Chatlog 2011-06-15

See panel, original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain non-obvious edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

14:26:54 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg
14:26:54 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/15-rdf-wg-irc
14:26:56 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:26:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-wg
14:26:58 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
14:26:58 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 34 minutes
14:26:59 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:27:00 <trackbot> Date: 15 June 2011
14:29:39 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
14:31:43 <AndyS> AndyS has left #rdf-wg
14:31:48 <AndyS> AndyS has joined #rdf-wg
14:43:18 <gavin> gavin has joined #rdf-wg
14:54:44 <mbrunati> mbrunati has joined #rdf-wg
14:55:00 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
14:55:42 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started
14:55:49 <Zakim> + +1.707.861.aaaa
14:56:43 <Zakim> +Bernadette
14:57:01 <davidwood> Zakim, Bernadette is davidwood
14:57:01 <Zakim> +davidwood; got it
14:57:13 <davidwood> Chair: David Wood
14:57:20 <Zakim> + +1.760.705.aabb
14:57:23 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
14:57:23 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
14:57:25 <Zakim> +Ivan
14:57:25 <Zakim> +Tony
14:57:39 <Scott_Bauer> Zakim, Tony is me
14:57:39 <Zakim> +Scott_Bauer; got it
14:57:41 <Olivier> Olivier has joined #rdf-wg
14:58:46 <cmatheus> cmatheus has joined #rdf-wg
14:58:49 <Zakim> +??P13
14:58:49 <davidwood> Zakim, who is here?
14:58:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see gavin, davidwood, +1.760.705.aabb, Scott_Bauer, Ivan, ??P13
14:58:51 <Zakim> +LeeF
14:59:01 <AZ> Zakim, Bernadette is me
14:59:02 <Zakim> sorry, AZ, I do not recognize a party named 'Bernadette'
14:59:02 <mbrunati> zakim ??P13 is me
14:59:25 <gavin> If you were Bernadatte now your davidwood ;)
14:59:26 <mbrunati> zakim, ??P13 is me
14:59:31 <Zakim> +mbrunati; got it
14:59:37 <Zakim> +??P6
14:59:37 <LeeF> AZ, bernadette was davidwood, not you
14:59:54 <davidwood> AZ, Bernadette dialed from our office number earlier for the SWCG call, so I'm sure it is me now.
14:59:57 <Zakim> +[Sophia]
15:00:09 <cmatheus> zakim, ??P6 is me
15:00:09 <Zakim> +cmatheus; got it
15:00:18 <pfps> pfps has joined #rdf-wg
15:00:25 <AlexHall> AlexHall has joined #rdf-wg
15:01:08 <AZ> Zakim, +1.760.705.aabb is me
15:01:08 <Zakim> +AZ; got it
15:01:19 <Zakim> + +1.443.212.aacc
15:01:26 <AlexHall> zakim, aacc is me
15:01:26 <Zakim> +AlexHall; got it
15:01:31 <Zakim> + +1.303.474.aadd
15:01:48 <Zakim> +??P18
15:01:52 <AndyS> zakim, ??P18 is me
15:01:52 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
15:02:23 <moustaki> moustaki has joined #rdf-wg
15:02:57 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
15:03:00 <Zakim> +Souri
15:03:06 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:03:06 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:03:08 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:03:08 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:03:08 <pfps> Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see gavin, davidwood, AZ, Scott_Bauer, Ivan, mbrunati, LeeF, cmatheus, [Sophia], AlexHall, +1.303.474.aadd, AndyS, MacTed, Souri
15:03:21 <Zakim> +??P28
15:03:30 <Zakim> +??P33
15:03:39 <FabGandon> FabGandon has joined #rdf-wg
15:03:40 <pfps> Zakim, mute me
15:03:42 <Zakim> sorry, pfps, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
15:03:44 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P28 is yvesr 
15:03:45 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it
15:04:06 <mischat> zakim, ??�P33 is me
15:04:06 <Zakim> sorry, mischat, I do not recognize a party named '??�P33'
15:04:38 <mischat> zakim, +??P33 is mischat 
15:04:38 <Zakim> sorry, mischat, I do not recognize a party named '+??P33'
15:04:46 <mischat> zakim, +??P33 is me
15:04:46 <Zakim> sorry, mischat, I do not recognize a party named '+??P33'
15:04:47 <Scott_Bauer> rrsagent, make records public
15:04:57 <davidwood> pfps, 61#
15:04:58 <ericP> ericP has joined #rdf-wg
15:05:13 <zwu2> zwu2 has joined #rdf-wg
15:05:20 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:05:20 <Zakim> On the phone I see gavin, davidwood, AZ, Scott_Bauer, Ivan, mbrunati, LeeF, cmatheus, [Sophia], AlexHall, +1.303.474.aadd (muted), AndyS, MacTed (muted), Souri, yvesr, ??P33
15:05:23 <zwu2> zakim, code?
