IRC log of sparql on 2011-03-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:54:44 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sparql
14:54:44 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:54:46 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:54:46 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sparql
14:54:48 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 77277
14:54:48 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
14:54:49 [trackbot]
Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
14:54:49 [trackbot]
Date: 08 March 2011
14:54:51 [LeeF]
zakim, this will be SPARQL
14:54:51 [Zakim]
ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
14:54:53 [LeeF]
Chair: LeeF
14:55:02 [LeeF]
14:55:13 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
14:55:17 [LeeF]
Scribenick: pgearon
14:55:20 [Zakim]
14:55:25 [NickH]
NickH has joined #sparql
14:55:54 [SteveH_]
SteveH_ has joined #sparql
14:56:54 [NickH]
Zakim, ??P7 is me
14:56:54 [Zakim]
+NickH; got it
14:57:08 [NicoM]
NicoM has joined #sparql
14:57:18 [Zakim]
14:57:29 [Zakim]
14:57:36 [AndyS]
zakim, IPCaller is me
14:57:36 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
14:57:42 [Zakim]
14:57:52 [Zakim]
14:58:43 [kasei]
Zakim, mute me
14:58:43 [Zakim]
kasei should now be muted
14:59:49 [Zakim]
14:59:52 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
14:59:57 [SteveH]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:59:57 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
15:00:10 [Zakim]
15:00:20 [Zakim]
15:00:27 [pgearon]
15:00:31 [MattPerry]
MattPerry has joined #sparql
15:00:35 [LeeF]
paul, are you ok to scribe today?
15:00:43 [pgearon]
yes, I can scribe
15:00:46 [LeeF]
15:00:48 [Zakim]
+ +1.216.368.aaaa
15:00:54 [chimezie]
Zakim, +1.216.368.aaaa is me
15:00:54 [Zakim]
+chimezie; got it
15:01:13 [Zakim]
15:01:43 [LeeF]
zakim, who's on the phone?
15:01:43 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, LeeF, AndyS, NicoM, kasei (muted), SteveH, Sandro, pgearon, chimezie, MattPerry
15:02:25 [LeeF]
topic: Admin
15:02:26 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at
15:03:02 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at
15:03:13 [LeeF]
Next regular meeting: 2011-03-15 @ 14:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Andy S) NOTE DIFFERENT TIME FOR NON-US LOCATIONS
15:05:14 [bglimm]
bglimm has joined #sparql
15:05:31 [LeeF]
topic: To Last Call
15:06:33 [LeeF]
bglimm, we are wondering if you intend to look at the formal section of SPARQL Query when you have a chance?
15:07:04 [pgearon]
SteveH: Query in the same state as last time
15:07:12 [Zakim]
15:07:25 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
15:07:25 [Zakim]
chimezie should now be muted
15:08:11 [pgearon]
bglimm: will still have a look at the formal section soon
15:08:56 [pgearon]
Not much happened. The main thing still outstanding is the BNode issue
15:09:11 [pgearon]
If there's anything else that needs doing, then someone should point it out
15:09:32 [pgearon]
I was under the impression that all outstanding issues were handled (except test data)
15:09:37 [kasei]
15:10:18 [pgearon]
for AndyS... That was a few weeks ago now, so my memory isn't clear, but I think so yes
15:11:04 [pgearon]
LeeF: AndyS and kasei to be asked to review Update at their convenience
15:11:17 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
15:11:17 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
15:11:58 [LeeF]
15:12:42 [pgearon]
LeeF: some progress for "Protocol"
15:12:54 [kasei]
Zakim, unmute me
15:12:54 [Zakim]
kasei should no longer be muted
15:13:10 [pgearon]
LeeF: Service Description
15:13:55 [LeeF]
"Add link to discussion on empty graphs in the Update document (when such a section exists) "
15:14:47 [pgearon]
for LeeF: no, I wasn't
15:15:34 [pgearon]
kasei: service description describes dropping empty graphs
15:16:00 [pgearon]
kasei: supporting empty graphs
15:16:11 [pgearon]
LeeF: this needs to have some reference in the Update document
15:16:36 [LeeF]
15:17:21 [pgearon]
kasei: Update doc describes dropping graphs. Not clear from this description if it describes supporting empty graphs
15:17:58 [pgearon]
LeeF: Update may not need to say what is supported in a store. Service description can describe this
15:18:59 [LeeF]
15:19:14 [LeeF]
ACTION: Lee to propose text for SD document explaining 3.4.7 sd:EmptyGraphs
15:19:15 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-406 - Propose text for SD document explaining 3.4.7 sd:EmptyGraphs [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-03-15].
