13:55:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ldp
13:55:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/04/22-ldp-irc
13:55:53 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:55:54 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ldp
13:55:55 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
13:55:56 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
13:55:56 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:55:57 <trackbot> Date: 22 April 2013
13:58:07 <nmihindu> nmihindu has joined #ldp
13:58:33 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
13:58:40 <Zakim> +??P3
13:58:46 <krp> krp has joined #ldp
13:58:54 <Ashok> Ashok has joined #ldp
13:59:11 <pchampin> zakim, ??P3 is me
13:59:11 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
13:59:27 <BartvanLeeuwen> BartvanLeeuwen has joined #ldp
14:00:06 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:00:16 <Zakim> +??P5
14:00:27 <Zakim> +Arnaud
14:00:27 <rgarcia> rgarcia has joined #ldp
14:00:40 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
14:00:46 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
14:00:47 <Zakim> +??P8
14:00:55 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, ??P8 is me
14:00:55 <Zakim> +BartvanLeeuwen; got it
14:00:57 <Zakim> +??P10
14:01:10 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
14:01:10 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
14:01:11 <Zakim> +??P12
14:01:11 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:01:13 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:01:35 <svillata> Zakim, ??P12 is me
14:01:35 <Zakim> +svillata; got it
14:01:49 <Zakim> +[IBM]
14:01:54 <SteveS> Zakim, [IBM] is me
14:01:55 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
14:02:01 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:02:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see pchampin, [IPcaller], ??P5, Arnaud, TallTed (muted), Ashok_Malhotra, BartvanLeeuwen, ??P10, svillata, SteveS
14:02:18 <roger> roger has joined #ldp
14:03:13 <Zakim> +??P15
14:03:36 <rgarcia> zakim, ??P15 is me
14:03:36 <Zakim> +rgarcia; got it
14:03:40 <Zakim> +??P17
14:03:43 <Zakim> + +44.208.573.aaaa
14:03:43 <Zakim> +[GVoice]
14:03:50 <cody> cody has joined #ldp
14:04:00 <Ashok> scribenick: Ashok
14:04:04 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
14:04:12 <Zakim> +SteveBattle
14:04:36 <nmihindu> zakim, ??P17 is me
14:04:36 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
14:04:42 <Zakim> -??P10
14:04:50 <Ashok> Topic:  Minutes from lat week
14:04:52 <Ashok>  http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/meeting/2013-04-15
14:04:55 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:05:00 <Ashok> s/lat/last/
14:05:08 <cody> zakim, IPCaller is me
14:05:08 <Zakim> +cody; got it
14:05:44 <Arnaud> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2013-04-15
14:05:46 <Zakim> +??P1
14:05:47 <Zakim> -??P5
14:05:55 <Ashok>  http://www.w3.org/2013/ldp/meeting/2013-04-15
14:06:06 <krp> zakim, ??P1 is me
14:06:06 <Zakim> +krp; got it
14:06:10 <Ashok> Note revised link above
14:06:27 <stevebattle> It was 2012 for the previous minutes as well
14:06:29 <TallTed> Arnaud - Ashok's link is correct ... differs from yours
14:06:58 <TallTed> sorry, I'm wrong.  *this* works -- http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2013-04-15
14:07:07 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:07:07 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
14:07:41 <Zakim> +bblfish
14:07:54 <bblfish> object to what?
14:08:06 <bblfish> ah yes, the meetings from last week.
14:08:08 <bblfish> thanks
14:08:39 <Ashok> RESOLUTION:  Minutes from 4/15 are accepted
14:08:55 <Ashok> Topic: f2f in Madrid
14:09:02 <Zakim> +??P10
14:09:06 <bblfish> ah that's cool. When is it?
14:09:15 <Ashok> Raul has added hotel info to f2f
14:10:09 <bblfish> When is the next F2F? I have not been following closely enough
14:10:12 <Ashok> Arnaud:  You can get a hotel anywhere in downtown Madrid and take public transport
14:10:25 <Ashok> Raul:  Yes ... may take 30 minutes
14:10:35 <BartvanLeeuwen> +q
14:10:38 <BartvanLeeuwen> q-
14:10:45 <Ashok> Topic:  Actions and Issues
14:10:47 <bblfish> what was the URL for the next meeting?
