13:00:58 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
13:00:58 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-irc
13:01:00 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
13:01:00 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
13:01:02 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
13:01:02 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
13:01:03 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
13:01:03 <trackbot> Date: 08 February 2017
13:01:10 <hknublau> present+
13:01:34 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #shapes
13:01:41 <Nicky> present+
13:02:12 <ipolikoff> ipolikoff has joined #shapes
13:02:57 <simonstey> present+
13:03:42 <TallTed> present+
13:03:51 <ipolikoff> present+
13:09:34 <simonstey> scribe: simonstey
13:09:42 <TallTed> chair: TallTed
13:09:49 <simonstey> Topic: approval of last week's minutes
13:09:50 <TallTed> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 01 Feb 2017 Telecon: https://www.w3.org/2017/02/01-shapes-minutes.html
13:10:00 <hknublau> +1
13:10:03 <Nicky> +1
13:10:06 <ipolikoff> +1
13:10:13 <TallTed> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 01 Feb 2017 Telecon: https://www.w3.org/2017/02/01-shapes-minutes.html
13:11:00 <simonstey> hknublau: we have a new member on the call
13:11:29 <simonstey> tim: Tim Smith, working on semantics since the late 90s
13:12:02 <simonstey> ... I've seen many many use cases that could benefit from the results of this wg
13:14:47 <simonstey> TallTed: I don't see your organization listed as w3c member yet
13:15:00 <simonstey> tim: our membership was approved on feb. 2nd
13:16:15 <tsmith6> tsmith6 has joined #shapes
13:16:26 <TallTed> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/How_to_Join
13:18:58 <simonstey> TallTed: a few new issues have been raised
13:18:59 <TallTed> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/raised
13:19:16 <simonstey> issue-223
13:19:16 <trackbot> issue-223 -- Should we disallow shapes with mismatching type -- raised
13:19:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/223
13:19:21 <simonstey> issue-224
13:19:21 <trackbot> issue-224 -- Can we improve the language around the use of rdf:types for shapes -- raised
13:19:21 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/224
13:19:26 <simonstey> issue-225
13:19:26 <trackbot> issue-225 -- Respond to "Validation results and reports" -- raised
13:19:26 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/225
13:19:57 <TallTed> PROPOSED: OPEN issues issue-223, issue-224, issue-225
13:20:01 <hknublau> +1
13:20:06 <ipolikoff> +1
13:20:11 <simonstey> +1
13:20:13 <tsmith6> +1
13:20:15 <Nicky> +1
13:20:29 <TallTed> +1
13:20:29 <TallTed> RESOLVED: OPEN issues issue-223, issue-224, issue-225
13:21:05 <simonstey> topic: discussing responses to public comments
13:21:58 <simonstey> hknublau: I opened issues for some of the more substantial comments
13:22:29 <simonstey> TOPIC: issue-223
13:23:42 <ipolikoff> q+
13:24:18 <simonstey> hknublau: in the example stated in the issue, a nodeshape defines a sh:path -> is also a propertyshape
13:25:07 <simonstey> ... currently that's allowed, but might be confusing for others
13:25:35 <hknublau> ack ipolikoff
13:26:05 <simonstey> ipolikoff: I think, currently the spec disallows a construct like that
13:26:16 <simonstey> ... but not clear enough
13:27:46 <hknublau> simonstey: (Summary of the email that I sent today)
13:28:10 <ipolikoff> wasn't that about issue-139?
13:29:54 <TallTed> issue-139?
13:29:54 <trackbot> issue-139 -- Can all constraint properties be applied in all scenarios? -- closed
13:29:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/139
13:31:41 <TallTed> PROPOSED: CLOSE issue-223 by adding two syntax rules: a) SHACL instances of sh:NodeShape cannot have values for sh:path; b) SHACL instances of sh:PropertyShape must have a value for sh:path
13:31:55 <hknublau> +1
13:31:56 <simonstey> hknublau: we could provide shapes to verify our syntax rules.. but that's a huge undertaking we don't really have time for
13:32:08 <ipolikoff> +1
13:32:09 <simonstey> +1
13:32:13 <TallTed> +1
13:32:26 <tsmith6> +1
13:32:26 <Nicky> +1
13:32:40 <TallTed> RESOLVED: CLOSE issue-223 by adding two syntax rules: a) SHACL instances of sh:NodeShape cannot have values for sh:path; b) SHACL instances of sh:PropertyShape must have a value for sh:path
13:33:05 <simonstey> hknublau: unfortunately, there are a lot of rules that are very hard to actually check
13:33:30 <simonstey> ... but most of them are easy to check
13:33:38 <simonstey> topic: issue-224
13:33:54 <TallTed> issue-224?
13:33:54 <trackbot> issue-224 -- Can we improve the language around the use of rdf:types for shapes -- open
13:33:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/224
13:33:56 <simonstey> hknublau: that issue is also about the relation between node-/propertyshapes
13:34:42 <simonstey> ipolikoff: two people said that the current language is weird
13:35:02 <simonstey> ... because you can have type declarations for node/propertyshapes
13:35:27 <simonstey> ... but they aren't used for determining the actual type
13:35:56 <simonstey> ... proposal would be to RECOMMEND the use of type declarations
13:37:51 <simonstey> TallTed: when the type statement isn't the declaration.. what is?
13:42:03 <simonstey> hknublau: I think it would be sufficient to adapt SHOULD for half of the examples
13:42:46 <simonstey> TallTed: but that raises the question of how you select those
13:44:21 <hknublau_> hknublau_ has joined #shapes
13:46:46 <simonstey> simonstey: I propose to remove "However, the presence of any rdf:type triple does not determine whether a node is treated as a node shape or not. "
13:46:56 <TallTed> PROPOSED: CLOSE issue-224 by deleting two instances of "However, the presence of any rdf:type triple does not determine whether a node is treated as a node shape or not."; making SHOULD uppercase in the sh:NodeShape and sh:PropertyShape definition; and by adding rdf:type statements to most if not all examples
13:47:51 <simonstey> ... not sure if we should also change should to SHOULD
13:49:01 <simonstey> TallTed: the difference is whether its defining behaviour or syntax
13:49:38 <simonstey>    The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL       NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and       "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in       RFC 2119.
13:49:46 <simonstey> https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt
13:50:35 <TallTed> PROPOSED: CLOSE issue-224 by deleting two instances of "However, the presence of any rdf:type triple does not determine whether a node is treated as a node shape or not."; changing "should" to "is recommended, but not required," in the sh:NodeShape and sh:PropertyShape definitions; and by adding rdf:type statements to most if not all examples
13:50:49 <simonstey> +1
13:50:51 <hknublau_> +1
13:51:05 <ipolikoff> +1
13:51:09 <TallTed> +1
13:51:09 <tsmith6> +1
13:51:34 <Nicky> +1
13:51:39 <TallTed> RESOLVED: CLOSE issue-224 by deleting two instances of "However, the presence of any rdf:type triple does not determine whether a node is treated as a node shape or not."; changing "should" to "is recommended, but not required," in the sh:NodeShape and sh:PropertyShape definitions; and by adding rdf:type statements to most if not all examples
13:52:29 <simonstey> TallTed: soo.. we have a question on prebinding and one on validation reports
13:53:15 <TallTed> issue;225?
13:53:17 <simonstey> hknublau_: andy & peter are still discussing the prebinding issue.. so better start with the validation reports first
13:53:19 <simonstey> issue-225
13:53:19 <trackbot> issue-225 -- Respond to "Validation results and reports" -- open
13:53:19 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/225
13:53:25 <ipolikoff> q+
13:53:49 <simonstey> ack ipolikoff
13:55:36 <simonstey> ipolikoff: [giving some background info on the nature of the issue]
13:56:05 <simonstey> +q
13:56:33 <ipolikoff> for example, Each results structure in results(f,V,D,c,s,S) where c has type sh:ClassConstraintComponent and parameter values <sh:class,c> contains a different top-level validation result from f,v,D,c,s,S for each v in V that is not a SHACL instance of c in D and no other top-level validation results.
