18:00:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
18:00:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/28-shapes-irc
18:00:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
18:00:25 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
18:00:27 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
18:00:27 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
18:00:28 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
18:00:29 <trackbot> Date: 28 July 2016
18:00:52 <Arnaud> chair: Arnaud
18:00:56 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #shapes
18:00:57 <Arnaud> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2016.07.28
18:03:00 <hknublau> present+
18:03:25 <pano> present+
18:03:32 <kcoyle> present+
18:04:09 <Arnaud> I'm fighting with webex myself...
18:04:59 <TallTed> present+
18:06:46 <Arnaud> present+
18:08:24 <Arnaud> regrets: jamsden, andys
18:10:39 <Dimitris> scribenick: dimitris
<Dimitris> topic: Admin
18:11:15 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 21 July 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-shapes-minutes.html
18:11:37 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 21 July 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-shapes-minutes.html
18:12:02 <Dimitris> Arnaud: we meet again next week
<Dimitris> topic: Disposal of Raised Issues
18:12:15 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Open ISSUE-175
18:12:41 <hknublau> +1
18:12:44 <Dimitris> Arnaud: Dimitris raised an issue and put together some proposals for renaming the term scope
18:12:48 <Dimitris> +1
18:13:12 <kcoyle> +1
18:13:32 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Open ISSUE-175
18:13:39 <Dimitris> ... let's open it but should try and close it next week
18:13:55 <Dimitris> topic: ISSUE-134
18:14:12 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-134 as no longer relevant
18:14:33 <Dimitris> Arnaud: Looks like this has become irrelevant with the choices we made
18:14:34 <TallTed> +1
18:14:57 <pano> +1
18:14:58 <Dimitris> +1
18:15:06 <kcoyle> +1
18:15:26 <kcoyle> q+
18:15:34 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
18:16:00 <Dimitris> kcoyle: have we accepted the proposal for the property path generalization and can anyone point to that?
18:16:35 <Dimitris> Dimitris: yes
18:17:15 <Dimitris> Kcoyle: I can look up the resolution
18:17:37 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2016/06/30-shapes-minutes.html#resolution04
18:18:49 <hknublau_> hknublau_ has joined #shapes
18:19:23 <kcoyle> we can hear you
18:19:35 <kcoyle> maybe time to retire?
18:20:13 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-134 as no longer relevant
18:20:47 <hknublau_> +1
18:21:50 <Dimitris> topic: Drafts Publication
18:22:08 <Dimitris> Arnaud: When can we publish a new SHACL draft?
18:22:38 <hknublau_> q+
18:22:44 <Dimitris> ... how much time do the editors need?
18:22:49 <Arnaud> ack hknublau_
18:23:18 <Dimitris> hknublau: I think issue 133 will have a big impact and then the renaming of scope
18:23:43 <Dimitris> ... after these are resolved mostly readability and editorial issues will remain
18:23:48 <Dimitris> q+
18:24:21 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
18:25:14 <Dimitris> Arnaud: we can decide if we delay 133 and 175
18:25:49 <Dimitris> dimitris: I think we should delay a couple of weeks to make the syntax stable
18:27:07 <kcoyle> q+
18:27:14 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
18:27:23 <Dimitris> Arnaud: The abstract syntax was improved to tackle the issues we discussed last week but people should check the new document
18:28:09 <Dimitris> kcoyle: I would like to hear from people what they think about it
18:28:30 <Dimitris> Arnaud: I'd like us to agree on a plan
18:28:31 <ericP> q+ to say i'd love to rescue the word "parameters"
18:29:06 <Dimitris> ericp: there are many buttons that can hide different things in the document
18:29:16 <Dimitris> q+
18:29:22 <Arnaud> ack ericP
18:29:22 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say i'd love to rescue the word "parameters"
18:29:27 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
18:30:33 <Dimitris> Dimitris: I noticed some duplication in the examples, would be nice to align them
18:30:34 <hknublau_> Thanks @ericP to the collapse button for the BNF
18:30:49 <Dimitris> ericP: Scoping was a reason for duplication
18:32:13 <Dimitris> ... would be nice to make the validation work without explicit scopes
18:32:34 <Dimitris> Dimitris: There was already an issue about this by Holger
18:33:29 <Dimitris> hknublau: It is useful but since we are keep changing at the moment and syncing is not easy
18:33:56 <Dimitris> Arnaud: can we somehow automate the syncing
18:34:17 <Dimitris> ericP: Scala would be an option
18:34:32 <TallTed> "Nary" should become "N-ary" ...   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arity   "Nary" has meanings other than intended.
18:34:42 <kcoyle> thx ted
18:36:20 <Dimitris> Arnaud: Holger and Dimitris should signal when you are done so that Eric and Karen can start
18:37:23 <Dimitris> Ericp: I will do another pass at naming things
18:37:40 <Dimitris> ... like parameters / arguments
18:38:41 <Dimitris> tallted: if you want to change terminology you should make a complete proposal
18:39:30 <Dimitris> Arnaud: I agree with Ted, if you want to rename something make a concrete proposal, at this point we should be very precise
18:40:08 <Dimitris> topic: ISSUE-133
18:41:10 <ericP> TallTed, s/nary/n-ary/g done
18:41:11 <kcoyle> q+
18:41:12 <Dimitris> Arnaud: last week we had a strawpoll and the WG was divided with a slight preference for merging Shapes and NodeConstraints
18:41:16 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
18:42:01 <Dimitris> kcoyle: with Shape becoming a subclass of Constraint it doesn't work for me because we have shapes at different levels
18:42:40 <Dimitris> ... I need someone to explain to me how this works when constraints contain constraints
18:43:00 <Dimitris> ... at this point shapes look shapeless
18:44:10 <Dimitris> hknublau: we already have this situation anyway, shapes can point to NodeConstraints and NodeConstraints can point to Shapes
18:44:43 <Dimitris> ... it depends on if we agree if a Shape is actually a big constraints
18:45:15 <Dimitris> ... it is like an AND construct
18:45:43 <Dimitris> ... from this point of view merging makes sense
18:46:13 <Dimitris> kcoyle: then why do we still have constraint?
18:47:08 <Dimitris> ... so Shape is a Constraint
18:48:42 <Dimitris> hknublau: before we had sh:constraint to link to a NodeConstraint but now we attach directly to the shape
18:48:52 <Dimitris> q+
18:50:39 <Dimitris> EricP: the problem was with filters I think that was not clear if filters had filters what is happening
18:50:49 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/21-shapes-minutes.html#item04
18:51:01 <Dimitris> q-
18:52:15 <kcoyle> I think that's what I see, too
18:52:38 <Arnaud> STRAWPOLL: a) merge Shape and NodeConstraint, b) don't merge Shape and NodeConstraint
18:52:41 <Dimitris> Arnaud: this merge collapses concepts
18:53:05 <Dimitris> Dimitris: I also like to keep things separate
18:53:08 <hknublau_> a) +1 b) -0.7
18:53:11 <kcoyle> a) -.9 b) +1
18:53:30 <Dimitris> a) -0 b) +1
18:53:46 <TallTed> a +0.9  b -0.9
18:53:49 <pano> a:+1 b:0
18:53:56 <ericP> a) -.9
18:54:03 <ericP> a) -.9 b) +1
18:56:39 <Dimitris> Arnaud: what do we do with the strawpoll now? Either one would pass because noone has objected firmly
18:57:01 <TallTed> s/a +0.9  b -0.9/a +1  b -1/
18:59:15 <Dimitris> ... Eric, how is this related to ShEx?
18:59:50 <Dimitris> EricP, this will not change the abstract syntax, this is less about the alignment with ShEx
19:00:00 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: merge Shape and NodeConstraint
19:00:08 <hknublau_> +1
19:00:11 <Dimitris> s/EricP, /EricP: /
19:00:16 <pano> +1
19:00:20 <TallTed> +1
19:00:21 <Dimitris> -0
19:00:21 <kcoyle> -.9
19:00:29 <ericP> -.9
19:00:58 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Merge Shape and NodeConstraint
19:01:28 <Dimitris> Arnaud: with that done we can close issue 133, right?
19:01:47 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-133, based on the series of related resolutions
19:01:59 <hknublau_> +1
19:02:02 <Dimitris> hknublau: there are a couple of follow-up issues mentioned in my email but can be treated separate
19:02:04 <Dimitris> +1
19:02:11 <pano> +1
19:02:51 <kcoyle> +1
19:02:59 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-133, based on the series of related resolutions
19:04:11 <Dimitris> hknublau: with the merging sh:or is simpler and we can drop sh:datatypeIn and sh:classIn
19:04:18 <Arnaud> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2016Jul/0076.html
19:04:46 <Arnaud> topic: ISSUE-135
19:04:46 <trackbot> issue-135 -- Should sh:and/sh:or/sh:not/sh:valueShape support constraints too? -- open
19:04:46 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/135
19:04:52 <Dimitris> ... and another issue is if sh:and/or point to constraints which is indirectly resolved
19:05:15 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-135, no longer relevant
19:05:19 <Dimitris> +1
19:05:22 <pano> +1
19:05:23 <hknublau_> +1
19:05:33 <TallTed> +1
19:05:38 <kcoyle> +1
19:05:49 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-135, no longer relevant
19:06:12 <Arnaud> topic: ISSUE-141
19:06:12 <trackbot> issue-141 -- How to represent mixed datatype-or-class ranges -- open
19:06:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/141
19:06:40 <Dimitris> proposes: remove sh:datatypeIn and sh:classIn components as they can be expressed with sh:or
19:07:22 <hknublau_> +1
19:07:40 <Dimitris> s/proposes/PROPOSED/
19:09:04 <Dimitris> +1
19:09:10 <ericP> +1
19:09:23 <Dimitris> ericP: should we remove sh:in as well
19:09:29 <TallTed> +1
19:09:41 <pano> 0
19:09:41 <Dimitris> hknublau: sh:in is useful and I would keep it
19:09:51 <kcoyle> 0
19:09:57 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Remove sh:datatypeIn and sh:classIn components as they can be expressed with sh:or
19:11:14 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-141, mixed ranges can now be uniformly handled
19:11:14 <Dimitris> PROPOSED: close issue 141, mixed ranges can be expressed with sh:or
19:11:19 <hknublau_> +1
19:11:33 <Dimitris> +1
19:11:45 <TallTed> +1
19:11:45 <ericP> +1
19:11:54 <pano> 0
19:12:08 <kcoyle> +1
19:12:12 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close issue 141, mixed ranges can be expressed with sh:or
19:12:18 <hknublau_> Wow, we are on a run. Should we handle the scope naming issue next?
19:13:02 <Dimitris> Arnaud: let's talk about nested severities
<Dimitris> topic: ISSUE-150
19:13:24 <Dimitris> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2016Jul/0079.html
19:14:31 <Dimitris> EricP, I had an action item to see how ShEx people would do it and they said they avoid it
19:14:32 <Arnaud> action-37
19:14:32 <trackbot> action-37 -- Eric Prud'hommeaux to Check what happens in the shex extension that has severities -- due 2016-05-26 -- OPEN
19:14:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/actions/37
19:16:01 <Arnaud> issue-150
19:16:01 <trackbot> issue-150 -- Treatment of nested severities -- open
19:16:01 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/150
19:17:31 <Dimitris> Arnaud: Dimitris sent an email with his preferences
19:18:08 <Arnaud> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2016Jul/0079.html
19:22:12 <kcoyle> lowest = least severe?
19:22:33 <Dimitris> 
19:22:35 <Dimitris> b) Use the outer, unless the inner was lower e.g.
19:22:37 <Dimitris> outer: Warning,  inner: Info -> use Info
19:22:39 <Dimitris> outer: Warning,  inner: Violation -> use Warning
19:24:13 <kcoyle> q+
19:26:24 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
19:26:58 <Dimitris> kcoyle: I would want the opposite of what Dimitris prefers, the most severe
19:27:30 <Dimitris> ... if it is inner or outer, the most severe should win
19:28:13 <hknublau_> q+
19:28:17 <Dimitris> Arnaud: there are different dimensions
19:28:31 <Arnaud> ack hknublau_
19:28:34 <Dimitris> kcoyle: but we need to make it very clear
19:29:28 <TallTed> q+
19:29:33 <Dimitris> hknublau: I think the current spec is OK for me, if an nested object returns a violation there are many cases where we want to override
19:30:00 <Dimitris> ... I need some time to look into this in more detail
19:30:04 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
19:30:46 <Dimitris> TallTed: I think the conceptualization of this is key
19:31:00 <Dimitris> ... I have data about people and require an address
19:31:41 <Dimitris> ... within the address I can allow a city or state, or more details, if the inner shape is the address
19:32:02 <Dimitris> ... my address shape must have a street address
19:32:35 <hknublau_> sh:shape may even take a companion parameter to specify the minimum severity.
19:32:41 <Dimitris> ... the violation of the inner shape should not mean that the outer shape is broken
19:54:15 <Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting
19:54:15 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
19:54:15 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been hknublau, pano, kcoyle, TallTed, Arnaud, ericP, Dimitris
19:54:23 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:54:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/28-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
19:54:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
19:54:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items