00:00:51 guus: owl:sameAs is semantically not stricter than skos:exactMatch, strange domain/range constraints of skos are problematic 00:01:40 Jun: context is necessary to determine source of owl:sameAs inference 00:02:55 stefan: waht to record on the whiteboard? 00:03:27 ivan: maybe now/later: identity-vocabulary 00:03:39 jeremy: maybe never 00:03:57 Topic: Afternoon Wrap-up 00:04:20 tomlurge has joined #rdfn 00:05:10 david: we should have some results tomorrow... 00:05:24 sandro: we should have micro-charters 00:06:02 ... as results that say what kind of group should do what to work out some features 00:06:52 mikeUshold: we should prioritize (not enough people to do breakouts on all) issues 00:08:27 ivan: we should only work on Core tomorrow, not on Infrastructure 00:08:31 (disagreement) 00:08:52 david: let's better go through one by one 00:09:31 ... named graphs might be the easiest one to start with. 00:10:06 most people think named graphs is "maybe now", few "maybe later" 00:11:02 ... standardise Turtle? 00:11:06 most people for it 00:11:35 ... follow your nose (formalise HTTP Get)? 00:12:05 more maybe nows than maybe later... not as clear as the previous 00:12:19 ... json RDF serialisation? 00:12:46 14-15 maybe now, frewer maybe later 00:12:54 ... ATOM 00:13:01 more maybe later than maybe now 00:13:25 ... canonical RDF/XML fixing RDF/XML 00:13:38 majority maybe never 00:14:27 ... literals as subject? 00:14:34 majority maybe never 00:15:38 bnodes? 00:15:58 majority maybe now (15 now, 8 later, 5 never) 00:16:20 ... consolidate RDF RDFS namespaces? 00:16:27 majority never 00:16:47 ivan: alternative would be RDFa profiles. 00:17:58 axel: could be mentioned as a feature of a Turtle standardisation charter 00:18:43 RDF URIs vs IRI (vs Qnames???) 00:18:51 majority never 00:19:14 ... n-ary predicates? 00:19:28 maybe later 00:19:57 RDF URIs vs IRI (vs Qnames???) 00:20:14 change from before maybe now, but needs no discussion 00:20:23 ... binary? 00:20:25 never 00:20:35 revise RDF semantics? 00:20:37 now 00:20:43 lists? 00:20:48 maybe later 00:21:54 RDFa profiles? 00:22:31 now 00:22:53 Rule based querying? 00:22:58 later 00:26:42 ivan, guus: infrastructure topics could go into another WG such as SWEO, Best practices, etc. 00:27:47 next feature ... 00:28:02 identity for non-RDF resources? 00:28:40 For infrastructure issues, the questions is: Does anyone want to fight for one of these to be in a Core group's charter 00:28:50 (the following features are in question whether we need to discuss that tomorrow) 00:28:57 identity, not tomorrow 00:29:38 provenance vocabularies, not tomorrow 00:30:04 annotations for RDF graphs, tomorrow 00:30:28 standard APIs, not tomorrow 00:30:46 Unified query layer, not tomorrow 00:31:38 context was merged into annotations 00:31:45 change vocabularies, not tomorrow 00:31:53 isolation APIs, not tomorrow 00:32:51 identity vocabularies, not tomorrow 00:33:14 petermika, guus: think it's important for linked data 00:33:56 david, ivan: important issue, but not necessarily in the resulting working group 00:34:21 jjc: argument against, we shouldn't guess what the LOD community will do/use 00:35:23 richard: owl:sameAs was used because it was the closest available... if we want to fix that, we need to offer something. 00:36:11 ian: LOD community uses owl:sameAs as a vocabulary. 00:37:03 Lin: does the use of RDF depend on vocabularies? for defining vocabuaries we need to make sure whether that is essential. 00:37:34 identity vocabularies: discussed tomorrow 00:39:38 change vocabulary: later 00:39:50 weakly deprecation? 