Chatlog 2009-09-29

From SPARQL Working Group
Jump to: navigation, search

See original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

13:51:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:51:01 <RRSAgent> logging to
13:51:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:51:03 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sparql
13:51:05 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
13:51:06 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:51:06 <trackbot> Date: 29 September 2009
13:51:07 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
13:51:23 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
13:51:28 <LeeF> Regrets: SimonS
13:51:47 <LeeF> Agenda:
13:52:03 <LeeF> LeeF has changed the topic to: Agenda:
13:56:32 <SteveH> they will now :)
13:56:42 <LeeF> Not once I play my Jedi mind tricks.
13:56:48 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:56:55 <Zakim> +??P4
13:57:20 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P4 is [Garlik]
13:57:20 <Zakim> +[Garlik]; got it
13:57:21 <Zakim> +LeeF
13:57:43 <chimezie> chimezie has joined #sparql
13:57:58 <Zakim> +kasei
13:58:01 <chimezie> Zakim, what is the passcode?
13:58:02 <Zakim> the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), chimezie
13:58:03 <Zakim> +OlivierCorby
13:58:34 <kasei> Zakim, mute me
13:58:34 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted
13:58:35 <Zakim> +Chimezie_Ogbuji
13:58:55 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
13:58:55 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
13:59:36 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me
13:59:36 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
13:59:46 <LeeF> Scribe: Chimezie
13:59:48 <LeeF> Scribenick: chimezie
13:59:58 <Zakim> +bglimm
14:00:02 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:00:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm
14:00:08 <bglimm> bglimm has joined #SPARQL
14:00:23 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres
14:00:24 <bglimm> I can hear you
14:00:35 <Zakim> +??P38
14:00:47 <Zakim> +pgearon
14:00:49 <AndyS> zakim, ??P38 is me
14:00:49 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
14:00:52 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
14:00:52 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
14:00:56 <SimonKJ> SimonKJ has joined #sparql
14:01:28 <chimezie> Zakim, who is here?
14:01:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon
14:01:30 <Zakim> On IRC I see SimonKJ, bglimm, chimezie, Zakim, RRSAgent, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, LeeF, AxelPolleres, karl, LukeWM, ivanh, danbri, iv_an_ru, SteveH, kjetil, AlexPassant, kasei,
14:01:32 <Zakim> ... KjetilK, trackbot, ericP
14:01:40 <LeeF> ericP, joining us?
14:01:44 <LeeF> ivanh, joining us?
14:01:47 <LeeF> iv_an_ru, joining us?
14:01:53 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
14:01:53 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
14:02:04 <LeeF> kjetil, joining us?
14:02:07 <ivanh> zakim, dial ivanh-voip
14:02:07 <Zakim> ok, ivanh; the call is being made
14:02:08 <Zakim> +IvanH
14:02:18 <ivanh> LeeF: yes:-)
14:02:21 <Zakim> +EricP
14:02:22 <Zakim> +??P1
14:02:26 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??P1 is me
14:02:26 <Zakim> +AlexPassant; got it
14:02:56 <Zakim> +SimonKJ
14:03:15 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:03:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon, IvanH, AlexPassant, EricP, SimonKJ
14:04:12 <LeeF> topic: Admin
14:04:13 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at
14:04:19 <Zakim> + +1.617.588.aaaa - is perhaps manrique?
14:04:40 <LeeF> zakim, aaaa is Orri
14:04:40 <Zakim> sorry, LeeF, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
14:04:45 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:04:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei (muted), OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon, IvanH, AlexPassant, EricP, SimonKJ, manrique?
14:04:50 <LeeF> zakim, manrique? is Orri
14:04:50 <Zakim> +Orri; got it
14:05:08 <SteveH> minutes look fine
14:05:10 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at
14:05:40 <LeeF> next meeting is October 6 same time
14:06:00 <chimezie> LeeF:Axel to chair next week
14:06:04 <bglimm> I cannot make it
14:06:10 <LeeF> regrets for next week: bglimm, leef, and ericp at risk
14:06:11 <bglimm> next week (travelling)
14:06:37 <chimezie> unknown speaker (maybe ericP):anyone else making ISWC meeting?
14:06:40 <bglimm> s/travellking/travelling/
14:06:55 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #sparql
14:07:00 <AxelPolleres> good idea to meet up @ ISWC, maybe we shall collect who's there
14:07:05 <chimezie> s/speaker/pgearon
14:07:06 <chimezie> ty
14:07:16 <LeeF>
14:08:09 <chimezie> LeeF: want to start putting together agenda and logistics for F2F
14:08:19 <AxelPolleres> collected so far planning to go to ISWC: steveH, chime, LeeF, AxelP
14:08:27 <chimezie> ... need to know RSVP
14:08:44 <SteveH> AlexPassant, also Greg Williams
14:09:00 <chimezie> LeeF:All organizations need to re-join group
14:09:06 <SteveH> AxelPolleres, and ericP
14:09:31 <LeeF> topic: Liaisons
14:09:38 <SteveH> LeeF, do you have a list of who's not rejoined?
14:09:45 <ericP> nothing from XQuery or HCLS
14:09:57 <ivanH> OWL is now really in PR
14:10:00 <AxelPolleres> riff is meeting today, but didn't have meeting last week
14:10:00 <LeeF> SteveH, good question - I don't offhand but imagine ivanh might be able to compile one?
14:10:08 <AxelPolleres> s/riff/RIF/
14:10:36 <chimezie> LeeF: Eric ask HCLS about F2F meeting at ISWC
14:10:50 <chimezie> ericP: probably will involve usecases for distributed query and update
14:11:35 <chimezie> LeeF:open actions
14:11:52 <chimezie> Ori: who is leading RDB2RDF?
14:11:53 <LeeF> topic: actions & issues
14:12:08 <chimezie> s/Ori/Orri
14:12:12 <ivanh> To Orri: Harry Halpin Staff Contact, Ahmed Ezzat HP, Michael Hausenblas DERI
14:12:14 <AndyS>
14:12:50 <chimezie> LeeF: looking at errata.  Only looking at the diff
14:13:05 <chimezie> ... *then* merge content.
14:13:22 <SteveH> yes
14:13:39 <AxelPolleres>
14:13:48 <chimezie> LeeF: looked at open issues  - summarizing state of issues
14:13:55 <LeeF> issues summary -
14:14:39 <chimezie> ... will propose to resolve some issues (perhaps next week).
14:14:46 <AndyS> I took a look and they looked fine.
14:15:11 <AxelPolleres> q+ to report on ACTION-98
14:15:18 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
14:15:18 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to report on ACTION-98
14:15:30 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me
14:15:31 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
14:15:37 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-98
14:15:37 <trackbot> ACTION-98 Ask ivanh/eric whether we need to mention time permitting features in FPWD. closed
14:16:56 <chimezie> ACTION-78 & ACTION-79 probably should be closed (can't go further)
14:17:05 <chimezie> w/out something to review, etc.
14:17:20 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-78
14:17:20 <trackbot> ACTION-78 Continue discussion of update= vs. query= on the mailing list closed
14:17:31 <Zakim> +??P43
14:17:32 <chimezie> LeeF: Simon and I will work into update document
14:17:35 <SteveH> q+
14:17:39 <KjetilK> Zakim, ??P43 is me
14:17:39 <Zakim> +KjetilK; got it
14:17:52 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me
14:17:52 <Zakim> KjetilK should now be muted
14:18:19 <chimezie> SteveH: investigate use of single verb
14:18:26 <chimezie> ... for HAVING/FILTER
14:18:49 <LeeF> let's talk about HAVING vs. FILTER later
14:18:50 <chimezie> LeeF: will discuss aggregate issue later today
14:18:53 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-78
14:18:53 <trackbot> ACTION-78 Continue discussion of update= vs. query= on the mailing list closed
14:19:02 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-79
14:19:03 <trackbot> ACTION-79 Continue forward with aggregates w.r.t test cases, HAVING/FILTER clause, ISSUE-35, ... closed
14:19:22 <chimezie> LeeF: any other action to close?
14:19:48 <chimezie> ... Andy asked about tracking issues in task forces
14:20:03 <chimezie> LeeF: Chairs will monitor and will elevate outstanding issues
14:20:30 <Zakim> -EricP
14:20:34 <chimezie> ... scalability concerns, etc..
