14:59:08 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-ldp-irc ←
14:59:10 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
14:59:12 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
14:59:12 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started ←
14:59:13 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
14:59:13 <trackbot> Date: 15 December 2014
14:59:53 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
15:00:01 <Zakim> +ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: +ericP ←
15:00:36 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ashok_Malhotra ←
15:01:13 <Zakim> +Alexandre
Zakim IRC Bot: +Alexandre ←
15:01:55 <Zakim> +deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: +deiu ←
15:02:52 <deiu> Sandro said he's going to be late 20mins and asks if we can postpone LD Patch until he gets there
Andrei Sambra: Sandro said he's going to be late 20mins and asks if we can postpone LD Patch until he gets there ←
15:03:07 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[OpenLink] ←
15:03:15 <TallTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me ←
15:03:15 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it ←
15:03:18 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:03:18 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
15:03:21 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
15:03:27 <pchampin> zakim, ??p18 is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, ??p18 is me ←
15:03:27 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pchampin; got it ←
15:04:05 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
15:04:13 <SteveS> zakim, [IBM] is me
Steve Speicher: zakim, [IBM] is me ←
15:04:13 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it ←
15:05:53 <betehess> scribe: Alexandre
(Scribe set to Alexandre Bertails)
15:05:57 <betehess> scribenick: betehess
<betehess> chair: Arnaud
<betehess> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2014.12.15
<betehess> topic: Admin
15:06:18 <betehess> Arnaud: approving the minutes of previous meeting
Arnaud Le Hors: approving the minutes of previous meeting ←
<betehess> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-12-08
http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2014-12-08 ←
15:06:24 <betehess> RESOLVED: no objection, minutes of 8 December 2014 approved
RESOLVED: no objection, minutes of 8 December 2014 approved ←
15:06:34 <betehess> ... next meeting could be Jan 6th
... next meeting could be Jan 6th ←
15:06:52 <betehess> ... but people could be returning to work that day
... but people could be returning to work that day ←
15:06:59 <azaroth> +1 to 12th
Robert Sanderson: +1 to 12th ←
15:07:10 <azaroth> Otherwise regrets for for the 5th
Robert Sanderson: Otherwise regrets for for the 5th ←
15:07:17 <SteveS> +1 to 12th
Steve Speicher: +1 to 12th ←
15:07:18 <betehess> ... or 12th?
... or 12th? ←
15:07:40 <betehess> Ashok: 12th!
Ashok Malhotra: 12th! ←
15:07:52 <betehess> Arnaud: let's do Jan 12th
Arnaud Le Hors: let's do Jan 12th ←
15:07:59 <betehess> ... next meeting on Jan 12th
... next meeting on Jan 12th ←
15:08:25 <betehess> ... tracking of actions and issues
... tracking of actions and issues ←
15:08:55 <betehess> ... Alex had one action
... Alex had one action ←
15:09:00 <betehess> ... we can close it
... we can close it ←
15:09:24 <betehess> ... we'll talk about the issue later
... we'll talk about the issue later ←
15:09:31 <betehess> topic: LDP and Paging
15:09:40 <betehess> Arnaud: LDP going to CR, Paging to PR
Arnaud Le Hors: LDP going to CR, Paging to PR ←
15:09:52 <betehess> ... there was discussion about the abstract in LDP
... there was discussion about the abstract in LDP ←
15:09:58 <betehess> ... SteveS took an action
... SteveS took an action ←
15:10:08 <betehess> ... ericP worked on getting the spec out
... ericP worked on getting the spec out ←
15:10:31 <betehess> ericP: choose Jan 16th for the end of PR and CR
Eric Prud'hommeaux: choose Jan 16th for the end of PR and CR ←
15:10:52 <betehess> ... not sure how long the waiting period should be
... not sure how long the waiting period should be ←
15:11:09 <betehess> ... for PR, there is a minimum, 3weeks/1month?
... for PR, there is a minimum, 3weeks/1month? ←
15:11:40 <betehess> Arnaud: end of PR for LDP: minimum is 4 weeks
Arnaud Le Hors: end of PR for LDP: minimum is 4 weeks ←
15:11:56 <betehess> ... on track to be publish on Dec 16th
... on track to be publish on Dec 16th ←
15:12:03 <betehess> ... then we have the waiting period
... then we have the waiting period ←
15:12:40 <betehess> ... for Paging, as we have no commitment for implementations, so we're planning to wait longer
... for Paging, as we have no commitment for implementations, so we're planning to wait longer ←
15:12:49 <betehess> ... so could be 3 months
... so could be 3 months ←
15:13:10 <betehess> ... Mar 16th sounds more reasonable
... Mar 16th sounds more reasonable ←
15:13:16 <betehess> ... what do others think?
... what do others think? ←
15:13:25 <betehess> SteveS: day doesn't matter too much to me
Steve Speicher: day doesn't matter too much to me ←
15:13:34 <betehess> ... so March sounds reasonable
... so March sounds reasonable ←
15:13:57 <betehess> PROPOSAL: Mar 16th for the end of CR Paging
PROPOSED: Mar 16th for the end of CR Paging ←
15:14:05 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
15:14:10 <betehess> +1
+1 ←
15:14:18 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:15:01 <betehess> Arnaud: all +1s say that people will be implementing the spec: yay!
Arnaud Le Hors: all +1s say that people will be implementing the spec: yay! ←
15:15:13 <betehess> RESOLVED: Mar 16th for the end of CR Paging
RESOLVED: Mar 16th for the end of CR Paging ←
15:15:36 <betehess> ericP: the LDP ontology uses the LDP paging namespace
Eric Prud'hommeaux: the LDP ontology uses the LDP paging namespace ←
15:15:52 <betehess> ... we may need different ns for paging
... we may need different ns for paging ←
15:15:59 <betehess> ... eg ldp-paging
... eg ldp-paging ←
15:16:10 <betehess> ... people would have to include both namespaces
... people would have to include both namespaces ←
15:16:14 <azaroth> q+
Robert Sanderson: q+ ←
15:16:15 <betehess> ... but much more modular
... but much more modular ←
15:16:24 <SteveS> q+
Steve Speicher: q+ ←
15:16:26 <betehess> ... and no need to modify things after LDP got to Rec
... and no need to modify things after LDP got to Rec ←
15:16:38 <Arnaud> ack azaroth
Arnaud Le Hors: ack azaroth ←
15:17:04 <betehess> azaroth: the expectation is that LDP Paging @@@
Robert Sanderson: the expectation is that LDP Paging wouldn't be used without LDP? And hence modularity would only be one way? ←
15:17:52 <betehess> Arnaud: slight overhead with the 2 namespaces
Arnaud Le Hors: slight overhead with the 2 namespaces ←
15:17:58 <betehess> ... but kinda makes sense
... but kinda makes sense ←
15:18:16 <Arnaud> ack SteveS
Arnaud Le Hors: ack SteveS ←
15:18:16 <azaroth> s/@@@/wouldn't be used without LDP? And hence modularity would only be one way?/
15:18:18 <betehess> ... and people could come up with a different mechanism for paging, and another ns
... and people could come up with a different mechanism for paging, and another ns ←
15:18:36 <betehess> SteveS: we talked about that some time, and we decided to keep it in ldp ns, can't remember when or why
Steve Speicher: we talked about that some time, and we decided to keep it in ldp ns, can't remember when or why ←
15:19:15 <betehess> ... there will always be new ns, how do be layer new terms into LDP then?
