14:58:09 RRSAgent has joined #sparql 14:58:09 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-sparql-irc 14:58:11 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:58:12 Zakim has joined #sparql 14:58:13 Zakim, this will be 77277 14:58:14 ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes 14:58:14 Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference 14:58:14 Date: 25 January 2011 14:58:17 zakim, this will be SPARQL 14:58:18 ok, LeeF, I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM already started 14:58:19 Chair: LeeF 14:58:21 Scribe: sandro 14:58:24 Scribenick: sandro 14:58:28 MattPerry has joined #sparql 14:58:30 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-01-25 14:58:32 Regrets: Chimezie 14:58:33 Zakim, who's on the phone? 14:58:40 On the phone I see pgearon, +44.208.439.aaaa 14:58:51 Zakim, aaaa is [Garlik] 14:58:56 +[Garlik]; got it 14:58:58 + +1.617.553.aabb 14:59:00 +??P11 14:59:03 zakim, aabb is me 14:59:04 Zakim, [Garlik] is temporarily me 14:59:07 zakim, ??P11 is me 14:59:16 +LeeF; got it 14:59:20 +SteveH; got it 14:59:20 NickH has joined #sparql 14:59:22 +AndyS; got it 14:59:28 + +33.4.92.38.aacc 14:59:36 zakim, who is speaking? 14:59:47 zakim, aacc is me 14:59:50 +AxelPolleres 14:59:54 +ocorby; got it 14:59:56 AndyS, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: LeeF (73%), AxelPolleres (4%) 14:59:58 + +1.603.897.aadd 15:00:03 +kasei 15:00:06 zakim, aadd is me 15:00:06 +MattPerry; got it 15:00:09 +sandro 15:00:22 +??P19 15:00:33 +??P21 15:00:33 zakim, ??P19 is me 15:00:35 +NickH; got it 15:00:47 zakim, ??P21 is me 15:00:47 +cbuilara; got it 15:00:54 zakim, who's on the phone? 15:00:54 On the phone I see pgearon, SteveH, LeeF, AndyS, ocorby, AxelPolleres, MattPerry, kasei, sandro, NickH, cbuilara 15:01:16 Zakim, passcode? 15:01:16 the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), bglimm 15:01:20 scribe: sandro 15:01:31 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-01-25 15:01:36 topic: Admin 15:01:41 PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-01-18 15:02:17 LeeF: main thing last week was what to do with Bindings spec 15:02:20 seconded 15:02:27 RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-01-18 15:02:31 bglimm, keep trying. 15:02:36 Next regular meeting: 2011-02-01 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Greg) 15:02:59 bglimm, different countries wont help with this problem. 15:03:35 LeeF: Chime is switching jobs, and wont be able to make telecons, but will still be active in WG via email. 15:03:36 + +44.186.528.aaee 15:03:44 Zakim, +44.186.528.a is me 15:03:51 Zakim, mute me 15:03:51 +bglimm; got it 15:04:08 bglimm should now be muted 15:04:23 LeeF: I'd like to a regular pattern for telecons of status checks, converging on Last Call. Checking on comments, documments, reviews, etc. That's the agenda today and for the next few weeks. 15:05:07 Regrets: Chimezie, Alex 15:05:35 NicoM has joined #sparql 15:05:42 q+ to suggest we ack comments quickly as it's taking time to deal with them 15:06:24 Axel: Anyone willing to take HK2 15:06:28 HK-2 on update ... 15:06:46 LeeF: should be an Update editor. Paul? 15:06:57 Paul: I'll give it a try 15:06:59 -pgearon 15:07:02 ack AndyS 15:07:02 AndyS, you wanted to suggest we ack comments quickly as it's taking time to deal with them 15:07:08 argh. back in a moment..... 15:07:41 +pgearon 15:07:46 (should I record this as an action? Lee: no, we'll just use the wiki page.) 15:09:16 sandro: it's possible to automate the "please wait, we're working on it" 15:09:25 lee: I don't mind confirming them by hand. 15:09:47 lee: let's let all outstanding commenters know they haven't been forgotten, and do it for the future within a few days. 15:09:51 (sounds great) 15:09:58 ACTION: Lee to let commenters with open comments know that they're not forgotten 15:09:58 Created ACTION-378 - Let commenters with open comments know that they're not forgotten [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-02-01]. 15:12:42 AndyS: I could use help responding to comments on json document 15:12:44 q+ 15:12:51 ack sandro 15:13:22 sandro: did you mean "substantive" in the sense of "big" or "changes to format" ? 15:13:35 +q 15:13:51 lee: I don't think the WG was looking for changes to format. 15:14:11 lee: same comments as before -- json format is kinda too verbose since it's XML-inspired. 15:14:20 sandro: ah, okay. 15:14:21 ack pgearon 15:14:34 lee: not so much "it's broken" as "it would be nice if..." 15:14:51 paul: I dont want to see the json format change, but the document is pretty much unacceptable in its current format. 15:15:10 paul: I think Richard (cygri) and I agree on the comments 15:15:20 lee: it just needs a few hours of wordsmithing. 15:15:48 lee: if someone wants to help Andy, that'd be great. query is more urgent, though. 15:15:55 I'll send "thx for the comments" messages 15:16:13 axel: one comment on Uniform HTTP protocol 15:16:20 axel: (http delete) 15:16:41 axel: two things on uniqueness of blank nodes, and not-exists vs minus. 15:16:46 axel: I can draft answers. 15:17:08 axel: but someone else please handle the HTTP Delete one. 15:17:16 lee: We'll ask Chime to do that one. 15:17:31 ACTION: Lee to ask Chimezie to look at KK-6 and GR-3 15:17:31 Created ACTION-379 - Ask Chimezie to look at KK-6 and GR-3 [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-02-01]. 15:17:46 topic: Last Call Status 15:17:56 http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/To_Last_Call 15:18:30 Lee: Service Description has two reviews, responded to, reaching convergence. In very good shape. 15:18:47 greg: a few bits waiting on other docs, or responses from people. 15:18:49 Zakim, unmute me 15:18:49 bglimm should no longer be muted 15:19:04 LeeF: Entailment, waiting for reviews from folks who agreed to do it. 15:19:13 sure 15:19:27 Zakim, mute me 15:19:27 bglimm should now be muted 15:19:34 LeeF: Query -- plenty of references about editing continuing 15:19:50 Lee: Any idea when it will be ready to review 15:20:12 Steve: I'm hoping some time this week (unintelligible) 15:20:33 Andy: three things to due. head-to-tail edit to get references right, and go through formal section to check it. 15:20:41 Lee: some time next week? 15:20:47 Andy: I can't promise times. 15:21:44 Lee: Update? 15:22:07 Paul: all recent things mentioned about Update have been done. But I wouldnt say the document is complete. 15:22:49 Lee: need conversation with Alex and you (Paul). if you have nothing on todo list, then we should have it reviewed. 15:23:30 q+ 15:23:46 ack SteveH 15:24:06 SteveH: What about Update vs Query vs other stuff on left side of equals? update= ? 15:24:20 lee: as I recall, we settled on update= I think. 15:24:35 q+ 15:24:42 ack kasei 15:24:50 q+ 15:25:12 greg: We agreed you can have multiple operations, including a query. So maybe it should be: request= 15:25:26 ?? last one is a query? I 15:25:33 SteveH: Did we really say the last thing might be a query?? 15:25:37 Lee: news to me, too! 15:26:04 ack pgearon 15:26:05 greg: I thought in transactionality, we said the last thing was you could pull data out, even if it's not really atomic. 15:26:19 paul: We were talking about it, but I thought we decided against it. 15:26:26 paul: it's not in Update now 15:26:30 greg: Okay. 15:27:02 paul: Andy commented on Update section 3.1.2 editors note, about graph triples with bnodes. That's still to be discussed..... 