13:00:34 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
13:00:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/02/15-shapes-irc
13:00:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
13:00:36 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
13:00:38 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
13:00:38 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
13:00:39 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
13:00:39 <trackbot> Date: 15 February 2017
13:03:39 <pano> pano has joined #shapes
13:04:26 <Nicky> Nicky has joined #shapes
13:06:35 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #shapes
13:09:09 <TallTed> present+
13:09:15 <hknublau> present+
13:09:22 <pano> present+
13:10:33 <Nicky> present +
13:10:52 <simonstey> present+
13:11:03 <simonstey> present+ Nicky
13:13:26 <TallTed> chair: TallTed
13:13:52 <pano> scribe: pano
13:14:06 <TallTed> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 08 Feb 2017 Telecon: https://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-minutes.html
13:14:27 <simonstey> +1
13:14:30 <Nicky> +1
13:14:31 <hknublau> +1
13:14:32 <pano> +1
13:15:05 <TallTed> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 08 Feb 2017 Telecon: https://www.w3.org/2017/02/08-shapes-minutes.html
13:15:21 <TallTed> next call: Wednesday 2017.02.22
13:15:42 <pano> Topic: Admin
13:15:55 <TallTed> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/raised
13:16:48 <TallTed> PROPOSED: Open all ISSUE-226, ISSUE-227, ISSUE-228, ISSUE-229, ISSUE-230, ISSUE-231
13:16:53 <hknublau> +1
13:16:55 <simonstey> +1
13:16:59 <pano> +1
13:17:05 <Nicky> +1
13:17:13 <TallTed> RESOLVED: Open all ISSUE-226, ISSUE-227, ISSUE-228, ISSUE-229, ISSUE-230, ISSUE-231
13:19:38 <TallTed> TOPIC: issueless rename of sh:xor
13:20:10 <simonstey> +q
13:20:10 <pano> Topic: wrong name xor
13:20:28 <pano> Simon: What was the problem with only one of?
13:20:41 <pano> TallTed: It is a very long label
13:21:50 <hknublau> sh:xone
13:22:07 <pano> ... I did some research and found a couple of terms: one and only one, exactly one, or shorter onee, oaoo
13:22:24 <hknublau> ack simonstey
13:24:40 <pano> Simon: A couple of meetings ago, Dean had explained the differences in interpratation of xor, which leads to discussion. I like holger's proposal. Im less in favor of abbreviations with double letters
13:25:54 <pano> ... I believe we discussed the response to expected comments to be that we would explain/clarify our interpretation of sh:xor
13:27:29 <pano> TallTed: In English exclusive or makes sense, but since we're dealing with stakeholders that intepret exclusive or differently it might be good to reconsider
13:28:02 <TallTed> PROPOSED: change sh:xor to sh:xone, pronounced "ex-one", meaning "exactly one"
13:28:10 <hknublau> +1
13:28:16 <Nicky> +1
13:28:43 <pano> +1
13:28:47 <TallTed> +1
13:28:50 <simonstey> +1
13:28:56 <TallTed> RESOLVED: change sh:xor to sh:xone, pronounced "ex-one", meaning "exactly one"
13:30:30 <TallTed> issue-230?
13:30:30 <trackbot> issue-230 -- Inconsistency in the use of $this and $PATH in sh:sparql vs constraint components -- open
13:30:30 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/230
13:30:36 <pano> Topic: ISSUE-230
13:31:35 <pano> hknublau: this was pointed out by Peter, and correctly so. I have already updated this in the document
13:33:59 <simonstey> sounds good to me
13:34:02 <simonstey> +q
13:34:19 <pano> ... since sparql based constraints are applicable to Property Shapes, this needs to be fixed as well by allowing the use of $PATH when sh:sparql is used in property shapes
13:35:04 <hknublau_> hknublau_ has joined #shapes
13:35:10 <hknublau_> My usual crash. Redialling in.
13:35:42 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #shapes
13:36:43 <pano> Simon: do we need to add some sort of disclaimer or note in the spec when we remove something from the language
13:37:05 <pano> TallTed: Any implementation of SHACL is at risk currently anyway
13:37:49 <pano> s/Simon:/simonstey:/
13:38:22 <hknublau_> PROPOSAL: Remove the special handling of the result variable ?focusNode in SPARQL constraints. $this will become the sh:focusNode.
13:38:35 <simonstey> +1
13:38:38 <TallTed> +1
13:38:41 <hknublau_> +1
13:38:43 <pano> +1
13:38:46 <Nicky> +1
13:39:19 <TallTed> RESOLVED: Remove the special handling of the result variable ?focusNode in SPARQL constraints. $this will become the sh:focusNode.
13:40:28 <hknublau_> PROPOSAL: Close ISSUE-230 by changing the binding of ?this from the value node to the focus node (section 5.3.1) and allowing the use of $PATH in SPARQL-based constraints.
13:40:37 <simonstey> +1
13:40:39 <hknublau_> +1
13:40:48 <TallTed> +1
13:40:50 <Nicky> +1
13:40:53 <pano> +1
13:40:59 <TallTed> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-230 by changing the binding of ?this from the value node to the focus node (section 5.3.1) and allowing the use of $PATH in SPARQL-based constraints.
13:41:23 <pano> Topic: ISSUE-231
13:42:21 <pano> hknublau: [explains ISSUE-231]
13:44:04 <pano> ... the constraint component is the owner of the validators
13:44:20 <hknublau_> PROPOSAL: Change the rule for sh:resultMessage in section 5.3.2 to fall back to sh:message at the constraint component if no other message has been found.
13:44:26 <hknublau_> +1
13:44:30 <TallTed> +1
13:44:39 <pano> +1
13:44:40 <Nicky> +1
13:45:09 <simonstey> +1
13:45:45 <pano> simonstey: shouldn't it be the other way around with the constraint component and the validator?
13:47:19 <pano> ... if we phrase it using overridden I would prefer that wording
13:49:26 <TallTed> PROPOSAL: in section 5.3.2, add sh:message to constraint component; that may be over-ridden by a more specific sh:resultMessage attached to a specific validator within that constraint component
13:49:45 <simonstey> +1
13:49:57 <TallTed> s/sh:resultMessage/sh:message/
13:50:07 <hknublau_> +1
13:50:11 <TallTed> +1
13:50:15 <pano> +1
13:50:20 <Nicky> +1
13:50:41 <TallTed> RESOLVED: CLOSE issue-231 by: in section 5.3.2, add sh:message to constraint component; that may be over-ridden by a more specific sh:resultMessage attached to a specific validator within that constraint component
13:51:45 <pano> Topic: ISSUE-227
13:53:40 <pano> hknublau: there seems to be good progress being made in the SPARQL group, but the point being made in comments is that the definition of EXISTS in SPARQL is broken, therefor SPARQL is broken, therefor we cannot make a spec that is built on SPARQL
13:54:58 <pano> TallTed: we already state somewhere that we acknowledge that SPARQL has issues.
13:55:20 <pano> ... and we can acknowledge that more clearly
13:56:57 <pano> ... this is a legitimate issue with SPARQL, and we can say that we can't solve this. We can acknowledge that this issue is there, and that one has to be aware of this.
13:59:02 <TallTed> PROPOSED: CLOSE issue-227 by adding wording to the effect of: As of this writing, SPARQL EXISTS is imperfectly defined, and implememtations vary; therefore use of EXISTS may have inconsistent results, and should be approached with care.
13:59:14 <simonstey> +1
13:59:17 <Nicky> +1
13:59:20 <hknublau_> +1
13:59:26 <pano> +1
13:59:28 <TallTed> +1
13:59:47 <TallTed> RESOLVED: CLOSE issue-227 by adding wording to the effect of: As of this writing, SPARQL EXISTS is imperfectly defined, and implememtations vary; therefore use of EXISTS may have inconsistent results, and should be approached with care.
14:00:19 <pano> Simon: could we add a link to the current efforts in the SPARQL CG?
14:00:34 <pano> s/Simon:/simonstey:/
14:02:14 <TallTed> action: simonstey to produce a JSON-LD @context draft
14:02:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Produce a json-ld @context draft [on Simon Steyskal - due 2017-02-22].
14:02:39 <pano> Topic: ISSUE-226
14:02:50 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #shapes
14:03:22 <pano> hknublau: this may help in the adoption, if we can make a readible JSON-LD template for shapes
14:05:07 <pano> s/readible/readable/
14:06:15 <TallTed> trackbot: end meeting
14:06:15 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:06:15 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been TallTed, hknublau, pano, simonstey, Nicky
14:06:23 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:06:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/15-shapes-minutes.html trackbot