13:56:22 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ldp
13:56:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/08/26-ldp-irc
13:56:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:56:24 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #ldp
13:56:26 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
13:56:26 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:56:27 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:56:27 <trackbot> Date: 26 August 2013
14:00:11 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
14:00:13 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
14:00:18 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
14:00:18 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
14:00:19 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
14:00:19 <Zakim> sorry, TallTed, muting is not permitted when only one person is present
14:00:27 <Zakim> +Sandro
14:00:41 <Zakim> +??P2
14:00:44 <Zakim> +Arnaud
14:01:12 <Arnaud> Arnaud has changed the topic to: LDPWG: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Main_Page -  next call's agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.08.26
14:01:51 <Zakim> +SteveS
14:01:57 <nmihindu> nmihindu has joined #ldp
14:02:33 <Zakim> +JohnArwe
14:02:41 <JohnArwe> JohnArwe has joined #ldp
14:03:24 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:03:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see TallTed, Sandro, ??P2, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe
14:03:53 <JohnArwe> zakim, ??p2 is cody
14:03:53 <Zakim> +cody; got it
14:05:03 <Zakim> +??P13
14:05:29 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P13 is me
14:05:29 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
14:07:49 <Arnaud> nandana, are you there?
14:07:51 <nmihindu> JohnArwe, having bad connection. I will be muted the whole time.
14:08:04 <Zakim> +EricP
14:09:00 <ericP> scribenick: ericP
14:10:01 <ericP> RESOLVED: accept the minutes from 19 Aug
14:10:39 <ericP> Arnaud: next meeting is the F2F
14:11:32 <ericP> ... ericP, put your name on the F2F page
14:11:44 <ericP> ... looking at TimBL's comments, we have a lot of work
14:12:11 <ericP> ... we don't have many registrants. i wonder if this is 'cause folks thought we were already done.
14:12:25 <ericP> ... but we'll have to make a lot of decisions which will impact the spec
14:13:02 <ericP> sandro: TimBL has a conflicting appointment in Scotland
14:13:33 <ericP> ... I wonder if it's worth scheduling a special telecon before the F2F for anyone who'd like to discuss with TimBL.
14:13:44 <ericP> ... he should have some time before the F2F
14:13:59 <ericP> Arnaud: we'll follow up with him after the call
14:14:49 <ericP> ... i don't want folks to be surprised by changes that we make to the LC
14:15:07 <Zakim> +bblfish
14:15:20 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
14:15:20 <ericP> ... he gave us a way out with compliance profiles, but they [changes] will still be significant
14:15:28 <ericP> topic: agenda
14:15:51 <ericP> Arnaud: please review the agenda, particularly those who will attend remotely
14:16:03 <bblfish> 1hi
14:16:06 <ericP> topic: Actions and Issues
14:17:43 <ericP> SteveS: re: action-41, Steve Battle said he had a verbal discussion with David Wood
14:18:07 <ericP> Arnaud: we can ask Steve Battle, though David Wood is expected at the F2F
14:18:38 <svillata> svillata has joined #ldp
14:19:00 <nmihindu> Test Suite update - Raul is working on it and he plans to complete it within next week.
14:19:12 <nmihindu> Primer update - We are progressing and most of the examples are done. It will be ready by F2F.
14:19:14 <ericP> topic: Status Updates
14:19:25 <Zakim> +??P15
14:19:37 <Zakim> -cody
14:19:40 <svillata> Zakim, ??P15 is me
14:19:40 <Zakim> +svillata; got it
14:20:01 <ericP> cody: I was able to complete my edits on the primer, but haven't checked them in yet
14:20:10 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:20:27 <JohnArwe> zakim, IPCaller is Cody
14:20:27 <Zakim> +Cody; got it
14:21:08 <nmihindu> Cody, I already check in stuff today too, I can do it for cody if needed.
14:21:55 <ericP> Arnaud: our goal should be to have edits completed so we can work on them at the F2F
14:22:01 <ericP> topic: LC Comments
14:22:44 <ericP> Arnaud: TimBL sent us lots of comments, but he's pointing out a general problem: there's way too much optional stuff (SHOULDs)
14:23:11 <ericP> ... there are conflicting requirements; Martin Nally is reading the spec and saying "why is this a MUST?"
14:23:34 <ericP> ... TimBL wants to have a server which does whatever the client asks, regardless of whether it understands
14:23:53 <ericP> ... this is like our "vanilla server" which doesn't know the domain.
14:24:28 <ericP> ... On the other end of the spectrum, people like Martin Nally are using domain-specific servers.
14:24:58 <ericP> ... There are constraints that the client doens't need to know about which will drive the behavior
14:25:35 <ericP> ... I think we need a switch in the spec between domain-specific and general.
14:25:35 <bblfish> q+
14:26:48 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:27:14 <ericP> ericP: can look at what use cases prevent a domain-specific server from complying with a MUST
14:27:35 <ericP> bblfish: could look at is as speech acts. (though may be a bit late.)
14:27:36 <JohnArwe> @ericp: when you spoke about justifiying options, are you suggesting that those be recorded/written?
14:29:17 <Arnaud> ack sandro
14:29:21 <ericP> @JohnArwe, yeah, probably. though mostly i want to make sure we don't rule out MUSTs on domain-specific servers simply because they're only helpful to general clients
14:29:45 <ericP> sandro: what's the diff between and app-specific server and a client that's doing something that you're not expecting
14:30:31 <ericP> ... e.g. if client 1 tries delete something on the server and client 2 restores it, that's the same effect as the server not complying with the DELETE request
14:30:40 <ericP> ... that may be a helpful way to look at this.
14:30:52 <bblfish> +1 for sandro. That would be a bit like what I was thinking.
14:30:55 <ericP> Arnaud: interesting idea.
14:31:22 <SteveS> q+
14:31:29 <ericP> ... another issue for TimBL is that the client might POST some triples to the server and the server doesn't keep all of them
14:31:42 <ericP> ... that's just like another client deleting them
14:32:20 <ericP> ... The use case is that you have an existing service and you add a thin LDP layer on top of it
14:32:27 <ericP> q+
14:32:43 <Arnaud> ack steves
14:32:55 <bblfish> q+
14:33:26 <svillata> q?
14:33:44 <JohnArwe> @Sandro: are you thinking that server behaviors that cannot be reliably tested without "legislating out" competing requests might be .... just not testable, something else?  and if not testable, is the implication "therefore not interesting to specify" ?
14:35:06 <JohnArwe> ericp, mute
14:35:15 <ericP> sandro: as a client, i'd like to know how the service is going to behave.
14:35:31 <ericP> ... i'd like to know if it's a general server or an app-specific server.
14:35:38 <bblfish> +1
14:35:55 <Arnaud> ack eric
14:36:31 <bblfish> -1 the idea that the app specific server should be the first thing is completely wrong.
14:36:53 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:37:43 <ericP> ericP: i believe that our chartered job 1 is to address the app-specific services. that's the largest audience we can enable.
14:38:14 <ericP> bblfish: i think that step 0 is that the client can POST something and find the data there.
14:38:29 <ericP> ... then there would be restrictions for specific kinds of containers
14:38:36 <Kalpa> Kalpa has joined #ldp
14:38:52 <ericP> ... for example, you can post a blog entry or a shopping cart entry.
14:39:09 <ericP> ... or you want folks to post bugs to a bug report
14:39:41 <ericP> q/
14:39:43 <ericP> q?
14:39:49 <ericP> q+
14:40:32 <JohnArwe> I note that TimBL's comments do not show up in the LC comment tracker, although he emailed public-ldp-comments in both cases
14:40:43 <Arnaud> ack eric
14:41:11 <JohnArwe> Is there something we need to do explicitly for the tracker to ingest them?
14:41:38 <ericP> Arnaud: somehow we need to capture these two behaviors
14:41:42 <SteveS> JohnArwe, yes Arnaud has added them before, guess he didn't get to the new ones
14:42:03 <SteveS> To be clear, as far as the scope of our charter: " the group is chartered to produce one or more W3C Recommendations that define a RESTful way to read and write Linked Data, suitable for use in application integration and the construction of interoperable and modular software systems."
14:42:08 <bblfish> Agree. this needs investigation
14:42:37 <bblfish> who was that talking?
14:42:41 <Arnaud> cody
14:42:46 <Zakim> -bblfish
14:42:50 <ericP> cody: i can see generic triples on level 0 and higher levels that restrict the behavior
14:43:45 <Zakim> +bblfish
14:43:47 <JohnArwe> you broke up at end ericp
14:44:06 <ericP> SteveS: to what extent can we say that level 0 is just HTTP
14:46:33 <SteveS> I'm flexible too, like Arnaud Tues and Fridays are more open than others
14:49:19 <ericP> Arnaud: we have two sets of comments
14:49:25 <ericP> ... small wants from Ashok
14:49:35 <ericP> ... large ones from Mark Baker
14:49:43 <ericP> ... maybe we can discuss the latter
14:49:54 <SteveS> https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/55082/ldp/2812
14:51:44 <ericP> SteveS: the primary issue i see is the DELETE comment
14:52:13 <ericP> ... we say that you MUST return 404 or 410 on future GETs
14:52:25 <ericP> ... Mark says we're re-defining HTTP
14:52:58 <ericP> JohnArwe: that wasn't our intent. we just wanted to shorten people's search of the underlying specs
14:53:05 <JohnArwe> BTW I've gotten similar feedback that it's not clear what's us re-stating other specs vs our own net add from internal implementers.
14:53:37 <ericP> Arnaud: Mark's assertion is that we can't constrain HTTP and our spec specifically is intended to constrain HTTP
14:54:01 <ericP> ... we may be able to address the DELETE comment, but maybe there's something larger behind them.
14:54:12 <ericP> ... relates also to the question of how generic a client can be
14:54:39 <ericP> ... AndyS asked if httpd (Apache Web Server) would be a compliant HTTP server, and if not, why not?
14:55:11 <ericP> SteveS: Mark appears to think of all web resources as fitting into the LDPR bucket
14:55:29 <JohnArwe> I think Andy's question was LDP compliance not HTTP
14:55:44 <ericP> ... we're seeing LDPRs as only those resources which can advertise themselves as such.
14:56:22 <bblfish> I think one should ask him a few more questions on this
14:56:39 <bblfish> q+
14:56:39 <ericP> Arnaud: his last line says that he expects all web servers as being LDP servers
14:57:01 <ericP> ... I see that an LDP server is an HTTP server, but not sure the converse is true.
14:57:11 <ericP> ... if so, if there anything of value in our spec?
14:57:34 <ericP> bblfish: perhaps we should answer asking why can't refine subsets of resources.
14:57:55 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
14:58:01 <ericP> ... we can ask what is the danger. if we're doing something silly, it should be easy to give us compelling screw case.
14:58:58 <ericP> Arnaud: we may need to work these in advance.
14:59:21 <ericP> ... we should have any dialog we need to clarify comments before the F2F.
15:00:18 <ericP> ... the editor's should send mail clarifying our intent and asking about remaining conflict.
15:00:27 <SteveS> I did update the comments' "assigned to" field last week
15:00:30 <ericP> ... i'll work with sandro to set up a call with TimBL
15:00:57 <Zakim> -svillata
15:00:59 <Zakim> -Sandro
15:00:59 <Zakim> -TallTed
15:01:00 <Zakim> -EricP
15:01:00 <Zakim> -SteveS
15:01:02 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
15:01:04 <Zakim> -Cody
15:01:05 <Zakim> -Arnaud
15:01:12 <Zakim> -nmihindu
15:01:41 <Zakim> -bblfish
15:01:42 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
15:01:42 <Zakim> Attendees were TallTed, Sandro, Arnaud, SteveS, JohnArwe, cody, nmihindu, EricP, bblfish, svillata
15:38:31 <betehess> betehess has joined #ldp
17:18:51 <Zakim> Zakim has left #ldp
17:32:25 <gavinc> gavinc has joined #ldp
18:34:09 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
19:00:28 <SteveS> SteveS has joined #ldp
19:52:22 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
19:59:45 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
20:01:57 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #ldp
20:08:27 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
20:10:11 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #ldp
20:16:31 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:14:37 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:16:52 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp
22:19:35 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #ldp
22:38:54 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #ldp