Chatlog 2010-08-17

See original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.

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

13:32:36 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:32:36 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/08/17-sparql-irc
13:32:42 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sparql
13:45:37 <OlivierCorby> OlivierCorby has joined #sparql
13:54:09 <bglimm> bglimm has joined #sparql
13:55:05 <NicoM> NicoM has joined #sparql
13:56:27 <AlexPassant> AlexPassant has joined #sparql
13:57:01 <SteveH__> SteveH__ has joined #sparql
13:58:10 <AxelPolleres> trackbot, start meeting
13:58:12 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:58:14 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
13:58:14 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:15 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:58:16 <trackbot> Date: 17 August 2010
13:59:20 <bglimm> Zakim, I am here. Why don't you get that?
13:59:21 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, bglimm.
13:59:31 <kasei> heh
14:00:00 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sparql
14:00:02 <kasei> Zakim, who's here?
14:00:02 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has not yet started, kasei
14:00:03 <Zakim> On IRC I see MattPerry, SteveH, AlexPassant, NicoM, bglimm, OlivierCorby, Zakim, RRSAgent, AxelPolleres, LeeF, karl, kasei, pgearon, iv_an_ru, sandro, trackbot
14:00:15 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:00:15 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has not yet started, AxelPolleres
14:00:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see MattPerry, SteveH, AlexPassant, NicoM, bglimm, OlivierCorby, Zakim, RRSAgent, AxelPolleres, LeeF, karl, kasei, pgearon, iv_an_ru, sandro, trackbot
14:00:19 <bglimm> What a crap. First Zakim does not recognize that I have called and not all circuits are busy!
14:00:30 <SteveH> bglimm, ah, I jsut beat you I guess
14:00:39 <bglimm> Sandro, Ivan, any chance that this will be fixed any time soon?
14:00:48 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:00:48 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has not yet started, AxelPolleres
14:00:49 <Zakim> On IRC I see MattPerry, SteveH, AlexPassant, NicoM, bglimm, OlivierCorby, Zakim, RRSAgent, AxelPolleres, LeeF, karl, kasei, pgearon, iv_an_ru, sandro, trackbot
14:01:00 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, this is SPARQL
14:01:00 <Zakim> ok, AxelPolleres; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM
14:01:11 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:01:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see kasei, AxelPolleres, +44.208.439.aacc, +49.911.973.4.aadd, +33.4.92.38.aaee
14:01:17 <Souri> Souri has joined #sparql
14:01:28 <SteveH> Zakim, aacc is [Garlik]
14:01:29 <Zakim> +[Garlik]; got it
14:01:33 <Zakim> + +44.186.528.aaff
14:01:36 <bglimm> Yes, SteveH, but I dialed in twice before and Zakim just did not recognise that
14:01:38 <SteveH> Zakim, [Garlik] is temporarily me
14:01:38 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
14:01:43 <OlivierCorby> Zakim, aaee is me
14:01:43 <Zakim> +OlivierCorby; got it
14:01:44 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aagg
14:01:45 <bglimm> Zakim, +44.186.528.aaff is me
14:01:46 <Zakim> +bglimm; got it
14:01:51 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aahh
14:01:54 <bglimm> now calling via France
14:01:55 <MattPerry> zakim, aagg is me
14:01:55 <Zakim> +MattPerry; got it
14:01:55 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:01:58 <Zakim> On the phone I see kasei, AxelPolleres, SteveH, +49.911.973.4.aadd, OlivierCorby, bglimm, MattPerry, +1.603.897.aahh
14:02:01 <Souri> zakim, aahh is me
14:02:03 <Zakim> +Souri; got it
14:02:03 <NicoM> Zakim, +49.9 is me
14:02:05 <Zakim> +NicoM; got it
14:02:09 <SteveH> bglimm, are you us�ing the London number? the other one doesn't work at all, as far as I can see
14:02:23 <AxelPolleres> scribe: OlivierCorby
14:02:27 <bglimm> +44.203.318.0479  that's what I use
14:02:33 <bglimm> As in the agenda
14:02:35 <AxelPolleres> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-08-17
14:02:49 <SteveH> bglimm, yeah. that's the one I connected on
14:02:53 <kasei> Zakim, who is talking?
