13:55:48 RRSAgent has joined #RDB2RDF 13:55:48 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/11/03-RDB2RDF-irc 13:56:16 zakim, code? 13:56:16 sorry, Ashok, I don't know what conference this is 13:56:37 Zakim, this is SW_RDB2RDF 13:56:37 mhausenblas, I see SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be SW_RDB2RDF". 13:56:38 zakim, this will be rdb2rdf 13:56:39 ok, Ashok; I see SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes 13:56:56 zakim, code? 13:56:56 the conference code is 7322733 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Ashok 13:57:20 ok 13:59:07 SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM has now started 13:59:08 +tpac 13:59:47 ok 14:00:53 joerg has joined #RDB2RDF 14:02:05 Seema has joined #rdb2rdf 14:02:43 +dmcneil 14:02:44 -dmcneil 14:02:46 +dmcneil 14:03:06 +seema 14:08:50 +[IPcaller] 14:11:51 zakim, [IPcaller] is joerg 14:11:51 +joerg; got it 14:13:46 Sure, Michael 14:14:00 Discussuing David's comments http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0022.html 14:14:55 All comments on R2RML document 14:17:45 * "The base IRI MUST be a valid IRI. It SHOULD end in a slash (“/”) character." - I would have thought this would say that it should end in an IRI delimiter, rather than specifically referring to a slash. 14:19:43 URI spec: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt 14:19:57 David: Why not allow other valid IRI delimiters such as # -- ref to RFC3987 14:20:09 IRI spec: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt 14:20:12 ... also change SHOULD to MUST 14:20:15 (thanks seema) 14:20:41 I agree with David's suggestions 14:21:41 David: Note on relative IRI resolution is unclear ... editors please improve wording 14:22:31 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/ 14:22:50 Michael: I've added Ashok's collected LC comments to http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Last_Call 14:23:28 Michael: please use this space for notes and decisions (if we have a resolution, we can directly link it from there - same for new issues) 14:24:13 Thanks, Michael 14:25:25 Michael: Thanks to Ashok who did the hard work to collect them, I just pasted it there ;) 14:26:41 David: An R2RML data validator is a system that takes as its input an R2RML mapping, a base IRI, and a SQL connection to an input database, and checks for the presence of data errors. When checking the input database, a data validator MUST report any data errors that are raised in the process of generating the output dataset. 14:26:59 Ashok: Why do need this paragraph? 14:29:56 Seema and David: This is implementation guidance. Why do we need in the spec. 14:31:16 David: Section 41. * "SHOULD NOT contain any mapping components (logical tables, term maps, predicate-object maps) that are not referenced by a triples map (in other words, are “unused”)" - I think the list of mapping components should either be complete, or formally defined elsewhere. If I am reading it correctly, it omits join condition and referencing object map. This seems like a needless lack of clarity in the spec. 14:32:13 ... define mapping components formally and completely and then refer in various palces in the spec. 14:32:21 Seema: +1 14:33:02 david: * "MAY assign IRIs or blank node identifiers to any mapping component in order to enable re-use of mapping components within the mapping graph." - I see that the term "mapping component" is used again here, so maybe it does warrant a formal definition. I see the term "mapping constructs" is used just below this. Are these the same thing? 14:33:22 ... change mapping construct to mapping component 14:34:42 * "For example, an IRI that represents a subject map may be used as the subject map of multiple triples maps; and may even be used as an object map of another triples map if it has the right properties." - I notice that this is not an exhaustive list of how resources may be reused. Since it says "For example", does this count as non-normative? I only raise these questions. I am not enough of a spec-lawyer to know how best to handle this. 14:35:20 David: Show the example using the example syntax 14:35:53 David: * "Using these classes is OPTIONAL in a mapping graph." - I think this wording could lead to confusion as it could be read to mean that an R2RML mapping could be defined without a TriplesMap. I think what is meant, as the next sentence clarifies, is that the triples defining the types of the mapping components are optional. 