SPARQL Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 03 August 2010

Agenda
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0168.html
Seen
Andy Seaborne, Axel Polleres, Birte Glimm, Chimezie Ogbuji, Gregory Williams, Lee Feigenbaum, Matthew Perry, Paul Gearon, Sandro Hawke, Souripriya Das, Steve Harris
Regrets
Sandro Hawke, Chimezie Ogbuji
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/2010-07-27 link
  2. close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management link
  3. Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT link
  4. close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects link
  5. Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft handles that case in a clearly defined manner. link
  6. close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs link
  7. Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_ link
  8. close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4 link
Topics
13:55:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/08/03-sparql-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/08/03-sparql-irc

13:56:15 <LeeF> trackbot, start meeting

Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, start meeting

13:56:17 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

13:56:19 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 77277

13:56:19 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes

13:56:20 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:56:20 <trackbot> Date: 03 August 2010
13:56:24 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, this will be SPARQL

13:56:24 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes

13:56:38 <LeeF> Chair: AxelPolleres
13:57:45 <AxelPolleres> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0168.html
13:58:32 <AxelPolleres> lee, ok for you to scribe?

Axel Polleres: lee, ok for you to scribe?

13:58:36 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started

13:58:43 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

13:58:51 <AndyS> zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, [IPcaller] is me

13:58:51 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

13:58:58 <bglimm> Zakim, passcode?

Birte Glimm: Zakim, passcode?

13:58:58 <Zakim> the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), bglimm

Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), bglimm

13:59:17 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres

Zakim IRC Bot: +AxelPolleres

13:59:26 <Zakim> +kasei

Zakim IRC Bot: +kasei

13:59:30 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Axel Polleres: Zakim, who is on the phone?

13:59:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei

13:59:35 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum

Zakim IRC Bot: +Lee_Feigenbaum

13:59:37 <Zakim> +bglimm

Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm

13:59:45 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me

Birte Glimm: Zakim, mute me

13:59:45 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted

13:59:45 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Gregory Williams: Zakim, mute me

13:59:46 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted

13:59:51 <LeeF> AxelPolleres, ok

Lee Feigenbaum: AxelPolleres, ok

13:59:56 <LeeF> Scribenick: LeeF

(Scribe set to Lee Feigenbaum)

14:00:04 <Zakim> +MattPerry

Zakim IRC Bot: +MattPerry

14:01:07 <AxelPolleres> regrets: sandro, chime
14:01:13 <LeeF> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0168.html
14:01:51 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: Plan is to continue from last week's meeting

Axel Polleres: Plan is to continue from last week's meeting

14:01:56 <LeeF> topic: Admin

1. Admin

14:02:04 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-27

PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-27

14:02:34 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-27

RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-27

14:02:56 <LeeF> topic: Update Formal Model Teleconference

2. Update Formal Model Teleconference

14:03:23 <Zakim> +pgearon

Zakim IRC Bot: +pgearon

14:03:35 <AxelPolleres> Lee: reporting on update conf call

Lee Feigenbaum: reporting on update conf call [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

14:04:21 <AxelPolleres> ... we sketched out some examples on update on graphstore.

Axel Polleres: ... we sketched out some examples on update on graphstore.

14:04:28 <AxelPolleres> ... up to editors now to implement

Axel Polleres: ... up to editors now to implement

14:04:42 <LeeF> LeeF: update call - consensus on definition of graph store state, operations as functions from graph store state to graph store state

Lee Feigenbaum: update call - consensus on definition of graph store state, operations as functions from graph store state to graph store state

14:04:48 <LeeF> topic: Admin (Revisited)

3. Admin (Revisited)

14:04:54 <kasei> regrets for next week

Gregory Williams: regrets for next week

14:04:54 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: next call is one week from today, August 10

Axel Polleres: next call is one week from today, August 10

14:05:10 <LeeF> ... Olivier or Ivan next in line to scribe, followed by Axel

... Olivier or Ivan next in line to scribe, followed by Axel

14:05:19 <AxelPolleres> Axel can scribe, if noone else will

Axel Polleres: Axel can scribe, if noone else will

14:05:32 <LeeF> topic: Comments

4. Comments

14:05:32 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments#WD_comments

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments#WD_comments

14:05:51 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: two unaddressed comments

Axel Polleres: two unaddressed comments

14:06:06 <LeeF> ... one is Jos's RIF comment - Chime is probably the owner of that comment

