Last modified on 7 June 2010, at 15:22
Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.
13:56:55 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql 13:56:55 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/06/07-sparql-irc 13:57:07 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sparql 13:57:17 <LeeF> zakim, room for 10 for 120 minutes? 13:57:19 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; conference Team_(sparql)13:57Z scheduled with code 772775 (SPARQL) for 120 minutes until 1557Z 13:57:30 <AxelPolleres> thnx lee 13:57:43 <Zakim> Team_(sparql)13:57Z has now started 13:57:50 <Zakim> +??P1 13:58:14 <Nicholashumfrey> zakim, ??P1 is me 13:58:14 <Zakim> +Nicholashumfrey; got it 13:58:45 <LeeF> "i have entered an invalid response" 13:58:45 <Zakim> + +03539149aaaa 13:58:53 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, aaaa is me 13:58:53 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres; got it 13:59:00 <Zakim> +[IPcaller] 13:59:20 <LeeF> zakim, IPcaller is me 13:59:20 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it 14:00:03 <Zakim> +[IPcaller] 14:00:17 <AndyS> zakim, IPCaller is me 14:00:17 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it 14:00:38 <LeeF> Nicholashumfrey, can you hear us? 14:01:03 <chimezie> chimezie has joined #sparql 14:01:37 <chimezie_> chimezie_ has joined #sparql 14:01:57 <Nicholashumfrey> LeeF, hello, yes I am Nicholas Humfrey 14:02:04 <Nicholashumfrey> sorry, I just stepped out the room 14:02:11 <Zakim> + +1.216.773.aabb 14:02:28 <chimezie_> Zakim, +1.216.773.aabb is me 14:02:28 <Zakim> +chimezie_; got it 14:02:39 <chimezie_> Zakim, who is here? 14:02:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Nicholashumfrey, AxelPolleres, LeeF, AndyS, chimezie_ 14:02:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see chimezie_, chimezie, Zakim, RRSAgent, Nicholashumfrey, AxelPolleres, SteveH, AndyS, pgearon, LeeF, karl, iv_an_ru, kasei, AlexPassant, sandro, trackbot 14:02:47 <SteveH> LeeF, what's the call? 14:02:53 <LeeF> HTTP RDF Update 14:03:12 <AxelPolleres> Will you join, steve? 14:03:47 <AxelPolleres> sorry, only spotted the missing minutes yesterday ;-) 14:04:34 <SteveH> SteveH has joined #sparql 14:04:50 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone? 14:04:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Nicholashumfrey, AxelPolleres, LeeF, AndyS, chimezie_ 14:05:43 <Nicholashumfrey> I think I need a bit more experience before attempting to scribe 14:05:48 <AxelPolleres> scribe: LeeF 14:05:58 <AxelPolleres> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-06-07 14:06:07 <SteveH> what's the code? 14:06:11 <LeeF> 772775 14:06:27 <Zakim> + +0208439aacc 14:06:36 <SteveH> Zakim, aacc is [Garlik] 14:06:36 <Zakim> +[Garlik]; got it 14:06:57 <SteveH> Zakim, [Garlik] is temporarily me 14:07:00 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 14:07:41 <LeeF> topic: Base URI for graph=g cases 14:07:49 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0238.html 14:08:22 <AxelPolleres> "In situations where there is no Base URI in the payload and a graph IRI is 14:08:22 <AxelPolleres> embedded, the RDF document that represents [AWWW] the networked RDF 14:08:23 <AxelPolleres> knowledge identified by the embedded graph IRI SHOULD be considered the 14:08:23 <AxelPolleres> retrieval context (5.1.2) [RFC3986]. Thus, the default base URI is the base 14:08:23 <AxelPolleres> URI of that RDF document." 14:09:11 <LeeF> chimezie: (how) can the base URI resolution rules be applied to the HTTP update protocol ? 14:09:28 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#base-resolution 14:09:37 <LeeF> .. if you're posting to /endpoint?graph=g what's the base URI? 14:10:51 <LeeF> ... tried to suggest an interpretation that the context of the retrieval is the embedded URI 14:11:43 <chimezie> resolution rules are here: http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.html#sec-5.1 14:14:58 <LeeF> My only strong opinion is that we do support a way where graph=g makes g the base URI, but I think we all agree on that 14:15:12 <AxelPolleres> "SHOULD be considered the Base URI of the encapsulating entity" 14:15:43 <AxelPolleres> leef, yes, I think we just are unsure about wording... 14:15:59 <AndyS> Like Lee, I care about the outcome. 14:17:55 <chimezie> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010AprJun/0230.html 14:18:21 <chimezie> "I'd like to find a way to make the graph URI the base even if that means 14:18:21 <chimezie> contorting things a little - after all, this 3rd party service/graph 14:18:21 <chimezie> naming we are using isn't the primary design space of REST anyway." 14:18:31 <chimezie> "I'd argue that the use of the graph=<abs URI> creates a new URI used to 14:18:31 <chimezie> retrieve the entity." 14:19:13 <AxelPolleres> ?graph=/y 14:19:14 <AxelPolleres> \ 14:19:33 <chimezie> PUT /rdf-graphs/employees?graph=http://otherserver/consultant/56 14:19:34 <chimezie> Host : example.com 14:19:34 <chimezie> <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> 14:19:34 <chimezie> <rdf:RDF 14:19:34 <chimezie> .... no base named .... 14:19:35 <chimezie> </rdf:RDF> 14:19:55 <chimezie> http://otherserver/consultant/56 14:20:05 <chimezie> http://otherserver/consultant/56 14:20:10 <LeeF> base URI ought to be http://otherserver/consultant/56 14:20:54 <AxelPolleres> What about just accepting Chime's wording plus adding the example? 14:21:28 <Nicholashumfrey> sounds good to me 14:21:31 <SteveH> +1 14:21:34 <AxelPolleres> no objections to the intention... 14:21:36 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone? 14:21:36 <Zakim> On the phone I see Nicholashumfrey, AxelPolleres, LeeF, AndyS, chimezie_, SteveH 14:22:10 <AxelPolleres> needs no resuloution. 14:22:56 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: chime to incorporate explaining wording plus example to editor's draft 14:22:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-252 - Incorporate explaining wording plus example to editor's draft [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2010-06-14]. 14:23:42 <LeeF> topic: "Networked RDF Knowledge" 14:24:11 <LeeF> "Networked RDF knowledge - An information resource identified by a graph IRI and managed by a server that implements this protocol. See [WEBARCH] for further discussion on Resources." 14:24:12 <AxelPolleres> Networked RDF knowledge - An information resource identified by a graph IRI and managed by a server that implements this protocol. See [WEBARCH] for further discussion on Resources. 14:24:56 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: there have been discussions around the term - proposals include RDF data, RDF knowledge, ... 14:25:29 <AxelPolleres> Would "RDF knowledge" work for all? 14:25:53 <LeeF> AndyS: the word "knowledge" in this context doesn't make sense to me 14:26:16 <LeeF> AndyS: but don't want to hold things up over it 14:26:30 <SteveH> I feel similarly to AndyS 14:26:35 <SteveH> I don't think it's a helpful term 14:27:55 <LeeF> chimezie: original SPARQL not clear about what a graph IRI identifies 14:28:18 <LeeF> ... either identifies something whose characteristics can be transferred over a protocol (vaguely an information resource) 14:28:19 <LeeF> ... or not 14:28:33 <LeeF> ... what the graph IRI represents can be serialized as an RDF document 14:28:44 <LeeF> ... so intuitive what the graph IRI identifies is an IR 14:28:53 <LeeF> s/represents/identifies 14:28:57 <LeeF> s/intuitive/intuitively 14:29:21 <AndyS> "The IRI identifies a resource, and the resource is represented by a graph (or, more precisely: by a document that serializes a graph). " 14:29:29 <AxelPolleres> RDF Knowledge = IRI identified Document or IRI identifying a resource? 14:30:56 <AxelPolleres> "However, in using a URI in this way, we are not directly identifying an RDF graph but rather the RDF knowledge that is represented by an RDF document, which serializes that graph." 14:31:08 <LeeF> chimezie: this thing needs a name to talk about the protocol model coherently 14:34:33 <LeeF> chimezie: expect to receive scrutiny over this from the TAG 14:34:38 <LeeF> s/over/about 14:35:36 <LeeF> AxelPolleres: maybe we should solicit feedback from the TAG ? 14:36:19 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: chime to change networked RDF knowledge to RDF knowledge 14:36:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-253 - Change networked RDF knowledge to RDF knowledge [on Chimezie Ogbuji - due 2010-06-14]. 14:36:59 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/49 14:37:49 <LeeF> topic: http-range 14:38:04 <LeeF> chimezie: kjetil wants http-range-14 to be a normative reference 14:38:14 <LeeF> ... greg shares that feeling 14:38:37 <LeeF> ... My response is that (1) not clear how a REC trac kdocument normatively references a TAG finding 14:38:48 <LeeF> ... (2) http-range-14 meant to address ambiguity about denotation of IRI 14:39:55 <LeeF> ... but there doesn't seem to be an amiguity here to resolve 14:40:05 <LeeF> ... we might get guidance from the TAG here? 14:40:34 <AxelPolleres> we might just point out that "http" resources that respond to a GET request with a 2xx response used as graph-uris may raise ambiguities? 14:42:12 <AxelPolleres> issue here is twofold... 14:43:07 <AxelPolleres> for one whether we do/don't want to discourage such URIs as (embedded?) graph URIs, and the second whether how we point to the TAG issue 14:43:08 <LeeF> chimezie: because we say that a graph IRI denotes an IR, it SHOULD get a 200 response 14:43:16 <LeeF> ... unclear if we need it as a normative reference since there's no ambiguity 14:44:22 <AxelPolleres> anyone for discuouraging graph uris that return 200? 