Chatlog 2011-09-27

From SPARQL Working Group
Jump to: navigation, search

See original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

13:57:40 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:57:40 <RRSAgent> logging to
13:57:49 <AndyS> zakim, this is SPARQL
13:57:49 <Zakim> AndyS, I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be SPARQL".
13:57:56 <AndyS> zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:57:56 <Zakim> ok, AndyS; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:58:13 <LeeF> trackbot, start meeting
13:58:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:58:17 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
13:58:17 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:18 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:58:18 <trackbot> Date: 27 September 2011
13:58:27 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:58:27 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:45 <swh> swh has joined #sparql
13:58:54 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:59:01 <Zakim> +??P3
13:59:05 <AndyS> zakim, ??P3 is me
13:59:05 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
13:59:10 <Zakim> + +1.310.729.aaaa
13:59:16 <kasei> Zakim, aaaa is me
13:59:16 <Zakim> +kasei; got it
13:59:49 <mperry> mperry has joined #sparql
13:59:56 <Zakim> +??P7
14:00:01 <cbuilara> zakim, ??P7 is me
14:00:01 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it
14:00:02 <Zakim> + +1.617.553.aabb
14:00:07 <LeeF> zakim, aabb is me
14:00:07 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
14:00:12 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
14:00:14 <Zakim> +Bert
14:00:16 <LeeF> Agenda:
14:00:35 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aacc
14:00:46 <LeeF> zakim, Bert is Olivier
14:00:46 <Zakim> +Olivier; got it
14:00:47 <mperry> zakim, aacc is me
14:00:48 <Zakim> +mperry; got it
14:00:52 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:00:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, kasei, cbuilara, LeeF, Olivier, mperry
14:01:25 <LeeF> Scribenick: cbuilara
14:02:26 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me
14:02:26 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted
14:02:29 <LeeF> topic: Admin
14:02:39 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at
14:03:13 <Zakim> +pgearon
14:03:23 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at
14:03:23 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #sparql
14:03:27 <chimezie> chimezie has joined #sparql
14:03:36 <LeeF> Next regular meeting: 2011-10-04 @ 15:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: Sandro? )
14:04:10 <Zakim> + +1.216.368.aadd
14:04:11 <cbuilara> LeeF: Andy, anything from the RDF-WG?
14:04:21 <chimezie> Zakim, 1.216.368.aadd is me
14:04:22 <Zakim> sorry, chimezie, I do not recognize a party named '1.216.368.aadd'
14:04:29 <cbuilara> AndyS: no, nothing new
14:04:30 <chimezie> Zakim, +1.216.368.aadd is me
14:04:30 <Zakim> +chimezie; got it
14:04:57 <cbuilara> AndyS: in the next f2f meeting probably we will push the job
14:05:02 <LeeF> topic: publication status
14:05:12 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
14:05:12 <Zakim> chimezie should now be muted
14:05:21 <LeeF> AxelPolleres, any news on overview document?
14:05:53 <AxelPolleres> no news on overview, hope to find an evening this week where I can finish it.
14:05:58 <cbuilara> LeeF: Fed query, still trying to finish issues from Greg, anything solved?
14:06:07 <cbuilara> zakim, unmute me
14:06:12 <Zakim> cbuilara was not muted, cbuilara
14:06:31 <LeeF> cbuilara: remaining issue is the comment from Axel - I will check that in today
14:06:37 <LeeF> ... fed query document is OK after that
14:07:12 <cbuilara> kasei: I'm not sure if everything is fixed
14:07:21 <cbuilara> s/LeeF/kasei
14:07:33 <cbuilara> kasei: I will have a look at the document
14:07:39 <cbuilara> zakim, mute me
14:07:40 <Zakim> cbuilara should now be muted
14:08:02 <cbuilara> LeeF: my main concern is that people is communicating
14:08:22 <LeeF> ACTION-514?
