17:56:26 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
17:56:26 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/04/28-shapes-irc
17:56:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
17:56:28 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
17:56:30 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
17:56:30 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
17:56:31 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
17:56:31 <trackbot> Date: 28 April 2016
17:59:30 <Arnaud> present+
17:59:33 <Arnaud> chair: Arnaud
17:59:44 <Arnaud> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2016.04.28
18:00:24 <hknublau> hknublau has joined #shapes
18:00:29 <Arnaud> regrets: pfps, Dimitris, labra
18:03:54 <Arnaud> present+ jamsden
18:04:01 <Arnaud> present+ hknublau
18:04:10 <Arnaud> present+ ericP
18:04:23 <Arnaud> present+ kcoyle
18:08:48 <hknublau> scribenick: hknublau
18:09:08 <hknublau> Too few people attending, likely a short meeting.
<hknublau> topic: Admin
18:09:11 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 21 April 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/04/21-shapes-minutes.html
18:11:11 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 21 April 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/04/21-shapes-minutes.html
<hknublau> topic: Disposal of Raised Issues
18:12:21 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Open ISSUE-152, ISSUE-153, ISSUE-154, ISSUE-155, ISSUE-157
18:12:23 <TallTed> present+
18:13:16 <jamsden> q+
18:13:41 <Arnaud> ack jamsden
18:13:44 <TallTed> +1
18:13:51 <hknublau> +1
18:14:25 <hknublau> jamsden: Could we in the future wrap multiple editorial issues up into a single change set?
18:14:26 <TallTed> q+
18:14:56 <hknublau> ... esp if the issue includes a suggested change
18:16:29 <hknublau> jamsden: Proposing to reject the current issues, instead doing reviews that may or may not lead to formal ISSUEs
18:16:30 <ericP> note that we have zillions (i checked) of emails in the archive
18:16:32 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
18:16:47 <marky> marky has joined #shapes
18:17:31 <hknublau> TallTed: Why reinventing W3C process. Not everyone is familiar with Git.
18:17:53 <hknublau> ... We could use a more interactive editing tool: wikis
18:18:44 <hknublau> Arnaud: We started using GitHub, because most people/developers now use.
18:19:26 <hknublau> ... W3C was blamed to be old fashioned, gave up to pressure from outside
18:20:07 <hknublau> ... Being in HTML format is better for publishing
18:21:18 <hknublau> ... From an issue management POV, GitHub has issue management built-in. OTOH Tracker is integrated with mailing list.
18:22:09 <hknublau> ... Possible change to process, e.g. all new issues will be OPEN by default.
18:23:09 <hknublau> ... On editorial issues we could agree that they don't need a formal resolution, the parties could just close if they agree outside.
18:24:09 <TallTed> q+
18:24:33 <hknublau> ... Possible downside: people may abuse this and just close issues, but in that case it can be escalated to WG.
18:25:14 <hknublau> ... Tracker gives permissions to everyone in the WG to change status, it's all tracked.
18:26:28 <hknublau> ... Other groups use GitHub for "simple" issues only, but that turned out to be a nightmare
18:26:55 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
18:27:20 <hknublau> TallTed: We could also just say that editorial issues don't need formal ISSUEs.
18:27:47 <hknublau> Arnaud: But how to make sure that issues have been addressed.
18:27:57 <marky> q+
18:28:05 <Arnaud> ack marky
18:29:14 <hknublau> marky: I am a big fan of using GitHub, I could provide a quick how-to guide for GitHub techniques.
18:30:02 <hknublau> Arnaud: Pull requests can be very efficient.
18:30:10 <hknublau> q+
18:30:29 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
18:32:40 <hknublau> hknublau: If someone raises issues it would be ideal to also have a proposal for resolving them.
18:33:05 <hknublau> ... Also, it would be good to periodically go through your issues to see if they have been addressed in the meantime.
18:34:32 <jamsden> q+
18:35:10 <Arnaud> ack jamsden
18:35:14 <hknublau> Arnaud: We could have a label [Editorial] in the subject line
18:35:47 <hknublau> jamsden: Life cycle changes in Tracker does not produce an email notification.
18:37:37 <hknublau> ericP: Correct. It's working the other way around - Tracker monitors the mailing list.
18:41:08 <hknublau> Arnaud: We could go through existing tickets and mark them as [Editorial]
18:42:18 <hknublau> kcoyle: GitHub forking does work reasonably well for editorial changes.
18:44:06 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Editorial issues should have [Editorial] in the subject line and can be opened and closed by the editors and/or commenters without formal resolution from the WG
18:44:22 <hknublau> jamsden: We should encourage properly formed issues, they should have recommended changes.
