IRC log of sparql on 2010-08-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:58:37 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:58:37 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:58:38 [bglimm]
13:58:39 [Zakim]
13:58:44 [MattPerry]
MattPerry has joined #sparql
13:59:04 [Zakim]
13:59:13 [AndyS]
zakim, [IPCaller] is me
13:59:15 [Zakim]
13:59:23 [Zakim]
13:59:23 [AxelPolleres]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
13:59:27 [Zakim]
+AndyS; got it
13:59:39 [AxelPolleres]
13:59:40 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P12, AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei
13:59:41 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
13:59:45 [Zakim]
13:59:46 [AxelPolleres]
regrets: Lee Feigenbaum
13:59:55 [AxelPolleres]
chair: Axel Polleres
14:00:06 [AndyS]
14:00:07 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:00:09 [Zakim]
14:00:13 [AxelPolleres]
scribe: AndyS
14:00:13 [AndyS]
scribenick: AndyS
14:00:19 [Zakim]
14:00:21 [AndyS]
scribe: Andy Seaborne
14:00:21 [NickH]
zakim, ??P12 is me
14:00:28 [AxelPolleres]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:00:33 [Zakim]
+NickH; got it
14:00:39 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, AndyS, AxelPolleres, kasei, OlivierCorby, Ivan, MattPerry
14:00:43 [NickH]
Zakim, why are you so slow?
14:00:51 [AndyS]
Regrets: LeeF
14:00:59 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, NickH.
14:01:02 [Zakim]
14:01:13 [Zakim]
14:01:27 [NickH]
zakim, who is speaking?
14:01:32 [AndyS]
This meeting: schedule / editors then test cases then other
14:01:39 [Zakim]
NickH, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
14:01:39 [bglimm]
Why can I not even call France? The number you called is not available...
14:01:46 [AxelPolleres]
topic: admin
14:01:47 [AndyS]
Topic: admin
14:01:58 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at
14:02:11 [SteveH__]
??P22 might be me, not sure
14:02:21 [AndyS]
14:02:38 [AxelPolleres]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at
14:02:51 [Zakim]
+ +1.603.791.aaaa
14:02:56 [bglimm]
Zakim, passcode?
14:02:59 [Zakim]
the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), bglimm
14:03:24 [AxelPolleres]
sandro, able to scribe next week?
14:03:26 [Zakim]
14:03:38 [AlexPassant]
Zakim, +[IPcaller] is me
14:03:38 [Zakim]
sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller]'
14:03:59 [AxelPolleres]
14:04:03 [AndyS]
Topic: publication schedule
14:04:42 [AndyS]
Status of query
14:05:01 [Zakim]
14:05:08 [bglimm]
Zakim, +[IPcaller.a] is me
14:05:10 [Zakim]
sorry, bglimm, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller.a]'
14:05:16 [bglimm]
Zakim, I hate you
14:05:16 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'I hate you', bglimm
14:05:18 [AndyS]
SteveH: maybe end September
14:05:20 [AxelPolleres]
tentatively end of september
14:05:27 [bglimm]
Zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me
14:05:27 [Zakim]
+bglimm; got it
14:05:34 [AndyS]
AndyS: Good enough target
14:05:34 [AlexPassant]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:05:34 [Zakim]
+AlexPassant; got it
14:05:45 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:05:45 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:06:16 [AndyS]
pgearon: missing edits to do / pregress next week / semantics ? --> mid Sept
14:06:28 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:06:28 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:06:33 [chimezie]
chimezie has joined #sparql
14:06:52 [AndyS]
bglimm: ready to go - one example to add ideally
14:07:01 [AndyS]
AxelPollares: Last call status?
14:07:10 [AndyS]
AxelPolleres: Last call status?
14:07:15 [AxelPolleres]
chime, are you on the phone already?
14:07:20 [ivan]
14:07:33 [chimezie]
not yet, dealing with something on my end will be joinining in a few seconds
14:07:37 [AndyS]
ivan: some open issues with RIF
14:07:42 [chimezie]
Zakim, what is the passcode?
14:07:42 [Zakim]
the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), chimezie
14:07:43 [AndyS]
ack ivan
14:07:53 [AxelPolleres]
open issues about rif:imports ...
14:08:16 [AxelPolleres]
semi-sparql/semi-rif stuff
14:08:17 [Zakim]
14:08:22 [SteveH__]
sorry, just looked at my diary, end sept is a bit optimistic, I'm on holiday for 2 weeks before then, mid oct is more likely
14:08:54 [Souri]
Souri has joined #sparql
14:09:18 [AndyS]
AxelPolleres: open issues on RIF e.g. rif:imports - timescale?
14:09:44 [AndyS]
chimezie: no interest from RIF WG yet.
14:10:04 [AndyS]
ivan: formally, there is an open issue on this
14:10:33 [AndyS]
AxelPolleres; at risk?
14:10:41 [AndyS]
ivan: no - must be decided
14:11:03 [AxelPolleres]
should we just mark the naming of the URI rif:imports "at risk", unless we get agreement.
14:11:07 [AndyS]
... naming is less certain - prefer to agree with RIF on URI name
14:12:26 [AndyS]
AxelPolleres: RIF call moved - inconvenient
14:13:02 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: will find out about next RIF meeting and try to join, to clarify use of rif:imports URI.
14:13:02 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - will
14:13:07 [AndyS]
ivan: also : URIs to use for naming entailment regimes for RIF
14:14:04 [AxelPolleres]
Rif is today, will try to join.
14:15:29 [bglimm]
Can we maybe try and get at least one person from RIF to take part in the reviewing that be do before we publish?
14:15:37 [AndyS]
chimezie: ready mid Sept
14:15:41 [bglimm]
14:16:07 [chimezie]
on RIF WG agenda: 5. Feedback on SPARQL ER [9-11] (20 mn)
14:16:22 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:16:22 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:16:24 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: ask in RIF for another review from them
14:16:24 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - ask
14:16:40 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: axel to ask in RIF for another review from them
14:16:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-297 - Ask in RIF for another review from them [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-31].
14:17:00 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: axel to clarify se of rif:imports URI with RIF.
14:17:00 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-298 - Clarify se of rif:imports URI with RIF. [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-31].
14:17:23 [AndyS]
protocol - LeeF sent regrets for today
14:17:27 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to check with Lee about protocol
14:17:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-299 - Check with Lee about protocol [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-31].
14:17:42 [AndyS]
kasei: 2 open issues
14:17:58 [AndyS]
... one for parsable formats for endpoint
14:18:20 [AndyS]
... other entailment regimes and parameterized inference
14:18:34 [AndyS]
... done as much as we can do for that at the moment
14:19:14 [bglimm]
I think we concluded that there are too many different opinions and it is out of scope
14:20:05 [SteveH__]
that's my understanding
14:20:17 [SteveH__]
[re. prop paths and [sth] being part of query doc]
14:20:17 [AxelPolleres]
fed-query and prop-paths within query
14:20:19 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
14:20:19 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
14:20:19 [AndyS]
AxelPolleres; Prop path & service -> query doc
14:20:22 [bglimm]
q+ to ask about conformance criteria
14:20:37 [bglimm]
Zakim, unmute me
14:20:37 [Zakim]
bglimm should no longer be muted
14:20:58 [AndyS]
bglimm: PF what is required?
14:21:38 [AxelPolleres]
who started to speak, please put yourself on the queue :-)
14:22:48 [NickH]
and there will always be bugs ;-)
14:22:56 [SteveH__]
AndyS: you mgiht wish to reject some queries in some circumstances
14:23:45 [kasei]
14:23:51 [kasei]
but it was meant for features that are outside of SPARQL
14:24:27 [SteveH__]
I think Andy is correct, it's very hard to cover the real world cases
14:24:33 [kasei]
we do have concrete instances, but not for this.
14:25:02 [bglimm]
The problem with PP is that it changes the algebra and that means it changes the evaluation of BGPs, which is also what ent. reg. does, so there is a kind of conflict in that ent. regimes assume standard SPARQL algebra. PP is orthogonal to Ent. Regimes.
14:25:15 [NickH]
might support count() but not other aggregates
14:25:20 [SteveH__]
14:25:52 [AndyS]
bglimm, orthogonal - yes- not conflicting with.
14:26:10 [AndyS]
... it does not change BGP eval.
14:26:44 [bglimm]
well, the semantics of PP can be undefined, we just don't have anything for that
14:26:54 [chimezie]
so we don't have a notion of a well-formed query?
14:26:57 [AxelPolleres]
14:27:42 [AxelPolleres]
{ ?x :p* ?y } ???
14:29:56 [AxelPolleres]
andys: pp are orthogonal to entailment
14:30:10 [AxelPolleres]
birte: then it's not a problem
14:31:04 [AxelPolleres]
topic: rdf-http-update
14:31:18 [chimezie]
Zakim, unmute me
14:31:18 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
14:31:28 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:31:28 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:31:57 [AndyS]
chimezie: "ready for publication = all major issues addressed" => TBL comments, some WG points (small)
14:32:13 [AxelPolleres]
comments from timbl open, comments from the WG should be mostly handled, depends on timbl's answers.
14:32:29 [AxelPolleres]
axel: let's follow up with sndro as well on that
14:32:53 [AndyS]
topic: test cases
14:32:54 [chimezie]
Zakim, mute me
14:32:54 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
14:33:09 [AndyS]
two sets: select expressions, count aggregates
14:33:14 [AxelPolleres]
14:33:22 [AndyS]
count aggregate:
14:33:48 [AxelPolleres]
14:34:34 [AxelPolleres]
can we approve agg01-agg07 ?
