RDF Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 25 May 2011

Seen
Alex Hall, Andy Seaborne, Antoine Zimmerman, Christopher Matheus, David Wood, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Fabien Gandon, Ivan Herman, Jeremy Carroll, Matteo Brunati, Mischa Tuffield, Nicholas Humfrey, Patrick Hayes, Peter Patel-Schneider, Richard Cyganiak, Sandro Hawke, Scott Bauer, Souripriya Das, Steve Harris, William Waites, Yves Raimond, Zhe Wu
Guests
Antoine Zimmerman
Chair
David Wood
Scribe
Fabien Gandon, Sandro Hawke
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. minutes from last meeting accepted link
  2. We'll use genid as the .well-known name link
  3. The thing we're working on is "RDF 1.1" link
  4. for short names we would use rdf11-X where rdf-X stands for the current recommendations link
  5. resolve ISSUE 8 by keeping IRI-s and their punycode equivalent separate as different URI References in RDF link
Topics
<sandro> Guest: Antoine (AZ) Zimmerman
14:32:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/25-rdf-wg-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/25-rdf-wg-irc

14:32:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:32:56 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394

14:32:56 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 28 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 28 minutes

14:32:57 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:32:57 <trackbot> Date: 25 May 2011
14:33:10 <ivan> Chair: David Wood
14:53:21 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started

(No events recorded for 20 minutes)

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started

14:53:28 <Zakim> +??P6

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P6

14:54:33 <FabGandon> Zakim says code is not valid ?

Fabien Gandon: Zakim says code is not valid ?

14:54:49 <ivan> ??

Ivan Herman: ??

14:54:52 <ivan> may be early...

Ivan Herman: may be early...

14:55:04 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip

Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip

14:55:04 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made

14:55:05 <Zakim> -??P6

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P6

14:55:05 <Zakim> +??P6

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P6

14:55:06 <Zakim> +Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan

14:55:31 <Zakim> +Tony

Zakim IRC Bot: +Tony

14:55:54 <moustaki> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Yves Raimond: Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:55:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P6, Ivan, Tony

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P6, Ivan, Tony

14:55:57 <Scott_Bauer> zakim, Tony is me

Scott Bauer: zakim, Tony is me

14:55:57 <Zakim> +Scott_Bauer; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Scott_Bauer; got it

14:56:02 <moustaki> Zakim, ??P6 is yvesr

Yves Raimond: Zakim, ??P6 is yvesr

14:56:02 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +yvesr; got it

14:57:12 <Zakim> +??P9

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9

14:57:22 <NickH> Zakim, ??P9 is me

Nicholas Humfrey: Zakim, ??P9 is me

14:57:22 <Zakim> +EricP

Zakim IRC Bot: +EricP

14:57:22 <Zakim> +NickH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +NickH; got it

14:59:36 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-Schneider

Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-Schneider

15:00:32 <zwu2> code?

Zhe Wu: code?

15:00:33 <NickH> FabGandon, it works for me

Nicholas Humfrey: FabGandon, it works for me

15:00:35 <Zakim> +??P11

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11

15:00:42 <zwu2> what is the conference code?

Zhe Wu: what is the conference code?

15:00:45 <mbrunati> zakim, P11 is me

Matteo Brunati: zakim, P11 is me

15:00:45 <Zakim> sorry, mbrunati, I do not recognize a party named 'P11'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, mbrunati, I do not recognize a party named 'P11'

15:00:54 <moustaki> zwu2: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.05.25

Yves Raimond: zwu2, http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.05.25

15:00:55 <Zakim> +??P12

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12

15:01:00 <mbrunati> zakim, ??P11 is me

Matteo Brunati: zakim, ??P11 is me

15:01:00 <Zakim> +mbrunati; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +mbrunati; got it

15:01:01 <zwu2> thanks

Zhe Wu: thanks

15:01:06 <moustaki> s/zwu2:/zwu2,
15:01:11 <SteveH> Zakim, ??p12 is [Garlik]

Steve Harris: Zakim, ??p12 is [Garlik]

15:01:12 <Zakim> +[Garlik]; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +[Garlik]; got it

15:01:12 <Zakim> +koalie

Zakim IRC Bot: +koalie

15:01:15 <zwu2> zakim, what is the conference code?

Zhe Wu: zakim, what is the conference code?

15:01:15 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), zwu2

Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), zwu2

15:01:19 <SteveH> Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH, mischat

Steve Harris: Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH, mischat

15:01:19 <Zakim> +SteveH, mischat; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH, mischat; got it

15:01:21 <Zakim> +AlexHall

Zakim IRC Bot: +AlexHall

15:01:33 <Zakim> +??P16

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P16

15:01:40 <ivan> zakim, koalie is fabien

Ivan Herman: zakim, koalie is fabien

15:01:40 <Zakim> +fabien; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +fabien; got it

15:01:46 <Zakim> + +1.415.586.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.415.586.aaaa

15:01:48 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

15:01:53 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPCaller is me

15:01:53 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

15:01:55 <Zakim> +zwu2

Zakim IRC Bot: +zwu2

15:01:58 <cmatheus> zakim, ??P16 is me

Christopher Matheus: zakim, ??P16 is me

15:01:58 <Zakim> +cmatheus; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cmatheus; got it

15:02:01 <FabGandon> zakim, fabien is FabGandon

Fabien Gandon: zakim, fabien is FabGandon

15:02:01 <Zakim> +FabGandon; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +FabGandon; got it

15:02:15 <FabGandon> Scribe: FabGandon

(Scribe set to Fabien Gandon)

15:02:21 <Zakim> +mhausenblas

Zakim IRC Bot: +mhausenblas

15:02:22 <cygri> zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me

Richard Cyganiak: zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me

15:02:22 <Zakim> +cygri; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it

15:02:33 <Zakim> -AndyS

Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS

15:02:40 <cmatheus> I'm muted on this end.

Christopher Matheus: I'm muted on this end.

15:02:58 <ericP> Zakim, please mute cmatheus

Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, please mute cmatheus

15:02:58 <Zakim> cmatheus should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: cmatheus should now be muted

15:03:00 <Zakim> +sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +sandro

15:03:03 <ericP> Zakim, please unmute cmatheus

Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, please unmute cmatheus

15:03:03 <Zakim> cmatheus should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: cmatheus should no longer be muted

15:03:21 <Zakim> +PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH

15:03:29 <Zakim> +??P27

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P27

15:03:45 <AndyS> zakim, ??P27 is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, ??P27 is me

15:03:45 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

15:04:14 <Zakim> +Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri

15:04:38 <cmatheus> no.

Christopher Matheus: no.

15:04:46 <ericP> ack me

Eric Prud'hommeaux: ack me

15:04:51 <cmatheus> ack me

Christopher Matheus: ack me

15:04:54 <ericP> Zakim, unmute cmatheus

Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, unmute cmatheus

15:04:54 <Zakim> cmatheus was not muted, ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: cmatheus was not muted, ericP

15:05:11 <cmatheus> let me hang up and try gain.

Christopher Matheus: let me hang up and try gain.

