14:25:07 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dawg
14:25:07 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc
14:25:23 <DanC> no problem, HiroyukiS. Nice to see you again;
14:27:19 <Zakim> SW_DAWG()10:30AM has now started
14:27:21 <Zakim> +??P20
14:27:25 <AndyS> zakim, ??P20 is AndyS
14:27:25 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
14:27:39 <kendall> kendall has joined #dawg
14:27:51 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum
14:27:53 <Zakim> -Lee_Feigenbaum
14:27:54 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum
14:28:04 <LeeF> zakim, Lee_Feigenbaum is LeeF
14:28:04 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
14:28:10 <Zakim> +??P22
14:28:23 <HiroyukiS> Zakim, ??P22 is HiroyukiS
14:28:23 <Zakim> +HiroyukiS; got it
14:28:26 <LeeF> zakim, mute me please
14:28:26 <Zakim> LeeF should now be muted
14:28:47 <Zakim> +??P24
14:29:12 <Zakim> +PatH
14:29:20 <Zakim> +DanC
14:29:24 <Zakim> +Leslie
14:29:28 <Zakim> +Kendall_Clark
14:29:35 <Zakim> -??P24
14:29:58 <JanneS> JanneS has joined #dawg
14:30:00 <kendall> he's e'steamed all the time! :>
14:30:02 <DanC> Zakim, take up item 1
14:30:02 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Convene, take roll, review records and agenda" taken up [from DanC]
14:30:09 <DanC> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005OctDec/att-0074/_ag18Oct.html
14:30:14 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:30:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, LeeF (muted), HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, Leslie, Kendall_Clark
14:30:34 <SteveH> hum Leslie might be me, any easy way to check?
14:30:36 <Zakim> +??P24
14:30:49 <DanC> Zakim, mute Leslie temporarily
14:30:49 <Zakim> Leslie should now be muted
14:30:50 <kendall> Leslie, a fine, if eccentric British name. :>
14:30:52 <JanneS> I have another call to make - I'll join you by phone in 5-10 mins.
14:31:02 <SteveH> Zakim, Leslie is SteveH
14:31:02 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
14:31:04 <Zakim> SteveH should now be unmuted again
14:31:13 <Zakim> +Bert
14:31:25 <JanneS> I promised two weeks ago I would scribe today - I can do so once I join in.
14:31:37 <ericP> zakim, Bert is really ericP
14:31:37 <Zakim> +ericP; got it
14:31:38 <Zakim> +Bijan_Parsia
14:31:50 <AndyS> Perfectly reasonable British name.  Esp N of the border.
14:31:56 <Yoshio> Yoshio has joined #dawg
14:32:07 <kendall> eccentric is always reasonable ;>
14:32:10 <jeen> zakim, P24 is jeen
14:32:10 <Zakim> sorry, jeen, I do not recognize a party named 'P24'
14:32:12 <AndyS> For both M and F.
14:32:14 <Zakim> +Yoshio
14:32:25 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: RDF Data Access 18 Oct. scribe: JanneS http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
14:32:30 <jeen> zakim, ??P24 is jeen
14:32:30 <Zakim> +jeen; got it
14:32:33 <ericP> JanneS, happy to let you scribe
14:32:45 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:32:45 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, LeeF (muted), HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, jeen, ericP, Bijan_Parsia, Yoshio
14:33:02 <ericP> Meeting: DAWG
14:33:09 <kendall> it's an ideological construct, of course. one i'm not responsible for. :>
14:33:09 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:33:10 <ericP> Chair: DanC
14:33:24 <DaveB> hi, that IPcaller is me
14:33:34 <ericP> Scribe: JanneS
14:33:59 <JanneS> Eric, please start without me - I'll join u in 5 mins
14:34:12 <ericP> JanneS, can yuo sribe next week?
14:34:22 <LeeF> I'll be right back on a different phone, this one is decidedly unhappy.
14:34:24 <JanneS> nope, I'll be in a plane
14:34:27 <DanC> ACTION: EricP to send [OK?] message to Bjoern [DONE]
14:34:28 <ericP> Scribe: EricP
14:34:41 <Zakim> -LeeF
14:34:41 <DanC> ACTION: EricP to respond to "ORDER with IRIs" comment [DONE]
14:34:41 <DaveB> Zakim, +[IPcaller] is DaveB
14:34:43 <Zakim> sorry, DaveB, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller]'
14:34:46 <Zakim> + +1.617.566.aaaa
14:34:52 <ericP> action -1
14:34:53 <LeeF> zakim, +1.617.566.aaaa is LeeF
14:34:53 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
14:34:56 <ericP> action -2
14:35:20 <EliasT> EliasT has joined #dawg
14:35:28 <DanC> agenda + SPARQL QL next publication
14:35:37 <DanC> agenda + SPARQL Results format comments
14:35:49 <Zakim> +Elias
14:36:04 <kendall> talk about unforeseen (-seeable?) spec interactions!
14:36:11 <EliasT> how do I tell Zakim that Elias is EliasT?
14:36:22 <EliasT> Zakim, Elias is EliasT
14:36:22 <Zakim> +EliasT; got it
14:36:24 <DanC> Zakim, next item
14:36:24 <Zakim> agendum 2. "toward Note on using SPARQL with WSDL 1.1" taken up [from DanC]
14:36:42 <ericP> ACTION: DaveB to to propose source test to approve [CONTINUED]
14:36:49 <kendall> who's the hands of stone typist? really loud.
14:36:52 <EliasT> Zakim, mute me
14:36:52 <Zakim> EliasT should now be muted
14:36:53 <ericP> ACTION: DanC to follow up re optional test based on op:dateTime triple [CONTINUED]
14:37:02 <ericP> ACTION: DanC to notify www-rdf-comments about difference between RDF URI refs and IRIs, e.g. spaces [CONTINUED]
14:37:25 <franconi> franconi has joined #dawg
14:37:35 <ericP> ACTION: Lee to elaborate on how to use this WSDL 1.1 stuff with tools [DONE]
14:37:39 <ericP> action -6
14:37:53 <franconi> Hi all, we can not participate on the phone today :-(
14:37:54 <kendall> yep
14:38:00 <ericP> ACTION: KC, EricP to review WSDL 1.1 sparql protocol publication candidate, once a candidate pointer is mailed to the WG [DONE]
14:38:05 <ericP> action -7
14:38:06 <DanC> hi, franconi 
14:38:14 <DanC> Zakim, next item
14:38:14 <Zakim> agendum 3. "protocol testing update" taken up [from DanC]
14:38:21 <EliasT> Zakim, unmute me
14:38:21 <Zakim> EliasT should no longer be muted
14:38:22 <kendall> re: SOTD being tricky for the Protocol WSDL 1.1 Note
14:38:36 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
14:38:37 <ericP> ACTION DanC: publish WSDL 1.1 sparql protocol note, contingent on thumbs-up from KC, EricP, Lee/Elias [CONTINUED]
14:38:43 <JanneS> Zakim, IPcaller.a is JanneS
14:38:43 <Zakim> +JanneS; got it
14:39:26 <EliasT> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005OctDec/0063.html
14:39:30 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:39:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, jeen, ericP, Bijan_Parsia, Yoshio, [IPcaller], LeeF, EliasT, JanneS
14:41:06 <AndyS> The page at DataAccess/proto-tests/ does not mention protocol
14:41:17 <ericP> ACTION: Jeen try to reproduces EliasT's protocol testing results
14:41:19 <patH> I have to drop out for about 4 minutes, will leave my phone muted.
14:41:26 <DanC> roger, patH
14:41:31 <JanneS> EricP, I'm ready to scribe now
14:41:37 <JanneS> ..if u want
14:42:32 <ericP> zakim, IPcaller is DaveB
14:42:32 <Zakim> +DaveB; got it
14:42:32 <AndyS> 01-Sep-2005 22:08
14:42:34 <JanneS> sign me up for scribing 2 weeks again - i'll by flying next week
14:42:58 <ericP> JanneS, roger that
14:43:34 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe
14:43:34 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose ericP
14:43:38 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe
14:43:38 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SteveH
14:43:47 <DanC> Zakim, pick a scribe
14:43:47 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Kendall_Clark
14:44:11 <EliasT> Makefile has been committed
14:44:17 <ericP> next meeting: 1 week hence, scribe: KendallC
14:44:30 <patH> back now.
