12:56:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
12:56:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/10/26-shapes-irc
12:56:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
12:56:44 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
12:56:46 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
12:56:46 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
12:56:47 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
12:56:48 <trackbot> Date: 26 October 2016
12:56:52 <Arnaud> present+
12:57:25 <AndyS> present+
12:58:13 <Arnaud> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2016.10.26
12:58:43 <Arnaud> chair: Arnaud
12:59:53 <Arnaud> regrets: simonstey, pano
13:01:05 <hknublau> hknublau has joined #shapes
13:01:06 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #shapes
13:01:16 <Dimitris> Dimitris has joined #shapes
13:02:27 <Dimitris> present+
13:02:30 <hknublau> present+
13:02:30 <kcoyle> present+
13:02:31 <ericP> present+
13:04:13 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #shapes
13:06:30 <Arnaud> hi Ted
13:06:35 <Arnaud> we are waiting for you :)
13:07:55 <TallTed> present+
13:08:13 <TallTed> scribenick:TallTed
<TallTed> topic: Admin
13:08:33 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 19 Oct 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/10/19-shapes-minutes.html
13:09:10 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 19 Oct 2016 Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2016/10/19-shapes-minutes.html
13:12:59 <hknublau> With regards to summer time shift, I will suggest to move the future meetings forward, at least by 30 minutes because it would otherwise start at midnight for me.
<TallTed> topic: Disposal of raised issues
13:13:52 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Open ISSUE-192
13:14:15 <kcoyle> +1
13:14:18 <TallTed> +1
13:14:20 <Dimitris> +1
13:14:33 <hknublau> 0.5
13:14:42 <AndyS> +1
13:14:49 <ericP> +1
13:15:15 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Open ISSUE-192
13:16:17 <TallTed> TOPIC: Clean up of no longer relevant issues
13:15:58 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-146 and ISSUE-190 as no longer relevant given the removal of sh:hasShape
13:16:17 <hknublau> +1
13:16:20 <Dimitris> +1
13:16:24 <TallTed> +1
13:16:40 <AndyS> +1
13:16:41 <Labra> Labra has joined #shapes
13:17:02 <kcoyle> +1
13:17:09 <ericP> +1
13:17:13 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-146 and ISSUE-190 as no longer relevant given the removal of sh:hasShape
13:18:14 <Dimitris> what about issue-158
13:18:25 <Labra> present+ labra
13:18:59 <TallTed> TOPIC: ISSUE-140 - SHACL needs to support validation of individual nodes
13:18:32 <Arnaud> issue-140
13:18:32 <trackbot> issue-140 -- SHACL needs to support validation of individual nodes -- open
13:18:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/140
13:19:31 <ericP> https://ericprud.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/#MaxCountConstraintComponent
13:22:29 <hknublau> The tables look good to me.
13:23:25 <hknublau> We should just avoid the term "fail" because that's currently used for "failures" such as invalid recursion.
13:24:49 <Dimitris> maybe replace result with validates and pass/fail to yes/no
13:25:06 <ericP> propose 👍 👎
13:25:57 <hknublau> Assuming we do that, what else needs to happen to close ISSUE-140?
13:27:36 <TallTed> TallTed: this appears to be confirmation that SHACL does support validation of individual nodes, so once complete, ISSUE-140 is done
13:28:28 <TallTed> TOPIC: ISSUE-158 -- ill-typed literals do not always trigger a validation result
13:28:03 <Arnaud> issue-158
13:28:03 <trackbot> issue-158 -- ill-typed literals do not always trigger a validation result -- open
13:28:03 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/158
13:28:29 <Dimitris> ex:i1 ex:p "c"^^xsd:integer
13:29:00 <ericP> q+
13:29:26 <Arnaud> ack ericP
13:29:46 <TallTed> Dimitris: proposes we just say nothing
13:29:58 <hknublau> q+
13:30:05 <TallTed> Arnaud: expects it will be implementation dependent
13:31:04 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
13:31:11 <TallTed> ericP: errors will likely happen with maxvalue/minvalue ...  and testsuite includes these issues
13:31:32 <TallTed> hknublau: also in favor of not handling this.  could be handled by extensions, custom constraint components.
13:31:58 <TallTed> ... one major concern is weight of process.
13:32:26 <Dimitris> q+
13:33:34 <TallTed> ericP: leaving this out doesn't seem to lessen our work.  evaluating numeric constraints seems to require numeric values...
13:34:49 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
13:35:23 <TallTed> hknublau: this seems like an extra test.  evaluating a letter value against a numeric restriction will already produce some error; no need to check first that the value being compared is a number.
13:35:43 <kcoyle> q+
13:36:01 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
13:36:04 <TallTed> Dimitris: [echoes Holger]
13:37:24 <TallTed> kcoyle: don't see how we can *not* do this.  could write SHACL validations for everything, to check this type of thing, but we should say what is supposed to happen if the data graph itself has problems such as "string"^^xsd:int
13:37:30 <hknublau> q+
13:37:40 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
13:37:56 <TallTed> ... we can't just rely on SPARQL, particularly for people who aren't using SPARQL
13:38:03 <Dimitris> q+
13:38:26 <AndyS> q+
13:38:45 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
13:39:40 <TallTed> Dimitris: suppose we support xsd:int and xsd:integer, and then I create my own ex:int and ex:integer, what is SHACL to do?
13:39:42 <ericP> i don't see any performance impact given that SPARQL/XML Schema impls already have a prescribed behavior
13:39:54 <Arnaud> ack AndyS
13:40:10 <AndyS> Example: SELECT  (COALESCE ("555"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#byte>+0, "invalid") AS ?X) {}
13:40:58 <TallTed> AndyS: what SPARQL can check depends on the implementation.  it can be messy to handle even simple things, it's worse when you get into custom.
13:42:09 <TallTed> ... if I have ^^fubar and you don't, and I pass you a shape def using it, what happens?
13:43:56 <ericP> q+ to question expense
13:45:47 <Arnaud> ack ericP
13:45:47 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to question expense
13:45:57 <TallTed> ... building SPARQL operations can cover a small set of datatypes, but not all xsd, and certainly not all custom
13:48:22 <TallTed> ericP: wonder what we'd be enforcing?  SPARQL has prescribed behaviors for comparisons...  facets have to be lexically valid though not necessarily canonical form...
13:48:42 <kcoyle> q+
13:49:01 <TallTed> ... seems like this is already done, if using a reasonable engine.  unreasonable engines are likely to give strange responses anyway.
13:49:32 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
13:49:37 <TallTed> ... how many digits in "a1"?
13:51:30 <ericP> q+
13:51:32 <TallTed> Arnaud: let's consider the original example in the issue...  ` "c"^^xsd:integer `
13:51:39 <Arnaud> ack ericP
13:52:05 <TallTed> q+
13:52:39 <TallTed> ericP: SPARQL would ignore that until trying to operate on it
13:54:13 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
13:55:34 <Dimitris> q+
13:55:38 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
14:00:34 <TallTed> TallTed: basic confirmation that typed literals conform to the (basic, xsd or the like) type they claim to be seems vital
14:02:14 <TallTed> TallTed: it could be made switchable, if performance is hugely impacted in spaces where this level of validation is deemed unnecessary
14:02:51 <TallTed> kcoyle: starting by saying "data must be valid" dodges the whole concept of data validation...
14:03:37 <Dimitris> q+
14:05:02 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
14:05:08 <Dimitris> ex:i1 ex:p "c"^^xsd:integer
14:05:59 <kcoyle> q+
14:06:05 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
14:07:17 <ericP> q+ to describe the SPARQL Operator Mapping
14:08:21 <TallTed> [having triples with predicates which aren't part of the shape, with invalidly typed literals, seems ok] ?
14:08:27 <Arnaud> ack ericP
14:08:27 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to describe the SPARQL Operator Mapping
14:09:25 <TallTed> ericP: many operations (numeric comparisons, etc.) already have defined results.  it's only the question of "this must be an integer" that remains.
14:09:29 <ericP> -> https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-query/#OperatorMapping SPARQL Operator Mapping
14:10:44 <kcoyle> what happens with: dct:title must be a literal ? dct:subject must be an IRI ?
14:10:48 <TallTed> ... for SPARQL, we said "here are the operators and datatypes SPARQL handles" and defined what happens with those, and left other things to be implementation specific
14:11:25 <TallTed> ... delivers both "here's what you can count on" and extensibility
14:13:28 <Dimitris> how about a strawpoll with a) validate well-formed literals for all xsd datatypes b) do not check for ill-formed literals
14:14:14 <Dimitris> (when a sh:datatype constraint is defined)
14:15:22 <Dimitris> q+
14:16:51 <Arnaud> ack Dimitris
14:18:26 <kcoyle> What's an "ill-formed literal"?
14:18:44 <Dimitris> "c"^^xsd:integer
14:18:54 <Arnaud> STRAWPOLL: a) leave this undefined (quality of the implementation), b) require implementation to check well-formedness for built-in datatypes, c) add a new constraint to check well-formedness of literals
14:18:57 <kcoyle> thanks
14:19:55 <ericP> a:-.9 b:.5 c:0
14:20:00 <TallTed> a) -0.9 b) +0.5 c) +1
14:20:00 <kcoyle> a) -1 b) +1 c) 0
14:20:01 <Labra> a) -0.9 b) +1 c) 0
14:20:46 <Dimitris> a) -0 (should say something) b) +1 c) +1
14:22:08 <Dimitris> we should define build-in
14:24:41 <Dimitris> and we should specify we refer to sh:datatype only here (or not)
14:27:10 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#built-in-datatypes
14:28:04 <hknublau> Someone needs to come up with a formally acceptable proposal for the new definition of sh:datatype. Only then we can vote.
14:28:27 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-158, requiring implementations to check well-formedness for built-in datatypes covered in SPARQL 1.1 Query
14:28:42 <ericP> +1
14:28:45 <Labra> +1
14:28:47 <kcoyle> +1
14:29:23 <hknublau> ... for sh:datatype
14:29:44 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-158, requiring implementations to check well-formedness for built-in datatypes covered in SPARQL 1.1 Query for sh:datatype
14:29:47 <ericP> +1
14:30:14 <TallTed> +1   better than not at all
14:30:25 <Labra> +1
14:30:31 <Dimitris> +1 although it can get slow
14:30:34 <kcoyle> +1
14:30:46 <hknublau> 0
14:31:00 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-158, requiring implementations to check well-formedness for built-in datatypes covered in SPARQL 1.1 Query for sh:datatype
14:31:31 <Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting
14:31:31 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:31:31 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, AndyS, Dimitris, hknublau, kcoyle, ericP, TallTed, labra
14:31:39 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:31:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/10/26-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
14:31:40 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
14:31:40 <RRSAgent> I see no action items