13:59:35 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/03/31-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/03/31-ldp-irc ←
13:59:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
13:59:39 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
13:59:39 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute ←
13:59:40 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:59:40 <trackbot> Date: 31 March 2014
13:59:52 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started ←
13:59:59 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's here? ←
14:00:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
14:00:01 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
14:00:01 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, SteveS, codyburleson, deiu, betehess, TallTed, JohnArwe, bblfish, nmihindu, jmvanel, sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, SteveS, codyburleson, deiu, betehess, TallTed, JohnArwe, bblfish, nmihindu, jmvanel, sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, trackbot ←
14:00:04 <Zakim> +TimBL
Zakim IRC Bot: +TimBL ←
14:00:14 <deiu> Zakim, TimBL is me
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, TimBL is me ←
14:00:14 <Zakim> +deiu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +deiu; got it ←
14:00:20 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
14:00:20 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it ←
14:00:22 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:00:22 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:00:46 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:00:54 <codyburleson> Zakim, IPcaller is me.
Cody Burleson: Zakim, IPcaller is me. ←
14:00:54 <Zakim> +codyburleson; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +codyburleson; got it ←
14:01:01 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
14:01:08 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
14:01:23 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:01:46 <Zakim> +JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: +JohnArwe ←
14:01:46 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ashok_Malhotra ←
14:02:09 <deiu> Zakim: who's here?
14:02:14 <deiu> Zakim, who's here?
Andrei Sambra: Zakim, who's here? ←
14:02:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see TallTed (muted), deiu, codyburleson, Arnaud, bblfish, Sandro, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see TallTed (muted), deiu, codyburleson, Arnaud, bblfish, Sandro, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra ←
14:02:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see MiguelAraCo, Ashok, Zakim, RRSAgent, SteveS, codyburleson, deiu, betehess, TallTed, JohnArwe, bblfish, nmihindu, jmvanel, sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see MiguelAraCo, Ashok, Zakim, RRSAgent, SteveS, codyburleson, deiu, betehess, TallTed, JohnArwe, bblfish, nmihindu, jmvanel, sandro, Arnaud, ericP, Yves, trackbot ←
14:02:17 <Zakim> +ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: +ericP ←
14:03:24 <Zakim> + +1.919.306.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.919.306.aaaa ←
14:03:39 <SteveS> Zakim, aaaa is me
Steve Speicher: Zakim, aaaa is me ←
14:03:39 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it ←
14:05:08 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:05:08 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
14:05:49 <codyburleson> For the record; MiguelAraCo is sharing voice with me on Skype. I dial in through Skype, then I add Miguel to the call.
Cody Burleson: For the record; MiguelAraCo is sharing voice with me on Skype. I dial in through Skype, then I add Miguel to the call. ←
<codyburleson> scribe: codyburleson
(Scribe set to Cody Burleson)
<codyburleson> chair: Arnaud
<codyburleson> present: deiu, TallTed, Arnaud, bblfish, Sandro, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, ericP, SteveS, MiguelAraCo, nmihindu, codyburleson
<codyburleson> regrets: stevebattle
<codyburleson> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2014.03.31
<codyburleson> topic: Admin
<codyburleson> subtopic: Minutes of last meeting
14:06:18 <JohnArwe> ericp, did you ever poke at action-135?
John Arwe: ericp, did you ever poke at ACTION-135? ←
14:06:31 <JohnArwe> ...still says open
John Arwe: ...still says open ←
14:07:08 <ericP> JohnArwe, i've got stuff open
Eric Prud'hommeaux: JohnArwe, i've got stuff open ←
14:07:10 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:07:10 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:07:31 <ericP> SteveS thought i'd used some tool to generate the HTML but i actually just edited HTML
Eric Prud'hommeaux: SteveS thought i'd used some tool to generate the HTML but i actually just edited HTML ←
14:07:35 <TallTed> Zakim, codyburleson has MiguelAraCo
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, codyburleson has MiguelAraCo ←
14:07:35 <Zakim> +MiguelAraCo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MiguelAraCo; got it ←
14:07:44 <ericP> i stole the template from another namespace doc
Eric Prud'hommeaux: i stole the template from another namespace doc ←
14:07:50 <deiu> minutes seem ok
Andrei Sambra: minutes seem ok ←
14:08:11 <codyburleson> Resolved: Minutes of March 24th approved.
