See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 21 June 2011
<mhausenblas> scribenick: betehess
PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
<ericP> second
PROPOSAL: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-rdb2rdf-minutes.html with a change from rdfs:range to rdfs:domain
<ericP> second
<cygri> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: Accept the minutes of last meeting http://www.w3.org/2011/06/14-rdb2rdf-minutes.html with a change from rdfs:range to rdfs:domain
mhausenblas: my intention is to have no pending issue
<cygri> ISSUE-29?
<trackbot> ISSUE-29 -- Require blank node and IRI identifier expressions to produce strings -- pending review
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/29
<mhausenblas> ISSUE-29?
<trackbot> ISSUE-29 -- Require blank node and IRI identifier expressions to produce strings -- pending review
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/29
mhausenblas: people from rdb2rdf and rdf wgs: please advise
<Souri> seems unrelated
@@: not sure why it's related to the rdf wg
mhausenblas: it's because it's related to blank nodes
cygri: it's about literals and strings
<dmcneil> +q
cygri: so I don't see the relation with bnodes
<Souri> +1 to Richard (Issue-29 has no relation at all to RDF 1.1 string literal)
Souri: looked at it a bit
... agree with richard
mhausenblas: my bad, I mixed it up with issue 29
<mhausenblas> ISSUE-9
<cygri> ISSUE-9?
<trackbot> ISSUE-9 -- Generate Blank Nodes for duplicate tuples -- postponed
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/9
mhausenblas: wanted to speak about ISSUE-9
<ericP> cygri, (aside: does 29 lean on SPARQL BNode constructors? http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-sparql11-query-20110512/#func-bnode)
<dmcneil> -q
<ericP> betehess: iirc, we had two solutions for the DM
<ericP> ... it was ok in the algorithm to define bnodes
<ericP> ... it wasn't clear how to do it in the datalog rules
<ericP> ... J&M found an article about how to add multiset semantics to datalog
<ericP> ... this is really about SQL and not about RDF
<ericP> ... (can't resolve this without J||M here)
<mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: Change status of ISSUE-9 to OPEN and Michael asks Juan/Marcelo re next steps
+1
<ericP> +1
<boris> +1
RESOLUTION: Change status of ISSUE-9 to OPEN and Michael asks Juan/Marcelo re next steps
<mhausenblas> ACTION: Hausenblas to mail Juan/Marcelo re ISSUE-9 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-rdb2rdf-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-135 - Mail Juan/Marcelo re ISSUE-9 [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2011-06-28].
<mhausenblas> ACTION-126?
<trackbot> ACTION-126 -- Souripriya Das to implement ISSUE-18 resolution and make sure that all class and property names are meaningful -- due 2011-05-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/126
Souri: would like to close action-126 if everybody agree
[ souri explaining how he implemented issue-18 ]
scribe: is this solution ok?
<mhausenblas> Michael: looking at http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/
<Souri> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/r2rml/#LogicalTable_Class
mhausenblas: is that possible to
see the changes in CVS?
... that's my wish
... fine with Souri's work, wondering if we should do
micro-reviewing
cygri: if this is controversial,
editors should advertise their changes
... in case anybody complains
<mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: If an Editor thinks that a change is controversial, the Editor notifies WG, silence is interpreted as consensus
<ericP> +1
sounds good
<dmcneil> +q
dmcneil: I think that changes on properties are a step backward
<ericP> i agree with David, but i am ok with the general proposal
dmcneil: prefers how they were before
<Souri> email that I had sent regarding this change (Action-126): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Jun/0092.html
<ericP> that is, i'm happy for souri to make the change, notify us, and we push back
RESOLUTION: If an Editor thinks that a change is controversial, the Editor notifies WG, silence is interpreted as consensus
<ericP> that said, there are a couple folks who prefer terser predicate names
mhausenblas: cygri, you have a post to your proposal?
cygri, we should postpone this conversation
<dmcneil> that was Richard, not me
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-126
<trackbot> ACTION-126 Implement ISSUE-18 resolution and make sure that all class and property names are meaningful closed
<mhausenblas> ISSUE-18?
<trackbot> ISSUE-18 -- Allow SQL queries to be reused in a mapping -- open
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/issues/18
Souri: I propose we close the first issue and open a new one
mhausenblas: but I agree with Souri
dmcneil: +1
<mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: close ISSUE-18
<Souri> +1
+1
<cygri> +1, the issue is addressed in ACTION-126
<boris> +1
RESOLUTION: close ISSUE-18
<mhausenblas> ACTION-123?
<trackbot> ACTION-123 -- Souripriya Das to implement decision re ISSUE-25 -- due 2011-05-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/123
Souri: it's about the little text
in the resolution
... where to put it?
... in the introduction?
... or create a new section
cygri: would like to think about it and propose on the ML
<mhausenblas> ACTION-124?
<trackbot> ACTION-124 -- Seema Sundara to implement decision re ISSUE-29 (bNodes identifier and URI expressions be of string types) -- due 2011-05-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/124
<dmcneil> I created ISSUE-46 to capture the naming issue
<mhausenblas> thanks, dmcneil
<ericP> cygri pointed me at related d2r functions
cygri: anything that should produce uri, it must produce valid uris
ericP: we can provide people some
functions
... usually, we don't assert functions will produce valid
uris
<Souri> I am okay with raising an issue for it
cygri: I suggest we don't discuss
it now, let's open an issue
... what do we do when we have to cast values to uris?
<mhausenblas> ISSUE-132?