15:05:24 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), zwu2
15:05:31 <MacTed> Zakim, P33 is mischat 
15:05:31 <Zakim> sorry, MacTed, I do not recognize a party named 'P33'
15:05:33 <Scott_Bauer> Scribe: Scott_Bauer
15:05:34 <davidwood> Scribe: Scott Bauer
15:05:34 <pfps> Zakim, MacTed is me
15:05:34 <Zakim> +pfps; got it
15:05:45 <davidwood> scribenick: Scott_Bauer
15:05:58 <Zakim> +[Sophia.a]
15:05:59 <Zakim> + +1.408.642.aaee
15:06:06 <MacTed> Zakim, ??P33 is mischat 
15:06:06 <Zakim> +mischat; got it
15:06:09 <Zakim> + +1.415.586.aaff
15:06:15 <FabGandon> Zakim, Sophia.a is me
15:06:15 <Zakim> +FabGandon; got it
15:06:15 <MacTed> Zakim, pfps is OpenLink_Software
15:06:17 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
15:06:23 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:06:23 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:06:36 <davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 08 June telecon:
15:06:36 <davidwood>    http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-06-08
15:06:38 <Scott_Bauer> Topic:  June 8 telcon minutes
15:06:42 <MacTed> pfps - where are you calling from?  might +1.303.474.aadd be you?
15:06:59 <Scott_Bauer> david:  Made changes but they were not promulgated
15:07:26 <Scott_Bauer> ... edited to capture resolution on issue-60
15:07:45 <JeremyCarroll> JeremyCarroll has joined #rdf-wg
15:07:55 <Scott_Bauer> ... closed issue-60 in the tracker, but it doesn't show in the minutes
15:08:21 <pfps> zakim, aadd is me
15:08:21 <Zakim> +pfps; got it
15:08:25 <Scott_Bauer> ... will check with Sandro
15:08:26 <gavin> Fixed
15:08:28 <pfps> q-
15:08:30 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdf-wg
15:08:38 <gavin> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-06-08 is now correct
15:08:39 <MacTed> ack aadd
15:08:44 <MacTed> ack +1.303.474.aadd
15:08:52 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:08:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see gavin, davidwood, AZ, Scott_Bauer, Ivan, mbrunati, LeeF, cmatheus, [Sophia], AlexHall, pfps (muted), AndyS, MacTed (muted), Souri, yvesr, mischat, FabGandon,
15:08:56 <Zakim> ... +1.408.642.aaee, +1.415.586.aaff
15:09:15 <Scott_Bauer> Gavin: its all fixed
15:09:34 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:09:38 <Zakim> +mhausenblas
15:09:50 <cygri> zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me
15:09:50 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
15:10:06 <Scott_Bauer> Andy: problems with issue-58
15:10:20 <Scott_Bauer> David: closed presumed to be archaic
15:10:37 <AlexHall> I see the resolution in the minutes
15:11:04 <gavin> I'll fix it ;)(
15:11:20 <LeeF> thanks, gavin
15:12:03 <Scott_Bauer> David: I will fix it
15:12:57 <pfps> Zakim, mute me
15:12:58 <Zakim> pfps was already muted, pfps
15:13:17 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-wg
15:13:26 <AndyS> Absent any info, presume as per proposal (close, do nothing), but it does not actually say that in the issue tracker.