00:40:03 maybe now 00:41:11 Main Entry: deprecate 00:41:13 Part of Speech: verb 00:41:15 Definition: belittle, condemn 00:41:16 Synonyms: cut down to size, depreciate, derogate, detract, disapprove of, discommend, discountenance, disesteem, disfavor, disparage, expostulate, frown, mudsling, not go for, object, pooh-pooh, poor mouth, protest against, put down*, rip*, run down, take dim view of, take down, take exception to 00:41:35 s/weakly deprecation+bestpractices/ 00:41:36 I like belittle or derogate or disesteem 00:41:54 but there are lots of other good candidates 00:42:19 topic: agenda tomorrow 00:42:34 stefan: suggest to group in 1) syntax 2) semantics 3) other 00:43:10 Syntax: 00:43:36 json, turtle ... breakout group lead by dajobe 00:44:53 (named graphs go under other, though they have both syntax and semantics bits) 00:45:29 RDFa profiles fo under syntax as well 00:46:32 Semantics: 00:49:33 RDF Semantics doc, RDFS/pfps, Bnodes, follow-your-nose 00:49:41 NamedGraphs: 00:49:56 Named graphs vs n-quads, annotations 00:51:15 (further minutes/notes on tomorrow's agenda will be collected and pasted to the minutes by david Wood ...) 00:55:39 james has joined #rdfn 00:55:59 dwood has joined #rdfn 00:56:03 /me thanks all scribes 00:56:06 Groups: 00:56:06 1. Syntax (Dave Beckett, TBD) 00:56:06 - Turtle 00:56:07 - JSON 00:56:08 - RDFa profiles 00:56:09 2. Semantics (Paul Gearon) 00:56:12 - Bnodes 00:56:14 - Revising RDF Semantics 00:56:16 - Weak deprecation 00:56:18 3. Graph Metadata (Elisa Kendall) 00:56:20 - Named Graphs 00:56:22 - Annotations 00:56:24 4. Linked Data (David Booth) 00:56:26 - Identity vocabulary 00:56:28 - FYN 00:56:47 <_mdean> _mdean has joined #rdfn 00:56:49 rssagent, draft minutes 00:57:04 rrsagent, draft minutes 00:57:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-minutes.html dwood 00:57:38 FabGandon has left #rdfn 00:59:11 RRSAgent, make minutes 00:59:11 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-minutes.html sandro 00:59:28 rrsagent, make logs public 01:56:12 iand has joined #rdfn 03:31:24 cygri has joined #rdfn 03:32:27 AndyS has joined #rdfn 04:08:44 dbooth has joined #rdfn 04:56:11 tomlurge has joined #rdfn 05:01:06 cygri has joined #rdfn 05:25:12 pgearon has joined #rdfn 05:42:48 cygri has joined #rdfn 06:24:13 FabGandon has joined #rdfn 06:28:20 Boards to prepare breakout sessions: http://twitpic.com/20cxq8 http://twitpic.com/20cxr7 http://twitpic.com/20cxs7 06:42:54 FabGandon has left #rdfn 16:16:39 RRSAgent has joined #rdfn 16:16:39 logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-irc 16:16:44 pfps has joined #rdfn 16:16:45 mdean has joined #rdfn 16:16:45 rrsagent, make log public 16:17:01 dbooth has joined #rdfn 16:17:02 meeting: RDF Next Steps Workshop 16:17:20 ekendall has joined #rdfn 16:17:30 ekw has joined #rdfn 16:17:54 scribe: dbooth 16:18:11 Topic: Tim's late submission 16:18:42 Ivan: I think tim wants literals as subjects to allow quoted graphs in subject 16:18:54 Tim's late submission: http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/RDF-Future.html 16:19:34 Ivan: I don't understand what his #2 in "Extending the RDF model to allow N3" means. 16:20:22 stefan: #1 would be taken care of by the named graph 16:20:34 ... And #2 I don't know what this means. 16:22:41 stefan: So we should put the literals as subjects on the agenda 16:22:51 jeremy: He also suggested revisiting rdf/xml syntax 16:24:02 stefan: but i think that may be covered by deprecating 16:24:12 (scribe not sure he got stefan's sentiment correct) 16:24:38 s/deprecating/deprecating certain features 16:25:55 does anybody disagree with any items 1-7 under 'Cleaning up the RDF model' 16:26:52 Topic: Logistics for today 16:26:52 yes 16:27:47 mscottm2 has joined #rdfn 16:28:11 Ivan: All discussions in break-out groups should be recorded. Use IRC and make sure RRSAgent is on the channel, and at the end say "rrsagent, make logs public" and "rrsagent, draft minutes". 16:28:47 mscottm has joined #rdfn 16:28:52 ... We'll also have a plenary after at 3:30 and chairs will report. 16:29:09 I won't be present for that, so somebody else will have to report for Syntax 16:29:39 ivan: we also didn't decide yesterday whether to draft a charter. we can collaborate on a draft. 16:30:10 draft http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/RDF_Core_Charter_2010 16:30:28 ... If we start a group we would first draft one w sandro, share it with this group to see if it reflects overall agreement with this workshop, then go to SWIG and others for broader discussion this summer. 