IRC log of rdf-wg on 2011-03-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:57:19 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg
15:57:19 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/03/09-rdf-wg-irc
15:57:28 [cmatheus]
rrsagent, make records public
15:57:50 [cmatheus]
Scribe: cmatheus
15:58:28 [NickH]
NickH has joined #rdf-wg
15:59:50 [AndyS]
no zakim?
16:00:04 [NickH]
UK phone number seems to be working much better than it was
16:00:20 [JFB]
Hi, is the conference code really 73394 (it's not accepted)?
16:00:37 [NickH]
JFB: 73394 worked for me
16:00:38 [AZ]
JFB, yes it is
16:00:41 [AlexHall]
AlexHall has joined #rdf-wg
16:00:50 [JFB]
Still trying....
16:00:54 [davidwood]
Chair: Guus Schreiber
16:00:58 [AndyS]
Code worked for me but no zakim annoucements in IRC.
16:01:12 [cygri]
cygri has joined #rdf-wg
16:01:27 [sandro]
zakim, this is rdf-wg
16:01:37 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #rdf-wg
16:01:40 [Guus]
zakim, who is here?
16:01:40 [Zakim]
sorry, Guus, I don't know what conference this is
16:01:42 [pchampin]
pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
16:01:42 [Zakim]
On IRC I see cygri, AlexHall, NickH, RRSAgent, AZ, pfps, dfensel6, gavin, cmatheus, hsbauer, Guus, JFB, LeeF, webr3, SteveH, AndyS, ivan, davidwood, yvesr, manu, manu1, sandro,
16:01:44 [zwu2]
zwu2 has joined #rdf-wg
16:01:45 [Zakim]
... trackbot
16:01:57 [sandro]
zakim, this is rdf-wg
16:01:57 [Zakim]
sorry, sandro, I do not see a conference named 'rdf-wg' in progress or scheduled at this time
16:02:00 [sandro]
zakim, this is rdfwg
16:02:03 [Zakim]
ok, sandro; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM
16:02:10 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the call?
16:02:10 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Scott_Bauer, Dieter, ??P18, Guus, Azimmerm, ??P36, [IPcaller], AlexHall, LeeF, Sandro, zwu2, mhausenblas
16:02:18 [cygri]
zakim, mhausenblas is me
16:02:18 [Zakim]
+cygri; got it
16:02:21 [zwu2]
zakim, mute me
16:02:21 [Zakim]
zwu2 should now be muted
16:02:26 [davidwood]
I'll be a few minutes late :(
16:02:29 [AndyS]
zakim, IPCaller is me
16:02:32 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
16:02:34 [Zakim]
+Peter_Patel-Schneider
16:02:39 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
16:02:47 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
16:02:49 [Zakim]
+Ivan
16:02:51 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has joined #rdf-wg
16:02:54 [mbrunati]
mbrunati has joined #rdf-wg
16:02:59 [Zakim]
+gavinc
16:03:09 [Zakim]
+JeanFrancois
16:03:15 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
16:03:18 [sandro]
sandro has changed the topic to: RDF WG Meeting 2011-03-09 http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.03.09
16:03:19 [webr3]
zakim, i am IPcaller
16:03:19 [Zakim]
+Luca
16:03:24 [manu]
zakim, code?
16:03:29 [cmatheus]
Topic: Admin
16:03:30 [sandro]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.03.09
16:03:31 [Zakim]
ok, webr3, I now associate you with [IPcaller]
16:03:37 [Zakim]
the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), manu
16:03:40 [ivan]
+1
16:03:42 [tomayac]
tomayac has joined #rdf-wg
16:03:42 [webr3]
+1
16:03:45 [Zakim]
+AxelPolleres
16:03:46 [cmatheus]
David: Approve agenda
16:03:46 [JFB]
+1
16:03:53 [Zakim]
+davidwood
16:03:56 [sandro]
PROPOSED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-03-02
16:04:00 [cmatheus]
... minutes accepted
16:04:04 [sandro]
RESOLVED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-03-02
16:04:09 [Zakim]
+??P55
16:04:11 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller.a]
16:04:15 [manu]
zakim, I am ??P55
16:04:15 [Zakim]
+manu; got it
16:04:19 [cmatheus]
... day light savings time
16:04:25 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller.aa]
16:04:31 [cmatheus]
custom: follow american time
16:04:36 [mischat]
mischat has joined #rdf-wg
16:04:45 [mbrunati]
zakim,
16:04:45 [Zakim]
I don't understand '', mbrunati
16:04:56 [cmatheus]
... custom: follow american time
16:05:03 [Zakim]
+ +1.404.978.aaaa - is perhaps Dzung_Tran?
16:05:09 [mbrunati]
zakim, [IPcaller.aa] is me
16:05:09 [Zakim]
+mbrunati; got it
16:05:19 [sandro]
Guus: For European folks, the next two telecons will be an hour early.
