IRC log of sparql on 2009-11-17

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:44:00 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #sparql
14:44:00 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/11/17-sparql-irc
14:44:02 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, make logs world
14:44:02 [Zakim]: Zakim has joined #sparql
14:44:04 [trackbot]: Zakim, this will be 77277
14:44:04 [Zakim]: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
14:44:05 [trackbot]: Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
14:44:05 [trackbot]: Date: 17 November 2009
14:44:06 [LeeF]: zakim, this will be SPARQL
14:44:06 [Zakim]: ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
14:44:09 [LeeF]: Chair: LeeF
14:44:17 [LeeF]: Scribenick: pgearon
14:44:22 [LeeF]: Regrets: AxelPolleres, LukeWM
14:44:30 [LeeF]: Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-11-17
14:44:40 [LeeF]: LeeF has changed the topic to: Agenda - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-11-17
14:57:04 [Zakim]: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
14:57:10 [pgearon_]: pgearon_ has joined #sparql
14:57:11 [Zakim]: +??P5
14:57:16 [AlexPassant]: Zakim, ??P5 is me
14:57:16 [Zakim]: +AlexPassant; got it
14:57:42 [Zakim]: +??P7
14:57:49 [KjetilK]: Zakim, ??P7 is me
14:57:49 [Zakim]: +KjetilK; got it
14:57:50 [Zakim]: +LeeF
14:57:57 [AlexPassant]: hi
14:58:06 [KjetilK]: Zakim, mute me
14:58:06 [Zakim]: KjetilK should now be muted
14:58:31 [KjetilK]: Zakim, unmute me
14:58:31 [Zakim]: KjetilK should no longer be muted
14:58:38 [john-l]: john-l has joined #sparql
14:58:42 [Zakim]: +kasei
14:58:51 [Zakim]: +??P12
14:58:56 [Zakim]: +bglimm
14:59:06 [bglimm]: Zakim, mute me
14:59:06 [Zakim]: bglimm should now be muted
14:59:15 [AndyS]: zakim, who is on the phone?
14:59:15 [Zakim]: On the phone I see AlexPassant, KjetilK, LeeF, kasei, ??P12, bglimm (muted)
14:59:29 [AndyS]: zakim, ??P12 is me (probably)
14:59:29 [Zakim]: I don't understand '??P12 is me (probably)', AndyS
14:59:34 [pgearon_]: I'm dialing in now
14:59:40 [AndyS]: zakim, ??P12 is me
14:59:41 [Zakim]: +AndyS; got it
14:59:51 [kasei]: Zakim, mute me
14:59:51 [Zakim]: kasei should now be muted
15:00:11 [Zakim]: +pgearon
15:00:17 [LeeF]: zakim, who's on the phone?
15:00:17 [Zakim]: On the phone I see AlexPassant, KjetilK, LeeF, kasei (muted), AndyS, bglimm (muted), pgearon
15:00:25 [ivan]: zakim, dial ivan-voip
15:00:26 [Zakim]: ok, ivan; the call is being made
15:00:32 [Zakim]: +Ivan
15:00:54 [Zakim]: +??P20
15:01:08 [tommik]: tommik has joined #sparql
15:01:18 [LeeF]: zakim, ??P20 is Orri
15:01:21 [Zakim]: +john-l
15:01:31 [davidcharboneau_]: davidcharboneau_ has joined #sparql
15:01:32 [Zakim]: +Orri; got it
15:01:45 [Zakim]: +??P30
15:01:47 [KjetilK]: Zakim, mute me
15:01:51 [SteveH_]: Zakim, ??P30 is SteveH
15:01:57 [LeeF]: zakim, who's on the phone?
