Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Chatlog 2011-06-29
From RDF Working Group Wiki
See panel, original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.
Please justify/explain non-obvious edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.
14:47:20 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg 14:47:20 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/29-rdf-wg-irc 14:47:22 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world 14:47:22 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdf-wg 14:47:24 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394 14:47:24 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 13 minutes 14:47:25 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference 14:47:25 <trackbot> Date: 29 June 2011 14:47:28 <LeeF> zakim, this will be rdfwg 14:47:28 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 13 minutes 14:47:33 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF 14:47:38 <LeeF> ScribenickL NickH 14:47:47 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.29 14:48:35 <LeeF> Regrets: David Wood, pfps, Thomas Steiner, FabGandon 14:48:38 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg 14:51:41 <FabGandon> FabGandon has joined #rdf-wg 14:51:50 <Scott_Bauer> Scott_Bauer has joined #rdf-wg 14:53:37 <gavinc> gavinc has joined #rdf-wg 14:53:46 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started 14:53:53 <Zakim> +??P16 14:54:00 <ww> Zakim, ??P16 is me 14:54:00 <Zakim> +ww; got it 14:54:05 <ww> Zakim, please mute me 14:54:05 <Zakim> sorry, ww, muting is not permitted when only one person is present 14:54:28 <AndyS1> AndyS1 has joined #rdf-wg 14:54:47 <Zakim> +Scott_Bauer 14:54:51 <Zakim> -ww 14:54:52 <Zakim> +ww 14:54:56 <ww> Zakim, please mute me 14:54:56 <Zakim> ww should now be muted 14:55:02 <ww> Zakim, thank you 14:55:02 <Zakim> you are very welcome, ww 14:55:24 <Zakim> +gavinc 14:55:34 <Zakim> +??P26 14:55:55 <yvesr> Zakim: ??P26 is yvesr 14:56:01 <FabGandon> Please note my regrets (Fabien Gandon, trapped in a meeting), sorry. 14:56:03 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P26 is yvesr 14:56:03 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it 14:56:20 <mbrunati> mbrunati has joined #rdf-wg 14:56:58 <LeeF> Regrets+ FabGandon 14:57:31 <Zakim> +LeeF 14:58:44 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg 14:58:59 <Zakim> +??P33 14:59:03 <AndyS1> zakim, ??P33 is me 14:59:03 <Zakim> +AndyS1; got it 14:59:41 <pchampin> pchampin has joined #rdf-wg 14:59:46 <AndyS1> zakim, who is on the phone? 14:59:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see ww (muted), Scott_Bauer, gavinc, yvesr, LeeF, AndyS1 14:59:48 <Zakim> +wcandillon 15:00:01 <AZ> zakim, wcandillon is me 15:00:01 <Zakim> +AZ; got it 15:00:10 <Zakim> +??P39 15:00:21 <pchampin> zakim, ??P39 is me 15:00:21 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it 15:00:33 <zwu2> zwu2 has joined #rdf-wg 15:00:53 <zwu2> zakim, code? 15:00:58 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), zwu2 15:01:01 <AZ> zakim, mute me 15:01:03 <Zakim> AZ should now be muted 15:01:25 <Zakim> +AlexHall 15:01:28 <Zakim> +zwu2 15:01:34 <zwu2> zakim, mute me 15:01:34 <Zakim> zwu2 should now be muted 15:01:35 <AlexHall> AlexHall has joined #rdf-wg 15:03:04 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone? 15:03:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see ww (muted), Scott_Bauer, gavinc, yvesr, LeeF, AndyS1, AZ (muted), pchampin (muted), AlexHall, zwu2 (muted) 15:03:45 <AZ> what's happening with last week minutes? 