<sandro> PRESENT: davidwood, gavinc, zwu2, AlexHall, sandro, Souri, Scott_Bauer, LeeF, Mischa, Pierre, Ian, Andy, Richard, NickH, Ivan, Steve, Danbri, Yves, Guus, ericP, tomayac, az, pfps, macted
<sandro> GUEST: Tim (tlebo) Lebo, RPI
<sandro> Oops, we didnt have RRSAgent for the introductions....
Sandro Hawke: Oops, we didnt have RRSAgent for the introductions.... ←
11:26:24 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/13-rdf-wg-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/13-rdf-wg-irc ←
11:26:34 <sandro> zakim, this is rdf2wg
Sandro Hawke: zakim, this is rdf2wg ←
11:26:34 <Zakim> ok, sandro; that matches SW_RDFWG(F2F)6:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, sandro; that matches SW_RDFWG(F2F)6:00AM ←
11:26:40 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
Guus Schreiber: zakim, who is here? ←
11:26:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room, AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P0, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room, AZ ←
11:26:41 <Zakim> On IRC I see pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, Scott_Bauer, pchampin, AZ, Souri, AlexHall, mox601, iand, cygri, tlebo, gavinc, danbri, ivan, swh, Guus, AndyS, ww, ericP, yvesr, manu,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, Scott_Bauer, pchampin, AZ, Souri, AlexHall, mox601, iand, cygri, tlebo, gavinc, danbri, ivan, swh, Guus, AndyS, ww, ericP, yvesr, manu, ←
11:26:43 <Zakim> ... NickH, trackbot, manu1, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: ... NickH, trackbot, manu1, sandro ←
11:27:03 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-10-12
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-10-12 ←
11:27:29 <sandro> RRSAgent, make logs public
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
11:27:39 <Guus> scribe?
Guus Schreiber: scribe? ←
11:28:36 <ivan> zakim, MIT_Meeting_Room also has Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas
Ivan Herman: zakim, MIT_Meeting_Room also has Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas ←
11:28:36 <Zakim> +Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas; got it ←
11:28:57 <ivan> zakim, MIT_Meeting_Room also has micha
Ivan Herman: zakim, MIT_Meeting_Room also has micha ←
11:28:57 <Zakim> +micha; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +micha; got it ←
11:31:49 <yvesr> scribe yvesr
Yves Raimond: scribe yvesr ←
11:32:00 <ivan> scribenick: yvesr
(Scribe set to Yves Raimond)
11:32:04 <ivan> scribe: yvesr
11:32:19 <yvesr> Guus: let's start with Pat's email
Guus Schreiber: let's start with Pat's email ←
11:32:21 <tomayac> scribenick: tomayac
(Scribe set to Thomas Steiner)
11:32:31 <ivan> scribe: tomayac
11:33:38 <LeeF> zakim, MIT_Meeting_Room also has TedT
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, MIT_Meeting_Room also has TedT ←
11:33:38 <Zakim> +TedT; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TedT; got it ←
11:33:56 <Guus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0210.html
Guus Schreiber: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0210.html ←
11:33:57 <tomayac> Guus suggests to start with ISSUE-71
Guus suggests to start with ISSUE-71 ←
11:34:23 <tomayac> was originally ISSUE-12, but got closed and is now ISSUE-71
was originally ISSUE-12, but got closed and is now ISSUE-71 ←
11:34:35 <sandro> issue-71
11:34:37 <sandro> issue-71?
11:34:37 <trackbot> ISSUE-71 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-71 -- Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) -- open ←
11:34:37 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/71
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/71 ←
11:34:39 <tomayac> we can either do nothing, or option 2d
we can either do nothing, or option 2d ←
11:34:44 <Guus> Proposal for Issue 12
Guus Schreiber: Proposal for ISSUE-12 ←
11:34:50 <tomayac> people could live with that
people could live with that ←
11:35:02 <tomayac> any further discussion required?
any further discussion required? ←
11:35:19 <tomayac> got extensively discussed
got extensively discussed ←
11:35:27 <tomayac> marked as a feature at risk
marked as a feature at risk ←
11:36:08 <AndyS> and also let RDFa know
Andy Seaborne: and also let RDFa know ←
11:36:47 <tomayac> AndyS: makes the spec a little cleaner
Andy Seaborne: makes the spec a little cleaner ←
11:37:02 <tomayac> Guus: objections?
Guus Schreiber: objections? ←
11:38:27 <Guus> ISSUE-71: Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) W.r.t the representation of language-typed literals I took an action to propose the following resolution: "Lexical form is "foo", datatype is rdf:TaggedLiteral. The abstract syntax has a lexical form and language tag (like in RDF 2004). The value is assigned directly (like in RDF 2004), bypassing the datatype. The datatype has an empty lexical space and empty L2V mapping. (Option 2d from t
Guus Schreiber: ISSUE-71: Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) W.r.t the representation of language-typed literals I took an action to propose the following resolution: "Lexical form is "foo", datatype is rdf:TaggedLiteral. The abstract syntax has a lexical form and language tag (like in RDF 2004). The value is assigned directly (like in RDF 2004), bypassing the datatype. The datatype has an empty lexical space and empty L2V mapping. (Option 2d from t ←
11:38:28 <trackbot> ISSUE-71 Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) notes added
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-71 Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) notes added ←
11:39:41 <cygri> PROPOSAL: Resolve ISSUE-71 by adopting the phrasing in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Sep/0083.html
PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-71 by adopting the phrasing in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Sep/0083.html ←
11:41:05 <LeeF> Can someone paste the wiki page or email that had the various options in it? (the place at which this was option 2d)?
Lee Feigenbaum: Can someone paste the wiki page or email that had the various options in it? (the place at which this was option 2d)? ←
11:41:15 <ivan> PROPOSAL: Resolve ISSUE-71 by adopting the phrasing in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Sep/0083.html
PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-71 by adopting the phrasing in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Sep/0083.html ←
11:41:33 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
11:41:40 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
11:41:44 <iand> +0
11:41:46 <AZ_> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
11:41:47 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
11:41:48 <LeeF> I'm happy with this
Lee Feigenbaum: I'm happy with this ←
11:41:51 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
11:41:54 <tomayac> Guus: please click on the link, too log to paste. marks a feature at risk.
Guus Schreiber: please click on the link, too log to paste. marks a feature at risk. ←
11:41:58 <pfps> +epsilon
Peter Patel-Schneider: +epsilon ←
11:42:03 <AlexHall> +1
11:42:12 <NickH> +1
Nicholas Humfrey: +1 ←
11:42:12 <ivan> -> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/tagged_literals/results is the poll result
Ivan Herman: -> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/tagged_literals/results is the poll result ←
11:42:13 <tomayac> Guus: Resolved.
Guus Schreiber: Resolved. ←
11:42:13 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
11:42:22 <gavinc> +0
Gavin Carothers: +0 ←
11:42:32 <ivan> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-71 by adopting the phrasing in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Sep/0083.html
RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-71 by adopting the phrasing in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Sep/0083.html ←
11:42:52 <AndyS> ε > 0
Andy Seaborne: ε > 0 ←
11:43:23 <sandro> +1 it's good enough for 2011; someday maybe we can add more URIs for language tags
Sandro Hawke: +1 it's good enough for 2011; someday maybe we can add more URIs for language tags ←
11:43:31 <tomayac> Guus: dave proposed to have a discussion on sandro's proposal.
Guus Schreiber: dave proposed to have a discussion on sandro's proposal. ←
11:43:33 <davidwood> PROPOSED: While it's desirable to have dataset tag IRIs denote their associated g-boxes, because of existing deployments we can't just rule that now. Instead, we can provide some way to flag the cases where it does, so the market can move in that direction. (Sandro)
PROPOSED: While it's desirable to have dataset tag IRIs denote their associated g-boxes, because of existing deployments we can't just rule that now. Instead, we can provide some way to flag the cases where it does, so the market can move in that direction. (Sandro) ←
11:43:55 <iand> what are dataset IRIs?
Ian Davis: what are dataset IRIs? ←
11:44:15 <pfps> I worry about "flying flags" in RDF, particularly if this means building a theory into the semantics of RDF.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I worry about "flying flags" in RDF, particularly if this means building a theory into the semantics of RDF. ←
11:44:46 <mischat> we would need to inform the RDF 1.1 people about the previous resolution re: manu's email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0115.html
Mischa Tuffield: we would need to inform the RDF 1.1 people about the previous resolution re: manu's email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0115.html ←
11:45:01 <tomayac> ivan: sandro, when you say provide some case to flag the cases, what do you mean?
Ivan Herman: sandro, when you say provide some case to flag the cases, what do you mean? ←
11:45:09 <tlebo> I think http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts#Via_SPARQL_1.1_.2B_RDF_1.1 is related
Tim Lebo: I think http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts#Via_SPARQL_1.1_.2B_RDF_1.1 is related ←
11:45:13 <AndyS> tag: denote g-box? Should that be g-snap?
Andy Seaborne: tag: denote g-box? Should that be g-snap? ←
11:45:30 <Souri_> Could you please put the proposal on IRC one more time?
Souripriya Das: Could you please put the proposal on IRC one more time? ←
11:45:30 <LeeF> I support this goal, but I worry that adopting it might mean that we are inventing like 4 new mechanisms for communicating this which don't currently exist
Lee Feigenbaum: I support this goal, but I worry that adopting it might mean that we are inventing like 4 new mechanisms for communicating this which don't currently exist ←
11:45:40 <LeeF> PROPOSED: While it's desirable to have dataset tag IRIs denote their associated g-boxes, because of existing deployments we can't just rule that now. Instead, we can provide some way to flag the cases where it does, so the market can move in that direction. (Sandro)
PROPOSED: While it's desirable to have dataset tag IRIs denote their associated g-boxes, because of existing deployments we can't just rule that now. Instead, we can provide some way to flag the cases where it does, so the market can move in that direction. (Sandro) ←
11:46:16 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
11:46:25 <tomayac> sandro: there are two different kinds of data sets
Sandro Hawke: there are two different kinds of data sets ←
11:46:30 <tlebo> q+
Tim Lebo: q+ ←
11:46:39 <AndyS> The word "tag" is confusing me somewhat.
Andy Seaborne: The word "tag" is confusing me somewhat. ←
11:46:48 <iand> sandro, when you say tag do you mean the names in named graphs
Ian Davis: sandro, when you say tag do you mean the names in named graphs ←
11:47:00 <gavinc> I think he does.
Gavin Carothers: I think he does. ←
11:47:22 <sandro> "NameTag" Datasets vs "KeyTag" Datasets
Sandro Hawke: "NameTag" Datasets vs "KeyTag" Datasets ←
11:47:34 <mischat> scribe mischat
Mischa Tuffield: scribe mischat ←
11:47:41 <davidwood> q+ to suggest there is no reason to find that anything "denotes" anything else until we address Pat's CoU proposal. It may in fact be dangerous to do so.
David Wood: q+ to suggest there is no reason to find that anything "denotes" anything else until we address Pat's CoU proposal. It may in fact be dangerous to do so. ←
11:47:43 <swh> scribenick: mischat
(Scribe set to Mischa Tuffield)
11:47:47 <ivan> scribenick: mischat
11:47:56 <tlebo> attempt to reconcile the "tag" with an actual, implied URI: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts#Via_SPARQL_1.1_.2B_RDF_1.1
Tim Lebo: attempt to reconcile the "tag" with an actual, implied URI: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts#Via_SPARQL_1.1_.2B_RDF_1.1 ←
11:48:10 <mischat> sandro: is asking Andy what is the other word you use instead of name
Sandro Hawke: is asking Andy what is the other word you use instead of name ←
11:48:16 <mischat> ?
? ←
11:48:39 <sandro> AndyS, is "label" better than "tag"?
Sandro Hawke: TimS, is "label" better than "tag"? ←
11:48:39 <mischat> s/Andy/Tim/
11:49:14 <gavinc> I'll just call it <http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/trig/#graphname> ;)
Gavin Carothers: I'll just call it <http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/trig/#graphname> ;) ←
11:49:22 <mischat> tlebo: is trying to reconcile the graph insert in the graph* terminology ^^
Tim Lebo: is trying to reconcile the graph insert in the graph* terminology ^^ ←
11:49:59 <mischat> tlebo: the example inserts the same triples into two graph containers
Tim Lebo: the example inserts the same triples into two graph containers ←
11:50:15 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
11:50:30 <gavinc> ack tlebo
Gavin Carothers: ack tlebo ←
11:50:36 <mischat> tlebo: the proposal is trying present what an insert does in terms on graph* terminology
Tim Lebo: the proposal is trying present what an insert does in terms on graph* terminology ←
11:51:04 <mischat> tlebo: the proposal is different from sandro's as the global graph container is different
Tim Lebo: the proposal is different from sandro's as the global graph container is different ←
11:51:14 <swh> q+ to as about the intent
Steve Harris: q+ to as about the intent ←
11:51:19 <mischat> q?
q? ←
11:51:30 <tlebo> archived view: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts&oldid=3770#Via_SPARQL_1.1_.2B_RDF_1.1
Tim Lebo: archived view: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/index.php?title=Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts&oldid=3770#Via_SPARQL_1.1_.2B_RDF_1.1 ←
11:51:34 <ivan> ack davidwood
Ivan Herman: ack davidwood ←
11:51:34 <Zakim> davidwood, you wanted to suggest there is no reason to find that anything "denotes" anything else until we address Pat's CoU proposal. It may in fact be dangerous to do so.
Zakim IRC Bot: davidwood, you wanted to suggest there is no reason to find that anything "denotes" anything else until we address Pat's CoU proposal. It may in fact be dangerous to do so. ←
11:52:28 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
11:52:35 <mischat> davidwood: is concerned about the WG making a finding about how an IRI should be making a decision on what "denotes" when there is no Pat around
David Wood: is concerned about the WG making a finding about how an IRI should be making a decision on what "denotes" when there is no Pat around ←
11:52:43 <mischat> … and given cygri's email
… and given Pat's email ←
11:52:53 <mischat> davidwood: would like to move this issue out for the time being
David Wood: would like to move this issue out for the time being ←
11:52:56 <mischat> q?
q? ←
11:53:05 <sandro> ack sandro
Sandro Hawke: ack sandro ←
11:53:23 <mischat> sandro: is asking AndyS what is a better name than tag
Sandro Hawke: is asking AndyS what is a better name than tag ←
11:53:26 <sandro> ReferingNameDatasets vs MerelyTaggingNameDatasets
Sandro Hawke: ReferingNameDatasets vs MerelyTaggingNameDatasets ←
11:53:30 <Souri_> Shall we refer to it as graph-IRI (to avoid "name" and all those ~4-letter words)? :-)
Souripriya Das: Shall we refer to it as graph-IRI (to avoid "name" and all those ~4-letter words)? :-) ←
11:53:39 <tlebo> "name" might, but not http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-service-description#name
Tim Lebo: "name" might, but not http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-service-description#name ←
11:53:54 <sandro> ReferingNameDatasets vs MerelyLabelingNameDatasets
Sandro Hawke: ReferingNameDatasets vs MerelyLabelingNameDatasets ←
11:53:54 <mischat> sandro: is asking if there are two different ways about talking about a dataset
Sandro Hawke: is asking if there are two different ways about talking about a dataset ←
11:54:04 <swh> q-
Steve Harris: q- ←
11:54:07 <mischat> Guus: are you talking about "labelling"
Guus Schreiber: are you talking about "labelling" ←
11:54:22 <mischat> " various people " tagging and labelling sound like the same thing
" various people " tagging and labelling sound like the same thing ←
11:54:43 <gavinc> label == name == context == graph name == graph iri == graphName == graph tag ?
Gavin Carothers: label == name == context == graph name == graph iri == graphName == graph tag ? ←
11:54:59 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
11:55:32 <iand> sandro, are you asking for the WG to explore a way for datasets to optionally declare that the labels for graphs denote those graphs?
Ian Davis: sandro, are you asking for the WG to explore a way for datasets to optionally declare that the labels for graphs denote those graphs? ←
11:55:45 <mischat> sandro: thinks that in sparql it is merely an association
Sandro Hawke: thinks that in sparql it is merely an association ←
11:55:45 <mischat> davidwood: where the tag is an identifier to what happens have an HTTP Get operation
David Wood: where the tag is an identifier to what happens have an HTTP Get operation ←
11:56:08 <mischat> sandro: the name in the, sense of REST, identifies the graph-container
Sandro Hawke: the name in the, sense of REST, identifies the graph-container ←
11:56:27 <pchampin> q+ to propose an analogy
Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+ to propose an analogy ←
11:56:29 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
11:56:30 <mischat> sandro: name identifies and refers to a graph-container ?
Sandro Hawke: name identifies and refers to a graph-container ? ←
11:56:39 <mischat> or s//?$//
or s//?$// ←
11:57:04 <mischat> Guus: sandro could you please formulate your proposal ?
Guus Schreiber: sandro could you please formulate your proposal ? ←
11:57:25 <iand> q+ andys
11:57:30 <davidwood> s/given cygri's email/given Pat's email/
11:58:14 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
11:58:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room, AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P0, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room, AZ ←
11:58:15 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room has MIT_Meeting_Room, Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas, micha, TedT
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room has MIT_Meeting_Room, Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas, micha, TedT ←
11:58:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see danbri, iand, Souri_, AlexHall, AZ_, MacTed, gavinc, mischat, tomayac, davidwood, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, Scott_Bauer, pchampin, mox601, cygri, tlebo, ivan, swh,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see danbri, iand, Souri_, AlexHall, AZ_, MacTed, gavinc, mischat, tomayac, davidwood, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, Scott_Bauer, pchampin, mox601, cygri, tlebo, ivan, swh, ←
11:58:20 <Zakim> ... Guus, ww, ericP, yvesr, manu, NickH, trackbot, manu1, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: ... Guus, ww, ericP, yvesr, manu, NickH, trackbot, manu1, sandro ←
11:58:56 <Guus> zakim, ??p0 is BBC
Guus Schreiber: zakim, ??p0 is BBC ←
11:58:56 <Zakim> +BBC; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +BBC; got it ←
11:59:06 <cygri> zakim, I'm with BBC
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, I'm with BBC ←
11:59:06 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it ←
11:59:17 <mischat> zakim, I'm with BBC
zakim, I'm with BBC ←
11:59:17 <Zakim> +mischat; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +mischat; got it ←
11:59:26 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: There is a kind of dataset (a "type-2 dataset) where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. These are in contrast with "type 1" datasets, where the "name" iri has an undeclared association with the "graph". We like type-2 datasets, but people are using type-1 datasets and we can't just rule them out. So we should provide a standard way for people to indicate when they are using type-2 dat
STRAWPOLL: There is a kind of dataset (a "type-2 dataset) where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. These are in contrast with "type 1" datasets, where the "name" iri has an undeclared association with the "graph". We like type-2 datasets, but people are using type-1 datasets and we can't just rule them out. So we should provide a standard way for people to indicate when they are using type-2 dat ←
11:59:26 <sandro> asets.
Sandro Hawke: asets. ←
12:00:03 <LeeF> q+
Lee Feigenbaum: q+ ←
12:00:04 <NickH> zakim, I'm with BBC
Nicholas Humfrey: zakim, I'm with BBC ←
12:00:05 <Zakim> +NickH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +NickH; got it ←
12:00:07 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
12:00:18 <yvesr> Zakim, i'm with BBC
Yves Raimond: Zakim, i'm with BBC ←
12:00:18 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +yvesr; got it ←
12:00:39 <mischat> ack pchampin
ack pchampin ←
12:00:39 <Zakim> pchampin, you wanted to propose an analogy
Zakim IRC Bot: pchampin, you wanted to propose an analogy ←
12:00:54 <mischat> pchampin: thinks he like the proposal.
Pierre-Antoine Champin: thinks he like the proposal. ←
12:01:48 <mischat> pchampin: there is an analogy: in a school you would ask to have a label on every coat. But you wouldn't be labelling the coat
Pierre-Antoine Champin: there is an analogy: in a school you would ask to have a label on every coat. But you wouldn't be labelling the coat ←
12:01:57 <mischat> pchampin: like the proposal
Pierre-Antoine Champin: like the proposal ←
12:02:00 <mischat> ack AndyS
ack AndyS ←
12:02:16 <mischat> AndyS: thinks type2 is restrictive
Andy Seaborne: thinks type2 is restrictive ←
12:02:37 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: There is a kind of dataset (type-2) where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. These are in contrast with type-1 datasets, where the "name" iri has an undeclared association with the "graph". We like type-2 datasets, but people are using type-1 datasets and we can't just rule them out. So we should provide a standard way for people to indicate when they are using type-2 datasets.
STRAWPOLL: There is a kind of dataset (type-2) where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. These are in contrast with type-1 datasets, where the "name" iri has an undeclared association with the "graph". We like type-2 datasets, but people are using type-1 datasets and we can't just rule them out. So we should provide a standard way for people to indicate when they are using type-2 datasets. ←
12:02:40 <cygri> q+ to say that it's not “types” of datasets but patterns of use
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to say that it's not “types” of datasets but patterns of use ←
12:02:41 <mischat> … and there is another proposal where the IRI - is a label for a g-snap is the more general case
… and there is another proposal where the IRI - is a label for a g-snap is the more general case ←
12:02:44 <gavinc> +q to ask how we are identifying the dataset so that we can type it?
Gavin Carothers: +q to ask how we are identifying the dataset so that we can type it? ←
12:03:05 <mischat> sandro: agrees with sandro
Sandro Hawke: agrees with sandro ←
12:03:30 <iand> zakim, I'm with BBC
Ian Davis: zakim, I'm with BBC ←
12:03:30 <Zakim> +iand; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +iand; got it ←
12:03:33 <tlebo> we should also propose the convention for how anyone can awww:identify "type-1 datasets" as "type-2 datasets" given the "type-1 dataset"'s "name" (the convention would derive from http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/#indirect-graph-identification)
Tim Lebo: we should also propose the convention for how anyone can awww:identify "type-1 datasets" as "type-2 datasets" given the "type-1 dataset"'s "name" (the convention would derive from http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/#indirect-graph-identification) ←
12:03:49 <mischat> AndyS: understands that the proposal fits in with sandro's Web Semantic proposals
Andy Seaborne: understands that the proposal fits in with sandro's Web Semantic proposals ←
12:04:05 <danbri> q+ to ask if it's the dataset that's typed, or the entry in it...?
Dan Brickley: q+ to ask if it's the dataset that's typed, or the entry in it...? ←
12:04:10 <mischat> sandro: isn't sparql today a type 1
Sandro Hawke: isn't sparql today a type 1 ←
12:04:38 <mischat> sandro: how about a type-3 being an IRI referring to a gsnap
Sandro Hawke: how about a type-3 being an IRI referring to a gsnap ←
12:04:42 <mischat> sandro: how about a type-3 being an IRI referring to a g-snap
Sandro Hawke: how about a type-3 being an IRI referring to a g-snap ←
12:05:12 <mischat> AndyS: would like to see a world while there are different Contexts, as per Pat's suggestion. AndyS doesn't like the current proposal
Andy Seaborne: would like to see a world while there are different Contexts, as per Pat's suggestion. AndyS doesn't like the current proposal ←
12:05:16 <AndyS> q?
Andy Seaborne: q? ←
12:05:41 <ivan> ack LeeF
Ivan Herman: ack LeeF ←
12:06:00 <mischat> …. seems to give privilege to type 1, and AndyS thinks that this is not the right thing.
…. seems to give privilege to type 1, and AndyS thinks that this is not the right thing. ←
12:06:17 <AlexHall> +1 LeeF
12:06:28 <swh> +1
Steve Harris: +1 ←
12:06:30 <pchampin> q+
12:06:41 <mischat> LeeF: this seems to suggest that we will be prescribe a handle of various ways to do RDF, and this is not the best thing to do …
Lee Feigenbaum: this seems to suggest that we will be prescribe a handle of various ways to annotate RDF to specify which type of dataset you're using, and this is not the best thing to do … ←
12:06:48 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: There is a kind of dataset (type-2) where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. These are in contrast with type-1 datasets, where the "name" iri has an undeclared association with the "graph". Some people want to use type-2 datasets, but people are using type-1 datasets and we can't just mandate type-2. We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when they are using type-2 data
STRAWPOLL: There is a kind of dataset (type-2) where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. These are in contrast with type-1 datasets, where the "name" iri has an undeclared association with the "graph". Some people want to use type-2 datasets, but people are using type-1 datasets and we can't just mandate type-2. We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when they are using type-2 data ←
12:06:48 <sandro> sets.
Sandro Hawke: sets. ←
12:06:58 <tlebo> @AndyS, while others can have different contexts, anyone should still be able to awww:identify others' contextualized forms.
Tim Lebo: @AndyS, while others can have different contexts, anyone should still be able to awww:identify others' contextualized forms. ←
12:07:03 <LeeF> s/to do RDF/to annotate RDF to specify which type of dataset you're using
12:07:06 <ivan> ack cygri
Ivan Herman: ack cygri ←
12:07:06 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to say that it's not “types” of datasets but patterns of use
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to say that it's not “types” of datasets but patterns of use ←
12:07:12 <Guus> ack cygri
Guus Schreiber: ack cygri ←
12:07:20 <mischat> cygri: thinks it is mistake phrasing this as a type of dataset
Richard Cyganiak: thinks it is mistake phrasing this as a type of dataset ←
12:07:47 <swh> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
12:08:03 <iand> Alternate STRAWPOLL phrasing: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when their the "name" IRIs in their dataset both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer.
Ian Davis: Alternate STRAWPOLL phrasing: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when their the "name" IRIs in their dataset both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. ←
12:08:06 <sandro> But I need *interop* of them,
Sandro Hawke: But I need *interop* of them, ←
12:08:06 <mischat> cygri: thinks that sandro's approach is not ideal, there is lots of talk about different ways which you can make use of a dataset
Richard Cyganiak: thinks that sandro's approach is not ideal, there is lots of talk about different ways which you can make use of a dataset ←
12:08:08 <AndyS> "There is a usage of dataset where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. " but ...
Andy Seaborne: "There is a usage of dataset where the "name" IRI both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. " but ... ←
12:08:47 <mischat> cygri: but thinks that the current setup allows for sandro's type 2 dataset, and doesn't think that we should give a privileged status to a given way of using a dataset
Richard Cyganiak: but thinks that the current setup allows for sandro's type 2 dataset, and doesn't think that we should give a privileged status to a given way of using a dataset ←
12:08:50 <tlebo> but how does a third party uniformly refer to a SPARQL endpoint's GraphContainer?
Tim Lebo: but how does a third party uniformly refer to a SPARQL endpoint's GraphContainer? ←
12:08:54 <AndyS> ... then is there behind that a work item for the WG for this form, not others? Is the recognition of this work item the reason for the proposal?
Andy Seaborne: ... then is there behind that a work item for the WG for this form, not others? Is the recognition of this work item the reason for the proposal? ←
12:09:29 <sandro> +1 Ian's rephrasing
Sandro Hawke: +1 Ian's rephrasing ←
12:09:43 <AndyS> (see Pat's email)
Andy Seaborne: (see Pat's email) ←
12:09:49 <yvesr> scribe: yvesr
(Scribe set to Yves Raimond)
12:09:52 <mischat> scribenick yvesr
Mischa Tuffield: scribenick yvesr ←
12:09:57 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
12:10:06 <ivan> scribenick: yvesr
12:10:09 <sandro> (scribenick is unnecessary with commonscribe, fwiw.)
Sandro Hawke: (scribenick is unnecessary with commonscribe, fwiw.) ←
12:10:17 <AndyS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0195.html
Andy Seaborne: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0195.html ←
12:10:19 <davidwood> +1 to Ian's rephrasing
David Wood: +1 to Ian's rephrasing ←
12:10:23 <Souri_> +1 to David's thoughts that Ian's rephrasing is compatible with Pat's CoU suggestion
Souripriya Das: +1 to David's thoughts that Ian's rephrasing is compatible with Pat's CoU suggestion ←
12:10:24 <yvesr> Guus: would cygri be more happy with iand's rephrasing?
Guus Schreiber: would cygri be more happy with iand's rephrasing? ←
12:10:29 <mischat> q?
Mischa Tuffield: q? ←
12:10:31 <yvesr> +1
+1 ←
12:10:39 <gavinc> ack me
Gavin Carothers: ack me ←
12:10:39 <Zakim> gavinc, you wanted to ask how we are identifying the dataset so that we can type it?
Zakim IRC Bot: gavinc, you wanted to ask how we are identifying the dataset so that we can type it? ←
12:10:40 <ivan> ack gavinc
Ivan Herman: ack gavinc ←
12:10:53 <tlebo> But how does a third party awww:identify graphs within SPARQL endpoints that do NOT provide @iand's indication?
Tim Lebo: But how does a third party awww:identify graphs within SPARQL endpoints that do NOT provide @iand's indication? ←
12:11:01 <yvesr> gavinc: only worry about sandro's proposal - how are we supposed to refer to the dataset?
Gavin Carothers: only worry about sandro's proposal - how are we supposed to refer to the dataset? ←
12:11:10 <yvesr> gavinc: we're on our way to create 'named datasets'
Gavin Carothers: we're on our way to create 'named datasets' ←
12:11:17 <AndyS> Maybe SPARQL service description helps here.
Andy Seaborne: Maybe SPARQL service description helps here. ←
12:11:27 <yvesr> gavinc: how are we supposed to make assertions about a dataset atm?
Gavin Carothers: how are we supposed to make assertions about a dataset atm? ←
12:11:30 <cygri> q+ to answer gavinc
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to answer gavinc ←
12:11:36 <pchampin> q+ to solve gavin's problem
Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+ to solve gavin's problem ←
12:11:46 <AndyS> ... which is "service" not dataset but that's the visible useable thing.
Andy Seaborne: ... which is "service" not dataset but that's the visible useable thing. ←
12:12:01 <yvesr> gavinc: sparql descriptions help for sparql end points - how do i move it around a trig dataset?
Gavin Carothers: sparql descriptions help for sparql end points - how do i move it around a trig dataset? ←
12:12:02 <sandro> q+ to talk about TriG metadata
Sandro Hawke: q+ to talk about TriG metadata ←
12:12:12 <pchampin> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Quadless-Proposal#Link_with_named_graphs_and_datasets
Pierre-Antoine Champin: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Quadless-Proposal#Link_with_named_graphs_and_datasets ←
12:12:13 <ivan> ack pchampin
Ivan Herman: ack pchampin ←
12:12:13 <Zakim> pchampin, you wanted to solve gavin's problem
Zakim IRC Bot: pchampin, you wanted to solve gavin's problem ←
12:12:42 <sandro> +1 pchampin and graph literals!!!
Sandro Hawke: +1 pchampin and graph literals!!! ←
12:12:43 <yvesr> pchampin: coming back to the proposal i made a while ago - it would be improved by ivan's proposal to work with a datatype
Pierre-Antoine Champin: coming back to the proposal i made a while ago - it would be improved by ivan's proposal to work with a datatype ←
12:13:02 <yvesr> pchampin: if we had graph literals and a vocabulary to express these relationships, then we could be unambiguous
Pierre-Antoine Champin: if we had graph literals and a vocabulary to express these relationships, then we could be unambiguous ←
12:13:31 <sandro> +999999
Sandro Hawke: +999999 ←
12:13:34 <yvesr> pchampin: not saying it should be how dataset should be implemented, but at least that's a unifying vocabulary to describe this
Pierre-Antoine Champin: not saying it should be how dataset should be implemented, but at least that's a unifying vocabulary to describe this ←
12:13:37 <yvesr> +99999 too
+99999 too ←
12:13:41 <ivan> ack cygri
Ivan Herman: ack cygri ←
12:13:41 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to answer gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to answer gavinc ←
12:13:54 <yvesr> cygri: makign statements about dataset is easy - just give it a URI
Richard Cyganiak: making statements about dataset is easy - just give it a URI ←
12:14:12 <yvesr> cygri: the SPARQL service description gives us a mechanism to do that
Richard Cyganiak: the SPARQL service description gives us a mechanism to do that ←
12:14:17 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:14:24 <yvesr> cygri: the URI of the Trig file is a good URI to make statements about the dataset
Richard Cyganiak: the URI of the Trig file is a good URI to make statements about the dataset ←
12:14:30 <iand> we already have draft text in RDF Concepts defining an RDF Dataset: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-multigraph
Ian Davis: we already have draft text in RDF Concepts defining an RDF Dataset: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-multigraph ←
12:14:39 <yvesr> cygri: the problem sandro's trying to solve is to know when a dataset is using a particular convention
Richard Cyganiak: the problem sandro's trying to solve is to know when a dataset is using a particular convention ←
12:14:40 <Souri_> s/makign /making /
12:14:45 <danbri> so we don't lose it in the scrollback, -->
Dan Brickley: so we don't lose it in the scrollback, --> ←
12:14:46 <danbri> [13:08] <iand> Alternate STRAWPOLL phrasing: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when their the "name" IRIs in their dataset both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer.
Dan Brickley: [13:08] <iand> Alternate STRAWPOLL phrasing: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when their the "name" IRIs in their dataset both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. ←
12:14:49 <yvesr> cygri: having a statement asserting it doesn't solve that problem
Richard Cyganiak: having a statement asserting it doesn't solve that problem ←
12:15:02 <tlebo> Regarding "how does the GraphContainer description travel with TRIG, etc, non-SPARQL" - use service description's sd:NamedGraph/sd:GraphCollection, and replace sd:Service/sd:availableGraphDescriptions (https://github.com/timrdf/csv2rdf4lod-automation/blob/master/doc/ontology-diagrams/sparql-service-description-2010-10-31.pdf?raw=true)
Tim Lebo: Regarding "how does the GraphContainer description travel with TRIG, etc, non-SPARQL" - use service description's sd:NamedGraph/sd:GraphCollection, and replace sd:Service/sd:availableGraphDescriptions (https://github.com/timrdf/csv2rdf4lod-automation/blob/master/doc/ontology-diagrams/sparql-service-description-2010-10-31.pdf?raw=true) ←
12:15:02 <sandro> can I respond?
Sandro Hawke: can I respond? ←
12:15:07 <yvesr> cygri: people lie on the Web - these statements could be false
Richard Cyganiak: people lie on the Web - these statements could be false ←
12:15:24 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
12:15:25 <yvesr> cygri: ... except if you trust the provider of the statement and the dataset to do the right thijng
Richard Cyganiak: ... except if you trust the provider of the statement and the dataset to do the right thijng ←
12:15:50 <yvesr> cygri: people are also wrong with mimetypes
Richard Cyganiak: people are also wrong with mimetypes ←
12:15:55 <AndyS> "This WG will write a practice and experience note about using NG IRIs to both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph(g-box)", really a GraphContainer. "
Andy Seaborne: "This WG will write a practice and experience note about using NG IRIs to both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph(g-box)", really a GraphContainer. " ←
12:16:05 <yvesr> q+
q+ ←
12:16:12 <yvesr> q-
q- ←
12:16:19 <ivan> ack danbri
Ivan Herman: ack danbri ←
12:16:19 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask if it's the dataset that's typed, or the entry in it...?
Zakim IRC Bot: danbri, you wanted to ask if it's the dataset that's typed, or the entry in it...? ←
12:16:24 <sandro> sandro: It's kjust like mime types --- sometimes they are wrong, sometimes people lie -- but they are still useful.
Sandro Hawke: It's kjust like mime types --- sometimes they are wrong, sometimes people lie -- but they are still useful. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
12:16:25 <davidwood> gavinc should respond, too. I'm curious whether describing data out-of-band with triples is acceptable to him.
David Wood: gavinc should respond, too. I'm curious whether describing data out-of-band with triples is acceptable to him. ←
12:16:34 <yvesr> cygri, i think it is still *much* more useful than *asumming* something tha tmay be wrong or controversial
cygri, i think it is still *much* more useful than *asumming* something tha tmay be wrong or controversial ←
12:16:43 <cygri> sandro, you're wrong on that. in sindice we do large-scale RDF processing and we have to ignore mime types.
Richard Cyganiak: sandro, you're wrong on that. in sindice we do large-scale RDF processing and we have to ignore mime types. ←
12:16:58 <sandro> danbri: I'd like smaller granularity, like Ian's strawpoll, instead of Sandro's
Dan Brickley: I'd like smaller granularity, like Ian's strawpoll, instead of Sandro's [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
12:17:03 <yvesr> danbri: ian's reformulation is more concrete
Dan Brickley: ian's reformulation is more concrete ←
12:17:32 <yvesr> danbri: in my store, i can have URIs of FOAF files, RSS feeds... I'd love to have descriptions to explain how my data is managed
Dan Brickley: in my store, i can have URIs of FOAF files, RSS feeds... I'd love to have descriptions to explain how my data is managed ←
12:17:38 <sandro> I'm okay with DanBri's, but I thikn it might be harder.
Sandro Hawke: I'm okay with DanBri's, but I thikn it might be harder. ←
12:17:48 <ivan> ack swh
Ivan Herman: ack swh ←
12:17:51 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:18:14 <yvesr> swh: another concern: type-1 includes some things that are undesirable - includign using people URIs as graph identifiers
Steve Harris: another concern: type-1 includes some things that are undesirable - includign using people URIs as graph identifiers ←
12:18:32 <gavinc> Out of band triples are totally fine, I'm just confused as to how "just name things with URIs is easy" and the last months of conversations about what exactly naming graphs means are reconcilable?
Gavin Carothers: Out of band triples are totally fine, I'm just confused as to how "just name things with URIs is easy" and the last months of conversations about what exactly naming graphs means are reconcilable? ←
12:18:44 <AndyS> +1 to "there are bad ways of doing 'associates'" (bad = wrong)
Andy Seaborne: +1 to "there are bad ways of doing 'associates'" (bad = wrong) ←
12:18:57 <sandro> NamedGraphs is either: LabeledGraphs and ReferedToGraphs
Sandro Hawke: NamedGraphs is either: LabeledGraphs and ReferedToGraphs ←
12:19:07 <sandro> (or Identified Graphs?)
Sandro Hawke: (or Identified Graphs?) ←
12:19:29 <cygri> LabeledGraphs would be more accurate for what we have in SPARQL. that ship has sailed though :-(
Richard Cyganiak: LabeledGraphs would be more accurate for what we have in SPARQL. that ship has sailed though :-( ←
12:19:45 <yvesr> swh: my concern is mainly that enumariting all possibilities is going to be very difficult, and chances of getting it wrong are high
Steve Harris: my concern is mainly that enumariting all possibilities is going to be very difficult, and chances of getting it wrong are high ←
12:19:46 <danbri> e.g. my store might have one graph (for latest version) <http://example.com/sandro.foaf> and also the transactions stashed using <uuid:12341234>. A manifest / table of contents / sitemap for the database should let me express that I've done this. But *also* it should let me express mappings from technical entities (servers, accounts, crypto) to social entities (people, orgs, ...).
Dan Brickley: e.g. my store might have one graph (for latest version) <http://example.com/sandro.foaf> and also the transactions stashed using <uuid:12341234>. A manifest / table of contents / sitemap for the database should let me express that I've done this. But *also* it should let me express mappings from technical entities (servers, accounts, crypto) to social entities (people, orgs, ...). ←
12:19:46 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:20:03 <yvesr> swh: the chances that someone actually use it are infinitely small
Steve Harris: the chances that someone actually use it are infinitely small ←
12:20:03 <sandro> cygri, I agree that ship has sailed -- but we can launch another ship.
Sandro Hawke: cygri, I agree that ship has sailed -- but we can launch another ship. ←
12:20:11 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
12:20:27 <sandro> "IdentifiedGraphs"
Sandro Hawke: "IdentifiedGraphs" ←
12:20:29 <danbri> q+ to argue for the social use case too (swh mentioned...)
Dan Brickley: q+ to argue for the social use case too (swh mentioned...) ←
12:20:44 <ivan> ack sandro
Ivan Herman: ack sandro ←
12:20:44 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to talk about TriG metadata
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to talk about TriG metadata ←
12:21:02 <yvesr> sandro: trig bizarelly has no way to specify metadata
Sandro Hawke: trig bizarelly has no way to specify metadata ←
12:21:13 <yvesr> sandro: no way to assert who is the author or a trig file
Sandro Hawke: no way to assert who is the author or a trig file ←
12:21:15 <AndyS> <> dc:creator "me" .
Andy Seaborne: <> dc:creator "me" . ←
12:21:23 <tlebo> +1 AndyS
Tim Lebo: +1 AndyS ←
12:21:26 <yvesr> sandro: you can put the metadata in the default graph
Sandro Hawke: you can put the metadata in the default graph ←
12:21:50 <pchampin> ... but some people argued that the default graph is not more assertive than named graphs
Pierre-Antoine Champin: ... but some people argued that the default graph is not more assertive than named graphs ←
12:21:58 <AndyS> (no different from situation for an RDF graph as far as I can see)
Andy Seaborne: (no different from situation for an RDF graph as far as I can see) ←
12:22:06 <yvesr> sandro: it would be nice to have a standard place - and what about metadata about metadata? who is the author of the author of the trig annotation?
Sandro Hawke: it would be nice to have a standard place - and what about metadata about metadata? who is the author of the author of the trig annotation? ←
12:22:07 <cygri> AndyS++
Richard Cyganiak: AndyS++ ←
12:22:29 <yvesr> sandro: which graph has the metadata in it?
Sandro Hawke: which graph has the metadata in it? ←
12:22:40 <pchampin> @Andy: well, if you chose to believe an RDF file, you have to believe what it says about itself
Pierre-Antoine Champin: @Andy: well, if you chose to believe an RDF file, you have to believe what it says about itself ←
12:22:51 <iand> q?
12:22:51 <mischat> shouldn't this sit in a Linked Data primer or similar
Mischa Tuffield: shouldn't this sit in a Linked Data primer or similar ←
12:22:52 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:22:58 <gavinc> +q to respond
Gavin Carothers: +q to respond ←
12:23:00 <yvesr> sandro: it seems like it would fail when you're carrying someone else's metadata
Sandro Hawke: it seems like it would fail when you're carrying someone else's metadata ←
12:23:13 <AlexHall> (MIT discussion re metadata graphs described with special rdf:types...)
Alex Hall: (MIT discussion re metadata graphs described with special rdf:types...) ←
12:23:38 <swh> <G#meta> { <> dc:subject <G> ; a :MetadataGraph } … or something
Steve Harris: <G#meta> { <> dc:subject <G> ; a :MetadataGraph } … or something ←
12:23:56 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
12:23:59 <LeeF> LeeF: In Anzo, we have "metadata graphs" that give metadata about the graphs. We can also use it to give metadata about datasets, which are first-class objects (i.e. with URIs, etc.) in Anzo
Lee Feigenbaum: In Anzo, we have "metadata graphs" that give metadata about the graphs. We can also use it to give metadata about datasets, which are first-class objects (i.e. with URIs, etc.) in Anzo [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
12:24:05 <ivan> ack AndyS
Ivan Herman: ack AndyS ←
12:24:18 <yvesr> AndyS: about ian's phrasing, i'd change the word 'standard'
Andy Seaborne: about ian's phrasing, i'd change the word 'standard' ←
12:24:29 <yvesr> AndyS: we'll write a 'practice and experience' note - non-normative
Andy Seaborne: we'll write a 'practice and experience' note - non-normative ←
12:24:34 <mischat> +1 to AndyS
Mischa Tuffield: +1 to AndyS ←
12:24:46 <zwu2> +1 AndyS
12:24:50 <LeeF> swh, yes, that's very much what we do
Lee Feigenbaum: swh, yes, that's very much what we do ←
12:24:59 <sandro> If it's not a standard, then ... how does it work?
Sandro Hawke: If it's not a standard, then ... how does it work? ←
12:25:01 <swh> LeeF, ditto
Steve Harris: LeeF, ditto ←
12:25:03 <yvesr> danbri: convention?
Dan Brickley: convention? ←
12:25:09 <tlebo> awww:identifying a GraphContainer in a TRiG file using fragment identifiers? e.g. http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/666e284870cc/ontology/components/NamedGraph/named-graph-topics.trig#http%3A//www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card
Tim Lebo: awww:identifying a GraphContainer in a TRiG file using fragment identifiers? e.g. http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/666e284870cc/ontology/components/NamedGraph/named-graph-topics.trig#http%3A//www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card ←
12:25:10 <yvesr> AndyS: best practice would work for me
Andy Seaborne: best practice would work for me ←
12:25:13 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
12:25:24 <ivan> (what was also said) maybe defining Classes so that rdf:type could be used
Ivan Herman: (what was also said) maybe defining Classes so that rdf:type could be used ←
12:25:26 <davidwood> In Callimachus, we assign a URI to each data "file" when loaded, thus making a named graph from it. Anyone can upload metadata about a named graph by referring to its URI. Therefore, our approach is similar conceptually to LeeF's.
David Wood: In Callimachus, we assign a URI to each data "file" when loaded, thus making a named graph from it. Anyone can upload metadata about a named graph by referring to its URI. Therefore, our approach is similar conceptually to LeeF's. ←
12:25:29 <iand> i think we could define a class for this type of dataset. that's all we need
Ian Davis: i think we could define a class for this type of dataset. that's all we need ←
12:25:50 <yvesr> danbri: named graphs give you technical partition of your data - not social partition - you need out of band information
Dan Brickley: named graphs give you technical partition of your data - not social partition - you need out of band information ←
12:26:03 <ivan> iand, or a class for this type of (n,G) association, not the whole dataset
Ivan Herman: iand, or a class for this type of (n,G) association, not the whole dataset ←
12:26:06 <yvesr> danbri: i hope this best practice note tackles that
Dan Brickley: i hope this best practice note tackles that ←
12:26:06 <pchampin> q?
12:26:07 <LeeF> davidwood, do you do anything different do if you're loading a trig file that defines multiple graphs?
Lee Feigenbaum: davidwood, do you do anything different do if you're loading a trig file that defines multiple graphs? ←
12:26:14 <davidwood> yes
David Wood: yes ←
12:26:23 <davidwood> We make multiple graphs
David Wood: We make multiple graphs ←
12:26:34 <ivan> q?
Ivan Herman: q? ←
12:26:34 <sandro> q+ to say danbri, can't you build that with a vocabulary on top of IdentifiedGraphs ?
Sandro Hawke: q+ to say danbri, can't you build that with a vocabulary on top of IdentifiedGraphs ? ←
12:26:37 <ivan> ack davidwood
Ivan Herman: ack davidwood ←
12:26:41 <yvesr> danbri: we haven't shown the way on how to make the most of sparql, including this social use-case
Dan Brickley: we haven't shown the way on how to make the most of sparql, including this social use-case ←
12:26:43 <danbri> sandro, yes, we can do.
Dan Brickley: sandro, yes, we can do. ←
12:26:44 <ivan> ack danbri
Ivan Herman: ack danbri ←
12:26:44 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to argue for the social use case too (swh mentioned...)
Zakim IRC Bot: danbri, you wanted to argue for the social use case too (swh mentioned...) ←
12:26:48 <ivan> ack gavinc
Ivan Herman: ack gavinc ←
12:26:48 <Zakim> gavinc, you wanted to respond
Zakim IRC Bot: gavinc, you wanted to respond ←
12:26:49 <pchampin> @danbri: but then, whouldn't it be nice to have this "out of band" information in RDF?
Pierre-Antoine Champin: @danbri: but then, whouldn't it be nice to have this "out of band" information in RDF? ←
12:27:07 <danbri> (...just arguing that the use case is at least as important as the 'what url i got it from' use case which we've spent hours talking about in various forms)
Dan Brickley: (...just arguing that the use case is at least as important as the 'what url i got it from' use case which we've spent hours talking about in various forms) ←
12:27:13 <danbri> (possibly more important, ultimately)
Dan Brickley: (possibly more important, ultimately) ←
12:27:19 <yvesr> gavinc: about AndyS's proposal of just adding a triple to a trig file - which graph does that go in?
Gavin Carothers: about AndyS's proposal of just adding a triple to a trig file - which graph does that go in? ←
12:27:28 <danbri> (since so much data will be acquired transactionally, e.g. oauth'd)
Dan Brickley: (since so much data will be acquired transactionally, e.g. oauth'd) ←
12:27:40 <iand> in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-multigraph we define RDF Dataset and we could also define an RDF Denoting Dataset to be an RDF Dataset where the graph names denote the graphs
Ian Davis: in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#section-multigraph we define RDF Dataset and we could also define an RDF Denoting Dataset to be an RDF Dataset where the graph names denote the graphs ←
12:27:44 <yvesr> gavinc: maybe that is enough
Gavin Carothers: maybe that is enough ←
12:27:57 <yvesr> gavinc: but if we're all doing it, there should be common practices
Gavin Carothers: but if we're all doing it, there should be common practices ←
12:28:08 <Guus> wonder whether we can get a straw polln a revised phrasing
Guus Schreiber: wonder whether we can get a straw polln a revised phrasing ←
12:28:11 <sandro> +1 iands, not sure about the name "Denoting", but yes.
Sandro Hawke: +1 iands, not sure about the name "Denoting", but yes. ←
12:28:16 <yvesr> gavinc: right now, i have no idea how that works
Gavin Carothers: right now, i have no idea how that works ←
12:28:19 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:28:34 <cygri> iand, that would rather have to go into RDF Semantics i think
Richard Cyganiak: iand, that would rather have to go into RDF Semantics i think ←
12:28:42 <yvesr> AndyS: i don't care how the triple goes - it is an assertion, it could go in many different places
Andy Seaborne: i don't care how the triple goes - it is an assertion, it could go in many different places ←
12:29:03 <gavinc> thanks AndyS
Gavin Carothers: thanks AndyS ←
12:29:07 <ivan> ack sandro
Ivan Herman: ack sandro ←
12:29:07 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to say danbri, can't you build that with a vocabulary on top of IdentifiedGraphs ?
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to say danbri, can't you build that with a vocabulary on top of IdentifiedGraphs ? ←
12:29:19 <yvesr> Guus: are we nearing a point where we can put a modified strawpoll?
Guus Schreiber: are we nearing a point where we can put a modified strawpoll? ←
12:29:35 <yvesr> sandro: AndyS, I don't think that works - we need an assertive metadata format
Sandro Hawke: AndyS, I don't think that works - we need an assertive metadata format ←
12:29:47 <yvesr> sandro: TriG files carry stuff they're not asserting
Sandro Hawke: TriG files carry stuff they're not asserting ←
12:29:51 <yvesr> cygri: where does this come from?
Richard Cyganiak: where does this come from? ←
12:29:57 <iand> cygri: we use denotes in RDF Concepts
Richard Cyganiak: we use denotes in RDF Concepts [ Scribe Assist by Ian Davis ] ←
12:30:06 <yvesr> cygri: i wrote that spec, and it doesn't say anything in that respect
Richard Cyganiak: i wrote that spec, and it doesn't say anything in that respect ←
12:30:28 <AndyS> sandro - can you point to concrete text that lead you to that conclusion?
Andy Seaborne: sandro - can you point to concrete text that lead you to that conclusion? ←
12:30:44 <tlebo> what happened to <> ?
Tim Lebo: what happened to <> ? ←
12:30:49 <AlexHall> 3 options for describing a dataset: (1) conventions for special naming or typing of metadata graphs, (2) add a fifth column, (3) reify the dataset
Alex Hall: 3 options for describing a dataset: (1) conventions for special naming or typing of metadata graphs, (2) add a fifth column, (3) reify the dataset ←
12:31:11 <yvesr> danbri: i agree this is a useful use case
Sandro Hawke: danbri,: i agree this is a useful use case ←
12:31:22 <yvesr> s/danbri/sandro: danbri,/
12:31:44 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate when their the "name" IRIs in their dataset both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer.
STRAWPOLL: We should write some text about for people to indicate when their the "name" IRIs in their dataset both refers to and awww:identifies the "graph", really a GraphContainer. ←
12:31:50 <danbri> standards-based; ...
Dan Brickley: standards-based; ... ←
12:31:51 <yvesr> sandro: perhaps we could phrase it by saying 'somebody' should
Sandro Hawke: perhaps we could phrase it by saying 'somebody' should ←
12:32:14 <danbri> ... sparql-queriable, rdf-describable, ... conventions/ best practice, ...
Dan Brickley: ... sparql-queriable, rdf-describable, ... conventions/ best practice, ... ←
12:32:30 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
12:32:35 <AndyS> s/provide a standard way/write some text about/
12:33:30 <danbri> swh 'because there are so many, and there are so incredibly complex, it takes us a lot to describe and ... ... this one is a weird special case'
Dan Brickley: swh 'because there are so many, and there are so incredibly complex, it takes us a lot to describe and ... ... this one is a weird special case' ←
12:33:36 <NickH> +1 to swh
Nicholas Humfrey: +1 to swh ←
12:34:20 <sandro> AndyS, that s/// will alter the scribe record --- changing my proposed strawpoll !
Sandro Hawke: AndyS, that s/// will alter the scribe record --- changing my proposed strawpoll ! ←
12:34:36 <ivan> STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs in their dataset both behave, such as when it awww:indentifies the graph, really a container
STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs in their dataset both behave, such as when it awww:indentifies the graph, really a container ←
12:35:04 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
12:35:06 <tlebo> any third party should be able to refer to another's GraphContainer, regardless of what the GraphContainer 'owner' offers.
Tim Lebo: any third party should be able to refer to another's GraphContainer, regardless of what the GraphContainer 'owner' offers. ←
12:35:10 <yvesr> sandro: i am ok with that
Sandro Hawke: i am ok with that ←
12:35:23 <yvesr> Guus: it opens for conventions we document, and conventions we don't document
Guus Schreiber: it opens for conventions we document, and conventions we don't document ←
12:35:38 <ivan> STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs in their dataset behave, such as when it aww:identifies the graph (really a container)
STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate how the 'name' IRIs in their dataset behave, such as when it aww:identifies the graph (really a container) ←
12:35:44 <iand> q+
12:35:59 <ivan> ack cygri
Ivan Herman: ack cygri ←
12:36:00 <MacTed> s/their 'name'/the 'name'/
12:36:15 <yvesr> cygri: i think this idea of indicating how they do it in their dataset is a waste of time
Richard Cyganiak: i think this idea of indicating how they do it in their dataset is a waste of time ←
12:36:20 <yvesr> cygri: it just doesn't work
Richard Cyganiak: it just doesn't work ←
12:36:32 <danbri> e.g. suggest something like: "Should provide RDF-based mechanisms and best practice documentation techniques, to share additional meta-information about collections of RDF graphs, including but not limited to a) info about how IRIs relate to the content they're associated with; b) data grouping technqiues that are more social than technical (eg. 'information from colleagues').'
Dan Brickley: e.g. suggest something like: "Should provide RDF-based mechanisms and best practice documentation techniques, to share additional meta-information about collections of RDF graphs, including but not limited to a) info about how IRIs relate to the content they're associated with; b) data grouping technqiues that are more social than technical (eg. 'information from colleagues').' ←
12:36:45 <yvesr> cygri: there's nothing that encourages people to get that triple right
Richard Cyganiak: there's nothing that encourages people to get that triple right ←
12:36:56 <yvesr> cygri: nothing bad happens when you get it wrong
Richard Cyganiak: nothing bad happens when you get it wrong ←
12:37:02 <iand> q-
12:37:06 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
12:37:21 <sandro> cygri: This is a waste of time -- it just doesn't work. There is nothing that encourages people to get the triple right. Unless there is some Sandro-best-practice person running around....
Richard Cyganiak: This is a waste of time -- it just doesn't work. There is nothing that encourages people to get the triple right. Unless there is some Sandro-best-practice person running around.... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
12:38:22 <AndyS> +1 to danbri suggestion. /me concerned about "standard" ==> else it's not a dataset.
Andy Seaborne: +1 to danbri suggestion. /me concerned about "standard" ==> else it's not a dataset. ←
12:38:39 <cygri> yvesr, yes that's what pedantic web did, and it doesn't scale
Richard Cyganiak: yvesr, yes that's what pedantic web did, and it doesn't scale ←
12:38:43 <iand> i disagree that it is a waste of time, lots of data is wrong but that doesn't mean we should prevent people from writing data
Ian Davis: i disagree that it is a waste of time, lots of data is wrong but that doesn't mean we should prevent people from writing data ←
12:38:48 <sandro> sandro: Yeah, my main point is that it's beneficial
Sandro Hawke: Yeah, my main point is that it's beneficial [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
12:38:54 <yvesr> cygri, agreed, but trying to standardise the relationship won't work as well
cygri, agreed, but trying to standardise the relationship won't work as well ←
12:38:54 <ivan> +1 to iand
Ivan Herman: +1 to iand ←
12:38:58 <yvesr> cygri, we'll never get it right
cygri, we'll never get it right ←
12:39:04 <gavinc> +1 to iand
Gavin Carothers: +1 to iand ←
12:39:14 <swh> danbri's suggestion seems more plausible
Steve Harris: danbri's suggestion seems more plausible ←
12:39:29 <cygri> yvesr, i think it's useful to document this convention as a good practice. that's all
Richard Cyganiak: yvesr, i think it's useful to document this convention as a good practice. that's all ←
12:39:46 <swh> I strongly don't feel it's good practice
Steve Harris: I strongly don't feel it's good practice ←
12:39:52 <yvesr> cygri, but what is the convention? i am not even sure we agree on that
cygri, but what is the convention? i am not even sure we agree on that ←
12:40:00 <swh> its one possible way to hold data, but it's not even the best one
Steve Harris: its one possible way to hold data, but it's not even the best one ←
12:40:05 <yvesr> swh, +1
swh, +1 ←
12:40:26 <cygri> yvesr, the convention is what sandro said
Richard Cyganiak: yvesr, the convention is what sandro said ←
12:40:32 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to have data-providers using "Referring-IRI" datasets, and for data-consumers to get an indication of whether the data-provider claims to be doing so.
STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to have data-providers using "Referring-IRI" datasets, and for data-consumers to get an indication of whether the data-provider claims to be doing so. ←
12:40:42 <yvesr> swh, or at least not the only way
swh, or at least not the only way ←
12:40:52 <danbri> -1
Dan Brickley: -1 ←
12:40:54 <cygri> -1
Richard Cyganiak: -1 ←
12:40:55 <swh> -1
Steve Harris: -1 ←
12:41:00 <tlebo> q?
Tim Lebo: q? ←
12:41:00 <iand> -1
12:41:10 <danbri> Lots of things are useful to some people. but this has an advocacy feel.
Dan Brickley: Lots of things are useful to some people. but this has an advocacy feel. ←
12:41:29 <iand> (13:34:42) ivan: STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs in their dataset both behave, such as when it awww:indentifies the graph, really a container
Ian Davis: (13:34:42) ivan: STRAWPOLL: We should provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs in their dataset both behave, such as when it awww:indentifies the graph, really a container ←
12:41:41 <tlebo> The fact is, these things already implicitly exist - it's not a special case. It's universal!
Tim Lebo: The fact is, these things already implicitly exist - it's not a special case. It's universal! ←
12:42:29 <danbri> for me the issue is granularity ---
Dan Brickley: for me the issue is granularity --- ←
12:42:30 <tlebo> The (myriad, nuanced) relationships among anybody's GraphContainers should be described in RDF - and they should choose the vocabulary they want to describe those associations.
Tim Lebo: The (myriad, nuanced) relationships among anybody's GraphContainers should be described in RDF - and they should choose the vocabulary they want to describe those associations. ←
12:42:33 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to have data-providers using type-2 datasets, and for data-consumers to get an indication of whether the data-provider claims to be doing so.
Sandro Hawke: STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to have data-providers using type-2 datasets, and for data-consumers to get an indication of whether the data-provider claims to be doing so. ←
12:42:35 <AndyS> alt -- "the WG writes up several usage scenarios " (so can say when to use and when not to)
Andy Seaborne: alt -- "the WG writes up several usage scenarios " (so can say when to use and when not to) ←
12:42:48 <tlebo> so, all we need is A WAY to reference anybody's GraphContainers.
Tim Lebo: so, all we need is A WAY to reference anybody's GraphContainers. ←
12:42:52 <danbri> in my stores some named graphs are referring IRIs, some are transactional, and there are RDF-describable links (derrivation, pipelines, etc) between them
Dan Brickley: in my stores some named graphs are referring IRIs, some are transactional, and there are RDF-describable links (derrivation, pipelines, etc) between them ←
12:42:59 <danbri> (inference even, on occasion)
Dan Brickley: (inference even, on occasion) ←
12:43:24 <yvesr> danbri, +1
danbri, +1 ←
12:43:25 <ivan> STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs behave, such as when it awww:indentifies the graph, really a container
STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to provide a standard way for people to indicate how their 'name' IRIs behave, such as when it awww:indentifies the graph, really a container ←
12:43:36 <cygri> -1
Richard Cyganiak: -1 ←
12:43:38 <pchampin> +1
12:43:43 <iand> +1
12:43:48 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
12:43:52 <danbri> 'behave' is a little anthroporphic, but sure +1
Dan Brickley: 'behave' is a little anthroporphic, but sure +1 ←
12:43:55 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
12:43:56 <pfps> -epsilon
Peter Patel-Schneider: -epsilon ←
12:44:08 <yvesr> cygri: we should document patterns and conventions, *not* find a standard way
Richard Cyganiak: we should document patterns and conventions, *not* find a standard way ←
12:44:13 <davidwood> +0
David Wood: +0 ←
12:44:13 <danbri> thought i think there is too much bias towards this specific use case, so i'll repeat
Dan Brickley: thought i think there is too much bias towards this specific use case, so i'll repeat ←
12:44:15 <danbri> [13:36] <danbri> e.g. suggest something like: "Should provide RDF-based mechanisms and best practice documentation techniques, to share additional meta-information about collections of RDF graphs, including but not limited to a) info about how IRIs relate to the content they're associated with; b) data grouping technqiues that are more social than technical (eg. 'information from colleagues').'
Dan Brickley: [13:36] <danbri> e.g. suggest something like: "Should provide RDF-based mechanisms and best practice documentation techniques, to share additional meta-information about collections of RDF graphs, including but not limited to a) info about how IRIs relate to the content they're associated with; b) data grouping technqiues that are more social than technical (eg. 'information from colleagues').' ←
12:44:16 <tlebo> ALL WE NEED is a way to reference anybody else's GraphContainer. Leave the rest to RDF.
Tim Lebo: ALL WE NEED is a way to reference anybody else's GraphContainer. Leave the rest to RDF. ←
12:44:17 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
12:44:21 <pchampin> q+
12:44:25 <yvesr> cygri: we don't have any interest at all documenting all others
Richard Cyganiak: we don't have any interest at all documenting all others ←
12:44:32 <davidwood> +1 to cygri
David Wood: +1 to cygri ←
12:44:44 <yvesr> Guus: it would be useful to document best practice conventions to document how their named IRIs behave
Guus Schreiber: it would be useful to document best practice conventions to document how their named IRIs behave ←
12:44:49 <iand> i think we have no consensus on even whether this is useful :(
Ian Davis: i think we have no consensus on even whether this is useful :( ←
12:45:01 <yvesr> cygri: it would be useful to document this one particular convention for using names
Richard Cyganiak: it would be useful to document this one particular convention for using names ←
12:45:09 <danbri> cygri, I want to be able to sparql a store for subset of its content that is (per some notion of) 'stuff from/by Richard ...'
Dan Brickley: cygri, I want to be able to sparql a store for subset of its content that is (per some notion of) 'stuff from/by Richard ...' ←
12:45:10 <sandro> I just want to know what <t> { <t> <p> <o> } means. :-/
Sandro Hawke: I just want to know what <t> { <t> <p> <o> } means. :-/ ←
12:45:17 <davidwood> +1 to danbri's proposal
David Wood: +1 to danbri's proposal ←
12:45:18 <yvesr> swh: i like danbri's suggestion from earlier
Steve Harris: i like danbri's suggestion from earlier ←
12:45:30 <yvesr> danbri: i want to go to my store, and get all the stuff from cygri
Dan Brickley: i want to go to my store, and get all the stuff from cygri ←
12:45:30 <tlebo> This isn't an opt-in thing, it ALREADY is. We just need a way to reference other's GraphContainers.
Tim Lebo: This isn't an opt-in thing, it ALREADY is. We just need a way to reference other's GraphContainers. ←
12:45:32 <iand> so we are saying we don't agree that it's useful for people to be able to describe their named graphs identifiers
Ian Davis: so we are saying we don't agree that it's useful for people to be able to describe the purpose of their named graph identifiers ←
12:45:32 <AndyS> sandro - Pat's proposal/idea?
Andy Seaborne: sandro - Pat's proposal/idea? ←
12:45:34 <MacTed> maybe maybe maybe...
Ted Thibodeau: maybe maybe maybe... ←
12:45:34 <MacTed> STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to have a standard way for people to indicate how the 'name' IRIs in their dataset behave, e.g., whether they awww:indentifies the graph (really a container), or when they only "refer to" the graph, or both
STRAWPOLL: It would be useful to have a standard way for people to indicate how the 'name' IRIs in their dataset behave, e.g., whether they awww:indentifies the graph (really a container), or when they only "refer to" the graph, or both ←
12:45:45 <danbri> i'm ok with guus's "behaves"; it addresses my use case
Dan Brickley: i'm ok with guus's "behaves"; it addresses my use case ←
12:45:51 <gavinc> q?
Gavin Carothers: q? ←
12:45:54 <sandro> AndyS, I haven't read the whole thread, but probably.
Sandro Hawke: AndyS, I haven't read the whole thread, but probably. ←
12:45:58 <iand> s/describe their named graphs/describe the purpose of their named graph/
12:46:15 <tlebo> RDF handle the "zillion" cases - just give me a URI!
Tim Lebo: RDF handle the "zillion" cases - just give me a URI! ←
12:46:32 <cygri> -1 to "best practice"
Richard Cyganiak: -1 to "best practice" ←
12:46:51 <zwu2> how about good practice?
Zhe Wu: how about good practice? ←
12:46:52 <tlebo> q?
Tim Lebo: q? ←
12:47:02 <cygri> zwu2, just "practice"?
Richard Cyganiak: zwu2, just "practice"? ←
12:47:06 <gavinc> okay, webarch conforming practice?
Gavin Carothers: okay, webarch conforming practice? ←
12:47:29 <yvesr> sandro: we don't have a consensus on any compromise
Sandro Hawke: we don't have a consensus on any compromise ←
12:47:44 <yvesr> sandro: it makes no sense to have a uri denote multiple things
Sandro Hawke: it makes no sense to have a uri denote multiple things ←
12:47:57 <swh> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
12:48:00 <pfps> yes, but what do URIs name/denote?
Peter Patel-Schneider: yes, but what do URIs name/denote? ←
12:48:10 <sandro> resources.
Sandro Hawke: resources. ←
12:48:26 <pfps> sure, but we've had that since 2004
Peter Patel-Schneider: sure, but we've had that since 2004 ←
12:48:39 <danbri> sandro: "it was a small step in the right direction" [...] [...] [...] [...]
Sandro Hawke: "it was a small step in the right direction" [...] [...] [...] [...] [ Scribe Assist by Dan Brickley ] ←
12:48:44 <tlebo> sd:name rdfs:subPropertyOf dcterm:identifier ---- handles the "oops, we aren't using URIs properly"
Souripriya Das: name rdfs:subPropertyOf dcterm:identifier ---- handles the "oops, we aren't using URIs properly" [ Scribe Assist by Tim Lebo ] ←
12:48:48 <yvesr> Guus: sandro, you started to say it's a small step in the rght direction
Guus Schreiber: sandro, you started to say it's a small step in the rght direction ←
12:49:01 <yvesr> danbri: would you object to such a small step?
Dan Brickley: would you object to such a small step? ←
12:49:28 <AndyS> q?
Andy Seaborne: q? ←
12:49:42 <yvesr> swh: i don't understand sandro's logical leap
Steve Harris: i don't understand sandro's logical leap ←
12:49:46 <sandro> sandro: (big rant a minute ago) It's kind of absurd to use IRIs as merely labels.
Sandro Hawke: (big rant a minute ago) It's kind of absurd to use IRIs as merely labels. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
12:49:56 <gavinc> huh?
Gavin Carothers: huh? ←
12:49:59 <yvesr> swh: there's no relation between having a uri denote a graph or a thing
Steve Harris: there's no relation between having a uri denote a graph or a thing ←
12:50:00 <AndyS> Is this not what RDF does? Describe things?
Andy Seaborne: Is this not what RDF does? Describe things? ←
12:50:00 <Guus> ack swh
Guus Schreiber: ack swh ←
12:50:13 <yvesr> sandro: an IRI should both identify and refer
Sandro Hawke: an IRI should both identify and refer ←
12:50:20 <danbri> sandro, they're being used properly, just that there is a missing column for relationship type
Dan Brickley: sandro, they're being used properly, just that there is a missing column for relationship type ←
12:50:21 <cygri> STRAWPOLL: The WG will non-normatively document a particular convention for using datasets, where in <u,G> the URI is denotes a graph container and G is the state of the container.
STRAWPOLL: The WG will non-normatively document a particular convention for using datasets, where in <u,G> the URI is denotes a graph container and G is the state of the container. ←
12:50:24 <yvesr> sandro: in SPARQL, graph URIs are not used that way - i think that's a problem
Sandro Hawke: in SPARQL, graph URIs are not used that way - i think that's a problem ←
12:50:26 <iand> Ivan's strawpoll had the most votes. i propose we re-vote on that strawpoll and move on
Ian Davis: Ivan's strawpoll had the most votes. i propose we re-vote on that strawpoll and move on ←
12:50:39 <yvesr> sandro: i don't want to standardise new things that build on that problem
Sandro Hawke: i don't want to standardise new things that build on that problem ←
12:50:45 <danbri> q+ to suggest thinking of this as a missing 5th column
Dan Brickley: q+ to suggest thinking of this as a missing 5th column ←
12:50:51 <tlebo> INSERT { GRAPH ?s {} } ===> :my_s sd:name ?s; !owl:sameAs ?s .
Tim Lebo: INSERT { GRAPH ?s {} } ===> :my_s sd:name ?s; !owl:sameAs ?s . ←
12:50:54 <AndyS> q?
Andy Seaborne: q? ←
12:50:54 <yvesr> sandro: if you want another relationship, it's not an IRI
Sandro Hawke: if you want another relationship, it's not an IRI ←
12:50:57 <tlebo> INSERT { GRAPH ?s {} } ===> :my_s sd:name ?s; !owl: sameAs ?s .
Tim Lebo: INSERT { GRAPH ?s {} } ===> :my_s sd:name ?s; !owl: sameAs ?s . ←
12:51:00 <cygri> q+ to propose new wording
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to propose new wording ←
12:51:08 <Guus> ack pchampin
Guus Schreiber: ack pchampin ←
12:51:28 <danbri> zakim, please mute america
Dan Brickley: zakim, please mute america ←
12:51:28 <Zakim> sorry, danbri, I do not know which phone connection belongs to america
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, danbri, I do not know which phone connection belongs to america ←
12:51:38 <cygri> zakim, apply electroshock to sandro and david
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, apply electroshock to sandro and david ←
12:51:44 <Zakim> I don't understand 'apply electroshock to sandro and david', cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'apply electroshock to sandro and david', cygri ←
12:51:46 <danbri> zakim, please mute mit_meeting_room
Dan Brickley: zakim, please mute mit_meeting_room ←
12:51:46 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room should now be muted ←
12:52:01 <tlebo> Zakim: Sorry, danbri, I don't recognize "america".
12:52:04 <danbri> call us back when you've stopped chatting
Dan Brickley: call us back when you've stopped chatting ←
12:52:14 <danbri> zakim, unmute mit_meeting_room
Dan Brickley: zakim, unmute mit_meeting_room ←
12:52:14 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room should no longer be muted ←
12:52:28 <gavinc> geee, I think it's break time?
Gavin Carothers: geee, I think it's break time? ←
12:52:40 <yvesr> gavinc, +1 :)
gavinc, +1 :) ←
12:52:40 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
12:53:15 <yvesr> pchampin: i wanted to answer to cygri's concerns - i think the idea is to providing a framework enabling to specify those practices
Pierre-Antoine Champin: i wanted to answer to cygri's concerns - i think the idea is to providing a framework enabling to specify those practices ←
12:53:23 <NickH> zakim, BBC has Guus thomas swh ivan
Nicholas Humfrey: zakim, BBC has Guus thomas swh ivan ←
12:53:23 <yvesr> pchampin: not to define a fixed set of practices
Pierre-Antoine Champin: not to define a fixed set of practices ←
12:53:25 <Zakim> +Guus, thomas, swh, ivan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Guus, thomas, swh, ivan; got it ←
12:53:42 <AndyS> Does "document good practices" work for people?
Andy Seaborne: Does "document good practices" work for people? ←
12:53:44 <yvesr> pchampin: danbri's use case fit perfectly into that
Pierre-Antoine Champin: danbri's use case fit perfectly into that ←
12:53:59 <davidwood> I propose to discuss Pat's Context of Use suggestion, which is a better way (IMO) to address these concerns.
David Wood: I propose to discuss Pat's Context of Use suggestion, which is a better way (IMO) to address these concerns. ←
12:54:03 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:54:26 <yvesr> pchampin: this proposal is to connect the dots - being able to write the right query for scoping all graphs written by X
Pierre-Antoine Champin: this proposal is to connect the dots - being able to write the right query for scoping all graphs written by X ←
12:54:37 <sandro> +1 graph literals are at least understandable and well-defined.
Sandro Hawke: +1 graph literals are at least understandable and well-defined. ←
12:54:39 <tlebo> INSERT { GRAPH ?s {} } ===> :my_s sd:name ?s; skos:broader ?s; dcterms:identifier ?s . (SOME SPARQL endpoints may pretend ?s owl:sameAs :my_s )
Tim Lebo: INSERT { GRAPH ?s {} } ===> :my_s sd:name ?s; skos:broader ?s; dcterms:identifier ?s . (SOME SPARQL endpoints may pretend ?s owl:sameAs :my_s ) ←
12:54:40 <ivan> ack danbri
Ivan Herman: ack danbri ←
12:54:40 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest thinking of this as a missing 5th column
Zakim IRC Bot: danbri, you wanted to suggest thinking of this as a missing 5th column ←
12:54:44 <Souri> +1 to discussing Pat's CoU suggestion
Souripriya Das: +1 to discussing Pat's CoU suggestion ←
12:54:51 <mischat> this seems similar to the discussion about how a "<> a foaf:Person . " is not the right thing™ - but RDF doesn't forbid it.
Mischa Tuffield: this seems similar to the discussion about how a "<> a foaf:Person . " is not the right thing™ - but RDF doesn't forbid it. ←
12:55:05 <pfps> the 64bit question is just what "properly" means here.
Peter Patel-Schneider: the 64bit question is just what "properly" means here. ←
12:55:31 <yvesr> danbri: we introduced a 4th column to specify a graph, we should have had a 5th column to explain how we use the 4th one
Dan Brickley: we introduced a 4th column to specify a graph, we should have had a 5th column to explain how we use the 4th one ←
12:55:35 <tlebo> +1 to fifth column == context
Tim Lebo: +1 to fifth column == context ←
12:55:38 <swh> sandro, can you explain [possibly offline] what you think awww:identifies means? Because my unders�ta�nding is like davidwood's
Steve Harris: sandro, can you explain [possibly offline] what you think awww:identifies means? Because my unders�ta�nding is like davidwood's ←
12:55:48 <iand> what about the context of the context?
Ian Davis: what about the context of the context? ←
12:55:56 <ivan> ack cygri
Ivan Herman: ack cygri ←
12:55:56 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to propose new wording
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to propose new wording ←
12:55:58 <yvesr> danbri: we're not doing anything wrong - we're just missing information - a manifest file, a sitemap, anything...
Dan Brickley: we're not doing anything wrong - we're just missing information - a manifest file, a sitemap, anything... ←
12:56:09 <danbri> yvesr s/should/could/
Dan Brickley: yvesr s/should/could/ ←
12:56:10 <tlebo> (but not actually *having* the fifth column)
Tim Lebo: (but not actually *having* the fifth column) ←
12:56:14 <sandro> +1 danbri we're missing some information about the fourth column relates
Sandro Hawke: +1 danbri we're missing some information about the fourth column relates ←
12:56:36 <cygri> STRAWPOLL: The WG will non-normatively document one particular convention for using datasets, where in <u,G> the URI is denotes a graph container and G is the state of the container.
STRAWPOLL: The WG will non-normatively document at least one particular convention for using datasets, where in <u,G> the URI is denotes a graph container and G is the state of the container. ←
12:56:41 <yvesr> sandro: i agree with danbri
Sandro Hawke: i agree with danbri ←
12:57:18 <sandro> +0.5 I'm fine with us documenting, but that doesn't solve my problem
Sandro Hawke: +0.5 I'm fine with us documenting, but that doesn't solve my problem ←
12:57:38 <iand> cygri: that is the opposite to Pat's email where he suggested URIs identify graph containers and denote graphs
Richard Cyganiak: that is the opposite to Pat's email where he suggested URIs identify graph containers and denote graphs [ Scribe Assist by Ian Davis ] ←
12:57:40 <yvesr> danbri, well, we have a framework for asserting things about the 4th column :)
danbri, well, we have a framework for asserting things about the 4th column :) ←
12:57:44 <yvesr> danbri, RDF :)
danbri, RDF :) ←
12:57:54 <danbri> s/document one/document at least one/
12:58:03 <zwu2> +1 bettern than no convention
Zhe Wu: +1 bettern than no convention ←
12:58:07 <yvesr> cygri: i mean it in the sense that you can expect to dereference u and get the grah
Richard Cyganiak: i mean it in the sense that you can expect to dereference u and get the grah ←
12:58:23 <danbri> q+
Dan Brickley: q+ ←
12:58:26 <sandro> +1 yes, it's a decent step in the right direction.
Sandro Hawke: +1 yes, it's a decent step in the right direction. ←
12:58:35 <ivan> ack danbri
Ivan Herman: ack danbri ←
12:58:36 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
12:58:44 <yvesr> danbri: cygri, what's the granularity of your proposal?
Dan Brickley: cygri, what's the granularity of your proposal? ←
12:58:47 <yvesr> cygri: datasets
Richard Cyganiak: datasets ←
12:58:56 <cygri> STRAWPOLL: The WG will non-normatively document one particular convention for using datasets, where in <u,G> the URI denotes+awww:identifies a graph container and G is the state of the container.
STRAWPOLL: sandro will non-normatively document one particular convention for using datasets, where in <u,G> the URI denotes+awww:identifies a graph container and G is the state of the container. ←
12:59:05 <tlebo> Everyone else can go beyond "this particular case", iif you give them URIs to reference others' GraphContainers.
Tim Lebo: Everyone else can go beyond "this particular case", iif you give them URIs to reference others' GraphContainers. ←
12:59:10 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
12:59:12 <iand> +1
12:59:12 <danbri> +1
Dan Brickley: +1 ←
12:59:17 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
12:59:17 <Guus> +1
Guus Schreiber: +1 ←
12:59:18 <swh> +0.1
Steve Harris: +0.1 ←
12:59:19 <zwu2> +1
12:59:23 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
12:59:25 <pchampin> +1
12:59:26 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
12:59:26 <yvesr> +1, but we should strill provide a framework to document other cases
+1, but we should still provide a framework to document other cases ←
12:59:28 <sandro> +1 it's a step in the right driections . we still need graph literals or good semantics for TriG.
Sandro Hawke: +1 it's a step in the right driections . we still need graph literals or good semantics for TriG. ←
12:59:28 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
12:59:30 <mischat> 0
Mischa Tuffield: 0 ←
12:59:33 <AlexHall> +0.5
12:59:34 <yvesr> s/strill/still
12:59:35 <pfps> =0 because of "denotes"
Peter Patel-Schneider: =0 because of "denotes" ←
12:59:45 <NickH> 0
12:59:57 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
12:59:58 <pfps> 0 because of smilies
Peter Patel-Schneider: 0 because of smilies ←
13:00:00 <Souri> 0 (state => snapshot?)
Souripriya Das: 0 (state => snapshot?) ←
13:00:02 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
13:00:06 <pfps> 0 because of "denotes"
Peter Patel-Schneider: 0 because of "denotes" ←
13:00:34 <cygri> s/The WG/sandro/?
13:00:34 <danbri> it's a good thing to do
Dan Brickley: it's a good thing to do ←
13:01:07 <pfps> WG activities are not a zero-sum game, so adding work may positively affect other work.
Peter Patel-Schneider: WG activities are not a zero-sum game, so adding work may positively affect other work. ←
13:01:15 <danbri> ( and s'ing 'sandro' back to 'the wg' won't fix things )
Dan Brickley: ( and s'ing 'sandro' back to 'the wg' won't fix things ) ←
13:01:26 <cygri> sandro, good point. sorry
Richard Cyganiak: sandro, good point. sorry ←
13:02:15 <danbri> er *scribe
Dan Brickley: er *scribe ←
13:02:59 <Souri> we probably should still consider discussing Pat's CoU suggestion sometime
Souripriya Das: we probably should still consider discussing Pat's CoU suggestion sometime ←
13:03:09 <Zakim> -AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ ←
13:03:21 <gavinc> Yes
Gavin Carothers: Yes ←
13:30:25 <tlebo> BTW, I'm begging for http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts#Just_give_me_a_URI
(No events recorded for 27 minutes)
Tim Lebo: BTW, I'm begging for http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts#Just_give_me_a_URI ←
13:33:38 <mischat> zakim, unmute BBC
Mischa Tuffield: zakim, unmute BBC ←
13:33:38 <Zakim> BBC was not muted, mischat
Zakim IRC Bot: BBC was not muted, mischat ←
13:33:39 <Guus> let's reconvene
Guus Schreiber: let's reconvene ←
13:34:07 <mischat> can you guys at MIT hear us OK ?
Mischa Tuffield: can you guys at MIT hear us OK ? ←
13:36:59 <tlebo> Are we talking about http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0228.html ?
Tim Lebo: Are we talking about http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0228.html ? ←
13:37:33 <tlebo> This one http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0195.html ?
Tim Lebo: This one http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0195.html ? ←
13:37:38 <Zakim> +AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: +AZ ←
13:38:14 <ivan> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0195.html Pat's email
Ivan Herman: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0195.html Pat's email ←
13:38:42 <tlebo> scribe: tlebo
(Scribe set to Tim Lebo)
13:38:58 <ivan> scribenick: tlebo
13:39:01 <cygri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0212.html
Richard Cyganiak: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0212.html ←
13:40:00 <tlebo> cygri:given an RDF graph, there is a "context" in which the statements are made and are true.
Richard Cyganiak: given an RDF graph, there is a "context" in which the statements are made and are true. ←
13:40:11 <tlebo> e.g. "the age of Alice is 29 years"
e.g. "the age of Alice is 29 years" ←
13:40:21 <tlebo> obviously not true forever.
obviously not true forever. ←
13:40:52 <tlebo> ... time is not the only situation. Different people can be the "contexts"
... time is not the only situation. Different people can be the "contexts" ←
13:41:32 <tlebo> ... :age 30 in a different graph; merging the two graphs causes some conflict.
... :age 30 in a different graph; merging the two graphs causes some conflict. ←
13:41:44 <tlebo> ... merging consolidates the contexts
... merging consolidates the contexts ←
13:41:57 <tlebo> ... named graphs keeps contexts separate
... named graphs keeps contexts separate ←
13:42:22 <tlebo> ... we need to decide case-by-case when to merge the graphs we want.
... we need to decide case-by-case when to merge the graphs we want. ←
13:42:32 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
13:43:00 <mischat> 1. RDF Semantics defines an entailment relationship between sets of triples, a.k.a. RDF graphs
Mischa Tuffield: 1. RDF Semantics defines an entailment relationship between sets of triples, a.k.a. RDF graphs ←
13:43:00 <tlebo> @cygri reading points from his email
@cygri reading points from his email ←
13:43:04 <mischat> 2. This entailment relationship is only valid if all triples share the same context
Mischa Tuffield: 2. This entailment relationship is only valid if all triples share the same context ←
13:43:31 <mischat> 3. Therefore, placing triples with incompatible context into a single graph is not seen as as something useful, and we understand RDF graphs as only containing triples of compatible context
Mischa Tuffield: 3. Therefore, placing triples with incompatible context into a single graph is not seen as as something useful, and we understand RDF graphs as only containing triples of compatible context ←
13:43:35 <mischat> 4. It follows that merging two graphs with incompatible contexts is not a valid operation
Mischa Tuffield: 4. It follows that merging two graphs with incompatible contexts is not a valid operation ←
13:43:37 <mischat> 5. Whether two contexts are compatible or not is outside of the scope of RDF Semantics
Mischa Tuffield: 5. Whether two contexts are compatible or not is outside of the scope of RDF Semantics ←
13:43:44 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
13:44:04 <sandro> I do :-)
Sandro Hawke: I do :-) ←
13:44:21 <tlebo> cygri: not sure on response to Pat (aka wrong)
Richard Cyganiak: not sure on response to Pat (aka wrong) ←
13:44:45 <davidwood> q+ to ask cygri what he thinks of Pat's proposal
David Wood: q+ to ask cygri what he thinks of Pat's proposal ←
13:44:56 <tlebo> ... current semantics is not designed for contexts and time; not extendable to handle it either
... current semantics is not designed for contexts and time; not extendable to handle it either ←
13:45:16 <tlebo> ... keep it context free
... keep it context free ←
13:45:33 <mischat> q+ danbri
Mischa Tuffield: q+ danbri ←
13:45:58 <tlebo> (I agree with @cygri; we can keep RDF context-free and "compile" what we want from different named graphs/ contexts into the acontextual)
(I agree with @cygri; we can keep RDF context-free and "compile" what we want from different named graphs/ contexts into the acontextual) ←
13:46:12 <tlebo> sandro: people are using RDF in different contexts; we should recognize that.
Sandro Hawke: people are using RDF in different contexts; we should recognize that. ←
13:46:51 <tlebo> ... Pat's claim that we need to be explicit about contexts is worthwhile.
... Pat's claim that we need to be explicit about contexts is worthwhile. ←
13:47:02 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
13:47:12 <Guus> ack sandro
Guus Schreiber: ack sandro ←
13:47:21 <tlebo> ... Pat says not to put :age into a context - b/c you have to decontextualize it.
... Pat says not to put :age into a context - b/c you have to decontextualize it. ←
13:47:53 <pfps> but everything has a context!
Peter Patel-Schneider: but everything has a context! ←
13:47:56 <tlebo> ... inferencing across different graphs - we need to decontextualize it into the "universal" context.
... inferencing across different graphs - we need to decontextualize it into the "universal" context. ←
13:48:13 <Guus> ack davidwood
Guus Schreiber: ack davidwood ←
13:48:13 <Zakim> davidwood, you wanted to ask cygri what he thinks of Pat's proposal
Zakim IRC Bot: davidwood, you wanted to ask cygri what he thinks of Pat's proposal ←
13:48:16 <tlebo> ... sandro tried to represent Pat's position.
... sandro tried to represent Pat's position. ←
13:48:27 <Souri> I thought Graph-IRI gives us a hook to a context (which could itself comprise of many triples describing why/when/where/how/etc.)
Souripriya Das: I thought Graph-IRI gives us a hook to a context (which could itself comprise of many triples describing why/when/where/how/etc.) ←
13:48:27 <pchampin> I agree with Sandro's interpretation of Pat's answer (for what it's worth ;)
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I agree with Sandro's interpretation of Pat's answer (for what it's worth ;) ←
13:48:55 <ivan> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0228.html pat's response to richard
Ivan Herman: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0228.html pat's response to richard ←
13:48:56 <mischat> http://www.w3.org/mid/38CB85A6-F664-4A30-BCA5-985E49B7DC46@ihmc.us
Mischa Tuffield: http://www.w3.org/mid/38CB85A6-F664-4A30-BCA5-985E49B7DC46@ihmc.us ←
13:49:14 <mischat> ^^ pat's response
Mischa Tuffield: ^^ pat's response ←
13:49:34 <tlebo> davidwood: we aren't agreeing on "context"; suggests @cygri reread Pat's to see the different interpretations of "context"
David Wood: we aren't agreeing on "context"; suggests @cygri reread Pat's to see the different interpretations of "context" ←
13:49:36 <pfps> everything depends on what you mean - http://...age could mean "age on 11/11/11" and http://...born could mean "born how long ago"
Peter Patel-Schneider: everything depends on what you mean - http://...age could mean "age on 11/11/11" and http://...born could mean "born how long ago" ←
13:49:40 <sandro> sandro: I think there's a huge opportunity for a joint solution here, between Richard and Pat -- where have multiple context, but a special "Web" context where thinks can be merged.
Sandro Hawke: I think there's a huge opportunity for a joint solution here, between Richard and Pat -- where have multiple context, but a special "Web" context where thinks can be merged. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:50:10 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
13:50:23 <Souri> q+
Souripriya Das: q+ ←
13:50:24 <Guus> ack danbri
Guus Schreiber: ack danbri ←
13:50:25 <tlebo> (beyond "web context", it's also any context we choose to create by merging some graphs and decontexutalizing them)
(beyond "web context", it's also any context we choose to create by merging some graphs and decontexutalizing them) ←
13:51:13 <tlebo> danbri: example - tried to decontextualize (date of birth, not age)
Dan Brickley: example - tried to decontextualize (date of birth, not age) ←
13:51:38 <tlebo> danbri: foaf, color of cars
Dan Brickley: foaf, color of cars ←
13:52:03 <sandro> danbri: we added foaf:age because myspace needed it. we can't make them decontextualize
Dan Brickley: we added foaf:age because myspace needed it. we can't make them decontextualize [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:52:05 <tlebo> danbri: foaf people wanted age, e.g. myspace spits it out every day
Dan Brickley: foaf people wanted age, e.g. myspace spits it out every day ←
13:52:32 <tlebo> danbri: we shouldn't be putting it into standards b/c research project
Dan Brickley: we shouldn't be putting it into standards b/c research project ←
13:52:41 <sandro> danbri: there will be volatile properties; this should be a W3C CG dogin the research.
Dan Brickley: there will be volatile properties; this should be a W3C CG dogin the research. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:52:47 <cygri> q+ to say that decontextualizing everything looks like a pipe dream
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to say that decontextualizing everything looks like a pipe dream ←
13:52:50 <tlebo> ... volitatile and non-volitile properties
... volatile and non-volatile properties ←
13:52:57 <Guus> ack Souri
Guus Schreiber: ack Souri ←
13:53:01 <davidwood> Avoiding context makes sense, iff you can be sure you are actually doing it. It is trivial with events, but what about universally true statements made in RDF that are then taken *into* a particular context?
David Wood: Avoiding context makes sense, iff you can be sure you are actually doing it. It is trivial with events, but what about universally true statements made in RDF that are then taken *into* a particular context? ←
13:53:06 <pchampin> s/volitatile/volatile/
13:53:13 <pchampin> s/volitile/volatile/
13:54:13 <tlebo> souri: @cygri's proposition, can associate dimensions of the Graph IRI - why was it created, etc? These are dimensions on the context.
Souripriya Das: @cygri's proposition, can associate dimensions of the Graph IRI - why was it created, etc? These are dimensions on the context. ←
13:54:40 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
13:55:23 <gavinc> Channeling PatH via email: "No, that is not why named graphs were invented. They were invented so that one could say things about graphs in RDF. Things like who is asserting them, where they came from, etc..,: but not to supply a 'context' for the truth of the triples in them. That would be data, not metadata."
Gavin Carothers: Channeling PatH via email: "No, that is not why named graphs were invented. They were invented so that one could say things about graphs in RDF. Things like who is asserting them, where they came from, etc..,: but not to supply a 'context' for the truth of the triples in them. That would be data, not metadata." ←
13:55:36 <tlebo> cygri: practice of decontextualizing and modeling decontextulized or not. But can merge without worrying? No, we'll still have to worry about it.
Richard Cyganiak: practice of decontextualizing and modeling decontextulized or not. But can merge without worrying? No, we'll still have to worry about it. ←
13:55:46 <tlebo> ... most rdf published is context dependent.
... most rdf published is context dependent. ←
13:55:51 <tlebo> ... may contradict
... may contradict ←
13:55:55 <AndyS> ack cygri
Andy Seaborne: ack cygri ←
13:55:56 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to say that decontextualizing everything looks like a pipe dream
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to say that decontextualizing everything looks like a pipe dream ←
13:55:57 <sandro> cygri: it would be great if everyone was modeling in a way that would be true forever and could just be merged, but that's not the world we're living in , and I don't see it happening any time sooon. Most info published is context dependent. Not true forever, has errors, and we have to deal with that.
Richard Cyganiak: it would be great if everyone was modeling in a way that would be true forever and could just be merged, but that's not the world we're living in , and I don't see it happening any time sooon. Most info published is context dependent. Not true forever, has errors, and we have to deal with that. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:55:57 <tlebo> ... we need to deal with it.
... we need to deal with it. ←
13:56:19 <sandro> cygri: "just decontextualize" doesnt seem very practical.
Richard Cyganiak: "just decontextualize" doesnt seem very practical. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:56:26 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
13:56:43 <pchampin> q+
13:57:00 <danbri> (specifically, if you describe everything as events, you are perfectly decontextual but borderline un-unformative, if you want the state of the world at some specific time...)
Dan Brickley: (specifically, if you describe everything as events, you are perfectly decontextual but borderline un-unformative, if you want the state of the world at some specific time...) ←
13:57:03 <AndyS> ack pchampin
Andy Seaborne: ack pchampin ←
13:57:04 <tlebo> (can't we apply decontextualized semantics to contextualized data that we "choose" to decontextualize it?)
(can't we apply decontextualized semantics to contextualized data that we "choose" to decontextualize it?) ←
13:57:05 <Guus> ack pchampin
Guus Schreiber: ack pchampin ←
13:57:35 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
13:57:46 <tlebo> []: disagreement is centered on SPARQL (?)
Pierre-Antoine Champin: disagreement is centered on SPARQL (?) ←
13:57:50 <gavinc> the named graph paper is a rather clear input to named graphs in SPARQL isn't it?
Gavin Carothers: the named graph paper is a rather clear input to named graphs in SPARQL isn't it? ←
13:57:55 <ivan> ack AndyS
Ivan Herman: ack AndyS ←
13:58:04 <pchampin> pchampin: I think the disagreement btw Richard and Pad concerning named graphs is that Pat is refering to the "Named Graph" paper, while Richard is refering to named graphs in SPARQL
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I think the disagreement btw Richard and Pad concerning named graphs is that Pat is refering to the "Named Graph" paper, while Richard is refering to named graphs in SPARQL [ Scribe Assist by Pierre-Antoine Champin ] ←
13:58:04 <tlebo> s/[]/pchampin/
13:58:15 <sandro> agreed -- Pat's proposal was about contexts for just the 4th column
Sandro Hawke: agreed -- Pat's proposal was about contexts for just the 4th column ←
13:58:34 <Souri> +1 to AndyS about Pat's attempt being less ambitious than what Richard's trying to propose
Souripriya Das: +1 to AndyS about Pat's attempt being less ambitious than what Richard's trying to propose ←
13:58:46 <tlebo> (the SPARQL endpoint named graph is a specific case of contextualized RDF)
(the SPARQL endpoint named graph is a specific case of contextualized RDF) ←
13:58:49 <gavinc> +1 AndyS
Gavin Carothers: +1 AndyS ←
13:58:54 <sandro> AndyS: Pat's "Context of Use" email was just about the fourth column.
Andy Seaborne: Pat's "Context of Use" email was just about the fourth column. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:59:44 <tlebo> general consensus that @cygri's context is different from Pat's
general consensus that @cygri's context is different from Pat's ←
13:59:45 <AndyS> ack me
Andy Seaborne: ack me ←
13:59:55 <tlebo> Pat wants "web context"
Pat wants "web context" ←
14:00:05 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
14:00:21 <tlebo> sandro: we have multiple contexts and need to deal with it.
Sandro Hawke: we have multiple contexts and need to deal with it. ←
14:00:25 <tlebo> cygri: yes
Richard Cyganiak: yes ←
14:00:39 <pfps> this is starting to look like the discussions with tbl on common meaning in the Semantic Web
Peter Patel-Schneider: this is starting to look like the discussions with tbl on common meaning in the Semantic Web ←
14:00:45 <tlebo> ... not hard to store/query/vis contextualized data - problem is when we approach semantics.
... not hard to store/query/vis contextualized data - problem is when we approach semantics. ←
14:00:46 <Souri> event-based formulation (as DanBri said above?) is another way of specifying the context ino
Souripriya Das: event-based formulation (as DanBri said above?) is another way of specifying the context info ←
14:01:02 <Souri> s/context ino/context info/
14:01:20 <tlebo> sandro: cygri gave up on reasoning with RDF graphs b/c they are in different contexts.
Sandro Hawke: cygri gave up on reasoning with RDF graphs b/c they are in different contexts. ←
14:01:44 <tlebo> cygri: collecting from wires, will need to post-process to check appropriate, clean, remodeling, etc.
Richard Cyganiak: collecting from the wild, will need to post-process to check appropriate, clean, remodeling, etc. ←
14:02:02 <AlexHall> s/wires/the wild/
14:02:02 <pchampin> s/from wires/from the wild/
Pierre-Antoine Champin: s/from wires/from the wild/ (warning: replacement failed) ←
14:02:09 <tlebo> ... when reasoning over web data, those that do it say "of course we clean it up first"
... when reasoning over web data, those that do it say "of course we clean it up first" ←
14:02:21 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
14:02:24 <pchampin> q+
14:02:58 <tlebo> sandro: we could construct ecosystems and feedback loops that increases quality.
Sandro Hawke: we could construct ecosystems and feedback loops that increases quality. ←
14:03:09 <tlebo> ... more rigid consumers (e.g. schema.org)
... more rigid consumers (e.g. schema.org) ←
14:03:11 <mischat> i guess the question next is how does this relate to trig and/or graph serialisations, and whether we wish to be able to reason on top of data given to you in a trig file
Mischa Tuffield: i guess the question next is how does this relate to trig and/or graph serialisations, and whether we wish to be able to reason on top of data given to you in a trig file ←
14:03:23 <pchampin> q-
14:03:27 <tlebo> ... will give pressure to increase quality - we need to make these systems possible.
... will give pressure to increase quality - we need to make these systems possible. ←
14:04:03 <tlebo> []: not "contextualizing web" but "contextualizing web at a point in time"
Andy Seaborne: not "contextualizing web" but "contextualizing web at a point in time" ←
14:04:11 <AndyS> q-
Andy Seaborne: q- ←
14:04:18 <tlebo> s/[]/AndyS/
14:04:30 <sandro> (I'm thinking about Cassandra's "eventual consistency" as a parallel to the way the Web Context might be consistent in the face of errors, lag, etc)
Sandro Hawke: (I'm thinking about Cassandra's "eventual consistency" as a parallel to the way the Web Context might be consistent in the face of errors, lag, etc) ←
14:05:47 <tlebo> davidwood: re Pat's emails, happy with g-box ... (others disagree) david agrees. (LINK to thread?)
David Wood: re Pat's emails, happy with g-box ... (others disagree) david agrees. (LINK to thread?) ←
14:06:15 <tlebo> gavinc: straw poll on agreeing to the email
Gavin Carothers: straw poll on agreeing to the email ←
14:06:40 <gavinc> IRI----HTTP/"identifies" ---- g-box
Gavin Carothers: IRI----HTTP/"identifies" ---- g-box ←
14:06:42 <gavinc> IRI----denotes/names-----g-snap
Gavin Carothers: IRI----denotes/names-----g-snap ←
14:07:09 <tlebo> sandro: what does this mean?
Sandro Hawke: what does this mean? ←
14:07:18 <tlebo> davidwood: Pat's trying to formally define context.
David Wood: Pat's trying to formally define context. ←
14:07:26 <tlebo> sandro: URIs can denote g-boxes.
Sandro Hawke: URIs can denote g-boxes. ←
14:07:39 <tlebo> ... and you can't stop him.
... and you can't stop him. ←
14:08:09 <tlebo> sandro: you can't identify g-snaps.
Sandro Hawke: identifying g-snaps might be a problem. ←
14:08:20 <davidwood> Start of thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0194.html
David Wood: Start of thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Oct/0194.html ←
14:08:38 <tlebo> (tlebo disagrees, you can identify g-snaps - in the words of @sandro - you can't stop me.)
(tlebo disagrees, you can identify g-snaps - in the words of @sandro - you can't stop me.) ←
14:08:53 <sandro> s/you can't identify g-snaps/identifying g-snaps might be a problem/
14:09:08 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/uri-res-rep.png
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/uri-res-rep.png ←
14:09:08 <tlebo> x: need clear definition of "identifies"
Steve Harris: need clear definition of "identifies" ←
14:09:17 <yvesr> s/x/swh
14:09:22 <AndyS> <tag:1234> owl:sameAs { <s> <p> <o> }
Andy Seaborne: <tag:1234> owl:sameAs { <s> <p> <o> } ←
14:10:04 <tlebo> sandro: identifies" means it like REST means it. The relationship between a URL and the thing the URL is conceptually associated with in an identifying matter.
Sandro Hawke: identifies" means it like REST means it. The relationship between a URL and the thing the URL is conceptually associated with in an identifying matter. ←
14:10:20 <AndyS> That is naming so IRI----HTTP/"names" ---- g-box which is true of HTTP URLs.
Andy Seaborne: That is naming so IRI----HTTP/"names" ---- g-box which is true of HTTP URLs. ←
14:10:25 <tlebo> sandro: heart of REST and WWW. you put a URL in, you get a representation back.
Sandro Hawke: heart of REST and WWW. you put a URL in, you get a representation back. ←
14:10:37 <AndyS> just don't use a #frag
Andy Seaborne: just don't use a #frag ←
14:10:48 <tlebo> ... REST - imagine thing over there. URL represents it and you get a representation of it when you request it.
... REST - imagine thing over there. URL represents it and you get a representation of it when you request it. ←
14:11:11 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
14:12:05 <tlebo> sandro: tag URIs say "there is no representation" - you still get identifying, but david may disagree.
Sandro Hawke: tag URIs say "there is no representation" - you still get identifying, but david may disagree. ←
14:12:53 <davidwood> I don't understand "there is no representation", so don't know whether I agree
David Wood: I don't understand "there is no representation", so don't know whether I agree ←
14:12:56 <cygri> q-
Richard Cyganiak: q- ←
14:13:02 <tlebo> guus: there is no requirement that a representation exists.
Guus Schreiber: there is no requirement that a representation exists. ←
14:13:09 <davidwood> ah
David Wood: ah ←
14:13:23 <tlebo> swh: now has sense of "identifies" w.r.t. REST's URL and representation.
Steve Harris: now has sense of "identifies" w.r.t. REST's URL and representation. ←
14:13:47 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
14:13:49 <swh> … actually re this conversation, I'm not sure it's a universal def'n
Steve Harris: … actually re this conversation, I'm not sure it's a universal def'n ←
14:13:49 <tlebo> guus: where does that get us with identifying g-boxes and g-snaps
Guus Schreiber: where does that get us with identifying g-boxes and g-snaps ←
14:14:02 <davidwood> In that case, I agree with Sandro if he means that TAG URIs *identify* resources even if they cannot be resolved in a manner that returns a representation.
David Wood: In that case, I agree with Sandro if he means that TAG URIs *identify* resources even if they cannot be resolved in a manner that returns a representation. ←
14:14:49 <tlebo> cygri: decontextualization - relationships are to hold "forever" - what about the g-box "can changing."
Richard Cyganiak: decontextualization - relationships are to hold "forever" - what about the g-box "can changing." ←
14:15:06 <tlebo> ... URI for a g-box (that can change b/c the representation cna change tomorrow)
... URI for a g-box (that can change b/c the representation cna change tomorrow) ←
14:15:24 <AlexHall> taking a g-snap decontextualizes the g-box
Alex Hall: taking a g-snap decontextualizes the g-box ←
14:15:31 <tlebo> ... you get different g-snaps when requesting the g-box
... you get different g-snaps when requesting the g-box ←
14:15:52 <tlebo> sandro and @cygri have concerns with proposal.
sandro and @cygri have concerns with proposal. ←
14:16:01 <AndyS> :x a :Car does not stop the car changing color
Andy Seaborne: :x a :Car does not stop the car changing color ←
14:16:27 <tlebo> sandro: def b-boxes are representations of g-snaps (?)
Sandro Hawke: def b-boxes are representations of g-snaps (?) ←
14:16:37 <tlebo> (that sounds backwards to me)
(that sounds backwards to me) ←
14:17:02 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
14:17:15 <tlebo> gavinc: Pat's point: 2 parallel words, a semantic rule when one works, the other has to work.
Gavin Carothers: Pat's point: 2 parallel words, a semantic rule when one works, the other has to work. ←
14:17:18 <sandro> sandro: g-boxes are resources, their representations are g-texts, conveying the contained g-snap
Sandro Hawke: g-boxes are resources, their representations are g-texts, conveying the contained g-snap [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:18:22 <tlebo> sandro: let's cut this off, Pat is not here.
Sandro Hawke: let's cut this off, Pat is not here. ←
14:18:47 <tlebo> sandro: where are we with not being able to inference across multiple contexts?
Sandro Hawke: where are we with not being able to inference across multiple contexts? ←
14:19:05 <tlebo> davidwood: the point is that you don't know what contexts there are (in RDF)
David Wood: the point is that you don't know what contexts there are (in RDF) ←
14:19:42 <tlebo> ... encoding a context in the graph, and another context in another graph. Third party merges them (can do in RDF) - find logical inconsistency, but above level of merge.
... encoding a context in the graph, and another context in another graph. Third party merges them (can do in RDF) - find logical inconsistency, but above level of merge. ←
14:19:56 <tlebo> ... assuming apriori out of band contexts to know it SHOULD NOT be combined.
... assuming apriori out of band contexts to know it SHOULD NOT be combined. ←
14:20:11 <tlebo> sandro: not knowing context - can assume are different, or same,
Sandro Hawke: not knowing context - can assume are different, or same, ←
14:20:25 <tlebo> davidwood: or don't care about the contexts.
David Wood: or don't care about the contexts. ←
14:20:34 <Souri> q+
Souripriya Das: q+ ←
14:20:40 <tlebo> sandro: regardless, they are either the same or different (and you're implicitly deciding)\
Sandro Hawke: regardless, they are either the same or different (and you're implicitly deciding)\ ←
14:20:45 <cygri> q+ to talk about "compatibe/incompatible" contexts
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to talk about "compatibe/incompatible" contexts ←
14:20:59 <tlebo> davidwood: merging two graphs does not entail "I have made a decision about contexts"
David Wood: merging two graphs does not entail "I have made a decision about contexts" ←
14:20:59 <Guus> q+
Guus Schreiber: q+ ←
14:21:08 <tlebo> +1 to sandro
+1 to sandro ←
14:21:19 <tlebo> (you've implicitly made a choice about context)
(you've implicitly made a choice about context) ←
14:21:32 <pchampin> q+
14:21:55 <tlebo> souri: removing graph names and merging - :age 31 and 32. Can go to event based organization - everything in this event is true (merging can't, because different events).
Souripriya Das: removing graph names and merging - :age 31 and 32. Can go to event based organization - everything in this event is true (merging can't, because different events). ←
14:22:03 <AlexHall> propose to give different terms to richard's "context" vs. pat's "context" -- i understand this discussion to be relevant to richard's context
Alex Hall: propose to give different terms to richard's "context" vs. pat's "context" -- i understand this discussion to be relevant to richard's context ←
14:22:31 <tlebo> davidwood: have a graph not event-encoded - can have metadata true in a date. (alice graph 1 and 2)
David Wood: have a graph not event-encoded - can have metadata true in a date. (alice graph 1 and 2) ←
14:22:57 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
14:23:02 <sandro> ack Souri
Sandro Hawke: ack Souri ←
14:23:18 <tlebo> souri: :g1 graph happened, :g2 graph happened, merging into :g3 eliminates contexts of first two graphs.
Souripriya Das: :g1 graph happened, :g2 graph happened, merging into :g3 eliminates contexts of first two graphs. ←
14:23:21 <cygri> souri++
Richard Cyganiak: souri++ ←
14:23:22 <tlebo> q?
q? ←
14:23:31 <gavinc> PatH channeling ... " So for example if you write "it is raining' then thats not going to stay true, and if you write "it is raining now' that might be true but we have no way to know since we don't know when 'now' was, but if you write 'it is raining on 08/09/2011' then this stays true while time passes. Which is obviously better for communciation across times. So putting the "context' (or as much of it as necessary to fix the truth of what you are saying)
Gavin Carothers: PatH channeling ... " So for example if you write "it is raining' then thats not going to stay true, and if you write "it is raining now' that might be true but we have no way to know since we don't know when 'now' was, but if you write 'it is raining on 08/09/2011' then this stays true while time passes. Which is obviously better for communciation across times. So putting the "context' (or as much of it as necessary to fix the truth of what you are saying) ←
14:23:33 <gavinc> into the assertion itself is a basic good rule for data which is supposed to last for a while and still be true."
Gavin Carothers: into the assertion itself is a basic good rule for data which is supposed to last for a while and still be true." ←
14:23:34 <cygri> ack me
Richard Cyganiak: ack me ←
14:23:34 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to talk about "compatibe/incompatible" contexts
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to talk about "compatibe/incompatible" contexts ←
14:23:58 <sandro> +1 gavinc
Sandro Hawke: +1 gavinc ←
14:24:13 <tlebo> cygri: merging two graphs - same contexts? need notion of contexts are compatible or not (and depends on use case).
Richard Cyganiak: merging two graphs - same contexts? need notion of contexts are compatible or not (and depends on use case). ←
14:24:15 <Guus> [ivan is leaving]
Guus Schreiber: [ivan is leaving] ←
14:24:20 <pchampin> q+ to suggest that contexts are not a property of the graph, but a property of their use
Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+ to suggest that contexts are not a property of the graph, but a property of their use ←
14:24:22 <tlebo> ... depends on what you want to do with it, the modeling.
... depends on what you want to do with it, the modeling. ←
14:24:25 <sandro> bye Ivan!
Sandro Hawke: bye Ivan! ←
14:25:45 <gavinc> but as danbri said, people may just say "it's raining"
Gavin Carothers: but as danbri said, people may just say "it's raining" ←
14:25:51 <tlebo> (why can't we just leave RDF a-contextual and let us mix contexts when we want to, think we can?)
(why can't we just leave RDF a-contextual and let us mix contexts when we want to, think we can?) ←
14:25:54 <davidwood> q+ to respond to Richard
David Wood: q+ to respond to Richard ←
14:26:06 <gavinc> and the process of changing that to it's raining on ISODATETIME is a nice research project
Gavin Carothers: and the process of changing that to it's raining on ISODATETIME is a nice research project ←
14:26:16 <AlexHall> +1 tlebo
14:26:21 <pchampin> @gavinc: and *where* is it raining, exactly? :->
Pierre-Antoine Champin: @gavinc: and *where* is it raining, exactly? :-> ←
14:26:22 <tlebo> guus: YYY is out of context
Guus Schreiber: YYY is out of context ←
14:26:33 <davidwood> q-
David Wood: q- ←
14:26:35 <gavinc> pchampin, yes that too
Gavin Carothers: pchampin, yes that too ←
14:26:41 <yvesr> ack Guus
Yves Raimond: ack Guus ←
14:26:50 <tlebo> guus: naming is main mechanism we have, and dereferencing. that's it. can't go any further.
Guus Schreiber: naming is main mechanism we have, and dereferencing. that's it. can't go any further. ←
14:26:58 <tlebo> ... perhaps over-pragmatic, but.
... perhaps over-pragmatic, but. ←
14:27:20 <tlebo> cygri: use cases require holding data in incompatible contexts in same dataset. semantics has to work regardless.
Richard Cyganiak: use cases require holding data in incompatible contexts in same dataset. semantics has to work regardless. ←
14:27:25 <AlexHall> use prov info to record the context in which a graph is asserted, use the prov info to decide which data to include in the dataset that you want to apply inference to.
Alex Hall: use prov info to record the context in which a graph is asserted, use the prov info to decide which data to include in the dataset that you want to apply inference to. ←
14:27:42 <gavinc> We are not meeting those use cases, yeah I'm okay with that ;)
Gavin Carothers: We are not meeting those use cases, yeah I'm okay with that ;) ←
14:27:48 <tlebo> (but since semantics only applies to a-contextual RDF, it's fine)
(but since semantics only applies to a-contextual RDF, it's fine) ←
14:28:08 <tlebo> cygri: keep scope of semantics to individual graphs, since they should be within some context
Richard Cyganiak: keep scope of semantics to individual graphs, since they should be within some context ←
14:28:12 <tlebo> (+1 cygri)
(+1 cygri) ←
14:28:28 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
14:28:29 <pchampin> ack me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: ack me ←
14:28:30 <Zakim> pchampin, you wanted to suggest that contexts are not a property of the graph, but a property of their use
Zakim IRC Bot: pchampin, you wanted to suggest that contexts are not a property of the graph, but a property of their use ←
14:29:00 <cygri> guus: so you don't want to touch semantics at all?
Guus Schreiber: so you don't want to touch semantics at all? [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
14:29:08 <tlebo> TTT: context of a graph, talking about it is a mistake. the context is in the use of the graph (consuming it)
Pierre-Antoine Champin: context of a graph, talking about it is a mistake. the context is in the use of the graph (consuming it) ←
14:29:20 <tlebo> s/TTT/pchampin/
14:29:26 <cygri> cygri: well, that would be one way of ensuring no bad entailments from putting incompatible contexts into the same dataset
Richard Cyganiak: well, that would be one way of ensuring no bad entailments from putting incompatible contexts into the same dataset [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
14:29:49 <sandro> q+ to proposed TriGR, with a "fifth" column.
Sandro Hawke: q+ to proposed TriGR, with a "fifth" column. ←
14:30:06 <Souri> event-centric formulation of triples is good, but verbose, which leads people to not use it. Use of named graphs and associating context info with graph is easier (less verbose), but requires applications or people doing the merge to first check the contexts of the graphs being merged are compatible or not. We can provide some non-normative examples to illustrate this.
Souripriya Das: event-centric formulation of triples is good, but verbose, which leads people to not use it. Use of named graphs and associating context info with graph is easier (less verbose), but requires applications or people doing the merge to first check the contexts of the graphs being merged are compatible or not. We can provide some non-normative examples to illustrate this. ←
14:30:22 <Guus> Guus: "mnmed graphs" is the mechanism to indicate triples are in a particular context, not other ways to characterize/type/formalize context
Guus Schreiber: "mnmed graphs" is the mechanism to indicate triples are in a particular context, not other ways to characterize/type/formalize context [ Scribe Assist by Guus Schreiber ] ←
14:30:26 <tlebo> pchampin: the context is not a property of the graph, but it's use. so the semantics is not cross-context. Semantics tells nothing about XYZ.
Pierre-Antoine Champin: the context is not a property of the graph, but it's use. so the semantics is not cross-context. Semantics tells nothing about contexts, it just means that it that contexts do not exist outisde the semantics. ←
14:30:33 <cygri> souri +100
Richard Cyganiak: souri +100 ←
14:30:41 <Guus> Guus: you're on you own to interpret, for example, a merge
Guus Schreiber: you're on you own to interpret, for example, a merge [ Scribe Assist by Guus Schreiber ] ←
14:31:07 <tlebo> (so, contexts matter, but the semantics does not address it?)
(so, contexts matter, but the semantics does not address it?) ←
14:31:31 <pchampin> s/XYZ/contexts, it just means that it that contexts do not exist outisde the semantics/
14:31:44 <tlebo> guus: the way people use RDF, and in OWL. We should not (address contexts?).
Guus Schreiber: the way people use RDF, and in OWL. We should not (address contexts?). ←
14:31:46 <pchampin> @tlebo: contexts matter on a pragmatic level
Pierre-Antoine Champin: @tlebo: contexts matter on a pragmatic level ←
14:31:57 <mischat> similar to the "<> a foaf:Person ." issue which one finds in the wild, we can't say that it is w�rong RDF.
Mischa Tuffield: similar to the "<> a foaf:Person ." issue which one finds in the wild, we can't say that it is w�rong RDF. ←
14:32:10 <Souri> q+
Souripriya Das: q+ ←
14:32:57 <tlebo> sandro: retreat to syntax? what would help? Simplest is a variation of TRiG - a 5th column to name the context.
Sandro Hawke: retreat to syntax? what would help? Simplest is a variation of TRiG - a 5th column to name the context. ←
14:33:13 <tlebo> ... TRiG-R - b/c relationship is added.
... TRiG-R - b/c relationship is added. ←
14:33:19 <sandro> <label> <relation> { ... graph .... }
Sandro Hawke: <label> <relation> { ... graph .... } ←
14:33:30 <tlebo> (but <> already IS the context)
(but <> already IS the context) ←
14:34:10 <yvesr> looks like n3!
Yves Raimond: looks like n3! ←
14:34:48 <cygri> q+ to ask about SPARQL
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to ask about SPARQL ←
14:34:56 <cygri> q-
Richard Cyganiak: q- ←
14:35:30 <tlebo> sandro: manifests? to not break SPARQL.
Sandro Hawke: manifests? to not break SPARQL. ←
14:35:47 <tlebo> guus: OWL used the ontology itself as the manifest.
Guus Schreiber: OWL used the ontology itself as the manifest. ←
14:35:49 <sandro> sandro: Maybe the service description could have a manifest of how each label is related.
Sandro Hawke: Maybe the service description could have a manifest of how each label is related. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:36:12 <sandro> q-
Sandro Hawke: q- ←
14:36:49 <tlebo> souri: a primer? non-normative. an example of how to specify the context.
Souripriya Das: a primer? non-normative. an example of how to specify the context. ←
14:37:17 <tlebo> (<> already provides context... along with how you got <>)
(<> already provides context... along with how you got <>) ←
14:37:19 <Souri> q-
Souripriya Das: q- ←
14:37:29 <tlebo> should we discuss manifests?
should we discuss manifests? ←
14:38:03 <danbri> danbri: it just needs to be possible, we don't need to do *all* the work (re manifest formats / aka 'table of contents' for a datastore)
Dan Brickley: it just needs to be possible, we don't need to do *all* the work (re manifest formats / aka 'table of contents' for a datastore) [ Scribe Assist by Dan Brickley ] ←
14:38:07 <tlebo> dawg discussed manifests
dawg discussed manifests ←
14:38:26 <tlebo> topic: Manifests
14:38:36 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
14:38:47 <yvesr> ack sandro
Yves Raimond: ack sandro ←
14:38:50 <danbri> q+ to ask andys and dawg folk how much manifest-style work has happened in sparql community
Dan Brickley: q+ to ask andys and dawg folk how much manifest-style work has happened in sparql community ←
14:39:05 <AndyS> It's one style amongst several/many/open ended ... it's just RDF.
Andy Seaborne: It's one style amongst several/many/open ended ... it's just RDF. ←
14:39:27 <tlebo> sandro: labels are "..." or <...>?
Sandro Hawke: labels are "..." or <...>? ←
14:39:43 <tlebo> how is manifest different from sparql service description?
how is manifest different from sparql service description? ←
14:39:45 <danbri> (quotes being uri-as-string stuff?)
Dan Brickley: (quotes being uri-as-string stuff?) ←
14:39:46 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
14:41:10 <danbri> i forgot my homepage b/g graphic has a picture of this from another meeting: http://danbri.org/ (colours = graph types, volatile, version, composite etc)
Dan Brickley: i forgot my homepage b/g graphic has a picture of this from another meeting: http://danbri.org/ (colours = graph types, volatile, version, composite etc) ←
14:41:30 <tlebo> cygri: VoID - RDF datasets vocab.
Richard Cyganiak: VoID - RDF datasets vocab. ←
14:41:38 <tlebo> ... not quite a manifest, but related.
... not quite a manifest, but related. ←
14:41:54 <tlebo> ... when pub RDF, also publich VoID file that describes the dataset.
... when pub RDF, also publich VoID file that describes the dataset. ←
14:42:13 <tlebo> ... "here is a dataset, here is a SPARQL endpoint where you can query, here is a dump to put into your own store"
... "here is a dataset, here is a SPARQL endpoint where you can query, here is a dump to put into your own store" ←
14:42:19 <sandro> q+ to sketch Service Description names the Dataset Manifest Graph M, in the service's dataset; M contains triples like { <G1> eg:relatedBy owl:SameAs. <G2> eg:relatedBy log:Semantics }.
Sandro Hawke: q+ to sketch Service Description names the Dataset Manifest Graph M, in the service's dataset; M contains triples like { <G1> eg:relatedBy owl:SameAs. <G2> eg:relatedBy log:Semantics }. ←
14:42:27 <danbri> ack danbri
Dan Brickley: ack danbri ←
14:42:27 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask andys and dawg folk how much manifest-style work has happened in sparql community
Zakim IRC Bot: danbri, you wanted to ask andys and dawg folk how much manifest-style work has happened in sparql community ←
14:42:30 <tlebo> ... wanted outside of a SPARQL store, since can access different ways.
... wanted outside of a SPARQL store, since can access different ways. ←
14:42:38 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
14:42:45 <Guus> ack sandro
Guus Schreiber: ack sandro ←
14:42:45 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to sketch Service Description names the Dataset Manifest Graph M, in the service's dataset; M contains triples like { <G1> eg:relatedBy owl:SameAs. <G2>
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to sketch Service Description names the Dataset Manifest Graph M, in the service's dataset; M contains triples like { <G1> eg:relatedBy owl:SameAs. <G2> ←
14:42:48 <Zakim> ... eg:relatedBy log:Semantics }.
Zakim IRC Bot: ... eg:relatedBy log:Semantics }. ←
14:43:14 <tlebo> q?
q? ←
14:43:28 <sandro> vs { [ inDataset <d>; label "G1"; relation owl:SameAs ] }
Sandro Hawke: vs { [ inDataset <d>; label "G1"; relation owl:SameAs ] } ←
14:43:39 <mischat> have we won if we are in a position to describe things that people may want to describe, but not limiting people to how they have to describe things?
Mischa Tuffield: have we won if we are in a position to describe things that people may want to describe, but not limiting people to how they have to describe things? ←
14:43:43 <tlebo> sandro: sketching a service description - two proposals
Sandro Hawke: sketching a service description - two proposals ←
14:44:11 <swh> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
14:44:26 <tlebo> +1 not following
+1 not following ←
14:44:37 <tlebo> guus: please no sameAs
Guus Schreiber: please no sameAs ←
14:45:00 <AndyS> sandro - please explain log:semantics as people are unclear about it (or maybe they know and do not like it)
Andy Seaborne: sandro - please explain log:semantics as people are unclear about it (or maybe they know and do not like it) ←
14:45:02 <tlebo> (are we tryign to model contexts still?)
(are we tryign to model contexts still?) ←
14:45:32 <tlebo> context: where it is and where it came from.
context: where it is and where it came from. ←
14:45:45 <mischat> +1
Mischa Tuffield: +1 ←
14:45:46 <mischat> to tlebo
Mischa Tuffield: to tlebo ←
14:45:52 <sandro> { <G1> eg:relatedBy eg:labeling-a-snap. <G2> eg:relatedBy eg:label-is-url-source }
Sandro Hawke: { <G1> eg:relatedBy eg:labeling-a-snap. <G2> eg:relatedBy eg:label-is-url-source } ←
14:46:15 <gavinc> +q
Gavin Carothers: +q ←
14:46:15 <sandro> { <G1> eg:relatedBy eg:labeling-a-snap. <G2> eg:relatedBy eg:label-is-url-i-fetched-it-from }
Sandro Hawke: { <G1> eg:relatedBy eg:labeling-a-snap. <G2> eg:relatedBy eg:label-is-url-i-fetched-it-from } ←
14:46:24 <tlebo> (what is going on?)
(what is going on?) ←
14:46:35 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
14:46:40 <Guus> ack swh
Guus Schreiber: ack swh ←
14:47:02 <yvesr> { ... } a eg:Snap
Yves Raimond: { ... } a eg:Snap ←
14:47:17 <cygri> swh++
Richard Cyganiak: swh++ ←
14:47:33 <tlebo> swh: 10s millions of named graphs.
Steve Harris: 10s millions of named graphs. ←
14:47:51 <danbri> I anticipate manifest graphs could use http://www.w3.org/TR/HTTP-in-RDF10/ to describe where date was gotten
Dan Brickley: I anticipate manifest graphs could use http://www.w3.org/TR/HTTP-in-RDF10/ to describe where date was gotten ←
14:48:12 <danbri> (if we have 10s of millions of named graphs, all the more reason to be able to navigate that jungle...)
Dan Brickley: (if we have 10s of millions of named graphs, all the more reason to be able to navigate that jungle...) ←
14:48:45 <tlebo> gavinc: name of graph is distinct from subjects in the graph, o/w you run into the "OWL problem" b/c the graph name is the subject of the graph - it gets odd.
Gavin Carothers: name of graph is distinct from subjects in the graph, o/w you run into the "OWL problem" b/c the graph name is the subject of the graph - it gets odd. ←
14:48:49 <sandro> for swh: { <endpoint> eg:uses-dataset-relation eg:labeling-a-snap }
Sandro Hawke: for swh: { <endpoint> eg:uses-dataset-relation eg:labeling-a-snap } ←
14:49:17 <tlebo> davidwood: "owl problem" is bad name for it.
David Wood: "owl problem" is bad name for it. ←
14:49:18 <swh> sandro, or { <dataset> eg:uses … }
Steve Harris: sandro, or { <dataset> eg:uses … } ←
14:49:45 <Guus> q?
Guus Schreiber: q? ←
14:49:49 <gavinc> ack me
Gavin Carothers: ack me ←
14:49:56 <tlebo> (none of this matters as if you give URIs for the GraphContainers; let people describe what they want in RDF)
(none of this matters if you give URIs for the GraphContainers; let people describe what they want in RDF) ←
14:50:02 <AlexHall> the "graph/resource conflation" problem?
Alex Hall: the "graph/resource conflation" problem? ←
14:50:05 <tlebo> s/as if/if/
14:50:32 <tlebo> topic: review
14:50:36 <sandro> breajk for an hour in ten minutes
Sandro Hawke: break for an hour in ten minutes ←
14:50:53 <sandro> guus: after break, go through issues list
Guus Schreiber: after break, go through issues list [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:51:06 <tlebo> guus: let's list issues
Guus Schreiber: let's list issues ←
14:51:40 <tlebo> guus: what about manifest to discuss?
Guus Schreiber: what about manifest to discuss? ←
14:51:50 <Souri> s/breajk/break/
14:52:14 <tlebo> sandro: TRiGers, do you like something at top state relation, or add fifth column.
Sandro Hawke: TRiGers, do you like something at top state relation, or add fifth column. ←
14:52:21 <tlebo> (this is already handled by <>)
(this is already handled by <>) ←
14:52:22 <swh> -∞ to a 5th c��olumn
Steve Harris: -∞ to a 5th c��olumn ←
14:52:36 <cygri> q+ to ask what we would put in when dumping a sparql store
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to ask what we would put in when dumping a sparql store ←
14:53:23 <tlebo> @cygri, either <> or <URI_to_endpoint>
@cygri, either <> or <URI_to_endpoint> ←
14:53:38 <sandro> PROPOSED: We add to TriG an optional 5 column relationship-indiciator, which defaults to "loose association" as now.
PROPOSED: We add to TriG an optional 5 column relationship-indiciator, which defaults to "loose association" as now. ←
14:53:42 <AndyS> <> :namingStyle rdf:GBoxIdentifies .
Andy Seaborne: <> :namingStyle rdf:GBoxIdentifies . ←
14:53:46 <cygri> tlebo, my question� was about the relationship
Richard Cyganiak: tlebo, my question� was about the relationship ←
14:53:52 <iand> wikipedia says "A fifth column is a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group such as a nation from within."
Ian Davis: wikipedia says "A fifth column is a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group such as a nation from within." ←
14:53:55 <tlebo> gavinc: 5th column does NOT mean fifth column.
Gavin Carothers: 5th column does NOT mean fifth column. ←
14:54:28 <tlebo> context is already handled by where it is and where it came from - this is already represented.
context is already handled by where it is and where it came from - this is already representable. ←
14:54:40 <tlebo> s/represented/representable/
14:54:57 <tlebo> sandro: could read the manifest as triples if you'd like.
Sandro Hawke: could read the manifest as triples if you'd like. ←
14:55:59 <tlebo> topic: still manifests
14:56:16 <gavinc> TriG <G1> <eg:labeling-a-snap> {<s> <p> <o> }?
Gavin Carothers: TriG <G1> <eg:labeling-a-snap> {<s> <p> <o> }? ←
14:56:39 <tlebo> <> prov:wasDerivedFrom :process_of_dumping_SPARQL_endpoint .
<> prov:wasDerivedFrom :process_of_dumping_SPARQL_endpoint . ←
14:56:47 <tlebo> <> prov:wasDerivedFrom : process_of_dumping_SPARQL_endpoint .
<> prov:wasDerivedFrom : process_of_dumping_SPARQL_endpoint . ←
14:57:17 <tlebo> cygri: many will get confused and will just put garbage into it to "fill the field"
Richard Cyganiak: many will get confused and will just put garbage into it to "fill the field" ←
14:57:22 <tlebo> +100 @cygri
+100 @cygri ←
14:57:29 <tlebo> ... people dont' care.
... people dont' care. ←
14:57:52 <sandro> I think you're right cygri, and I dont know what to do about it.
Sandro Hawke: I think you're right cygri, and I dont know what to do about it. ←
14:57:55 <tlebo> guus: fine, but what are the benefits?
Guus Schreiber: fine, but what are the benefits? ←
14:57:57 <yvesr> q+
Yves Raimond: q+ ←
14:58:12 <tlebo> UUU: it just needs a vocab.
Andy Seaborne: it just needs a vocab. ←
14:58:20 <cygri> s/UUU/AndyS/
14:59:06 <AlexHall> it needs a vocab and a reasonable abstract syntax/semantics for RDF datasets that doesn't preclude reasonable things people want to do with that vocab
Alex Hall: it needs a vocab and a reasonable abstract syntax/semantics for RDF datasets that doesn't preclude reasonable things people want to do with that vocab ←
14:59:25 <pchampin> q+
14:59:37 <cygri> ack me
Richard Cyganiak: ack me ←
14:59:37 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to ask what we would put in when dumping a sparql store
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to ask what we would put in when dumping a sparql store ←
15:00:01 <tlebo> OOO: worried about the "one style" without being sure it's the right one. we already have a system to describe it (RDF)
Andy Seaborne: worried about the "one style" without being sure it's the right one. we already have a system to describe it (RDF) ←
15:00:12 <Guus> ack yvesr
Guus Schreiber: ack yvesr ←
15:00:15 <swh> +1 to AndyS
Steve Harris: +1 to AndyS ←
15:00:15 <sandro> +1 AndyS we can just tag the style in the TriG metadata
Sandro Hawke: +1 AndyS we can just tag the style in the TriG metadata ←
15:01:09 <tlebo> BBC: what do people gain? what is motivation to use it? use cases.
Yves Raimond: what do people gain? what is motivation to use it? use cases. ←
15:01:42 <gavinc> s/OOO/AndyS/
15:02:33 <mischat> surely when this becomes a real world problem, a WG could look at how people are tackling it in the wild
Mischa Tuffield: surely when this becomes a real world problem, a WG could look at how people are tackling it in the wild ←
15:02:33 <tlebo> maybeAndyS: incentive is need for knowledge, but no vocab to get it. Do not completely agree with cygri that can't be useful.
Pierre-Antoine Champin: incentive is need for knowledge, but no vocab to get it. Do not completely agree with cygri that can't be useful. ←
15:02:36 <yvesr> s/BBC/yvesr
15:02:49 <tlebo> (do we need to review what <> means, and that we can describe it with RDF?)
(do we need to review what <> means, and that we can describe it with RDF?) ←
15:02:56 <yvesr> s/maybeAndyS/pchampin
15:02:57 <cygri> s/maybeAndyS/pchampin/
15:03:28 <tlebo> guus: will revisit issues list
Guus Schreiber: will revisit issues list ←
15:03:36 <AZ> bye
Antoine Zimmermann: bye ←
15:03:49 <zwu2> I am leaving
15:04:10 <Souri> I need to leave ... meeting at office
Souripriya Das: I need to leave ... meeting at office ←
15:04:22 <NickH> Zakim, mute MIT_Meeting_Room
Nicholas Humfrey: Zakim, mute MIT_Meeting_Room ←
15:04:34 <Zakim> -AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ ←
15:04:37 <cygri> zakim, mute me
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, mute me ←
15:04:50 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room should now be muted ←
15:05:13 <Zakim> sorry, cygri, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, cygri, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
15:05:39 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's here? ←
15:05:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see BBC, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see BBC, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room (muted) ←
15:06:03 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room has MIT_Meeting_Room, Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas, micha, TedT
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room has MIT_Meeting_Room, Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas, micha, TedT ←
15:06:08 <Zakim> BBC has Guus, thomas, swh, ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: BBC has Guus, thomas, swh, ivan ←
15:06:12 <Zakim> On IRC I see AndyS, swh, mischat, Guus, danbri, tomayac, MacTed, zwu2, iand, AlexHall, gavinc, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, pchampin, mox601, cygri, tlebo, ww, ericP, yvesr, manu,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see AndyS, swh, mischat, Guus, danbri, tomayac, MacTed, zwu2, iand, AlexHall, gavinc, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, pchampin, mox601, cygri, tlebo, ww, ericP, yvesr, manu, ←
15:06:15 <Zakim> ... NickH, trackbot, manu1, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: ... NickH, trackbot, manu1, sandro ←
15:06:32 <MacTed> Zakim, mute BBC
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute BBC ←
15:06:32 <Zakim> BBC should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: BBC should now be muted ←
15:56:37 <Guus> reconvene in 5
(No events recorded for 50 minutes)
Guus Schreiber: reconvene in 5 ←
15:56:48 <Guus> 5/4
Guus Schreiber: 5/4 ←
15:59:52 <Guus> Boston: ready to reconvene?
Guus Schreiber: Boston: ready to reconvene? ←
16:03:11 <cygri> danbri, thanks for http://www.w3.org/mid/CAFNgM+YE1Ld6iZdjYVQCGEuDw-L44PB1PAjt=e4XYJ389vORkQ@mail.gmail.com … well put!
Richard Cyganiak: danbri, thanks for http://www.w3.org/mid/CAFNgM+YE1Ld6iZdjYVQCGEuDw-L44PB1PAjt=e4XYJ389vORkQ@mail.gmail.com … well put! ←
16:03:33 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?
Andy Seaborne: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:03:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see BBC (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see BBC (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, MIT_Meeting_Room (muted) ←
16:03:36 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room has MIT_Meeting_Room, Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas, micha, TedT
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room has MIT_Meeting_Room, Guus, thomas, danbri, steve, ivan, richard, andy, ian, pchamplin, yves, nicholas, micha, TedT ←
16:03:39 <Zakim> BBC has Guus, thomas, swh, ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: BBC has Guus, thomas, swh, ivan ←
16:03:50 <NickH> Zakim, unmute BBC
Nicholas Humfrey: Zakim, unmute BBC ←
16:03:50 <Zakim> BBC should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: BBC should no longer be muted ←
16:03:55 <NickH> Zakim, unmute MIT_Meeting_Room
Nicholas Humfrey: Zakim, unmute MIT_Meeting_Room ←
16:03:55 <Zakim> MIT_Meeting_Room should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MIT_Meeting_Room should no longer be muted ←
16:06:19 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to update rdf-concepts re ISSUE-71
ACTION: cygri to update rdf-concepts re ISSUE-71 ←
16:06:20 <trackbot> Created ACTION-97 - Update rdf-concepts re ISSUE-71 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-97 - Update rdf-concepts re ISSUE-71 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20]. ←
16:08:45 <iand> example of my use of graph literals: http://schemapedia.com/examples/cf314c8dab338aa1edaa93df2b54ad7b.rdf
Ian Davis: example of my use of graph literals: http://schemapedia.com/examples/cf314c8dab338aa1edaa93df2b54ad7b.rdf ←
16:08:53 <iand> no datatype though
Ian Davis: no datatype though ←
16:09:10 <iand> schemapedia.com/examples/cf314c8dab338aa1edaa93df2b54ad7b.ttl is turtle version
Ian Davis: schemapedia.com/examples/cf314c8dab338aa1edaa93df2b54ad7b.ttl is turtle version ←
16:09:16 <iand> http://schemapedia.com/examples/cf314c8dab338aa1edaa93df2b54ad7b.ttl
Ian Davis: http://schemapedia.com/examples/cf314c8dab338aa1edaa93df2b54ad7b.ttl ←
16:11:38 <iand> my use case is to embed examples of usage (i.e. to mention a set of triples without asserting them)
Ian Davis: my use case is to embed examples of usage (i.e. to mention a set of triples without asserting them) ←
16:13:38 <gavinc> Topic: Raised Issues
16:13:40 <gavinc> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/raised
Gavin Carothers: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/raised ←
16:13:50 <NickH> scribe NickH
Nicholas Humfrey: scribe NickH ←
16:14:02 <NickH> scribe: NickH
(Scribe set to Nicholas Humfrey)
16:14:02 <davidwood> scribe: NickH
16:14:12 <NickH> davidwood: there are 8 issues marked as raised
David Wood: there are 8 issues marked as raised ←
16:14:23 <NickH> davidwood: think we want to open all of these
David Wood: think we want to open all of these ←
16:14:33 <NickH> davidwood: ISSUE-63 is the only one that is a black hole
David Wood: ISSUE-63 is the only one that is a black hole ←
16:14:44 <mischat> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/63
Mischa Tuffield: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/63 ←
16:14:52 <LeeF> ISSUE-50?
16:14:52 <trackbot> ISSUE-50 -- Revisit "Request to allow b-nodes as property labels" -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-50 -- Revisit "Request to allow b-nodes as property labels" -- raised ←
16:14:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/50
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/50 ←
16:14:58 <LeeF> ISSUE-63?
16:14:58 <trackbot> ISSUE-63 -- Introduce an HTML5 datatype -- raised
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-63 -- Introduce an HTML5 datatype -- raised ←
16:14:58 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/63
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/63 ←
16:15:47 <NickH> davidwood: issue-50 is left over. We should mark it as declined because it isn't part of our charter
David Wood: ISSUE-50 is left over. We should mark it as declined because it isn't part of our charter ←
16:15:50 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/raised
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/raised ←
16:16:18 <davidwood> Propose to close ISSUE-50 stating that this WG will not revisit this issue because it is not chartered to do so.
David Wood: Propose to close ISSUE-50 stating that this WG will not revisit this issue because it is not chartered to do so. ←
16:16:24 <iand> +1
16:16:28 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:16:30 <AndyS1> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
16:16:31 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
16:16:32 <pchampin> +1
16:16:33 <cygri> +2
Richard Cyganiak: +2 ←
16:16:46 <AlexHall> +1
16:16:53 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
16:17:10 <sandro> +1 bnodes as predicate identifiers? kinda late for that in RDF.
Sandro Hawke: +1 bnodes as predicate identifiers? kinda late for that in RDF. ←
16:17:11 <NickH> RESOLVED
RESOLVED ←
16:17:38 <NickH> RESOLVED close ISSUE-50 stating that this WG will not revisit this issue because it is not chartered to do so.
RESOLVED close ISSUE-50 stating that this WG will not revisit this issue because it is not chartered to do so. ←
16:17:48 <sandro> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-50 stating that this WG will not revisit this issue because it is not chartered to do so.
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-50 stating that this WG will not revisit this issue because it is not chartered to do so. ←
16:17:53 <sandro> (need the colon)
Sandro Hawke: (need the colon) ←
16:18:07 <sandro> +1 open the RAISED issues
Sandro Hawke: +1 open the RAISED issues ←
16:18:10 <NickH> davidwood: 7 remaining issues marked as 'raised'
David Wood: 7 remaining issues marked as 'raised' ←
16:18:39 <NickH> davidwood: any disscussion about these issues?
David Wood: any disscussion about these issues? ←
16:19:25 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:20:03 <gavinc> http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-fragids-in-embedded-rdf
Gavin Carothers: http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-fragids-in-embedded-rdf ←
16:20:07 <NickH> cygri: ISSUE-37 I am struggling to remember it
Richard Cyganiak: ISSUE-37 I am struggling to remember it ←
16:20:14 <NickH> cygri: left over from the previous group
Richard Cyganiak: left over from the previous group ←
16:20:15 <MacTed> RRSAgent, pointer?
Ted Thibodeau: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
16:20:15 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2011/10/13-rdf-wg-irc#T16-20-15
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2011/10/13-rdf-wg-irc#T16-20-15 ←
16:20:34 <NickH> cygri: it is reasonable to open it and think about if we should do anything about
Richard Cyganiak: it is reasonable to open it and think about if we should do anything about ←
16:20:47 <NickH> Guus: unlikely to result in spec change
Guus Schreiber: unlikely to result in spec change ←
16:20:58 <NickH> Guus: but might lead to some extra documentation
Guus Schreiber: but might lead to some extra documentation ←
16:21:04 <cygri> +1 to opening all other raised issues
Richard Cyganiak: +1 to opening all other raised issues ←
16:21:38 <NickH> davidwood: chairs can open the remaining issues but didn't want to open things that didn't need opening
David Wood: chairs can open the remaining issues but didn't want to open things that didn't need opening ←
16:21:54 <NickH> davidwood: lets move on to open issues
David Wood: lets move on to open issues ←
16:21:57 <cygri> q+ to ask if we can get products in the tracker for all specs
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to ask if we can get products in the tracker for all specs ←
16:22:07 <pchampin> q-
16:22:08 <NickH> davidwood: lets focus on the open graph issues
David Wood: lets focus on the open graph issues ←
16:22:11 <davidwood> Topic: Open Issues
16:22:13 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/open?sort=product
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/open?sort=product ←
16:23:46 <NickH> cygri: the products that we have at the moment are cleanup tasks, then each of the task forces
Richard Cyganiak: the products that we have at the moment are cleanup tasks, then each of the task forces ←
16:23:55 <sandro> +1 products = specs, if possible
Sandro Hawke: +1 products = specs, if possible ←
16:23:58 <NickH> cygri: might be good the have products for each of the specs
Richard Cyganiak: might be good the have products for each of the specs ←
16:24:23 <NickH> Guus: isn't a product for the primer
Guus Schreiber: isn't a product for the primer ←
16:25:02 <NickH> davidwood: can easily create new projects for primer
David Wood: can easily create new products for primer ←
16:25:09 <NickH> davidwood: created one for primer
David Wood: created one for primer ←
16:25:12 <NickH> davidwood: created one for concepts
David Wood: created one for concepts ←
16:25:24 <iand> s/projects/products/
16:26:11 <cygri> ISSUE-76?
16:26:11 <trackbot> ISSUE-76 -- RDF Semantics and RDF Concepts disagree on definition of datatypes -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-76 -- RDF Semantics and RDF Concepts disagree on definition of datatypes -- open ←
16:26:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/76
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/76 ←
16:26:12 <NickH> davidwood: ISSUE-76 - which does it belong
David Wood: ISSUE-76 - which does it belong ←
16:26:38 <NickH> davidwood: putting it into concecpts
David Wood: putting it into concecpts ←
16:26:45 <NickH> cygri: it should go under semantics
Richard Cyganiak: it should go under semantics ←
16:27:34 <LeeF> ISSUE-75?
16:27:34 <trackbot> ISSUE-75 -- Valid plain literals containing #x0 are ill-typed in RDF 1.1 -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-75 -- Valid plain literals containing #x0 are ill-typed in RDF 1.1 -- open ←
16:27:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/75
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/75 ←
16:27:40 <NickH> davidwood: where would you put ISSUE-75?
David Wood: where would you put ISSUE-75? ←
16:27:49 <NickH> cygri: concepts
Richard Cyganiak: concepts ←
16:28:15 <NickH> davidwood: last uncategorised on is ISSUE-39
David Wood: last uncategorised on is ISSUE-39 ←
16:29:19 <NickH> ACTION: sandro to rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices
ACTION: sandro to rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices ←
16:29:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-98 - Rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-98 - Rdf: and rdfs: namespace should resolve to something that meets best practices [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-20]. ←
16:29:54 <davidwood> CLOSED: ISSUE-39
David Wood: CLOSED: ISSUE-39 ←
16:29:56 <NickH> CLOSE: ISSUE-39
16:30:22 <NickH> davidwood: everything is categorised correctly more or less
David Wood: everything is categorised correctly more or less ←
16:30:50 <NickH> davidwood: starting with cleanup tasks
David Wood: starting with cleanup tasks ←
16:31:27 <NickH> ISSUE-6?
16:31:27 <trackbot> ISSUE-6 -- Handling RDF Errata -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-6 -- Handling RDF Errata -- open ←
16:31:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/6
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/6 ←
16:31:43 <gavinc> Better view: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/products/5
Gavin Carothers: Better view: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/products/5 ←
16:32:20 <NickH> davidwood: asks cygri is this is done for Concepts
David Wood: asks cygri is this is done for Concepts ←
16:32:32 <NickH> cygri: either been addressed or there are open issues for it
Richard Cyganiak: either been addressed or there are open issues for it ←
16:33:53 <NickH> ISSUE-7?
16:33:53 <trackbot> ISSUE-7 -- Leftover issues from the RDF Core WG -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-7 -- Leftover issues from the RDF Core WG -- open ←
16:33:53 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/7
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/7 ←
16:34:37 <NickH> davidwood: we have closed a number of these - can either close or open a other issue
David Wood: we have closed a number of these - can either close or open a other issue ←
16:34:45 <NickH> davidwood: propose closing ISSUE-7
David Wood: propose closing ISSUE-7 ←
16:35:27 <NickH> davidwood: spent time on this in several telecons in June
David Wood: spent time on this in several telecons in June ←
16:35:37 <NickH> davidwood: confident that we can close this
David Wood: confident that we can close this ←
16:36:12 <davidwood> Closed ISSUE-7 because all leftover issues have either resulted in new open issues or closed issues due to compliance with our charter.
David Wood: Closed ISSUE-7 because all leftover issues have either resulted in new open issues or closed issues due to compliance with our charter. ←
16:36:53 <NickH> ISSUE-9?
16:36:53 <trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- Inference rules are incomplete in the RDF Semantics -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-9 -- Inference rules are incomplete in the RDF Semantics -- open ←
16:36:53 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/9
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/9 ←
16:36:56 <AlexHall> fyi, issues 42-62 cover the postponed issues from last wg
Alex Hall: fyi, issues 42-62 cover the postponed issues from last wg ←
16:37:46 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/9
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/9 ←
16:37:48 <NickH> davidwood: what does pfps want to do with ISSUE-9?
David Wood: what does pfps want to do with ISSUE-9? ←
16:38:18 <NickH> pfps: we should deal with it
Peter Patel-Schneider: we should deal with it ←
16:38:32 <NickH> Guus: added a product 'RDF Semantics' and moved it there
Guus Schreiber: added a product 'RDF Semantics' and moved it there ←
16:39:06 <NickH> ISSUE-10?
16:39:06 <trackbot> ISSUE-10 -- Look if there are RDF(S) notions that are to be deprecated -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-10 -- Look if there are RDF(S) notions that are to be deprecated -- open ←
16:39:06 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/10
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/10 ←
16:39:18 <danbri> cygri, re Sindice etc ... how much rss1 is still usefully out there?
Dan Brickley: cygri, re Sindice etc ... how much rss1 is still usefully out there? ←
16:39:56 <NickH> davidwood: going to leave gavinc to do some work on ISSUE-10
David Wood: going to leave gavinc to do some work on ISSUE-10 ←
16:40:05 <NickH> ISSUE-11?
16:40:06 <trackbot> ISSUE-11 -- Reconciliation of various, semantics-oriented documents with the core RDF ones -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-11 -- Reconciliation of various, semantics-oriented documents with the core RDF ones -- open ←
16:40:06 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/11
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/11 ←
16:41:04 <NickH> davidwood:
16:41:31 <NickH> davidwood: we leave ISSUE-11 open until our documents are closer to being ready
David Wood: we leave ISSUE-11 open until our documents are closer to being ready ←
16:41:34 <gavinc> ISSUE-24?
16:41:34 <trackbot> ISSUE-24 -- Should we deprecate RDF containers (Alt, Bag, Seq)? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-24 -- Should we deprecate RDF containers (Alt, Bag, Seq)? -- open ←
16:41:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/24
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/24 ←
16:41:38 <gavinc> ISSUE-25?
16:41:38 <trackbot> ISSUE-25 -- Should we deprecate (RDF 2004) reification of statements? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-25 -- Should we deprecate (RDF 2004) reification of statements? -- open ←
16:41:38 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/25
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/25 ←
16:41:46 <gavinc> Can close ISSUE-10
Gavin Carothers: Can close ISSUE-10 ←
16:42:09 <NickH> davidwood: would you like to look at ISSUE-11 in relation to SPARQL 1.1
David Wood: would you like to look at ISSUE-11 in relation to SPARQL 1.1 ←
16:42:21 <NickH> AndyS: would rather not
Andy Seaborne: would rather not ←
16:42:50 <NickH> ACTION sandro to look at ISSUE-11 in relation to SPARQL 1.1
ACTION sandro to look at ISSUE-11 in relation to SPARQL 1.1 ←
16:42:51 <trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - Look at ISSUE-11 in relation to SPARQL 1.1 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-99 - Look at ISSUE-11 in relation to SPARQL 1.1 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-20]. ←
16:42:57 <AlexHall> deprecated/archaic features: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/ArchaicFeatures (needs clean-up)
Alex Hall: deprecated/archaic features: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/ArchaicFeatures (needs clean-up) ←
16:42:58 <sandro> action: sandro to ask editors of SPARQL Entailment Regimes what they'd suggest RDF specs says about their work.
ACTION: sandro to ask editors of SPARQL Entailment Regimes what they'd suggest RDF specs says about their work. ←
16:42:59 <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Ask editors of SPARQL Entailment Regimes what they'd suggest RDF specs says about their work. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-100 - Ask editors of SPARQL Entailment Regimes what they'd suggest RDF specs says about their work. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-20]. ←
16:43:40 <gavinc> Really? RDF XML Literals got lucky 13?
Gavin Carothers: Really? RDF XML Literals got lucky 13? ←
16:44:44 <NickH> Guus: leave ISSUE-13 open for now
Guus Schreiber: leave ISSUE-13 open for now ←
16:45:58 <NickH> davidwood: if you think we are ready to close ISSUEs-24 and ISSUE-25, then go for it now
David Wood: if you think we are ready to close ISSUEs-24 and ISSUE-25, then go for it now ←
16:46:59 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: we'll suggest people stop using RDF containers (Alt, Bag, Seq) in new work.
STRAWPOLL: we'll suggest people stop using RDF containers (Alt, Bag, Seq) in new work. ←
16:47:12 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
16:47:16 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: we'll suggest people stop using RDF containers (Alt, Bag, Seq) in new work. (and close ISSUE-24)
STRAWPOLL: we'll suggest people stop using RDF containers (Alt, Bag, Seq) in new work. (and close ISSUE-24) ←
16:47:16 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
16:47:18 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
16:47:23 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
16:47:26 <cygri> q+ to ask what they should use instead
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to ask what they should use instead ←
16:47:26 <LeeF> +1
Lee Feigenbaum: +1 ←
16:47:27 <iand> -1
16:47:31 <AlexHall> +1
16:47:34 <danbri> Proposed: "WG resolves that representing 'ordering' in any open world binary-relation logic language is intrinsically rather annoying; practitioners are notified that RDF containers are annoying, but so are the linked list thingies, and each may be differingly annoying in different situations."
PROPOSED: "WG resolves that representing 'ordering' in any open world binary-relation logic language is intrinsically rather annoying; practitioners are notified that RDF containers are annoying, but so are the linked list thingies, and each may be differingly annoying in different situations." ←
16:47:35 <davidwood> ack cygri
David Wood: ack cygri ←
16:47:35 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to ask if we can get products in the tracker for all specs and to ask what they should use instead
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to ask if we can get products in the tracker for all specs and to ask what they should use instead ←
16:47:39 <danbri> -0.12
Dan Brickley: -0.12 ←
16:48:07 <NickH> cygri: what is the alternative? Can we put some test in describing what people should do?
Richard Cyganiak: what is the alternative? Can we put some test in describing what people should do? ←
16:48:24 <NickH> davidwood: we should promote RDF Lists
Sandro Hawke: we should promote RDF Lists ←
16:48:39 <sandro> s/davidwood/sandro/
16:48:45 <NickH> iand: I don't agree that we should tell people to stop using them
Ian Davis: I don't agree that we should tell people to stop using them ←
16:48:50 <danbri> q?
Dan Brickley: q? ←
16:49:07 <AndyS> -X unless we propose an alternative (not sure on X yet)
Andy Seaborne: -X unless we propose an alternative (not sure on X yet) ←
16:49:22 <danbri> proposed: "Bag and Alt are mostly harmless, mostly useless."
PROPOSED: "Bag and Alt are mostly harmless, mostly useless." ←
16:49:58 <NickH> davidwood: can I suggest that we have a proposal that we vote on, to jsut depricate Alt and Bag
David Wood: can I suggest that we have a proposal that we vote on, to just depricate Alt and Bag ←
16:50:06 <NickH> s/jsut/just/
16:50:21 <davidwood> Propose to deprecate ALT with the language proposed at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/ArchaicFeatures
David Wood: Propose to deprecate ALT with the language proposed at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/ArchaicFeatures ←
16:50:27 <NickH> sandro: is anyone going to object to deprecating Bag and Alt?
Sandro Hawke: is anyone going to object to deprecating Bag and Alt? ←
16:50:29 <NickH> iand: yes
16:50:32 <NickH> danbri: yes
Dan Brickley: yes ←
16:50:45 <danbri> ' This is an archaic feature of RDF. It was included in the RDF specifications published in 1999 and 2004, but we no longer recommend it be used in new deployments. Some existing software uses it, however, and it will be present in some archival data, so general purpose software must handle it correctly. See @@@ for a more information.'
Dan Brickley: ' This is an archaic feature of RDF. It was included in the RDF specifications published in 1999 and 2004, but we no longer recommend it be used in new deployments. Some existing software uses it, however, and it will be present in some archival data, so general purpose software must handle it correctly. See @@@ for a more information.' ←
16:50:55 <pfps> +1
16:51:00 <NickH> davidwood: deprecate does not mean remove
David Wood: deprecate does not mean remove ←
16:51:08 <iand> +1 to archaic
16:51:21 <NickH> danbri: I don't like deprecate and rdf:Seq has its uses
Dan Brickley: I don't like deprecate and rdf:Seq has its uses ←
16:51:42 <NickH> danbri: language will be 'This is an archaic feature of RDF'
David Wood: language will be 'This is an archaic feature of RDF' ←
16:51:46 <cygri> +1 to the text in wiki/ArchaicFeatures for alt, bag and seq
Richard Cyganiak: +1 to the text in wiki/ArchaicFeatures for alt, bag and seq ←
16:51:57 <NickH> s/danbri/davidwood/
16:51:57 <sandro> PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF ←
16:52:08 <NickH> danbri: I don't object
Dan Brickley: I don't object ←
16:52:13 <NickH> iand: I don't object
16:52:17 <MacTed> +1 proposal
Ted Thibodeau: +1 proposal ←
16:52:17 <danbri> Ian agrees with me
Dan Brickley: Ian agrees with me ←
16:52:22 <swh> +1
Steve Harris: +1 ←
16:52:28 <iand> i agree with dan
16:52:31 <NickH> iand: I agree with danbri
Ian Davis: I agree with danbri ←
16:52:32 <sandro> PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF ←
16:52:40 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:52:40 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
16:52:41 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
16:52:41 <iand> +1
16:52:42 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
16:52:42 <pfps> +1
16:52:44 <swh> +1
Steve Harris: +1 ←
16:52:45 <Guus> =1
Guus Schreiber: =1 ←
16:52:49 <mischat> PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt and rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF ?
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt and rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF ? ←
16:52:50 <pchampin> +1
16:52:54 <danbri> stop calling it 'deprecated' please, that's too harsh terminology. I do not want to tell people that their data is bad; just that it is unfashionable.
Dan Brickley: stop calling it 'deprecated' please, that's too harsh terminology. I do not want to tell people that their data is bad; just that it is unfashionable. ←
16:53:17 <mischat> s/PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt and rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF \?//
Mischa Tuffield: s/PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Alt and rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF \?// (warning: replacement failed) ←
16:53:19 <sandro> RESOLVED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF
RESOLVED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF ←
16:53:19 <NickH> davidwood: we won't use the term 'deprecated' anymore
David Wood: we won't use the term 'deprecated' anymore ←
16:53:21 <davidwood> RESOLVED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF
RESOLVED: Mark rdf:Alt as an archaic features of RDF ←
16:53:30 <davidwood> PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF
PROPOSED: Mark rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF ←
16:53:36 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
16:53:38 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
16:53:39 <iand> +1
16:53:39 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
16:53:40 <pfps> +1
16:53:40 <danbri> +1
Dan Brickley: +1 ←
16:53:41 <swh> +1
Steve Harris: +1 ←
16:53:41 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
16:53:55 <mischat> +1
Mischa Tuffield: +1 ←
16:53:56 <pchampin> +1
16:54:08 <NickH> ericP: what is the alternative?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: what is the alternative? ←
16:54:19 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
16:54:21 <sandro> eric: I don't know what to tell people to use instead. Maybe x hasFlagColor :red, :blue, :green
Eric Prud'hommeaux: I don't know what to tell people to use instead. Maybe x hasFlagColor :red, :blue, :green [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:54:39 <NickH> ericP: I am not really sure what to tell people
Eric Prud'hommeaux: I am not really sure what to tell people ←
16:54:53 <NickH> ericP: is the answer to tell people to use a repeated property?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: is the answer to tell people to use a repeated property? ←
16:55:02 <iand> people can use custom sequence properties, ex:sequence "1"
Ian Davis: people can use custom sequence properties, ex:sequence "1" ←
16:55:14 <sandro> davidwood: I use a repeated property, possibly off another node.
David Wood: I use a repeated property, possibly off another node. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:55:18 <pchampin> @ericP: that would be my answer
Pierre-Antoine Champin: @ericP: that would be my answer ←
16:55:39 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:55:56 <NickH> davidwood: are you going to formally object?
David Wood: are you going to formally object? ←
16:56:01 <NickH> ericP: no, no
Eric Prud'hommeaux: no, no ←
16:56:10 <davidwood> RESOLVED: Mark rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF
RESOLVED: Mark rdf:Bag as an archaic features of RDF ←
16:56:28 <NickH> sandro: is anyone objecting?
Sandro Hawke: is anyone objecting to doing this with Seq? ←
16:56:33 <NickH> danbri: yes
Dan Brickley: yes ←
16:56:48 <NickH> danbri: going to close ISSUE-24
David Wood: going to close ISSUE-24 ←
16:56:55 <sandro> s/?/ to doing this with Seq?/
16:57:14 <NickH> s/danbri/davidwood/
16:58:04 <NickH> davidwood: closing ISSUE-24
David Wood: closing ISSUE-24 ←
16:58:04 <sandro> ISSUE: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24)
ISSUE: Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) ←
16:58:05 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-77 - Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/77/edit .
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-77 - Should we mark rdf:Seq as archaic (cf ISSUE-24) ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/77/edit . ←
16:58:33 <NickH> danbri leaves
danbri leaves ←
16:59:29 <NickH> Guus is packing up
Guus is packing up ←
16:59:54 <NickH> Guus: my plane is in 2 hours
Guus Schreiber: my plane is in 2 hours ←
17:00:33 <NickH> davidwood: I missed you Guus
David Wood: I missed you Guus ←
17:00:45 <tlebo> q+ to ask what OWL 2's annotations fixed that was broken in RDF's reification? (or if OWL 2 fixed them)
Tim Lebo: q+ to ask what OWL 2's annotations fixed that was broken in RDF's reification? (or if OWL 2 fixed them) ←
17:00:49 <NickH> ISSUE-25?
17:00:49 <trackbot> ISSUE-25 -- Should we deprecate (RDF 2004) reification of statements? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-25 -- Should we deprecate (RDF 2004) reification of statements? -- open ←
17:00:49 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/25
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/25 ←
17:02:29 <tlebo> owl 2 annotations don't carry any truthfulness in them.
Tim Lebo: owl 2 annotations don't carry any truthfulness in them. ←
17:02:35 <NickH> pfps: sparql annotations and RDF Reification are completely different
Peter Patel-Schneider: OWL annotations and RDF Reification are completely different ←
17:02:46 <tlebo> RDF's intent was to be "truthiness"
Tim Lebo: RDF's intent was to be "truthiness" ←
17:02:49 <yvesr> s/sparql/OWL
17:03:18 <tlebo> "owl annotations are just data sitting on the side; do with it what you will"
Tim Lebo: "owl annotations are just data sitting on the side; do with it what you will" ←
17:03:22 <tlebo> q-
Tim Lebo: q- ←
17:03:52 <NickH> pfps: when you talk about the truthiness of the Reification, you get the truthiness of the RDF
Peter Patel-Schneider: when you talk about the truthiness of the Reification, you get the truthiness of the RDF ←
17:04:18 <AndyS> statings
Andy Seaborne: statings ←
17:04:21 <NickH> davidwood: when you make a statement about another statement - you are saying something about it
David Wood: when you make a statement about another statement - you are saying something about it ←
17:04:29 <NickH> davidwood: I could say that it is false
David Wood: I could say that it is false ←
17:05:07 <NickH> davidwood: I think what pfps is saying is, the ability for you saying that statement is true is by expessing a fact about another triple
David Wood: I think what pfps is saying is, the ability for you saying that statement is true is by expessing a fact about another triple ←
17:05:31 <NickH> davidwood: I am not saying I agree with it, I am saying I understand what he is saying
David Wood: I am not saying I agree with it, I am saying I understand what he is saying ←
17:05:42 <tlebo> RDF had more "truthiness" of the triple cited; while OWL 2 is completely agnostic to the truth of the triple being cited.
Tim Lebo: RDF had more "truthiness" of the triple cited; while OWL 2 is completely agnostic to the truth of the triple being cited. ←
17:06:23 <tlebo> Then let's deprecate RDF reification and use OWL 2 if we still want it.
Tim Lebo: Then let's deprecate RDF reification and use OWL 2 if we still want it. ←
17:06:24 <NickH> davidwood: there is no explicit truthiness tie, just making a statement
David Wood: there is no explicit truthiness tie, just making a statement ←
17:06:30 <pfps> owl 2 annotations aren't about statements at all, of course, they are "about" classes (or ....)
Peter Patel-Schneider: owl 2 annotations aren't about statements at all, of course, they are "about" classes (or ....) ←
17:07:08 <tlebo> the rdfs:range of owl:annotatedSource is owl:Class ?
Tim Lebo: the rdfs:range of owl:annotatedSource is owl:Class ? ←
17:07:10 <NickH> sandro: happy to mark Reification as archaic as long as we can provide something to replace it with
Sandro Hawke: happy to mark Reification as archaic as long as we can provide something to replace it with ←
17:07:16 <tlebo> (@pfps)
Tim Lebo: (@pfps) ←
17:07:35 <pfps> saying Bird creationdate 11/11/11 isn't saying something about a logical construct, but is instead might be saying something about an object
Peter Patel-Schneider: saying Bird creationdate 11/11/11 isn't saying something about a logical construct, but is instead might be saying something about an object ←
17:07:50 <NickH> davidwood: I didn't hear pfps respone to my paraphrasing of him
David Wood: I didn't hear pfps respone to my paraphrasing of him ←
17:08:31 <NickH> davidwood: not concened about OWL annotations - interested in the deprecation of RDF Reification
David Wood: not concened about OWL annotations - interested in the deprecation of RDF Reification ←
17:09:01 <iand> q+
17:09:09 <davidwood> Straw poll: Should we mark rdf 2004 reification as archaic?
David Wood: Straw poll: Should we mark rdf 2004 reification as archaic? ←
17:09:15 <davidwood> ack iand
David Wood: ack iand ←
17:09:17 <ericP> -0
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -0 ←
17:09:48 <gavin_> -0 to wait until something can replace it exists
Gavin Carothers: -0 to wait until something can replace it exists ←
17:09:57 <NickH> iand: want to make a distinction between reification mechanics and the language used for reification
Ian Davis: want to make a distinction between reification mechanics and the language used for reification ←
17:10:19 <NickH> iand: happy to make reification mechanics as archaic
Ian Davis: happy to make reification mechanics as archaic ←
17:10:33 <NickH> iand: as long as the language remains
Ian Davis: as long as the language remains ←
17:10:49 <NickH> iand: the Talis changespec uses RDF reification
Ian Davis: the Talis changespec uses RDF reification ←
17:11:07 <yvesr> -0 until we understand what we're going to do about graphs and whether we can describe how users can replace one by the other
Yves Raimond: -0 until we understand what we're going to do about graphs and whether we can describe how users can replace one by the other ←
17:11:14 <sandro> sandro: so let's postpone issue-25 until we have a better solution, then we can mark RDF reificaton as archaic.
Sandro Hawke: so let's postpone ISSUE-25 until we have a better solution, then we can mark RDF reificaton as archaic. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:11:26 <sandro> ian: The reification mechanics (the vocab) are different from the concept of reification in general
Ian Davis: The reification mechanics (the vocab) are different from the concept of reification in general [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:11:27 <sandro> maybe I got that wrong...
Sandro Hawke: maybe I got that wrong... ←
17:11:32 <sandro> ian: I need the reif spec.
Ian Davis: I need the reif spec. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:11:34 <sandro> s/spev/vocab/
Sandro Hawke: s/spev/vocab/ (warning: replacement failed) ←
17:11:35 <tlebo> (sorry, @iand - I think i was using @iand to reference Ivan earlier...)
Tim Lebo: (sorry, @iand - I think i was using @iand to reference Ivan earlier...) ←
17:11:40 <NickH> pchampin: we are depreicating the non existant reification mechanics
Pierre-Antoine Champin: we are depreicating the non existant reification mechanics ←
17:11:51 <NickH> davidwood: is there something better?
David Wood: is there something better? ←
17:11:58 <cygri> +1 to the archaification of reification
Richard Cyganiak: +1 to the archaification of reification ←
17:12:03 <NickH> iand: I can't think of anyting better at the moment
Ian Davis: I can't think of anyting better at the moment ←
17:12:49 <NickH> swh: archaic just means that you shouldn't do anything new with it, not that you can't use it for old things
Steve Harris: archaic just means that you shouldn't do anything new with it, not that you can't use it for old things ←
17:12:54 <LeeF> ISSUE-37?
17:12:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- Handling of fragment identifiers in RDF embedded in other document formats -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-37 -- Handling of fragment identifiers in RDF embedded in other document formats -- open ←
17:12:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/37
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/37 ←
17:12:58 <LeeF> ISSUE-46?
17:12:58 <trackbot> ISSUE-46 -- Revisit "Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two uri's to be equivalent?" -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-46 -- Revisit "Should RDF have a mechanism for declaring two uri's to be equivalent?" -- open ←
17:12:58 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/46
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/46 ←
17:13:16 <NickH> iand: might be a long time before I can change, don't like that idea of my customers using something marked as archaic
Ian Davis: might be a long time before I can change, don't like that idea of my customers using something marked as archaic ←
17:13:29 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to propose resolution for ISSUE-37 and ISSUE-69
ACTION: cygri to propose resolution for ISSUE-37 and ISSUE-69 ←
17:13:30 <trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - Propose resolution for ISSUE-37 and ISSUE-69 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-101 - Propose resolution for ISSUE-37 and ISSUE-69 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20]. ←
17:13:41 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
17:13:54 <NickH> pchampin: my memory of it was that I was the only one who wanted to discuss it
Pierre-Antoine Champin: my memory of it was that I was the only one who wanted to discuss it ←
17:14:11 <AndyS> q-
Andy Seaborne: q- ←
17:14:12 <NickH> pchampin: I had a feeling that people were strongly opposed to it
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I had a feeling that people were strongly opposed to it ←
17:14:13 <gavin_> +0.5 to include sameAssness in RDF (would defer to JJC for a full +1)
Gavin Carothers: +0.5 to include sameAssness in RDF (would defer to JJC for a full +1) ←
17:14:18 <NickH> pchampin: I can live without it
Pierre-Antoine Champin: I can live without it ←
17:14:36 <AlexHall> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-05-04#ISSUE__2d_46__3f_
Alex Hall: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-05-04#ISSUE__2d_46__3f_ ←
17:14:50 <iand> for clarity on ISSUE-25: reification mechanics is http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#section-Reification and reification vocabulary is http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_reificationvocab
Ian Davis: for clarity on ISSUE-25: reification mechanics is http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#section-Reification and reification vocabulary is http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_reificationvocab ←
17:15:09 <AndyS> rdf:sameAs owl:sameAs owl:sameAs
Andy Seaborne: rdf:sameAs owl:sameAs owl:sameAs ←
17:15:24 <gavin_> Yes, that ;)
Gavin Carothers: Yes, that ;) ←
17:15:39 <iand> rdf:sameAs owl:equivalentProperty owl:sameAs
Ian Davis: rdf:sameAs owl:equivalentProperty owl:sameAs ←
17:15:48 <davidwood> Propose to close ISSUE-46 because owl:sameAs is already widely used and accepted. This WG has no better answer.
David Wood: Propose to close ISSUE-46 because owl:sameAs is already widely used and accepted. This WG has no better answer. ←
17:15:50 <pchampin> rdf:sameAs rdf:sameAs owl:sameAs
Pierre-Antoine Champin: rdf:sameAs rdf:sameAs owl:sameAs ←
17:15:55 <pfps> +1
17:15:58 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
17:16:09 <cygri> +!
Richard Cyganiak: +! ←
17:16:11 <gavin_> -0.5 as it adds little bits of OWL when you really don
Gavin Carothers: -0.5 as it adds little bits of OWL when you really don ←
17:16:13 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
17:16:13 <gavin_> 't need it
Gavin Carothers: 't need it ←
17:16:15 <iand> -0
17:16:20 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:16:22 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
17:16:25 <pchampin> +0
17:16:25 <AlexHall> +1
17:16:26 <AndyS> +0.5
Andy Seaborne: +0.5 ←
17:16:35 <tlebo> OWL is just another vocabulary.
Tim Lebo: OWL is just another vocabulary. ←
17:16:52 <iand> +1
17:16:54 <AndyS> (other useful owl-isms?)
Andy Seaborne: (other useful owl-isms?) ←
17:17:06 <davidwood> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-46 with no action.
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-46 with no action. ←
17:17:12 <gavin_> Yeah, basiclly RDFS Plus
Gavin Carothers: Yeah, basiclly RDFS Plus ←
17:17:15 <pchampin> @Andy: InverseFunctionalProperty ?
Pierre-Antoine Champin: @Andy: InverseFunctionalProperty ? ←
17:17:20 <gavin_> owl:sameAs and owl:import
Gavin Carothers: owl:sameAs and owl:import ←
17:17:44 <iand> wasn't owl:imports a bug? :)
Ian Davis: wasn't owl:imports a bug? :) ←
17:18:05 <pchampin> owl:imports owl:sameAs rdf:subject
Pierre-Antoine Champin: owl:imports owl:sameAs rdf:subject ←
17:18:12 <AndyS> IFP, FP, symmetric,...
Andy Seaborne: IFP, FP, symmetric,... ←
17:18:14 <NickH> ISSUE-62?
17:18:14 <trackbot> ISSUE-62 -- Revisit "The test cases manifest format has a semantic error" -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-62 -- Revisit "The test cases manifest format has a semantic error" -- open ←
17:18:14 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/62
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/62 ←
17:18:46 <NickH> davidwood: had anyone looked at test cases recently?
David Wood: had anyone looked at test cases recently? ←
17:18:57 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
17:19:50 <NickH> davidwood: would anyone like to volenteer to take over the RDF test cases?
David Wood: would anyone like to volenteer to take over the RDF test cases? ←
17:19:59 <NickH> <silence>
<silence> ←
17:20:10 <NickH> davidwood: will have to rope ericP into it later
David Wood: will have to rope ericP into it later ←
17:20:26 <NickH> ISSUE-1?
17:20:27 <trackbot> ISSUE-1 -- Is TURTLE the same as SPARQL 1.1 triple syntax? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-1 -- Is TURTLE the same as SPARQL 1.1 triple syntax? -- open ←
17:20:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/1
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/1 ←
17:20:28 <tlebo> @iand, "URI reference event r" from http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#section-Reification; huh?
Tim Lebo: @iand, "URI reference event r" from http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/#section-Reification; huh? ←
17:20:40 <AndyS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0174.html Test case semantic error
Andy Seaborne: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0174.html Test case semantic error ←
17:21:15 <sandro> gavin_: "Yes, But...."
Gavin Carothers: "Yes, But...." [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:21:47 <NickH> gavin_: escaoping...
Gavin Carothers: escaoping... ←
17:22:07 <NickH> gavin_: they could be the same apart from some well motivated exceptions
Gavin Carothers: they could be the same apart from some well motivated exceptions ←
17:22:10 <sandro> PROPOSED: Close issue-1 saying they should be the same except for well-motivated (and small) exceptions.
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-1 saying they should be the same except for well-motivated (and small) exceptions. ←
17:22:36 <NickH> davidwood: not sure we have resolved this issue
David Wood: not sure we have resolved this issue ←
17:22:51 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
17:22:54 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:22:57 <NickH> sandro: I think we can close this issue
Sandro Hawke: I think we can close this issue ←
17:22:57 <gavin_> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
17:23:07 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
17:23:07 <AndyS> suggest one SPARQL and one RDF person catelogue differences
Andy Seaborne: suggest one SPARQL and one RDF person catelogue differences ←
17:23:09 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
17:23:14 <gavin_> Hi Andy ;)
Gavin Carothers: Hi Andy ;) ←
17:23:16 <NickH> +1
+1 ←
17:23:49 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
17:24:07 <sandro> RESOLVED: Close issue-1 saying they should be the same except for well-motivated (and small) exceptions.
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-1 saying they should be the same except for well-motivated (and small) exceptions. ←
17:24:08 <NickH> gavin_: until Turtle gets closer to being final, hope that the differences will go away
Gavin Carothers: until Turtle gets closer to being final, hope that the differences will go away ←
17:24:14 <davidwood> ack AndyS
David Wood: ack AndyS ←
17:24:25 <NickH> AndyS: no point if you have resolved it
Andy Seaborne: no point if you have resolved it ←
17:24:42 <NickH> AndyS: we should have a definativce cataglogue of what the differences are
Andy Seaborne: we should have a definitive cataglogue of what the differences are ←
17:24:58 <pchampin> s/definativce/definitive/
17:25:00 <NickH> AndyS: and then work out if it makes sense or not
Andy Seaborne: and then work out if it makes sense or not ←
17:25:18 <NickH> AndyS: I volenteer to do the work from the SPARQL side
Andy Seaborne: I volenteer to do the work from the SPARQL side ←
17:25:33 <AndyS> For now, on the wiki.
Andy Seaborne: For now, on the wiki. ←
17:25:41 <NickH> davidwood: who shall do the work from the Turtle side?
David Wood: who shall do the work from the Turtle side? ←
17:25:51 <NickH> gavin_: me
Gavin Carothers: me ←
17:27:02 <AndyS> NB This applies to TriG as well. e.g. trailing DOT
Andy Seaborne: NB This applies to TriG as well. e.g. trailing DOT ←
17:27:18 <davidwood> Andy and Gavin will create a list of issues between SPARQL and Turtle. The list will be maintained on the RDF WG wiki and may become an appendix to the Turtle spec.
David Wood: Andy and Gavin will create a list of issues between SPARQL and Turtle. The list will be maintained on the RDF WG wiki and may become an appendix to the Turtle spec. ←
17:27:34 <NickH> AndyS: yes, that is fine
Andy Seaborne: yes, that is fine ←
17:27:38 <NickH> gavin_: yup
Gavin Carothers: yup ←
17:28:13 <tlebo> +1
Tim Lebo: +1 ←
17:28:18 <tlebo> (we have issues)
Tim Lebo: (we have issues) ←
17:28:51 <yvesr> no
Yves Raimond: no ←
17:29:14 <NickH> davidwood: we resolve to put N-Triples into the Turtle document
David Wood: we resolve to put N-Triples into the Turtle document ←
17:29:49 <NickH> gavin_: no resolution on what to do with old N-Triples that doesn't have a media type and new n-Triples that does have a media type
Gavin Carothers: no resolution on what to do with old N-Triples that doesn't have a media type and new n-Triples that does have a media type ←
17:29:55 <AndyS> As long as there is a NT language and mime type (and its suggested to use UTF-8) somewhere
Andy Seaborne: As long as there is a NT language and mime type (and its suggested to use UTF-8) somewhere ←
17:30:02 <AndyS> Ditto NQ
Andy Seaborne: Ditto NQ ←
17:30:22 <NickH> ISSUE-19?
17:30:22 <trackbot> ISSUE-19 -- Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-19 -- Should TURTLE allow triples like "[ :p 123 ]." as SPARQL does ? -- open ←
17:30:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/19
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/19 ←
17:30:41 <NickH> gavin_: this can be resolved closed as a duplicate of ISSUE-1
Gavin Carothers: this can be resolved closed as a duplicate of ISSUE-1 ←
17:30:54 <NickH> gavin_: I have just closed ISSUE-1
Gavin Carothers: I have just closed ISSUE-1 ←
17:31:11 <NickH> ISSUE-73?
17:31:11 <trackbot> ISSUE-73 -- IRI_REF vs. IRIref -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-73 -- IRI_REF vs. IRIref -- open ←
17:31:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/73
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/73 ←
17:31:29 <NickH> gavin_: I need to resolve this with AndyS
Gavin Carothers: I need to resolve this with AndyS ←
17:31:43 <NickH> davidwood: do you need help from the working group?
David Wood: do you need help from the working group? ←
17:31:53 <NickH> gavin_: I need help from AndyS
Gavin Carothers: I need help from AndyS ←
17:32:04 <NickH> gavin_: they are subtly different
Gavin Carothers: they are subtly different ←
17:32:22 <NickH> gavin_: they shouldn't be combined, they should be renamed
Gavin Carothers: they shouldn't be combined, they should be renamed ←
17:33:12 <NickH> ISSUE-74?
17:33:13 <trackbot> ISSUE-74 -- Prefixed names and slashes -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-74 -- Prefixed names and slashes -- open ←
17:33:13 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/74
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/74 ←
17:33:38 <NickH> gavin_: this is actually a working group issue
Gavin Carothers: this is actually a working group issue ←
17:33:52 <NickH> both are agreed and people think both are right
both are agreed and people think both are right ←
17:34:12 <NickH> davidwood: end of the Turtle Issues
David Wood: end of the Turtle Issues ←
17:34:20 <NickH> davidwood: lets go to RDF General
David Wood: lets go to RDF General ←
17:34:23 <NickH> ISSUE-3?
17:34:23 <trackbot> ISSUE-3 -- Between us, we need to study the feedback we got via http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/ on the previous round of specs (and errata) -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-3 -- Between us, we need to study the feedback we got via http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/ on the previous round of specs (and errata) -- open ←
17:34:23 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/3
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/3 ←
17:34:41 <NickH> davidwood: certainly have to do that, certainly havn't done it
David Wood: certainly have to do that, certainly havn't done it ←
17:34:45 <NickH> davidwood: lets move on
David Wood: lets move on ←
17:35:19 <NickH> sandro: if it doesn't require a working group decision, better to put an action on somebody
Sandro Hawke: if it doesn't require a working group decision, better to put an action on somebody ←
17:35:50 <NickH> davidwood: I think we should put an action on Ivan
David Wood: I think we should put an action on Ivan ←
17:36:06 <NickH> davidwood: I can't imageine who else could do this well
David Wood: I can't imageine who else could do this well ←
17:36:15 <NickH> sandro: I think cygri would do a good job
Sandro Hawke: I think cygri would do a good job ←
17:36:39 <tlebo> also not hearing things.
Tim Lebo: also not hearing things. ←
17:37:53 <NickH> cygri: I am not going to volenteer for this because I think it is going to be a lot of work
Richard Cyganiak: I am not going to volenteer for this because I think it is going to be a lot of work ←
17:38:13 <NickH> davidwood: wondering if one of Guus's students might want to do this
David Wood: wondering if one of Guus's students might want to do this ←
17:38:34 <NickH> work for someone young, keen and wanting to prove himself
work for someone young, keen and wanting to prove himself ←
17:39:17 <sandro> action: davidwood ask Guus to find a student to do the work of ISSUE-3
ACTION: davidwood ask Guus to find a student to do the work of ISSUE-3 ←
17:39:17 <trackbot> Created ACTION-102 - Ask Guus to find a student to do the work of ISSUE-3 [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-102 - Ask Guus to find a student to do the work of ISSUE-3 [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20]. ←
17:39:20 <Scott_Bauer> scribe: scott
Scott Bauer: scribe: scott ←
17:39:28 <sandro> scribe: scott
(Scribe set to Scott Bauer)
17:40:48 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: issue 65 where do these exist?
David Wood: ISSUE-65 where do these exist? ←
17:40:52 <LeeF> ISSUE-65?
17:40:52 <trackbot> ISSUE-65 -- Update XSD 1.0 references to XSD 1.1 -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-65 -- Update XSD 1.0 references to XSD 1.1 -- open ←
17:40:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/65
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/65 ←
17:40:57 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
17:42:54 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: we have rdf concepts written when rdf was xml. We ought to push xsd to serializations.
David Wood: we have rdf concepts written when rdf was xml. We ought to push xsd to serializations. ←
17:43:22 <Scott_Bauer> … need to change wording in concepts.
… need to change wording in concepts. ←
17:43:38 <davidwood> ack cygri
David Wood: ack cygri ←
17:44:17 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: a broader point. Can't have a literal anymore in 1.1. need something more in rdf concepts
Richard Cyganiak: a broader point. Can't have a plain literal anymore in 1.1. need something more in rdf concepts ←
17:44:47 <Scott_Bauer> … datatypes only get into rdf when you get into semantics. needs to change.
… datatypes only get into rdf when you get into semantics. needs to change. ←
17:44:56 <gavin_> s/literal/plain literal/
17:45:02 <pchampin> q+ to ask richard about simple entailment
Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+ to ask richard about simple entailment ←
17:45:03 <Scott_Bauer> … needs to somehow include xsd: string
… needs to somehow include xsd: string ←
17:45:35 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: we have clean up to do in rdf concepts
David Wood: we have clean up to do in rdf concepts ←
17:45:46 <Scott_Bauer> … section 5 datatypes.
… section 5 datatypes. ←
17:46:31 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to mention ISSUE-65 in RDF Concepts ED (Section 5)
ACTION: cygri to mention ISSUE-65 in RDF Concepts ED (Section 5) ←
17:46:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-103 - Mention ISSUE-65 in RDF Concepts ED (Section 5) [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-103 - Mention ISSUE-65 in RDF Concepts ED (Section 5) [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20]. ←
17:46:40 <Scott_Bauer> action: cygri to add issue 65 as an issue on the rdf concepts section 5 datatypes
ACTION: cygri to add ISSUE-65 as an issue on the rdf concepts section 5 datatypes ←
17:46:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-104 - Add issue 65 as an issue on the rdf concepts section 5 datatypes [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-104 - Add ISSUE-65 as an issue on the rdf concepts section 5 datatypes [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20]. ←
17:47:08 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: alex does that address your issue on issue 65
David Wood: alex does that address your issue on ISSUE-65 ←
17:47:32 <Scott_Bauer> … richard I propose to take your action and close action 65.
… richard I propose to take your action and close ACTION-65. ←
17:47:58 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: at this point its in CR
Sandro Hawke: at this point its in CR ←
17:48:28 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: we can raise an new issue if it stalls
David Wood: we can raise an new issue if it stalls ←
17:48:44 <Scott_Bauer> … closing issue 65 moving to an editorial action.
… closing ISSUE-65 moving to an editorial action. ←
17:48:56 <Scott_Bauer> … on rdf concepts
… on rdf concepts ←
17:49:03 <Scott_Bauer> topic: issue 66
17:49:48 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: this needs to be a semantics issue
David Wood: this needs to be a semantics issue ←
17:50:11 <Scott_Bauer> alexwood: owl2 and rid add some not referenced in semantics
Alex Hall: owl2 and rid add some not referenced in semantics ←
17:50:26 <davidwood> s/alexwood/alexhall/
17:50:48 <Scott_Bauer> cygrid: the concepts in rdf semantics are practical and should be in semantics
Richard Cyganiak: the list of XSD datatypes in rdf semantics are practical and should be in RDF concepts ←
17:51:07 <Scott_Bauer> s/cygrid/cygri
17:51:18 <pchampin> s/concepts/list of XSD datatypes/
17:51:24 <iand> he said the datatype list should be in concepts (as well as semantics)
Ian Davis: he said the datatype list should be in concepts (as well as semantics) ←
17:51:32 <gavin_> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
17:51:42 <pchampin> s/be in semantics/be in RDF concepts/
17:51:45 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: list of datatypes that are in recommended for use in semantics should be in concepts
Richard Cyganiak: list of datatypes that are in recommended for use in semantics should be in concepts ←
17:51:50 <mischat> +1
Mischa Tuffield: +1 ←
17:51:50 <iand> +1
17:51:53 <pchampin> +1
17:51:55 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: i concur
David Wood: i concur ←
17:51:57 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
17:52:04 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
17:52:43 <Scott_Bauer> action: cygri contact pat and peter and make sure they are ok with this
ACTION: cygri contact pat and peter and make sure they are ok with this ←
17:52:43 <trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Contact pat and peter and make sure they are ok with this [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-105 - Contact pat and peter and make sure they are ok with this [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20]. ←
17:53:33 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: lets leave graphs alone
David Wood: lets leave graphs alone ←
17:53:46 <gavin_> action: gavinc add link from Turtle datatypes section to recommended list in concepts
ACTION: gavinc add link from Turtle datatypes section to recommended list in concepts ←
17:53:47 <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Add link from Turtle datatypes section to recommended list in concepts [on Gavin Carothers - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-106 - Add link from Turtle datatypes section to recommended list in concepts [on Gavin Carothers - due 2011-10-20]. ←
17:53:48 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: topic issue 16
David Wood: topic ISSUE-16 ←
17:54:02 <Scott_Bauer> topic: issue 16
17:54:08 <cygri> ISSUE-16?
17:54:08 <trackbot> ISSUE-16 -- What is the normative serialization of the JSON grammar? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-16 -- What is the normative serialization of the JSON grammar? -- open ←
17:54:08 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/16
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/16 ←
17:54:16 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: should this be an issue at all?
David Wood: should this be an issue at all? ←
17:55:16 <Scott_Bauer> … this should remain open and we move on
… this should remain open and we move on ←
17:55:29 <Scott_Bauer> topic: issue 69
17:55:58 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: richard gave himself an action for 34 and 69. will propose something
David Wood: richard gave himself an action for 34 and 69. will propose something ←
17:56:28 <Scott_Bauer> topic: issue 70
17:56:45 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: close as an editorial issue
David Wood: close as an editorial issue ←
17:56:54 <Scott_Bauer> … ?
… ? ←
17:57:04 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: I'd like to keep it open
Richard Cyganiak: I'd like to keep it open ←
17:57:33 <gavin_> issue-75?
17:57:33 <trackbot> ISSUE-75 -- Valid plain literals containing #x0 are ill-typed in RDF 1.1 -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-75 -- Valid plain literals containing #x0 are ill-typed in RDF 1.1 -- open ←
17:57:33 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/75
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/75 ←
17:57:45 <Scott_Bauer> topic: issue 75
17:58:55 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: unicode not allowed in xml version. all sorts of formerly valid rdf plain literals are no longer valid
Richard Cyganiak: unicode not allowed in xml version. all sorts of formerly valid rdf plain literals are no longer valid ←
17:59:27 <Scott_Bauer> … unicode .0
… unicode .0 ←
18:00:11 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: what should the resolution be?
David Wood: what should the resolution be? ←
18:00:41 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: we should have all the changes rdf 1.0 and 1.1 in same place.
Richard Cyganiak: we should have all the changes rdf 1.0 and 1.1 in same place. ←
18:01:11 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: put it in use cases and requirements?
Sandro Hawke: put it in use cases and requirements? ←
18:01:38 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: do we have such a document?
Richard Cyganiak: do we have such a document? ←
18:01:44 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: no
Sandro Hawke: no ←
18:02:04 <iand> we should notify community early to see if it breaks any implementations
Ian Davis: we should notify community early to see if it breaks any implementations ←
18:02:06 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: will create a note -- not an action item.
David Wood: will create a note -- not an action item. ←
18:02:23 <Scott_Bauer> …
… ←
18:02:56 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: we put it in rdf concepts now?
Sandro Hawke: we put it in rdf concepts now? ←
18:03:36 <AlexHall> how many implementors validate xsd:strings right now?
Alex Hall: how many implementors validate xsd:strings right now? ←
18:03:49 <iand> we could write a negative test case: :x :y "\u0000" .
Ian Davis: we could write a negative test case: :x :y "\u0000" . ←
18:04:09 <iand> ask implementors to try that test and see if they handle it
Ian Davis: ask implementors to try that test and see if they handle it ←
18:04:11 <Scott_Bauer> letting cygri create the action item?
letting cygri create the action item? ←
18:04:16 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to add a note to RDF Concepts re ISSUE-75
ACTION: cygri to add a note to RDF Concepts re ISSUE-75 ←
18:04:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-107 - Add a note to RDF Concepts re ISSUE-75 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-107 - Add a note to RDF Concepts re ISSUE-75 [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-10-20]. ←
18:04:19 <sandro> gavin_: This wasn't a problem pre-turtle because no syntax could express it.
Gavin Carothers: This wasn't a problem pre-turtle because no syntax could express it. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:04:51 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: Ian's says it should be a test case
David Wood: Ian's says it should be a test case ←
18:05:06 <Scott_Bauer> gavinc: it can't be expressed in n-triples
Gavin Carothers: it can't be expressed in n-triples ←
18:05:30 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: it's a syntax error -- you expect it to fail
Sandro Hawke: it's a syntax error -- you expect it to fail ←
18:05:36 <iand> it can be expressed in ntriples (as above) but it is just datatype invalid
Ian Davis: it can be expressed in ntriples (as above) but it is just datatype invalid ←
18:05:54 <Scott_Bauer> topic: issue 76
18:06:18 <cygri> sandro++
Richard Cyganiak: sandro++ ←
18:06:46 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: close issue 75 first
Sandro Hawke: close ISSUE-75 first ←
18:06:48 <iand> If i can write "x"^^xsd:int then I can write "\u0000"^^xsd:string
Ian Davis: If i can write "x"^^xsd:int then I can write "\u0000"^^xsd:string ←
18:07:05 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: closing issue 75
David Wood: closing ISSUE-75 ←
18:07:36 <Scott_Bauer> … issue 76 overcome by events if datatypes move from semantics to concepts
… ISSUE-76 overcome by events if datatypes move from semantics to concepts ←
18:07:49 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: it's a bug and needs to stay open.
Richard Cyganiak: it's a bug and needs to stay open. ←
18:08:15 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: we resolved this at an earlier date but we forgot to close it
David Wood: we resolved this at an earlier date but we forgot to close it ←
18:08:35 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: pat closed it
David Wood: pat closed it ←
18:08:53 <NickH> ACTION-76?
Nicholas Humfrey: ACTION-76? ←
18:08:53 <trackbot> ACTION-76 -- Patrick Hayes to summarize the options -- due 2011-08-24 -- CLOSED
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-76 -- Patrick Hayes to summarize the options -- due 2011-08-24 -- CLOSED ←
18:08:53 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/76
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/76 ←
18:09:03 <Scott_Bauer> this was action 76
18:09:08 <gavin_> iand, I agree (sort of) but I don't think you could write Recomended RDF that used #x0 at all.
Gavin Carothers: iand, I agree (sort of) but I don't think you could write Recomended RDF that used #x0 at all. ←
18:09:37 <gavin_> by a strict reading of the specifications
Gavin Carothers: by a strict reading of the specifications ←
18:09:49 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: action: check with pat hayes to see if issue 76 can be closed
David Wood: action: check with pat hayes to see if ISSUE-76 can be closed ←
18:10:04 <Scott_Bauer> action: check with pat hayes to see if issue 76 can be closed
ACTION: check with pat hayes to see if ISSUE-76 can be closed ←
18:10:04 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - check
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - check ←
18:10:35 <davidwood> action: davidwood to check with pat hayes to see if issue 76 can be closed
ACTION: davidwood to check with pat hayes to see if ISSUE-76 can be closed ←
18:10:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-108 - Check with pat hayes to see if issue 76 can be closed [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-108 - Check with pat hayes to see if ISSUE-76 can be closed [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20]. ←
18:10:54 <MacTed> RRSAgent, drop action 11
Ted Thibodeau: RRSAgent, drop ACTION-11 ←
18:11:04 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: only other issues are with graphs
David Wood: only other issues are with graphs ←
18:11:30 <Scott_Bauer> … we can do issues for graphs or we can talk about the primer
… we can do issues for graphs or we can talk about the primer ←
18:11:30 <cygri> "Review of all outstanding Documents that the WG is updating."
Richard Cyganiak: "Review of all outstanding Documents that the WG is updating." ←
18:11:56 <cygri> q+ to suggest "Review of all outstanding Documents that the WG is updating."
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to suggest "Review of all outstanding Documents that the WG is updating." ←
18:12:15 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: issue 21 re node sharing is a possibilities
Sandro Hawke: ISSUE-21 re node sharing is a possibilities ←
18:12:24 <pchampin> q-
18:12:31 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: let's not look at graphs now
Richard Cyganiak: let's not look at graphs now ←
18:12:37 <gavin_> +1 no more talking about graphs
Gavin Carothers: +1 no more talking about graphs ←
18:12:39 <iand> no issues were raised from our f2f discussions on named graphs. pity we couldn't get concrete issues from them
Ian Davis: no issues were raised from our f2f discussions on named graphs. pity we couldn't get concrete issues from them ←
18:12:53 <iand> gavin_: we can't talk about graphs anyway
Gavin Carothers: we can't talk about graphs anyway [ Scribe Assist by Ian Davis ] ←
18:13:14 <gavin_> ack cygri
Gavin Carothers: ack cygri ←
18:13:14 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to suggest "Review of all outstanding Documents that the WG is updating."
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to suggest "Review of all outstanding Documents that the WG is updating." ←
18:13:18 <sandro> indeed, iand.... :-(
Sandro Hawke: indeed, iand.... :-( ←
18:13:18 <Scott_Bauer> … review outstanding documents
… review outstanding documents ←
18:13:39 <Scott_Bauer> … need editors drafts for other documents
… need editors drafts for other documents ←
18:13:54 <Scott_Bauer> … check up on prospective editors for these
… check up on prospective editors for these ←
18:14:07 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: we should look into the editors list
David Wood: we should look into the editors list ←
18:14:47 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: we need to do one issue per week before last call
Sandro Hawke: we need to close one (on average) issue per week before last call ←
18:15:20 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: let's go through the editors list
David Wood: let's go through the editors list ←
18:15:38 <Scott_Bauer> … we'll do the primer if we have time.
… we'll do the primer if we have time. ←
18:15:56 <sandro> s/do one/close one (on average)/
18:16:09 <Scott_Bauer> … vocabulary. we had dan brickley. Do we need a co-editor
… vocabulary. we had dan brickley. Do we need a co-editor ←
18:16:16 <Scott_Bauer> … anyone interested
… anyone interested ←
18:16:33 <pchampin> and if he does, I volunteer
Pierre-Antoine Champin: and if he does, I volunteer ←
18:16:41 <Scott_Bauer> action: davidwood ask danbri if he would like a co-editor on vocabulary
ACTION: davidwood ask danbri if he would like a co-editor on vocabulary ←
18:16:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-109 - Ask danbri if he would like a co-editor on vocabulary [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-109 - Ask danbri if he would like a co-editor on vocabulary [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20]. ←
18:17:23 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: n-triples two oracle editors on one documents.
David Wood: n-triples two oracle editors on one documents. ←
18:17:42 <Scott_Bauer> gavinc: they raised objections and were made editors as a result.
Gavin Carothers: they raised objections and were made editors as a result. ←
18:19:06 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: a fait accompli n-triples will be a part of the turtle doc
David Wood: a fait accompli n-triples will be a part of the turtle doc ←
18:19:13 <iand> thanks sandro - i work better through the medium of text :)
Ian Davis: thanks sandro - i work better through the medium of text :) ←
18:19:33 <Scott_Bauer> … sour and she will work with gavin on the document
… souri and zhe will work with gavin on the document ←
18:19:48 <Scott_Bauer> s/sour/souri
18:19:56 <gavin_> s/she/zhe/
18:21:33 <Guus> [from Heathrow]
Guus Schreiber: [from Heathrow] ←
18:21:59 <gavin_> This is the Linked Data API stuff yes?
Gavin Carothers: This is the Linked Data API stuff yes? ←
18:22:08 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: yves could you describe any progress on the JSON recipes note
David Wood: yves could you describe any progress on the JSON recipes note ←
18:22:27 <Scott_Bauer> yvesr: have not started on it yet.
Yves Raimond: have not started on it yet. ←
18:23:29 <Scott_Bauer> action: davidwood ping fabian re rdf syntax spec revised
ACTION: davidwood ping fabian re rdf syntax spec revised ←
18:23:30 <trackbot> Created ACTION-110 - Ping fabian re rdf syntax spec revised [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-110 - Ping fabian re rdf syntax spec revised [on David Wood - due 2011-10-20]. ←
18:24:12 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: richard the n-quad syntax?
David Wood: richard the n-quad syntax? ←
18:24:43 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: we don't know what's going to have until abstract syntax is better developed
Richard Cyganiak: we don't know what's going to have until abstract syntax is better developed ←
18:25:06 <Scott_Bauer> … might be part of the turtle work for eric or gavin?
… might be part of the turtle work for eric or gavin? ←
18:25:42 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: I disagree. we agreed that turtle would not deal with named graphs.
David Wood: I disagree. we agreed that turtle would not deal with named graphs. ←
18:26:05 <Scott_Bauer> gavinc: I'm willing to work with someone on the the trig syntax.
Gavin Carothers: I'm willing to work with someone on the the trig syntax. ←
18:26:22 <Scott_Bauer> … I'd like someone else to co-edit
… I'd like someone else to co-edit ←
18:27:14 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: trig and n-quads I've worked with but syntax is a lot of detailed syntax gavin is better at.
Richard Cyganiak: trig and n-quads I've worked with but syntax is a lot of detailed syntax gavin is better at. ←
18:27:27 <Scott_Bauer> … grammar is 95% the same
… grammar is 95% the same ←
18:27:42 <Scott_Bauer> gavin: I need some else but I agree
Gavin Carothers: I need some else but I agree ←
18:27:50 <Scott_Bauer> … the grammar will not be repeated.
… the grammar will not be repeated. ←
18:28:15 <Scott_Bauer> cygri: Once we know abstract syntax we should revisit.
Richard Cyganiak: Once we know abstract syntax we should revisit. ←
18:28:41 <Scott_Bauer> … concepts work is unknown. Work may go well
… concepts work is unknown. Work may go well ←
18:29:04 <Scott_Bauer> … I might consider in the future but not now.
… I might consider in the future but not now. ←
18:29:49 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: process question for sandro.
David Wood: process question for sandro. ←
18:29:58 <sandro> change the shortname "rdf-syntax-grammar" to "rdf-xml"
Sandro Hawke: change the shortname "rdf-syntax-grammar" to "rdf-xml" ←
18:30:01 <sandro> seems fine to me.
Sandro Hawke: seems fine to me. ←
18:31:34 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: should we do anything with our last 30 minutes
David Wood: should we do anything with our last 30 minutes ←
18:32:31 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: I have much of the scribe cleanup done but you are free to clean them up as necessary.
Sandro Hawke: I have much of the scribe cleanup done but you are free to clean them up as necessary. ←
18:33:28 <Scott_Bauer> … (referring to the minutes)
… (referring to the minutes) ←
18:34:21 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: rdf primer is scheduled what do people want?
David Wood: rdf primer is scheduled what do people want? ←
18:35:08 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: will it be a multi syntax document
Sandro Hawke: will it be a multi syntax document ←
18:35:11 <Guus> should come back on a telecon
Guus Schreiber: should come back on a telecon ←
18:35:20 <Scott_Bauer> davidwood: that would be great
David Wood: that would be great ←
18:35:41 <Guus> 1st version turtle/trig, add others later
Guus Schreiber: 1st version turtle/trig, add others later ←
18:36:27 <Scott_Bauer> … good for the community if all the serializations are represented in the primer.
… good for the community if all the serializations are represented in the primer. ←
18:36:52 <Guus> sure
Guus Schreiber: sure ←
18:36:55 <Scott_Bauer> gavinc: only one will have named graphs or can deal with it.
Gavin Carothers: only one will have named graphs or can deal with it. ←
18:37:22 <Scott_Bauer> sandro: convenient in trig doable in others
Sandro Hawke: convenient in trig doable in others ←
18:37:38 <Scott_Bauer> … near a clear model use trig
… need a clear modell use trig ←
18:38:34 <sandro> sandro: Once we have a clear enough model, I think it will be easy enough to define a useable way to do it in pure triples.
Sandro Hawke: Once we have a clear enough model, I think it will be easy enough to define a useable way to do it in pure triples. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:38:47 <Scott_Bauer> s/near a clear mode/need a clear model/
18:39:06 <sandro> PROPOSED: The primer should have examples in each of our syntaxes
PROPOSED: The primer should have examples in each of our syntaxes ←
18:39:17 <gavin_> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
18:39:18 <pchampin> +1
18:39:19 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
18:39:20 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:39:20 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
18:39:23 <Scott_Bauer> +1
+1 ←
18:39:25 <Guus> +1
Guus Schreiber: +1 ←
18:39:30 <sandro> RESOLVED: The primer should have examples in each of our syntaxes
RESOLVED: The primer should have examples in each of our syntaxes ←
18:39:45 <sandro> PROPOSED: The primer should have a section on each of our syntaxes
PROPOSED: The primer should have a section on each of our syntaxes ←
18:39:45 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
18:39:49 <gavin_> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
18:39:49 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
18:39:49 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:39:51 <pchampin> +1
18:39:55 <Scott_Bauer> +1
+1 ←
18:39:59 <sandro> RESOLVED: The primer should have a section on each of our syntaxes
RESOLVED: The primer should have a section on each of our syntaxes ←
18:40:10 <sandro> PROPOSED: The primer should be 500 bytes long.
PROPOSED: The primer should be 500 bytes long. ←
18:40:11 <Guus> this section may be an appendix
Guus Schreiber: this section may be an appendix ←
18:40:27 <sandro> PROPOSED: The section on RDF/XML should not be first
PROPOSED: The section on RDF/XML should not be first ←
18:40:32 <pchampin> +1000
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1000 ←
18:40:36 <Guus> good to limit main text length
Guus Schreiber: good to limit main text length ←
18:40:57 <sandro> Guus? I thought you left...
Sandro Hawke: Guus? I thought you left... ←
18:41:03 <Guus> [anybody hearing me?]
Guus Schreiber: [anybody hearing me?] ←
18:41:05 <davidwood> PROPOSED: The section on RDF/XML should be the last syntactical section. Turtle should be first.
PROPOSED: The section on RDF/XML should be the last syntactical section. Turtle should be first. ←
18:41:13 <cygri> PROPOSED: The full text for the RDF/XML section should be: “Don't.”
PROPOSED: The full text for the RDF/XML section should be: “Don't.” ←
18:41:15 <davidwood> Guus: We don't hear you
Guus Schreiber: We don't hear you [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
18:41:23 <davidwood> Please vote on:
David Wood: Please vote on: ←
18:41:28 <davidwood> PROPOSED: The section on RDF/XML should be the last syntactical section. Turtle should be first.
PROPOSED: The section on RDF/XML should be the last syntactical section. Turtle should be first. ←
18:41:31 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
18:41:35 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
18:41:36 <pchampin> +1
18:41:44 <AlexHall> +1
18:41:44 <gavin_> +1 given that we resolve name graphs in turtle ;)
Gavin Carothers: +1 given that we resolve name graphs in turtle ;) ←
18:41:45 <Guus> i think this is going in tto much detail, just formulate reqs, not structure
Guus Schreiber: i think this is going in tto much detail, just formulate reqs, not structure ←
18:41:48 <sandro> +0 I think that's a little much
Sandro Hawke: +0 I think that's a little much ←
18:41:50 <gavin_> hehe
Gavin Carothers: hehe ←
18:41:59 <gavin_> You think? ;)
Gavin Carothers: You think? ;) ←
18:42:32 <gavin_> AlexHall: What font should we use?
Alex Hall: What font should we use? [ Scribe Assist by Gavin Carothers ] ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#2) generated 2011-10-13 18:46:34 UTC by 'sandro', comments: None