15:05:19 <Zakim> -cmatheus

Zakim IRC Bot: -cmatheus

15:05:32 <davidwood> Oops

David Wood: Oops

15:05:33 <Zakim> +??P16

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P16

15:05:36 <davidwood> On my way now

David Wood: On my way now

15:05:37 <davidwood> Sorry

David Wood: Sorry

15:05:55 <cmatheus> zakim, ??P16 is me

Christopher Matheus: zakim, ??P16 is me

15:05:55 <Zakim> +cmatheus; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cmatheus; got it

15:06:24 <davidwood> Err, I can't join the telecon; "The conference is restricted at this time"

David Wood: Err, I can't join the telecon; "The conference is restricted at this time"

15:06:34 <sandro> sure you got the right code...??

Sandro Hawke: sure you got the right code...??

15:06:42 <davidwood> Sandro, yes

David Wood: Sandro, yes

15:06:51 <SteveH> maybe up to our limit?

Steve Harris: maybe up to our limit?

15:06:52 <sandro> (that's the error if you make a typo in the conference code.)

Sandro Hawke: (that's the error if you make a typo in the conference code.)

15:06:57 <Zakim> +??P31

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P31

15:07:01 <ww> zakim, ??P31 is me

William Waites: zakim, ??P31 is me

15:07:01 <Zakim> +ww; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +ww; got it

15:07:11 <ericP> davidwood, if that fails, i can try to conference you in with my phone

Eric Prud'hommeaux: davidwood, if that fails, i can try to conference you in with my phone

15:07:12 <ww> zakim, mute me

William Waites: zakim, mute me

15:07:12 <Zakim> ww should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: ww should now be muted

15:07:48 <davidwood> No, still getting the error message :(

David Wood: No, still getting the error message :(

15:08:23 <davidwood> EricP, thanks.  I'm at +1.540.898.1842

David Wood: EricP, thanks. I'm at +1.540.898.1842

15:08:51 <sandro> davidwood, the problem is likely in DTMF signalling between your phone and zakim -- some digit is probably not being conveyed correctly.

Sandro Hawke: davidwood, the problem is likely in DTMF signalling between your phone and zakim -- some digit is probably not being conveyed correctly.

15:09:15 <ww> rfc2833 ftw!

William Waites: rfc2833 ftw!

15:09:20 <davidwood> Sandro, OK.

David Wood: Sandro, OK.

15:09:21 <sandro> (I had a cell phone where 2/5/8/0 didn't make it through to Zakim.)

Sandro Hawke: (I had a cell phone where 2/5/8/0 didn't make it through to Zakim.)

15:09:25 <davidwood> Yay.  Thanks to EricP.

David Wood: Yay. Thanks to EricP.

15:10:13 <FabGandon> yes

yes

15:11:08 <FabGandon> davidwood: issues with missing parts in minutes from the last telecon

David Wood: issues with missing parts in minutes from the last telecon

15:11:31 <FabGandon> ... no objection now to accept the minutes

... no objection now to accept the minutes

15:11:41 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

15:11:51 <FabGandon> RESOLVED: minutes from last meeting accepted

RESOLVED: minutes from last meeting accepted

15:11:56 <davidwood> ack ivan

David Wood: ack ivan

15:11:57 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan

15:12:36 <cygri> q+

Richard Cyganiak: q+

15:12:45 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

15:12:46 <FabGandon> ivan: We should now try to register what ever name we chose.

Ivan Herman: We should now try to register what ever name we chose.

15:12:51 <cygri> q-

Richard Cyganiak: q-

15:12:52 <cygri> q+

Richard Cyganiak: q+

15:12:57 <cygri> steveh i'll let you go first

Richard Cyganiak: steveh i'll let you go first

15:13:18 <FabGandon> sandro: we need a formal document

Sandro Hawke: we need a stable document

15:13:26 <sandro> s/formal/stable/
15:13:33 <sandro> ... for IETF registration

Sandro Hawke: ... for IETF registration

15:14:37 <FabGandon>   ACTION: sandro to prepare document for IETF registration

ACTION: sandro to prepare document for IETF registration

15:15:15 <sandro> ACTION: sandro to start conversation on reservince our well-known string.

ACTION: sandro to start conversation on reservince our well-known string.

15:15:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-52 - Start conversation on reservince our well-known string. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-06-01].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-52 - Start conversation on reservince our well-known string. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-06-01].

15:15:26 <davidwood> ack cygri

David Wood: ack cygri

15:15:39 <FabGandon> davidwood: how long for the document to be ready?

David Wood: how long for the document to be ready?

15:16:09 <FabGandon> cygri: we haven't decided on the name

Richard Cyganiak: we haven't decided on the name

15:16:20 <davidwood> I expect the RDF Concepts doc to be in draft in the next couple of months.

David Wood: I expect the RDF Concepts doc to be in draft in the next couple of months.

15:16:22 <davidwood> ack SteveH

David Wood: ack SteveH

15:16:53 <sandro> +1 a WG Note on this

Sandro Hawke: +1 a WG Note on this

15:17:02 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

15:17:02 <FabGandon> SteveH: we could do a strow poll for the name now.

Steve Harris: we could do a strow poll for the name now.

15:17:22 <SteveH> genid for name

Steve Harris: genid for name

15:17:24 <cygri> bnode, skolem, gensym, genid

Richard Cyganiak: bnode, skolem, gensym, genid

15:17:28 <yvesr> node for name?

Yves Raimond: node for name?

15:17:34 <mischat> blank

Mischa Tuffield: blank

15:17:35 <FabGandon> davidwood: good ideas for a name?

David Wood: good ideas for a name?

15:17:40 <yvesr> id

Yves Raimond: id

15:17:40 <pfps> I like steveH  ;_)

Peter Patel-Schneider: I like steveH ;_)

15:17:47 <zwu2> bnode, genid

Zhe Wu: bnode, genid

15:18:09 <Zakim> +nick.a

Zakim IRC Bot: +nick.a

15:18:13 <AndyS> I prefer a name that is for blank nodes - not generic (e.g. genid) that makes spotting bnodes harder.

Andy Seaborne: I prefer a name that is for blank nodes - not generic (e.g. genid) that makes spotting bnodes harder.

15:18:16 <PatH> I dont think we should use 'bnode'

Patrick Hayes: I dont think we should use 'bnode'

15:18:19 <davidwood> genid is good for me because it is short.  well-known is not.

David Wood: genid is good for me because it is short. well-known is not.

15:18:22 <SteveH> +1 to PatH

Steve Harris: +1 to PatH

15:18:30 <davidwood> -1 to bnode

David Wood: -1 to bnode

15:18:34 <JeremyCarroll> I prefer something generic

Jeremy Carroll: I prefer something generic

15:18:38 <NickH> snode

Nicholas Humfrey: snode

15:18:42 <FabGandon> ivan: a number of people against "bnode"

Ivan Herman: a number of people against "bnode"

15:18:45 <JeremyCarroll> -1 to bnode

Jeremy Carroll: -1 to bnode

15:19:05 <AZ> +1 genid

Antoine Zimmerman: +1 genid

15:19:10 <cygri> +1 to skolem

Richard Cyganiak: +1 to skolem

15:19:16 <PatH> I like genid as being the least bad of the lot.