15:27:31 lee: please send msg to mailing list 15:27:47 -SteveH 15:27:49 update= 15:27:54 request= 15:27:58 lee: straw poll on update= vs request= 15:28:10 0 15:28:23 request= 15:28:28 request= 15:28:29 request= 15:28:34 update= 15:28:35 update= 15:28:36 0 15:28:38 0 15:28:42 0 15:28:43 request= 15:28:52 +[Garlik] 15:28:57 -ocorby 15:29:23 (update= is OK - not a strong feeling) 15:29:31 q+ 15:29:37 ack AxelPolleres 15:29:56 undecided, tendency to update 15:29:57 axel: I kind of like query= [query doc] update= [update doc] 15:30:06 q+ 15:30:10 ack kasei 15:30:14 lee: update request === request= 15:30:47 greg: because it's form encoding, with a single form.... 15:30:57 greg: would request= accept a query? 15:31:12 ...we could support both update=(update) request=(either) 15:31:29 + +34.92.38.aaff 15:31:46 zakim, aaff is me 15:31:46 +ocorby; got it 15:32:34 I see that protocol uses "request" more than I remember so I'll go with update= ["request=" either is worrying] 15:32:48 lee: could be query=queries, update=updates, request=anything 15:33:20 q+ 15:33:25 ack AndyS 15:33:59 AndyS: I'm not keen on a std way of doing both. I want to keep them as separate as possible. Worried about injection attacks, etc. 15:34:08 lee: what about Greg's web form? 15:34:31 AndyS: A processor can offer both at the same endpoint. I don't want to not know until parsing. 15:34:45 I also have AndyS's concerns 15:35:05 LeeF: Even if a processor offers both, that doesn't solve the HTML form use case. 15:35:32 AndyS: A form is going to do different things on the results anyway, so it'll need to look at the text anyway. 15:35:43 ...it's actually very hard to get it right, but eay to hack 15:35:43 that still will require javascript client-side, right? 15:36:15 straw poll: update=, request=, request= 15:36:20 or server side, kasei, at something between the client and sparql. 15:36:30 update= 15:36:37 update= 15:36:40 upate= 15:36:41 update= 15:36:43 update= 15:36:44 update= or request=update. 15:36:49 update=, or request=, no preference between those two 15:36:57 update= 15:37:08 happy to support an update-only term, but want one that supports both. 15:37:56 ISSUE: Does the SPARQL Protocol need a single form parameter that can take either a query string or an update request string? 15:37:56 Created ISSUE-65 - Does the SPARQL Protocol need a single form parameter that can take either a query string or an update request string? ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/65/edit . 15:38:12 can we resolve this one? 15:38:59 PROPOSED: SPARQL Protocol uses the form parameter name "update" for update requests 15:39:21 seconded 15:39:28 +1 15:39:34 +1 15:39:36 RESOLVED: SPARQL Protocol uses the form parameter name "update" for update requests 15:40:08 Lee: Uniform HTTP Protocol 15:40:31 lee: chime just sent a summary of changes. I need to check with him to see if there are any open issues. I don't think the thread is totally up to date. 15:40:44 lee: I think it's nearly ready for review, but I'll check with Chime 15:40:52 lee: we DO need to decide on name for document. 15:41:27 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0088.html 15:41:31 sandro: no process/techincal problems. 15:42:57 Lee: note's Chime: My personal preference is 12 and 6 15:43:19 lee: "dataset" seems a little confusing since operations deal mostly with graphs. 15:43:44 sandro: what was the response to that? 15:44:05 lee: while the protocol deals with indiv graphs, they're part of a dataset. 15:44:26 lee: when you use graph= you're referencing a graph withing a dataset. 15:44:26 good summary. 15:45:45 sandro: if we take "SPARQL 1.1" out, then what about other document titles? 15:45:47 ?graph= is SPARQL-y 15:45:56 Lee: Well, there's no real SPARQL going over the wire here. 15:46:15 would "RESTful RDF Dataset Protocol" be accepted as yet another alternative? 15:46:32 Or "RDF Dataset Protocol" ? 15:46:51 RESTful isn't offical terminology? 