14:36:56 ... what it is really saying is that you don't have to have rdf:type predicate on your resources. This needs to be clarified 14:38:05 I'll be able to join in 1 hr 14:38:34 Seema: Mapping may not define all classes ... needs to be clarified 14:39:28 David and Seema: Wording needs to be clarified 14:40:34 David: * Since it doesn't say that an R2RML mapping graph MUST contain at least one TriplesMap, the implication is that an empty mapping graph that produces no triples is valid R2RML. I just mention this to confirm that is the intent. 14:41:12 ... Clarify that a NULL mapping (without a triples map) is still a valid mapping 14:42:20 David: * "The applicable class of a resource can always be inferred from its properties." - I think this captures a requirement on implementors that should be made more explicit. To get started processing an R2RML mapping, implementors must infer that a resource is a TriplesMap based on the presence of any of the mapping predicates which are required and have a domain of TriplesMap. Once you have the TriplesMaps then the rest of the types are implied by thei 14:43:53 ... Call out type inferencing required for triples maps. The others are easier becuase they are also doing type inferencing but the position cla 14:44:11 s/cla/clarifies this./ 14:46:45 David: Section 4.2 * "The preferred file extension is .ttl." - Is preferred a weaker form of SHOULD? 14:47:15 Shall we change "preferred to "SHOULD" 14:47:49 Seema: Can Turtle files have other file extensions? 14:48:37 David: * "It is common to use document-local IRIs in mapping documents by defining the default prefix in the beginning of the document, and using it for creating IRIs for mapping components such as triples maps" - This note does not seem like it belongs in the spec. 14:49:32 David/Seema/Ashok: We recommend removing the paragraph 14:50:18 David: Section 4.3 * "A data error is a condition of the data in the input database that would lead to the generation of an invalid RDF term, such as an invalid IRI or an ill-typed literal." - This seems like quite a loose definition. Since we have a more formal definition just below, can we strike this? 14:50:52 ... remove phrase "such as ..." 14:51:18 Seema: Agree ... remove phrase 14:52:14 David: * "A term map with a datatype override produces an ill-typed literal of a supported RDF datatype." Where "ill-typed" is defined in section 10 as "A typed literal of a supported RDF datatype is ill-typed if its lexical form is not in the lexical space of the RDF datatype identified by its datatype IRI." - Doesn't this definition of a mandatory error contradict our stated intent of: if data values fall outside of the intersection of SQL data types and X 14:53:14 Ashok: Suggest we defer this till we resolve issue 69 14:53:49 David: * "A logical table is a possibly virtual database table that is to be mapped to RDF triples. A logical table is either..." - I would remove the loose definition of "a possibly virtual database table" and combine these two sentences into one. The first time I read the sentence I thought it was talking about database views and database tables. 14:54:24 David: Why a loose definition followed by an exact definition ... suggest we collapse into one 14:55:14 David: Section 5.1 * "A SQL base tables or views is represented by a resource that has exactly one rr:tableName property." - change "tables"->"table" and "views"->"view" 14:55:22 ... this is a typo 14:55:40 David: * "If no catalog or schema are specified" - change "are"->"is" 14:55:48 ... fix grammar 14:56:21 David: * "If no catalog or schema are specified, then the default catalog and default schema of the SQL connection are assumed." - I think this is potentially confusing because it could be read to suggest that the R2RML implementor is supposed to do something wtih the default catalog/schema. But in fact the intent is for the identifier to be passed unchanged across the SQL connection. 14:58:31 David: The R2RML does not have to do anything ... the default schema/catalog are sent automatically out of band 14:59:15 ... make clear the R2RML processor does not have to do anything just send the unqualified identifier on through 14:59:53 David: Section 5.2 * "A SQL query is a SELECT query in the SQL language that can be executed over the input database." - How about explicitly saying that it is a string representation of a SELECT query? 