IRC log of rdf-wg on 2012-03-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:26:05 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #rdf-wg
14:26:05 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/03/28-rdf-wg-irc
14:26:07 [trackbot]: RRSAgent, make logs world
14:26:07 [Zakim]: Zakim has joined #rdf-wg
14:26:09 [trackbot]: Zakim, this will be 73394
14:26:09 [Zakim]: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 34 minutes
14:26:10 [trackbot]: Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:26:10 [trackbot]: Date: 28 March 2012
14:30:15 [mischat_]: mischat_ has joined #rdf-wg
14:43:53 [mischat]: mischat has joined #rdf-wg
14:53:22 [danbri_]: danbri_ has joined #rdf-wg
14:55:42 [pchampin]: pchampin has joined #rdf-wg
14:57:29 [Zakim]: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started
14:57:36 [Zakim]: +??P5
14:57:41 [AndyS]: zakim, ??P5 is me
14:57:41 [Zakim]: +AndyS; got it
14:58:59 [cgreer]: cgreer has joined #rdf-wg
14:59:34 [Zakim]: +Guus_Schreiber
14:59:46 [Zakim]: +cgreer
15:00:13 [Zakim]: +Arnaud
15:00:30 [Zakim]: +pfps
15:01:12 [Zakim]: +??P12
15:01:23 [ivan]: zakim, dial ivan-voip
15:01:23 [Zakim]: ok, ivan; the call is being made
15:01:25 [Zakim]: +Ivan
15:01:25 [pchampin]: zakim, ??P12 is me
15:01:25 [Zakim]: +pchampin; got it
15:01:33 [Zakim]: +gavinc
15:01:35 [Zakim]: +[OpenLink]
15:01:41 [pfps]: pfps has joined #rdf-wg
15:01:50 [MacTed]: Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
15:01:50 [Zakim]: +MacTed; got it
15:01:54 [MacTed]: Zakim, mute me
15:01:54 [Zakim]: MacTed should now be muted
15:02:24 [Zakim]: +sandro
15:02:45 [Zakim]: +davidwood
15:02:53 [Zakim]: +mhausenblas
15:03:02 [Zakim]: +??P21
15:03:08 [cygri]: cygri has joined #rdf-wg
15:03:41 [cygri]: zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:41 [Zakim]: On the phone I see AndyS, Guus_Schreiber, cgreer, Arnaud (muted), pfps, pchampin, Ivan, gavinc, MacTed (muted), sandro, davidwood, mhausenblas, ??P21
15:03:42 [yvesr]: Zakim, ??P21 is me
15:03:44 [Zakim]: +yvesr; got it
15:03:50 [cygri]: zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me
15:03:50 [Zakim]: +cygri; got it
15:04:08 [Zakim]: +LeeF
15:05:14 [sandro]: scribe: sandro
15:05:20 [sandro]: proposed: accept minutes from last week
15:05:28 [sandro]: resolved: accept minutes from last week
15:05:34 [sandro]: topic: action item review
15:06:09 [Zakim]: + +1.603.897.aaaa
15:06:14 [sandro]: https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/users/my
15:06:28 [sandro]: davidwood: Anyone want to own up to progress on any actions?
15:06:42 [sandro]: AndyS: I'm waiting for word from the editors that the draft is ready for review.
15:06:43 [Souri]: Souri has joined #rdf-wg
15:06:51 [LeeF]: scribe: LeeF
15:06:58 [gavinc]: I claim victory on 150, and ...mostly... 155
15:07:04 [pchampin]: I had the same understanding
15:07:15 [davidwood]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/150
15:07:20 [LeeF]: ACTION-150?
15:07:20 [trackbot]: ACTION-150 -- Gavin Carothers to fail to update Turtle/N-Triples grammar to not use \u escaping in the local part of prefix names -- due 2012-03-21 -- OPEN
15:07:20 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/150
15:07:31 [NickH]: Zakim, NickH is with yvesr
15:07:31 [Zakim]: +NickH; got it
15:07:44 [davidwood]: close ACTION-150
15:07:44 [trackbot]: ACTION-150 Fail to update Turtle/N-Triples grammar to not use \u escaping in the local part of prefix names closed
15:07:45 [LeeF]: gavinc: it was really easy and it did work
15:07:54 [LeeF]: AndyS: Is the doc ready for review?