Patrick Hayes: I like genid as being the least bad of the lot.

15:19:18 <ivan> +1 to skolem or genid

Ivan Herman: +1 to skolem or genid

15:19:20 <AndyS> Let's still do the strawpoll to get the balance.

Andy Seaborne: Let's still do the strawpoll to get the balance.

15:19:21 <SteveH> +1 t genid

Steve Harris: +1 t genid

15:19:22 <davidwood> skolem would work for me

David Wood: skolem would work for me

15:19:27 <FabGandon> +1 genid

+1 genid

15:19:30 <yvesr> -1 to skolem

Yves Raimond: -1 to skolem

15:19:32 <mbrunati> probably blank or skolem

Matteo Brunati: probably blank or skolem

15:19:43 <yvesr> we should remove that whole skolem terminology imho

Yves Raimond: we should remove that whole skolem terminology imho

15:19:50 <ww> and blank?

William Waites: and blank?

15:19:54 <zwu2> no -1 to genid yet

Zhe Wu: no -1 to genid yet

15:20:02 <FabGandon> davidwood: strow poll bnode, genid and skolem

David Wood: strow poll bnode, genid and skolem

15:20:04 <davidwood> Straw poll: bnode, genid or skolem

David Wood: Straw poll: bnode, genid or skolem

15:20:11 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: bnode, genid, skolem ---  numbers of each

STRAWPOLL: bnode, genid, skolem --- numbers of each

15:20:22 <SteveH> -1, +1, -1

Steve Harris: -1, +1, -1

15:20:22 <AndyS> The argument was for other systems to be able spot these from the URI.

Andy Seaborne: The argument was for other systems to be able spot these from the URI.

15:20:23 <PatH> -1/+1/0

Patrick Hayes: -1/+1/0

15:20:25 <sandro> +0 / +1 / +0

Sandro Hawke: +0 / +1 / +0

15:20:25 <davidwood> +1 genid, +1 skolem, −1 bnode

David Wood: +1 genid, +1 skolem, −1 bnode

15:20:27 <ivan> -1,+1,+1

Ivan Herman: -1,+1,+1

15:20:30 <ww> +2, +1 +3

William Waites: +2, +1 +3

15:20:30 <zwu2> +1/+1/-1

Zhe Wu: +1/+1/-1

15:20:31 <yvesr> +1, 0, -1

Yves Raimond: +1, 0, -1

15:20:35 <NickH> -1, +1, -1

Nicholas Humfrey: -1, +1, -1

15:20:41 <cygri> -1/0/+1

Richard Cyganiak: -1/0/+1

15:20:43 <PatH> You did say 'slash'

Patrick Hayes: You did say 'slash'

15:20:50 <mbrunati> -1, , -1, 0

Matteo Brunati: -1, , -1, 0

15:20:53 <AlexHall> -1/+1/-0

Alex Hall: -1/+1/-0

15:20:53 <AndyS> +1/0/-1

Andy Seaborne: +1/0/-1

15:20:58 <JeremyCarroll> +0/+1/+0.5

Jeremy Carroll: +0/+1/+0.5

15:21:05 <mischat> 0/1/0

Mischa Tuffield: 0/1/0

15:21:05 <ww> 0/-1/+2

William Waites: 0/-1/+1

15:21:08 <Souri> +1,0,-1

Souripriya Das: +1,0,-1

15:21:10 <ww> s/2/1
15:21:23 <ww> zakim, unmute me

William Waites: zakim, unmute me

15:21:23 <Zakim> ww should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: ww should no longer be muted

15:21:43 <cygri> q+

Richard Cyganiak: q+

15:21:44 <mbrunati> mmm, skolem +1

Matteo Brunati: mmm, skolem +1

15:21:51 <sandro> ww: it's entirely aesthetics and personal preference -- nothing serious -- just a name.

William Waites: it's entirely aesthetics and personal preference -- nothing serious -- just a name. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

15:21:55 <FabGandon> ww: no serious issues with any of the names

William Waites: no serious issues with any of the names

15:22:06 <ww> zakim, mute me

William Waites: zakim, mute me

15:22:06 <Zakim> ww should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: ww should now be muted

15:22:18 <FabGandon> mbrunati: why not use blank nodes?

Matteo Brunati: why not use blank nodes?

15:22:21 <davidwood> ack cygri

David Wood: ack cygri

15:22:44 <ww> skuri?

William Waites: skuri?

15:22:48 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

15:22:57 <FabGandon> cygri: the text of the resolution introduces the term "skolem"

Richard Cyganiak: the text of the resolution introduces the term "skolem"

15:23:03 <yvesr> q+

Yves Raimond: q+

15:23:04 <AndyS> It stands in place of a blank node and it is distinguished by this. so my "skolem" -1 => 0

Andy Seaborne: It stands in place of a blank node and it is distinguished by this. so my "skolem" -1 => 0

15:23:13 <davidwood> ack SteveH

David Wood: ack SteveH

15:23:15 <FabGandon> ... not too much sense to discuss that now

... not too much sense to discuss that now

15:23:47 <cygri> q+

Richard Cyganiak: q+

15:23:59 <PatH> They are skolem constants but the 'skolem' terminiology goes way beyond this usage, so this is a very simple case.

Patrick Hayes: They are skolem constants but the 'skolem' terminiology goes way beyond this usage, so this is a very simple case.

15:24:01 <FabGandon> SteveH: introduce more obscure jargon is not a good idea and the term "genid" is already largely used

Steve Harris: introduce more obscure jargon is not a good idea and the term "genid" is already largely used

15:24:02 <davidwood> ack yvesr

David Wood: ack yvesr

15:24:02 <NickH> I agree with SteveH

Nicholas Humfrey: I agree with SteveH

15:24:32 <sandro> but which is jargon??     "skolem" is in every dictionary.

Sandro Hawke: but which is jargon?? "skolem" is in every dictionary.

15:24:42 <FabGandon> yvesr: we have enough jargon to not include yet another term

Yves Raimond: we have enough jargon to not include yet another term

15:24:58 <davidwood> ack cygri

David Wood: ack cygri

15:25:08 <FabGandon> davidwood: strow poll favours genid and objections have been resolved

David Wood: strow poll favours genid and objections have been resolved

15:26:13 <JeremyCarroll> q+

Jeremy Carroll: q+

15:26:15 <PatH> Welcome to a working group :-)

Patrick Hayes: Welcome to a working group :-)

15:26:19 <FabGandon> cygri: we need a real formal term for thisand on the list skolem was the last candidates

Richard Cyganiak: we need a real formal term for thisand on the list skolem was the last candidates

15:26:22 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll

David Wood: ack JeremyCarroll

15:27:02 <FabGandon> JeremyCarroll: we are talking about the scheme name not the text.

Jeremy Carroll: we are talking about the scheme name not the text.

