18:57:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
18:57:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/02/11-shapes-irc
18:57:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
18:57:03 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
18:57:05 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
18:57:05 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
18:57:06 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
18:57:06 <trackbot> Date: 11 February 2016
18:57:57 <Arnaud> present+
18:58:51 <kcoyle> present+
19:01:07 <simonstey> present+
19:01:28 <Jim> Jim has joined #shapes
19:01:55 <Arnaud> present+ Jim
19:02:20 <aryman> aryman has joined #shapes
19:02:38 <pfps> pfps has joined #shapes
19:02:45 <pfps> present+
19:02:48 <Labra> Labra has joined #shapes
19:03:13 <Arnaud> regrets: Dimitris
19:03:14 <aryman> present+ aryman
19:03:52 <TallTed> present+
19:04:06 <Labra> present+
19:04:26 <Arnaud> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2016.02.11
19:04:32 <Arnaud> chair: Arnaud
19:04:52 <simonstey> http://www.w3.org/2008/04/scribe.html
19:05:21 <aryman> scribe: aryman
19:05:34 <aryman> scribeNick: aryman
19:06:16 <aryman> TOPIC: Admin
19:06:19 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 4 February 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-shapes-minutes.html
19:06:25 <pfps> minutes looked OK to me
19:06:55 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 4 February 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-shapes-minutes.html
19:07:24 <aryman> TOPIC: New Member
19:07:47 <aryman> Arnaud: Welcome Jim Amsden from IBM, working on OSLC
19:09:41 <aryman> Jim: I've had a long-term interest in semantic web and it has recently become a job responsibility at OSLC and Linked Data.
19:10:04 <aryman> TOPIC: Public Mailing List Feedback
19:11:12 <aryman> kcoyle: We do not have a mailing list that has the usual name, specifically DC people expected "comments" in the name
19:11:35 <aryman> kcoyle: We have been using the mailing from the initial workshop
<Arnaud> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-shapes/
19:12:14 <aryman> Arnaud: Eric and I decided to continue to use that public list for comments
19:13:37 <aryman> kcoyle: We should update the description displayed by the archives
19:15:08 <aryman> Arnaud: Eric will update the mailing list description to include comments on the specs
19:16:47 <aryman> TOPIC: Disposal of Raised Issues
19:16:09 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Open ISSUE-121 Should the SHACL owl:Ontology include the # character
19:16:52 <aryman> q+
19:16:59 <Arnaud> ack aryman
19:17:50 <simonstey> q+
19:18:03 <TallTed> https://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-vocab-pub/#naming   as Simon noted in the Agenda...
19:18:09 <simonstey> -q
19:18:32 <aryman> q+
19:18:44 <hknublau> hknublau has joined #shapes
19:19:43 <TallTed> +1 open it
19:19:48 <simonstey> +1
19:19:59 <Labra> +1
19:20:02 <aryman> +1
19:20:09 <kcoyle> +1
19:20:39 <Jim> +1
19:20:44 <pfps> +1
19:20:53 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Open ISSUE-121 Should the SHACL owl:Ontology include the # character
19:21:09 <Arnaud> issue-122
19:21:09 <trackbot> issue-122 -- Should we postpone publishing a SHACL shapes file (indefinitely)? -- raised
19:21:09 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/122
19:22:47 <kcoyle> no, shows sound coming from you on webex
19:23:18 <aryman> q+
19:23:22 <Arnaud> ack aryman
19:23:42 <ericP> aryman: i see no reason not to publish a shapes file
19:24:08 <ericP> Jim: we use these a lot in OSLC, makes the tools more dynamic
19:24:54 <aryman> q+
19:25:02 <Arnaud> ack aryman
19:26:09 <aryman> aryman: we should allow another WG member to create the shapes file
19:26:48 <aryman> Arnaud: let's see how much time this takes away for the WG
19:27:01 <aryman> s/for/from/
19:27:14 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-122, as is, we can revisit this if it becomes  a problem later on
19:27:23 <aryman> +1
19:27:24 <pfps> +1
19:27:26 <ericP> +1
19:27:26 <simonstey> +1
19:27:30 <Jim> +1
19:27:32 <kcoyle> +1
19:27:37 <hknublau> 0
19:27:37 <TallTed> +0
19:27:44 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-122, as is, we can revisit this if it becomes  a problem later on
19:27:47 <hknublau> present+
19:30:09 <aryman> TOPIC: ISSUE-78
19:30:24 <simonstey> issue-78
19:30:24 <trackbot> issue-78 -- Should SHACL support marking classes as abstract -- open
19:30:24 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/78
19:32:19 <aryman> q+
19:32:29 <Arnaud> ack aryman
19:33:46 <ericP> q+
19:33:50 <Arnaud> ack ericP
19:34:42 <aryman> aryman: You could create a shape that checked for direct instances of a class and reported a violation.
