function (e.g. lucene:contains) then we will need to prove to the world & XQuery WG that we were not able to subset ft:contains to meet our needs

Eric Prud'hommeaux: I think that if we try to standardize something analogous to an XQuery function (e.g. lucene:contains) then we will need to prove to the world & XQuery WG that we were not able to subset ft:contains to meet our needs

15:09:18 <Zakim> -ywang4

Zakim IRC Bot: -ywang4

15:09:24 <LeeF> AndyS: to be pragmatic, i don't want to put an xquery parser inside my sparql impl

Andy Seaborne: to be pragmatic, i don't want to put an xquery parser inside my sparql impl

15:09:36 <ywang4> see you next time :)

Yimin Wang: see you next time :)

15:10:02 <LeeF> SteveH_: it would be tough to separate e.g. how it refers to rdf literals rather than xml nodes

Steve Harris: it would be tough to separate e.g. how it refers to rdf literals rather than xml nodes

15:10:38 <AndyS> --> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-full-text-10/#id-grammar

Andy Seaborne: --> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-full-text-10/#id-grammar

15:10:39 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: straw poll on full text

Axel Polleres: straw poll on full text

15:10:45 <AxelPolleres> q?

Axel Polleres: q?

15:10:47 <ericP> q-

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q-

15:10:48 <LeeF> ack SimonS

ack SimonS

15:10:49 <Zakim> SimonS, you wanted to say most existing implementations seem quite similar

Zakim IRC Bot: SimonS, you wanted to say most existing implementations seem quite similar

15:10:49 <LeeF> ack ericP

ack ericP

15:10:56 <SimonS> q-

Simon Schenk: q-

15:11:00 <kjetil> +1

Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1

15:11:01 <ericP> 0

Eric Prud'hommeaux: 0

15:11:02 <SteveH_> 0

Steve Harris: 0

15:11:04 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

15:11:08 <kasei> -1

Greg Williams: -1

15:11:08 <AxelPolleres> 0

Axel Polleres: 0

15:11:10 <john-l> +1

John Clark: +1

15:11:10 <AlexPassant> +1

Alex Passant: +1

15:11:11 <PrateekJain-WSU> 0

Prateek Jain: 0

15:11:11 <SimonS> +1

Simon Schenk: +1

15:11:13 <LukeWM> +1

Luke Wilson-Mawer: +1

15:11:17 <LeeF> 0, against my better judgment which says +1

0, against my better judgment which says +1

15:11:21 <ericP> nice

Eric Prud'hommeaux: nice

15:11:56 <ericP> i'm surprised. usally "better judgement" is aligned with discresion

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i'm surprised. usally "better judgement" is aligned with discresion

15:11:58 <LeeF> topic: LimitPerResource

8. LimitPerResource

Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 4/6/2

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 4/6/2
15:12:28 <AlexPassant> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource

Alex Passant: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource

15:13:12 <LeeF> AlexPassant: proposal is to find a way to limit solutions not by tuples but by distinct instances of a resource

Alex Passant: proposal is to find a way to limit solutions not by tuples but by distinct instances of a resource

15:13:19 <LeeF> ... example syntax on wiki page

... example syntax on wiki page

15:13:42 <kjetil> q+

Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+

15:13:49 <LeeF> ack kjetil

ack kjetil

15:13:56 <LeeF> kjetil: this is the single most important feature for us

Kjetil Kjernsmo: this is the single most important feature for us

15:14:08 <LeeF> q+ to ask about relationship with subselect

q+ to ask about relationship with subselect

15:14:25 <AxelPolleres> q+ on whether thisis an issue for surface syntax

Axel Polleres: q+ on whether thisis an issue for surface syntax

15:14:29 <LeeF> kjetil: you don't know in advance how many rows you expect back

Kjetil Kjernsmo: you don't know in advance how many rows you expect back

15:15:09 <AxelPolleres> q-

Axel Polleres: q-

15:15:15 <SteveH_> q+

Steve Harris: q+

15:15:30 <LeeF> LeeF: is it true that if sparql has subselects then limitperresource is syntactic sugar?

Lee Feigenbaum: is it true that if sparql has subselects then limitperresource is syntactic sugar?