15:13:53 <Scott_Bauer> David: The wiki is now correct
15:14:33 <Scott_Bauer> ... The minutes from June 8 are accepted
15:14:53 <Scott_Bauer> ... Richard has claimed victory on action-59
15:15:12 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Documents
15:15:32 <Scott_Bauer> ... Peter had action-69
15:15:35 <pfps> yes, my action is done!
15:15:51 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:16:19 <Scott_Bauer> ... passing by Dan, Sandro
15:16:49 <davidwood> Scribes page proposes the summer telecon schedule: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Scribes
15:17:22 <pfps> fine by m
15:17:25 <pfps> s/m/me/
15:17:31 <Scott_Bauer> ... Any objections to the summer telecon schedule as shown
15:17:52 <MacTed> Zakim, who's noisy?
15:18:02 <Zakim> MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: davidwood (13%), yvesr (82%)
15:18:07 <MacTed> Zakim, mute yvesr
15:18:07 <Zakim> yvesr should now be muted
15:18:11 <yvesr> Zakim, mute me
15:18:11 <Zakim> yvesr was already muted, yvesr
15:18:43 <davidwood> RESOLVED: to accept the summer telecon schedule.
15:18:44 <Scott_Bauer> ... resolved to accept the schedule as written
15:19:23 <Scott_Bauer> ... Action 56 from Antoine.  Guus also not here.
15:19:47 <AZ> Scott, it's not for Antoine, it's Pierre-Antoine's action
15:19:51 <Scott_Bauer> ... Closing the action item for Guus
15:20:35 <Scott_Bauer> ... Pierre-Antoine for action 56 (correction to the above)
15:20:36 <AndyS> ping ericP (Q from chair)
15:20:53 <Scott_Bauer> ... leaving turtle document action open.
15:20:58 <ericP> Zakim, please dial ericP-mobile
15:20:58 <Zakim> ok, ericP; the call is being made
15:21:00 <Zakim> +EricP
15:21:03 <davidwood> SPARQL/RDF WG Meeting regarding graph terminology:
15:21:03 <davidwood> 	Poll at http://www.doodle.com/iny935vc6n67vxpv
15:21:33 <Scott_Bauer> ... action item to schedule graph terminology discussion a poll is posted.
15:21:46 <davidwood> Revisit RDF Postponed Issues
15:21:46 <Scott_Bauer> ... brings us back to postponed issues
15:21:55 <Scott_Bauer> Topic: Postponed issues
15:22:04 <AZ> +1 to close it
15:22:04 <AndyS> Currently, 22/June and 6/July most "yes"s  -- 15:00 (UTC+01)
15:22:20 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/59
15:22:20 <davidwood> 	See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jun/0063.html where Peter proposes to close as "opened in error".
15:22:30 <pfps> +1 to close 59
15:22:38 <Scott_Bauer> david:  issue 59 opened in error and proposal is to closse as suggested by Peter
15:22:39 <ivan> +1
15:22:42 <davidwood> +1 to close
15:22:44 <cygri> +1 to close ISSUE-59
15:22:46 <zwu2> +1 close
15:22:50 <mbrunati> +1 to close
15:22:55 <cmatheus> +1 close
15:22:58 <yvesr> +1
15:23:01 <pfps> OK
15:23:52 <Scott_Bauer> RESOLVED: Issue-59 was CLOSED because it was opened in error by the last RDF WG.  See: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/59
15:23:52 <Scott_Bauer> ... issue-62 in relation to the turtle doc Guus to discuss with Eric.
15:23:57 <gavin> I did talk to eric last week!
15:24:01 <davidwood>  ISSUE-62: Revisit "The test cases manifest format has a semantic error"
15:24:01 <trackbot> ISSUE-62 Revisit "The test cases manifest format has a semantic error" notes added
15:24:43 <Scott_Bauer> ... Richard proposed continuing issue-62 proposed to be moved from raised to open
15:24:45 <davidwood> Propose to OPEN ISSUE-62 for later discussions
15:25:02 <cygri> (I think it was danbri who proposed to continue this .... but i agree)
15:25:36 <Scott_Bauer> ... any objections to opening 62, hearing none it is open
15:25:36 <Scott_Bauer> RESOLVED: Issue-62 was OPENED because we need to consider it properly.  See: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/62
15:25:48 <Scott_Bauer> ... Moves us to issue-12
15:25:51 <davidwood>  ISSUE-12: Reconcile various forms of string literals
15:25:51 <trackbot> ISSUE-12 Reconcile various forms of string literals (time permitting) notes added
15:26:06 <Scott_Bauer> ... Guus thought we were close to consensus.
15:26:10 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/12
15:26:11 <davidwood> Are we reaching consensus: see thread starting with http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jun/0010.html
15:26:11 <davidwood> No :) See William's proposal and resulting thread at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jun/0069.html
15:26:23 <Scott_Bauer> ... William made a proposal and I think we are not close.
15:26:23 <AndyS> ww sent regrets
15:26:39 <cygri> q+
15:26:41 <JeremyCarroll> q+
15:26:47 <davidwood> ack cygri
15:26:51 <Scott_Bauer> ... looking back on thread a contrary test case was stated.
15:27:07 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll
15:28:14 <Scott_Bauer> Jeremy: May need to take this off line.  The first working group put the lang treatments in late in the day.
15:28:29 <Scott_Bauer> ... late change to the desing of model and syntax.
15:28:53 <Souri> s/desing/design/
15:28:57 <Scott_Bauer> ... 2004 working group felt they weren't able to change the design and the intent of the rdf-wg wasn't clear.
15:29:24 <Zakim> -yvesr
15:29:53 <Scott_Bauer> ... the question is should we fix the design or live with it.
15:30:31 <Scott_Bauer> David:  Owl wg expressed a concern in changing datatypes
15:31:01 <Scott_Bauer> Jeremy:  Advantages of the current design is that it works well with DL
15:31:21 <AndyS> Was there a specific example of what possible change messes OWL up?
15:31:38 <Scott_Bauer> ... current design more targeted at more niave user 
15:32:24 <Scott_Bauer> David:  We already have plain strings.  Don't really buy the arguments we are breaking rdf
15:32:53 <davidwood> AndyS, IanH expressed concern over any change to datatypes because that would require changes in OWL.
15:33:49 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  Language tags as datatypes have significant opposition.
15:34:53 <Scott_Bauer> ... other proposal with not too much opposition to abandon the untagged strings and leave the tag literals as they are now.  
15:35:06 <Scott_Bauer> ... leaving plain literals as syntatic sugar
15:35:39 <Scott_Bauer> ... what problems would we still work out.  What does this mean for OWL.  Peter raised some concerns
15:35:58 <Scott_Bauer> ... some questions about how to deal with this in the syntaxs
15:36:09 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to address OWL concerns
15:36:36 <Scott_Bauer> ... curious to hear if this would raise concerns in OWL and Sparql
15:36:58 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll
15:36:58 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to address OWL concerns
15:37:56 <Scott_Bauer> Jeremy: one of the constraints changes may break OWL.  They mean by OWL is OWL DL.  Mapping from triples into some other language.
15:38:04 <pfps> q+
15:38:07 <pfps> zakim, unmute me
15:38:07 <Zakim> pfps should no longer be muted
15:38:29 <davidwood> ack pfps
15:38:30 <AndyS> SPARQL -- it's only result of DATATYPE("foo"@en) --> in detail, if class, not datatype, still err but unexpected?  SPARQL could just fib a bit and return rdf:LTS.
15:38:32 <Scott_Bauer> ... cause a greater divergence between OWL and RDF.
15:39:24 <Scott_Bauer> Peter: Any change to RDF (substantive) would be changes to OWL RL systems
15:40:08 <Scott_Bauer> Alex: Some details might change in mapping layer, but mapping is transparent for us from rules to sparql queries.
15:40:23 <pfps> zakim, mute me
15:40:23 <Zakim> pfps should now be muted
15:40:34 <cygri> q+
15:40:45 <Scott_Bauer> David: Lacking some of the people who could support Richard's proposal are not here.
15:41:04 <davidwood> ack cygri
15:41:06 <zwu2> I have to leave early to attend a customer meeting
15:41:08 <Scott_Bauer> ... Ian is invited to express OWL concerns in the future
15:41:12 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
15:41:12 <zwu2> bye
15:41:20 <Zakim> - +1.408.642.aaee
15:41:48 <Zakim> +??P19
15:41:54 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P23 is me
15:41:54 <Zakim> sorry, yvesr, I do not recognize a party named '??P23'
15:42:00 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  How does this related to sparql.  Two places where its affected.  Returning a lang type string currently causes an error.
15:42:13 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P33 is me
15:42:13 <Zakim> I already had ??P33 as mischat, yvesr
15:42:14 <pfps> of course, it is not just OWL RL systems that have to change, but also OWL DL systems - my view is that most OWL DL implementers would not care too much, as long as the changes can be fit into OWL DL, changes to the OWL documents might be more problematic
15:42:18 <AndyS> q+
15:43:05 <Scott_Bauer> ... serializtion of sparql results xsd: string and plain literal are the same in the design with of those is supposed to be produced.   How should code be written.
15:43:40 <davidwood> ack AndyS
15:44:04 <davidwood> pfps, Alex (Revelytix) is an OWL RL implementor.
15:44:11 <Scott_Bauer> Andy:  to the second point.  Policy should be consistant between rdf and sparql results.
15:45:44 <Scott_Bauer> Lee:  One place to serialized it and do so in a simple form.  If rdf-wg goes in this direction charter implications may be affected.
15:45:54 <Scott_Bauer> Ivan: no charter implications
15:46:12 <AlexHall> We are a RIF implementor. Presumably changes to OWL RL would be reflected as changes to the rules as expressed in the profiles doc. We can handle those changes quite easily.
15:46:21 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  The one without the datatype markings should imply the other form is still valid.
15:46:28 <LeeF> ivan, thanks, did not realize that XML results document was already in our charter, so that's something, at least
15:46:31 <davidwood> AlexHall, Thanks
15:46:51 <Scott_Bauer> ... the consumer has to be prepared to deal with eithe form.
15:47:32 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:47:36 <davidwood> q?
15:47:38 <Scott_Bauer> David: Not sure where to take this discussion.
15:48:14 <Scott_Bauer> Andy:  have one proposal to point to.  Need a straw man proposal.
15:48:23 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to mention real disagreement and/or semantics of SHOULD
15:48:48 <Scott_Bauer> David:  Asks Richard to prepare the proposal
15:48:50 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll
15:48:50 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to mention real disagreement and/or semantics of SHOULD
15:48:56 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  I can do that
15:49:16 <davidwood> Thanks to Richard
15:49:27 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to create up-to-date wiki page on ISSUE-12 proposal incl. arguments from the mailing list
15:49:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-62 - Create up-to-date wiki page on ISSUE-12 proposal incl. arguments from the mailing list [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2011-06-22].
15:49:28 <ivan> q+
15:49:32 <Scott_Bauer> Jeremy: For some reason literal design remains a very contentious issue
15:50:05 <Scott_Bauer> ... It takes up a lot of time for the working group
15:50:40 <Scott_Bauer> ... we will not make everyone happy
15:50:57 <Scott_Bauer> David: There are too many ways to express literals
15:51:53 <pfps> zakim, unmute me
15:51:53 <Zakim> pfps should no longer be muted
15:52:06 <ericP> i read that as a proposal to discuss the type faces used to represent the number 1 in RDF serializations
15:52:49 <Scott_Bauer> Peter:  OWL and RIF spent a lot of time hashing over the addition to literals.  If a larger change is made it's a big change to solve a tiny thing. 
15:52:53 <ericP> (ref to jjc's concearn that literals are too difficult 'cause they matter to too many folks)
15:53:11 <Scott_Bauer> ... strings with lang tags are not very comprehensive.
15:53:39 <Souri> I'll be happy if the only change we make is say that "abc" = "abc"^^xsd:string (and SPARQL query result could contain a string literal in either form and still be conformant)
15:53:40 <gavin> XML literals for language, oh god... No, no it isn't.
15:54:04 <Scott_Bauer> ... deprecation of lang type literals would make me happy
15:54:14 <LeeF> I'd be happy if Souri's happy
15:54:29 <Scott_Bauer> David: Key argument is we have lang type literals and rdf literals
15:55:02 <davidwood> The key argument is that we have plain literals, rdf:plainLiteral, and xsd:string literals.
