RDF Working Group

Minutes of 16 January 2013

Seen
Andy Seaborne, Antoine Zimmermann, Arnaud Le Hors, David Wood, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Fabien Gandon, Gavin Carothers, Gregg Kellogg, Guus Schreiber, Ivan Herman, Lee Feigenbaum, Markus Lanthaler, Patrick Hayes, Peter Patel-Schneider, Pierre-Antoine Champin, Richard Cyganiak, Sandro Hawke, Steve Harris, Ted Thibodeau, Thomas Baker, Yves Raimond, Zhe Wu
Chair
David Wood
Scribe
Richard Cyganiak, Gavin Carothers, Pierre-Antoine Champin
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. Accept the minutes of the 9 January telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09 link
  2. Close ISSUE-23; we are indeed defining new formats and new media types for multi-graph. link
  3. Resolve ISSUE-16 by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627 link
  4. Resolve ISSUE-92 by saying that it has been done link
Topics
15:54:25 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/16-rdf-wg-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/16-rdf-wg-irc

15:54:32 <davidwood> Zakim, this is rdf

David Wood: Zakim, this is rdf

15:54:33 <Zakim> davidwood, I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be rdf".

Zakim IRC Bot: davidwood, I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be rdf".

15:54:44 <davidwood> Zakim, this will be rdf

David Wood: Zakim, this will be rdf

15:54:44 <Zakim> ok, davidwood; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, davidwood; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes

15:55:05 <davidwood> Chair: David Wood
15:55:23 <davidwood> I think we will need a scribe replacement...

David Wood: I think we will need a scribe replacement...

15:57:46 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started

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

15:57:53 <Zakim> +Guus

Zakim IRC Bot: +Guus

15:58:09 <Zakim> +bhyland

Zakim IRC Bot: +bhyland

15:58:26 <davidwood> Zakim, bhyland is me

David Wood: Zakim, bhyland is me

15:58:27 <Zakim> +davidwood; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +davidwood; got it

15:59:49 <Zakim> +[GVoice]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[GVoice]

15:59:55 <ericP> Zakim, GVoice is me

Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, GVoice is me

15:59:55 <Zakim> +ericP; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +ericP; got it

16:00:31 <Zakim> +??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13

16:00:44 <Zakim> +??P14

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14

16:00:50 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P14 is me

Steve Harris: Zakim, ??P14 is me

16:00:50 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it

16:01:35 <Zakim> +Arnaud

Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud

16:01:56 <Zakim> +GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: +GavinC

16:02:04 <yvesr> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Yves Raimond: Zakim, who is on the phone?

16:02:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus, davidwood, ericP, ??P13, SteveH, Arnaud, GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Guus, davidwood, ericP, ??P13, SteveH, Arnaud, GavinC

16:02:09 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P13 is me

Yves Raimond: Zakim, ??P13 is me

16:02:10 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +yvesr; got it

16:02:21 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

16:02:32 <Zakim> + +1.617.838.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.838.aaaa

16:02:35 <Zakim> +??P24

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P24

16:02:40 <TallTed> Zakim, aaaa is me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, aaaa is me

16:02:40 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it

16:02:46 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

16:02:47 <AZ> Zakim, ??P24 is me

Antoine Zimmermann: Zakim, ??P24 is me

16:02:48 <Zakim> +AZ; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AZ; got it

16:02:48 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller]

16:02:49 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

16:02:49 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted

16:03:10 <Zakim> + +1.408.992.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.408.992.aabb

16:03:15 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

16:03:25 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me

Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPCaller is me

16:03:25 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it

16:04:00 <Zakim> +cygri

Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri

16:04:03 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip

Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip

16:04:03 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made

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

16:04:04 <Zakim> +Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan

16:04:25 <Zakim> +??P26

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P26

16:04:35 <markus> zakim, ??P26 is me

Markus Lanthaler: zakim, ??P26 is me

16:04:35 <Zakim> +markus; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +markus; got it

16:04:49 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09

16:05:34 <Zakim> + +1.650.265.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.650.265.aacc

16:05:49 <zwu2> zakim, +1.650.265.aacc is me

Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.650.265.aacc is me

16:05:49 <Zakim> +zwu2; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +zwu2; got it

16:05:51 <davidwood> Zakim, who is here?

David Wood: Zakim, who is here?

16:05:51 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus, davidwood, ericP, yvesr, SteveH, Arnaud, GavinC, Sandro, TallTed (muted), AZ, +1.408.992.aabb, AndyS, cygri, Ivan, markus, zwu2

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Guus, davidwood, ericP, yvesr, SteveH, Arnaud, GavinC, Sandro, TallTed (muted), AZ, +1.408.992.aabb, AndyS, cygri, Ivan, markus, zwu2

16:05:52 <zwu2> zakim, mute me

Zhe Wu: zakim, mute me

16:05:55 <Zakim> On IRC I see zwu2, gavinc, AndyS, Arnaud, markus, AZ, Guus, RRSAgent, Zakim, cygri, tbaker, FabGandon, TallTed, gkellogg, ivan, SteveH, trackbot, mischat, davidwood, manu1, manu,

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see zwu2, gavinc, AndyS, Arnaud, markus, AZ, Guus, RRSAgent, Zakim, cygri, tbaker, FabGandon, TallTed, gkellogg, ivan, SteveH, trackbot, mischat, davidwood, manu1, manu,

16:05:55 <Zakim> ... yvesr, sandro, ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: ... yvesr, sandro, ericP

16:05:55 <Zakim> zwu2 should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: zwu2 should now be muted

16:06:08 <cygri> scribe: cygri

(Scribe set to Richard Cyganiak)

16:06:15 <Zakim> -ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP

16:06:16 <davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 9 January telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09

David Wood: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 9 January telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09

16:06:29 <cygri> topic: Minutes of last meeting

1. Minutes of last meeting

16:06:47 <cygri> sandro: i fixed the problem in last week's minutes

Sandro Hawke: i fixed the problem in last week's minutes

16:07:03 <cygri> RESOLVED: Accept the minutes of the 9 January telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09\

RESOLVED: Accept the minutes of the 9 January telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-01-09

16:07:10 <davidwood> Review of action items

David Wood: Review of action items

16:07:10 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview

16:07:10 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/open

16:07:16 <cygri> s/09\/09/
16:07:23 <cygri> topic: Review of action items

2. Review of action items

16:07:33 <gavinc> ACTION-190 was done a while ago?

Gavin Carothers: ACTION-190 was done a while ago?