16:30:44 fabien: should we look at a plenary later this year? 16:31:01 ivan: Not sure it's realistic becuase of the voting time needed by the AC. October is too early. 16:31:16 pgearon has joined #rdfn 16:31:28 ... realistically we could start a group in january. 16:31:46 mdean has joined #rdfn 16:31:55 andy: are we just considering an RDf WG or would we also consider best practices. 16:32:17 dwood: that would fall out of the WG 16:32:38 ivan: due to the manpower situation, it may all be in one group. 16:33:18 jeremy: representation by wider group. people here are not paying the full price. 16:34:11 sandro: goal of this workshop is not to reach consensus on the charter, but to enumerate the pros and cons of a charter, because only w3c members can do that. we tech people produce our suggestions that then go to the AC. 16:34:49 ivan: true, but if we go to the next step (the community) whatever text we go out there with, it woujld look funny if somebody strongly objected. 16:35:31 richard: from the list of things on the whiteboard, there isn't much that requires changes to rdf, but adding things. Not sure its an RDF WG that is required. 16:35:33 the draft charter above is missing several things we discussed - annotations, follow your nose, idenitity model 16:35:42 ivan: But it's a WG -- i don't care what it's called. 16:36:07 jeremy: "RDF Core" might fly better to AC. 16:36:32 Topic: Sandro's draft charter 16:37:37 jjc has joined #rdfn 16:37:58 sandro: suggestion for what the break=outs should do. Draft a paragraph of what might go into the charter, and outline the pros and cons 16:38:31 juansequeda has joined #rdfn 16:39:54 RDF Core Charter 2010: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/RDF_Core_Charter_2010 16:40:11 pgearon has joined #rdfn 16:41:10 gus: looks rather formal -- like a charter. 16:45:02 daveb: maybe add a references section 16:46:24 ivan: breakout chairs: elisa, dbooth, daveb, andy 16:48:28 AxelPolleres_ has joined #rdfn 16:50:22 Breakout groups: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/RDF/NextStepWorkshop 16:50:35 ADJOURNING TO BREAKOUT GROUPS 16:51:20 ekw_ has joined #rdfn 16:53:57 ? 16:54:47 DaveB has joined #rdfn 16:55:13 AndyS has joined #rdfn 16:55:41 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 16:55:54 DaveB has joined #rdfn 16:55:59 mscottm has joined #rdfn 16:57:34 the syntax group has gone to work in #rdfn1 16:58:13 RDF Next Step Group is on irc.w3.org:6665 chanel #rdfn-meta 16:58:42 AndyS has joined #rdfn 16:59:17 dbooth has joined #rdfn 16:59:52 pgearon has joined #rdfn 17:01:11 cygri has joined #rdfn 17:01:26 ekw has joined #rdfn 17:01:54 it's #rdfn-s 17:03:28 The linked data break-out will use channel #rdfn-lod 17:05:59 Named graphs and metadata logs : http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-meta-minutes.html 17:06:26 AndyS has joined #rdfn 17:07:56 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 17:11:38 Currently reviewing what we are doing ... looking at TBL syntax issues 17:11:49 ... building a list of everything on the wiki 17:13:28 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/RDF_Core_Charter_2010#Syntax 17:18:26 Spliiting to concrete syntax issues and data model issues 17:19:49 "Syntax" lists was a collector for homeless items - now categorising into two sections 17:31:03 Now Turtle and NG-Turtle/Trig(?) 17:34:49 AndyS has joined #rdfn 17:44:02 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 17:45:42 Idea of a Turtle themes syntax stack 17:46:18 (we are updating the wiki as we work - currently generating content, sort out more later) 17:46:23 Working on RDF - JSON 17:51:56 kasei has joined #rdfn 17:59:50 ekw has joined #rdfn 18:01:34 tomlurge has joined #rdfn 18:02:04 AxelPolleres has joined #rdfn 18:07:13 AndyS has joined #rdfn 18:22:28 kasei has joined #rdfn 18:23:42 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 18:24:28 AndyS2 has joined #rdfn 18:25:52 AndyS has joined #rdfn 18:28:03 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 18:28:35 AndyS2 has joined #rdfn 18:29:52 AndyS3 has joined #rdfn 19:03:54 AndyS has joined #rdfn 19:41:20 <_mdean> _mdean has joined #rdfn 19:43:11 kasei has joined #rdfn 19:43:44 FabGandon has left #rdfn 20:27:15 LeeF has joined #rdfn 20:27:52 RRSAgent, pointer? 20:27:52 See http://www.w3.org/2010/06/27-rdfn-irc#T20-27-52 20:33:08 pfps has joined #rdfn 20:33:43 jjc has joined #rdfn 20:34:24 pgearon has joined #rdfn 20:36:21 cygri has joined #rdfn 20:38:45 ekw has joined #rdfn 20:38:54 AndyS has joined #rdfn 20:40:01 AxelPolleres has joined #rdfn 20:40:44 tomlurge has joined #rdfn 20:41:13 <_mdean> _mdean has joined #rdfn 20:41:41 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 20:47:24 jun has joined #rdfn 20:48:36 mdean has joined #rdfn 20:56:12 dwood has joined #rdfn 21:31:44 jeremycarroll has joined #rdfn 21:39:47 pgearon has joined #rdfn 21:39:59 dwood has joined #rdfn 21:40:06 AndyS has joined #rdfn 21:41:47 ekw has joined #rdfn 21:47:04 mscottm has joined #rdfn 21:47:07 We're baaack. 21:48:49 cygri has joined #rdfn 21:48:49 ekendall has joined #rdfn 21:49:59 FabGandon has joined #rdfn 21:52:00 mikeU has joined #rdfn 21:52:38 Andy presenting syntax 21:52:46 Principles: do they confuse. 21:52:57 DW: we are not in position to come up with this list. 21:53:17 SH: charter should decide si higher level princple. What level of compatibiliy are we guaranteeing or not. 21:53:56 SH: suprirse by extent to which we kind of wanted to just deprecate RDF/XML, even though a nonstarter in the community 21:54:30 DB: the notion of weakly deprecated, did we capture this somewhere? 21:54:39 ANdy: yes. 21:55:06 Ivan: excpet for RDF ID, these are not RDF/XML things that we want to deprecate. First paragraph almost on semantic level. 21:55:15 SH: error here, disconnected form data model 21:55:24 Ivan: good to separate what is RDF/XML features. 21:55:41 Jeremhy: property attributes muddled. 21:55:50 SH: i don't find this way of splitting helpful. 21:55:59 ANdy: I wanted to split them this way. 21:56:06 SH: huge problem in TUrtle. 21:56:13 Jeremy: was conscious choice. 21:56:37 Andy: there are problems, things that codl be done better. 21:56:42 AndyS1 has joined #rdfn 21:57:01 Ivan: what weaklyh deprecated means should be removed from RDF/XML. 21:57:14 SH: this is combined with next item, lets look there before making changes 21:57:23 ANdy: reificatin was weakly deprecated last time. 21:57:40 Jeremy: it was downplayed, did not use the word 'deprecate'. 21:58:15 SH: editing issues. Should this go into semantic issues group? 21:58:34 ANdy: can we go ahead and leave it? 21:58:43 SH: i don't want to mess with it now. 21:58:54 Ivan: collections syntax. 21:59:15 ANdy: syntax is very awkward, annoying. How did it ever get to this? Confuses people. 21:59:33 AxelPolleres has left #rdfn 21:59:41 ANdy: it will break if any changes to new data. 22:00:06 ANdy: we want to encourage and discourage certain things to minimize damage. 22:00:09 AxelPolleres has joined #rdfn 22:00:40 SH: what do we think of the term 'weakly deprecated'? 22:00:47 AxelPolleres has changed the topic to: plenary - wrapup of breakout groups (AxelPolleres) 22:00:57 ANdy: we do expect parsers to handle weaklyh deprecated syntax, and not wave hands and forget about it 22:01:25 Ivan: what you seem to propose.. we would try now to get together a JSON XG? 22:01:56 ANdy: yes. IF we wait a year... we lose may ablity to do useful prework. 22:02:27 ANdy: the styly of getting gitems of prework - is it a useful style? 22:02:57 SH: i am optimistic that this list will put community on notice that these are important issues, so get thinking about this if it is important to you. 22:03:11 Ivan: this page will eventually go public (actually, already is). 22:03:32 SH: some urgenecy to start soon, does not specifically say 'incubator' 22:03:56 ANdy: RDFa trying to get going soon, certainly before this working group. 22:04:00 Ivan: why relevant here? 22:04:07 Andy: not for JSON 22:04:34 Ivan: only thing is RDFa will be frozen if group comes up with named graph, RDFa will not be able express it. 22:05:00 SH: we now have many syntaxes. We will move into triple syntax or quad syntax. 22:05:19 Ivan: RDFa might go into V2 before too long. 22:05:32 Andy :what is name of Turtle as triple syntax? 