14:10:48 <sergio> sergio has joined #ldp
14:10:53 <rgarcia> bblfish, it will be June 18-20
14:11:02 <bblfish> Mh. ok. thanks perfect
14:11:02 <rgarcia> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/F2F3
14:11:22 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:11:38 <Zakim> -BartvanLeeuwen
14:11:45 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:11:45 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:11:49 <TallTed> Zakim, who's noisy?
14:11:49 <cody> Somebody needs to mute.
14:11:52 <sergio> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:11:52 <Zakim> +sergio; got it
14:12:00 <Zakim> TallTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: cody (57%), Arnaud (86%), [IPcaller] (56%)
14:12:03 <Zakim> +??P8
14:12:08 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, ??p8 is me
14:12:08 <Zakim> +BartvanLeeuwen; got it
14:12:16 <Zakim> -krp
14:12:26 <Ashok> Arnaud:  Please do your action items
14:12:52 <Ashok> Roger:  I have been on vacation will try this week
14:13:38 <bblfish> zakim, who is making noise
14:13:38 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is making noise', bblfish
14:13:39 <krp> krp has joined #ldp
14:13:43 <bblfish> zakim who is making noise
14:13:51 <Ashok> Arnaud:  Nandana, when can you do the review of the PROV documents?
14:14:19 <sergio> Zakim, who's noisy?
14:14:25 <nmihindu> Erik has already provided some comments on the mailing list and I will provide mine within next week
14:14:36 <Zakim> sergio, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Arnaud (29%)
14:15:07 <Ashok> Arnaud: No new issues
14:15:38 <Ashok> Topic: ISSUE-35: POSTing to a container MUST yield a fresh URI
14:15:43 <bblfish> Issue-35?
14:15:43 <trackbot> ISSUE-35 -- POSTing to a container MUST yield a fresh URI -- open
14:15:43 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/35
14:16:18 <Ashok> Arnaud:  There has been a long discussion on this
14:16:57 <bblfish> but restauring a URL with a POST should not be a good reason. Use a PUT then
14:17:19 <SimpsonTP_> SimpsonTP_ has joined #ldp
14:17:22 <Zakim> +??P1
14:17:29 <krp> zakim, ??P1 is me
14:17:29 <Zakim> +krp; got it
14:17:42 <Zakim> +??P21
14:17:47 <SimpsonTP_> Zakim, ??p21 is me
14:17:47 <Zakim> +SimpsonTP_; got it
14:18:03 <BartvanLeeuwen_> Zakim, ??p21 is me
14:18:03 <Zakim> I already had ??P21 as SimpsonTP_, BartvanLeeuwen_
14:18:11 <bblfish> q+
14:18:23 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:18:31 <Arnaud> PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-35: POSTing to a container MUST yield a fresh URI, by adding that servers SHOULD not reuse URLs while acknowledging that they MAY under certain circumstances, per Arnaud's suggestion
14:18:35 <Ashok> Arnaud:  I suggest we say servers SHOULD not reuse URIs ... but may be reused in some cases
14:18:49 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:18:49 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
14:18:59 <TallTed> q+
14:19:06 <Kalpa> Kalpa has joined #ldp
14:19:12 <ericP> I don't think we need to encourage re-use. just say "SHOULD"
14:19:15 <Arnaud> ack tallted
14:19:17 <stevebattle> Exactly, MacTed swayed me to his cause with this compelling argument as well.
14:19:27 <Ashok> bblfish:  ... Due to past history being lost
14:19:30 <cody> +1
14:19:31 <ericP> +1
14:19:32 <rgarcia> +1
14:19:33 <bblfish> +1
14:19:33 <stevebattle> +1
14:19:34 <Ashok> +1
14:19:34 <TallTed> +1
14:19:35 <SteveS> +1
14:19:36 <sergio> +1
14:19:38 <roger> +1
14:19:41 <krp> +1
14:19:41 <svillata> +1
14:19:45 <Yves> +1
14:19:46 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:19:46 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:19:47 <pchampin> +1
14:19:48 <nmihindu> +1
14:19:58 <Arnaud> Resolved: Close ISSUE-35: POSTing to a container MUST yield a fresh URI, by adding that servers SHOULD not reuse URLs while acknowledging that they MAY under certain circumstances, per Arnaud's suggestion
14:20:20 <bblfish> Issue-59?
14:20:20 <trackbot> ISSUE-59 -- Reconsider usage of Aggregate/Composite construct to get predictable container delete behavior -- open
14:20:20 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/59
14:20:37 <Ashok> Topic:  ISSUE-59: Reconsider usage of Aggregate/Composite construct to get predictable container delete behavior
14:21:30 <Ashok> Arnaud:  Discusses the issue and current positions
14:21:55 <Ashok> ... SteveS had suggested a single type of container
14:22:50 <Ashok> ... if container deleted it goes away ... server MAY delete some of the contained resources
14:23:45 <Ashok> ... some folks want an attribute that says members are deleted or not
14:24:07 <bblfish> q+
14:24:32 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:24:41 <TallTed> q+
14:24:46 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:24:46 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
14:25:51 <Ashok> bblfish:  You could create a weak container ...
14:26:13 <bblfish> <.> ldp:contains <>
14:26:46 <roger> I think if you are POSTing to a container, then it is always a 'strong member', IMO.
14:26:49 <Ashok> ... That would be a strong member ... if not it would be a weak member
14:28:20 <pchampin> q+
14:28:36 <Arnaud> ack tallted
14:29:08 <Ashok> Ted:  Decisions were made and then we decided we did not consider everything
14:29:23 <Ashok> ... I would rather not revisit decisions
14:29:32 <Arnaud> ack pchampin
14:29:41 <pchampin> (sorry my voip is very bad)
14:29:43 <pchampin> I'll type
14:29:50 <bblfish> Well Ted, the vote for weak aggregation was very weak. 2+1 only, so it was not that strong
14:29:55 <pchampin> If we decide that containers are mostly for creating resources
14:29:58 <TallTed> s/then we decided/then we realized/
14:30:06 <pchampin> and have no comitment w.r.t delete
14:30:14 <pchampin> may be it would be better to rename them otherwise
14:30:18 <pchampin> factory?
14:30:57 <SteveS> q+
14:31:06 <pchampin> ./me sorry TallTed, I wasn't there, and I missed that in the minutes, then...
14:31:19 <roger> creation, pagination, update
14:31:29 <Arnaud> ack steves
14:32:14 <Ashok> SteveS:  Maybe we could agree on semantics and leave naming for later
14:33:10 <Ashok> ... Henry suggested that a contains relation could be added when a member is added and these would
14:33:29 <Ashok> ... deleted when container is deleted
14:33:44 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:33:44 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:33:59 <Ashok> ... lot of open issues with contains type model as well
14:34:30 <bblfish> q?
14:35:02 <Arnaud> PROPOSAL: close ISSUE-59 per Steve's suggestion, per Arnaud's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Apr/0088.html
14:35:17 <Ashok> Arnaud:  Let me make a proposal ...
14:35:19 <TallTed> so you're proposing the first option from your mail?
14:35:30 <cody> +1 (with questions)
14:35:36 <ericP> +1
14:35:39 <SteveS> +1
14:35:45 <sergio> +0
14:35:47 <roger> +1 (first option)
14:35:54 <svillata> +1
14:35:56 <bblfish> -0.7 (not sure why we have problems with what is there now)
14:35:57 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:35:57 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
14:36:12 <rgarcia> +1
14:36:13 <BartvanLeeuwen_> +1
14:36:16 <rgarcia> rgarcia has left #ldp
14:36:24 <nmihindu> +1
14:36:27 <rgarcia> rgarcia has joined #ldp
14:36:37 <TallTed> +1  I can live with this
14:36:40 <Ashok> -1
14:36:46 <stevebattle> +1
14:36:50 <krp> +1
14:36:53 <pchampin> +0
14:37:03 <stevebattle> q+
14:37:17 <Ashok> Arnaud:  We have a single type of container and postpone the recursive delete issue
14:38:14 <TallTed> it's all here -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Apr/0088.html
14:38:27 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
14:39:02 <Arnaud> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Apr/0088.html
14:40:08 <TallTed> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/14
14:40:12 <bblfish> Issue-59?
14:40:12 <trackbot> ISSUE-59 -- Reconsider usage of Aggregate/Composite construct to get predictable container delete behavior -- open
14:40:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/59
14:41:09 <SteveS> DRAFT PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-59 by having only 1 single type of container: ldp:Container, deletion of container will remove membership triples (server may remove member resources), put recursive delete on wish list
14:41:42 <TallTed> it's here now -- http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/59
14:41:44 <TallTed> dangit
14:41:56 <Ashok> q+
14:42:05 <stevebattle> q-
14:42:46 <Zakim> -SimpsonTP_
14:42:46 <bblfish> q+
14:42:57 <bblfish> What's the difference between these two options?
14:43:03 <Arnaud> STRAWPOLL: option a, option b from note at http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/59
14:43:11 <stevebattle> Bart has the best excuses for leaving a meeting.
14:43:57 <TallTed> A +0  B +0.5    (I'd prefer B to have "SHOULD delete ldp:contains" rather than MUST)
14:44:16 <ericP> A:+1, B:-.5
14:44:27 <stevebattle> +1,0
14:44:48 <Arnaud> ack ashok
14:44:57 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:45:13 <SteveS> +1, -0.51
14:45:31 <pchampin> A:+0 B:-1
14:45:33 <rgarcia> A:+1, B:-0.49
14:45:47 <ericP> q+
14:45:56 <nmihindu> A: +1, B: 0
14:46:24 <roger> A: +1, B: -1
14:46:36 <ericP> ack me
14:46:44 <sergio> ok, after thinking a bit, I change my vote: A: +1, B: 0
14:46:51 <cody> q+
14:47:43 <Arnaud> ack cody
14:48:20 <bblfish> q+
14:48:41 <pchampin> q+
14:49:09 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:49:17 <krp> A: +0.8, B: -0.2
14:50:10 <Ashok> Henry:  Asks why not 2 kinds of containers ... we should recap arguments that appeaed after TPAC
14:50:30 <SteveS> q+
14:50:32 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:50:32 <Zakim> TallTed was not muted, TallTed
14:50:35 <Ashok> ... you shouldn't be deleting stuff on the Web in any case
14:51:51 <Ashok> Ted:  Argus by analogy with file system ... you have to delete members manually
14:52:13 <Ashok> s/Argus/Argues/
14:52:26 <ericP> DELETE -r /container HTTP/1.0  ?
14:52:33 <Ashok> ... people find that tedious
14:52:47 <pchampin> bblfish: and by the way, you don't really delete the file (in *nix filesystems at least) by removingit from a directory
14:53:11 <pchampin> ... it only gets deleted when no hard link to it exists anymore
14:54:00 <ericP> pchampin, oof, another challenge associated with recurssive delete, *known* links to a contained resource
14:54:07 <SteveS> If people want filesystem semantics, I wonder why they just don't use WebDAV
14:54:28 <ericP> SteveS, does WebDAV offer recurssive delete?
14:54:37 <Arnaud> ack pchampin
14:54:40 <pchampin> about option B: As an implementer, I don't feel comfortable in letting the client deciding which resources are strongly contained and which are not. I would rather leave it to the implementation to decide that.
14:54:54 <Ashok> Arnaud:  We have a third option ... keep spec as is ... two types of containers
14:55:06 <SteveS> ericP, that is the default model and only one
14:55:18 <cody> q+
14:55:29 <pchampin> hence my -1 on option B
14:55:48 <Arnaud> ack steves
14:56:04 <bblfish> pchampin: I don't think option B is saying the client would decide that.
14:56:34 <Ashok> SteveS:  Agrees with pchampin argument
14:57:07 <gavinc> gavinc has joined #ldp
14:57:11 <Ashok> ... if we have 2 types of containers we need to define how we can switch from to another, etc.
14:57:20 <Arnaud> ack cody
14:57:40 <stevebattle> I never liked the two different kinds of containers.
14:58:12 <Zakim> -ericP
14:58:50 <Ashok> Ashok:  I was worried about DELETE semantics
14:59:18 <cody> +0.5
14:59:22 <pchampin> @bblfish: may be I misread item 3; I was assuming that the client can specify the ldp:contains arc at POST time
14:59:34 <roger> +1
14:59:34 <Arnaud> PROPOSAL: close ISSUE-59 per Steve's suggestion, option a in note http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/59
14:59:39 <TallTed> +1
14:59:41 <bblfish> pchampin: that was something I was thinking of
14:59:42 <SteveS> +1
14:59:46 <rgarcia> +1
14:59:47 <sergio> +1
14:59:48 <pchampin> @bblfish: re-reading it, that's still how I understand it...
14:59:49 <svillata> +1
15:00:48 <bblfish> q+
15:01:04 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
15:01:17 <Ashok> Ashok:  Option 1 may cut off an option for recursive delete
15:01:59 <stevebattle> +1
15:02:09 <SteveS> bblfish, the origins of this issue is that it is not simple…per discussions at Cambridge
15:02:11 <Ashok> Henry:  Perhaps work out option 2 more fully
15:02:33 <Ashok> Arnaud:  Please send mail with worked out proposals
15:02:46 <sergio> one additional week to discuss by mail make sense
15:03:09 <Zakim> -bblfish
15:03:14 <bblfish> thanks
15:03:15 <Zakim> -cody
15:03:17 <Ashok> Arnaud:  Let's take a week otherwise we will close with option A
15:03:19 <Zakim> -Yves
15:03:22 <Arnaud> MEETING ADJOURNED
15:03:22 <Zakim> - +44.208.573.aaaa
15:03:24 <Zakim> -sergio
15:03:25 <Zakim> -SteveS
15:03:25 <Zakim> -svillata
15:03:26 <Zakim> -TallTed
15:03:26 <Zakim> -nmihindu
15:03:29 <Zakim> -krp
15:03:31 <Zakim> -Arnaud
15:03:31 <Zakim> -SteveBattle
15:03:32 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
15:03:33 <Zakim> -rgarcia
15:03:36 <Zakim> -pchampin
15:06:36 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #ldp
15:08:37 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, BartvanLeeuwen, in SW_LDP()10:00AM
15:08:38 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
15:08:38 <Zakim> Attendees were pchampin, Arnaud, Ashok_Malhotra, BartvanLeeuwen, TallTed, svillata, SteveS, rgarcia, +44.208.573.aaaa, ericP, SteveBattle, nmihindu, cody, krp, bblfish, Yves,
15:08:38 <Zakim> ... sergio, SimpsonTP_
15:11:14 <Kalpa> Kalpa has left #ldp
15:13:46 <BartvanLeeuwen_> sorry about that ;)
15:19:33 <BartvanLeeuwen_> got the RDF to prove it: http://data.brandweeraa.nl/data/messages/c89b8140690204b1f10bc27edd81b86eede3003f
15:19:35 <BartvanLeeuwen_> cya
16:40:32 <Arnaud> hi all
16:40:39 <Arnaud> does anyone who SimpsonTP is?
17:01:05 <Zakim> Zakim has left #ldp
17:12:46 <betehess> Arnaud, at 10:17, I read * SimpsonTP_ is now known as BartvanLeeuwen_
17:12:56 <betehess> also, Bart <-> Simpson
17:32:16 <jmvanel> jmvanel has joined #ldp
17:32:57 <Arnaud> ah, thanks Alexandre!
18:40:14 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp