Chatlog 2010-04-13

See original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.

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

13:50:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:50:47 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-sparql-irc
13:50:49 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:50:49 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sparql
13:50:51 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:50:51 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
13:50:51 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
13:50:52 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
13:50:52 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:50:52 <trackbot> Date: 13 April 2010
13:50:56 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-04-13
13:50:58 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
13:51:07 <LeeF> Regrets: AxelPolleres, Souri
13:53:06 <Prateek> Prateek has joined #sparql
13:54:51 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sparql
13:57:41 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:57:48 <Zakim> +bglimm
13:57:56 <SteveH> SteveH has joined #sparql
13:58:00 <dcharbon2> dcharbon2 has joined #sparql
13:58:59 <LeeF> zakim, stop ignoring my pass code
13:58:59 <Zakim> I don't understand 'stop ignoring my pass code', LeeF
13:59:04 <Zakim> +kasei
13:59:05 <Zakim> +LeeF
13:59:06 <LeeF> thanks, zakim
13:59:12 <Zakim> +[Garlik]
13:59:20 <kasei> Zakim, mute me
13:59:24 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted
13:59:25 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aaaa
13:59:28 <SteveH> Zakim, [Garlik] is temporarily SteveH
13:59:28 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
13:59:33 <kasei> no
13:59:44 <MattPerry> zakim, 1.603.897.aaaa is me
13:59:44 <Zakim> sorry, MattPerry, I do not recognize a party named '1.603.897.aaaa'
13:59:53 <LeeF> zakim, aaaa is MattPerry
13:59:53 <Zakim> +MattPerry; got it
14:00:12 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:00:12 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:00:12 <Zakim> +Ivan
14:00:36 <Zakim> +pgearon
14:00:38 <Zakim> +??P9
14:00:40 <ivan> try again
14:00:43 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??P9 is me 
14:00:44 <ivan> zakim, drop me
14:00:48 <Zakim> +AlexPassant; got it
14:00:49 <AlexPassant> hi
14:00:50 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
14:00:52 <Zakim> -Ivan
14:00:54 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:00:56 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:00:58 <Zakim> +Ivan
14:01:08 <tommik> tommik has joined #sparql
14:01:30 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
14:01:30 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
14:01:40 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:01:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see bglimm (muted), kasei (muted), LeeF, SteveH, MattPerry, Ivan, pgearon, AlexPassant
14:02:01 <Zakim> + +035840564aabb
14:02:08 <tommik> zakim, aabb is me
14:02:08 <Zakim> +tommik; got it
14:02:29 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-04-06
14:02:34 <Zakim> +Sandro
14:03:03 <AlexPassant> yes
14:03:06 <Zakim> +??P37
14:03:16 <AndyS> zakim, ??P37 is me
14:03:16 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
14:03:17 <chimezie> chimezie has joined #sparql
14:03:29 <AndyS> .. probably ...
14:04:28 <LeeF> Scribenick: AlexPassant
14:04:31 <Zakim> +dcharbon2
14:04:42 <dcharbon2> zakim, mute me
14:04:43 <Zakim> dcharbon2 should now be muted
14:04:45 <Zakim> + +1.916.214.aacc
14:05:24 <Zakim> + +1.216.636.aadd
14:05:38 <chimezie> Zakim, +1.216.636.aadd is me
14:05:38 <Zakim> +chimezie; got it