16:07:33 <AZ> q+

Antoine Zimmermann: q+

16:07:57 <davidwood> ack AZ

David Wood: ack AZ

16:08:15 <cygri> AZ: I had an action to complete for yesterday; it's not yet finished

Antoine Zimmermann: I had an action to complete for yesterday; it's not yet finished

16:08:24 <cygri> … drafting the document on dataset semantics

… drafting the document on dataset semantics

16:08:35 <cygri> … hope to have a draft by end of the week, or beginning of next

… hope to have a draft by end of the week, or beginning of next

16:08:47 <cygri> … how do i publish it on the w3c server?

… how do i publish it on the w3c server?

16:09:06 <cygri> ivan: you should be able to write to mercurial

Ivan Herman: you should be able to write to mercurial

16:09:15 <cygri> … open a new folder, edit it there, and commit it

… open a new folder, edit it there, and commit it

16:09:25 <Zakim> + +33.4.92.96.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: + +33.4.92.96.aadd

16:09:33 <cygri> … once it becomes a proper W3C publication, webmaster copies it from mercurial

… once it becomes a proper W3C publication, webmaster copies it from mercurial

16:09:55 <cygri> davidwood: we will need to extend the charter soon

David Wood: we will need to extend the charter soon

16:10:00 <FabGandon> Zakim, +33.4.92.96.aadd is me

Fabien Gandon: Zakim, +33.4.92.96.aadd is me

16:10:00 <Zakim> +FabGandon; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +FabGandon; got it

16:10:01 <cygri> … so need to get our documents in order

… so need to get our documents in order

16:10:14 <cygri> … guus, status of the primer?

… guus, status of the primer?

16:10:20 <cygri> Guus: not much progress since last time

Guus Schreiber: not much progress since last time

16:10:39 <cygri> davidwood: we will need to get some work done in the next weeks to avoid embarrassment

David Wood: we will need to get some work done in the next weeks to avoid embarrassment

16:10:43 <davidwood> Topic: RDF Concepts

3. RDF Concepts

16:10:45 <cygri> scribe: gavinc

(Scribe set to Gavin Carothers)

16:10:46 <ivan> zakim, mute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me

16:10:46 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted

16:10:56 <cygri> davidwood: we have some open issues

David Wood: we have some open issues [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

16:11:18 <cygri> … i think some of them can be handled quickly, others may need more discussion

Richard Cyganiak: … i think some of them can be handled quickly, others may need more discussion

16:11:22 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/105: Graphs, datasets, authoritative representations, and content negotiation

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/105: Graphs, datasets, authoritative representations, and content negotiation

16:11:34 <cygri> ISSUE-105?

Richard Cyganiak: ISSUE-105?

16:11:34 <trackbot> ISSUE-105 -- Graphs, datasets, authoritative representations, and content negotiation -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-105 -- Graphs, datasets, authoritative representations, and content negotiation -- open

16:11:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/105

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/105

16:12:35 <Zakim> +[GVoice]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[GVoice]

16:12:45 <gavinc> cygri: This is a nebulous issue, there are multiple parts. One is the media types of graphs vs datasets

Richard Cyganiak: This is a nebulous issue, there are multiple parts. One is the media types of graphs vs datasets

16:13:03 <gavinc> ... this came up with JSON-LD.

... this came up with JSON-LD.

16:13:38 <sandro> q?

Sandro Hawke: q?

16:13:41 <gavinc> ... another is how do fragment identifiers work in datasets? If you have graph names with fragments does that mean anything?

... another is how do fragment identifiers work in datasets? If you have graph names with fragments does that mean anything?

16:14:24 <gavinc> ... I think the summary from before Christmas was that if we don't say anything that Datasets and Graphs can be used interchangeably. That's what people will do if we don't say anything anyway

... I think the summary from before Christmas was that if we don't say anything that Datasets and Graphs can be used interchangeably. That's what people will do if we don't say anything anyway

16:15:00 <Zakim> +PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH

16:15:01 <gavinc> ... if we do say anything about the relationship between Datasets and Graphs we may be creeping back into defining dataset semantics which we said we wouldn't do.

... if we do say anything about the relationship between Datasets and Graphs we may be creeping back into defining dataset semantics which we said we wouldn't do.

16:15:19 <sandro> q+

Sandro Hawke: q+

16:15:30 <davidwood> ack sandro

David Wood: ack sandro

16:15:51 <gavinc> davidwood: Goal is to determine if we can close this quickly

David Wood: Goal is to determine if we can close this quickly

16:16:03 <gavinc> sandro: I think JSON-LD says something about this

Sandro Hawke: I think JSON-LD says something about this

16:16:48 <pfps> Is Sandro saying that one can always return a trig document when an rdf graph is being requested?

Peter Patel-Schneider: Is Sandro saying that one can always return a trig document when an rdf graph is being requested?

16:17:04 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

16:17:11 <LeeF> zakim, IPcaller is me

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, IPcaller is me

16:17:11 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF; got it

16:17:18 <gavinc> davidwood: No, pfps, I don't think he said that.

David Wood: No, pfps, I don't think he said that.

16:17:19 <AndyS> Does not reflect concern on the list from Steve IIRC.

Andy Seaborne: Does not reflect concern on the list from Steve IIRC.

16:17:20 <LeeF> zakim, mute me please

Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, mute me please

16:17:21 <Zakim> LeeF should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: LeeF should now be muted

16:17:29 <Zakim> +??P36

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P36

16:17:36 <sandro> PROPOSED: We advise people that when they are trying to get a graph and get a dataset instead (in Trig or JSON-LD), it's okay to just use the default graph as your graph, without issuing a warning or error.

PROPOSED: We advise people that when they are trying to get a graph and get a dataset instead (in Trig or JSON-LD), it's okay to just use the default graph as your graph, without issuing a warning or error.

16:17:44 <gavinc> pfps: If your asking for a graph you should never get back a dataset

Peter Patel-Schneider: If your asking for a graph you should never get back a dataset

16:18:04 <davidwood> ok

David Wood: ok

16:18:08 <markus> +1

Markus Lanthaler: +1

16:18:27 <Zakim> + +1.415.686.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.415.686.aaee

16:18:33 <gkellogg> zakim, I am aaee

Gregg Kellogg: zakim, I am aaee

16:18:33 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg; got it

16:18:35 <SteveH> +1 to pfps

Steve Harris: +1 to pfps

16:18:54 <gavinc> pfps: If I ask for a RDF document, and I get back something else, what should I do?

Peter Patel-Schneider: If I ask for a RDF document, and I get back something else, what should I do?

16:19:18 <gavinc> sandro: if you can't parse the TriG document you clearly you can't do anything

Sandro Hawke: if you can't parse the TriG document you clearly you can't do anything

16:19:20 <cygri> +1

Richard Cyganiak: +1

16:19:23 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

16:19:27 <gavinc> ... but if you can, use the default graph

... but if you can, use the default graph

16:19:36 <davidwood> -1 from PatH (via phone)

David Wood: -1 from PatH (via phone)

16:19:43 <gavinc> pfps: if this is acceptable then providers will do it.

Peter Patel-Schneider: if this is acceptable then providers will do it.

16:19:47 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/106: Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/106: Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

16:19:51 <Arnaud> should we really specify how an error is to be handled?

Arnaud Le Hors: should we really specify how an error is to be handled?

16:19:52 <SteveH> you absolutely should not interpret the default graph as if it were graph content

Steve Harris: you absolutely should not interpret the default graph as if it were graph content

16:19:53 <gavinc> davidwood: Moving on.

David Wood: Moving on.

16:19:54 <gkellogg> +1

Gregg Kellogg: +1

16:19:55 <pfps> -1 from me because of implementation burden

Peter Patel-Schneider: -1 from me because of implementation burden

16:19:56 <cygri> ISSUE-106?

Richard Cyganiak: ISSUE-106?

16:19:56 <trackbot> ISSUE-106 -- Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-106 -- Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics -- open

16:19:56 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/106

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/106

16:20:25 <gavinc> cygri: Mostly editoral. There is some content that moved between them.

Richard Cyganiak: Mostly editoral. There is some content that moved between them.

16:20:47 <gavinc> ... I guess this is mostly editoral, but I would like to keep open until there is a RDF Semantics draft

... I guess this is mostly editoral, but I would like to keep open until there is a RDF Semantics draft

16:21:10 <gavinc> davidwood: Propose to close?

David Wood: Propose to close?

16:21:42 <gavinc> cygri: I would like to keep it open, as there will be some work in the semantics draft...

Richard Cyganiak: I would like to keep it open, as there will be some work in the semantics draft...

16:22:01 <gavinc> PatH: I think they are all just editoral, no diffrence of opinion

Patrick Hayes: I think they are all just editoral, no diffrence of opinion

16:22:45 <gavinc> cygri: I would like to have a marker in the concepts, so that I can refer to the fact that there isn't a semantics draft for RDF concepts to point to

Richard Cyganiak: I would like to have a marker in the concepts, so that I can refer to the fact that there isn't a semantics draft for RDF concepts to point to

16:22:47 <TallTed> it's useful for bookkeeping; seems reasonable to leave it and move on

Ted Thibodeau: it's useful for bookkeeping; seems reasonable to leave it and move on

16:23:11 <gavinc> cygri: if the chairs are happier with it closed and an action instead that's fine

Richard Cyganiak: if the chairs are happier with it closed and an action instead that's fine

16:23:35 <gavinc> davidwood: I prefer to close and turn into action.

David Wood: I prefer to close and turn into action.

16:23:44 <gavinc> cygri: I'll do that.

Richard Cyganiak: I'll do that.

16:23:59 <gavinc> cygri: I raised it, I can close it?

Richard Cyganiak: I raised it, I can close it?

16:24:11 <gavinc> davidwood: Prefer to close and refer to action

David Wood: Prefer to close and refer to action

16:24:21 <gavinc> PatH: Ringing off

Patrick Hayes: Ringing off

16:24:27 <Zakim> -PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH

16:24:56 <gavinc> ACTION on PatH to work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

ACTION on PatH to work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

16:24:56 <trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/users>.

Trackbot IRC Bot: Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/users>.

16:25:03 <gavinc> ACTION PatH to work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

ACTION PatH to work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

16:25:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-221 - Work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics [on Patrick Hayes - due 2013-01-23].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-221 - Work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics [on Patrick Hayes - due 2013-01-23].

16:25:30 <gavinc> CLOSE ISSUE-106 Converted to ACTION-221

CLOSE ISSUE-106 Converted to ACTION-221

16:25:47 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

ACTION: cygri to work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics

16:25:47 <trackbot> Created ACTION-222 - Work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-01-23].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-222 - Work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-01-23].

16:25:54 <gavinc> CLOSE ISSUE-106

CLOSE ISSUE-106

16:25:54 <trackbot> Closed ISSUE-106 Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics.

Trackbot IRC Bot: Closed ISSUE-106 Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics.

16:25:57 <cygri> ACTION-222?

Richard Cyganiak: ACTION-222?

16:25:57 <trackbot> ACTION-222 -- Richard Cyganiak to work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics -- due 2013-01-23 -- OPEN

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-222 -- Richard Cyganiak to work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics -- due 2013-01-23 -- OPEN

16:25:57 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/222

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/222

16:26:30 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107: Revised definition of blank nodes

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107: Revised definition of blank nodes

16:26:31 <gavinc> ISSUE-107

ISSUE-107

16:26:31 <trackbot> ISSUE-107 -- Revised definition of blank nodes -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-107 -- Revised definition of blank nodes -- open

16:26:31 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107

16:26:34 <AZ> q+

Antoine Zimmermann: q+

16:26:34 <ivan> trackbot, associate ACTION-222 with ISSUE-106

Ivan Herman: trackbot, associate ACTION-222 with ISSUE-106

16:26:35 <trackbot> ACTION-222 (Work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics) associated with ISSUE-106.

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-222 (Work with PatH to make sure there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics) associated with ISSUE-106.

16:27:00 <gavinc> cygri: We didn't resolve this in the last WD

Richard Cyganiak: We didn't resolve this in the last WD

16:27:26 <TallTed> trackbot, associate ACTION-221 with ISSUE-106

Ted Thibodeau: trackbot, associate ACTION-221 with ISSUE-106

16:27:26 <trackbot> ACTION-221 (Work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics) associated with ISSUE-106.

Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-221 (Work with cygri to make there is no duplicated content between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics) associated with ISSUE-106.

16:27:30 <gavinc> ... next step to work with AZ to take one of the proposals and make both of us happy with it.

... next step to work with AZ to take one of the proposals and make both of us happy with it.

16:27:47 <gavinc> ack az

ack az

16:28:00 <gavinc> AZ: drafted a mail but didn't send it

Antoine Zimmermann: drafted a mail but didn't send it

16:28:12 <gavinc> ... I just have to find it and complete it in the next few days

... I just have to find it and complete it in the next few days

16:28:18 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/109: What's the consequence of a literal being ill-typed?

