Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Chatlog 2013-03-06
From RDF Working Group Wiki
See panel, original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.
Please justify/explain non-obvious edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.
15:56:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg 15:56:13 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/03/06-rdf-wg-irc 15:56:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world 15:56:15 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-wg 15:56:17 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394 15:56:17 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes 15:56:18 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference 15:56:18 <trackbot> Date: 06 March 2013 15:57:38 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-wg 15:57:41 <AndyS> zakim, this is 73394 15:57:41 <Zakim> AndyS, I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be 73394". 15:57:43 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started 15:57:52 <Zakim> +Guus_Schreiber 15:58:04 <Zakim> +[IPcaller] 15:58:13 <AndyS> zakim, IPcaller is me 15:58:13 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it 15:58:46 <Zakim> + +1.408.992.aaaa 15:58:51 <Zakim> +Sandro 15:59:01 <pfps> zakim, aaaa is me 15:59:01 <Zakim> +pfps; got it 15:59:36 <Zakim> +GavinC 15:59:36 <TallTed> TallTed has changed the topic to: RDF WG -- http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/ -- current agenda http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.03.06 15:59:55 <Guus> any volunteers for scribing? 16:00:16 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software 16:00:26 <Guus> zakim, who is here? 16:00:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus_Schreiber, AndyS, pfps, Sandro, GavinC, OpenLink_Software 16:00:28 <Zakim> On IRC I see pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, gkellogg, TallTed, gavinc, markus, sandro, AndyS, ivan, yvesr_, ericP, Arnaud, manu1, manu, mischat, trackbot 16:00:56 <Zakim> +Arnaud 16:01:11 <Zakim> +??P0 16:01:17 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P0 16:01:17 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it 16:01:20 <Zakim> +??P5 16:01:54 <Guus> chair: Guus 16:02:04 <yvesr_> Zakim, who is on the phone? 16:02:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus_Schreiber, AndyS, pfps, Sandro, GavinC, TallTed (muted), Arnaud, gkellogg, ??P5 16:02:11 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdf-wg 16:02:14 <yvesr_> Zakim, ??P5 is me 16:02:14 <Zakim> +yvesr_; got it 16:02:27 <Zakim> +cygri 16:02:37 <Guus> zakim, pick a scibe 16:02:37 <Zakim> I don't understand 'pick a scibe', Guus 16:02:48 <Guus> zakim, pick a scribe 16:02:48 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose cygri 16:03:07 <Zakim> +[GVoice] 16:03:23 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg 16:03:24 <ericP> [GVoice] is me 16:03:28 <ericP> Zakim, [GVoice] is me 16:03:28 <Zakim> +ericP; got it 16:03:58 <cygri> scribe: cygri 16:04:08 <Zakim> +??P34 16:04:11 <markus> zakim, ??P34 is me 16:04:11 <Zakim> +markus; got it 16:04:14 <cgreer> cgreer has joined #rdf-wg 16:04:23 <Guus> zaki, who is here? 16:04:23 <cygri> chair: Guus 16:04:30 <cygri> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.03.06 16:04:48 <pfps> did someone upload the most recent Semantics document for Pat? 16:04:49 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip 16:04:49 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made 16:04:51 <Zakim> +Ivan 16:04:55 <Zakim> + +081165aabb 16:05:07 <Zakim> + +1.707.874.aacc 16:05:12 <AZ> Zakim, aabb is me 16:05:12 <Zakim> +AZ; got it 16:05:17 <cgreer> zakim, aacc is me 16:05:18 <Zakim> +cgreer; got it 16:05:26 <cygri> topic: Admin 16:05:45 <cygri> guus: For the next three weeks, telecons will be one hour earlier for people in europe 16:06:05 <ivan> zakim, mute me 16:06:05 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted 16:06:11 <cygri> PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of the 27 February telecon: 16:06:14 <pfps> minutesa re fine 16:06:20 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-02-27 16:06:43 <cygri> RESOLVED: Accept the minutes of the 27 February telecon: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2013-02-27 