IRC log of sparql on 2009-04-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:54:14 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #sparql

13:54:14 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/28-sparql-irc

13:54:16 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

13:54:16 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #sparql

13:54:18 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be 77277

13:54:18 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes

13:54:19 [trackbot]

Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference

13:54:19 [trackbot]

Date: 28 April 2009

13:54:24 [LeeF]

s/Date:/ Date:

13:54:29 [LeeF]

Chair: LeeF

13:54:33 [cgi-irc]

cgi-irc has joined #sparql

13:54:34 [LeeF]

Regrets: Orri

13:55:01 [LeeF]

hi, who just joined via the w3c Web IRC interface?

13:55:01 [Zakim]

SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started

13:55:09 [Zakim]

+??P34

13:55:15 [AlexPassant]

Zakim: ??P34 is me

13:55:29 [SteveH]

LeeF: updated, relocating to meeting room...

13:55:38 [SteveH]

sorry, LeeF,

13:55:46 [AlexPassant]

Zakim: +??P34 is me

13:55:57 [Zakim]

+john-l

13:56:00 [Zakim]

-??P34

13:56:01 [Zakim]

+??P34

13:56:01 [Zakim]

+??P35

13:56:23 [AlexPassant]

Zakim, +??P34 is me

13:56:23 [Zakim]

sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '+??P34'

13:56:28 [AlexPassant]

Zakim, ??P34 is me

13:56:28 [Zakim]

+AlexPassant; got it

13:56:40 [AlexPassant]

wow :) thanks LeeF , needs to update my irssi config

13:56:47 [pgearon]

pgearon has joined #sparql

13:56:58 [SteveH_]

SteveH_ has joined #sparql

13:56:58 [Zakim]

+kasei

13:57:00 [AndyS]

zakim, please mute ??P35

13:57:00 [Zakim]

??P35 should now be muted

13:57:05 [Zakim]

+ +049261287aaaa

13:57:06 [kasei]

Zakim, mute me

13:57:06 [Zakim]

kasei should now be muted

13:57:10 [AndyS]

zakim, please unmute ??P35

13:57:10 [Zakim]

??P35 should no longer be muted

13:57:18 [SimonS]

Zakim, aaaa is me

13:57:18 [Zakim]

+SimonS; got it

13:57:19 [AndyS]

zakim, ??P35 is me

13:57:20 [Zakim]

+AndyS; got it

13:57:41 [AndyS]

Good morning, Paul

13:58:03 [Zakim]

+??P40

13:58:10 [Zakim]

+??P41

13:58:10 [SteveH]

Zakim, ??P40 is [Garlik]

13:58:12 [Zakim]

+[Garlik]; got it

13:58:16 [LukeWM]

LukeWM has joined #sparql

13:58:20 [bijan]

zakim, ??p41 isme

13:58:20 [Zakim]

I don't understand '??p41 isme', bijan

13:58:25 [Zakim]

+ +03539149aabb

13:58:25 [SteveH]

Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH and LukeWM

13:58:26 [Zakim]

+SteveH, LukeWM; got it

13:58:27 [bijan]

zakim, ??p41 is me

13:58:27 [Zakim]

+bijan; got it

13:58:37 [Zakim]

+??P46

13:58:54 [pgearon]

AndyS: Hi. Sorry, am trying to dial in

13:59:13 [Zakim]

+LeeF

13:59:13 [chimezie]

chimezie has joined #sparql

13:59:22 [chimezie]

Zakim, passcode?

13:59:22 [Zakim]

the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), chimezie

13:59:29 [LeeF]

zakim, who's here?

13:59:29 [Zakim]

On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, ??P46, LeeF

13:59:32 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

13:59:33 [Zakim]

On IRC I see chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, cgi-irc, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, AlexPassant, john-l,

13:59:35 [Zakim]

... KjetilK, ericP, trackbot

13:59:44 [pgearon]

I'm on the phone too

13:59:59 [LeeF]

zakim, ??P46 is pgearon

14:00:00 [Zakim]

+pgearon; got it

14:00:03 [ivan]

zakim, dial ivan-voip

14:00:04 [Zakim]

+Chimezie_Ogbuji

14:00:05 [Zakim]

ok, ivan; the call is being made

14:00:07 [Zakim]

+Ivan

14:00:36 [LeeF]

Scribe: chimezie

14:00:41 [LeeF]

Scribenick: chimezie

14:01:15 [LeeF]

agenda + introductions

14:01:16 [LeeF]

agenda + errata

14:01:26 [cgi-irc]

Hi Lee, this is Prateek Jain from WSU

14:01:52 [SteveH]

lots of scrolling noise

14:01:53 [LeeF]

Hi Prateek, thanks - can you type "/nick Prateek" (without the quotes)

14:02:16 [kjetil]

Zakim, what is the code?

14:02:16 [Zakim]

the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), kjetil

14:02:44 [Zakim]

+??P60

14:02:55 [kjetil]

Zakim, ??P60 is me

14:02:55 [Zakim]

+kjetil; got it

14:02:59 [Zakim]

+ +01212803aacc

14:03:22 [JanneS]

JanneS has joined #sparql

14:03:25 [iv_an_ru]

zakim, +0121 is me

14:03:25 [Zakim]

+iv_an_ru; got it

14:03:34 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

14:03:35 [LeeF]

zakim, who's here?

14:03:37 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

14:03:42 [Zakim]

On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, pgearon, LeeF, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, kjetil (muted), iv_an_ru

14:03:45 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

14:03:47 [Zakim]

On IRC I see JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, Prateek, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, AlexPassant,

14:03:54 [Zakim]

... john-l, KjetilK, ericP, trackbot

14:03:56 [Zakim]

+JanneS

14:04:26 [chimezie]

LeeF: we have quite a bit to cover today perhaps we can have a 90 minute call?

14:04:37 [Zakim]

+PrateekJain-WSU

14:04:40 [LeeF]

agenda - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-04-28

14:04:47 [LeeF]

topic: administrative

14:04:54 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-21

14:05:02 [SteveH]

I had 1 issue with the mins

14:05:46 [SteveH]

I think it was this: Eric Prud'hommeaux: it matters for portability between scripting and the bigger impls. [ Scribe Assist by Greg Williams ] ←

14:05:52 [chimezie]

LeeF: perhaps we can update the minutes after the teleconference?

14:06:34 [chimezie]

... we can approve the minutes modulo this change

14:06:45 [LeeF]

RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-21, modulo change noted by SteveH

14:06:54 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21

14:06:54 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-10 - Talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21 [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05].

14:08:07 [chimezie]

LeeF: We will skip next weeks teleconference and resume a week from tommorow

14:08:27 [chimezie]

Zakim, mute me

14:08:27 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted

14:08:28 [LeeF]

topic: introductions - Paul Gearon

14:09:12 [chimezie]

Paul: I was one of the original developers on Mulgara. Currently working with Neurocommons with Mulgara

14:09:37 [chimezie]

... originally working on a storage system and query over the database. Worked on first implementation of SPARQL

14:10:27 [LeeF]

open actions - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/open

14:10:47 [chimezie]

LeeF: 3 open actions having to do with rdf:text. We will discuss this today (shortly)

14:11:05 [chimezie]

... Any additional review?

14:11:12 [LeeF]

trackbot, close action-7

14:11:12 [trackbot]

ACTION-7 Send a pointer to the mailinglist for rdf:text, when it's up to LC closed

14:11:14 [chimezie]

SteveH: I consider it discharged

14:11:16 [LeeF]

trackbot, close action-8

14:11:16 [trackbot]

ACTION-8 Review rdf:text closed

14:11:18 [LeeF]

trackbot, close action-9

14:11:18 [trackbot]

ACTION-9 Try to review rdf:text closed

14:11:25 [pgearon]

chimezie: sorry for audio quality. It's Fedora Commons : www.fedora-commons.org

14:11:34 [LeeF]

s/chimezie:/chimezie,

14:11:47 [LeeF]

topic: rdf:text

14:11:56 [chimezie]

s/Neurocommons/Fedora Commons

14:12:42 [chimezie]

LeeF: Jointly put forward by two WGs. Potentially impacts SPARQL. Andy has reviewed, so has SteveH. As a group we need to decide how to respond

14:12:56 [AxelPolleres]

q+ on status of the review.

14:13:14 [chimezie]

LeeF: Best way forward on this?

14:13:24 [LeeF]

ack AxelPolleres

14:13:24 [Zakim]

AxelPolleres, you wanted to comment on status of the review.

14:14:02 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: Andy's comments are substantial and important cna can be addressed w/out to many changes. rdf:text should not discuss semantic equivalent besides D-entailment.

14:14:46 [Zakim]

+dnewman2

14:14:55 [chimezie]

... We probably n eed a few mail cycles to finalized. Perhaps a short agenda item during the F2F

14:15:25 [SteveH]

+1 to having it in record

14:15:29 [chimezie]

LeeF: Can we ensure the discusdsion is mentioned on the WG list for the benefit of everyone else?

14:15:45 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: Agreed.

14:16:31 [bijan]

I'm trying to review the comments

14:16:34 [bijan]

I don't fully understand them

14:16:34 [dnewman2]

dnewman2 has joined #sparql

14:16:35 [chimezie]

LeeF: Does RIF/OWL need official responses? Anyone here have issues with Andy/SteveH speaking on behalf of the WG?

14:16:46 [bijan]

q+

14:16:51 [chimezie]

SteveH: Andy's understanding is slightly better than mine

14:16:53 [bijan]

zakim, unmute me

14:16:53 [Zakim]

bijan was not muted, bijan

14:17:23 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: We should try to clarify the last point regarding datatypes and ??string function??

14:17:49 [chimezie]

bijan: We are either working up an official response or send a personal comment. Please clarify

14:18:11 [SteveH]

I feel that SPARQL should send an official response

14:18:12 [chimezie]

LeeF: The WG hasn't sent an official repsonse, but we have a close relationship with these groups. I'm happy with current process.

14:18:27 [chimezie]

... Not sure if anyone else wants a more formal process?

14:18:31 [iv_an_ru]

IMHO a personal comment is enough.

14:19:00 [chimezie]

bijan: There is some fatigue there. Want to make it light-weight.

14:19:41 [chimezie]

... not sure how D-entailment would help or what the substantive impact is regarding the suggested changes

14:19:50 [chimezie]

... want to understand the changes well enough

14:19:51 [SteveH]

q+

14:19:53 [AndyS]

q+ to ask about the results format

14:19:56 [LeeF]

ack bijan

14:20:00 [LeeF]

ack SteveH

14:20:05 [iv_an_ru]

yes

14:20:27 [chimezie]

SteveH: The changes are substantitive. It will probably cause another last call

14:20:30 [LeeF]

ack AndyS

14:20:30 [Zakim]

AndyS, you wanted to ask about the results format

14:20:38 [chimezie]

AndyS: Trying to avoid any chance of a last call for rdf:text

14:20:49 [bijan]

Hurrah!

14:20:55 [SteveH]

that's good

14:21:15 [chimezie]

... there should be a section specifically on SPARQL added

14:21:29 [chimezie]

... wouldn't be unhappy about framing as clarification

14:21:30 [SteveH]

if that's true, agreed

14:21:35 [SteveH]

but it wasn't my understanding

14:21:47 [AndyS]

I don't see that Axel's proposed change addresses the Q's on functions.

14:21:57 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: Change from D-entailment to equivalence. Don't think it implies a new last call

14:22:48 [AxelPolleres]

q+ suggestion

14:22:54 [AndyS]

Change is semantic equive to D-entailment (note there is notone singleD-entailment)

14:23:11 [LeeF]

ack AxelPolleres

14:23:37 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: Fine with putting suggestion on Wiki page and decide next week ?

14:23:53 [chimezie]

AndyS: Would appreciate replies to my email (which included examples)

14:24:22 [chimezie]

... Fine with putting it on Wiki page but it is not subsititute for discussion around the issue(s)

14:25:03 [kjetil]

q?

14:25:09 [LeeF]

ack suggestion

14:25:13 [chimezie]

... We still aren't discussing result set format

14:25:24 [chimezie]

LeeF: AxelP can you take a look at this?

14:25:27 [bijan]

q+

14:25:30 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: Sure

14:25:31 [AndyS]

ack AndyS

14:25:36 [LeeF]

ack bijan

14:26:07 [chimezie]

bijan: It might be the case that wee disallow rdf:text in results. Some entailment regimes might want to do differently

14:26:32 [chimezie]

AndyS: It is viable to say it is analagous to RDF graph exchange

14:26:58 [chimezie]

bijan: if rdf:text takes off, we will have to revise anyways at some point

14:27:34 [LeeF]

topic: face to face

14:27:45 [LeeF]

zakim, who's here?

14:27:45 [Zakim]

On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, pgearon, LeeF, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), Ivan, kjetil (muted), iv_an_ru, JanneS,

14:27:48 [Zakim]

... PrateekJain-WSU, dnewman2

14:27:48 [Zakim]

[Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM

14:27:49 [Zakim]

On IRC I see dnewman2, JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, Prateek, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF,

14:27:52 [Zakim]

... AlexPassant, john-l, KjetilK, ericP, trackbot

14:27:53 [chimezie]

LeeF: Confirm attendance (in person versus on phone)

14:27:57 [LeeF]

wiki page http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1

14:28:24 [kjetil]

Zakim, unmute me

14:28:24 [Zakim]

kjetil should no longer be muted

14:28:31 [chimezie]

Zakim, unumte me

14:28:31 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'unumte me', chimezie

14:28:37 [kasei]

I'll be in cambridge next week.

14:28:43 [chimezie]

Zakim, unmute me

14:28:43 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted

14:28:54 [chimezie]

I will not be there in person, *may* be able to participate on phone (not sure)

14:28:56 [Zakim]

-kasei

14:29:36 [chimezie]

Zakim, mute me

14:29:36 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted

14:30:46 [chimezie]

LeeF: Timing of F2F.

14:30:57 [chimezie]

... an hour earlier?

14:31:47 [chimezie]

... Let us make it an hour earlier

14:32:27 [LeeF]

face to face will be 7 - 3 EDT 12 - 8 Bristol time, break each day at 11:30 ET

14:32:53 [chimezie]

LeeF: I put on the agenda a rough goal for the F2F

14:33:09 [chimezie]

... don't want to spend the entire time debating features but to begin the deep dive

14:33:30 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

14:33:30 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

14:33:39 [chimezie]

... Perhaps we split the 2 days into 4 half-day blocks. In one of those we discuss deliverables, etc.

14:33:56 [chimezie]

... in the other 3, start diving into features we have consensus on already (by today possibly)

14:34:49 [chimezie]

... This way we can hit the ground running (WRT to features and our process)

14:35:37 [chimezie]

... Also want to discuss a naming convention

14:35:43 [chimezie]

... input/feedback?

