IRC log of sparql on 2009-04-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:55:50 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #sparql

13:55:50 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-sparql-irc

13:55:52 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

13:55:52 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #sparql

13:55:54 [kjetil]

I've told the secretary to check the Bristol Hotel and book me there, and then a lift up to HP would be nice :-)

13:55:54 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be 77277

13:55:54 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes

13:55:55 [trackbot]

Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference

13:55:56 [trackbot]

Date: 21 April 2009

13:56:03 [LeeF]

s/Date:/ Date:

13:56:06 [LeeF]

Chair: AxelPolleres

13:56:09 [LeeF]

Scribe: LeeF

13:56:11 [LukeWM]

LukeWM has joined #sparql

13:56:11 [LeeF]

Scribenick: LeeF

13:56:22 [Zakim]

SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started

13:56:26 [LeeF]

Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-04-21

13:56:28 [Zakim]

+john-l

13:56:36 [SteveH_]

SteveH_ has joined #sparql

13:56:40 [LeeF]

Regrets: Chimezie, Bijan

13:56:50 [Zakim]

+??P3

13:56:58 [SteveH_]

Zakim, ??P3 is [Garlik]

13:56:58 [Zakim]

+[Garlik]; got it

13:57:07 [SteveH_]

Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

13:57:07 [Zakim]

+SteveH, LukeWM; got it

13:57:12 [Zakim]

+ +34.91.664.aaaa

13:57:39 [SteveH_]

Zakim, who's on the phone?

13:57:39 [Zakim]

On the phone I see john-l, [Garlik], +34.91.664.aaaa

13:57:41 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

13:57:46 [Zakim]

+??P9

13:57:54 [AndyS]

zakim, ??P9 is me

13:57:54 [Zakim]

+AndyS; got it

13:58:11 [kasei]

Zakim just hung up on me :(

13:58:12 [AndyS]

Maybe. zakim did not speak the full messages

13:58:28 [AndyS]

zakim, please mute me

13:58:28 [Zakim]

AndyS should now be muted

13:58:39 [AndyS]

zakim, please unmute me

13:58:39 [Zakim]

AndyS should no longer be muted

13:59:07 [AxelPolleres]

Zakim, who is on the phone?

13:59:07 [Zakim]

On the phone I see john-l, [Garlik], AxelPolleres, AndyS

13:59:08 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

13:59:11 [Zakim]

+ +1.937.775.aabb

13:59:12 [Zakim]

+kasei

13:59:12 [Zakim]

+Lee_Feigenbaum

13:59:21 [kasei]

Zakim, mute me

13:59:22 [Zakim]

kasei should now be muted

13:59:26 [SimonS]

SimonS has joined #sparql

13:59:53 [SimonS]

four

13:59:58 [LeeF]

zakim, aabb is Prateek

13:59:58 [Zakim]

+Prateek; got it

14:00:09 [PrateekJain-WSU]

Hi This is Prateek Jain,937 775 4638

14:00:11 [JanneS]

JanneS has joined #sparql

14:00:27 [LeeF]

zakim, Prateek is PrateekJain-WSU

14:00:27 [Zakim]

+PrateekJain-WSU; got it

14:00:45 [Zakim]

+??P19

14:00:52 [kjetil]

Zakim, ??P19 is me

14:00:52 [Zakim]

+kjetil; got it

14:00:54 [LeeF]

zakim, mute me please

14:00:54 [Zakim]

Lee_Feigenbaum should now be muted

14:00:58 [AxelPolleres]

Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:00:58 [Zakim]

On the phone I see john-l, [Garlik], AxelPolleres, AndyS, PrateekJain-WSU, kasei (muted), Lee_Feigenbaum (muted), kjetil

14:00:59 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

14:01:00 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

14:01:00 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

14:01:07 [Zakim]

+JanneS

14:01:09 [Zakim]

+SimonS

14:02:17 [AxelPolleres]

Zakim, who is on the phone?

14:02:17 [Zakim]

On the phone I see john-l, [Garlik], AxelPolleres, AndyS, PrateekJain-WSU, kasei (muted), LeeF (muted), kjetil (muted), JanneS, SimonS

14:02:19 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

14:02:46 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: plan today is to get through the rest of the features from the wiki and go over Web survey

14:03:05 [LeeF]

... survey will be open for 1.5 weeks or so, to give us an idea of where to go from the F2F topic on

14:03:10 [LeeF]

topic: Admin

14:03:23 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14

14:03:29 [LeeF]

RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-14

14:03:52 [LeeF]

next meeting: one week from today, 28 Apr, will talk about F2F details

14:04:03 [LeeF]

scribe for next meeting: Ivan M

14:04:29 [LeeF]

topic: Liaisons:

14:04:37 [ywang4]

ywang4 has joined #sparql

14:04:41 [LeeF]

s/Liaisons:/Liaisons

14:04:55 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: rdf:text is basically finished, not sure when it will go to Last Call

14:05:07 [AxelPolleres]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec

14:05:09 [LeeF]

... if we want to review it, it would be great

14:05:13 [AndyS]

I volunteer (not exclusively)

14:05:34 [SteveH_]

tentative volunteer, but I can't promise

14:05:38 [LeeF]

ACTION: AndyS to review rdf:text

14:05:39 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-8 - Review rdf:text [on Andy Seaborne - due 2009-04-28].

14:05:44 [LeeF]

ACTION: SteveH to try to review rdf:text

14:05:44 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-9 - Try to review rdf:text [on Steve Harris - due 2009-04-28].

14:05:57 [LeeF]

AndyS: there will be substantive issues based on what I've seen

14:06:29 [Zakim]

+ +656304aacc

14:06:44 [LeeF]

zakim, aacc is ywang4

14:06:44 [Zakim]

+ywang4; got it

14:06:45 [AlexPassant]

AlexPassant has joined #sparql

14:07:14 [Zakim]

+??P39

14:07:15 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: RIF WG had F2F in Cambridge last week

14:07:25 [LeeF]

... plan is to go to LC by end of May

14:07:25 [AlexPassant]

Zakim, ??P39 is me

14:07:25 [Zakim]

+AlexPassant; got it

14:07:35 [LeeF]

... will appreciate SPARQL WG reviews then

14:07:43 [ericP]

Zakim, please dial ericP-office

14:07:43 [Zakim]

ok, ericP; the call is being made

14:07:45 [Zakim]

+EricP

14:07:55 [LeeF]

q+ to ask about 90 min. teleconference?

14:08:43 [LeeF]

ericP: HCLS group is doing stuff with federated queries

14:10:37 [kjetil]

ack LeeF

14:10:37 [Zakim]

LeeF, you wanted to ask about 90 min. teleconference?

14:10:50 [JanneS]

I'll drop out after 60, sorry

14:12:04 [LeeF]

topic: introduction, Prateek

14:12:15 [LeeF]

PrateekJain-WSU: PhD student at Wright State work wtih Amit Sheth

14:12:23 [LeeF]

... research is in the area of query rewriting with emphasis on SPARQL

14:12:35 [LeeF]

... trying to exploit semantic relationships within a knowledge base to automatically rewrite SPARQL

14:13:13 [LeeF]

... interested in rdf serialization of queries and path queries

14:13:44 [LeeF]

topic: feature survey

14:13:53 [AxelPolleres]

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/

14:14:04 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: Each organization can fill out the survey once

14:14:26 [LeeF]

...we will probably have around 8 features which we will aim for in the working group

14:14:41 [LeeF]

...the survey lists 31 features that survived the "interested for anyone" criteria

14:15:08 [LeeF]

...format of the survey was limited by what the WBS survey gave us

14:15:44 [LeeF]

...options for each feature are ranks 1 - 31 and "don't mind" and "don't want"

14:15:58 [LeeF]

...do not rank all features

14:16:06 [LeeF]

...rank up to the first 8 of your choices

14:16:13 [AndyS]

q+

14:16:19 [LeeF]

ack AndyS

14:16:39 [SteveH_]

q+

14:16:55 [LeeF]

AndyS: are you going to enforce the limit?

14:17:07 [AndyS]

ack AndyS

14:17:14 [kjetil]

q+

14:17:24 [LeeF]

LeeF: we will ask anyone who ranks more than 8 to adjust their choices to only rank 8

14:17:34 [LeeF]

ack SteveH_

14:18:20 [LeeF]

SteveH_: Don't agree with only ranking 8 - if my top 4 don't get done, i don't get to express an opinion about the bottom half of things

14:18:38 [LeeF]

q+

14:18:52 [LeeF]

q+ to say that i'd be happy with ranking more than 8, just not all 31

14:21:01 [kjetil]

q+ to ask if the rank algorithm can't account for people ranking all

14:21:20 [kjetil]

ack me

14:21:21 [LeeF]

SteveH_: voting shouldn't have any different weight just because you rank 4 vs. ranking 30

14:21:22 [Zakim]

kjetil, you wanted to ask if the rank algorithm can't account for people ranking all

14:21:23 [Zakim]

+dnewman2

14:21:26 [LeeF]

q-

14:21:46 [LeeF]

kjetil: if we use ranking algorithm, people can rank as many as they which

14:22:12 [dnewman2]

dnewman2 has joined #sparql

14:23:24 [AndyS]

q+

14:24:32 [john-l]

I prefer using a ranking algorithm.

14:25:21 [LeeF]

LeeF; I was concerned that organizations interested in 25 features should not be able to cast 'more' votes and influence things more than someone who casts less

14:25:29 [LeeF]

AndyS: Concerned that everyone be playing by the same rules

14:25:48 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: i think if we use a threshold like 12 or so we can compromise

14:25:52 [SteveH_]

LeeF, things like Condorcet don't give any advantage to ballot stuffers

14:27:11 [kjetil]

Here's a site we can use for the final ballot: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/civs.html

14:27:25 [john-l]

I propose that we have every organization rank ALL of the features, and then use a Condorcet system to eliminate all but 8-12 winners.

14:27:35 [SteveH_]

or, alternative: http://plugin.org.uk/rdf/condorcet/

14:28:36 [LeeF]

I'm not comfortable at all with approving a specific ranking to drive things forwards

14:28:44 [LeeF]

s/I'm not/LeeF: I'm not/

14:29:10 [SteveH_]

we don't need the threashold

14:29:21 [LeeF]

q?

14:29:29 [AndyS]

ack me

14:29:56 [LeeF]

SteveH_: with condorcet you're only voting against yourself

14:30:25 [LeeF]

... rank the features you want in the order you'd like them and then we can analyze the data

14:30:48 [kasei]

hearing lots of interference on kjetil(?)

14:31:29 [SteveH_]

for ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_Method

14:32:15 [ericP]

no tactical voting? i quit!

14:32:30 [LeeF]

SteveH_: with Condorcet there's no advantage at all to ranking fewer or more choices, nor to ranking two things the same

14:32:43 [LeeF]

kjetil: it's just about the relative preference

14:34:45 [LeeF]

LeeF: it's important to me that "all 1 votes" doesn't mean "everything is super important!" but instead "i don't care which of these we do, they're all equally important" - it sounds like people are on the same page about that

14:35:02 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: suggested deadline for filling out the survey is May 1

14:35:11 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

14:35:11 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

14:35:18 [JanneS]

the vote page has April-28 set as the deadline

14:35:27 [ericP]

i would like to propose a new voting scheme

14:35:32 [ericP]

it uses parameterized owl entailment

14:35:49 [LeeF]

LeeF: encourages everyone to fill out the survey as soon as you feel ready to

14:36:22 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/SPARQLX

14:37:48 [AxelPolleres]

strawman from bijan: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009AprJun/0089.html

14:38:14 [ericP]

q+ to say i've had people use an XML expression of queries

14:38:15 [AndyS]

That is SPARQL algebra in XML , not SPARQL AST

14:38:38 [LeeF]

ericP: i've had people use XML version of queries for debugging in conjuncgtion with XSLT, can see some use of it

14:39:20 [LeeF]

AndyS: abstract syntax need to be formally addressed if we do pragmas

14:39:24 [JanneS]

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Pragmas

14:40:28 [LeeF]

AndyS: TopQuadrant uses an RDF serialization to store queries

14:40:46 [ericP]

+1 to two

14:41:01 [SimonS]

+1 on two

14:41:14 [ericP]

i'm 0 on XML and -1 on RDF ('cause it's so concentious)

14:41:15 [AndyS]

My requirement is to get the abstraction right and do XML, JSON, another

14:42:09 [SimonS]

+q

14:42:17 [LeeF]

ack ericP

14:42:17 [Zakim]

ericP, you wanted to say i've had people use an XML expression of queries

14:42:30 [LeeF]

ack SimonS

14:42:39 [LeeF]

Prateek: we are looking at SPIN for some of our work

14:42:44 [ericP]

q+ to warn of contentious issues

14:42:55 [LeeF]

SimonS: can see use cases for RDF serialization of SPARQL, don't have any use cases for XML

14:43:25 [JanneS]

was the motivation to query sparql via sparql?

14:43:49 [LeeF]

ericP: i've seen this be contentious before - in particular the expression of a graph pattern in RDF - difficult space to work in

14:43:53 [LeeF]

q?

14:43:55 [LeeF]

ack ericP

14:43:55 [Zakim]

ericP, you wanted to warn of contentious issues

14:43:56 [SimonS]

kind of. Rather composing SPARQL queries at runtime from RDF data

14:44:00 [ericP]

q-

14:44:32 [ericP]

upshot: whatever we do, we don't want people expressing their data in RDF

14:44:43 [LeeF]

s/upshot:/ upshot:

14:45:00 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll on RDF serialization of SPARQL queries

14:45:01 [ericP]

-1

14:45:02 [SteveH_]

-1, it's a minefield

14:45:03 [AndyS]

0

14:45:03 [kjetil]

0

14:45:04 [PrateekJain-WSU]

+1

14:45:05 [LukeWM]

-1

14:45:05 [JanneS]

sounds like closure to the extreme i.e. sparql query result could be a valid sparql query

14:45:07 [LeeF]

0

14:45:07 [john-l]

0

14:45:08 [AlexPassant]

0

14:45:09 [kasei]

0

14:45:09 [JanneS]

0

14:45:09 [AxelPolleres]

0

14:45:12 [SimonS]

0 would be nice, but difficult

14:45:39 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll on XML serialization of SPARQL queries

14:45:48 [john-l]

+1

14:45:49 [AndyS]

0

14:45:50 [LukeWM]

0

14:45:51 [LeeF]

0

14:45:52 [SteveH_]

0, could be useful, but not huge usecases for us

14:45:52 [PrateekJain-WSU]

+1

14:45:53 [ericP]

0

14:45:55 [JanneS]

0

14:45:56 [AxelPolleres]

0

14:45:56 [kasei]

+1

14:45:58 [SimonS]

-0

14:45:58 [kjetil]

0

14:46:00 [AlexPassant]

0

14:46:12 [LeeF]

bijan is a +1 by proxy, I'm positive

14:47:32 [LeeF]

topic: FunctionLibrary

14:47:37 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FunctionLibrary

14:48:24 [AxelPolleres]

Related here http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB

14:48:51 [AxelPolleres]

http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/

14:49:03 [AxelPolleres]

http://jena.sourceforge.net/ARQ/library-function.html

14:49:31 [ericP]

q+ to talk about existing extensibility

14:50:05 [LeeF]

LeeF: this feature is about spending the working group's time expanding the core set of functions that query writers can expect to be interoperable between implementations

14:50:21 [LeeF]

ericP: we did spend some time testing last time to make sure that extension functions work in a sane way

14:50:23 [SteveH_]

+1 to ericP

14:50:41 [AndyS]

Significant value. Reuse F&O where possible. Fix a set of functions expected everywhere - not too large to ensure universal coverage.

14:50:56 [SteveH_]

+1 to AndyS too

14:52:22 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: the question here is whether the WG should expand the list of built-in functions

14:53:04 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll on working on extending function library

14:53:12 [AxelPolleres]

0

14:53:13 [SteveH_]

+1

14:53:14 [kjetil]

+1

14:53:14 [LeeF]

=1

14:53:15 [kasei]

+1 but low priority

14:53:16 [john-l]

0

14:53:17 [JanneS]

+1

14:53:17 [LeeF]

+1 even

14:53:17 [PrateekJain-WSU]

+1

14:53:18 [ericP]

0

14:53:20 [SimonS]

0

14:53:23 [AndyS]

+1

14:53:29 [LukeWM]

+1

14:53:30 [AlexPassant]

0

14:53:46 [kjetil]

(but yeah, at the end)

14:53:49 [AndyS]

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:CreatingIrisAndLiterals

14:53:50 [LeeF]

topic: FullText

14:53:58 [kjetil]

Zakim, unmute me

14:53:58 [Zakim]

kjetil should no longer be muted

14:54:22 [AxelPolleres]

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FullText

14:54:43 [LeeF]

kjetil: most Web sites have search boxes... if you want to use a triple store for an application and SPARQL on top of that

14:54:51 [LeeF]

... you need someway to communicate a search down to SPARQL endpoint

14:54:56 [LeeF]

s/someway/some way

14:55:10 [LeeF]

... we could standardize in several ways here

14:55:34 [LeeF]

... could have a function in function library

14:55:54 [LeeF]

... could also use xpath/xquery text functions

14:56:03 [SteveH_]

q+ to ask about XPath fulltext v's regex

14:56:05 [LeeF]

... users might want to search more than just one literal

14:56:19 [AndyS]

q+ to talke about XQ full text

14:56:20 [LeeF]

q+ to ask about xpath compared with lucene and to note potential contention

14:56:25 [AxelPolleres]

q+ to ask about redundancy wrt regex

14:56:30 [AndyS]

q+ to say it's not a library function

14:56:37 [ericP]

q-

14:56:39 [LeeF]

kjetil: lots of possibilities but think this is important for interoperability

14:57:08 [LeeF]

SteveH_: I read the xpath full text specification - more complicated than I thought it would be

14:57:12 [ericP]

-> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-xpath-full-text-10-20080516/#section-ftcontainsexpr-examples xpath full text examples

14:57:38 [LeeF]

... this is more complex than just referring to xpath spec, because there's a lot there that is xpath-specific

14:57:49 [LeeF]

... on the other end of a scale, LIKE syntax is just syntactic sugar over regex

14:58:07 [AndyS]

SteveH_: similarity to LIKE

14:58:26 [LeeF]

... would need to understand what we're talking about - the LIKE syntax is easy to standardize, full text feature will be a lot of work just to figure out what parts of the XPath full text doc are relevant and which aren't

14:58:40 [ericP]

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:FullText doesn't mention regex

14:58:52 [ericP]

what uses cases does regex not support?

14:58:57 [LeeF]

kjetil: Virtuoso feels that it is harder to implement regular expressions than full text

14:59:01 [SteveH_]

ericP, stemming for one

14:59:15 [LeeF]

AndyS: i think XQuery full text is too big, too complicated

14:59:24 [LeeF]

... it's important to ensure that existing tools, not just lucene, can be used

14:59:38 [LeeF]

q?

14:59:39 [LeeF]

ack SteveH_

14:59:40 [Zakim]

SteveH_, you wanted to ask about XPath fulltext v's regex

14:59:41 [LeeF]

ack AndyS

14:59:41 [Zakim]

AndyS, you wanted to talke about XQ full text and to say it's not a library function

14:59:58 [LeeF]

AndyS: this is not just a library function - it's not a restriction, since it's generative from an index

15:00:06 [LeeF]

... "find me all the things that match 'x'"

15:00:17 [LeeF]

... "find me all the URIs of documents that contain the following string"

15:00:53 [LeeF]

... concerned that scripting engines end up with a real burden to implement this

15:00:56 [SteveH_]

not just smaller implementations, the only impl. of XPath fulltext i've seen is huge

15:00:56 [LeeF]

ack LeeF

15:00:56 [Zakim]

LeeF, you wanted to ask about xpath compared with lucene and to note potential contention

15:01:11 [ericP]

the scripting people can be incomplete. doesn't really matter except for bragging rights

15:01:56 [kasei]

ericP: it matters for portability between scripting and the bigger impls.

15:02:42 [ericP]

kasei, i think that's an argument for then being sound, but not complete

15:03:29 [kjetil]

q+

15:03:34 [SimonS]

q+ to say most existing implementations seem quite similar

15:03:48 [ericP]

i was arguing that if the burden of implementation keeps some scripts from being complete, that's not a big cost. however, we'd like to see them interoperate even in their subsets

15:03:59 [LeeF]

LeeF: i see a strong case for interoperability here, but also see a huge amount of work to standardize this well

15:04:15 [LeeF]

AndyS: there are other things to consider as well, such as scoring of results

15:04:21 [SteveH_]

I don't want to see a world where we end up just standardising lucene syntax

15:04:32 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: seems that xpath/xquery might be too heavy for us, as opposed to aligning what existing implementations do

15:04:45 [ericP]

q+ to ask if lucene is a strict subset of xpath:ftcontains

15:04:46 [AndyS]

ack to SteveH_ -- starting point only

15:05:12 [SteveH_]

ericP, it's not no

15:05:25 [LeeF]

q?

15:05:31 [LeeF]

ack AxelPolleres

15:05:31 [Zakim]

AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about redundancy wrt regex

15:05:33 [LeeF]

ack kjetil

15:06:08 [ericP]

we'll have a hell of a fight if we want to standardize a non-xpath function if there's an xpath function nearby

15:06:10 [AndyS]

Maybe good to add some clear syntax to make it easier to understand for query writers

15:06:17 [JanneS]

(I need to leave, will be voting -1 for the full fledged proposal with XQuery and XPath Full Text 1.0, +1 if we add some syntactic sugar to ease interoperability with Lucene type of implementations)

15:06:25 [ericP]

burden will be on us to prove that it's not covered by subsetting ftcontains

15:06:44 [AxelPolleres]

q-

15:07:12 [LeeF]

SimonS: most implementations I know are very close to or based on Lucene - that seems to be what people want

15:07:17 [LeeF]

... syntax extensions are similar as well

15:07:25 [SteveH_]

or, what implemetors found it easiest to build

15:07:29 [JanneS]

(uh, BasicFederatedQuery deserves the protocol extensions is my +1 for both, no comment on LimitPerResource yet) - bye

15:07:56 [Zakim]

-JanneS

15:08:29 [LeeF]

ericP: I think that if we try to standardize something analogous to an XQuery function (e.g. lucene:contains) then we will need to prove to the world & XQuery WG that we were not able to subset ft:contains to meet our needs

15:09:18 [Zakim]

-ywang4

15:09:24 [LeeF]

AndyS: to be pragmatic, i don't want to put an xquery parser inside my sparql impl

15:09:36 [ywang4]

see you next time :)

15:09:40 [ywang4]

ywang4 has left #sparql

15:10:02 [LeeF]

SteveH_: it would be tough to separate e.g. how it refers to rdf literals rather than xml nodes

15:10:38 [AndyS]

--> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-full-text-10/#id-grammar

15:10:39 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll on full text

15:10:45 [AxelPolleres]

q?

15:10:47 [ericP]

q-

15:10:48 [LeeF]

ack SimonS

15:10:49 [Zakim]

SimonS, you wanted to say most existing implementations seem quite similar

15:10:49 [LeeF]

ack ericP

15:10:56 [SimonS]

q-

15:11:00 [kjetil]

+1

15:11:01 [ericP]

0

15:11:02 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll on full text

15:11:02 [SteveH_]

0

15:11:04 [AndyS]

+1

15:11:08 [kasei]

-1

15:11:08 [AxelPolleres]

0

15:11:10 [john-l]

+1

15:11:10 [AlexPassant]

+1

15:11:11 [PrateekJain-WSU]

0

15:11:11 [SimonS]

+1

15:11:13 [LukeWM]

+1

15:11:17 [LeeF]

0, against my better judgment which says +1

15:11:21 [ericP]

nice

15:11:56 [ericP]

i'm surprised. usally "better judgement" is aligned with discresion

15:11:58 [LeeF]

topic: LimitPerResource

15:12:28 [AlexPassant]

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource

15:13:12 [LeeF]

AlexPassant: proposal is to find a way to limit solutions not by tuples but by distinct instances of a resource

15:13:19 [LeeF]

... example syntax on wiki page

15:13:42 [kjetil]

q+

15:13:49 [LeeF]

ack kjetil

15:13:56 [LeeF]

kjetil: this is the single most important feature for us

15:14:08 [LeeF]

q+ to ask about relationship with subselect

15:14:25 [AxelPolleres]

q+ on whether thisis an issue for surface syntax

15:14:29 [LeeF]

kjetil: you don't know in advance how many rows you expect back

15:15:09 [AxelPolleres]

q-

15:15:15 [SteveH_]

q+

15:15:30 [LeeF]

LeeF: is it true that if sparql has subselects then limitperresource is syntactic sugar?

15:15:39 [LeeF]

SteveH_: you also need grouping/limiting operations

15:16:25 [LeeF]

... in other cases besides http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:LimitPerResource#Related_Use_Cases.2FExtensions you need a grouping operator

15:16:40 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: Alex & Kjetil would you be happy if this was subsumed by subselect?

15:16:48 [LeeF]

kjetil: yes, if we do subselect

15:16:57 [AxelPolleres]

let's do a strawpoll conditional to subselects

15:16:58 [LeeF]

AlexPassant: yes, it's the capability itself that is important

15:17:14 [ericP]

0

15:17:16 [kjetil]

+1

15:17:18 [AlexPassant]

+1

15:17:18 [kasei]

+1

15:17:19 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll - would you want LimitPerResource GIVEN that we do not do subselects

15:17:20 [AndyS]

-1

15:17:21 [john-l]

+1

15:17:21 [AxelPolleres]

0

15:17:22 [SteveH_]

-1

15:17:25 [LeeF]

0

15:17:26 [LukeWM]

0

15:17:28 [PrateekJain-WSU]

0

15:17:31 [SimonS]

0

15:17:38 [SteveH_]

[but we do do this a lot, but doing it without subselects would be crazy]

15:17:55 [LeeF]

topic: Basic federated queries

15:17:59 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

15:17:59 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

15:18:03 [LeeF]

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:BasicFederatedQuery

15:18:12 [LeeF]

AndyS: goal is to find minimal features needed to make federation happen

15:19:01 [LeeF]

... what's the minimal needed for one sparql endpoint to call out to another to get some results back

15:19:24 [LeeF]

... related thing for sending CONSTRUCT query to another processor as part of the FROM clause to get data in - can do that now with long URLs

15:19:43 [LeeF]

... very related to query parameters

15:19:49 [LeeF]

... very related to subqueries

15:19:54 [ericP]

q+ to say that he added the encode-this-and-append-to-graph-url functionality on the command line

15:20:01 [LeeF]

ack LeeF

15:20:01 [Zakim]

LeeF, you wanted to ask about relationship with subselect

15:20:06 [LeeF]

ack SteveH_

15:20:26 [LeeF]

AndyS: overall task in federated query is to find the right place to get a certain piece of information

15:20:52 [LeeF]

... missing piece is the ability to actually make the call to a remote service, that's the minimum required piece

15:21:22 [LeeF]

... ARQ does with SERVICE keyword, Virtuoso does it with pragma attached to subselect - mechanism less important than the feature

15:21:22 [AxelPolleres]

Axel: syntax to "execute federated query plans, yes?

15:21:38 [LeeF]

ack ericP

15:21:38 [Zakim]

ericP, you wanted to say that he added the encode-this-and-append-to-graph-url functionality on the command line

15:21:39 [ericP]

ack me

15:21:39 [SimonS]

q+ to say he does this using special named graphs

15:22:21 [LeeF]

ericP: HCLS group does a lot of query federation using my command line stuff

15:22:31 [LeeF]

... useful but not top priority

15:22:43 [LeeF]

SimonS: we define special named graphs that are evaluated remotely and then do subqueries against one or more remote endpoints

15:22:46 [LeeF]

... a lot of people use it

15:23:39 [LeeF]

q?

15:23:40 [LeeF]

ack SimonS

15:23:40 [Zakim]

SimonS, you wanted to say he does this using special named graphs

15:23:47 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: straw poll on basic federated query

15:23:48 [SimonS]

q-

15:23:49 [kasei]

+1

15:23:50 [kjetil]

+1

15:23:51 [LukeWM]

-1

15:23:51 [SteveH_]

0, useful, but very very scary

15:23:51 [AndyS]

+1

15:23:51 [ericP]

+1

15:23:53 [SimonS]

+1

15:23:54 [john-l]

-1

15:23:55 [PrateekJain-WSU]

+1

15:23:55 [AlexPassant]

0

15:23:56 [LeeF]

0

15:23:59 [AxelPolleres]

0

15:24:50 [ericP]

john-l, i'm curious about your -1. issue of priorities, or serious concearns?

15:25:02 [LeeF]

ericP, you're not concerned about Luke's -1?

15:25:16 [john-l]

ericP: Just priorities.

15:25:23 [LeeF]

s/ericP:/ericP,

15:25:27 [ericP]

and LukeWM?

15:25:49 [LeeF]

topic: query by reference and parameters

15:25:58 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: doesn't parameters need query by reference?

15:26:06 [ericP]

LeeF, shoudl i talk about SPARQLfed grammar?

15:26:11 [LeeF]

???: Parameters are useful without query by reference, for example for distributed joins

15:26:25 [SimonS]

s/???/SimonS/

15:26:49 [LukeWM]

ericP, my -1 was because I've just not come across any use cases for it day to day

15:27:00 [ericP]

roger

15:27:03 [ericP]

tx

15:28:02 [LeeF]

LeeF: query by ref might depend on parameters but not vice versa - params got some support, query by ref got no support (no +1s)

15:28:21 [LeeF]

SteveH_: are you going to change the survey to not say "make 8 votes"?

15:28:41 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: yes, I will change the text to not be restricted to 8 votes

15:29:04 [LeeF]

AxelPolleres: AOB?

15:29:14 [LeeF]

Adjourned.

15:29:27 [SteveH_]

bye

15:29:31 [Zakim]

-john-l

15:29:34 [Zakim]

-[Garlik]

15:29:35 [Zakim]

-SimonS

15:29:46 [Zakim]

-kasei

15:29:48 [Zakim]

-AlexPassant

15:29:52 [Zakim]

-kjetil

15:30:35 [Zakim]

-AndyS

15:30:42 [Zakim]

-PrateekJain-WSU

15:30:57 [LeeF]

zakim, who's on the phone?

15:30:57 [Zakim]

On the phone I see AxelPolleres, LeeF, EricP, dnewman2

15:35:53 [Zakim]

-EricP

15:35:54 [Zakim]

-LeeF

15:35:56 [Zakim]

-AxelPolleres

15:36:08 [AxelPolleres]

rrsagent, make minutes

15:36:08 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-sparql-minutes.html AxelPolleres

15:37:49 [AxelPolleres]

anybody has an idea how I get the fancy minutes from http://www.w3.org/2009/04/21-sparql-minutes.html?

15:38:56 [AndyS]

Not sure (Lee does thr magice) but there is some manual work to get the straw poll summaries.

15:39:26 [AxelPolleres]

alright, I linked the draft minutes for the moment, Lee if you could do the magic, I'd appreciate.

15:39:49 [AxelPolleres]

survey is changed... query by ref out,

15:40:07 [AxelPolleres]

text doesn't say anything anymore about number of votes.

15:40:12 [AxelPolleres]

bye all

15:40:13 [AxelPolleres]

AxelPolleres has left #sparql

15:40:55 [Zakim]

disconnecting the lone participant, dnewman2, in SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM

15:40:59 [Zakim]

SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended

15:41:00 [Zakim]

Attendees were john-l, SteveH, LukeWM, +34.91.664.aaaa, AxelPolleres, AndyS, +1.937.775.aabb, kasei, PrateekJain-WSU, kjetil, LeeF, JanneS, SimonS, +656304aacc, ywang4,

15:41:03 [Zakim]

... AlexPassant, EricP, dnewman2

15:48:43 [kasei]

kasei has left #sparql

16:19:31 [LukeWM]

LukeWM has joined #sparql

16:19:58 [SteveH]

SteveH has joined #sparql

17:57:02 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #sparql

19:02:40 [LeeF]

LeeF has joined #sparql