IRC log of rdf-wg on 2011-06-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:03:07 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg
15:03:07 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/22-rdf-wg-irc
15:03:18 [NickH]: zakim, code?
15:03:18 [Zakim]: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), NickH
15:04:04 [pfps]: zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:05 [Zakim]: On the phone I see pfps (muted), davidwood, Guus, Sandro, gavinc, PatHayes, AZ (muted), pchampin (muted), cygri, Scott_Bauer (muted)
15:04:22 [pfps]: zakim, unmute me
15:04:22 [Zakim]: pfps should no longer be muted
15:04:46 [Guus]: sandro is trying to fix it, pls waita little bit
15:04:51 [zwu2]: still gets conference is restricted,
15:04:57 [MacTed]: MacTed has joined #rdf-wg
15:05:59 [MacTed]: Zakim, code?
15:05:59 [Zakim]: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), MacTed
15:06:00 [sandro]: ZAKIM PROBLEMS -- PLEASE BE PATIENT
15:06:08 [iand]: iand has joined #rdf-wg
15:07:41 [sandro]: zakim, who is on the call?
15:07:41 [Zakim]: On the phone I see pfps, davidwood, Guus, Sandro, gavinc, PatHayes, AZ (muted), pchampin (muted), cygri, Scott_Bauer (muted)
15:07:53 [sandro]: zakim, room for 30 for 90 minutes?
15:07:55 [Zakim]: ok, sandro; conference Team_(rdf-wg)15:07Z scheduled with code 26631 (CONF1) for 90 minutes until 1637Z; however, please note that capacity is now overbooked
15:08:12 [Zakim]: -Sandro
15:08:17 [Zakim]: -Guus
15:08:20 [Zakim]: -cygri
15:08:22 [Zakim]: -PatHayes
15:08:23 [Zakim]: -Scott_Bauer
15:08:28 [Zakim]: -gavinc
15:08:39 [Zakim]: -davidwood
15:08:39 [Zakim]: -AZ
15:08:44 [Zakim]: -pchampin
15:08:48 [Zakim]: -pfps
15:08:50 [sandro]: zakim, who is here?
15:08:51 [Zakim]: T&S_(RDFWG)10:00AM has ended
15:08:55 [Zakim]: Attendees were Souri, pfps, davidwood, +1.310.729.aaaa, kasei, +1.540.841.aabb, Sandro, pgearon, gavinc, MattPerry, yvesr, chimezie, Guus, pchampin, cygri, PatHayes, AZ, bglimm,
15:08:59 [Zakim]: ... Scott_Bauer
15:09:01 [Zakim]: apparently T&S_(RDFWG)10:00AM has ended, sandro
15:09:03 [MacTed]: Zakim, this is 26631
15:09:07 [sandro]: zakim, who is here?
15:09:11 [Zakim]: ok, MacTed; that matches Team_(rdf-wg)15:07Z
15:09:13 [Zakim]: +davidwood
15:09:18 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Sandro, OpenLink_Software, Scott_Bauer, PatHayes, davidwood
15:09:19 [Zakim]: +mhausenblas
15:09:21 [Zakim]: +Guus
15:09:23 [Zakim]: +AZ
15:09:23 [sandro]: sandro has changed the topic to: RDF-WG weekly meeting - DIFFERENT CODE TODAY: 26631, Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.05.11
15:09:23 [sandro]: sandro has changed the topic to: RDF-WG weekly meeting - DIFFERENT CODE TODAY: 26631, Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.05.11
15:09:25 [Zakim]: +gavinc
15:09:25 [MacTed]: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:09:27 [MacTed]: Zakim, mute me
15:09:28 [Zakim]: +MacTed; got it
15:09:28 [cygri]: zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me
15:09:29 [Zakim]: MacTed should now be muted
15:09:31 [Zakim]: +cygri; got it
15:09:36 [Zakim]: + +44.752.594.aaaa
15:09:57 [MacTed]: Zakim, who's noisy?
15:10:01 [AZ]: AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:10:05 [Guus]: zakim, who is here?