14:20:42 <Zakim> +EricP
14:21:06 <chimezie> ... members bring forth issues if they think they need to be raised.  does that work?
14:21:07 <ericP> +1
14:21:09 <bglimm> +1
14:21:11 <SteveH> +1
14:21:24 <AndyS> +1 (label issues with TF-XXX?)
14:21:32 <bglimm> we could use a prefix, like for emails
14:21:46 <AxelPolleres> +1 (good idea to label)
14:22:00 <LeeF> topic: FPWDs
14:22:21 <Zakim> +Prateek
14:23:03 <chimezie> LeeF: (to team contacts). How do reviewers raise technical issues? What should reviewers look for towards FPWD
14:23:06 <ericP> +1
14:23:10 <AndyS> DAWG?
14:24:02 <chimezie> IvanH: there is no obvious process other than general formatting, etc. nothing specific
14:24:46 <AxelPolleres> to be checked technical issues, abstract, formatting
14:25:02 <SteveH>
14:25:29 <Prateek> Prateek has joined #sparql
14:25:32 <AxelPolleres> Reviewers for query from last time: birte, Lee 
14:25:37 <bglimm> I volunteered 
14:26:05 <chimezie> SteveH: no mention of aggregate functions.  generally rough.  grammar needs cleaning up
14:26:19 <chimezie> LeeF: have open issue regarding exact collection of aggregate functions.  COUNT, etc..
14:27:21 <chimezie> AndyS: do we want to freeze that? I wanted to flesh out content
14:27:27 <SteveH> q+
14:27:34 <chimezie> LeeF: for FPWD , I'm not concerned about a frozen version
14:28:02 <LeeF> ack SteveH
14:28:18 <chimezie> SteveH: not happy having email address on document
14:28:26 <chimezie> ... can I have link to a home page instead?
14:28:34 <LeeF> ACTION: Birte to review for FPWD readiness
14:28:34 <trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Review for FPWD readiness [on Birte Glimm - due 2009-10-06].
14:28:37 <bglimm> ok
14:28:39 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to review for FPWD readiness
14:28:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Review for FPWD readiness [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06].
14:28:51 <LeeF>
14:29:17 <AxelPolleres> reviewers for SPARQL/Update: Steve, Luke, Lee
14:29:24 <chimezie> pgearon: was unavailable
14:29:48 <AxelPolleres> I actually missed my own volunteering on reviewing Query... adding action...
14:30:01 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel o review for FPWD readiness
14:30:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - O review for FPWD readiness [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-10-06].
14:30:01 <chimezie> pgearon: I will catch up with other editor
14:30:32 <LeeF> ACTION: Paul to notify Steve, Luke, and Lee when /Update is ready for FPWD review
14:30:33 <trackbot> Created ACTION-102 - Notify Steve, Luke, and Lee when /Update is ready for FPWD review [on Paul Gearon - due 2009-10-06].
14:31:05 <chimezie> LeeF: simon and i discussed the protocol document and sent course of action to list
14:31:18 <chimezie> ... waiting on simon to get setup with CVS access
14:31:18 <AndyS> q+
14:31:38 <AxelPolleres> reviewers for http-update: simonKJ, simonS, Lee
14:31:48 <AxelPolleres> reviewers for protocol-1.1: Axel Alex
14:31:53 <LeeF>
14:32:17 <chimezie> LeeF: a few areas about lack of support for XSLT
14:32:33 <LeeF> q?
14:32:45 <chimezie> ericP: need to extend the 'standard'..
14:33:32 <LeeF> ACTION: Simon Johnston and Lee to notify Axel and Alex when /Protocol is ready for FPWD review
14:33:32 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Simon
14:33:32 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. sjohnsto2, sschenk)
14:33:42 <LeeF> ACTION: sjohnsto2 and Lee to notify Axel and Alex when /Protocol is ready for FPWD review
14:33:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-103 - And Lee to notify Axel and Alex when /Protocol is ready for FPWD review [on Simon Johnston - due 2009-10-06].
14:34:00 <LeeF> ack AndyS
14:34:11 <chimezie> AndyS: converting query 1.0 document to XML format 
14:34:26 <LeeF> Gist of current discussion is that we're editing the docs in XML and the xml-spec XSL needs to be updated to support all the XML tags we use before we actually publish the docs
14:34:33 <chimezie> ericP: brought text into emacs, then did REGEX s/repl on various elements
14:34:56 <chimezie> ... no references
14:35:09 <chimezie> AndyS: how are you doing that?
14:36:01 <LeeF> ACTION: eric to xml-spec'ify the SPARQL Query/1.0 document
14:36:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-104 - Xml-spec'ify the SPARQL Query/1.0 document [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2009-10-06].
14:37:18 <chimezie> ericP: [.. gives instructions to AndyS .. for XML processing infrastructure ]
14:37:50 <SimonKJ> q+
14:37:55 <LeeF>
14:38:04 <LeeF> ack SimonKJ
14:38:34 <chimezie> SimonKJ: What browsers should be used with that (problems in safari / chrome)
14:38:45 <chimezie> ericP: depends on stylesheet implementation
14:39:00 <LeeF>
14:39:05 <SimonKJ> confirmed, renders correctly in Firefox
14:40:45 <AndyS> I'll review formally and write email.
14:40:54 <LeeF> Andy, thanks
14:41:02 <LeeF> SteveH and kjetil, are you interested in reviewing it?
14:41:19 <KjetilK> Zakim, unmute me
14:41:19 <Zakim> KjetilK should no longer be muted
14:41:58 <AxelPolleres> reviewers (from last time) for http-update: member:simonKJ, simonS, Lee
14:42:47 <chimezie> LeeF: [ .. asks around for reviewers .. ]
14:42:54 <chimezie> simonK: happy to review
14:43:10 <LeeF> ACTION: Andy to review
14:43:10 <trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Review [on Andy Seaborne - due 2009-10-06].
14:43:16 <KjetilK> q+
14:43:17 <chimezie> ty
14:43:51 <chimezie> KjetilK: been outside of group and remembered simon and I had opposing proposals for update
14:44:01 <LeeF> ACTION: sjohnsto2 to review
14:44:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Review [on Simon Johnston - due 2009-10-06].
14:44:04 <chimezie> LeeF: hopefully review raises those issues
14:44:12 <LeeF> ACTION: kjetil to review
14:44:12 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - kjetil
14:44:16 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me
14:44:16 <Zakim> KjetilK should now be muted
14:44:19 <KjetilK> Zakim, unmute me
14:44:19 <Zakim> KjetilK should no longer be muted
14:44:30 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to make sure that Kjetil reviews
14:44:30 <trackbot> Created ACTION-107 - Make sure that Kjetil reviews [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06].
14:44:31 <AndyS> chimezie, do you prefer commenst as ready or all at once?
14:44:38 <KjetilK> Zakim, mute me
14:44:38 <Zakim> KjetilK should now be muted
14:44:48 <chimezie> I prefer all at once
14:44:56 <AndyS> OK - will batch
14:47:32 <kasei> Zakim, unmute me
14:47:32 <Zakim> kasei should no longer be muted
14:47:55 <kasei> sketch of service description doc:
14:48:51 <LeeF> AxelPolleres, who were our reviewers signed up for SD?
14:49:22 <chimezie> kasei: format needs fleshing out.
14:49:29 <chimezie> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:49:29 <Zakim> On the phone I see [Garlik], LeeF, kasei, OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm (muted), AxelPolleres, AndyS, pgearon, Ivanh, AlexPassant, EricP, SimonKJ, Orri, KjetilK (muted),
14:49:32 <Zakim> ... Prateek
14:49:34 <chimezie> LeeF: any completeness issues
14:49:56 <chimezie> kasei: if everyone is onboard with email proposal (limiting scope of vocabulary), 
14:50:20 <chimezie> ... only big issue is fleshed out discussion of discovery (conneg, RDFa, etc.).  no missing parts, however
14:50:25 <chimezie> LeeF: get people reviewing
14:51:14 <LeeF> ACTION: sjohnsto2 to review for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting)
14:51:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-108 - Review for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) [on Simon Johnston - due 2009-10-06].
14:51:24 <LeeF> ACTION: Axel to review for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting)
14:51:24 <trackbot> Created ACTION-109 - Review for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-10-06].
14:51:39 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to review for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting)
14:51:40 <trackbot> Created ACTION-110 - Review for FPWD readiness (modulo formatting) [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06].
14:52:37 <chimezie> topic: TF-PP starting points 
14:52:37 <AxelPolleres> +1 to pull PP forward, didn't really have a chance to prepare on Entailment yet, my bad.
14:52:41 <chimezie> LeeF: happy with email responses?
14:52:49 <chimezie> AndyS: fine on mailing list
14:53:40 <SteveH> I'd like to hear from implementors
14:53:41 <chimezie> LeeF: any other issues beyond email dialog?
14:53:58 <SteveH> also, I think my vote for 2 goes from 0 to -1, I've heard scary things
14:54:09 <kasei> Zakim, mute me
14:54:09 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted
14:54:37 <chimezie> topic: TF-ENT issues 
14:54:45 <bglimm>
14:54:59 <bglimm> There is quite a bit to do still
14:55:36 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me
14:55:36 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted
14:55:47 <chimezie> LeeF: AndyS asked about requirements
14:56:20 <chimezie> ... how do we (in timely fashion) to where we are in agreement on requirements
14:56:25 <bglimm> q+ to ask about SHOULD MUST or MAY
14:56:28 <chimezie> ... and what problem we are trying to solve
14:56:31 <KjetilK> q-
14:56:38 <LeeF> ack bglimm
14:56:38 <Zakim> bglimm, you wanted to ask about SHOULD MUST or MAY
14:57:02 <chimezie> bglimm: one argument was regarding consistency tests for RDFS.  inconsistent KB or RDFS graph would entail any consequence
14:57:07 <chimezie> ... andy suggested turning into MAY
14:57:19 <chimezie> ... against RDFS entailment.  SHOULD is preferred
14:57:40 <pgearon> +q
14:57:50 <chimezie> AndyS: initial question is regarding what we are addressing
14:58:09 <chimezie> i think the usecase addressed is well motivated by current document
14:58:09 <bglimm> well, we want RDFS entailment and we want scalable
14:58:18 <AxelPolleres> q+
14:58:37 <chimezie> AndyS: are we enabling rule-based engines.  what happens about lack of soundess/completeness?
14:59:20 <chimezie> i.e., lack of additional answers that follow from more than explicit matching (i.e., vocabulary based interpretations)
14:59:36 <bglimm> I think we can have something like OWL RL, but I would like to give explanations on when implementations are incomplete
15:00:04 <AxelPolleres> q-
15:00:14 <AxelPolleres> (will do this on the mailinglist)
15:00:16 <chimezie> pgearon: concerned about practical aspects of inconsistent RDF graph returning everythin
15:00:36 <chimezie> ... w/out sufficient bindings, alot of patterns could theoretically return infinite set (won't make much sense)
15:00:44 <AxelPolleres> q+ to now still mention something.
15:00:45 <Zakim> -Orri
15:01:13 <chimezie> ... not sure how infinite set will work
15:01:29 <bglimm> Yes, as I understand Andy, he said that he can guarantee that he would either return some answers (which are sound) and then stop without finding the inconsistency or he finds it and then stops
15:01:37 <chimezie> we already require that queries are safe WRT current SPARQL
15:01:38 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
15:01:38 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to now still mention something.
15:01:44 <LeeF> ack pgearon
15:02:04 <bglimm> yes
15:02:09 <AndyS> bglimm, no.
15:02:20 <bglimm> ok, explain
15:02:30 <chimezie> AxelPolleres: legal graphs are RDFS consistent..already prescribed.
15:02:54 <chimezie> AndyS: i want a list of requirements to measure design against
15:03:08 <ivanh> q+
15:03:09 <chimezie> q+ dont' we already have requiremnts?
15:04:18 <ivanh> q-
15:04:25 <LeeF> q= chimezie
15:04:26 <chimezie> AndyS: we need to consider protocol implications
15:04:28 <LeeF> q+ chimezie
15:04:42 <ivanh> q+
15:05:01 <chimezie> bglimm: non terminating system will seem 'okay' 
15:05:13 <LeeF> ack chimezie
15:05:58 <bglimm> Yes, and one thing is that entailment regimes must say how they guarantee that a system will always return a finite set of answers
15:06:22 <bglimm> There is a list of 4 requirements that entailment regimes must specify
15:06:45 <bglimm> Yes, you can allow incomplete systems, for example
15:08:01 <AxelPolleres> "The effect of a query on an inconsistent graph is not covered by this specification, but must be specified by the particular SPARQL extension." is all I find in the current spec.
15:08:09 <LeeF> ack ivanh
15:08:25 <AxelPolleres> ... but this suggests that we have to define a behavior.
15:08:25 <AxelPolleres>  
15:08:44 <chimezie> bglimm: is this the case that a claim about error is not required in addition to the guarantee of safe queries?
15:08:48 <AxelPolleres> ayways, I think for FPWD, it is enough to list the options.
15:09:01 <LeeF> ISSUE: TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the face of inconsistencies?
15:09:01 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-42 - TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the face of inconsistencies? ; please complete additional details at .
15:09:06 <chimezie> er.. i didn't mean to scribe that in such a way
15:09:13 <chimezie> s/bglimm:/bglimm,
15:09:34 <chimezie> AndyS: talking about if we must check for inconsistency *before* answering the question?
15:09:41 <bglimm> I agree with Ivanh
15:09:49 <chimezie> Ivanh: valid question, need to answer it
15:09:50 <LeeF> related to ISSUE-42: Related - do you have to check a graph for consistency to deliver answers for RDFS entailment
15:09:50 <trackbot> ISSUE-42 TF-ENT What should happen for RDFS entailment in the face of inconsistencies? notes added
15:10:10 <chimezie> Ivanh: shouldn't be part of the document
15:10:23 <chimezie> AndyS: want a requirements phase/discussion
15:10:58 <chimezie> If we tease out error handling, expectation, safety of queries, this might clarify the discussion
15:11:40 <bglimm> Andy, I did send this around to get feedback. If you say that some aspect causes difficulties with certain implementation techniques that is valueable feedback, but please explain what actually is the problem, what ways do we have to solve that etc
15:12:28 <kasei> I share Andy's concerns.
15:12:38 <pgearon> +1
15:12:57 <chimezie> for BGP queries solved in a top-down fashion, you aren't doing validity checking, but are answering a question against a known fact base
15:13:08 <AxelPolleres> I see here the following options: the current spec just says that the effect has to be specified, it doesn't prescribe that these could be specified as implementation-dependent. Let's just summarize the options for FPWD. 
15:13:08 <ivanh> for the records: I do share Andy's technical concerns!
15:13:57 <chimezie> LeeF: was suggesting we proceed in a way to better collect requirements
15:13:57 <SteveH> q+
15:14:09 <chimezie> AndyS: happy if requirements phase is not explicit
15:14:09 <LeeF> q?
15:14:21 <LeeF> ack SteveH
15:14:54 <chimezie> SteveH: shares Andy's concern it is not obvious what kind of systems are being targeted by current proposal
15:15:32 <chimezie> bglimm: The systems will be different.  I'm using OWL reasoner - different approach .  if there are wording problems let me know 
15:15:40 <ivanh> q+
15:17:32 <chimezie> LeeF: first time around, specification defines answers.  
15:17:50 <chimezie> ... then while debating technical points.  arguements were based on implementation technique
15:18:33 <kasei> I thought that's just what Andy has done... (?)
15:19:01 <LeeF> kasei, right, i think that's exactly what Andy has done
15:19:17 <chimezie> LeeF: i might not be able to scribe too much longer :(
15:19:26 <LeeF> chimezie, no prob - thanks for scribing
15:19:29 <chimezie> Ivanh: should i as an implementor check consistency and what do I do if I find them?
15:19:34 <AxelPolleres> I can take over...
15:19:51 <AxelPolleres> scribe: Axel Polleres
15:20:15 <LukeWM> 90 minutes is a long time, chimezie
15:20:31 <AxelPolleres> Ivanh: 2 questions, a) should inconsistency always be checked b) what is to be done in case
15:20:47 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: Birte can you summarize these?
15:20:47 <LeeF> q?
15:20:49 <LeeF> ack ivanh
15:21:18 <ivanh> q+
15:21:28 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: we need more formal reviews.
15:21:42 <AxelPolleres> ... what's ready to review.
15:21:54 <AxelPolleres> Birte: only RDFS part ready for review.
15:22:16 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: happy to wait.
15:22:40 <AxelPolleres> Birte: Let's reach more agreement on RDFS first.
15:23:19 <AxelPolleres> Andy & Birte discussing whether MUST->MAY is sufficient or not.
15:23:32 <AxelPolleres> q+
15:24:06 <AxelPolleres> ivanh: ready to review, but next week is difficult, question of timing. 
15:24:16 <LeeF> ACTION: ivanh to review RDFS part of as time permits him
15:24:16 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - ivanh
15:24:16 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ivanh, imikhail)
15:24:20 <chimezie> bglimm: if a system is doing proper RDFS consistency checking, this is at least a superset of what it needs to do in order to answer queries (even semi-niavely)
15:24:23 <LeeF> ACTION: ivanh to review RDFS part of as time permits him
15:24:23 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - ivanh
15:24:31 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to make sure IvanH reviews RDFS part of as time permits him
15:24:31 <trackbot> Created ACTION-111 - Make sure IvanH reviews RDFS part of as time permits him [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-10-06].
15:24:47 <AxelPolleres> ... another thing which should be mentioned is RIF and OWL RL.
15:24:49 <bglimm> I added a template section for RIF and OWL RL
15:25:02 <AndyS> Suggest an example with a simple case like subClassOf (editorial)
15:25:08 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: agreed.
15:25:10 <bglimm> and D-etnailemnt
15:25:22 <LeeF> q?
15:25:24 <Zakim> -Chimezie_Ogbuji
15:25:25 <LeeF> ack ivanh
15:26:09 <AxelPolleres> Axel: will try to add something on the RIF part.
15:26:26 <AxelPolleres> ... and give the remaining doc a thorough review.
15:26:50 <AxelPolleres> LeeF: looks like we are on track for the rquired docs with regards reviews
15:27:09 <AxelPolleres> ... F&R should be possible to publish without too much discussion.
15:27:21 <AxelPolleres> ... 90mins is long.
15:27:59 <bglimm> I think I can write mine until Monday and send it by email, but I'll be away on Tuesday
15:28:27 <SteveH> I can't do anything my monday either
15:28:28 <Zakim> -Ivanh
15:28:31 <SteveH> by
15:28:49 <ericP>
15:28:50 <LeeF> AxelPolleres, any chance you can do the minutes dance?
15:28:54 <bglimm> bye
15:28:57 <AxelPolleres> Axel: All who volunteered for reviews, please try to have them ready for discussion by next week, we will discuss whatever is ready/reviewed already.
15:28:58 <Zakim> -bglimm
15:29:09 <AxelPolleres> lee, can do, no prob.
15:29:09 <Zakim> -pgearon
15:29:14 <Zakim> -Prateek
15:29:16 <SteveH> it's not legal xml.... ok
15:29:16 <LeeF> related to ACTION-104: See
15:29:16 <trackbot> ACTION-104 Xml-spec'ify the SPARQL Query/1.0 document notes added
15:29:20 <LeeF> trackbot, close ACTION-104
15:29:20 <trackbot> ACTION-104 Xml-spec'ify the SPARQL Query/1.0 document closed
15:29:33 <Zakim> -EricP
15:29:33 <SteveH> bye
15:29:34 <Zakim> -LeeF
15:29:36 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
15:29:37 <Zakim> -SimonKJ
15:29:38 <Zakim> -[Garlik]
15:29:38 <Zakim> -kasei
15:29:39 <LukeWM> bye
15:29:43 <Zakim> -AlexPassant
15:29:44 <Zakim> -KjetilK
15:29:50 <Zakim> -AndyS
15:29:50 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public
15:29:59 <OlivierCorby> OlivierCorby has left #sparql
15:30:05 <Zakim> -OlivierCorby
15:30:06 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:30:07 <Zakim> Attendees were [Garlik], LeeF, kasei, OlivierCorby, Chimezie_Ogbuji, bglimm, AxelPolleres, pgearon, AndyS, Ivanh, EricP, AlexPassant, SimonKJ, +1.617.588.aaaa, Orri, KjetilK,
15:30:09 <Zakim> ... Prateek
15:30:34 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public