15:02:08 [Zakim]: KjetilK should now be muted
15:02:18 [Zakim]: +SteveH; got it
15:02:25 [tommik]: zakim, ??P30 is me
15:02:28 [Zakim]: On the phone I see AlexPassant, KjetilK (muted), LeeF, kasei (muted), AndyS, bglimm (muted), pgearon, Ivan, Orri, john-l, SteveH
15:02:33 [Zakim]: +tommik
15:02:51 [KjetilK]: tommik, SteveH claimed to be ??P30
15:02:53 [Zakim]: I already had ??P30 as SteveH, tommik
15:03:30 [Zakim]: +dcharbon2
15:03:54 [pgearon]: LeeF: threw about 3 meeting worth of stuff into this week's agenda, so we probably won't get through it all
15:03:55 [KjetilK]: Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:05 [Zakim]: On the phone I see AlexPassant, KjetilK (muted), LeeF, kasei (muted), AndyS, bglimm (muted), pgearon, Ivan, Orri, john-l, SteveH, tommik, dcharbon2
15:04:33 [pgearon]: LeeF: Go through topics that don't require discussion first, then others
15:04:48 [LeeF]: PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-10
15:04:49 [Zakim]: +Chimezie_Ogbuji
15:05:08 [chimezie]: chimezie has joined #sparql
15:05:12 [pgearon]: LeeF: no minutes from F2F or from the 27th yet
15:05:19 [LeeF]: RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-11-10
15:05:26 [Zakim]: +Sandro
15:06:08 [kasei]: I'm at risk for next week.
15:06:10 [pgearon]: LeeF: On Ivan's suggestion, now removed OWL from liaison list
15:06:56 [bglimm]: Zakim, unmue me
15:06:56 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'unmue me', bglimm
15:07:01 [bglimm]: Zakim, unmute me
15:07:03 [Zakim]: bglimm should no longer be muted
15:07:20 [sandro]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009OctDec/0430.html
15:07:24 [SteveH_]: echo?
15:07:36 [pgearon]: bglimm: providing summary of entailment call
15:07:48 [sandro]: (the echo is probably bglimm, and will go away when she mutes again, I bet.)
15:07:49 [pgearon]: bglimm: started on ISSUE-28, entailment update
15:08:17 [pgearon]: bglimm: ISSUE-34 interaction with blank nodes, now closed
15:08:47 [pgearon]: bglimm: ISSUE-42 RDFS entailment with inconsistency
15:09:04 [pgearon]: bglimm: agreed with current implementations raising errors
15:09:09 [LeeF]: bglimm: systems may/should raise an error for inconsistency
15:09:32 [pgearon]: bglimm: ISSUE-47 (?) entailment on graphs or endpoints
15:10:18 [pgearon]: bglimm: need more info to work with RIF
15:10:40 [Zakim]: + +0383306aaaa
15:10:51 [sandro]: (um, that's not how I recall the RIF issue. The 'need another editor' was specifically about non-mon logics, which RIF includes. But that doesn't apply for RIF core or rif BLD.)
15:11:05 [pgearon]: bglimm: currently trying to come up with a proposal on entailment for annotations
15:11:07 [iv_an_ru]: Zakim, +0383 is me
15:11:07 [Zakim]: +iv_an_ru; got it
15:11:14 [bglimm]: Zakim, mute me
15:11:14 [Zakim]: bglimm should now be muted
15:11:28 [iv_an_ru]: (finally connected :)
15:11:50 [kasei]: pgearon, s/47/43/
15:11:55 [bglimm]: Sandro, I always said, even before that telecon that I don't feel confident about RIF and either Axel helps me with that or we need another co-editor
15:11:57 [LeeF]: topic: query issues from f2f
15:11:59 [LeeF]: PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-11 by noting that it's invalid to project variables/functions on variables that are not included in the GROUP BY clause and also nothing that what this means in practice depends on ISSUE-41
15:13:29 [LeeF]: Orri: seconded
15:13:34 [SteveH_]: included isn't enough
15:13:34 [bglimm]: Axel wanted to help with RIF core, but I'm not sure whether he will find the time or not.
15:14:02 [SteveH_]: e.g. GROUP BY ?x+?Y
15:14:11 [LeeF]: PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-11 by noting that it's invalid to project variables/functions on variables that are not exactly the GROUP BY clause and also nothing that what this means in practice depends on ISSUE-41
15:14:41 [LeeF]: RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-11 by noting that it's invalid to project variables/functions on variables that are not exactly the GROUP BY clause and also nothing that what this means in practice depends on ISSUE-41
15:14:49 [LeeF]: no abstentions or objections
15:14:51 [Prateek]: Prateek has joined #sparql
15:14:55 [LeeF]: trackbot, close ISSUE-11
15:14:56 [trackbot]: ISSUE-11 Implicit vs explicit GROUPing closed
15:15:13 [Zakim]: +Prateek
15:15:16 [LeeF]: PROPOSED: Asterisk is a valid argument to COUNT, but not to other aggregate functions, and not to custom aggregates
15:15:20 [AndyS]: I register agrement with Steve on the imprecise wording
15:15:24 [AndyS]: (prev point)
15:15:39 [KjetilK]: +1
15:15:42 [pgearon]: seconded
15:15:42 [SteveH_]: +1
15:15:44 [ivan]: +1
15:15:49 [iv_an_ru]: +1
15:15:51 [LeeF]: RESOLVED: Asterisk is a valid argument to COUNT, but not to other aggregate functions, and not to custom aggregates, no abstentions or objections
15:15:52 [bglimm]: +1
15:16:37 [LeeF]: PROPOSED: SPARQL 1.1 does not inlude any subqueries other than sub-selects in graph patterns, noting that the question of an EXISTS FILTER form is still pending
15:16:44 [pgearon]: LeeF: holding off on third item, due to need for discussion on unbound variables
15:17:17 [SteveH_]: +1
15:17:21 [AndyS]: abstain
15:17:22 [pgearon]: +1
15:17:29 [iv_an_ru]: +0.001
15:17:31 [chimezie]: abstain
15:17:35 [bglimm]: +1
15:17:36 [john-l]: abstain
15:17:36 [LeeF]: RESOLVED: SPARQL 1.1 does not inlude any subqueries other than sub-selects in graph patterns, noting that the question of an EXISTS FILTER form is still pending, AndyS, chimezie abstaining
15:17:37 [tommik]: +1
15:17:40 [pgearon]: actually, I'm going to change to an abstain (sorry)
15:18:28 [AndyS]: q+
15:18:40 [pgearon]: concern about not having an option for EXISTS
15:18:46 [iv_an_ru]: Yes, exists can be rewritten as OPTIONAL
15:19:00 [LeeF]: ack AndyS
15:19:11 [iv_an_ru]: but existing SQL optimizers tend to disagree with me :)
15:19:16 [LeeF]: s/concern about/Orri: concern about/
15:19:27 [pgearon]: AndyS: orri was describing a NOT EXISTS or EXISTS outside of a filter
15:19:37 [SteveH_]: { EXISTS } UNION { EXISTS }
15:20:00 [AndyS]: Not quite the same.
15:20:02 [LeeF]: zakim, who's on the phone?
15:20:02 [Zakim]: On the phone I see AlexPassant, KjetilK (muted), LeeF, kasei (muted), AndyS, bglimm (muted), pgearon, Ivan, Orri, john-l, SteveH, tommik, dcharbon2, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Sandro,
15:20:05 [Zakim]: ... iv_an_ru, Prateek
15:20:05 [SteveH_]: no, but similar
15:20:37 [pgearon]: LeeF: asking abstainers what their problem is
15:22:22 [chimezie]: Basically, there is a use case where you want to capture an exclusion criteria (match X but not Y), where Y is a Group Graph Pattern itself
15:22:38 [chimezie]: I'm not 100% if that scenario is covered by the EXISTS FILTER form alternative
15:23:45 [LeeF]: subtopic: name for coalesce
15:24:10 [iv_an_ru]: One of bad cases is an expression like (A or exists (X) or exists (Y) or exists (Z)) --- too much joins if turned into OPTIONALs.
15:24:26 [pgearon]: LeeF: coalesce is an SQL term that returns the first value that evaluates as non-null
15:24:58 [pgearon]: LeeF: in SPARQL we are looking at returning the first value that doesn't result in an unbound or a type error
15:25:22 [SteveH_]: not just SQL it's used in general computer science
15:25:31 [pgearon]: LeeF: proposed names: coalesce, first_bound, left_most, try, others....
15:25:41 [SteveH_]: q+
15:25:45 [LeeF]: ack SteveH_
15:25:51 [AndyS]: TRY > FIRST > LEFTMOST > 0 > others
15:26:22 [iv_an_ru]: Will I explain any other name as "X is an other name for COALESCE" ? :)
15:26:22 [KjetilK]: q+
15:26:27 [AlexPassant]: its however obscure for non english speakers / non-sql people
15:26:33 [LeeF]: ack KjetilK
15:26:49 [SteveH_]: AlexPassant, and people who don't know the computer science meaning
15:27:08 [chimezie]: I would almost suggest REDUCE via abuse of notation, but I don't want to hamper progress
15:27:13 [pgearon]: (voice?): aren't we using a different meaning to compsci and SQL?
15:27:21 [SteveH_]: no, same meaning
15:27:23 [LeeF]: s/voice?/kjetil
15:27:31 [KjetilK]: Zakim, mute me
15:27:31 [SteveH_]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_coalescing_operator
15:27:31 [Zakim]: KjetilK should now be muted
15:27:33 [AndyS]: Different to SQL(errors)
15:27:58 [LeeF]: strawpoll: COALESCE
15:28:02 [SteveH_]: +1
15:28:04 [john-l]: +1
15:28:06 [KjetilK]: 0
15:28:06 [chimezie]: +1
15:28:06 [ivan]: 0
15:28:07 [sandro]: 0
15:28:08 [davidcharboneau_]: 0
15:28:09 [AlexPassant]: 0
15:28:09 [kasei]: 0
15:28:10 [LeeF]: +1
15:28:10 [bglimm]: +1
15:28:10 [Prateek]: 0
15:28:10 [iv_an_ru]: +1
15:28:11 [tommik]: 0
15:28:15 [AndyS]: 0
15:28:15 [pgearon]: 0
15:28:18 [LeeF]: Orri: +1
15:28:26 [pgearon]: I note that the title of that Wikipedia article is "Null" coalescing article
15:28:38 [LeeF]: strawpoll: TRY
15:28:45 [tommik]: 0
15:28:45 [SteveH_]: 0
15:28:46 [KjetilK]: +1
15:28:47 [john-l]: 0
15:28:47 [pgearon]: +1
15:28:48 [iv_an_ru]: -1
15:28:48 [bglimm]: 0
15:28:49 [sandro]: 0
15:28:51 [AndyS]: +1
15:28:51 [ivan]: 1
15:28:52 [chimezie]: 0
15:28:52 [LeeF]: 0
15:28:53 [AlexPassant]: 0
15:28:53 [davidcharboneau_]: 0
15:28:55 [kasei]: -1
15:29:08 [LeeF]: strawpoll: FIRST_BOUND
15:29:08 [Prateek]: 0
15:29:11 [KjetilK]: +1
15:29:12 [tommik]: 0
15:29:12 [SteveH_]: 0
15:29:12 [pgearon]: -1
15:29:12 [john-l]: +1
15:29:13 [AlexPassant]: +1
15:29:14 [davidcharboneau_]: +1
15:29:14 [bglimm]: 0
15:29:15 [AndyS]: -1
15:29:17 [chimezie]: +1
15:29:19 [LeeF]: +1
15:29:20 [sandro]: 0
15:29:20 [ivan]: 1
15:29:22 [iv_an_ru]: TRY without a CATCH will damage my C++ed brains.
15:29:23 [SteveH_]: correction: -1
15:29:30 [iv_an_ru]: -1
15:29:37 [sandro]: zakim, who is talking?
15:29:47 [Zakim]: sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: LeeF (73%), AndyS (5%), Orri (5%), Ivan (85%), dcharbon2 (9%), Chimezie_Ogbuji (5%)
15:29:49 [davidcharboneau_]: zakim, mute me
15:29:50 [sandro]: first_value?
15:29:51 [Zakim]: sorry, davidcharboneau_, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
15:30:02 [LeeF]: zakim, mute ivan
15:30:02 [Zakim]: Ivan should now be muted
15:30:07 [bglimm]: yes
15:30:11 [ivan]: sorry...
15:30:12 [iv_an_ru]: BTW, do we support '_' in other "words", like names?