18:45:05 <hknublau> +1
18:45:08 <TallTed> +1
18:45:40 <kcoyle> +1
18:46:10 <marky> +1
18:47:14 <Arnaud> ericP: +1
18:47:27 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Editorial issues should have [Editorial] in the subject line and can be opened and closed by the editors and/or commenters without formal resolution from the WG
18:47:35 <jamsden> +1
18:48:30 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Open ISSUE-152, ISSUE-153, ISSUE-154, ISSUE-155, ISSUE-157
<hknublau> topic: ISSUE-126 & ISSUE-127
trackbot: issue-126 -- sh:TemplateConstraint is used in examples but not defined -- open
trackbot: http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/126
trackbot: issue-127 -- sh:TemplateScope is mentioned but not defined -- open
trackbot: http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/127
18:49:40 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-126 and ISSUE-127 as no longer relevant
18:49:50 <kcoyle> +1
18:49:55 <hknublau> +1
18:50:00 <TallTed> +1
18:50:22 <jamsden> =1
18:50:25 <jamsden> +1
18:50:26 <Arnaud> ericP: +1
18:50:37 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-126 and ISSUE-127 as no longer relevant
<hknublau> topic: ISSUE-110
<trackbot> issue-110 -- relationship between sh:constraint and sh:property and sh:inverseProperty -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/110
18:51:55 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-110 as addressed by the current draft
18:52:03 <hknublau> +1
18:52:08 <TallTed> +1
18:52:23 <Arnaud> ericP: +1
18:53:03 <kcoyle> +1
18:53:12 <jamsden> +1
18:53:19 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-110 as addressed by the current draft
18:53:24 <marky> +1
<hknublau> topic: ISSUE-123
18:54:10 <Arnaud> issue-123
18:54:10 <trackbot> issue-123 -- Shall we unify the syntax of sh:directType and sh:class? -- open
18:54:10 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/123
18:54:39 <jamsden> q+
18:55:13 <Arnaud> ack jamsden
18:55:30 <hknublau> hknublau: Proposing to drop sh:directType (not too relevant, problems with inferencing)
18:56:24 <hknublau> jamsden: OSLC Resource Shapes didn't do inferencing and everything was directType, but compatibility with OSLC is less relevant now.
18:57:08 <Labra> Labra has joined #shapes
18:58:00 <hknublau> Arnaud: Nobody seems to fight for sh:directType, we'll vote next week.
<hknublau> topic: ISSUE-141
18:58:22 <Arnaud> issue-141
18:58:22 <trackbot> issue-141 -- How to represent mixed datatype-or-class ranges -- open
18:58:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/141
18:58:41 <hknublau> q+
18:59:07 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
18:59:27 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Proposals#ISSUE-141:_Mixed_ranges
19:00:13 <ericP> q+ to ask if a class constraint is the same as a property constraint on the property rdf:type
19:01:57 <hknublau> hknublau: Proposing merging sh:datatype and sh:class to sh:type (as in emails)
19:02:02 <jamsden> q+
19:02:04 <Arnaud> ack ericP
19:02:04 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to ask if a class constraint is the same as a property constraint on the property rdf:type
19:07:21 <Arnaud> ack jamsden
19:07:45 <hknublau> jamsden: OWL did distinguish the types of properties (Object/DatatypeProperty)
19:08:18 <hknublau> ... SHACL tries to provide constraints in a particular context
19:09:32 <hknublau> ... although I find the simplification appealing, but for structural query purposes I think it goes too far.
19:12:22 <hknublau> ... (following discussion I am OK with this change)
19:13:28 <hknublau> ericP: Easier to have two properties sh:datatype, sh:class for static analysis
19:13:53 <hknublau> hknublau: There is also sh:nodeKind for that
19:14:55 <hknublau> Arnaud: Please go to Proposals page to cast your preference
<hknublau> topic: ISSUE-92
19:16:52 <Arnaud> issue-92
19:16:52 <trackbot> issue-92 -- Should repeated properties be interpreted as additive or conjunctive? -- open
19:16:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/92
19:17:10 <hknublau> ericP: I have tried to encode a version of ShEx with strictly conjunctive semantics.
19:17:50 <hknublau> ... problem: multiple constraints on the same property, and you expect them to work not strictly conjunctively
19:18:30 <hknublau> ... Jose and I wanted to meet about this and make a proposal. Iovka found issues with sh:partition (e.g. putting a disjunction inside of it)
19:19:29 <hknublau> ... SHACL is a bit like OWL, ShEx is more like BNF
19:20:37 <hknublau> Arnaud: We can leave it at this, waiting for ShEx people.
19:21:24 <jamsden> 78 is still open
<hknublau> topic: ISSUE-105
19:22:36 <Arnaud> issue-105
19:22:36 <trackbot> issue-105 -- SHACL SPARQL constraints depend on namespaces in a graph, which is not defined -- open
19:22:36 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/105
19:23:57 <Arnaud> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2016Apr/0177.html
19:26:50 <hknublau> hknublau: Explaining proposal with a property at sh:sparql to point at prefix declarations, and these declaration may extend each other.
19:26:54 <marky> +q
19:27:05 <Arnaud> ack marky
19:27:33 <hknublau> marky: Who is the audience of this simplification.
19:27:41 <hknublau> Arnaud: The author of the SHACL document
19:29:08 <hknublau> ... latest proposal addresses part of the problems - explicit pointer at prefixes
19:29:13 <jamsden> q+
19:29:27 <Arnaud> ack jamsden
19:29:27 <TallTed> q+
19:29:59 <hknublau> jamsden: I continue to believe there are two languages here (SPARQL and SHACL) and there is no relationship between the two
19:30:29 <hknublau> ... to do this properly we'd need an abstract syntax tree in RDF
19:30:38 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
19:31:25 <hknublau> TallTed: SPARQL spec defines explicitly that prefix duplicates are invalid
19:32:01 <hknublau> ... SHACL engine needs to look at existing PREFIXes, just to make something that isn't a big problem a bit easier.
19:32:12 <ericP> to TallTed's point, "A prefix declared with the PREFIX keyword may not be re-declared in the same query."
19:32:55 <Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting
19:32:55 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
19:32:55 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, jamsden, hknublau, ericP, kcoyle, TallTed, marky
19:33:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:33:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/28-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
19:33:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
19:33:04 <RRSAgent> I see no action items