SPARQL Working Group

Minutes of 03 April 2012

Seen
Andy Seaborne, Axel Polleres, Birte Glimm, Carlos Buil Aranda, Chimezie Ogbuji, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Gregory Williams, Lee Feigenbaum, Matthew Perry, Olivier Corby, Paul Gearon, Steve Harris
Regrets
Axel Polleres, Chimezie Ogbuji
Scribe
Carlos Buil Aranda
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Accept last week's minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-03-27 link
  2. Publish Overview document as Last Call, conditional on review & changes in wake of review from LeeF, AndyS abstaining link
  3. Adopt option 6 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html, EricP abstaining link
  4. bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed), Greg and Carlos and Birte and Olivier abstaining link
  5. Change SPARQL blank node production to be in sync with the Turtle production (e.g. exclude escapes and encodings) link
Topics
14:01:09 <LeeF> scribenick: cbuilara

(Scribe set to Carlos Buil Aranda)

14:01:31 <LeeF> regrets: Axel, Chime
14:01:46 <LeeF> topic: admin

1. admin

14:01:54 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-03-27

PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-03-27

14:02:46 <cbuilara> LeeF: the csv/tsv we have to work with Sandro about it so we can publish it

Lee Feigenbaum: the csv/tsv we have to work with Sandro about it so we can publish it

14:02:55 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-03-27

RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-03-27

14:03:01 <cbuilara> LeeF: any concerns with last week minutes?

Lee Feigenbaum: any concerns with last week minutes?

14:03:11 <cbuilara> LeeF: April 10th, any regrets?

Lee Feigenbaum: April 10th, any regrets?

14:03:17 <LeeF> (none)

Lee Feigenbaum: (none)

14:03:19 <pgearon> at risk here

Paul Gearon: at risk here

14:03:26 <LeeF> topic: Overview

2. Overview

14:04:10 <cbuilara> LeeF: status, need one more review from LeeF, I still have to do it, anybody would be uncomfortable to publish document as conditional LC?

Lee Feigenbaum: status, need one more review from LeeF, I still have to do it, anybody would be uncomfortable to publish document as conditional LC?

14:04:27 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish Overview document as Last Call, conditional on review & changes in wake of review from LeeF

PROPOSED: Publish Overview document as Last Call, conditional on review & changes in wake of review from LeeF

14:04:53 <AndyS> abstain

Andy Seaborne: abstain

14:05:10 <kasei> +1

Gregory Williams: +1

14:05:24 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:05:25 <cbuilara> +1

+1

14:05:27 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:05:30 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish Overview document as Last Call, conditional on review & changes in wake of review from LeeF, AndyS abstaining

RESOLVED: Publish Overview document as Last Call, conditional on review & changes in wake of review from LeeF, AndyS abstaining

14:05:37 <LeeF> topic: Property paths

3. Property paths

14:05:56 <LeeF> Axel's summary of property path options: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0000.html

Lee Feigenbaum: Axel's summary of property path options: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0000.html

14:05:56 <cbuilara> LeeF: Axel's summary

Lee Feigenbaum: Axel's summary

14:06:27 <LeeF> Axel's summary of path forward for property paths: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0001.html

Lee Feigenbaum: Axel's summary of path forward for property paths: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0001.html

14:07:08 <cbuilara> LeeF: the basic impression is that we have one consensus, try to generate a response to all 3 commenters and move forward

Lee Feigenbaum: the basic impression is that we have one consensus, try to generate a response to all 3 commenters and move forward

14:10:03 <kasei> q+ to ask about option 8 wording

Gregory Williams: q+ to ask about option 8 wording

14:10:14 <cbuilara> LeeF: summary of remaining options: option 3 was the most supported option last option, solved problems with one commenter, option 6 is the newest and scales back, pp can be viewed as syntactic short cut, it has support in the mailing list, will be discussed, option 7 adding distinct and all keywords for wrapping, option 8 leaves semantics unspecified

Lee Feigenbaum: summary of remaining options: option 3 was the most supported option last option, solved problems with one commenter, option 6 is the newest and scales back, pp can be viewed as syntactic short cut, it has support in the mailing list, will be discussed, option 7 adding distinct and all keywords for wrapping, option 8 leaves semantics unspecified

14:11:00 <LeeF> ack kasei

Lee Feigenbaum: ack kasei

14:11:00 <Zakim> kasei, you wanted to ask about option 8 wording

Zakim IRC Bot: kasei, you wanted to ask about option 8 wording

14:11:22 <LeeF> Andy's option 6 - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html

Lee Feigenbaum: Andy's option 6 - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html

14:11:26 <cbuilara> LeeF: option 6 by Andy

Lee Feigenbaum: option 6 by Andy

14:11:31 <LeeF> Andy's option 6 - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html

Lee Feigenbaum: Andy's option 6 - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html

14:11:47 <LeeF> 6.A:   /, |, ! as there are in 2LC.

Lee Feigenbaum: 6.A: /, |, ! as there are in 2LC.

14:11:48 <LeeF> 6.B:   *, +, ? are non-counting

Lee Feigenbaum: 6.B: *, +, ? are non-counting

14:11:48 <LeeF> 6.C:   No DISTINCT

Lee Feigenbaum: 6.C: No DISTINCT

14:11:48 <LeeF> 6.D:   No {} forms: {n}, {n,m}, {n,}, {,m}

Lee Feigenbaum: 6.D: No {} forms: {n}, {n,m}, {n,}, {,m}

14:13:10 <cbuilara> LeeF: it does not cover all the possible use cases

Lee Feigenbaum: it does not cover all the possible use cases

14:13:41 <cbuilara> LeeF: it seems that covers most common cases

Lee Feigenbaum: it seems that covers most common cases

14:13:56 <cbuilara> LeeF: it cuts complexity that was getting PP

Lee Feigenbaum: it cuts complexity that was getting PP

14:14:13 <bglimm> q+

Birte Glimm: q+

14:14:17 <LeeF> ack bglimm

Lee Feigenbaum: ack bglimm

14:14:18 <cbuilara> LeeF: questions?

Lee Feigenbaum: questions?

14:14:31 <cbuilara> bglimm: did you check with commenters?

Birte Glimm: did you check with commenters?

14:14:48 <cbuilara> LeeF: we did, if we agree we will submit the answer

Lee Feigenbaum: we did, if we agree we will submit the answer

14:15:08 <cbuilara> bglimm: we make the most complex operators non counting

Birte Glimm: we make the most complex operators non counting

14:15:38 <Zakim> +EricP

Zakim IRC Bot: +EricP

14:15:57 <kasei> I think 6 is the best path forward.

Gregory Williams: I think 6 is the best path forward.

14:16:01 <cbuilara> LeeF: support or comments for option 6?

Lee Feigenbaum: support or comments for option 6?

14:16:09 <MattPerry> +1 for option 6, others were getting too complicated

Matthew Perry: +1 for option 6, others were getting too complicated

14:16:18 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:16:21 <cbuilara> +1 for option 6

+1 for option 6

14:16:22 <AndyS> +1 to option 6.

Andy Seaborne: +1 to option 6.

14:16:25 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

14:16:33 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:17:29 <cbuilara> LeeF: lets go with option 6, I will make the response based on AndyS summary

Lee Feigenbaum: lets go with option 6, I will make the response based on AndyS summary

14:18:18 <cbuilara> AndyS: I think question mark operator, I have not seen much of it

Andy Seaborne: I think question mark operator, I have not seen much of it

14:19:49 <cbuilara> AndyS: leaving it is the better choice

Andy Seaborne: leaving it is the better choice

14:19:59 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Adopt option 6 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html

PROPOSED: Adopt option 6 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html

14:20:38 <cbuilara> LeeF: we go ahead and adopt option 6

Lee Feigenbaum: we go ahead and adopt option 6

14:20:44 <kasei> +1

Gregory Williams: +1

14:20:45 <MattPerry> +1

Matthew Perry: +1

14:20:48 <cbuilara> +1

+1

14:20:52 <Olivier> +1

Olivier Corby: +1

14:20:58 <ericP> +0 # too ignorant to vote

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +0 # too ignorant to vote

14:20:59 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:21:07 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Adopt option 6 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html, EricP abstaining

RESOLVED: Adopt option 6 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0285.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0286.html, EricP abstaining

14:21:47 <cbuilara> LeeF: amount of work perspective about the option 6?

Lee Feigenbaum: amount of work perspective about the option 6?

14:22:12 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to contact the 3 property path commenters to see if option 6 addresses their concerns with property paths

ACTION: Lee to contact the 3 property path commenters to see if option 6 addresses their concerns with property paths

14:22:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-605 - Contact the 3 property path commenters to see if option 6 addresses their concerns with property paths [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2012-04-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-605 - Contact the 3 property path commenters to see if option 6 addresses their concerns with property paths [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2012-04-10].

14:22:23 <cbuilara> AndyS: I will start working on it, but I can't work properly until next week

Andy Seaborne: I will start working on it, but I can't work properly until next week

14:23:09 <cbuilara> LeeF: any topic for discussion?

Lee Feigenbaum: any topic for discussion?

14:23:33 <cbuilara> LeeF: AndyS, what about the comments from the RDF WG?

Lee Feigenbaum: AndyS, what about the comments from the RDF WG?