15:30:19 [LeeF]: strawpoll: leftmost
15:30:25 [SteveH_]: -1
15:30:25 [pgearon]: -1
15:30:27 [kasei]: -1
15:30:27 [john-l]: 0
15:30:27 [ivan]: 0
15:30:28 [tommik]: 0
15:30:28 [AndyS]: 0
15:30:28 [AlexPassant]: 0
15:30:28 [chimezie]: -1
15:30:29 [sandro]: -1
15:30:31 [KjetilK]: 0
15:30:32 [LeeF]: 0
15:30:35 [Prateek]: 0
15:30:39 [davidcharboneau_]: -1
15:30:40 [iv_an_ru]: -1, LEFTMOST is -Inf :)
15:30:41 [bglimm]: 0
15:30:51 [sandro]: (I like FIRSTVALUE, my self.)
15:31:24 [LeeF]: Note general consensus around "COALESCE"
15:31:44 [pgearon]: LeeF: Do projected expressions require an alias?
15:32:02 [LeeF]: (?x+?y)
15:32:03 [chimezie]: Zakim, mute me
15:32:03 [Zakim]: Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
15:32:19 [pgearon]: LeeF: F2F came to mild consensus that aliases would be required
15:32:26 [SteveH_]: q+
15:32:29 [LeeF]: ack SteveH_
15:32:38 [pgearon]: LeeF: thinks AndyS mildly disagreed
15:32:45 [kasei]: I'm with AndyS against it.
15:33:03 [SteveH_]: SELECT (1+2)
15:33:12 [AndyS]: Example: SELECT count(*) { ... }
15:33:13 [pgearon]: SteveH_: thinks that it might be better to put it off to the next SPARQL, rather than allowing it now and needing to remove it later
15:33:37 [chimezie]: but don't you *have* to bind it to a variable to be in a solution set?
15:33:39 [pgearon]: (referring to unaliased projections)
15:33:41 [chimezie]: or am I missing something
15:33:47 [SteveH_]: ?`(1+2)` is not going to be fun :)
15:34:10 [LeeF]: strawpoll on requiring aliases for expressions - please vote "required", "not required", or "don't care"
15:34:15 [pgearon]: many APIs allow column selection by index, not just by name
15:34:23 [davidcharboneau_]: required
15:34:24 [SteveH_]: required
15:34:25 [chimezie]: required
15:34:25 [kasei]: not required
15:34:25 [LeeF]: Orri: required
15:34:26 [AndyS]: not required
15:34:26 [iv_an_ru]: required
15:34:28 [pgearon]: required
15:34:31 [ivan]: required
15:34:32 [LeeF]: don't care
15:34:35 [tommik]: don't care
15:34:35 [bglimm]: don't care
15:34:39 [john-l]: don't care
15:34:39 [Prateek]: don't care
15:34:48 [KjetilK]: don't care
15:34:59 [iv_an_ru]: BTW "AS" between expressions helps to localize syntax errors
15:35:09 [pgearon]: I think it would be a valid extension to not require it, wouldn't it?
15:35:14 [LeeF]: Notes definite preference for requiring aliases
15:35:29 [LeeF]: subtopic: HAVING vs. FILTER
15:36:52 [pgearon]: LeeF: in SPARQL HAVING must happen after the main query pattern, so we don't need a separate name like SQL needs
15:37:16 [pgearon]: LeeF: so do we copy SQL and use SQL's HAVING, or re-use FILTER?
15:37:32 [SteveH_]: WHERE { ... } GROUP BY ?x FILTER( SUM(?y) > 2)
15:37:37 [pgearon]: AndyS: must appear after the GROUP BY
15:37:41 [chimezie]: Re-using FILTER seems intuitive to me, especially since its use with aggregates clearly delineates the 2 use cases
15:37:45 [iv_an_ru]: I've implemented HAVING yesterday in Virtuoso. Convenient...
15:37:51 [AndyS]: {... } GROUP BY - HAVING } ...
15:38:28 [LeeF]: strawpoll: HAVING vs. FILTER vs. don't care
15:38:29 [pgearon]: HAVING
15:38:30 [AlexPassant]: FILTER
15:38:31 [kasei]: filter
15:38:33 [bglimm]: HAVING
15:38:35 [iv_an_ru]: HAVING
15:38:36 [chimezie]: FILTER
15:38:37 [ivan]: don't care
15:38:37 [SteveH_]: don't care
15:38:38 [davidcharboneau_]: don't care
15:38:39 [tommik]: don't care
15:38:39 [LeeF]: don't care
15:38:45 [john-l]: don't care
15:38:47 [KjetilK]: don't care
15:38:48 [AndyS]: HAVING but too early to decide (cutom aggregates)
15:38:49 [Prateek]: don't care
15:39:01 [pgearon]: wow, close one
15:39:03 [AndyS]: s/cutom/custom/
15:39:05 [iv_an_ru]: One more keyword --- one less redundand flexibility fo making errors.
15:39:12 [SteveH_]: leave it to editors?
15:39:49 [LeeF]: Leave it up to the editors.
15:40:11 [pgearon]: LeeF: commas in SELECT list?
15:40:15 [LeeF]: (expr AS ?var)
15:41:20 [AndyS]: Optional commas, please
15:41:26 [iv_an_ru]: We have now optional commas in select lists
15:41:32 [SteveH_]: Optional commas is the worst possible outcome
15:41:33 [pgearon]: do we?
15:41:34 [SteveH_]: IMHO
15:41:39 [LeeF]: strawpoll: commas required, brackets required, either allowed, don't care
15:42:32 [iv_an_ru]: we have required (...): (expr) as ?var but optional commas
15:42:49 [pgearon]: AndyS: concern that commas and brackets are distinct and shouldn't be voted on as one vs the other
15:43:19 [iv_an_ru]: It's easier to close compiler's eyes on extra commas than to explain the syntax to every SQL-minded developer
15:43:42 [AndyS]: Agree with iv_an_ru
15:44:12 [SteveH_]: letter them?
15:44:16 [iv_an_ru]: Maybe it'ssafer to permit either a list without commas or a list with all commas but not a list with few optional commas.
15:44:22 [LeeF]: strawpoll: 1. commas required, 2. (expr AS ?var) required, 3. (expr) AS ?var required. 2 + optional commas, 3 + optional commas
15:45:02 [kasei]: 2
15:45:04 [ivan]: 2
15:45:04 [chimezie]: 3
15:45:04 [SteveH_]: 2
15:45:05 [AlexPassant]: 3
15:45:07 [davidcharboneau_]: 3
15:45:09 [AndyS]: 2+opt commas or 2
15:45:12 [LeeF]: Orri: 3 + optional commas
15:45:12 [iv_an_ru]: 3+ optional commas
15:45:14 [LeeF]: 2
15:45:17 [bglimm]: 3+ optional commas (but no strong preference)
15:45:19 [john-l]: 3
15:45:23 [KjetilK]: 2
15:45:24 [pgearon]: 2 + optional commas
15:45:25 [tommik]: 2
15:45:32 [Prateek]: 2
15:45:59 [LeeF]: Notes overall group preference for 2. (expr AS ?var)
15:46:57 [pgearon]: LeeF: should now discuss aggregates and mixed data types
15:47:22 [pgearon]: LeeF: what to do with MIN with strings, integers, dates, etc
15:48:03 [pgearon]: LeeF: F2F also discussed SUM, AVG, etc. Thought to use semantics of "+"
15:48:46 [pgearon]: LeeF: this propagates errors. Casts and COALESCE could overcome some of this. But AndyS showed that it isn't quite the same behaviour
15:49:35 [SteveH_]: SPARQL doesn't have a NULL technically speaking
15:49:56 [pgearon]: orri: why not skip over nulls for sum (skip over errors and unbound)
15:50:47 [SteveH_]: +1 to testcases and usecases
15:51:02 [pgearon]: AndyS: want to check common cases. Complicated cases are good for testing, but not needed so much for designing
15:51:35 [SteveH_]: we haven't looked at any complicated cases yet
15:52:33 [pgearon]: AndyS: thinks the common case is a 1-level query and what ends up in the result set. Wants to get down to use cases to make sure the group is all on the same page
15:53:01 [pgearon]: LeeF: need to define semantics
15:53:20 [pgearon]: AndyS: want to define semantics, but don't let corner cases drive the semantics
15:54:24 [Zakim]: -Sandro
15:54:34 [KjetilK]: This is fixed, and hard to do, but perhaps relevant: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2009Jun/0272.html ?
15:55:23 [pgearon]: LeeF: thinks that this isn't an issue that we'll progress on in a teleconference
15:55:24 [KjetilK]: q+
15:55:29 [KjetilK]: ack me
15:55:57 [iv_an_ru]: TPC-H is a good use case ;)
15:56:22 [SteveH_]: -1 to TPC-H as a usecase :)
15:56:31 [AndyS]: q+
15:56:36 [KjetilK]: Zakim, mute me
15:56:36 [Zakim]: KjetilK should now be muted
15:56:38 [LeeF]: ack AndyS
15:57:18 [SteveH_]: yes, agreed with Andy
15:57:26 [pgearon]: AndyS: can we hear an example of problem?
15:57:27 [SteveH_]: should look harder at what to do with errors
15:59:22 [kasei]: i'll have some service description stuff. will send an email about it this week.
15:59:39 [Zakim]: -Chimezie_Ogbuji
15:59:41 [Zakim]: -Orri
15:59:44 [Zakim]: -Prateek
15:59:45 [Zakim]: -dcharbon2
15:59:46 [Zakim]: -john-l
15:59:47 [Zakim]: -bglimm
15:59:48 [Zakim]: -SteveH
15:59:51 [Zakim]: -iv_an_ru
15:59:53 [Zakim]: -KjetilK
15:59:53 [Zakim]: -Ivan
15:59:55 [Zakim]: -tommik
16:00:00 [AndyS]: Good call.
16:00:05 [Zakim]: -AlexPassant
16:00:08 [Zakim]: -kasei
16:00:10 [Zakim]: -LeeF
16:00:11 [Zakim]: -pgearon
16:00:16 [Zakim]: -AndyS
16:00:17 [Zakim]: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
16:00:20 [Zakim]: Attendees were AlexPassant, KjetilK, LeeF, kasei, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, Ivan, john-l, Orri, SteveH, tommik, dcharbon2, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Sandro, +0383306aaaa, iv_an_ru, Prateek
16:01:15 [AndyS]: pgearon - write an outline design fromwht you think is right. Then you''l know :-)
16:01:34 [pgearon]: consensus was reached on 2 conflicting designs, and people keep referring back to the "consensus" :-)
16:01:52 [pgearon]: AndyS, yes, you're right. I should just define what the consensus was :-)
16:02:24 [pgearon]: pgearon has left #sparql
16:04:19 [kasei]: KjetilK?
16:06:41 [KjetilK]: kasei!
16:07:37 [kasei]: heya. the new patches look good. applied them this morning.
16:07:46 [KjetilK]: great!
16:07:53 [kasei]: (really bad lag here, sorry if i'm not responsive)
16:07:59 [KjetilK]: np
16:09:07 [KjetilK]: are you ready to do a CPAN upload, or should I?
16:09:10 [kasei]: as far as maintainence, i'd be happy to release it or have you do it.
16:09:19 [kasei]: either way would be fine.
16:09:39 [KjetilK]: ok, since I am the only one using it now, I guess I could do it?
16:10:18 [kasei]: if you like, sure. but don't feel obligated; I can try to package it up tonight if you'd like me to.
16:10:23 [kasei]: really whatever is easiest.
16:11:03 [KjetilK]: ok, I'll do it later tonight, np
16:11:19 [KjetilK]: thanks for applying the patches!
16:11:34 [KjetilK]: it smells dinner here, I should be going
16:11:37 [KjetilK]: wife++
16:12:58 [kasei]: ok, later.
16:16:48 [ivan]: ivan has left #sparql
17:02:25 [dcharbon2]: dcharbon2 has joined #sparql
18:04:06 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #sparql
19:11:24 [pgearon]: pgearon has joined #sparql
19:56:16 [pgearon]: pgearon has joined #sparql