IRC log of sparql-ent on 2010-02-24
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:02:38 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #sparql-ent
- 15:02:38 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/02/24-sparql-ent-irc
- 15:02:51 [bglimm]
- agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-24
- 17:02:17 [kpbrown]
- kpbrown has joined #sparql-ent
- 17:02:20 [kpbrown]
- kpbrown has left #sparql-ent
- 17:30:06 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #sparql-ent
- 17:40:21 [ivan]
- ivan has joined #sparql-ent
- 17:40:28 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #sparql-ent
- 17:46:03 [bglimm]
- Hi Ivan
- 17:46:10 [ivan]
- hi birte
- 17:46:21 [bglimm]
- can we set the link to the agenda as chat topic?
- 17:46:29 [bglimm]
- http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-24
- 17:46:32 [ivan]
- of course
- 17:46:35 [bglimm]
- I didn't manage to do that
- 17:46:45 [ivan]
- ivan has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-24
- 17:46:54 [bglimm]
- :-)
- 17:46:55 [ivan]
- ivan has changed the topic to: agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-24
- 17:47:32 [ivan]
- zakim, room for 10 for 90 minutes?
- 17:47:33 [Zakim]
- ok, ivan; conference Team_(sparql-ent)17:47Z scheduled with code 26631 (CONF1) for 90 minutes until 1917Z
- 17:47:44 [ivan]
- here we are:-)
- 17:47:58 [ivan]
- I asked for 90 minutes if we round out (and we still have 10 minutes)
- 17:48:44 [ivan]
- ivan has changed the topic to: Zakim code 26631, agenda http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-24
- 17:49:19 [bglimm]
- :-)
- 17:50:32 [bglimm]
- I've updated the wiki agenda now
- 17:58:37 [Zakim]
- Team_(sparql-ent)17:47Z has now started
- 17:58:44 [Zakim]
- +bglimm
- 17:58:45 [AxelPolleres]
- AxelPolleres has joined #sparql-ent
- 17:58:53 [AxelPolleres]
- hi all
- 17:58:57 [bglimm]
- Hi
- 17:59:01 [bglimm]
- The access code is 26631
- 17:59:02 [AxelPolleres]
- chime?
- 17:59:07 [bglimm]
- Not yet
- 18:01:44 [AxelPolleres]
- will sandro join?
- 18:01:52 [bglimm]
- He said so I think
- 18:01:55 [ivan]
- zakim, dial ivan-voip
- 18:01:55 [Zakim]
- ok, ivan; the call is being made
- 18:01:57 [Zakim]
- +Ivan
- 18:02:41 [Zakim]
- +AxelPolleres
- 18:03:42 [sandro]
- sandro has joined #sparql-ent
- 18:03:48 [sandro]
- zakim, what is the code?
- 18:03:48 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), sandro
- 18:03:51 [sandro]
- rrsagent, pointer?
- 18:03:51 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2010/02/24-sparql-ent-irc#T18-03-51
- 18:04:11 [Zakim]
- +Sandro
- 18:04:15 [sandro]
- zakim, who is on the call?
- 18:04:15 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see bglimm, Ivan, AxelPolleres, Sandro
- 18:05:33 [sandro]
- (axel to make sure anything important gets recorded, but not really scribe.)
- 18:05:35 [AxelPolleres]
- topic: general entailment regimes issues
- 18:05:50 [AxelPolleres]
- inconsistency handling is not clear
- 18:06:55 [AxelPolleres]
- sandro: at least, is there a protocol way to signal inconsistency, even if not required
- 18:07:03 [AxelPolleres]
- ... seems to me that we want to have that
- 18:08:13 [ivan]
- q+
- 18:10:04 [chimezie]
- chimezie has joined #sparql-ent
- 18:10:13 [AxelPolleres]
- birte can you paste the C2 variation again?
- 18:10:28 [Zakim]
- + +1.216.445.aaaa
- 18:10:31 [bglimm]
- Wait a sec
- 18:10:35 [AxelPolleres]
- guess that's chime?
- 18:10:42 [chimezie]
- Zakim +1.216.445.aaaa is me
- 18:10:44 [chimezie]
- yes :)
- 18:10:47 [bglimm]
- Current C2 in PWD:
- 18:10:47 [bglimm]
- (C2) Each variable x that occurs in the subject position of a triple in
- 18:10:47 [bglimm]
- BGP is such that sk(μ(x)) occurs in sk(SG).
- 18:10:48 [bglimm]
- Proposed C2:
- 18:10:48 [bglimm]
- (C2) For each variable x in V(BGP), sk(μ(x)) occurs in sk(SG) or in
- 18:10:48 [bglimm]
- Vocab.
- 18:12:16 [AxelPolleres]
- rdf:_1 .... rdf:_n ?
- 18:13:28 [AxelPolleres]
- Vocab is a meant here to be a finite subset of the RDF, RDFS, OWL vocabularies
- 18:13:34 [bglimm]
- Here vocal is defined as the reserved vocabulary for the entailment
- 18:13:34 [bglimm]
- regime (e.g., the RDF vocabulary for RDF entailment) minus terms of the
- 18:13:34 [bglimm]
- form rdf:_n with n in {1, 2, …}.
- 18:15:24 [AxelPolleres]
- this condition is not about inconsistencies, is it?
- 18:15:49 [AxelPolleres]
- ivan: we don't want to restrict, where we don't have to.
- 18:17:51 [AxelPolleres]
- my problem is ... we cannot reach the infinite wisdom... anyways
- 18:21:17 [AxelPolleres]
- if we want to keep answers finite... we have to drop intuitiveness at some point :-(
- 18:24:00 [AxelPolleres]
- still la bit puzzled about the role of data values in C2
- 18:24:29 [AxelPolleres]
- take the decision on C2 on email...
- 18:25:25 [AxelPolleres]
- birte to please explain the role of data values in C2
- 18:25:40 [AxelPolleres]
- topic: shall we mark rif "at risk"?
- 18:26:25 [AxelPolleres]
- ivan: rif not being rrec shouldn't be a problem, confident that it will be ready there, afraid that it would be interpreted in underied way, if we mark it
- 18:26:31 [AxelPolleres]
- birte: ok
- 18:31:08 [AxelPolleres]
- I think we can define SPARQL wrt a RIF/RDF combination... but not really how you get to the scoping graph?
- 18:31:32 [AxelPolleres]
- we can just say what the scoping grpah for some RIF/RDF combination is
- 18:33:27 [AxelPolleres]
- we can sort out how we get to the correspondoing RIF/RDF combination later on.
- 18:34:07 [ivan]
- q+
- 18:34:25 [AxelPolleres]
- birte: at some point it was discussed whether we'd have an entailment regime per ruleset.
- 18:34:28 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 18:34:34 [ivan]
- ack ivan
- 18:34:42 [AxelPolleres]
- ivan thinks that this is useless..
- 18:34:59 [bglimm]
- Here's somebody from RIF suggestion that: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2010Jan/0019.html
- 18:35:05 [AxelPolleres]
- q+ to state that this point is void, if we have solved "rif:imports"
- 18:35:18 [AxelPolleres]
- ack AxelPolleres
- 18:35:18 [Zakim]
- AxelPolleres, you wanted to state that this point is void, if we have solved "rif:imports"
- 18:36:43 [AxelPolleres]
- sandro: the case that is still open is...
- 18:37:09 [AxelPolleres]
- ... how does the client state which ruleset?
- 18:37:27 [AxelPolleres]
- FROM mygraph ...
- 18:37:36 [AxelPolleres]
- where mygraph refers to a ruleset
- 18:38:05 [sandro]
- don't we need: QUERY ... FROM ... WITH <entailment-regime or ruleset > ....
- 18:39:04 [sandro]
- ahhhh, FROM <ruleset>
- 18:39:55 [bglimm]
- Select ... FROM data.rdf FROM rules.rdf WHERE { ... }
- 18:40:22 [sandro]
- so this needs RIF-in-RDF for FROM.
- 18:41:01 [sandro]
- ivan: the rules.rdf would be an rdf graph with the rif:import triple in it.
- 18:41:10 [AxelPolleres]
- the current definitions (if we don't want to interfer with SPARQL 1.0 ) we can't do FROM <ruleset>
- 18:41:16 [bglimm]
- yes that would work
- 18:41:34 [AxelPolleres]
- ... but we can do FROM <... rif:imports ...>
- 18:42:49 [bglimm]
- it should probably called rif:useRuleSet or something like that
- 18:43:04 [bglimm]
- or even sparql:useRuleSet
- 18:44:08 [AxelPolleres]
- sparql:useRuleSet
- 18:44:51 [sandro]
- conclusion: if necessary, we can do rif-import under spaql
- 18:45:01 [AxelPolleres]
- conclusion is... if all goes wrong, we can do "rif:imports" ourselves.
- 18:45:57 [AxelPolleres]
- I think we can handle bnodes.
- 18:46:24 [AxelPolleres]
- chime suggested to stick with *strongly safe* core?