15:03:50 <AZ> I get a 404 15:04:33 <AZ> Pat was scribe 15:04:59 <PatHayes> PatHayes has joined #rdf-wg 15:05:40 <Zakim> +PatHayes 15:06:02 <LeeF> scribenick: gavinc 15:06:53 <gavinc> http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/manual.html 15:07:05 <gavinc> Scribe: gavinc 15:07:18 <LeeF> (Defer approving 22-Jun minutes until next week) 15:07:24 <gavinc> Topic: Admin 15:07:58 <Zakim> + +1.312.348.aaaa 15:08:10 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software 15:08:26 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 15:08:26 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it 15:08:28 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me 15:08:28 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted 15:08:46 <mbrunati> zakim, +1.312.348.aaaa is me 15:08:46 <Zakim> +mbrunati; got it 15:09:02 <gavinc> subtopic: Action Items 15:09:03 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/pendingreview 15:09:33 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg 15:09:49 <LeeF> ACTION-56? 15:09:49 <trackbot> ACTION-56 -- Pierre-Antoine Champin to review SPARQL LC WD document -- due 2011-06-15 -- PENDINGREVIEW 15:09:49 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/56 15:10:37 <gavinc> LeeF: Have review from Pierre, looking it over about half of it touches on the graph terminology. The other half is a good review of the document in general 15:10:50 <Zakim> +??P61 15:10:54 <gavinc> LeeF: Do we want to use this as a start of an official review? 15:11:12 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P61 is me 15:11:13 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it 15:11:23 <AZ> +1 as a starting point for a WG review 15:11:30 <gavinc> Pierre: Original idea to have a group review, current version is more of a set of talking points. Our just submit it with my name on it. 15:11:52 <gavinc> LeeF: Need some way to get some consensuses around the review. 15:11:52 <AndyS1> Review is: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jun/0154.html 15:11:58 <LeeF> close ACTION-56 15:11:58 <trackbot> ACTION-56 Review SPARQL LC WD document closed 15:11:59 <AZ> +1 to close 15:12:16 <gavinc> ACTION-60? 15:12:16 <trackbot> ACTION-60 -- Guus Schreiber to discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP -- due 2011-06-15 -- PENDINGREVIEW 15:12:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/60 15:12:21 <AndyS1> review in the att: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jun/att-0154/sparql-notes.txt 15:12:42 <LeeF> close ACTION-60 15:12:43 <trackbot> ACTION-60 Discuss Turtle doc schedule with ericP closed 15:12:45 <gavinc> LeeF: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Jun/0170.html 15:13:12 <gavinc> LeeF: No one with an open action is on the call 15:13:36 <gavinc> ACTION-63? 15:13:36 <trackbot> ACTION-63 -- Lee Feigenbaum to take http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/StringLiterals/AbolishUntaggedPlain to SPARQL WG to gauge the impact on SPARQL process and schedule -- due 2011-06-22 -- OPEN 15:13:36 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/63 15:13:51 <LeeF> ACTION-63, Completed and SPARQL WG is in process of figuring out how to respond or accommodate the resolution 15:13:51 <trackbot> 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 notes added 15:13:57 <LeeF> close ACTION-63 15:13:57 <trackbot> 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 closed 15:14:31 <gavinc> Topic: Graph Terminology 15:14:45 <gavinc> LeeF: there was a join telecon last week between this group and sparql wg 15:15:12 <gavinc> ... looking at SPARQL graph protocol document, and how it lined up with g-text, g-snap, g-box 15:15:58 <AndyS1> who here was there? 15:15:59 <gavinc> LeeF: anyone able to summarize last weeks graph telecon? 15:16:02 <pchampin> I was 15:16:16 <AZ> I was there too 15:16:41 <AZ> zakim, unmute me 15:16:41 <Zakim> AZ should no longer be muted 15:17:07 <Zakim> +??P2 15:17:17 <mischat> zakim, ??P2 is me 15:17:17 <Zakim> +mischat; got it 15:17:19 <pchampin> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-sparql11-http-rdf-update-20110512/ 15:17:21 <mischat> zakim, mute me 15:17:21 <Zakim> mischat should now be muted 15:17:22 <gavinc> AZ: Summary, matching terms g-box, g-snap, g-text to terms used in SPARQL graph store documents 15:17:29 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/ 15:17:41 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-http-rdf-update/#terminology 15:17:57 <gavinc> AZ: Agreed to align RDF Document to g-text 15:18:20 <gavinc> ... but concern about the use of the term document 15:18:30 <PatHayes> sandro, you on the call? 15:18:35 <gavinc> ... RDF specification, maybe we shouldn't use Document to talk about g-text. 15:18:39 <LeeF> (i don't think so :-/ )( 15:18:46 <PatHayes> ta. 15:18:47 <gavinc> ... Richard to take first stab at creating new terms. 15:19:10 <gavinc> ... RDF Graph Content maybe sort of... mmm, maybe not. 15:19:17 <pchampin> IFAIR, there was no clear consensus on that one 15:19:22 <AndyS1> (g-text is our own placeholder for a real name) 15:19:26 <gavinc> ... Not sure if we could match g-box to one of these terms exactly 15:19:35 <gavinc> ... RDF GRaph is used but not defined. 15:19:40 <PatHayes> +q 15:19:49 <gavinc> ... RDF Graph should correspond to g-snap 15:20:11 <LeeF> . ACTION: chimezie, pgearon, PatHayes, pchampin to propose how to link g-box to relevant terms from the SPARQL graph store spec 15:20:16 <gavinc> ... I think there was an action to define how the other terms can be more or less match to our terminology 15:20:17 <LeeF> (from last week's telecon on graph terminology) 15:20:37 <gavinc> ACTION-64? 15:20:37 <trackbot> ACTION-64 -- Richard Cyganiak to propose labels for g-text, g-snap -- due 2011-06-29 -- OPEN 15:20:37 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/64 15:21:01 <LeeF> ack PatHayes 15:21:05 <gavinc> LeeF: THanks for summary 15:21:21 <gavinc> PatHayes: We are still slightly muddled about g-box 15:21:36 <gavinc> PatHayes: g-box is more complicated 15:22:03 <gavinc> PatHayes: THere isn't anything corresponding. Maybe we should generalise ??? into a graph resource or whatever. 15:22:15 <gavinc> PatHayes: Anything that can emit graph representations 15:22:40 <gavinc> PatHayes: would encompass the things in SPARQL 15:22:52 <ww> s/\?\?\?/g-box/ 15:22:54 <Souri> Souri has joined #rdf-wg 15:23:01 <Zakim> +Souri 15:23:21 <gavinc> LeeF: A few actions on people to do the sorts of things Pat just talked about. To give proper terms to what we want to do in our graph work, and in SPARQL 15:24:18 <pchampin> q+ 15:25:02 <PatHayes> listen to pierre-a on this topic. 15:25:10 <LeeF> ack pchampin 15:25:44 <gavinc> pchampin: No clear consense on g-box. 15:26:10 <gavinc> pchampin: RDF graph concerns somethign with an IRI attached to it, or just an abstract thing, no clear answer 15:26:16 <yvesr> i believe PatHayes mentioned that g-box is equivalent to a graph store with just one graph in it 15:26:50 <cmatheus> cmatheus has joined #rdf-wg 15:26:51 <PatHayes> Yes, just one 'default' graph. SPARQL also says this, in effect. 15:27:15 <gavinc> LeeF: does what LeeF said in IRC match what your talking about? 15:27:16 <yvesr> PatHayes, indeed - it does make sense 15:27:26 <LeeF> s/what LeeF said/what yvesr said 15:27:35 <AndyS1> Makes sense for default graph. 15:27:38 <PatHayes> YEs to all the questions. 15:27:51 <LeeF> q? 15:27:55 <AndyS1> In practice, there are multiple ways in which the IRI is associated to a graph in the dataset/store. Used as a indirect association. e.g. same URI as the place contents were read from originally. e.g. true g-snap naming. All are used. 15:28:00 <AZ> zakim, mute me 15:28:00 <Zakim> AZ should now be muted 15:28:02 <PatHayes> q+ 15:28:07 <LeeF> ack PatHayes 15:28:16 <ww> i think i agree with pat and i don't think our notion of graph should be tied to http as such 15:28:36 <gavinc> PatH: This concern about the term document. Some people assume that the thing is mutable. 15:29:12 <gavinc> PatH: Thing returned from GET is a Document? 15:29:21 <gavinc> LeeF: Is a Document a mutable thing or not? 15:29:27 <SteveH> no feeling either way 15:29:32 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me 15:29:32 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted 15:29:39 <gavinc> PatH: I don't think the webArch talks about Documents 15:29:48 <PatHayes> that was Andy 15:29:49 <gavinc> s/PatH/Andy 15:30:03 <gavinc> Andy: Document not quiet the info resource 15:30:24 <LeeF> MacTed: Intuition is never really correct 15:30:29 <ww> gavin: from our perspective (topq) documents are mutable 15:30:39 <LeeF> gavinc: TopQuadrant position is that documents are mutable, and it's hard to talk about semantic technologies when you're not on the Web 15:30:43 <ww> ... or it becomes very hard a=to talk about semantic technologies when you happen to not be on the web 15:30:54 <LeeF> s/and it's hard/or it's hard 15:30:59 <ww> ... everybody here does that whether they internalise that or not 15:32:26 <Souri> s/quiet/quite/ 15:32:34 <gavinc> MacTed: Document is immuatable. As soon as you hit web space, everything is mutable. Unless you have all it's metadata. It's also any specified URI. 15:32:35 <AZ> From this discussion, it seems that the term Document is not appropriate for "A serialization of an RDF Graph into a concrete syntax." 15:32:37 <AndyS1> AWWW - "RDF documents" 4.2.4. -- not defined -- used once 15:32:53 <PatHayes> MacTed: terms are overloaded. In web space, all abstract things have extra properties like date, creation. People dont hold this intuitively. 15:33:01 <AndyS1> and also xml docments, svg documents 15:33:14 <PatHayes> Good examples, Andy. 15:33:29 <gavinc> MacTed: Invent a new term for things that have never been defined. 15:33:31 <pchampin> q+ 15:33:36 <LeeF> ack pchampin 15:33:59 <ww> real, physical 3-d documents are still mutable i think unless we go to a lot of trouble (like notarising and such) to make sure they are immutable 15:34:20 <gavinc> pchampin: Document outside the web has many diffrent meanings. I think it's not used in Web Architecture. 15:34:29 <PatHayes> As an artist, I can assure you that physical documents are mutable. 15:34:36 <gavinc> pchampin: I like terms resource and representation. Quiet well defined meanings 15:35:05 <PatHayes> me too. 15:35:21 <gavinc> LeeF: How would resource and representation map? 15:35:39 <gavinc> pchampin: g-box is an info resource 15:35:42 <PatHayes> HOw about "graph data structure" or "graph data object" ? 15:35:50 <gavinc> pchampin: g-box is outside the web, I think I agree with that 15:36:06 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me 15:36:06 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted 15:36:08 <gavinc> pchampin: g-text is an rdf representation, and a g-box is a resource 15:36:30 <AndyS1> +1 15:36:33 <ww> +1 15:36:38 <gavinc> pchampin: I think, that's my understand of g-* terms 15:36:46 <AZ> yes 15:36:48 <yvesr> yes 15:36:56 <PatHayes> I think Sandro's original idea was g-box is resource, g-snap is (abstract) state of the resource, and g-text is the rest-representation that the resource emits. 15:36:57 <gavinc> LeeF: g-snap is an RDF Graph 15:37:09 <AndyS1> g-snap is also state of g-box at a moment. 15:37:20 <pchampin> +1 Pat, Andy 15:37:30 <gavinc> LeeF: g-box is some sort of resource 15:37:57 <Guus> resource = graph resource, I assume 15:38:09 <gavinc> PatH: I think Sandro was trying to put our graphs into Rest terms. 15:38:12 <LeeF> Guus, i think so, though we haven't said so directly (Yet) 15:38:32 <Souri> SPARQL Dataset = {<default, g-snap> plus zero or more <IRI, g-snap>} and SPARQL Graph Store = {<default, g-box plus zero more <IRI, g-box>} and g-text = a serialization of a g-box 15:39:10 <gavinc> pchampin: It might be too restrictive to say that Sandro was trying to align with web terms. Was also okay with g-box off the web as well 15:39:25 <gavinc> pchampin: Maybe we are just focusing on the web. 15:39:37 <PatHayes> True, I agree. OK, slight generalization. But the kind of thing that COULD be on the Web. 15:39:40 <gavinc> pchampin: Good to start with the Web. 15:39:59 <AndyS1> souri - Many uses do fit that model, not all though. 15:40:18 <gavinc> LeeF: If we whole heartedly take the web view, does it break down when it's not on the web. 15:40:23 <PatHayes> Can there be a web page that is not on the web? 15:40:34 <LeeF> gavinc: yes, it breaks down fairly badly 15:40:41 <AndyS1> Pat - hard to say :-) 15:41:01 <LeeF> gavinc: you need to do things like ask for URIs and base URIs of a document on the filesystem 15:41:12 <LeeF> gavinc: ends up being very very weird for peopl editing documents in a filesystem 15:41:30 <ww> q+ 15:41:31 <LeeF> gavinc: may be intrinsic to people using a Web technology off the WEb 15:41:36 <ww> zakim, unmute me 15:41:36 <Zakim> ww should no longer be muted 15:41:37 <LeeF> ack ww 15:41:39 <PatHayes> Hmm, I don't read REST as saying that all resources must be 'on' the web. 15:42:16 <LeeF> ww: I don't see the difference between filesystem paths and URIs? 15:42:31 <LeeF> gavinc: file paths (or URIs) don't behave the same way that HTTP URIs do 15:42:51 <LeeF> gavinc: when i talk about a URI, I'm inevitably talking about an HTTP URI ... but on my machine, I don't want to go off and resolve the URL, I just want to find it on my local machine 15:42:51 <ww> s/I don't see the difference/how exactly is it different/ 15:43:09 <LeeF> gavinc: XML _sort of_ solves this with XML Catalogs, but RDF doesn't really have anything that deals with this 15:43:27 <LeeF> gavinc: SPARQL solves this by lying - it says that I have a URI U, and I resolve it by looking it up in my local database 15:43:27 <PatHayes> q+ 15:43:40 <ww> zakim, mute me 15:43:40 <Zakim> ww should now be muted 15:43:41 <SteveH> I don't agree with gavinc 15:43:44 <LeeF> gavinc: a lot of machinery to make you look like you're on the Web when you're not 15:43:59 <LeeF> PatHayes: nowhere in RDF where URIs are required to be resolvable 15:44:04 <gavinc> PatH: You don't have to do any GETs at all. 15:44:04 <LeeF> ... except maybe in owl:import 15:44:22 <AndyS1> I disagree with gavinc as well. There is an URI loosely associated with a graph - not a deref promise 15:44:25 <LeeF> gavinc: part of it is that our software depends heavily on owl:impport 15:45:14 <Souri> +1 to AndyS1 (liar is too strong a word! :-)) 15:45:57 <PatHayes> local distortion in the truth-field. 15:46:31 <pchampin> @Pat, do you mean a Reality Distortion Field? :-D 15:47:19 <LeeF> LeeF: gavinc, are you looking for terms that are more neutral yet map to resource/representation in a Web context and map to more familiar concepts to people working not on the Web? 15:47:29 <LeeF> gavinc: maybe, but i'm not sure how strongly i feel about it - there is value in reusing the Web terms 15:47:32 <gavinc> AndyS: There is what SPARQL 1.0 says about Datasets, and in 1.1 the Graph Store is a mutable dataset. 15:47:55 <gavinc> ... You do end up with a degree of impersise naming going on. 15:48:06 <gavinc> ... the graph is a set of mutable slots you can go and change. 15:48:10 <gavinc> q? 15:48:13 <LeeF> ack PatHayes 15:48:37 <ww> so, a graph store has slots (g-boxes?) to contain g-snaps? 15:48:42 <gavinc> AndyS: The cat is out of the bag. 15:48:58 <gavinc> AndyS: You can't really change the behavior of developers 15:49:01 <ww> and when you put/pull a graph you send/get a g-text/ 15:49:02 <SteveH> +1 to AndyS 15:49:18 <SteveH> people have already evolved usage patterns 15:49:19 <pchampin> +1 to Andy 15:49:28 <gavinc> AndyS: Developers are going to be using it. We are more following then, leading them 15:49:49 <AZ> AZ has joined #rdf-wg 15:49:49 <SteveH> q+ 15:49:55 <PatHayes> I agree we are wanting to follow current use as far as possible. 15:50:10 <gavinc> LeeF: I thought we got to g-*, there were not any terms that everyone used. 15:50:28 <gavinc> AndyS: g-* just used as specific terms to avoid confusion 15:50:42 <gavinc> PatH: Yes, now it's time to get better terms 15:51:00 <LeeF> ack SteveH 15:51:16 <MacTed> when initially put out, g-box felt very akin to t-box and a-box ... 15:51:34 <PatHayes> Oh God, not a-boxes. 15:51:34 <gavinc> SteveH: More or less agree with Andy. We have a reasonable number of people using RDF and everyone talks about graph, and no one is too confused. 15:52:10 <zwu2> +SteveH 15:52:10 <AZ> Can we capture what we are discussing in terms of ISSUE, and try to advance towards proposing ACTIONs? 15:52:30 <gavinc> SteveH: People are abusing/missuing the term for named graphs 15:52:45 <SteveH> s/SteveH/AndyS/ 15:53:12 <AZ> ACTION-64? 15:53:12 <trackbot> ACTION-64 -- Richard Cyganiak to propose labels for g-text, g-snap -- due 2011-06-29 -- OPEN 15:53:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/64 15:53:41 <PatHayes> PatHayes: if we try to keep the word 'graph' in our terms, that might help. Then those who don't care about fine distinctions can go on as before and not be 'wrong'. 15:53:44 <gavinc> [Wednesday, June 22, 2011] [08:00:08 AM] <cygri> ACTION: chimezie, pgearon, PatHayes, pchampin to propose how to link g-box to relevant terms from the SPARQL graph store spec 15:54:15 <gavinc> ISSUE-14? 15:54:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-14 -- What is a named graph and what should we call it? -- open 15:54:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/14 15:54:20 <gavinc> ISSUE-30? 15:54:20 <trackbot> ISSUE-30 -- How does SPARQL's notion of RDF dataset relate our notion of multiple graphs? -- open 15:54:20 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/30 15:54:24 <gavinc> ISSUE-29? 15:54:24 <trackbot> ISSUE-29 -- Do we support SPARQL's notion of "default graph"? -- open 15:54:24 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/29 15:54:31 <gavinc> ISSUE-32? 15:54:31 <trackbot> ISSUE-32 -- Can we identify both g-boxes and g-snaps? -- open 15:54:31 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/32 15:54:41 <gavinc> LeeF: Not related to issue 32 15:54:59 <AZ> I see 15:55:15 <gavinc> LeeF: What I heard today was advice to Richard in ACTION-34, might be a good idea to lean on Resource and Representation 15:55:28 <gavinc> LeeF: Don't trust the term Document 15:55:45 <gavinc> LeeF: I don't think we are in a position to resolve anything 15:55:45 <AZ> ok, thanks for the clarification 15:56:55 <gavinc> LeeF: Given that we don't have our chairs, I'm not inclined to make something up. Is there new info to talk about on one of our graph issues? 15:57:09 <gavinc> LeeF: Are there any topics from the mailing list folks want to talk about? 15:57:16 <gavinc> LeeF: Otherwise end a little early. 15:57:20 <PatHayes> Do we want to discuss Pierre-A's responses/comments on SPARQL? 15:58:29 <gavinc> LeeF: We can't really do anything about those specific comments... we need to work them in to our conclusions and feed them back to the SPARQL group. 15:58:47 <gavinc> LeeF: Want to avoid stacking turtles, but should someone else look over the review? 15:59:11 <gavinc> PatH: I agree with it. 15:59:35 <gavinc> AndyS: What effect do we expect to make? 16:00:33 <gavinc> LeeF: Not clear yet. One might be to change the terms being used in Graph Store document. Another would be the change the def to align. And another would be to just be informative. 16:00:50 <AndyS1> (other than specific editorial comments) 16:01:00 <gavinc> PatH: There are one or two place where from our perspective the document seems inconstant 16:01:35 <AZ> alright I can do that 16:01:41 <gavinc> LeeF: Can we get a few people to review the SPARQL review? 16:01:55 <gavinc> PatH: I will. 16:01:57 <LeeF> ACTION: Pat to review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol 16:01:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-67 - Review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol [on Patrick Hayes - due 2011-07-06]. 16:02:17 <LeeF> ACTION: Antoine to review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol 16:02:17 <trackbot> Created ACTION-68 - Review Pierre-A's comments on SPARQL graph store upade protocol [on Antoine Zimmermann - due 2011-07-06]. 16:02:32 <gavinc> AndyS: Wouldn't recommend too strong alignment, as we haven't nailed it down ourselves. 16:02:51 <Zakim> -SteveH 16:02:56 <gavinc> LeeF: Sorry if it was a little less directed and focused. 16:03:05 <zwu2> thanks and bye 16:03:16 <AZ> byebye 16:03:18 <Zakim> -zwu2 16:03:19 <PatHayes> LeeF, what exactly was it I agreed to do at the beginning of the meeting? 16:03:23 <Zakim> -yvesr 16:03:24 <mbrunati> thanks bye 16:03:24 <Zakim> -LeeF 16:03:26 <Zakim> -MacTed 16:03:28 <Zakim> -mischat 16:03:32 <Zakim> -AlexHall 16:03:34 <Zakim> -ww 16:03:34 <LeeF> PatHayes, use CommonScribe to generate the non-draft version of last week's minutes 16:03:34 <AlexHall> AlexHall has left #rdf-wg 16:03:36 <Zakim> -mbrunati 16:03:38 <Zakim> -AZ 16:03:42 <Zakim> -AndyS1 16:03:42 <mbrunati> mbrunati has left #rdf-wg 16:03:46 <Zakim> -Souri 16:03:48 <Zakim> -gavinc 16:03:50 <Zakim> -PatHayes 16:03:55 <Zakim> -Scott_Bauer 16:03:55 <pchampin> @PayHayes, I think you agreed to publish last week minutes 16:03:58 <gavinc> rrsagent, make records public 16:04:34 <Zakim> -pchampin 16:04:35 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has ended 16:04:39 <Zakim> Attendees were ww, Scott_Bauer, gavinc, yvesr, LeeF, AndyS1, AZ, pchampin, AlexHall, zwu2, PatHayes, MacTed, mbrunati, SteveH, mischat, Souri # SPECIAL MARKER FOR CHATSYNC. DO NOT EDIT THIS LINE OR BELOW. SRCLINESUSED=00000376