<trackbot> ISSUE-132 does not exist
mhausenblas: so we can't close action-124
<mhausenblas> ACTION-132?
<trackbot> ACTION-132 -- Boris Villazón-Terrazas to update UML diagrams to reflects changes from ISSUE-32 and ISSUE-18 -- due 2011-06-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/132
<mhausenblas> ACTION-133?
<trackbot> ACTION-133 -- Eric Prud'hommeaux to write proposal for issue-22 -- due 2011-06-07 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/133
ericP: written some text, some
review by cygri, so some progress
... not ready to be closed
<mhausenblas> ACTION-117?
<trackbot> ACTION-117 -- Michael Hausenblas to figure out runtime and if charter extension is necessary -- due 2011-05-31 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/117
mhausenblas: who of you guys can help me?
ericP: does it mean writing text
to the AC?
... ok, if you drive it
Ashok: I can help
... but how long to you want the extension?
mhausenblas: if LC is September, maybe another year after September?
ericP&ashok: makes sense
<mhausenblas> ACTION-69
<mhausenblas> ACTION-69?
<trackbot> ACTION-69 -- Daniel Miranker to work on UC&R on OLAP application -- due 2011-05-31 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/69
cygri: we should re-assign to somebody in the wg
mhausenblas: it's a use case that it would be nice to have
cygri: for me, this document is
to drive the design of the specs
... so we may do without that?
<cygri> PROPOSAL: close ISSUE-69, the UC&R ship has sailed
<cygri> PROPOSAL: close ACTION-69, the UC&R ship has sailed
<mhausenblas> +1
<ericP> +1
<Souri> +1 to dropping it
+1
<boris> +1
RESOLUTION: close ACTION-69, the UC&R ship has sailed
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-69
<trackbot> ACTION-69 Work on UC&R on OLAP application closed
ACTION-&*?
ACTION-78?
<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
ACTION-68?
<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
<ericP> action-102?
<trackbot> ACTION-102 -- Ted Thibodeau to sum up the possibilities for generating reliable URIs for DM (to avoid bNodes) on the Wiki -- due 2011-05-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/102
ACTION-102
mhausenblas: do we still need it?
ericP: it could affect dm and
r2rml
... with solution not involving bnodes
... at this point, it will be difficult to come up with
arguments
<mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: close ACTION-102
+1
<ericP> +1
<boris> +1
RESOLUTION: close ACTION-102
<cygri> +1, four months was enough time
<Souri> +1
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-102
<trackbot> ACTION-102 Sum up the possibilities for generating reliable URIs for DM (to avoid bNodes) on the Wiki closed
<mhausenblas> ACTION-115?
<trackbot> ACTION-115 -- Sören Auer to create an issue addressing vendor-specific names like "owner" -- due 2011-05-24 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/115
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-115
<trackbot> ACTION-115 Create an issue addressing vendor-specific names like "owner" closed
mhausenblas: would like to keep it open, to see the official terminology from sql
<mhausenblas> ACTION-134?
<trackbot> ACTION-134 -- Juan Sequeda to ask Marcelo Arenas whether he is happy to be co-editor of the NULL Note -- due 2011-06-21 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/134
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-134
<trackbot> ACTION-134 Ask Marcelo Arenas whether he is happy to be co-editor of the NULL Note closed
mhausenblas: Marcelo accepted
ACTION-128?
<trackbot> Sorry... I don't know anything about this channel
<mhausenblas> ACTION-27?
<trackbot> ACTION-27 -- Michael Hausenblas to invite Olaf some time in the future (will be decided by group) -- due 2011-02-01 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/27
<cygri> PROPOSAL: drop ACTION-27 as outdated
<mhausenblas> +1
<Souri> +1
<boris> +1
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-27
<trackbot> ACTION-27 Invite Olaf some time in the future (will be decided by group) closed
RESOLUTION: drop ACTION-27 as outdated
<cygri> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/pendingreview
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-96
<trackbot> ACTION-96 Capture this (multiple subject maps) and other (future) potential error cases in the Wiki (ISSUE-16) closed
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-97
<trackbot> ACTION-97 Look into D2RQ implementation and update http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/Entity_disambiguation closed
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-130
<trackbot> ACTION-130 Implement ISSUE-32 as resolved today (based on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011May/0030.html) closed
<mhausenblas> close ACTION-100
<trackbot> ACTION-100 Ask Marie-Claire Forgue if there is a chance to present or discuss RDB2RDF at the W3C track at WWW2011 closed
<mhausenblas> [adjourned]
<mhausenblas> trackbot, end telecon
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/ok// Succeeded: s/thanks!// Succeeded: s/@@/cygri/ Succeeded: s/dmcneil, you have/cygri, you have/ Succeeded: s/dmcneil: we should/cygri, we should/ Succeeded: s/mhausenblas: anything that should/cygri: anything that should/ Found ScribeNick: betehess Inferring Scribes: betehess Default Present: dmcneil, mhausenblas, +49.133.6.aaaa, Alexandre, Souri, boris, Ashok_Malhotra, EricP, cygri_ Present: dmcneil mhausenblas +49.133.6.aaaa Alexandre Souri boris Ashok_Malhotra EricP cygri_ David Boris Alex Ashok Richard ericP eric Michael Regrets: Soeren Juan Marcelo Percy Seema Nuno Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2011Jun/0113.html Found Date: 21 Jun 2011 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/06/21-rdb2rdf-minutes.html People with action items: hausenblas[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]