IRC log of sparql on 2011-03-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:57:43 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:57:43 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:57:45 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:57:45 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sparql
13:57:47 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 77277
13:57:47 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:57:48 [trackbot]
Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:57:48 [trackbot]
Date: 29 March 2011
13:57:48 [LeeF]
zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:57:48 [Zakim]
ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:58:20 [LeeF]
Regrets: Chime, NickH, sandro
13:58:23 [LeeF]
Chair: LeeF
13:58:27 [bglimm]
bglimm has joined #sparql
13:58:41 [LeeF]
13:58:54 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:58:56 [Zakim]
13:59:06 [Zakim]
13:59:08 [Zakim]
13:59:09 [Zakim]
13:59:09 [Zakim]
13:59:13 [cbuilara]
zakim, IPcaller is me
13:59:13 [Zakim]
+cbuilara; got it
13:59:31 [MattPerry]
MattPerry has joined #sparql
13:59:43 [Zakim]
13:59:45 [Zakim]
13:59:46 [kasei]
Zakim, ??P13 is me
13:59:46 [Zakim]
+kasei; got it
13:59:52 [Zakim]
14:00:08 [SteveH__]
SteveH__ has joined #sparql
14:00:10 [LeeF]
scribenick: bglimm
14:00:28 [Zakim]
14:00:50 [Zakim]
14:00:58 [SteveH__]
Zakim, ??P21 is me
14:00:58 [Zakim]
+SteveH__; got it
14:01:06 [LeeF]
zakim, who's on the phone?
14:01:06 [Zakim]
On the phone I see AxelPolleres, kasei, cbuilara, bglimm, LeeF, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, SteveH__
14:01:56 [alepas]
alepas has joined #sparql
14:02:35 [LeeF]
topic: Admin
14:02:39 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at
14:02:41 [bglimm]
Topic: Admin
14:02:53 [Zakim]
14:03:00 [Zakim]
+ +539149aaaa
14:03:12 [alepas]
Zakim, +539149aaaa is me
14:03:12 [Zakim]
+alepas; got it
14:03:21 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at
14:03:26 [Zakim]
14:03:29 [LeeF]
Next regular meeting: 2011-04-05 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Axel or Alex)
14:03:30 [AndyS]
zakim, ??P26 is me
14:03:30 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
14:04:17 [Souri]
Souri has joined #sparql
14:04:27 [AxelPolleres]
comments page should be up-to-date
14:04:34 [bglimm]
LeeF: We have some comments, mostly under control
14:04:39 [LeeF]
14:04:47 [AxelPolleres]
some are unasigned, still
14:05:03 [bglimm]
... maybe spend some tome on not in, in
14:05:13 [Zakim]
14:05:55 [bglimm]
.... SPARQL implementations currently have no understanding of datatypes, which can result in unintuitive results for comparissons
14:06:34 [bglimm]
... should SPARQL prescribe some understanding for core datatypes in comparrisson operators
14:06:45 [bglimm]
... Andy, teve, should we look into that?
14:06:52 [bglimm]
14:07:07 [bglimm]
SteveH: Seems like an improvement, but not full understanding
14:08:13 [bglimm]
AndyS: The comment is related to 1.0 stuff and not specific to 1.1
14:08:33 [AndyS]
It will change a basic, unextended SPARQL 1.0 query processor. (we should have done it last time but that makes it a change)
14:08:45 [bglimm]
LeeF: Not much enthusiasm for this topic, so lets not spend too much time on it
14:09:08 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: We are mostly up-to-date
14:09:15 [SteveH]
would be it be sufficient to recommend that SPARQL 1.1 processors should handle all the datatypes so that...
14:09:16 [LeeF]
14:09:17 [AndyS]
While sensible, it's technically a change. Not sure if its in the 1.0 test suite or not.
14:09:25 [SteveH]
SHOULD or something
14:09:26 [bglimm]
... regarding the comments
14:10:38 [LeeF]
topic: Last Call Status
14:10:49 [LeeF]
14:11:14 [bglimm]
LeeF: Lets go through the documents and editors correct me if I am wrong with something
14:11:34 [bglimm]
... Query has still some editorial comments and aggregates algebra section
14:11:51 [bglimm]
... has still some things that can be improved
14:12:03 [bglimm]
SteveH: Not much knew from me
14:12:24 [bglimm]
AndyS: I did some changes for RDF merge and wait for Axel's second part of the review
14:12:46 [bglimm]
LeeF: If I had some time, shoud I rather work on the protocoll or review query?
14:13:10 [bglimm]
AndyS: We had already three reviews, so I think protocol is more important to get done
14:13:21 [Zakim]
14:13:21 [bglimm]
SteveH: Same from my side
14:13:51 [Zakim]
14:13:55 [AndyS]
zakim, IPcaller is me
14:13:55 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
14:14:00 [kasei]
was I meant to start that review yet? I thought I was waiting on somebody to ping me on that?
14:14:05 [bglimm]
LeeF: Update had some work done regarding Axel's review, Andy's review is still to be addressed
14:14:31 [LeeF]
kasei, ah, i did not realize that
14:14:52 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: There is nothing that cannot be resolved by us. Andy suggested some restructuring to make the distinction between the formal and informal part
14:15:01 [bglimm]
... that has not been done yet
14:15:31 [NicoM]
NicoM has joined #sparql
14:15:34 [bglimm]
.... I'll sync up with Paul and Alex for that. We are not too far from LC
14:15:45 [bglimm]
LeeF: I think Greg can go ahead with his review
14:16:35 [bglimm]
Axel: I worked in parallel to Axel, so now we have to resolve CVS conflicts and get an overview again
14:16:57 [bglimm]
.... seems Axel has done a lot of stuff, so most might be addressed
14:17:13 [kasei]
14:17:15 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: Points that are open are marked in my email answer to Andy
14:17:17 [LeeF]
kasei, thanks
14:17:34 [kasei]
am out of the country now, but will try to review it soon
14:17:36 [bglimm]
.... some things are left open because I wait for conirmation from Paul
14:17:55 [bglimm]
LeeF: Protocol, nothing new, same for Service Descriptions
14:17:55 [kasei]
14:18:23 [bglimm]
.... RDF Dataset/HTTP Protocol, we have to look at the name of the doc shortly
14:18:41 [bglimm]
... Kjetil's comments still have to be considered
14:19:42 [bglimm]
bglimm: d-entailment updated for ent. regimes and section added for property paths
14:20:05 [LeeF]
ACTION: Matt to look at new d-entailment text
14:20:05 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Matt
14:20:08 [bglimm]
LeeF: Matt, can you look at the D-Entailment section?
14:20:09 [LeeF]
ACTION: Matthew to look at new d-entailment text
14:20:09 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-422 - Look at new d-entailment text [on Matthew Perry - due 2011-04-05].
14:20:10 [bglimm]
Matt: Yes
14:20:43 [bglimm]
LeeF: Federated Query is waiting on Axel and myself to finish the review
14:20:49 [bglimm]
.... other documents nothing new
14:20:58 [bglimm]
... Anything important for LC?
14:21:10 [LeeF]
topic: Name of the RDF dataset protocol specification
14:21:12 [bglimm]
14:21:38 [bglimm]
LeeF: We realised that the name might not be appropriate
14:22:03 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: Rename the datset protocol to the SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol
14:22:12 [bglimm]
... It is about managing graph stores. So we could change dataset to graph store
14:22:19 [bglimm]
... Chime is ok with that
14:22:26 [bglimm]
... any objections to that change?
14:22:35 [AndyS]
14:22:38 [NicoM]
14:22:40 [AxelPolleres]
14:22:40 [Souri]
14:22:52 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: Rename the datset protocol to the SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol
14:23:05 [AxelPolleres]
Note that we need to propagate this change to other docs referring to that one!
14:23:08 [LeeF]
topic: tests
14:23:16 [AxelPolleres]
14:23:27 [LeeF]
close ACTION-421
14:23:27 [trackbot]
ACTION-421 Look through test cases and provide a summary by next TC closed
14:23:31 [bglimm]
LeeF: Olivier looked through the test cases and where we stand
14:24:17 [kasei]
I reference it in the SD doc
14:24:20 [kasei]
will change
14:24:26 [bglimm]
me too
14:24:27 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres: we need to make sure that all other documents update the name of the http protocol document
14:25:01 [LeeF]
14:25:37 [bglimm]
LeeF: Hope we can approve some tests
14:26:54 [bglimm]
LeeF: Olivier ran the tests with his implementation
14:27:19 [LeeF]
14:27:19 [bglimm]
.... two areas where we miss test cases
14:27:34 [AndyS]
See ARQ gets: Tests = 332 : Successes = 298 : Errors = 9 : Failures = 25
14:27:47 [bglimm]
... for the IF function and scoping? for zero length paths
14:28:12 [bglimm]
LeeF: AndyS, can we get that covered
14:28:24 [bglimm]
AndyS: I was hoping for WG support for this
14:28:58 [bglimm]
LeeF: Matt, would you mind to come up with a test that covers the missing property path features?
14:29:05 [LeeF]
ACTION: Matthew to include a test on nodes in path of length zero come from specified named graph (e.g. graph <g1> {?x <p>* ?y})
14:29:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-423 - Include a test on nodes in path of length zero come from specified named graph (e.g. graph <g1> {?x <p>* ?y}) [on Matthew Perry - due 2011-04-05].
14:29:06 [bglimm]
Matt: I can do that
14:29:17 [LeeF]
ACTION: Lee to follow-up and make sure we get IF() tests
14:29:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-424 - Follow-up and make sure we get IF() tests [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-04-05].
14:29:40 [bglimm]
LeeF: We still have some empty directories
14:31:02 [bglimm]
... I fixed the manifest now.
14:31:24 [bglimm]
... Olivier picked up on negative syntax tests, should we keep these types?
14:31:46 [bglimm]
... Do we have similar types for the positive tests?
14:32:10 [bglimm]
... Any opinions?
14:32:14 [bglimm]
14:32:18 [kasei]
is it in a different namespace?
14:32:23 [kasei]
the new 1.1 namespace?
14:32:30 [LeeF]
14:32:30 [LeeF]
14:32:30 [LeeF]
14:32:39 [kasei]
mf is the old dawg namespace, then?
14:32:42 [Zakim]
14:32:53 [Zakim]
14:32:59 [LeeF]
@prefix mf: <> .
14:33:06 [kasei]
if it's the same namespace, I'd prefer keeping the '11'
14:33:35 [bglimm]
AndyS: I suggest the negative syntax tests without 1.1 should be changed
14:34:05 [Zakim]
14:34:07 [Zakim]
14:34:08 [bglimm]
LeeF: Should we move all syntax tests into one directory?
14:34:09 [AxelPolleres]
I didn't add those classes yet, I am afraid (the ones with 11)
14:34:14 [cbuilara]
Zakim, IPcaller is me
14:34:14 [Zakim]
+cbuilara; got it
14:34:19 [Zakim]
+ +3539149aabb
14:34:29 [alepas]
Zakim, +3539149aabb is me
14:34:29 [Zakim]
+alepas; got it
14:34:33 [AxelPolleres]
14:34:39 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
14:34:46 [bglimm]
AndyS: The syntax tests should have coverage even if hey are scattared in different directories
14:35:21 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: Do we need NegativeSyntaxTest11 and NegativeUpdateSyntaxTest11?
14:35:32 [kasei]
think it needs to either be just negativesyntaxtest11 or be explicit by changing NegativeSyntaxTest to NegativeQuerySyntaxTest
14:35:39 [kasei]
prefer the latter
14:35:42 [bglimm]
.... Is that not clear from the fact that the test is an update test or a query test?
14:35:52 [bglimm]
AndyS: I find it clearer the way it is.
14:36:08 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: Do we need the same for PositiveSyntax...Test?
14:36:16 [bglimm]
AndyS: I think we have that already.
14:36:34 [bglimm]
.... Yes, and that's the only way to distinguish them, so we have to keep it
14:37:10 [AxelPolleres]
I need an action to add those new types to mf: and to README.html
14:37:12 [bglimm]
AndyS: For the syntax tests the type is important to distinguish them
14:37:35 [bglimm]
LeeF: The ones in Aggregates without the 11 have to be updated. I'll do that now
14:38:20 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to add those new types to mf: and to README.html
14:38:20 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-425 - Add those new types to mf: and to README.html [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-04-05].
14:38:58 [AxelPolleres]
... new types: Positive/NegativeSyntaxTest11 and Positive/NegativeUpdateSyntaxTest11 yes?
14:39:01 [bglimm]
LeeF: Do you know whether that is the only place?
14:39:06 [bglimm]
AndyS: Yes.
14:39:14 [bglimm]
LeeF: Ok, then I updated that
14:40:56 [LeeF]
ACTION: Andy to change the @prefix : prefix in the syntax directories to use an absolute URI
14:40:56 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-426 - Change the @prefix : prefix in the syntax directories to use an absolute URI [on Andy Seaborne - due 2011-04-05].
14:41:39 [AxelPolleres]
14:41:57 [LeeF]
ack AxelPolleres
14:41:59 [bglimm]
LeeF: We are not consistent in the update tests for specifying the data
14:42:18 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: We don't really need new types for the query evaluation tests
14:42:23 [AxelPolleres]
:QueryEvaluationTest vs :QueryEvaluationTest11 ?
14:43:01 [bglimm]
AndyS: We make sure that when you execute the test suite, you do 1.1.
14:43:13 [LeeF]
ut:graphData [ ut:graph
14:43:13 [LeeF]
ut:graphData [ ut:data
14:43:25 [bglimm]
LeeF: ut: graph vs. ut:graph, which one should be used?
14:43:52 [bglimm]
s/ut: graph/ut:data/
14:44:20 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: data is just for the default graph
14:44:59 [bglimm]
LeeF: Is the second of my example incorrect?
14:45:02 [AxelPolleres]
14:45:55 [LeeF]
ACTION: Lee to clean up occurrences of ut:graphData [ ut:data
14:45:55 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-427 - Clean up occurrences of ut:graphData [ ut:data [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-04-05].
14:46:24 [bglimm]
LeeF: extra prefixes don't harm, could be cleaned up
14:46:32 [bglimm]
... same for duplicate tests
14:47:07 [bglimm]
... delete/insert, we know about the blank node in the template issue
14:47:16 [bglimm]
... should now be a negative syntax test
14:47:33 [LeeF]
ACTION: Lee to fix the delete-insert queries that should be negative syntax tests in delete-insert
14:47:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-428 - Fix the delete-insert queries that should be negative syntax tests in delete-insert [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-04-05].
14:48:21 [bglimm]
LeeF: Olivier identified six ent. test cases that have a mistake
14:48:27 [bglimm]
bglimm: I'll check that
14:49:03 [bglimm]
LeeF: Axel, Olivier had some comments for the readMe document, can you address those?
14:49:19 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to ckeck Olivier's comments on the test cases README.html
14:49:19 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-429 - Ckeck Olivier's comments on the test cases README.html [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-04-05].
14:50:05 [bglimm]
LeeF: We have several successful implementations for property paths that path the property path tests
14:50:19 [bglimm]
... AndyS, have you run those tests?
14:50:28 [bglimm]
AndyS: Yes, there are 30 tests and I have run them
14:50:32 [AndyS]
Tests = 30 : Successes = 30 : Errors = 0 : Failures = 0
14:51:09 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: Approve the 30 tests in the property-path directory
14:51:10 [AndyS]
(error means bad test setup e.g. data syntax wrong ; failure means different results)
14:51:22 [kasei]
14:51:24 [AndyS]
14:51:30 [OlivierCorby]
14:51:34 [LeeF]
RESOLVED: Approve the 30 tests in the property-path directory
14:51:42 [LeeF]
ACTION: Lee to mark 30 prop path tests approved today
14:51:43 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-430 - Mark 30 prop path tests approved today [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-04-05].
14:52:06 [bglimm]
LeeF: I wanted to look at the negative syntax tests
14:53:12 [bglimm]
... bad01 to bad03, they don't have update opertions, AndyS suggests we make that legal, so the tests are no longer negative tests
14:53:27 [bglimm]
... can be useful in some applications
14:53:45 [kasei]
I'm hesitant, but no strong feelings
14:54:05 [bglimm]
... Paul, Alex, any implications for the upate spec?
14:54:21 [bglimm]
Paul (?): I think that wouldn't be a big change.
14:54:39 [bglimm]
LeeF: Are you indifferent, in favour, or against that?
14:54:57 [bglimm]
Paul (?): I don't have strong feeling, but seems ok
14:55:30 [bglimm]
LeeF: I don't see it doing harm and seems easy
14:55:44 [bglimm]
AndyS: Changes the grammar
14:56:00 [bglimm]
.. the grammar is in the query doc even for update
14:56:06 [LeeF]
ACTION: Andy to change update grammar to allow zero-operation update requests
14:56:06 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-431 - Change update grammar to allow zero-operation update requests [on Andy Seaborne - due 2011-04-05].
14:57:03 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: AndyS, for INSERT DATA and DELETE DATA, we do have quads there now. Is that intended?
14:57:19 [bglimm]
AndyS: That is unrelated to zero operation deletes
14:57:25 [bglimm]
AxelPolleres: Yes
14:57:42 [bglimm]
AndyS: There is a note that says that there are no variables
14:57:50 [LeeF]
PROPOSED: Approve tests in syntax-update-1 except for *bad-0{1,2,3}.ru
14:57:54 [bglimm]
... that's in 19.8
14:58:31 [LeeF]
Let's take up all the syntax tests next time
14:58:35 [bglimm]
AndyS: I can do the prefix update first and then prprove the tests next week
14:58:45 [LeeF]
14:58:55 [MattPerry]
14:58:55 [SteveH]
bye everyone
14:58:56 [Zakim]
14:59:01 [Zakim]
14:59:04 [Zakim]
14:59:06 [Zakim]
14:59:07 [Zakim]
14:59:08 [Zakim]
14:59:11 [Zakim]
14:59:12 [Zakim]
14:59:12 [Zakim]
14:59:16 [bglimm]
RRSAgent, make records public
14:59:26 [Zakim]
14:59:29 [Zakim]
14:59:33 [Zakim]
15:00:16 [Zakim]
15:00:17 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:00:19 [Zakim]
Attendees were AxelPolleres, cbuilara, bglimm, LeeF, kasei, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, SteveH__, pgearon, alepas, AndyS, Souri_, NicoM
15:04:19 [bglimm]
rrsagent, create minutes
15:04:19 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate bglimm
15:04:46 [bglimm]
member:RRSAgent, make records public
15:04:54 [bglimm]
RRSAgent, make logs world
16:21:36 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
16:32:25 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
16:34:08 [AndyS]
Grammar mods -- ";;;;;;;;;" is a parse error. i.e. ";" is a separator of concrete operations. request is operations*, ";" is separator and optional terminator.
16:36:48 [AndyS]
While I'm modifying tests, any (more) bad syntax examples anyway wants to add to the suite?
16:57:20 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has joined #sparql
16:58:47 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has joined #sparql
17:04:53 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sparql
17:40:12 [LeeF]
close ACTION-426
17:40:12 [trackbot]
ACTION-426 Change the @prefix : prefix in the syntax directories to use an absolute URI closed
17:40:16 [LeeF]
close ACTION-431
17:40:16 [trackbot]
ACTION-431 Change update grammar to allow zero-operation update requests closed
18:27:42 [LeeF]
close ACTION-430
18:27:43 [trackbot]
ACTION-430 Mark 30 prop path tests approved today closed
18:33:14 [LeeF]
close ACTION-428
18:33:14 [trackbot]
ACTION-428 Fix the delete-insert queries that should be negative syntax tests in delete-insert closed
20:38:07 [karl]
karl has joined #sparql