<trackbot> Date: 31 January 2012

trackbot, this will be SW_RDB2RDF

<trackbot> Sorry, mhausenblas, I don't understand 'trackbot, this will be SW_RDB2RDF'. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

<scribe> scribenick: mhausenblas

Admin

PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2012/01/24-RDB2RDF-minutes.html

<juansequeda> +1

RESOLUTION: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2012/01/24-RDB2RDF-minutes.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Jan/0085.html

Towards CR

Ashok: Have not yet started the W3CM communication
... waiting for final URLs for R2RML and DM from the Editors
... How long should CR phase be?
... looks like we have implementations ready by mid 2012

Ivan: we should work backwords

Michael: charter ends in 09/2012

Ivan: we should make sure that we go PR around 06/2012
... maybe even 05/2012 for SemTech

acc ericP

<Zakim> ericP, you wanted to reflect Ralph's advice

damn

VoIP problem again

Ashok can you take over chairing pls

Ivan can you take over scribing please

we will be back in a few minutes

<Ashok> Eric: Ralph and PLH often act in Director's role

<Ashok> They like to see links to the test cases and implementation reports

<Ashok> Michael: We have a Wiki

<Ashok> Michael: I can create an implementation report pointing to the Wiki

<Ashok> Michael: I can create an implementation report as an Editor's Draft

<ericP> +1

<Ashok> Richard: Some of the material can be auto-generated

PROPOSAL: Use http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Implementations as basis

<Ashok> Michael: For both R2RML and DM

<ericP> +1

<cygri> +1

<nunolopes> +1

<ivan> +1

RESOLUTION: Use http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Implementations as basis

<Souri> +1

PROPOSAL: Use http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/ as basis for TC

<Ashok> Eric: They also want to see a pointer to "How to Test"

<Ashok> Richard: Does this document become a note?

<Ashok> Ivan: Not necessarily

Michael: I'd prefer a WG Note

<Ashok> ... if it is a stable document on the website, that's good enough

<cygri> i too have a preference for making the TCs a WG Note

<Ashok> Eric: We need to talk about the test cases

<Ashok> ... and how to test

<Ashok> Eric: Create a new page with ptrs to test cases, how to test and the results?

<Ashok> +1

<boris> section 4

<MacTed> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/#how-to-run-the-tests

<MacTed> @@@ This section shall contain some hints on how to actually run the test suite, upload the results for generating implementation reports for implementers.

<Ashok> Richard: Will there be a test harness?

<MacTed> Moreover, the section describes the inputs/outputs of the testing ...

Richard: agree with ericP

<Ashok> Ted: We need to just fill out section 4 which has placeholders

MacTed: seems like the sec 4 is already doing this in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/

<Ashok> ... don't like the idea of a static implementation report. It will get out of date.

<ericP> i don't see what factoring out the harness and submission from the test cases has to do with whether the implementation report is static

<Ashok> Boris: Talks about what we need to do re. test cases, how to run and where to send implementation reports

<ericP> +1 to the test cases and the harness having at the least different lifetimes

<Ashok> Richard: Argues for a formal implementation report ... just needed to get out of CR. Not to last forever.

<Ashok> Michael: Much of the implmenation report can be auto-generated

<Ashok> Richard: We create a new Wiki page that talks about test cases, what test harness may be available ...

<Ashok> Richard: Some implementors may produce a test harness, may like to share with others

PROPOSAL: Create http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Submitting_Implementation_Reports and explain how to handle EARL, and link to http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/

<ericP> +1

<nunolopes> +1

<cygri> +1

<Ashok> Ashok: EARL -> Evaluation Report Language

<MacTed> +1

<boris> +1

RESOLUTION: Create http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Submitting_Implementation_Reports and explain how to handle EARL, and link to http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/

<Ashok> Next steps: Editors will alert WG that final versions of docs are ready

<Ashok> ... Ashok will then start the CR process

<Ashok> Ashok: CR will end on April 30

Richard: we need to interoperable implementation for PR, right?
... question is also what does interoperable mean

Michael: Boris, can you please fill in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Submitting_Implementation_Reports ...?

<Ashok> Ricard: We need to meet our exit criteria

<ericP> "This Candidate Recommendation is expected to advance to Proposed Recommendation no earlier than 12 April 2012." -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-xml-c14n2-20120124/

Michael: ... and also remove the respective sections from TC doc?
... Thanks a lot, Boris!

<Ashok> Eric: Tests are simple ...