15:15:39 <LeeF> SteveH_: you also need grouping/limiting operations

Steve Harris: you also need grouping/limiting operations

15:16:25 <LeeF> ... in other cases besides http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource#Related_Use_Cases.2FExtensions you need a grouping operator

... in other cases besides http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource#Related_Use_Cases.2FExtensions you need a grouping operator

15:16:40 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: Alex & Kjetil would you be happy if this was subsumed by subselect?

Axel Polleres: Alex & Kjetil would you be happy if this was subsumed by subselect?

15:16:48 <LeeF> kjetil: yes, if we do subselect

Kjetil Kjernsmo: yes, if we do subselect

15:16:57 <AxelPolleres> let's do a strawpoll conditional to subselects

Axel Polleres: let's do a strawpoll conditional to subselects

15:16:58 <LeeF> AlexPassant: yes, it's the capability itself that is important

Alex Passant: yes, it's the capability itself that is important

15:17:14 <ericP> 0

Eric Prud'hommeaux: 0

15:17:16 <kjetil> +1

Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1

15:17:18 <AlexPassant> +1

Alex Passant: +1

15:17:18 <kasei> +1

Greg Williams: +1

15:17:19 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: straw poll - would you want LimitPerResource GIVEN that we do not do subselects

Axel Polleres: straw poll - would you want LimitPerResource GIVEN that we do not do subselects

15:17:20 <AndyS> -1

Andy Seaborne: -1

15:17:21 <john-l> +1

John Clark: +1

15:17:21 <AxelPolleres> 0

Axel Polleres: 0

15:17:22 <SteveH_> -1

Steve Harris: -1

15:17:25 <LeeF> 0

0

15:17:26 <LukeWM> 0

Luke Wilson-Mawer: 0

15:17:28 <PrateekJain-WSU> 0

Prateek Jain: 0

15:17:31 <SimonS> 0

Simon Schenk: 0

15:17:38 <SteveH_> [but we do do this a lot, but doing it without subselects would be crazy]

Steve Harris: [but we do do this a lot, but doing it without subselects would be crazy]

15:17:55 <LeeF> topic: Basic federated queries

9. Basic federated queries

Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 7/4/2

<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0-): 7/4/2
15:17:59 <kjetil> Zakim, mute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me

15:17:59 <Zakim> kjetil should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil should now be muted

15:18:03 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:BasicFederatedQuery

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:BasicFederatedQuery

15:18:12 <LeeF> AndyS: goal is to find minimal features needed to make federation happen

Andy Seaborne: goal is to find minimal features needed to make federation happen

15:19:01 <LeeF> ... what's the minimal needed for one sparql endpoint to call out to another to get some results back

... what's the minimal needed for one sparql endpoint to call out to another to get some results back

15:19:24 <LeeF> ... related thing for sending CONSTRUCT query to another processor as part of the FROM clause to get data in - can do that now with long URLs

... related thing for sending CONSTRUCT query to another processor as part of the FROM clause to get data in - can do that now with long URLs

15:19:43 <LeeF> ... very related to query parameters

... very related to query parameters

15:19:49 <LeeF> ... very related to subqueries

... very related to subqueries

15:19:54 <ericP> q+ to say that he added the encode-this-and-append-to-graph-url functionality on the command line

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to say that he added the encode-this-and-append-to-graph-url functionality on the command line

15:20:01 <LeeF> ack LeeF

ack LeeF

15:20:01 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to ask about relationship with subselect

Zakim IRC Bot: LeeF, you wanted to ask about relationship with subselect

15:20:06 <LeeF> ack SteveH_

ack SteveH_

15:20:26 <LeeF> AndyS: overall task in federated query is to find the right place to get a certain piece of information

Andy Seaborne: overall task in federated query is to find the right place to get a certain piece of information

15:20:52 <LeeF> ... missing piece is the ability to actually make the call to a remote service, that's the minimum required piece

... missing piece is the ability to actually make the call to a remote service, that's the minimum required piece

15:21:22 <LeeF> ... ARQ does with SERVICE keyword, Virtuoso does it with pragma attached to subselect - mechanism less important than the feature

... ARQ does with SERVICE keyword, Virtuoso does it with pragma attached to subselect - mechanism less important than the feature

15:21:22 <AxelPolleres> Axel: syntax to "execute federated query plans, yes?

Axel Polleres: syntax to "execute federated query plans, yes? [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

15:21:38 <LeeF> ack ericP

ack ericP

15:21:38 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say that he added the encode-this-and-append-to-graph-url functionality on the command line

Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to say that he added the encode-this-and-append-to-graph-url functionality on the command line

15:21:39 <ericP> ack me

Eric Prud'hommeaux: ack me

15:21:39 <SimonS> q+ to say he does this using special named graphs

Simon Schenk: q+ to say he does this using special named graphs

15:22:21 <LeeF> ericP: HCLS group does a lot of query federation using my command line stuff

Eric Prud'hommeaux: HCLS group does a lot of query federation using my command line stuff

15:22:31 <LeeF> ... useful but not top priority

... useful but not top priority

15:22:43 <LeeF> SimonS: we define special named graphs that are evaluated remotely and then do subqueries against one or more remote endpoints

Simon Schenk: we define special named graphs that are evaluated remotely and then do subqueries against one or more remote endpoints

15:22:46 <LeeF> ... a lot of people use it

... a lot of people use it

15:23:39 <LeeF> q?

q?

15:23:40 <LeeF> ack SimonS

ack SimonS

15:23:40 <Zakim> SimonS, you wanted to say he does this using special named graphs

Zakim IRC Bot: SimonS, you wanted to say he does this using special named graphs

15:23:47 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: straw poll on basic federated query

Axel Polleres: straw poll on basic federated query

15:23:48 <SimonS> q-

Simon Schenk: q-

15:23:49 <kasei> +1

Greg Williams: +1

15:23:50 <kjetil> +1

Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1

15:23:51 <LukeWM> -1

Luke Wilson-Mawer: -1

15:23:51 <SteveH_> 0, useful, but very very scary

Steve Harris: 0, useful, but very very scary

15:23:51 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

15:23:51 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:23:53 <SimonS> +1

Simon Schenk: +1

15:23:54 <john-l> -1

John Clark: -1

15:23:55 <PrateekJain-WSU> +1

Prateek Jain: +1

15:23:55 <AlexPassant> 0

Alex Passant: 0

15:23:56 <LeeF> 0

0

15:23:59 <AxelPolleres> 0

Axel Polleres: 0

15:24:50 <ericP> john-l, i'm curious about your -1. issue of priorities, or serious concearns?

Eric Prud'hommeaux: john-l, i'm curious about your -1. issue of priorities, or serious concearns?

15:25:02 <LeeF> ericP, you're not concerned about Luke's -1?

ericP, you're not concerned about Luke's -1?

15:25:16 <john-l> ericP, Just priorities.

John Clark: ericP, Just priorities.

15:25:27 <ericP> and LukeWM?

Eric Prud'hommeaux: and LukeWM?

15:25:49 <LeeF> topic: query by reference and parameters

10. query by reference and parameters

15:25:58 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: doesn't parameters need query by reference?

Axel Polleres: doesn't parameters need query by reference?

15:26:06 <ericP> LeeF, shoudl i talk about SPARQLfed grammar?

Eric Prud'hommeaux: LeeF, shoudl i talk about SPARQLfed grammar?

15:26:11 <LeeF> SimonS: Parameters are useful without query by reference, for example for distributed joins

Simon Schenk: Parameters are useful without query by reference, for example for distributed joins

15:26:49 <LukeWM> ericP, my -1 was because I've just not come across any use cases for it day to day

Luke Wilson-Mawer: ericP, my -1 was because I've just not come across any use cases for it day to day

15:27:00 <ericP> roger

Eric Prud'hommeaux: roger

15:27:03 <ericP> tx

Eric Prud'hommeaux: tx

15:28:02 <LeeF> LeeF: query by ref might depend on parameters but not vice versa - params got some support, query by ref got no support (no +1s)

Lee Feigenbaum: query by ref might depend on parameters but not vice versa - params got some support, query by ref got no support (no +1s)

15:28:21 <LeeF> SteveH_: are you going to change the survey to not say "make 8 votes"?

Steve Harris: are you going to change the survey to not say "make 8 votes"?

15:28:41 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: yes, I will change the text to not be restricted to 8 votes

Axel Polleres: yes, I will change the text to not be restricted to 8 votes

15:29:04 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: AOB?

Axel Polleres: AOB?

15:29:14 <LeeF> Adjourned.

Adjourned.



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2009-04-21 15:44:35 UTC by 'lfeigenb', comments: 'initial minutes, LeeF as scribe'