See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 30 August 2011
<scribe> scribenick: mhausenblas
<cygri> dmcneil, i just wrote a reply to your mail
PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/08/23-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
<juansequeda> +1
<boris> +1
RESOLUTION: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/08/23-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Aug/0135.html
Ashok: Richard, how much more work is needed for R2RML?
Richard: From my POV it is feature-complete
Ashok: same question for DM, Juan?
Juan: good to go
<ericP> i believe that <http://localhost/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directMapping/explicitFK#definition> reflects the current plan modulo a possible dispute around using '.' in place of ','
<ericP> i believe that <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directMapping/explicitFK#definition> reflects the current plan modulo a possible dispute around using '.' in place of ','
Souri: Modulo last-moments addition, I think 15 Sep should be doable
PROPOSAL: The working group postpones the last call publication to the 16th of September
<Souri> We are going to do a rewrite of the ISSUE-57 related note by end of this week
<Souri> I am out next Tuesday
PROPOSAL: The working group postpones the last call publication to the 16th of September (frozen at 16, publish on 20 Sep)
Ashok: When will the document be available, finally
Souri: I'd consider the translation table as out of scope for mid-September
<Souri> PROPOSAL: If WG is okay with eliminating some of the recently added content (such as, Translation Scheme) and any new additions, then we can try putting out the LC document by Sep 16.
Ivan: The proposal is too vague for me to vote, sorry
PROPOSAL: The working group postpones the last call publication to the 16th of September beside translation scheme
<Souri> Translation Scheme, editing the content on many-to-many mapping, ISSUE-57 note rewriting, graphMap associating with POmap
Richard: I'd like to understand why to remove the feature (translation scheme)
Souri: only timing-wise
<Souri> -1 to giving them an idea that we have not thought enough about
Michael: treat it like ISSUE-57, let the community decide?
Souri: no
Michael: What is exactly the plan, Souri?
Souri: Just render the idea, not spell it out
Ivan: this is not LC then
<dmcneil> +q
Ashok: Agree with Ivan
... I was gonna ask if we can add features after LC and the
answer was no IIUC
Ivan: Just to clarify - beyond editorial changes we'd need to issue a second LC
<ericP> 2 questions to ask re: whether LC comments bring you back to WG status:
<ericP> does this change implementations?
<ericP> is this likely to change the mind of commentors?
<ericP> .
Ashok: Looks like we could treat the translation scheme like ISSUE-57?
Michael: That's what I suggested, but Souri said no?
David: I agree with Michael/Ashok
<Souri> We can come up with an alternate scheme for translation and then discuss it.
<ericP> it sounds like dmcneil is willing to push up the risk of a 2nd LC a bit in order to include the feature
Richard: I'd be OK with the idea
to add it as a 'feature-at-risk' ala ISSUE-57
... Re Souri's point concerning polishing
... I think the public doesn't pay much attention before
LC
... so we can expect some good comments
... would be open to changes
Ivan: So, impl. are less of my
concern
... that in CR phase, really
<ericP> note that losing the CR gamble is expensive
Ivan: but going out there with a
lack of consensus is definitely not good
... If there are too many comments re a LC feature (such as
translation scheme) we should be open to simply remove
Richard: ISSUE-57 re Turtle is in the same space, in fact
Souri: We can discuss an alternate proposal for TS
PROPOSAL: The working group postpones the last call publication to the 16th of September beside translation schemes where a note describes the issue behind it
<dmcneil> +1
Ashok: we can remove it now and risk a 2nd LC, then
Ivan: I'd be rather unhappy with it
<Souri> +1 to revising the Translation Scheme proposal (to make it simpler) and then going to LC by 16-SEP-2011
Souri: So, we went through the latest write-up yesterday but didn't have time to change
Richard: I'll be around
theoretical but only have very limited time to devote to W3C
stuff
... it would be great to have issues raised for the Translation
Scheme
<Souri> makes sense
Souri: we can provide these issues by end of week
PROPOSAL: The working group postpones the last call publication to the 16th of September beside translation schemes where a note describes the issue behind it
<Souri> we had those four points only: translation scheme (we need a simpler scheme for mapping: <DB value(s), RDF term>), ISSUE-57 refinement of the note regarding the alternate proposal, correcting Sec 2.6 example, graphMap association with POMap
<dmcneil> +q
Ashok: If Souri, Seema and Richard sort out the issue this week, we can take the resolution next week
(David asks a clarification question re feature-freeze)
Richard: What we could say is that there are four issues (which we need to raise), then we could say after all these are resolved we're LC ready
<Souri> ISSUE: Translation Scheme as proposed seems too complicated for the simple task of mapping <DB value(s), RDF term>
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-66 - Translation Scheme as proposed seems too complicated for the simple task of mapping <DB value(s), RDF term> ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/66/edit .
Ashok: Do the Editors think you can resolve it this week?
(discussion around what the issues are and if it is feasible to resolve it)
<dmcneil> +q
Michael: So, I understand that if W3C management now asks me when we go LC, I will say: once we're done with the issues, yes - we can not give any exact date ...?
<Souri> I have raised ISSUE-66 for the translation scheme
<Souri> I am on vacation Fri and Tue
David: I don't see a lot of chances to get the work done (with the availability of Richard and Souri ...)
Souri: I'm positive to be able to
resolve it this week
... Is it OK to resolve ISSUE via mailing list?
Ivan: Yes, up to us to define the policy
[meeting adjourned]
<ericP> juansequeda, http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directMapping/explicitFK#definition
<ericP> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/directMapping/explicitFK#emp-addr-ex1
trackbot, end telecon
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) Succeeded: s/1+/q+/ Succeeded: s/them going/then going/ Found ScribeNick: mhausenblas Inferring Scribes: mhausenblas Default Present: +3539149aaaa, mhausenblas, MacTed, juansequeda, +1.314.394.aabb, cygri, EricP, Ashok_Malhotra, dmcneil, Ivan, boris, +1.603.897.aacc Present: +3539149aaaa mhausenblas MacTed juansequeda +1.314.394.aabb cygri EricP Ashok_Malhotra dmcneil Ivan boris +1.603.897.aacc Michael Juan Ted Boris David Eric Ashok Seema Souri Regrets: Marcelo Percy Nuno Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Aug/0167.html Found Date: 30 Aug 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/08/30-rdb2rdf-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]