15:00:13 ... wording could be improved 15:03:03 Seema: Maybe he means the concept not a string 15:03:54 so maybe change the sentence defining the rr:sqlQuery object to be "a string that conforms to the production..." 15:03:59 +mhausenblas 15:04:06 zakim, i'm with mhausenblas 15:04:06 +cygri; got it 15:06:29 Zakim, who's here? 15:06:29 On the phone I see tpac, dmcneil, seema, joerg, mhausenblas 15:06:30 On IRC I see Seema, joerg, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ashok, cygri, mhausenblas, dmcneil, MacTed, ivan, betehess, trackbot, iv_an_ru, ericP 15:06:32 mhausenblas has cygri 15:06:43 Break for 10 minutes 15:08:14 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Last_Call 15:08:40 david's comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0022.html 15:09:42 \me will be back in 10 min 15:11:45 Michael: Thanks David for adding your latest LC comment (16) to http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Last_Call 15:16:49 meeting: RDB2RDF 15:16:57 chair: Ashok 15:17:22 present: David, Seema, Michael, Richard, Ashok 15:18:31 David: * "It MUST NOT have duplicate column names or unnamed derived columns in the SELECT list." - It seems obvious now but when I first read this I had trouble understanding what was meant by "unnamed derived columns". I think it means if the query includes expressions as projected columns then they must be named. 15:19:57 ... can we improve the wording 15:21:12 David: * "For any database objects referenced without an explicit catalog name or schema name, the default catalog and default schema of the SQL connection are used." - Same comment as from previous section. I think this statement could be improved to clarify that an R2RML processor does not need to do anything to accomplish using the default catalog/schema. 15:21:57 ... please clarify that happens automatically by commention and database 15:22:06 s/commention/connection/ 15:22:43 David: Section 6 * "specifies how to generate the subjects for each row of the logical table" - I think this would be clearer if it said "generate a subject for each row". Otherwise it sounds like it might be possible for a subject map to generate multiple subjects from each row. 15:22:48 David: * "specifies how to generate the subjects for each row of the logical 15:22:48 table" - I think this would be clearer if it said "generate a subject for 15:22:49 each row". Otherwise it sounds like it might be possible for a subject map 15:22:50 to generate multiple subjects from each row. 15:23:01 Richard: Yes, we will fix this 15:23:17 David: * "together with the subjects generated by the subject map" - Similar to previous comment, changing "subjects"->"subject" I think removes ambiguity. 15:23:26 ... improve wording 15:23:43 juansequeda has joined #rdb2rdf 15:24:11 David: * "The referenced columns of all term maps of a triples map (subject map, predicate maps, object maps, graph maps) MUST be column names that exist in the term map's logical table." - Per the previous definition of "column name" this implies that the values cannot be qualified. Is that the intent? So a column reference in a mapping cannot be "EMP.JOB", it must be "JOB"? 15:28:13 Richard: Does not reduce expressivity 15:30:47 ... can add a short explanatory note 15:31:15 ACTION: cygri to add note to R2RML section 6 to the effect that referenced columns are really unqualified column names and that's intentional 15:31:15 Created ACTION-161 - Add note to R2RML section 6 to the effect that referenced columns are really unqualified column names and that's intentional [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-11-10]. 15:31:25 David: Section 6.3 * "A predicate-object map is a function that creates predicate-object pairs from logical table rows." - Perhaps this would be clearer if it said "creates a predicate-object pair for each logical table row". This would avoid ambiguity about how many predicate-object pairs are created per logical table row. 15:31:50 ... clarify wording as suggested 15:32:22 David: Section 7.1 * "Occurrances of these properties..." - "Occurrances" -> "Occurrences" * "aaa rr:subject bbb." - Using aaa and bbb as sample values makes the table messy, IMO. Would "x" and "y" serve the same purpose but look cleaner? 