22:05:41 Ivan: if we speak about quads. 22:05:54 sandro: RDF/XML and RDFa will be "triple" syntaxes and Turtle and JSON may turn into "quad" syntaxes. 22:06:32 Ivan: ok, any questions on the syntax part? 22:09:10 <_mdean> _mdean has joined #rdfn 22:30:46 cygri has joined #rdfn 22:31:59 AndyS has joined #rdfn 22:32:39 <_mdean> _mdean has joined #rdfn 22:33:24 ekw has joined #rdfn 22:35:22 pgearon has joined #rdfn 22:36:42 scor has joined #rdfn 22:36:52 SH: straw poll... there is huge user community hearing us say they should use RDF/XML. QUESTION: should we put some effort into doing a new RDF/XML (maybe just add named graphs) 22:37:21 Jeremy: my view of reading syntax breakout. We can add one attribute for named grpahs and be done. This seems plausible. 22:37:31 SH: having one attribute is as bad as doing everything. 22:37:47 SH: you will need parallel paths. Is there any other way? 22:37:53 DB: will this break existing parsers? 22:38:09 Jeremy: my parser would ignore it and move on. 22:38:14 SH: will do wrong thing. 22:38:26 DW: yes, it will not recognize the graph, the wrong thing. 22:38:35 SH: doing wrong thign is a very bad idea. 22:38:41 DB: consumer;s choice, how to handle it. 22:38:56 SH: consumers not know enough to make informed choices. 22:39:36 ?? - updtate version of parser... old parsers not handle named graphs. But id alread not know how to handle a named graph. ALso most people are using Jeremy's implementation anyway. 22:40:03 ANdy: Jeremy, can you by tonight... update the parser (laughter) 22:40:34 s/??/pgearon/ 22:40:38 RC: we should learn from past. Lesson from old XML story. Many proposals, none went anywyere. Why expect anything different now? 22:41:18 Ivan: I think there are a large no of applications out there relying on RDF/XML. IT was the standard format, turtle was for geeks. They many nto like it, but they live with it. 22:41:39 Process point: are we hearing from the other breakout groups or are we crossing an event horizon on XML-related stuff. 22:41:51 Ivan: for them, the worse may be over Might be worse to ask them to start over again, than to accept small change. Transition path not that clear. 22:41:51 <_mdean> _mdean has joined #rdfn 22:42:00 SH: my use case is govt agencies publishing linked data. 22:42:18 Peter: how many people in known universe... 22:42:31 SH:pubishing data for 9B people to consume. 22:43:07 Dave? timing.l.if you deprecate this, then there is the issue that new tools will nto accept RDF/XML. People who continue to publish RDF/XML will not work. 22:43:25 ? noone say depreceate RDF/XML, we are makingit second class citizen 22:43:36 ? this is defacto deprecation. 22:44:41 dbooth has joined #rdfn 22:44:58 DW: we oftenhear: lets put the web back into the semantic web. Much of our message has been deviated/diverted because people use XML in government, but we ignor web authors. Now we are talking aboutg TUrtle andJSON. This is more about web authors and less about big data in data centers. I am ok to tweak RDF/XML if keeps it current with named grphas. 22:45:37 Jeremy: mistake to say RDF/XML is not compatibel with named grahs. Whole point is that a graphs has a name, the URL is it. Not such a big problem. 22:46:01 STefan D: we maintain compatibility of course, not choice. 22:46:27 Ivan: this is not the issue. Named graph is an example. Do we go extra mile to put the features in RDF/XML? or we we essentially freeze RDF/XML 22:46:48 Stefan: if we freeze it, then there is backwards incompatibility. 22:47:13 Stefan: we may need meta-features to have named graphs supported. 22:47:37 Ivan: if we accept change in model, do we add syntax into RDF/XML to cover it. 22:47:57 RC: we should not make the change unless we are prepared to do this. 22:48:17 SH: do we agree that any changes have to be such that RDF/XML is still viable. 22:49:00 MikeD: general agreement to update RDF/XML with any new features. 22:49:26 SH: poll: how many people comfortable with updating RDF/XML? 2/3 of people say yes. 22:49:46 DB: many people not like RDF/XML but many people want to do new version of RDF/XML. 22:49:53 DB; would it be backwards compatible? 22:50:00 SH: i think it shoudl be. 22:50:11 Dave: back compatibily is key. 22:50:26 Ivan: I fully agree. 22:50:43 Dave: if you have only old parser, ti will still work. 22:51:22 ANdy: you may protect the producers of information but you do not protect the consumers. 22:51:26 Axel: Any update on RDF/XML it MUST be backwards comaptibility 22:51:30 does backwards compatible mean not doing the wrong thing? 22:51:42 ekw has joined #rdfn 22:51:58 DW: the problems of what happens if you make a new RDF/XML format that looks like it is working, but does not quite work. IT woudl be trivial to make forma that will break parsers. 22:52:36 DW: URL is the name of the graph. IT is also true, yet againj, that some features of RDF donot serializ into RDF/XML or RDFa. 22:53:11 DW? what if we guarantee in new world tha tanything we can do in RDF we can do in Turtle. That is wher ewill will likey end up anyway. Lets find middl groud. 22:53:52 RC: I am scared by idea of revisiting RDF/ XML. This is worst possible things that can come out of this meeting. To me, it is horrible w/ only one things: consistently implemented. 22:54:40 RC:The ONLY good thing about RDF/XML is that it is truly interoperable, it works eveyr where as std syntax. Let us NOT BREAK IT! 22:55:12 RC: Lets leave it as it is. Lets move forward to using Turtle and JSON. 22:55:33 Jeremy: is RDF:atgraph too big a change ? 22:55:37 RC: not sure. 22:56:11 Jeremhy: we could have anoher RDF/XML that is identical but for this one thing. New namespace. 22:56:56 DB: only value in current RDF/XML is that it is a true standard. Otherwise just plain horrible. So why keep it around? Just move forward. 22:57:00 ? (Ontotext) ? 22:57:11 DB: that means using one parser instead of two. 22:57:41 s/keep it around/make a new version of it/ 22:57:43 ? ONtotext: yes. Jena's parser is most popular. Join with Sesame parser then you hve maybe 80% of all parsing convered. 22:57:58 to mscottm: thanks! 22:58:24 s/Just move forward/If turtle is standardized that, then why bother with a new version of RDF-XML? 22:58:25 SH: i think we are at diminishing returns. 22:59:05 DW: HTML5 experience makes it look like XHTML is deprecated. God only knows what will happen. 22:59:24 Ivan: we will see on mailing list when charter goes public what people think. Look forward to this. 23:01:06 Evan: I don't hate RDF/XML, so implicitly depracating it will send a very bad message. 23:01:40 Jeremyh: from semantics bfreakout.. we discussed arguments agains literals as subjects is that it breaks RDF/XML. 23:01:55 SH: so we don't want to break RDF/XML and we don't want to fix it? 23:02:03 Jeremy: maybe ask RDF atribute. 23:02:13 SH: need to do technical investigation. 23:02:27 Jeremy: literals as subjects is totally crap from this point of view. 23:02:35 DW: I agree, i had not thought of this before. 23:02:59 ====SEMANTICS BREAKOUT REPORT===== 23:04:41 Paul: inference rules. Not complete. 23:04:46 Jeremy: there is a bug. 23:04:52 dwood has joined #rdfn 23:05:16 Ivan: there are two things, one there is a bug. Two yo uhave to adopt putting a cap on underscore ? (did not get this). 23:05:56 Ivan: my question is whether we would propose to change semantics on that point 23:05:58 Peter: this is for later. 23:06:35 ? fix of adding one extra rule. 23:06:42 Ivan: bnodes cannot be in predciate positions. 23:07:08 ? this is the one. Extra rule you could add even if you disallow ? in ? position. 23:07:42 http://www.dcc.uchile.cl/~cgutierr/papers/minimal.pdf 23:07:46 Paul: bnodes... (reading the wiki notes) 23:08:34 ... this paper describes an alternative to ter Horst's approach of allowing non-RDF intermediate triples, by adding a new "implicit typing" rule to the RDFS inference rules 23:09:18 Paul: slolemizatoin, do not create URI of rit, but have a namespace. A namespace that is not a URI. 23:09:21 ... anyways, what almost everybody does is the "ter Horst" way, i.e. allowing some generalised RDF for interemediate triples 23:09:28 DB: this is one possibility, not recommending it per se. 23:10:05