13:56:59 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sparql
13:56:59 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/02-sparql-irc
13:57:01 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:57:01 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sparql
13:57:03 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
13:57:03 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:57:04 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:57:04 <trackbot> Date: 02 October 2012
13:57:12 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL
13:57:12 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:57:14 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2012-10-02
13:57:16 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
13:57:24 <LeeF> zakim, code?
13:57:24 <Zakim> the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), LeeF
13:57:56 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
13:58:03 <Zakim> + +1.310.729.aaaa
13:58:08 <Zakim> +EricP
13:58:11 <kasei> Zakim, aaaa is me
13:58:11 <Zakim> +kasei; got it
13:58:23 <Zakim> + +1.617.553.aabb
13:58:26 <LeeF> zakim, aabb is me
13:58:26 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
13:59:10 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sparql
13:59:30 <Zakim> + +33.4.92.96.aacc
14:00:01 <Olivier> zakim, aacc is me
14:00:01 <Zakim> +Olivier; got it
14:00:04 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aadd
14:00:13 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:00:19 <Zakim> +??P7
14:00:19 <MattPerry> zakim, aadd is me
14:00:20 <Zakim> +MattPerry; got it
14:00:25 <AndyS> zakim, IPcaller is me
14:00:25 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
14:00:30 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #sparql
14:00:33 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P7 is me
14:00:33 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
14:00:35 <Zakim> +Sandro
14:00:58 <Zakim> +??P13
14:01:00 <cbuilara> zakim, ??P13 is me
14:01:00 <Zakim> +cbuilara; got it
14:01:24 <Zakim> + +49.897.aaee
14:01:40 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, aaee is probably me
14:01:40 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres?; got it
14:01:51 <Zakim> +pgearon
14:02:12 <chimezie> chimezie has joined #sparql
14:02:18 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:02:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see kasei, EricP, LeeF, Olivier, MattPerry, AndyS, SteveH, Sandro, cbuilara, AxelPolleres?, pgearon
14:02:22 <bglimm> bglimm has joined #sparql
14:02:54 <Zakim> +??P19
14:03:06 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:03:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see kasei, EricP, LeeF, Olivier, MattPerry, AndyS, SteveH, Sandro, cbuilara, AxelPolleres?, pgearon, ??P19
14:03:07 <bglimm> Zakim, ??P19 is me
14:03:08 <Zakim> +bglimm; got it
14:03:25 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, it;s really me!
14:03:25 <Zakim> I don't understand 'it;s really me!', AxelPolleres
14:03:27 <Zakim> +Chimezie
14:03:34 <kasei> Zakim, who is talking?
14:03:45 <Zakim> kasei, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
14:03:46 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
14:03:46 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
14:04:13 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me
14:04:13 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted
14:04:17 <AndyS> greg - where in the test suite are these?
14:04:35 <sandro> scribe: sandro
14:04:35 <LeeF> scirbenick: sandro
14:04:39 <LeeF> topic: admin
14:04:40 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
14:04:40 <Zakim> Chimezie should now be muted
14:04:47 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: axel to clean up the scribelist
14:04:47 <trackbot> Created ACTION-689 - Clean up the scribelist [on Axel Polleres - due 2012-10-09].
14:04:47 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-09-25
14:05:22 <sandro> +1
14:05:28 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-09-25
14:05:41 <kasei> AndyS, grepping I see agg tests (avg-02, err-02, min-0[12]), coalesce01, plus-1 and plus-2
14:06:12 <sandro> lee: no open comments for query, right?
14:06:23 <sandro> andy: comments page is up to date, and shows nothing open.
14:06:56 <sandro> lee: tests?
14:06:59 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/implementations/
14:07:12 <sandro> ericP, I hear plh in the background
14:07:54 <sandro> lee: Based on the feedback, do any of the query tests need to change?
14:08:15 <sandro> eric: It seems like the goal is to have the generated values be in the canonical form?
14:08:22 <ericP> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#decimal-lexical-representation
14:08:37 <sandro> eric: So, looking at this, I see the text.....
14:08:37 <sandro> q+
14:08:42 <ericP>  In all cases, leading and trailing zeroes are prohibited subject to the following:  there must be at least one digit to the right and to the left of the decimal point which may be a zero.
14:08:57 <sandro> eric: This text says to me there should be a trailing zero.
14:09:43 <sandro> AndyS:in the algorithms section, it says if an integer, then use ... map, without decimal point
14:10:21 <sandro> sandro: Eric, is this about the specs or the test suite?
14:10:24 <AndyS> NB "xmlschema11-2/#decimal-lexical-representation" is different to the email ref of EricP
14:11:02 <sandro> eric: If the spec allows any valid lex rep, then, no, this isnt about the spec.
14:11:49 <AxelPolleres> I think we define result set equivalence by RDF simple entailment...http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/README.html#queryevaltests 
14:12:08 <sandro> sandro: I'm proposing this as a post-PR test suite cleanup thing.
14:12:08 <AxelPolleres> ... not more, not less.
14:12:28 <sandro> eric: I don't see how people can pass the tests like this.
14:12:44 <sandro> lee: We have impls that *do* pass, which is evidence to the contrary.
14:12:55 <sandro> eric: What result set do we get?
14:13:29 <kasei> q+
14:13:39 <LeeF> ack kasei
14:13:39 <sandro> eric: Were the tests passed by human intervention?
14:14:11 <sandro> kasei: Everyone already has that burden, because we're not providing a test harness.
14:14:15 <ArthurK> ArthurK has joined #sparql
14:14:48 <sandro> kasei: We can't assume things here -- we don't control how import is done, or when/how/if canonicallization is done.
14:14:49 <AxelPolleres> q+
14:15:02 <sandro> sandro: Is that written down -- that the tests are numeric equivalence.
14:15:06 <sandro> q-
14:15:11 <bglimm> q+
14:15:12 <sandro> lee: Let's take an action to document and move on.
14:15:29 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/README.html#howto would be a good place to document this.
14:15:33 <Zakim> + +1.512.651.aaff
14:15:34 <sandro> eric: I'd like to resolve whether a zero is needed, but we can do that later.
14:15:51 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
14:16:05 <ArthurK> Zakim, +1.512.651.aaff is me
14:16:05 <Zakim> +ArthurK; got it
14:16:24 <bglimm> ack bglimm
14:16:42 <LeeF> ACTION: Axel and Lee to document expectation of comparing numeric results in test results in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/README.html#howto
14:16:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-690 - And Lee to document expectation of comparing numeric results in test results in http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/README.html#howto [on Axel Polleres - due 2012-10-09].
14:17:20 <sandro> lee: Eric, any other problems you found?
14:17:41 <sandro> eric: one of the other tests, mentioned in my email, gives a result that's very hard to explain.
14:17:52 <sandro> eric: graph constraint on outside of subselect.
14:18:43 <sandro> eric: graph constraint on outside of graph constraint is done via a stack of graph constraints.    but for subquery (and maybe service?) is you preserve the graph constraint.
14:18:56 <kasei> sq03.rq: graph ?g { {select ?x where {?x ?p ?g}} }
14:20:24 <sandro> lee: I propose this is a corner case, unlikely to come up in practice.   you wont have to teach this.   I propose to change nothing.
14:20:49 <sandro> eric: i just wanted to see if this resonates with anyone
14:20:56 <sandro> lee: you want to remove the test?
14:21:19 <sandro> eric: we could say the graph constraint,   { ... { ...      we could have the same behavior.
14:21:29 <sandro> lee: we're not open to a substantive change at this point.
14:22:25 <sandro> sandro: this is out of order, too late eric
14:22:33 <sandro> eric: no, this is implementation feedback.
14:22:44 <sandro> eric: (argument from email)
14:23:14 <sandro> lee: personally, I'd object to that change, as unintuitive to me.    a subquery inside a graph constraint, I can't see why I'd want anything else.
14:23:22 <sandro> lee: anyone support eric's proposal
14:23:27 <sandro> <crickets>
14:23:40 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query1.1/rq25.xml as PR
14:23:49 <kasei> +1
14:23:50 <AxelPolleres> I agree that this is a corner case, were there might be different opinions, but the test case clarifies what behaviour the group expects.
14:23:53 <sandro> +1
14:23:53 <AxelPolleres> +1
14:23:55 <Olivier> +1
14:24:00 <bglimm> +1
14:24:01 <AndyS> +1 ASF
14:24:04 <chimezie> +1
14:24:07 <MattPerry> +1
14:24:08 <pgearon> +1
14:24:14 <LeeF> +1
14:24:16 <SteveH> +1
14:24:22 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query1.1/rq25.xml as PR
14:24:33 <cbuilara> +1
14:24:40 <LeeF> topic: Update
14:24:56 <AxelPolleres> RV-10
14:26:40 <sandro> axel: somewhat arguable results.    I proposed test cases yesterday, there were some opinions.