15:33:56 ... leave to edotor's discretion 15:34:24 David: Section 7.2 * "the singleton set containing the value of rr:column" - For clarity, I think this should be changed to something like "... the value of _the rr:column property_". Otherwise it could be read as describing a set containing rr:column. 15:36:17 Richard/Seema reword for clarity 15:36:47 David: Section 7.3 * "Backslash characters MUST be escaped by doubling them with another backslash character." - This reads ambiguously to me. It could be read as saying to use two or three backslashes. This possibility for confusion is compounded by the Turtle backslash handling. For clarity it could be changed to something like "Backslash characters MUST be escaped by preceding them with another backslash character." 15:37:56 can we say "/" and "//" 15:39:42 +ericP 15:40:40 David's comments are at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0022.html 15:41:13 present+: Eric 15:42:07 cygri: ok, adopt proposal to replace "doubling" with "preceding", add the actual character ("\") in brackets, and add an example for backslash doubling. same for the next sentence on curly brackets 15:42:28 David: * "If a template contains multiple pairs of unescaped curly braces, then adjacent pairs SHOULD be separated..." - I don't think the word "adjacent" is helpful here and it could lead to confusion. I think the word can simply be dropped. 15:43:14 ... remove word "adjacent" 15:47:49 ... then any pair should be separated from the next one by ... 15:48:39 Leave to editor's discretion 15:48:49 cygri: i'm ok with changing to "... then any pair should be separated from the next one by ..." 15:48:58 David: * On first reading it is not clear how to produce an IRI from database columns without having the R2RML processor perform percent encoding. It seems to me to be worth adding a note mentioning that this can be done by creating a SQL query based logical table that includes an expression building up an IRI value from the database. This would avoid using a template and thus avoid the automatic percent encoding. 15:52:03 ACTION: cygri to add note to 7.3 to explain that you cannot get an un-%-escaped iri from a template, but you can get it by using a view and a column 15:52:03 Created ACTION-162 - Add note to 7.3 to explain that you cannot get an un-%-escaped iri from a template, but you can get it by using a view and a column [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-11-10]. 15:52:17 David Section 7.6 * "...that does not have a specified langauge tag." - "langauge" -> "language" 15:52:25 ... typo 15:53:12 David: Section 7.7 * "A quoted and escaped data value is a SQL literal that can be used in a SQL query, such as.." - Seems to me that this needs a bit more definition. What does quoting mean? What does escaping mean? 15:54:01 Richard: Add reference to SQL production 15:56:04 cygri: david, do you want a crisper definition, or more explanation of escaping in the spec? 15:56:14 david: crisper definition. it's a rough spot in the spec 15:56:22 BREAK: Until 12:30 Eastern 15:56:46 -tpac 15:56:51 -mhausenblas 15:56:52 -dmcneil 15:56:57 -seema 15:57:04 -joerg 15:57:41 -ericP 15:57:42 SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM has ended 15:57:43 Attendees were tpac, dmcneil, seema, joerg, mhausenblas, cygri, ericP 15:58:44 cygri has joined #rdb2rdf 16:05:33 SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM has now started 16:05:40 +OpenLink_Software 16:05:43 -OpenLink_Software 16:05:45 SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM has ended 16:05:46 Attendees were OpenLink_Software 16:29:06 Souri has joined #rdb2rdf 16:29:42 SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM has now started 16:29:48 +dmcneil 16:30:17 +ericP 16:30:21 -dmcneil 16:30:23 +dmcneil 16:31:10 +[IPcaller] 16:31:42 zakim, [IPcaller] is joerg 16:31:42 +joerg; got it 16:31:52 +tpac 16:32:18 zakim, this is rdb2rdf 16:32:18 Ashok, this was already SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM 16:32:19 ok, Ashok; that matches SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM 16:32:56 rrsagent, make logs public 16:32:58 +Souri 16:33:02 Ashok, is there a schedule somewhere? What issues are being addressed right now? 16:33:37 It's a busy day with deadines, so I'm not sure when I would be able to call in, but I would like to be on the call when DM issues are being address 16:33:50 +mhausenblas 16:33:59 +seema 16:35:11 David's comments are at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0022.html 16:35:11 