14:35:47 [SteveH]

+1, happy

14:35:50 [chimezie]

Sounds like a reasonable agenda to me

14:35:54 [AndyS]

+1

14:35:54 [LukeWM]

sounds ok to me

14:35:56 [pgearon]

+1

14:35:57 [kjetil]

+1

14:35:57 [Prateek]

+1

14:35:58 [AxelPolleres]

+1

14:35:59 [AlexPassant]

+1

14:36:06 [iv_an_ru]

+1

14:36:07 [bijan]

+1 to the organizational majesty of lee

14:36:07 [SimonS]

+1

14:36:27 [chimezie]

LeeF: Questions about logistics?

14:36:32 [kjetil]

Zakim, unmute me

14:36:32 [Zakim]

kjetil should no longer be muted

14:36:50 [JanneS]

q+

14:36:51 [chimezie]

kjetil: Car pool from HP labs?

14:37:03 [AndyS]

s/from/to

14:37:17 [chimezie]

SteveH: I'm going by car, but it is quite small

14:37:28 [iv_an_ru]

I'm sorry, I had to escape right now.

14:37:33 [Zakim]

-iv_an_ru

14:38:08 [kjetil]

Zakim, unmute me

14:38:08 [Zakim]

kjetil was not muted, kjetil

14:38:13 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

14:38:13 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

14:38:15 [AndyS]

Suggest aim to be at HPL 11:30am for setup.

14:38:16 [LeeF]

ack JanneS

14:38:38 [chimezie]

JanneS: ??HP?? providing a teleconference #?

14:39:09 [AxelPolleres]

should be the same teleconf facility... to be clarified by eric, I guess.

14:39:20 [ivan]

q+

14:39:43 [AxelPolleres]

andy: normal phone in the room as "fallback"

14:39:53 [chimezie]

... (conversation continues regarding logistics) ...

14:40:03 [LeeF]

ack ivan

14:40:28 [chimezie]

ivan: We should not have a problem with Zakim

14:40:28 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to work with Ivan, ericP to reserve zakim for face to face days

14:40:28 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-11 - Work with Ivan, ericP to reserve zakim for face to face days [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05].

14:40:39 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to work with EricP to procure a phone for the Cambridge, MA location

14:40:39 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-12 - Work with EricP to procure a phone for the Cambridge, MA location [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05].

14:40:41 [AxelPolleres]

we shall request zakim for both days, eric should get the physical phone, that should work.

14:40:54 [chimezie]

... prefer to use/have Zakim

14:41:02 [LeeF]

topic: feature survey

14:41:16 [LeeF]

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

14:41:31 [LeeF]

feature survey results - http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/results

14:41:49 [SteveH]

q+ to ask about public/private-ness

14:41:53 [SteveH]

q-

14:42:03 [chimezie]

I wasn't able to decipher priority order from that page

14:42:20 [chimezie]

LeeF: Inclincation to have votes on this survey be public, but wanted to run it by group 1st

14:42:24 [chimezie]

... concerns?

14:42:26 [kjetil]

+1 on public

14:42:36 [SteveH]

+1 from me

14:42:40 [AxelPolleres]

PROPOSED: have votes on featue survey be public

14:42:50 [SteveH]

raw data: http://plugin.org.uk/misc/sparql-votes.ttl

14:42:50 [AndyS]

chimezie, it was opaque with new results it's clear - may need to reload browser (I had caching weirdnesses)

14:42:59 [AxelPolleres]

RESOLVED: have votes on feature survey be public

14:43:05 [iv_an_ru]

+1 for public votes

14:43:26 [AxelPolleres]

http://plugin.org.uk/misc/votes.svg

14:43:45 [AndyS]

Does the TTL record the "don't wants"?

14:43:59 [chimezie]

SteveH: Rendering of another file.

14:44:05 [SteveH]

http://plugin.org.uk/misc/sparql-vote-results.ttl

14:44:36 [chimezie]

... Process of taking the .ttl page, ran an algorithm to produce a graph

14:44:56 [chimezie]

... people should verify validity. The javascript is visible as well

14:45:11 [chimezie]

... SVG file captures the ???? relationships

14:45:24 [LeeF]

s/????/Condorcet

14:45:37 [LeeF]

q?

14:45:54 [chimezie]

... Condorcet method looks for pair-wise comparison of every feature voted for and counts how many times feature appear in each vote

14:45:54 [AxelPolleres]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method

14:46:32 [chimezie]

... can get loops ..

14:46:53 [SteveH]

???? = beats

14:47:04 [chimezie]

LeeF: one way of interpreting results

14:47:14 [chimezie]

... this was suggested as a good way to look at this

14:47:27 [chimezie]

... it is not quite cut and dry as appears in diagram

14:47:47 [chimezie]

... do we have consensus on the popular features? For example, Agg functions are at the top

14:48:58 [SteveH]

note, my condorcet code doesn't take don't want into account, treats it as won't car

14:49:01 [chimezie]

... AggregateFuncs & Update are the two with consensus importance

14:49:30 [LeeF]

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

14:49:56 [chimezie]

... Subselects are not top choice, but 11 WG members put it within top 10 ranking. 6 WG members put it in top 3

14:50:15 [chimezie]

LeeF: Propose there is consensus on these 3 at least

14:50:46 [chimezie]

I agree that these seem to represent consensus

14:50:46 [pgearon]

+1

14:50:47 [SteveH]

I support that idea

14:50:48 [kjetil]

Zakim, unmute me

14:50:48 [Zakim]

kjetil should no longer be muted

14:50:48 [AlexPassant]

+1

14:50:50 [Prateek]

+1

14:50:51 [ivan]

+1

14:50:52 [AndyS]

I support these features

14:50:53 [kjetil]

+1

14:50:54 [AxelPolleres]

+1

14:50:55 [LukeWM]

me too

14:51:58 [chimezie]

LeeF: Hold off on making them requirements for further conversation

14:52:20 [AndyS]

Agree not going to "required" until results are fully in.

14:52:38 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: The SPARQL WG adopt AggregateFunctions, Subselects, and Update as three deliverables (either required or time-permitting) for the second phase of the group

14:52:42 [SteveH]

seconded

14:52:50 [kjetil]

+1

14:52:55 [AndyS]

+1

14:52:58 [ivan]

+1

14:52:58 [AxelPolleres]

+1

14:52:59 [Prateek]

+1

14:52:59 [JanneS]

+1

14:53:01 [pgearon]

+1

14:53:03 [SimonS]

+1

14:53:14 [LeeF]

RESOLVED: The SPARQL WG adopt AggregateFunctions, Subselects, and Update as three deliverables (either required or time-permitting) for the second phase of the group

14:53:56 [kjetil]

Zakim, mute me

14:53:56 [Zakim]

kjetil should now be muted

14:54:06 [chimezie]

LeeF: would like to (for F2F) solicit volunteers for more design details. If you can give survey on designs, please let the Chair know

14:54:13 [chimezie]

s/Chair/Chairs

14:55:29 [chimezie]

LeeF: discussion on features with little support but for which we have champions who should discuss why or why not these should be included

14:55:34 [kjetil]

Zakim, unmute me

14:55:34 [Zakim]

kjetil should no longer be muted

14:56:31 [chimezie]

... there was discussion that limit per resource could be handled by subselects (which is currently a high-priority feature)

14:57:17 [chimezie]

kjetil: Now with subselects it is a small thing to implement. It is extremely important feature because alot of cases we want to list the resources and limit them so we don't get too many solutions

14:57:31 [SteveH]

q+ to talk abut FOAF

14:57:33 [chimezie]

... The main selling point is that RDF is suited for heterogenous data

14:58:00 [LeeF]

ack SteveH

14:58:01 [chimezie]

... would like to hear from those who don't want it

14:58:02 [Zakim]

SteveH, you wanted to talk abut FOAF

14:58:32 [chimezie]

SteveH: This is a feature that is needed quite a bit with FOAF in exactly this case: trying to find up to 3 foaf:names and don't want to be overwhelmed with results

14:58:36 [SimonS]

q+ to say I am fine with subselects, but do not want explicit syntax

14:58:45 [chimezie]

... prefer subselect aggregate behavior rather than specific syntax in case we get it wrong

14:59:46 [chimezie]

SimonS: Time-permitting feature anyways. The ORGs that need it, if we do the whole work to specify the syntax, would that be acceptable to WG?

15:00:03 [SteveH]

my ord needs it for frefernce

15:00:06 [SteveH]

*org

15:00:18 [SimonS]

wasn't me

15:00:28 [AxelPolleres]

q+ to ask about surface syntax

15:00:29 [chimezie]

LeeF: Concerned with org-specific spec'ing

15:00:35 [AndyS]

s/SimonS/kjetil/

15:01:28 [chimezie]

... I feel it would be wise to wait and see if impl. add syntax even with the other features

15:01:34 [LeeF]

ack SimonS

15:01:34 [Zakim]

SimonS, you wanted to say I am fine with subselects, but do not want explicit syntax

15:01:35 [chimezie]

... that would make a stronger case for standardization

15:01:54 [chimezie]

SimonS: I don't like introducing specific syntax, but happy with subselects addressing this issue

15:01:56 [SteveH]

+1 to SimonS

15:02:06 [chimezie]

... makes sense to build into feature we standardize eventually

15:02:17 [LeeF]

ack AxelPolleres

15:02:17 [Zakim]

AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about surface syntax

15:02:32 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: Do we want to subsume such things under surface syntax?

15:02:50 [chimezie]

... avote against surface syntax speaks generally about things like this

15:03:18 [AndyS]

SurfaceSyntax is a bit of a catch-all. I'm wary of putting too much in it.

15:03:28 [chimezie]

LeeF: There doesn't seem to be overwhelming support

15:04:02 [chimezie]

kjetil: We might want to come back to this after discussion on surface syntax

15:04:38 [chimezie]

LeeF: if we accept surface syntax we need a strict definiition

15:04:59 [chimezie]

... to me it is any feature that can be re-written with identical semantics w/out the new syntax

15:05:52 [Zakim]

-kjetil

15:05:58 [chimezie]

LeeF: SPARQL/OWL and Parameterized Inference there is confusion on how they are related

15:06:41 [chimezie]

bijan: We have extensibility point on semantics of additional answers. We have a number of implementations

15:07:02 [chimezie]

... it would be nice to converge on SPARQL syntax / semantics. Have alot of users who want it that move to higher expressivity

15:07:29 [chimezie]

... a separate document and can envision more regimes , so this can be a 'starter'

15:07:32 [AxelPolleres]

Bijan, could you paste a link to the BGP extension proposed?

15:07:52 [chimezie]

... it's relation to parameterized inference is that it gives us more regimes to parameterized. Don't need p-inference to make use of SPARQL/OWL.

15:08:05 [chimezie]

... independent on how you indicate semantics

15:08:28 [chimezie]

LeeF: It would be helpful to address priority

15:08:30 [pgearon]

+q

15:08:36 [chimezie]

... there are 2 ORGs that don't want this

15:08:45 [LeeF]

ack pgearon

15:08:58 [AxelPolleres]

q+ to further explain disambiguation of ParamInference and SPARQL/OWL

15:09:13 [chimezie]

pgearon: Don't want to see it, because it could bring the server to its knees

15:09:26 [chimezie]

LeeF: This would not be compulsory (and it's own document)

15:09:32 [AndyS]

q+ to ask about WG Notes

15:09:39 [ivan]

q+

15:09:40 [chimezie]

bijan: compulsory only for systems that *want* to support this

15:10:02 [LukeWM]

q+

15:10:03 [bijan]

s/to support OWL sensitive query/

15:10:13 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: I agree with Bijan. They are complementary. SPARQL/OWL discusses one entailmemnt regime, p-inference is about requesting (in a query) for a certain entailment regime

15:10:18 [bijan]

s/to support this/to support OWL sensitive query/

15:10:33 [bijan]

RDFS should fall out of it, yes

15:10:42 [chimezie]

... do we want to increment up from simple entailment (RDFS, etc..)

15:11:08 [chimezie]

... do we want the WG to work on whether it is requested , do we want the WG to specify advertization of entailment regime (service description)

15:11:13 [LeeF]

ack AndyS

15:11:13 [Zakim]

AndyS, you wanted to ask about WG Notes

15:11:18 [LeeF]

ack AxelPolleres

15:11:18 [Zakim]

AxelPolleres, you wanted to further explain disambiguation of ParamInference and SPARQL/OWL

15:11:42 [chimezie]

AndyS: WG notes? Not confortable with WG members doing paralle work being injected later into REC track

15:11:56 [pgearon]

+1 for the WG to specify advertising entailment regime (and optional features in general)

15:12:06 [chimezie]

... nervous about 'compulsory' implies tests to distinguish if services meet levels of compliance

15:12:19 [ChrisW]

ChrisW has joined #sparql

15:13:12 [AndyS]

AndyS: Was picking up on the point Lee made about REC track.

15:13:17 [chimezie]

LeeF: great point. Something like SPARQL/OWL (which is orthogonal to main query language) is appropriate for a specification that is reviewed as a REC track or Note

15:13:30 [chimezie]

... SPARQL/OWL is appropriate for this

15:13:36 [chimezie]

bijan: Was thinking about REC track

15:14:11 [chimezie]

... I have been tasked to write this up anyways. Want to force CR on implementations to force convergence

15:14:16 [JanneS]

(sorry gotta run home) - hear you next week

15:14:26 [Zakim]

-JanneS

15:14:37 [chimezie]

AndyS: If we put it on REC track we have a finite amount of time to discuss issues

15:14:47 [chimezie]

bijan: Agreed. We don't have to decide until late in the game

15:15:11 [chimezie]

... willing to do work with possible outcome of a Note. If we can make it with reasonable amount of effort, it wouldn't preclude a REC doc

15:15:21 [chimezie]

... a Note is better than nothing

15:15:28 [LeeF]

q?

15:16:19 [AxelPolleres]

q+

15:16:20 [chimezie]

ivan: do we plan to do anythign at all with rules. If everything goes as planned, by the time this SPARQL is a REC we ill have RIF as a REC

15:16:30 [AndyS]

If SPARQL/OWL, be great for a RDFS (RDFS++) Note as well.

15:16:33 [chimezie]

... something should say how SPARQL relates to RIF.. we should be careful

15:16:45 [chimezie]

+1 with Ivan about isolating SPARQL from other standards

15:17:00 [pgearon]

q+

15:17:09 [chimezie]

Zakum unmute me

15:17:14 [LeeF]

ack ivan

15:17:16 [chimezie]

Zakum, unmute me

15:17:31 [chimezie]

Parematerized inference does give an extension point to RIF as described in the Wiki

15:17:40 [LeeF]

chimezie, thanks, you are right

15:17:48 [AndyS]

zakim, unmute chimezie

15:17:49 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted

15:17:55 [SteveH]

but arguable not an appropriate one...

15:18:11 [AxelPolleres]

+1 to ivan

15:18:16 [LeeF]

q?

15:18:20 [LeeF]

ack LukeWM

15:18:31 [chimezie]

zakim, mute me

15:18:31 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted

15:18:47 [chimezie]

LukeWM: don't know that much about OWL, haven't had much experience with it, mostly a matter of priority

15:18:59 [LeeF]

ack AxelPolleres

15:19:23 [chimezie]

AxelPolleres: RIF+RDF graphs complies well with entailment regimes for SPARQL

15:20:19 [chimezie]

... they should go together

15:20:24 [bijan]

q+ to ask if this is how we mean to go on as opposed to the language groups doing them themselves

15:20:27 [chimezie]

LeeF: Time is the primary caveat

15:20:32 [SteveH]

I suspect that RIF and OWL raise slightly different issues

15:20:44 [bijan]

SteveH: for sure

15:21:03 [chimezie]

... doing one of these will be a good way to test the current extension point

15:21:15 [LeeF]

ack pgearon

15:21:54 [chimezie]

pgearon: Rules are: rule-based query and rulesets that generate statements (falls into area of update)

15:22:25 [chimezie]

zakim, unmute me

15:22:25 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted

15:22:48 [LeeF]

chimezie: I think there is an overlap between what SPARQL/OWL and parameterizedinference are tryingto achieve

15:22:54 [LeeF]

... important to spell out more clearly than we currently do

15:23:16 [LeeF]

... better to do one or the other than nother

15:23:29 [LeeF]

... important as we do more expressive querying of the semantic web

15:23:46 [SteveH]

I don't like conflating ParameterisedInference and SPARQL/OWL

15:23:50 [LeeF]

ack bijan

15:23:50 [Zakim]

bijan, you wanted to ask if this is how we mean to go on as opposed to the language groups doing them themselves

15:23:58 [SteveH]

they are really quite different

15:24:18 [chimezie]

bijan: perhaps WGs and community can do this

15:24:24 [ivan]

q+

15:24:32 [SimonS]

SteveH +1

15:24:36 [chimezie]

This argument applies to OWL as well as RIF , BTW (having this done in separate communities)

15:25:00 [ivan]

q-

15:25:05 [AxelPolleres]

+1 to that OWL and RIF did already a lot of pre-work in these regards and it shouldn't be so difficult as some expect.

15:25:30 [ivan]

q+

15:25:34 [chimezie]

SteveH: one is about querying store with inference capability and the other is about for this query , use this set of features

15:25:52 [chimezie]

The difference is that in once case you are being specific about the 'feature' in the other, the feature is open ended

15:25:56 [chimezie]

zakim, unmute me

15:25:56 [Zakim]

Chimezie_Ogbuji was not muted, chimezie

15:26:43 [SteveH]

q+ (again sorry)

15:26:48 [LeeF]

chimezie: RDF clinical data - want to derive variables for reporting to external agency - reporting requirements come after the fact - makes sense to write constraints for how to derive variables and then include that as parameter to the query

15:28:04 [chimezie]

ivan: if we forget RIF for a moment, we have various ways to add inference (RDF, OWL2, RDFS, etc..)

15:28:27 [chimezie]

... a finite list. Not really parameterized. With RIF we have something else. A well0defined way to define rules

15:29:09 [SimonS]

q+ the (RDF, OWL2, ...) case is not that different if you consider ontologies as parameters analogous to rulesets

15:29:28 [LeeF]

ack SteveH

15:29:31 [LeeF]

ack ivan

15:29:34 [SimonS]

q+

15:29:37 [chimezie]

SteveH: different point. Prior was working on rule-based query engines.

15:29:45 [chimezie]

... didn't require syntax extension

15:30:09 [Zakim]

-john-l

15:30:13 [chimezie]

... the concern is regarding the proposed syntax. Doesn't cover this usecase . Use services instead of rules

15:30:27 [chimezie]

... the community therefor doesn't have enough consensus

15:30:40 [bijan]

It seems that people are confusing defining an entailment/generation regime with the task of assigning such a regime to a particular BGP

15:31:19 [AxelPolleres]

q+ why just FROM is not so easy.

15:31:29 [chimezie]

the latter is needed in either case

15:31:32 [AxelPolleres]

q?

15:31:35 [AxelPolleres]

q+

15:31:46 [AndyS]

+1 to SteveH - need parts of query, not just overall

15:31:52 [bijan]

Why a rule set instead of an arbitrary extra graph?

15:32:07 [chimezie]

i.e., specifying a regime is only useful if you can 'use' it explicitely. I think of this latter part as the common ground between both

15:32:43 [bijan]

chimezie, sure (though you can do it with endpoints), but they are distinct.

15:33:55 [chimezie]

LeeF: not sure where are . Perhaps continue on mailing list?

15:34:00 [chimezie]

... pick it up during F2F

15:34:04 [chimezie]

... adjorn for today

15:34:10 [bijan]

Cheers to Lee for noble chairing

15:34:30 [bijan]

Cheers to chime for scribing the maddness

15:34:31 [SteveH]

thanks Lee, Chimezie

15:34:34 [Zakim]

-Chimezie_Ogbuji

15:34:37 [AxelPolleres]

thanks all! see you next week

15:34:37 [Zakim]

-bijan

15:34:38 [Zakim]

-[Garlik]

15:34:40 [AlexPassant]

thanks

15:34:43 [Zakim]

-PrateekJain-WSU

15:34:44 [Zakim]

-AlexPassant

15:34:45 [pgearon]

Thanks everyone

15:34:46 [AxelPolleres]

AxelPolleres has left #sparql

15:34:49 [Zakim]

-Ivan

15:34:56 [Zakim]

-AxelPolleres

15:34:57 [chimezie]

do you need me to generate minutes, etc..?

15:35:15 [LeeF]

chimezie, no I'll take care of it

15:35:22 [chimezie]

okay

15:35:35 [Zakim]

-SimonS

15:35:41 [Zakim]

-AndyS

15:35:46 [Zakim]

-LeeF

15:35:55 [Zakim]

-pgearon

15:38:00 [ChrisW]

ChrisW has left #sparql

15:39:51 [kasei]

kasei 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, AlexPassant, kasei, +049261287aaaa, SimonS, AndyS, +03539149aabb, SteveH, LukeWM, bijan, AxelPolleres, LeeF, pgearon, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, kjetil,

15:41:03 [Zakim]

... +01212803aacc, iv_an_ru, JanneS, PrateekJain-WSU, dnewman2

15:53:51 [SteveH_]

SteveH_ has joined #sparql

15:53:59 [LukeWM]

LukeWM has joined #sparql

16:05:21 [ivan]

ivan has left #sparql

16:40:02 [SimonS]

SimonS has left #sparql

17:19:45 [LeeF]

for anyone's edification, here's what i do to make the minutes

17:20:07 [LeeF]

(not sure if anyone can do this or not)

17:20:10 [LeeF]

1: http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/panel/

17:20:20 [LeeF]

2: choose SPARQL, "Use this group"

17:20:50 [LeeF]

3: in the "Copy RRSAgent IRC Log to Wiki Chatlog", make sure we've got the correct date and lcick "Copy IRC Log"

17:21:29 [LeeF]

4: follow the link to the new wiki page for the raw minutes ( http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/index.php?title=Chatlog_2009-04-28&redirect=no in this case)

17:21:37 [LeeF]

5: hand edit the minutes to do the following:

17:22:04 [LeeF]

5a: remove cruft

17:22:49 [LeeF]

5b: :%s/ivan/ivanh (vim)

17:25:51 [LeeF]

5c: add a line like this near the beginning:

17:25:53 [LeeF]

<LeeF> Present: Lee, Alex, Axel, Andy, iv_an_ru, IvanH, chimezie, john-l, lukewm, steveh, dnewman2, bijan, kjetil, prateek, kasei, Simon, pgearon, Janne

17:26:10 [LeeF]

(goal is to list all participants in a way that is unambiguous with respect to http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Participants2 )

17:26:38 [LeeF]

5d: manually (grr) do any s/.../... substitutions while cleaning up mnutes a la normal

17:27:54 [LeeF]

5e: make sure there are sane '<Person> topic: foo' lines scattered about

17:30:56 [LeeF]

5f: add '<Person> summary: foo' lines below topics where useful

17:36:34 [LeeF]

6: click "preview nicely formatted version" near the top

17:36:45 [LeeF]

(this brings me to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/wiki_scribe/?source=http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Chatlog_2009-04-28 )

17:37:07 [LeeF]

7: in some cases, there will be errors in pink boxes - go back and fix the wiki minutes source and re-generate the preview

17:37:40 [LeeF]

8: enter comment / description of changes and click 'Save for Review/Approval'

17:37:51 [LeeF]

9: send link to WG

17:37:54 [LeeF]

10: ???

17:37:56 [LeeF]

11: profit!

17:40:55 [ericP]

good plan

17:43:10 [LeeF]

hey

17:43:12 [LeeF]

ericP

17:43:16 [LeeF]

you got some actions in this meeting this morning

17:43:30 [LeeF]

'ACTION: ericP to solve world hunger'

17:49:26 [ericP]

✔

17:49:28 [ericP]

next?

17:51:39 [LeeF]

do little thin rectangles really solve world hunger?

17:52:11 [LeeF]

can you reserve zakim all day for next wednesday and thursday (May 6th and 7th)? we'll need it from 7am - 3pm (maybe later, i guess) our time

18:07:07 [LeeF]

ericP?

18:37:04 [ericP]

heya

18:37:33 [ericP]

i'm in pretty deep right now so it may wait 'till monday

19:52:34 [iv_an_ru]

iv_an_ru has joined #sparql

22:52:55 [pgearon]

pgearon has joined #sparql