RESOLVED: Minutes of March 24th approved. ←
14:08:22 <Zakim> +??P24
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P24 ←
14:08:29 <codyburleson> subTopic: Next meeting.
14:08:37 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P24 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P24 is me ←
14:08:37 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
14:08:48 <nmihindu> Zakim, mute me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, mute me ←
14:08:48 <Zakim> nmihindu should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: nmihindu should now be muted ←
14:09:35 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I am unable to be there; I need someone to chair. After that, we have the F2F in Boston and we will likely NOT have the meeting just before that; I'd rather have the one next week (because I don't think we should skip 2 meetings).
Arnaud Le Hors: I am unable to be there; I need someone to chair. After that, we have the F2F in Boston and we will likely NOT have the meeting just before that; I'd rather have the one next week (because I don't think we should skip 2 meetings). ←
14:09:47 <bblfish> Who is going to Seoul?
Henry Story: Who is going to Seoul? ←
14:09:50 <TallTed> 10am Monday Boston == 11pm Monday in Seoul
Ted Thibodeau: 10am Monday Boston == 11pm Monday in Seoul ←
14:09:51 <SteveS> I will be at LDPWG call next week
Steve Speicher: I will be at LDPWG call next week ←
14:10:00 <TallTed> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/south-korea/seoul
Ted Thibodeau: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/south-korea/seoul ←
14:10:24 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:10:24 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
14:10:26 <nmihindu> bblfish, I will be there for WWW
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: bblfish, I will be there for WWW ←
14:10:43 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:10:43 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:10:46 <codyburleson> ericP: I can take the chair.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: I can take the chair. ←
14:11:26 <codyburleson> Topic: Tracking of Actions and Issues
14:11:48 <codyburleson> JohnArwe: 136 is resolved and closed.
John Arwe: 136 is resolved and closed. ←
14:12:32 <bblfish> there are tools to do ontologies
Henry Story: there are tools to do ontologies ←
14:12:37 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
14:12:48 <codyburleson> ericP: Either Steve or I can do it by hand again (fix the namespace thing); I haven't done it yet, but I looked at it.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: Either Steve or I can do it by hand again (fix the namespace thing); I haven't done it yet, but I looked at it. ←
14:13:28 <bblfish> We do this automatically with the cert spec http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert#
Henry Story: We do this automatically with the cert spec http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert# ←
14:13:35 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish ←
<codyburleson> topic: F2F5 Boston
14:13:37 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I was hoping we'd have fresh documents to review for the Face-to-Face. The Guide, Primer, etc. So, please make progress on these before F2F.
Arnaud Le Hors: I was hoping we'd have fresh documents to review for the Face-to-Face. The Guide, Primer, etc. So, please make progress on these before F2F. ←
14:14:12 <codyburleson> What's Henry's id on this chat?
What's Henry's id on this chat? ←
14:14:29 <nmihindu> codyburleson, it is bblfish
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: codyburleson, it is bblfish ←
14:14:33 <codyburleson> thx
thx ←
14:15:13 <bblfish> specgen is here: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/file/18e2252e594d/ontologies/specgen
Henry Story: specgen is here: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/file/18e2252e594d/ontologies/specgen ←
14:15:16 <bblfish> the one we used
Henry Story: the one we used ←
14:15:21 <bblfish> there must be better ones out there by now
Henry Story: there must be better ones out there by now ←
14:15:26 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
14:15:52 <codyburleson> Arnaud: If you have newer documents ready for review, please e-mail the list so that we can read them before the next meeting.
