IRC log of sparql on 2011-05-03

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:56:40 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:56:40 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/03-sparql-irc
13:56:44 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sparql
13:56:54 [AxelPolleres]
Zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:56:54 [Zakim]
ok, AxelPolleres; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:57:17 [AxelPolleres]
agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-05-03
13:57:34 [AxelPolleres]
any regrets?
13:57:46 [AxelPolleres]
chair: Axel Polleres
13:58:20 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:58:28 [Zakim]
+??P5
13:58:30 [bglimm]
bglimm has joined #sparql
13:58:37 [Zakim]
+AxelPolleres
13:58:51 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
13:58:58 [Zakim]
+??P7
13:59:01 [NickH]
Zakim, ??P5 is me
13:59:02 [Zakim]
+NickH; got it
13:59:03 [AndyS]
zakim, IPCaller is me
13:59:03 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
13:59:11 [cbuilara]
zakim, ??P7 is me
13:59:11 [Zakim]
+cbuilara; got it
13:59:18 [Zakim]
+ +44.186.528.aaaa
13:59:21 [Zakim]
+kasei
13:59:22 [NickH]
The early bird gets the UK phone line
13:59:32 [bglimm]
Zakim, +44.186.528.aaaa is me
13:59:32 [Zakim]
+bglimm; got it
13:59:39 [Zakim]
+pgearon
13:59:52 [kasei]
bglimm, did you see my proposed service description changes for the entailment properties?
14:00:16 [bglimm]
Greg, no, I didn't see it
14:00:21 [bglimm]
Did you email?
14:00:24 [kasei]
in email last night
14:00:37 [bglimm]
Hm, I checked today, but mst have overlooked it
14:00:40 [bglimm]
Will have a look now
14:01:10 [MattPerry]
MattPerry has joined #sparql
14:01:29 [LeeF]
AxelPolleres, SteveH and I discussed Dave Beckett's comments and do not believe that there are any substantive changes that arise from them
14:01:48 [AxelPolleres]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:01:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.617.553.aabb
14:01:51 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, AxelPolleres, AndyS, cbuilara, bglimm, kasei, pgearon, +1.617.553.aabb
14:01:56 [LeeF]
zakim, LeeF is aabb
14:01:59 [Zakim]
sorry, LeeF, I do not recognize a party named 'LeeF'
14:02:02 [LeeF]
zakim, aabb is LeeF
14:02:03 [Zakim]
+LeeF; got it
14:02:09 [Zakim]
+ +1.603.897.aacc
14:02:23 [MattPerry]
zakim, aacc is me
14:02:23 [Zakim]
+MattPerry; got it
14:02:53 [Zakim]
+[Sophia]
14:03:15 [alex_]
alex_ has joined #sparql
14:03:32 [bglimm]
Greg, I think what you propose in the mail is good
14:03:36 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:03:36 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:03:50 [kasei]
bglimm, ok, good. I think that was the last remaining issue.
14:03:59 [kasei]
Zakim, who is talking?
14:04:10 [Zakim]
kasei, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: LeeF (46%), AxelPolleres (25%), AndyS (3%)
14:04:26 [Zakim]
+ +3539149aadd
14:04:26 [Zakim]
+sandro
14:04:39 [alexpassant]
Zakim, +3539149aadd is me
14:04:39 [Zakim]
+alexpassant; got it
14:04:43 [Zakim]
+??P29
14:04:43 [NickH]
Zakim, mute LeeF
14:04:45 [Zakim]
LeeF should now be muted
14:04:45 [AxelPolleres]
scribe: Alex Passant
14:04:55 [SteveH]
Zakim, ??P29 is me
14:04:55 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:05:24 [alexpassant]
topic: admin
14:05:28 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-04-0
14:05:28 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: approve the minutes from last time
14:05:29 [Zakim]
+??P32
14:05:35 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-04-26
14:05:43 [SteveH]
Zakim, ??P32 is me
14:05:43 [Zakim]
+SteveH; got it
14:05:46 [Zakim]
-SteveH
14:06:08 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-04-26
14:06:29 [alexpassant]
... next meeting - next week
14:06:48 [alexpassant]
topic: Last call publications of documents
14:06:53 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/To_Last_Call
14:07:09 [alexpassant]
... points to check for every documents, in the agenda
14:07:11 [alexpassant]
... start with query
14:07:16 [alexpassant]
... are editors ok for LC ?
14:07:40 [alexpassant]
AndyS: yes, need to check the aggregate example with SteveH
14:07:54 [alexpassant]
... ready in terms of content
14:08:13 [alexpassant]
SteveH: pubchecker
14:08:20 [LeeF]
best effort is good enough for me!
14:08:25 [LeeF]
i'm happy to wrestle with the rest of it
14:08:28 [alexpassant]
... except some wording, similar to other WD
14:08:31 [LeeF]
ack me
14:08:31 [bglimm]
I added
14:08:37 [bglimm]
This document is a Last Call Working Draft.
14:08:37 [bglimm]
Publication as a Last Call Working Draft indicates that the SPARQL Working Group believes it has
14:08:37 [bglimm]
addressed all substantive issues and that the document is stable. The Working Group expects to advance this specification to Recommendation Status.
14:08:38 [bglimm]
Comments on this document should be sent to public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, a mailing list with
14:08:38 [bglimm]
a public archive. Comments on this working draft are due on or before
14:08:38 [bglimm]
29 July 2011.
14:08:48 [bglimm]
To make the pub rule checker happy
14:09:03 [alexpassant]
LeeF: if pubrules is happy, I'm happy
14:09:10 [alexpassant]
SteveH: changes between the previous WD and the current oen
14:09:18 [alexpassant]
... havent done anything about that now
14:09:38 [bglimm]
pub rul cchecker want the keyword "Last Call Working Draft" and an end date for a review period
14:09:40 [alexpassant]
sandro: would do a diff rather than CVS
14:10:20 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: ask editors to do the changes section
14:10:25 [alexpassant]
... we can leave it out if not here
14:10:46 [alexpassant]
... happy to leave it out it no time
14:11:02 [alexpassant]
... would like to drop the CVS log
14:11:57 [pgearon]
+1 for dropping the logs
14:12:08 [bglimm]
I created pub rule checking
14:12:10 [bglimm]
doc
14:12:23 [bglimm]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Pub-Process
14:12:24 [alexpassant]
... birte done a summary of pubrules
14:12:31 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:12:31 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:12:46 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
14:13:21 [alexpassant]
... any critical comments about Query ?
14:13:29 [alexpassant]
... only one I'm worried about is Dave Beckett comment
14:13:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.216.368.aaee
14:14:03 [alexpassant]
SteveH: nothing that cause any publication problem
14:14:03 [chimezie]
Zakim, +1.216.368.aaee is me
14:14:03 [Zakim]
+chimezie; got it
14:14:09 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
14:14:09 [Zakim]
chimezie should now be muted
14:14:19 [alexpassant]
SteveH: response has been updated
14:14:44 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:14:44 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:15:19 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:15:19 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:15:35 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:15:35 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:15:47 [LeeF]
q+ to discuss dates
14:16:21 [alexpassant]
LeeF: date to end the LC
14:16:30 [alexpassant]
... need some time to let people look at it
14:16:33 [alexpassant]
... min 6 weeks
14:16:40 [alexpassant]
... then running into the summer
14:16:45 [alexpassant]
... people slowing down
14:16:50 [bglimm]
29 July
14:17:06 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:17:06 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:17:19 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:17:19 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:17:32 [alexpassant]
... third week of june for the minimum
14:17:45 [alexpassant]
... gives a slim change to publish other documents as LC and get them at the same time
14:17:51 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL1.1 Query as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29
14:17:56 [alexpassant]
... include that date as part of the resolution
14:18:25 [LeeF]
Do our reviewers support publishing as is?
14:18:47 [LeeF]
+1 to pgearon's comment
14:18:56 [alexpassant]
pgearon: oportunity to get feedback at semtech
14:19:28 [AndyS]
Seconded
14:19:30 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL1.1 Query as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29
14:19:34 [LeeF]
+1 to publishing query LC
14:19:37 [SteveH]
+1
14:19:38 [sandro]
+1 (W3C)
14:19:38 [alexpassant]
+1
14:19:38 [bglimm]
+1
14:19:40 [cbuilara]
+1
14:19:42 [OlivierCorby]
+1
14:19:45 [AndyS]
+1 (ASF)
14:19:46 [MattPerry]
+1 (Oracle)
14:19:49 [chimezie]
+1 (IE)
14:19:51 [kasei]
+1 (RPI)
14:20:03 [pgearon]
+1
14:20:32 [AndyS]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:20:32 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, AxelPolleres, AndyS, cbuilara, bglimm (muted), kasei, pgearon, LeeF, MattPerry, [Sophia], alexpassant, sandro, SteveH.a, chimezie (muted)
14:20:44 [LeeF]
NickH?
14:20:49 [NickH]
+1 (BBC)
14:20:50 [chimezie]
i have
14:20:57 [LeeF]
thanks!
14:21:28 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: publish SPARQL1.1 Query as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29
14:21:36 [LeeF]
...with no objections or abstentions
14:21:50 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: next document: Update
14:22:48 [SteveH]
it's a capitalisation issue
14:22:55 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:22:58 [SteveH]
"This", not "this"
14:22:58 [pgearon]
generated HTML for Update is: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.html
14:22:59 [LeeF]
ack
14:23:02 [LeeF]
ack me
14:23:02 [Zakim]
LeeF, you wanted to discuss dates
14:23:24 [LeeF]
SteveH, where?
14:23:35 [SteveH]
LeeF, in the title "Status of This Document"
14:23:41 [SteveH]
our XSLT produces "this"
14:23:50 [LeeF]
wow
14:23:51 [SteveH]
I fixed it in the query-1.1 one
14:23:53 [LeeF]
how dumb
14:23:54 [LeeF]
:-)
14:24:22 [SteveH]
well, someone had to draw a line somwhere :)
14:24:33 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: dont see intractions between USING and USING NAME
14:24:42 [alexpassant]
... just a macro for graphs around unnamed patterns
14:24:52 [alexpassant]
s/NAME/NAMED
14:25:44 [alexpassant]
... ok with the current wording ?
14:26:41 [alexpassant]
kasei: I'm happy with the changes
14:27:09 [alexpassant]
there's the "do we need USING DEFAULT -- PROPOSED: move that to "Postponed Issues""
14:27:36 [AxelPolleres]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Jan/0000.html
14:28:13 [AxelPolleres]
draft rtesponse here... http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:HK-2
14:29:15 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:MS-1
14:30:43 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: commentfrom MS, critical for LC ?
14:30:52 [alexpassant]
alexpassant: no, no crotical
14:31:01 [alexpassant]
s/crotical/critical
14:31:20 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:ST-1
14:31:28 [LeeF]
pgearon, let's get this wording straightened out, and then I'll fix the status stuff in the generated HTML
14:31:43 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:RN-1
14:31:50 [pgearon]
LeeF: ok
14:32:30 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: need to be sure that the comments are not critical
14:32:56 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to confirm with Paul and Alex that open comments don't contain LC critical parts that are still open
14:32:56 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-453 - Confirm with Paul and Alex that open comments don't contain LC critical parts that are still open [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-05-10].
14:33:40 [bglimm]
q+ to ask about links of federated query and json
14:34:07 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:34:07 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:34:25 [bglimm]
http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-federation/
14:34:32 [bglimm]
http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-federated-query/
14:34:33 [alexpassant]
bglimm: some broken links to other documents
14:34:42 [bglimm]
http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-results-json/
14:35:37 [alexpassant]
... 404 links
14:35:41 [alexpassant]
... which one to chose for JSON
14:36:24 [LeeF]
I suggest removing reference to JSON document and adding it back in at some point in the future
14:37:11 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: let the JSON doc aside for the moment
14:37:20 [LeeF]
We can keep it in unlinked also, I don't really care.
14:37:32 [alexpassant]
AndyS: lets make it unlinked
14:38:32 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:38:32 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:38:42 [NickH]
Zakim, who is talking?
14:38:44 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: update wording of the WITH, one more person to review
14:38:53 [Zakim]
NickH, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: AxelPolleres (86%)
14:39:20 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Andy to approve rewording for WITH in update if any
14:39:20 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-454 - Approve rewording for WITH in update if any [on Andy Seaborne - due 2011-05-10].
14:39:48 [alexpassant]
... sorting that with paul after the call
14:39:54 [alexpassant]
... go ahead with proposal to LC
14:40:50 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL1.1 Update as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-454 and ACTION-453
14:41:13 [LeeF]
I'm OK with that
14:41:57 [SteveH]
+1 (Garlik)
14:42:02 [kasei]
+1 (RPI)
14:42:03 [sandro]
+1 (W3C)
14:42:04 [AndyS]
+1 (ASF)
14:42:05 [LeeF]
+1 (Cambridge Semanics)
14:42:06 [chimezie]
+1 (IE)
14:42:06 [bglimm]
+1 (The University of Oxford)
14:42:08 [OlivierCorby]
+1 (INRIA)
14:42:11 [pgearon]
+1
14:42:11 [MattPerry]
+1 (Oracle)
14:42:11 [cbuilara]
+1 (UPM)
14:42:18 [alexpassant]
+1 (DERI)
14:42:48 [AxelPolleres]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:42:48 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, AxelPolleres, AndyS, cbuilara, bglimm (muted), kasei, pgearon, LeeF, MattPerry, [Sophia], alexpassant, sandro, SteveH.a, chimezie (muted)
14:42:51 [NickH]
+1 (BBC)
14:43:26 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: publish SPARQL1.1 Update as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-454 and ACTION-453
14:43:43 [AxelPolleres]
... with no objections and no abstentions
14:44:04 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: next, SD
14:44:11 [alexpassant]
... ready ?
14:44:44 [alexpassant]
kasei: request to add use of entailement in the examples
14:44:53 [alexpassant]
... so that SD can describe entailement
14:45:08 [alexpassant]
... and samepl SD shown in Turtle, in addition to RDF/XML
14:45:18 [bglimm]
Yes
14:46:08 [alex_]
alex_ has joined #sparql
14:46:20 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: greg to add use of entailement in the examples and sample SD shown in Turtle
14:46:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-455 - Add use of entailement in the examples and sample SD shown in Turtle [on Gregory Williams - due 2011-05-10].
14:46:44 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Birte to approve completion of ATION-455
14:46:44 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-456 - Approve completion of ATION-455 [on Birte Glimm - due 2011-05-10].
14:47:38 [alex_]
kasei: no major issues in open comments. 2 comments from Rob Vesse, mostly editorial
14:47:54 [alex_]
Zakim: scribe is alex_
14:48:32 [alexpassant]
AxelPolleres: all comments addressed from reviewers
14:48:36 [LeeF]
+1
14:49:10 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL1.1 Service Description as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-456
14:49:36 [bglimm]
+1 (The University of Oxford)
14:49:38 [kasei]
+1 (RPI)
14:49:39 [LeeF]
+1 (Cambridge Semantics)
14:49:39 [OlivierCorby]
+1 (INRIA)
14:49:40 [AndyS]
+1 (ASF)
14:49:40 [cbuilara]
+1 (UPM)
14:49:42 [MattPerry]
+1 (Oracle)
14:49:44 [NickH]
+1 (BBC)
14:49:45 [alexpassant]
+1 (DERI)
14:49:48 [pgearon]
+1 (Revelytix)
14:49:50 [sandro]
+0 (W3C)
14:50:05 [chimezie]
+1 (IE)
14:50:35 [sandro]
(Nothing big -- I'm just not a fan of this whole design.... Certainly not opposed, just not a fan.)
14:51:22 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: publish SPARQL1.1 Update as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-454, no objections, one abstention
14:51:30 [kasei]
sandro, not a fan of the SD thing in general? or something specific about this specific design?
14:51:51 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: publish SPARQL1.1 Service Description as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-456, no objections, one abstention
14:52:28 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: axel to fix resolution in the notes to remove wrongly copied duplicate resolution concerning Update
14:52:28 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-457 - Fix resolution in the notes to remove wrongly copied duplicate resolution concerning Update [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-05-10].
14:52:54 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:52:54 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:53:18 [AxelPolleres]
topic: entailment
14:53:49 [sandro]
kasei, I think SD is being used to solve problems (like selecting entailment) that would be better done in other ways.
14:55:10 [AxelPolleres]
q?
14:55:19 [AxelPolleres]
ack bglimm
14:55:19 [Zakim]
bglimm, you wanted to ask about links of federated query and json
14:55:54 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL1.1 Entailment Regimes as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29
14:56:14 [AndyS]
+1 (ASF)
14:56:15 [bglimm]
+1 (The University of Oxford)
14:56:15 [LeeF]
+1 (Cambridge Semantics)
14:56:16 [chimezie]
+1 (IE)
14:56:17 [cbuilara]
+1 (UPM)
14:56:18 [OlivierCorby]
+1 (INRIA)
14:56:18 [MattPerry]
+1 (Oracle)
14:56:18 [kasei]
+1 (RPI)
14:56:19 [alexpassant]
+1 (DERI)
14:56:25 [SteveH]
+1 (Garlik)
14:56:27 [pgearon]
+1 (Revelytix)
14:57:00 [sandro]
+1 (W3C) --- assuming RIF-in-RDF stuff in this is fixed, as per email between me and Axel
14:57:00 [NickH]
+1 (BBC)
14:57:45 [bglimm]
So we have to update the entailment doc with a new RIF-in-RDF URL?
14:57:46 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: sandro to fix RIF-in RDF note, publish it, and fix reference in the entailemt doc
14:57:46 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-458 - Fix RIF-in RDF note, publish it, and fix reference in the entailemt doc [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-05-10].
14:58:33 [sandro]
This includes fixing a couple minor errors in the example.
14:58:56 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL1.1 Entailment Regimes as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-458
14:59:07 [sandro]
+1 (W3C)
14:59:07 [kasei]
+1 (RPI)
14:59:09 [NickH]
+1 (BBC)
14:59:10 [pgearon]
+1 (Revelytix)
14:59:11 [LeeF]
+1 (Cambridge Semantics)
14:59:12 [AndyS]
+1 (ASF)
14:59:12 [MattPerry]
+1 (Oracle)
14:59:13 [cbuilara]
+1 (UPM)
14:59:14 [SteveH]
+1 (Garlik)
14:59:15 [OlivierCorby]
+1 (INRIA)
14:59:17 [chimezie]
+1 (IE)
14:59:20 [bglimm]
+1 (The University of Oxford)
14:59:51 [alexpassant]
+1 (DERI)
14:59:57 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: publish SPARQL1.1 Entailment Regimes as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29 modulo completion of ACTION-458
15:00:41 [LeeF]
graph store protocol
15:00:54 [chimezie]
Zakim, unmute me
15:00:54 [Zakim]
chimezie should no longer be muted
15:01:37 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
15:01:37 [AndyS]
q+
15:01:39 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
15:02:18 [bglimm]
+1
15:02:33 [NickH]
can stay
15:02:39 [alexpassant]
can't stay
15:02:49 [alexpassant]
can someone take the scribe role?
15:03:14 [chimezie]
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:KK-6
15:03:21 [sandro]
RESOLVED: Extend the meeting to discuss other two documents
15:04:55 [Zakim]
-alexpassant
15:04:59 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: publish SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29
15:05:13 [bglimm]
+1 (The University of Oxford)
15:05:16 [NickH]
+1 (BBC)
15:05:18 [chimezie]
+1 (IE)
15:05:18 [MattPerry]
+1 (Oracle)
15:05:20 [cbuilara]
+1 (UPM)
15:05:21 [kasei]
+1 (RPI)
15:05:21 [AndyS]
+1 (ASF)
15:05:22 [LeeF]
+1 (Cambridge Semantics)
15:05:23 [SteveH]
+1 (Garlik)
15:05:24 [AxelPolleres]
+1 (DERI)
15:05:25 [OlivierCorby]
+1 (INRIA)
15:05:30 [sandro]
+1 (W3C)
15:05:30 [pgearon]
+1 (Revelytix)
15:05:57 [AndyS]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, AxelPolleres, AndyS, cbuilara, bglimm (muted), kasei, pgearon, LeeF, MattPerry, [Sophia], sandro, SteveH.a, chimezie
15:06:21 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: publish SPARQL 1.1 Graph Store HTTP Protocol as Last call working draft with publication date May 12 and comments period until July 29, no objections, no abstentions
15:07:06 [LeeF]
thanks to all of the editors for all of the hard work getting this far!
15:07:26 [LeeF]
and congratulations to the whole group for getting this far
15:07:41 [AxelPolleres]
adjourned
15:07:44 [Zakim]
-[Sophia]
15:07:47 [Zakim]
-chimezie
15:07:48 [chimezie]
later
15:07:50 [Zakim]
-SteveH.a
15:07:53 [NickH]
well done everyone!
15:07:53 [Zakim]
-bglimm
15:07:55 [MattPerry]
bye
15:07:56 [Zakim]
-cbuilara
15:08:00 [Zakim]
-kasei
15:08:02 [Zakim]
-MattPerry
15:08:06 [Zakim]
-NickH
15:09:39 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to send request for publication as soon as "modulo" actions are completed (and poke responsibles to complete before 6th)
15:09:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-459 - Send request for publication as soon as "modulo" actions are completed (and poke responsibles to complete before 6th) [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-05-10].
15:12:15 [Zakim]
-LeeF
15:12:16 [Zakim]
-sandro
15:12:17 [Zakim]
-AxelPolleres
15:12:35 [sandro]
AxelPolleres, LeeF --- great job you guys.... and everyone :-)
15:13:29 [AxelPolleres]
rrsagent, make records public
15:13:47 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
15:13:58 [AxelPolleres]
THanks to everyone! and let's take that spin to also finish the other docs in the coming weeks! ;-)
15:14:22 [kasei]
preferred turtle media type these days is text/turtle?
15:15:48 [Zakim]
-AndyS
15:16:00 [AndyS]
kasei, yes - registered by W3C in March.
15:16:19 [kasei]
thanks, AndyS
15:17:26 [Zakim]
-pgearon
15:17:28 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:17:30 [Zakim]
Attendees were AxelPolleres, NickH, AndyS, cbuilara, kasei, bglimm, pgearon, +1.617.553.aabb, LeeF, +1.603.897.aacc, MattPerry, [Sophia], sandro, alexpassant, SteveH, chimezie
15:17:48 [AndyS]
Who will be at Semtech?
15:20:32 [bglimm]
Not me, we have a paper on SPARQL OWL Direct Semantics Entailment at OWL ED (colocated with SemTec), but C&P is presenting it for us
15:21:09 [SteveH]
I very much doubt I'll be there
15:21:10 [sandro]
I have travel approval for SemTech, but haven't actually booked tix yet.
15:21:24 [sandro]
So could me as 70%
15:25:36 [AxelPolleres]
I will be at Semtech!
15:26:14 [AxelPolleres]
let's put Semtech on the agenda for next week's meeting under Admin issues.. we probably have to discuss advertising in general
15:26:23 [kasei]
anybody have a minute to glance at SD updates?
15:26:45 [AxelPolleres]
need to run, sorry
15:27:06 [pgearon]
I can soon, but am trying to sort through pubrules right now
15:29:20 [LeeF]
LeeF has joined #sparql
15:29:49 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #sparql
15:35:53 [kasei]
sandro, sorry, didn't see your response re: SD earlier. not sure I understand about "selecting" entailment.
15:38:31 [sandro]
I want to be able to query the same data with and without RIF entailment. The way to do that with SPARQL 1.1 is a crazy hack involving SD.
15:44:09 [kasei]
i'm not sure how the SD would be involved in that.
15:44:43 [alex]
alex has joined #sparql
15:48:33 [kasei]
what sort of "crazy hack" do you have in mind?
15:58:04 [bglimm]
Sandro, I think we discussed this a couple of times and as there was no agreement as to how you can "select" entailments, it boiled down to SDs just describing what is on offer. As a user, you cannot change that. We would need more time for getting an agreement about how users can ask systems to do some kind of entailment, what happens if the system cannot do that for some reasone etc
15:58:45 [sandro]
I know, bglimm, and that's why I'm not objecting -- merely abstaining.
15:59:12 [bglimm]
Ah, ok, that's the explanation for your abstain decision, fair point
16:01:32 [kasei]
i'm just curious what this "crazy hack" is. have we discussed this before?
16:01:47 [kasei]
definitely think selecting entailment is well outside the scope of the SD stuff.
16:04:29 [chimezie]
the query language (or the SPARQL RDF protocol) is really the place for such a thing
16:18:35 [alex_]
alex_ has joined #sparql
16:28:12 [LeeF]
LeeF has joined #sparql
17:07:15 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
17:28:39 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sparql
17:35:03 [bglimm]
Does anybody know whether the SPARQL 1.1 documents, when I reference them in the bibliography are normative?
17:35:25 [bglimm]
Or should that be under Other References?
17:36:02 [bglimm]
I would expect that everything that is not REC is under Other References
17:37:08 [kasei]
but open question about whether all REC docs should be normative.
17:39:55 [bglimm]
Yes, that I would assume. How can they not be?
17:41:43 [kasei]
well, in SD I link to RDFa by saying that RDFa could be used to encode the SD, but I don't think that's enough for it to be normative.
17:42:34 [kasei]
it's merely informative. nothing in SD requires support for or conformance with the RDFa rec.
17:42:37 [bglimm]
Hm, in that sense you are right. I understood it as normative docs in general and not w.r.t. the document, but I could be wrong
17:42:55 [kasei]
ah, yeah. we should get that clarified :)
17:45:04 [bglimm]
I just asked Markus (he worked on OWL) and I might be wrong with my simplistic categorization, but he suggested I check the OWL specs, they have lots of references because he wan't 100% certain
17:45:31 [SteveH__]
SteveH__ has joined #sparql
17:46:12 [bglimm]
Yes, there they seemto put into the normative section what is normative for the document
17:46:38 [bglimm]
I guess I have to sort my bibliography then
18:07:58 [kasei]
who would I ping about a bug in the open actions tracker?
18:49:50 [AndyS]
AndyS has joined #sparql
19:47:57 [SteveH]
SteveH has joined #sparql
20:34:21 [NickH]
ask sandro?