<pfps> sounds LOVELY!

<AndyS> redialing ...

<cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.08.17

<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

APPROVED

RESOLVED

<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].

ACTION-65: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-65 And Pat to consider what words to add to minimal proposal. notes added

ACTION-66: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-66 Contact Paul notes added

ACTION-67: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-67 Review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol notes added

ACTION-68: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-68 Review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol notes added

ACTION-69: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-69 Update Turtle issue list to reflect current status notes added

ACTION-70: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-70 Send email to provenance WG chairs about a joint call notes added

ACTION-71: CONTNIUED

<trackbot> ACTION-71 Email team-prov-chairs@w3.org about joint task force, or something. maybe include RDFa and SPARQL notes added

next telecon

davidwood: i proposed by email that ivan chair a meeting about RDF JSON work

whois tomayac

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

<gavinc> http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/

<manu> http://json-ld.org/playground/

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

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

Turtle

-> 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 comments list
... 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

RDF Concepts

-> 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

<cygri> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/rdf-concepts-FPWD/rdf-concepts/Overview.html

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

<gavinc> +q

<gavinc> -q

ericP: note that the WG is permitting the editors to make changes after the decision to publish

ISSUE-12 language-tagged literals

<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

<mischat> ok

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?

AndyS: principally uniformity
... current datatype of "" or ""@en is an error

<AndyS> rdf:LangString

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

<PatHayes> better

<AndyS> could you type into IRC?

<NickH> sorry, can't understand

<pchampin> sorry

<pchampin> to AndyS's remark: having a valid lexical form makes it cumbersome, see PlainLiteral

<PatHayes> agree.

<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> 'plain

<PatHayes> ' is now a type. no prblem

<PatHayes> ;-

<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

<AndyS> ??

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.

<PatHayes> yes

ericP: are there any disiderada which help us figure the implementation

<PatHayes> ok

<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]

action -4

Guus: editors will have to look closely at PatHayes's summary

WG priorities before F2F

Guus: which are the highest priority issues?

<pchampin> +1

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

<cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal

<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

<AndyS> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Documents#N-Triples

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

pfps, agreed?

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 for later?
... 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

ADJOURNED

<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.

<pchampin> http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/manual.html

<cygri> AndyS, ok i'll do that

<pchampin> here is the link

<cygri> ericP, http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/panel/?group=rdf-wg&go=Use+This+Group

<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