15:55:05 <Scott_Bauer> Peter:  Any OWL tool will handle any one of these and do the right thing
15:55:31 <gavin> I don't think anyone was
15:55:46 <Scott_Bauer> David: Who's objecting to collapsing the definitions
15:55:59 <LeeF> +10000 to leaving language tags aside :-)
15:56:08 <Scott_Bauer> Gavin:  How to do it is the contentious issue
15:56:27 <Scott_Bauer> David:  Would someone be willing to write up the propsal 
15:56:31 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  
15:56:41 <Scott_Bauer> ... We have that already
15:57:04 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain
15:58:25 <Scott_Bauer> David:  Issue of contention was around sparql. 
15:58:39 <AndyS> err - datatype("foo") is already xsd:string
15:59:07 <cygri> AndyS, but currently it needs an exception in the spec to make it so. that exception could go away
15:59:09 <yvesr> AndyS, so it's fine?
15:59:48 <AlexHall> I thought the SPARQL issue was around results serialization, not datatype("foo")
15:59:49 <AndyS> Yes - it's fine.  The output issue is same-as RDF and not covered.
15:59:55 <Scott_Bauer> David:  Requestinng that Lee have a look at the page and provide comments re: sparql
16:00:14 <AndyS> AlexHall, yes - we are only talking simple literals - no langs
16:00:22 <davidwood> q?
16:00:27 <AndyS> AlexHall, yes - we are only talking simple literals - no langs covered in this discussion
16:00:29 <Souri> I am worried about "One of the two forms should be forbidden when answering queries over RDF 1.1"
16:00:41 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to give unrequested advice to chairs
16:00:45 <pchampin> what would be called a "plain literal" then, anyway?
16:01:04 <davidwood> ack ivan
16:01:05 <Scott_Bauer> Lee:  Spec has the data issue as an exception.  Main concern term that sparql uses for simple literals no longer exist it has a more far reaching effect.  Will take a look at it and take it to the sparql working group.
16:01:05 <AndyS> Souri, +1 -- and the answer should be use "foo" form.
16:01:12 <ericP> i think that removing "plain literal" mostly involves removing rows from the operator mapping and conditions for the function definitions
16:01:18 <LeeF> ACTION: Lee to take http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain to SPARQL WG to gauge the impact on SPARQL process and schedule 
16:01:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - Take http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain to SPARQL WG to gauge the impact on SPARQL process and schedule  [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2011-06-22].
16:01:28 <ericP> (having drafted most of the plain literal text)
16:01:48 <Scott_Bauer> Ivan: procedural issue.  The problem of strings was in the charter as a time permits issue.  
16:02:00 <cygri> q+
16:02:12 <pfps> zakim, mute me
16:02:15 <Scott_Bauer> ... it would be ok if the working group decided to postpone the issue
16:02:18 <Zakim> pfps should now be muted
16:02:27 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll
16:02:27 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to give unrequested advice to chairs
16:03:12 <Scott_Bauer> Jeremy:  If the discussion goes on and on, a proposal vote should be taken
16:03:28 <davidwood> ack cygri
16:04:09 <ivan> q+
16:04:31 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  Yes it's a time permitting issue.  We understand what's not possible.   I would rather see the straw poll first.
16:04:45 <AndyS> SPARQL issue -- simple literal used as return type and arg in various functions  - obvious changes though : would fix at least one current bug :-)
16:04:57 <davidwood> ack ivan
16:05:05 <Scott_Bauer> ... I think we are close to finding something
16:05:46 <Scott_Bauer> Ivan:  Issue has taken up a lot of energy.  Named Graphs is something we must do.
16:06:06 <Scott_Bauer> ... We should not just close it but set a deadline
16:06:23 <davidwood> Straw poll: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain
16:06:30 <Scott_Bauer> David: I want a straw poll right now.