14:44:45 <AxelPolleres> -1 with the understanding that warning about possible ambiguities should be enough 14:44:54 <AndyS> most graphs already return 200 (rightly or wrongly) 14:46:19 <AxelPolleres> seems we have agreement about that (-1) 14:47:32 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: Axel to find out whether/how we can refence the TAG issue http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues#httpRange-14 in a rec document with team contacts 14:47:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-254 - Find out whether/how we can refence the TAG issue http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues#httpRange-14 in a rec document with team contacts [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-06-14]. 14:48:14 <AxelPolleres> topic: red box on http-post in Section 5.3 14:48:16 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#http-post 14:48:25 <Zakim> -LeeF 14:49:29 <AxelPolleres> Chime: try to clarify two use cases of POST for creating resources or adding content 14:51:01 <AxelPolleres> ... in order to support that, empty POST to the graphstore shall give you a new resource/iri 14:51:33 <AndyS> Until this point, "graph store" isn't in the HTTP Update document. 14:53:01 <AxelPolleres> s/graphstore/network-manipulable RDF dataset/ 14:54:22 <AxelPolleres> Alternative to Service description would be an extra operation for GET (to get the network-manipulable RDF dataset) 14:54:36 <AxelPolleres> chime: not sure whether this is the right place... 14:54:55 <AndyS> The terminology has "graph store". My point is that the concept of dataset/graph store is not used except in description. It's just for the naming. The operations (except here) never refer to the dataset 14:55:04 <Zakim> -chimezie_ 14:55:15 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone? 14:55:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see Nicholashumfrey, AxelPolleres, AndyS, SteveH 14:55:21 <chimezie> sorry about having to leave prematurely 14:55:22 <Nicholashumfrey> sorry I don't have a strong opinion / experience in this 14:56:15 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/http-rdf-update/#http-post 14:58:05 <SteveH> Zakim, who's speaking 14:58:05 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who's speaking', SteveH 14:58:09 <SteveH> Zakim, who's speaking? 14:58:19 <Zakim> SteveH, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: AxelPolleres (9%), AndyS (5%) 14:58:21 <AndyS> I don't see there is an issue. How do does one find SPARQL query endpoints? 14:58:28 <SteveH> quite 14:59:13 <AndyS> Why? 15:01:17 <AxelPolleres> Andy: Not really clear why/how this is different from finding any document on the Web. 15:03:50 <AxelPolleres> Seems to be agreement that behaovior is clear (but not what the issue of the red box really is... shall we just remove it?) 15:04:26 <AxelPolleres> Graph Store - An RDF dataset whose named graphs can be added to or deleted from [SPARQL-UPDATE]. 15:04:47 <AxelPolleres> any comments on that? 15:06:21 <AxelPolleres> �Andy: why do we need to reference graph store at all? 15:06:49 <AxelPolleres> Axel: is used in Terminology of "Network-manipulable RDF Dataset - A graph store used by an implementation of this protocol whose named RDF graphs can be managed by HTTP operations and their identifiers are either resolvable or can be embedded in the query component of the request URI in a manner described in section 4.2 in this document." 15:08:26 <SteveH> "network-manipulable RDF dataset" is somewhat a synonym of "graph store", no? 15:09:13 <AxelPolleres> not clear why we need a distinction "network-manipulable RDF dataset" and "graphstore" 15:10:38 <AxelPolleres> Axel: network-manipulable RDF dataset has an address, graphstore, doesn't necessarily. 15:11:58 <AxelPolleres> service endpoint for Update is not necessaily equal URI of "network-manipulable RDF dataset" ? 15:12:43 <AxelPolleres> ... network-manipulable RDF dataset seems in that sense more synonymous to service endpoint than to graphstore to me 15:12:50 <AndyS> Surely, service endpoint != dataset URI -- Why not an HTTP Update service? 15:13:28 <AxelPolleres> Andy, you suggest to rename"network-manipulable RDF dataset" to "HTTP Update service"? 15:13:45 <AndyS> Let's wait to discuss this with Chimie so we can understand his concern. 15:14:04 <AxelPolleres> or (my suggestion) "RDF HTTP Update endpoint"? 15:15:01 <AxelPolleres> needs clarification 15:15:59 <SteveH> not from me 15:16:36 <Zakim> -SteveH 15:17:26 <AxelPolleres> summary: 2 issues left: (i) red box in Section 5.3 , not clear whether it's needed (ii) term "network-manipulable RDF dataset" and distinction from "graph store" and "endpoint" needs clarification 15:17:31 <AxelPolleres> adjourned 15:17:31 <Zakim> -AndyS 15:17:37 <AxelPolleres> thanks all 15:17:42 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres 15:17:49 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000185