14:06:46 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:06:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see bglimm (muted), kasei (muted), LeeF, SteveH, MattPerry, Ivan, pgearon, AlexPassant, tommik, Sandro, AndyS, dcharbon2 (muted), chimezie
14:07:13 <LeeF> topic: Admin
14:07:14 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-04-06
14:07:15 <AlexPassant> topic: admin issues
14:08:08 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-04-06
14:08:18 <AlexPassant> LeeF: minutes approved
14:08:28 <AlexPassant> ... next meeting next week same time
14:08:31 <LeeF> Next meeting: 2010-04-20 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: chimezie)
14:08:34 <AlexPassant> ... chimezie will scribe
14:08:50 <kasei> i'm at risk for next week
14:10:03 <AlexPassant> LeeF: new member in the WG - as an observer
14:11:14 <AlexPassant> LeeF: usually WG meetings are not open to public
14:11:48 <AlexPassant> ... but no issues for having an observer
14:11:56 <LeeF> topic: Use PATCH in HTTP Protocol for RDF
14:12:03 <AndyS> Traditionally (DAWG), we get observers to scribe :-)
14:12:04 <AlexPassant> ... first topic: issues of PATCH in HTTP
14:12:12 <AlexPassant> ... based on Ivan's email
14:12:27 <AlexPassant> ... using it to track RDF changes
14:12:35 <AlexPassant> ... do we want PATCH in the Update protocol
14:12:51 <SteveH> q+
14:13:19 <AlexPassant> chimezie: conversations about what would it mean to use PATCH in the protocol
14:13:28 <AlexPassant> ... and if we should have it or not
14:13:49 <AlexPassant> ... not sure if that's a good fit for the protocol
14:14:16 <AlexPassant> ... if we specify it, how much we do
14:14:43 <AlexPassant> ... make sure what format we use in PATCH, and what semantics we use
14:14:56 <AlexPassant> ... if we do add PATCH
14:15:16 <AlexPassant> ... do we have an informal section - as one of the formats that can be used
14:15:27 <AlexPassant> ... if we incorporate PATCH in the HTTP protocol
14:15:39 <AlexPassant> ... ambiguity of having two bindings
14:15:56 <AlexPassant> ... might be considered as an abuse of the protocol
14:16:12 <LeeF> q+ to understand what the proposal for how PATCH would be used would be 
14:16:24 <LeeF> ack SteveH
14:16:36 <AlexPassant> SteveH: read the RFC
14:16:44 <AlexPassant> ... pretty compatible w/ SPARQL update
14:16:52 <AlexPassant> ... given the HTTP client libraries
14:17:07 <AlexPassant> ... wouldnt want to get PATCH only
14:17:19 <LeeF> ack 
14:17:21 <LeeF> ack me
14:17:21 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to understand what the proposal for how PATCH would be used would be
14:17:33 <AlexPassant> LeeF: appropriate use for PATCH
14:17:40 <AlexPassant> ... content for the PATCH will be a SPARQL Update request ?
14:17:46 <AlexPassant> chimezie: that's my understanding
14:18:10 <AlexPassant> LeeF: any idea if there's WSDL2 bindings for PATCH
14:18:21 <AlexPassant> chimezie: don't know but will be surprised if there's
14:18:43 <sandro> q+ to ask about whether patch allows conneg
14:19:17 <AlexPassant> LeeF: main question is whether we want it in the protocol document
14:19:29 <AlexPassant> ... wounldnt affect the doc
14:19:51 <AndyS> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789
14:20:09 <AlexPassant> chimezie: will resolve ambiguity of the PATCH format
14:20:23 <LeeF> ack sandro
14:20:23 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask about whether patch allows conneg
14:20:41 <AlexPassant> sandro: wondering if theres appropriate content negociation
14:21:03 <AlexPassant> chimezie: PATCH method is extensible and allows to specify the format
14:21:22 <AlexPassant> sandro: using media/type SPARQL/Update
14:21:37 <LeeF> q?