14:47:05 <Zakim> -JanneS
14:47:26 <JanneS> uh, redialling
14:48:13 <Zakim> +??P3
14:48:21 <JanneS> Zakim, ??P3 is JanneS
14:48:21 <Zakim> +JanneS; got it
14:49:38 <DanC> agenda + note on querying lists
14:49:54 <DanC> Zakim, next item
14:49:54 <Zakim> agendum 4. "SPARQL Protocol and WSDL" taken up [from DanC]
14:52:10 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
14:52:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, jeen, ericP, Bijan_Parsia, Yoshio, DaveB, LeeF, EliasT, JanneS
14:52:36 <ericP> kendall, the WSDL WG resolution favors the current SPARQL WSDL plan
14:52:51 <ericP> DanC, does that mean our WSDL is ready?
14:52:53 <DanC> DanC: I've seen responses to our (DAWG's) last call comments on WSDL 2.0 to the effect that "yes, we'll make changes to accomodate your needs" and mail back from kendall saying "ok, we're happy"
14:53:00 <ericP> kendall, not quite
14:54:02 <ericP> Bijan, the WSD WG is working on the ability to POST a URL-encoded query to a bare UIR
14:54:14 <EliasT> Zakim, mute me
14:54:14 <Zakim> EliasT should now be muted
14:55:09 <DanC> # RE: limitations of {http output serialization} Jonathan Marsh (Thursday, 6 October)
14:55:09 <DanC>     * Re: limitations of {http output serialization} Kendall Clark (Monday, 17 October) 
14:55:13 <DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-desc-comments/2005Oct/thread.html
14:56:59 <ericP_> ericP_ has joined #dawg
14:57:11 <DanC> ACTION KendallC: propose revised WSDL descripton of SPARQL protocol w.r.t. [missed]
14:57:31 <DaveB> on ... fault serialization and output serialization (I heard)
14:59:27 <DanC> tx. daveb
14:59:43 <DanC> # RE: fault serialization Jonathan Marsh (Wednesday, 5 October)
14:59:43 <DanC>     * Re: fault serialization Kendall Clark (Monday, 17 October) 
15:00:51 <DanC> so my action continues...
15:00:55 <DanC> ACTION: DanC to notifty DAWG of WSDL response to our WSDL comments [PENDING]
15:01:59 <ericP> ericP has joined #dawg
15:02:14 <DanC> . ACTION: DanC to ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 1.1 and WSDL 2 SPARQL protocol stuff, once both are available
15:03:07 <DanC> DONE:  DanC to ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 2 SPARQL protocol stuff, once both are available
15:03:23 <DanC> ACTION: DanC to ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 1.1 protocol stuff, once it's are available [PENDING]
15:04:21 <AndyS> I noted <fault name="QueryRequestRefused" whttp:code="500"/> but 500 is server internal error.  http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/HTRESP.html
15:04:21 <DanC> Zakim, next item
15:04:21 <Zakim> agendum 5. "# issues#rdfSemantics" taken up [from DanC]
15:04:32 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:04:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, jeen, ericP, Bijan_Parsia, Yoshio, DaveB, LeeF, EliasT (muted), JanneS
15:04:39 <kendall> What's the point, Andy?
15:04:56 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#rdfSemantics
15:05:02 <kendall> 500 is the most general "request unprocessed because of server condition" code... Is there another you'd suggest?
15:05:16 <AndyS> 500 is not the right code (server error) 4xx are client errors
15:05:39 <kendall> but refusing to process a query isn't a client error
15:05:51 <SteveH> AndyS, Kendall and I discussed this on the list previously...
15:05:59 <kendall> yep
15:06:37 <AndyS> I still think it is wrong.  See earlier ref.
15:07:07 <kendall> Yes, I see that you think it's wrong. I still don't understand why you think it's wrong and what you would suggest using otherwise.
15:08:30 <kendall> Just read the spec:
15:08:38 <kendall> 10.5 Server Error 5xx
15:08:38 <kendall> Response status codes beginning with the digit "5" indicate cases in which the server is aware that it has erred or is incapable of performing the request. 
15:08:41 <AndyS> I have just said why.  Refused !=> server internal error.  See 400 : The request had bad syntax or was inherently impossible to be satisfied.
15:08:53 <kendall> That's not what the spec says, Andy.
15:09:09 <kendall> 500 says, explicitly, that the server is "incapable of performing hte request"
15:09:40 <kendall> 400 only says "by the server due to malformed syntax", which is not what QueryRequestRefused semantics are.
15:10:21 <kendall> 500 says "The server encountered an unexpected condition which prevented it from fulfilling the request.
15:10:21 <kendall> "
15:10:22 <EliasT> 400 The request had bad syntax or was inherently impossible to be satisfied.
15:10:52 <kendall> Well, that's not what my copy of HTTP 1.1 on the W3C site says, interestingly enough. :>
15:10:59 <kendall> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html
15:11:36 <EliasT> ahh different documents.
15:11:49 <LeeF> Let's split the difference and make it 450. ;-)
15:11:54 <kendall> heh
15:12:02 <kendall> i mean,  none of them is precisely right, clearly.
15:12:20 <EliasT>  Response status codes beginning with the digit "5" indicate cases in which the server is aware that it has erred or is incapable of performing the request.
15:13:03 <kendall> yep, as I quoted. :>
15:13:15 <EliasT> is the service incapable or just not willing?
15:13:16 <EliasT> :-)
15:13:48 <kendall> Well, yes, of course. There's a bit of semantic stretch in *any* of them. ;>
15:14:13 <kendall> 500 are not all server *errors* anyway!
15:14:25 <kendall> not available now, or not implemented are not errors
15:15:57 <EliasT> I guess it's more folk wisdom to not use 500 except for crashes.
15:16:15 <kendall> so i'd be fine with 501, then
15:16:26 <kendall> but i'm totally unconvinced that it should be a 4xx
15:16:43 <kendall> but i'm also unconvinced by mere appeals to folk wisdom
15:16:58 <EliasT> right. agree. nothing like a good spec to follow.
15:17:48 <AndyS> Folk wisdom matters here because app servers do it automatically :-)
15:18:28 <kendall> 4xx is the wrong status code group
15:18:38 <kendall> if someone wants to suggest 501 over 500, I think that's reasonable
15:18:52 <kendall> I don't care that much what app servers do. Which ones? Not the one I use.
15:18:58 <DaveB> checking the dawg charter http://www.w3.org/2003/12/swa/dawg-charter#rdfs-owl-queries it seems to hint that entailment could be in the service description or protocol
15:19:10 <ericP> PatH: we need to keep bNode rigidity orthogonal to entailment selection
15:19:17 <ericP> Bijan: [nods]
15:19:38 <bijan> bijan has joined #dawg
15:19:41 <AndyS>  "406 Not Acceptable"?
15:20:15 <ericP> DanC, editor comments?
15:20:32 <ericP> AndyS, I think redundancy optional will have hidden traps
15:21:17 <kendall> Nope, 406 is wrong too.
15:21:55 <DanC> Dave: I think the results format should reflect the entailment used, in the "parameterized entailment" case
15:22:19 <bijan> +1 to dave's comment
15:22:20 <kendall> 4xx is wrong: " The 4xx class of status code is intended for cases in which the client seems to have erred." There's no implication to that effect in QueryRequestRefused; in fact, I *think* it says otherwise explicitly.
15:22:21 <AndyS> We have the <link> as well for an open ended set of info
15:22:40 <bijan> I'm fine exploiting <link> for that
15:23:33 <DaveB> I'd probably suggest a separate <entailment> (handwave) term
15:23:42 <ericP> Bob _:a
15:23:45 <ericP> Bob _:b
15:24:34 <ericP> *
15:24:37 <DanC> EricP: I'd like to achieve a sort of minimalism where Bob/_:a and Bob/_:b would be reduced to Bob/_:a
15:24:53 <bijan> You can keep the results set with told redundancy, then minimize that result set to check for non-rigid simple entailment
15:25:01 <AndyS> Query: { ?Bob foaf:name "foo" }
15:25:51 <EliasT> EliasT has joined #dawg
15:25:55 <DanC> (I think we've gotten off track; we're not hearing the editors think about the spec impact of the 3 proposals; we're cooking up other proposals.)
15:26:25 <DanC> (but since "redundancy optional" is pretty fuzzy...)
15:28:26 <patH> Foaf is built with an implicit unique name assumption (quite common). So with Andy's query, distint bnode replies FOAF-entail two people.
15:28:37 <ericP> DanC: tests already follow redundancy optional. will require an identifier for redundant rows to test LC design
15:29:21 <patH> Even though that isnt a strictly correct RDF entailment, its not RDF-wrong. And a FOAF-savy querier to a FOAF-savvy source can communicarte usefully when 'redundancy' isnt removed.
15:30:26 <Zakim> -EliasT
15:30:33 <bijan> patH, but it seems like that should get a distinct uri indicating those assumptions
15:30:47 <bijan> I.e., it should exploit this extensibility point
15:30:53 <Zakim> +Enrico_Franconi
15:31:06 <ericP> [DanC and AndyS discuss { _:x bindsTo "X" ; bindsTo _:X } == { _:x bindsTo "X" } ?]
15:31:07 <DanC> . http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#rdfSemantics
15:31:27 <patH> Well, sure, Bijan, but we have to be careful not to build in redundancy-removal so as to rule this opiut. Also there is no 'name' for this.
15:31:39 <patH> opiut/out
15:32:27 <bijan> I agree about the building in redundacy-removal so as to preclude important options, natch :)
15:32:34 <bijan> And I agree that there is currently no name for it
15:32:57 <bijan> but I suggest that providing that name isn't our job, but hte foaf community's
15:33:10 <patH> Bijan, I think all I am saying is that the bnode-redundancy should be ortthogonal to entailment, whcih was laredy made.
15:33:16 <bijan> We support them by supporting and extensiviblity point
15:33:17 <bijan> yeah
15:33:19 <bijan> Which is cool
15:33:32 <bijan> I think that woudl be a great example to discuss in the spec
15:33:37 <bijan> To encourage peopel in that direction
15:33:40 <bijan> If we had a primer :)
15:33:57 <kendall> Do not stare at Happy Fun Ball.
15:34:19 <DanC> consider a 4th column... query parameterized
15:34:29 <DanC> DaveB: it seems similar to limit
15:35:19 <DanC> q+ to note "parameterized entialment" seems to interact with the bounds of the charter
15:35:42 <DanC> ack danc
15:35:42 <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to note "parameterized entialment" seems to interact with the bounds of the charter
15:36:01 <patH> Dan, I thikn point is not so much for us to do this, as to not put out a design that rules it out as a future.
15:37:00 <ericP> ooOOoo, a mime tree for entailment
15:37:47 <DanC> poll: (a) LC design / (b) redundancy optional / (c) parameterized entailment / (d) query parameter
15:38:32 <patH> (a), (c) as a second choice.
15:38:34 <DanC> pat, I'm trying to actually address this issue. I want to talk about designs that people are interested to actively support: write text, write code, teach people to use, etc. Anything else is not a good use of WG telcon time.
15:39:35 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:39:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, SteveH, Kendall_Clark, jeen, ericP, Bijan_Parsia, Yoshio, DaveB, LeeF, JanneS (muted), Enrico_Franconi
15:39:44 <AndyS> AndyS a +0.5  b -1   c +1  d -1
15:40:25 <DanC> HS: pref a, ok c
15:40:39 <DanC> PH: a +0.5  b -1   c +1  d -1
15:40:58 <DanC> DanC: (c)
15:41:18 <kendall> KC: Strongly dislike A & B; prefer C to D.
15:41:20 <DanC> Steve: c/d... can see lots of sides
15:41:55 <DanC> DanC: (b), rather
15:42:32 <DanC> Jeen: c, maybe b
15:42:45 <DanC> EricP: (a)
15:43:11 <jeen> (I am neutral on option a and strongly dislike d)
15:43:38 <bijan> Bijan: a -2, b -2, C +1, D +1(with some confusion), C&D +maybe
15:44:09 <Yoshio> Yoshio prefers (c). It's all up to the service policy, and that should be clearly stated in the service description. Against (d), it will put too much burden to small servers if it should be responsible for doing what is required
15:44:53 <DanC> DaveB: +c, -.5 d, unsure about b
15:44:53 <JanneS> Zakim, unmute JanneS
15:44:53 <Zakim> JanneS should no longer be muted
15:45:03 <DaveB> DanC captured it ok
15:45:15 <DanC> Lee: like c, dunno d, don't like b
15:45:43 <DanC> JanneS: c appeals, as does d; I'm OK with a
15:45:43 <JanneS> c, a, -b, -d
15:45:52 <DanC> s/as does d//
15:45:57 <franconi> Enrico: a -2, b -2, C +1, D +? (I don't get it fully yet)
15:46:48 <kendall> i'm going to choose random numbers between 0 and 1
15:46:56 <patH> my c vote is assuming we get the bnoide issue right.
15:47:20 <JanneS> I'm off to babysitting again.. bye
15:47:31 <Zakim> -JanneS
15:49:52 <SteveH> DanC, he didn't +0.5 AFAICT
15:52:28 <ericP> patH, I think a lot of what we've been debating is how complicated the query treatment can be
15:52:31 <ericP> ... graph
15:52:37 <ericP> ... entailment node
15:52:44 <ericP> ... rigid bNodes
15:53:37 <ericP> ... can we embed all that in the choice of graph? Bijan opposes this.
15:54:14 <ericP> DanC, we've invested 18 months in putting these in a single graph name
15:55:01 <patH> Wel, seems to me that most of what we have done works quite well if we allow these to be identified separately, which is why I voted for c.
15:55:30 <DanC> s/DanC, we've/DanC: we've/
15:58:01 <ericP> i think both C and D will come from the client
15:58:42 <ericP> Bijan: I'm more concearned with extensibility than with nailing down the current standards
15:58:50 <patH> +1
15:59:05 <ericP> ... we need to identify RDF semantics, and RDFS doesn't seem tough
15:59:47 <ericP> PathH: FOAF use Unique Name Assumption
16:00:37 <DanC> ACTION Bijan: work with Pat to come up with a proposal re rdfSemantics. ETA 2 weeks.
16:00:52 <DaveB> bye all
16:00:53 <AndyS> Thanks for the offer Bijan and Pat
16:00:55 <Zakim> -DaveB
16:01:03 <SteveH> bye
16:01:22 <Zakim> -SteveH
16:01:23 <Zakim> -PatH
16:01:24 <Zakim> -DanC
16:01:25 <Zakim> -Bijan_Parsia
16:01:27 <Zakim> -Kendall_Clark
16:01:28 <Zakim> -jeen
16:01:30 <Zakim> -Enrico_Franconi
16:01:31 <Zakim> -Yoshio
16:01:33 <Zakim> -HiroyukiS
16:01:35 <Zakim> -ericP
16:01:41 <DanC> ericp, I don't think Pat said FOAF. If he did, he misunderstood.
