SPARQL Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 10 August 2010

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-08-10
Seen
Alexandre Passant, Andy Seaborne, Axel Polleres, Birte Glimm, Chimezie Ogbuji, Gregory Williams, Ivan Herman, Lee Feigenbaum, Nicholas Humfrey, Nico Michaelis, Paul Gearon, Sandro Hawke, Steve Harris
Regrets
Nico Michaelis, Gregory Williams, Alexandre Passant, Chimezie Ogbuji
Chair
Lee Feigenbaum
Scribe
Ivan Herman
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-03 link
  2. Resolve ISSUE-48 via current DELETE WHERE { tempalte } abbreviation as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#t416 link
  3. Close ISSUE-51 based on the current design of WITH/USING/USING NAMED to specify the RDF dataset for an Update operation link
  4. Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14, AndyS abstraining link
  5. Close ISSUE-55 based on the use of a scalar argument SEPARATOR=";" as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#aggregates, LeeF abstaining link
Topics
13:59:57 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:59:57 <trackbot> Date: 10 August 2010
13:59:57 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute

14:00:05 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, this will be SPARQL

14:00:05 <Zakim> ok, LeeF, I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM already started

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, LeeF, I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM already started

14:00:07 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
14:00:18 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-08-10
14:00:22 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

14:00:40 <AndyS> zakim, [IPCaller] is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, [IPCaller] is me

14:00:40 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

14:00:40 <NicholasH> zakim: who is on the call?
14:00:45 <SteveH_> bglimm, I got the last line I guess, sorry!

Steve Harris: bglimm, I got the last line I guess, sorry!

14:00:46 <Zakim> +pgearon

Zakim IRC Bot: +pgearon

14:00:47 <Zakim> + +1.617.245.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.245.aaaa

14:00:47 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

14:00:53 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip

Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip

14:00:53 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made

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

14:00:55 <Zakim> +Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan

14:01:11 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?

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

14:01:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0, Garlik, AndyS, pgearon, +1.617.245.aaaa, Sandro, Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P0, Garlik, AndyS, pgearon, +1.617.245.aaaa, Sandro, Ivan

14:01:20 <LeeF> zakim, aaaa is me

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, aaaa is me

14:01:20 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF; got it

14:01:24 <SteveH> Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

Steve Harris: Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

14:01:24 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

14:01:31 <NicholasH> zakim, who is here?

Nicholas Humfrey: zakim, who is here?

14:01:31 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0, SteveH, AndyS, pgearon, LeeF, Sandro, Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P0, SteveH, AndyS, pgearon, LeeF, Sandro, Ivan

14:01:32 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, SteveH, AxelPolleres, NicholasH, bglimm, LeeF, AndyS, ivan, karl, iv_an_ru, pgearon, sandro, trackbot, kasei

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, SteveH, AxelPolleres, NicholasH, bglimm, LeeF, AndyS, ivan, karl, iv_an_ru, pgearon, sandro, trackbot, kasei

14:01:42 <sandro> sandro has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-08-10

Sandro Hawke: sandro has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-08-10

14:02:07 <NicholasH> Zakim, ??P0 is me

Nicholas Humfrey: Zakim, ??P0 is me

14:02:07 <Zakim> +NicholasH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +NicholasH; got it

14:02:13 <ivan> zakim, mute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me

14:02:23 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted

14:02:27 <ivan> just a minute

Ivan Herman: just a minute

14:02:31 <Zakim> +bglimm

Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm

14:02:42 <LeeF> topic: admin

1. admin

14:02:50 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me

Birte Glimm: Zakim, mute me

14:02:54 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-03

PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-03

14:02:59 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted

14:03:20 <ivan> zakim, unmute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute me

14:03:20 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should no longer be muted

14:03:40 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres

Zakim IRC Bot: +AxelPolleres

14:04:05 <AndyS> 1/ not typing, 2/ muted

Andy Seaborne: 1/ not typing, 2/ muted

14:04:12 <ivan> scribenick: ivan

(Scribe set to Ivan Herman)

14:04:37 <ivan> lee: propose to approve the minutes for last week

Lee Feigenbaum: propose to approve the minutes for last week

14:04:42 <ivan> ... carried once

... carried once

14:04:47 <ivan> .... carried twice

.... carried twice

14:04:48 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-03

RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-03

14:04:49 <AxelPolleres> seconded

Axel Polleres: seconded

14:04:51 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:04:58 <ivan> Topic: next meeting

2. next meeting

14:05:00 <LeeF> Next regular meeting: 2010-08-17 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EDT

Lee Feigenbaum: Next regular meeting: 2010-08-17 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EDT

14:05:05 <ivan> next week, same time and place

next week, same time and place

14:05:10 <AndyS> My regrets for next week's meeting.

Andy Seaborne: My regrets for next week's meeting.

14:05:22 <ivan> ivan: I am not 100% sure to be around next week

Ivan Herman: I am not 100% sure to be around next week

14:05:27 <AxelPolleres> think Alex sent regrets (on vacation)

Axel Polleres: think Alex sent regrets (on vacation)

14:05:34 <LeeF> Regrets: Nico, Greg, Alex, Chime
14:05:36 <chimezie> Zakim, what is the passcode?

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, what is the passcode?

14:05:36 <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

14:06:10 <ivan> Topic: go through open issues

3. go through open issues

14:06:18 <Zakim> + +1.216.636.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.216.636.aabb

14:06:22 <ivan> Lee: there are some issues we may want to close, see the agenda

Lee Feigenbaum: there are some issues we may want to close, see the agenda

14:06:31 <chimezie> Zakim, +1.216.636.aabb is me

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, +1.216.636.aabb is me

14:06:31 <Zakim> +chimezie; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +chimezie; got it

14:06:40 <AxelPolleres> chime, sandro, could either of you look into http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Aug/0004.html and draft a reply?

Axel Polleres: chime, sandro, could either of you look into http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Aug/0004.html and draft a reply?

14:07:05 <ivan> lee: any other topic for the agenda

Lee Feigenbaum: any other topic for the agenda

14:07:12 <sandro> AxelPolleres, I don't think that should be me, no.

Sandro Hawke: AxelPolleres, I don't think that should be me, no.

14:07:12 <chimezie> yeah, i was looking at that

Chimezie Ogbuji: yeah, i was looking at that

14:07:18 <ivan> AxelPolleres: an additional comment from timbl, we may want to reply

Axel Polleres: an additional comment from timbl, we may want to reply

14:07:36 <ivan> lee: it is better if chime looks at it, and see if there is a wg attention he may bring it up on the list

Lee Feigenbaum: it is better if chime looks at it, and see if there is a wg attention he may bring it up on the list

14:08:11 <AxelPolleres> I'll put chime responsible on the comments page, thanks!

Axel Polleres: I'll put chime responsible on the comments page, thanks!

14:08:16 <LeeF> topic: Issue Rodeo

4. Issue Rodeo

14:08:36 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/open

Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/open

14:08:42 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, mute me

14:08:42 <Zakim> chimezie should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: chimezie should now be muted

14:08:48 <ivan> start with issue 48

start with ISSUE-48

14:08:54 <LeeF> ISSUE-48?

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-48?

14:08:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-48 -- Is DELETE too verbose? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-48 -- Is DELETE too verbose? -- open

14:08:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/48

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/48

14:09:04 <sandro> no description.  :-/

Sandro Hawke: no description. :-/

14:09:25 <ivan> lee: issue 48 not repeating the pattern when the only thing you want is to delete a pattern

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-48 not repeating the pattern when the only thing you want is to delete a pattern

14:09:35 <LeeF> DELETE WHERE { ... }

Lee Feigenbaum: DELETE WHERE { ... }

14:09:47 <ivan> ... the decision a few month ago was to have delete where {...}

... the decision a few month ago was to have delete where {...}

14:09:58 <ivan> ... we already discussed it and resolved it

... we already discussed it and resolved it

14:10:02 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-48 via current DELETE WHERE { tempalte } abbreviation as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#t416

PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-48 via current DELETE WHERE { tempalte } abbreviation as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#t416

14:10:03 <ivan> ... the proposal is to close the issue

... the proposal is to close the issue

14:10:15 <AxelPolleres> +1

Axel Polleres: +1

14:10:24 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:10:24 <ivan> s/tempalte/template/

s/tempalte/template/

14:10:27 <ivan> +1

+1

14:10:31 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:10:32 <chimezie> +1

Chimezie Ogbuji: +1

14:10:47 <NicholasH> +1

Nicholas Humfrey: +1

14:10:52 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

14:10:56 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

14:10:56 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:10:57 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-48 via current DELETE WHERE { tempalte } abbreviation as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#t416

RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-48 via current DELETE WHERE { tempalte } abbreviation as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#t416

14:11:06 <LeeF> trackbot, close ISSUE-48

Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ISSUE-48

14:11:06 <trackbot> ISSUE-48 Is DELETE too verbose? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-48 Is DELETE too verbose? closed

14:11:11 <ivan> s/tempalte/template/

s/tempalte/template/

14:11:13 <LeeF> ISSUE-49?

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-49?

14:11:13 <trackbot> ISSUE-49 -- Is a graph an information resource -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-49 -- Is a graph an information resource -- open

14:11:13 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/49

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/49

14:11:24 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me

Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, unmute me

14:11:24 <Zakim> chimezie should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: chimezie should no longer be muted

14:11:33 <ivan> lee: this is something kjetill raised a while ago, chime added section 8 in the draft

Lee Feigenbaum: this is something kjetill raised a while ago, chime added section 8 in the draft

14:11:40 <sandro> link to section 8 ?

Sandro Hawke: link to section 8 ?

14:11:42 <ivan> ... it explaines http-range

... it explaines http-range

14:11:46 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14

14:11:48 <ivan> s/explaines/explains

s/explaines/explains

14:12:09 <ivan> lee: chime, is that correct?

Lee Feigenbaum: chime, is that correct?

14:12:14 <ivan> chimezie: yes, it does

Chimezie Ogbuji: yes, it does

14:12:32 <ivan> sandro: I have not had the time to read it

Sandro Hawke: I have not had the time to read it

14:12:51 <ivan> ... is the graph an inform resource

... is the graph an inform resource

14:12:58 <ivan> chimezie: yes it is

Chimezie Ogbuji: yes it is

14:13:12 <ivan> lee: sandro would you want to return to that later?

Lee Feigenbaum: sandro would you want to return to that later?

14:13:15 <ivan> sandro: yes

Sandro Hawke: yes

14:13:15 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/51

Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/51

14:13:19 <LeeF> ISSUE-51?

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-51?

14:13:19 <trackbot> ISSUE-51 -- Shall dataset clauses be allowed in SPARQL/update? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-51 -- Shall dataset clauses be allowed in SPARQL/update? -- open

14:13:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/51

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/51

14:13:47 <ivan> Lee: how do you define a dataset for a graph pattern matching in update

Lee Feigenbaum: how do you define a dataset for a graph pattern matching in update

14:14:00 <ivan> .... we spent a lot of time on that, including a task force

.... we spent a lot of time on that, including a task force

14:14:16 <ivan> ... the document has the text the tf agreed on

... the document has the text the tf agreed on

14:14:25 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-51 based on the current design of WITH/USING/USING NAMED to specify the RDF dataset for an Update operation

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-51 based on the current design of WITH/USING/USING NAMED to specify the RDF dataset for an Update operation

14:14:57 <ivan> +1

+1

14:15:25 <ivan> lee: paul, from your point of view, this is stable, isn't it?

Lee Feigenbaum: paul, from your point of view, this is stable, isn't it?

14:15:32 <ivan> pgearon: yes

Paul Gearon: yes

14:15:42 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-51 based on the current design of WITH/USING/USING NAMED to specify the RDF dataset for an Update operation

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-51 based on the current design of WITH/USING/USING NAMED to specify the RDF dataset for an Update operation

14:15:48 <LeeF> trackbot, close ISSUE-51

Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ISSUE-51

14:15:48 <trackbot> ISSUE-51 Shall dataset clauses be allowed in SPARQL/update? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-51 Shall dataset clauses be allowed in SPARQL/update? closed

14:15:55 <LeeF> ISSUE-52?

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-52?

14:15:55 <trackbot> ISSUE-52 -- Do we need the availability of an unnamed graph in SD? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-52 -- Do we need the availability of an unnamed graph in SD? -- open

14:15:55 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/52

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/52

14:16:01 <sandro> Lee okay to return to 49 at any point now.

Sandro Hawke: Lee okay to return to 49 at any point now.

14:16:21 <AndyS> Is it ever not available?

Andy Seaborne: Is it ever not available?

14:16:24 <ivan> lee: discussing this without greg is difficult

Lee Feigenbaum: discussing this without greg is difficult

14:16:50 <ivan> lee: we will come back to that

Lee Feigenbaum: we will come back to that

14:16:59 <ivan> lee: back to issue 49,

Lee Feigenbaum: back to ISSUE-49,

14:17:16 <ivan> sandro: the text in the draft, I do not disagree with anything it says

Sandro Hawke: the text in the draft, I do not disagree with anything it says

14:17:17 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14

14:17:22 <ivan> +1

+1

14:17:34 <AndyS> 0

Andy Seaborne: 0

14:17:45 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14, AndyS abstraining

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-49 based on the current text in Section 8 at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#httpRange-14, AndyS abstraining

14:17:48 <sandro> +1   the text isn't perfect   :-]     but it's good enough and not worth more debate

Sandro Hawke: +1 the text isn't perfect :-] but it's good enough and not worth more debate

14:17:50 <ivan>  member:trackbot, close ISSUE-49

member:trackbot, close ISSUE-49

14:17:52 <LeeF> s/abstraining/abstaining

Lee Feigenbaum: s/abstraining/abstaining

14:18:00 <chimezie> Sandro: if you have feedback on how to clarify the text would be welcome :)

Sandro Hawke: if you have feedback on how to clarify the text would be welcome :) [ Scribe Assist by Chimezie Ogbuji ]

14:18:00 <ivan> trackbot, close ISSUE-49

trackbot, close ISSUE-49

14:18:00 <trackbot> ISSUE-49 Is a graph an information resource closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-49 Is a graph an information resource closed

14:18:16 <LeeF> ISSUE-55?

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-55?

14:18:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-55 -- Can/how can a separator string be supplied to the GROUP_CONCAT aggregate? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-55 -- Can/how can a separator string be supplied to the GROUP_CONCAT aggregate? -- open

14:18:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/55

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/55

14:18:48 <ivan> lee: the decision is to add a syntax to define the extra separator character

Lee Feigenbaum: the decision is to add a syntax to define the extra separator character

14:18:53 <ivan> q+

q+

14:18:56 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-55 based on the use of a scalar argument SEPARATOR=";" as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#aggregates

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-55 based on the use of a scalar argument SEPARATOR=";" as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#aggregates

14:19:05 <LeeF> ack ivan

Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivan

14:19:26 <LeeF> ivan: when I looked at the text itself, i realized that GROUP_CONCAT Is almost not defined in the document - I had to go to a mysql document to find out what it means

Ivan Herman: when I looked at the text itself, i realized that GROUP_CONCAT Is almost not defined in the document - I had to go to a mysql document to find out what it means [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ]

14:19:34 <LeeF> ... think it could use more editorial explanation

Lee Feigenbaum: ... think it could use more editorial explanation

14:19:50 <ivan> lee: steve, is it on your radar

Lee Feigenbaum: steve, is it on your radar

14:20:04 <ivan> steve: it needs more text

Steve Harris: it needs more text

14:20:18 <ivan> ... technically it is correct

... technically it is correct

14:20:43 <ivan> +1

+1

14:21:07 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

14:21:16 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-55 based on the use of a scalar argument SEPARATOR=";" as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#aggregates, LeeF abstaining

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-55 based on the use of a scalar argument SEPARATOR=";" as in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#aggregates, LeeF abstaining

14:21:17 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:21:19 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:21:25 <LeeF> trackbot, close ISSUE-55

Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ISSUE-55

14:21:25 <trackbot> ISSUE-55 Can/how can a separator string be supplied to the GROUP_CONCAT aggregate? closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-55 Can/how can a separator string be supplied to the GROUP_CONCAT aggregate? closed

14:21:32 <LeeF> ISSUE-56?

Lee Feigenbaum: ISSUE-56?

14:21:32 <trackbot> ISSUE-56 -- Does HTTP PATCH affect either the SPARQL Protocol or the SPARQL Uniform etc. HTTP etc. Protocol? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-56 -- Does HTTP PATCH affect either the SPARQL Protocol or the SPARQL Uniform etc. HTTP etc. Protocol? -- open

14:21:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/56

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/56

14:21:50 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-56 based on the text at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#http-patch

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-56 based on the text at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#http-patch

14:22:02 <ivan> q+

q+

14:22:12 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

14:22:33 <LeeF> ack ivan

Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivan

14:22:35 <ivan> ivan: chime, did timbl's comment address/affect this part?

Ivan Herman: chime, did timbl's comment address/affect this part?

14:23:45 <LeeF> chimezie: we might want to wait - i have one open question - if you direct a PATCH at a graph IRI it suggests that you are only manipulating that graph, but SPARQL Update can affect other graphs

Chimezie Ogbuji: we might want to wait - i have one open question - if you direct a PATCH at a graph IRI it suggests that you are only manipulating that graph, but SPARQL Update can affect other graphs [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ]

14:24:01 <LeeF> ... you might return a status code like Method Not Supported, but it's uncertain

Lee Feigenbaum: ... you might return a status code like Method Not Supported, but it's uncertain

14:24:11 <LeeF> ack AndyS

Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS

14:24:26 <LeeF> AndyS: What is the significance of "RECOMMENDED" in capital text?

Andy Seaborne: What is the significance of "RECOMMENDED" in capital text? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ]

14:24:49 <LeeF> chimezie: RFC 2119 allows RECOMMENDED to be used in plcae of SHOULD

Chimezie Ogbuji: RFC 2119 allows RECOMMENDED to be used in plcae of SHOULD [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ]

14:25:04 <LeeF> ... i use RECOMMENDED where I did not want the same force of SHOULD

Lee Feigenbaum: ... i use RECOMMENDED where I did not want the same force of SHOULD

14:25:09 <ivan> chimezie: I use recommended when i did not want to use the same force than should

Chimezie Ogbuji: I use recommended when i did not want to use the same force than should

14:25:33 <ivan> AndyS: then i am not very happy with the text; patch is not widely used and implemented yet

Andy Seaborne: then i am not very happy with the text; patch is not widely used and implemented yet

14:25:51 <ivan> lee: it is also not good to use rfc terms in an informal sections

Lee Feigenbaum: it is also not good to use rfc terms in an informal sections

14:25:55 <SteveH> I'm not sure I agree that "few" systems support PATCH, libcurl does, and many things are based on that

Steve Harris: I'm not sure I agree that "few" systems support PATCH, libcurl does, and many things are based on that

14:26:07 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

14:26:24 <ivan> AndyS: we should then make it a bit weaker, we should be noting that _if_ it is used, it has a particular meaning

Andy Seaborne: we should then make it a bit weaker, we should be noting that _if_ it is used, it has a particular meaning

14:26:27 <SteveH> q-

Steve Harris: q-

14:26:36 <ivan> ... recommending should is quite strong

... recommending should is quite strong

14:26:52 <ivan> ... that means that is the way it should happen unless you have good reason to do something else

... that means that is the way it should happen unless you have good reason to do something else

14:26:56 <ivan> chimezie: ok, understood

Chimezie Ogbuji: ok, understood

14:27:07 <LeeF> q?

Lee Feigenbaum: q?

14:27:10 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

14:27:15 <LeeF> ack AndyS

Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS

14:27:55 <ivan> AndyS: is this discussion on sparql protocol rather than an http protocol issue

Andy Seaborne: is this discussion on sparql protocol rather than an http protocol issue

14:28:24 <ivan> chimezie: we did not reach a conclusion on that, there was then an additional comment why we did not have that

Chimezie Ogbuji: we did not reach a conclusion on that, there was then an additional comment why we did not have that

14:28:35 <ivan> ... that is the reason why it is informative

... that is the reason why it is informative

14:28:56 <ivan> AndyS: that is confusing because people will and do use PUT with sparql update requests

Andy Seaborne: that is confusing because people will and do use PUT with sparql update requests

14:29:04 <LeeF> s/PUT/POST

Lee Feigenbaum: s/PUT/POST

14:29:24 <ivan> chimezie: a post 'here' and a post for other protocols will be different, but there is an ambiguity in general that we have to document

Chimezie Ogbuji: a post 'here' and a post for other protocols will be different, but there is an ambiguity in general that we have to document

14:30:09 <ivan> LeeF: at some point we will have to find dedicated time to look at the protocol and define the relationships more exactly

Lee Feigenbaum: at some point we will have to find dedicated time to look at the protocol and define the relationships more exactly

14:30:26 <ivan> ... maybe an overview document that axel and i work on will have to clarify that

... maybe an overview document that axel and i work on will have to clarify that

14:31:10 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to make sure that the relationship between SPARQL protocol and HTTP protocol is clearly laid out before Last Call

ACTION: Lee to make sure that the relationship between SPARQL protocol and HTTP protocol is clearly laid out before Last Call

14:31:10 <trackbot> Created ACTION-290 - Make sure that the relationship between SPARQL protocol and HTTP protocol is clearly laid out before Last Call [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-08-17].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-290 - Make sure that the relationship between SPARQL protocol and HTTP protocol is clearly laid out before Last Call [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-08-17].

14:32:09 <ivan> SteveH: what was the reason we split the two documents

Steve Harris: what was the reason we split the two documents

14:32:16 <AndyS> q-

Andy Seaborne: q-

14:32:25 <ivan> lee: we never had a strong discussion on why we have them separate

Lee Feigenbaum: we never had a strong discussion on why we have them separate

14:32:31 <pgearon> +q

Paul Gearon: +q

14:32:34 <ivan> ... the http was a pretty new document

... the http was a pretty new document

14:33:02 <pgearon> q-

Paul Gearon: q-

14:33:06 <ivan> chimezie: I recall that as a major motivation, we also wanted to have a strong RESTFUL constraint

Chimezie Ogbuji: I recall that as a major motivation, we also wanted to have a strong RESTFUL constraint

14:33:14 <ivan> SteveH: riiiight:-(

Steve Harris: riiiight:-(

14:33:37 <ivan> ... the protocol document with update is restful...

... the protocol document with update is restful...

14:33:46 <ivan> ... it was just an idle thought

... it was just an idle thought

14:33:53 <ivan> lee: it is still something we can consider

Lee Feigenbaum: it is still something we can consider

14:34:05 <ivan> ... to define the overall relationships between the two

... to define the overall relationships between the two

14:34:07 <ivan> ... we will consider it

... we will consider it

14:34:22 <ivan> lee: the remaining 3 issues remain open

Lee Feigenbaum: the remaining 3 issues remain open

14:34:53 <ivan> ... 57 is close to a resolution, leaning towards the features with other but we backed off

... 57 is close to a resolution, leaning towards the features with other but we backed off

14:35:22 <ivan> ... various implementers took actions to send descriptions to the mailing list, and I have an actions with test cases, that is not yet done

... various implementers took actions to send descriptions to the mailing list, and I have an actions with test cases, that is not yet done

14:35:45 <ivan> ... issue 58, register mime type for sparql

... ISSUE-58, register mime type for sparql

14:36:03 <ivan> sandro: what we do is to add some text into the document

Sandro Hawke: what we do is to add some text into the document

14:36:26 <ivan> ... from the process perspective it can go anywhere, it has to be a rec track one and that is it

... from the process perspective it can go anywhere, it has to be a rec track one and that is it

14:36:30 <AndyS> Yes

Andy Seaborne: Yes

14:36:35 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#mediaType

Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#mediaType

14:36:37 <ivan> lee: the query one is in the query document

Lee Feigenbaum: the query one is in the query document

14:36:38 <AxelPolleres> had two  more potential issues http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0149.html not sure whether we need to add them here... but also don't want to forget them

Axel Polleres: had two more potential issues http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0149.html not sure whether we need to add them here... but also don't want to forget them

14:36:56 <ivan> lee: it is probably the update document then

Lee Feigenbaum: it is probably the update document then

14:37:09 <ivan> sandro: it is corrct

Sandro Hawke: it is corrct

14:37:18 <ivan> s/corrct/correct/

s/corrct/correct/

14:37:59 <ivan> sandro: I will send a mail to paul with a possible alternative formatting

Sandro Hawke: I will send a mail to paul with a possible alternative formatting

14:38:21 <ivan> pgearon: I would have thought it should go in a document that has anything to do with protocol

Paul Gearon: I would have thought it should go in a document that has anything to do with protocol

14:38:28 <AndyS> MIME type is related to syntax/language

Andy Seaborne: MIME type is related to syntax/language

14:38:28 <ivan> lee: we had it in query...

Lee Feigenbaum: we had it in query...

14:38:33 <sandro> Here's how I did the RIF one, following the IETF formatting more: http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-core/#Appendix:_RIF_Media_Type_Registration

Sandro Hawke: Here's how I did the RIF one, following the IETF formatting more: http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-core/#Appendix:_RIF_Media_Type_Registration

14:38:51 <ivan> lee: and then?

Lee Feigenbaum: and then?

14:39:29 <ivan> sandro: once it is published (probably in LC), someone has to raise on the ietf list, and when we get to rec, there is another process to do

Sandro Hawke: once it is published (probably in LC), someone has to raise on the ietf list, and when we get to rec, there is another process to do

14:39:37 <AxelPolleres> q+ to ask about two additional (protocol related) issues

Axel Polleres: q+ to ask about two additional (protocol related) issues

14:39:45 <ivan> lee: paul, if it is o.k. with you, I would prefer you'd put it into the update doc

Lee Feigenbaum: paul, if it is o.k. with you, I would prefer you'd put it into the update doc

14:39:52 <LeeF> ACTION: Paul to work MIME type registration information into SPARQL Update document based on Sandro's suggestion for formatting etc.

ACTION: Paul to work MIME type registration information into SPARQL Update document based on Sandro's suggestion for formatting etc.

14:39:52 <trackbot> Created ACTION-291 - Work MIME type registration information into SPARQL Update document based on Sandro's suggestion for formatting etc. [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-17].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-291 - Work MIME type registration information into SPARQL Update document based on Sandro's suggestion for formatting etc. [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-17].

14:40:00 <ivan> pgearon: the more places it appears in the better is, no problems

Paul Gearon: the more places it appears in the better is, no problems

14:40:03 <LeeF> q?

Lee Feigenbaum: q?

14:40:07 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres

Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres

14:40:07 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about two additional (protocol related) issues

Zakim IRC Bot: AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about two additional (protocol related) issues

14:40:30 <LeeF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0149.html

Lee Feigenbaum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0149.html

14:40:44 <ivan> AxelPolleres: I had additional problems and I wonder whether they should go to issue list

Axel Polleres: I had additional problems and I wonder whether they should go to issue list

14:41:01 <ivan> ... do we need a return format for update?

... do we need a return format for update?

14:41:15 <ivan> ... if we simply get yes/no than we may be fine with the old one

... if we simply get yes/no than we may be fine with the old one

14:41:20 <LeeF> ISSUE: What does the response to a SPARQL Update request look like in SPARQL protocol?

ISSUE: What does the response to a SPARQL Update request look like in SPARQL protocol?

14:41:20 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-60 - What does the response to a SPARQL Update request look like in SPARQL protocol? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/60/edit .

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-60 - What does the response to a SPARQL Update request look like in SPARQL protocol? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/60/edit .

14:41:28 <AndyS> I had assumed the result body of an update would be empty.

Andy Seaborne: I had assumed the result body of an update would be empty.

14:41:29 <ivan> ... the other question where we would say something about transactions

... the other question where we would say something about transactions

14:41:34 <LeeF> AndyS++

Lee Feigenbaum: AndyS++

14:41:37 <ivan> ... where do we put it

... where do we put it

14:41:45 <ivan> ... probably the protocol document

... probably the protocol document

14:42:16 <ivan> lee: my gut feeling is that the content of a response will be empty for update, but it is better to have a formal issue on that

Lee Feigenbaum: my gut feeling is that the content of a response will be empty for update, but it is better to have a formal issue on that

14:42:27 <ivan> AxelPolleres: we had discussion about conveying additional infos

Axel Polleres: we had discussion about conveying additional infos

14:42:30 <SteveH> would like to put informative stuff in there, like number of triples added etc

Steve Harris: would like to put informative stuff in there, like number of triples added etc

14:42:32 <pgearon> http 200/400/500 are the most likely responses

Paul Gearon: http 200/400/500 are the most likely responses

14:42:55 <pgearon> oh, and 401

Paul Gearon: oh, and 401

14:42:58 <ivan> lee: the other one probably just need the editors to take an action on documenting adomicity

Lee Feigenbaum: the other one probably just need the editors to take an action on documenting adomicity

14:43:03 <SteveH> 403

Steve Harris: 403

14:43:17 <SteveH> and 201

Steve Harris: and 201

14:43:22 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to make sure text on transactionality/concurrency gets added to protocol document

ACTION: Lee to make sure text on transactionality/concurrency gets added to protocol document

14:43:22 <trackbot> Created ACTION-292 - Make sure text on transactionality/concurrency gets added to protocol document [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-08-17].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-292 - Make sure text on transactionality/concurrency gets added to protocol document [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-08-17].

14:43:23 <SteveH> oh, only for PUT

Steve Harris: oh, only for PUT

14:43:27 <AndyS> any HTTP response code

Andy Seaborne: any HTTP response code

14:43:44 <SteveH> +1 to AndyS

Steve Harris: +1 to AndyS

14:44:12 <chimezie> ACTION: chimezie to modify HTTP Update document to reduce language regarding PATCH and to not use RFC 2119 language

ACTION: chimezie to modify HTTP Update document to reduce language regarding PATCH and to not use RFC 2119 language

14:44:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-293 - Modify HTTP Update document to reduce language regarding PATCH and to not use RFC 2119 language [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2010-08-17].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-293 - Modify HTTP Update document to reduce language regarding PATCH and to not use RFC 2119 language [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2010-08-17].

14:44:13 <ivan> lee: the question was whether we would like to have a shortcut for update; we are not yet ready to close that

Lee Feigenbaum: the question was whether we would like to have a shortcut for update; we are not yet ready to close that

14:44:17 <AxelPolleres> can one add additional information to the success responses? e.g. if the endpoint wants to provide some additional information such as "300 triples added" ?

Axel Polleres: can one add additional information to the success responses? e.g. if the endpoint wants to provide some additional information such as "300 triples added" ?

14:44:39 <Zakim> -SteveH

Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH

14:45:00 <ivan> Topic: document publishing status/plans

5. document publishing status/plans

14:45:21 <ivan> Lee: how far away are we from a pretty stable document

Lee Feigenbaum: how far away are we from a pretty stable document

14:45:29 <Zakim> +Garlik

Zakim IRC Bot: +Garlik

14:45:30 <ivan> ... do we need one more publication before LC

... do we need one more publication before LC

14:45:37 <SteveH> Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

Steve Harris: Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me

14:45:37 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

14:45:53 <ivan> ... if the document is not yet ready for that, we may need an in-depth review

... if the document is not yet ready for that, we may need an in-depth review

14:46:13 <ivan> ... looking at editorials as well as content wise

... looking at editorials as well as content wise

14:46:17 <ivan> q+

q+

14:46:42 <LeeF> ack ivan

Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivan

14:47:37 <ivan> lee: query?

Lee Feigenbaum: query?

14:48:16 <ivan> SteveH: we need one more round before LC; there is quite a bit more content to be added

Steve Harris: we need one more round before LC; there is quite a bit more content to be added

14:48:38 <ivan> AndyS: yes, I agree, it would be a good idea to have a non-lc publication

Andy Seaborne: yes, I agree, it would be a good idea to have a non-lc publication

14:48:57 <ivan> ... i have been working on the property path part, that has to be moved across to the query document

... i have been working on the property path part, that has to be moved across to the query document

14:49:24 <ivan> ... the main thing to move sections into the algebra, and this has to be quite slick before lc

... the main thing to move sections into the algebra, and this has to be quite slick before lc

14:49:43 <ivan> lee: do you want to move the pp into the document before next publication

Lee Feigenbaum: do you want to move the pp into the document before next publication

14:49:46 <ivan> AndyS: yes

Andy Seaborne: yes

14:50:06 <SteveH> prefer to wait til after changes

Steve Harris: prefer to wait til after changes

14:50:21 <ivan> lee: do you want a comprehensive review now or only after things are done that you want to do

Lee Feigenbaum: do you want a comprehensive review now or only after things are done that you want to do

14:50:37 <ivan> AndyS: i need a really good one for the lc

Andy Seaborne: i need a really good one for the lc

14:50:53 <ivan> ... and there is only that much review people can do

... and there is only that much review people can do

14:51:03 <ivan> q+

q+

14:51:07 <LeeF> ack ivan

Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivan

14:51:59 <ivan> lee: update?

Lee Feigenbaum: update?

14:52:14 <AxelPolleres> I think we should have at least one new reviewer, obviously previous reviewers should also be welcome to give further comments.

Axel Polleres: I think we should have at least one new reviewer, obviously previous reviewers should also be welcome to give further comments.

14:52:25 <ivan> pgearon: a few things have to go in, that has to be done before we have a review

Paul Gearon: a few things have to go in, that has to be done before we have a review

14:53:15 <LeeF> potential across the board approach:

Lee Feigenbaum: potential across the board approach:

14:53:26 <LeeF> 1) Editors put into documents all missing pieces

Lee Feigenbaum: 1) Editors put into documents all missing pieces

14:53:36 <LeeF> 2) Publish documents as public WD

Lee Feigenbaum: 2) Publish documents as public WD

14:53:47 <LeeF> 3) Begin in-group comprehensive reviews of all documents

Lee Feigenbaum: 3) Begin in-group comprehensive reviews of all documents

14:53:56 <LeeF> 4) Incorporate review changes into Last Call-ready editors drafts

Lee Feigenbaum: 4) Incorporate review changes into Last Call-ready editors drafts

14:54:06 <LeeF> 5) Publish Last Call

Lee Feigenbaum: 5) Publish Last Call

14:54:14 <ivan> 6) be happy

6) be happy

14:54:25 <AndyS> Will next pub round [*] include tests?

Andy Seaborne: Will next pub round [*] include tests?

14:54:38 <bglimm> 6)

Birte Glimm: 6)

14:55:05 <ivan> lee: birte, chime, are you happy with that?

Lee Feigenbaum: birte, chime, are you happy with that?

14:55:23 <ivan> chimezie: i could use some community discussion before publication

Chimezie Ogbuji: i could use some community discussion before publication

14:55:24 <AxelPolleres> AndyS, I think we should include tests.

Axel Polleres: AndyS, I think we should include tests.

14:55:24 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me

Birte Glimm: Zakim, unmute me

14:55:24 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should no longer be muted

14:55:32 <ivan> ... eg, timbl's comment

... eg, timbl's comment

14:55:57 <ivan> ... or do you plan to have comment incorporated before publications

... or do you plan to have comment incorporated before publications

14:56:36 <ivan> ... if you could distill tim's comment before next call, and see what reactions we get also on the swig list

... if you could distill tim's comment before next call, and see what reactions we get also on the swig list

14:56:50 <ivan> chimezie: if I can write down the issues for next week, that would be good

Chimezie Ogbuji: if I can write down the issues for next week, that would be good

14:57:13 <ivan> LeeF: the wg has to have a quick turn around; ie, the answers should come from the wg

Lee Feigenbaum: the wg has to have a quick turn around; ie, the answers should come from the wg

14:58:25 <ivan> --- adjourned ---

--- adjourned ---



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2010-08-10 15:44:20 UTC by 'lfeigenb', comments: 'thanks to Ivan H for scribing!'