15:10:05 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Sandro, MacTed (muted), Scott_Bauer, PatHayes, davidwood, cygri, Guus, AZ, gavinc, +44.752.594.aaaa
15:10:06 [AZ]: zakim, mute me
15:10:07 [Zakim]: AZ should now be muted
15:10:09 [Zakim]: MacTed, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: cygri (54%)
15:10:11 [Zakim]: +??P24
15:10:12 [Zakim]: +pfps
15:10:14 [cygri]: cygri has joined #rdf-wg
15:10:20 [mischat]: zakim, ??P24 is me
15:10:20 [Zakim]: +mischat; got it
15:10:24 [mischat]: zakim, mute me
15:10:24 [Zakim]: mischat should now be muted
15:10:38 [iand]: zakim, +44.752.594.aaaa is me
15:10:38 [Zakim]: +iand; got it
15:10:40 [Zakim]: +??P25
15:10:46 [zwu2]: zwu2 has joined #rdf-wg
15:10:46 [SteveH]: Zakim, ??P25 is me
15:10:46 [Zakim]: +SteveH; got it
15:10:47 [Guus]: zakim code is 26631
15:10:56 [zwu2]: zakim, code?
15:10:56 [Zakim]: the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), zwu2
15:11:24 [Zakim]: +AlexHall
15:11:34 [Guus]: zakim, unmute me
15:11:34 [Zakim]: Guus was not muted, Guus
15:11:37 [Zakim]: +Souri
15:11:40 [cygri]: cygri has joined #rdf-wg
15:11:48 [Zakim]: + +1.408.642.aabb
15:11:51 [Guus]: zakim, who is here?
15:11:51 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Sandro, MacTed (muted), Scott_Bauer, PatHayes, davidwood, cygri, Guus, AZ (muted), gavinc, iand, mischat (muted), pfps, SteveH, AlexHall, Souri, +1.408.642.aabb
15:11:55 [Zakim]: +??P21
15:12:00 [zwu2]: zakim, +1.408.642.aabb is me
15:12:00 [Zakim]: +zwu2; got it
15:12:02 [NickH]: Zakim, ??P21 is me
15:12:02 [Zakim]: +NickH; got it
15:12:06 [zwu2]: zakim, mute me
15:12:06 [Zakim]: zwu2 should now be muted
15:12:09 [Zakim]: +??P15
15:12:22 [pchampin]: zakim, ??P15 is me
15:12:23 [Zakim]: +pchampin; got it
15:12:28 [PatHayes]: I seem to be.
15:13:08 [PatHayes]: accept minutes of 15 june telcon...
15:13:09 [pfps]: minutes look OK to me
15:13:09 [FabGandon]: FabGandon has joined #rdf-wg
15:13:13 [PatHayes]: no objections
15:13:25 [PatHayes]: resolved.
15:13:42 [sandro]: RRSAgent, pointer?
15:13:42 [RRSAgent]: See http://www.w3.org/2011/06/22-rdf-wg-irc#T15-13-42
15:14:25 [PatHayes]: I cant see that page, FWIW.
15:15:16 [Zakim]: +FabGandon
15:15:19 [MacTed]: RRSAgent, make logs public
15:15:45 [MacTed]: PatHayes, mischat - try again
15:16:06 [pchampin]: in progress
15:16:18 [PatHayes]: still getting 403 error
15:17:18 [PatHayes]: scribe cannot hear speaker.
15:17:34 [pchampin]: pchampin: I have a draft that I will post to the RDF-WG mailing list
15:17:55 [mischat]: that was pchampin stating that he would email this list with a draft of RDF-WG's comments for the SPARQL-WG
15:18:45 [mischat]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.22
15:19:32 [PatHayes]: guus: lets look at the second group of graph issues.
15:19:47 [PatHayes]: no objections.
15:20:53 [PatHayes]: issue 15.
15:20:54 [mischat]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/15
15:20:58 [sandro]: issue-15?
15:20:58 [trackbot]: ISSUE-15 -- What is the relationship between the IRI and the triples in a dataset/quad-syntax/etc -- open
15:20:58 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/15
15:21:11 [AZ]: AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:21:23 [davidwood]: q+ to ask whether we should also address Turtle QNames alignment with SPARQL prefixed names?
15:22:24 [davidwood]: q-
15:23:04 [PatHayes]: sandro: person sees a quads document or sparql store, what is 'association' between IRI and a graph? Application-dependent?
15:23:16 [cygri]: q+
15:23:24 [PatHayes]: sandro: or IRI *identifies* the g-box or g-snap?
