SPARQL WG Weekly Telecon

Minutes of 09 June 2009

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-06-09
Present
Eric Prud'hommeaux, Lee Feigenbaum, Axel Polleres, Andy Seaborne, Bijan Parsia, Greg Williams, Paul Gearon, Steve Harris, Luke Wilson-Mawer, Chime Ogbuji, Orri Erling, Kjetil Kjernsmo, Birte Glimm, Jacek Kopecký, Prateek Jain, Simon Schenk
Regrets
Ivan Mikhailov, Alex Passant
Scribe
Jacek Kopecký
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. approve http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-02 link
  2. we will have an own section "Service Description" link
Topics
<LeeF> present: ericp, leef, axel, andy, bijan, kasei, pgearon, steveh, LukeWM, chimezie, orri, KjetilK, bglimm, JacekK, Prateek, Simon
<LeeF> regrets: iv_an_ru, AlexPassant
<LeeF> Meeting: SPARQL WG Weekly Telecon
14:03:04 <AxelPolleres> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-06-09
14:03:45 <JacekK> scribe: JacekK

(Scribe set to Jacek Kopecký)

14:03:52 <JacekK> scribenick: JacekK
14:04:43 <JacekK> next scribe: Kjetil (tentatively)

next scribe: Kjetil (tentatively)

14:04:48 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me

14:04:48 <Zakim> KjetilK.a should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: KjetilK.a should now be muted

14:04:50 <LeeF> Regrets for next week for me [SemTech]

Lee Feigenbaum: Regrets for next week for me [SemTech]

14:05:11 <AxelPolleres> Proposed: approve http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-02

PROPOSED: approve http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-02

14:05:24 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: approve http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-02

RESOLVED: approve http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-06-02

14:05:40 <JacekK> topic: liaisons

1. liaisons

14:05:43 <bijan> Nope

Bijan Parsia: Nope

14:06:01 <bijan> The OWL Specs are going to CR (for the interested)

Bijan Parsia: The OWL Specs are going to CR (for the interested)

14:06:14 <JacekK> ericP: nothing from xquery either

Eric Prud'hommeaux: nothing from xquery either

14:06:43 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: RIF's final specs will be discussed soon, otherwise nothing

Axel Polleres: RIF's final specs will be discussed soon, otherwise nothing

14:06:55 <JacekK> AxelPolleres congratules on OWL CR

AxelPolleres congratules on OWL CR

14:07:13 <JacekK> topic: actions

2. actions

14:08:21 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-10

Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ACTION-10

14:08:30 <trackbot> ACTION-10 Talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21 closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-10 Talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21 closed

14:09:13 <KjetilK> KjetilK has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-06-09

Kjetil Kjernsmo: KjetilK has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-06-09

14:10:55 <JacekK> trackbot, close ACTION-23

trackbot, close ACTION-23

14:10:55 <trackbot> ACTION-23 Summarize implicit vs. explicit grouping re ISSUE-11 closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-23 Summarize implicit vs. explicit grouping re ISSUE-11 closed

14:11:21 <JacekK> trackbot, close ACTION-34

trackbot, close ACTION-34

14:11:21 <trackbot> ACTION-34 Summarize issue discussed in the end of the telecon regarding PUT closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-34 Summarize issue discussed in the end of the telecon regarding PUT closed

14:11:52 <JacekK> trackbot, close ACTION-35

trackbot, close ACTION-35

14:12:50 <trackbot> ACTION-35 Tell OWL/RIF that SPARQL is content with http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/PlainLiteral closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-35 Tell OWL/RIF that SPARQL is content with http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/PlainLiteral closed

14:13:30 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-21

Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ACTION-21

14:13:34 <trackbot> ACTION-21 Summarize dataset issue w/ examples / suggestions per ISSUE-8 closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-21 Summarize dataset issue w/ examples / suggestions per ISSUE-8 closed

14:12:18 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/features/

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/features/

14:12:24 <JacekK> topic: features and rationales document

3. features and rationales document

14:13:07 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: most relevant things already in the document

Axel Polleres: most relevant things already in the document

14:13:13 <KjetilK> Zakim, unmute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, unmute me

14:13:13 <Zakim> KjetilK.a should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: KjetilK.a should no longer be muted

14:13:46 <Zakim> +??P42

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P42

14:14:03 <JacekK> kjetil: we have pretty much all the text we require, with some open issues

