None.
13:34:18 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc ←
13:34:26 <ivanh> rrsagent, set log public
Ivan Herman: rrsagent, set log public ←
13:42:25 <ivanh> zakim, room for 10 at 14:00Z for 90 minutes?
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Ivan Herman: zakim, room for 10 at 14:00Z for 90 minutes? ←
13:42:27 <Zakim> ok, ivan; conference Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z scheduled with code 26632 (CONF2) at 14:00Z for 90 minutes until 1530Z
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; conference Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z scheduled with code 26632 (CONF2) at 14:00Z for 90 minutes until 1530Z ←
13:42:47 <ivanh> ivan has changed the topic to: ad-hoc conference at zakim, with code 26632
Ivan Herman: ivan has changed the topic to: ad-hoc conference at zakim, with code 26632 ←
13:56:02 <sandro> zakim, who is here?
(No events recorded for 13 minutes)
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is here? ←
13:56:02 <Zakim> Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has not yet started, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has not yet started, sandro ←
13:56:03 <Zakim> On IRC I see sandro, AndyS, RRSAgent, Zakim, ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see sandro, AndyS, RRSAgent, Zakim, ivan ←
13:56:05 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
13:56:05 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc#T13-56-05
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc#T13-56-05 ←
13:59:56 <Zakim> Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has now started ←
14:00:03 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:00:15 <AndyS> zakim, [IPCaller] is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, [IPCaller] is me ←
14:00:15 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
14:00:31 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:00:32 <Zakim> +bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm ←
14:01:13 <Zakim> +dcharbon2
Zakim IRC Bot: +dcharbon2 ←
14:02:02 <bglimm> Zakim, whi is on the phone?
Birte Glimm: Zakim, whi is on the phone? ←
14:02:02 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, bglimm.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, bglimm. ←
14:02:13 <bglimm> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Birte Glimm: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:02:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2 ←
14:02:56 <bglimm> ok, then we'll strat
Birte Glimm: ok, then we'll strat ←
14:02:59 <bglimm> start
Birte Glimm: start ←
14:03:47 <bglimm> scribe: bglimm
(Scribe set to Birte Glimm)
14:04:03 <bglimm> was that the right command?
was that the right command? ←
14:04:15 <AndyS> yes
Andy Seaborne: yes ←
14:04:32 <bglimm> Issue 28: Entailment regimes vs. update?
ISSUE-28: Entailment regimes vs. update? ←
14:04:37 <sandro> zakim, who is here?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is here? ←
14:04:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2 ←
14:04:38 <Zakim> On IRC I see bglimm, davidcharboneau, sandro, AndyS, RRSAgent, Zakim, ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bglimm, davidcharboneau, sandro, AndyS, RRSAgent, Zakim, ivan ←
14:05:19 <sandro> bglimm: Do all systems have to implement UPDATE? Maybe we can leave entailment + update undefined?
Birte Glimm: Do all systems have to implement UPDATE? Maybe we can leave entailment + update undefined? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:05:55 <bglimm> Sandro: Clearly there will be read-only end-point.
Sandro Hawke: Clearly there will be read-only end-point. ←
14:06:16 <bglimm> ... we do want to alow for the possibility of systems doing both entailment and update
... we do want to alow for the possibility of systems doing both entailment and update ←
14:07:48 <sandro> bglimm: with an OWL disjunction, how could you choose?
Birte Glimm: with an OWL disjunction, how could you choose? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:08:06 <bglimm> ... AndyS: Is there entailment in the pattern used in the query
... AndyS: Is there entailment in the pattern used in the query ←
14:10:10 <bglimm> Sandro: If the modified graph contains entailments, we probably don't want to use entailment, but if the modified graph is target of an insert that could be ok
Sandro Hawke: If the modified graph contains entailments, we probably don't want to use entailment, but if the modified graph is target of an insert that could be ok ←
14:11:23 <sandro> sandro: I think the main thing is: if the updated graph contains inference, implementations may reject the update, if they can't do it (the usual case).
Sandro Hawke: I think the main thing is: if the updated graph contains inference, implementations may reject the update, if they can't do it (the usual case). [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:12:17 <bglimm> AndyS: I would leave it to systems and not put a complete spec part into the entailment doc
Andy Seaborne: I would leave it to systems and not put a complete spec part into the entailment doc ←
14:12:20 <sandro> sandro: I think we should have a sentence like that somewhere.
Sandro Hawke: I think we should have a sentence like that somewhere. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:13:04 <AndyS> David, have we covered the point behind the issue?
Andy Seaborne: David, have we covered the point behind the issue? ←
14:13:33 <sandro> bglimm: Okay, settled.
Birte Glimm: Okay, settled. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:13:41 <AndyS> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/34
Andy Seaborne: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/34 ←
14:13:51 <sandro> topic: issue-34
14:14:01 <bglimm> [ISSUE 34]: How do entailment regimes interaction with
[ISSUE-34]: How do entailment regimes interaction with ←
14:14:01 <bglimm> aggregates, grouping, and blank nodes?
aggregates, grouping, and blank nodes? ←
14:14:33 <sandro> bglimm: For RDF and RDFS it's clear from the spec now.
Birte Glimm: For RDF and RDFS it's clear from the spec now. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:14:50 <sandro> bglimm: For OWL DS I'm just adding the ent. reg. spec. It's pretty much the same.
Birte Glimm: For OWL DS I'm just adding the ent. reg. spec. It's pretty much the same. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:15:04 <sandro> bglimm: close this issue?
Birte Glimm: close this issue? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:15:34 <sandro> andy: I don't understand why this issue mentions blank nodes
Andy Seaborne: I don't understand why this issue mentions blank nodes [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:16:10 <sandro> bglimm: It's kind of confused now yes. At the time, we weren't sure about counting blank nodes. Since we now limit bnodes to those that occured in original graph, that pretty much solves the issue.
Birte Glimm: It's kind of confused now yes. At the time, we weren't sure about counting blank nodes. Since we now limit bnodes to those that occured in original graph, that pretty much solves the issue. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:16:27 <bglimm> [ISSUE 42]: TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the
[ISSUE-42]: TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the ←
14:16:27 <bglimm> face of inconsistencies?
face of inconsistencies? ←
14:16:30 <sandro> andy: Yeah, at least makes it finite!
Andy Seaborne: Yeah, at least makes it finite! [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:16:37 <sandro> topic: issue-42
14:17:14 <sandro> bglimm: the MUST raise an error could be a problem to implement with good performance.
Birte Glimm: the MUST raise an error could be a problem to implement with good performance. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:17:32 <sandro> bglimm: such as in the face of join.
Birte Glimm: such as in the face of join. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:17:44 <sandro> bglimm: MAY raise it, SHOULD if they encounter it.
Birte Glimm: MAY raise it, SHOULD if they encounter it. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:19:08 <bglimm> bglimm: I'll write an email to record the decisions/discussions so Axel and Lee can decide to close them
Birte Glimm: I'll write an email to record the decisions/discussions so Axel and Lee can decide to close them ←
14:19:08 <AndyS> Check entailment: ASK { ?s ?p ?o }
Andy Seaborne: Check entailment: ASK { ?s ?p ?o } ←
14:20:52 <sandro> sandro: can we have a keyword or something so the client can demand a consistency check (to be accepted or rejected).
Sandro Hawke: can we have a keyword or something so the client can demand a consistency check (to be accepted or rejected). [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:21:19 <sandro> AndyS: There are other things you want, like asserting primitives during the duration of the query.
Andy Seaborne: There are other things you want, like asserting primitives during the duration of the query. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:21:38 <sandro> sandro: Fine. This could be added later.
Sandro Hawke: Fine. This could be added later. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:21:50 <sandro> AndyS: This is not the full API for a reasoning system.
Andy Seaborne: This is not the full API for a reasoning system. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:22:00 <bglimm> [ISSUE 43]: should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole
[ISSUE-43]: should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole ←
14:22:01 <bglimm> dataset or individual graphs?
dataset or individual graphs? ←
14:22:03 <sandro> bglimm: So we'll leave this for later.
Birte Glimm: So we'll leave this for later. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:22:16 <sandro> topic: issue-43
14:22:42 <sandro> bglimm: "endpoing does this entailment" in service description
Birte Glimm: "endpoing does this entailment" in service description [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:23:07 <sandro> bglimm: But you might want to query direct subclasses. one graph with simple entailment, another with rdfs entailment
Birte Glimm: But you might want to query direct subclasses. one graph with simple entailment, another with rdfs entailment [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:23:49 <sandro> AndyS: I think this is about service description, not the Entailment Document.
Andy Seaborne: I think this is about service description, not the Entailment Document. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:24:50 <sandro> sandro: I think the Entailment Document should make clear we expect endpoints to often have graphs with inference and graphs without inference.
Sandro Hawke: I think the Entailment Document should make clear we expect endpoints to often have graphs with inference and graphs without inference. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:25:04 <sandro> sandro: Yes, this is something service description shoudl do.
Sandro Hawke: Yes, this is something service description shoudl do. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:27:19 <bglimm> bglimm: Axel can do next Friday, so we could do another telcon next Friday no RIF
Birte Glimm: Axel can do next Friday, so we could do another telcon next Friday no RIF ←
14:28:29 <bglimm> Sandro: Some RIF dialects are not based on model theory
Sandro Hawke: Some RIF dialects are not based on model theory ←
14:29:01 <bglimm> ... they are not really entailments, but they behave in a sense like entailments
... they are not really entailments, but they behave in a sense like entailments ←
14:30:25 <bglimm> Sandro: Sometimes you want an endpoint that does just RIF and sometimes you want to have entailment wrt a particular rule set
Sandro Hawke: Sometimes you want an endpoint that does just RIF and sometimes you want to have entailment wrt a particular rule set ←
14:30:48 <bglimm> AndyS: This can be computationally hard.
Andy Seaborne: This can be computationally hard. ←
14:31:16 <bglimm> ... you can use different graphs in your data set that have the features you want.
... you can use different graphs in your data set that have the features you want. ←
14:31:52 <bglimm> Sandro: Can we add something to the language or protocol to specify what rule set to use? So that the client can say what it wants.
Sandro Hawke: Can we add something to the language or protocol to specify what rule set to use? So that the client can say what it wants. ←
14:32:08 <bglimm> AndyS: That goes into content/entailment negotiation.
Andy Seaborne: That goes into content/entailment negotiation. ←
14:32:30 <bglimm> ...: The server could declare what it can do and the client can decide whether that is ok or not
...: The server could declare what it can do and the client can decide whether that is ok or not ←
14:33:24 <bglimm> AndyS: It would require changes in several places to give the client the ability to ask for a particular rule set to be used
Andy Seaborne: It would require changes in several places to give the client the ability to ask for a particular rule set to be used ←
14:33:50 <sandro> sandro: not sure if it's important to have a way for the client to ask for particular inference, or just use service description.
Sandro Hawke: not sure if it's important to have a way for the client to ask for particular inference, or just use service description. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:34:54 <bglimm> Sandro: we should get a note for RIF to et RIF into a kind of graph format
Sandro Hawke: we should get a note for RIF to et RIF into a kind of graph format ←
14:34:59 <sandro> sandro: one way for now is by naming a graph....
Sandro Hawke: one way for now is by naming a graph.... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:35:29 <sandro> sandro: We can probably get a RIF Note with rif:import, so you can name a graph that has that.
Sandro Hawke: We can probably get a RIF Note with rif:import, so you can name a graph that has that. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:35:35 <sandro> bglimm: solves part of the problem.
Birte Glimm: solves part of the problem. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:36:22 <sandro> topic: non-monotonic logics
14:36:32 <sandro> bglimm: I've been ignoring it.
Birte Glimm: I've been ignoring it. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:36:47 <sandro> AndyS: I think that's our only terminating decision.
Andy Seaborne: I think that's our only terminating decision. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:37:41 <sandro> bglimm: I'm happy to have a co-editor who can address non-mon. Not good thing for me to address.
Birte Glimm: I'm happy to have a co-editor who can address non-mon. Not good thing for me to address. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:38:07 <bglimm> Sandro: I think there is only one person from RIF who could really do that
Sandro Hawke: I think there is only one person from RIF who could really do that ←
14:38:36 <bglimm> ... there are production rules which have no model theory
... there are production rules which have no model theory ←
14:38:56 <bglimm> AndyS: For production rules there is not even work on conjunctive queries
Andy Seaborne: For production rules there is not even work on conjunctive queries ←
14:38:56 <sandro> andy: PRD: no notion of answering a conjunctive query.
Andy Seaborne: PRD: no notion of answering a conjunctive query. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:39:00 <sandro> sandro: Right....
Sandro Hawke: Right.... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:39:17 <sandro> andy: I'd like to see some pre-work there.
Andy Seaborne: I'd like to see some pre-work there. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:39:33 <sandro> sandro: I agree... someone who knows and cares about that stuff needs to do some work there.
Sandro Hawke: I agree... someone who knows and cares about that stuff needs to do some work there. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:39:50 <sandro> bglimm: it wont go into this round unless someone else comes in to work on it.
Birte Glimm: it wont go into this round unless someone else comes in to work on it. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:39:58 <sandro> sandro: okay.
Sandro Hawke: okay. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:40:10 <bglimm> bglimm: Anything else for RIF?
Birte Glimm: Anything else for RIF? ←
14:40:34 <sandro> topic: OWL entailment, Direct Semantics
14:40:52 <sandro> bglimm: Not all axioms carry semantics, but users want to query them. eg annotations.
Birte Glimm: Not all axioms carry semantics, but users want to query them. eg annotations. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:41:34 <sandro> bglimm: Maybe: say use DS for axioms that carry semantics,and simple entailment for non-logic axioms. So users can still query for annotations.
Birte Glimm: Maybe: say use DS for axioms that carry semantics,and simple entailment for non-logic axioms. So users can still query for annotations. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:42:33 <sandro> AndyS: Sounds good to me. Linked between the two partitions could be problematic.
Andy Seaborne: Sounds good to me. Linked between the two partitions could be problematic. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:42:43 <sandro> bglimm: need to do one part.
Birte Glimm: need to do one part. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:43:05 <bglimm> Sandro: Another way would be to let the client do.
Sandro Hawke: Another way would be to let the client do. ←
14:46:11 <sandro> sandro: If it works, and PFPS is okay with it, then great. Otherwise, fall back on the two-graphs approach.
Sandro Hawke: If it works, and PFPS is okay with it, then great. Otherwise, fall back on the two-graphs approach. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:46:49 <AndyS> I can't make next Friday.
Andy Seaborne: I can't make next Friday. ←
14:46:57 <sandro> next meeting: tentative next friday, cancel if no business
Sandro Hawke: next meeting: tentative next friday, cancel if no business ←
14:48:16 <sandro> bglimm: I'll send e-mail summarizing these matters, and let the chairs figure out whether/how to close issues
Birte Glimm: I'll send e-mail summarizing these matters, and let the chairs figure out whether/how to close issues [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:48:32 <sandro> AndyS: OR, since this is time-permitting, and we're doing it outside the WG, ...
Andy Seaborne: OR, since this is time-permitting, and we're doing it outside the WG, ... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:49:03 <Zakim> -dcharbon2
Zakim IRC Bot: -dcharbon2 ←
14:49:05 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
14:49:07 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
14:49:08 <Zakim> -bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: -bglimm ←
14:49:08 <Zakim> Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has ended ←
14:49:09 <Zakim> Attendees were AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2 ←
14:49:31 <sandro> nice timing, bijan :-)
Sandro Hawke: nice timing, bijan :-) ←
14:49:44 <sandro> <Zakim> Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has ended
Sandro Hawke: <Zakim> Team_(sparql-ent)14:00Z has ended ←
14:49:44 <sandro> <Zakim> Attendees were AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2
Sandro Hawke: <Zakim> Attendees were AndyS, Sandro, bglimm, dcharbon2 ←
14:49:44 <sandro> --> bijan (bparsia@130.88.198.12) has joined #sparql-ent
Sandro Hawke: --> bijan (bparsia@130.88.198.12) has joined #sparql-ent ←
14:49:48 <bijan> Are you just wrapping up ?:)
Bijan Parsia: Are you just wrapping up ?:) ←
14:49:54 <bglimm> yes, all done
yes, all done ←
14:49:57 <sandro> we hung about about 15 seconds ago.
Sandro Hawke: we hung about about 15 seconds ago. ←
14:49:58 <bijan> Sorry, my meeting ran over :(
Bijan Parsia: Sorry, my meeting ran over :( ←
14:49:59 <bijan> Ok
Bijan Parsia: Ok ←
14:50:01 <bijan> Cool
Bijan Parsia: Cool ←
14:50:02 <bijan> sorry
Bijan Parsia: sorry ←
14:50:05 <AndyS> GMT Bijan.
Andy Seaborne: GMT Bijan. ←
14:50:23 <bijan> Yes, I'm still wrongtimed
Bijan Parsia: Yes, I'm still wrongtimed ←
14:50:23 <AndyS> You still on summer time? :-)
Andy Seaborne: You still on summer time? :-) ←
14:50:31 <bijan> Well, Zoe was in the states
Bijan Parsia: Well, Zoe was in the states ←
14:50:34 <bijan> but they shifted too
Bijan Parsia: but they shifted too ←
14:50:36 <bijan> so i have no excuse
Bijan Parsia: so i have no excuse ←
14:50:38 <bglimm> rrsagent, make records public
rrsagent, make records public ←
14:50:58 <bijan> I was talking to someone about experiment design and got distracted
Bijan Parsia: I was talking to someone about experiment design and got distracted ←
14:51:28 <bijan> Oh well. I'll look at the minutes. sorry for flaking out
Bijan Parsia: Oh well. I'll look at the minutes. sorry for flaking out ←
14:51:30 <bglimm> Sandro, are you still there?
Sandro, are you still there? ←
14:51:33 <sandro> yes.
Sandro Hawke: yes. ←
14:51:44 <bglimm> How can I get the minutes into the wiki?
How can I get the minutes into the wiki? ←
14:52:01 <sandro> ummmmm. I'll do it. hold on.
Sandro Hawke: ummmmm. I'll do it. hold on. ←
14:52:06 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
14:52:06 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc#T14-52-06
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc#T14-52-06 ←
14:52:10 <bglimm> With the control centre, I tried URL http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc but it did not work
With the control centre, I tried URL http://www.w3.org/2009/11/13-sparql-ent-irc but it did not work ←
14:52:36 <sandro> yeah, because this is on a different channel, it thinks this is a task force, and the minutes should go into a different series.
Sandro Hawke: yeah, because this is on a different channel, it thinks this is a task force, and the minutes should go into a different series. ←
14:52:54 <sandro> I'm trying to decide whether to really make it a task force, or pretend it was a real sparql meeting.
Sandro Hawke: I'm trying to decide whether to really make it a task force, or pretend it was a real sparql meeting. ←
14:53:06 <ivanh> ivan has left #sparql-ent
Ivan Herman: ivan has left #sparql-ent ←
14:53:16 <bglimm> Hm,
Hm, ←
14:53:25 <bglimm> is task force complicated?
is task force complicated? ←
14:53:44 <sandro> Not sure. :-) I'll try and see if I still remember how to do it. :-)
Sandro Hawke: Not sure. :-) I'll try and see if I still remember how to do it. :-) ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2009-11-13 16:31:32 UTC by 'unknown', comments: 'saving'