15:19:43 [pgearon]
In the DROP section I was trying to describe how a store would behave in the 2 situations: 1. supporting empty graphs. 2. Not recording empty graphs. I tried hard not to commit to saying what should/should not be supported
15:20:09 [LeeF]
pgearon, thanks, I'll take a look at that too
15:20:28 [pgearon]
kasei: would like someone to glance at conformance section for service description
15:21:16 [pgearon]
kasei: conformance section says, "must include one triple". AndyS would like this to say, "must include at least one triple"
15:21:23 [LeeF]
ACTION: Greg to change conformance section in SD to refer to including "at least" one triple...
15:21:23 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-407 - Change conformance section in SD to refer to including "at least" one triple... [on Gregory Williams - due 2011-03-15].
15:21:24 [SteveH]
+1 to that
15:21:33 [LeeF]
ACTION: Andy to look over current conformance section in service description modulo "at least" change from ACTION-407
15:21:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-408 - Look over current conformance section in service description modulo "at least" change from ACTION-407 [on Andy Seaborne - due 2011-03-15].
15:21:56 [pgearon]
LeeF: HTTP protocol document
15:21:59 [kasei]
Zakim, mute me
15:21:59 [Zakim]
kasei should now be muted
15:22:11 [chimezie]
Zakim, unmute me
15:22:11 [Zakim]
chimezie should no longer be muted
15:22:57 [pgearon]
LeeF: comments on relationship to service description. Also comment from Leigh Dodds with other operations that might be included
15:23:29 [pgearon]
chimezie: Thinks that operations in POST are beyond scope, but we should have this discussion
15:23:47 [pgearon]
LeeF: will come back to new operations
15:24:05 [pgearon]
LeeF: SteveH still has pending review on this doc
15:24:18 [pgearon]
LeeF: Entailment document
15:24:34 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
15:24:34 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
15:24:53 [pgearon]
LeeF: received review from Jay. Should mark this off on Wiki page. Still waiting on review from Clark and Parsia
15:25:29 [pgearon]
LeeF: to bglimm, should we discuss D-entailment today?
15:26:29 [pgearon]
LeeF: JSON doc waiting for reviewers to have some time
15:26:33 [bglimm]
I reminded C&P (talked o Hector) and he'll try to push Evren who is doing the review
15:26:36 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
15:26:36 [Zakim]
chimezie should now be muted
15:27:40 [pgearon]
LeeF: can people please consider tests as we get closer to LC
15:28:17 [pgearon]
LeeF: also need to review existing tests, as these have taken a back seat to editorial issues recently
15:28:19 [AndyS]
405 is done
15:28:34 [bglimm]
I think I had one, which I completed, but can't remember what it was
15:28:42 [AndyS]
.. that was 405.
15:28:50 [bglimm]
I'll search for it
15:28:56 [LeeF]
trackbot, close ACTION-405
15:28:57 [trackbot]
ACTION-405 Draft xml for revised Extending BGP matching section for query closed
15:28:58 [kasei]
LeeF, I've completed 396 and 403
15:28:59 [bglimm]
15:29:07 [bglimm]
15:29:14 [LeeF]
trackbot, close ACTION-396
15:29:14 [trackbot]
ACTION-396 Contact chime on Dataset Update Protocol issue closed
15:29:28 [LeeF]
trackbot, close ACTION-403
15:29:28 [trackbot]
ACTION-403 Answer to with counterexample to JB-2 closed
15:29:37 [bglimm]
398 I also did
15:29:47 [bglimm]
prepare test cases for approval
15:29:51 [LeeF]
trackbot, close ACTION-398
15:29:51 [trackbot]
ACTION-398 Prepare entailment tests for next week for approval closed
15:29:57 [bglimm]
Axel looked at them too
15:30:06 [LeeF]
topic: Blank nodes in DELETE templates
15:30:08 [pgearon]
LeeF: Next topic. Blank nodes in DELETE templates
15:31:20 [pgearon]
LeeF: resolution was for blank nodes to represent wildcards when deleting
15:31:39 [LeeF]
15:31:44 [pgearon]
LeeF: recently SteveH, AndyS, pgearon found issues around implementation
15:32:13 [SteveH]
andy didn't capture my preference which was make it an error
15:32:14 [pgearon]
LeeF: AndyS also did work on how to delete lists without this "shortcut"
15:32:31 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: SPARQL 1.1 Update forbids blank nodes in DELETE templates
15:33:07 [SteveH]
15:33:10 [bglimm]
15:33:11 [pgearon]
LeeF: does anyone have anything further to discuss on this, or serious concerns?