... one is Jos's RIF comment - Chime is probably the owner of that comment

14:06:22 <AxelPolleres> chime implicit owneer on JB-1

Axel Polleres: chime implicit owneer on JB-1

14:06:39 <LeeF> ... will talk about that when Sandro and Chime are around

... will talk about that when Sandro and Chime are around

14:06:42 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Aug/0003.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Aug/0003.html

14:06:45 <LeeF> ... other comment is Reto's recent comment

... other comment is Reto's recent comment

14:06:51 <LeeF> q+

q+

14:07:02 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: this comment touches on several drafts

Axel Polleres: this comment touches on several drafts

14:07:12 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: I will draft a response

Axel Polleres: I will draft a response

14:07:13 <LeeF> q-

q-

14:07:16 <AxelPolleres> RK-1

Axel Polleres: RK-1

14:07:17 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: axel to draft response to RK-1

ACTION: axel to draft response to RK-1

14:07:17 <trackbot> Created ACTION-287 - Draft response to RK-1 [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-287 - Draft response to RK-1 [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-10].

14:08:26 <LeeF> topic: test cases vocabulary

5. test cases vocabulary

14:08:30 <AxelPolleres> topic: test case vocabulary

6. test case vocabulary

14:08:54 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0117.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0117.html

14:09:02 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0121.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0121.html

14:09:27 <AndyS> First link is wrong?

Andy Seaborne: First link is wrong?

14:10:31 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: where do we want to add the entailment regime?

Axel Polleres: where do we want to add the entailment regime?

14:10:39 <LeeF> ... then we need a URI for the graph

... then we need a URI for the graph

14:10:59 <AxelPolleres> sd:entailmentRegime

Souripriya Das: entailmentRegime [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

14:11:05 <LeeF> ... if we use the SD entailment regime property then what is the subject of that?

... if we use the SD entailment regime property then what is the subject of that?

14:11:24 <LeeF> ... if the graph itself then in one manifest file we would fix the entailment regime for a graph for all tests

... if the graph itself then in one manifest file we would fix the entailment regime for a graph for all tests

14:11:30 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?

Andy Seaborne: zakim, who is on the phone?

14:11:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei (muted), Lee_Feigenbaum, bglimm (muted), MattPerry, pgearon

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

14:12:08 <LeeF> ... one proposal is to nest qt:data predicates

... one proposal is to nest qt:data predicates

14:12:15 <AxelPolleres> q?

Axel Polleres: q?

14:12:25 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

14:12:49 <Zakim> +Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri

14:13:13 <AndyS> q-

Andy Seaborne: q-

14:13:47 <AxelPolleres>           qt:data   [ qt:data <rdf01.ttl> ;

Axel Polleres: qt:data [ qt:data <rdf01.ttl> ;

14:13:47 <AxelPolleres>                         sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ] ;

Axel Polleres: sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ] ;

14:13:51 <LeeF> q+ to ask why can't entailment tests have additional constructs

q+ to ask why can't entailment tests have additional constructs

14:13:56 <AxelPolleres>           qt:data   [ owl:sameAs <rdf01.ttl> ;

Axel Polleres: qt:data [ owl:sameAs <rdf01.ttl> ;

14:13:57 <AxelPolleres>                         sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ] ;

Axel Polleres: sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ] ;

14:14:27 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0121.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0121.html

14:14:30 <bglimm> But mine didn't allow for using different ent. regimes for different graphs

Birte Glimm: But mine didn't allow for using different ent. regimes for different graphs

14:14:33 <LeeF>  qt:data <foo.ttl> ; qt:entailmentSetup [ qt:graph <foo.ttl> ; qt:regime ent:RDFS ]

qt:data <foo.ttl> ; qt:entailmentSetup [ qt:graph <foo.ttl> ; qt:regime ent:RDFS ]

14:14:47 <AndyS> what about:    [ qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime (<g> ent:RDF) ]

Andy Seaborne: what about: [ qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime (<g> ent:RDF) ]

14:15:37 <LeeF> AndyS: what Lee and I are trying to get to is to talk about the data and then annotate it with the entailment info that should also apply

Andy Seaborne: what Lee and I are trying to get to is to talk about the data and then annotate it with the entailment info that should also apply

14:17:03 <LeeF> AndyS: We could go with Birte's setup where you have one entailment regime tested per query

Andy Seaborne: We could go with Birte's setup where you have one entailment regime tested per query

14:17:44 <AndyS>  qt:worksOn [ qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDFS ]

Andy Seaborne: qt:worksOn [ qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDFS ]

14:19:08 <Souri> +1 to simple proposal => one entailment regime for the query

Souripriya Das: +1 to simple proposal => one entailment regime for the query

14:19:28 <bglimm> that would work for me

Birte Glimm: that would work for me

14:19:30 <bglimm> yes

Birte Glimm: yes

14:19:35 <AndyS>  qt:graphWithEnt [ qt:withNameAs <g1> ; qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDFS ]

Andy Seaborne: qt:graphWithEnt [ qt:withNameAs <g1> ; qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDFS ]

14:19:42 <AndyS> ... but simple is good.

Andy Seaborne: ... but simple is good.

14:20:16 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: go with simple for now

Axel Polleres: go with simple for now

14:20:32 <Zakim> +Garlik

Zakim IRC Bot: +Garlik

14:20:40 <SteveH> Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

Steve Harris: Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

14:20:40 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

14:20:42 <AxelPolleres> let's go with the simple proposal from Birte for now, for more complex ones I will try to capture Lee's proposal for more complex ones.

Axel Polleres: let's go with the simple proposal from Birte for now, for more complex ones I will try to capture Lee's proposal for more complex ones.

14:21:31 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: we need the ability to refer to different graphs with the same name to describe the state of the graph store before and after an update

Axel Polleres: we need the ability to refer to different graphs with the same name to describe the state of the graph store before and after an update

14:22:26 <LeeF> AndyS: who's implemented these test cases?

Andy Seaborne: who's implemented these test cases?

14:22:30 <LeeF> (silence)

(silence)

14:22:37 <LeeF> AndyS: getting to update soon, entailment later on

Andy Seaborne: getting to update soon, entailment later on

14:23:17 <bglimm> I hope to soon start with entailment tests

Birte Glimm: I hope to soon start with entailment tests

14:24:16 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel to reintroduce extra vocabulary for graphstore to solve issue on named graphs in update test cases

ACTION: Axel to reintroduce extra vocabulary for graphstore to solve issue on named graphs in update test cases

14:24:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-288 - Reintroduce extra vocabulary for graphstore to solve issue on named graphs in update test cases [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-288 - Reintroduce extra vocabulary for graphstore to solve issue on named graphs in update test cases [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-10].

14:24:38 <chimezie> Zakim, what is the passcode?

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, what is the passcode?

14:24:38 <Zakim> the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), chimezie

Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), chimezie

14:24:40 <LeeF> topic: issues

7. issues

Summary: closed many issues, will continue at ISSUE-48 next time

14:24:50 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: last time we ended with issue 23

Axel Polleres: last time we ended with ISSUE-23

14:24:53 <LeeF> ISSUE-30?

ISSUE-30?

14:24:53 <trackbot> ISSUE-30 -- What RESTful update operations should be defined? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-30 -- What RESTful update operations should be defined? -- open

14:24:53 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/30

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/30

14:25:18 <Zakim> + +1.216.445.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.216.445.aaaa

14:25:30 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in  the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management

PROPOSED: close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management

14:25:42 <chimezie> Zakim, +1.216.445.aaaa is me

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, +1.216.445.aaaa is me

14:25:42 <Zakim> +chimezie; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +chimezie; got it

14:26:11 <LeeF> seconded

seconded

14:26:12 <AxelPolleres> +1

Axel Polleres: +1

14:26:45 <LeeF> AndyS: what about PATCH?

Andy Seaborne: what about PATCH?

14:26:48 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: it's mentioned informatively

Axel Polleres: it's mentioned informatively

14:26:50 <LeeF> AndyS: OK

Andy Seaborne: OK

14:27:03 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in  the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management

14:27:08 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-30

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-30

14:27:08 <trackbot> ISSUE-30 What RESTful update operations should be defined? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-30 What RESTful update operations should be defined? closed

14:27:36 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-33

Axel Polleres: ISSUE-33

14:27:36 <AxelPolleres> Can we use the correct meaning of the full slate of HTTP errors when specifying the update protocol via WSDL?

Axel Polleres: Can we use the correct meaning of the full slate of HTTP errors when specifying the update protocol via WSDL?

14:27:42 <LeeF> ISSUE-33?

ISSUE-33?