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/109: What's the consequence of a literal being ill-typed?

16:28:21 <ericP> i'm getting pressure to go to another call and don't think i'm critical here

Eric Prud'hommeaux: i'm getting pressure to go to another call and don't think i'm critical here

16:28:25 <gavinc> ISSUE-109

ISSUE-109

16:28:25 <trackbot> ISSUE-109 -- What's the consequence of a literal being ill-typed? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-109 -- What's the consequence of a literal being ill-typed? -- open

16:28:25 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/109

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/109

16:28:49 <gavinc> davidwood: Lots of disciusion, no resolution

David Wood: Lots of discussion, no resolution

16:29:12 <gavinc> cygri: One way of doing this is making it part of the semantics. PatH said there was a way of doing that that makes sense to him.

Richard Cyganiak: One way of doing this is making it part of the semantics. PatH said there was a way of doing that that makes sense to him.

16:29:24 <gavinc> ... there would also need to be a small edit to RDF Concepts to make it happen.

... there would also need to be a small edit to RDF Concepts to make it happen.

16:29:26 <gkellogg> s/disciusion/discussion/
16:29:35 <ericP> -> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/file/tip/rdf-turtle/coverage/tests/ atomic tests for Turtle

Eric Prud'hommeaux: -> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/file/tip/rdf-turtle/coverage/tests/ atomic tests for Turtle

16:29:42 <ericP> (committed after much pain)

Eric Prud'hommeaux: (committed after much pain)

16:29:46 <gavinc> ... it might be controversial

... it might be controversial

16:29:52 <Zakim> -ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP

16:30:12 <gavinc> ... some clarification about what applications are supposed to do with malformed typed literals? is it an error or not?

... some clarification about what applications are supposed to do with malformed typed literals? is it an error or not?

16:30:20 <davidwood> q?

David Wood: q?

16:30:24 <gavinc> pfps: If it's an error then where is the error message?

Peter Patel-Schneider: If it's an error then where is the error message?

16:30:30 <gavinc> ... it's NOT an error!

... it's NOT an error!

16:30:43 <gavinc> ... It's perfectly fine as far as RDF is concerned

... It's perfectly fine as far as RDF is concerned

16:30:46 <gavinc> ... what's the issue?

... what's the issue?

16:30:58 <gavinc> cygri: The issue is that the datatype can't assign a value.

Richard Cyganiak: The issue is that the datatype can't assign a value.

16:31:23 <gavinc> ... it clearly is an error, someone did something wrong publishing that data.

... it clearly is an error, someone did something wrong publishing that data.

16:31:37 <gavinc> ... You shouldn't be publishing that kind of data.

... You shouldn't be publishing that kind of data.

16:31:51 <gavinc> ... is this an error or not? The current spec doesn't say one way or another

... is this an error or not? The current spec doesn't say one way or another

16:31:59 <gavinc> pfps: I think everything is perfectly clear.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I think everything is perfectly clear.

16:32:07 <gavinc> pfps: It isn't an error.

Peter Patel-Schneider: It isn't an error.

16:32:13 <gavinc> pfps: How can it be an error?

Peter Patel-Schneider: How can it be an error?

16:32:31 <yvesr> +1 with cygri - we should be clear on that, and it should be flagged by applications

Yves Raimond: +1 with cygri - we should be clear on that, and it should be flagged by applications

16:32:35 <gavinc> davidwood: any time the spec talks about an inconsistent graph...

David Wood: any time the spec talks about an inconsistent graph...

16:32:48 <pchampin> q+

Pierre-Antoine Champin: q+

16:32:49 <gavinc> sandro: An error is when someone does something they aren't supposed to do.

Sandro Hawke: An error is when someone does something they aren't supposed to do.

16:32:59 <gavinc> pfps: an error is when the system barfs

Peter Patel-Schneider: an error is when the system barfs

16:33:02 <LeeF> If we don't agree on what an error is then it doesn't seem so productive to discuss whether this condition is an error or not :)

Lee Feigenbaum: If we don't agree on what an error is then it doesn't seem so productive to discuss whether this condition is an error or not :)

16:33:06 <cygri> RDF 2004 says: "Such a case, while in error, is not syntactically ill-formed."

Richard Cyganiak: RDF 2004 says: "Such a case, while in error, is not syntactically ill-formed."

16:33:14 <TallTed> a mistyped literal, like "abc" typed as a datetime.  that seems like an error...

Ted Thibodeau: a mistyped literal, like "abc" typed as a datetime. that seems like an error...

16:33:27 <AndyS> Quote text.

Andy Seaborne: Quote text.

16:33:33 <pchampin> q-

Pierre-Antoine Champin: q-

16:33:40 <davidwood> q?

David Wood: q?

16:33:58 <gavinc> sandro: Lexical space provided by a regular expression...

Sandro Hawke: Lexical space provided by a regular expression...

16:34:09 <gavinc> pfps: if you go outside, stuff happens, but it's not an error

Peter Patel-Schneider: if you go outside, stuff happens, but it's not an error

16:34:22 <gavinc> ... then you need to have an error condition and error return

... then you need to have an error condition and error return

16:34:38 <gavinc> cygri: RDF Concepts says there is an error

Richard Cyganiak: 2004 RDF Concepts says there is an error

16:34:43 <gavinc> pfps: Then RDF Concepts is wrong.

Peter Patel-Schneider: Then RDF Concepts is wrong.

16:34:51 <gavinc> ... there should be some handling method for that error

... there should be some handling method for that error

16:35:02 <davidwood> s/RDF Concepts says there is an error/2004 RDF Concepts says there is an error/
16:35:20 <gavinc> cygri: No, it doesn't say what happens when you use a language tag that isn't a language, it doesn't say what to do if you use an IRI that isn't an IRI

Richard Cyganiak: No, it doesn't say what happens when you use a language tag that isn't a language, it doesn't say what to do if you use an IRI that isn't an IRI

16:35:34 <gavinc> pchampin: A data model can have an illtyped literal

Peter Patel-Schneider: A data model can have an illtyped literal

16:36:06 <gavinc> cygri: RDF 2004 says that in the case of an ill-typed it is an error but not a syntax error

Richard Cyganiak: RDF 2004 says that in the case of an ill-typed it is an error but not a syntax error

16:36:20 <gavinc> s/pchampin/pfps
16:36:30 <gavinc> pfps: It's a stupid thing to do, but not an "error"

Peter Patel-Schneider: It's a stupid thing to do, but not an "error"

16:36:39 <gavinc> cygri: I would like it to be an error

Richard Cyganiak: I would like it to be an error

16:36:47 <yvesr> should we do a strawpoll on whether we think it should be an error or not?