15:08:01 [LeeF]: gavinc: for my part, yes. ask eric too
15:08:19 [LeeF]: AndyS: Excellent. OK if there are still bits to do
15:08:34 [LeeF]: gavinc: right, let's see if Eric is happy with the collections in turtle bits. in section 4
15:08:48 [FabGandon]: FabGandon has joined #rdf-wg
15:08:54 [davidwood]: Topic: Turtle
15:09:02 [Zakim]: +ericP
15:09:38 [LeeF]: davidwood: tried to close all actions and issues from last week that were already closed and left ones that need further discussion. gavin, eric, andy, pierre-antoine -- should we go through actions or just pick off select ones?
15:10:23 [LeeF]: <lots of REALLY strong opinions registered in response>
15:10:37 [ivan]: scribenick: LeeF
15:10:45 [Zakim]: +FabGandon
15:11:43 [LeeF]: ISSUE-74?
15:11:43 [trackbot]: ISSUE-74 -- Prefixed names and slashes -- open
15:11:43 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/74
15:12:02 [LeeF]: ACTION-151?
15:12:02 [trackbot]: ACTION-151 -- Gavin Carothers to update issue 74 with new escaping rules -- due 2012-03-21 -- OPEN
15:12:02 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/151
15:12:11 [LeeF]: davidwood: status of 151?
15:12:19 [LeeF]: gavinc: ok to close, but should also close ISSUE-74
15:12:26 [LeeF]: ... no longer valid
15:12:28 [davidwood]: close ACTION-151
15:12:28 [trackbot]: ACTION-151 Update issue 74 with new escaping rules closed
15:13:41 [LeeF]: ACTION-152?
15:13:41 [trackbot]: ACTION-152 -- Gavin Carothers to create new issue for :'s in the local part of prefix names -- due 2012-03-21 -- OPEN
15:13:41 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/152
15:13:46 [davidwood]: Closed ISSURE-74
15:13:53 [davidwood]: Closed ISSUE-74
15:14:13 [LeeF]: gavinc: issue is FB Open Graph Protocol, which have URIs with colons in local names, particularly in RDFa representation. When Facebook serializes it, you either get invalid Turtle (includes colons), or you get back full IRIs
15:14:22 [LeeF]: close ISSUE-74
15:14:22 [trackbot]: ISSUE-74 Prefixed names and slashes closed
15:14:43 [LeeF]: ericP: if we had influence, we could persuade them to put a backslash before the colon and all would be ok
15:14:50 [LeeF]: davidwood: shoudl we really be changing the standard based on this?
15:15:01 [LeeF]: gavinc: problem is that RDFa is OK with it
15:15:19 [LeeF]: ... facebook is confused because the 2 specs are confusing
15:15:23 [LeeF]: davidwood: <redacted>
15:16:09 [LeeF]: davidwood: does anyone object to this change in turtle?
15:16:35 [LeeF]: q+ how does this affect SPARQL?
15:16:39 [LeeF]: q+ to ask how does this affect SPARQL?
15:16:42 [sandro]: looking at http://ogp.me/ seeing og:locale:alternate and og:image:url and music:album:track etc...
15:16:46 [LeeF]: ericP: seems like a safe change
15:17:04 [NickH]: Open Graph Protocol changes regularly...
15:17:33 [sandro]: +1 allowing colons in local parts
15:17:54 [ivan]: +1 to sandro, i.e., transitively, to allow colons in local parts
15:18:01 [LeeF]: ericP: 2 languages that are similar, one syntax difference that pepole are tripping over. other differences which haven't been come against. make our lives easier by allowing colons?
15:18:12 [LeeF]: q?
15:18:18 [LeeF]: ack LeeF
15:18:18 [Zakim]: LeeF, you wanted to ask how does this affect SPARQL?
15:18:22 [NickH]: having colons in the local part is a bit confusing but it does look nice
15:18:26 [sandro]: d'oh
15:18:28 [NickH]: like a URN ;-)
15:18:31 [sandro]: forgot about SPARQL
15:18:42 [LeeF]: LeeF: Uhh guys, what about SPARQL?
15:18:42 [AndyS]: Just on ":" (and not "/"). Technically, can be done (I think, not checked), but it breaks a lot of existing software in a confusing way.
15:18:53 [LeeF]: Everyone: Oh.
15:19:14 [LeeF]: ivan: not a question of RDFa or SPARQL. there are millions of pages that already do this
15:19:34 [LeeF]: sandro: this isn't just a gorilla, it's sensible design
15:19:49 [LeeF]: ivan: would it trigger a new last call for SPARQL?
15:20:17 [sandro]: lee: There might be a new LC for SPARQL, so there MAY be a window here.
15:20:54 [AndyS]: q+
15:21:02 [sandro]: lee: If you want to do this, ask the SPARQL WG *today* please
15:21:13 [Arnaud]: q+
15:21:21 [ivan]: ack AndyS
15:21:25 [LeeF]: AndyS: think it's technically possible, i could check
15:21:33 [LeeF]: ... i don't think it's just the 2 WGs involved
15:21:39 [LeeF]: ... convincing implementers of this change shouldn't be dismissed
15:21:44 [LeeF]: ... turtle has been this way for a very long time
15:22:00 [LeeF]: ... initial reaction will certainly be pushback (active and passive)
15:22:07 [sandro]: q?
15:22:13 [sandro]: q+
15:22:18 [LeeF]: ack Arnaud
15:22:23 [ivan]: ack Arnaud
15:22:26 [PatH]: PatH has joined #rdf-wg
15:22:38 [ivan]: q+
15:22:41 [PatH]: Sorry Im late (again).
15:22:42 [LeeF]: Arnaud: we could consider asking facebook if they'd be willing to change. even though they are really big, they have a couple of lines of code to change in one place which might make the change everywhere
15:22:53 [davidwood]: ack sandro
15:22:55 [LeeF]: gavinc: not enough for FB to change their parser, everyone who has created a web page using this has to change also
15:23:10 [Zakim]: +PatH
15:23:21 [ivan]: q-
15:23:26 [LeeF]: sandro: this is OK in RDFa, so the issue is only when a OGP doc is expressed in turtle. why can't it be done as a qname type thing with a backslash after the prefix?
15:23:42 [sandro]: me:sandro foaf:likes music:album\:disc
15:24:10 [LeeF]: gavinc: yes
15:24:24 [sandro]: sandro: that seems like a one line code change somewhere, in facebooks Turtle serializer.
15:24:33 [LeeF]: gavinc: not as big an issue now that we have reserved character escaping
15:24:45 [LeeF]: ... now it's merely an issue that people will make, rather than an unavoidable error
15:25:02 [LeeF]: sandro: easy error for turtle parser to catch and fix / help with
15:25:18 [AndyS]: q+
15:26:06 [davidwood]: ack AndyS
15:26:23 [AndyS]: What about a:b:c:d which is currently legal (as "a:b :c :d ." )
15:26:28 [LeeF]: AndyS: there is a corner case (see above)
15:26:42 [LeeF]: AndyS: this changes turtle if you've been taking advantage of whitespace being optional
15:26:56 [ericP]: i'm willing to let that case go
15:26:57 [LeeF]: sandro: off with their heads!
15:27:22 [LeeF]: AndyS: probably only a potential issue with machine outputted turtle
15:27:28 [LeeF]: (luddites emerge)
15:27:40 [sandro]: ceci n'est pas un pipe
15:28:01 [sandro]: ceci n'est pas une pipe
15:28:04 [LeeF]: ACTION: Andy to see if allowing colons in prefix names is an ambiguity
15:28:04 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-160 - See if allowing colons in prefix names is an ambiguity [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-04-04].
15:28:41 [LeeF]: ericP: is that action in SPARQL?
15:28:46 [LeeF]: AndyS: if it works in SPARQL, it will work in Turtle
15:29:20 [LeeF]: sandro: what about asking the SPARQL WG?
15:30:21 [LeeF]: LeeF: will the RDF WG's decision be predicated on SPARQL WG's willingness?
15:30:26 [LeeF]: sandro: would rather not have to make that decision now
15:30:27 [LeeF]: LeeF: OK
15:30:28 [sandro]: oh no a Lethal Turtle....
15:31:24 [LeeF]: gavinc: they're already generating legal turtle (with full IRIs)
15:31:32 [LeeF]: AndyS: that de-motivates the change, right?
15:31:43 [LeeF]: sandro: we'd be accommodating everyone out in the world who is writing OGP data
15:31:52 [LeeF]: gavinc: issue is more complicated than....
15:31:53 [sandro]: s/writing/working with/
15:32:23 [LeeF]: davidwood: can ask FB to change, or ask SPARQL WG to work with us to align RDF + RDFa + SPARQL
15:32:40 [LeeF]: ... i think that taking this opportunity to align w3c syntaxes is a useful and valuable thing to do
15:32:48 [LeeF]: sandro: we should look at all characters that RDFa allows there, then
15:32:59 [LeeF]: davidwood: perfect is the enemy of good
15:33:18 [ericP]: q+ to say we get to make exactly one step
15:33:41 [LeeF]: sandro: i'm happy with adding colon to sparql. andy said we should ask FB to change. we'd be asking them to change their predicate names, and there's no way they'll do that
15:33:50 [LeeF]: AndyS: that's not the case - just asking them to output legal turtle
15:33:54 [LeeF]: sandro: but that's not actually a problem
15:34:03 [LeeF]: sandro: they'd have to change predicate names to solve this problem
15:34:09 [LeeF]: AndyS: they can continue to use existing predicate names
15:34:45 [LeeF]: ericP: right now, to use existing pred names they can output full URIs - not as pleasant to use - or can output prefix names with backslashes. with changes, they can output prefix names without backslashes. it's a nice practice in general to have local names without characters that need to be escaped
15:34:57 [swh]: swh has joined #rdf-wg
15:35:09 [LeeF]: ericP: we only get to make one step here - backslashes are new, so there arent a lot of implementations to stay compatible with.
15:35:17 [AndyS]: FB can currently either use <a:b:c>, and will be able to use a:b\:c (future turtle) so it's style, not technical.
15:35:59 [AndyS]: CURIEs which post-date SPARQL, choose to differ.
15:36:22 [LeeF]: ericP: tried to get CURIEs into SPARQL, but couldn't be done because of rest of the grammar. property paths make this worse
15:36:32 [LeeF]: ... don't think we'll ever have CURIEs fitting in turtle and sparql
15:36:32 [sandro]: Agreed, AndyS. I think our motivation is just to make FB's vocab easier to work with in Turtle and Sparql (no need for \ )
15:36:35 [LeeF]: AndyS: agree
15:36:42 [sandro]: q?
15:36:50 [ericP]: ack me
15:36:50 [Zakim]: ericP, you wanted to say we get to make exactly one step
15:36:55 [davidwood]: ack ericP
15:37:08 [LeeF]: davidwood: gavin, will you write up this issue?
15:37:11 [LeeF]: gavinc: ayup
15:37:21 [LeeF]: sandro: can we just make a decision?
15:38:39 [sandro]: PROPOSED: Change the Turtle syntax to allow colons in local parts, IFF the SPARQL WG agrees to change SPARQL to match, in order to make it easier for people to work with facebook's style of property names.
15:38:54 [ivan]: +1
15:38:56 [ericP]: +1
15:38:59 [gavinc]: +1
15:39:00 [davidwood]: +1
15:39:01 [pchampin]: +1
15:39:01 [yvesr]: +0
15:39:04 [sandro]: +1
15:39:05 [AndyS]: abstain
15:39:06 [LeeF]: 0 (-1 if there is any grammar ambiguity)
15:39:10 [MacTed]: +1
15:39:27 [sandro]: (assuming no grammar ambiguity of course)
15:39:32 [Souri]: 0
15:39:47 [sandro]: (other than whitespace. a:b:c:d )
15:39:57 [NickH]: +1
15:40:10 [LeeF]: ericP: that backwards incompatibility is something that I'm ok with
15:40:54 [sandro]: PROPOSED: Change the Turtle syntax to allow colons in local parts, IFF the SPARQL WG agrees to change SPARQL to match, in order to make it easier for people to work with facebook's style of property names. We understand this will change how turtle lines like a:b:c:d are parsed; we don't need to support documents written like that.
15:41:04 [ericP]: +1
15:41:06 [LeeF]: (this seems like solving a problem that probably doesn't exist, but it may someday make it easier for me to write turtle, so... *shrug*. The non-WG-member implementers may howl.)
15:41:21 [AndyS]: abstain (this is not a problem)
15:41:21 [LeeF]: s/(this/LeeF: (this/
15:41:37 [LeeF]: abstain (this is not a problem)
15:42:24 [sandro]: sandro: It's not nearly as big a problem as it sounded at the begging of this problem.
15:43:22 [LeeF]: AndyS: there's not a technical problem, we're asking implementers and others to do something
15:43:30 [LeeF]: sandro: agree that it's a style issue at this point
15:43:46 [LeeF]: davidwood: we could solve this just by acknowledging it's not a problem, closing the issue, etc.
15:43:55 [LeeF]: sandro: the people who would be unhappy are those who would have to write lots of backslashes
15:44:43 [AndyS]: # is also a contentious character for the same reasons.
15:45:18 [ericP]: +1
15:45:28 [LeeF]: davidwood: I propose that we close ACTION-152, take no action, and open no new issue
15:45:35 [LeeF]: sandro: I won't object, but I don't think this is a good idea
15:45:46 [sandro]: -0 I think we'll be very sad writing a lot of backslashes for a lot of years
15:46:14 [ericP]: i note that sandro and i differ only in the degree to which we are concearned about facebook users. we both agree that a change is the best choice
15:46:17 [sandro]: but whatever. I tend to be perfectionist about things like that.
15:46:23 [PatH]: backslashes have rights too!
15:46:24 [gavinc]: -0 I think we'll be writing parsers that accept invalid Turtle in a year or two
15:46:38 [sandro]: Oh, YES gavin.
15:46:56 [PatH]: zakim, mute me
15:46:56 [Zakim]: PatH should now be muted
15:47:24 [AndyS]: If we do this, then do it properly : not rush a proposal through ATM. Ask FB + check the grammars.
15:47:43 [PatH]: +1 Andy
15:48:00 [LeeF]: gavinc: other issue: turtle does not specify how errors are handled
15:48:09 [LeeF]: ... so it isn't clear to me that if i parsed this that i would not be conforming
15:48:24 [LeeF]: ericP: we have a language, and that's not the language
15:48:32 [LeeF]: gavinc: but conformance is expressed in terms of positive parsing
15:48:46 [Guus]: I suggest that editors make a proposal with "feature at risk" note, and ask explicit feedback from parties concerned
15:49:13 [MacTed]: Zakim, unmute me
15:49:13 [Zakim]: MacTed should no longer be muted
15:49:33 [PatH]: +1 Guus. Lets be strictly proper. diplomacy and all.
15:50:09 [gavinc]: +1 Guus!
15:50:19 [LeeF]: davidwood: let's accept guus's suggestion
15:50:32 [MacTed]: Zakim, mute me
15:50:32 [Zakim]: MacTed should now be muted
15:50:50 [LeeF]: davidwood: andy, will you ask SPARQL WG about this?
15:50:52 [LeeF]: AndyS: ok
15:50:56 [LeeF]: davidwood: what about asking FB?
15:50:59 [LeeF]: sandro: there's nothing to ask FB!
15:51:17 [PatH]: not ask, but inform facebook. diplomacy.
15:51:25 [MacTed]: FB is now generating valid Turtle. would whatever change we're contemplating *break* that? if not, nothing to ask/inform about...
15:51:40 [ericP]: /invite mr_facebook #rdf-wg
15:52:17 [ericP]: +1 to sandro's point
15:52:22 [yvesr]: is there any example of that in the wild?
15:52:34 [ivan]: q+
15:52:35 [PatH]: like for example maybe fbk are planning a change....
15:52:40 [ericP]: noting that fb has some influece on how people expect to use their data
15:52:42 [davidwood]: ack ivan
15:52:45 [yvesr]: (of people writing broken Turtle following Facebook's OGP?)
15:53:20 [sandro]: sandro: So the question for facebook is whether they would prefer people to have to use backslashes in working with their data in turtle and SPARQL.
15:53:21 [PatH]: zakim, unmute me
15:53:21 [Zakim]: PatH should no longer be muted
15:53:49 [MarkZ]: MarkZ has joined #rdf-wg
15:54:23 [MarkZ]: i'm all down with these colons and stuff
15:54:39 [PatH]: it does no actual harm to just *talk* to North Korea
15:54:47 [AndyS]: q+
15:54:54 [davidwood]: ack AndyS
15:55:13 [LeeF]: AndyS: if we do this, I think # will be the next character to come up - to handle fragments
15:56:14 [LeeF]: (discussion of how that would conflict with comments)
15:56:45 [ericP]: what about non-breaking zero-width trailing combining character whitespace?
15:57:12 [LeeF]: ACTION: Andy to ask SPARQL WG about Colon-gate 2012
15:57:12 [trackbot]: Created ACTION-161 - Ask SPARQL WG about Colon-gate 2012 [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-04-04].
15:57:45 [sandro]: So -- the big motive for allowing colons in local names is because people will be writing parsers to accept them ANYWAY, since people will be writing them anyway.
15:57:46 [LeeF]: davidwood: now for an easy topic
15:58:19 [PatH]: zakim, mute me
15:58:27 [Zakim]: +Arnaud.a
15:58:34 [Zakim]: -Arnaud
15:58:37 [Zakim]: PatH should now be muted
15:58:47 [PatH]: crackle, buzz, beep, rattle, smack
15:59:13 [Guus]: let's pls finish the Turtle discussion, we have used enough time on Named Graphs to wait another week
15:59:26 [Zakim]: -ericP
15:59:30 [AndyS]: sandro - reasonable claim - do we have evidence (seems likely but you said "will be" which is absolute)
15:59:57 [Zakim]: +ericP
16:00:15 [gavinc]: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#n-triples-compatibility
16:01:02 [LeeF]: gavin: should a backwards incompatible escape sequence be an issue?
16:01:08 [LeeF]: davidwood: won't other changes break b.c.?
16:01:10 [LeeF]: gavinc: yes
16:01:15 [LeeF]: davidwood: why is this a special issue?
16:01:18 [sandro]: AndyS, I have no evidence people will forget the backslashes, but I think I heard some parser writers on the call saying they expected they'd allow colons without backslashes, because they thought users would forget the backslashes.
16:01:19 [LeeF]: gavinc: others are just with encoding
16:02:04 [Zakim]: -Arnaud.a
16:02:08 [LeeF]: AndyS: i've never seen any data with \b \f in turtle, so...
16:02:32 [LeeF]: davidwood: there could be old data around with \b or \f
16:02:37 [LeeF]: AndyS: would change from illegal to legal
16:02:41 [LeeF]: davidwood: non issue for me
16:02:42 [LeeF]: gavinc: me too
16:02:46 [PatH]: \b***** this for a topic of conversation.
16:03:00 [Zakim]: +Arnaud
16:03:15 [LeeF]: AndyS: i haven't seen anything that indicates this is anything more than a question
16:03:20 [davidwood]: Zhe brought this up to Gavin off list. Gavin sent it to the list.
16:03:24 [LeeF]: gavinc: offlist indications to the contrary
16:03:39 [Guus]: I suggest this is editorial discretion of the editors, seems small enough, but pls make an explicit note in the document
16:03:39 [Zakim]: -Arnaud
16:03:42 [LeeF]: s/gavinc: me too/gavinc: me too. Zhe brought it up
16:03:51 [LeeF]: davidwood: let's leave this to the editors and move on
16:03:56 [LeeF]: ISSUE-4?
16:03:56 [trackbot]: ISSUE-4 -- Do we depecate N-Triples and use Turtle instead? -- open
16:03:56 [trackbot]: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/4
16:04:05 [Zakim]: +Arnaud
16:04:58 [LeeF]: AndyS: people use n-triples, it's faster for loading
16:05:01 [ericP]: +1
16:05:03 [cgreer]: +1
16:05:04 [LeeF]: davidwood: should we resolve issue-4 and keep n-triples?
16:05:07 [LeeF]: AndyS: yes
16:05:09 [LeeF]: +1
16:05:20 [Souri]: +1 to not deprecating N-Triples
16:05:26 [LeeF]: ivan: what about discussion with Oracle?
16:05:32 [LeeF]: davidwood: Oracle wants to keep n-triples
16:05:44 [ivan]: 1
16:05:46 [LeeF]: (excellentuse of the word "apoplectic")
16:06:22 [PatH]: +1 to closing issue 4.
16:06:36 [MacTed]: +1
16:06:41 [Guus]: +1
16:06:42 [Souri]: +1 to closing it with "not deprecating N-Triples"
16:06:58 [LeeF]: RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-4, keeping N-triples as not deprecated
16:07:10 [LeeF]: close ISSUE-4
16:07:10 [trackbot]: ISSUE-4 Do we depecate N-Triples and use Turtle instead? closed
16:07:25 [LeeF]: davidwood: all done with turtle!
16:07:32 [LeeF]: davidwood: no time for named graph semantivcs
16:07:48 [LeeF]: davidwood: let's put solution design .1 on the queue for next week
16:07:54 [LeeF]: davidwood: AOB?
16:07:58 [LeeF]: Guus: how about clarifying questions?
16:08:15 [PatH]: zakim, unmute me
16:08:15 [Zakim]: PatH should no longer be muted
16:08:16 [LeeF]: Guus: the rdf:Graph construct is not used in a use case. is that by accident?
16:08:21 [PatH]: +q
16:08:29 [LeeF]: ... they used GraphStateContainer construct
16:08:45 [LeeF]: sandro: i assume he'd have to use it for the inference case (separation of inference and one of the two ways you'd do endorsement)
16:10:09 [Zakim]: -gavinc
16:10:31 [MacTed]: Zakim, unmute me
16:10:31 [Zakim]: MacTed should no longer be muted
16:10:37 [LeeF]: Guus: from use cases, we want to see that if you fetch something at a particular time, there's no guarantee that it will be there at a future time
16:11:04 [LeeF]: sandro: quick strawpoll here
16:11:11 [LeeF]: ... i intentionally left g-boxes out of 6.1 design
16:11:17 [LeeF]: ... because they seem like an extension point
16:11:22 [LeeF]: ... should i put them in properly?
16:11:29 [LeeF]: PatH: NO.
16:11:36 [LeeF]: ... let's get it clear without the g-boxes
16:11:38 [LeeF]: sandro: i agree
16:12:27 [LeeF]: PatH: is the association, the rdf:graph connection, holds between a resource and a graph?
16:12:28 [LeeF]: sandro: yes
16:12:39 [LeeF]: PatH: is that intended to extend beyond the document? is it asserted by the document?
16:12:41 [LeeF]: sandro: yes
16:12:47 [LeeF]: PatH: consider 2 docs with no default graph.
16:12:50 [LeeF]: u1 { a b c}
16:12:51 [LeeF]: and
16:12:54 [LeeF]: u1 { d e f}
16:13:08 [LeeF]: do those conclude: u1 {a b c . d e f } ?
16:13:15 [LeeF]: sandro: no, those are logically inconsistent
16:13:34 [LeeF]: PatH: i think there is something that needs to be fixed then
16:14:47 [mischat]: mischat has joined #rdf-wg
16:16:47 [LeeF]: PatH: above case says it's not ok to use same label in mutiple documents -- in ??? semantics, it's perfectly fine and entails the merge
16:17:04 [LeeF]: sandro: if you're going to do that you need to be explicit about that fact
16:17:18 [ericP]: +1 to PatH
16:17:19 [LeeF]: PatH: a lot of our discussion turns on people having different intuitions about this point
16:17:29 [AndyS]: {...} is not automatically a graph, it can be part of a graph but all graph must be in same doc.
16:17:43 [LeeF]: davidwood: more next week
16:17:48 [sandro]: ( "this point" being what happens when you have u1 { a b c} in one document and u1 { d e f} in another.
16:17:49 [Zakim]: - +1.603.897.aaaa
16:17:50 [LeeF]: davidwood: Adjourned.
16:17:52 [Zakim]: -PatH
16:17:54 [Zakim]: -Arnaud
16:17:56 [Zakim]: -sandro
16:17:57 [Zakim]: -ericP
16:17:58 [Zakim]: -davidwood
16:17:59 [Zakim]: -Ivan
16:18:01 [Zakim]: -cgreer
16:18:02 [Zakim]: -Guus_Schreiber
16:18:02 [Zakim]: -yvesr
16:18:04 [Zakim]: -MacTed
16:18:05 [Zakim]: -LeeF
16:18:09 [danbri]: danbri has joined #rdf-wg
16:18:14 [Zakim]: -cygri
16:18:17 [MarkZ]: MarkZ has joined #rdf-wg
16:18:17 [Zakim]: -pchampin
16:18:20 [Zakim]: -AndyS
16:18:29 [LeeF]: c'mon common scribe, get moving
16:18:52 [Zakim]: -FabGandon
16:18:56 [AndyS]: sandro - right - hence the requirement seems to be whole graph in doc -- may be fragmented in concrete syntax, not in abstract syntax.
16:25:13 [Zakim]: -pfps
16:25:15 [Zakim]: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has ended
16:25:15 [Zakim]: Attendees were AndyS, Guus_Schreiber, cgreer, Arnaud, pfps, Ivan, pchampin, gavinc, MacTed, sandro, davidwood, yvesr, cygri, LeeF, +1.603.897.aaaa, NickH, ericP, FabGandon, PatH
16:59:43 [manu1_]: manu1_ has joined #rdf-wg
17:28:46 [AndyS]: Is CURIE 1.0 the current definitive definition? Is there work in progress anywhere to change it?
17:29:03 [AndyS]: (gavinc)
17:32:39 [AndyS]: gavinc: was there a formal response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Jan/0025.html ?
17:34:55 [AndyS]: Hmm - curie ::= [ [ prefix ] ':' ] irelative-ref (as defined in [RFC3987]) but ...
17:36:38 [AndyS]: irelative-ref => irelative-part => "//" iauthority ipath-abempty OR ipath-absolute ... but ipath-absolute starts with "/" so irelative-ref always starts with a "/" or "//".
17:44:16 [LeeF]: LeeF has joined #rdf-wg
17:46:01 [AndyS]: irelative-part also allows ipath-noscheme but that forbids "a:b" -- I see a bug.
18:20:57 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #rdf-wg
20:04:04 [gavinc]: AndyS, sorry had to work on displaying court cases with Javascript for a few hours ;) Yes, there was http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Jan/0091.html