- 18:47:30 [bglimm]
- if p(?n) then p(?n+1).
- 18:47:30 [bglimm]
- p(1).
- 18:47:31 [bglimm]
- and the query
- 18:47:31 [bglimm]
- p(?x).
- 18:51:01 [AxelPolleres]
- sandro: why the finiteness restriction in first place?
- 18:51:05 [AxelPolleres]
- can we change that?
- 18:51:42 [AxelPolleres]
- ... no implementation crucially relies on that.
- 18:52:17 [AxelPolleres]
- ...if it's just not intuitive, we may want to question that.
- 18:53:19 [sandro]
- axel: simple way to restrict finiteness: things in answer must occur in data.
- 18:55:38 [sandro]
- sandro: that's a non starter -- you couldn't get results from a computation.
- 18:56:07 [sandro]
- axel: you could allow computations to recursive level N from the data.
- 18:57:03 [sandro]
- sandro: just say it has to be any finite number of recursions.
- 18:57:11 [AxelPolleres]
- sandro: how if we only restrict that any implemnentation has to limit the recursion depth.
- 18:57:16 [AxelPolleres]
- ... but not how?
- 18:58:42 [AxelPolleres]
- p(1)
- 18:58:56 [AxelPolleres]
- q(x+1) :- p(x).
- 18:59:10 [AxelPolleres]
- r(x+1) :- q(x)
- 19:05:43 [AxelPolleres]
- sandro: suggests... just leave behaivor of SPARQL undefined whenever the closure of R is infinite?
- 19:07:23 [AxelPolleres]
- chime: suggest to standardise a possibly boring finite subset
- 19:07:35 [AxelPolleres]
- sandr: suggest to just don't worry about finiteness
- 19:07:43 [AxelPolleres]
- (two quite opposite positions)
- 19:09:16 [sandro]
- sandro: use case, define an odd() predicate, then query for { ?s ?p ?o; ?o a oddNumber }
- 19:09:41 [Zakim]
- -bglimm
- 19:09:52 [bglimm]
- sorry dropped out
- 19:11:33 [Zakim]
- +bglimm
- 19:11:48 [ivan]
- q+
- 19:12:06 [AxelPolleres]
- ivan is still on the q
- 19:12:50 [sandro]
- axel: a use case for RIF in SPARQL with strongly-safe core == subsets of RDFS-entailment, ad hoc OWL-RL entailment.
- 19:13:46 [AxelPolleres]
- ivan: what comes to my mind... did we have in SPARQL a way to include a time/resource limit?
- 19:14:01 [AxelPolleres]
- sandro: we only have result limit
- 19:14:08 [sandro]
- sandro: I think it only has LIMIT; with entailment, yes, it would be nice to have TIME limit, too.
- 19:14:08 [bglimm]
- resource limit: LIMIT N
- 19:15:03 [AxelPolleres]
- not for this round, I guess.
- 19:15:50 [sandro]
- sandro: maybe you can throw this in the SPARQL protocol, as an ignore-if-you-don't-understand
- 19:16:32 [Zakim]
- -Ivan
- 19:16:32 [bglimm]
- bye
- 19:16:33 [Zakim]
- - +1.216.445.aaaa
- 19:16:33 [AxelPolleres]
- thanks birte...
- 19:16:35 [Zakim]
- -Sandro
- 19:16:35 [bglimm]
- adjourned
- 19:16:46 [Zakim]
- -bglimm
- 19:16:48 [Zakim]
- -AxelPolleres
- 19:16:49 [Zakim]
- Team_(sparql-ent)17:47Z has ended
- 19:16:51 [Zakim]
- Attendees were bglimm, Ivan, AxelPolleres, Sandro, +1.216.445.aaaa
- 19:17:10 [AxelPolleres]
- rrsagent, make records public
- 19:17:31 [sandro]
- rrsagent, pointer?
- 19:17:31 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2010/02/24-sparql-ent-irc#T19-17-31
- 19:19:20 [sandro]
- ewwwww. commonscribe doesn't want to handle this irc log being on a strange channel.
- 19:21:55 [bglimm]
- hm, what's so strange about it. Should I pick a different one for the next teleconf?
- 19:22:57 [sandro]
- it's just looking for #sparql. maybe easier to use that, next time, since there's no conflict with the WG at that time.
- 19:23:34 [bglimm]
- ok. Whoever is not interested in entailments can just ignore us ;-)
- 19:24:12 [sandro]
- indeed.
- 19:44:50 [AxelPolleres]
- AxelPolleres has left #sparql-ent
- 21:59:49 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #sparql-ent