Chatlog 2013-01-21

From Linked Data Platform
Jump to: navigation, search

See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

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

14:52:48 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ldp
14:52:48 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/21-ldp-irc
14:52:50 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:52:50 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ldp
14:52:52 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
14:52:52 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
14:52:53 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
14:52:53 <trackbot> Date: 21 January 2013
14:54:53 <BartvanLeeuwen> BartvanLeeuwen has joined #ldp
14:54:56 <Ruben1> Ruben1 has joined #ldp
14:55:50 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
14:55:57 <Zakim> +Ruben
14:56:11 <Ashok> zakim, code?
14:56:11 <Zakim> the conference code is 53794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Ashok
14:56:58 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
14:58:11 <Zakim> +SteveBattle
14:58:26 <rgarcia> rgarcia has joined #ldp
14:59:40 <Zakim> +EricP
14:59:49 <Zakim> +Arnaud
15:00:24 <Zakim> +bblfish
15:00:28 <Zakim> +??P9
15:00:56 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:01:03 <SteveS> zakim, [IBM] is me
15:01:03 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
15:01:05 <rgarcia> zakim, ??P9 is me
15:01:05 <Zakim> +rgarcia; got it
15:01:18 <JohnArwe> JohnArwe has joined #ldp
15:01:53 <Zakim> +JohnArwe
15:01:56 <Zakim> +??P12
15:02:01 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, ??P12 is me
15:02:01 <Zakim> +BartvanLeeuwen; got it
15:02:21 <JohnArwe> zakim, who is here?
15:02:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ruben, Ashok_Malhotra, SteveBattle, EricP, Arnaud, bblfish, rgarcia, SteveS, JohnArwe, BartvanLeeuwen
15:02:23 <Zakim> On IRC I see JohnArwe, rgarcia, Ruben1, BartvanLeeuwen, Zakim, RRSAgent, Ashok, Arnaud, dret, jmvanel, AndyS, sergio, SteveS, stevebattle, deiu, bblfish, trackbot, Yves, sandro,
15:02:23 <Zakim> ... ericP
15:02:34 <cygri> cygri has joined #ldp
15:02:45 <Zakim> +cygri
15:03:07 <Zakim> +roger
15:03:17 <nmihindu> nmihindu has joined #ldp
15:03:21 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:03:46 <rogerm> rogerm has joined #ldp
15:04:04 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
15:04:11 <Arnaud> zakim, who is here?
15:04:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ruben, Ashok_Malhotra, SteveBattle, EricP, Arnaud, bblfish, rgarcia, SteveS, JohnArwe, BartvanLeeuwen, cygri, roger, [IPcaller], [IPcaller.a]
15:04:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see rogerm, nmihindu, cygri, JohnArwe, rgarcia, Ruben1, BartvanLeeuwen, Zakim, RRSAgent, Ashok, Arnaud, dret, jmvanel, AndyS, sergio, SteveS, stevebattle, deiu, bblfish,
15:04:14 <Zakim> ... trackbot, Yves, sandro, ericP
15:04:47 <bblfish> hi
15:04:55 <sergio> I'm out of the office using sip
15:04:58 <sergio> sorry
15:05:14 <dret> Zakim, IPcaller.a is me
15:05:14 <Zakim> +dret; got it
15:05:25 <sergio> Zakim, IPcaller is me
15:05:25 <Zakim> +sergio; got it
15:05:53 <Arnaud> zakim, who is here?
15:05:53 <Zakim> On the phone I see Ruben, Ashok_Malhotra, SteveBattle, EricP, Arnaud, bblfish, rgarcia, SteveS, JohnArwe, BartvanLeeuwen, cygri, roger, sergio, dret
15:05:55 <Zakim> On IRC I see rogerm, nmihindu, cygri, JohnArwe, rgarcia, Ruben1, BartvanLeeuwen, Zakim, RRSAgent, Ashok, Arnaud, dret, jmvanel, AndyS, sergio, SteveS, stevebattle, deiu, bblfish,
15:05:55 <Zakim> ... trackbot, Yves, sandro, ericP
15:07:24 <JohnArwe> scribe: JohnArwe
<JohnArwe> Topic: Minutes of January 14
15:07:36 <JohnArwe> PROPOSED: accept minutes Jan 14
15:07:39 <Zakim> +Yves
15:07:42 <SteveS> +1
15:08:27 <JohnArwe> RESOLVED: minutes of Jan 14 approved without objection
15:08:46 <JohnArwe> topic: Actions/issues
<JohnArwe> subTopic: Actions pending review
<JohnArwe> ACTION-27
15:09:04 <bblfish> what action?
15:09:14 <bblfish> ISSUE-25?
15:09:14 <trackbot> ISSUE-25 -- Weak aggregation and strong composition in containers -- closed
15:09:14 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/25
15:10:19 <Kalpa> Kalpa has joined #ldp
15:10:22 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: how to proceed to close?
<JohnArwe> SteveS: propose close action now, raise new issues if disagree.
15:10:30 <cygri> zakim, kalpa is with me
15:10:30 <Zakim> +kalpa; got it
15:10:30 <JohnArwe> RESOLVED: Close action-27
15:11:06 <JohnArwe> zero issues pending review.
15:11:13 <JohnArwe> subTOPIC: Raised issues
15:11:25 <JohnArwe> issue-45?
15:11:25 <trackbot> ISSUE-45 -- POSTing to an LDPR appends content to the resource -- raised
15:11:25 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/45
15:11:38 <bblfish> eu we can close ACTION-28
15:11:52 <stevebattle> A LDPC is defined to be an LDPR
15:12:13 <stevebattle> Isn't this issue ambiguous?
15:13:33 <JohnArwe> Henry, what did your 'eu' mean?
15:13:36 <stevebattle> OK
15:13:44 <bblfish> I don't think an LDPR is a subclass of LDPC
15:13:54 <bblfish> q+
15:14:03 <bblfish> ah
15:14:04 <bblfish> q-
15:14:30 <JohnArwe> henry, you made a comment in irc about action 28 that I did not understand.
15:14:41 <JohnArwe> PROPOSED: open issue-45
15:14:43 <SteveS> Arnaud: LDPC is a subclass of an LDPR, where POST could be over written
15:14:46 <SteveS> +1
15:15:05 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: hearing no disagreement
15:15:11 <bblfish> Me I think I probably disagree also that an LDPC is an LDPR ...
15:15:12 <JohnArwe> RESOLVED: open issue-45
15:15:17 <bblfish> q+
15:15:23 <bblfish> can I close http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/28
<JohnArwe> subTopic: ACTION-28
15:15:41 <bblfish> ACTION-28?
15:15:41 <trackbot> ACTION-28 -- Henry Story to access Control: fill in use cases and requirements and Identity section -- due 2012-11-21 -- OPEN
15:15:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/28
15:15:53 <Ashok> q+
15:16:39 <Zakim> -bblfish
15:16:40 <stevebattle> SteveS, would you like to talk about where we are on UC&R in a moment (I have no info)?
15:16:42 <Arnaud> ack ashok
15:16:51 <bblfish> q-
15:17:45 <Zakim> +bblfish
15:18:15 <SteveS> stevebattle, sure….I really don't think it is in anyone's queue (not sure why)
15:19:39 <bblfish> q-
15:19:40 <JohnArwe> ashok and henry to discuss action-28 and figure out what more to add to page
15:19:56 <JohnArwe> TOPIC: Use Case and Requirements Draft
15:20:15 <JohnArwe> SteveS: not clear whose publication queue it is in
15:21:13 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: Staff contacts (Yves) can you check on status?  As far as editors know all issues were addressed and we were expecting it to be published by now.
15:21:31 <JohnArwe> TOPIC: LDP Spec
15:22:17 <JohnArwe> SteveS: inserted all new open issues since F2F, removed closed/handled ones, so (sans issue 45) the editor's draft reflects all open issues.
<JohnArwe> Topic: Open Issues
15:23:16 <JohnArwe> subTOPIC: Issue 37 (The Model)
15:23:18 <bblfish> ISSUE-37?
15:23:18 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- What is the LDP data model and the LDP interaction model? -- open
15:23:18 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/37
15:23:29 <bblfish> q+
15:24:30 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
15:24:59 <JohnArwe> Henry: we don't have an ontology, should we open an issue to create one so we can 'argue' more effectively about proposals?
15:25:04 <SteveS> q+
15:25:18 <stevebattle> I agree (ontology) - just informally on the wiki - not OWL or anything right now.
15:25:58 <cygri> +1 to starting with prose
15:26:01 <sergio> +1
15:26:24 <sergio> formal ontology/vocabulary later
15:27:21 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: wiki will seed, not a substitute for formalism
15:27:47 <Arnaud> ack steves
15:28:11 <Kalpa> +1 for ontology
15:29:05 <JohnArwe> SteveS: Submission did include an ontology.  Need to be careful of not having 2 copies evolving in parallel and generating confusiong b/c they do not align.
15:29:57 <bblfish> I'll put up the ontology
15:30:00 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: avoid creating more pages/more places to monitor - be sure they are really needed
15:30:43 <stevebattle> Shall we review by editing the wiki, or via email?
15:31:10 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: members should being reviewing issue 37 wiki page http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ISSUE-37#Linked_Data_Platform and discuss on mailing list so next week we can make progress
15:32:26 <stevebattle> Yes
15:33:57 <JohnArwe> JohnArwe: as discussions occur, who is going to keep wiki page aligned with email stream?
15:34:23 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: we'll figure that out as we go, the default would be Erik but others can update
15:34:42 <JohnArwe> erik: as various aspects are agreed on, should move into spec
15:35:01 <SteveS> q+
15:35:13 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: agree; trying to get people to come in prepped next week so we can start assessing agreement on each aspect
15:36:06 <JohnArwe> Steves: you said something we all agree on; I thought we were adding alternatives.  What is the relationship between working through things on that page vs closing issue 37?
15:36:47 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: if we agree on everything on the page, we can close the issue.  we need to get people's opinions reflected on the page in order to make progress.
15:36:58 <sergio> ISSUE-34?
15:36:58 <trackbot> ISSUE-34 -- Adding and removing arcs in weak aggregation -- open
15:36:58 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/34
15:37:29 <JohnArwe> subTOPIC: Issue 34
15:37:38 <bblfish> Issue-34?
15:37:38 <trackbot> ISSUE-34 -- Adding and removing arcs in weak aggregation -- open
15:37:38 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/34
15:38:54 <SteveS> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ISSUE-34
15:40:05 <JohnArwe> SteveS: JohnArwe constructed page, Henry has one child, Roger has a second, email traffic.
15:41:21 <JohnArwe> Henry: my proposal is compatible with the existing spec I think.  I do not see it as different from the spec as it exists today; perhaps we could add an Aggregation class.
15:41:58 <JohnArwe> ... in the process of answering questions I added a bunch of relations, saw that this was ballooning the spec, did not like that, and worked to reduce it back to a minimum.
15:42:01 <Zakim> -EricP
15:42:28 <Zakim> +[GVoice]
15:43:12 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: that's interesting, did not get that from the discussion.  So if it's true that aggregation represents just a way of using the existing spec, then we'd have to figure out where to say that.
15:43:50 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: Roger's proposal looks "more different" then, since I think he wants to add a lot more to the spec.
15:44:27 <bblfish> q+
15:44:59 <JohnArwe> Roger: I think LDP is very general, and if we want uptake need to think about how to address those scenarios.  Am I alone in thinking LDP is very general and useful?  Use case document seemed to have what I was looking for.
15:45:08 <Arnaud> ack steves
15:45:12 <stevebattle> You have my sympathies :)
15:45:37 <jmvanel> jmvanel has joined #ldp
15:46:17 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
15:46:19 <JohnArwe> SteveS: agree with broader sense, not sure if we agree on how much is reasonable for 2013 scope.  Get something with value out sooner, and add later.
15:47:49 <JohnArwe> Henry: aggregation and containment, one would have to go through Roger's example and see if can be done using Henry's (my) proposal.  If we assume the "not issue 34" pieces of Roger's example are possible, is there anything in the example that cannot be done?
15:47:59 <Kalpa> Kalpa has joined #ldp
15:48:21 <stevebattle> I imagine that the LDP can be used to pass messages and invoke services in the way that Roger desires by using it as a kind of drop-box. I don't see that it requires additional machinery in the LDP.
15:49:43 <Arnaud> q?
15:49:58 <JohnArwe> Roger: appears with your proposal you're adding more than is needed.  I'm imagining you're just editing triples; aggregation is normal linked data.  Your proposal seemed to have containment, aggregation, and then something else (latter covered by posting generic RDF).  That's too unconstrained for the uses we're targeting.
15:50:34 <JohnArwe> Henry: my example was perhaps in need of improvement.
15:51:06 <JohnArwe> Roger: thought bug tracker example would be a good one to evaluate the proposals against
15:51:11 <stevebattle> Can we take scenarios from the UC&R?
15:53:42 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: existing example (friends/enemies) showed me there was a clear difference in understanding.  At F2F we agreed Container does something very special - deleting all members when the container is removed.  The friends/enemies example it's just another link to add a friend, you said we needed behavior there too (validation that the linked to resource is a Friend).  If it's validation, that's different than aggr.
15:55:08 <bblfish> q+
15:55:34 <JohnArwe> SteveB: you come to LDPR, it tells you about a few interesting predicates (domain specific) that you can build up/change in order to impl your app.  Validation is not the central issue, it's how the client discovers from the server what it can do.
15:55:34 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
15:56:16 <stevebattle> Dare I say it, Roger - you want the available speech acts to be documented.
15:56:38 <Zakim> -bblfish
15:56:41 <bblfish> oops
15:56:47 <bblfish> my skype cut me off
15:56:49 <JohnArwe> Henry: that would be a different issue - how describe what types appear in collection, what types you can create, you can use ontologies
15:57:38 <Zakim> +bblfish
15:58:00 <JohnArwe> SteveB: need more dynamic, not static membership criteria; we concluded properties better than classes.
15:58:10 <Arnaud> q?
15:59:02 <BartvanLeeuwen> q+
15:59:33 <Zakim> -dret
15:59:35 <Arnaud> ack bart
15:59:36 <BartvanLeeuwen> q-
15:59:39 <JohnArwe> Henry: gives examples of possible graph types, described by vocab that client knows.  there's also some vocab about buying things.  but those are not obviously the same as aggr
16:00:47 <JohnArwe> Roger: spreads out beyond issue 34, scope creep, issues are wider.
16:01:22 <SteveS> I believe we need to doing something in the spec for aggregation
16:01:33 <Zakim> -Ruben
16:01:42 <Ruben1> Ruben1 has left #ldp
16:02:05 <JohnArwe> Arnaud: slowing getting to pt where we think we don't need to do anything special about aggr, might add text somewhere along the lines of what Henry says, otherw I may propose soon to accept what Henry's discussion comes up with.
16:02:30 <JohnArwe> ...suspect issue 34 resolution becomes we don't need to do anything more (no spec change)
16:02:44 <JohnArwe> ...really comes out as other issues like paging
16:02:50 <Arnaud> q?
16:02:57 <Zakim> -SteveS
16:03:00 <stevebattle> Thanks, bye.
16:03:00 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
16:03:04 <Zakim> -bblfish
16:03:04 <BartvanLeeuwen> thx Arnaud
16:03:04 <sergio> bye
16:03:05 <Zakim> -Yves
16:03:05 <Zakim> -roger
16:03:05 <Zakim> -rgarcia
16:03:07 <Zakim> -Arnaud
16:03:07 <Zakim> -cygri
16:03:08 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
16:03:09 <Kalpa> Kalpa has left #ldp
16:03:09 <Zakim> -BartvanLeeuwen
16:03:11 <Zakim> -sergio
16:03:12 <SteveS_> SteveS_ has joined #ldp
16:03:13 <Zakim> -ericP
16:03:14 <Zakim> -SteveBattle
16:03:16 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
16:03:16 <Zakim> Attendees were Ruben, Ashok_Malhotra, SteveBattle, EricP, Arnaud, bblfish, SteveS, rgarcia, JohnArwe, BartvanLeeuwen, cygri, roger, dret, sergio, Yves, kalpa
16:03:36 <JohnArwe> Arnaud, so you take the minutes from here right?
16:04:02 <bblfish> bye
16:04:22 <SteveS_> SteveS_ has joined #ldp
16:07:48 <stevebattle> stevebattle has joined #ldp
16:12:19 <stevebattle> stevebattle has joined #ldp
16:19:38 <Arnaud> johnarwe, yes I will
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000222