Chatlog 2012-10-30

From RDF Working Group Wiki
Revision as of 12:53, 30 October 2012 by Sandro (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

See panel, original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain non-obvious edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

00:05:19 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #rdf-wg
01:29:17 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
02:14:44 <swh> swh has joined #rdf-wg
05:25:12 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-wg
06:52:13 <manu1> manu1 has joined #rdf-wg
07:23:22 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdf-wg
07:24:37 <cygri_> cygri_ has joined #rdf-wg
07:29:58 <cygri_> cygri_ has joined #rdf-wg
07:30:21 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdf-wg
07:45:45 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #rdf-wg
08:03:12 <davidwood> davidwood has joined #rdf-wg
08:11:55 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #rdf-wg
08:15:59 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-wg
08:16:12 <sandro> zakim, call Rhone_4
08:16:12 <Zakim> sorry, sandro, I don't know what conference this is
08:16:17 <sandro> zakim, this is rdf
08:16:17 <Zakim> sandro, I see SW_RDFWG(TPACF2F)2:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be rdf".
08:16:19 <sandro> zakim, call Rhone_4
08:16:19 <Zakim> sorry, sandro, I don't know what conference this is
08:16:26 <sandro> zakim, this will be rdf
08:16:26 <Zakim> ok, sandro; I see SW_RDFWG(TPACF2F)2:00AM scheduled to start 136 minutes ago
08:16:29 <sandro> zakim, call Rhone_4
08:16:29 <Zakim> ok, sandro; the call is being made
08:16:29 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG(TPACF2F)2:00AM has now started
08:16:32 <Zakim> +Rhone_4
08:17:01 <sandro> zakim, drop rhone_4
08:17:01 <Zakim> Rhone_4 is being disconnected
08:17:02 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG(TPACF2F)2:00AM has ended
08:17:02 <Zakim> Attendees were Rhone_4
08:17:33 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #rdf-wg
08:17:39 <sandro> zakim, call Rhone_4
08:17:39 <Zakim> ok, sandro; the call is being made
08:17:40 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG(TPACF2F)2:00AM has now started
08:17:41 <Zakim> +Rhone_4
08:17:55 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
08:18:02 <Guus> Guus has joined #rdf-wg
08:18:08 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
08:18:08 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2012/10/30-rdf-wg-irc#T08-18-08
08:18:13 <sandro> RRSAgent, make logs public
08:20:17 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdf-wg
08:22:10 <ivan> ivan has joined #rdf-wg
08:23:06 <FabGandon> FabGandon has joined #rdf-wg
08:23:17 <cygri> scribe: cygri
08:23:33 <cygri> topic: Issue review
08:24:14 <cygri> guus: Let's go through them in order. Goal is just to do a quick assessment, not necessarily to resolve them.
08:25:10 <cygri> subtopic: ISSUE-3
08:25:43 <cygri> ISSUE-3?
08:25:43 <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
08:25:43 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/3
08:25:46 <cygri> ACTION-102?
08:25:46 <trackbot> ACTION-102 -- David Wood to ask Guus to find a student to do the work of ISSUE-3 -- due 2011-10-20 -- CLOSED
08:25:46 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/102
08:26:14 <cygri> guus: I have to review how many comments there are
08:27:06 <cygri> ivan: The role of the errata document is that if there's consensus on the comments list that something is indeed an error, it gets put into the errata document.
08:27:20 <cygri> sandro: That may not have been done here as the staff contacts left etc
08:27:48 <cygri> sandro: This starts with February 2004
08:28:00 <cygri> davidwood: Looks like at least a couple hundred of emails
08:29:15 <cygri> guest: Larry Masinter
08:29:36 <cygri> [discussion of badge colors]
08:30:24 <cygri> topic: rdf:Seq and implications for XMP
08:30:37 <cygri> davidwood: We resolved yesterday to mark rdf:Seq as archaic
08:31:10 <cygri> ... there's wide implementation in particular from Adobe in XMP
08:31:36 <cygri> Larry Masinter: There are thousands of people in Adobe. That said...
08:31:56 <cygri> ... XMP has its own internal data model that is syntactically serialized as RDF/XML.
08:32:12 <cygri> ... It's also no longer an Adobe specification, it's now an ISO standard.
08:32:27 <Zakim> +Gavinc
08:32:58 <cygri> ivan: It's certainly true that the latest version of Photoshop uses rdf:Seq.
08:33:16 <davidwood> Good morning, GavinC.  We are speaking with Larry Masinger (TAG) about Adobe XMP and rdf:Seq.  We will turn onto TriG next.
08:33:17 <cygri> Larry Masinter: Why bother declaring something that is widely deployed as obsolete?
08:33:36 <cygri> ericP: The goal is to steer new deployments away from rdf:Seq.
08:33:48 <cygri> Larry Masinter: What are you trying to accomplish?
08:34:06 <cygri> sandro: RDF has multiple ways of expressing sequence, none of which is very well supported.
08:34:30 <cygri> ... There's some agreement that rdf:Seq is the least best one
08:35:01 <cygri> Larry Masinter: HTML has several ways of drawing things. It's not clear that there's a design pattern that there should only be one way of doing any particular thing.
08:35:28 <cygri> davidwood: This is a weak form of deprecation.
08:35:56 <cygri> Larry Masinter: There's a problem when standards committees try to constrain future standards committees.
08:36:10 <cygri> [crosstalk]
08:36:14 <gavinc> +q
08:36:29 <davidwood> ack gavinc
08:36:29 <tidoust> tidoust has joined #rdf-wg
08:36:47 <cygri> gavinc: I'm not sure I agree with sandro's characterization that we're not telling people what to do.
08:37:06 <cygri> ... I think we resolved that people should use rdf:List instead of containers
08:37:26 <cygri> davidwood: I believe we have a resolution that hasn't made it into our documents.
08:37:30 <sandro> I hope your memory is better than mine on that, Gavin.     I certainly agree with that resolution.
08:37:33 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
08:38:05 <cygri> Larry Masinter: XMP is in the PDF standard. PDF is used in various governments, etc.