14:35:39 [kasei]
I agree with (and pass) agg01-agg07.
14:36:02 [SteveH__]
I would like to abstain on all
14:37:14 [AxelPolleres]
PROPOSED: Approve test cases agg01-agg07 modulo check by email from Andy
14:38:42 [SteveH__]
I don't think I'll be able to run them for real
14:38:51 [SteveH__]
[sorry, very noisy here, dont want to use phone]
14:39:02 [SteveH__]
I can "run" then on paper
14:39:08 [SteveH__]
14:39:10 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: andy to check test cases agg01-agg07
14:39:10 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-300 - Check test cases agg01-agg07 [on Andy Seaborne - due 2010-08-31].
14:39:25 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: steve to check test cases agg01-agg07
14:39:25 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-301 - Check test cases agg01-agg07 [on Steve Harris - due 2010-08-31].
14:39:59 [kasei]
q+ to ask whether the current test setup would allow testing of group_concat (non-deterministic w.r.t. sorting)
14:40:45 [bglimm]
14:40:48 [bglimm]
ack me
14:40:49 [Zakim]
bglimm, you wanted to ask about conformance criteria
14:40:50 [AxelPolleres]
ack bglimm
14:40:57 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:40:57 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:41:35 [SteveH__]
yes, order applies after the aggregates
14:42:23 [AxelPolleres]
andyS: order in the group vs order by
14:42:30 [kasei]
I'm talking about results like: "1, 2" vs. "2, 1"
14:43:19 [AndyS]
Can't be expressed - and isn't defined
14:43:33 [AndyS]
kasei: could use a regex on a subquery
14:43:41 [AxelPolleres]
greg: could be done with an outer ask query checkin all the possiblities
14:44:00 [SteveH__]
"1, 1" and "2, 2" is ok
14:44:01 [AxelPolleres]
andy: not to write tests which are not portable
14:44:26 [kasei]
seems most (portable) solutions to this involve subqueries
14:44:34 [AxelPolleres]
... alternative to regex would be length (not perfect, but ok)
14:45:20 [AxelPolleres]
there is one query with to results in the testsuite.
14:45:30 [Zakim]
14:46:16 [SteveH__]
we shouldn't change the 1.0 testsuite
14:46:29 [SteveH__]
but we can publish a new suite
14:46:41 [AxelPolleres]
axel: extend testcase vocabulary by alternatives.
14:46:57 [AxelPolleres]
andy: jsut one or two alternatives isn't really the issue.
14:47:00 [Zakim]
14:47:17 [AxelPolleres]
... embedding tst in the outer query would be better.
14:47:23 [bglimm]
Zakim, mute me
14:47:23 [Zakim]
bglimm should now be muted
14:48:04 [SteveH__]
bglimm, were :)
14:48:06 [AxelPolleres]
let's see how far we get with deterministic testcases only.
14:48:09 [AndyS]
I prefer to have subqueries and one result per test, not alternative results
14:49:06 [AxelPolleres]
SELECT ?N COUNT(?P1) WHERE { ?P name ?N; knows ?P1 } group by ?P
14:49:41 [chimezie]
zakim, unmute me
14:49:41 [Zakim]
Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
14:49:52 [AndyS]
14:49:52 [kasei]
undefined or error?
14:50:20 [kasei]
14:50:21 [chimezie]
i would think this should be an error
14:51:08 [MattPerry]
Oracle SQL will give an error
14:51:27 [AxelPolleres]
14:53:15 [AndyS]
14:53:51 [AxelPolleres]
strawpoll: should ungrouped variabled in project expressions generate an error?
14:53:56 [AndyS]
what about a warning?
14:54:13 [chimezie]
14:54:14 [AxelPolleres]
s/project expresisons/projections/
14:54:22 [bglimm]
14:54:22 [kasei]
14:54:26 [MattPerry]
+1 for error
14:54:26 [Souri]
14:54:34 [NickH]
14:54:35 [AndyS]
14:54:40 [OlivierCorby]
14:54:44 [SteveH__]
14:54:45 [pgearon]
14:54:45 [AlexPassant]
14:54:48 [ivan]
14:54:49 [AxelPolleres]
(DERI hat) +1
14:55:33 [SteveH__]
didn't we already have a descision on this, or is it a new issue?
14:55:43 [AndyS]
we have discussed this before
14:55:44 [bglimm]
I agree with CHime
14:55:55 [MattPerry]
I agree with chime too
14:55:57 [kasei]
i'd probably have to know what "not an error" actually is... unbound? undefined behaviour?
