SPARQL Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 15 June 2010

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-06-15
Seen
Alexandre Passant, Andy Seaborne, Axel Polleres, Birte Glimm, Gregory Williams, Ivan Herman, Lee Feigenbaum, Matthew Perry, Olivier Corby, Paul Gearon, Sandro Hawke, Souripriya Das, Steve Harris, Unknown NickH
Regrets
Axel Polleres, Paul Gearon, Ivan Herman, Sandro Hawke
Scribe
Birte Glimm
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-08 link
Topics

There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.

It may be helpful to

14:00:00 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/06/15-sparql-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/06/15-sparql-irc

14:00:01 <Zakim> +kasei

Zakim IRC Bot: +kasei

14:00:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:00:04 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 77277

14:00:04 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now

14:00:05 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
14:00:05 <trackbot> Date: 15 June 2010
14:00:05 <bglimm> rrsagent, make logs world

Birte Glimm: rrsagent, make logs world

14:00:05 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 's make logs world', bglimm.  Try /msg RRSAgent help

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I'm logging. I don't understand 's make logs world', bglimm. Try /msg RRSAgent help

14:00:13 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Gregory Williams: Zakim, mute me

14:00:13 <Zakim> sorry, kasei, I don't know what conference this is

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, kasei, I don't know what conference this is

14:00:13 <bglimm> rrsagent, set logs world

Birte Glimm: rrsagent, set logs world

14:00:15 <LeeF> zakim, this is SPARQL

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, this is SPARQL

14:00:15 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, LeeF; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM

14:00:21 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Gregory Williams: Zakim, mute me

14:00:21 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted

14:00:36 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

14:00:43 <bglimm> Scribe: bglimm

(Scribe set to Birte Glimm)

14:00:46 <Zakim> -MattPerry

Zakim IRC Bot: -MattPerry

14:00:47 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPCaller is me

14:00:47 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

14:00:53 <bglimm> Zakim, who is here?

Zakim, who is here?

14:00:53 <Zakim> On the phone I see +86528aaaa, kasei (muted), AndyS

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see +86528aaaa, kasei (muted), AndyS

14:00:54 <Zakim> On IRC I see SteveH__, RRSAgent, AlexPassant, MattPerry, Zakim, bglimm, OlivierCorby, LeeF, iv_an_ru, SteveH, AndyS, karl, pgearon, kasei, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see SteveH__, RRSAgent, AlexPassant, MattPerry, Zakim, bglimm, OlivierCorby, LeeF, iv_an_ru, SteveH, AndyS, karl, pgearon, kasei, sandro, trackbot

14:00:59 <Zakim> + +1.617.245.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.245.aabb

14:01:03 <LeeF> zakim, aabb is me

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, aabb is me

14:01:03 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF; got it

14:01:05 <bglimm> Zakim, +86528aaaa is me

Zakim, +86528aaaa is me

14:01:05 <Zakim> +bglimm; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm; got it

14:01:16 <bglimm> scribe: bglimm
14:01:18 <Zakim> +MattPerry

Zakim IRC Bot: +MattPerry

14:01:24 <bglimm> ScribeNick: bglimm
14:02:08 <AndyS> Advanced regrets for 29/June.   Will (still) be returning from the US.

Andy Seaborne: Advanced regrets for 29/June. Will (still) be returning from the US.

14:02:45 <Zakim> -LeeF

Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF

14:02:47 <Zakim> +[Garlik]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[Garlik]

14:02:56 <SteveH> Zakim, [Garlik] is temporarily me

Steve Harris: Zakim, [Garlik] is temporarily me

14:02:56 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

14:03:31 <Zakim> +Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri

14:03:33 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum

Zakim IRC Bot: +Lee_Feigenbaum

14:03:45 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's on the phone?

