See also: IRC log
<pfps> sounds LOVELY!
<AndyS> redialing ...
<PatHayes> PatHayes is PatH
PROPOSED: accept http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-03 as a record of the 3 Aug telecon as amended per http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.08.17
<mbrunati> sorry guys today I'm only via irc, some problems with the audio
<scribe> ACTION: FabGandon to implement http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-03#resolution_2 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-73 - Implement http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-08-03#resolution_2 [on Fabien Gandon - due 2011-08-24].
<trackbot> ACTION-65 And Pat to consider what words to add to minimal proposal. notes added
<trackbot> ACTION-66 Contact Paul notes added
<trackbot> ACTION-67 Review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol notes added
<trackbot> ACTION-68 Review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol notes added
<trackbot> ACTION-69 Update Turtle issue list to reflect current status notes added
<trackbot> ACTION-70 Send email to provenance WG chairs about a joint call notes added
<trackbot> ACTION-71 Email email@example.com about joint task force, or something. maybe include RDFa and SPARQL notes added
davidwood: i proposed by email that ivan chair a meeting about RDF JSON work
tomayac: Ian will put the doc in
version control and we'll review
... in 1.5 weeks we should have something to disucss re: JSON
davidwood: does the JSON LD work obviate our need to continue our work?
tomayac: i'm slightly confused
about the JSON LD work
... ivan said we'd start with the Talis JSON and proceed to JSON LD
... progress in the JSON LD task force
davidwood: given manu's assertion that JSON LD meets all stated use cases so perhaps we should avoid making a competing spec
manu: i still need to review the
RDF JSON use cases
... some diligence required to confirm the claim that JSON LD work meets all stated use cases
... should have a document in 2 months
... (JSON LD)
... we just need to examine both approaches
manu: there's a JSON LD
playground which shows the choices of input and output
... shows a set of examples in different JSON representations
... spec defines the round-trip to RDF/XML
... the first 20% should be sufficient prep for next week
... then go ahead and play with the playground
<scribe> ACTION: manu to send JSON discussion preparation message to public-rdf-wd [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-74 - Send JSON discussion preparation message to public-rdf-wd [on Manu Sporny - due 2011-08-24].
<tomayac> it was resolved in http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/2
next telecon: 24 Aug
<tomayac> from issue 2: "(1) Incubate on something like JSON-LD, (2) make a REC on something like Talis RDF/JSON, and (3) make a Note on current practice stuff like Linked Data API, at FTF1"
topic FTF2 Admin
<tomayac> ian's and my doc will thus cover (2)
Guus: please fill in http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/F2F2
cygri: we need UK site decision
expected next week
... would help to know how many folks to expect
<NickH> If people want to have a meeting in London, then I am sure the BBC can work something out
Guus: i see 4 so far
<NickH> we have a lot of meeting rooms!
<pchampin> I didn't update the wiki page yet, but I will only be able to join if there is a european location
<gavinc> It looked like it was a Europe F2F with a remote at MIT ;)
<AndyS> OxfordU/comp lab has a setup that works with MIT [no WG member?]
Guus: i can imagine half in UK, half at MIT
-> http://www.w3.org/News/2011#entry-9171 Turtle FPWD news item
<mischat> i had asked soton uni, but it coincided with the "freshers week" which meant that rooms would have been hard to come by
Guus: editors need to monitor the
... someone should mail the semweb lists
gavinc: already one feedback from bob charm
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to send mail to semantic web and LOD lists requesting feedback on Turtle FPWD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-75 - Send mail to semantic web and LOD lists requesting feedback on Turtle FPWD [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-08-24].
Guus: if folks want to distribute this more widely, go ahead
gavinc: this WG is not lisverva subscribable
ericP: i don't think we've made DBWG and listserve work together
-> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html editor's draft
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Aug/0008.html decision to publish
Guus: are editors still intereted in feedback?
cygri: sure, but i'd say we're
good enough to publish now
... we could pick a date and get to what we can before the pub date
davidwood: i propose we make a transition request
Guus: there are comments, but if you don't want to address them before publication, go ahead
<mischat> i have gone through the document abstract concept documents too, nothing but minor issues, i will send it round at some point soon
davidwood: i'd like to make the transition request and make changes in parallel
ericP: note that the WG is permitting the editors to make changes after the decision to publish
<davidwood> Transition request for RDF Concepts to FPWD sent
AndyS: cygri introduced two classes: rdf:text is the current plain literals and langstring, including xsd:string
PatHayes: all seems fine except
the open question about whether it's a new datatype
... i'm happy to make it a datatype; i see it's a small change
PatHayes: there are some who see this change as large
<gavinc> can OWL datatype properties be used with literals without a datatype?
<AndyS> sorry - will redial
PatHayes: what value do we get out of it being a datatype?
... current datatype of "" or ""@en is an error
PatHayes: i see that as sufficient motivation to make rdf:langString a datatype
cygri: an concearned that this
proposal changes the way datatypes work
... lang-tagged string has an atypical lexical form
... is there a work-around?
... e.g. say that rdf:langStrings have no lexical to value mapping?
AndyS: a few options:
<cygri> ackm e
AndyS: cygri's: that there be no
valid LtoV for rdf:langStrings
... modify the LtoV, which is parameterized by the datatype. extend the function to take a language parameter
PatHayes: can say that LtoV operates on a lexical form + a tag
<PatHayes> very rough sound
<AndyS> could you type into IRC?
<NickH> sorry, can't understand
<pchampin> to AndyS's remark: having a valid lexical form makes it cumbersome, see PlainLiteral
<pchampin> to Pat's remark: using the full lexical form will raise problems with Turtle, which has syntactic sugar for some datatypes
<AndyS> The lexical part is the string - not encoded (c.f. rdf:PlainLiteral). Add extra info to the process by some means
<PatHayes> any syntax that can describe tags, can be used unchanged.
cygri: it looks like we have consensus about what we want rdf:langString to look like, but we need to work to implementation details
<PatHayes> the only change is to the abstract model.
cygri: this will change the terminology. past changes and these invalidate the term "plain literal"
<PatHayes> ' is now a type. no prblem
<AndyS> I don't think it must change Turtle - it's a mechanism along side short forms like integer or decimal or double.
cygri: we want to avoid the impression that we've radically changed the language (which i don't believe we have)
<AndyS> plain literal = rdf:Text
Guus: you can connect the old terminology to the current form
<PatHayes> really, this is a storm in a teacup.
<PatHayes> I could try to summarize the options in an email.
<PatHayes> I see four so far.
ericP: are there any disiderada which help us figure the implementation
<AndyS> Thanks Pat
<scribe> ACTION: PatHayes to summarize the options [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - PatHayes
<scribe> ACTION: PatH to summarize the options [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action05]
Guus: editors will have to look closely at PatHayes's summary
Guus: which are the highest priority issues?
Guus: propose named graphs
cygri: agreed. the rdf:langString seems to be making good progress
davidwood: we're going to have a hard time writing documents and proposing changes to SPARQL until we have nailed down the multi-graph terminology
<trackbot> Created ACTION-76 - Summarize the options [on Patrick Hayes - due 2011-08-24].
<trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
Guus: ok, multi-graph. what else?
cygri: what are the objections
against using the SPARQL dataset design?
... sandro, pchampin, PatHayes aren't happy
<scribe> ACTION: cygri to add strawman rdf dataset proposal to concepts [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - Add strawman rdf dataset proposal to concepts [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-08-24].
<PatHayes> Actually, PatH is getting to the point where he almost doesnt care what terminology is used, as long as we settle on something.
<AndyS> Probably too weak/loose/open/flexible for this WG
Guus: priorities for Turtle?
<pchampin> @cygri: I have to get up to date with the mailing list (I'm just back from holiday), but I as soon as I'm up to date, I can try to summarize in a mail what makes me unhappy in the SPARQL dataset model
gavinc: talking to AndyS
yesterday, ericP and I thought that N-Triples would be going
into the Turtle doc
... but apparently there was a WG decision to publish separately?
Guus: there are many motivations to publish separately
<cygri> gavinc, i'm pretty sure there wasn't any resolution on this yet. discussion but no resolution. discussion is in the F2F1 minutes, day1+day2
Guus: but no cost to start with it as an appendix
<scribe> ACTION: ericP to add http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Documents#N-Triples content as an appendix to Turtle editor's draft before F2F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Add http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Documents#N-Triples content as an appendix to Turtle editor's draft before F2F [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2011-08-24].
Guus: JSON work will be discussed
next week. priority discussion deferred 'till then
... is it worth starting on the semantics document?
PatHayes: we could start in parallel noting that terminology will shift
Guus: we have separate editors
listed for N-Triples
... which means they are likely to comment on gavinc's draft
... i think that the primer is good to write near the end
PatHayes: propose we gather examples
<scribe> ACTION: Guus to discuss with FabGandon about where to put examples and what to do with primary before F2F [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Discuss with FabGandon about where to put examples and what to do with primary before F2F [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-08-24].
Guus: leave Trig and quad syntax
... leave RDF/XML for later?
<PatHayes> i have to leave soon. Andy, can you email me the current plain/lang literal terminology?
davidwood: we're motivated to touch RDF/XML only once
<AndyS> Richard - do you want to let PatH know your current state on terminology? I'll resend email he may have lost
<AndyS> Regrets for next week.
<cygri> AndyS, ok i'll do that
<pchampin> here is the link
<cygri> start there
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: ericP Inferring Scribes: ericP WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: ACTION-65 ACTION-66 ACTION-67 ACTION-68 ACTION-69 ACTION-70 ACTION-71 AndyS DavidW FabGandon Garlik Guus MacTed Marcelo NickH OpenLink_Software P12 P21 P29 P32 P9 PROPOSED PatH PatHayes Peter_Patel-Schneider Scott_Bauer Sophia Souri SteveH Tony aabb aacc cygri davidwood ericP gavinc manu manu1 mbrunati mischat mischat_ pchampin pfps rdf tomayac trackbot zwu2 You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 17 Aug 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/08/17-rdf-wg-minutes.html People with action items: cygri ericp fabgandon guus manu path pathayes[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]