Juan, we are going thru David's comments 16:36:17 David: Section 8 * It would be good for this section to reference the place in section 11 that describes how triples are generated from the "joint SQL query". Otherwise this section appears to lead to a dead-end. It defines the joint SQL query but doesn't say what to do with it. 16:37:19 olyerickson has joined #RDB2RDF 16:39:31 ... add reference here to Section 11 16:39:39 betehess has joined #rdb2rdf 16:40:13 Souri agrees 16:40:24 David: * "SELECT * FROM ({child-query}) AS tmp" - I would change this to just: child-query or: {child-query} 16:41:36 ... just put the other query here 16:47:37 family (h, w): TM_h and TM_w 16:48:49 MenTriplesMap 16:49:17 predicate: wife 16:49:30 refObjectMap [ 16:49:41 parentTriplesMap WomenTriplesMap 16:49:51 ] 16:50:44 HUSBAND WIFE 16:50:52 John Mary 16:53:54 David: We need a motivating example. It's a complex case 16:54:21 David: * "SELECT * FROM ({child-query}) AS child, ({parent-query}) AS parent" - >From a SQL perspective, this feels wrong because it doesn't address the issue of column name collisions between the child and parent query. Is the thought that we can just ignore this because we describe in section 11 that the projected columns are split between child and parent? 16:57:12 Souri: Not sure what other databases do in this case 16:57:33 scribenick: Ashok 16:57:43 scribe: Ashok 17:01:16 Souri: SELECT {column-list} FROM ... 17:01:23 right 17:02:18 We discused the fourth bullet 17:02:33 David: * I think it is worth noting in this section that the join condition between child and parent does not have to be a 1:1 relationship. It can be M:N. 17:03:16 Souri: Add note saying join could be M:N in general 17:03:19 David: Section 9.1 17:03:35 * "then the triples will share the same single blank node." - The word "single" seems un-needed and awkward in this sentence. I would remove it. 17:04:19 ... Fix the English here 17:04:20 +OpenLink_Software 17:04:26 Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 17:04:26 +MacTed; got it 17:04:27 Zakim, mute me 17:04:27 MacTed should now be muted 17:04:55 Souri: how about "that blank node"? 17:05:14 s/that/share that/ 17:05:40 David: Section 10 17:05:57 * "and in hte" - change "hte" -> "the" 17:06:13 ... fix the typo 17:06:26 David: Section 11 * "The output dataset MUST NOT contain any other RDF triples or named graphs besides these." - I am curious to hear the thought process behind this text. I assume it is to have well defined behavior for interop and mapping portability? In our R2RML implementation, we intend to generate additional triples that provide metadata about the generated triples. So this text seems overly restrictive to us. I can see a few ways to address our need: 17:07:06 -joerg 17:07:12 chsiao has joined #RDB2RDF 17:09:03 cygri has joined #rdb2rdf 17:09:28 at least those graphs containing those triples 17:11:48 -MacTed 17:12:26 +juansequeda 17:12:30 Zakim, mute me 17:12:30 juansequeda should now be muted 17:15:03 joerg has joined #RDB2RDF 17:15:49 I am okay with either taking this out OR keeping it there and allowing implementations to provide a (session-level?) setting of flags to dictate whether additional triples may be included 17:16:17 q+ to ask if we want to test against Person:age 33, 32, 34. 17:17:41 ack next 17:17:42 ericP, you wanted to ask if we want to test against Person:age 33, 32, 34. 17:21:57 http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#extensionFunctions 17:22:57 http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#operatorExtensibility 17:25:11 Richard: I suggest adding a note 17:25:56 +1 17:26:51 +1 to ericP: "additional triples" would be more appropriate 17:28:20 chsiao has joined #RDB2RDF 17:30:31 Richard: add a note in Section 11 along the line: "an implementation may offer access to a dataset (or multiple datasets) that contains additional triples in addition to those in the output dataset, such as provenance or inferred triples. the test cases however assume that there are no additional triples." 17:30:56 +1 17:31:18 ericP: take out the test case stuff? 17:31:22 ashok: i'd take it out 17:31:49 richard: ok let's remove the test case sentence 17:32:20 David: Section 11.1 * "Each generated triple is placed into one or more particular graphs" - I would strike the word "particular" from this sentence. 