16:06:50 <cygri> guus: Review of action items 16:08:28 <cygri> Guus: I did my three actions by putting various things on the agenda 16:08:36 <cygri> topic: Turtle 16:08:56 <cygri> gavinc: Regarding the test suite, we got a patch on the comments mailing list 16:09:15 <cygri> ... I'm looking into combining Eric's test suite with the one from Gregg and Andy 16:09:23 <cygri> ... also, additional tests for more coverage were submitted 16:09:40 <AndyS> q+ 16:09:42 <ericP> q+ to discuss sandro's proposal for ordering the tests 16:09:52 <cygri> ... also a proposal to change the test suite to make it easier to check results 16:09:57 <cygri> ... we plan to do all of these things 16:09:58 <Guus> ack AndyS 16:10:28 <cygri> AndyS: We've already asked people to run the tests. No we change them again. What about the process? 16:11:02 <cygri> ... Secondly, there is no right order of triples in the files. Concerned about putting too much emphasis on testing line by line 16:11:22 <cygri> gavinc: I'm not too concerned about the process. We did not announce availability of a test suite. 16:11:30 <Guus> ack ericP 16:11:30 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to discuss sandro's proposal for ordering the tests 16:12:18 <cygri> ericP: Regarding ordering of statements, there is indeed no mandated order. One could argue for the order implied by the algebra 16:12:23 <cygri> ... Dave Beckett's proposed change is very useful for readers. 16:12:58 <cygri> ... So I'm sympathetic to his request, despite agreeing in general that the test suite should depend on graph isomorphism and not order 16:13:13 <Guus> q+ to state 16:13:42 <cygri> ... Sandro proposed to put the atomic tests before the other tests, to make it clearer why a parser fails the tests 16:14:54 <cygri> guus: Concerned about timeline. Want to publish ASAP. 16:15:17 <cygri> gavinc: The test suite was supposed to be published with the PR. Some implementers are complaining why it wasn't. 16:15:25 <cygri> ... so would get it out immediately 16:15:57 <cygri> ericP: I appreciate the difficulty of having a moving target for implementers, but this is also where we get help from the community to get the test suite into good shape 16:16:16 <AndyS> q+ 16:16:17 <cygri> guus: Decision on March 20 for the test suite needed to go to PR? 16:16:33 <Guus> ack Guus 16:16:33 <Zakim> Guus, you wanted to state 16:16:49 <cygri> gavinc: What is the process for updating the document to add link to the test suite, point out changes? 16:17:01 <cygri> guus: Sandro said that already 16:17:13 <cygri> sandro: We can't change the published document 16:17:29 <cygri> ... but can change our web page 16:17:48 <ivan> zakim, unmute me 16:17:48 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted 16:17:51 <cygri> ericP: We could also republish the document, with editorial changes 16:17:52 <ivan> q+ 16:17:56 <cygri> sandro: I suppose we could 16:18:22 <cygri> ... never heard of anyone doing this, but why not 16:18:32 <gkellogg> ReSpec actually has a way to show the test suite location in the head of the document. 16:18:47 <cygri> ivan: The document points to the wiki. The wiki has the details. We don't need to change the document. 16:18:57 <cygri> gavinc: There's also an error in the list of changes. 16:19:08 <cygri> guus: We can fix that for PR publication. 16:19:26 <cygri> ... So we should change the wiki page now, and fix the list of changes when going to PR. 16:19:47 <cygri> gavinc: Where is this link to the test suite in the document? I don't see it in the status section. 16:20:17 <cygri> ivan: In the CR request wiki page 16:20:30 <ericP> gavinc, what's inaccurate in the changes since last doc? 16:20:36 <cygri> ... And that can be fixed, it's just a group-internal document. 16:20:38 <ericP> s/doc/publication/ 16:21:17 <gavinc> ericP, "Renaming for STRING_* productions to STRING_LITERAL_QUOTE style names rather than numbers " "Local part of prefix names can now include ":" " "Turtle in HTML ", were all in Last Call 16:21:18 <cygri> guus: Gavin, can we get everything complete in two weeks? 16:21:20 <AndyS> CR ends March 26th 16:21:20 <cygri> gavinc: Yes. 16:21:23 <AndyS> q- 16:21:54 <ivan> q- 16:22:00 <Guus> ack ivan 16:22:28 <gavinc> " The Candidate Recommendation period ends 26 March 2013" 16:22:37 <cygri> [discussion of when exactly CR ends] 16:23:12 <Guus> The minimal duration for this CR period is until 26 March, 2013. 