08:38:17 <cygri> ... I'm not sure what the improvement is that you're trying to gain.
08:38:38 <cygri> sandro: People in the know are aware they shouldn't use rdf:Seq
08:38:40 <ivan> q+
08:38:42 <cygri> q+
08:38:58 <cygri> Larry Masinter: I'm not in the know. Why?
08:39:13 <cygri> ericP: curried predicates, out of favour, etc.
08:39:15 <cygri> q?
08:39:42 <gavinc> The issue is rdf:_1, rdf_*
08:40:16 <cygri> [eric's WPM exceed scribe capabilities]
08:40:42 <davidwood> ack ivan
08:40:43 <sandro> q?
08:40:59 <sandro> I hear Larry saying we can and should support both.   :-(
08:41:38 <cygri> ivan: We sohuldn't repeat yesterday's discussion. We asked Larry what we wanted to ask.
08:41:50 <cygri> ericP: But he didn't say what we wanted to hear.
08:42:02 <cygri> Larry Masinter: I'm not speaking for Adobe obviously.
08:42:15 <cygri> ... I will ask the ISO committee on their opinion.
08:42:25 <sandro> s/will/would/
08:42:48 <davidwood> ack cygri
08:42:50 <cygri> Larry Masinter: It's ISO 16684 (?)
08:43:05 <Arnaud> scribe: Arnaud
08:44:03 <Arnaud> cygri: challenge the assertion that people in the know know we shouldn't use seq
08:44:21 <davidwood> q?
08:44:31 <cygri> scribe: cygri
08:44:43 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-10-29#resolution_2
08:44:47 <cygri> davidwood: Where does this leave our resolution from yesterday?
08:45:02 <cygri> sandro: I hear Larry's advise that we should fully support rdf:Seq.
08:45:16 <cygri> davidwood: Can you clarify whom you speak for?
08:45:36 <cygri> Larry Masinter: Personal opinion. Informed by design principles.
08:45:50 <ericP> q?
08:45:51 <cygri> ... Deprecating something that's used successfully seems foolish.
08:46:17 <cygri> ... The rationale for deprecating it is not clear.
08:46:57 <yvesr> q+
08:46:59 <cygri> ... Photoshop and Acrobat are more widely deployed than the RDF tools you're concerned about.
08:47:37 <cygri> ... The rationale you gave is that tools you're aware of have trouble with rdf:Seq. There are many other tools with more market share that use it.
08:48:07 <cygri> davidwood: Purpose of RDF is interoperability. Tools that use it only internally as configuration are different.
08:48:33 <cygri> ... The places where we see difficulties with rdf:Seq is in the possibly smaller market that is concerned with interoperability
08:49:11 <cygri> Larry Masinter: The current RDF specifications passed the exit criteria, so do they not have interoperable implementations?
08:49:43 <cygri> davidwood: R&D was done in the 2002-2004 WG. Widely criticized for that.
08:50:07 <cygri> sandro: I'd like to clarify. rdf:Seq was in the 1999 spec already.
08:50:28 <cygri> ... So couldn't be removed due to charter
08:50:33 <davidwood> ack yvesr
08:50:37 <cygri> Larry Masinter: How is now different from 2004?
08:50:41 <yvesr> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Extension_Versioning,_Update_and_Compatibility
08:50:48 <cygri> sandro: It was a wrong decision back then.
08:51:07 <cygri> yves: [?] uses rdf:Seq to describe sequences of updates.
08:51:07 <sandro> sandro: We've been *silently* deprecating Seq for 12 years now.     let's stop doing that, at least.
08:51:15 <davidwood> q?
08:51:17 <yvesr> s/[?]/Mozilla Gecko
08:51:19 <sandro> q+
08:51:34 <cygri> ericP: My guess is that we're not going to deprecate rdf:Seq.
08:51:42 <cygri> ... Give up and move on.
08:52:08 <cygri> sandro: I'm not comfortable with silently deprecating rdf:Seq. I want to be wholeheartedly in favour of everything in the specification. Not the case for rdf:Seq.
08:52:26 <cygri> ... If we could improve support...
08:52:27 <ivan> ack sandro
08:52:31 <gavinc> indeed, support the collection types in Turtle :\
08:52:32 <cygri> ... e.g., syntax in Turtle
08:52:42 <cygri> davidwood: We won't do that design work today.
08:52:57 <cygri> ... We have the answer from Larry that we needed. Thank you Larry!
08:53:06 <cygri> Larry Masinter: You have my personal opinion.
08:53:11 <cygri> davidwood: Yes.
08:53:32 <cygri> ivan: We have a resolution from yesterday. Do we want to revisit that resolution?
08:53:45 <davidwood> PROPOSAL: Hold the resolution at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-10-29#resolution_2 in abeyance pending further study.
08:53:52 <ivan> +1
08:54:16 <cygri> sandro: That means re-opening ISSUE-77.
08:54:28 <sandro> +1 sadly
08:54:33 <gavinc> +1
08:54:35 <yvesr> +1
08:54:37 <davidwood> +1
08:54:53 <cygri> Arnaud: Why change this now?
08:55:01 <cygri> ±0
08:55:15 <cygri> davidwood: New information, need to reopen the issue
08:55:35 <AZ> 0
08:55:48 <FabGandon> 0
08:55:49 <Arnaud> -0
08:56:05 <davidwood> RESOLVED: Hold the resolution at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-10-29#resolution_2 in abeyance pending further study.
08:56:11 <davidwood> ISSUE-77.
08:56:19 <cygri> davidwood: I will re-open ISSUE-77 with these comments.
08:56:22 <davidwood> ISSUE-77 reopened.
08:56:25 <sandro> gavinc, are you with us for the day, or only a little while?
08:56:36 <gavinc> 1.56 am :D
08:56:38 <cygri> topic: TriG
08:56:57 <sandro> that doesn't answer my question, actually, gavinc
08:56:59 <davidwood> q?