16:05:36 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #rdf-wg
16:05:38 [davidwood]
We need an international standard for DST…
16:05:42 [Zakim]
+Souri
16:05:48 [cmatheus]
Guus: next telecoms - note time differences
16:05:55 [cmatheus]
... action item review
16:05:59 [gavin]
davidwood, yes, to banish it forever and never speak of it again
16:06:01 [cmatheus]
Topic: Action Items
16:06:01 [NickH]
Zakim, ??P36 is me
16:06:01 [Zakim]
+NickH; got it
16:06:02 [sandro]
davidwood, that could never work for north-vs-southern hemisphere, at least. :-)
16:06:04 [mbrunati]
q-
16:06:07 [Souri]
Souri has joined #rdf-wg
16:06:11 [Guus]
q?
16:06:23 [Zakim]
+??P49
16:06:28 [Guus]
ack Luca
16:06:29 [SteveH]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:06:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Scott_Bauer, Dieter, ??P18, Guus, Azimmerm, NickH, AndyS, AlexHall, LeeF, Sandro, zwu2 (muted), cygri, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Ivan, gavinc, JeanFrancois,
16:06:33 [sandro]
zakim, who is talking?
16:06:33 [Zakim]
... [IPcaller], pchampin, AxelPolleres, davidwood, manu, [IPcaller.a], mbrunati, Dzung_Tran?, Souri, ??P49
16:06:35 [mischat]
zakim, ??P49 is me
16:06:35 [Zakim]
+mischat; got it
16:06:41 [mischat]
zakim, mute me
16:06:41 [Zakim]
mischat should now be muted
16:06:45 [Zakim]
sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus (13%)
16:07:04 [SteveH]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
16:07:04 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
16:07:07 [sandro]
q?
16:07:13 [cmatheus]
... Action 7
16:07:23 [webr3]
-> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/GraphConceptTerminology
16:07:25 [cygri]
ACTION-7?
16:07:25 [trackbot]
ACTION-7 -- Nathan Rixham to write a wiki page clarifying the different "graph" concepts -- due 2011-03-02 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:07:25 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/7
16:07:26 [cmatheus]
... Nathan wiki page on graph concepts
16:07:32 [cmatheus]
Nathan: done
16:07:50 [sandro]
close ACTION-7
16:07:50 [trackbot]
ACTION-7 Write a wiki page clarifying the different "graph" concepts closed
16:07:51 [AxelPolleres]
close ACTION-7
16:07:51 [trackbot]
ACTION-7 Write a wiki page clarifying the different "graph" concepts closed
16:07:56 [cmatheus]
... Sandro, can you mark action 7 as closed
16:08:04 [cmatheus]
Resolved: Action 7 closed
16:08:08 [sandro]
ACTION-12?
16:08:08 [trackbot]
ACTION-12 -- Guus Schreiber to talk to paul groth to get a provenance use case for graphs -- due 2011-03-02 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:08:08 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/12
16:08:16 [cmatheus]
... action 12
16:08:21 [sandro]
close ACTION-12
16:08:21 [trackbot]
ACTION-12 Talk to paul groth to get a provenance use case for graphs closed
16:08:22 [cmatheus]
... closed
16:08:32 [sandro]
ACTION-15?
16:08:32 [trackbot]
ACTION-15 -- Guus Schreiber to make hotel suggestions for FTF1 -- due 2011-03-09 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:08:32 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/15
16:08:45 [cmatheus]
... action 15 - hotel suggestions - done.
16:08:55 [sandro]
close ACTION-15
16:08:55 [trackbot]
ACTION-15 Make hotel suggestions for FTF1 closed
16:09:00 [cmatheus]
Resolved: Action 12 closed
16:09:19 [cmatheus]
Resolved: Action 15 closed
16:09:23 [sandro]
guus: No hotels at CWI, but three groups close by. not a big city. at most 35 minutes.
16:09:28 [manu]
I have created a wiki page attempting to collect design requirements for RDF in JSON here: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#RDF_in_JSON_Design_Requirements
16:09:37 [manu]
(That's related to ACTION-16)
16:09:41 [sandro]
cmatheus, please don't use "Resolved" for actions.
16:09:54 [cmatheus]
sandro, got it.
16:10:10 [sandro]
action-18?
16:10:10 [trackbot]
ACTION-18 -- Ivan Herman to establish a wiki page for the FTF1 agenda and list initial content -- due 2011-03-09 -- PENDINGREVIEW
16:10:10 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/18
16:10:15 [sandro]
close action-18
16:10:15 [trackbot]
ACTION-18 Establish a wiki page for the FTF1 agenda and list initial content closed
16:10:22 [cmatheus]
... Action 18 - closed.
16:10:48 [cmatheus]
... Dan Brickley action on named graph. not on call.
16:10:54 [sandro]
action-5?
16:10:54 [trackbot]
ACTION-5 -- Yves Raimond to draft a use case for named graphs from BBC work -- due 2011-03-02 -- OPEN
16:10:54 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/5
16:11:03 [cmatheus]
... Action 5 remains open
16:11:35 [cmatheus]
... Action for Pat -- regrets on being out for ten days.
16:11:38 [mischat]
zakim, unmute me
16:11:38 [Zakim]
mischat should no longer be muted
16:11:47 [cmatheus]
... Mishat to provided ...
16:12:05 [sandro]
close action-11
16:12:06 [trackbot]
ACTION-11 Provide Garlik pov re: use-cases with SteveH closed
16:12:09 [cmatheus]
Mischat: turned action into pending reviews.
16:12:12 [mischat]
zakim, mute me
16:12:12 [Zakim]
mischat should now be muted
16:12:18 [sandro]
action-16?
16:12:18 [trackbot]
ACTION-16 -- Manu Sporny to summarize positions that folks have taken via the mailing list onto the wiki in an attempt to figure out which document should be used as a starting point for the RDF in JSON work. -- due 2011-03-09 -- OPEN
16:12:18 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/16
16:12:27 [cmatheus]
Guus: action closed.
16:12:59 [cmatheus]
Manu: JSon - summarization of positions. still under discussion.
16:13:06 [sandro]
close action-16
16:13:06 [trackbot]
ACTION-16 Summarize positions that folks have taken via the mailing list onto the wiki in an attempt to figure out which document should be used as a starting point for the RDF in JSON work. closed
16:13:18 [cmatheus]
Guss: you did your action item and it can be closed.
16:13:22 [sandro]
action-17?
16:13:22 [trackbot]
ACTION-17 -- Gavin Carothers to try and produce a digram based on the g-box, g-snap, g-text model from Sandro's email and this conversation -- due 2011-03-16 -- OPEN
16:13:22 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/17
16:13:37 [cmatheus]
... action 17: g-box diagram
16:14:00 [cygri]
it was gavin speaking
16:14:02 [cmatheus]
Gavin: haven had time to get to it this week.
16:14:03 [sandro]
gavin: I'll do it soon and put it on the wiki page of graph concepts
16:14:21 [cmatheus]
Guus: keep open, hopefully close next week.
16:14:36 [cmatheus]
... ends discussionon actionitems
16:15:01 [cmatheus]
Topic: first F2F
16:15:05 [Guus]
q?
16:15:22 [mischat]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/F2F1
16:15:30 [cmatheus]
Guus: please indicate whether you are attending on wiki page.
16:15:45 [ivan]
q+
16:15:48 [cmatheus]
... need a page to track regrets.
16:16:16 [ivan]
q-
16:16:58 [cmatheus]
Ivan: needs to give list of all participants. if you don't provide a name you may not be permitted in.
16:17:00 [davidwood]
Regrets section added to http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/F2F1
16:17:18 [cmatheus]
... will have two meeting rooms plus my office.
16:17:39 [cmatheus]
Guus: moving on to the agenda for F2F
16:18:20 [cmatheus]
... proposal: use day one to discussion items on table for task forces and identify what's need to be done for first draft.
16:18:46 [cmatheus]
... structure: reporting, discussion, planning
16:19:09 [cmatheus]
... dinner in the evening by university. lunch offered by Talis.
16:19:31 [cmatheus]
... need to be more specific on topics. can we live with this layout?
16:19:37 [cygri]
+1
16:19:41 [JFB]
+1
16:19:42 [manu]
+1 for F2F1 Agenda
16:19:58 [mbrunati]
+1
16:20:04 [davidwood]
+1
16:20:05 [cmatheus]
... F2F1 agenda approved.
16:20:07 [pfps]
not much more can be done at this time to figure out agenda for F2F1
16:20:14 [tomayac]
+1
16:20:26 [cmatheus]
... next two weeks we will fill in the details.
16:20:35 [cmatheus]
Topic: Task Forces
16:21:15 [cmatheus]
Guss: general remark: very happy to see so many threads.
16:21:27 [cmatheus]
... some worry that we might go outside the charter.
16:21:42 [cmatheus]
... over next few weeks we need to start restricting outselves.
16:21:49 [mischat]
s/Guss/Guus/
16:21:54 [cmatheus]
... must need way to manage things over coming year.
16:22:00 [cygri]
q+
16:22:07 [cmatheus]
... can't do everything we've talked about over last two weeks.
16:22:14 [cmatheus]
... any comments?
16:22:50 [cmatheus]
Richard: good to have broad discussion to get issues on table, but also important to make clear what charter is. what it allows us to do and what it doesn't.
16:23:12 [cmatheus]
... would be useful for thos ewho wrote the charter to speak up when things out of scope come up.
16:23:14 [sandro]
q+ to say writers intent doesn't matter....
16:23:30 [cygri]
q-
16:23:55 [sandro]
q-
16:24:10 [cmatheus]
Guus: agreed, we need to start limiting discussions. point well taken.
16:25:09 [cmatheus]
David: we don't want to let the conversation to get out of control but people should feel free to make proposals and voice opinions.
16:25:13 [AndyS]
Are changes that affect other RECs in or out of scope? (by intent - words do no restrict this WG)
16:25:21 [cmatheus]
Guus: moving on to task force discussions.
16:25:36 [cmatheus]
... starting with Turtle TF
16:25:38 [mischat]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Turtle
16:26:05 [cmatheus]
... potential deliverables for Turtle work.
16:26:12 [cygri]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Turtle/Proposals
16:26:17 [cmatheus]
Richard: on background of the wiki page -- I created it.
16:27:01 [cmatheus]
... some terms in discussions where captured in wiki page.
16:27:47 [manu]
+1 to Qurtle, N-Quads++
16:27:58 [manu]
-1 to everything else (current opinion, may change)
16:28:01 [cmatheus]
... summary: make minimal fixes (e.g. aligning with sparql); super turtle would add some additional properties; qurtle would add quad support.
16:28:19 [ivan]
q+
16:28:26 [sandro]
I suggest the names N-Triples2 and N-Quads2 are more descriptive than "++" since it's not backward compatible.
16:29:02 [cmatheus]
... still under discussion. n-triple++ could be recognized and turned into a minimal format for exchanging triples.
16:29:25 [cmatheus]
... n-quads - take current proposal and add option for naming contexts/graphs.
16:29:35 [gavin]
Sandro, why would it not parse current n-triples/n-quads?
16:29:36 [cmatheus]
... idea is to turn it into a specification.
16:29:52 [cmatheus]
... has been said that fourth element should be required.
16:30:28 [cmatheus]
... another proposal: rdf-tuples like csv. more like a serialization of a sparql result set.
16:30:37 [sandro]
gavin, I suppose it could be, but with utf-8 I'd exepect the \uXXXXXXXX syntax to be removed.
16:30:54 [cmatheus]
Ivan: comment 1: maybe worth adding what the media types are.
16:31:10 [SteveH]
sandro, it's useful for non-UTF-8 systems, like some version of emacs
16:31:34 [cmatheus]
... qurtle should be seperated by media types
16:31:47 [tomayac]
+1 for having different media types
16:31:55 [SteveH]
+1
16:31:56 [AndyS]
sandro, \uXXXX and \UXXXXXXXX in Turtle today.
16:31:59 [cmatheus]
... comment 2: on current page, rdf-tuples is not mentioned in the charter.
16:32:23 [cmatheus]
... whole issue around n-triples and their extension is not in the charter either.
16:32:37 [sandro]
zakim, who is talking?
16:32:49 [Zakim]
sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: gavinc (70%), Ivan (8%)
16:33:02 [cmatheus]
Gavin: charter speaks of revising existing notes and other parts of RDF
16:33:22 [cmatheus]
Ivan: yes, it talks of that on the edge. but rdf-tuples is not in the charter.
16:33:35 [cmatheus]
... n-triples could be squeezed a little bit.
16:33:49 [gavin]
+q
16:34:07 [Guus]
ack ivan
16:34:33 [cmatheus]
Ivan: strictly speaking the charter may exclude super-turtle.
16:34:42 [sandro]
q+
16:34:54 [Guus]
ack gavin
16:35:10 [cmatheus]
... charter says standardize turtle and add graph support. doesn't include extensions beyond graph support.
16:35:44 [Guus]
ack samdro
16:35:51 [cmatheus]
Gavin: n-turtle and quads on list because they could use the additional symbol.
16:35:52 [ivan]
ack sandro
16:35:54 [Guus]
ack sandro
16:36:00 [pchampin]
+1 to standardize tokens
16:36:10 [AndyS]
q+
16:36:19 [SteveH]
reverse paths are only in the pattern side
16:36:19 [cmatheus]
Sandro: don't think standardized turtle excludes things like reverse paths in sparql 1.1.
16:36:26 [AndyS]
q-
16:36:27 [SteveH]
not in CONSTRUCT { } for e.g.
16:36:28 [AxelPolleres]
q+
16:36:29 [cmatheus]
Ivan: sparql 1.1 doesn't include reverse paths.
16:36:37 [AndyS]
Not in INSERT DATA {}
16:36:46 [SteveH]
or CONSTRUCT
16:36:52 [ivan]
ack AxelPolleres
16:36:54 [cygri]
q+
16:37:02 [cmatheus]
Axel: reverse paths are in sparql 1.1.
16:37:18 [cmatheus]
Sandro: not an insert or construct. they are sort of there and not there.
16:37:23 [Guus]
ack cygri
16:37:23 [ivan]
ack cygri
16:38:21 [cmatheus]
Richard:charter items:syntax to support multiple graphs. may be sufficient to support quads. that's how it was introduced into discussion.
16:39:17 [cmatheus]
Guus: at F2F need to focus on quads issue. and what kind of documents can be produced for the discussion. suggestions for actions to be taken here?
16:39:47 [cmatheus]
Daivid: what about a survey on what direction the group wants to take.
16:39:50 [mischat]
wonders what the dependency of quad serialisation in the turtle task force is on the graphs task force ?
16:40:11 [cmatheus]
Guus: have already had these discussions. would make more sense to summarize the ideas.
16:40:16 [mischat]
q+
16:40:20 [ivan]
s/Daivid/Manu/
16:40:23 [cmatheus]
... or is that not true.
16:40:24 [mischat]
zakim, unmute me
16:40:24 [Zakim]
mischat should no longer be muted
16:40:48 [sandro]
q?
16:40:50 [cmatheus]
Mischat: there's a massive dependancy on what comes out of graphs task force.
16:40:54 [sandro]
q+
16:40:58 [ivan]
ack mischat
16:41:01 [cmatheus]
... how do people fel about that.
16:41:03 [mischat]
zakim, mute me
16:41:03 [Zakim]
mischat should now be muted
16:41:11 [mischat]
ok
16:41:17 [AndyS]
"restore" creeps into dataset publishing.
16:41:22 [cmatheus]
Guus: possible alternative route: at F2F just focus on turtle.
16:41:23 [ivan]
ack sandro
16:41:51 [cmatheus]
Sandro: find it hard to think of grpah issue in isolation. thinking about in context of turtle (or somtehing) would be useful.
16:41:59 [SteveH]
+1 to sandro
16:42:01 [mischat]
+! to sandro
16:42:03 [mischat]
+1
16:42:05 [ivan]
+1 to sandro
16:42:05 [webr3]
and that turtle is just turtle?
16:42:08 [cmatheus]
... suggesting that the turtle issue may be handled by graph tf instead.
16:42:09 [webr3]
+1 though
16:42:11 [manu]
+1 to sandro
16:42:16 [davidwood]
+1 cannot handle in isolation
16:42:17 [pchampin]
+1
16:42:22 [mbrunati]
+1
16:42:37 [AndyS]
Start with TriG
16:42:48 [webr3]
yes, trig example 3 is good
16:42:48 [cmatheus]
Guus: could there be a strawman proposal for what qurtle could look like on table at F2F?
16:43:07 [mischat]
do we need both TriG and N-quads ?
16:43:11 [cmatheus]
Sandro: suggests using name trig instead of qurtle.
16:43:27 [gavin]
Yes.
16:43:32 [SteveH]
people use turtle and n-triples
16:43:33 [NickH]
mischat: parsing performance?
16:43:34 [SteveH]
so, yes
16:43:35 [cmatheus]
Guus: do we need both TriG and N-Quads?
16:43:52 [mischat]
q+
16:43:54 [cmatheus]
... should we follow Sandro's suggestion for using TriG as strawman proposal?
16:43:58 [ivan]
ack mischat
16:44:04 [sandro]
(that was Andy's suggestion I was seconding)
16:44:15 [LeeF]
I don't see the harm in having both. I haven't seen any significant cost to the community from having both N-triples and turtle
16:44:37 [gavin]
And there is significant benifit
16:44:52 [ivan]
ACTION: mischat to make a survey on what serializations triple stores use in the wild
16:44:52 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-19 - Make a survey on what serializations triple stores use in the wild [on Mischa Tuffield - due 2011-03-16].
16:44:53 [cmatheus]
Mischat: happy to go through existing implementations of data stores and n-quads.
16:45:00 [LeeF]
gavin, yup
16:45:22 [Souri]
We use N-Triples quite a bit and planning to support N-Quads as well
16:45:24 [AndyS]
q+
16:45:37 [cmatheus]
Guus: would a document on turtle have an appendix on how to hande graphs? or a separate doc?
16:45:51 [cmatheus]
... separate doc makes extra doc harder to use.
16:45:56 [ivan]
ack AndyS
16:46:04 [webr3]
and if you publish quads, i need a quint store, (recurse up to RDBMS)
16:46:06 [cmatheus]
Sandro: if soemone is focused just on Turtle a smaller doc is better.
16:46:16 [cygri]
q+
16:46:40 [cmatheus]
AndyS: would suggest a single doc. if TriG doc is free standing there would be a lot that would have to be copied over.
16:46:42 [SteveH]
could be 3 docs + a grammar doc
16:47:12 [AndyS]
happy for SteveH suggestion as well. One technical doc.
16:47:18 [webr3]
confirm? so more-than-turtle is now part of Graphs-TF, or still Turtle TF (is turtle tf, just for "turtle" as we have it now or)?
16:47:21 [cmatheus]
Richard: seconds Andy's statement. add n-triples to grammar. additions would probably be quite low. so vote for a single doc.
16:47:28 [danbri]
danbri has joined #rdf-wg
16:47:34 [cmatheus]
Guus: let's have this as a dicsussion point at F2F.
16:48:02 [cmatheus]
David: is "more than turtle" part of Graph TF?
16:48:16 [cmatheus]
Sandro: if it relates to graph additions then yes.
16:48:28 [ivan]
s/David/Nathan/
16:48:36 [cmatheus]
Guus: so TriG will be part of Graph TF discussions.
16:48:47 [cmatheus]
Topic: JSON TF
16:48:57 [manu]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#Questions_to_Contemplate
16:49:02 [cmatheus]
Manu: started with list of questions.
16:49:12 [manu]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#RDF_in_JSON_Use_Cases
16:49:13 [cmatheus]
... morphed into a set of preliminary use cases.
16:49:31 [cmatheus]
... if ou can think of a use case that's not here please add it.
16:49:50 [cmatheus]
... change into a set of rdf/json design requirements.
16:50:06 [cmatheus]
s/change/changed/
16:50:24 [manu]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-JSON#RDF_in_JSON_Design_Requirements
16:50:43 [cmatheus]
Guus: the answers to the questions seem to be divided into two groups.
16:51:01 [cmatheus]
... those in favor of user-friendly and whose for machine friendly approach.
16:51:19 [cmatheus]
Manu: some confusion due to my statement of questions.
16:51:29 [gavin]
I think the an ?s ?p ?o syntax -can- be simpler to explain and use then a complicated "Easy" to use syntax. N-Triples vs. RDF/XML ;)
16:51:32 [cmatheus]
... maybe better to talk about use cases first.
16:51:52 [cmatheus]
Guus: for the F2F the main goal will be to decide which of the two approaches should be the major one.
16:52:02 [cmatheus]
Manu: I believe that is the case.
16:52:15 [cmatheus]
... should there be two serializations or just one.
16:52:27 [cmatheus]
... some people pushing for machine readable version.
16:52:28 [cygri]
q+
16:52:42 [cmatheus]
... some people argue there's not enough time to do both.
16:53:03 [cmatheus]
Guus: fro chairs perspective you will have a strong push to do only one.
16:53:27 [ivan]
ack cygri
16:53:29 [ivan]
q+
16:53:32 [Zakim]
-mischat
16:53:35 [cmatheus]
Richard: assuming we do one syntax, should it be human friendly, or should it be machine friendly, or should it be a compromise?
16:53:38 [gavin]
+q
16:53:44 [ivan]
ack ivan
16:53:45 [cmatheus]
... which of those to work on is the main question at the moment.
16:54:22 [cmatheus]
Ivan: I asked on the mailing list but didn't get answer the question of what are the communities we are targeting.
16:54:40 [tomayac]
there are two strong camps in this wg for one, and for two serializations.
16:54:44 [cmatheus]
... not of interest to traditional RDF communities. they are perfectly happy with turtle and won't use JSON.
16:54:47 [manu]
+1 to Ivan - RDF in JSON serialization is /not/ for those that are using RDF today w/ RDF/XML and TURTLE
16:54:52 [gavin]
-q
16:54:53 [SteveH]
+1
16:55:08 [LeeF]
Some of us are using RDF today with JSON though
16:55:09 [Guus]
[chair hat off]: i disagree with Ivan, we do a lot with JSON in our applications
16:55:13 [NickH]
Ivan: I disagree - parsing JSON is super fast in PHP
16:55:13 [cmatheus]
... the other community is not well represented in this group.
16:55:27 [NickH]
Ivan: don't need to write a 'new' parser
16:55:35 [cmatheus]
Manu: what I intended with the machine-friendly/human-friendly question.
16:55:42 [Guus]
q?
16:55:42 [pchampin]
q+
16:55:45 [tomayac]
i consider myself part of this "other community" ;-)
16:55:47 [webr3]
NickH, +1, it's most useful for js environments too (as in node/rhino etc)
16:55:56 [davidwood]
[chair hat off] I have come to see use cases for both developers and Web authors as separate requirements.
16:55:59 [gavin]
+q
16:56:02 [cmatheus]
... with machine serialization you transform the rdf in to a json structure and you're don.
16:56:16 [pfps]
I agree with Guus - the main reason I see for working with JSON here is to allow JSON stuff to feed into RDF (which I am already using)
16:56:25 [AndyS]
That was my understanding of machine-serialization. Speaks to : "goal is to provide an RDF serialization as complete as possible"
16:56:36 [cmatheus]
with human friednly it's more along line of json-ld.
16:56:41 [mischat_]
mischat_ has joined #rdf-wg
16:56:48 [davidwood]
machine-friendly serialization is *easy*. Human-friendly is not.
16:56:57 [mbrunati]
+1 to andy
16:57:08 [NickH]
+1 to davidwood
16:57:08 [cmatheus]
... with machine friendly don't care how humans will use it. with human friendly you expect users to use data like they use it today.
16:57:28 [cmatheus]
... expect things to map to associative arrays. can use things without a heavy api.
16:57:39 [webr3]
q?
16:57:48 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
16:57:57 [ivan]
ack pchampin
16:58:02 [mischat]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
16:58:06 [Zakim]
+mischat; got it
16:58:09 [mischat]
zakim, mute me
16:58:10 [Zakim]
mischat should now be muted
16:58:29 [cmatheus]
Webr3: probably I have with RDF serialization. JSON is both human and machine friendly.
16:58:44 [ivan]
s/Web3/pchampin/
16:58:47 [Guus]
q?
16:58:59 [cmatheus]
... rdf is very different. the underlining data structure are very different from the documents.
16:59:18 [cygri]
maybe rename? "json developer friendly" and "j-triples++"
16:59:30 [cmatheus]
... I like Andy's proposal to let program to handle JSON as usual without having to parse it into a real graph structure.
16:59:35 [webr3]
+1 to "rdf goggles"
16:59:41 [ivan]
ack gavin
16:59:46 [Guus]
ack gavin
17:00:38 [pfps]
+inf to the madness of RDF/XML
17:00:53 [NickH]
+1 to gavin!
17:01:05 [webr3]
gavin, it was my understanding that human friendly meant simple kv objects that can be used without an api - not "to write easily"
17:01:21 [cmatheus]
GavinL making it human friendly make is easier to author. have a problem with the term "friendly" as applied here -- neither one seems very friendly.
17:01:44 [gavin]
Sure, but RDF JSON is "simple" KV objects... that happen to be triples rather then more complicated data struture
17:01:54 [cmatheus]
Manu: some people want to translate data in JSON. some would like data to be immediately usable in a JS program.
17:02:07 [pfps]
gavin: "human friendly" made RDF/XML hostile for both humans and other machines
17:02:19 [AndyS]
My worry is the "human friendly" is unclear. App task seems to influence the friendliness approach. So TF is quite a lot of work (life of WG), a lot of WG energy. Happy is doable but I'm doubtful.
17:02:29 [cmatheus]
... if that division exists, we have quite a bit of talking to do to come to consensus.
17:02:30 [webr3]
gavin, something you can do obj.name, obj.age - rather than.. well working w/ triples
17:02:34 [AndyS]
s/is doable/if doable/
17:02:34 [tomayac]
+1 for sandro's view that there're 2 camps
17:02:45 [ivan]
s/sandro/manu/
17:02:54 [pchampin]
I agree about the "2 camps" view
17:03:01 [LeeF]
I'm in the "interested in serializing triples to JSON" camp, but in fairness I'm also not terribly worried about the need for a standard here.
17:03:19 [SteveH]
+1 to LeeF
17:03:27 [webr3]
gavin, well, it wouldn't be RDF.. it would be simple objects w/ a subject - or just some rdf goggles
17:03:32 [cygri]
+1 to the concern about ending up with something like RDF/XML
17:03:42 [gavin]
RDFa works great :D
17:03:44 [AndyS]
LeeF, module MIME registration. Good to know format of incoming.
17:03:47 [tomayac]
sorry, thanks for the correction, ivan
17:03:55 [gavin]
But looks like triples in the end?
17:03:55 [AndyS]
LeeF, yes, modulo MIME registration. Good to know format of incoming.
17:04:05 [cmatheus]
Manu: in RDFa would have a tree and set properties from the subject.
17:04:27 [cygri]
webr3++
17:04:29 [cmatheus]
... we seem to think that think about triples is easy but the rest of the world thinks about objects.
17:04:39 [Zakim]
-mischat
17:04:57 [ivan]
q+
17:04:59 [cmatheus]
... objets have key-vaue pairs. they map to triples but users don't see the mapping.
17:05:09 [ivan]
ack ivan
17:05:24 [cmatheus]
Ivan: you seem to have jumped to a conclusion too quickly.
17:05:36 [cmatheus]
... the reason for the problem in acceptance is not the fact you have triples.
17:05:37 [mischat_]
mischat_ has joined #rdf-wg
17:05:46 [gavin]
Triples aren't hard. English majors get them in 15-20 minutes ;)
17:05:51 [davidwood]
The "natural" format is the graph, not triples nor quads nor XML nor JSON, etc. Let's not confuse serialization syntax with the graph.
17:05:52 [tomayac]
we should try to think json/objects, and less semantic web
17:05:58 [cmatheus]
.. rather the dominating syntax (RDF-XML) made it very difficult to see that there are triples.
17:06:00 [AndyS]
I disagree it hasn't worked. RDF is not a substitution for something else.
17:06:13 [manu]
q+ to speak to triples.
17:06:24 [ivan]
ack manu
17:06:24 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to speak to triples.
17:06:49 [cmatheus]
Manu: why are we trying to convince people to use triples when they are already comfortable with objects and JSON?
17:06:51 [pchampin]
@Ivan: I agree about the problem coming partly from RDF/XML
17:07:05 [pchampin]
but my experience is that some people also have difficulties accepting *triples*
17:07:06 [gavin]
'cause objects suck at linking?
17:07:09 [cygri]
q+
17:07:18 [cmatheus]
...we shouldn't be trying to retrain the world in how they express their data.
17:07:23 [davidwood]
+1 to Manu. Objects are *most appropriate* for UIs.
17:07:31 [ivan]
ack cygri
17:07:39 [webr3]
manu, yes, but that means /not/ changing their current data - so would be more of a data transformation map
17:08:05 [gavin]
Maybe we need JSON RDF Syntax and JSON GRDDL?
17:08:06 [cmatheus]
Richard: take this with a grain of salt. you could make the same argument for designing rdf-xml the way it was deisgned.
17:08:17 [cmatheus]
... some people naturally think in trees.
17:08:19 [manu]
q+ to discuss HTML+RDFa and why it was successful.
17:08:42 [cmatheus]
... danger if we say let's just treat everything as objects and somehow we'll get out our triples.
17:08:59 [ivan]
ack manu
17:08:59 [Zakim]
manu, you wanted to discuss HTML+RDFa and why it was successful.
17:09:01 [cmatheus]
... why shouldn't I be concerned with this rdf-xml trap?
17:09:25 [tomayac]
q+
17:09:29 [cmatheus]
Manu: RDFa was successful because we built it on top of html.
17:09:36 [SteveH]
RDF/XML is was very widely used too, it's just not liked
17:09:40 [SteveH]
RSS1 for e.g.
17:09:46 [sandro]
I don't agree that RDFa was more successful than RDF/XML.
17:09:49 [ivan]
q+
17:09:56 [cmatheus]
... was very hard to sell rdf-xml to the world. rdfa was easy to sell. not sure why this was the case.
17:09:58 [ivan]
ack tomayac
17:10:08 [cmatheus]
Thomas: triples are not that hard.
17:10:14 [AndyS]
Real data is published in N-Triples. Semi :-)
17:10:25 [LeeF]
triples are pretty easy... triples + datatypes + languages + blank nodes + URIs are harder :-)
17:10:45 [cmatheus]
... we at Google are seeing that once people see that the data is just triples they realize that it's not that hard.
17:10:53 [mbrunati]
+1 lee and the model stuff as graph
17:10:58 [ivan]
q-
17:11:30 [cmatheus]
... my point is that for the rdf-json serialization we can think triples. let's not limit ourselves and not hide the fact that it is rdf. it is triples, nothing more nothing less.
17:11:53 [cmatheus]
Sandro: I'm wondering if there's candidate syntax that does what you're asking for?
17:12:52 [cmatheus]
Thomas: haven't read them all. elements of some do. trying to reach a compromise I think we can come up with a bridge between the camps and the development communities.
17:13:18 [cmatheus]
Manu: would it help to go through some of the design requirements?
17:13:46 [Guus]
can anybody hear me?
17:13:58 [davidwood]
I do hope to make progress on this ftf. Some things are just easier that way.
17:14:01 [Guus]
-
17:14:04 [davidwood]
Guus: no :(
17:14:19 [cmatheus]
Thomas: this should be something to discuss at F2F. Some of you have been here for over 10 years some like me have been here for like 1 year or so. we should get together and try to be objective.
17:14:26 [Zakim]
-Guus
17:14:35 [AndyS]
I see Turtle as object-ish but linking is first class. JSON only has strings.
17:14:46 [cygri]
excellent point AndyS
17:14:53 [pchampin]
+1 Andy
17:14:56 [cmatheus]
David: in the interst of time we should leave this topic. this can be done at the F2F.
17:14:59 [LeeF]
i see TriG as objectish -- takes a bunch of triples and puts them into a single bucket == object! :-)
17:15:00 [gavin]
+1 AndyS
17:15:01 [cmatheus]
Topic: Graphs
17:15:02 [Zakim]
+Guus_Schreiber
17:15:21 [Zakim]
-SteveH
17:15:30 [Zakim]
-AndyS
17:15:41 [cmatheus]
Guus: we at the 75 minute mark and have to stop.
17:16:00 [cmatheus]
... I suggest we end here and leave the other items to next time.
17:16:01 [Zakim]
-Dieter
17:16:09 [Zakim]
-NickH
17:16:16 [dfensel6]
dfensel6 has left #rdf-wg
17:16:23 [LeeF]
take care, all.
17:16:25 [Zakim]
-Souri
17:16:27 [Zakim]
-mbrunati
17:16:27 [ivan]
zakim, drop me
17:16:27 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has left #rdf-wg
17:16:28 [tomayac]
bye, take care
17:16:28 [Zakim]
Ivan is being disconnected
17:16:28 [Zakim]
-Ivan
17:16:30 [Zakim]
-cygri
17:16:30 [Zakim]
-davidwood
17:16:32 [Zakim]
-manu
17:16:32 [zwu2]
bye
17:16:32 [Zakim]
-AlexHall
17:16:33 [mbrunati]
ok, thanks
17:16:33 [Zakim]
-LeeF
17:16:34 [Zakim]
-Sandro
17:16:35 [pchampin]
bye
17:16:36 [Zakim]
-Guus_Schreiber
17:16:37 [AlexHall]
AlexHall has left #rdf-wg
17:16:38 [Zakim]
-gavinc
17:16:40 [Zakim]
-Azimmerm
17:16:42 [Zakim]
-Dzung_Tran?
17:16:44 [Zakim]
-Scott_Bauer
17:16:48 [Zakim]
-JeanFrancois
17:16:50 [Zakim]
-Peter_Patel-Schneider
17:16:53 [Zakim]
-AxelPolleres
17:16:53 [JFB]
bye
17:16:54 [Zakim]
-[IPcaller.a]
17:16:55 [SteveH]
AndyS, on big calls people get kicked randomly when zakim wants more lines
17:16:56 [Zakim]
-zwu2
17:16:58 [Zakim]
-pchampin
17:17:06 [Zakim]
-??P18
17:17:06 [Zakim]
SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has ended
17:17:08 [Zakim]
Attendees were Scott_Bauer, Dieter, Guus, Azimmerm, AlexHall, LeeF, Sandro, zwu2, cygri, AndyS, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Ivan, gavinc, JeanFrancois, AxelPolleres, davidwood,
17:17:11 [Zakim]
... pchampin, manu, +1.404.978.aaaa, mbrunati, Souri, NickH, mischat, SteveH, Guus_Schreiber
17:22:25 [AndyS]
SteveH, oh.
17:23:53 [SteveH]
AndyS, happend in SPARQL v1 a lot at the start, on end of conf call
17:25:52 [mischat_]
mischat_ has joined #rdf-wg
17:27:00 [hsbauer]
quit
18:13:38 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
19:05:09 [cygri]
cygri has joined #rdf-wg
19:23:44 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rdf-wg
19:31:49 [danbri]
danbri has joined #rdf-wg
20:00:17 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #rdf-wg
20:02:09 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
20:33:37 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
20:34:37 [danbri]
danbri has joined #rdf-wg
20:36:39 [danbri]
danbri has joined #rdf-wg
21:57:49 [danbri_]
danbri_ has joined #rdf-wg
22:10:53 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #rdf-wg