Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Chatlog 2011-03-01
From SPARQL Working Group
See original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.
Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.
14:53:30 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql 14:53:30 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/03/01-sparql-irc 14:53:36 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sparql 14:53:52 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, this will be sparql 14:53:52 <Zakim> ok, AxelPolleres; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes 14:56:14 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started 14:56:21 <Zakim> +??P11 14:56:38 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P11 is me 14:56:38 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 14:56:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller] 14:57:03 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me. 14:57:03 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it 14:57:25 <Zakim> +??P13 14:57:32 <Zakim> +corby 14:57:38 <SteveH> AndyS, did you just say something? 14:57:39 <NickH> zakim, ??P13 is me 14:57:39 <Zakim> +NickH; got it 14:58:06 <AndyS> Yes - did you hear anytghing? I can't hear you. skype testing service worked though. 14:58:21 <SteveH> I'm muted, one sec 14:58:43 <Zakim> +kasei 14:58:45 <cbuilara> cbuilara has joined #sparql 14:58:48 <Zakim> +pgearon 14:58:58 <NickH> getting some echo 15:00:32 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sparql 15:00:48 <Zakim> +[IPcaller] 15:00:49 <AxelPolleres> trackbot, start meeting 15:00:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world 15:00:53 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277 15:00:53 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now 15:00:54 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference 15:00:54 <trackbot> Date: 01 March 2011 15:01:06 <cbuilara> zakim, IPcaller is me 15:01:06 <Zakim> sorry, cbuilara, I do not recognize a party named 'IPcaller' 15:01:29 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone? 15:01:29 <Zakim> I notice SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has restarted 15:01:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see SteveH, AndyS, NickH, corby, kasei, pgearon, [IPcaller], AxelPolleres, Sandro, MattPerry 15:01:35 <cbuilara> Zakim, IPcaller is me 15:01:35 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it 15:01:44 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me 15:01:46 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted 15:02:07 <SteveH> SteveH has joined #sparql 15:02:14 <AxelPolleres> scribe: steveH 15:02:21 <AxelPolleres> chair: Axel Polleres 15:02:35 <AxelPolleres> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2011-03-01 15:02:53 <AxelPolleres> regrets: LeeF, Chime 15:03:12 <Zakim> +bglimm 15:03:15 <AxelPolleres> topic: admin 15:03:20 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me 15:03:20 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted 15:03:24 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-02-22 15:03:59 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-02-22 15:04:10 <AxelPolleres> topic: comments 15:04:32 <SteveH> Axel: I've updated the comments page, picked any additional comments found on list 15:04:48 <SteveH> ... have several things not assigned, 1 from Greg R, from 26th of Jan 15:05:02 <SteveH> ... not sure if there was an overall answer 15:05:10 <SteveH> ... Lee thinks he's ok with the answer 15:05:17 <SteveH> ... Axel to check with Lee 15:05:42 <SteveH> ... next comment from Jeremy C. on Update, graph identification 15:05:52 <SteveH> ... using URIs that are IRI 15:06:03 <SteveH> ... I will ask Chime if noone else wants to comment 15:06:28 <SteveH> next, some comment on AVG() testcase from Jeen B 15:06:43 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Feb/0025.html 15:06:45 <SteveH> Axel: anybody voluneering? 15:07:06 <SteveH> I guess I should, but I'm really busy 15:07:40 <SteveH> Axel: I'll put Steve's name on it 15:07:56 <SteveH> ... we should clear all the comments before going to last call 15:07:56 <NickH> NickH has joined #sparql 15:08:05 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Steve to draft an answer for JB-4 15:08:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-401 - Draft an answer for JB-4 [on Steve Harris - due 2011-03-08]. 15:08:24 <alex_> alex_ has joined #sparql 15:08:51 <SteveH> Axel: last comment from ???, I can take a look at that 15:08:59 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel to take care of RV-7 15:08:59 <trackbot> Created ACTION-402 - Take care of RV-7 [on Axel Polleres - due 2011-03-08]. 