14:03:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see bglimm, kasei (muted), AndyS, MattPerry, SteveH, Souri, Lee_Feigenbaum

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bglimm, kasei (muted), AndyS, MattPerry, SteveH, Souri, Lee_Feigenbaum

14:04:05 <LeeF> Regrets: Axel, pgearon, Sandro, IvanH
14:04:13 <bglimm> Regrets: Axel, Paul, Ivan, Sandro
14:04:22 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-06-15
14:04:34 <LeeF> last week's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-08

Lee Feigenbaum: last week's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-08

14:04:55 <Zakim> +??P27

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P27

14:05:02 <AlexPassant> Zakim: ??p27 is me
14:05:10 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??p27 is me

Alexandre Passant: Zakim, ??p27 is me

14:05:10 <Zakim> +AlexPassant; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AlexPassant; got it

14:05:25 <bglimm> Zakim, who is on the call?

Zakim, who is on the call?

14:05:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see bglimm, kasei (muted), AndyS, MattPerry, SteveH, Souri, Lee_Feigenbaum, AlexPassant

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bglimm, kasei (muted), AndyS, MattPerry, SteveH, Souri, Lee_Feigenbaum, AlexPassant

14:05:27 <OlivierCorby> tel server does not recognize when I deal sparql code

Olivier Corby: tel server does not recognize when I deal sparql code

14:06:12 <SteveH> OlivierCorby, disconnect and try again

Steve Harris: OlivierCorby, disconnect and try again

14:06:24 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-08

RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-08

14:06:57 <LeeF> Next meeting: 2010-06-29 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EDT

Lee Feigenbaum: Next meeting: 2010-06-29 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EDT

14:06:58 <NickH> I keep getting disconnected from the UK number

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown NickH: I keep getting disconnected from the UK number

14:07:02 <bglimm> Lee: Andy has already send regrets from 29 July

Lee Feigenbaum: Andy has already send regrets from 29 July

14:07:17 <LeeF> SteveH strongly at risk for 6/29

Lee Feigenbaum: SteveH strongly at risk for 6/29

14:07:21 <bglimm> SteveH: I am at risk, unlikely to make it actually

Steve Harris: I am at risk, unlikely to make it actually

14:07:35 <LeeF> NickH, apparently zakim is having troubles - solution is to either keep trying or to try the US number if you can

Lee Feigenbaum: NickH, apparently zakim is having troubles - solution is to either keep trying or to try the US number if you can

14:08:00 <bglimm> LeeF: new comment about the HTTP protocol

Lee Feigenbaum: new comment about the HTTP protocol

14:08:01 <Zakim> +??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21

14:08:13 <bglimm> ... Chime can say something about that

... Chime can say something about that

14:08:14 <NickH> Zakim, ??21 is me

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown NickH: Zakim, ??21 is me

14:08:14 <Zakim> sorry, NickH, I do not recognize a party named '??21'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, NickH, I do not recognize a party named '??21'

14:08:19 <bglimm> ... nothing new from RIF

... nothing new from RIF

14:08:20 <NickH> Zakim, ??P21 is me

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown NickH: Zakim, ??P21 is me

14:08:20 <Zakim> +NickH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +NickH; got it

14:08:38 <bglimm> ... RDF2RDF will have a F2F in CA and has published their use cases

... RDF2RDF will have a F2F in CA and has published their use cases

14:08:47 <Zakim> +OlivierCorby

Zakim IRC Bot: +OlivierCorby

14:08:54 <bglimm> s/RDF2RDF/RDB2RDF/

s/RDF2RDF/RDB2RDF/

14:09:23 <bglimm> ... W3C might set up a WG for governments to handle linked data

... W3C might set up a WG for governments to handle linked data

14:09:55 <LeeF> Dedicated teleconference on test cases: June 30th, 15:00 BST (10:00 EDT)

Lee Feigenbaum: Dedicated teleconference on test cases: June 30th, 15:00 BST (10:00 EDT)

14:09:57 <bglimm> ... time for test cases call is Wed Jun 30, 3pm UK time, 10am US Eastern

... time for test cases call is Wed Jun 30, 3pm UK time, 10am US Eastern

14:10:13 <bglimm> ... some test cases in emails

... some test cases in emails

14:10:28 <bglimm> ... make sure we have a place to put these

... make sure we have a place to put these

14:10:36 <LeeF> topic: SemTech

1. SemTech

14:10:55 <bglimm> ... SemTec plans: we have a SPARQL 1.1 panel at Wed 2pm local time

... SemTec plans: we have a SPARQL 1.1 panel at Wed 2pm local time

14:11:03 <bglimm> ... same as the one at ISWC

... same as the one at ISWC

14:12:06 <bglimm> ... Is there interest in meeting informally outside of the panel?

... Is there interest in meeting informally outside of the panel?

14:12:18 <AndyS> Be good to informally meet up

Andy Seaborne: Be good to informally meet up

14:12:29 <bglimm> I won't be there

I won't be there

14:12:57 <bglimm> topic: Function Library

2. Function Library

14:13:15 <bglimm> LeeF: Axel is fleshing out the design on a wiki page

Lee Feigenbaum: Axel is fleshing out the design on a wiki page

14:13:18 <LeeF> topic: zero-length paths

3. zero-length paths

14:13:31 <bglimm> .... 0-length path semantics is stilll undefined

.... 0-length path semantics is stilll undefined

14:13:50 <bglimm> ... everything in the world, everything in the graph

... everything in the world, everything in the graph

14:14:14 <LeeF> See Andy's suggestion at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0360.html

Lee Feigenbaum: See Andy's suggestion at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0360.html

14:14:49 <bglimm> ... AndyS suggested compromise that 0-length matches any subject and object node in the DS and constant subj./obj.  IRIs in the triple pattern

... AndyS suggested compromise that 0-length matches any subject and object node in the DS and constant subj./obj. IRIs in the triple pattern

14:15:01 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

14:15:05 <LeeF> ack SteveH

Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH

14:15:26 <bglimm> SteveH: I might miss something, but if you have:

Steve Harris: I might miss something, but if you have:

14:15:58 <bglimm> ?x :p{0,1} ?y, I would expect that to match only triples with that

?x :p{0,1} ?y, I would expect that to match only triples with that

14:15:59 <SteveH> ?x :p{0,1} ?y

Steve Harris: ?x :p{0,1} ?y

14:16:01 <bglimm> predicate

predicate

14:16:23 <LeeF> ?x :p{0} ?y

Lee Feigenbaum: ?x :p{0} ?y

14:16:28 <bglimm> LeeF: Lets consider first ?x p{0} ?y

Lee Feigenbaum: Lets consider first ?x p{0} ?y

14:16:45 <kasei> or bnodes

Gregory Williams: or bnodes

14:16:52 <Souri> So are we saying every property is reflexive?

Souripriya Das: So are we saying every property is reflexive?

14:17:00 <bglimm> ... gives all pairs of (iri, iri) for IRIs that occur in the graph as sub. or obj

... gives all pairs of (iri, iri) for IRIs that occur in the graph as sub. or obj

14:17:02 <SteveH> ?x :p _:foo

Steve Harris: ?x :p _:foo

14:17:13 <bglimm> I don't think

I don't think

14:18:04 <bglimm> Do you mean ?x :p{0} _:foo?

Do you mean ?x :p{0} _:foo?

14:18:09 <SteveH> <x> :p <y> . <y> :p <z> . <z> :p <a>

Steve Harris: <x> :p <y> . <y> :p <z> . <z> :p <a>

14:18:12 <Zakim> -AlexPassant

Zakim IRC Bot: -AlexPassant

14:18:27 <SteveH> <d> :q <e> /

Steve Harris: <d> :q <e> /

14:18:39 <SteveH> ?x :p* ?y

Steve Harris: ?x :p* ?y

14:18:56 <SteveH> <x> :p* ?y

Steve Harris: <x> :p* ?y

14:19:08 <bglimm> That just gives <x> I guess

That just gives <x> I guess

14:19:35 <SteveH> <x> :q <e>

Steve Harris: <x> :q <e>

14:19:37 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

14:19:51 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??ipcaller is me

Alexandre Passant: Zakim, ??ipcaller is me

14:19:51 <Zakim> sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '??ipcaller'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '??ipcaller'

14:20:05 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??[IPcaller] is me

Alexandre Passant: Zakim, ??[IPcaller] is me

14:20:05 <Zakim> sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '??[IPcaller]'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '??[IPcaller]'

14:20:22 <bglimm> LeeF: we will have some more test cases for this, to illustrate what are expected results

Lee Feigenbaum: we will have some more test cases for this, to illustrate what are expected results

14:20:37 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Zero-length paths are defined to match all subjects and objects in the graph plus any IRI literal that is the subject or object of the triple pattern.