13:57:25 <simonstey> hknublau_: peter mentions 3 parts explicitely
13:58:11 <simonstey> ... we could address 2) fairly easily by putting some boilerplate text in the spec
13:59:22 <simonstey> TallTed: the cleanest way to address the comments would be to raise an issue for all concret ones
14:00:43 <simonstey> -q
14:01:21 <simonstey> ... let's discuss/address/resolve those issues next week
14:02:21 <simonstey> ipolikoff: there was also a comment on whether "shapes graph" is defined too narrowly
14:04:45 <TallTed> issue-139?
14:04:45 <trackbot> issue-139 -- Can all constraint properties be applied in all scenarios? -- closed
14:04:45 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/139
14:04:56 <simonstey> TallTed: if this issue was somehow already discussed before, then we should use the results of that discussion as response
14:05:05 <simonstey> TOPIC: issue-139
14:05:45 <simonstey> hknublau_: this issue was discussed for ~1 month.. i.e. whether every constraint component  could be used anywhere
14:06:07 <simonstey> ... it helped to unify definitions
14:06:55 <simonstey> ... I don't think we should have to write testcases and/or spend too much time on that
14:07:06 <TallTed> holger's mail -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2017Feb/0012.html
14:07:10 <tsmith6> q+
14:07:18 <simonstey> ... I've provided a list of constraint components that can't be used with nodeshapes
14:07:25 <simonstey> ack tsmith6
14:07:28 <TallTed> ack tsmith6
14:07:33 <simonstey> ack tsmith
14:08:19 <simonstey> tsmith6: as a relative novice reading through the spec, I was very confused about the possibility of defining e.g. mincount for nodeshapes
14:08:40 <simonstey> ... and was wondering when this would actually make sense
14:12:09 <TallTed> PROPOSED: reopen ISSUE-139, motivated by surrounding changes in SHACL spec
14:12:14 <hknublau_> +1
14:12:31 <simonstey> +1
14:12:33 <tsmith6> +1
14:12:33 <TallTed> +1
14:12:57 <Nicky> +1
14:12:59 <TallTed> RESOLVED: reopen ISSUE-139, motivated by surrounding changes in SHACL spec
14:13:41 <TallTed> PROPOSED: CLOSE ISSUE-139 by declaring that NodeShapes are ill-formed if they use any of the properties listed in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2017Feb/0012.html
14:13:55 <hknublau_> +1
14:13:59 <ipolikoff> +1
14:14:04 <tsmith6> +1
14:14:04 <TallTed> +1
14:14:05 <simonstey> +1
14:14:22 <TallTed> RESOLVED: CLOSE ISSUE-139 by declaring that NodeShapes are ill-formed if they use any of the properties listed in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2017Feb/0012.html
14:17:35 <TallTed> trackbot, close meeting
14:17:35 <trackbot> Sorry, TallTed, I don't understand 'trackbot, close meeting'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
14:17:40 <simonstey> TallTed: I encourage everyone to reread the spec
14:17:41 <TallTed> trackbot, end meeting
14:17:41 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:17:41 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been hknublau, Nicky, simonstey, TallTed, ipolikoff
14:17:49 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:17:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
14:17:50 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
14:17:50 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
14:18:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
14:18:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-irc
14:18:30 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:19:04 <TallTed> trackbot, start meeting
14:19:07 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
14:19:10 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
14:19:10 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
14:19:10 <trackbot> Date: 08 February 2017
14:19:10 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
14:19:27 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:19:45 <simonstey> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:19:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-minutes.html simonstey
14:20:11 <TallTed> RRSAgent, make minutes public
14:20:11 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', TallTed.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
14:20:29 <TallTed> trackbot, end meeting
14:20:29 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:20:29 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been hknublau, Nicky, simonstey, TallTed, ipolikoff
14:20:37 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:20:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
14:20:38 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
14:20:38 <RRSAgent> I see no action items