Arnaud Le Hors: If you have newer documents ready for review, please e-mail the list so that we can read them before the next meeting. ←
14:16:03 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
14:17:30 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I'm going to develop the tentative agenda for the next F2F. It is obviously going to be focused around addressing any Last Call comments received. As of now, I have not seen any public Last Call comments sent to the comment list. Unless things change drastically, we may have very little to do in terms of comments.
Arnaud Le Hors: I'm going to develop the tentative agenda for the next F2F. It is obviously going to be focused around addressing any Last Call comments received. As of now, I have not seen any public Last Call comments sent to the comment list. Unless things change drastically, we may have very little to do in terms of comments. ←
14:18:15 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I will build the agenda so that we have some padding towards the end, which we can dedicate to Interoperability Testing.
Arnaud Le Hors: I will build the agenda so that we have some padding towards the end, which we can dedicate to Interoperability Testing. ←
14:19:09 <codyburleson> Topic: LDP Specification
14:20:09 <codyburleson> Arnaud: A lot of the changes we made were in response to Tim BL's comments. It would be nice if one of you guys (Eric, Sandro) can help us get him to have another look.
Arnaud Le Hors: A lot of the changes we made were in response to Tim BL's comments. It would be nice if one of you guys (Eric, Sandro) can help us get him to have another look. ←
<codyburleson> subtopic: Context URI
14:21:17 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Context URI for the Link Header. John sent an email suggesting 2 possible ways to deal with it.
Arnaud Le Hors: Context URI for the Link Header. John sent an email suggesting 2 possible ways to deal with it. ←
14:21:56 <Arnaud> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0083.html
Arnaud Le Hors: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0083.html ←
14:23:46 <codyburleson> JohnArwe: When creating resource using POST, the request URI is not what you're going to want because that will be URI of the container. We need to say on those create requests that we want the default URI for that context URI to be the created resource's URI.
John Arwe: When creating resource using POST, the request URI is not what you're going to want because that will be URI of the container. We need to say on those create requests that we want the default URI for that context URI to be the created resource's URI. ←
14:24:44 <codyburleson> JohnArwe: For the PUT create, I think the same is the same. But I hedge a little bit on this.
John Arwe: For the PUT create, I think the same is the same. But I hedge a little bit on this. ←
14:26:00 <codyburleson> JohnArwe: The other thing that's different is what the client needs to do. If you say 'here's the syntax', then you're requiring the client to specify in the next request header to use that syntax.
John Arwe: The other thing that's different is what the client needs to do. If you say 'here's the syntax', then you're requiring the client to specify in the next request header to use that syntax. ←
14:26:00 <MiguelAraCo> q+
Miguel Aragón: q+ ←
14:26:00 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
14:26:32 <Arnaud> ack MiguelAraCo
Arnaud Le Hors: ack MiguelAraCo ←
14:26:37 <bblfish> Concerning PUT
Henry Story: Concerning PUT ←
14:26:37 <bblfish> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html#sec9.6
Henry Story: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html#sec9.6 ←
14:26:37 <bblfish> In contrast, the URI in a PUT request identifies the entity enclosed with the request -- the user agent knows what URI is intended and the server MUST NOT attempt to apply the request to some other resource. If the server desires that the request be applied to a different URI, it MUST send a 301 (Moved Permanently) response; the user agent MAY then make its own decision regarding whether or not to redirect the request.
Henry Story: In contrast, the URI in a PUT request identifies the entity enclosed with the request -- the user agent knows what URI is intended and the server MUST NOT attempt to apply the request to some other resource. If the server desires that the request be applied to a different URI, it MUST send a 301 (Moved Permanently) response; the user agent MAY then make its own decision regarding whether or not to redirect the request. ←
14:27:44 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish ←
14:27:57 <JohnArwe> Ok so that says that the server does not have the freedom to assign a different URI, which is good.
John Arwe: Ok so that says that the server does not have the freedom to assign a different URI, which is good. ←
14:28:15 <JohnArwe> ...That does not cause the 5988 context URI to become defined as the request URI, though.