PROPOSED: Zero-length paths are defined to match all subjects and objects in the graph plus any IRI literal that is the subject or object of the triple pattern.

14:20:49 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??IPcaller is me

Alexandre Passant: Zakim, ??IPcaller is me

14:20:49 <Zakim> sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '??IPcaller'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '??IPcaller'

14:20:49 <bglimm> Zakim, ??ipcaller is AlexPassant

Zakim, ??ipcaller is AlexPassant

14:20:50 <Zakim> sorry, bglimm, I do not recognize a party named '??ipcaller'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bglimm, I do not recognize a party named '??ipcaller'

14:22:17 <bglimm> We could just have + and no * and number must be greater than 0 in path length restrictions...

We could just have + and no * and number must be greater than 0 in path length restrictions...

14:22:43 <LeeF> Tentative consensus on the fact that zero-length paths are defined to match all subjects and objects in the graph plus any IRI literal that is the subject or object of the triple pattern.

Lee Feigenbaum: Tentative consensus on the fact that zero-length paths are defined to match all subjects and objects in the graph plus any IRI literal that is the subject or object of the triple pattern.

14:22:52 <LeeF> Encourage further discussion & test cases and will solicit external feedbcak

Lee Feigenbaum: Encourage further discussion & test cases and will solicit external feedbcak

14:23:27 <bglimm> topic: SPARQL UPDATE and service keyword

4. SPARQL UPDATE and service keyword

14:23:43 <bglimm> LeeF: Steve did send an email regarding this

Lee Feigenbaum: Steve did send an email regarding this

14:23:44 <LeeF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0267.html

Lee Feigenbaum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0267.html

14:24:58 <bglimm> LeeF: Do we have to define atomicity or any other issues we have to define?

Lee Feigenbaum: Do we have to define atomicity or any other issues we have to define?

14:25:25 <bglimm> SteveH: We could say that we do not define atomicity.

Steve Harris: We could say that we do not define atomicity.

14:25:37 <bglimm> LeeF: What do implementations do?

Lee Feigenbaum: What do implementations do?

14:26:13 <bglimm> AndyS: depends a bit on the implementation, depends on the underlying datasource

Andy Seaborne: depends a bit on the implementation, depends on the underlying datasource

14:26:25 <bglimm> ... whether it supports transactions

... whether it supports transactions

14:26:34 <bglimm> ... in one case you would deadlock

... in one case you would deadlock

14:26:51 <bglimm> ... it would attemot to get a write lock on something that is already locked

... it would attemot to get a write lock on something that is already locked

14:27:03 <bglimm> ... there is no lock coordination

... there is no lock coordination

14:27:30 <bglimm> SteveH: Our implementation would also do that.

Steve Harris: Our implementation would also do that.

14:27:52 <SteveH> actually, it wouldn't, but it did in the past

Steve Harris: actually, it wouldn't, but it did in the past

14:28:09 <bglimm> Leef: Should we say that implementors should care about how they handle concurrency?

Lee Feigenbaum: Should we say that implementors should care about how they handle concurrency?

14:29:02 <bglimm> SteveH: A user might not know that two endpoints are actually the same endpoint

Steve Harris: A user might not know that two endpoints are actually the same endpoint

14:29:18 <bglimm> LeeF: Not clear what we can do to prevent this

Lee Feigenbaum: Not clear what we can do to prevent this

14:29:53 <bglimm> .... we say that multiple operations should be atomic, but we cannot really specify it more

.... we say that multiple operations should be atomic, but we cannot really specify it more

14:30:43 <bglimm> LeeF: At one point we said that update queries just use SPARQL 1.0 queries, but I think we changed that to SPARQL 1.1 at some point

Lee Feigenbaum: At one point we said that update queries just use SPARQL 1.0 queries, but I think we changed that to SPARQL 1.1 at some point

14:31:08 <bglimm> AndyS: You could do the same as service does in the example with load

Andy Seaborne: You could do the same as service does in the example with load

14:31:37 <bglimm> SteveH: It is worth a note in the security section because it can be part of a DoS attack

Steve Harris: It is worth a note in the security section because it can be part of a DoS attack

14:31:46 <LeeF> Advice to editor: consider a note in the security section about the interplay of SERVICE & LOAD against the endpoint handling an Update request

Lee Feigenbaum: Advice to editor: consider a note in the security section about the interplay of SERVICE & LOAD against the endpoint handling an Update request

14:33:17 <bglimm> LeeF: We need to do a review of the open issues

Lee Feigenbaum: We need to do a review of the open issues

14:33:31 <bglimm> ... understand the most important open issues for the docuemmnts

... understand the most important open issues for the docuemmnts

14:33:47 <bglimm> s/docuemmnts/documents/

s/docuemmnts/documents/

14:34:08 <bglimm> .... Axel and I need to write an overview document about the different parts of the spec

.... Axel and I need to write an overview document about the different parts of the spec

14:34:26 <bglimm> Topic: Aggregates

5. Aggregates

14:34:48 <bglimm> LeeF: AndyS and SteveH tried to highlight the most important issues here

Lee Feigenbaum: AndyS and SteveH tried to highlight the most important issues here

14:35:09 <bglimm> ... Andy asked what does SELECT * mean in conjunction with GROUP BY clause

... Andy asked what does SELECT * mean in conjunction with GROUP BY clause

14:35:29 <bglimm> ... SELECT * could be an error if the query mentions variables not in the group by

... SELECT * could be an error if the query mentions variables not in the group by

14:35:42 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

14:35:42 <bglimm> ... we could also only collect vars in the group by clause

... we could also only collect vars in the group by clause

14:35:47 <LeeF> ack SteveH

Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH

14:35:54 <bglimm> I prefer option 1

I prefer option 1

14:36:02 <LeeF> Example  SELECT * { ... ?x ... ; ... ?y ... } GROUP BY ?x

Lee Feigenbaum: Example SELECT * { ... ?x ... ; ... ?y ... } GROUP BY ?x

14:36:18 <LeeF> is that (1) an error (projecting ?y which is not in GROUP BY) or (2) a valid query that projects just ?x ?

Lee Feigenbaum: is that (1) an error (projecting ?y which is not in GROUP BY) or (2) a valid query that projects just ?x ?

14:36:31 <SteveH> marginal preference for (2)

Steve Harris: marginal preference for (2)

14:36:36 <SteveH> but very marginal

Steve Harris: but very marginal

14:36:45 <bglimm> 2 would project ut ?y before aggregating

2 would project ut ?y before aggregating

14:36:51 <bglimm> s/ut/out/

s/ut/out/

14:36:57 <MattPerry> I would say this is an error

Matthew Perry: I would say this is an error

14:37:00 <Souri> in SQL it will be an error

Souripriya Das: in SQL it will be an error

14:37:13 <SteveH> hm, maybe I'm changing my mind

Steve Harris: hm, maybe I'm changing my mind

14:37:13 <bglimm> I prefer to have it like SQL with error

I prefer to have it like SQL with error

14:38:08 <Souri> In Oracle, "select * from scott.emp group by ename;" returns "ORA-00979: not a GROUP BY expression"

Souripriya Das: In Oracle, "select * from scott.emp group by ename;" returns "ORA-00979: not a GROUP BY expression"

14:39:26 <AndyS> pref option 2

Andy Seaborne: pref option 2

14:39:32 <bglimm> LeeF: In IRC, I see strong support for 1

Lee Feigenbaum: In IRC, I see strong support for 1

14:39:43 <kasei> I prefer 2 slightly, though it's a pretty strange query...

Gregory Williams: I prefer 2 slightly, though it's a pretty strange query...