14:03:00 <kasei> very loud
14:03:00 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
14:03:00 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
14:03:01 <AxelPolleres> regrets: Nicholas Humfrey, AndyS
14:03:04 <Zakim> kasei, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: AxelPolleres (33%), bglimm (50%)
14:03:19 <bglimm> I just muted, I think I have a noisy line
14:03:47 <chimezie> chimezie has joined #sparql
14:04:31 <Zakim> +Sandro
14:04:42 <Zakim> +Chimezie_Ogbuji
14:04:44 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-10
14:05:13 <Zakim> +pgearon
14:05:16 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-10
14:05:40 <AxelPolleres> topic: comment by TBL
14:05:44 <Zakim> + +1.617.245.aaii
14:05:49 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Aug/0004.html
14:05:51 <Zakim> +??P34
14:05:53 <AlexPassant> Zakim, ??P34 is me
14:05:53 <Zakim> +AlexPassant; got it
14:06:30 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0227.html
14:07:31 <OlivierCorby> 1st point about linked data
14:07:51 <LeeF> Should we take these one at a time for group discussion?
14:08:21 <AxelPolleres> lee, yup, let'chime summarise first
14:09:59 <LeeF> k
14:10:27 <AxelPolleres> 1) One point is that, mostly, this is a book about how to implement a
14:10:27 <AxelPolleres> linked data when you have an existing SPARQL server.  This is clearly a good idea..
14:10:27 <AxelPolleres> That could be expressed in the abstract.
14:11:42 <AxelPolleres> Chime: how can we refere to LinkedData /design issues doc... since it's not a spec
14:11:57 <OlivierCorby> Relevance of linked data wrt to this doc ?
14:12:14 <LeeF> I don't personsally share Tim's view, but I also don't have any objections to this view (so yeah, I agree with Chime and Axel)
14:12:51 <LeeF> I view it as a lightweight, higly portable way to work with RDF data, that's it
14:12:58 <LeeF> s/higly/highly
14:13:26 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: chime to add a statement reflecting TL-1 point 1) in the http-rdf-update
14:13:26 <trackbot> Created ACTION-294 - Add a statement reflecting TL-1 point 1) in the http-rdf-update [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2010-08-24].
14:13:49 <LeeF> (BTW, my regrets next week - on vacation)
14:14:27 <OlivierCorby> 2. direct vs indirect graph manipulation
14:14:49 <AxelPolleres> "I would prefer 4.2 be couched as "Graph Mirroring".  This echoes the way many web sites
14:14:49 <AxelPolleres> (and FTP sites) mirror another's contents, and may even provide enhanced access, while not being authoritative.
14:14:49 <AxelPolleres> "
14:15:59 <AxelPolleres> Axel: Graph Mirroring is a use case, but not the only one, we should make that clear in the response.
14:16:29 <AxelPolleres> Chime: hostname/authority was maybe not clear, maybe just needs some rewording
14:16:30 <chimezie> ".. it is often the case (with HTTP graph URIs in particular) that the server associated with the hostname is not the same as the server managing the identified RDF knowledge (as a result of a change in domain name ownership, for instance), the host server is not available, or the URI is not dereferencable"
14:17:58 <AxelPolleres> Chime: general tenor of the mail, is that Tim unerstand the whole document as one use case we have in mind. 
14:18:27 <AxelPolleres> sandro: maybe easier, if we respond and try to find some concrete suggestions we can take on board.
14:19:13 <AxelPolleres> "I'd note that it may be useful to have a way of saying that. A simple P label could do."
14:19:42 <AxelPolleres> this sentence not really understandable, maybe ask for clarification.
14:20:21 <AxelPolleres> "so instead of
14:20:21 <AxelPolleres> 	 http://example.com/rdf-graphs/employees?graph=http%3A//www.example.org/other/graph
14:20:22 <AxelPolleres> why not
14:20:22 <AxelPolleres> 	 http://example.com/rdf-graphs/www.example.org/other/graph
14:20:22 <AxelPolleres> or
14:20:22 <AxelPolleres> 	 http://example.com/rdf-graphs/employees/other/graph
14:20:24 <AxelPolleres> "
14:20:36 <SteveH> we need the http/https/urn scheme in there I think
14:21:06 <AxelPolleres> Should we mention both alternatives? I.e. explicityle ecourage masking
14:21:06 <AxelPolleres> the "?" URIs and adding a section that explains why that might be
14:21:07 <AxelPolleres> useful?
14:21:21 <pgearon> I'd like to see ? as an option
14:21:38 <kasei> +1 pgearon
14:21:46 <SteveH> yeah
14:21:47 <AxelPolleres> tim wrote: "A rewrite rule on the server can of course turn this into the "?" form internally and the CGI apparatus fired up as a result."
14:22:28 <pgearon> Many implementations are servlet based, and ? is much easier there
14:22:29 <SteveH> rewrite rules aren't that bothered about ?s
14:22:43 <SteveH> pgearon, really? even with PUT?
14:22:50 <NicoM> for non static graphs, having proxies not cache anything may be a good thing
14:23:11 <LeeF> are proxies that don't cache ? URIs behaving as per spec or are they being naughty?
14:23:16 <AxelPolleres> Axel: Should we explicitly mention the rewrite option in the doc?
14:23:18 <pgearon> SteveH: for me, sure. I'd expect that JS based implementations would prefer ? as well
14:23:26 <AxelPolleres> Chime: wouldn't hurt, can think aobut some text.
14:23:37 <SteveH> pgearon, not really, you have to write your own parser either way
14:25:03 <AxelPolleres> points 4) 5)  ...
14:25:56 <AxelPolleres> chime: maybe we should ask back for clarification whether there's specific text he had in mind.
14:26:05 <AxelPolleres> sandro: quicker if we propose text
14:26:09 <AxelPolleres> chime: ok
14:27:31 <AxelPolleres> "...that THE DEFAULT GRAPH OF THE QUERY IS THE ONE IN THE HTTP REQUEST.
14:27:31 <AxelPolleres> Obvious really, but people can miss it."
14:28:52 <AxelPolleres> chime: last TC we need to clarify protocol interaction in general. we can put that in the response
14:29:00 <AxelPolleres> ... ongoing issue
14:29:37 <AxelPolleres> Axel: last point 6) on  MS-Author-Via header
14:29:57 <AxelPolleres> Chime: some idea, but not sure what he had in mind
14:30:06 <AxelPolleres> ... ask back for clarification.
14:30:36 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Chime to draft response for TL-1
14:30:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-295 - Draft response for TL-1 [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2010-08-24].
14:31:44 <Zakim> - +1.617.245.aaii
14:31:53 <AxelPolleres> topic: issues to be postponed
14:32:58 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues
14:34:06 <SteveH> yes, it was stuff that was left over
14:34:10 <SteveH> we did it by hand IIRC
14:34:16 <SteveH> by we, I mean other people :)
14:34:26 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
14:34:26 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
14:35:14 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum
14:35:24 <AxelPolleres> "alternative limit per resource" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0194.html
14:35:28 <LeeF> the issues list was very much done by hand
14:35:38 <LeeF> zakim, huh?
14:35:38 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, LeeF.
14:35:43 <LeeF> the issues list was very much done by hand
14:36:47 <pgearon> +1 for not touching it right now
14:36:51 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE: Treatment of "alternative limit per resource" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0194.html
14:36:51 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-61 - Treatment of "alternative limit per resource" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0194.html ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/61/edit .
14:37:29 <AxelPolleres> query syntax for algebra operators http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0193.html
14:38:12 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE: shall there be more concise query syntax for all algebra operators http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0193.html
14:38:12 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-62 - Shall there be more concise query syntax for all algebra operators http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0193.html ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/62/edit .
14:38:52 <AxelPolleres> axel: ISSUE-62 related to the open issue around assignment.
14:39:55 <SteveH> why are these being created as ISSUES?!
14:41:14 <pgearon> SteveH, perhaps AxelPolleres means that it's a known limitation of the language?
14:42:29 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-61 with the understanding that we leave treatment of such queries for a coming WG
14:44:49 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-61 and ISSUE-62 with the understanding that this is out of scope of the current WG
14:45:01 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-61
14:45:01 <trackbot> ISSUE-61 Treatment of "alternative limit per resource" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0194.html closed
14:45:10 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-62
14:45:10 <trackbot> ISSUE-62 Shall there be more concise query syntax for all algebra operators http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0193.html closed
14:45:41 <pgearon> +q
14:45:49 <pgearon> q-
14:46:49 <AxelPolleres> Axel: so, postponed issue will only be those which we really can't close.
14:47:02 <AxelPolleres> .... this way we don't put any burden to a future WG.
14:47:53 <AxelPolleres> topic: mark SPARQL update member submission
14:49:29 <AxelPolleres> Axel: sandro, can we add a disclaimer on the member submission?
14:49:53 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: as long as we check with submitters, and find sensible wording, that should be fine.
14:50:33 <AxelPolleres> Axel: What we're looking for is a text similar to the OWL1 docs...
14:51:02 <AlexPassant> I wrote a simple proposal on the list
14:51:42 <AlexPassant> just need to s/Wroking Draft/REC when we switch to rec. 
14:51:43 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: Alex' wording needs to be updates, that would be a problem
14:51:49 <AlexPassant> but I'm open to other proposals
14:52:13 <AxelPolleres> ACITON SteveH to suggest a wording for a disclaimer text for the SPARQL update member submission
14:52:27 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: member:SteveH to suggest a wording for a disclaimer text for the SPARQL update member submission
14:52:27 <trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
14:52:45 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: steveH  to suggest a wording for a disclaimer text for the SPARQL update member submission
14:52:45 <trackbot> Created ACTION-296 -  to suggest a wording for a disclaimer text for the SPARQL update member submission [on Steve Harris - due 2010-08-24].
14:52:52 <AxelPolleres> topic: AOB?
14:53:04 <Zakim> -Chimezie_Ogbuji
14:53:05 <Zakim> -Lee_Feigenbaum
14:53:06 <Zakim> -bglimm
14:53:06 <Zakim> -MattPerry
14:53:08 <Zakim> -AlexPassant
14:53:09 <Zakim> -Sandro
14:53:10 <Zakim> -SteveH
14:53:10 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
14:53:12 <Zakim> -kasei
14:53:13 <AxelPolleres> hearing none, adjourned
14:53:13 <Zakim> -OlivierCorby
14:53:24 <Zakim> -pgearon
14:53:27 <Zakim> -NicoM
14:53:37 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public
14:54:02 <OlivierCorby> OlivierCorby has left #sparql
14:54:12 <Zakim> -Souri
14:54:14 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
14:54:16 <Zakim> Attendees were +44.186.528.aaaa, kasei, +44.186.528.aabb, AxelPolleres, +44.208.439.aacc, +49.911.973.4.aadd, +33.4.92.38.aaee, SteveH, OlivierCorby, +1.603.897.aagg, bglimm,
14:54:19 <Zakim> ... +1.603.897.aahh, MattPerry, Souri, NicoM, Sandro, Chimezie_Ogbuji, pgearon, +1.617.245.aaii, AlexPassant, Lee_Feigenbaum
15:21:37 <SteveH> SteveH has joined #sparql
17:08:29 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has left #sparql
17:13:34 <Zakim> Zakim has left #sparql
17:53:17 <SteveH__> SteveH__ has joined #sparql
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000215