15:23:24 [SteveH]: q+
15:23:51 [Guus]: ack cygri
15:24:37 [PatHayes]: cygri: suggest to first think about constraints on what we can do, before getting into details. We can't damage sparql.
15:25:07 [pchampin]: q+ to comment on cygri's remark
15:25:12 [PatHayes]: cygri: propose we don't constrain the meaning of association.
15:25:14 [Guus]: ack SteveH
15:25:25 [davidwood]: gavinc, thanks
15:25:32 [Guus]: ack pchampin
15:25:33 [Zakim]: pchampin, you wanted to comment on cygri's remark
15:25:44 [PatHayes]: SteveH: agree with Richard, counterprodutive to try to constrain it.
15:25:57 [pchampin]: I agree with Richard and Steve
15:26:13 [sandro]: q+ to disagree :-)
15:26:16 [pchampin]: but I'm concerned about SPARQL using the term "identify" for the relation btw the graph and the IRI
15:26:39 [pchampin]: even if Pat makes a difference btw "naming" and "identifying"
15:26:45 [pchampin]: I'm affraid not everyone does
15:26:45 [Guus]: ack sandro
15:26:45 [Zakim]: sandro, you wanted to disagree :-)
15:27:11 [pchampin]: @cygri, well the SPARQL HTTP protocol we discussed a moment ago does a lot
15:27:37 [Guus]: do we agree that SPARQL only talks about relation between IRI and *g-box*?!
15:27:49 [PatHayes]: sandro: yes, sparql is out there, cannot change implementations. But users think of IRI as identifying the graph. sparql syntax suggests this. WOuldnt break anything to say that this is the 'name' of a g-box.
15:28:14 [cygri]: q+
15:28:40 [Guus]: ack cygri
15:28:42 [PatHayes]: sandro: good design practice to encourage propoer name use.
15:28:57 [Zakim]: +LeeF
15:29:21 [Guus]: [welcome, Lee. Sorry, we had to change the Zakim code]
15:29:46 [LeeF]: [I never remember it anyway, so no worries :-) ]
15:29:56 [PatHayes]: cygri: prefer to rephrase differently. You have an RDF document, to put it into a store then the URI of it is used as its name, is normal: but other ideas are not abuse. Need to phrase carefully.
15:30:00 [sandro]: cygri: you fetch a foaf file, you store the triples in an end point with the retrival URI as the "graph name". is that abuse?
15:30:06 [SteveH]: +1 to cygri
15:30:17 [PatHayes]: q+
15:30:25 [SteveH]: +0.5 maybe, it's not neccesarily a good idea
15:30:32 [pchampin]: and btw, your copy of the foaf file in your datastore is not the same g-box as the foaf file, so it should not be named the same as the foaf file
15:30:33 [SteveH]: q+ to clarify
15:30:39 [Guus]: ack PatHayes
15:30:40 [LeeF]: +1 to cygri
15:30:42 [pchampin]: so even Richard's example would be bad practice according to Sandro
15:31:42 [sandro]: PatHayes: i think SPARQL conceives of the association, the linke between the name and the thing named, is part of the construct. the name is sort of unique, by different name, it would be a different named-graph.
15:31:49 [LeeF]: When we incorporate data from the Web into Anzo stores (rare, but we do it sometimes), we sometimes use the retrieval URI for the name of the graph, and other times use a totally different graph name... really depends on the intended use case for us
15:32:01 [Guus]: ack SteveH
15:32:01 [Zakim]: SteveH, you wanted to clarify
15:32:26 [sandro]: ... so if we want to avoid that tight association, we should avoid the term "name"
15:32:32 [cygri]: q+ not to get hung up on words like "named". what matters is the actual definition
15:32:50 [PatHayes]: steveH: dont feel so strongly about saying Wrong.
15:33:09 [sandro]: q+
15:33:15 [PatHayes]: steveH: exact terminology not so important as being clear on intention.
15:33:40 [cygri]: q-
15:34:00 [PatHayes]: Guus: different name means different g-box? Need to be clear.
15:34:06 [sandro]: queue=sandro
15:34:13 [PatHayes]: SteveH: not issue for me.
15:35:00 [cygri]: q+ to say that there are no trig documents on the web
15:35:09 [PatHayes]: sandro: we should talk about trig(?) Want a standard notion of how IRIs are assocaited with texts.