14:40:10 <SteveH> marginal preference for 2

Steve Harris: marginal preference for 2

14:40:15 <SteveH> er, 1

Steve Harris: er, 1

14:40:24 <LeeF> straw poll - #1 is error and #2 is projects just the group by key variables

Lee Feigenbaum: straw poll - #1 is error and #2 is projects just the group by key variables

14:40:30 <bglimm> 1

1

14:40:33 <Souri> prefer 1

Souripriya Das: prefer 1

14:40:36 <kasei> 2

Gregory Williams: 2

14:40:37 <AndyS> #2

Andy Seaborne: #2

14:40:38 <MattPerry> 1

Matthew Perry: 1

14:40:38 <OlivierCorby> 2

Olivier Corby: 2

14:40:39 <SteveH> prefer 1

Steve Harris: prefer 1

14:40:48 <LeeF> 0

Lee Feigenbaum: 0

14:41:43 <bglimm> 4 to 3 for option 1

4 to 3 for option 1

14:41:54 <AndyS> 4 for #1 , 3 for #2, and 1 for #0

Andy Seaborne: 4 for #1 , 3 for #2, and 1 for #0

14:42:14 <bglimm> LeeF: No convincing decision, we should bring it to the attention of the group and get more feedback

Lee Feigenbaum: No convincing decision, we should bring it to the attention of the group and get more feedback

14:42:17 <kasei> ha. I prefer #2, but support #1 by default because it just explodes when I try executing the query.

Gregory Williams: ha. I prefer #2, but support #1 by default because it just explodes when I try executing the query.

14:42:21 <bglimm> ... create more test cases

... create more test cases

14:42:39 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to craft a test case for SELECT * ... GROUP BY and solicit implementor, WG, and community feedback

ACTION: Lee to craft a test case for SELECT * ... GROUP BY and solicit implementor, WG, and community feedback

14:42:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-257 - Craft a test case for SELECT * ... GROUP BY and solicit implementor, WG, and community feedback [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-06-22].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-257 - Craft a test case for SELECT * ... GROUP BY and solicit implementor, WG, and community feedback [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-06-22].

14:43:02 <bglimm> So did you change your vote kasei?

So did you change your vote kasei?

14:43:27 <kasei> bglimm, no.

Gregory Williams: bglimm, no.

14:43:28 <bglimm> LeeF: There was discussion about GROUP BY without having an aggregate

Lee Feigenbaum: There was discussion about GROUP BY without having an aggregate

14:43:41 <kasei> just means I need to do more impl. work.

Gregory Williams: just means I need to do more impl. work.

14:43:46 <bglimm> ah

ah

14:44:21 <bglimm> LeeF: wrong reference

Lee Feigenbaum: wrong reference

14:45:09 <bglimm> ... I waned to go back to what AndyS called null aggregation

... I waned to go back to what AndyS called null aggregation

14:45:19 <LeeF> which leads me to a fairly natural interpretation of

Lee Feigenbaum: which leads me to a fairly natural interpretation of

14:45:19 <LeeF> SELECT ?s ?p

Lee Feigenbaum: SELECT ?s ?p

14:45:19 <LeeF> {

Lee Feigenbaum: {

14:45:19 <LeeF>     ?s ?p ?p

Lee Feigenbaum: ?s ?p ?p

14:45:19 <LeeF> } GROUP BY ?s ?p

Lee Feigenbaum: } GROUP BY ?s ?p

14:45:20 <bglimm> AndyS: I'll type a small example

Andy Seaborne: I'll type a small example

14:45:20 <LeeF> as "null aggregation"

Lee Feigenbaum: as "null aggregation"

14:45:21 <AndyS> Example SELECT ?s { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?s

Andy Seaborne: Example SELECT ?s { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?s

14:46:01 <bglimm> but is has GROUP BY for all projected vars, so should be fine

but is has GROUP BY for all projected vars, so should be fine

14:46:52 <bglimm> AndyS: It could be aggregation that just does nothing

Andy Seaborne: It could be aggregation that just does nothing

14:47:04 <bglimm> SteveH: It could be an imolicit SAMPLE

Steve Harris: It could be an imolicit SAMPLE

14:47:15 <bglimm> s/imolicit/implicit/

s/imolicit/implicit/

14:47:32 <bglimm> AndyS: but here the var is not necessarily in the key

Andy Seaborne: but here the var is not necessarily in the key

14:47:40 <bglimm> SteveH: That's not a problem

Steve Harris: That's not a problem

14:47:55 <SteveH> SELECT SAMPLE(?s) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?s

Steve Harris: SELECT SAMPLE(?s) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?s

14:48:22 <AndyS> SELECT (?o+1 AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o+1

Andy Seaborne: SELECT (?o+1 AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o+1

14:48:41 <bglimm> That's scary

That's scary

14:48:46 <AndyS> SELECT (?o+1 AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

Andy Seaborne: SELECT (?o+1 AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

14:49:13 <bglimm> SteveH: That should be legal

Steve Harris: That should be legal

14:49:38 <bglimm> LeeF: Must the expressions be functional?

Lee Feigenbaum: Must the expressions be functional?

14:49:46 <LeeF> SELECT (rand(?o) AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

Lee Feigenbaum: SELECT (rand(?o) AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

14:49:59 <kasei> which of those first two is meant to be legal?

Gregory Williams: which of those first two is meant to be legal?

14:50:09 <AndyS> SELECT (?o AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

Andy Seaborne: SELECT (?o AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

14:50:15 <bglimm> AndyS: Going back to the use of sample, that must be carefully worded

Andy Seaborne: Going back to the use of sample, that must be carefully worded

14:50:45 <bglimm> SteveH: The renaming happens later in the algebra, so that is not a problem

Steve Harris: The renaming happens later in the algebra, so that is not a problem

14:51:09 <SteveH> SELECT (SAMPLE(?o)+1 AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

Steve Harris: SELECT (SAMPLE(?o)+1 AS ?e) { ?s ?p ?o } GROUP BY ?o

14:51:17 <bglimm> AndyS: If we have the ?o+1, we need to have ?o available later on

Andy Seaborne: If we have the ?o+1, we need to have ?o available later on

14:53:00 <bglimm> LeeF: I am interested in understanding which queries are legal and which ones are not in an email, so that we agree

Lee Feigenbaum: I am interested in understanding which queries are legal and which ones are not in an email, so that we agree

14:53:40 <bglimm> SteveH: I so far based the definitions on the F2F decisions, algebra got complicated though

Steve Harris: I so far based the definitions on the F2F decisions, algebra got complicated though

14:53:42 <AndyS> If we do go for "SELECT *" withGROUP BY is illegal, I'm presuming this *not* a grammar issue

Andy Seaborne: If we do go for "SELECT *" withGROUP BY is illegal, I'm presuming this *not* a grammar issue

14:53:49 <bglimm> ... we can revise if too complicated

... we can revise if too complicated

14:53:55 <LeeF> ACTION: Steve to summarize which queries are legal and not in terms of expressions in GROUP BY and expressions in the SELECT clause that deal with group by keys and with aggregators

ACTION: Steve to summarize which queries are legal and not in terms of expressions in GROUP BY and expressions in the SELECT clause that deal with group by keys and with aggregators

14:53:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-258 - Summarize which queries are legal and not in terms of expressions in GROUP BY and expressions in the SELECT clause that deal with group by keys and with aggregators [on Steve Harris - due 2010-06-22].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-258 - Summarize which queries are legal and not in terms of expressions in GROUP BY and expressions in the SELECT clause that deal with group by keys and with aggregators [on Steve Harris - due 2010-06-22].

14:53:57 <SteveH> AndyS, doesn't seem like one

Steve Harris: AndyS, doesn't seem like one

14:54:02 <LeeF> q?

Lee Feigenbaum: q?

14:54:37 <bglimm> LeeF: Last issue: AndyS asked about composite keys give an implicit sorting

Lee Feigenbaum: Last issue: AndyS asked about composite keys give an implicit sorting

14:55:01 <bglimm> ... Is that something that is or is not in the current draft?

... Is that something that is or is not in the current draft?

