From RDF Working Group Wiki
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:+18.104.22.168.79.03 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