14:26:59 <sandro> lee: steve and olivier think...      andy thinks......
14:27:18 <sandro> lee: Did the commenter (Rob) express a preference here?
14:27:20 <SteveH> steve and olivier think it should be different bnodes, and thinks the same
14:27:28 <SteveH> *andy
14:27:30 <LeeF> INSERT DATA { ... _:b1 ... } ; INSERT DATA { ... _:b1 ... } 
14:27:33 <LeeF> One bnode or two?
14:27:42 <ericP> lee: steve and olivier think that multiple inserts using the same blank node label should result in different bnodes. andy thinks it should be the same
14:28:04 <AndyS> Third option - ban it.
14:28:30 <LeeF> sandro: think i agree with Andy, based on discussion in RDF group and resolution that in its multigraph syntax, this would be the same blank node
14:28:52 <AxelPolleres> RV would expect something even "more different"  ... "distinct fresh blank nodes will be generated for each usage in each block." 
14:28:57 <SteveH> I'm not sure there's a parllell with TriG, that more like within one ;
14:29:03 <sandro> lee: That RDF-WG argument has some weight for me, yes.
14:29:09 <AndyS> FYI: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/21
14:29:30 <sandro> AxelPolleres: Rob (commenter) expects different ones, even in nested blocks.
14:29:40 <kasei> I agree with Steve. TriG is more like GRAPH :g1 {} GRAPH ?g2 {}, not multiple operations in the same request.
14:29:40 <sandro> AxelPolleres: Which is not what we want, I think.
14:29:52 <sandro> SteveH: That's not how I recall it.   link to message?
14:30:01 <sandro> bglimm: Is it because of the semicolon?
14:30:47 <sandro> lee: I've always thought of blank node labels as document scope.
14:30:56 <SteveH> +1 to strawpoll
14:31:46 <AxelPolleres> q+ to answer on sandro
14:31:51 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
14:31:51 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to answer on sandro
14:32:11 <SteveH> sando gave the argument that convinced the RDF-WG
14:32:21 <sandro> sandro: I think the RDF-WG was swayed by the notion of serializing a dataset with shared blank nodes between graphs.
14:32:46 <LeeF> straw poll: do the occurrences of _:b1 in  "INSERT DATA { ... _:b1 ... } ; INSERT DATA { ... _:b1 ... }" refer to ONE blank node or TWO blank nodes?
14:32:47 <sandro> AxelPolleres: This is different -- you can do that, with one request with multiply GRAPH clauses.
14:32:51 <sandro> sandro: ah, okay.
14:33:05 <pgearon> two
14:33:08 <SteveH> two
14:33:10 <AndyS> one blank - or ban it.
14:33:13 <chimezie> one
14:33:14 <sandro> one
14:33:15 <ericP> one
14:33:16 <bglimm> two (slight preference)
14:33:18 <MattPerry> one
14:33:19 <AxelPolleres> don't care
14:33:19 <Olivier> 2
14:33:38 <ArthurK> one or ban it
14:33:44 <SteveH> ban it would be ok
14:33:56 <sandro> lee: even split.    when we had a similar issue on spanning BGPs with entailment semantics, the end result was to ban it.
14:34:08 <AxelPolleres> if you ask me as an editor, I'd switch to "one" (because then I don't have to edit anything 
14:34:11 <SteveH> … ot make it implementation defined *ducks*
14:34:12 <AxelPolleres> ;-)
14:34:33 <sandro> PROPOSED: It's an error to use the same blank node label in two different parts.    We'd not test this, just assert it.
14:34:52 <AndyS> s/parts/operations in the same request/
14:35:20 <sandro> PROPOSED: It's an error to use the same blank node label in two different operations in the same request.    We'd not test this, just assert it.
14:35:28 <SteveH> we're omly sort-of testing for it - the test is a bit strange
14:35:30 <sandro> AndyS: We're already testing for it.   
14:35:43 <sandro> AndyS: This also re-opens the query document.
14:35:49 <AxelPolleres> I don't think we have an *approved test case* for that, do we?
14:36:14 <sandro> AndyS: Hmmmm, what was Rob running against....
14:37:14 <AxelPolleres> RV-10 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2012Sep/0022.html) doesn't mention a test case, and the exmple he mentions isn't conflicting with the ban across requests, is it?
14:37:29 <sandro> lee: let's do that proposal, then unapprove test 53.
14:37:44 <SteveH> we could make it a negative syntax test if we wanted to
14:37:54 <sandro> lee: the publish updates and query as PR, contingient on this modification.
14:38:07 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
14:38:07 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
14:38:15 <sandro> lee: not time for a new test.
14:38:52 <sandro> PROPOSED: It's an error to use the same blank node label in two different operations in the same request.   Remove test 53.   At some point in the future, add negative syntax test.
14:38:55 <AndyS> Test was added  2012/05/26
14:39:08 <sandro> +1
14:39:10 <AxelPolleres> unapprove .... go for PR ... add and re-approve negative syntax test in the future.
14:39:28 <kasei> +1
14:39:30 <bglimm> +1
14:39:32 <MattPerry> +1
14:39:32 <ArthurK> +1
14:39:33 <pgearon> abstain
14:39:41 <Olivier> abstain
14:39:42 <cbuilara> abstain
14:39:42 <AxelPolleres> +1 (also changing unapproved new basic-update tests to negative syntax tests)
14:40:30 <LeeF> +1
14:40:45 <SteveH> +1
14:41:02 <LeeF> RESOLVED: It's an error to use the same blank node label in two different operations in the same request.   Remove test 53.   At some point in the future, add negative syntax test.
14:41:39 <AndyS> test 53 ==  syntax-update-1/syntax-update-53.ru
14:41:56 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query1.1/rq25.xml as PR contingent on the text changes to note that it's an error to use the same blank node label in two different operations in the same request
14:42:14 <sandro> +1 W3C
14:42:18 <LeeF> +1 
14:42:20 <AndyS> +1 ASF
14:42:21 <bglimm> +1 (UUlm)
14:42:21 <pgearon> +1
14:42:21 <cbuilara> +1
14:42:23 <Olivier> +1
14:42:23 <MattPerry> +1
14:42:23 <SteveH> +1 Experian
14:42:24 <AxelPolleres> how do we check/review the change?
14:42:30 <Zakim> -EricP
14:42:44 <AxelPolleres> +1 (plus action to approval by review)
14:42:57 <ArthurK> +1
14:43:39 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query1.1/rq25.xml as PR contingent on the text changes to note that it's an error to use the same blank node label in two different operations in the same request
14:44:19 <sandro> sandro has changed the topic to: SPARQL WG  : http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2012-10-02
14:44:20 <AndyS> ACTION AndyS make change to rq25 to reflect banning use of the same bNode label across operations.  Notify WG when done.
14:44:20 <trackbot> Created ACTION-691 - Make change to rq25 to reflect banning use of the same bNode label across operations.  Notify WG when done. [on Andy Seaborne - due 2012-10-09].
14:44:20 <LeeF> ACTION: Axel to approve the change re: banning multiple same blank node label in update requests
14:44:20 <trackbot> Created ACTION-692 - Approve the change re: banning multiple same blank node label in update requests [on Axel Polleres - due 2012-10-09].
14:45:45 <LeeF> ACTION: Axel to update wording in update document to be consistent wiht change re: blank node labels in query doc
14:45:45 <trackbot> Created ACTION-693 - Update wording in update document to be consistent wiht change re: blank node labels in query doc [on Axel Polleres - due 2012-10-09].
14:45:48 <AndyS> q+
14:46:11 <sandro> AxelPolleres: We need an okay from Rob.
14:46:28 <sandro> AndyS: What part of Query changes?
14:46:48 <sandro> LeeF: I think it's just editorial, removing an editorial bit about update scope.
14:46:50 <AndyS> ack me
14:47:42 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml as PR contingent on acknowledgement of response to RV-10 and contingent on ACTION-693 completion
14:47:59 <AxelPolleres> q+ to maybe approve RV-10 just now? http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:RV-10
14:48:21 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml as PR contingent on acknowledgement of response to RV-10 and contingent on ACTION-692 and ACTION-693 completion
14:48:22 <sandro> AndyS: Continent on 692 as well?
14:50:14 <LeeF> kasei: +1
14:50:19 <AxelPolleres> +1 (siemens)
14:50:22 <AndyS> +1 ASF
14:50:24 <LeeF> +1
14:50:26 <bglimm> +1 (UUlm)
14:50:26 <pgearon> +1
14:50:27 <cbuilara> +1
14:50:28 <sandro> +1
14:50:29 <MattPerry> +1 Oracle
14:50:35 <Olivier> +1
14:50:36 <ArthurK> +1
14:50:39 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/update-1.1/Overview.xml as PR contingent on acknowledgement of response to RV-10 and contingent on ACTION-692 and ACTION-693 completion
14:52:49 <Zakim> -Chimezie
14:52:52 <sandro> lee: GSP?    later, Chime isn't here.