Yves Raimond: should we do a strawpoll on whether we think it should be an error or not?

16:36:53 <gavinc> pfps: That would be a change to the RDF Semantics

Peter Patel-Schneider: That would be a change to the RDF Semantics

16:36:57 <pchampin> I would like it to be an inconsistency as well

Pierre-Antoine Champin: I would like it to be an inconsistency as well

16:37:11 <davidwood> yvesr, we know now that we will not agree...

David Wood: yvesr, we know now that we will not agree...

16:37:20 <gavinc> sandro: Do I have to accept it? Do I have to ignore it? What do I do?

Sandro Hawke: Do I have to accept it? Do I have to ignore it? What do I do?

16:37:25 <gavinc> pfps: I'd like to keep doing what I do today, I accept it.

Peter Patel-Schneider: I'd like to keep doing what I do today, I accept it.

16:38:11 <davidwood> AZ, can you please put that in the minutes?

David Wood: AZ, can you please put that in the minutes?

16:38:40 <sandro> so it's "in error" but not "an error" ?

Sandro Hawke: so it's "in error" but not "an error" ?

16:38:40 <AZ> I think that RDF 2004 saying "... while in error, is not syntactically ill formed" is actally meaning "... while stupid as hell, is not formally an error"

Antoine Zimmermann: I think that RDF 2004 saying "... while in error, is not syntactically ill formed" is actally meaning "... while stupid as hell, is not formally an error"

16:38:57 <sandro> +1 cygri it should be an inconsistency

Sandro Hawke: +1 cygri it should be an inconsistency

16:39:00 <gavinc> cygri: Semantics is strange in this regard. It would be simple to say that the presence of an ill typed literal creates an inconsistency

Richard Cyganiak: Semantics is strange in this regard. It would be simple to say that the presence of an ill typed literal creates an inconsistency

16:39:01 <AndyS> May not know the datatype map.  Hence need to deal with it in some sense.  Inconsistency is unknown.

Andy Seaborne: May not know the datatype map. Hence need to deal with it in some sense. Inconsistency is unknown.

16:39:06 <gavinc> pfps: That requires a change to the RDF Semantics

Peter Patel-Schneider: That requires a change to the RDF Semantics

16:39:27 <gavinc> davidwood: I think he did propose that.

David Wood: I think he did propose that.

16:39:41 <gavinc> pfps: Right now we have two documents that say error where there is no error.

Peter Patel-Schneider: Right now we have two documents that say error where there is no error.

16:40:10 <gavinc> cygri: We need to address this, we should change this from a Concepts into a Semantics issue.

Richard Cyganiak: We need to address this, we should change this from a Concepts into a Semantics issue.

16:40:46 <gavinc> davidwood: is there a pointer to the resolution being talked about in IRC?

David Wood: is there a pointer to the proposal being talked about in IRC?

16:41:11 <AndyS> s/resolution/proposal/
16:41:24 <AndyS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Nov/0268.html

Andy Seaborne: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Nov/0268.html

16:41:38 <gavinc> davidwood: PatH says he's fine with that. pfps you disagree?

David Wood: PatH says he's fine with that. pfps you disagree?

16:42:02 <gavinc> pfps: If the change is going to be made, it needs to be made correctly.

Peter Patel-Schneider: If the change is going to be made, it needs to be made correctly.

16:42:27 <gavinc> pfps: That proposal doesn't make sense.

Peter Patel-Schneider: That proposal doesn't make sense.

16:43:15 <gavinc> cygri: I don't know how to change that proposal into the semantics.

Richard Cyganiak: I don't know how to change that proposal into the semantics.

16:43:40 <gavinc> ... the mecanics would need to be worked out.

... the mecanics would need to be worked out.

16:44:09 <gavinc> pfps: The proposal is kind of weird. In any D entailment... ... ... ...

Peter Patel-Schneider: The proposal is kind of weird. In any D entailment... ... ... ...

16:44:50 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

16:44:56 <davidwood> ack ivan

David Wood: ack ivan

16:44:57 <ivan> zakim, unmute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute me

16:44:58 <Zakim> Ivan was not muted, ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan was not muted, ivan

16:45:02 <gavinc> davidwood: hoping to move on...

David Wood: hoping to move on...

16:45:13 <Zakim> +PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH

16:45:26 <gavinc> ivan: What pfps described for D entailment, don't we already have that for XMLLiterals?

Ivan Herman: What pfps described for D entailment, don't we already have that for XMLLiterals?

16:45:55 <gavinc> cygri: The pure presense of an ill-typed literal doesn't cause an inconsistency. Only if there is a range statement.

Richard Cyganiak: The pure presense of an ill-typed literal doesn't cause an inconsistency. Only if there is a range statement.

16:46:28 <gavinc> ... same for all datatypes. You have to have a range statement AND an ill-typed literal to get an inconsistency.

... same for all datatypes. You have to have a range statement AND an ill-typed literal to get an inconsistency.

16:47:21 <gavinc> PatH: SOmething could be consistant in RDF, but not with a specific datatype map.

Patrick Hayes: SOmething could be consistant in RDF, but not with a specific datatype map.

16:47:23 <ivan> zakim, mute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me

16:47:23 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted

16:47:31 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/111: Should RDF Concepts define any operations on RDF datasets?

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/111: Should RDF Concepts define any operations on RDF datasets?

16:47:34 <gavinc> davidwood: lets move on

David Wood: lets move on

16:47:36 <gavinc> ISSUE-111

ISSUE-111

16:47:36 <trackbot> ISSUE-111 -- Should RDF Concepts define any operations on RDF datasets? -- open

Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-111 -- Should RDF Concepts define any operations on RDF datasets? -- open

16:47:36 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/111

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/111

16:47:56 <gavinc> davidwood: If we find a resolution this will effect ISSUE-105

David Wood: If we find a resolution this will effect ISSUE-105

16:48:03 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Dataset_Operations

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

16:48:36 <Zakim> -GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: -GavinC

16:49:20 <path> paste that again?

Patrick Hayes: paste that again?

16:49:42 <SteveH> path, http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Dataset_Operations

Steve Harris: path, http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Dataset_Operations

16:49:54 <path> ta

Patrick Hayes: ta

16:50:17 <Zakim> +GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: +GavinC

16:50:51 <davidwood> AZ:Tentative definition:

Antoine Zimmermann: Tentative definition: [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ]

16:50:51 <davidwood> """

David Wood: """

16:50:51 <davidwood> Two RDF datasets (DG1, NG1) and (DG2, NG2) are dataset-isomorphic iff:

David Wood: Two RDF datasets (DG1, NG1) and (DG2, NG2) are dataset-isomorphic iff:

16:50:51 <davidwood>   - DG1 and DG2 are graph-isomorphic;

David Wood: - DG1 and DG2 are graph-isomorphic;

16:50:51 <davidwood>   - For each (n1,g1) in NG1, there exists (n2,g2) in NG2 such that n1=n2

David Wood: - For each (n1,g1) in NG1, there exists (n2,g2) in NG2 such that n1=n2

16:50:51 <davidwood> and g1 and g2 are graph-isomorphic;

David Wood: and g1 and g2 are graph-isomorphic;

16:50:51 <davidwood>   - For each (n2,g2) in NG2, there exists (n1,g1) in NG1 such that n1=n2

David Wood: - For each (n2,g2) in NG2, there exists (n1,g1) in NG1 such that n1=n2

16:50:52 <davidwood> and g1 and g2 are graph-isomorphic.

David Wood: and g1 and g2 are graph-isomorphic.

16:50:52 <davidwood> """

David Wood: """

16:51:09 <cygri> sandro: i was assuming we won't define any of this

Sandro Hawke: i was assuming we won't define any of this [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

16:51:17 <cygri> … given that we don't do semantics for datasets

Richard Cyganiak: … given that we don't do semantics for datasets

16:51:18 <AZ> q+

Antoine Zimmermann: q+

16:51:35 <cygri> … i'm not opposed to this but seems unnecessary

Richard Cyganiak: … i'm not opposed to this but seems unnecessary

16:51:37 <SteveH> +1 to sandro

Steve Harris: +1 to sandro

16:51:48 <davidwood> q?

David Wood: q?

16:52:16 <davidwood> ack AZ

David Wood: ack AZ

16:53:26 <cygri> sandro: i guess we should do for datasets whatever we do for graphs

Sandro Hawke: i guess we should do for datasets whatever we do for graphs [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

16:53:27 <cygri> scribe: pchampin

(Scribe set to Pierre-Antoine Champin)

16:53:28 <pchampin> I can scribe

I can scribe

16:53:41 <Zakim> -zwu2

Zakim IRC Bot: -zwu2

16:53:57 <AZ> AZ: isomorphism is not related to semantics, it's purely about structure

Antoine Zimmermann: isomorphism is not related to semantics, it's purely about structure [ Scribe Assist by Antoine Zimmermann ]

16:54:03 <zwu2> Sorry, have to go to another meeting.

Zhe Wu: Sorry, have to go to another meeting.

16:54:03 <pfps> Hmm, things are fine in Sunnyvale.

Peter Patel-Schneider: Hmm, things are fine in Sunnyvale.

16:54:06 <davidwood> q?

David Wood: q?

16:54:12 <AZ> ...(not to be confused with equivalence)

Antoine Zimmermann: ...(not to be confused with equivalence)

16:54:50 <pchampin> cygri: we still need some discussion; is there anything that makes sense and would not create too much contention

Richard Cyganiak: we still need some discussion; is there anything that makes sense and would not create too much contention

16:55:24 <pchampin> path: what we could say: if you replace in a dataset a graph by an isomorphic graph, the two datasets are isomorphic

Patrick Hayes: what we could say: if you replace in a dataset a graph by an isomorphic graph, the two datasets are isomorphic

16:55:52 <pchampin> ... That extends simply the notion of graph-isomotphism to datasets.

... That extends simply the notion of graph-isomotphism to datasets.

16:56:05 <pchampin> AZ: this basically is what I proposed.

Antoine Zimmermann: this basically is what I proposed.

16:56:58 <pchampin> davidwood: should RDF concepts define only isomorphism on RDF datasets?

David Wood: should RDF concepts define only isomorphism on RDF datasets?

16:57:11 <pchampin> cygri: I'm not sure other operations are not useful

Richard Cyganiak: I'm not sure other operations are not useful

16:57:26 <pchampin> ... e.g. union

... e.g. union

16:57:31 <sandro> q+

Sandro Hawke: q+

16:57:40 <SteveH> it's not uneccessary, but there's not enough experience yet!

Steve Harris: it's not uneccessary, but there's not enough experience yet!

16:57:48 <pchampin> ... but may be I can be convinced it is not necessary

... but may be I can be convinced it is not necessary

16:58:02 <sandro> q-

Sandro Hawke: q-

16:58:06 <pchampin> path: my problem is that there are 3 different ways to define union,

Patrick Hayes: my problem is that there are 3 different ways to define union,

16:58:15 <sandro> yeah -- we don't have consensus on which kind of union to use

Sandro Hawke: yeah -- we don't have consensus on which kind of union to use

16:58:16 <pchampin> ... so that would take a lot of time to reach a consensus

... so that would take a lot of time to reach a consensus

16:58:50 <yvesr> i wonder if there's room to define all three of them, and give them different operatiosn name :)

Yves Raimond: i wonder if there's room to define all three of them, and give them different operatiosn name :)

16:59:00 <sandro> q+

Sandro Hawke: q+

16:59:11 <yvesr> UNION-MERGE, UNION-REPLACE, etc.

Yves Raimond: UNION-MERGE, UNION-REPLACE, etc.

16:59:23 <davidwood> ack sandro

David Wood: ack sandro

17:00:00 <pchampin> sandro: defining different unions with different names would help people to have a simpler debate in the future

Sandro Hawke: defining different unions with different names would help people to have a simpler debate in the future

17:00:10 <AndyS> Blog about it.

Andy Seaborne: Blog about it.

17:00:13 <SteveH> I don't see the point of going to the effort of defining them all right now

Steve Harris: I don't see the point of going to the effort of defining them all right now

17:00:18 <SteveH> +1 to AndyS

Steve Harris: +1 to AndyS

17:00:24 <TallTed> +1 sandro -- name and define different (non-exhaustive!) possibilities, and then leave for future debate

Ted Thibodeau: +1 sandro -- name and define different (non-exhaustive!) possibilities, and then leave for future debate

17:00:35 <davidwood> Review/accept Pat's solution to http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/205: Add note to explanation of skolemization

David Wood: Review/accept Pat's solution to http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/205: Add note to explanation of skolemization

17:00:56 <sandro> davidwood: Sandro, Yves, etc, go ahead and do that if you want to.

David Wood: Sandro, Yves, etc, go ahead and do that if you want to. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:01:43 <Zakim> +[GVoice]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[GVoice]

17:01:46 <AndyS> Remove the :

Andy Seaborne: Remove the :

17:01:47 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/205

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/205

17:02:01 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-skolemization

Richard Cyganiak: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-skolemization

17:02:46 <pchampin> cygri: it has been added, then changed after comments from Peter; I'd like Peter to check the current version (URL above)

Richard Cyganiak: it has been added, then changed after comments from Pat; I'd like Pat to check the current version (URL above)

17:02:57 <pchampin> s/Peter/Pat/
17:03:59 <davidwood> close ACTION-205

David Wood: close ACTION-205

17:03:59 <trackbot> Closed ACTION-205 Add note to explanation of skolemization.

Trackbot IRC Bot: Closed ACTION-205 Add note to explanation of skolemization.

17:04:19 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/23: Does going from single-graph to multi-graph require new format and new media types?

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/23: Does going from single-graph to multi-graph require new format and new media types?

17:04:30 <cygri> topic: ISSUE-23

4. ISSUE-23

17:04:49 <pchampin> davidwood: isn't issue 23 a duplicate?

David Wood: isn't ISSUE-23 a duplicate?

17:05:24 <pchampin> cygri: I think this was already discusses

Richard Cyganiak: I think this was already discusses

17:05:41 <pchampin> davidwood: suggest to close issue 23, the answer being yes

David Wood: suggest to close ISSUE-23, the answer being yes

17:06:06 <path> gavin, pedal harder.

Patrick Hayes: gavin, pedal harder.

17:06:29 <pchampin> markus: does this mean JSON-LD would require different media-types for single-graph / multi-graph?

Markus Lanthaler: does this mean JSON-LD would require different media-types for single-graph / multi-graph?

17:07:05 <pchampin> davidwood: no

David Wood: no

17:07:08 <TallTed> it's the shift from "one giant graph" of RDF2004 to "there are multiple graphs" of RDFnow ...

Ted Thibodeau: it's the shift from "one giant graph" of RDF2004 to "there are multiple graphs" of RDFnow ...

17:07:16 <AZ> +1 to close

Antoine Zimmermann: +1 to close

17:07:21 <cygri> PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-23; we are indeed defining new formats and new media types for multi-graph.

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-23; we are indeed defining new formats and new media types for multi-graph.

17:07:23 <SteveH> +1 to close

Steve Harris: +1 to close

17:07:23 <pchampin> gkellog: will this not raise problem if RDFa decides to support multiple graphs in the future?

Gregg Kellogg: will this not raise problem if RDFa decides to support multiple graphs in the future?

17:07:24 <path> +1

Patrick Hayes: +1

17:07:25 <TallTed> answer is obviously "yes" and we've been doing it

Ted Thibodeau: answer is obviously "yes" and we've been doing it

17:07:32 <davidwood> +1

David Wood: +1

17:07:34 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmermann: +1

17:07:38 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

17:07:40 <gkellogg> s/gkellog/gkellogg/
17:07:40 <cygri> +1

Richard Cyganiak: +1

17:07:42 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

17:07:42 <sandro> understood that this is about Trig and doesn't affect RDFa or JSON-LD.

Sandro Hawke: understood that this is about Trig and doesn't affect RDFa or JSON-LD.

17:07:45 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

17:07:49 <gavinc_> +1

Gavin Carothers: +1

17:07:50 <gkellogg> +0

Gregg Kellogg: +0

17:07:52 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

17:07:53 <markus> +0

Markus Lanthaler: +0

17:08:23 <pchampin> davidwood: we can't speculate on what RDFa will do in the future

David Wood: we can't speculate on what RDFa will do in the future

17:08:35 <cygri> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-23; we are indeed defining new formats and new media types for multi-graph.

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-23; we are indeed defining new formats and new media types for multi-graph.

17:08:37 <davidwood> TOPIC: JSON-LD

5. JSON-LD

17:08:47 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/16: What is the normative serialization of the JSON grammar?

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/16: What is the normative serialization of the JSON grammar?

17:08:51 <path> i have to ring off.

Patrick Hayes: i have to ring off.

17:09:00 <Zakim> -PatH

Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH

17:09:15 <gavinc_> err... yeah, that's about What is JSON ;)

Gavin Carothers: err... yeah, that's about What is JSON ;)

17:09:29 <gavinc_> JSON, not RDF

Gavin Carothers: JSON, not RDF

17:09:31 <cygri> markus: i think this is about JSON itself

Markus Lanthaler: i think this is about JSON itself [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:09:56 <cygri> … JSON-LD uses the JSON RFC as the basis

Richard Cyganiak: … JSON-LD uses the JSON RFC as the basis

17:09:58 <AndyS> RFC4627

Andy Seaborne: RFC4627

17:10:09 <gavinc_> +1 for RDF4627

Gavin Carothers: +1 for RDF4627

17:10:10 <pchampin> markus: JSON-LD uses RFC 4627

Markus Lanthaler: JSON-LD uses RFC 4627

17:10:36 <cygri> davidwood: propose to resolve this by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627

David Wood: propose to resolve this by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627 [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:10:54 <cygri> PROPOSAL: Resolve ISSUE-16 by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627

PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-16 by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627

17:11:01 <markus> +1

Markus Lanthaler: +1

17:11:02 <gkellogg> +1

Gregg Kellogg: +1

17:11:02 <davidwood> +1

David Wood: +1

17:11:03 <cygri> +1

Richard Cyganiak: +1

17:11:08 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmermann: +1

17:11:12 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

17:11:14 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

17:11:18 <pchampin> +1

+1

17:11:30 <Arnaud> +1

Arnaud Le Hors: +1

17:11:31 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

17:11:32 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

17:11:36 <cygri> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-16 by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627

RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-16 by saying that this WG uses JSON-LD to address the charter, which internally uses RFC4627

17:11:40 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/92: Mention RDF in the JSON-LD Syntax Introduction.

David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/92: Mention RDF in the JSON-LD Syntax Introduction.

