13:55:41 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
13:55:44 <LeeF> Scribe: bglimm
(Scribe set to Birte Glimm)
13:55:47 <LeeF> Scribenick: bglimm
13:56:32 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-08-09
13:56:37 <LeeF> LeeF has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-08-09 (LeeF)
Lee Feigenbaum: LeeF has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-08-09 (LeeF) ←
13:57:07 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started ←
13:57:15 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
13:57:21 <bglimm> Zakim, ??P2 is me
Zakim, ??P2 is me ←
13:57:21 <Zakim> +bglimm; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm; got it ←
13:57:47 <Zakim> +??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
13:57:54 <AndyS> zakim, ??P3 i sme
Andy Seaborne: zakim, ??P3 i sme ←
13:57:54 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P3 i sme', AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P3 i sme', AndyS ←
13:57:58 <Zakim> + +1.617.553.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.553.aaaa ←
13:58:00 <AndyS> zakim, ??P3 is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, ??P3 is me ←
13:58:00 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
13:58:04 <LeeF> zakim, aaaa is me
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, aaaa is me ←
13:58:05 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF; got it ←
13:58:21 <AndyS> Hi there
Andy Seaborne: Hi there ←
13:58:25 <AndyS> A lot of echo
Andy Seaborne: A lot of echo ←
13:58:26 <Zakim> +??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←
13:58:31 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P4 is me
Steve Harris: Zakim, ??P4 is me ←
13:58:31 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it ←
13:58:33 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
Zakim, mute me ←
13:58:33 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted ←
13:58:38 <bglimm> better?
better? ←
13:59:20 <Zakim> +kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: +kasei ←
13:59:24 <kasei> success!
Gregory Williams: success! ←
14:00:06 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
14:00:12 <cbuilara> zakim, ??P12 is me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, ??P12 is me ←
14:00:12 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cbuilara; got it ←
14:00:29 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.603.897.aabb ←
14:00:39 <MattPerry> zakim, aabb is me
Matthew Perry: zakim, aabb is me ←
14:00:39 <Zakim> +MattPerry; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MattPerry; got it ←
14:01:52 <bglimm> yes
yes ←
14:01:56 <LeeF> topic: Admin
14:02:01 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-08-02
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-08-02 ←
14:02:05 <Zakim> + +3539154aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +3539154aacc ←
14:02:49 <LeeF> Regrets: Olivier, Paul, Chimezie
14:02:55 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-08-02
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-08-02 ←
14:03:28 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?
Andy Seaborne: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:03:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see bglimm (muted), AndyS, LeeF, SteveH, kasei, cbuilara, MattPerry, +3539154aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bglimm (muted), AndyS, LeeF, SteveH, kasei, cbuilara, MattPerry, +3539154aacc ←
14:03:46 <alexpassant> that should be me
Alexandre Passant: that should be me ←
14:03:53 <alexpassant> zakim, +3539154aacc is me
Alexandre Passant: zakim, +3539154aacc is me ←
14:03:53 <Zakim> +alexpassant; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +alexpassant; got it ←
14:04:03 <Zakim> + +49.897.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +49.897.aadd ←
14:04:25 <axelpolleres> Zakim, aadd is probably me
Axel Polleres: Zakim, aadd is probably me ←
14:04:25 <Zakim> +axelpolleres?; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +axelpolleres?; got it ←
14:04:40 <bglimm> LeeF: Next meeting next week
Lee Feigenbaum: Next meeting next week ←
14:05:06 <bglimm> LeeF: AndyS is set to scribe
Lee Feigenbaum: AndyS is set to scribe ←
14:05:20 <LeeF> Next regular meeting: 2011-08-16 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Andy)
Lee Feigenbaum: Next regular meeting: 2011-08-16 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Andy) ←
14:05:48 <bglimm> LeeF: AndyS, anything from the RDF working group?
Lee Feigenbaum: AndyS, anything from the RDF working group? ←
14:05:56 <bglimm> Zakim, umute me
Zakim, umute me ←
14:05:56 <Zakim> I don't understand 'umute me', bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'umute me', bglimm ←
14:06:06 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
Zakim, mute me ←
14:06:08 <Zakim> bglimm was already muted, bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm was already muted, bglimm ←
14:06:13 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me
Zakim, unmute me ←
14:06:13 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should no longer be muted ←
14:06:29 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
Zakim, mute me ←
14:06:29 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted ←
14:06:48 <bglimm> I didn't get what Andy said
I didn't get what Andy said ←
14:06:59 <bglimm> I have shitty sound :-(
I have shitty sound :-( ←
14:07:07 <LeeF> Andy: Nothing new from RDF WG, but they will probably be reaching a decision on language tagged literals soon
Andy Seaborne: Nothing new from RDF WG, but they will probably be reaching a decision on language tagged literals soon [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:07:12 <LeeF> topic: Federated Query
14:08:16 <bglimm> LeeF: We have a federated query review. Carlos, will you discuss further changes by email?
Lee Feigenbaum: We have a federated query review. Carlos, will you discuss further changes by email? ←
14:08:31 <axelpolleres> q+
Axel Polleres: q+ ←
14:09:23 <bglimm> greg: The only major issues is that we agreed to not formally specify the endpoint semantics (?), the section is informative, but is wrong
Gregory Williams: The only major issues is that we agreed to not formally specify the endpoint semantics (?), the section is informative, but is wrong ←
14:09:28 <LeeF> ack axelpolleres
Lee Feigenbaum: ack axelpolleres ←
14:09:42 <bglimm> LeeF: I suggest to make the text less formal and keep the section informative
Lee Feigenbaum: I suggest to make the text less formal and keep the section informative ←
14:10:02 <cbuilara> +q
Carlos Buil Aranda: +q ←
14:10:02 <bglimm> Axel: As long as the section is informative, I think it is ok. We can change it later
Axel Polleres: As long as the section is informative, I think it is ok. We can change it later ←
14:10:14 <bglimm> LeeF: I think we should still get the semantics right
Lee Feigenbaum: I think we should still get the semantics right ←
14:10:24 <LeeF> ack cbuilara
Lee Feigenbaum: ack cbuilara ←
14:10:48 <bglimm> Carlos: The section was to address the changes suggested by Andy
Carlos Buil Aranda: The section was to address the changes suggested by Andy ←
14:11:37 <bglimm> LeeF: I think we just have to keep working towards convergence
Lee Feigenbaum: I think we just have to keep working towards convergence ←
14:11:58 <bglimm> ... Carlos, can you have a look at the comments and further discuss by email?
... Carlos, can you have a look at the comments and further discuss by email? ←
14:12:02 <bglimm> Carlos: Ok
Carlos Buil Aranda: Ok ←
14:12:04 <axelpolleres> I can take an action to check Greg's review and implications as well...
Axel Polleres: I can take an action to check Greg's review and implications as well... ←
14:12:15 <axelpolleres> (would make it easier to remember for me ;-))
Axel Polleres: (would make it easier to remember for me ;-)) ←
14:12:17 <LeeF> ACTION: Axel to look at Greg's review of federated query
ACTION: Axel to look at Greg's review of federated query ←
14:12:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-514 - Look at Greg's review of federated query [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-08-16].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-514 - Look at Greg's review of federated query [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-08-16]. ←
14:12:31 <AndyS> What I see in doc is not as Carlos described (from a quick skim) is doc in CVS up to date?
Andy Seaborne: What I see in doc is not as Carlos described (from a quick skim) is doc in CVS up to date? ←
14:13:08 <bglimm> Carlos: I commited a change
Carlos Buil Aranda: I commited a change ←
14:13:12 <LeeF> topic: Other documents
14:13:15 <kasei> that "ranging over all services" is the part I'm not seeing and have a problem with.
Gregory Williams: that "ranging over all services" is the part I'm not seeing and have a problem with. ←
14:13:17 <bglimm> AndyS: I'll read it more carefully then
Andy Seaborne: I'll read it more carefully then ←
14:13:42 <bglimm> LeeF: Axel did work on the overview doc and AndyS reviewed it
Lee Feigenbaum: Axel did work on the overview doc and AndyS reviewed it ←
14:13:50 <bglimm> Axel: I partially adressed the comments
Axel Polleres: I partially adressed the comments ←
14:13:59 <bglimm> ... est we can to by email
... rest we can to by email ←
14:14:04 <bglimm> s/est/rest/
14:14:28 <bglimm> ... I will work on it further, but nothing seems critical for publishing
... I will work on it further, but nothing seems critical for publishing ←
14:14:50 <bglimm> LeeF: Let's see whether we can publish th overview together with fed. query and the protocol oc
Lee Feigenbaum: Let's see whether we can publish th overview together with fed. query and the protocol oc ←
14:15:14 <bglimm> Axel: We should probably publish as a FPWD to get some feedback
Axel Polleres: We should probably publish as a FPWD to get some feedback ←
14:15:36 <bglimm> LeeF: I think it is an important document, but we probably won't get too much feedback on it
Lee Feigenbaum: I think it is an important document, but we probably won't get too much feedback on it ←
14:15:39 <AndyS> q+ to ask about xmlspec / respec ization
Andy Seaborne: q+ to ask about xmlspec / respec ization ←
14:16:13 <bglimm> LeeF: Can anybody else review the overview doc?
Lee Feigenbaum: Can anybody else review the overview doc? ←
14:16:16 <bglimm> (silence)
(silence) ←
14:16:19 <axelpolleres> q+ to ask one more question in the context off the overview doc
Axel Polleres: q+ to ask one more question in the context off the overview doc ←
14:16:27 <bglimm> LeeF: Matt can you review it?
Lee Feigenbaum: Matt can you review it? ←
14:16:32 <LeeF> ACTION: Matthew to review the overview document
ACTION: Matthew to review the overview document ←
14:16:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-515 - Review the overview document [on Matthew Perry - due 2011-08-16].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-515 - Review the overview document [on Matthew Perry - due 2011-08-16]. ←
14:16:33 <bglimm> Matt: Yes, I can review it
Matthew Perry: Yes, I can review it ←
14:16:38 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
14:16:40 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
14:16:40 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to ask about xmlspec / respec ization
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to ask about xmlspec / respec ization ←
14:18:14 <bglimm> Axel: I asked on the mailing list about the wiki to HTML script
Axel Polleres: I asked on the mailing list about the wiki to HTML script ←
14:18:19 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me
Zakim, unmute me ←
14:18:19 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should no longer be muted ←
14:18:33 <LeeF> zakim, mute bglimm
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, mute bglimm ←
14:18:33 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted ←
14:18:33 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
14:18:41 <bglimm> Zakim, mute
Zakim, mute ←
14:18:41 <Zakim> I don't understand 'mute', bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'mute', bglimm ←
14:18:46 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
Zakim, mute me ←
14:18:46 <Zakim> bglimm was already muted, bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm was already muted, bglimm ←
14:18:56 <bglimm> Sandro said it is a lot of work to set the scrpt up
Sandro said it is a lot of work to set the scrpt up ←
14:19:08 <bglimm> It is only worth doing if we use it several times
It is only worth doing if we use it several times ←
14:19:25 <axelpolleres> ok, I can do it manually, just wanted to know whether there's an easy way.
Axel Polleres: ok, I can do it manually, just wanted to know whether there's an easy way. ←
14:20:05 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
14:20:07 <LeeF> ack axelpolleres
Lee Feigenbaum: ack axelpolleres ←
14:20:07 <Zakim> axelpolleres, you wanted to ask one more question in the context off the overview doc
Zakim IRC Bot: axelpolleres, you wanted to ask one more question in the context off the overview doc ←
14:20:13 <AndyS> ack me
Andy Seaborne: ack me ←
14:20:14 <bglimm> LeeF: I think we can keep working on the wiki for a while and then manually convert to XML
Lee Feigenbaum: I think we can keep working on the wiki for a while and then manually convert to XML ←
14:20:31 <bglimm> Axel: Andy had a comment about using named graphs
Axel Polleres: Andy had a comment about using named graphs ←
14:20:56 <bglimm> .. I can avoid using named graphs, so we can get away without them
.. I can avoid using named graphs, so we can get away without them ←
14:21:12 <bglimm> ... The other thing was the list of all documents, which we now have in all dcs
... The other thing was the list of all documents, which we now have in all dcs ←
14:21:23 <bglimm> ... I used a different order than the other docs
... I used a different order than the other docs ←
14:21:38 <bglimm> ... I ordered to make a nice story in the overview
... I ordered to make a nice story in the overview ←
14:22:19 <bglimm> ... in some of the other documents, we don't have the list. I suggest to link from all other docs to the overview, where we have the list
... in some of the other documents, we don't have the list. I suggest to link from all other docs to the overview, where we have the list ←
14:22:40 <bglimm> ...so we would only have one list, which is in the overview doc
...so we would only have one list, which is in the overview doc ←
14:22:48 <bglimm> +1 to Axel's suggestion
+1 to Axel's suggestion ←
14:23:15 <bglimm> AndyS: I personally don't find it useful to be directed to the overview
Andy Seaborne: I personally don't find it useful to be directed to the overview ←
14:23:33 <bglimm> ... I find the order we ended up with appropriate
... I find the order we ended up with appropriate ←
14:24:15 <bglimm> Axel: I don't have a particular order preference for thenon-overview docs, but I do have one for the overview
Axel Polleres: I don't have a particular order preference for thenon-overview docs, but I do have one for the overview ←
14:24:51 <bglimm> ... would you be ok to keep the structure of the document, but adjust the list?
... would you be ok to keep the structure of the document, but adjust the list? ←
14:25:21 <bglimm> AndyS: I think the structure should be major areas first and then the minor areas
Andy Seaborne: I think the structure should be major areas first and then the minor areas ←
14:25:21 <SteveH> I have no preference
Steve Harris: I have no preference ←
14:25:30 <kasei> I tend to favor Andy's approach
Gregory Williams: I tend to favor Andy's approach ←
14:26:51 <bglimm> LeeF: We have slightly more votes for Andy's sugggestion. Axel, can you restructure?
Lee Feigenbaum: We have slightly more votes for Andy's sugggestion. Axel, can you restructure? ←
14:27:01 <bglimm> Axel: Yes and it is anyway a FPWD
Axel Polleres: Yes and it is anyway a FPWD ←
14:27:14 <axelpolleres> I can restructure, finding time is more the issue.
Axel Polleres: I can restructure, finding time is more the issue. ←
14:27:24 <bglimm> AndyS: I can't remember how long it takes overall from FPWD to LC
Andy Seaborne: I can't remember how long it takes overall from FPWD to LC ←
14:27:37 <bglimm> LeeF: FPWD has no fixed duration
Lee Feigenbaum: FPWD has no fixed duration ←
14:27:54 <bglimm> ... LC has a minimum time of three weeks I believe
... LC has a minimum time of three weeks I believe ←
14:27:57 <axelpolleres> Shall we tendentially decide for a short name? proposal: sparql11-overview
Axel Polleres: Shall we tendentially decide for a short name? proposal: sparql11-overview ←
14:28:21 <bglimm> LeeF: I am happy with the short name
Lee Feigenbaum: I am happy with the short name ←
14:28:29 <bglimm> AndyS: Looks good
Andy Seaborne: Looks good ←
14:28:41 <bglimm> LeeF: Let's decide when we decide to publish
Lee Feigenbaum: Let's decide when we decide to publish ←
14:29:21 <bglimm> ... Neither the chairs nor team contacts did make progress on the CVS document (scribed correctly?)
... Neither the chairs nor team contacts did make progress on the csv-tsv and json document (scribed correctly?) ←
14:29:48 <axelpolleres> s/CVS/csv-tsv and json/
14:30:07 <bglimm> ... I addressed most of Andy's comments for the protocol doc
... I addressed most of Andy's comments for the protocol doc ←
14:30:39 <axelpolleres> it should follow the same rules as FROM FROM NAMED, shouldn't it? (didn't check the mails in detail)
Axel Polleres: it should follow the same rules as FROM FROM NAMED, shouldn't it? (didn't check the mails in detail) ←
14:30:41 <bglimm> ... we still have some discussions
... we still have some discussions ←
14:31:17 <bglimm> ... Andy can you outline the usecase that you had on the mailing list?
... Andy can you outline the usecase that you had on the mailing list? ←
14:31:41 <bglimm> Didn't get what Andy said :-(
Didn't get what Andy said :-( ←
14:33:33 <AndyS> AndyS: One possible UC is that the dataset for matching is a new, temporary dataset (maybe retrieved from the web)
Andy Seaborne: One possible UC is that the dataset for matching is a new, temporary dataset (maybe retrieved from the web) [ Scribe Assist by Andy Seaborne ] ←
14:33:49 <axelpolleres> Lee's way sounds good, USING/USING NAMED is described in Table 2 of the update doc
Axel Polleres: Lee's way sounds good, USING/USING NAMED is described in Table 2 of the update doc ←
14:34:26 <bglimm> LeeF: Clearly the spec still needs to be improved
Lee Feigenbaum: Clearly the spec still needs to be improved ←
14:34:40 <bglimm> ... but the question whether the current model is acceptable
... but the question whether the current model is acceptable ←
14:35:01 <axelpolleres> see http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-update/#mappingRequestsToOperations
Axel Polleres: see http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-update/#mappingRequestsToOperations ←
14:35:06 <bglimm> AndyS: Regardless what we decide, the change will change the update doc
Andy Seaborne: Regardless what we decide, the change will change the update doc ←
14:36:06 <bglimm> Axel: Sounds to me that removing the parameters is in line with the update document
Axel Polleres: Sounds to me that removing the parameters is in line with the update document ←
14:36:13 <bglimm> LeeF: If that
Lee Feigenbaum: If that ←
14:36:25 <axelpolleres> Are you sure that we need to change Update, I don't think so.
Axel Polleres: Are you sure that we need to change Update, I don't think so. ←
14:36:29 <bglimm> LeeF: If you specified it like this, then we might not need a change
Lee Feigenbaum: If you specified it like this, then we might not need a change ←
14:37:04 <bglimm> AndyS: We have time to do a last cal for update in parallel with the protocol doc
Andy Seaborne: We have time to do a last cal for update in parallel with the protocol doc ←
14:37:23 <bglimm> LeeF: Are we happy with the semantics of the protocol or should we consider alternatives?
Lee Feigenbaum: Are we happy with the semantics of the protocol or should we consider alternatives? ←
14:37:38 <bglimm> ... AndyS, do you need more time to think about it?
... AndyS, do you need more time to think about it? ←
14:38:00 <axelpolleres> I understand that protocol says that updateReq with parameters simply means that the requested endpoint needs to answer Tr(updateReq,parameters) where Tr just replaces the USING USINGCLAUSES
Axel Polleres: I understand that protocol says that updateReq with parameters simply means that the requested endpoint needs to answer Tr(updateReq,parameters) where Tr just replaces the USING USINGCLAUSES ←
14:38:05 <bglimm> AndyS: Yes and we are a small group of people and I want to make sure we address the right problem
Andy Seaborne: Yes and we are a small group of people and I want to make sure we address the right problem ←
14:38:19 <bglimm> ... we are not getting enough input
... we are not getting enough input ←
14:38:33 <axelpolleres> this can be defined similarly as the tables in the update document, but it is ok if it defined in the protocol dfocument.
Axel Polleres: this can be defined similarly as the tables in the update document, but it is ok if it defined in the protocol dfocument. ←
14:39:11 <bglimm> AndyS: Steve, you are another major update implementor. Did you get your head around that?
Andy Seaborne: Steve, you are another major update implementor. Did you get your head around that? ←
14:39:26 <bglimm> Steve: It is not a feature that we currently use, so I can't give input
Steve Harris: It is not a feature that we currently use, so I can't give input ←
14:39:43 <bglimm> LeeF: Anybody else implementing it?
Lee Feigenbaum: Anybody else implementing it? ←
14:40:03 <bglimm> Axel: How is it for query request now when there are parameters?
Axel Polleres: How is it for query request now when there are parameters? ←
14:40:50 <SteveH> Lee's interpretation is the only one that makes sense to me
Steve Harris: Lee's interpretation is the only one that makes sense to me ←
14:40:54 <bglimm> LeeF: The design for update is different because there are different update requests
Lee Feigenbaum: The design for update is different because there are different update requests ←
14:41:18 <axelpolleres> LeeF: my proposal was that parameters replace any using/using named in any operation part of a request.
Lee Feigenbaum: my proposal was that parameters replace any using/using named in any operation part of a request. [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:41:27 <bglimm> ... We don't want to do something that we regret later. Maybe I write up the current design and send it to the list to get feedback
... We don't want to do something that we regret later. Maybe I write up the current design and send it to the list to get feedback ←
14:41:46 <bglimm> AndyS: That might be a good idea. Any other points, where you need feedback?
Andy Seaborne: That might be a good idea. Any other points, where you need feedback? ←
14:42:00 <bglimm> LeeF: I think I addressed most points, but I will get back to it
Lee Feigenbaum: I think I addressed most points, but I will get back to it ←
14:42:12 <bglimm> AndyS: Add more example
Andy Seaborne: Add more example ←
14:43:16 <bglimm> LeeF: There is still an issue with characters in query strings
Lee Feigenbaum: There is still an issue with characters in query strings ←
14:44:32 <bglimm> ... I'll rewrite the text, to make it clearer
... I'll rewrite the text, to make it clearer ←
14:44:50 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to email list with proposed design for dataset parameters in protocol for update requests
ACTION: Lee to email list with proposed design for dataset parameters in protocol for update requests ←
14:44:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-516 - Email list with proposed design for dataset parameters in protocol for update requests [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-08-16].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-516 - Email list with proposed design for dataset parameters in protocol for update requests [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-08-16]. ←
14:45:44 <bglimm> LeeF: Test case covering
Lee Feigenbaum: Test case covering ←
14:45:55 <bglimm> ... Axel, can you give an overview of the status
... Axel, can you give an overview of the status ←
14:46:13 <bglimm> Axel: We had a couple of actions to evaluate coverage
Axel Polleres: We had a couple of actions to evaluate coverage ←
14:46:28 <bglimm> ... 492 and following
... 492 and following ←
14:46:36 <bglimm> ... for update, the action is done
... for update, the action is done ←
14:46:47 <axelpolleres> close ACTION-492
Axel Polleres: close ACTION-492 ←
14:46:47 <trackbot> ACTION-492 Check coverage of test suite (on Update) closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-492 Check coverage of test suite (on Update) closed ←
14:47:17 <bglimm> 493 is create a summary on the wiki
493 is create a summary on the wiki ←
14:47:23 <axelpolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage
Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage ←
14:48:00 <bglimm> ... For each area we wanted to have statements from implementors as to who implements the features
... For each area we wanted to have statements from implementors as to who implements the features ←
14:48:26 <bglimm> ... please have a look and add yourself under implementation or remove yourself as appropriate
... please have a look and add yourself under implementation or remove yourself as appropriate ←
14:48:50 <bglimm> ... action 494 is query on greg
... ACTION-494 is query on greg ←
14:49:02 <bglimm> greg: I still need to finish it
Gregory Williams: I still need to finish it ←
14:49:11 <AndyS> JSON results test suite broken.
Andy Seaborne: JSON results test suite broken. ←
14:49:13 <bglimm> Axel: Yes, it is a lot of work
Axel Polleres: Yes, it is a lot of work ←
14:49:51 <bglimm> Axel: 495 is protocol test cases coverage, which should also cover how we test protocol at all
Axel Polleres: 495 is protocol test cases coverage, which should also cover how we test protocol at all ←
14:49:57 <bglimm> LeeF: No progress yet
Lee Feigenbaum: No progress yet ←
14:50:04 <bglimm> Axel: Action 496 is on Chime
Axel Polleres: ACTION-496 is on Chime ←
14:50:47 <bglimm> ... for the graph store protocol
... for the graph store protocol ←
14:50:59 <bglimm> ... it might need an extension for the manifest structure
... it might need an extension for the manifest structure ←
14:51:26 <axelpolleres> close ACTION-497
Axel Polleres: close ACTION-497 ←
14:51:27 <trackbot> ACTION-497 Check entailment regimes test case coverage closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-497 Check entailment regimes test case coverage closed ←
14:51:31 <bglimm> Axel: Action 497 is on entailment reg.
Axel Polleres: ACTION-497 is on entailment reg. ←
14:51:36 <bglimm> .. that is completed
.. that is completed ←
14:51:50 <bglimm> ... That is the last action on test case coverage
... That is the last action on test case coverage ←
14:52:12 <AndyS> Close ACTION-507
Andy Seaborne: Close ACTION-507 ←
14:52:12 <trackbot> ACTION-507 Draft text for CSV/TSV status para closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-507 Draft text for CSV/TSV status para closed ←
14:52:28 <AndyS> Close ACTION-500
Andy Seaborne: Close ACTION-500 ←
14:52:29 <trackbot> ACTION-500 Review updates in Fed query doc (particularly section 2.4 and 4) for LC readiness closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-500 Review updates in Fed query doc (particularly section 2.4 and 4) for LC readiness closed ←
14:52:41 <bglimm> ... for update, we have not yet everything covered: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage#Update
... for update, we have not yet everything covered: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage#Update ←
14:52:50 <bglimm> ... Do we need to test silent?
... Do we need to test silent? ←
14:53:16 <bglimm> ... In syntax tests that is covered, but sine we cannot test error, it is hard for non-syntax test
... In syntax tests that is covered, but sine we cannot test error, it is hard for non-syntax test ←
14:53:17 <AndyS> Is there not a EvalFail test type?
Andy Seaborne: Is there not a EvalFail test type? ←
14:53:24 <bglimm> ... I propose to not test that
... I propose to not test that ←
14:53:30 <bglimm> ... any objections?
... any objections? ←
14:53:39 <bglimm> ... silence=agreement?
... silence=agreement? ←
14:53:56 <kasei> q+
Gregory Williams: q+ ←
14:54:35 <bglimm> greg: We could create a negative evaluation test
Gregory Williams: We could create a negative evaluation test ←
14:54:45 <SteveH> a test would be DROP SILENT GRAPH <http://nosuchgrah>
Steve Harris: a test would be DROP SILENT GRAPH <http://nosuchgrah> ←
14:55:16 <SteveH> I think minimal testing for SILENT is OK
Steve Harris: I think minimal testing for SILENT is OK ←
14:55:22 <SteveH> but we can test it to an extent
Steve Harris: but we can test it to an extent ←
14:55:24 <bglimm> greg: we could probably add something to make such tests possible
Gregory Williams: we could probably add something to make such tests possible ←
14:55:44 <bglimm> Axel: So the proposal is to add negative evaluation tests
Axel Polleres: So the proposal is to add negative evaluation tests ←
14:56:28 <bglimm> greg: We might need a test for success, not a test for the state of the graph store
Gregory Williams: We might need a test for success, not a test for the state of the graph store ←
14:56:48 <bglimm> AndyS: A test without result, just saying that you somehow got through
Andy Seaborne: A test without result, just saying that you somehow got through ←
14:56:57 <bglimm> Axel: I will look into that
Axel Polleres: I will look into that ←
14:57:30 <bglimm> LeeF: Shall we record an action?
Lee Feigenbaum: Shall we record an action? ←
14:57:35 <axelpolleres> ACTION: Axel to look into negative evaluation tests and "silent success test" possibility for update tests.
ACTION: Axel to look into negative evaluation tests and "silent success test" possibility for update tests. ←
14:57:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-517 - Look into negative evaluation tests and "silent success test" possibility for update tests. [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-08-16].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-517 - Look into negative evaluation tests and "silent success test" possibility for update tests. [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-08-16]. ←
14:58:34 <bglimm> Axel: Andy suggested to move the negative syntax tests to the syntax test folder
Axel Polleres: Andy suggested to move the negative syntax tests to the syntax test folder ←
14:59:32 <bglimm> Axel: It is probably o t o move them there. Some tests are negative syntax tests because we disallowed bnodes, but they have not been moved after the decision
Axel Polleres: It is probably o t o move them there. Some tests are negative syntax tests because we disallowed bnodes, but they have not been moved after the decision ←
14:59:51 <LeeF> Suggest just leaving it as is for now then
Lee Feigenbaum: Suggest just leaving it as is for now then ←
14:59:59 <bglimm> Axel: Any volunteers to move the tests?
Axel Polleres: Any volunteers to move the tests? ←
15:00:52 <bglimm> Axel: We anyway need to action somebody to create the missing update tests. Maybe that person can then also move the tests.
Axel Polleres: We anyway need to action somebody to create the missing update tests. Maybe that person can then also move the tests. ←
15:00:57 <axelpolleres> Zakim, pick a victim
Axel Polleres: Zakim, pick a victim ←
15:00:57 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH ←
15:01:26 <bglimm> Steve: No way I can find the time
Steve Harris: No way I can find the time ←
15:01:35 <bglimm> LeeF: Let's leave it as it is for now
Lee Feigenbaum: Let's leave it as it is for now ←
15:01:42 <bglimm> Axel: Next is entailment
Axel Polleres: Next is entailment ←
15:02:13 <bglimm> ... we should also have negative tests for container membership properties
... we should also have negative tests for container membership properties ←
15:02:25 <Zakim> -alexpassant
Zakim IRC Bot: -alexpassant ←
15:02:27 <bglimm> no tests for axiomatic triples yet
no tests for axiomatic triples yet ←
15:02:51 <bglimm> ... we could just add an ask query for the triples
... we could just add an ask query for the triples ←
15:03:08 <bglimm> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage#Entailment
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage#Entailment ←
15:04:30 <bglimm> Axel: It seems we are out of time
Axel Polleres: It seems we are out of time ←
15:04:33 <bglimm> yes
yes ←
15:04:45 <bglimm> Axel: Birte, can you look into completing the test cases
Axel Polleres: Birte, can you look into completing the test cases ←
15:04:48 <bglimm> Birte: Yes
Birte Glimm: Yes ←
15:04:52 <bglimm> adjourned
adjourned ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2011-08-09 15:09:49 UTC by 'bglimm', comments: None