13:54:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ldp
13:54:03 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/06/03-ldp-irc
13:54:05 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:54:05 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ldp
13:54:07 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
13:54:07 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
13:54:08 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:54:08 <trackbot> Date: 03 June 2013
13:56:05 <mielvds1> mielvds1 has joined #ldp
13:57:28 <roger> roger has joined #ldp
13:57:50 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
13:57:58 <Zakim> +Ruben
13:58:23 <Zakim> -Ruben
13:58:25 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
13:58:25 <Zakim> Attendees were Ruben
13:58:36 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
13:58:42 <Zakim> +Arnaud
13:59:46 <Ashok> Ashok has joined #ldp
14:00:25 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
14:00:43 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
14:00:44 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
14:00:49 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
14:00:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Arnaud, TallTed
14:00:50 <Zakim> On IRC I see Ashok, roger, mielvds1, Zakim, RRSAgent, TallTed, jmvanel, Arnaud, bblfish, betehess, Yves, sandro, trackbot, ericP, thschee
14:01:13 <Zakim> +bblfish
14:01:23 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
14:01:24 <nmihindu> nmihindu has joined #ldp
14:02:02 <Zakim> + +44.208.573.aaaa
14:02:07 <JohnArwe> JohnArwe has joined #ldp
14:02:14 <bblfish> :-)
14:02:21 <roger> zakim, i am aaaa
14:02:21 <Zakim> +roger; got it
14:02:36 <krp> krp has joined #ldp
14:02:49 <Zakim> +Ruben
14:02:50 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #ldp
14:03:07 <mielvds1> zakim, Ruben is me
14:03:07 <Zakim> +mielvds1; got it
14:03:21 <Zakim> +??P10
14:03:58 <Zakim> +??P7
14:04:07 <nmihindu> zakim, ??P10 is me
14:04:07 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
14:04:17 <pchampin> zakim, ??P7 is me
14:04:17 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
14:04:22 <Zakim> + +1.415.392.aabb
14:04:28 <JohnArwe> zakim, aabb is me
14:04:28 <Zakim> +JohnArwe; got it
14:04:45 <Zakim> + +1.919.306.aacc
14:05:28 <JohnArwe> scribe: bill
14:05:46 <JohnArwe> scribe: miel
14:06:30 <bblfish> Topic: approve minutes
14:06:53 <roger> a question on the back channel, for the F2F3 is it better to stay near the open middleware centre, or is it better to stay in town ?
14:07:04 <Zakim> +??P14
14:07:07 <rgarcia> rgarcia has joined #ldp
14:07:11 <mielvds1> Resolution; minutes of may 13 approved
14:07:17 <krp> zakim, ??P14 is me
14:07:17 <Zakim> +krp; got it
14:07:52 <bblfish> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.06.03
14:08:00 <nmihindu> roger, better stay close to downtown, in my opinion :)
14:08:03 <mielvds1> Resolution: Minutes may 20 approved
14:08:18 <Zakim> +??P15
14:08:28 <Zakim> +??P16
14:08:36 <rgarcia> zakim, ??P15 is me
14:08:36 <Zakim> +rgarcia; got it
14:08:52 <mielvds1> Topic: Next Face 2 Face
14:09:23 <mielvds1> Arnaud: we need different people to discuss and close issues
14:10:12 <mielvds1> Arnaud: Last june we need a spec that we can publish. We will need to accept that some issues will be postponed
14:10:52 <mielvds1> Arnaud: We need to reach that target, because summer is coming. This means big delays, which is bad
14:12:00 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I will do my best as chair to deliver the spec on time
14:12:08 <mielvds1> Arnaud: time to raise issues
14:12:46 <mielvds1> Topic: Tracking of Actions and issues
14:13:37 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I have posted a list of issues that I consider: at risk => they have no proposal
14:14:16 <mielvds1> Arnaud: if there are issues that are of intrest to you, I strongly suggest you come with a proposal BEFORE the meeting
14:14:20 <nmihindu> Issues at risk -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013May/0309.html
14:14:39 <roger> roger has joined #ldp
14:15:14 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I started using issues-pending-review to keep better track
14:15:24 <mielvds1> Topic: Actions
14:15:36 <bblfish> actions?
14:15:39 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:15:39 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:16:09 <bblfish> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/open
14:16:53 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I propose we close action 3, ..
14:17:15 <mielvds1> Resolution: close action 63, 64, 66
14:18:23 <mielvds1> Arnaud: no other actions to close
14:18:27 <mielvds1> Topic: issues
14:19:09 <mielvds1> Arnaud: all issues have a proposal, they can be discussed during meeting. Let's spend time on raised issues
14:19:44 <JohnArwe> actions 63, 64, 66 now closed in db
14:19:51 <mielvds1> Arnaud: let's start with issue 74
14:20:14 <bhyland> bhyland has joined #ldp
14:20:25 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I propose top open it, objections?
14:20:39 <mielvds1> Resolution: open issue 74
14:21:16 <JohnArwe> arnaud - on 74 you resolved to open; was it also your intent to vote on the proposal today?
14:21:47 <mielvds1> Arnaud: we might vote on 74 later, now raised issues
14:21:47 <JohnArwe> ok... later, time permitting
14:21:56 <mielvds1> Rsolution: open issue 77
14:23:37 <mielvds1> Arnaud: roger, still want to open issue 72?
14:23:50 <mielvds1> roger: genuine hole in the spec
14:23:59 <bblfish> I am ok with closing issue-76
14:24:03 <mielvds1> Resolution: open issue 72
14:24:24 <JohnArwe> regrets: serena, andy, sergio, piere-antoine
14:24:44 <TallTed> I'm having some trouble following along -- what is the sort order being used for discussion of raised issues?
14:24:45 <bblfish> q+
14:25:07 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:25:38 <mielvds1> bblfish: I think we can close issue 76
14:25:48 <mielvds1> Resolution: close issue 76
14:26:28 <roger> @TallTed, I believe the discussion order is according to difficulty/complexity
14:27:24 <pchampin> q+
14:27:44 <pchampin> yes; I'm mute
14:27:44 <bblfish> the answer I was mentioning that I wrote this morning is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Jun/0003.html
14:27:47 <pchampin> muted :)
14:28:02 <bblfish> q?
14:28:03 <pchampin> can't find the unmute button
14:28:04 <pchampin> q-
14:28:16 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
14:28:16 <Zakim> On the phone I see Arnaud, TallTed (muted), bblfish, Ashok_Malhotra, roger, mielvds1, nmihindu, pchampin, JohnArwe, +1.919.306.aacc, krp, rgarcia, Yves
14:28:19 <Zakim> On IRC I see roger, rgarcia, pchampin, krp, JohnArwe, nmihindu, Ashok, mielvds1, Zakim, RRSAgent, TallTed, jmvanel, Arnaud, bblfish, betehess, Yves, sandro, trackbot, ericP,
14:28:19 <Zakim> ... thschee
14:28:21 <mielvds1> Resolution: open issue 75
14:28:52 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I hope people in the RDF semantics can come in and look at these specific issues
14:29:13 <mielvds1> Arnaud: issue 71 is main topic of discussion
14:29:15 <mielvds1> Resolution: open issue 71
14:30:25 <bblfish> q+
14:30:31 <mielvds1> Arnaud: explain, henry, what issue 73 is about
14:30:33 <TallTed> tangential but important -- all instances of "rdf:member" should be corrected to "rdfs:member", in ISSUEs, ACTIONs, etc.
14:30:37 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:30:56 <mielvds1> bblfish: there is a confusion, people are taking any relation as member relation
14:31:32 <mielvds1> bblfish: there needs to be a relation between LDPC and the members of it according to ATOM and REST people
14:32:02 <mielvds1> bblfish: LDP contains (issue 79) is closely related, it's a better issue
14:32:18 <mielvds1> bblfish: we can close issue 73
14:33:36 <mielvds1> bblfish: in my impl. clients could find all created members
14:34:06 <mielvds1> bblfish: 79 explains this, 73 is the real spec issue
14:34:27 <mielvds1> bblfish: 73 is more a 'best practice' issue
14:35:19 <mielvds1> Resolution: we will change the product of issue 73 to deployment guide
14:35:43 <JohnArwe> issue-73 updated in db per the resolution
14:35:50 <mielvds1> Arnaud: issue 78 and 79 are left
14:36:58 <mielvds1> bblfish: issue 79 depends on if we want inferencing, if we want to allow it
14:37:53 <mielvds1> correction -> issue 78
14:38:00 <mielvds1> bblfish: clients stick to LDP and have zero inferencing
14:38:18 <mielvds1> Arnaud: wise thing to do to steer spec to what people expect
14:38:33 <pchampin> not sure the term "level" is used, but different "kinds of entailments" are well defined in RDF Semantics and OWL
14:38:44 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
14:38:44 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
14:39:31 <bblfish> ok with that
14:39:33 <mielvds1> Resolution: open issue 78
14:39:36 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:39:36 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
14:40:15 <JohnArwe> issue-78 opened in db
14:40:45 <mielvds1> Arnaud: I suggest we open 79
14:44:38 <mielvds1> Can issue 79 be opened?
14:45:34 <mielvds1> Topic: Open Issues
14:45:40 <bblfish> Issue-64?
14:45:40 <trackbot> ISSUE-64 -- Non-member-properties and Hypermedia as the Engine of Application State (HATEOAS) Compliance -- pending review
14:45:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/64
14:45:41 <nmihindu> issue-64
14:45:41 <trackbot> ISSUE-64 -- Non-member-properties and Hypermedia as the Engine of Application State (HATEOAS) Compliance -- pending review
14:45:41 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/64
14:46:42 <JohnArwe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013May/0226.html proposal email
14:47:00 <mielvds1> Arnaud: the proposal of John is to close the one regarding non-member-properties, related issue first-page is in de draft now
14:47:18 <JohnArwe> s/ de / editor's /
14:47:31 <bblfish> link headers sounds pretty safe given that other protocols have already reveiewed them.
14:48:39 <pchampin> +.5 for a URI
14:48:43 <bblfish> q+
14:48:51 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:49:18 <mielvds1> bblfish: the disadvantage of the short url, is that there is no RDF. We cannot put it in the body.
14:49:47 <pchampin> q+
14:49:51 <mielvds1> Arnaud: if we put it in the RDF content, you do a get, which what we want to avoid (having to get all members)
14:49:55 <JohnArwe> I don't care either way; I'm not sure that this semantic is general enough to make it worth registering a short name, so I'm fine with defining our own URL
14:50:07 <mielvds1> Arnaud: http link header seems to be more adequate
14:51:49 <mielvds1> Arnaud: let's have a quick poll
14:52:12 <pchampin> q-
14:52:24 <Arnaud> PROPOSAL: close issue-64 per John's proposal with a URL (rather than shortname)
14:52:41 <pchampin> +1
14:52:43 <JohnArwe> +1
14:52:45 <TallTed> +1
14:52:48 <mielvds1> +1
14:52:48 <roger> +1
14:52:51 <rgarcia> +1
14:52:54 <nmihindu> +1
14:52:58 <Ashok> +1
14:53:02 <krp> +1
14:53:09 <Arnaud> +1 (on behalf SteveS)
14:53:22 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: close issue-64 per John's proposal with a URL (rather than shortname)
14:53:40 <bblfish> Issue-71?
14:53:40 <trackbot> ISSUE-71 -- No membershipSubject or membershipPredicate -- raised
14:53:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/71
14:55:05 <bblfish> q+
14:55:08 <mielvds1> Arnaud: How many people want to reuse the vocabularies?
14:55:36 <mielvds1> Arnaud: reuse voc to lower reuse. Harder for developers, they have to implement more
14:55:51 <JohnArwe> regrets: steve battle
14:55:52 <mielvds1> Arnaud: Or, we keep it simple.
14:56:13 <pchampin> q+
14:56:43 <mielvds1> Arnaud: just one type of membership. People with implemented vocs will have to do a transformation
14:56:49 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:56:58 <bblfish> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013May/0250.html
14:57:05 <mielvds1> bblfish: that might be the wrong kind of question
14:58:18 <mielvds1> bblfish: Use case of SteveS - LDPR and you want to add something. The way you are putting it, creates a relation.
14:58:30 <pchampin> :-(
14:58:38 <Arnaud> ack pchampin
14:58:41 <JohnArwe> pierre sounds like a dialer auto-dialing
14:58:44 <pchampin> I'll write it down quickly
14:59:08 <pchampin> I think people will have to massage their data anyway
14:59:10 <pchampin> if only to add LDPR and LDPC types to their resources
14:59:26 <pchampin> (ok, my mistake)
14:59:28 <bblfish> in short it's the wrong question. The end of ISSUE-71 shows two other ways to allow the same use cases to be resolved. Add some kind of declarative inferencing language and one has many more possibilites.
14:59:50 <pchampin> so keeping it orthogonal with the app-specific vocabulary seems a reasonable way to proceed
15:00:01 <mielvds1> Arnaud: the question was raised: there is no issue for this anyway
15:01:14 <bblfish> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013May/0250.html
15:01:38 <Zakim> -roger
15:02:24 <TallTed> this seems effectively the question of "require inference (to handle { ldp:membershipPredicate owl:subProperty rdfs:member } ), or do not require inference" ... and I've hit a hard stop and must drop from this call.
15:02:31 <Zakim> -TallTed
15:03:26 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
15:03:32 <Zakim> - +1.919.306.aacc
15:03:43 <Zakim> -Yves
15:03:47 <bblfish> thanks
15:03:48 <pchampin> bye
15:03:48 <Zakim> -rgarcia
15:03:54 <Zakim> -pchampin
15:03:54 <Zakim> -nmihindu
15:03:56 <Zakim> -krp
15:03:56 <Zakim> -Arnaud
15:03:56 <Zakim> -mielvds1
15:03:58 <Zakim> -bblfish
15:04:01 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
15:04:01 <mielvds1> mielvds1 has left #ldp
15:04:02 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
15:04:02 <Zakim> Attendees were Arnaud, TallTed, bblfish, Ashok_Malhotra, +44.208.573.aaaa, roger, mielvds1, nmihindu, pchampin, +1.415.392.aabb, JohnArwe, +1.919.306.aacc, krp, rgarcia, Yves
15:20:20 <betehess> betehess has joined #ldp
17:01:26 <Zakim> Zakim has left #ldp
17:36:05 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
17:56:55 <bhyland> bhyland has joined #ldp
20:33:34 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp
22:53:00 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #ldp