08:57:37 <cygri> gavinc: There is an editor's draft of TriG. It is old, doesn't reflect current "consensus" on graphs.
08:57:55 <cygri> ... Most of the document will have to change based on decisions made around graphs.
08:58:07 <cygri> ... Most edge cases change.
08:58:39 <cygri> ... Since almost all of the interesting design decisions change between TriG-as-deployed and the new standard, do we want to rename it?
08:58:40 <gavinc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/trig/index.html#
08:58:47 <cygri> davidwood: I believe we have a resolution to keep the name.
08:59:23 <cygri> gavinc: Some of us supported the resolution on the condition that the language mostly stays like TriG-as-deployed. This doesn't seem to be the case.
08:59:34 <cygri> sandro: What's the biggest change?
09:00:03 <cygri> gavinc: When I repeat the graph label multiple times, it is not an error, but the union
09:00:24 <cygri> ericP: What does the old draft say?
09:00:30 <cygri> gavinc: It's an error.
09:00:38 <cygri> sandro: It doesn't invalidate old data.
09:00:57 <cygri> ... I'm pretty sure Anzo supports it already.
09:01:03 <cygri> [discussion of = sign]
09:01:20 <cygri> gavinc: Trailing periods are now removed.
09:01:23 <cygri> q+
09:01:34 <cygri> sandro: Strikes me as trivial.
09:01:50 <davidwood> ack cygri
09:02:12 <ericP> cygri: sandro says that the changes are trivial
09:02:27 <ericP> ... they may be trivial to human eyes, but not to parsers
09:02:32 <sandro> q?
09:02:35 <gavinc> +q
09:02:45 <ericP> ... the question is "does it break the language?"
09:02:49 <davidwood> RESOLVED We will call a recommended dataset syntax "TriG", but informally and in the media type, "trig".
09:02:51 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-10-03#resolution_5
09:03:05 <ericP> sandro: i think it doesn't break it in most cases, less than the ways in which we broke Turtle
09:03:29 <cygri> gavinc: All of the examples provided in the old spec are no longer TriG documents.
09:03:48 <ericP> -> http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/TriG/Spec/ the DERI Trig spec of which we speak
09:04:12 <cygri> davidwood: We have a resolution on this.
09:04:26 <cygri> ... Many were not in favour, but the resolution passed.
09:04:42 <cygri> ... Gavin, issues related not to naming?
09:05:03 <cygri> q+
09:05:06 <ericP> i believe that all the examples in the fu-berlin spec are still Trig by our definition
09:05:10 <ivan> ack gavinc
09:05:11 <davidwood> ack gavinc
09:05:14 <cygri> gavinc: It is still unclear to me how to write the section that introduces named graphs.
09:05:28 <cygri> ... This makes it challenging to write what a graph label is.
09:05:30 <sandro> q?
09:05:38 <cygri> davidwood: Not sure I follow.
09:05:48 <davidwood> ack cygri
09:06:10 <ericP> cygri: I don't see this prob 'cause the Abstract Syntax defines an RDF Dataset
09:06:23 <sandro> +1 cygri    TriG just needs to say it's serializing a Dataset.
09:06:26 <ericP> ... all the Trig doc must do is say "we serialize one of those."
09:06:39 <ivan> +1 cygri
09:07:01 <ericP> ... there could be challenges in the motivating text (why you would want to use this), but that text is a minor point
09:07:18 <gavinc> "A graph statement pairs an IRI with a RDF Graph"
09:07:20 <cygri> gavinc: I guess then there's one sentence describing it that matches RDF Concepts.
09:07:31 <cygri> ... Makes for a short, not very helpful document. But maybe that's all we can do.
09:07:50 <cygri> ... I think the grammar is in reasonable shape as it's based on Turtle.
09:07:56 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
09:08:19 <cygri> ... I assume the Turtle Feature-At-Risk for BASE/PREFIX applies.
09:08:53 <cygri> ... Do we need to repeat the stuff from Turtle or just refer to it?
09:08:57 <cygri> q+
09:08:58 <sandro> just reference turtle grammar
09:09:21 <cygri> ericP: I'm a big fan of being able to copy and paste stuff
09:09:23 <yvesr> q+ to ask about default graph (sorry)
09:09:35 <cygri> gavinc: Grammar will have to be repeated, but the rest maybe not.
09:09:44 <cygri> q-
09:09:58 <cygri> davidwood: It seems like some of the October resolutions are not yet fully reflected.
09:10:04 <cygri> ... in the grammar.
09:10:06 <cygri> gavinc: That's correct
09:10:33 <sandro> q+ to say please provide dates on editor's drafts
09:10:43 <cygri> [discussion of grammar minutiae]
09:11:14 <sandro> q+ sandro2 to ask why repeat grammar?     it's not you can actually cut/paste it.
09:11:50 <davidwood> ack yvesr
09:11:50 <Zakim> yvesr, you wanted to ask about default graph (sorry)
09:12:05 <ericP> q+ yvesr
09:12:08 <davidwood> ack sandro
09:12:08 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to say please provide dates on editor's drafts
09:12:24 <cygri> q+
09:12:49 <gavinc> yeah, no not changing the date every time I edit the document
09:13:41 <davidwood> ack sandro2
09:13:41 <Zakim> sandro2, you wanted to ask why repeat grammar?     it's not you can actually cut/paste it.
09:14:08 <cygri> cygri: [doesn't want to spend time making sure the date on ED is correct]
09:14:21 <cygri> sandro: How about putting a clearly non-date there, January 99 or something
09:14:28 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
09:14:31 <cygri> ... Regarding grammar, copy-paste doesn't work
09:14:39 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me
09:14:39 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
09:14:55 <davidwood> AndyS, we are speaking about TriG grammar.
09:15:00 <cygri> gavinc: I'll probably repeat them and make clear it's same as the Turtle grammar
09:15:07 <cygri> ivan: In my view, editor's pregorative
09:15:28 <cygri> ericP: I like to copy-and-paste
09:15:36 <cygri> ... I also like to click through in an HTML spec
09:15:44 <davidwood> q?
09:15:44 <cygri> sandro: It can click you over to the Turtle spec.
09:15:55 <cygri> ack me
09:16:11 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
09:16:18 <davidwood> ack yvesr
09:16:23 <cygri> ericP: Special markings on productions imported from other specs are good
09:16:42 <cygri> yvesr: I sent an email last week about the default graph in TriG.
09:16:53 <cygri> q+
09:17:03 <sandro> I rather like the idea of the TriG spec being 1 page.     :-)      (It can be if it just refs turtle)
09:17:10 <cygri> ... If you load a TriG file into a triple store and write it out again, you're not sure it comes out the same
09:17:29 <cygri> ... So what's the point of the default graph.
09:17:41 <davidwood> Yves' message regarding default graphs in Trig: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Oct/0212.html
09:17:41 <AndyS> ?? it does in Jena.
09:18:34 <cygri> ivan: There are default graphs in SPARQL. Therefore, it should be in TriG. TriG does not introduce any new concept, and shouldn't be silent on any concept that's in the data model.
09:18:38 <pchampin> q+
09:18:55 <davidwood> ack cygri
09:19:19 <ericP> cygri: the data model of a SPARQL store is an RDF data set
09:19:36 <ericP> ... the data model of Trig is also an RDF data set
09:19:46 <pchampin> q-
09:20:04 <ericP> ... the Trig doc currently doesn't tell you how to load a Trig doc into the SPARQL store
09:20:34 <pchampin> q+
09:20:35 <ericP> ... there can be a middle step between ingesting Trig and writing to the SPARQL store where the impl can do what it wants
09:21:06 <ericP> ... the injestion is not a "restore from trig file", but more "add trig file to store"
09:21:19 <cygri> yvesr: I still think that's a confusing behaviour in TriG
09:21:30 <davidwood> ack pchampin
09:21:37 <ericP> yvesr: i think that [default graphs] are the most difficult feature of Trig
09:21:47 <cygri> ... Makes it hard to explain triple store behaviour, and explain how to use the default graph
09:22:15 <cygri> pchampin: Let me try to rephrase. A TriG file represents a dataset. There's a correct way to parse a TriG file into a dataset.
09:22:53 <cygri> ... But what's less well defined is how to integrate a dataset into a graph store.
09:23:13 <cygri> ... If we validate a TriG parser, it has to be clear what graphs we end up with
09:23:31 <cygri> ... But when a graph store digests a dataset, things can happen.
09:23:47 <cygri> ... Emphasizing this difference may make it less confusing
09:24:13 <cygri> AndyS: There was a comment that if you read something in and write it out again, you don't get the same thing.
09:24:17 <cygri> q+
09:24:43 <cygri> q-
09:24:54 <yvesr> q+
09:24:57 <cygri> ... We don't know what the right model of operation is for some of these things
09:25:15 <cygri> ... So banning some features because of store behaviour is risky.
09:25:58 <cygri> yvesr: I feel that the SPARQL definition of dataset came from implementations. We imported that as the general RDF dataset model.
09:26:07 <cygri> ... So it started with implementations
09:26:11 <davidwood> ack yvesr
09:26:50 <cygri> davidwood: Gavin, has your view changed based on this dicsussion?
09:26:55 <cygri> gavinc: No.
09:27:24 <cygri> ivan: We have little choice. TriG is just a syntax. If default graph in the model, it has to be in the syntax.
09:28:11 <cygri> davidwood: Our primary concern is to get this document out the door. How will we turn this into an FPWD and start the process?
09:28:28 <cygri> gavinc: We should be ready for FPWD quite soon.
09:28:50 <cygri> ... My request to the WG: Examples for use of TriG would be helpful.
09:29:08 <cygri> ... Preferably small ones. Those from the old spec are not great, and all I have are 6GB.
09:30:02 <cygri> [discussion of grammar minutiae]
09:31:15 <cygri> [scribe is lost]
09:31:40 <cygri> [discussion of TriG examples]
09:31:52 <ivan> q+
09:31:52 <sandro> gavinc: The examples in the current ED aren't right.     We can no longer say G1 refers to a graph, etc
09:32:02 <cygri> q+
09:32:05 <sandro> sandro: That text isn't right any more, but the trig is okay
09:32:54 <ericP> cygri: one obvious example would be something which shows versioning
09:32:57 <AZ> examples of trig files: https://www.google.com/search?q=prefix+filetype%3Atrig
09:33:03 <ericP> ... a provenance example would be useful
09:33:20 <AZ> and a provenance example: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/examples/eg-33-a-simpler-hasProvenanceIn/rdf/eg-33-a-simpler-hasProvenanceIn.trig
09:33:25 <ericP> ... the PROV WG has an examplw which shows how DC maps to PROV
09:33:36 <ericP> ... ask Tim Libo?
09:33:46 <ericP> ivan: there's also the PROV Primer
09:34:00 <ericP> ... should be easy to tweak to use named graphs
09:34:10 <gavinc> uh, az that isn't trig :(
09:34:23 <ericP> ... contact Paul Gross quickly; there's a PROV F2F at MIT in a week
09:34:43 <cygri> s/Gross/Groth/
09:35:27 <davidwood> ack ivan
09:35:29 <cygri> davidwood: I'll send a message to Paul
09:35:34 <davidwood> ack cygri
09:35:45 <cygri> ivan: I can translate an example to TriG
09:36:18 <cygri> davidwood: Assuming we can get an example out of ivan, when can you provide doc for review
09:36:23 <cygri> gavinc: November 15
09:36:46 <cygri> ivan: We should not publish this before next RDF Concepts
09:36:51 <davidwood> action: davidwood to contact Paul Groth re provenance example for TriG (before the prov wg ftf)
09:36:52 <trackbot> Created ACTION-200 - Contact Paul Groth re provenance example for TriG (before the prov wg ftf) [on David Wood - due 2012-11-06].
09:37:19 <cygri> davidwood: So we'll start the WG review on Nov 15
09:37:21 <davidwood> q?
09:37:43 <cygri> [nitpicking about examples]
09:38:25 <sandro> sandro: We need to tell Prov about our modified TriG so they can update their examples.
09:38:31 <cygri> ivan: So at the PROV F2F I can tell them that they can use TriG and refer to the upcoming FPWD
09:38:41 <ericP> q+ to clarify the changes from the old Trig
09:38:42 <cygri> ... they made every effort to remove anything that looks like TriG from the documents
09:38:47 <cygri> ... Now they can put it back.
09:39:03 <cygri> sandro: When is their next round of publications?
09:39:11 <cygri> ivan: Hope to vote for CR next week.
09:39:21 <cygri> sandro: Won't have FPWD by then
09:39:33 <cygri> ivan: Can they refer to an ED?
09:39:47 <cygri> sandro: No, not a stable URI.
09:40:22 <sandro> sandro: well, okay, I guess, sure.
09:40:24 <cygri> davidwood: It's a CR. We can put an ED reference there and make clear we'll update it.
09:40:30 <cygri> topic: [COFFEE BREAK]
09:40:36 <gavinc> 25 minutes?
09:40:42 <cygri> davidwood: break for 25 minutes
09:40:47 <davidwood> yes
09:45:58 <Zakim> -AndyS
09:47:33 <Zakim> -Gavinc
09:47:38 <gavinc> Extra heads removed from our hg
09:57:40 <cygri> RRSAgent, make logs public
10:03:14 <Zakim> +Gavinc
10:03:41 <gavinc> Shinny grammar http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/trig/index.html#sec-grammar
10:09:40 <gavinc> did I make sandro happy? ;)
10:10:56 <gavinc> Please DON'T update it each time, makes resolving merges annoying :P
10:11:10 <gavinc> Yes.
10:11:34 <sandro> Well, you make me smile at least.  :-)
10:11:35 <gavinc> N-Quads and N-Triples!
10:11:44 <gavinc> since we didn't talk about N-Triples anywhere else
10:12:13 <pchampin> scribe: pchampin
10:12:38 <pchampin> davidwood: we first considered making N-Triples a part of Turtle, then we decided to split it
10:12:46 <tidoust> tidoust has joined #rdf-wg
10:13:23 <gavinc> dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/n-triples.html
10:14:06 <pchampin> gavinc: current dratf shouldn't require much work
10:14:08 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
10:14:12 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me
10:14:12 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
10:14:38 <cygri> topic: N-Quads and N-Triples
10:15:09 <pchampin> [discussing the language name]
10:15:46 <pchampin> davidwood: did we agree to make this document REC track?
10:15:50 <pchampin> gavinc: yes
10:16:43 <pchampin> sandro: are escape sequences allowed?
10:16:49 <pchampin> gavinc: in this version, yes
10:18:07 <pchampin> sandro: could get rid of ECHAR in theory (backslash-escaping)
10:18:35 <pchampin> gavinc: would be back to the 2004 version, whose goal was to have a single way to represent things
10:18:41 <pchampin> ... but this is not a requirement of this version
10:19:01 <pchampin> ... in this version, you don't require either encoding, as this is UTF-8
10:19:21 <pchampin> s/encoding/escaping/
10:19:44 <pchampin> ... although some cases require UCHAR anyway (scribe missed which case it was)
10:20:05 <cygri> q+
10:20:20 <sandro> queue=cygri
10:20:20 <AndyS> Does any N-triples-2004 parser implement the UCHAR can't be used for chars like TAB?
10:20:22 <gavinc> q- ericP
10:20:22 <davidwood> ack ericp
10:20:28 <davidwood> ack cygri
10:21:04 <pchampin> sandro: any canonical form?
10:21:10 <AndyS>  scribe: + Some escape is needed for newline
10:21:14 <AZ> you can only have one UCHAR in an IRIREF !?
10:21:24 <AZ> """[132s]		IRIREF		::= 	('<' ([^<>"{}|^`\]-[#x00-#x20])* | UCHAR '>')"""
10:21:40 <gavinc> errr...
10:21:55 <gavinc> should be [19] IRIREF ::=  '<' ([^#x00-#x20<>\"{}|^`\] | UCHAR)* '>'
10:21:58 <gavinc> will fix
10:22:06 <AndyS> AZ - C&P error from Turtle - no *
10:22:33 <pchampin> cygri: the nice thing about N-Triples/N-Quad is that they are easy to process with text tools
10:22:34 <AndyS> but it is a compression algorithm.
10:22:38 <sandro> cygri: I suggest we have a Normalized N-Triples, informative, one space between terms, etc.
10:22:58 <pchampin> ... its easier if you have some normalized/canonical form
10:23:16 <pchampin> ... though this is good practice, mostly; it does not need to be normatively defined
10:23:40 <davidwood> q?
10:24:01 <pchampin> ... making it non-normative would mainly minimize work
10:24:06 <ivan> q+
10:24:16 <davidwood> ack ivan
10:24:53 <pchampin> ivan: the first example has comments, but the grammar does not seem to define comments
10:26:25 <pchampin> sandro: comments are line-oriented, while the rest of the grammar is not
10:26:44 <pchampin> ... hence, the comments are not in the grammar
10:26:51 <sandro> gavin: comments are treated as whitespace
10:26:55 <pchampin> ... you can't copy-paste the grammar, you have to read the spec
10:27:19 <AndyS> Is "<s> <p> <o> . # comment" to be legal?  (hope not)
10:27:45 <davidwood> The first example says yes
10:27:49 <pchampin> gavinc: documents will be ready for working group review on the 15 of november
10:28:24 <pchampin> gavinc: to AndyS question: yes it is possible in this version of N-Triples
10:28:45 <pchampin> AndyS: normalized N-Triples should say that comments must have their own line
10:28:51 <pchampin> gavinc: yes
10:29:16 <davidwood> gavinc: Normalized n-triples should allow end-of-line comments, but canonicalized n-triples should have line-oriented comments.
10:29:30 <pchampin> gavinc: newlines inside triples are quite probably allowed
10:29:43 <pchampin> (many people in the room): hummmm
10:30:23 <sandro> wondering about calling N-Triple something like "line-mode turtle".
10:30:26 <davidwood> gavinc: Expects to have n-triples spec ready for review by WG on 15 Nov with the intention to ask for FPWD shortly thereafter.
10:30:31 <pchampin> gavinc: again, you shouldn't do that in noramlized N-Triples
10:30:33 <pchampin> q+
10:30:45 <davidwood> ack pchampin
10:31:21 <sandro> pchampin: Maybe we shouldn't make Normalized N-Triples just informative.  If N-Triples is so permissive, there may be more need for Normalized N-Triples.
10:31:49 <cygri> q+
10:32:43 <AndyS> If gavinc shrugs, shall we make it one line per triple, no trailing comments c.f. nt-2004.
10:32:45 <sandro> ivan: I'm fine with N-Triples including these Normalization rules.
10:32:49 <AndyS> q+
10:32:56 <sandro> ack cygri
10:33:09 <pchampin> pchampin: what is the motivation for making it so more permissive?
10:33:31 <pchampin> s/pchampin/cygri/
10:33:51 <pchampin> gavinc: the motivation was to reuse as much as possible the rules from Turtle
10:33:58 <Guus> Guus has left #rdf-wg
10:34:02 <pchampin> ... remember that it was originally a subset of Turtle
10:34:19 <Guus> Guus has joined #rdf-wg
10:34:21 <pchampin> ... we can easily make it more restrictive
10:34:43 <pchampin> ... by removing turtly bits from it
10:35:56 <pchampin> cygri: I think it more important to make it close to the old N-triples than to make it "turtlier"
10:36:58 <pchampin> gavinc: the older spec was very pedantic, and noone implemented it strictly
10:37:16 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-testcases/#eoln
10:37:19 <davidwood> ack AndyS
10:37:28 <gavinc> line 	::= 	ws* ( comment | triple )? eoln
10:37:35 <gavinc> tailing newline
10:37:49 <pchampin> andys: I think the expectation is that N-Triples is one line per triple
10:37:50 <cygri> what's a newline?
10:38:41 <pchampin> ... reusing turtle should not be a design constraint
10:39:17 <pchampin> davidwood: also recall that Oracle didn't want anything to break their existing N-Triples parser
10:40:08 <gavinc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/n-triples.html#n-triple-changes
10:41:31 <cygri> gavin, this one has a newline: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/xmlbase/test008.nt
10:42:45 <AndyS> The test cases have a final newlines in the copy I'm looking at.
10:42:56 <gavinc> huh
10:43:02 <AndyS> and copyright statement.
10:43:12 <gavinc> ... I wonder if it depends on where you got them from
10:43:24 <davidwood> PROPOSED: The RDF 1.1 n-triples grammar will not allow line breaks within triples
10:43:38 <ivan> +1
10:43:39 <cygri> +1.1
10:43:40 <AndyS> +1
10:43:40 <ericP> +1
10:43:41 <gavinc> +1
10:43:42 <pchampin> +1
10:43:47 <Arnaud> +1
10:43:54 <ericP> +0.9
10:44:02 <AZ> +1
10:44:07 <davidwood> +1
10:44:08 <yvesr> +1
10:44:19 <ivan> RESOLVED: The RDF 1.1 n-triples grammar will not allow line breaks within triples
10:44:44 <pchampin> RESOLVED: The RDF 1.1 n-triples grammar will not allow line breaks within triples
10:45:23 <gavinc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/n-triples.html#n-triple-changes
10:45:27 <davidwood> The editors will be gavinc and ericp
10:45:47 <pchampin> davidwood: Eric, your appear as an editor of N-Triples, are you happy with that?
10:45:57 <pchampin> ericp: I'm happy eitherway
10:46:16 <pchampin> davidwood: anyway we'll have you as contact for the IETF registration
10:46:29 <pchampin> topic: N-Quads
10:47:04 <pchampin> cygri: I think it would be nice to have an N-Quads syntax
10:47:11 <AndyS> +1 to NQuads spec.  NQ exists!  (don't care about empty graph but easy to add something)
10:47:23 <ericP> q+ to demonstrate ignorance by asking what use case is addressed by N-Quads which is not addressed by Trig
10:47:26 <pchampin> sandro: what about the default graph?
10:47:34 <gavinc> <> <> <> . <> <> <> <> .
10:48:29 <davidwood> ack ericp
10:48:29 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to demonstrate ignorance by asking what use case is addressed by N-Quads which is not addressed by Trig
10:48:41 <AndyS> q+
10:49:00 <pchampin> ericp: what can we accomplish with N-Quads that we can't with Trig?
10:49:52 <pchampin> ... seems that you don't end up with faster process for N-Quads than with Trig?
10:50:12 <pchampin>  ivan: same argument as N-Triples: you can use line-oriented tools
10:50:42 <gavinc> Too late, N-Quads exist
10:50:43 <pchampin> ... and it is already used like that out there
10:50:49 <cygri> q+
10:51:26 <pchampin> sandro: N-Triples is a subset of Turtle, you never need an N-Triple parser if you have a Turtle parser.
10:51:35 <pchampin> ... this is not the same between N-Quads and Trig
10:51:39 <davidwood> ack AndyS
10:52:16 <pchampin> andys: it's already out there, and people use it
10:52:38 <pchampin> ... re. N-Triples, people use specific parsers that happen to be faster than Turtle parsers
10:52:38 <davidwood> ack cygri
10:53:30 <pchampin> cygri: agreed it is a de facto standard
10:53:43 <pchampin> ... sure, we could work out a subset of Trig for that purpose
10:53:58 <pchampin> ... cons: it's not what is currently being used
10:54:21 <AndyS> newlines again?
10:54:27 <Arnaud> q+
10:54:34 <davidwood> ack Arnaud
10:54:41 <pchampin> ... pros: it could be a profile of N-Quads
10:55:33 <pchampin> arnaud: still feel uncomfortable about the proliferation of syntaxes
10:55:43 <pchampin> ... we are moving from 1 normative syntax to 7
10:56:15 <pchampin> ... I understand that having multiple syntaxes makes it clear that what matters is the data model
10:56:17 <davidwood> q?
10:56:32 <pchampin> ericp: but for this, we only need 2, not 7
10:56:53 <pchampin> arnaud: I agree that we should endorse existing syntax
10:57:03 <pchampin> ... but not try to define a new one to replace the old one,
10:57:11 <pchampin> ... because the old one will not disappear
10:58:26 <ivan> q+
10:58:31 <davidwood> ack ivan
10:58:42 <pchampin> davidwood: multiples syntax make it clearer that the data model is what matters
10:59:15 <pchampin> ivan: I would propose that the current N-Triples document include N-Quads (as it is used in the wild)
10:59:44 <ericP> to convert from N-Quads to N-Trig: awk '{print $4 " { " $1 " " $2 " " $3 "}"}'
11:00:01 <pchampin> arnaud: how would it be acceptable for N-Triples/N-Quad when it was not for Turtle/Trig?
11:00:15 <pchampin> ivan: I just want to limit the proliferation of documents
11:00:24 <pchampin> q+
11:00:49 <sandro> PROPOSED: We'll do N-Quads on the REC Track, as another Dataset serialization syntax, in line with existing, in-the-wild N-Quads.
11:01:01 <gavinc> +1
11:01:04 <pchampin> ivan: we define a notation for dumps, defining what's already out there, and that's all
11:01:06 <sandro> +1
11:01:12 <cygri> sandro, can we say "in the same doc as N-Triples"?
11:01:20 <ericP> -0.9
11:01:30 <AZ> +1
11:01:30 <ivan> +1
11:01:37 <pchampin> +1
11:01:43 <ericP> -0.9 due to proliferation of parsers
11:01:43 <davidwood> +1
11:01:47 <Arnaud> +1
11:02:04 <AZ> q+
11:02:05 <cygri> +1
11:02:13 <cygri> q+
11:02:22 <gavinc> "Line Oriented RDF Syntaxes"
11:02:22 <pchampin> q-
11:02:42 <yvesr> +0.1
11:03:03 <gavinc> The parsers already exist
11:03:30 <gavinc> Just about any SPARQL store has to deal with N-Quads already
11:03:36 <sandro> sandro: line-trig would be yet another language (in people's heads).   n-quads already exists.
11:04:08 <pchampin> eric: I was more concerned in limiting the number of parsers, not the number of languages
11:04:27 <pchampin> ... anyway, converting N-Quads to line-oriented Trig is quite trivial
11:04:36 <pchampin> s/trivial/easy/
11:04:48 <davidwood> ack AZ
11:04:48 <ivan> ack AZ
11:04:52 <sandro> sandro: How about in the spec we provide the informative unix command to convert n-quads to trig.  :-)
11:04:56 <pchampin> ... making it easy to parse N-Quads with an (instrumented) Trig parser
11:05:07 <mlnt> mlnt has joined #rdf-wg
11:05:12 <ivan> ack cygri
11:05:36 <sandro> sandro: nquads syntax would be restricted to datasets (no literals or bnodes in fourth column)
11:05:46 <pchampin> az: we should remove from N-Quads the fact that bnodes are allowed in the graph name position
11:06:01 <Arnaud> q+
11:06:05 <sandro> cyg: the fact that an RDF syntax exists because not every RDF toolkit has to implement it.    they are for particular user bases.
11:06:05 <pchampin> cygri: N-Quads will not lead to a proliferation of parsers, because the parsers are already there
11:06:41 <davidwood> ack Arnaud
11:07:08 <pchampin> s/az: we should/az: should we/
11:07:12 <gavinc> Introduction to RDF Syntaxes?
11:07:17 <gavinc> as part of the primer?
11:08:09 <pchampin> sandro: OWL had an Overview document, to help people with a large number of documents
11:08:15 <cygri> q+
11:08:19 <pchampin> ivan: I think this is a good idea
11:08:35 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
11:08:54 <pchampin> guus: in OWL1, this was the first section in all the documents
11:09:03 <davidwood> ack cygri
11:09:07 <pchampin> ivan: I think a separate document is better
11:09:11 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/
11:09:52 <pchampin> cygri: I'm not sure about the targeted reader of such an overview document
11:10:33 <pchampin> ... the need for such an overview exist, but then it should not stop at the boundaries of this particular WG
11:11:41 <davidwood> For an example of a useful overview document, see the CSS WG's current work page: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work
11:11:44 <davidwood> q?
11:11:51 <pchampin> ... the reader would also want to know about SPARQL or RDFa
11:11:58 <sandro> RESOLVED: We'll do N-Quads on the REC Track, as another Dataset serialization syntax, in line with existing, in-the-wild N-Quads.
11:12:01 <yvesr> so what should the primer 'syntax' section cover, then?
11:12:04 <pchampin> ivan: I disagree, but that's ok
11:12:09 <cygri> davidwood, that's a nice page
11:12:15 <gavinc> No.
11:13:42 <gavinc> "Line Oriented RDF Syntaxes"
11:13:54 <gavinc> I'd like to avoid the word "Dump"
11:13:55 <sandro> "RDF Dump Formats"
11:14:07 <gavinc> "Line Oriented RDF Syntaxes"?
11:14:18 <AndyS> "Line oriented" -- the MapReduce case
11:14:37 <sandro> PROPOSED: We're do N-Triples and N-Quads in one REC-track documents, title to be decided
11:14:49 <Arnaud> +1
11:14:50 <ivan> +1
11:14:50 <sandro> +1
11:14:53 <gavinc> +1
11:14:53 <AndyS> +1
11:14:53 <cygri> +1
11:14:55 <pchampin> +1
11:14:56 <AZ> +1
11:14:59 <davidwood> +1
11:15:10 <yvesr> +1
11:15:13 <davidwood> Richard and Gavin to edit.
11:15:13 <sandro> RESOLVED: We're do N-Triples and N-Quads in one REC-track documents, title to be decided
11:15:16 <ericP> abstain
11:15:17 <davidwood> q?
11:15:52 <pchampin> topic: issue list
11:16:22 <tbaker> tbaker has joined #rdf-wg
11:17:49 <pchampin> guus: I made a scan of the www-rdf-comments archive
11:18:13 <Zakim> -AndyS
11:18:33 <pchampin> http://www.w3.org/mid/508FACB7.7080103@vu.nl
11:18:48 <AndyS1> AndyS1 has joined #rdf-wg
11:19:05 <AndyS> AndyS has left #rdf-wg
11:19:05 <pchampin> guus: we can paste it in a wiki page
11:19:34 <pchampin> ... there could be duplications with the errata
11:20:13 <FabGandon> concerning errata I did this for RDF-XML http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-RDF-XML
11:20:59 <pchampin> ivan: there is no formal process with the errata
11:22:07 <sandro> gavinc, we're looking at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/open
11:22:19 <sandro> :-)
11:23:24 <sandro> re ISSUE-23 -- does JSON-LD need a different media type when it contains multiple graphs???!?!   (everyone sighs)
11:25:11 <cygri> Resolution to close ISSUE-35 and ISSUE-38 from yesterday: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2012-10-29#resolution_10
11:25:38 <davidwood> Close ISSUE-35 We will not use an rdf:Graph construct.
11:27:02 <davidwood> Close ISSUE-38 We will create dataset serialization formats (TriG and n-quads).
11:27:10 <sandro> trackbot, hello?
11:27:10 <trackbot> Sorry, sandro, I don't understand 'trackbot, hello?'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help
11:27:17 <sandro> issue-35?
11:27:17 <trackbot> ISSUE-35 -- Should there be an rdf:Graph construct, or something like that? -- open
11:27:17 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/35
11:28:41 <davidwood> close ISSUE-35
11:28:41 <trackbot> ISSUE-35 Should there be an rdf:Graph construct, or something like that? closed
11:28:47 <davidwood> close ISSUE-38
11:28:47 <trackbot> ISSUE-38 What new vocabulary should be added to RDF to talk about graphs? closed
11:28:48 <sandro>  agreed: close ISSUE-78 and make it an action on Guus
11:31:04 <pchampin> cygri: re issue-80 it is hard to get the document updated, as the WG is no longer active
11:31:54 <pchampin> sandro: we agreed yesterday that we didn't need to update them, as they are referring to an older version of RDF
11:31:55 <sandro> sandro: I don't think we need to do anything here....
11:32:52 <pchampin> cygri: the problem is that rdf:PlainLiteral is in the rdf: namespace, and it should not be there anymore
11:33:34 <pchampin> ... OWL should now manage with xsd:String and rdf:LangString
11:33:57 <pchampin> ivan: they can not make this kind of change now, only editorial changes
11:34:33 <pchampin> sandro: the only thing to do is to send an email to the owl-comments list
11:35:03 <pchampin> ACTION cygri to send a message about rdf:PlainLiteral to the owl-comments mailing list
11:35:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-201 - Send a message about rdf:PlainLiteral to the owl-comments mailing list [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2012-11-06].
11:35:06 <sandro> +1 cygri ask OWL WG to redo rdf:PlainLiteral as using xs:string and xs:LangString.
11:35:17 <gavinc> ISSUE-99 is a No.
11:35:43 <pchampin> close issue-80
11:35:44 <trackbot> ISSUE-80 Ask OWL and RIF WGs to update the rdf:PlainLiteral spec closed
11:36:17 <gavinc> ISSUE-99 is a No!
11:36:25 <gavinc> and there is a bigger reason ;)
11:36:36 <gavinc> in that we likely shouldn't have the HTML datatype either
11:36:56 <pchampin> fabgandon: re issue-99 we discussed that yesterday,
11:37:12 <pchampin> ... and I recorded for the XML syntax that it should include an example of HTML literal using CDATA
11:37:22 <cygri> ISSUE-99?
11:37:22 <trackbot> ISSUE-99 -- Does RDF/XML get a special syntax for HTML Literals? -- open
11:37:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/99
11:37:38 <pchampin> close issue-99
11:37:38 <trackbot> ISSUE-99 Does RDF/XML get a special syntax for HTML Literals? closed
11:37:39 <gavinc> FabGandon, I wouldn't do that yet ;)
11:40:48 <FabGandon> FabGandon has left #rdf-wg
11:41:19 <Zakim> -Gavinc
11:47:56 <manu1> manu1 has joined #rdf-wg
11:50:36 <gkellogg> gkellogg has joined #rdf-wg
11:52:59 <Zakim> +??P0
11:53:05 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P0
11:53:05 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
12:20:06 <markus> Zakim, what's the code?
12:20:06 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), markus
12:22:25 <Zakim> +??P1
12:22:36 <markus> Zakim, ??P1 is me
12:22:36 <Zakim> +markus; got it
12:22:56 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
12:22:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see Rhone_4, gkellogg, markus
12:22:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see gkellogg, manu1, AndyS1, tbaker, markus, Guus, cygri, pchampin, Zakim, Arnaud, davidwood, trackbot, manu, gavinc, RRSAgent, yvesr, sandro, ericP
12:24:11 <Zakim> +Tony
12:25:30 <ScottB> ScottB has joined #rdf-wg
12:25:52 <ScottB> Zakim, Tony is temporarily me
12:25:52 <Zakim> +ScottB; got it
12:25:58 <Zakim> +??P4
12:26:06 <manu1> zakim, I am ??P4
12:26:06 <Zakim> +manu1; got it
12:26:36 <Zakim> +Gavinc
12:40:11 <ericP> AndyS1, perl -pe 's/([^ ]+) ([^ ]+) (.*?) ([^ ]+) \./$4 { $1 $2 $3 }/'
12:42:26 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #rdf-wg
12:42:39 <tidoust> tidoust has joined #rdf-wg
12:43:58 <Guus> Guus has joined #rdf-wg
12:44:14 <yvesr> scribe: yvesr
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000671