15:27:17 <FabGandon> davidwood: strow poll to accept "genid"

David Wood: strow poll to accept "genid"

15:27:18 <sandro> PROPOSED: We'll use genid as the .well-known name

PROPOSED: We'll use genid as the .well-known name

15:27:21 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:27:21 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

15:27:23 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmerman: +1

15:27:25 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

15:27:26 <zwu2> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

15:27:27 <JeremyCarroll> +1

Jeremy Carroll: +1

15:27:27 <mbrunati> +1

Matteo Brunati: +1

15:27:28 <AndyS> Abstain (a +0)

Andy Seaborne: Abstain (a +0)

15:27:28 <cmatheus> +1

Christopher Matheus: +1

15:27:29 <FabGandon> +1

+1

15:27:29 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

15:27:30 <ww> +0

William Waites: +0

15:27:30 <davidwood> +1

David Wood: +1

15:27:30 <cygri> -0

Richard Cyganiak: -0

15:27:30 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

15:27:35 <mischat> +1

Mischa Tuffield: +1

15:27:37 <pfps> +0

Peter Patel-Schneider: +0

15:27:38 <NickH> +1

Nicholas Humfrey: +1

15:27:39 <PatH> +1

Patrick Hayes: +1

15:27:48 <sandro> RESOLVED:  We'll use genid as the .well-known name

RESOLVED: We'll use genid as the .well-known name

15:28:18 <SteveH> are we having a note on genid?

Steve Harris: are we having a note on genid?

15:28:33 <sandro> close action-49

Sandro Hawke: close ACTION-49

15:28:34 <trackbot> ACTION-49 Propose revised wording for ISSUE-40 text, possibly also for section 3.2 of RDF Concepts closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-49 Propose revised wording for ISSUE-40 text, possibly also for section 3.2 of RDF Concepts closed

15:28:37 <sandro> close action-50

Sandro Hawke: close ACTION-50

15:28:37 <trackbot> ACTION-50 Propose edits to fix wording for ISSUE-40 resolution closed

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-50 Propose edits to fix wording for ISSUE-40 resolution closed

15:28:56 <ww> second proposal for note on genid

William Waites: second proposal for note on genid

15:28:58 <AndyS> +1 to a note or some such WG communication (more than a blog entry)

Andy Seaborne: +1 to a note or some such WG communication (more than a blog entry)

15:29:14 <SteveH> I can contribute to a note if we want one

Steve Harris: I can contribute to a note if we want one

15:29:50 <FabGandon> cygri: I can update the editor draft on my machine and put it online.

Richard Cyganiak: I can update the editor draft on my machine and put it online.

15:29:54 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

15:30:12 <FabGandon> sandro: we need a note or Rec publish I think

Sandro Hawke: we need a note or Rec publish I think

15:30:42 <FabGandon> ... are we going to do the note or note?

... are we going to do the note or note?

15:31:07 <FabGandon> davidwood: we can then republish content in the concept doc.

David Wood: we can then republish content in the concept doc.

15:31:19 <SteveH> q-

Steve Harris: q-

15:31:33 <FabGandon> cygri: two paragraphs, not worth a note.

Richard Cyganiak: two paragraphs, not worth a note.

15:31:36 <SteveH> I don't agree about visbility FWIW

Steve Harris: I don't agree about visbility FWIW

15:31:43 <davidwood> q?

David Wood: q?

15:31:51 <FabGandon> davidwood: do we agree not to produce a note?

David Wood: do we agree not to produce a note?

15:32:02 <FabGandon> ... yes

... yes

15:32:25 <FabGandon> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/25

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/25

15:32:36 <FabGandon> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/33

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/33

15:33:05 <FabGandon> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/48

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/48

15:33:13 <FabGandon> PatH: done

Patrick Hayes: done

15:33:47 <FabGandon> ... text in the wiki shows it's done

... text in the wiki shows it's done

15:33:56 <FabGandon> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/51

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/51

15:34:34 <FabGandon> Topic: editing documents.

1. editing documents.

15:35:34 <FabGandon> davidwood: email thread about editing documents

David Wood: email thread about editing documents

15:35:59 <FabGandon> ivan: ready to create a repository / archive

Ivan Herman: ready to create a repository / archive

15:36:28 <FabGandon> ... decide on short names for the docs

... decide on short names for the docs

15:36:50 <FabGandon> ... decide on RDF 1.1 vs. RDF Next

... decide on RDF 1.1 vs. RDF Next

15:37:24 <FabGandon> ... who should be on the front page of docs and what are the rules to decide the names that appear

... who should be on the front page of docs and what are the rules to decide the names that appear

15:38:34 <JeremyCarroll> I have an AOB item - I will add myself to queue at end of meeting

Jeremy Carroll: I have an AOB item - I will add myself to queue at end of meeting

15:38:56 <davidwood> JeremyCarroll, ok

David Wood: JeremyCarroll, ok

15:39:12 <FabGandon> ivan: we should make it clear that we are not making a radical change to RDF

Ivan Herman: we should make it clear that we are not making a radical change to RDF

15:39:14 <SteveH> I prefer year'd versions

Steve Harris: I prefer year'd versions

15:39:25 <SteveH> the current one tends to be called RDF '04 anyway

Steve Harris: the current one tends to be called RDF '04 anyway

15:39:30 <sandro> +1 years

Sandro Hawke: +1 years

15:39:41 <JeremyCarroll> +1 to Ivan

Jeremy Carroll: +1 to Ivan

15:39:42 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

15:40:05 <cygri> +1 to ivan ... but RDF '13 is also not bad

Richard Cyganiak: +1 to ivan ... but RDF '13 is also not bad

15:40:12 <davidwood> ack SteveH

David Wood: ack SteveH

15:40:15 <FabGandon> ivan: I prefer 1.1 since it reflects the additions we are making

Ivan Herman: I prefer 1.1 since it reflects the additions we are making

15:40:47 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to explain 2004

Jeremy Carroll: q+ to explain 2004

15:40:59 <FabGandon> SteveH: 1.1 is the way forward if we go for numbers but I prefer the years.

Steve Harris: 1.1 is the way forward if we go for numbers but I prefer the years.

15:41:01 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll

David Wood: ack JeremyCarroll

15:41:01 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to explain 2004

Zakim IRC Bot: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to explain 2004

15:41:33 <sandro> JeremyCarroll: "2004" results from that group having messed up, making bigger changes than they meant to.

Jeremy Carroll: "2004" results from that group having messed up, making bigger changes than they meant to. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

15:41:46 <sandro> JeremyCarroll: We should have given ourselves a number.

Jeremy Carroll: We should have given ourselves a number. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

15:42:08 <FabGandon> JeremyCarroll: having a number now is a good idea

Jeremy Carroll: having a number now is a good idea

15:42:14 <AndyS> Is the rdf: URI changing ?  (no) It has a year as has RDFS so year is a bit confusing here.

Andy Seaborne: Is the rdf: URI changing ? (no) It has a year as has RDFS so year is a bit confusing here.

15:42:29 <SteveH> AndyS, good point

Steve Harris: AndyS, good point

15:42:33 <Zakim> -cmatheus

Zakim IRC Bot: -cmatheus

15:42:41 <pfps> +1.1  :-)

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1.1 :-)

15:42:46 <FabGandon> JeremyCarroll: I like 1.1

Jeremy Carroll: I like 1.1

15:43:03 <SteveH> RDF-beta

Steve Harris: RDF-beta

15:43:13 <mbrunati> like 1.1

Matteo Brunati: like 1.1

15:43:14 <Souri> +1.1 to 1.1

Souripriya Das: +1.1 to 1.1

15:43:22 <pfps> +2 to 1.1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +2 to 1.1

15:43:23 <AZ> +1 to 1.1

Antoine Zimmerman: +1 to 1.1

15:43:24 <ericP> 1.1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: 1.1

15:43:26 <SteveH> 1.1

Steve Harris: 1.1

15:43:29 <cygri> 1.1

Richard Cyganiak: 1.1

15:43:29 <zwu2> +1 to 1.1

Zhe Wu: +1 to 1.1

15:43:31 <AndyS> 1.1

Andy Seaborne: 1.1

15:43:31 <davidwood> +1.1 to 1.1

David Wood: +1.1 to 1.1

15:43:31 <ivan> 1.1

Ivan Herman: 1.1

15:43:32 <JeremyCarroll> +1 to 1.1

Jeremy Carroll: +1 to 1.1

15:43:33 <yvesr> +1 to 1.1

Yves Raimond: +1 to 1.1

15:43:34 <mischat> 1.1

Mischa Tuffield: 1.1

15:43:38 <NickH> +1.1

Nicholas Humfrey: +1.1

15:43:39 <AlexHall> 1.1

Alex Hall: 1.1

15:43:41 <FabGandon> davidwood: strow poll on 1.1 vs years

David Wood: strow poll on 1.1 vs years

15:43:47 <FabGandon> 1.1

1.1

15:43:53 <zwu2> is there a big difference between 1.1 or 1.5?

Zhe Wu: is there a big difference between 1.1 or 1.5?

15:43:55 <ericP> 1½?

Eric Prud'hommeaux: 1½?

15:43:56 <ww> 1 + epsilon

William Waites: 1 + epsilon

15:44:36 <NickH> I hope that there won't be enough changes for it to be 1.5

Nicholas Humfrey: I hope that there won't be enough changes for it to be 1.5

15:44:42 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

15:44:48 <sandro> RESOLVED: The thing we're working on is "RDF 1.1"

RESOLVED: The thing we're working on is "RDF 1.1"

15:44:48 <davidwood> ack ivan

David Wood: ack ivan

15:45:32 <SteveH> SPARQL-WD added "11" to the end of the shortname

Steve Harris: SPARQL-WD added "11" to the end of the shortname

15:45:34 <FabGandon> ivan: for the URIs all docs we produce have a short name + 1.1

Ivan Herman: for the URIs all docs we produce have a short name + 1.1

15:46:48 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/

Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/

15:47:34 <ivan> rdf-mt-11

Ivan Herman: rdf-mt-11

15:47:44 <sandro> vs rdf11-mt ?

Sandro Hawke: vs rdf11-mt ?

15:47:57 <cygri> +1 for rdf11-xxx

Richard Cyganiak: +1 for rdf11-xxx

15:48:02 <FabGandon> ivan: reuse of the old shot names should be considered only at the end when we publish the final rec

Ivan Herman: reuse of the old shot names should be considered only at the end when we publish the final rec

15:48:09 <SteveH> +1 for rdf11-*

Steve Harris: +1 for rdf11-*

15:48:11 <AndyS> actually it's /sparql11-update/ etc for SPARQL

Andy Seaborne: actually it's /sparql11-update/ etc for SPARQL

15:49:30 <ivan> PROPOSED: for short names we would use rdf11-X where rdf-X stands for the current recommendations

PROPOSED: for short names we would use rdf11-X where rdf-X stands for the current recommendations

15:49:40 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

15:49:41 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

15:49:42 <zwu2> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

15:49:43 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

15:49:44 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:49:44 <davidwood> +1

David Wood: +1

15:49:45 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

15:49:45 <cygri> +1

Richard Cyganiak: +1

15:49:46 <mbrunati> +1

Matteo Brunati: +1

15:49:47 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

15:49:48 <ww> +1

William Waites: +1

15:49:52 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmerman: +1

15:50:00 <NickH> +1

Nicholas Humfrey: +1

15:50:07 <Souri> +1

Souripriya Das: +1

15:50:09 <pfps> +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1

15:50:11 <PatH> 0

Patrick Hayes: 0

15:50:18 <FabGandon> +1

+1

15:50:19 <PatH> Hey, I *am* retired.

Patrick Hayes: Hey, I *am* retired.

15:50:19 <ivan> RESOLVED: for short names we would use rdf11-X where rdf-X stands for the current recommendations

RESOLVED: for short names we would use rdf11-X where rdf-X stands for the current recommendations

15:50:41 <ivan> ISSUE-8?

Ivan Herman: ISSUE-8?

15:50:41 <trackbot> ISSUE-8 -- Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-8 -- Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents -- open

15:50:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/8

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/8

15:50:56 <FabGandon> Topic: Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents

2. Incorporate IRI-s into the RDF documents

15:51:14 <JeremyCarroll> +10

Jeremy Carroll: +10

15:51:22 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

15:52:02 <ericP> q+ to say there are a zillion forms of protocol dependent and independent normalizations which we don't want to do

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to say there are a zillion forms of protocol dependent and independent normalizations which we don't want to do

15:52:12 <pfps> +1 to ericP

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to ericP

15:52:18 <SteveH> q+ to talk about security

Steve Harris: q+ to talk about security

15:52:23 <AlexHall> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0469.html

Alex Hall: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0469.html

15:52:24 <davidwood> ack ericP

David Wood: ack ericP

15:52:24 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say there are a zillion forms of protocol dependent and independent normalizations which we don't want to do

Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to say there are a zillion forms of protocol dependent and independent normalizations which we don't want to do

15:52:25 <AndyS> Unless we go for completely normalising IRIs e.g. /x/../y  (which i bleive is wrong by IRI spec as RDF does not produce the IRI - it transfers it)

Andy Seaborne: Unless we go for completely normalising IRIs e.g. /x/../y (which i bleive is wrong by IRI spec as RDF does not produce the IRI - it transfers it)

15:52:27 <ericP> various unicode forms etc.

Eric Prud'hommeaux: various unicode forms etc.

15:52:45 <ivan> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0469.html mail including Felix Sasaki's advice

Ivan Herman: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0469.html mail including Felix Sasaki's advice

15:52:58 <davidwood> ack SteveH

David Wood: ack SteveH

15:52:58 <Zakim> SteveH, you wanted to talk about security

Zakim IRC Bot: SteveH, you wanted to talk about security

15:53:24 <PatH> +1

Patrick Hayes: +1

15:53:35 <FabGandon> SteveH: we should keep in mine that RDF is for machines

Steve Harris: we should keep in mind that RDF is for machines

15:53:43 <JeremyCarroll>  Note:  Applications using IRIs as identity tokens with no relationship to a    protocol MUST use the Simple String Comparison (see section 5.3.1).