14:23:43 <pgearon> +q

Paul Gearon: +q

14:23:50 <ericP> q+

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+

14:23:51 <pgearon> q-

Paul Gearon: q-

14:23:52 <cbuilara> AndyS: there is an email

Andy Seaborne: there is an email

14:24:00 <Zakim> -AndyS

Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS

14:24:06 <LeeF> topic: colons

4. colons

14:24:07 <LeeF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0284.html

Lee Feigenbaum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JanMar/0284.html

14:24:51 <ericP> {a:b:c:d}

Eric Prud'hommeaux: {a:b:c:d}

14:25:00 <ericP> { a:b :c :d }

Eric Prud'hommeaux: { a:b :c :d }

14:25:16 <cbuilara> ericP: this is how it parses now

Eric Prud'hommeaux: this is how it parses now

14:25:31 <cbuilara> ericP: there is a backwards incompatibility

Eric Prud'hommeaux: there is a backwards incompatibility

14:26:11 <cbuilara> LeeF: do we do this change too? or it works for the wg?

Lee Feigenbaum: do we do this change too? or it works for the wg?

14:26:18 <pgearon> +q

Paul Gearon: +q

14:26:22 <LeeF> ack pgearon

Lee Feigenbaum: ack pgearon

14:26:24 <LeeF> ack ericP

Lee Feigenbaum: ack ericP

14:26:24 <ericP> q-

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q-

14:26:52 <cbuilara> pgearon: it is a good idea, but does it changes the grammar very much?

Paul Gearon: it is a good idea, but does it changes the grammar very much?

14:28:05 <kasei> people have already suggested / and how property paths will end up preventing that...

Gregory Williams: people have already suggested / and how property paths will end up preventing that...

14:28:39 <cbuilara> SteveH; I can't think of a big issue

SteveH; I can't think of a big issue

14:29:02 <pgearon> so long as it doesn't break anything existing, then I'm all for these changes

Paul Gearon: so long as it doesn't break anything existing, then I'm all for these changes

14:29:27 <ericP> q+ to also discuss http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#term-turtle2-BLANK_NODE_LABEL

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to also discuss http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#term-turtle2-BLANK_NODE_LABEL

14:30:04 <ericP> PROPOSED: bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed)

PROPOSED: bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed)

14:30:14 <ericP> PROPOSED: bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed)

PROPOSED: bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed)

14:30:23 <LeeF> +1

Lee Feigenbaum: +1

14:30:25 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

14:30:35 <pgearon> +1

Paul Gearon: +1

14:30:36 <kasei> 0

Gregory Williams: 0

14:30:37 <cbuilara> 0

0

14:30:40 <MattPerry> +1

Matthew Perry: +1

14:30:47 <bglimm> 0 not much clue about this...

Birte Glimm: 0 not much clue about this...

14:30:51 <Olivier> 0

Olivier Corby: 0

14:30:55 <LeeF> RESOLVED: bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed), Greg and Carlos and Birte and Olivier abstaining

RESOLVED: bare ':'s are allowed in local names (\'d ':'s not allowed), Greg and Carlos and Birte and Olivier abstaining

14:31:49 <LeeF> ACTION: Andy to update grammar to allow colons in local names

ACTION: Andy to update grammar to allow colons in local names

14:31:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-606 - Update grammar to allow colons in local names [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-04-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-606 - Update grammar to allow colons in local names [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-04-10].

14:32:27 <LeeF> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#term-turtle2-BLANK_NODE_LABEL

Lee Feigenbaum: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#term-turtle2-BLANK_NODE_LABEL

14:33:08 <cbuilara> ericP: if we allow escaping in local names, p and local, it allows the scape medical characters

Eric Prud'hommeaux: if we allow escaping in local names, p and local, it allows the scape medical characters

14:34:19 <ericP> example _:\:foo

Eric Prud'hommeaux: example _:\:foo

14:34:19 <cbuilara> ericP: the blank node labels in triple are the same than blank nodes labels in turtle

Eric Prud'hommeaux: the blank node labels in triple are the same than blank nodes labels in turtle

14:34:48 <cbuilara> ericP: no more labels like that _:\:foo

Eric Prud'hommeaux: no more labels like that _:\:foo

14:34:57 <LeeF> LeeF: Does anybody care?

Lee Feigenbaum: Does anybody care? [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ]

14:35:02 <LeeF> (silence)

Lee Feigenbaum: (silence)

14:35:05 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

14:35:35 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me

Birte Glimm: Zakim, mute me

14:35:36 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted

14:36:01 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Change SPARQL blank node production to be in sync with the Turtle production (e.g. exclude escapes and encodings)

PROPOSED: Change SPARQL blank node production to be in sync with the Turtle production (e.g. exclude escapes and encodings)

14:36:27 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

14:36:35 <bglimm> +1

Birte Glimm: +1

14:36:41 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Change SPARQL blank node production to be in sync with the Turtle production (e.g. exclude escapes and encodings)

RESOLVED: Change SPARQL blank node production to be in sync with the Turtle production (e.g. exclude escapes and encodings)



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2012-04-03 14:51:37 UTC by 'cbuilara', comments: None