14:53:01 <sandro> lee: FedQ ?
14:53:17 <Zakim> +Chimezie
14:53:29 <sandro> cbuilara: One comment, just a suggestion.     
14:53:34 <cbuilara> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2012Jul/0013.html
14:54:27 <AxelPolleres> RV-10 draft response updated at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:RV-10 (sending contingent to completion of ACTIONS on edits in query and update doc)
14:55:39 <sandro> lee: Since we need another week anyway, might as well go around with Peter again.   Carlos can you tell Peter that given where we are in the WG, we'd prefer to handle this in a future WG?
14:55:46 <sandro> cbuilara: yes, I'll do that today.
14:56:08 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/json-results/json-results.xml as PR
14:56:12 <sandro> +1
14:56:35 <AxelPolleres> +1 (siemens)
14:56:36 <sandro> lee: 3 100% test results
14:56:36 <bglimm> +1 (UUlm)
14:56:40 <LeeF> +1
14:56:41 <cbuilara> +1
14:56:45 <MattPerry> +1 (Oracle)
14:56:46 <SteveH> +1 Experian
14:56:47 <Olivier> +1
14:56:53 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/json-results/json-results.xml as PR
14:56:59 <AndyS> +1 ASF
14:57:09 <ArthurK> +1 Algebraix
14:57:27 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/csv-tsv-results/results-csv-tsv.html as PR
14:57:36 <sandro> lee: csv/tst -- also three at 100%
14:57:39 <sandro> +1
14:57:41 <AxelPolleres> +1 (siemens)
14:57:43 <LeeF> +1
14:57:43 <Olivier> +1
14:57:44 <bglimm> +1 (UUlm)
14:57:44 <cbuilara> +1
14:57:49 <AndyS> +1 ASF
14:57:50 <ArthurK> +1 Algebraix
14:57:52 <MattPerry> +1 (Oracle)
14:57:56 <SteveH> +1 Experian
14:58:02 <pgearon> +1
14:58:04 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/csv-tsv-results/results-csv-tsv.html as PR
14:58:32 <sandro> lee: Anything pending with Overview?
14:58:37 <Zakim> -Chimezie
14:58:43 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/sparql11-overview/Overview.xml as PR 
14:58:47 <sandro> axel: Nope.
14:58:48 <sandro> +1
14:58:51 <LeeF> +1
14:58:51 <AxelPolleres> +1 (siemens)
14:58:54 <ArthurK> +1 Algebraix
14:58:55 <bglimm> +1 (UUlm)
14:58:55 <cbuilara> +1
14:58:57 <MattPerry> +1 (Oracle)
14:58:59 <AndyS> +1 ASF
14:59:08 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Publish http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/sparql11-overview/Overview.xml as PR 
14:59:08 <Olivier> +1
15:00:26 <Zakim> -LeeF
15:00:29 <Zakim> -cbuilara
15:00:30 <sandro> sandro: I'll send an email on a little thing with XML Results format
15:00:31 <Zakim> -SteveH
15:00:32 <sandro> ADJOURN
15:00:32 <Zakim> -kasei
15:00:33 <Zakim> -bglimm
15:00:33 <Zakim> -Olivier
15:00:35 <Zakim> -MattPerry
15:00:41 <Zakim> -pgearon
15:02:20 <Zakim> -ArthurK
15:05:14 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-XMLres/
15:05:24 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/XMLres-errata
15:06:19 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres?
15:06:20 <Zakim> -AndyS
15:06:30 <Zakim> -Sandro
15:06:31 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
15:06:31 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.310.729.aaaa, EricP, kasei, +1.617.553.aabb, LeeF, +33.4.92.96.aacc, Olivier, +1.603.897.aadd, MattPerry, AndyS, SteveH, Sandro, cbuilara, +49.897.aaee,
15:06:31 <Zakim> ... AxelPolleres?, pgearon, bglimm, Chimezie, ArthurK
16:04:38 <AndyS> Enacting bNode label in update operations "change"/"clarification" : looks like one test failure - not  syntax-update-53.ru  which is actually OK -- one of Axel's new tests which are not approved.  insert-data-same-bnode2.ru
16:56:19 <Zakim> Zakim has left #sparql
17:26:44 <MacTed> MacTed has joined #sparql
18:59:45 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #sparql
19:01:46 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has left #sparql
19:30:23 <kasei> what's the status of the same-bnode tests. are they all expected to fail now?