15:47:29 Lee: strawpoll, type in preference 15:47:30 1 15:47:33 8,7 15:47:43 1,4,5 <- all ok 15:47:50 6 then 4 or 3 15:47:58 6 15:48:02 1,4,5 (i'm with Steve) - analogoous without SPARQL1.1 ok with me too 15:48:05 6 or 12 15:48:06 1 15:48:11 8 15:48:14 8,2, 12,6 15:48:23 (in that order) 15:48:24 6 15:48:47 12, 6 15:49:47 strawpoll on graph/dataset? 15:49:53 Include SPARQL 1.1 in the name or not? 15:49:58 yes 15:49:59 yes 15:49:59 yes 15:50:02 yes 15:50:02 yes 15:50:03 0 15:50:03 no 15:50:05 no 15:50:07 0 15:50:07 0 15:50:08 0 15:50:14 yes 15:50:39 given that we want to include SPARQL 1.1 branding, please indicate preference of names 1-6 15:50:41 if we have SPARQL 1.1 RDF is a bit redundant 15:50:48 6, 4 15:50:54 1,4,5 15:50:55 1,4,5 15:50:56 1 15:50:59 6 15:50:59 2,6 15:51:02 6 15:51:02 6,4 15:51:02 1 15:51:05 5,4 15:51:06 6 15:51:12 3 15:51:13 3 15:51:14 :-) 15:51:31 1 - 4 mentions 15:51:36 2 - 1 mention 15:51:41 3 - 2 mentions 15:51:47 4 - 5 mentions 15:51:48 (really 0, I think. I cant decide) 15:51:52 5 - 3 mentions 15:52:00 6 - 6 mentions 15:52:54 4 15:52:55 Lee: only 4 and 6: pick one 15:52:56 4 15:52:57 between 6 and 4 which would you prefer? 15:53:01 4 15:53:05 4 15:53:07 4 15:53:25 6 15:53:26 6 15:53:26 6 15:53:27 errr, please change my 4 to a 6, sorry. 15:53:33 6 15:53:36 6 15:53:42 4 15:53:57 64 but really neutral - agreement more important 15:54:27 sandro: plus count Chime as a 6. 15:54:49 HTTP is probably redundant 15:54:53 but other than that it's fine 15:55:06 http is in the short name :-) 15:55:08 Yeah, I figure people will not bother to say "HTTP" 15:55:11 SPARQL 1.1 RDF Dataset HTTP Protocol 15:55:17 SPARQL 1.1 RDF Dataset Protocol 15:55:39 RDF is also a bit redundant, but lets not go there :) 15:55:40 I think the HTTP bit is important 15:55:56 short name has http in it. 15:56:07 sparql11-http-rdf-update/ 15:56:25 strawpoll: include "HTTP" or not? 15:56:33 Yes 15:56:37 0 15:56:39 yes 15:56:39 no, but 0.5 15:56:40 0 15:56:44 0 15:56:45 no 15:56:49 0 15:56:56 0 15:57:00 0 15:57:11 yes 15:57:13 if we take out http, then we definitly have to revisit the short name 15:57:28 the short name is odd whatever 15:58:03 PROPOSED: Rename "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" to "SPARQL 1.1 RDF Dataset HTTP Protocol" 15:58:11 +1 15:58:24 RESOLVED: Rename "SPARQL 1.1 Uniform HTTP Protocol for Managing RDF Graphs" to "SPARQL 1.1 RDF Dataset HTTP Protocol" 16:00:05 so are the current bind08.srx results correct? 16:00:47 ah, ok. then i don't understand the issue. need to read more about it... 16:00:54 Would be "cp bind-05.srx bind08.srx" 16:01:08 lee: Federated Query. Carlos? 16:01:31 ADJOURN 16:01:36 Zakim, unmute me 16:01:38 BINDINGS in rq25 now. Carlos - hope it's not too short. 16:01:40 bye 16:01:45 bye 16:01:52 bye 16:01:54 bye, thanks. 16:01:57 bye 16:01:58 I will chek it Andy 16:02:13 Carlos - thanks 16:02:15 AxelPolleres has left #sparql 16:02:43 bglimm should no longer be muted 16:02:53 -LeeF 16:02:55 -sandro 16:03:05 -AxelPolleres 16:03:07 -cbuilara 16:03:11 -ocorby 16:03:13 -AndyS 16:03:17 -[Garlik] 16:03:26 -pgearon 16:03:28 -NickH 16:03:30 -MattPerry 16:03:34 -bglimm 16:20:25 LeeF, do we have world readable logs of this IRC session? 16:30:38 RRSAgent, make logs world 16:30:41 now we do :) 16:30:54 RRSAgent, pointer? 16:30:54 See http://www.w3.org/2011/01/25-sparql-irc#T16-30-54 16:31:32 thanks Lee 16:35:01 disconnecting the lone participant, kasei, in SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM 16:35:06 SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended 16:35:07 Attendees were pgearon, +44.208.439.aaaa, +1.617.553.aabb, LeeF, SteveH, AndyS, +33.4.92.38.aacc, AxelPolleres, ocorby, +1.603.897.aadd, kasei, MattPerry, sandro, NickH, cbuilara, 16:35:10 ... +44.186.528.aaee, bglimm, [Garlik], +34.92.38.aaff 18:30:20 Zakim has left #sparql 18:56:12 SteveH has joined #sparql