16:07:58 <Scott_Bauer> Richard: Just to point out datatype is already xsd:string.  If you ask for a datatype it returns string
16:08:21 <pchampin> q+ to ask about the term "plain literal"
16:08:36 <pchampin> ack me
16:08:52 <Zakim> pchampin, you wanted to ask about the term "plain literal"
16:08:59 <pfps> ls
16:09:10 <Souri> q+ to ask about the fourth item in the Issues: "SPARQL Results XML/JSON are hampered by the variability introduced by syntactic sugar. One of the two forms should be forbidden when answering queries over RDF 1.1."
16:09:29 <pfps> zakim, mute me
16:09:34 <Guus> Guus has joined #rdf-wg
16:09:35 <davidwood> ack Souri
16:09:38 <pchampin> ok
16:09:41 <Zakim> pfps was already muted, pfps
16:09:47 <Zakim> Souri, you wanted to ask about the fourth item in the Issues: "SPARQL Results XML/JSON are hampered by the variability introduced by syntactic sugar. One of the two forms should be
16:09:52 <Zakim> ... forbidden when answering queries over RDF 1.1."
16:10:27 <Scott_Bauer> Souri: variability.  Would we require sparql one of the two possible?  If we are required to return xsd:string
16:10:37 <Scott_Bauer> ... That is a problem
16:10:43 <LeeF> I imagine it's up to the SPARQL WG how to handle that in the XML format? 
16:10:55 <gavin> +1 LeeF, someone elses issue
16:11:04 <Scott_Bauer> David:  if you return quote: foo as a literal you should know that is an xsd:string
16:11:13 <Scott_Bauer> Souri:  thats fine
16:11:21 <davidwood> q?
16:11:49 <cygri> q+
16:12:04 <Scott_Bauer> Pierre:  A suggestion.  Maybe we can keep the plain literal which are semantically an xsd:string
16:12:27 <LeeF> Pierre++
16:12:35 <davidwood> ack cygri
16:12:39 <Scott_Bauer> David:  that makes a lot of sense to me
16:12:50 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  I agree with this absolutely
16:13:12 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
16:13:17 <LeeF> If RDF can do this by adjusting definitions of the existing terms that SPARQL Query leans on, that would be _great_
16:13:37 <Scott_Bauer> David: lets take a quick straw poll
16:13:46 <pfps> like
16:13:48 <AndyS> +1 and preferred output form (SHOULD -- MUST is hard due to compatibility) is "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string in RDF and in SPARQL results (proposal needs updating to cover this case - not leave open)
16:13:52 <davidwood> +1 to our current understanding of the proposal
16:14:00 <pchampin> +1
16:14:02 <AlexHall> +1
16:14:03 <davidwood> +1 to AndyS
16:14:07 <LeeF> +1 with Cambridge Semantics hat on, reserving judgment with SPARQL WG chair hat on
16:14:11 <Souri> +1 to AndyS
16:14:13 <MacTed> +1
16:14:13 <mbrunati> +1
16:14:18 <Guus> +1
16:14:19 <cmatheus> +1
16:14:20 <yvesr> +1
16:14:23 <gavin> +1 
16:14:28 <AZ> +1
16:14:45 <JeremyCarroll> +1
16:14:45 <ivan> 1
16:15:15 <gavin> Who cares about language tags? ;)
16:15:17 <ericP> +1
16:15:32 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to give more unsolicited advice
16:15:47 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll
16:15:47 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to give more unsolicited advice
16:15:55 <Scott_Bauer> David:  We seem to agree on three quarter of this proposal
16:16:00 <FabGandon> FabGandon has left #rdf-wg
16:16:05 <Zakim> -FabGandon
16:16:16 <Scott_Bauer> David: Let's take a formal vote since there are no objectsions
16:16:37 <Souri> s/objectsions/objections/
16:16:53 <Scott_Bauer> PROPOSAL: Accept the proposal at  http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain
16:17:11 <LeeF> Pat has spent a lot of time restating cygri's proposals, so I imagine he'd be happy with this
16:17:12 <JeremyCarroll> if pat wishes to object he can in the e-mail
16:17:23 <JeremyCarroll> and then we deal with that next week
16:17:31 <JeremyCarroll> same for any wg member
16:17:41 <davidwood> Propose to accept the proposal at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain with the modification that preferred output form (SHOULD) is "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string in RDF and in SPARQL results
16:18:00 <cygri> +1
16:18:00 <Souri> +1
16:18:03 <davidwood> +1
16:18:06 <AlexHall> +1
16:18:17 <pfps> +1
16:18:31 <Guus> +1
16:18:41 <Scott_Bauer> PROPOSED: Accept the proposal at  http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain
16:18:51 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg
16:19:07 <pfps> Where does the proposal talk about SPARQL?  All the SPARQL stuff is in the issues, right?