14:08:22 <trackbot> ACTION-514 -- Axel Polleres to look at Greg's review of federated query -- due 2011-08-16 -- OPEN
14:08:22 <trackbot>
14:08:35 <cbuilara> LeeF: Greg to look at the document and review it
14:08:48 <LeeF> topic: String functions
14:09:06 <LeeF> Comment from Jeen:
14:10:52 <LeeF> ack pgearon
14:11:03 <pgearon> sorry, having trouble with mute
14:11:35 <cbuilara> pgearon: I don't have a strong feeling on the hash functions, but the common ones
14:11:43 <LeeF> LeeF: 3 questions: 1) right set of string functions? 2) string functions are 1-indexed 3) set of hash functions
14:11:54 <cbuilara> pgearon: I never run to use the other hash functions
14:12:10 <cbuilara> pgearon: I do not have any particular use case
14:12:48 <cbuilara> LeeF: there wasn't strong objections to include all funcions
14:13:21 <cbuilara> LeeF: anyone objected to have all hash functons?
14:13:58 <Zakim> +Sandro
14:14:42 <cbuilara> LeeF: minutes of the hash functions:
14:15:13 <pgearon> my original position was that we should do all possible functions. This was not based on a perceived need for them all, but because I thought it was cheap to do.
14:15:55 <pgearon> Steve's comment indicates that it isn't so easy (I have not had an opportunity to implement these myself).
14:16:24 <LeeF> q?
14:16:39 <swh> Decent implementations of the more obscure ones are hard to come by, but it's not the end of the world
14:16:45 <cbuilara> LeeF: it seems a "why not add them all attitude?" any more opinions on that?
14:17:03 <AndyS> q+
14:17:35 <LeeF> ack AndyS
14:18:40 <cbuilara> LeeF: we do not have a protocol document, we can update the last call for hash functions without being a bit problem
14:18:55 <cbuilara> AndyS: it could be possible a second last call?
14:18:57 <LeeF> AxelPolleres, does RIF use the 1-indexed string functions?
14:19:52 <LeeF> q?
14:20:15 <pgearon> LeeF: RIF does use 1 based indexing
14:20:24 <LeeF> LeeF: if we trimmed the SHA functions, which ones would we include?
14:20:30 <LeeF> AndyS: SHA1 and SHA256 I think?
14:20:35 <cbuilara> AndyS: I do not have experience of people using SHA2
14:21:31 <cbuilara> LeeF: if anybody is ok to remove SHA2, say it
14:23:18 <cbuilara> LeeF: get somebody to select the right hash functions
14:23:20 <AndyS>
14:23:28 <LeeF> ACTION: Sandro to ask W3C security experts about popular / useful hash functions
14:23:28 <trackbot> Created ACTION-536 - Ask W3C security experts about popular / useful hash functions [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-10-04].
14:24:27 <LeeF> LeeF: We seem to have consensus on removingsome less comomn hash functions. We'll revisit this with a concrete resolution pending expert input on which ones to keep.
14:24:33 <LeeF> ack pgearon
14:25:25 <LeeF> pgearon: perhaps include a note in the document reminding people about function extensibility
14:26:13 <Zakim> + +1.781.899.aaee
14:26:24 <Zakim> -Sandro
14:27:24 <cbuilara> LeeF: my inclination would be to keep it in the way it is
14:27:27 <LeeF> subtopic: 1-indexed strings
14:27:29 <mperry> I am for 1-based strings
14:27:36 <LeeF> ack pgearon
14:27:39 <cbuilara> LeeF: what people think?
14:28:01 <cbuilara> pgearon: I'm happy with 1-based string
14:28:31 <cbuilara> AndyS: I'm neutral
14:28:41 <cbuilara> Andy: about the hash functions
14:28:55 <cbuilara> AndyS: we do not have any operation that return indexes
14:29:28 <cbuilara> AndyS: it is probably a mistake that we did not get it
14:29:57 <pgearon> I'm looking at RIF right now, and it doesn't have a string search
14:30:44 <AndyS>
14:31:24 <pgearon> RIF probably doesn't need it, since with logic programming you can just put a variable in for func:substring and it will fill in the value of the variable for you
14:31:53 <cbuilara> LeeF: why didn't xpath operations does not include index operations
14:32:15 <cbuilara> Sandro: we can ask, xquery may have some similar operations to that
14:34:14 <cbuilara> LeeF: Jeen is asking what criteria does the grup have about the string functions
14:35:13 <LeeF> LeeF: Seems to be consensus to keep 1-indexed strings in string functions (as per XML F&O and RIF)
14:35:44 <cbuilara> LeeF: question about set of functions
14:36:05 <AndyS> "fn:substring-before" and "fn:substring-after" go someway to help - they produce strings
14:37:04 <AxelPolleres> In RIF the criterion was basically scanning the ones in and taking those on board which we thought would be reasonable for that group's purposes (not much more, we definitly didn't think of other functions except those from Xpath/Xquery for strings)
14:38:14 <chimezie> for what its worth
14:38:34 <chimezie> i write XPath often without the need for explicit index returning functions (using substring-before and after, etc.)
14:40:15 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me
14:40:15 <Zakim> chimezie should no longer be muted
14:40:33 <cbuilara> Sandro: I will send a quick note to the xpath staff contact asking for comments about string functions
14:42:00 <cbuilara> LeeF: better to include substring before and after, anybodydisagrees?
14:42:07 <LeeF> LeeF: If we're already doing a 2nd last call, we probably ought to include substring-before and substring-after
14:42:42 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
14:42:42 <Zakim> chimezie should now be muted
14:42:51 <LeeF> for next week's agenda: PROPOSED: Include substring-before and substring-after as SPARQL 1.1 Query functions
14:43:11 <AxelPolleres> Naive proposal would be to propose to expand to those functions we miss from RIF's string functions, particularly substring-before/after ... would that do? (at least we would be cohherent between RIF and SPARQL then) on a quick look, we miss substring-before., substring-after, string-join, replace, 
14:44:00 <LeeF> topic: implementation report
14:45:00 <kasei>
14:45:03 <cbuilara> kasei: the output from that code in the cvs, one line per test, generates a quick summary 
14:45:44 <chimezie> i can begin to produce EARL
14:45:46 <cbuilara> LeeF: people should start producing reports
14:45:51 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me
14:45:51 <Zakim> chimezie should no longer be muted
14:48:52 <cbuilara> kasei: some of the tests files in CVS are not available with no login into the W3C
14:49:35 <kasei>
14:50:01 <kasei> the file notin01.rq should appear in that directory listing, but doesn't.
14:51:32 <cbuilara> Sandro: still searching for the problem
14:53:20 <cbuilara> LeeF: chimezie summarize entailment
14:53:33 <AndyS> SJ = Simon Johnstone
14:54:43 <Zakim> -chimezie
14:54:44 <AndyS> FWIW -- Fuseki sniffs the filename on multifile load -- browsers don't set content type
14:54:51 <cbuilara> s/entailment/protocol comments
14:55:09 <sandro> q+ re permissions
14:55:12 <cbuilara> s/entailment/protocol comments/
14:55:46 <LeeF> ack sandro
14:55:46 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to discuss permissions
14:56:58 <mperry> bye
14:57:06 <Zakim> -AndyS
14:57:14 <Zakim> -mperry
14:57:28 <Zakim> -Olivier
14:58:06 <cbuilara> Sandro: there may be a problem with the CVS server, I will try to refresh
15:00:31 <AndyS> if anyone (any two) people could confirm responses DM-1 and DB-11, I'd be most grateful.
15:00:55 <AndyS> pgearon - there are some shared query/update responses to draft.
15:01:35 <pgearon> OK. Just realized last night I have one for David Booth that I'm behind on
15:04:24 <sandro> notin01.rq : ➔ Gregory Williams (gwilliam) can admin
15:04:24 <sandro> Team access can admin