John Arwe: ...That does not cause the 5988 context URI to become defined as the request URI, though. ←
14:28:17 <codyburleson> Miguel, can you put that in writing? I did not type because I did not want to type over your talking.
Miguel, can you put that in writing? I did not type because I did not want to type over your talking. ←
14:29:34 <codyburleson> bblfish: I think you don't need any special syntax because if you specify what the default context is then the rest falls out automatically (I put this / my response in the mailing list).
Henry Story: I think you don't need any special syntax because if you specify what the default context is then the rest falls out automatically (I put this / my response in the mailing list). ←
14:29:35 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
14:29:51 <Arnaud> ack sandro
Arnaud Le Hors: ack sandro ←
14:30:22 <bblfish> this was my response to the mailing list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0085.html
Henry Story: this was my response to the mailing list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0085.html ←
14:30:23 <JohnArwe> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-5.2 By default, the context of a link conveyed in the Link header field
John Arwe: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-5.2 By default, the context of a link conveyed in the Link header field ←
14:30:23 <JohnArwe> is the IRI of the requested resource.
John Arwe: is the IRI of the requested resource. ←
14:31:17 <MiguelAraCo> We also ran into the context problem, and what we did is that if the client specified a context (or @base in turtle) we did whatever we could to honor that context. If the client didn't specify a context, in a POST request we create a slug for the new resource and then assign that context to the request, and in a PUT request we took the request URI as the context to use.
Miguel Aragón: We also ran into the context problem, and what we did is that if the client specified a context (or @base in turtle) we did whatever we could to honor that context. If the client didn't specify a context, in a POST request we create a slug for the new resource and then assign that context to the request, and in a PUT request we took the request URI as the context to use. ←
14:31:28 <codyburleson> Sandro: I don't understand how we have any prerogative to change this. LDP is not an application, so I don't understand how… Hopefully, their meaning is the same as ours (other working group), but we may need to confer with them.
Sandro Hawke: I don't understand how we have any prerogative to change this. LDP is not an application, so I don't understand how… Hopefully, their meaning is the same as ours (other working group), but we may need to confer with them. ←
14:31:48 <codyburleson> Sandro: It doesn't have a URI during the POST and it's up to the server to give it a URI later.
Sandro Hawke: It doesn't have a URI during the POST and it's up to the server to give it a URI later. ←
14:31:58 <MiguelAraCo> But I agree, that needs to be specified so we don't need to "assume" things.
Miguel Aragón: But I agree, that needs to be specified so we don't need to "assume" things. ←
14:32:25 <codyburleson> Sandro: But before we clarify in the spec, I think we should check it with the Working Group.
Sandro Hawke: But before we clarify in the spec, I think we should check it with the Working Group. ←
14:32:42 <codyburleson> Arnaud: So, it sounds like, if anything, Option 1 is what we want to do.
Arnaud Le Hors: So, it sounds like, if anything, Option 1 is what we want to do. ←
14:33:07 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: clarify specification by adding that on POST the default context URI is the to-be-created resource's URI
PROPOSED: clarify specification by adding that on POST the default context URI is the to-be-created resource's URI ←
14:33:25 <bblfish> +1
Henry Story: +1 ←
14:33:32 <nmihindu> +1
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +1 ←
14:33:42 <Ashok> +1
Ashok Malhotra: +1 ←
14:33:51 <MiguelAraCo> +1
Miguel Aragón: +1 ←
14:34:00 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
14:34:14 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
14:34:14 <codyburleson> +1
+1 ←
14:34:16 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
14:34:18 <JohnArwe> +1
14:34:23 <sandro> (well, really, it's the entity being transmitted --- but in LDP that's the same thing)
Sandro Hawke: (well, really, it's the entity being transmitted --- but in LDP that's the same thing) ←
14:34:45 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: clarify specification by adding that on POST the default context URI is the to-be-created resource's URI
RESOLVED: clarify specification by adding that on POST the default context URI is the to-be-created resource's URI ←
14:35:01 <SteveS> agree this is clarity is compatible with what we intended and most saw it this way
Steve Speicher: agree this is clarity is compatible with what we intended and most saw it this way ←
14:35:07 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Thanks. Somebody should take action to report to the HTTP guys.
Arnaud Le Hors: Thanks. Somebody should take action to report to the HTTP guys. ←
14:35:24 <codyburleson> Sandro: Please clarify: Are we only talking about posting to containers here?
Sandro Hawke: Please clarify: Are we only talking about posting to containers here? ←
14:36:07 <codyburleson> Arnaud: John Arwe - you mean POST on containers, right?
Arnaud Le Hors: John Arwe - you mean POST on containers, right? ←
14:36:18 <sandro> sandro: if we made POST to a NON-Container mean something, we'd mean the Link Context to be the entity being sent.
Sandro Hawke: if we made POST to a NON-Container mean something, we'd mean the Link Context to be the entity being sent. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:36:25 <bblfish> yes post on containers, but if the IETF guys are ok with the context always being the to be created member than that makes our case even stronger
Henry Story: yes post on containers, but if the IETF guys are ok with the context always being the to be created member than that makes our case even stronger ←
14:37:24 <codyburleson> Arnaud: We need to check with Eric on what group to send the email to. And then Sandro, thanks for volunteering to send the e-mail.
Arnaud Le Hors: We need to check with Eric on what group to send the email to. And then Sandro, thanks for volunteering to send the e-mail. ←
14:37:55 <sandro> action: sandro to contact Yves and Erik to make confirm with them that HTTP-WG is okay with this reading of the Link Context
ACTION: sandro to contact Yves and Erik to make confirm with them that HTTP-WG is okay with this reading of the Link Context ←
14:37:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-137 - Contact yves and erik to confirm with them that http-wg is okay with this reading of the link context [on Sandro Hawke - due 2014-04-07].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-137 - Contact yves and erik to confirm with them that http-wg is okay with this reading of the link context [on Sandro Hawke - due 2014-04-07]. ←
14:37:38 <codyburleson> subTopic: Null-relative URIs
14:38:31 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
14:38:40 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish ←
14:38:50 <codyburleson> Arnaud: There was a lot of discussion over null-relative URIs, which is not endorsed by the RDF data model. The WG seems to be united on understanding the limit of this, but wanting to stick to it because of its usefulness.
Arnaud Le Hors: There was a lot of discussion over null-relative URIs, which is not endorsed by the RDF data model. The WG seems to be united on understanding the limit of this, but wanting to stick to it because of its usefulness. ←
14:39:08 <bblfish> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0091.html
Henry Story: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0091.html ←
14:39:43 <bblfish> Relative IRIs: Some concrete RDF syntaxes permit relative IRIs as a convenient shorthand that allows authoring of documents independently from their final publishing location. Relative IRIs must be resolved against a base IRI to make them absolute. Therefore, the RDF graph serialized in such syntaxes is well-defined only if a base IRI can be established [RFC3986].
Henry Story: Relative IRIs: Some concrete RDF syntaxes permit relative IRIs as a convenient shorthand that allows authoring of documents independently from their final publishing location. Relative IRIs must be resolved against a base IRI to make them absolute. Therefore, the RDF graph serialized in such syntaxes is well-defined only if a base IRI can be established [RFC3986]. ←
14:40:16 <codyburleson> bblfish: There are 2 passages in the RDF Abstract Syntax 1.1 where it mentions relative IRIs. (Henry quotes the spec). We DO specify how base IRI can be established, so we're not going against the spec. We're leaving establishment of the base IRI for the server to do.
Henry Story: There are 2 passages in the RDF Abstract Syntax 1.1 where it mentions relative IRIs. (Henry quotes the spec). We DO specify how base IRI can be established, so we're not going against the spec. We're leaving establishment of the base IRI for the server to do. ←
14:41:18 <bblfish> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0092.html
Henry Story: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0092.html ←
14:42:10 <codyburleson> bblfish: In the next spec, I think maybe we should have 'intuitive containers', which I proposed a long time ago.
Henry Story: In the next spec, I think maybe we should have 'intuitive containers', which I proposed a long time ago. ←
14:43:52 <codyburleson> Sandro: What Henry is talking about should be on the list for nice consideration in future containers to add.
Sandro Hawke: What Henry is talking about should be on the list for nice consideration in future containers to add. ←
14:44:20 <SteveS> I think it might make sense to add some impl guidance (best practices) on '..' usage now
Steve Speicher: I think it might make sense to add some impl guidance (best practices) on '..' usage now ←
14:46:17 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Bottom line… we're OK with our use of null-relative URIs. But when it comes to the dot-dot stuff, we add some guidelines (and we have a doc for this). Everybody agree to that?
Arnaud Le Hors: Bottom line… we're OK with our use of null-relative URIs. But when it comes to the dot-dot stuff, we add some guidelines (and we have a doc for this). Everybody agree to that? ←
14:46:49 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:46:49 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
14:47:16 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:47:16 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:47:42 <codyburleson> Sandro: Suggest we redirect the comments to the appropriate list. They were not sent to the right list initially.
Sandro Hawke: Suggest we redirect the comments to the appropriate list. They were not sent to the right list initially. ←
14:48:00 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
14:48:08 <codyburleson> bblfish:
14:48:20 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:48:20 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
14:48:41 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
14:48:41 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
14:48:51 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish ←
14:48:52 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I'll forward the original e-mail and then we can respond to that officially.
Arnaud Le Hors: I'll forward the original e-mail and then we can respond to that officially. ←
14:49:13 <codyburleson> bblfish: Put the dot-dot thing in a different document? Is that wise?
Henry Story: Put the dot-dot thing in a different document? Is that wise? ←
14:50:04 <codyburleson> Sandro: Unsure.
Sandro Hawke: Unsure. ←
<codyburleson> Arnaud: I think the guide.
Arnaud Le Hors: I think the guide. ←
14:50:12 <SteveS> I think we should put in BP, once we have the text we may change our minds on target
Steve Speicher: I think we should put in BP, once we have the text we may change our minds on target ←
14:50:37 <codyburleson> subTopic: Multiple Named Graphs
14:51:57 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Reto said 'Require support for Turtle, but then Turtle does not support named graphs.'
Arnaud Le Hors: Reto said 'Require support for Turtle, but then Turtle does not support named graphs.' ←
14:52:17 <bblfish> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0073.html
Henry Story: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2014Mar/0073.html ←
14:54:45 <codyburleson> Arnaud: I take it that his question was answered in a way that satisfied him; I did not see any further comments.
Arnaud Le Hors: I take it that his question was answered in a way that satisfied him; I did not see any further comments. ←
14:55:15 <codyburleson> Sandro: I don't know if he is now being silent to Henry because he agrees or doesn't want to argue. I don't know.
Sandro Hawke: I don't know if he is now being silent to Henry because he agrees or doesn't want to argue. I don't know. ←
14:55:27 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
14:55:42 <codyburleson> Topic: Test Suite
14:55:47 <nmihindu> Raul is working on the Test Suite document.
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Raul is working on the Test Suite document. ←
14:55:50 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
14:55:53 <nmihindu> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/tip/Test%20Cases/LDP%20Test%20Cases.html
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/tip/Test%20Cases/LDP%20Test%20Cases.html ←
14:56:01 <nmihindu> At the moment he is updating the current document based on the changes to the specification.
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: At the moment he is updating the current document based on the changes to the specification. ←
14:56:19 <codyburleson> Arnaud: Raul said he is working on this to better match the specification.
Arnaud Le Hors: Raul said he is working on this to better match the specification. ←
14:56:27 <nmihindu> He will continue with the current test vocabulary and add new tests following the same approach.
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: He will continue with the current test vocabulary and add new tests following the same approach. ←
14:57:09 <codyburleson> Arnaud: The proposal is that the HTML document would use RDFa so that the tests can be extracted from it as well.
Arnaud Le Hors: The proposal is that the HTML document would use RDFa so that the tests can be extracted from it as well. ←
14:57:31 <codyburleson> Arnaud: It would be nice to have 1 official test suite for the group. We need to agree on what that is.
Arnaud Le Hors: It would be nice to have 1 official test suite for the group. We need to agree on what that is. ←
14:58:18 <codyburleson> Sandro: I think Raul's document is "about" what we want. May be a little more detailed than what we need. There is a lot of work to be done updating it to current version of spec, but then also the group validating. I imagine that taking a lot of time at the F2F.
Sandro Hawke: I think Raul's document is "about" what we want. May be a little more detailed than what we need. There is a lot of work to be done updating it to current version of spec, but then also the group validating. I imagine that taking a lot of time at the F2F. ←
14:59:01 <codyburleson> Sandro: I'm not sure that the RDFa is worth it.
Sandro Hawke: I'm not sure that the RDFa is worth it. ←
14:59:11 <nmihindu> sandro, that is his plan. Develop the test suite in a way that it can be used by an executable tool.
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: sandro, that is his plan. Develop the test suite in a way that it can be used by an executable tool. ←
14:59:21 <ericP> q+
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ ←
14:59:29 <Arnaud> ack ericP
Arnaud Le Hors: ack ericP ←
14:59:34 <ericP> -> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/tip/Test%20Cases/LDP%20Test%20Cases.html#TC-C11 structured tests
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/tip/Test%20Cases/LDP%20Test%20Cases.html#TC-C11 structured tests ←
15:01:00 <codyburleson> Arnaud: We're out of time, but we should continue the discussion on mailing list so that we really have a plan going forward.
Arnaud Le Hors: We're out of time, but we should continue the discussion on mailing list so that we really have a plan going forward. ←
15:01:13 <codyburleson> Sandro: Anbody planning to write a tool that runs these tests?
Sandro Hawke: Anbody planning to write a tool that runs these tests? ←
15:01:16 <bblfish> I should try to do that
Henry Story: I should try to do that ←
15:01:31 <bblfish> ok
Henry Story: ok ←
15:01:53 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: -JohnArwe ←
15:02:04 <nmihindu> sandro, we will also develop a tool for one of our projects, The plan is to make it generic enough for other impls to use as well.
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: sandro, we will also develop a tool for one of our projects, The plan is to make it generic enough for other impls to use as well. ←
15:02:04 <codyburleson> SteveS: I have someone actively investigating and planning to something. My IBM legal answer to whether it can be open-source "I'm working on it."
Steve Speicher: I have someone actively investigating and planning to something. My IBM legal answer to whether it can be open-source "I'm working on it." ←
15:02:08 <Zakim> -SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> -deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: -deiu ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> -TallTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed ←
15:02:11 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
15:02:13 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:02:14 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra ←
15:02:19 <codyburleson> Arnaud: MEETING ADJOURNED
Arnaud Le Hors: MEETING ADJOURNED ←
15:02:32 <Zakim> -nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: -nmihindu ←
15:02:40 <Zakim> -codyburleson
Zakim IRC Bot: -codyburleson ←
15:02:42 <SteveS> I will send a note out about what we are planning for test suite
Steve Speicher: I will send a note out about what we are planning for test suite ←
15:03:12 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
15:03:13 <Zakim> -ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP ←
15:03:13 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
15:03:13 <Zakim> Attendees were deiu, TallTed, Arnaud, bblfish, Sandro, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, ericP, +1.919.306.aaaa, SteveS, MiguelAraCo, nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were deiu, TallTed, Arnaud, bblfish, Sandro, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, ericP, +1.919.306.aaaa, SteveS, MiguelAraCo, nmihindu ←
Formatted by CommonScribe