15:33:26 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: SPARQL 1.1 Update forbids blank nodes in DELETE templates
15:33:43 [pgearon]
15:34:00 [pgearon]
I'll change it either way, but an action helps track it
15:34:02 [LeeF]
ACTION: Paul to edit Update document to note that blank nodes in DELETE templates are an error
15:34:03 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-409 - Edit Update document to note that blank nodes in DELETE templates are an error [on Paul Gearon - due 2011-03-15].
15:34:20 [LeeF]
topic: Dataset protocol & service description
15:35:14 [pgearon]
LeeF: service description initially conceived as description of features and capabilities of endpoints supporting SPARQL protocol
15:35:45 [pgearon]
LeeF: scope expanded to description of things like endpoint URLs
15:36:45 [pgearon]
LeeF: do we need additions to service description to include dataset protocol. Preference is to not make large changes
15:36:49 [chimezie]
Zakim, unmute me
15:36:49 [Zakim]
chimezie should no longer be muted
15:37:15 [chimezie]
15:37:19 [chimezie]
15:37:23 [pgearon]
chimezie: main comments are from Leigh Dodds and Rob Vesse
15:37:38 [pgearon]
chimezie: Leigh wants to do GET/PUT on protocol
15:37:47 [LeeF]
s/protocol/graph store
15:38:30 [LeeF]
Leigh asks: how do you find the URL to POST new graphs to?
15:38:47 [pgearon]
chimezie: Leigh has question on graph store being a dataset, but don't think it is
15:39:05 [LeeF]
Leigh would also want to implement the dataset protocol without exposing SPARQL query or SPARQL update endpoints, but SD document assumes that you're talking about SPARQL protocol & not dataset protocol
15:39:20 [LeeF]
Rob V says similar comments
15:40:01 [LeeF]
Greg proposed including a RESTDataset class, but not more substantive changes at this time
15:40:06 [Zakim]
15:40:26 [LeeF]
chimezie: there's currently an informative section in dataset protocol document talking about relationship with SD
15:40:33 [chimezie]
15:40:33 [LeeF]
... could introduce vocabulary there
15:40:39 [chimezie]
15:41:20 [kasei]
I don't understand what sd:defaultGraphStoreDescription would mean.
15:41:26 [LeeF]
15:41:39 [Zakim]
15:41:46 [NickH]
Zakim, ??P7 is me
15:41:46 [Zakim]
+NickH; got it
15:42:05 [LeeF]
q+ to ask if it really needs to support update
15:42:44 [pgearon]
chimezie: current relationship between services and dataset in the service desc doc
15:42:52 [chimezie]
15:43:07 [pgearon]
chimezie: can't reuse this term because the range is Dataset
15:43:09 [LeeF]
the range of that term is sd:Dataset
15:43:25 [pgearon]
chimezie: my understanding is that a graph store is not a dataset
15:43:28 [AndyS]
q+ to talk about g-boxes and g-snaps
15:43:28 [kasei]
Zakim, unmute me
15:43:30 [Zakim]
kasei should no longer be muted
15:43:38 [pgearon]
chimezie: new term would be the same thing, but relates service to a graph store instead
15:43:51 [pgearon]
LeeF: do we need to define a graph store class?
15:44:35 [LeeF]
chimezie: the object of the sd:defaultGraphStoreDescription would be the URL against which dataset protocol operations should be sent
15:44:52 [LeeF]
kasei: but it's the dataset protocol, not the graph store protocol?
15:45:14 [sandro]
15:46:01 [LeeF]
what about sd:datasetProtocolLocation or something ?
15:46:02 [sandro]
q+ to say I think a dataset can be mutable even if a graph isn't -- in changing it, you're changing what graphs are in it
15:46:15 [pgearon]
chimezie: if we're going to say that a graph store is not a dataset then don't know if protocol or SD docs are the place to say that
15:46:25 [LeeF]
ack AndyS
15:46:25 [Zakim]
AndyS, you wanted to talk about g-boxes and g-snaps
15:47:23 [sandro]
(but datasets in SPARQL *do* change, right?)
15:47:58 [kasei]
isn't the dataset protocol about moving from one dataset to another?
15:48:05 [LeeF]
sandro: don't all existing implementations of SPARQL 1.0 involve datasets changing?
15:48:41 [LeeF]
AndyS: it's not the dataset which is changing, it's what the service is currently supporting that is changing
15:48:56 [LeeF]
sandro: do people conceptualize this as replacing one dataset from another ?
15:49:06 [chimezie]
thread on mutability of datasets and graphs:
15:49:15 [LeeF]
AndyS: not necessarily, but in the same way that people using a programming language think of sets as mutable, even though mathematical sets are immutable
15:49:27 [LeeF]
sandro: wonder if treating datasets as a mutable structure is a simple way to deal with this ?
15:49:35 [LeeF]
AndyS: we call the mutable structure a graph store
15:50:07 [LeeF]
sandro: seems somewhat confusing to draw this distinction
15:50:15 [LeeF]
AndyS: changing update document to remove term "graph store" would be a big change
15:51:22 [pgearon]
AndyS: the slight trick is that we don't put datasets on the web. We put graphs on the web
15:51:37 [pgearon]
AndyS: don't have a theory of datasets as computational objects
15:51:40 [Zakim]
15:52:21 [kasei]
15:52:25 [LeeF]
AndyS: is it a dataset protocol?
15:52:38 [Zakim]
+ +41.86.528.aabb
15:52:47 [bglimm]
Zakim, +41.86.528.aabb is me
15:52:47 [Zakim]
+bglimm; got it
15:52:58 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
15:52:58 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
15:53:19 [LeeF]
ack kasei
15:53:25 [AndyS]
15:53:44 [LeeF]
kasei: hesitant to split up definition of SD across multiple documents
15:53:57 [LeeF]
... there's a lot of value to having it contained to one document
15:54:28 [LeeF]
kasei: would sd:defaultGraphStoreDescription be used in addition to sd:defaultDatasetDescription for services that implement both protocols?
15:54:35 [LeeF]
chimezie: the name probably isn't great
15:54:47 [LeeF]
chimezie: my intuition is that it would use both
15:54:51 [sandro]
15:55:45 [LeeF]
kasei: i thought we accomplish this already by typing an existing dataset as a RESTDataset
15:56:18 [LeeF]
chimezie: we don't have an explicit axiom saying a RESTDataset is disjoint from a Dataset, but there's an implication that they are disjoint, so it would be confusing to use them in that way
15:56:37 [LeeF]
kasei: we may run into problems because people are not going to understand that they're disjoint
15:56:53 [LeeF]
kasei: i think of one as a mutable version of the other, or an access point to move from one dataset to the next
15:57:28 [LeeF]
chimezie: via Leigh's comments, the question is out there as to the relationship between a graph store and a dataset
16:00:29 [LeeF]
16:02:03 [NickH]
is it decided if a GET to a SPARQL endpoint returns the service description?
16:02:15 [kasei]
NickH, yes
16:02:30 [Zakim]
16:02:32 [MattPerry]
16:02:33 [Zakim]
16:02:37 [Zakim]
16:02:40 [Zakim]
16:02:42 [Zakim]
16:02:43 [Zakim]
16:02:43 [Zakim]
16:02:45 [Zakim]
16:02:49 [NickH]
kasei: ok, thanks
16:02:54 [Zakim]
16:02:59 [Zakim]
16:03:09 [LeeF]
LeeF: With chair hat on, I'm very tempted to say that given resource and experience constraints, that SD is only about SPARQL protocol and is unrelated to the dataset protocol
16:03:38 [LeeF]
NickH, yes, see
16:03:55 [LeeF]
pgearon, can you do the magic to generate the minutes, please?
16:04:03 [pgearon]
16:04:07 [LeeF]
many thanks
16:06:44 [NickH]
LeeF: thanks, just checking if that has been confirmed
16:35:01 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, Sandro, in SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM
16:35:04 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
16:35:06 [Zakim]
Attendees were NickH, LeeF, AndyS, NicoM, kasei, SteveH, Sandro, pgearon, chimezie, MattPerry, bglimm
17:18:20 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
18:01:02 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sparql
18:06:34 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #sparql
18:24:16 [SteveH_]
SteveH_ has joined #sparql
19:02:16 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
19:20:33 [SteveH_]
SteveH_ has joined #sparql
21:13:25 [karl]
karl has joined #sparql
22:38:25 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql