13:59:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/21-sparql-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/21-sparql-irc ←
13:59:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:59:26 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 77277 ←
13:59:26 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute ←
13:59:27 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:59:28 <trackbot> Date: 21 August 2012
13:59:40 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started ←
13:59:47 <Zakim> +MattPerry
Zakim IRC Bot: +MattPerry ←
13:59:55 <AxelPolleres> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0122.html
14:00:10 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
14:00:13 <AndyS> zakim, ??P1 is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, ??P1 is me ←
14:00:13 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
14:00:27 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?
Andy Seaborne: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:00:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS ←
14:00:37 <LeeF> trackbot, start meeting
Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, start meeting ←
14:00:39 <Zakim> +kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: +kasei ←
14:00:39 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:00:41 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 77277 ←
14:00:41 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now ←
14:00:42 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
14:00:42 <trackbot> Date: 21 August 2012
14:00:43 <LeeF> oops
Lee Feigenbaum: oops ←
14:00:45 <LeeF> late to the party
Lee Feigenbaum: late to the party ←
14:00:50 <LeeF> zakim, this is sparql
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, this is sparql ←
14:00:50 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, LeeF; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM ←
14:01:12 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Axel Polleres: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:01:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS, kasei, AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS, kasei, AxelPolleres ←
14:01:15 <Zakim> +LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF ←
14:01:25 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
14:01:46 <LeeF> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0122.html
14:01:55 <Zakim> +Arthur_Keen
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arthur_Keen ←
14:01:56 <Zakim> +sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +sandro ←
14:02:38 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's on the phone? ←
14:02:38 <Zakim> On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS, kasei, AxelPolleres, LeeF, Arthur_Keen, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS, kasei, AxelPolleres, LeeF, Arthur_Keen, sandro ←
14:03:05 <AxelPolleres> matt, you mentioned you can scribe this week last time? (/me can do otherwise)
Axel Polleres: matt, you mentioned you can scribe this week last time? (/me can do otherwise) ←
14:03:15 <MattPerry> sure, I can scribe
Matthew Perry: sure, I can scribe ←
14:03:28 <AxelPolleres> scribe: MattPerry
(Scribe set to Matthew Perry)
14:03:36 <LeeF> topic: Admin
14:03:36 <Zakim> +??P10
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10 ←
14:03:41 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve the minutes from last week at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-08-14
PROPOSED: Approve the minutes from last week at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-08-14 ←
14:03:44 <cbuilara> zakim, ??P10 is me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, ??P10 is me ←
14:03:44 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cbuilara; got it ←
14:03:47 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, mute me ←
14:03:47 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: cbuilara should now be muted ←
14:04:06 <Zakim> +pgearon
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgearon ←
14:04:18 <AndyS> +1 to minutes
Andy Seaborne: +1 to minutes ←
14:04:27 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve the minutes from last week at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-08-14
RESOLVED: Approve the minutes from last week at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-08-14 ←
14:04:41 <Zakim> -cbuilara
Zakim IRC Bot: -cbuilara ←
14:04:47 <MattPerry> LeeF: any comments from RDF WG
Lee Feigenbaum: any comments from RDF WG ←
14:05:00 <MattPerry> AndyS: No, not yet. They are meeting this week
Andy Seaborne: No, not yet. They are meeting this week ←
14:06:18 <MattPerry> topic: Actions from last week
14:06:55 <MattPerry> LeeF: Carlos' Action to look at protocl tests?
Lee Feigenbaum: Carlos' Action to look at protocl tests? ←
14:06:57 <LeeF> cbuilara, have you had a chance yet to look at the protocol tests for completeness?
Lee Feigenbaum: cbuilara, have you had a chance yet to look at the protocol tests for completeness? ←
14:07:13 <cbuilara> no, sorry
Carlos Buil Aranda: no, sorry ←
14:07:20 <LeeF> ok
Lee Feigenbaum: ok ←
14:07:45 <MattPerry> LeeF: Greg & Sandro, did we get the validator moved?
Lee Feigenbaum: Greg & Sandro, did we get the validator moved? ←
14:07:46 <AndyS> I tried the tests -- still an issue with the singe endpoint for hosted and web data.
Andy Seaborne: I tried the tests -- still an issue with the singe endpoint for hosted and web data. ←
14:07:48 <cbuilara> I will look ointo the tests this week
Carlos Buil Aranda: I will look ointo the tests this week ←
14:07:49 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/protocol_validator forwards
Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/protocol_validator forwards ←
14:07:53 <LeeF> ok, great cbuilara
Lee Feigenbaum: ok, great cbuilara ←
14:08:07 <MattPerry> LeeF: anything else on protocol tests
Lee Feigenbaum: anything else on protocol tests ←
14:08:35 <MattPerry> kasei: No, I've made progress on ARQ testing, so I'm willing to open it up
Gregory Williams: No, I've made progress on ARQ testing, so I'm willing to open it up ←
14:08:47 <MattPerry> AndyS: what about overloading one endpoint to 2 services
Andy Seaborne: what about overloading one endpoint to 2 services ←
14:09:00 <Zakim> +??P17
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←
14:09:07 <cbuilara> zakim, ??P17 is me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, ??P17 is me ←
14:09:07 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cbuilara; got it ←
14:09:16 <MattPerry> ... some cases require data in the endpoint, some don't
... some tests require data in the endpoint, some don't ←
14:09:31 <cbuilara> ok
Carlos Buil Aranda: ok ←
14:09:43 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, mute me ←
14:09:43 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: cbuilara should now be muted ←
14:09:51 <MattPerry> s/cases/tests
14:10:21 <MattPerry> kasei: as written, all of them should work with data in the endpoint, but ARQ doesn't work that way
Gregory Williams: as written, all of them should work with data in the endpoint, but ARQ doesn't work that way ←
14:10:37 <MattPerry> ... it may be hard to make it work with all implementations
... it may be hard to make it work with all implementations ←
14:11:03 <MattPerry> AndyS: can we have 2 endpoints in the tests, one for each case?
Andy Seaborne: can we have 2 endpoints in the tests, one for each case? ←
14:11:41 <MattPerry> kasei: the validator attempts to load the data before running the tests
Gregory Williams: the validator attempts to load the data before running the tests ←
14:12:06 <MattPerry> AndyS: can you point to spec tests to confirm that interpretation
Andy Seaborne: can you point to spec tests to confirm that interpretation ←
14:12:31 <MattPerry> kasei: this is a case where an implementation has some freedom
Gregory Williams: this is a case where an implementation has some freedom ←
14:13:21 <MattPerry> LeeF: you use SPARQL update to load the data?
Lee Feigenbaum: you use SPARQL update to load the data? ←
14:13:25 <MattPerry> kasei: yes
Gregory Williams: yes ←
14:13:39 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
14:14:03 <MattPerry> ... For update tests, it won't work
... For update tests, it won't work ←
14:14:19 <MattPerry> LeeF: Andy, how would you want to see such a test written?
Lee Feigenbaum: Andy, how would you want to see such a test written? ←
14:14:41 <MattPerry> AndyS: there are two kinds of endpoints: those that host the data and those that get it from the web
Andy Seaborne: there are two kinds of endpoints: those that host the data and those that get it from the web ←
14:15:14 <MattPerry> ... For fuseki, if it's hosted data you cannot retieve data from the web
... For fuseki, if it's hosted data you cannot retieve data from the web ←
14:16:07 <MattPerry> ... the update tests run tests for both kinds on the same endpoint
... the update tests run tests for both kinds on the same endpoint ←
14:16:28 <MattPerry> ... doing the update assumes the data is local to the host
... doing the update assumes the data is local to the host ←
14:16:46 <MattPerry> ... so specifying protocol parameters don't make sense
... so specifying protocol parameters don't make sense ←
14:17:00 <MattPerry> LeeF: for systems that pass the tests it makes sense
Lee Feigenbaum: for systems that pass the tests it makes sense ←
14:18:05 <MattPerry> ... we are trying to test SPARQL update part of the protocol? correct?
... we are trying to test SPARQL update part of the protocol? correct? ←
14:18:15 <MattPerry> kasei: some tests may be for query
Gregory Williams: some tests may be for query ←
14:18:30 <MattPerry> ... I don't know of an alternative for testing
... I don't know of an alternative for testing ←
14:19:06 <MattPerry> AndyS: update is specified using GRAPH URI and NAMED GRAPH URI is referring to local dataset
Andy Seaborne: update is specified using GRAPH URI and NAMED GRAPH URI is referring to local dataset ←
14:19:25 <MattPerry> ... for query, it does not necessarily refer to the local dataset
... for query, it does not necessarily refer to the local dataset ←
14:19:34 <AndyS> using-graph-uri= & using-named-uri=
Andy Seaborne: using-graph-uri= & using-named-uri= ←
14:21:43 <MattPerry> AndyS: you make an update and then you query that dataset. The protocol parameters change the dataset
Andy Seaborne: you make an update and then you query that dataset. The protocol parameters change the dataset ←
14:22:10 <MattPerry> LeeF: the assumption is that you update the graph store and the dataset is the state of the graph store
Lee Feigenbaum: the assumption is that you update the graph store and the dataset is the state of the graph store ←
14:22:44 <MattPerry> ... you update and the the query that follows tests the state of the graph store,
... you update and the the query that follows tests the state of the graph store, ←
14:23:15 <MattPerry> AndyS: the dataset description in the protocol parameters is not the dataset in the graph store
Andy Seaborne: the dataset description in the protocol parameters is not the dataset in the graph store ←
14:23:37 <AxelPolleres> q+ to ask why dataset specification itself in update should update the graph store?
Axel Polleres: q+ to ask why dataset specification itself in update should update the graph store? ←
14:23:40 <AxelPolleres> "That is, the GroupGraphPattern in the WHERE clause will be matched against the dataset described by explicit USING or USING NAMED clauses, if specified, and against the Graph Store otherwise."
Axel Polleres: "That is, the GroupGraphPattern in the WHERE clause will be matched against the dataset described by explicit USING or USING NAMED clauses, if specified, and against the Graph Store otherwise." ←
14:24:45 <MattPerry> LeeF: given that configuration of a system, how can you test protocol?
Lee Feigenbaum: given that configuration of a system, how can you test protocol? ←
14:25:06 <MattPerry> AndyS: you write a query with a GRAPH keyword in it
Andy Seaborne: you write a query with a GRAPH keyword in it ←
14:25:38 <MattPerry> AxelPolleres: I tend to agree with Andy, we should not use test queries with USING and USING NAMED for protocol
Axel Polleres: I tend to agree with Andy, we should not use test queries with USING and USING NAMED for protocol ←
14:26:28 <MattPerry> LeeF: if you don't include dataset parameters in the protocol follow up query, the we fall back to what is the default dataset?, which is system-defined
Lee Feigenbaum: if you don't include dataset parameters in the protocol follow up query, the we fall back to what is the default dataset?, which is system-defined ←
14:26:44 <AxelPolleres> ... because we left the actual meaning of USING/USING NAMED and FROM/FROM NAMED deliberately open, i.e. system-specific
Axel Polleres: ... because we left the actual meaning of USING/USING NAMED and FROM/FROM NAMED deliberately open, i.e. system-specific ←
14:28:33 <MattPerry> LeeF: if we did update to ARQ, and we followed that up with query via the protocol without dataset specifications, but did have a graph clause that referenced the loaded graph URI, then that would test the state of the graph store?
Lee Feigenbaum: if we did update to ARQ, and we followed that up with query via the protocol without dataset specifications, but did have a graph clause that referenced the loaded graph URI, then that would test the state of the graph store? ←
14:28:36 <MattPerry> AndyS: yes
Andy Seaborne: yes ←
14:28:58 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's on the phone? ←
14:28:58 <Zakim> On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS, kasei, AxelPolleres, LeeF, Arthur_Keen, sandro, pgearon, cbuilara (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see MattPerry, AndyS, kasei, AxelPolleres, LeeF, Arthur_Keen, sandro, pgearon, cbuilara (muted) ←
14:28:59 <MattPerry> LeeF: i don't see anything that will work for all systems
Lee Feigenbaum: i don't see anything that will work for all systems ←
14:30:12 <MattPerry> Matt: we do what ARQ/fuseki does
Matthew Perry: we do what ARQ/fuseki does ←
14:30:36 <MattPerry> kasei: we do not allow update when cofigured to retrieve data from the web
Gregory Williams: we do not allow update when cofigured to retrieve data from the web ←
14:31:01 <MattPerry> Arthur_Keen: need to talk it over with our engineers
Arthur Keen: need to talk it over with our engineers ←
14:32:02 <MattPerry> ... can we get a writeup on this?
... can we get a writeup on this? ←
14:33:27 <cbuilara> no, I do not have a protocol implementation
Carlos Buil Aranda: no, I do not have a protocol implementation ←
14:34:23 <MattPerry> LeeF: the problem is that different systems use different systems to check the state of the graph store
Lee Feigenbaum: the problem is that different systems use different systems to check the state of the graph store ←
14:34:59 <MattPerry> ... writing a validator for this is thus a problem
... writing a validator for this is thus a problem ←
14:35:19 <AndyS> q+ to show a tricky case ...
Andy Seaborne: q+ to show a tricky case ... ←
14:35:26 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
14:35:26 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to show a tricky case ...
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to show a tricky case ... ←
14:35:29 <MattPerry> ... maybe we should check failures by hand
... maybe we should check failures by hand ←
14:35:59 <MattPerry> AndyS: the worst case, the default graph is the UNION of all graphs
Andy Seaborne: the worst case, the default graph is the UNION of all graphs ←
14:37:12 <MattPerry> kasei: I agree this is very hard to test. The protocol spec is very accepting
Gregory Williams: I agree this is very hard to test. The protocol spec is very accepting ←
14:38:07 <AndyS> ack me
Andy Seaborne: ack me ←
14:38:11 <MattPerry> LeeF: I would like to avoid publishing any document that says implementation X failed these tests, but they were actually conforming
Lee Feigenbaum: I would like to avoid publishing any document that says implementation X failed these tests, but they were actually conforming ←
14:39:13 <MattPerry> AndyS: in the query suite for 1.0, it wasn't possible to pass, there were tests with 2 anwers
Andy Seaborne: in the query suite for 1.0, it wasn't possible to pass, there were tests with 2 answers ←
14:39:27 <MattPerry> s/anwers/answers
14:40:14 <MattPerry> LeeF: how many tests are there
Lee Feigenbaum: how many tests are there ←
14:40:18 <MattPerry> kasei: 30 total
Gregory Williams: 30 total ←
14:40:30 <MattPerry> kasei: 9 or 10 have this issue
Gregory Williams: 9 or 10 have this issue ←
14:42:04 <MattPerry> LeeF: what if we hacked the validator to try each type of state checking query, and pass the test if one of the queries are successful
Lee Feigenbaum: what if we hacked the validator to try each type of state checking query, and pass the test if one of the queries are successful ←
14:42:16 <AndyS> Update, LOAD <foo> at /ds/update Query to /ds/query GRAPH <foo> { ... }
Andy Seaborne: Update, LOAD <foo> at /ds/update Query to /ds/query GRAPH <foo> { ... } ←
14:42:38 <MattPerry> kasei: it's possible, but I don't know if there is time to do it
Gregory Williams: it's possible, but I don't know if there is time to do it ←
14:42:58 <MattPerry> LeeF: I think that is what we should try
Lee Feigenbaum: I think that is what we should try ←
14:43:37 <MattPerry> AxelPolleres: do you suggest we span the whole possible space of interpretations
Axel Polleres: do you suggest we span the whole possible space of interpretations ←
14:43:56 <MattPerry> LeeF: right now we know of 2 prominent ways, so let's test those
Lee Feigenbaum: right now we know of 2 prominent ways, so let's test those ←
14:45:32 <MattPerry> LeeF: I think if we work with fuseki, that will cover a lot of implementations
Lee Feigenbaum: I think if we work with fuseki, that will cover a lot of implementations ←
14:45:39 <AxelPolleres> haven't looked into details but am in general hesitant on testing things which are implementation dependent, rather than spanning up the whole space of possible solutions we should maybe not even eattempt to test those features (e.g. the graph specification parameters)
Axel Polleres: haven't looked into details but am in general hesitant on testing things which are implementation dependent, rather than spanning up the whole space of possible solutions we should maybe not even eattempt to test those features (e.g. the graph specification parameters) ←
14:46:19 <AxelPolleres> ok.
Axel Polleres: ok. ←
14:46:35 <MattPerry> LeeF: cbuilara to look at protocol tests, kasei to work on hacking the validator, kasei and LeeF to investigate ARQ query issues
Lee Feigenbaum: cbuilara to look at protocol tests, kasei to work on hacking the validator, kasei and LeeF to investigate ARQ query issues ←
14:47:01 <MattPerry> AndyS: I'm happy with this approach
Andy Seaborne: I'm happy with this approach ←
14:47:28 <MattPerry> kasei: I'm ok with it but time is short
Gregory Williams: I'm ok with it but time is short ←
14:47:47 <MattPerry> topic: BIND comments
14:48:04 <MattPerry> LeeF: Andy sent a summary email
Lee Feigenbaum: Andy sent a summary email ←
14:48:16 <LeeF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0123.html
Lee Feigenbaum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0123.html ←
14:48:54 <MattPerry> LeeF: questions about scope issues related to BIND
Lee Feigenbaum: questions about scope issues related to BIND ←
14:49:44 <MattPerry> ... LC3 said BGP is in scope, LG1 and LG2 said GGP is in scope
... LC3 said BGP is in scope, LG1 and LG2 said GGP is in scope ←
14:50:23 <MattPerry> AndyS: expression side of the BIND is what gets affected
Andy Seaborne: expression side of the BIND is what gets affected ←
14:50:41 <MattPerry> LeeF: are any tests affected by this
Lee Feigenbaum: are any tests affected by this ←
14:50:51 <MattPerry> AndyS: no
Andy Seaborne: no ←
14:51:19 <MattPerry> kasei: I didn't change my implementation and the tests still passed
Gregory Williams: I didn't change my implementation and the tests still passed ←
14:51:39 <MattPerry> LeeF: does this proposal address the comments
Lee Feigenbaum: does this proposal address the comments ←
14:51:43 <MattPerry> AndyS: yes
Andy Seaborne: yes ←
14:52:25 <AxelPolleres> q+
Axel Polleres: q+ ←
14:52:31 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres ←
14:52:31 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask why dataset specification itself in update should update the graph store? and to
Zakim IRC Bot: AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask why dataset specification itself in update should update the graph store? and to ←
14:52:54 <MattPerry> AxelPolleres: Steve said he recalled some issues with BIND and FILTERs
Axel Polleres: Steve said he recalled some issues with BIND and FILTERs ←
14:53:30 <MattPerry> AndyS: what problems are there?
Andy Seaborne: what problems are there? ←
14:53:50 <MattPerry> AxelPolleres: the BIND ends the group, does filter go before or after bind?
Axel Polleres: the BIND ends the group, does filter go before or after bind? ←
14:54:12 <MattPerry> AndyS: you can always move filters outwards, so there is no issue with scope
Andy Seaborne: you can always move filters outwards, so there is no issue with scope ←
14:54:36 <MattPerry> AxelPolleres: maybe we should add more tests for this issue
Axel Polleres: maybe we should add more tests for this issue ←
14:55:03 <MattPerry> AndyS: easy to make these changes in the spec
Andy Seaborne: easy to make these changes in the spec ←
14:55:04 <Zakim> -cbuilara
Zakim IRC Bot: -cbuilara ←
14:55:28 <MattPerry> LeeF: we have consensus on Andy's suggested change to BIND
Lee Feigenbaum: we have consensus on Andy's suggested change to BIND ←
14:56:30 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
14:56:34 <cbuilara> zakim, ??2 is me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, ??2 is me ←
14:56:34 <Zakim> sorry, cbuilara, I do not recognize a party named '??2'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, cbuilara, I do not recognize a party named '??2' ←
14:56:36 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, mute me ←
14:56:36 <Zakim> sorry, cbuilara, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, cbuilara, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
14:56:53 <cbuilara> zakim, ??P2 is me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, ??P2 is me ←
14:56:53 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cbuilara; got it ←
14:56:56 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me
Carlos Buil Aranda: zakim, mute me ←
14:56:56 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: cbuilara should now be muted ←
14:57:15 <LeeF> ACTION: Andy to fix the LC3 spec as per the proposal in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0123.html
ACTION: Andy to fix the LC3 spec as per the proposal in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0123.html ←
14:57:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-673 - Fix the LC3 spec as per the proposal in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0123.html [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-08-28].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-673 - Fix the LC3 spec as per the proposal in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0123.html [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-08-28]. ←
14:58:00 <Zakim> -LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF ←
14:58:01 <Zakim> -MattPerry
Zakim IRC Bot: -MattPerry ←
14:58:02 <Zakim> -sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -sandro ←
14:58:02 <Zakim> -pgearon
Zakim IRC Bot: -pgearon ←
14:58:04 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
14:58:06 <Zakim> -Arthur_Keen
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arthur_Keen ←
14:58:08 <Zakim> -kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: -kasei ←
14:58:11 <Zakim> -cbuilara
Zakim IRC Bot: -cbuilara ←
14:58:26 <AxelPolleres> I can volunteer to look into whether we want more test cases for BIND+FILTER
Axel Polleres: I can volunteer to look into whether we want more test cases for BIND+FILTER ←
14:59:06 <AxelPolleres> (might not get to it in the next 1 or two weeks, but will give myself an action...
Axel Polleres: (might not get to it in the next 1 or two weeks, but will give myself an action... ←
14:59:39 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel to look into whether additional BIND+FILTERS test cases are needed
ACTION: Axel to look into whether additional BIND+FILTERS test cases are needed ←
14:59:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-674 - Look into whether additional BIND+FILTERS test cases are needed [on Axel Polleres - due 2012-08-28].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-674 - Look into whether additional BIND+FILTERS test cases are needed [on Axel Polleres - due 2012-08-28]. ←
15:00:14 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public
Axel Polleres: rrsagent, make records public ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2012-08-21 15:07:27 UTC by 'mperry', comments: 'Fixed typos'