<Ashok> ... can get graph equivalence code from Jena

<scribe> ACTION: Boris to fill http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Submitting_Implementation_Reports [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/31-RDB2RDF-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-193 - Fill http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Submitting_Implementation_Reports [on Boris Villazón-Terrazas - due 2012-02-07].

<Ashok> Ivan: Graph equivalence may be too much ... processor may produce additional output

<Ashok> ... Better may be to run SPARQL ASK query on the output

<MacTed> Interop....

<MacTed> 1. 2 implementations given same DBMS, produce similar G-snaps, both including at least xyz triples verified by SPARQL ASKs

<MacTed> 2. 2 implementations given same R2RML + same DBMS, produce similar G-snaps, both including at least xyz triples verified by SPARQL ASKs

<Zakim> ericP, you wanted to propose that implementations need a minimal mode per SPARQL tests

<Ashok> Richard: Implementations may have a strict mode where they do not generate any metadata

<dmcneil> we addressed this when we were doing the final review of the R2RML spec, right?

<Ashok> Discussion on whether we need a strict mode

<dmcneil> as I recall we defined the R2RML output data set strictly

<dmcneil> but implementors can expose other datasets

<cygri> [[

<cygri> The output dataset must not contain any other RDF triples or named graphs besides these. However, R2RML processors may provide access to datasets that contain additional triples or graphs beyond those in the output dataset, such as inferred triples or provenance information.

<cygri> ]]

<cygri> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#generated-rdf

<scribe> ACTION: Hausenblas to update http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Implementations with reports from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Jan/0067.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/31-RDB2RDF-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-194 - Update http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Implementations with reports from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Jan/0067.html [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2012-02-07].

<Ashok> Eric: Someone could write a normalizer

<ericP> note that SPARQL 1.0 CONSTRUCT tests and SPARQL Update tests faced this issue

<Ashok> Michael: Do we need to resolve this right now?

<Ashok> Ashok: Are we happy with the test cases?

<Ashok> Michael: We need to discuss this in the coming couple of weeks

<ericP> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-xml-c14n2-20120124/#sotd

<scribe> ACTION: ericP to propose a more detailed wording concerning i18y requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/31-RDB2RDF-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-195 - Propose a more detailed wording concerning i18y requirements [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2012-02-07].

<Ashok> Eric: There is the percnt encoding issue on the DM that Richard raised

<Zakim> Souri, you wanted to point out couple of minor issues in the diagrams in current R2RML Editor's Draft

<cygri> example: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#triples-map

<Ashok> Souri: there are 2 diagrams predmap, objmap, ... -> change * to + ?

Michael: Thanks, Boris!

<Ashok> Richard: Boris will have to sort this out ... I don't care

<Ashok> Ivan: When will we get the final document?

Richard: Ready when boris updates diagrams

<Ashok> Richard: Boris has to update diagram

Boris: Can do it now

<Ashok> Ivan: After CR we can make editorial changes but let's not plan on them

Michael: So, for R2RML Thu should be possible

<Ashok> Ashok: So, Thursday for both documents?

Eric: DM should be possible by Thu if we reach a resolution on IRI issues

<Ashok> Eric: Depends on if we can resolve URI and I18N issues

[meeting adjourned]

<ericP> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/R2RML_Test_Cases_v1#I18NnoSpecialChars

trackbot, end telecon

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Ralph/Eric: Ralph/
Succeeded: s/hoiw/how/
Succeeded: s/implemetors/implementors/
Succeeded: s/Grapg/Graph/
Succeeded: s/run SPARQL query/run SPARQL ASK query/
Succeeded: s/stricy/strict/
Found ScribeNick: mhausenblas
Inferring Scribes: mhausenblas
Default Present: MacTed, Ivan, EricP, Ashok_Malhotra, mhausenblas, nunolopes, juansequeda, dmcneil, cygri, seema, +2714aaaa, Marcelo, +34.60.062.aabb, Boris, Souri, +1.636.544.aacc
Present: MacTed Ivan EricP Ashok_Malhotra mhausenblas nunolopes juansequeda dmcneil cygri seema +2714aaaa Marcelo +34.60.062.aabb Boris Souri +1.636.544.aacc Ted Eric Ashok Michael Juan David Nuno Richard Seema
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2012Jan/0088.html
Found Date: 31 Jan 2012
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/01/31-RDB2RDF-minutes.html
People with action items: boris ericp hausenblas