14:21:46 <dcharbon2> zakim, unmute me
14:21:46 <Zakim> dcharbon2 should no longer be muted
14:21:49 <AndyS> ConNeg allways applies independent of verb? RFC 2616 sec 12
14:22:06 <AlexPassant> dcharbon2: looking at it, wondering if there's interactions with the regular SPARQL Protocol doc
14:22:34 <AlexPassant> ... given a PATCH to a graph, question is what's the semantics
14:22:44 <AlexPassant> ... you can use PATCH instead of POST to post an update request
14:23:55 <AlexPassant> chimezie: if it was a normative part, it should have an implementation
14:25:19 <AlexPassant> LeeF: can include informative section
14:25:31 <AlexPassant> sandro: may go one step further
14:25:42 <AlexPassant> ... if you use PATCH w/ this media type, here's what it means
14:25:45 <AlexPassant> ... but still optional
14:25:51 <AlexPassant> LeeF: main concern is not making it mandatory
14:26:05 <SteveH> it it's optional, I don't see the point
14:26:10 <SteveH> *if it's
14:27:03 <pgearon_> +q
14:28:01 <LeeF> ack pgearon
14:28:01 <AlexPassant> SteveH: prefer not mentioning at all if that's optional
14:28:36 <AlexPassant> pgearon_: might be implementation dependant
14:31:42 <AlexPassant> LeeF: seems that PATCH is ok for SPARQL Update but people will use POST
14:31:55 <AlexPassant> ... bue would be good to talk about PATCH in the protocol document
14:32:45 <LeeF> topic: URIs for built-in functions
14:33:02 <AlexPassant> LeeF: brief discussion last week 
14:33:08 <AlexPassant> ... discussion w/ team contact
14:33:34 <dcharbon2> dcharbon2 has left #sparql
14:33:44 <AlexPassant> ... general feeling that built-ins functions (for 1.0 and new ones in 1.1) should have URIs in addition to keywords in the language
14:33:44 <dcharbon2> dcharbon2 has joined #sparql
14:33:52 <AlexPassant> ... in line with extension functions and the rest of the language
14:33:59 <AlexPassant> ... what these URIs should look like ?
14:34:04 <dcharbon2> zakim, mute me
14:34:04 <Zakim> dcharbon2 should now be muted
14:34:10 <LeeF> q?
14:34:14 <AlexPassant> ... what do you get when dereferencing
14:34:19 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
14:34:19 <Zakim> chimezie should now be muted
14:34:48 <AlexPassant> AndyS: assigning URIS and their content
14:35:05 <AlexPassant> sandro: policy is that WG can pick any unused namespace 
14:35:08 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-builtin-function#
14:35:09 <AlexPassant> ... in /ns or in their space
14:35:19 <AlexPassant> ... eg RIF namespace for URIs
14:35:21 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/ns/rif-builtin-function#
14:35:42 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-function#
14:35:53 <AlexPassant> ... # or / is up to the group 
14:35:54 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-function/add
14:36:00 <AlexPassant> ... would go to the / option
14:36:07 <AlexPassant> ... but that's up to the WG
14:36:14 <AlexPassant> ... procedure: need some documents
14:36:19 <SteveH> RDFa?
14:36:22 <AlexPassant> ... better if we have clever Linked Data
14:36:31 <AlexPassant> ... HTML, RDFa, conneg, etc.
14:37:49 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-function   #  or /
14:38:00 <AlexPassant> AlexPassant : preference for # to avoid conneg issues
14:38:31 <AndyS> Observation - # typically means one doc, / means one doc per function
14:38:35 <kasei> SD doc is (maybe mistakenly) already calling them 'functions'
14:38:42 <kasei> and I thought so was another doc
14:38:57 <kasei> Zakim, unmute me
14:38:57 <Zakim> kasei should no longer be muted
14:39:12 <sandro> maybe - http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql/add
14:39:16 <AndyS> ?? .../ns/sparql#function-add or .../ns/sparql/function#add
14:39:30 <AlexPassant> kasei: done in the SD since the begining
14:39:52 <LeeF> ... /ns/sparql-function  
14:39:57 <SteveH> q+
14:40:06 <LeeF> ack SteveH
14:40:23 <LeeF> ... /ns/sparql-function  /ns/sparql-aggregate
14:40:31 <LeeF> ... /ns/sparql
14:40:32 <kasei> q+
14:40:37 <LeeF> ack kasei
14:41:00 <AlexPassant> kasei: need to make sure the SD doc is updated
14:41:05 <AlexPassant> ... based on the naming
14:41:12 <AndyS> Potential dual use: v few cases but MIN as agg and MIN as function
14:41:48 <SteveH> q+
14:41:52 <LeeF> ack SteveH
14:42:22 <AlexPassant> SteveH: function operate on the evaluated set
14:42:34 <AlexPassant> ... function has a different definition that the aggregate itself
14:42:36 <kasei> SteveH, do you have an idea of what sd:AggregateFunction should be renamed? Just sd:Aggregate?
14:43:32 <kasei> ok. brings up more modeling issues, but will follow up on mailing list.
14:44:10 <AlexPassant> LeeF: consensus that the document should not refer to aggregate functions 
14:44:13 <AlexPassant> ... but to aggregate
14:44:31 <LeeF> ... /ns/sparql
14:44:46 <kasei> Zakim, mute me
14:44:46 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted
14:45:06 <LeeF> ... /ns/sparql/add /ns/sparql/count
14:45:41 <kasei> syntactically that would be a problem since either can appear in a select expr, right?
14:45:44 <SteveH> q+
14:45:46 <AlexPassant> AndyS: wondering about name clashes
14:45:52 <LeeF> ack SteveH
14:46:08 <AlexPassant> SteveH: dont think you can have a function and aggregate with the same name
14:46:18 <Zakim> -pgearon
14:46:21 <AlexPassant> ... but may miss a case in the grammar when it's needed
14:46:33 <AlexPassant> AndyS: might have keywords that create confusion
14:46:36 <AlexPassant> ... mapping to the same URI
14:47:15 <LeeF> PROPOSED: SPARQL built-in functions and built-in aggregates have URIs of the form http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql/{function-or-aggregate-name}
14:47:31 <SteveH> lower case?
14:47:44 <kasei> yes, please :)
14:47:51 <Zakim> +pgearon
14:48:00 <LeeF> PROPOSED: SPARQL built-in functions and built-in aggregates have URIs of the form http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql/{lower-case-function-or-aggregate-name}
14:48:13 <bglimm> +1
14:48:16 <SteveH> +1
14:48:26 <ivan> +1
14:48:27 <LeeF> RESOLVED: SPARQL built-in functions and built-in aggregates have URIs of the form http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql/{lower-case-function-or-aggregate-name}
14:48:44 <AndyS> no
14:49:28 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me
14:49:28 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted
14:49:37 <bglimm> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0030.html
14:50:32 <AlexPassant> bglimm: first proposed change - access graph should be uniquely specified
14:50:43 <AlexPassant> ... wanted to make clear that it's unique up to different blank node names
14:50:46 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me
14:50:46 <Zakim> chimezie should no longer be muted
14:50:50 <AlexPassant> ... same proposal using different words
14:51:03 <AlexPassant> ... happy to take either of both
14:51:10 <AlexPassant> ... other proposed change
14:51:19 <AlexPassant> ... about infinite solutions
14:52:13 <ericP> ericP has joined #sparql
14:52:26 <ericP> federation today?
14:52:41 <LeeF> think it will get pushed to next week, ericP, sorry
14:52:44 <AlexPassant> ... "trivial" infinite answers
14:52:47 <ericP> no sweat
14:52:51 <ericP> ericP has left #sparql
14:53:01 <AlexPassant> ... suggested to say the entailement regime shuld define what trivial infinite answer is
14:53:43 <ivan> +1 to andy
14:55:05 <AlexPassant> chimezie: might be best if each part define what it means
14:56:58 <AlexPassant> LeeF: federated query
14:57:06 <AlexPassant> ... running out of time, topic for next week
14:57:42 <AlexPassant> ... dont see consensus aroung MINUS / NOT EXISTS
14:59:46 <LeeF> Adjourned
14:59:48 <Zakim> -chimezie
14:59:50 <Zakim> -SteveH
14:59:52 <Zakim> -bglimm
14:59:53 <ivan> zakim, drop me
14:59:53 <Zakim> -MattPerry
14:59:53 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
14:59:54 <Zakim> -Sandro
14:59:54 <Zakim> -Ivan
14:59:56 <Zakim> -LeeF
14:59:57 <Zakim> -tommik
14:59:59 <Zakim> -dcharbon2
15:00:01 <Zakim> -pgearon
15:00:03 <Zakim> -kasei
15:00:07 <SteveH> don't knock extra minutes LeeF 
15:00:26 <Zakim> -AndyS
15:00:30 <LeeF> LeeF: Happy to continue discussing MINUS/NOT EXISTS on mailing list as long as there is active discussion, but following active discussion, I intend to put the questiont o a vote of the group and move on with a resolution based on the vote
15:00:38 <AlexPassant> RRSAgent, make minutes
15:00:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-sparql-minutes.html AlexPassant
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000281