17:11:57 <pchampin> markus: that's done

Markus Lanthaler: that's done

17:12:07 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

17:12:11 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

17:12:14 <pchampin> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-92 by saysing that it has been done

PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-92 by saysing that it has been done

17:12:19 <gavinc_> +1 it's done

Gavin Carothers: +1 it's done

17:12:21 <SteveH> +1

Steve Harris: +1

17:12:21 <davidwood> +1

David Wood: +1

17:12:22 <gkellogg> +1

Gregg Kellogg: +1

17:12:23 <pchampin> +1

+1

17:12:24 <markus> +1

Markus Lanthaler: +1

17:12:24 <TallTed> +1 again/still

Ted Thibodeau: +1 again/still

17:12:24 <yvesr> +1

Yves Raimond: +1

17:12:28 <AndyS> +1

Andy Seaborne: +1

17:12:46 <AZ> +1

Antoine Zimmermann: +1

17:12:54 <cygri> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-92 by saying that it has been done

RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-92 by saying that it has been done

17:13:01 <davidwood> Working Group status: https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/products

David Wood: Working Group status: https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/products

17:13:42 <davidwood> Topic: AOB

6. AOB

17:13:45 <markus> q+

Markus Lanthaler: q+

17:13:50 <davidwood> ack markus

David Wood: ack markus

17:14:25 <cygri> markus: what's the group's position on IRI vs URL

Markus Lanthaler: what's the group's position on IRI vs URL [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:14:36 <ivan> zakim, unmute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute me

17:14:36 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should no longer be muted

17:14:44 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:14:52 <cygri> … I propose we close the issue, and re-open it only if someone complains

Richard Cyganiak: … I propose we close the issue, and re-open it only if someone complains

17:14:53 <pchampin> markus: the JSON-LD group resolved to stick to the technically correct term IRI

Markus Lanthaler: the JSON-LD group resolved to stick to the technically correct term IRI

17:15:03 <cygri> davidwood: chair hat off, redefining terms is dangerous

David Wood: chair hat off, redefining terms is dangerous [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:15:18 <AndyS> Nice idea but URL-NG is not yet ready.

Andy Seaborne: Nice idea but URL-NG is not yet ready.

17:15:21 <cygri> sandro: communities use different terms

Sandro Hawke: communities use different terms [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:15:23 <davidwood> ack ivan

David Wood: ack ivan

17:15:31 <cygri> davidwood: IRI is not a semweb-specific term

David Wood: IRI is not a semweb-specific term [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:15:32 <pchampin> sandro: this is not only about redefining terms; different communities use different terms

Sandro Hawke: this is not only about redefining terms; different communities use different terms

17:15:47 <ericP> there are lots of protocol RFCs to rewrite if we use "URL" to mean IRI

Eric Prud'hommeaux: there are lots of protocol RFCs to rewrite if we use "URL" to mean IRI

17:16:14 <cygri> ivan: someone proposed to use IRI, but put a comment in the document that explains the issue, stating that some people use URL to mean the same thing

Ivan Herman: someone proposed to use IRI, but put a comment in the document that explains the issue, stating that some people use URL to mean the same thing [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:16:36 <pchampin> ivan: we can add an editorial note stressing the fact that there is some inconsistency, but that this is not the job of this group to solve this inconsistency

Ivan Herman: we can add an editorial note stressing the fact that there is some inconsistency, but that this is not the job of this group to solve this inconsistency

17:16:59 <pchampin> sandro: the document could use "identifier" in 99% of the document,

Sandro Hawke: the document could use "identifier" in 99% of the document,

17:17:01 <cygri> sandro: editorially, you can probably say "identifier", and just define that term somewhere as meaning IRI/URL

Sandro Hawke: editorially, you can probably say "identifier", and just define that term somewhere as meaning IRI/URL [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:17:12 <ivan> zakim, mute me

Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me

17:17:12 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted

17:17:19 <pchampin> ... and add at some point "identifier means IRI, but you can consider is very like URL"

... and add at some point "identifier means IRI, but you can consider is very like URL"

17:17:28 <ivan> +1 to Gregg

Ivan Herman: +1 to Gregg

17:17:51 <pchampin> gkellogg: my position is that JSON-LD should comply with the rest of the documents of this WG, using IRI

Gregg Kellogg: my position is that JSON-LD should comply with the rest of the documents of this WG, using IRI

17:18:06 <cygri> sandro: stick with IRI, possibly move to URL in the future

Gregg Kellogg: stick with IRI, possibly move to URL in the future [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ]

17:18:10 <tbaker> +1 to Ivan and Gregg

Thomas Baker: +1 to Ivan and Gregg

17:18:16 <TallTed> we should use the correct word/acronym wherever possible, and say something like "others may use or have used URL or URI or other terms for IRI would have been correct; RDF-WG cannot unify/fix all such"

Ted Thibodeau: we should use the correct word/acronym wherever possible, and say something like "others may use or have used URL or URI or other terms for IRI would have been correct; RDF-WG cannot unify/fix all such"

17:18:22 <cygri> s/sandro: stick/gkellog: stick/
17:18:45 <Zakim> -Guus

Zakim IRC Bot: -Guus

17:18:54 <Zakim> - +1.408.992.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.408.992.aabb

17:18:57 <Zakim> -gkellogg

Zakim IRC Bot: -gkellogg

17:18:59 <pchampin> davidwood: if you want a resolution from this WG, please ask it by mail

David Wood: if you want a resolution from this WG, please ask it by mail

17:19:03 <Zakim> -SteveH

Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH

17:19:09 <Zakim> -GavinC

Zakim IRC Bot: -GavinC

17:19:11 <Zakim> -Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan

17:19:36 <Zakim> -AZ

Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ

17:19:41 <Zakim> -markus

Zakim IRC Bot: -markus

17:19:43 <Zakim> -cygri

Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri

17:19:49 <ericP> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/file/tip/rdf-turtle/coverage/tests/

Eric Prud'hommeaux: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/file/tip/rdf-turtle/coverage/tests/

17:19:54 <TallTed> please to post that info to the list, ericP :-)

Ted Thibodeau: please to post that info to the list, ericP :-)

17:20:16 <cygri> RRSAgent, make logs public

Richard Cyganiak: RRSAgent, make logs public

17:20:35 <Zakim> -LeeF

Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF

17:20:48 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

17:21:47 <Zakim> -AndyS

Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS

17:23:49 <pchampin> scribe: pchampin
17:23:53 <Zakim> -TallTed

Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed

17:23:56 <Zakim> -davidwood

Zakim IRC Bot: -davidwood

17:23:58 <Zakim> -ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP

17:24:00 <Zakim> -Arnaud

Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud

17:24:09 <Zakim> -FabGandon

Zakim IRC Bot: -FabGandon

17:25:21 <Zakim> -pchampin

Zakim IRC Bot: -pchampin



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#2) generated 2013-01-16 17:28:50 UTC by 'rcygania2', comments: 'fixed captialization in resolution, messed with topics, set scribe properly'