19:35:35 <aryman> ericP: We considered doing this in ShEx but pulled it out. It was used to prevent matching a base class instead of a subclass.
19:36:55 <aryman> Arnaud: do we can a Use Case or Requirement?
19:37:02 <aryman> s/can/have/
19:38:15 <aryman> Jim: this could be useful in Change Management
19:38:27 <simonstey> we dont have a uc for that
19:38:39 <aryman> Arnaud: Do we have an accepted Requirement in our UCR spec?
19:38:42 <simonstey> *no recorded one
19:38:46 <pfps> I don't remember any use cases for this
19:39:45 <kcoyle> I don't see anything explicit in the use cases
19:39:52 <aryman> q+
19:40:24 <ericP> the use case could start "suppose there were a language for constraining RDF graphs..."
19:40:37 <Arnaud> ack aryman
19:44:46 <TallTed> q+
19:46:21 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
19:48:27 <aryman> TallTed: several people have expressed requirements, and expressed possibly ways to address them, so we should discuss it further and work towards adding a Requirement
19:48:55 <aryman> Arnaud: we need someone who cares enough to work on it further
19:50:39 <aryman> aryman: If the solution to this requirement could be based on a shape then that would remove the objection to Holger's solution which encroaches on the modelling space
19:51:41 <aryman> hknublau: A shape solution would break down in the presence of RDFS inferencing since rdf:type links would be added
19:51:53 <aryman> TOPIC: ISSUE-119
19:52:39 <aryman> Arnaud: Simon raised the requirement to apply constraints to each member of an rdf:List
19:53:02 <simonstey> http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/data-shapes-ucr/#r6.12-expressivity-checking-for-well-formed-rdf-lists
19:53:32 <aryman> Arnaud: Holger objected on the grounds that this further expands the scope and can be solved using the extension mechanism
19:54:00 <aryman> Simon: we do have use cases but the spec is unclear about how to handle lists
19:55:10 <TallTed> issue-119?
19:55:10 <trackbot> issue-119 -- Defining constraints on (values of) rdf:Lists -- open
19:55:10 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/119
19:55:11 <Arnaud> yes
19:56:24 <aryman> Simon: I am concerned that the spec is currently not addressing the accepted List requirements
19:57:55 <aryman> hknublau: the language is already large and adding Lists were require more development and test cases. I can imagine many more similar types of requirements. We have the extension mechanism so we can defer it or let the community address it?
19:58:11 <pfps> got to go
19:58:36 <aryman> Arnaud: You ask for more features so what is you criterion for making the language larger?
19:59:12 <simonstey> +q
19:59:14 <aryman> hknublau: I proposed the sh:abstract feature a long time ago. I now want the language to stabilize.
19:59:17 <Arnaud> ack simonstey
19:59:52 <aryman> Arnaud: Yet you disagreed when I proposed to close the sh:abstract issue.
20:00:46 <aryman> simonstey: We do have the List requirements so we need to make a statement about how to address them.
20:01:19 <aryman> Arnaud: We could add a section to the spec about how to deal with Lists.
20:01:42 <kcoyle> q+
20:01:49 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
20:02:10 <TallTed> q+
20:02:33 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
20:02:50 <aryman> kcoyle: Lists are very important in the DC community but we don't have enough experience about how to deal with them in shapes. I am OK to leave this to the extension mechanism.
20:03:24 <aryman> TallTed: We still have one year so I don't see the need to close this issue now.
20:03:40 <simonstey> which suffices my issue btw
20:03:43 <aryman> Arnaud: We have a lot of issues open and we need to close some.
20:04:12 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-119, not expanding core to handle lists but adding a section on how to do so using the extension mechanism
20:04:16 <hknublau> +1
20:04:17 <ericP> +1
20:04:20 <aryman> +1
20:04:21 <simonstey> +1
20:04:21 <kcoyle> +1
20:04:23 <Labra> 0
20:04:28 <TallTed> +0
20:04:50 <Jim> +1
20:04:57 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-119, not expanding core to handle lists but adding a section on how to do so using the extension mechanism
20:06:35 <aryman> topic: ISSUE-47
20:06:35 <trackbot> ISSUE-47 -- Can SPARQL-based constraints access the shape graph, and how? -- open
20:06:35 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/47
20:06:49 <hknublau> q+
20:07:10 <hknublau> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/ISSUE-47:_Can_SPARQL-based_constraints_access_the_shape_graph
20:07:23 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
20:08:22 <aryman> q+
20:09:00 <aryman> hknublau: There are many use cases that having access to the shapes graph helps.
20:09:10 <Arnaud> ack aryman
20:09:56 <ericP> aryman: the fact that we have the shapes graph as an RDF graph is actually an accident
20:10:19 <ericP> ... we could have taken a different tragectory that doesn't use an RDF graph (e.g. ShEx)
20:10:31 <ericP> ... but since we used love RDF, we used RDF
20:10:54 <ericP> ... in order to get access to the shapes graph, the shacl processor has to be tightly coupled to the store
20:11:01 <hknublau> q+
20:11:28 <ericP> ... access to the shapes graph would eliminate loose-coupling e.g. queries to dbpedia
20:11:50 <ericP> ... in principle, you could do that, but the SHACL processor would have to generate more complex SPARQL queries
20:12:28 <ericP> ... i think we should have one language binding providing access to the shapes graph
20:12:50 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
20:14:22 <aryman> hknublau: Agree that this is a language binding issue. A SHACL processor can analyze each query and detect access to the shapes graph.
20:14:47 <kcoyle> +q
20:15:47 <aryman> Arnaud; Should access to the shapes graph be the default?
20:15:57 <aryman> s/;/:/
20:16:14 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
20:16:51 <aryman> hknublau: I would support having different levels of compliance, e.g. built-in only, extension in SPARQL, extension is SPARQL with shapes graph
20:17:24 <aryman> kcoyle: In the DC meeting the issue of Linked Data Platform came up. Is this related.
20:17:27 <aryman> q+
20:17:31 <Arnaud> ack aryman
20:19:04 <ericP> aryman: i don't think this is really a Linked Data issue because LDP is often implemented on non-RDF systems, e.g. relational databases.
20:19:28 <ericP> ... but you could use this when there's a triple store
20:21:10 <aryman> Arnaud: the proposal should be more neutral and specify what happens if the shapes graph is not available. We can't persuade everyone that the shapes graph must be present.
20:22:19 <ericP> "if he shapes graph is accessible..."
20:23:06 <aryman> TOPIC: ISSUE-57
20:23:38 <Arnaud> issue-57
20:23:38 <trackbot> issue-57 -- Cardinalities on expressions or groups of triple constraints -- open
20:23:38 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/57
20:25:41 <aryman> ericP: this feature is based on patterns that frequently occur in languages, i.e. a group of things that together are optional
20:26:16 <aryman> q+
20:26:58 <aryman> Arnaud: does the sh:partition constraint address this?
20:27:00 <Arnaud> ack aryman
20:27:02 <aryman> ericP: no
20:28:27 <aryman> aryman: sh:partition would let you express an optional group
20:28:38 <aryman> ericP: I'll try that
20:29:01 <aryman> TOPIC: Implementations
20:29:28 <aryman> Arnaud: I've added an Implementations section to our WG wiki page. There are three known implementations (or plans for one).
20:29:47 <aryman> Arnaud: Please add implementations that you are aware of.
20:30:56 <Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting
20:30:56 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
20:30:56 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, kcoyle, simonstey, Jim, pfps, aryman, TallTed, Labra, hknublau, ericP
20:31:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
20:31:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/11-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
20:31:05 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
20:31:05 <RRSAgent> I see no action items