16:01:43 <Zakim> -LeeF
16:01:55 <Zakim> -AndyS
16:01:56 <Zakim> SW_DAWG()10:30AM has ended
16:01:57 <Zakim> Attendees were AndyS, LeeF, HiroyukiS, PatH, DanC, Kendall_Clark, SteveH, ericP, Bijan_Parsia, Yoshio, jeen, EliasT, JanneS, DaveB, Enrico_Franconi
16:02:01 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: RDF Data Access 18 Oct. scribe: EricP http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
16:02:08 <ericP> DanC, I'm pretty sure he pronounced it Fo-af
16:02:22 <ericP> he also pointed out earlier that FOAF uses UNA
16:02:43 <ericP> .9 confidence in my attribution
16:02:53 <DanC> yeah, I parsed it as "FOAF" at first, but FOAF really doesn't have UNA, so I concluded that what he said was KOAN or some such
16:03:15 <DanC> maybe he really meant "FOAF has UNA". He's wrong, in that case.
16:03:41 <ericP> it was the example that came up when i was proposing minimal entailed results
16:03:42 <bijan> He meant that FOAF has a kinda UNA wrt certain bnodes
16:03:53 <bijan> In a lot of practice
16:04:00 <bijan> I don't know I agree, but I can see similar cases
16:04:05 <DanC> hm
16:04:19 <ericP> it came up in the context of a non-comprehensive query
16:04:32 <ericP> i.e., distinguishing atrributes were not selected
16:04:57 <ericP> only the name ("Bob") was selected, iirc
16:05:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-minutes.html ericP
16:05:23 <ericP> good bot
16:06:20 <Yoshio> Yoshio has left #dawg
16:12:14 <patH> I did mean FOAF, and OK, its more complicated. Its not strictly UNA, but it has sme of that quality. The OntoWorks reasoner does this too. It uses UNA as a default, unless it knows a=b. 
16:12:26 <DanC> ok.
16:13:14 <patH> BUt the point is, there are cases where its useful for a query to want to know about "redundant' bnodes, becuase they might not be redundant in some grander scheme of things (which is not itself rulked out by RDF semantics.)
16:14:00 <bijan> patH, I (with enrico) will start our action by applying, in some way, this: http://www.inf.unibz.it/~tessaris/stuff/sparqlcomments.html
16:14:03 <bijan> Those recommendations
16:15:25 <patH> OK. For the record, I (still) don't follow the point in Bnodes(a) about why the suggested alterntaive doenst work. 
16:16:18 <patH> Also, in Bnodes(b), the words "we should prevent this" loom large in my defend-the-spec meter. 
16:16:52 <patH> BUt lets take this discussion to email, OK?
16:18:01 <bijan> Yeah
16:18:10 <bijan> It's just a starting place
16:18:24 <patH> OK, just telling you where it hurts.
16:19:49 <bijan> Cool
16:33:40 <DanC> regrets+ josD
16:46:12 <DaveB> DaveB has joined #dawg
17:33:28 <bijan> bijan has left #dawg
17:56:26 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dawg
18:06:59 <patH> patH has left #dawg
18:37:53 <DanC> RRSAgent, make logs world-access
18:38:04 <DanC> RRSAgent, bye
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> I see 9 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-actions.rdf :
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: DaveB to to propose source test to approve [CONTINUED] [3]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T14-36-42
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: DanC to follow up re optional test based on op:dateTime triple [CONTINUED] [4]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T14-36-53
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: DanC to notify www-rdf-comments about difference between RDF URI refs and IRIs, e.g. spaces [CONTINUED] [5]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T14-37-02
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: DanC to publish WSDL 1.1 sparql protocol note, contingent on thumbs-up from KC, EricP, Lee/Elias [CONTINUED] [8]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T14-38-37
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Jeen try to reproduces EliasT's protocol testing results [9]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T14-41-17
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: KendallC to propose revised WSDL descripton of SPARQL protocol w.r.t. [missed] [10]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T14-57-11
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: DanC to notifty DAWG of WSDL response to our WSDL comments [PENDING] [11]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T15-00-55
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: DanC to ask WSDL WG to review WSDL 1.1 protocol stuff, once it's are available [PENDING] [12]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T15-03-23
18:38:04 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Bijan to work with Pat to come up with a proposal re rdfSemantics. ETA 2 weeks. [13]
18:38:04 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/10/18-dawg-irc#T16-00-37