Jeremy Carroll: Note: Applications using IRIs as identity tokens with no relationship to a protocol MUST use the Simple String Comparison (see section 5.3.1).

15:53:48 <FabGandon> s/mine/mind
15:53:51 <JeremyCarroll> from RFC 3987

Jeremy Carroll: from RFC 3987

15:54:01 <ivan> PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE 8 by keeping IRI-s and their punycode equivalent separate as different URI References in RDF

PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-8 by keeping IRI-s and their punycode equivalent separate as different URI References in RDF

15:54:02 <JeremyCarroll> this decision is in accord with this REQUIREMENT

Jeremy Carroll: this decision is in accord with this REQUIREMENT

15:54:16 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:54:17 <SteveH> seconded

Steve Harris: seconded

15:54:17 <JeremyCarroll> +1

Jeremy Carroll: +1

15:54:18 <AlexHall> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0604.html --> proposed text from ericP which defines IRI equivalence as Unicode equivalence and discourages use of punycode in RDF IRIs

Alex Hall: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0604.html --> proposed text from ericP which defines IRI equivalence as Unicode equivalence and discourages use of punycode in RDF IRIs

15:54:18 <zwu2> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

15:54:19 <PatH> Do we call them URI refs or IRIs?

Patrick Hayes: Do we call them URI refs or IRIs?

15:54:19 <ww> +1

William Waites: +1

15:54:20 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

15:54:23 <pfps> +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1

15:54:24 <mbrunati> +1

Matteo Brunati: +1

15:54:25 <FabGandon> +1

+1

15:54:27 <AlexHall> +1

Alex Hall: +1

15:54:30 <PatH> +1 to substance

Patrick Hayes: +1 to substance

15:54:46 <AndyS> IRIs

Andy Seaborne: IRIs

15:54:50 <PatH> OK

Patrick Hayes: OK

15:55:00 <Souri> +1

Souripriya Das: +1

15:55:19 <FabGandon> ivan: we use URI Ref and then editors can change it to IRIs

Ivan Herman: we use URI Ref and then editors can change it to IRIs

15:55:19 <ivan> RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE 8 by keeping IRI-s and their punycode equivalent separate as different URI References in RDF

RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE-8 by keeping IRI-s and their punycode equivalent separate as different URI References in RDF

15:55:39 <AndyS>  caution: URI reference != RDF URI reference

Andy Seaborne: caution: URI reference != RDF URI reference

15:55:53 <sandro> ACTION: david to officially inform the RDFa WG of our decision on ISSUE-8

ACTION: david to officially inform the RDFa WG of our decision on ISSUE-8

15:55:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-53 - Officially inform the RDFa WG of our decision on ISSUE-8 [on David Wood - due 2011-06-01].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-53 - Officially inform the RDFa WG of our decision on ISSUE-8 [on David Wood - due 2011-06-01].

15:56:18 <JeremyCarroll> http://www.rfc-ref.org/RFC-TEXTS/3987/chapter5.html#sub1 link for my quote

Jeremy Carroll: http://www.rfc-ref.org/RFC-TEXTS/3987/chapter5.html#sub1 link for my quote

15:56:41 <ivan> ISSUE-12?

Ivan Herman: ISSUE-12?

15:56:41 <trackbot> ISSUE-12 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-12 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open

15:56:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12

15:56:44 <FabGandon> ISSUE-12?

ISSUE-12?

15:56:44 <trackbot> ISSUE-12 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-12 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open

15:56:44 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12

15:57:13 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/LanguageTaggedStringDatatypeProposal

Richard Cyganiak: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/LanguageTaggedStringDatatypeProposal

15:57:13 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/EntailmentProposal

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/EntailmentProposal

15:57:19 <FabGandon> Topic: Reconcile various forms of string literals

3. Reconcile various forms of string literals

15:58:43 <sandro> scribe: sandro

(Scribe set to Sandro Hawke)

15:59:05 <AndyS> I asked Jena users and developers for feedback - little enthusiasm - more energy for just xsd:string to be deprecated and no other changes made.

Andy Seaborne: I asked Jena users and developers for feedback - little enthusiasm - more energy for just xsd:string to be deprecated and no other changes made.

15:59:07 <sandro> davidwood: Looking at the mailing list, it seems possible to get a decision.

David Wood: Looking at the mailing list, it seems possible to get a decision.

15:59:14 <sandro> q+

q+

15:59:25 <PatH> There was some email pushback...

Patrick Hayes: There was some email pushback...

15:59:31 <SteveH> I'm not exactly happy about the proposal

Steve Harris: I'm not exactly happy about the proposal

15:59:36 <davidwood> ack sandro

David Wood: ack sandro

15:59:40 <pfps> I'm not happy with the proposal.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm not happy with the proposal.

15:59:43 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

15:59:45 <Zakim> -FabGandon

Zakim IRC Bot: -FabGandon

15:59:53 <cygri> q+

Richard Cyganiak: q+

16:00:34 <SteveH> +1 to sandro, lang dt equivalent is cleaning, from some perspective

Steve Harris: +1 to sandro, lang dt equivalent is cleaning, from some perspective

16:00:41 <SteveH> *cleaner

Steve Harris: *cleaner

16:00:48 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to accept action to respond to this qu in e mail

Jeremy Carroll: q+ to accept action to respond to this qu in e mail

16:00:53 <davidwood> ack SteveH

David Wood: ack SteveH

16:01:02 <sandro> sandro: what happened to the proposal to use languages as datatypes?

Sandro Hawke: what happened to the proposal to use languages as datatypes?

16:01:20 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

16:01:28 <JeremyCarroll> +1 to steve

Jeremy Carroll: +1 to steve

16:01:30 <sandro> steve: I don't find this idea of non-string lexical values as a win.   it's a step sideways.

Steve Harris: I don't find this idea of non-string lexical values as a win. it's a step sideways.

16:01:36 <ww> I think @en is (should be) syntax sugar for ^^englishString

William Waites: I think @en is (should be) syntax sugar for ^^englishString

16:02:04 <sandro> PatH: Yes, it's a step sideways.  Motivated by trying to preserve the current situation.  Not a magic solution, preserve status quo.

Patrick Hayes: Yes, it's a step sideways. Motivated by trying to preserve the current situation. Not a magic solution, preserve status quo.

16:02:19 <davidwood> Might @en become a subclass of xsd:string?

David Wood: Might @en become a subclass of xsd:string?

16:02:21 <sandro> SteveH: Why take lanugage tags off the table?  I found that fairly elegant.

Steve Harris: Why take lanugage tags off the table? I found that fairly elegant.

16:02:42 <AndyS> q+

Andy Seaborne: q+

16:02:53 <sandro> PatH: Can you make that more preceise?       Making language tags, with their complex subtyping, into datatypes would be hell.

Patrick Hayes: Can you make that more preceise? Making language tags, with their complex subtyping, into datatypes would be hell.

16:02:58 <ivan> -> http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/ as a good reference on language tags

Ivan Herman: -> http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/ as a good reference on language tags

16:03:08 <cygri> q-

Richard Cyganiak: q-

16:03:17 <davidwood> ack cygri

David Wood: ack cygri

16:03:18 <sandro> SteveH: Some URI prefix then all possible language tags -- that would be kind of ugly, but all proposals here are ugly.

Steve Harris: Some URI prefix then all possible language tags -- that would be kind of ugly, but all proposals here are ugly.

16:03:20 <ivan> This is the generic form of a language tag: language-extlang-script-region-variant-extension-privateuse

Ivan Herman: This is the generic form of a language tag: language-extlang-script-region-variant-extension-privateuse

16:03:27 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll

David Wood: ack JeremyCarroll

16:03:27 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to accept action to respond to this qu in e mail

Zakim IRC Bot: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to accept action to respond to this qu in e mail

16:03:28 <SteveH> we'd end up with rdflang:<all-possible-langtags>

Steve Harris: we'd end up with rdflang:<all-possible-langtags>

16:03:33 <AndyS> q+ to say that we don't need to do the subtyping / lang tag meaning (which I agree is a bad fit)

Andy Seaborne: q+ to say that we don't need to do the subtyping / lang tag meaning (which I agree is a bad fit)

16:03:37 <PatH> Sorry to jump in.

Patrick Hayes: Sorry to jump in.

16:03:44 <PatH> +1 Andy

Patrick Hayes: +1 Andy

16:03:57 <AndyS> q-

Andy Seaborne: q-

16:04:05 <sandro> JeremyCarroll: Language tags are complicated, they are NOT like data types, but it's too complex to explain why they are not.   Like chinese -- very complex language tags.    Cannot be discussed on the call.

Jeremy Carroll: Language tags are complicated, they are NOT like data types, but it's too complex to explain why they are not. Like chinese -- very complex language tags. Cannot be discussed on the call.

16:04:29 <ww> I would like an explanation

William Waites: I would like an explanation

16:04:31 <ivan> zh-Hant-HK is the chinese with traditional scripts as used in Hong Kong

Ivan Herman: zh-Hant-HK is the chinese with traditional scripts as used in Hong Kong

16:04:32 <PatH> Suggest anyone who likes the idea, go read the lang tag spec.

Patrick Hayes: Suggest anyone who likes the idea, go read the lang tag spec.

16:04:34 <SteveH> ASK { rdflang:en ?p rdflang:en-GB } => false

Steve Harris: ASK { rdflang:en ?p rdflang:en-GB } => false

16:04:43 <ww> (on the list)

William Waites: (on the list)

16:04:47 <sandro> sandro: I disagree with some of your argument --- a string is a string.

Sandro Hawke: I disagree with some of your argument --- a string is a string.

16:04:55 <davidwood> ack pfps

David Wood: ack pfps

16:05:01 <sandro> sandro: it is ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT how complex the matching is.

Sandro Hawke: it is ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT how complex the matching is.

16:05:03 <PatH> No, they are NOT strings. Tags are related in complex ways which do not correspond to simple language/dialect or language/region cases.

Patrick Hayes: No, they are NOT strings. Tags are related in complex ways which do not correspond to simple language/dialect or language/region cases.

16:05:39 <sandro> pfps: I;m very uncomforable changing the guts of RDF for minimal benefit

Peter Patel-Schneider: I;m very uncomforable changing the guts of RDF for minimal benefit

16:05:48 <PatH> Peter, can you point to an actual problem? I can see none.

Patrick Hayes: Peter, can you point to an actual problem? I can see none.

16:05:59 <JeremyCarroll> I agree with peter too!!

Jeremy Carroll: I agree with peter too!!

16:06:04 <sandro> pfps: I'm against the proposal overall -- not specifically agreeing with JeremyCarroll (although I do, also)

Peter Patel-Schneider: I'm against the proposal overall -- not specifically agreeing with JeremyCarroll (although I do, also)

16:06:21 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

16:06:22 <sandro> davidwood: i think it's clear we wont resolve this today.

David Wood: i think it's clear we wont resolve this today.

16:06:26 <pfps> I didn't say that there was a problem, just that there was a change to the fundamentals of RDF.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I didn't say that there was a problem, just that there was a change to the fundamentals of RDF.

16:06:35 <sandro> davidwood: JeremyCarroll is right to move it to the list.

David Wood: JeremyCarroll is right to move it to the list.

16:06:43 <PatH> So, its our task to adjust RDF to suit ourselves.

Patrick Hayes: So, its our task to adjust RDF to suit ourselves.

16:06:45 <JeremyCarroll> my AOB: Propose congratulations to Gavin, Kindli and Patrick

Jeremy Carroll: my AOB: Propose congratulations to Gavin, Kindli and Patrick

16:07:03 <sandro> topic: Other Business

4. Other Business

16:07:21 <PatH> Seconded.

Patrick Hayes: Seconded.

16:07:30 <sandro> JeremyCarroll: Gavin and Kindli had a baby, Patrick (1 day old).  :-)

Jeremy Carroll: Gavin and Kindli had a baby, Patrick (1 day old). :-)

16:07:39 <PatH> Particularly as he has a really good name.

Patrick Hayes: Particularly as he has a really good name.

16:07:48 <zwu2> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

16:08:52 <sandro> sandro: how abuut we talk about the issue for remaining time...

Sandro Hawke: how abuut we talk about the issue for remaining time...

16:08:57 <sandro> topic: back to String Literals

5. back to String Literals

16:09:11 <sandro> pfps: I don't see what motivates all this in RDF.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't see what motivates all this in RDF.

16:09:18 <ww> language tags seem like a funny special case in the data model

William Waites: language tags seem like a funny special case in the data model

16:09:22 <PatH> The change is mathematically trivial, and the RDF machinery isnt very deep anyway.

Patrick Hayes: The change is mathematically trivial, and the RDF machinery isnt very deep anyway.

16:09:27 <ericP> the choice between "abc" and "abc"^^xsd:string is arbitrary and stymies unification

Eric Prud'hommeaux: the choice between "abc" and "abc"^^xsd:string is arbitrary and stymies unification

16:09:35 <ericP> (pfps)

Eric Prud'hommeaux: (pfps)

16:10:18 <PatH> We have to choose between tyuping a <striong, tag> pair, or writing "string@tag"

Patrick Hayes: We have to choose between tyuping a <striong, tag> pair, or writing "string@tag"

16:10:28 <sandro> pfps: Conceptually, adding a slew of datatypes (eg rdflang:en) that doesnt change the machinery nearly as much.     I don't think it's a good idea, but it's not really a chance to the RDF machinery.

Peter Patel-Schneider: Conceptually, adding a slew of datatypes (eg rdflang:en) that doesnt change the machinery nearly as much. I don't think it's a good idea, but it's not really a chance to the RDF machinery.

16:10:39 <sandro> pfps: is there an infinite number of languages?

Peter Patel-Schneider: is there an infinite number of languages?

16:10:45 <sandro> ivan: it's large but finite.

Ivan Herman: it's large but finite.

16:10:59 <ivan> language-extlang-script-region-variant-extension-privateuse

Ivan Herman: language-extlang-script-region-variant-extension-privateuse

16:11:33 <ww> zakim, unmute me

William Waites: zakim, unmute me

16:11:33 <Zakim> ww should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: ww should no longer be muted

16:12:03 <davidwood> q?

David Wood: q?

16:12:10 <ivan> q-

Ivan Herman: q-

16:12:13 <sandro> PatH: infinity is not the problem -- it's the complexity.

Patrick Hayes: infinity is not the problem -- it's the complexity.

16:12:14 <sandro> q+

q+

16:12:14 <ww> q+

William Waites: q+

16:12:18 <JeremyCarroll> one human being can invent an infinite number of privater use tags

Jeremy Carroll: one human being can invent an infinite number of privater use tags

16:12:29 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/

Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/International/articles/language-tags/

16:12:31 <sandro> pat: region means something differrent in each language.

Patrick Hayes: region means something differrent in each language.

16:12:33 <davidwood> ack ivan

David Wood: ack ivan

16:13:14 <davidwood> ack ww

David Wood: ack ww

16:13:14 <sandro> ww: i agree it's very complicated; one might want to model this stuff in RDF -- if it's a datatype, then there's a chance of doing that.   This simplifies this.

William Waites: i agree it's very complicated; one might want to model this stuff in RDF -- if it's a datatype, then there's a chance of doing that. This simplifies this.

16:13:18 <AndyS> and lang tag canonicalization is quite complex (it's not lower case)

Andy Seaborne: and lang tag canonicalization is quite complex (it's not lower case)

16:13:25 <ericP> q+

Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+

16:13:26 <sandro> q?

q?

16:13:30 <sandro> ack sandro

ack sandro

16:13:31 <davidwood> ack sandro

David Wood: ack sandro

16:13:43 <PatH> Language tags are widely used. Has any of these uers expressed a desire to replace them with RDF?

Patrick Hayes: Language tags are widely used. Has any of these uers expressed a desire to replace them with RDF?

16:13:48 <SteveH> AndyS, there is a (RDF?) document that recommends lowercase normalisation

Steve Harris: AndyS, there is a (RDF?) document that recommends lowercase normalisation

16:13:55 <SteveH> AndyS, abstract syntax maybe

Steve Harris: AndyS, abstract syntax maybe

16:14:03 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

16:14:06 <davidwood> q+ to ask about language tags and xsd:string

David Wood: q+ to ask about language tags and xsd:string

16:14:07 <PatH> +q

Patrick Hayes: +q

16:14:10 <SteveH> q+

Steve Harris: q+

16:14:11 <ww> zakim, mute me

William Waites: zakim, mute me

16:14:12 <davidwood> ack ericP

David Wood: ack ericP

16:14:13 <Zakim> ww should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: ww should now be muted

16:14:17 <sandro> sandro: just treat the language tag as opaque.   that's the most elegant solution here.

Sandro Hawke: just treat the language tag as opaque. that's the most elegant solution here.

16:14:25 <AndyS> steveH - yes.  It's not what RFC 4646 says :-(

Andy Seaborne: steveH - yes. It's not what RFC 4646 says :-(

16:14:35 <PatH> That does not work when datatype names become class names in RDFS.

Patrick Hayes: That does not work when datatype names become class names in RDFS.

16:14:57 <PatH> We need to establish the subclass relationships.

Patrick Hayes: We need to establish the subclass relationships.

16:15:00 <sandro> ericP: The only logic I've seen on language tags is LangMatches, as in SPARQL -- simple to implement -- I think Sandro's notion of treat them as opaque, or a little bit if "L-Entailment" on lang-matches, those tricks would work and simplify RDF.

Eric Prud'hommeaux: The only logic I've seen on language tags is LangMatches, as in SPARQL -- simple to implement -- I think Sandro's notion of treat them as opaque, or a little bit if "L-Entailment" on lang-matches, those tricks would work and simplify RDF.

16:15:31 <davidwood> ack ivan

David Wood: ack ivan

16:15:35 <PatH> What is the value space of these dataypes??

Patrick Hayes: What is the value space of these dataypes??

16:16:14 <sandro> ivan: Because the number of lang dts is huge, I want to be clear that we do not introduce into an RDFS reasoner to put in a huge number of class definitions.

Ivan Herman: Because the number of lang dts is huge, I want to be clear that we do not introduce into an RDFS reasoner to put in a huge number of class definitions.

16:16:20 <sandro> (of course not, if it's opaque.)

(of course not, if it's opaque.)

16:16:39 <sandro> ivan: "every datatype we know has to be defined to be a class".

Ivan Herman: "every datatype we know has to be defined to be a class".

16:16:48 <ww> I'm finding this discussion very interesting but unfortunately have to go

William Waites: I'm finding this discussion very interesting but unfortunately have to go

16:16:48 <sandro> ivan: we can wave our hands, perhaps.

Ivan Herman: we can wave our hands, perhaps.

16:17:08 <AndyS> PatH - exactly! - they have (presumably) the same value space (unicode string) which is a problem.

Andy Seaborne: PatH - exactly! - they have (presumably) the same value space (unicode string) which is a problem.

16:17:14 <sandro> ivan: In OWL-2-RL every DT needs a triple added.

Ivan Herman: In OWL-2-RL every DT needs a triple added.

16:17:27 <Zakim> -ww

Zakim IRC Bot: -ww

16:17:37 <sandro> I suggest value space is pairs (string, language tag).

I suggest value space is pairs (string, language tag).

16:17:38 <PatH> The classes of valaues are determined by the datatype spec. If we follow the tag specs, this gets very com,plicated and might not even fit into the RDFS class model. If we don't, the our reasoners will not deal with the datatypes correctly.

Patrick Hayes: The classes of valaues are determined by the datatype spec. If we follow the tag specs, this gets very com,plicated and might not even fit into the RDFS class model. If we don't, the our reasoners will not deal with the datatypes correctly.

16:17:58 <sandro> ADJOURN

ADJOURN

16:18:03 <JeremyCarroll> bye

Jeremy Carroll: bye

16:18:05 <Zakim> -[Garlik]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[Garlik]

16:18:06 <Zakim> -Souri

Zakim IRC Bot: -Souri

16:18:07 <Zakim> -yvesr

Zakim IRC Bot: -yvesr

16:18:09 <Zakim> -JeremyCarroll

Zakim IRC Bot: -JeremyCarroll

16:18:09 <zwu2> bye

Zhe Wu: bye

16:18:09 <AZ> bye

Antoine Zimmerman: bye

16:18:10 <mbrunati> ok, bye

Matteo Brunati: ok, bye

16:18:10 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider

Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider

16:18:13 <Zakim> -PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH

16:18:14 <Zakim> -cygri

Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#1) generated 2011-05-25 16:33:36 UTC by 'unknown', comments: None