Kjetil Kjernsmo: we have pretty much all the text we require, with some open issues

14:14:31 <LukeWM> q+

Luke Wilson-Mawer: q+

14:14:38 <JacekK> kjetil goes over the document

kjetil goes over the document

14:15:17 <JacekK> kjetil: for related discussions, we simply link to the issue tracker

Kjetil Kjernsmo: for related discussions, we simply link to the issue tracker

14:15:34 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0346.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0346.html

14:15:45 <AxelPolleres> (Andy's comments)

Axel Polleres: (Andy's comments)

14:16:10 <JacekK> kjetil: none of the issues seem to be bloking, we could go to FPWD on what we have

Kjetil Kjernsmo: none of the issues seem to be bloking, we could go to FPWD on what we have

14:16:46 <JacekK> kjetil: we should discuss if any issues need to be addressed before FPWD

Kjetil Kjernsmo: we should discuss if any issues need to be addressed before FPWD

14:16:48 <LeeF> q+ to suggest one week of review, then publish (even w/ unresolved issues) then refine

Lee Feigenbaum: q+ to suggest one week of review, then publish (even w/ unresolved issues) then refine

14:17:08 <AndyS> ?? 2nd and 3rd  ?? Isn't it to be done by end July in prep for charter II?

Andy Seaborne: ?? 2nd and 3rd ?? Isn't it to be done by end July in prep for charter II?

14:17:31 <AndyS> q+ to suggest keeping the issues in the doc

Andy Seaborne: q+ to suggest keeping the issues in the doc

14:17:37 <JacekK> LukeWM: some implementation text may not be correct (?)

Luke Wilson-Mawer: some implementation text may not be correct (?)

14:17:48 <LukeWM> ack LukeWM

Luke Wilson-Mawer: ack LukeWM

14:18:16 <AndyS> I can make sure it is at least feasible, parser-wise.

Andy Seaborne: I can make sure it is at least feasible, parser-wise.

14:18:21 <JacekK> kjetil: we may need better examples

Kjetil Kjernsmo: we may need better examples

14:18:55 <JacekK> ack LeeF

ack LeeF

14:18:55 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to suggest one week of review, then publish (even w/ unresolved issues) then refine

Zakim IRC Bot: LeeF, you wanted to suggest one week of review, then publish (even w/ unresolved issues) then refine

14:19:19 <SteveH> I'll commit to review it and comment

Steve Harris: I'll commit to review it and comment

14:19:30 <JacekK> LeeF: we need to get people to commit to comment on the doc (it's not long)

Lee Feigenbaum: we need to get people to commit to comment on the doc (it's not long)

14:19:30 <chimezie> I can do the same

Chime Ogbuji: I can do the same

14:19:37 <AxelPolleres> suggestion is to put remaining issue in ... as Editor's note?

Axel Polleres: suggestion is to put remaining issue in ... as Editor's note?

14:19:48 <KjetilK> my summary of issues: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0347.html

Kjetil Kjernsmo: my summary of issues: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0347.html

14:20:20 <JacekK> ericP: yes, we should make the open issues in a certain style so it's visible

Eric Prud'hommeaux: yes, we should make the open issues in a certain style so it's visible

14:20:34 <JacekK> ack AndyS

ack AndyS

14:20:34 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to suggest keeping the issues in the doc

Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to suggest keeping the issues in the doc

14:20:44 <JacekK> AndyS: the doc must be self-contained even if it's quite rough

Andy Seaborne: the doc must be self-contained even if it's quite rough

14:21:00 <AndyS> ack me

Andy Seaborne: ack me

14:21:13 <JacekK> AndyS: the summary up-front should be finished, frozen and time-stamped

Andy Seaborne: the summary up-front should be finished, frozen and time-stamped

14:21:33 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: it should be in the introduction, right?

Axel Polleres: it should be in the introduction, right?

14:21:58 <LeeF> ACTION: Axel to draft the introduction with a summary of the issues

ACTION: Axel to draft the introduction with a summary of the issues

14:21:58 <trackbot> Created ACTION-36 - Draft the introduction with a summary of the issues [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-06-16].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-36 - Draft the introduction with a summary of the issues [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-06-16].

14:22:36 <JacekK> AndyS: if the docs were on the wiki, it'd be easier to contribute text

Andy Seaborne: if the docs were on the wiki, it'd be easier to contribute text

14:23:01 <LeeF> The OWL WG edits their documents on the wiki and publishes directly from there, but that relies on a lot of SandroMagic (TM)

Lee Feigenbaum: The OWL WG edits their documents on the wiki and publishes directly from there, but that relies on a lot of SandroMagic (TM)

14:23:02 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: we decided for docs to be edited in CVS

Axel Polleres: we decided for docs to be edited in CVS

14:23:07 <SteveH> if the document is in the wiki its harder to track changes

Steve Harris: if the document is in the wiki its harder to track changes

14:23:38 <bijan> Why not use the Wiki for proposed text

Bijan Parsia: Why not use the Wiki for proposed text

14:23:43 <JacekK> AndyS: while we're trying to gather material, wiki would be better

Andy Seaborne: while we're trying to gather material, wiki would be better

14:23:44 <bijan> and let the editors integrate it

Bijan Parsia: and let the editors integrate it

14:24:01 <AndyS> What worked in RIF and OWL?

Andy Seaborne: What worked in RIF and OWL?

14:24:09 <AndyS> (worked well)

Andy Seaborne: (worked well)

14:24:31 <bijan> The OWL WG regularly refers to "Wiki maddness"

Bijan Parsia: The OWL WG regularly refers to "Wiki maddness"

14:24:36 <bijan> It was bad for publication

Bijan Parsia: It was bad for publication

14:24:40 <bijan> It was very annoying for editing

Bijan Parsia: It was very annoying for editing

14:24:45 <bijan> Brutal, really

Bijan Parsia: Brutal, really

14:25:27 <AndyS> OK - if the editors are prepared to "edit" not just "write"

Andy Seaborne: OK - if the editors are prepared to "edit" not just "write"

14:25:39 <JacekK> bijan: wiki is good for tweaks by everybody

Bijan Parsia: wiki is good for tweaks by everybody

14:25:50 <AndyS> Sounds like it is not a good as it might be.

Andy Seaborne: Sounds like it is not a good as it might be.

14:25:50 <JacekK> bijan: making systematic changes is harder, also seeing what you're doing is harder

Bijan Parsia: making systematic changes is harder, also seeing what you're doing is harder

14:26:07 <JacekK> bijan: wiki syntax is fragile

Bijan Parsia: wiki syntax is fragile

14:26:27 <Zakim> -kasei

Zakim IRC Bot: -kasei

14:26:37 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: so let's try to draft things on the wiki, and editors will incorporate that in the doc

Axel Polleres: so let's try to draft things on the wiki, and editors will incorporate that in the doc

14:26:44 <JacekK> bijan: that seems to be a reasonable model

Bijan Parsia: that seems to be a reasonable model

14:27:12 <JacekK> zakim, who is speaking?

zakim, who is speaking?

14:27:22 <AxelPolleres> kjetil is speaking

Axel Polleres: kjetil is speaking

14:27:22 <Zakim> JacekK, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 14 (40%), AxelPolleres? (14%), AndyS (16%)

Zakim IRC Bot: JacekK, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 14 (40%), AxelPolleres? (14%), AndyS (16%)

14:27:25 <Zakim> +??P2

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2

14:27:41 <kasei> Zakim, ??P2 is me

Greg Williams: Zakim, ??P2 is me

14:27:41 <Zakim> +kasei; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +kasei; got it

14:27:52 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Greg Williams: Zakim, mute me

14:27:52 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted

14:27:52 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: at this point, we need more reviewers and comments on the doc

Axel Polleres: at this point, we need more reviewers and comments on the doc

14:28:01 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: everyone should review it, but we should have a few actions

Axel Polleres: everyone should review it, but we should have a few actions

14:28:11 <JacekK> volunteers - steve, chime

volunteers - steve, chime

15:22:00 <LeeF> ACTION: Chimezie to review F&R document

(No events recorded for 53 minutes)

ACTION: Chimezie to review F&R document

15:22:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-39 - Review F&R document [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2009-06-16].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-39 - Review F&R document [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2009-06-16].

15:22:03 <LeeF> ACTION: Steve to review F&R document

ACTION: Steve to review F&R document

15:22:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-40 - Review F&R document [on Steve Harris - due 2009-06-16].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-40 - Review F&R document [on Steve Harris - due 2009-06-16].

14:28:35 <SteveH> by end of week it tight, but I'll try

Steve Harris: by end of week it tight, but I'll try

14:29:04 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: if the reviews arrive by end of week, we might already have a good almost-final material for the FPWD next week

Axel Polleres: if the reviews arrive by end of week, we might already have a good almost-final material for the FPWD next week

14:29:40 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: for FPWD, we might just go with what we have with some refinement, or does somebody suggest we need a detailed review?

Axel Polleres: for FPWD, we might just go with what we have with some refinement, or does somebody suggest we need a detailed review?

14:30:10 <KjetilK> q+

Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+

14:30:16 <JacekK> AndyS: I've done a single, not very complete, read-through

Andy Seaborne: I've done a single, not very complete, read-through

14:30:18 <KjetilK> ack me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack me

14:30:45 <JacekK> kjetil: people should also just have a look at the open issues (posted by Axel on my behalf)

Kjetil Kjernsmo: people should also just have a look at the open issues (posted by Axel on my behalf)

14:31:00 <JacekK> kjetil: let's go through them quickly right now

Kjetil Kjernsmo: let's go through them quickly right now

14:31:08 <JacekK> kjetil: 1) we need a short name

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 1) we need a short name

14:31:10 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0347.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0347.html

14:31:33 <JacekK> kjetil: 2) examples should be implemented (we should confirm this)

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 2) examples should be implemented (we should confirm this)

14:31:44 <JacekK> kjetil: 3) service descriptions should prolly be a section by itself

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 3) service descriptions should prolly be a section by itself

14:32:00 <JacekK> kjetil: 4) suggestion for new version of the protocol

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 4) suggestion for new version of the protocol

14:32:18 <LeeF> We haven't explicitly discussed project expressions, which is why

Lee Feigenbaum: We haven't explicitly discussed project expressions, which is why

14:32:28 <JacekK> kjetil: 5) we need to check project expressions if there should be some material

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 5) we need to check project expressions if there should be some material

14:32:37 <JacekK> kjetil: 6) patent policy (?)

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 6) patent policy (?)

14:32:56 <JacekK> ericP: just the boiler plate, we need not think about it

Eric Prud'hommeaux: just the boiler plate, we need not think about it

14:33:09 <LeeF> I can name 2 project expression issues off the top of my head - syntax for expressions & whether expression alias names are required

Lee Feigenbaum: I can name 2 project expression issues off the top of my head - syntax for expressions & whether expression alias names are required

14:33:13 <JacekK> kjetil: 7) some linking consistency

Kjetil Kjernsmo: 7) some linking consistency

14:33:58 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: service descriptions in their own subsection - any objections?

Axel Polleres: service descriptions in their own subsection - any objections?

14:34:07 <JacekK> s/subsection/section/

s/subsection/section/

14:34:17 <kasei> q+

Greg Williams: q+

14:34:19 <LeeF> +1 to serv descrip in own section, for the time being at least

Lee Feigenbaum: +1 to serv descrip in own section, for the time being at least

14:34:31 <LeeF> it may end up having protocol aspects, or query aspects, or neither

Lee Feigenbaum: it may end up having protocol aspects, or query aspects, or neither

14:34:38 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:34:38 <kasei> Zakim, unmute me

Greg Williams: Zakim, unmute me

14:34:38 <Zakim> kasei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should no longer be muted

14:35:18 <JacekK> kasei: the separate section might imply that implementors can deel with this modularly

Greg Williams: the separate section might imply that implementors can deel with this modularly

14:35:53 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me

Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me

14:35:53 <Zakim> KjetilK.a should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: KjetilK.a should now be muted

14:35:56 <JacekK> kasei: somebody could implement query, protocol but not service descriptions

Greg Williams: somebody could implement query, protocol but not service descriptions

14:36:10 <LeeF> q+

Lee Feigenbaum: q+

14:36:11 <ericP> note that our short name is still subject to approval by the publication team (who make sure we don't call it xquery-foo)

Eric Prud'hommeaux: note that our short name is still subject to approval by the publication team (who make sure we don't call it xquery-foo)

14:36:30 <AndyS> Not sure I agree - the service description might be 3rd party (woudl like 1st party but realistically?)

Andy Seaborne: Not sure I agree - the service description might be 3rd party (woudl like 1st party but realistically?)

14:36:30 <KjetilK> ack kasei

Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack kasei

14:36:38 <KjetilK> ack LeeF

Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack LeeF

14:37:00 <KjetilK> +1

Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1

14:37:03 <AxelPolleres> +1 to own section "Service Description"

Axel Polleres: +1 to own section "Service Description"

14:37:05 <kasei> +1 LeeF

Greg Williams: +1 LeeF

14:37:08 <JacekK> LeeF: for this document, it could be its own section; we don't need to say whether it belongs with either of the other parts

Lee Feigenbaum: for this document, it could be its own section; we don't need to say whether it belongs with either of the other parts

14:37:20 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Greg Williams: Zakim, mute me

14:37:20 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted

14:37:42 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: so we'll put svc descriptions in its own section, with an issue that it may belong to protocol or query

Axel Polleres: so we'll put svc descriptions in its own section, with an issue that it may belong to protocol or query

14:37:50 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED:  we will have an own section "Service Description"

RESOLVED: we will have an own section "Service Description"

14:38:35 <JacekK> topic: service descriptions

4. service descriptions

14:38:45 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: we need a bit of a better idea on what we need

Axel Polleres: we need a bit of a better idea on what we need

14:38:50 <LeeF> ISSUE: Is service description part of the protocol, the query language, or something else altogether?

ISSUE: Is service description part of the protocol, the query language, or something else altogether?

13:20:01 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-31 - Is service description part of the protocol, the query language, or something else altogether? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/31/edit .

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-31 - Is service description part of the protocol, the query language, or something else altogether? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/31/edit .

14:39:06 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: we have several proposals

(No events recorded for 79 minutes)

Axel Polleres: we have several proposals

14:39:48 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: 1) the issue was discussed already a long time ago in WG1

Axel Polleres: 1) the issue was discussed already a long time ago in WG1

14:39:56 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item10

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item10

14:40:19 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: the first WG's ftf4 lists some proposals

Axel Polleres: the first WG's ftf4 lists some proposals

14:40:36 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: the f&r doc could use some of that, e.g. for use cases

Axel Polleres: the f&r doc could use some of that, e.g. for use cases

14:41:04 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/23

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/23

14:41:09 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: the issue on media types & conneg is related

Axel Polleres: the issue on media types & conneg is related

14:41:59 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-05-06#Full__2d_text_search

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-05-06#Full__2d_text_search

14:42:17 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: there are two directions - the hard one to go through existing descriptions and recommend something, the easier one just to enable hooks for description without specifying the content

Axel Polleres: there are two directions - the hard one to go through existing descriptions and recommend something, the easier one just to enable hooks for description without specifying the content

14:42:28 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: we could just provide the mechanism and some examples

Axel Polleres: we could just provide the mechanism and some examples

14:43:29 <AndyS> +1 to small (minimal) framework + *suggestions* to use other vocabs

Andy Seaborne: +1 to small (minimal) framework + *suggestions* to use other vocabs

14:43:29 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

14:43:41 <JacekK> ericP: an endpoint might support DESCRIBE or similar queries about itself

Eric Prud'hommeaux: an endpoint might support DESCRIBE or similar queries about itself

14:44:20 <JacekK> ericP: we may want to write down some obvious things, such as a class of SPARQL endpoints

Eric Prud'hommeaux: we may want to write down some obvious things, such as a class of SPARQL endpoints

14:44:40 <AndyS> q+ to mention 3rd party use

Andy Seaborne: q+ to mention 3rd party use

14:44:48 <JacekK> SteveH: I have problems with packing it into the query; with gateways it's hard to know what the URI of the actual endpoint is

Steve Harris: I have problems with packing it into the query; with gateways it's hard to know what the URI of the actual endpoint is

14:44:56 <JacekK> ack SteveH

ack SteveH

14:45:21 <LeeF> I was a pretty strong advocate of service description, so I should also say that I strongly support doing whatever we see as minimal guidance to encourage people to start describing their endpoints/services :-)

Lee Feigenbaum: I was a pretty strong advocate of service description, so I should also say that I strongly support doing whatever we see as minimal guidance to encourage people to start describing their endpoints/services :-)

14:45:23 <JacekK> SteveH: I'm also uncomfortable about requiring some data to be in the endpoint

Steve Harris: I'm also uncomfortable about requiring some data to be in the endpoint

14:45:30 <AxelPolleres> q+ to ask whether we could  obtain the service description by simply Get [entpoint] requesting mime type rdf/xml?

Axel Polleres: q+ to ask whether we could obtain the service description by simply Get [entpoint] requesting mime type rdf/xml?

14:45:37 <JacekK> SteveH: must prefer an HTTP header that would point to the description

Steve Harris: must prefer an HTTP header that would point to the description

14:45:43 <JacekK> q+ to suggest HTTP OPTIONS

q+ to suggest HTTP OPTIONS

14:46:09 <kasei> in addition to an Endpoint class, I'd think at minimum we should define properties for extension points (functions, possibly entailment regimes)

Greg Williams: in addition to an Endpoint class, I'd think at minimum we should define properties for extension points (functions, possibly entailment regimes)

14:46:11 <JacekK> ericP: if we have the description, then we'd also want an endpoint that can query them

Eric Prud'hommeaux: if we have the description, then we'd also want an endpoint that can query them

14:46:44 <JacekK> SteveH: if the HTTP header gives you a URI, you can just do FROM that URI

Steve Harris: if the HTTP header gives you a URI, you can just do FROM that URI

14:46:45 <kasei> heh

Greg Williams: heh

14:47:03 <JacekK> ericP: I find it easier to specify graphs than to add HTTP headers

Eric Prud'hommeaux: I find it easier to specify graphs than to add HTTP headers

14:47:22 <AndyS> SOAP?

Andy Seaborne: SOAP?

14:47:24 <JacekK> SteveH: it took me less than an hour to add the header, but embedding dynamic data in the endpoint is harder

Steve Harris: it took me less than an hour to add the header, but embedding dynamic data in the endpoint is harder

14:47:28 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the queue?

Axel Polleres: Zakim, who is on the queue?

14:47:28 <Zakim> I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, JacekK on the speaker queue

Zakim IRC Bot: I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, JacekK on the speaker queue

14:47:48 <JacekK> ericP: the header may also not make it through proxies

Eric Prud'hommeaux: the header may also not make it through proxies

14:48:22 <JacekK> ericP: I meant it's difficult to specify the HTTP header, not to implement it - we'd need to involve IETF, HTTP extensibility, RFC iterations...

Eric Prud'hommeaux: I meant it's difficult to specify the HTTP header, not to implement it - we'd need to involve IETF, HTTP extensibility, RFC iterations...

14:48:30 <chimezie> What is the Atom precedence here?

Chime Ogbuji: What is the Atom precedence here?

14:48:43 <JacekK> AndyS: some use cases, where the endpoint is not the one offering the description

Andy Seaborne: some use cases, where the endpoint is not the one offering the description

14:48:52 <JacekK> AndyS: a repository (UDDI-like situation)

Andy Seaborne: a repository (UDDI-like situation)

14:48:56 <AxelPolleres> that's an interesting one.

Axel Polleres: that's an interesting one.

14:49:14 <JacekK> AndyS: all discussion now has focused on the endpoint describing itself

Andy Seaborne: all discussion now has focused on the endpoint describing itself

14:49:25 <LeeF> chimezie, good question

Lee Feigenbaum: chimezie, good question

14:49:34 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: is there an issue in the authority of descriptions?

Axel Polleres: is there an issue in the authority of descriptions?

14:49:59 <chimezie> Atom appears to have an explicit 'service document' with a known URI

Chime Ogbuji: Atom appears to have an explicit 'service document' with a known URI

14:50:02 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: what's the use case for 3rd party description of an endpoint?

Axel Polleres: what's the use case for 3rd party description of an endpoint?

14:50:07 <LeeF> chimezie, EliasT tells me that Atom Publishing Protocol (APP) has a well-known service.xml file

Lee Feigenbaum: chimezie, EliasT tells me that Atom Publishing Protocol (APP) has a well-known service.xml file

14:50:58 <chimezie> Yeah, i'm looking to see if the URI for this service document is 'hardcoded' or can be discovered via introspection of some kind

Chime Ogbuji: Yeah, i'm looking to see if the URI for this service document is 'hardcoded' or can be discovered via introspection of some kind

14:51:06 <AndyS> Currently - It is not part of the protocol.  Must have "query="

Andy Seaborne: Currently - It is not part of the protocol. Must have "query="

14:51:17 <JacekK> ericP: query is a required parameter

Eric Prud'hommeaux: query is a required parameter

14:51:36 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: could we add a new behavior there?

Axel Polleres: could we add a new behavior there?

14:51:48 <LeeF> chimezie, he says you can find it via a meta tag in HTML

Lee Feigenbaum: chimezie, he says you can find it via a meta tag in HTML

14:52:01 <JacekK> ericP: it's currently an error, and our WSDL description would then be "everything-optional"

Eric Prud'hommeaux: it's currently an error, and our WSDL description would then be "everything-optional"

14:52:02 <chimezie> hmmm..

Chime Ogbuji: hmmm..

14:52:25 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the queue?

Axel Polleres: Zakim, who is on the queue?

14:52:25 <Zakim> I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, JacekK on the speaker queue

Zakim IRC Bot: I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, JacekK on the speaker queue

14:52:28 <JacekK> ericP: but an error could be reasonable if the request is not recognized - an old system

Eric Prud'hommeaux: but an error could be reasonable if the request is not recognized - an old system

14:52:34 <AxelPolleres> ack AndyS

Axel Polleres: ack AndyS

14:52:34 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to mention 3rd party use

Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to mention 3rd party use

14:52:43 <AxelPolleres> ack AxelPolleres

Axel Polleres: ack AxelPolleres

14:52:43 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask whether we could  obtain the service description by simply Get [entpoint] requesting mime type rdf/xml?

Zakim IRC Bot: AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask whether we could obtain the service description by simply Get [entpoint] requesting mime type rdf/xml?

14:52:53 <LeeF> chimezie, EliasT points me to http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-atomsidebar/index.html

Lee Feigenbaum: chimezie, EliasT points me to http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-atomsidebar/index.html

14:52:58 <chimezie> [[[

Chime Ogbuji: [[[

14:52:58 <chimezie> How Service Documents are discovered is not defined in this

Chime Ogbuji: How Service Documents are discovered is not defined in this

14:52:59 <chimezie>    specification.

Chime Ogbuji: specification.

14:53:02 <chimezie> ]]] -- Atom Pub

Chime Ogbuji: ]]] -- Atom Pub

14:53:10 <JacekK> JacekK: one of the ways to get the description would be HTTP OPTIONS

Jacek Kopecký: one of the ways to get the description would be HTTP OPTIONS

14:53:17 <SteveH> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html

Steve Harris: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html

14:53:22 <SteveH> OPTIONs

Steve Harris: OPTIONs

14:53:41 <LeeF> I wouldn't knw where to start to implement something via OPTION

Lee Feigenbaum: I wouldn't knw where to start to implement something via OPTION

14:53:50 <AndyS> Do you get content neg on OPTIONs?

Andy Seaborne: Do you get content neg on OPTIONs?

14:53:56 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9#sec9.2

Eric Prud'hommeaux: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9#sec9.2

14:54:05 <LeeF> q?

Lee Feigenbaum: q?

14:54:08 <LeeF> ack JacekK

Lee Feigenbaum: ack JacekK

14:54:08 <Zakim> JacekK, you wanted to suggest HTTP OPTIONS

Zakim IRC Bot: JacekK, you wanted to suggest HTTP OPTIONS

14:54:11 <SteveH> AndyS, yes

Steve Harris: AndyS, yes

14:54:25 <AndyS> OPTION * is tricky but otherwise servelet API would route it.

Andy Seaborne: OPTION * is tricky but otherwise servelet API would route it.

14:54:28 <AndyS> Thx Steve

Andy Seaborne: Thx Steve

14:54:32 <JacekK> JacekK: OPTIONS is used to discover, for example, which of GET/POST/PUT/DELETE is available

Jacek Kopecký: OPTIONS is used to discover, for example, which of GET/POST/PUT/DELETE is available

14:54:43 <kasei> might run into trouble using OPTION in many www client APIs

Greg Williams: might run into trouble using OPTION in many www client APIs

14:54:48 <JacekK> JacekK: HTTP currently doesn't specify what can be returned as the body of the response

Jacek Kopecký: HTTP currently doesn't specify what can be returned as the body of the response

14:55:11 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: time is running out, any volunteer to summarize this in an email, or the wiki?

Axel Polleres: time is running out, any volunteer to summarize this in an email, or the wiki?

14:55:39 <JacekK> ericP: steve and I should have an argument on the wiki

Eric Prud'hommeaux: steve and I should have an argument on the wiki

14:56:00 <JacekK> ericP: but I'll be quite busy the upcoming weeks

Eric Prud'hommeaux: but I'll be quite busy the upcoming weeks

14:56:13 <JacekK> SteveH: I've already put my thoughts on the wiki

Steve Harris: I've already put my thoughts on the wiki

14:56:44 <JacekK> SteveH: I didn't add anything about the query language stuff, not expecting that we'd even consider it

Steve Harris: I didn't add anything about the query language stuff, not expecting that we'd even consider it

14:57:28 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Eric to add to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions about different options to serve descriptions

ACTION: Eric to add to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions about different options to serve descriptions

14:57:35 <chimezie> It seems like a comprehensive set of usecases might frame this discussion better (so we aren't talking about open-ended service descriptions, but descriptions of specific SPARQL-related services)

Chime Ogbuji: It seems like a comprehensive set of usecases might frame this discussion better (so we aren't talking about open-ended service descriptions, but descriptions of specific SPARQL-related services)

14:58:04 <JacekK> LeeF: SteveH, what did you mean by the query lang stuff?

Lee Feigenbaum: SteveH, what did you mean by the query lang stuff?

14:58:13 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Jacek to add to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions about different options to serve descriptions (specifically HTTP OPTION)

ACTION: Jacek to add to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions about different options to serve descriptions (specifically HTTP OPTION)

13:22:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-37 - Add to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions about different options to serve descriptions (specifically HTTP OPTION) [on Jacek Kopecký - due 2009-06-16].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-37 - Add to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ServiceDescriptions about different options to serve descriptions (specifically HTTP OPTION) [on Jacek Kopecký - due 2009-06-16].

14:58:30 <JacekK> SteveH: syntax extensions, but it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem - you need to know what lang is allowed before you could ask for the description

(No events recorded for 96 minutes)

Steve Harris: syntax extensions, but it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem - you need to know what lang is allowed before you could ask for the description

14:59:11 <AxelPolleres> Eric: at least type sparqlendpoint

Eric Prud'hommeaux: at least type sparqlendpoint [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

14:59:25 <AxelPolleres> Orri: each feature should have a URI.

Orri Erling: each feature should have a URI. [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

14:59:35 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0299.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0299.html

14:59:44 <kasei> I'm here

Greg Williams: I'm here

15:00:15 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: we prolly don't want to standardize a full description language

Axel Polleres: we prolly don't want to standardize a full description language

15:00:20 <Zakim> -john-l

Zakim IRC Bot: -john-l

15:00:28 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: a Note could be an option

Axel Polleres: a Note could be an option

15:00:33 <kasei> q+ to mention vocabulary

Greg Williams: q+ to mention vocabulary

15:00:36 <kasei> Zakim, unmute me

Greg Williams: Zakim, unmute me

15:00:36 <Zakim> kasei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should no longer be muted

15:00:41 <Zakim> -Chimezie_Ogbuji

Zakim IRC Bot: -Chimezie_Ogbuji

15:01:08 <AxelPolleres> Orri: void good for the data, but we need to extend for the query language/endpoitn capabilities

Orri Erling: void good for the data, but we need to extend for the query language/endpoitn capabilities [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

15:01:37 <JacekK> kasei: agree that we should have a class for endpoints, and I'd add a property for saying "this endpoint supports this extension function" and maybe other extensions (entailment regimes etc.)

Greg Williams: agree that we should have a class for endpoints, and I'd add a property for saying "this endpoint supports this extension function" and maybe other extensions (entailment regimes etc.)

15:01:39 <AxelPolleres> Kasei: we need URIs for extension functions supported, entailment regimes.

Greg Williams: we need URIs for extension functions supported, entailment regimes. [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

15:01:46 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

15:01:52 <SimonS> +1

Simon Schenk: +1

15:01:59 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Greg Williams: Zakim, mute me

15:01:59 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted

15:02:06 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item10

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ftf4.html#item10

15:02:29 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: the link mentions some of what we've discussed

Axel Polleres: the link mentions some of what we've discussed

15:02:56 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: did SADDLE come from that discussion?

Axel Polleres: did SADDLE come from that discussion?

15:03:20 <kasei> I can write up a brief proposal

Greg Williams: I can write up a brief proposal

15:03:25 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: volunteers for reviewing the old discussion?

Axel Polleres: volunteers for reviewing the old discussion?

15:03:33 <JacekK> AxelPolleres: thanks kasei

Axel Polleres: thanks kasei

13:25:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-38 - Write up a brief proposal surrounding service description [on Gregory Williams - due 2009-06-16].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-38 - Write up a brief proposal surrounding service description [on Gregory Williams - due 2009-06-16].

15:03:45 <JacekK> telcon done

(No events recorded for 98 minutes)

telcon done



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2009-06-09 19:25:10 UTC by 'lfeigenb', comments: 'thanks to Jacek for scribing'