15:35:20 [AZ]: AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:35:23 [sandro]: ack sandro
15:35:26 [pchampin]: s/trig(?)/Trig/
15:35:26 [Guus]: ack cygri
15:35:26 [Zakim]: cygri, you wanted to say that there are no trig documents on the web
15:35:29 [iand]: q+ what is the role of "follow your nose" principle in named graph IRIs?
15:35:33 [PatHayes]: cygri: not obvious to me.
15:35:34 [zwu2]: sandro, is that problem only relevant to TriG?
15:35:42 [iand]: q+ to say what is the role of "follow your nose" principle in named graph IRIs?
15:36:04 [sandro]: q+ to address provenance use case
15:36:18 [PatHayes]: cygri: it is an open issue, putting multigraph docs on the web. We have to be careful.
15:36:27 [iand]: ok
15:36:44 [AZ]: cygri, there *are* multiple-graph documents on the Web in the form of NQuads
15:36:54 [Guus]: ack iand
15:36:54 [Zakim]: iand, you wanted to say what is the role of "follow your nose" principle in named graph IRIs?
15:37:09 [iand]: my question is as above: does follow your nose have any bearing?
15:37:16 [zwu2]: q+
15:37:19 [PatHayes]: iand: what is role of Folloowyournose principle in graph naming?
15:37:25 [zwu2]: zakim, unmute me
15:37:25 [Zakim]: zwu2 should no longer be muted
15:37:37 [Guus]: ack sandro
15:37:37 [Zakim]: sandro, you wanted to address provenance use case
15:38:18 [cygri]: q+
15:38:20 [Guus]: ack zwu
15:38:21 [SteveH]: q+
15:38:23 [PatHayes]: sandro: to Richard, re. use cases. Want to be able to say, xxx said these triples, for example. This is what reification was for, and we are deprecating that. Need sopme principled way to make the association.
15:38:33 [PatHayes]: who is speakinmg?
15:38:38 [sandro]: zwu2,
15:38:44 [pfps]: I am starting to worry that we are verging on something very strong here, which doesn't appear to match the abilities of RDF.
15:38:52 [Guus]: zhe wu is speaking
15:38:59 [PatHayes]: zwu2: to sandro, is this relvant only to TriG, or also NQuad?
15:39:05 [PatHayes]: Sandro: all of them.
15:39:17 [sandro]: it's relevant to all of them
15:39:23 [Guus]: ack cygri
15:39:32 [SteveH]: <statement1> { <> :saidBy <sandro> . ... }
15:39:34 [sandro]: (sorry, phone problem.)
15:40:03 [PatHayes]: cygri: easy to fix. Just say 'saidBy'
15:40:30 [PatHayes]: sandro: this implies that object of saidBy is name of the graph/g-box. HOw do we know this?
15:40:38 [Guus]: ack SteveH
15:40:52 [PatHayes]: cygri: need not answer these questions.
15:41:18 [PatHayes]: SteveH: typing down the graph/IRI relation does not matter.
15:41:21 [PatHayes]: q+
15:41:34 [cygri]: q+
15:41:35 [AZ]: AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:41:44 [PatHayes]: sandro: how can we tuie the IRI in the triple to the actual graph?
15:41:52 [PatHayes]: tuie/tie
15:42:03 [Guus]: q?
15:42:15 [Guus]: ack PatHayes
15:42:17 [PatHayes]: SteveH: but that is just true.
15:43:17 [SteveH]: q+
15:43:20 [pchampin]: q+
15:43:25 [Guus]: ack cygri
15:43:26 [sandro]: PatHayes: weigh in on Sandro's side... if you use a URI in a triple, to refer to a graph, there is nothing in RDF to actually tie a URI to a graph. There's nothing in the semantics, etc. If it's completely open, there's no connection. We have to provide something to tie them. otherwise, your triple can mean anything, too.
15:43:50 [sandro]: cygri: i don't buy that. we have these pairs of IRI+Graph in the data model, that ties them.
15:44:04 [PatHayes]: cygri: I don't buy that. If we have IRI/graph pairs in the data model, then that ties them.
15:44:14 [SteveH]: q-
15:44:33 [pchampin]: ack me
15:44:41 [Guus]: ack pchampin
15:44:45 [pchampin]: I'm not sure I understand Richard's andswer
15:44:57 [pchampin]: I agree with Pat: if we want to talk about graphs
15:45:06 [pchampin]: we need a way to strictly name them
15:45:14 [pchampin]: the problem is: currents practices
15:45:22 [pchampin]: with SPARQL, and possibly Ttric
15:45:24 [sandro]: pchampin: If we want to talk about graphs, we need a way to strictly name them. the problem is current practice with SPARQL.
15:45:34 [pchampin]: s/Ttric/trig
15:45:42 [pchampin]: current practices are loose
15:45:51 [pchampin]: and it looks like a bad idea to override them
15:46:13 [PatHayes]: Guus: there are 2 schools of thought. Guidelines for usage?
15:46:30 [PatHayes]: sandro: that is not sufficient.
15:46:36 [PatHayes]: pat agrees.
15:46:56 [pchampin]: I think we should find a way to reconcile current loose practices with the requirement of strictly naming graphs/g-boxes
15:47:15 [PatHayes]: These guidelines need to cover more than sparql. OWL and RIf and ... will also want to talk about grpahs.
15:47:23 [SteveH]: how can you even tell if they have the "right" property?
15:47:26 [cygri]: q+ to ask what sort of tight binding sandro and PatH have in mind
15:47:30 [PatHayes]: Guus: hard to get backward copmpatibility.
15:47:52 [PatHayes]: sandro: everyone using a URI is 'bad' ways will be 'worng' But htat only amtters when we do inferences.
15:48:02 [PatHayes]: htat/that
15:48:23 [sandro]: sandro: it's like all the bad owl:sameAs triples out there.... graph-uris being person-URIs are like that.
15:48:34 [PatHayes]: cygri: what kind of tight binding IRI/graph do sandro and Pat have in mind?
15:48:52 [PatHayes]: sandro: I dont have a firm proposal.
15:49:12 [PatHayes]: sandro: it ought to be the URI of the g-box, as in sparql.
15:49:21 [gavinc]: owl:import imports an owl:Ontology, if your using an SPARQL database, and that owl:Ontology is defined in 3 named graphs one of which is named the same as the owl:import object... is that the one you import? Do you import all 3? OWL seems to say all 3. I assure you, that's -not- what we do :D
15:49:29 [SteveH]: I'm formly opposed to anything that talks about dereferencing URIs and g-boxes
15:49:47 [SteveH]: *firmly
15:49:48 [AlexHall]: +1 SteveH
15:49:50 [SteveH]: q+
15:49:54 [cygri]: ack cygri
15:49:54 [Zakim]: cygri, you wanted to ask what sort of tight binding sandro and PatH have in mind
15:49:59 [PatHayes]: Guus: sandro's def is purely operational?
15:50:13 [PatHayes]: sandro: no, operational can be should or just left open.
15:50:15 [cygri]: q+
15:50:26 [PatHayes]: q+
15:50:48 [sandro]: sandro: all we have to say is This IRI does Identify this g-box.
15:50:54 [Guus]: ack SteveH
15:51:09 [Souri]: q+ to say: As a user of SPARQL, we tend to informally assume a, possibly many-to-one, association between <graph_IRI> and a g-snap (set of triples).
15:51:25 [PatHayes]: SteveH: concerened that "identify" is loaded, not sure of this. In our systems we have +++ graphs with URIs, but htey are opaque. Don;t want to publish locations.
15:51:34 [Guus]: ack cygri
15:51:35 [sandro]: SteveH:In our systems we have very large number of URIs which can't be derefd. we don't particularly want to allow deref, esp with provenance.
15:52:06 [PatHayes]: cygri: concerned that sandro is asking for somthjing difficult. NOtion of g-box is new in RDF.
15:52:26 [PatHayes]: cygri: time-dependence will be a challenge to get it right.
15:52:33 [sandro]: cygri:Sandro, what you're asking for is quite difficult. The notion of g-box doesnt exist in RDF right now. And the difference between g-box and g-snap ... time variance ...rather challenging to add. Might be a good idea, but hard.
15:52:55 [sandro]: cygri: Right now, RDF doesn't say anything about dereference.
15:52:58 [PatHayes]: cygri: nothing in RDF about dereferncing model anywhere.
15:53:06 [Guus]: q?
15:53:39 [PatHayes]: cygri: leave this open.
15:53:41 [pchampin]: @cygri resources *are* time-variant in web architecture - however, I agree, RDF doesn't say anything about deference, and shouldn't
15:53:47 [sandro]: cygri: You're suggesting to pull those down into the specs, from best pracfice -- that concerns me.
15:54:09 [Souri]: q-
15:54:13 [AZ]: AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:54:38 [sandro]: PatHayes: There should be some kind of "baptism" to name a g-box on the web. Maybe my deref, better by something explicit.
15:54:53 [pchampin]: +1 to pathayes
15:55:08 [pchampin]: and Trig "<g> {... }" should not be it
15:55:31 [LeeF]: What if I have a g-box whose name is <urn:i:am:not:dereferenceable> and want to put _that_ guy on the Web?
15:55:36 [PatHayes]: sandro: I hear you, Richard. This might be too hard to get done.
15:55:57 [PatHayes]: Go ahead, Lee. As long as it is YOURS.
15:55:57 [pchampin]: @LeeF then mint a http URI for it; a g-box may have several URIs
15:56:04 [pchampin]: (anything can)
15:56:12 [Souri]: +1 to opposing deref of graph IRIs
15:56:22 [LeeF]: PatHayes, pchampin, I see, thanks
15:56:27 [cygri]: minimum proposal: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal
15:57:54 [PatHayes]: guus: right now it is in terms of g-box, should we separate this from g-snap?
15:58:10 [PatHayes]: cygri: not sure about g-box still.
15:58:36 [davidwood]: I don't agree with Richard's contention that time invariance isn't currently in RDF or WebArch. WebArch, for example, clearly says "the server sends back a message containing what it determines to be a representation of the resource *as of the time* that representation was generated." (emphasis mine)
15:58:48 [pchampin]: @cygcri, the thing behing a GRAPH IRI in SPARQL UPDATE would be a g-box (imho)
15:58:49 [davidwood]: RDF inherits that notion.
15:58:50 [cygri]: davidwood, it's nowhere in RDF
15:58:56 [pchampin]: or an RDF document in my public_html
15:59:02 [PatHayes]: sandro: want a falsifiable statement out there, tyoping the name to the graph.
15:59:13 [PatHayes]: tyoping/tyuping
15:59:21 [PatHayes]: tying, aaaargh
16:00:06 [PatHayes]: cygri: this is super-hard. Need a proposal which we can see.
16:00:16 [sandro]: cygri: Sandro, what you're trying to do with provenance -- with falseifiable stamtenets -- that's hard. Good luck.
16:00:18 [PatHayes]: Its not that hard, Richard. We already did it.
16:00:28 [PatHayes]: :-)
16:01:25 [mischat]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/TF-Graphs/RDF-Datasets-Proposal
16:01:38 [sandro]: PatHayes: our paper on Named Graphs solves this.
16:03:03 [mischat]: pat's proposal from a few years back http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1741344
16:03:18 [mischat]: PatHayes: please confirm ^^
16:03:55 [mischat]: pat confirmed that a simplification of the above paper would be sufficient to solve the issue at hand
16:03:58 [PatHayes]: Yes, confirm.
16:04:39 [PatHayes]: sandro: involve provenance WG?
16:04:47 [PatHayes]: Might be useful.
16:05:07 [mischat]: link to pat's paper which isn't behind a paywall : http://www.websemanticsjournal.org/index.php/ps/article/download/76/74
16:05:11 [PatHayes]: Guus will contact Paul
16:05:38 [gavinc]: www2005.org/cdrom/docs/p613.pdf same document direct to PDF
16:06:27 [PatHayes]: Action: Sandro and Pat to consider what words to add to minimal proposal.
16:06:27 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-65 - And Pat to consider what words to add to minimal proposal. [on Sandro Hawke - due 2011-06-29].
16:06:39 [PatHayes]: whoops.
16:06:59 [AZ]: AZ has joined #rdf-wg
16:07:03 [PatHayes]: so, sandro has action to kick my ass.
16:07:25 [PatHayes]: action: Guus to contact Paul
16:07:25 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-66 - Contact Paul [on Guus Schreiber - due 2011-06-29].
16:08:23 [cygri]: agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.22#Graphs
16:08:27 [mischat]: i fear that not constraining the Graph IRI to be a uri of a document, we will end up people people being quintuple stores ...
16:08:49 [mischat]: s/we will end up people people being quintuple stores/we will end up with people building quintuple stores/
16:09:17 [sandro]: mischat, what would be the elements of the quint?