17:32:49 Agreement 17:33:02 * "has no object map (but a referencing object map)" - This sentence was hard to parse on first read. I think it would be clearer if it said "(but _it does have_ a referencing...)" 17:33:22 Agreement 17:33:36 * "has no referencing object map (but a normal object map)" - Same comment as previous comment. 17:33:47 Agreement 17:34:15 "Target graphs, a set of zero or more IRIs" - To my reading of the steps, the target graph is either a single IRI (i.e. rr:defaultGraph) or a set of IRIs. I don't think it is ever a set of size zero. Futhermore, I think the steps above need to be changed to produce singleton sets of rr:defaultGraph. 17:35:34 +[IPcaller] 17:35:39 zakim, [IPcaller] is joerg 17:35:39 +joerg; got it 17:44:01 cygri: in 11.1, there are three instances of "add the following triples to the output dataset", which mention "Target Graphs". check that the target graphs are always a set (in the case of rr:defaultGrpah); also one rr:defaultGraph is incorrectly capitalized 17:44:46 David: * "For each possible combination " - For me this is a confusing way to describe the process. I don't think it is helpful to describe the subjects, predicates, and objects as sets and then take the cross-product of them. As far as I can tell this description only works in the document because the subjects, predicates, and objects are only ever singleton sets. Furthermore the steps are not written to produce sets. So I would change the descripti 17:48:35 TM => S{PO}* is the way it is right now 17:54:14 richard: allowing multiple s/p/o here was motivated by translation tables and by allowing multiple predicate maps on one p/o-map, both of these features were removed for LC 17:54:40 ... i think we should revisit this question once we have resolved these features 17:55:12 David: * "adding triples to the output dataset" is defined as a term but the place where that term is referenced uses different text. This makes it hard to search the document for places whether the term is referenced. Therefore I propose using the same text in both the definition and the uses. 17:55:23 david: also, sometimes it's "generate RDF term" (1) or "generate RDF terms" (multiple) 17:55:48 ... this editorial 17:55:58 Agreement 17:56:33 David: Section 11:2 * "A term map is a function that generates a set of RDF terms from a logical table row." - This statement is slightly different from the statement in section 7: "A term map is a function that generates an RDF term from a logical table row.". I think these two statements should match. 17:57:00 Richard: Requires cleanup after we resolve LC issues 17:57:19 David: * This section seems to have two different positions running through it: a) term maps produce a set of RDF terms (where the set is either empty or a singleton set?) b) term maps produce an RDF term or nothing It seems to me that we need to pick one or the other of these positions and make all the sentences consistent with that positions (both here and in earlier sections like section 7). 17:57:29 ... same issue. 17:57:41 We can revisit later 17:57:56 -juansequeda 17:57:56 * "if the term map references a NULL value" - Since we have a definition for "referenced columns" we should use that text here and make it a link. Then the language could be tightened to something like "if any of the term map's referenced columns have a NULL value" 17:59:03 +1 to "referenced column" comment about Sec 11.2 17:59:20 Should say "if value of one of the referenced columns is NULL" 17:59:28 Agreement 17:59:38 one or more? 17:59:40 richard: yes, and "referenced columns" is a link to the relevant definition 18:00:00 David: Section B.2 * I found it a bit confusing to click on the property links (e.g. rr:child) and to be taken to another document (I expected the properties to be defined in the spec). Furthermore it is not clear to me (maybe I missed something?) whether this related document is normative: http://www.w3.org/ns/r2rml# 18:00:01 ... yes, it should say, "one or more" 18:01:19 ... I would like Schema to be in the spec ... the pointer takes you to another (Schema) document 18:03:39 Richard: We could format differently to make it clear it's another document 18:06:49 note that e.g. the XML spec has the formal representation (BNF, in this case) interspersed with the normative text, c.f. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-starttags 18:07:07 I am ok with making the schema normative (old WD had this embedded in the spec) 18:07:09 the bnf is recapitulated at the bottom 18:07:54 (i've always found that a very readable and educational mixture) 18:08:15 I like it to be separated, but also ok with making the separated doc normative 18:08:20 ACTION: Hausenblas to ask Ivan re how other SW groups handle(d) Schema normative (or not) 18:08:21 Created ACTION-163 - Ask Ivan re how other SW groups handle(d) Schema normative (or not) [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2011-11-10]. 18:09:49 David: * "Note that additional constraints not stated in this table might apply, and making a property forbidden or required in certain situations." - This doesn't seem to be a grammatically correct sentence to me. 18:10:38 Agree to fix the sentence 18:10:55 David: * With the addition of shortcuts, I think parts of this table are wrong. e.g. rr:objectMap is now an optional property, so the cardinality for it should be "0...1" rather than "1". I think this applies to several of the properties. But, actually it is quite useful from a user and implementor perspective to see a list of which _sets_ of properties are required. Meaning that either rr:object or rr:objectMap is required. One way to address this would be 18:31:18 rr:table and rr:sql INSTEAD OF rr:tableName and rr:sqlQuery 18:32:39 rr:logicalTableName and rr:logicalTableSql 18:33:27 juansequeda has joined #rdb2rdf 18:34:19 just stay with rr:table ... as a shortcut for rr:logicalTable [ rr:tableName ...] 18:39:13 very confusing ... 18:39:35 Michael: I have to leave now, sorry - hope you still have a lot of fun - KUTGW! 18:40:14 OK... bye I will send you mail 18:41:18 I am very much for allowing shortcut only for tableName b/c somebody writing a sql query is already dealing with complex spec 18:41:19 ACTION: richard to create issue for the tableName sugar: 1. should we have it at all? 2. should it use different paragraphs? 3. should it apply just to tableName or also sqlQuery and sqlVersion? 4. the handling of this sugar in B.2 is non-obvious 18:41:20 Created ACTION-164 - Create issue for the tableName sugar: 1. should we have it at all? 2. should it use different paragraphs? 3. should it apply just to tableName or also sqlQuery and sqlVersion? 4. the handling of this sugar in B.2 is non-obvious [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-11-10]. 18:42:19 RRSAgent, draft minutes 18:42:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/03-RDB2RDF-minutes.html mhausenblas 18:42:35 RRSAgent, make logs public 18:43:04 ACTION-164 18:43:08 ACTION-164? 18:43:08 ACTION-164 -- Richard Cyganiak to create issue for the tableName sugar: 1. should we have it at all? 2. should it use different paragraphs? 3. should it apply just to tableName or also sqlQuery and sqlVersion? 4. the handling of this sugar in B.2 is non-obvious -- due 2011-11-10 -- OPEN 18:43:08 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/164 18:43:24 David: * With the addition of shortcuts, I think parts of this table are wrong. e.g. rr:objectMap is now an optional property, so the cardinality for it should be "0...1" rather than "1". I think this applies to several of the properties. But, actually it is quite useful from a user and implementor perspective to see a list of which _sets_ of properties are required. Meaning that either rr:object or rr:objectMap is required. One way to address this would be 18:45:17 David: * "R2RML view" and "SQL base table or view" are two concepts that appear in the "Context" column but do not have corresponding classes in the schema. Both of these concepts are informal sub-types of LogicalTable. This seems like enough of a wrinkle that it warrants some additional explanation. I certainly had to spend several minutes tracing everything to find all the connections. Alternatively, why don't we create classes for these two concepts? 18:46:15 Richard: makes sense to add as subclass of LogicalTable 18:46:45 David: * The referenced schema for rr:sqlQuery, rr:sqlVersion, and rr:tableName do not specify a domain for these properties. Don't these all have a domain of LogicalTable? 18:47:13 Richard: Issue I just created should also mention this last point 18:48:45 Starting on the other LV issues 18:48:56 s/LV/LC/ 18:49:18 Seema has joined #rdb2rdf 18:49:32 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Last_Call 18:49:38 -joerg 18:49:48 [1] Examples in 2.6 contain redundant rr:termType declaration Richard Cyganiak http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0000.html 18:50:55 RESOLVED: Close issue by removing redundancy 18:51:02 zakim, who is on the phone? 18:51:02 On the phone I see dmcneil, ericP, tpac, Souri, mhausenblas, seema 18:51:13 [2] Note and examples on R2RML SQL identifier syntax disagree with normative text Richard Cyganiak http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0001.html 18:51:22 commendable (b/c it was not "commentable") 18:52:49 RESOLVED: Editors will fix this 18:53:11 Souri: Related to Issue 35 18:54:16 ... syntax is a bit heavyweight 18:54:23 "\"emp\"" 18:55:03 [3] Cardinality of predicate maps in predicate-object maps Richard Cyganiak http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0004.html 19:00:19 S{P(+)O}(*) shortcut: writing and with < {P1 P2} O> => I do not see any reason for complicating our language for this shortcut 19:00:39 ashok & souri - i added a comment here like you requested: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/35 19:00:52 [4] Subject: RDB2RDF Last Call Working Draft transition announcement Bob Ferris http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0005.html 19:01:27 off for a few... back soon 19:01:33 -ericP 19:08:09 ISSUE-62 19:08:13 ISSUE-62? 19:08:13 ISSUE-62 -- Re-using public entity identifiers - external service call -- postponed 19:08:13 http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/62 19:08:54 Translation table is a deep topic, I'd say we revisit the issue and discuss during WG: however, note that if we add a translation scheme to the current LC then we do need another LC 19:09:36 [5] comments on working drafts Dominique Guardiola http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0006.html 19:09:41 souri, might still be worth it imo. 19:10:44 Discussion postponed 19:10:50 richard: regarding Bob's comment i think we should revisit the translation table issue, and reply with the outcome of that discussion; and also reply with our ISSUE-62 decision (postpone, potential R2RML 1.1 feature) 19:11:02 [5] comments on working drafts Dominique Guardiola http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0006.html 19:11:07 +ericP 19:11:42 [7] R2RML: classes of triples map only constants Ahmed Bassiouni http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0015.html 19:12:47 richard: see note at the beginning of http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#typing for a way of solving this 19:13:25 Richard: The note addresses his question 19:13:49 ... perhaps note seems to be improved. 19:14:19 richard, its ok with me to discuss this issue (Issue-62, Issue-66) again, but just wanted to remind us about the LC redo 19:14:33 ACTION: richard to consider rephrasing the note that addresses http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0015.html 19:14:34 Created ACTION-165 - Consider rephrasing the note that addresses http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0015.html [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-11-10]. 19:15:23 [8] R2RML: comments on spec and test cases Toby Inkster http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Sep/0017.html 19:16:44 Editorial. Agrred to fix. 19:16:54 Souri, rr:RefObjectMap still is a separate class, just the property rr:refObjectMap is gone. 19:17:05 so only one of the three occurrences is an error 19:17:40 ok thanks richard 19:17:58 [9] (Editorial) Last Call Comments on the Direct Mapping document Ivan Herman http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0000.html 19:19:19 Eric will look at these comments and report back. Seem to be all editorial. 19:19:41 [10] Editorial comments on R2RML Ivan Herman http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-comments/2011Oct/0001.html 19:21:30 R@RML editors will look at these editorial comments 19:21:41 -seema 19:21:43 -dmcneil 19:21:46 -tpac 19:21:48 s/R@RML/R2RML/ 19:21:53 -ericP 19:21:59 -mhausenblas 19:22:05 -Souri 19:22:07 SW_RDB2RDF(RDB2RDF)10:00AM has ended 19:22:08 Attendees were dmcneil, ericP, joerg, tpac, Souri, mhausenblas, seema, MacTed, juansequeda 19:22:10 rrsagent, generate minutes 19:22:10 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/11/03-RDB2RDF-minutes.html Ashok 20:06:32 chsiao has joined #RDB2RDF 20:32:17 betehess has joined #rdb2rdf 20:40:19 chsiao has joined #RDB2RDF 21:05:22 Zakim has left #RDB2RDF 21:17:52 betehess has joined #rdb2rdf 22:40:12 cygri has joined #rdb2rdf