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
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
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
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
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
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