14:56:01 [Souri]
I'd object I think
14:57:42 [AxelPolleres]
we have one objection (souri) against not error... and no objection against error...
14:57:44 [bglimm]
all queries, if you don't like them
14:58:10 [AxelPolleres]
Andy: we don't have other cases for queries which are syntactically correct, but should raise an error
14:58:29 [AxelPolleres]
Chime: we don't have a notion of "well-formed" queries
14:59:40 [AxelPolleres]
axel: how is that different from bnodes being shared between groups?
15:00:48 [AxelPolleres]
probably we need to take that to email...
15:01:14 [AxelPolleres]
Andy: if we find a class of queries for that case, it might be ok.
15:01:23 [SteveH__]
I belive that the current text says it an error, FWIW
15:01:28 [SteveH__]
but doesn't define an mechanism
15:01:30 [Souri]
if we can statically figure out that it does not conform, IMO we should consider giving an error
15:02:02 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION: Axel to try to summarise the positions on projecting ungrouped variables
15:02:02 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-302 - Try to summarise the positions on projecting ungrouped variables [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-31].
15:02:10 [AxelPolleres]
15:02:18 [ivan]
zakim, drop me
15:02:18 [Zakim]
Ivan is being disconnected
15:02:19 [Zakim]
15:02:41 [Zakim]
15:02:42 [AxelPolleres]
rrsagent, make records public
15:02:54 [Zakim]
15:02:59 [Zakim]
15:03:20 [Zakim]
15:03:40 [AndyS]
15:04:14 [Zakim]
15:04:27 [AndyS]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:27 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickH, AndyS, kasei, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, pgearon, +1.603.791.aaaa
15:04:31 [Zakim]
15:04:40 [SteveH__]
AndyS, yeah, that's probably what I'd do in an impl. given a free hand
15:04:40 [Zakim]
15:04:43 [Zakim]
15:04:45 [SteveH__]
it's a little crazy
15:04:53 [Zakim]
15:04:59 [SteveH__]
but sueful
15:05:16 [Souri]
The error in Oracle database for an incorrect use of select list expression in the presence of GROUP BY (select empno, count(*) from scott.emp group by ename) is: ORA-00979: not a GROUP BY expression
15:05:28 [Souri]
zakim, aaaa is me
15:05:28 [Zakim]
+Souri; got it
15:05:35 [AndyS]
currently wording prohibits any reuse of the name even if completely different variable (e.g. another subquery, or a different union branch)
15:05:46 [SteveH_]
SteveH_ has joined #sparql
15:05:50 [SteveH_]
AndyS, yes
15:06:22 [AndyS]
but a subquery without group can reuse a variable ... err !
15:06:40 [AxelPolleres]
apologies for having had to run quickly... seems my "let's adjourn" was not heard by another conversation on top
15:06:43 [AndyS]
Needs to define use (not introduction) in expressions in SELECT
15:06:58 [AndyS]
.. add to SELECT expressions section?
15:07:50 [AxelPolleres]
seemed that steve and andy kept on discussing, didn't want to stop them
15:07:53 [Souri]
got to go ... bye
15:08:13 [AxelPolleres]
bye all, sorry for the somewhat chaotic end of the call
15:08:26 [AxelPolleres]
thanks for scribing to andy
15:08:28 [Zakim]
15:08:36 [AxelPolleres]
rrsagent, make records public
15:09:39 [SteveH__]
SteveH__ has joined #sparql
15:09:58 [Zakim]
15:11:20 [Zakim]
15:11:22 [Zakim]
SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:11:23 [Zakim]
Attendees were AxelPolleres, kasei, AndyS, OlivierCorby, Ivan, MattPerry, NickH, pgearon, +1.603.791.aaaa, bglimm, AlexPassant, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Souri
15:18:57 [OlivierCorby]
OlivierCorby has left #sparql
15:39:44 [AndyS]
(new machine syndrome) where are the instructions for producing the minutes?
15:54:01 [AndyS]
Whoever it is, please stop editting the chatlog
15:56:09 [AndyS]
Why is material being added to the chatlog that was not in the meeting?
16:04:07 [AxelPolleres]
Andy, no worries, did the minutes already
16:04:29 [AxelPolleres]
if you want to have another look, please go ahead, think they're fine.
16:05:48 [AxelPolleres]
"Whoever it is, please stop editting the chatlog" that would've been me then... ;-) sorry, got in a routine of just doing the minutes myself recently
16:05:53 [AndyS]
I have done the minutes.
16:06:55 [AndyS]
Do not like the additional material that was not part of the call being added. I added a note about it.
16:07:30 [AxelPolleres]
you mean the summary?
16:09:06 [AxelPolleres]
it was just a summarty that should help us recalling the main outsomes of the call.
17:34:08 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sparql