16:19:22 <cygri> Propose to accept the proposal at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain with the modification that preferred output form (SHOULD) is "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string in RDF; recommends that SPARQL and other WGs does the same
16:19:29 <gavin> and recomend that any concrete syntax SHOULD use "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string
16:19:34 <LeeF> pfps, just in the proposal that davidwood just wrote on IRC
16:19:41 <AndyS> pfps - david's proposal says "SPARQL results"
16:19:51 <pfps> Of course, any change to RDF may impact SPARQL, and this does, but that is the main reason why we are doing this now, as opposed to later.
16:20:04 <davidwood> Propose to accept the proposal at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain with the modification that preferred output form (SHOULD) is "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string in RDF; recommends that SPARQL and other WGs does the same
16:20:06 <cygri> +1
16:20:09 <Souri> +1
16:20:10 <davidwood> +1
16:20:10 <cmatheus> +1
16:20:11 <mbrunati> +1
16:20:14 <LeeF> +1
16:20:21 <JeremyCarroll> +1
16:20:22 <pfps> ooh, right - I was looking at the wiki page
16:20:23 <AlexHall> +1
16:20:23 <AndyS> +1
16:20:26 <pfps> +1
16:20:27 <gavin> +1
16:20:28 <AndyS> (give or take the unicode char 001C)
16:20:29 <Scott_Bauer> David: Let's vote again on Richard's phrasing
16:20:35 <ivan> +1
16:20:41 <davidwood> RESOLVED: to accept the proposal at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain with the modification that preferred output form (SHOULD) is "foo" not "foo"^^xsd:string in RDF; recommends that SPARQL and other WGs does the same
16:20:47 <pchampin> +1
16:21:47 <Zakim> -LeeF
16:22:00 <Zakim> -mischat
16:22:01 <AndyS> q+
16:22:12 <pfps> OWL already strongly suggests using "foo" in concrete syntaxes
16:22:36 <Scott_Bauer> David: Lee will get back to me in relation to sparql
16:22:48 <davidwood> ack AndyS
16:23:00 <AndyS> ack me
16:23:02 <Scott_Bauer> Andy: Compatability does matter
16:23:36 <Scott_Bauer> Richard:  How do we make sure popular implementers are informed as soon as possible.
16:23:40 <gavin> rdflib already does this... sort of... via buggy string implementations ;)
16:23:44 <cygri> s/Richard/ivan/
16:23:48 <Scott_Bauer> David: I suggest a blog post.  
16:24:47 <Scott_Bauer> zakim, who is speaking
16:24:47 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is speaking', Scott_Bauer
16:24:58 <Scott_Bauer> zakim, who is talking
16:24:58 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is talking', Scott_Bauer
16:25:23 <Zakim> -JeremyCarroll
16:25:27 <Scott_Bauer> David: Officially adjourned
16:25:31 <mbrunati> bye 
16:25:31 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:25:32 <AZ> bye
16:25:33 <Zakim> -cmatheus
16:25:33 <Zakim> -Souri
16:25:34 <Zakim> -Ivan
16:25:34 <Zakim> -cygri
16:25:35 <Zakim> -mbrunati
16:25:35 <Zakim> -[Sophia]
16:25:37 <mbrunati> mbrunati has left #rdf-wg
16:25:37 <Zakim> -AlexHall
16:25:38 <Zakim> -pchampin
16:25:40 <Zakim> -davidwood
16:25:42 <Zakim> -gavin
16:25:44 <Zakim> -AZ
16:25:48 <AlexHall> AlexHall has left #rdf-wg
16:25:56 <Zakim> -pfps
16:26:06 <Zakim> -EricP
16:31:38 <Zakim> -Scott_Bauer
# SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC.  DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW.  SRCLINESUSED=00000476