IRC log of sparql on 2010-08-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:55:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:55:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/08/03-sparql-irc
13:55:39 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sparql
13:56:15 [LeeF]
trackbot, start meeting
13:56:17 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:56:19 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 77277
13:56:19 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:56:20 [trackbot]
Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:56:20 [trackbot]
Date: 03 August 2010
13:56:24 [LeeF]
zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:56:24 [Zakim]
ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:56:38 [LeeF]
Chair: AxelPolleres
13:57:15 [MattPerry]
MattPerry has joined #sparql
13:57:45 [AxelPolleres]
agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0168.html
13:58:32 [AxelPolleres]
lee, ok for you to scribe?
13:58:36 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:58:43 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
13:58:45 [bglimm]
bglimm has joined #sparql
13:58:51 [AndyS]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
13:58:51 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
13:58:58 [bglimm]
Zakim, passcode?
13:58:58 [Zakim]
the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), bglimm
13:59:17 [Zakim]
+AxelPolleres
13:59:26 [Zakim]
+kasei
13:59:30 [AxelPolleres]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
13:59:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei
13:59:35 [Zakim]
+Lee_Feigenbaum
13:59:37 [Zakim]
+bglimm
13:59:45 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
13:59:45 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
13:59:45 [kasei]
Zakim, mute me
13:59:46 [Zakim]
kasei should now be muted
13:59:51 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres, ok
13:59:56 [LeeF]
Scribenick: LeeF
14:00:04 [Zakim]
+MattPerry
14:01:07 [AxelPolleres]
regrets: sandro, chime
14:01:13 [LeeF]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0168.html
14:01:51 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: Plan is to continue from last week's meeting
14:01:56 [LeeF]
topic: Admin
14:02:04 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-27
14:02:34 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-27
14:02:56 [LeeF]
topic: Update Formal Model Teleconference
14:03:23 [Zakim]
+pgearon
14:03:35 [AxelPolleres]
Lee: reporting on update conf call
14:04:21 [AxelPolleres]
... we sketched out some examples on update on graphstore.
14:04:28 [AxelPolleres]
... up to editors now to implement
14:04:42 [LeeF]
LeeF: update call - consensus on definition of graph store state, operations as functions from graph store state to graph store state
14:04:48 [LeeF]
topic: Admin (Revisited)
14:04:54 [kasei]
regrets for next week
14:04:54 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: next call is one week from today, August 10
14:05:10 [LeeF]
... Olivier or Ivan next in line to scribe, followed by Axel
14:05:19 [AxelPolleres]
Axel can scribe, if noone else will
14:05:32 [LeeF]
topic: Comments
14:05:32 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments#WD_comments
14:05:51 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: two unaddressed comments
14:06:06 [LeeF]
... one is Jos's RIF comment - Chime is probably the owner of that comment
14:06:22 [AxelPolleres]
chime implicit owneer on JB-1
14:06:39 [LeeF]
... will talk about that when Sandro and Chime are around
14:06:42 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2010Aug/0003.html
14:06:45 [LeeF]
... other comment is Reto's recent comment
14:06:51 [LeeF]
q+
14:07:02 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: this comment touches on several drafts
14:07:12 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: I will draft a response
14:07:13 [LeeF]
q-
14:07:16 [AxelPolleres]
RK-1
14:07:17 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: axel to draft response to RK-1
14:07:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-287 - Draft response to RK-1 [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-10].
14:08:26 [LeeF]
topic: test cases vocabulary
14:08:30 [AxelPolleres]
topic: test case vocabulary
14:08:54 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0117.html
14:09:02 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0121.html
14:09:27 [AndyS]
First link is wrong?
14:10:31 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: where do we want to add the entailment regime?
14:10:39 [LeeF]
... then we need a URI for the graph
14:10:59 [AxelPolleres]
sd:entailmentRegime
14:11:05 [LeeF]
... if we use the SD entailment regime property then what is the subject of that?
14:11:24 [LeeF]
... if the graph itself then in one manifest file we would fix the entailment regime for a graph for all tests
14:11:30 [AndyS]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:11:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei (muted), Lee_Feigenbaum, bglimm (muted), MattPerry, pgearon
14:12:08 [LeeF]
... one proposal is to nest qt:data predicates
14:12:15 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:12:25 [AndyS]
q+
14:12:49 [Zakim]
+Souri
14:12:58 [Souri]
Souri has joined #sparql
14:13:13 [AndyS]
q-
14:13:47 [AxelPolleres]
qt:data [ qt:data <rdf01.ttl> ;
14:13:47 [AxelPolleres]
sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ] ;
14:13:51 [LeeF]
q+ to ask why can't entailment tests have additional constructs
14:13:56 [AxelPolleres]
qt:data [ owl:sameAs <rdf01.ttl> ;
14:13:57 [AxelPolleres]
sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ] ;
14:14:27 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0121.html
14:14:30 [bglimm]
But mine didn't allow for using different ent. regimes for different graphs
14:14:33 [LeeF]
qt:data <foo.ttl> ; qt:entailmentSetup [ qt:graph <foo.ttl> ; qt:regime ent:RDFS ]
14:14:47 [AndyS]
what about: [ qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime (<g> ent:RDF) ]
14:15:37 [LeeF]
AndyS: what Lee and I are trying to get to is to talk about the data and then annotate it with the entailment info that should also apply
14:17:03 [LeeF]
AndyS: We could go with Birte's setup where you have one entailment regime tested per query
14:17:44 [AndyS]
qt:worksOn [ qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDFS ]
14:18:50 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
14:19:08 [Souri]
+1 to simple proposal => one entailment regime for the query
14:19:28 [bglimm]
that would work for me
14:19:30 [bglimm]
yes
14:19:35 [AndyS]
qt:graphWithEnt [ qt:withNameAs <g1> ; qt:data <g> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDFS ]
14:19:42 [AndyS]
... but simple is good.
14:20:16 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: go with simple for now
14:20:32 [Zakim]
+Garlik
14:20:40 [SteveH]
Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me
14:20:40 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:20:42 [AxelPolleres]
let's go with the simple proposal from Birte for now, for more complex ones I will try to capture Lee's proposal for more complex ones.
14:21:31 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: we need the ability to refer to different graphs with the same name to describe the state of the graph store before and after an update
14:22:26 [LeeF]
AndyS: who's implemented these test cases?
14:22:30 [LeeF]
(silence)
14:22:37 [LeeF]
AndyS: getting to update soon, entailment later on
14:23:17 [bglimm]
I hope to soon start with entailment tests
14:24:16 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
14:24:16 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to reintroduce extra vocabulary for graphstore to solve issue on named graphs in update test cases
14:24:16 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-288 - Reintroduce extra vocabulary for graphstore to solve issue on named graphs in update test cases [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-10].
14:24:38 [chimezie]
Zakim, what is the passcode?
14:24:38 [Zakim]
the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), chimezie
14:24:40 [LeeF]
topic: issues
14:24:50 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: last time we ended with issue 23
14:24:53 [LeeF]
ISSUE-30?
14:24:53 [trackbot]
ISSUE-30 -- What RESTful update operations should be defined? -- open
14:24:53 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/30
14:25:18 [Zakim]
+ +1.216.445.aaaa
14:25:30 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management
14:25:42 [chimezie]
Zakim, +1.216.445.aaaa is me
14:25:42 [Zakim]
+chimezie; got it
14:26:11 [LeeF]
seconded
14:26:12 [AxelPolleres]
+1
14:26:45 [LeeF]
AndyS: what about PATCH?
14:26:48 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: it's mentioned informatively
14:26:50 [LeeF]
AndyS: OK
14:27:03 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-30 with the agreement that we will restrict ourselves to the operations mentioned in the current draft http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#graph-management
14:27:08 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-30
14:27:08 [trackbot]
ISSUE-30 What RESTful update operations should be defined? closed
14:27:36 [AxelPolleres]
ISSUE-33
14:27:36 [AxelPolleres]
Can we use the correct meaning of the full slate of HTTP errors when specifying the update protocol via WSDL?
14:27:42 [LeeF]
ISSUE-33?
14:27:42 [trackbot]
ISSUE-33 -- Can we use the correct meaning of the full slate of HTTP errors when specifying the update protocol via WSDL? -- open
14:27:42 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/33
14:28:56 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:29:03 [LeeF]
q-
14:29:12 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
14:29:12 [Zakim]
chimezie should now be muted
14:29:17 [LeeF]
ISSUE-35?
14:29:17 [trackbot]
ISSUE-35 -- Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)? -- open
14:29:17 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/35
14:29:29 [AndyS]
Yes. Done.
14:29:38 [chimezie]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:29:38 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei (muted), Lee_Feigenbaum, bglimm (muted), MattPerry, pgearon, Souri, SteveH, chimezie (muted)
14:29:49 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:30:28 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0134.html
14:30:36 [SteveH]
q+
14:30:41 [AxelPolleres]
SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X) {…}
14:30:42 [AxelPolleres]
-->
14:30:42 [AxelPolleres]
SELECT COUNT(?X)
14:30:42 [AxelPolleres]
{ SELECT DISTINCT ?X {…} }
14:30:48 [Zakim]
-SteveH
14:30:52 [SteveH]
sorry, wrong button!
14:31:10 [kasei]
what about COUNT(DISTINCT ?x) COUNT(?x)? very nasty subquery...?
14:31:20 [Zakim]
+Garlik
14:31:28 [SteveH]
Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me
14:31:28 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:31:43 [Zakim]
-SteveH
14:32:00 [Zakim]
+Garlik
14:32:03 [SteveH]
Zakim, Garlik is temporarily me
14:32:03 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:32:06 [AxelPolleres]
andy: it is already done and it's in the grammar
14:34:28 [SteveH]
+1 to having it in there
14:35:15 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT
14:35:31 [LeeF]
seconded
14:35:38 [SteveH]
+1
14:35:50 [Souri]
+1
14:35:53 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-35 with the understnading that all Aggregates can have DISTINCT
14:35:58 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-35
14:35:58 [trackbot]
ISSUE-35 Can aggregate functions take DISTINCT as an argument a la SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ?X)? closed
14:36:11 [LeeF]
ISSUE-37?
14:36:12 [trackbot]
ISSUE-37 -- How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? -- open
14:36:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/37
14:36:23 [AxelPolleres]
ISSUE-37
14:36:23 [AxelPolleres]
How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update?
14:36:38 [pgearon]
that's an issue that mostly bothers SteveH. IIRC
14:36:53 [SteveH]
sounds right
14:37:10 [AndyS]
Last week: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/18
14:37:49 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: do we need to say anything about the interaction of federated query with SPARQL Update?
14:38:15 [LeeF]
... SERVICE keyword in the WHERE clause does not seem to be a problem in terms of defining it
14:38:49 [pgearon]
+q
14:38:50 [LeeF]
... are there any other issues here?
14:38:57 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:39:01 [SteveH]
If that's the case it's al least worth a note in the update doc saying that it can have feedback effects
14:39:10 [AxelPolleres]
ack steveH
14:39:34 [LeeF]
ack pgearon
14:39:45 [LeeF]
pgearon: I don't think it's a big issue but worth mentioning in the udpate document
14:40:42 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects
14:41:01 [SteveH]
+1
14:41:01 [AndyS]
If update requests are truly atomic, it's a bit of a non-effect (atomic being a somewhat of an ideal)
14:41:11 [pgearon]
+1
14:41:19 [AndyS]
+1
14:41:21 [SteveH]
AndyS, not really, as the SERVICE request will happen inside a different context
14:41:34 [SteveH]
but it's certainly possible to live with
14:41:42 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-37 by adding a note to Update mentioning possible feedback effects
14:41:48 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-37
14:41:48 [trackbot]
ISSUE-37 How does basic federated query interact with SPARQL/Update? closed
14:42:14 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: paul to add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update
14:42:14 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-289 - Add a note on possible feedback effects of federated queries in update [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-10].
14:42:27 [LeeF]
ISSUE-39?
14:42:27 [trackbot]
ISSUE-39 -- Can variable used as aliases for expressions be themselves used in other expressions? -- open
14:42:27 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/39
14:42:42 [LeeF]
already resolved as far as I know - can be used further to the right
14:42:53 [AndyS]
agree with LeeF
14:42:59 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0274.html
14:43:01 [bglimm]
yes, I also remember that
14:43:16 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft handles that case in a clearly defined manner.
14:43:30 [LeeF]
seconded
14:43:55 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-39 with the insight that the current draft handles that case in a clearly defined manner.
14:44:02 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-39
14:44:02 [trackbot]
ISSUE-39 Can variable used as aliases for expressions be themselves used in other expressions? closed
14:44:09 [LeeF]
ISSUE-43?
14:44:09 [trackbot]
ISSUE-43 -- should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs? -- open
14:44:09 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/43
14:44:27 [AxelPolleres]
ISSUE-43 should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs?
14:44:47 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: Not sure if we can close this - we haven't really fleshed something out for use cases for this
14:44:58 [AndyS]
q+
14:45:02 [LeeF]
ack AndyS
14:45:16 [LeeF]
AndyS: the deployed systems I have can do queries over a mixture of entailments with different graphs
14:46:18 [pgearon]
+1
14:46:26 [kasei]
yes
14:46:27 [chimezie]
+1
14:46:28 [bglimm]
+1
14:46:40 [kasei]
although the SD currently has a shortcut way of saying that one entailment applies to all the graphs
14:46:49 [AxelPolleres]
strawpoll: close issue-43 by allowing differnt entailment regimes per graph
14:46:55 [AndyS]
+1
14:47:40 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes per graph
14:48:01 [bglimm]
yes
14:48:22 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs
14:48:24 [kasei]
q+ to ask if keeping sd:defaultEntailmentRegime is desirable (higher cost on SD consumers if we keep it I think)
14:48:29 [kasei]
Zakim, unmute me
14:48:29 [Zakim]
kasei should no longer be muted
14:48:47 [AndyS]
+1 to kasei
14:48:51 [bglimm]
Yes, I would still want it
14:49:15 [SteveH]
even higher cost if your store has 1M graphs
14:49:36 [bglimm]
Hm, at least it would spare me to write everywhere that we use OWL Direct Semantics, which is the only option for our system
14:50:38 [kasei]
Zakim, mute me
14:50:38 [Zakim]
kasei should now be muted
14:50:56 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-43 by allowing different entailment regimes over different graphs
14:51:03 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-43
14:51:03 [trackbot]
ISSUE-43 should entailment-regimes be declared over the whole dataset or individual graphs? closed
14:51:37 [AxelPolleres]
axel: we seem to have agreement to keep sd:defaultEntailmentRegime
14:51:54 [AxelPolleres]
ISSUE-44 Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge"
14:51:55 [LeeF]
ISSUE-44?
14:51:56 [trackbot]
ISSUE-44 -- Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge" -- open
14:51:56 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/44
14:52:40 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_
14:53:39 [LeeF]
seconded
14:53:43 [bglimm]
+1
14:53:46 [SteveH]
...reading
14:54:12 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-44 with the conclusion reached at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-06-07#__22_Networked_RDF_Knowledge__22_
14:54:18 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-44
14:54:18 [trackbot]
ISSUE-44 Suitability of term "networked RDF knowledge" closed
14:54:48 [LeeF]
ISSUE-47?
14:54:48 [trackbot]
ISSUE-47 -- Is MODIFY syntax required? -- open
14:54:48 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/47
14:55:05 [AxelPolleres]
ISSUE-47 Is MODIFY syntax required?
14:55:43 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009OctDec/0385.html
14:56:30 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:56:34 [LeeF]
Can we subjugate ISSUE-47 to ISSUE-59?
14:56:35 [pgearon]
+q
14:56:37 [kasei]
q-
14:57:04 [AndyS]
The exact syntax has gone, the mechanism is still there.
14:58:17 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4
14:58:20 [Zakim]
-MattPerry
14:58:45 [bglimm]
+1
14:59:09 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-47 with the insight that MODIFY is no longer supported as per resolution http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-03#resolution_4
14:59:17 [AxelPolleres]
close ISSUE-47
14:59:17 [trackbot]
ISSUE-47 Is MODIFY syntax required? closed
14:59:44 [Zakim]
-chimezie
14:59:44 [bglimm]
bye
14:59:45 [Zakim]
-Souri
14:59:47 [AxelPolleres]
adjourned
14:59:47 [Zakim]
-bglimm
14:59:48 [Zakim]
-pgearon
14:59:50 [Zakim]
-SteveH
14:59:52 [Zakim]
-kasei
14:59:54 [Zakim]
-AndyS
14:59:59 [Zakim]
-Lee_Feigenbaum
15:00:21 [kasei]
AndyS, question about PP doc...?
15:00:44 [AxelPolleres]
rrsagent, make records public
15:01:51 [AndyS]
kasei, need to be a quick Q
15:01:55 [AxelPolleres]
summary: closed many issues, will continue at ISSUE-48 next time
15:02:07 [AxelPolleres]
member:rrsagent, make records public
15:02:07 [kasei]
I see "A path of length zero connects a graph node to itself," but also in Defn of ZeroLengthPath "also any IRIs explicitly given as endpoints".
15:02:18 [kasei]
graph node? or IRI? (what about literals?)
15:02:21 [AxelPolleres]
rrsagent, make records public
15:02:31 [AndyS]
IRI is wrong - "RDF term"
15:02:43 [kasei]
ok, great. thanks.
15:02:43 [AndyS]
we do blank nodes as well :-)
15:02:50 [Zakim]
-AxelPolleres
15:02:51 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:02:53 [Zakim]
Attendees were AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei, Lee_Feigenbaum, bglimm, MattPerry, pgearon, Souri, SteveH, chimezie
15:03:02 [AxelPolleres]
thanks lee for scribing!
15:03:03 [kasei]
yeah, but they can't be named explicitly...
15:03:15 [AndyS]
and the algorithm description for "arb path" is to be ignored - reworking it currently.
15:03:20 [kasei]
they're taken care of by "matches subjects and all objects"
15:03:47 [kasei]
ah, ok. i was about half way through working it out
15:04:13 [AndyS]
"explicitly" given can arise from a path expansion.
15:04:54 [AxelPolleres]
minutes up at: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-08-03
15:07:19 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has left #sparql
15:14:53 [bglimm]
bglimm has left #sparql
15:22:19 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
16:18:29 [SteveH__]
SteveH__ has joined #sparql
17:10:18 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sparql
18:32:58 [bglimm]
bglimm has joined #sparql
18:38:24 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
19:27:23 [bglimm]
bglimm has joined #sparql
19:42:24 [yoyoyo]
yoyoyo has joined #sparql
19:43:00 [yoyoyo]
hi, is there a forum where i can post some questions about sparql query results?
19:44:27 [yoyoyo]
yoyoyo has joined #sparql