15:09:04 <SteveH> ??? = Rob V. 15:09:04 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2011Feb/0024.html 15:09:14 <Zakim> +AlexPassant 15:09:38 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:KK-7 15:09:59 <SteveH> Axel: one problem with comment from Jeen which we can't address yet 15:10:07 <SteveH> ... there's a mail about it on list 15:10:40 <SteveH> ... Jeen commented on MINUS v's NOT EXIST 15:10:44 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0369.html ... not exists vs. minus 15:10:53 <SteveH> ... don't know how to proceed there 15:11:13 <kasei> that isn't true, though 15:11:16 <SteveH> ... Jeen says that MINUS is equiv. in all cases where it's not redundant 15:11:38 <Zakim> -SteveH 15:12:03 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:JB-2 15:12:16 <Zakim> +??P11 15:12:24 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P11 is me 15:12:24 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 15:12:52 <SteveH> kasei: Jeen posted it on his weblog before this comment, and I commented on the blog 15:13:28 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: greg to answer to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0369.html with counterexample to JB-2 15:13:28 <trackbot> Created ACTION-403 - Answer to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0369.html with counterexample to JB-2 [on Gregory Williams - due 2011-03-08]. 15:13:58 <AxelPolleres> Next regular meeting: 2011-03-08 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Paul Gearon) 15:14:18 <AxelPolleres> regrets for next week from me 15:14:30 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: I will not be here but lee will be 15:14:31 <OlivierCorby> regrets also 15:14:40 <SteveH> ... geosparql has asked us for a review 15:14:49 <AxelPolleres> topic: geosparql review http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0343.html 15:15:05 <SteveH> MattPerry: we have a group of about 10, working on geosparql, it is straightforward, vocab + filter functions for SPARQL 15:15:30 <SteveH> ... in OGC they've had std. object models for geometry, takes on and created RDF vocab that does the same thing 15:15:45 <SteveH> ... different classes for polygon,. point, line + dimensions and so on 15:16:07 <SteveH> ... also functions for objects, created analagous filter functions for them 15:16:15 <SteveH> ... union intersection etc. 15:16:24 <SteveH> ... translation of existing standard 15:16:37 <SteveH> .... serialise these geometries in RDF, created datatypes 15:16:40 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2011/02/GeoSPARQL.pdf 15:16:57 <SteveH> ... existing text based standards can be put in literals 15:17:23 <SteveH> ... use these literals as arguments to functions 15:18:21 <cbuilara> I can do it, or ask anybody in my grpup 15:18:25 <cbuilara> group 15:18:34 <cbuilara> zakim, unmunte me 15:18:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'unmunte me', cbuilara 15:18:44 <cbuilara> zakim, unmunte me 15:18:44 <Zakim> I don't understand 'unmunte me', cbuilara 15:18:54 <cbuilara> zakim, unmute me 15:18:54 <Zakim> cbuilara should no longer be muted 15:19:19 <SteveH> cbuilara: people in my research group working on GML(?) 15:19:25 <SteveH> ... it would be worth them looking at it 15:19:47 <SteveH> ... I will send a review 15:19:54 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: carlos to look in his group� for a review for GeoSPARQL and send it to us 15:19:54 <trackbot> Could not create new action (failed to parse response from server) - please contact sysreq with the details of what happened. 15:19:54 <trackbot> Could not create new action (unparseable data in server response: local variable 'd' referenced before assignment) - please contact sysreq with the details of what happened. 15:20:16 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: to last call... 15:20:23 <SteveH> ... take a look at status of drafts 15:20:24 <AxelPolleres> topic: to last call 15:20:25 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/To_Last_Call 15:20:25 <AxelPolleres> \ 15:20:43 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me 15:20:43 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted 15:21:09 <bglimm> I had a few comments on the revised sections 15:22:43 <SteveH> AndyS: there are 12 markers in doc for things to do, all editorial - Steve can you look at the eval of ToList, not sure it can be removed 15:22:55 <SteveH> ... if people are happy to comment in that state we can go ahead 15:23:04 <AxelPolleres> andy: 12 editorial markers in the� doc at the moment... apart from that, we can go ahead with review 15:23:42 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: we have reviewers assigned, so can turn to BGP matching 15:23:53 <AxelPolleres> BGP matching extensions rewording suggestions by Birte http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0276.html 15:24:02 <SteveH> ... has rewording suggestions 15:24:31 <SteveH> bglimm: the main problem is that terminology is outdated, uses old terminology 15:24:47 <SteveH> ... uses different word from rest of text, not been updated since defintions were tested 15:24:56 <SteveH> ... would like it updated 15:25:17 <SteveH> ... the only thing I suggest is to require that solutions are uniquely satisfied 15:25:26 <SteveH> ... I think it's quite important 15:25:41 <AxelPolleres> q? 15:25:44 <SteveH> ... doesn't really change any of the semantics 15:26:06 <SteveH> AndyS: looked through the text, it looked pretty good, was planning on putting that text in 15:26:16 <SteveH> ... there's a couple of points I want to check 15:26:36 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: one point, reformulation of cond. 1, sent to list 15:27:08 <SteveH> [ discussion of uniquely specified issues ] 15:27:41 <Zakim> -SteveH 15:27:53 <AxelPolleres> s/uniquely/uniquely (up to RDF graph equivalence)/ ? 15:27:54 <SteveH> sorry, something wrong with the sip connection :( 15:28:13 <Zakim> +??P11 15:28:19 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P11 is me 15:28:19 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 15:29:02 <SteveH> q+ 15:29:44 <SteveH> q- 15:29:46 <pgearon> I can try 15:30:01 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: no action here 15:31:23 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Birte to draft xml for revised Extending BGP matching section for query 15:31:23 <trackbot> Created ACTION-405 - Draft xml for revised Extending BGP matching section for query [on Birte Glimm - due 2011-03-08]. 15:31:38 <SteveH> ... that's all for query 15:31:55 <SteveH> ... for update, any news? lots of discussion, will come to that later 15:32:10 <SteveH> ... service descirption, grega, can you give update 15:32:11 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me 15:32:11 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted 15:32:29 <SteveH> kasei: I've added a couple of things to the SD section, biggest thing is relationship with dataset protocol 15:33:14 <SteveH> ... said I'd take it to email, suggested simple change to SD vocab which will be sufficient to describe a dataset in terms of the dataset protocol 15:33:32 <SteveH> ... if its goes beyond that I'm going to push back, to avoid getting into out of scope things 15:33:37 <SteveH> ... waiting on more discussionm 15:33:57 <SteveH> ... been discussing conformance language with Andy 15:34:16 <SteveH> ... I'm happy discussing on email 15:35:07 <SteveH> I owe a review on {something} 15:35:10 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me 15:35:10 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted 15:35:23 <SteveH> bglimm: waiting for a review on entailment 15:35:57 <SteveH> ???: the parital review that was sent out is the final one 15:36:05 <SteveH> bglimm: I saw one review 15:36:11 <AxelPolleres> s/???/Matt/ 15:36:34 <SteveH> bglimm: connonicalisation issue 15:36:49 <SteveH> ... only define d-entailment within some limit 15:37:05 <SteveH> ... not happy, but it's what we decided, not sure if we want to revisit 15:37:28 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: I guess at the moment we just go on, what's your suggestion 15:37:46 <SteveH> bglimm: I would just remove the entailment, it's not nice that systems behave differently 15:38:09 <SteveH> ... SPARQL doesn't specify this behaviour, so maybe it's not up to the entailments regimes 15:38:48 <SteveH> ... you can only return ansers that occur in the graph, but that depends on parsing process 15:39:04 <SteveH> ... might have two different values, so might return two answers 15:39:22 <AxelPolleres> issue different answers and also differenct cardinalities implied. 15:39:23 <SteveH> ... can get different cardinality 15:39:40 <SteveH> ... do you want to require canonicalisation - seems to be the only way to solve this problem 15:40:24 <SteveH> bglimm will add a note to the document 15:40:27 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the call? 15:40:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, NickH, corby, kasei, pgearon, cbuilara, AxelPolleres, Sandro, MattPerry, bglimm, AlexPassant, SteveH 15:40:32 <AxelPolleres> q? 15:40:56 <SteveH> cbuilara: proposed semantics of service algebra, difficult to understand what I was proposing in email, I will follow your comments 15:41:16 <SteveH> ... it is almost finished I think, will be finished this/next week 15:41:44 <SteveH> formal update semantics] 15:41:51 <AxelPolleres> topic: Update Formal Semantics (incl. bnodes as DELETE-wildcards) 15:41:53 <SteveH> particularly bnodes as wildcards 15:41:59 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me 15:41:59 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted 15:42:25 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: summary - there were concerns about update semantics as in current draft 15:42:28 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml#formalModel 15:42:48 <SteveH> ... because it doesn't cover the resolution that we wanted to create blank nodes in delete patters as wildcards 15:42:57 <SteveH> ... there were some mails with suggestions 15:42:59 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0305.html 15:43:19 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0317.html 15:43:19 <SteveH> ... three options 15:43:39 <Zakim> -SteveH 15:43:52 <Zakim> +??P0 15:43:59 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P0 is me 15:43:59 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 15:44:11 <SteveH> ... several coinflip descisions on what it means 15:44:37 <SteveH> ... do the bns match all resources which are available, or whether they are [something] 15:44:43 <SteveH> ... people not so convinced 15:44:55 <SteveH> ... third option is to revisit resolution. no blank nodes as wildcards 15:44:57 <SteveH> q+ 15:46:52 <SteveH> q- 15:46:55 <AndyS> q+ 15:47:10 <AxelPolleres> Option 1: Bnode match all resources in the graph (essentially rewriting 1 in the mails) 15:48:12 <AxelPolleres> Option 2 : bnodes match whatever they match if treated as "moficy_tmeplate copied tyo body" 15:48:39 <AxelPolleres> (essentially rewriting 2) 15:49:14 <SteveH> AndyS: are there usecases where 1 & 2 are different 15:49:24 <AxelPolleres> Option 1 and 2 differ �, see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011JanMar/0317.html 15:51:12 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: at end of mail there's a simple example, so prolem with unbound is there 15:51:21 <AxelPolleres> Option 3: treat bnodes as in CONSTRUCT/INSERT, i.e. as new bnodes... would mean they don't match anything. 15:51:38 <AxelPolleres> (that is against our earlier resolution) 15:51:55 <AxelPolleres> Option 4: is to forbid bnodes in DELETE 15:51:55 <AndyS> q- 15:52:03 <SteveH> SteveH: rather to make it an error 15:52:18 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: one mail from birte, not happy with rewritings 15:52:26 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me 15:52:26 <Zakim> bglimm was not muted, bglimm 15:52:50 <SteveH> bglimm: you could just define that you wanted all things deleteed that are an instance of the graph 15:53:16 <SteveH> ... not specifiy how you want the deletion, reqriting is one way of doing the delete, would like a more abstract definition 15:53:35 <SteveH> ... would have to do some graph matching to decide which triples are deleted 15:53:39 <SteveH> ... re. option 2 15:53:42 <AndyS> IIUC version 1 does not reflect pattern of bNode use -> makes me v nervious 15:54:21 <SteveH> ... equiv. to option 1, but not specified with UNIONs 15:54:31 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: think it could be done but not sure anyone has time 15:55:12 <SteveH> ... need some kind of skolemisation/deskolemisation 15:55:25 <AndyS> Who was a supporter of the original point of making bNodes variables at all? Do we need to check with them? 15:55:34 <SteveH> bglimm: they are like variables in normal evaluation, don't have to skolemise 15:56:20 <SteveH> bglimm: think it's more difficult to delete lists 15:56:31 <SteveH> AndyS: do any of the mechanisms actually help? 15:57:01 <AxelPolleres> Can someone draft a Testcase that does list deletion? 15:57:05 <SteveH> bglimm: I think they do 15:57:12 <SteveH> AndyS: only works where you know the links 15:57:14 <SteveH> q+ 15:57:25 <SteveH> bglimm: that's the main usecase 15:57:34 <SteveH> AxelPolleres: only works with fixed length lists 15:59:19 <Zakim> -SteveH 15:59:37 <Zakim> +??P0 15:59:41 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P0 is me 15:59:41 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 16:00:23 <AndyS> Hmm - something like DELETE { ?x rdf:first ?f ; rdf:rest ?y } WHERE { ?list rdf:rest* ?x . ?x rdf:first ?f ; rdf:rest ?y } 16:00:33 <SteveH> 4, where forbidden = causes an error, rather than bannedby syntax 16:00:34 <bglimm> 3 or 4 16:00:41 <pgearon> option 4 (followed by 3) 16:00:43 <AndyS> which works by finding the list element one at a time 16:00:48 <kasei> 0 16:00:50 <sandro> (sorry, undecided.) 16:00:54 <AndyS> no opinion - need to see details. 16:01:02 <OlivierCorby> don't know yet 16:01:12 <Zakim> -pgearon 16:01:15 <AxelPolleres> Strawpoll Option1-4 ? 16:01:16 <AxelPolleres> prefer 1 over 2 , but can live with 3/4 16:01:39 <AxelPolleres> let's take it to email # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000313