16:23:13 <cygri> guus: It should have said that it ends no earlier than 26 March (?) 16:23:43 <cygri> ericP: My mistake. 16:23:55 <cygri> ... In my defense, I did it from a plane. 16:24:06 <cygri> guus: We didn't spot it. 16:24:42 <cygri> sandro: We have lots of ways to reach out to the community. 16:25:18 <gkellogg> q+ 16:25:30 <ivan> zakim, mute me 16:25:30 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted 16:25:35 <cygri> ericP: We should decide what the structure will be regarding EARL reports. Do we keep separate syntax and semantic tests, or unify them so that each test has a "parse" and "graph match" result (?) 16:26:13 <cygri> AndyS: Rather than asking people to do two things on each test, why not just keep them separate? 16:26:34 <cygri> sandro: Being able to parse, but not correctly handle, is not worth reporting. 16:27:09 <cygri> gkellogg: The way EARL works, we can't have it report that the test was both parsed and processed. 16:27:22 <gkellogg> q- 16:27:33 <cygri> gavinc: We have positivie and negative syntax tests, and evaluation tests. 16:28:02 <cygri> ericP: We said before that there is no reason that a semantics test isn't also a syntax test. 16:28:17 <Guus> q? 16:28:19 <cygri> sandro: Sure, but there is no reason to formalize that. 16:28:49 <cygri> [scribe missed some discussion] 16:29:10 <cygri> sandro: Do we require every implementer to submit EARL? Or is it fine if they just say "I passed all tests" 16:30:23 <sandro> +1 andy: the test suite might change, so "passed all the tests" isn't good enough 16:30:25 <cygri> AndyS: Concerned about people just saying they passed the tests if we are changing the test 16:30:37 <cygri> ... Rigorous testing is black and white 16:30:44 <cygri> sandro: I find that compelling. 16:31:02 <cygri> topic: Semantics 16:31:23 <cygri> guus: Peter was asking whether ED URL is the right version 16:31:36 <cygri> Peter: Pat got the latest version up. 16:32:05 <cygri> pfps: I think it's okay for FPWD 16:32:18 <ivan> q+ 16:32:23 <cygri> ... It's not yet done, has pointers to things that still need to be done 16:32:39 <cygri> ... So none of the issues should need to delay FPWD 16:32:50 <cygri> ... One issue, as far as I know 16:33:00 <ivan> zakim, unmute me 16:33:00 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted 16:33:04 <cygri> ... Antoine noted correctly that the WG decided something 16:33:41 <cygri> ... The term "vocabulary" is overloaded 16:33:58 <cygri> ... Pat changed the technical definition, and Antoine thinks it's a significant change 16:34:09 <AZ> it does not change the world, but it changes something 16:34:09 <cygri> ... My impression is that it's a technical issue internal to the semantics 16:35:03 <AZ> e.g., {<s> <p> <o>} would entail {<a> rdf:type rdfs:Resource} 16:35:05 <cygri> ... I think Antoine is technically correct, but it doesn't matter, at least not to implementations 16:35:14 <AZ> q+ 16:35:46 <cygri> q+ 16:36:08 <cygri> ... Also, blank node scope. It's a hot potato being passed back and forth between semantics and concepts 16:36:19 <cygri> ... Pat passed it back to concepts, but concepts doesn't have it yet 16:36:39 <cygri> ... Can be sorted out after FPWD 16:39:17 <cygri> cygri: I can review the document, saying if I see any issues with moving to FPWD. I will have more detailed comments too, but this can wait 16:39:40 <cygri> AZ: If we want to change the way interpretations are defined, then it needs a collective WG resolution. 16:40:12 <cygri> ... And Semantics used blank node scope, which Concepts doesn't define yet. 16:40:19 <AZ> q- 16:40:20 <ivan> q- 16:40:26 <cygri> ... No other critical issues. 16:40:41 <cygri> guus: Then I can put decision about Semantics FPWD on next week's agenda 16:40:41 <Guus> q? 16:40:44 <cygri> ack me 16:41:10 <cygri> ... Thanks to Pat and Peter for moving this forward so quickly 16:41:13 <cygri> Topic: Concepts 16:41:35 <cygri> We have open issue on scope of blank nodes 16:41:40 <cygri> ISSUE-107? 16:41:40 <trackbot> ISSUE-107 -- Revised definition of blank nodes -- open 16:41:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/107 16:42:00 <markus> scribe: markus 16:42:01 <yvesr> i can do 16:42:27 <markus> cygri: the issue has been open for a while... we had some concrete proposals 16:43:03 <markus> ... now that we have a semantics draft that relies on this makes the issue more pressing 16:43:22 <markus> ... it is a joint issue between the 2 documents 16:43:35 <markus> ... we need to ensure to keep them consistent 16:44:17 <markus> ... I'm quite busy at the moment so I can't spend much time on concepts at the moment 16:44:30 <markus> ... this won't change in the next 2 weeks 16:45:25 <markus> We are under time pressure.. according our schedule we should publish it in two weeks 16:46:01 <markus> cygri: Given that semantics is just going to FPWD concepts isn't that late 16:46:37 <markus> ... the docs have tight dependencies.. the sooner we go LC with concepts the bigger the risk for semantics if we need to change something 16:46:45 <pfps> q+ 16:46:49 <ivan> q+ 16:47:00 <ivan> zakim, unmute me 16:47:00 <Zakim> Ivan was not muted, ivan 16:47:03 <markus> ... they should probably be updated in lock step and ideally should go to LC at the same time 16:47:39 <markus> guus: I will put it back on the agenda in two weeks, is that OK? 16:47:42 <markus> cygri: sure 16:47:50 <cygri> scribe: cygri 16:47:57 <cygri> guus: I will put it on the agenda for March 20 16:47:58 <pfps> q- 16:48:07 <cygri> q? 16:48:14 <Guus> ack ivan 16:48:30 <gkellogg_> gkellogg_ has joined #rdf-wg 16:48:53 <cygri> ivan: As an FPWD, I would be okay with publishing the Semantics today 16:49:18 <cygri> q+ 16:49:37 <cygri> FPWD has administrative work attached etc 16:49:44 <AndyS> +1 to publish ASAP for FPWD. (?? Just add a list of items to discuss in the status.) 16:50:12 <cygri> ... not necessary to solve all the technical issues 16:50:13 <cygri> q- 16:50:20 <cygri> ivan: I'd be happy making a decision this week 16:50:28 <cygri> guus: I prefer to have two reviews. 16:50:31 <pfps> I've already said that I think that the current document is fine for a FPWD. However, for a FPWD I think we need reviews. 16:50:56 <pfps> I think that a message should go out to the WG that a vote on FPWD is on for next week for semantics. 16:50:58 <ivan> zakim, mute me 16:50:58 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted 16:51:27 <cygri> topic: JSON-LD 16:51:54 <cygri> guus: There was an extensive (to say the least) review from Sandro 16:52:07 <cygri> ... Can we get a 2nd review? 16:52:45 <cygri> sandro: Should that review happen before or after my comments are addressed? 16:53:15 <cygri> ... Depends on whether the editors want a 2nd opinion on some of the changes 16:53:35 <cgreer> I'll step up, do my best 16:54:22 <cygri> gkellogg: We will discuss Sandro's comments in our next call on Tuesday. 16:54:43 <cygri> sandro: I think JSON-LD is great, the design is solid and I have no concerns about it. My comments are mostly editorial. 16:54:57 <cygri> ... Some issues about how conformance is stated and forward compatibility. 16:55:22 <cygri> ... The main editorial question is regarding editorial division between this document and the API document. 16:55:27 <gkellogg> q+ 16:55:38 <cygri> ... I want this document to be complete as an RDF syntax. 16:55:49 <cygri> ... Have a complete mapping to RDF in this document. 16:56:08 <Guus> ack gkellogg 16:56:22 <cygri> gkellogg: I liked your suggestion to have a brief summary of the RDF transformation algorithm 16:57:10 <cygri> ... Others have commented on explaining the relationship to RDF in the main JSON-LD document 16:58:02 <Guus> ACTION cgreer to review the JSON-LD syntax document, after Sandro's review has been taken into account 16:58:02 <trackbot> Error finding 'cgreer'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/users>. 16:58:40 <cygri> ACTION: Charles to review the JSON-LD syntax document, after member:Sandro's review has been taken into account 16:58:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-238 - Review the JSON-LD syntax document, after member:Sandro's review has been taken into account [on Charles Greer - due 2013-03-13]. 16:59:35 <cygri> guus: We'd like to adjourn now to avoid top-of-the-hour traffic jam on the bridge 16:59:39 <Arnaud> regrets for next week, will be chairing the ldp f2f2 16:59:56 <Zakim> -pfps 17:00:02 <Zakim> -Ivan # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000253