... there will always be new ns, how do be layer new terms into LDP then? ←
15:19:26 <betehess> ... so -1 ldp-paging
... so no -1 ldp-paging ←
15:19:36 <betehess> ... like the idea of having one common vocabulary
... but like the idea of having one common vocabulary ←
15:19:42 <Zakim> +Roger
Zakim IRC Bot: +Roger ←
15:19:44 <betehess> ... and be clear about the status
... and be clear about the status ←
15:19:48 <Arnaud> s/so/so no/
15:19:59 <Arnaud> s/like/but like/
15:20:16 <betehess> ericP: in principle, after ldp fgoes to Rec, I weould be permitted to change the terms used in ldp
Eric Prud'hommeaux: in principle, after ldp fgoes to Rec, I weould be permitted to change the terms used in ldp ←
15:20:24 <betehess> ... but I think I could edit the doc (I guess)
... but I think I could edit the doc (I guess) ←
15:20:42 <betehess> ... value is: there is simplicity in having things in one place
... value is: there is simplicity in having things in one place ←
15:20:48 <betehess> Arnaud: look at schema.org
Arnaud Le Hors: look at schema.org ←
15:20:48 <deiu> q+
Andrei Sambra: q+ ←
15:20:51 <betehess> ... it's all in there
... it's all in there ←
15:20:54 <Arnaud> ack deiu
Arnaud Le Hors: ack deiu ←
15:21:10 <betehess> deiu: there is a performance issue too
Andrei Sambra: there is a performance issue too ←
15:21:20 <Zakim> + +33.6.47.14.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +33.6.47.14.aaaa ←
15:21:21 <betehess> ... eg tabulator would dereference all vocabularies
... eg tabulator would dereference all vocabularies ←
15:21:21 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
15:21:35 <betehess> ... so dereferencing things is costly for us
... so dereferencing things is costly for us ←
15:21:44 <bblfish> zakim, aaaa is me
Henry Story: zakim, aaaa is me ←
15:21:44 <Zakim> +bblfish; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish; got it ←
15:22:41 <betehess> ericP: it's modularity vs simplicity
Eric Prud'hommeaux: it's modularity vs simplicity ←
15:22:43 <TallTed> what's the URI for the (current) Vocabulary Status Ontology?
Ted Thibodeau: what's the URI for the (current) Vocabulary Status Ontology? ←
15:22:55 <SteveS> http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/note
Steve Speicher: http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/note ←
15:22:59 <betehess> q+
q+ ←
15:23:25 <betehess> sandro: not strong advocate of 1 namespace
Sandro Hawke: not strong advocate of 1 namespace ←
15:23:57 <betehess> ... people use the wrong namespaces all the time
... people use the wrong namespaces all the time ←
15:24:00 <Arnaud> ack betehess
Arnaud Le Hors: ack betehess ←
15:25:02 <Zakim> -Roger
Zakim IRC Bot: -Roger ←
15:25:10 <betehess> betehess: one namespace means ontology clashing
Alexandre Bertails: one namespace means ontology clashing ←
15:25:36 <betehess> ericP: what's the title and metadata for the document?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: what's the title and metadata for the document? ←
15:25:53 <betehess> ... [enumerating]
... [enumerating] ←
15:26:04 <Arnaud> STRAWPOLL: a) keep one namespace, b) move paging into its own namespace
STRAWPOLL: a) keep one namespace, b) move paging into its own namespace ←
15:26:19 <betehess> sandro: LDP Paging is part of LDP
Sandro Hawke: LDP Paging is part of LDP ←
15:26:33 <betehess> ... and we'd have to come back to LC if we want to change the NS
... and we'd have to come back to LC if we want to change the NS ←
15:27:00 <betehess> ericP: not sure
Eric Prud'hommeaux: not sure ←
15:27:06 <betehess> ... if the implementations are not impacted...
... if the implementations are not impacted... ←
15:27:17 <betehess> sandro: should ask the director
Sandro Hawke: should ask the director ←
15:27:32 <betehess> ... question is: do you affect somebody
... question is: do you affect somebody ←
15:27:50 <betehess> Arnaud: I suggest we keep it as it is: one namespace
Arnaud Le Hors: I suggest we keep it as it is: one namespace ←
15:27:57 <betehess> ... any objection?
... any objection? ←
15:27:59 <deiu> +0 (mainly because of having to go back to LC)
Andrei Sambra: +0 (mainly because of having to go back to LC) ←
15:28:13 <betehess> <betehess> -0.9
<betehess> -0.9 ←
15:28:59 <betehess> Arnaud: I hear no objection
Arnaud Le Hors: I hear no objection ←
15:29:04 <betehess> ... that settles it
... that settles it ←
15:29:51 <betehess> betehess: wait, we should ask the rest of w3c staff
Alexandre Bertails: wait, we should ask the rest of w3c staff ←
15:30:08 <betehess> I would prefer having the strawpoll
I would prefer having the strawpoll ←
15:30:13 <deiu> me too
Andrei Sambra: me too ←
15:30:15 <betehess> so that we can present it to w3c
so that we can present it to w3c ←
15:30:56 <betehess> Arnaud: don't think ericP convinced anybody (but Alex)
Arnaud Le Hors: don't think ericP convinced anybody (but Alex) ←
15:31:18 <betehess> ericP: should I change all the ldp related terms to "stable"
Eric Prud'hommeaux: should I change all the ldp related terms to "stable" ←
15:31:32 <betehess> ... and leave the paging ones as unstable?
... and leave the paging ones as unstable? ←
15:31:50 <betehess> [chorus]: yes
[chorus]: yes ←
15:31:56 <betehess> Arnaud: ok, let's move on
Arnaud Le Hors: ok, let's move on ←
15:32:02 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
15:32:10 <bblfish> q-
Henry Story: q- ←
15:32:17 <betehess> ... should be published tomorrow
... should be published tomorrow ←
15:32:40 <betehess> topic: LDP Patch
15:32:52 <betehess> Arnaud: betehess had the action item to ask timbl
Arnaud Le Hors: betehess had the action item to ask timbl ←
15:33:00 <betehess> ... hard vs soft delete
... hard vs soft delete ←
15:33:02 <betehess> q+
q+ ←
15:33:11 <Arnaud> ack betehess
Arnaud Le Hors: ack betehess ←
15:33:15 <betehess> ... which was having different operations
... which was having different operations ←
15:33:55 <deiu> betehess: once thing I didn't make clear in my email, the names for the operations were not discussed, so we can replace them if people come up with better ones
Alexandre Bertails: once thing I didn't make clear in my email, the names for the operations were not discussed, so we can replace them if people come up with better ones [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:34:04 <Arnaud> ack sandro
Arnaud Le Hors: ack sandro ←
15:34:16 <bblfish> can't hear sandro
Henry Story: can't hear sandro ←
15:34:17 <betehess> sandro: don't think timbl had considered the rollbacxk problem
Sandro Hawke: don't think timbl had considered the rollbacxk problem ←
15:34:22 <betehess> ... b/c he doesn't use it
... b/c he doesn't use it ←
15:34:32 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:34:42 <betehess> ... he doesn't want to implement a rollback system
... he doesn't want to implement a rollback system ←
15:34:45 <deiu> sandro: Tim didn't really think about the possibility of having rollbacks
Sandro Hawke: Tim didn't really think about the possibility of having rollbacks [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:35:07 <deiu> ... he thinks that you must not send a patch that can result in a rollback
Andrei Sambra: ... he thinks that you must not send a patch that can result in a rollback ←
15:35:09 <betehess> ... there should be no rollback
... there should be no rollback ←
15:35:28 <deiu> ... and he thinks that people should not have to implement systems that do rollbacks
Andrei Sambra: ... and he thinks that people should not have to implement systems that do rollbacks ←
15:35:39 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
15:35:46 <deiu> ... I too would have a problem with implementing rollbacks
Andrei Sambra: ... I too would have a problem with implementing rollbacks ←
15:36:05 <betehess> Arnaud: not sure we're why we're discussing about rollbacks
Arnaud Le Hors: not sure we're why we're discussing about rollbacks ←
15:36:11 <deiu> Arnaud: I don't really understand how we got to the rollback discussion
Arnaud Le Hors: I don't really understand how we got to the rollback discussion [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:36:32 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:36:32 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
15:36:42 <deiu> betehess: if there's a problem with the patch, the resource is left unchanged
Alexandre Bertails: if there's a problem with the patch, the resource is left unchanged [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:36:44 <pchampin> Bind and UpdateList can alreday fail
Pierre-Antoine Champin: Bind and UpdateList can alreday fail ←
15:37:45 <deiu> Arnaud: maybe the rollback term is too strong
Arnaud Le Hors: maybe the rollback term is too strong [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:38:10 <deiu> ... you cannot have a patch that "kind of" works but fails at the same time
Andrei Sambra: ... you cannot have a patch that "kind of" works but fails at the same time ←
15:38:14 <betehess> Arnaud: PATCH either succeeds of fails, no in between
Arnaud Le Hors: PATCH either succeeds of fails, no in between ←
15:38:35 <betehess> sandro: so during the patch, you are not modifying the db
Sandro Hawke: so during the patch, you are not modifying the db ←
15:38:43 <betehess> ... you are cumulating the add/delete
... you are cumulating the add/delete ←
15:38:50 <deiu> sandro: ok, so as you're applying the patch, you're not modifying the database, and in the processing of the patch you're making the necessary checks, so in that case the "rollback" is trivial
Sandro Hawke: ok, so as you're applying the patch, you're not modifying the database, and in the processing of the patch you're making the necessary checks, so in that case the "rollback" is trivial [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:38:53 <betehess> ... did I get it right?
... did I get it right? ←
15:39:01 <betehess> ... ok, should be fine
... ok, should be fine ←
15:39:34 <deiu> Arnaud: the preference is therefore to have 4 operations (2 additions and 2 deletes)
Arnaud Le Hors: the preference is therefore to have 4 operations (2 additions and 2 deletes) [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:39:45 <betehess> Arnaud: so, the preference is to have 4 operations? add/delete can-fail/never-fails?
Arnaud Le Hors: so, the preference is to have 4 operations? add/delete can-fail/never-fails? ←
15:39:49 <deiu> ... are we good with that now?
Andrei Sambra: ... are we good with that now? ←
15:40:08 <deiu> ... is there anything else the editors need at this point so we can close the issue?
Andrei Sambra: ... is there anything else the editors need at this point so we can close the ISSUE-103? ←
15:40:20 <deiu> s/issue/issue-103
15:40:51 <betehess> PROPOSAL: close ISSUE-103 with having 4 operations: add/delete can-fail/never-fails
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-103 with having 4 operations: add/delete can-fail/never-fails ←
15:41:00 <betehess> +1
+1 ←
15:41:06 <pchampin> +1
15:41:08 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
15:41:36 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
15:41:44 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:41:44 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:41:46 <Ashok> 1
Ashok Malhotra: 1 ←
15:41:46 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
15:41:48 <ericP> sandro, +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: sandro, +1 ←
15:42:03 <betehess> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-103 with having 4 operations: add/delete can-fail/never-fails
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-103 with having 4 operations: add/delete can-fail/never-fails ←
15:43:11 <betehess> Arnaud: current names are Add AddNew Delete DeleteAny
Arnaud Le Hors: current names are Add AddNew Delete DeleteAny ←
15:43:55 <pchampin> q+
15:44:12 <betehess> Arnaud+Sandro: DeleteAny sounds funny to me
Arnaud+Sandro: DeleteAny sounds funny to me ←
15:44:14 <Arnaud> ack pchampin
Arnaud Le Hors: ack pchampin ←
15:44:34 <betehess> ... AddNew looks ok
... AddNew looks ok ←
15:45:00 <betehess> pchampin: share concerns re: DeleteAny
Pierre-Antoine Champin: share concerns re: DeleteAny ←
15:45:29 <betehess> ... would prefer Add and Delete would be in same category (can-fail)
... would prefer Add and Delete would be in same category (can-fail) ←
15:45:38 <betehess> ... would be my preference
... would be my preference ←
15:45:55 <betehess> Arnaud: there is an asymmetry
Arnaud Le Hors: there is an asymmetry ←
15:46:14 <betehess> sandro: I'd like that (no assymetry)
Sandro Hawke: I'd like that (no assymetry) ←
15:46:21 <pchampin> pchampin : and the others could be AddNew and DeleteExisting
Pierre-Antoine Champin: pchampin : and the others could be AddNew and DeleteExisting ←
15:46:24 <TallTed> +1 AddNew/DeleteExisting could fail ; Add/Delete don't fail
Ted Thibodeau: +1 AddNew/DeleteExisting could fail ; Add/Delete don't fail ←
15:46:24 <azaroth> +1
Robert Sanderson: +1 ←
15:46:51 <betehess> PROPOSAL: AddNew/DeleteExisting could fail ; Add/Delete don't fail
PROPOSED: AddNew/DeleteExisting could fail ; Add/Delete don't fail ←
15:46:55 <azaroth> +1
Robert Sanderson: +1 ←
15:46:55 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
15:46:56 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
15:46:56 <Ashok> DeleteIfThere
Ashok Malhotra: DeleteIfThere ←
15:46:57 <betehess> +1
+1 ←
15:46:58 <pchampin> +1
15:47:09 <deiu> sandro: +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Andrei Sambra ] ←
15:47:16 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:47:31 <deiu> DeleteIfThereAndETagMatches
Andrei Sambra: DeleteIfThereAndETagMatches ←
15:48:02 <TallTed> DeleteIfExists better than DeleteIfThere
Ted Thibodeau: DeleteIfExists better than DeleteIfThere ←
15:48:24 <Ashok> One more letter!
Ashok Malhotra: One more letter! ←
15:49:01 <betehess> Arnaud: no real objections so far?
Arnaud Le Hors: no real objections so far? ←
15:49:05 <betehess> RESOLVED: AddNew/DeleteExisting could fail ; Add/Delete don't fail
RESOLVED: AddNew/DeleteExisting could fail ; Add/Delete don't fail ←
15:49:12 <pchampin> Sandro, you are right: "ifX" sounds like something that would not fail
Pierre-Antoine Champin: Sandro, you are right: "ifX" sounds like something that would not fail ←
15:49:25 <betehess> Arnaud: any other issue we should be aware of?
Arnaud Le Hors: any other issue we should be aware of? ←
15:49:32 <betehess> ... I believe we closed everything
... I believe we closed everything ←
15:49:49 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:50:00 <betehess> ... so when can we published it as CR? (new process track: combined with LC)
... so when can we published it as CR? (new process track: combined with LC) ←
15:50:04 <betehess> ... same burden
... same burden ←
15:50:16 <betehess> ... need to keep track of public comments
... need to keep track of public comments ←
15:51:06 <betehess> ... suggesting we go to CR
... suggesting we go to CR ←
15:51:20 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
15:51:24 <betehess> ... are we ready for such a decision? or do we need more time for people to review the spec?
... are we ready for such a decision? or do we need more time for people to review the spec? ←
15:51:39 <betehess> sandro: and we have to plan the transition meetings
Sandro Hawke: and we have to plan the transition meetings ←
15:51:49 <betehess> ... so the question is only "when"?
... so the question is only "when"? ←
15:51:52 <betehess> Arnaud: believe so
Arnaud Le Hors: believe so ←
15:52:09 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Publish LD Patch Format as Candidate Recommendation/Last Call WD
PROPOSED: Publish LD Patch Format as Candidate Recommendation/Last Call WD ←
15:52:09 <betehess> ... proposing we are doing it now
... proposing we are doing it now ←
15:52:10 <pchampin> question re. process: can we make slight editorial changes if we go to CR?
Pierre-Antoine Champin: question re. process: can we make slight editorial changes if we go to CR? ←
15:52:43 <bblfish> I have not read it
Henry Story: I have not read it ←
15:52:51 <betehess> sandro: has anyone other that the editors read the draft?
Sandro Hawke: has anyone other that the editors read the draft? ←
15:53:05 <betehess> betehess: timbl read it
Alexandre Bertails: timbl read it ←
15:53:22 <betehess> Arnaud: what's the exit criteria?
Arnaud Le Hors: what's the exit criteria? ←
15:53:32 <SteveS> I have not read it since updated but don’t object to move it forward, so many documents I need to patch
Steve Speicher: I have not read it since updated but don’t object to move it forward, so many documents I need to patch ←
15:53:37 <betehess> sandro: I'd say 2 implementations for the entire test suite
Sandro Hawke: I'd say 2 implementations for the entire test suite ←
15:53:43 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
15:53:49 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish ←
15:54:16 <betehess> bblfish: can I add metadata to the PATCH?
Henry Story: can I add metadata to the PATCH? ←
15:54:26 <betehess> deiu: it's not using an rdf representation
Andrei Sambra: it's not using an rdf representation ←
15:54:55 <betehess> bblfish: you won't be able to do event-sourcing
Henry Story: you won't be able to do event-sourcing ←
15:55:29 <betehess> betehess: that is orthogonal
Alexandre Bertails: that is orthogonal ←
15:56:19 <betehess> ... this is just HTTP PATCH
... this is just HTTP PATCH ←
15:56:27 <betehess> bblfish: want to keep history of changes
Henry Story: want to keep history of changes ←
15:56:44 <betehess> ... would be cool to have that in the PATCH format
... would be cool to have that in the PATCH format ←
15:56:54 <betehess> ... to know the reason
... to know the reason ←
15:57:12 <betehess> sandro: "I would like to express my PATCH as a trig document"
Sandro Hawke: "I would like to express my PATCH as a trig document" ←
15:57:48 <betehess> ... the PATCH could be RDF with a String for the PATCH inside it
... the PATCH could be RDF with a String for the PATCH inside it ←
15:58:07 <bblfish> ok, I can read it
Henry Story: ok, I can read it ←
15:58:31 <SteveS> I can update my review
Steve Speicher: I can update my review ←
15:58:57 <betehess> Arnaud: I am asking for volunteers to read the spec during the holiday
Arnaud Le Hors: I am asking for volunteers to read the spec during the holiday ←
15:59:00 <MiguelAraCo> I can commit to read it
Miguel Aragón: I can commit to read it ←
15:59:18 <betehess> ... let's make sure that for next call, people have read the spec
... let's make sure that for next call, people have read the spec ←
15:59:35 <betehess> ... also, would be nice to have a link to a complete test suite
... also, would be nice to have a link to a complete test suite ←
15:59:50 <betehess> sandro: and the implementation report
Sandro Hawke: and the implementation report ←
16:00:04 <betehess> q+
q+ ←
16:00:12 <Arnaud> ack betehess
Arnaud Le Hors: ack betehess ←
16:00:58 <Zakim> -azaroth
Zakim IRC Bot: -azaroth ←
16:01:22 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Publish LD Patch Format as Candidate Recommendation/Last Call WD
PROPOSED: Publish LD Patch Format as Candidate Recommendation/Last Call WD ←
16:01:25 <betehess> +1
+1 ←
16:01:27 <deiu> +1
Andrei Sambra: +1 ←
16:01:31 <pchampin> +1
16:01:31 <Ashok> +1
Ashok Malhotra: +1 ←
16:01:44 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
16:02:02 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
16:02:05 <betehess> we can't publish tomorrow (too late), so that'd be Thursday anyway
we can't publish tomorrow (too late), so that'd be Thursday anyway ←
16:02:16 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Publish LD Patch Format as Candidate Recommendation/Last Call WD
RESOLVED: Publish LD Patch Format as Candidate Recommendation/Last Call WD ←
16:02:24 <betehess> Arnaud: thank you
Arnaud Le Hors: thank you ←
16:02:34 <betehess> ... thank you all for joining
... thank you all for joining ←
16:02:40 <betehess> ... happy holidays!
... happy holidays! ←
16:02:44 <Zakim> -TallTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed ←
16:02:45 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra ←
16:02:47 <bblfish> happy holidays.
Henry Story: happy holidays. ←
16:02:48 <Zakim> -deiu
Zakim IRC Bot: -deiu ←
16:02:50 <betehess> adjourned
adjourned ←
16:02:54 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
16:02:55 <Zakim> -Alexandre
Zakim IRC Bot: -Alexandre ←
16:03:01 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
16:03:51 <Arnaud> rrsagent, draft minutes
Arnaud Le Hors: rrsagent, draft minutes ←
16:03:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-ldp-minutes.html Arnaud
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/12/15-ldp-minutes.html Arnaud ←
16:03:57 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
16:07:31 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
16:16:11 <Zakim> -SteveS
(No events recorded for 8 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS ←
16:16:18 <Zakim> -ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP ←
16:35:01 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, pchampin, in SW_LDP()10:00AM
(No events recorded for 18 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, pchampin, in SW_LDP()10:00AM ←
16:35:02 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
16:35:02 <Zakim> Attendees were azaroth, [IPcaller], Arnaud, ericP, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, deiu, TallTed, pchampin, SteveS, Roger, +33.6.47.14.aaaa, Sandro, bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were azaroth, [IPcaller], Arnaud, ericP, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, deiu, TallTed, pchampin, SteveS, Roger, +33.6.47.14.aaaa, Sandro, bblfish ←
<betehess> Present: azaroth, Arnaud, ericP, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, deiu, TallTed, pchampin, SteveS, Roger, Sandro, bblfish
Formatted by CommonScribe