14:55:28 <AndyS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0348.html

Andy Seaborne: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0348.html

14:55:40 <NickH> yup

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Scribe problem: the name 'NickH' does not match any of the 34 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: David Charboneau John Clark Kendall Clark Olivier Corby Souripriya Das Orri Erling Ahmed Ezzat Lee Feigenbaum Paul Gearon Birte Glimm Steve Harris Sandro Hawke Ivan Herman Nicholas Humfrey Prateek Jain Nophadol Jekjantuk Tommi Koivula Ivan Mikhailov David Newman Chimezie Ogbuji Bijan Parsia Alexandre Passant Matthew Perry Axel Polleres Eric Prud'hommeaux Daniel Schutzer Andy Seaborne Edward () Thomas Jari Vänttinen Gregory Williams Luke Wilson-Mawer Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown NickH: yup

14:55:41 <AlexPassant> yes

Alexandre Passant: yes

14:56:13 <bglimm> SteveH: I am not sure I understand the issue

Steve Harris: I am not sure I understand the issue

14:56:23 <SteveH> ...question

Steve Harris: ...question

14:57:18 <LeeF> 3 Y

Lee Feigenbaum: 3 Y

14:57:19 <bglimm> Sou you wouldn't get 3 Y, 1 A, 3 X, ...

Sou you wouldn't get 3 Y, 1 A, 3 X, ...

14:57:21 <LeeF> 1A

Lee Feigenbaum: 1A

14:57:37 <MattPerry> Wouldn't you add an order by for that guarantee

Matthew Perry: Wouldn't you add an order by for that guarantee

14:57:37 <Souri> no

Souripriya Das: no

14:57:39 <bglimm> SteveH: The current algebra does nt guarantee anything

Steve Harris: The current algebra does nt guarantee anything

14:57:50 <bglimm> ... you have to put an order by clause

... you have to put an order by clause

14:58:15 <bglimm> AndyS: My implementation would not give a guarantee, uses hash sets

Andy Seaborne: My implementation would not give a guarantee, uses hash sets

14:58:27 <Souri> I would be in favor of not guranteeing an order

Souripriya Das: I would be in favor of not guranteeing an order

14:58:42 <bglimm> SteveH: It seems too much to require that since we have an explicit order by clause that can be used if required

Steve Harris: It seems too much to require that since we have an explicit order by clause that can be used if required

14:58:56 <Souri> s/guranteeing/guaranteeing /

Souripriya Das: s/guranteeing/guaranteeing /

14:59:03 <bglimm> LeeF: Seems easy then, no guarantee is given on the ordering

Lee Feigenbaum: Seems easy then, no guarantee is given on the ordering

14:59:15 <bglimm> LeeF: Any other business?

Lee Feigenbaum: Any other business?

14:59:29 <bglimm> AndyS: The syntax issue for Union and MINUS

Andy Seaborne: The syntax issue for Union and MINUS

14:59:51 <bglimm> ... for Union, we coud not require left hand side brackets

... for Union, we coud not require left hand side brackets

15:00:13 <Souri> s/coud/could/

Souripriya Das: s/coud/could/

15:00:14 <bglimm> SteveH: I thought we wanted it to be more like optional

Steve Harris: I thought we wanted it to be more like optional

15:00:44 <kasei> I thought so as well, and would prefer it to work syntactically like optional.

Gregory Williams: I thought so as well, and would prefer it to work syntactically like optional.

15:00:55 <bglimm> LeeF: I think we agreed we shouldn't require braces on the left-hand side part, but no firm decision

Lee Feigenbaum: I think we agreed we shouldn't require braces on the left-hand side part, but no firm decision

15:01:18 <bglimm> .... if you are interested in these syntax issues, take a look at Andy's mail and get involved

.... if you are interested in these syntax issues, take a look at Andy's mail and get involved

15:01:38 <AndyS> see you in SF next week

Andy Seaborne: see you in SF next week

15:01:38 <bglimm> .... see you at SemTec or until 29th.

.... see you at SemTec or until 29th.

15:01:41 <SteveH> bye all

Steve Harris: bye all

15:01:42 <bglimm> adjourned

adjourned



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2010-06-15 15:14:01 UTC by 'bglimm', comments: "NickH is Nick Humfrey from BBC, but I don't know how I can get the commonScribe to know that"