14:27:42 <trackbot> ISSUE-33 -- Can we use the correct meaning of the full slate of HTTP errors when specifying the update protocol via WSDL? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-33 -- Can we use the correct meaning of the full slate of HTTP errors when specifying the update protocol via WSDL? -- open

14:27:42 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/33

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/33

14:28:56 <AxelPolleres> q?

Axel Polleres: q?

14:29:03 <LeeF> q-

q-

14:29:12 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, mute me

14:29:12 <Zakim> chimezie should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: chimezie should now be muted

14:29:17 <LeeF> ISSUE-35?

ISSUE-35?

14:29:17 <trackbot> ISSUE-35 -- Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-35 -- Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)? -- open

14:29:17 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/35

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/35

14:29:29 <AndyS> Yes.  Done.

Andy Seaborne: Yes. Done.

14:29:38 <chimezie> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:29:38 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei (muted), Lee_Feigenbaum, bglimm (muted), MattPerry, pgearon, Souri, SteveH, chimezie (muted)

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

14:29:49 <AxelPolleres> q?

Axel Polleres: q?

14:30:28 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0134.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0134.html

14:30:36 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

14:30:41 <AxelPolleres>  SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X) {…}

Axel Polleres: SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X) {…}

14:30:42 <AxelPolleres>   -->

Axel Polleres: -->

14:30:42 <AxelPolleres>  SELECT COUNT(?X)

Axel Polleres: SELECT COUNT(?X)

14:30:42 <AxelPolleres>   { SELECT DISTINCT ?X {…} }

Axel Polleres: { SELECT DISTINCT ?X {…} }

14:30:48 <Zakim> -SteveH

Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH

14:30:52 <SteveH> sorry, wrong button!

Steve Harris: sorry, wrong button!

14:31:10 <kasei> what about COUNT(DISTINCT ?x) COUNT(?x)? very nasty subquery...?

Gregory Williams: what about COUNT(DISTINCT ?x) COUNT(?x)? very nasty subquery...?

14:31:20 <Zakim> +Garlik

Zakim IRC Bot: +Garlik

14:31:28 <SteveH> Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

Steve Harris: Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

14:31:28 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

14:31:43 <Zakim> -SteveH

Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH

14:32:00 <Zakim> +Garlik

Zakim IRC Bot: +Garlik

14:32:03 <SteveH> Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

Steve Harris: Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

14:32:03 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

14:32:06 <AxelPolleres> andy: it is already done and it's in the grammar

Andy Seaborne: it is already done and it's in the grammar [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

14:34:28 <SteveH> +1 to having it in there

Steve Harris: +1 to having it in there

14:35:15 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT

14:35:31 <LeeF> seconded

seconded

14:35:38 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:35:50 <Souri> +1

Souripriya Das: +1

14:35:53 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT

14:35:58 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-35

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-35

14:35:58 <trackbot> ISSUE-35 Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-35 Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)? closed

14:36:11 <LeeF> ISSUE-37?

ISSUE-37?

14:36:12 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-37 -- How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? -- open

14:36:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/37

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/37

14:36:23 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-37

Axel Polleres: ISSUE-37

14:36:23 <AxelPolleres> How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update?

Axel Polleres: How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update?

14:36:38 <pgearon> that's an issue that mostly bothers SteveH. IIRC

Paul Gearon: that's an issue that mostly bothers SteveH. IIRC

14:36:53 <SteveH> sounds right

Steve Harris: sounds right

14:37:10 <AndyS> Last week: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/18

Andy Seaborne: Last week: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/18

14:37:49 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: do we need to say anything about the interaction of federated query with SPARQL Update?

Axel Polleres: do we need to say anything about the interaction of federated query with SPARQL Update?

14:38:15 <LeeF> ... SERVICE keyword in the WHERE clause does not seem to be a problem in terms of defining it

... SERVICE keyword in the WHERE clause does not seem to be a problem in terms of defining it

14:38:49 <pgearon> +q

Paul Gearon: +q

14:38:50 <LeeF> ... are there any other issues here?

... are there any other issues here?

14:38:57 <AxelPolleres> q?

Axel Polleres: q?

14:39:01 <SteveH> If that's the case it's al least worth a note in the update doc saying that it can have feedback effects

Steve Harris: If that's the case it's al least worth a note in the update doc saying that it can have feedback effects

14:39:10 <AxelPolleres> ack steveH

Axel Polleres: ack steveH

14:39:34 <LeeF> ack pgearon

ack pgearon

14:39:45 <LeeF> pgearon: I don't think it's a big issue but worth mentioning in the udpate document

Paul Gearon: I don't think it's a big issue but worth mentioning in the udpate document

14:40:42 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects

PROPOSED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects

14:41:01 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:41:01 <AndyS> If update requests are truly atomic, it's a bit of a non-effect (atomic being a somewhat of an ideal)

Andy Seaborne: If update requests are truly atomic, it's a bit of a non-effect (atomic being a somewhat of an ideal)

14:41:11 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:41:19 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

14:41:21 <SteveH> AndyS, not really, as the SERVICE request will happen inside a different context

Steve Harris: AndyS, not really, as the SERVICE request will happen inside a different context

14:41:34 <SteveH> but it's certainly possible to live with

Steve Harris: but it's certainly possible to live with

14:41:42 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects

14:41:48 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-37

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-37

14:41:48 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-37 How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? closed

14:42:14 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: paul to add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update

ACTION: paul to add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update

14:42:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-289 - Add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-289 - Add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-10].

14:42:27 <LeeF> ISSUE-39?

ISSUE-39?

14:42:27 <trackbot> ISSUE-39 -- Can variable used as aliases for expressions be themselves used in other expressions? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-39 -- Can variable used as aliases for expressions be themselves used in other expressions? -- open

14:42:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/39

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/39

14:42:42 <LeeF> already resolved as far as I know - can be used further to the right

already resolved as far as I know - can be used further to the right

14:42:53 <AndyS> agree with LeeF

Andy Seaborne: agree with LeeF

14:42:59 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0274.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0274.html

14:43:01 <bglimm> yes, I also remember that

Birte Glimm: yes, I also remember that

14:43:16 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft  handles that case in a clearly defined manner.

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft handles that case in a clearly defined manner.

14:43:30 <LeeF> seconded

seconded

14:43:55 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft  handles that case in a clearly defined manner.

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft handles that case in a clearly defined manner.

14:44:02 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-39

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-39

14:44:02 <trackbot> ISSUE-39 Can variable used as aliases for expressions be themselves used in other expressions? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-39 Can variable used as aliases for expressions be themselves used in other expressions? closed

14:44:09 <LeeF> ISSUE-43?

ISSUE-43?

14:44:09 <trackbot> ISSUE-43 -- should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-43 -- should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs? -- open

14:44:09 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/43

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/43

14:44:27 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-43 should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs?

Axel Polleres: ISSUE-43 should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs?

14:44:47 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: Not sure if we can close this - we haven't really fleshed something out for use cases for this

Axel Polleres: Not sure if we can close this - we haven't really fleshed something out for use cases for this

14:44:58 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

14:45:02 <LeeF> ack AndyS

ack AndyS

14:45:16 <LeeF> AndyS: the deployed systems I have can do queries over a mixture of entailments with different graphs

Andy Seaborne: the deployed systems I have can do queries over a mixture of entailments with different graphs

14:46:18 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:46:26 <kasei> yes

Gregory Williams: yes

14:46:27 <chimezie> +1

Chimezie Ogbuji: +1

14:46:28 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:46:40 <kasei> although the SD currently has a shortcut way of saying that one entailment applies to all the graphs

Gregory Williams: although the SD currently has a shortcut way of saying that one entailment applies to all the graphs

14:46:49 <AxelPolleres> strawpoll: close issue-43 by allowing differnt entailment regimes per graph

STRAWPOLL: close ISSUE-43 by allowing differnt entailment regimes per graph

14:46:55 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

14:47:40 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes per graph

PROPOSED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes per graph

14:48:01 <bglimm> yes

Birte Glimm: yes

14:48:22 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs

PROPOSED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs

14:48:24 <kasei> q+ to ask if keeping sd:defaultEntailmentRegime is desirable (higher cost on SD consumers if we keep it I think)

Gregory Williams: q+ to ask if keeping sd:defaultEntailmentRegime is desirable (higher cost on SD consumers if we keep it I think)

14:48:29 <kasei> Zakim, unmute me

Gregory Williams: Zakim, unmute me

14:48:29 <Zakim> kasei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should no longer be muted

14:48:47 <AndyS> +1 to kasei

Andy Seaborne: +1 to kasei

14:48:51 <bglimm> Yes, I would still want it

Birte Glimm: Yes, I would still want it

14:49:15 <SteveH> even higher cost if your store has 1M graphs

Steve Harris: even higher cost if your store has 1M graphs

14:49:36 <bglimm> Hm, at least it would spare me to write everywhere that we use OWL Direct Semantics, which is the only option for our system

Birte Glimm: Hm, at least it would spare me to write everywhere that we use OWL Direct Semantics, which is the only option for our system

14:50:38 <kasei> Zakim, mute me

Gregory Williams: Zakim, mute me

14:50:38 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted

14:50:56 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs

14:51:03 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-43

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-43

14:51:03 <trackbot> ISSUE-43 should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-43 should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs? closed

14:51:37 <AxelPolleres> axel: we seem to have agreement to keep sd:defaultEntailmentRegime

Axel Polleres: we seem to have agreement to keep sd:defaultEntailmentRegime [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ]

14:51:54 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-44 Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge"

Axel Polleres: ISSUE-44 Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge"

14:51:55 <LeeF> ISSUE-44?

ISSUE-44?

14:51:56 <trackbot> ISSUE-44 -- Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge" -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-44 -- Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge" -- open

14:51:56 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/44

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/44

14:52:40 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_

14:53:39 <LeeF> seconded

seconded

14:53:43 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:53:46 <SteveH> ...reading

Steve Harris: ...reading

14:54:12 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_

14:54:18 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-44

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-44

14:54:18 <trackbot> ISSUE-44 Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge" closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-44 Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge" closed

14:54:48 <LeeF> ISSUE-47?

ISSUE-47?

14:54:48 <trackbot> ISSUE-47 -- Is MODIFY syntax required? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-47 -- Is MODIFY syntax required? -- open

14:54:48 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/47

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/47

14:55:05 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-47 Is MODIFY syntax required?

Axel Polleres: ISSUE-47 Is MODIFY syntax required?

14:55:43 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009OctDec/0385.html

Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009OctDec/0385.html

14:56:30 <AxelPolleres> q?

Axel Polleres: q?

14:56:34 <LeeF> Can we subjugate ISSUE-47 to ISSUE-59?

Can we subjugate ISSUE-47 to ISSUE-59?

14:56:35 <pgearon> +q

Paul Gearon: +q

14:56:37 <kasei> q-

Gregory Williams: q-

14:57:04 <AndyS> The exact syntax has gone, the mechanism is still there.

Andy Seaborne: The exact syntax has gone, the mechanism is still there.

14:58:17 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4

PROPOSED: close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4

14:58:20 <Zakim> -MattPerry

Zakim IRC Bot: -MattPerry

14:58:45 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:59:09 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4

14:59:17 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-47

Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-47

14:59:17 <trackbot> ISSUE-47 Is MODIFY syntax required? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-47 Is MODIFY syntax required? closed

14:59:44 <Zakim> -chimezie

Zakim IRC Bot: -chimezie

14:59:44 <bglimm> bye

Birte Glimm: bye

14:59:45 <Zakim> -Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: -Souri

14:59:47 <AxelPolleres> adjourned

Axel Polleres: adjourned

14:59:47 <Zakim> -bglimm

Zakim IRC Bot: -bglimm

14:59:48 <Zakim> -pgearon

Zakim IRC Bot: -pgearon

14:59:50 <Zakim> -SteveH

Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH

14:59:52 <Zakim> -kasei

Zakim IRC Bot: -kasei

14:59:54 <Zakim> -AndyS

Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS

14:59:59 <Zakim> -Lee_Feigenbaum

Zakim IRC Bot: -Lee_Feigenbaum

15:00:21 <kasei> AndyS, question about PP doc...?

Gregory Williams: AndyS, question about PP doc...?

15:00:44 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public

Axel Polleres: rrsagent, make records public

15:01:51 <AndyS> kasei, need to be a quick Q

Andy Seaborne: kasei, need to be a quick Q

15:01:55 <AxelPolleres> summary: closed many issues, will continue at ISSUE-48 next time
15:02:07 <kasei> I see "A path of length zero connects a graph node to itself," but also in Defn of ZeroLengthPath "also any IRIs explicitly given as endpoints".

Gregory Williams: I see "A path of length zero connects a graph node to itself," but also in Defn of ZeroLengthPath "also any IRIs explicitly given as endpoints".

15:02:18 <kasei> graph node? or IRI? (what about literals?)

Gregory Williams: graph node? or IRI? (what about literals?)

15:02:21 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public

Axel Polleres: rrsagent, make records public



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2010-08-03 15:04:40 UTC by 'apollere2', comments: None