16:09:18 [PatHayes]: I personally am at least a penta store, myself.
16:09:30 [sandro]: issue-32?
16:09:30 [trackbot]: ISSUE-32 -- Can we identify both g-boxes and g-snaps? -- open
16:09:30 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/32
16:09:34 [PatHayes]: issue-32 for next time.
16:09:52 [PatHayes]: guus: issue 32 for next consideration.
16:09:54 [mischat]: sandro: well if the quad isn't the document URI, then the quint will end up being the document URI ....
16:10:06 [mischat]: s/sandro:/sandro,/
16:10:35 [PatHayes]: davidwood: we have some comments, and a requirement to respond to those.
16:10:53 [PatHayes]: davidwood: need some attention.
16:11:27 [PatHayes]: guus: volunteers to draft response?
16:11:35 [cygri]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2011Jun/0000.html
16:11:36 [PatHayes]: David volunteered.
16:11:57 [PatHayes]: davidwood: we need a process to track these and responses.
16:12:04 [PatHayes]: +100 to david.
16:12:25 [PatHayes]: sandro?
16:12:59 [PatHayes]: guus: start tracking later, not now. Sandro sounds tired.
16:13:09 [sandro]: :-)
16:13:26 [PatHayes]: guus: propose we start tracking later. USe actions for now.
16:14:42 [LeeF]: I can chair next week
16:14:47 [Zakim]: -pfps
16:14:55 [sandro]: (regrets for next week..... At kickoff of Gov Linked Data WG)
16:15:12 [PatHayes]: No chairs, no sandro...
16:16:06 [Zakim]: -Souri
16:16:10 [AZ]: bye
16:16:10 [Zakim]: -FabGandon
16:16:10 [Zakim]: -NickH
16:16:12 [Zakim]: -Sandro
16:16:12 [pchampin]: bye
16:16:14 [Zakim]: -cygri
16:16:16 [Zakim]: -davidwood
16:16:18 [Zakim]: -MacTed
16:16:18 [PatHayes]: has the scribe any more tasks to do at this point?
16:16:20 [Zakim]: -gavinc
16:16:21 [pchampin]: pchampin has left #rdf-wg
16:16:22 [Zakim]: -iand
16:16:24 [Zakim]: -AlexHall
16:16:26 [Zakim]: -SteveH
16:16:28 [Zakim]: -mischat
16:16:30 [Zakim]: -pchampin
16:16:32 [Zakim]: -Scott_Bauer
16:16:34 [Zakim]: -PatHayes
16:16:38 [Zakim]: -LeeF
16:16:41 [iand]: iand has left #rdf-wg
16:16:49 [Zakim]: -zwu2
16:16:51 [Guus]: Pat, let me look up the command to make the minutes, I always forget
16:17:21 [Zakim]: -AZ
16:17:37 [PatHayes]: where are you looking this up, BTW? I seem to not have the permissions to see this (?)
16:17:56 [PatHayes]: zakim, make minutes
16:17:56 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'make minutes', PatHayes
16:18:19 [PatHayes]: zakim, why am I not surprised?
16:18:19 [Zakim]: I don't understand your question, PatHayes.
16:18:27 [AlexHall]: http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/manual.html
16:18:37 [Guus]: trackbot, end meeting
16:18:37 [trackbot]: Zakim, list attendees
16:18:37 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been Sandro, Scott_Bauer, PatHayes, davidwood, Guus, AZ, gavinc, MacTed, cygri, pfps, mischat, iand, SteveH, AlexHall, Souri, zwu2, NickH,
16:18:38 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:18:38 [RRSAgent]: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/22-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot
16:18:39 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, bye
16:18:39 [RRSAgent]: I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/22-rdf-wg-actions.rdf :
16:18:39 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Sandro and Pat to consider what words to add to minimal proposal. [1]
16:18:39 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/22-rdf-wg-irc#T16-06-27
16:18:39 [RRSAgent]: ACTION: Guus to contact Paul [2]
16:18:39 [RRSAgent]: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2011/06/22-rdf-wg-irc#T16-07-25
16:18:40 [davidwood]: Pat, see the following:
16:18:41 [Zakim]: ... pchampin, FabGandon, LeeF
16:18:43 [davidwood]: Tracker: http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc