IRC log of ldp on 2013-03-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

01:55:04 [SteveS]
SteveS has joined #ldp
02:43:14 [krp]
krp has joined #ldp
02:51:04 [Arnaud]
Arnaud has joined #ldp
03:00:15 [Arnaud]
trackbot, make minutes public
03:00:15 [trackbot]
Sorry, Arnaud, I don't understand 'trackbot, make minutes public'. Please refer to <> for help.
03:01:08 [Arnaud]
invite zakim
03:01:22 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ldp
03:01:37 [Arnaud]
zakim: make minutes public
03:12:10 [Arnaud]
rrsagent, publish minutes
03:12:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Arnaud
03:17:59 [Arnaud]
rssagent, help
03:18:25 [Arnaud]
rrsagent, help
03:19:50 [Arnaud]
rrsagent, adminhelp
03:22:55 [Arnaud]
rrsagent, make logs public
03:37:42 [bhyland]
bhyland has joined #ldp
09:51:05 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #ldp
09:54:51 [Arnaud]
Arnaud has joined #ldp
10:51:50 [bhyland]
bhyland has joined #ldp
12:05:22 [Arnaud]
Arnaud has joined #ldp
12:44:08 [davidwood]
davidwood has joined #ldp
12:45:40 [davidwood1]
davidwood1 has joined #ldp
12:47:47 [bblfish]
bblfish has joined #ldp
12:49:18 [rgarcia]
rgarcia has joined #ldp
13:01:12 [SteveS]
SteveS has joined #ldp
13:01:20 [bblfish]
13:02:14 [Arnaud]
Arnaud has joined #ldp
13:02:22 [Arnaud]
trackbot, start meeting
13:02:24 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:02:24 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #ldp
13:02:26 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be LDP
13:02:26 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP(F2F)8:30AM already started
13:02:27 [trackbot]
Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
13:02:27 [trackbot]
Date: 15 March 2013
13:05:44 [krp]
krp has joined #ldp
13:06:19 [bblfish]
hi is the teleconf on?
13:06:32 [nmihindu]
nmihindu has joined #ldp
13:07:26 [Arnaud]
bblfish, not quite yet
13:07:45 [Arnaud]
well, I started it but we need to call in
13:08:05 [Arnaud]
we don't have the phone yet!
13:08:47 [cygri]
cygri has joined #ldp
13:09:09 [Arnaud]
coming up, hang in there
13:10:44 [cody]
cody has joined #ldp
13:11:01 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #ldp
13:11:53 [mesteban]
mesteban has joined #ldp
13:12:12 [Arnaud]
scribe: cody
13:12:15 [Arnaud]
chair: Arnaud
13:13:36 [cody]
topic: Scheduling next face to face
13:14:33 [Zakim]
13:15:01 [cody]
davidwood: last call period is minimum 3 weeks
13:15:11 [davidwood1]
13:16:02 [cody]
arnaud: Steve and I were looking at the calendar the other day. Doesn't seem that easy to find a week that's going to work that well.
13:16:26 [cody]
… first week of June is Semtech in San Fran
13:16:38 [cody]
… week of 3rd of June is out
13:17:02 [cody]
… one possibility: aim for second week of June
13:17:32 [bblfish]
I don't really hear anything. Arnaud is very distant, and there is background noise.
13:17:49 [cody]
… discussing the WHERE
13:18:03 [cody]
sandro: you're all welcome to come back here (M.I.T.)
13:19:16 [cody]
arnaud: ashok agreed to host in New York, but others complained that it's expensive
13:20:12 [cody]
migueal: We have to check for permission, but I think Madrid may be possible. We have to check for permission and get back to the group about that.
13:20:42 [cody]
migueal = miguel
13:21:16 [Ashok]
13:21:36 [mesteban]
13:22:28 [bblfish]
ah the noise is better now
13:22:35 [cody]
kevin: another thing to avoid is SWC which is like May 26
13:22:48 [bblfish]
I can hear Arnaud and others discussing W3C AC meeting...
13:23:51 [TallTed]
TallTed has joined #ldp
13:23:55 [cody]
arnaud: if we want to give buffer with our last call, should we aim for a bit later in June?
13:24:03 [cody]
sandro: the week of July 8th
13:24:40 [bblfish]
The last call is already coming up?
13:24:47 [davidwood]
13:24:58 [bblfish]
I thought this project was a 3 year project
13:25:07 [bblfish]
and we were only in the first year
13:25:33 [mesteban]
13:27:13 [cody]
sandro: last week of June is European Sem Web conference
13:27:35 [cody]
arnaud: I'm just wondering about May 20th
13:27:54 [mesteban]
No, the ESWC is the last week of May.
13:28:54 [cody]
arnaud: Except WWW conference is the week before
13:29:20 [cody]
ashok: isn't that a bit early?
13:29:38 [cody]
steves: I think it makes sense in this case, just to try to get to last call
13:30:13 [cody]
arnaud: Either the week of 10th of June or week of 17th of June
13:30:53 [cody]
arnaud: for now, let's go for the week of June 17th. We would do like 18, 19, 20 (if we want to do another 3 day)
13:31:12 [roger]
roger has joined #ldp
13:31:50 [cody]
F2F3 candidate locations, Madrid, London, or Boston (team favors that order), but arguing travel budgets
13:32:05 [cody]
davidwood: let's do a straw poll
13:32:14 [bblfish]
the noise has come back.
13:32:19 [JohnArwe]
JohnArwe has joined #ldp
13:32:24 [Arnaud]
strawpol: 1) madrid, 2) london, 3) boston
13:32:31 [SteveBattle]
SteveBattle has joined #ldp
13:32:42 [ericP]
1 0 -1
13:32:42 [bblfish]
+1 +1 -0.33333
13:32:45 [TallTed]
-1, -1, +1
13:32:45 [Ashok]
13:32:49 [SteveS]
+1, +1, +1
13:32:50 [sandro]
-1 -1 +1
13:32:51 [cygri]
+0.5 +1 0
13:32:52 [davidwood]
-1 −1 +1
13:32:55 [JohnArwe]
+1 +1 +1
13:32:58 [roger]
+1, +1, +1
13:32:59 [cody]
13:33:14 [bblfish]
13:33:15 [SteveBattle]
+1, +1, 0
13:33:27 [nmihindu]
+1 0 -1
13:33:33 [mesteban]
+1, +1, 0
13:33:33 [bblfish]
I hear now.
13:33:46 [bblfish]
13:33:52 [mesteban]
13:33:54 [bblfish]
that works
13:34:13 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
13:34:13 [RRSAgent]
13:34:18 [Arnaud]
ack bblfish
13:34:47 [bblfish]
I'll check the charter
13:34:48 [cody]
arnaud: it is not a 3 year project; we're chartered for 2 years
13:35:34 [davidwood]
13:35:38 [Arnaud]
0 +1 +1
13:35:48 [davidwood]
13:35:48 [davidwood]
13:35:48 [davidwood]
Face-to-face meeting, if needed
13:37:20 [cody]
arnaud: OK, we'll leave it at that for now. We have proposed dates, locations, and a general straw poll
13:37:40 [cody]
topic: Open Issues
13:38:30 [cody]
arnaud: technically we don't HAVE to take public comments into account at this point, but I think it wise to deal with them sooner, rather than later.
13:39:08 [cody]
… need to figure out how we want to address the comments. davaidwood, one of your colleagues, for example, submitted several
13:39:44 [cygri]
13:40:08 [cygri]
13:40:47 [cody]
davidwood: somebody needs to get back to James formally, in the working group, and say that we acknowledge the comments
13:41:02 [cody]
… I can do that. I'm sure Jame's perspective is similar to mine.
13:41:29 [cody]
sandro: do we want to start tracking comments now? lc tracker?
13:41:45 [cody]
… it's a comment tracker
13:41:46 [bblfish]
13:43:22 [bblfish]
13:43:27 [JohnArwe]
13:43:46 [cygri]
13:45:11 [Arnaud]
ack cygri
13:45:58 [bblfish]
Is someone scribing cygri's question because I did not hear what he said
13:45:59 [cody]
cygri: would be good to report on how we tried to make sense of some of the terminology issues at dinner last night
13:46:38 [bblfish]
13:46:39 [cody]
cygri: I don't know that we made consensus amongst ourselves, though
13:47:03 [cody]
… What we talked about can be lumped under ISSUE 37 (the model)
13:48:00 [cody]
… I objected to this notion that you could post to a container and then have a member of a container that is not an LDPR; I thought through and withdrawal that objection
13:48:10 [Arnaud]
ack bblfish
13:48:18 [bblfish]
13:48:18 [trackbot]
ISSUE-52 -- base -- raised
13:48:18 [trackbot]
13:49:17 [cody]
arnaud: lets talk about the issues we'd like to talk about today first, then we can sort out priority
13:49:32 [cody]
… there is the one on batch versus patch
13:49:36 [cody]
… we had binary
13:49:39 [cody]
… and model
13:49:43 [cody]
… missing any?
13:50:08 [cody]
stevebattle: issue 50 (one of henry's)
13:50:56 [SteveBattle]
13:50:56 [trackbot]
ISSUE-50 -- Intuitive Containers: better support for relative URIs -- open
13:50:56 [trackbot]
13:51:05 [cody]
arnaud: So, we have to try to manage time here. Can we first try to see if the dinner helped us get anywhere related to pagination.
13:51:16 [cody]
… Roger feels we rushed that
13:51:23 [cody]
… ISSUE 33
13:51:30 [SteveS]
ISSUE-33 ?
13:51:30 [trackbot]
ISSUE-33 -- Pagination for non-container resources -- closed
13:51:30 [trackbot]
13:52:03 [cody]
… Roger, is there anything you want to tell us about this issue to help us reconsider.
13:52:25 [SteveS]
13:52:27 [cody]
… Have you slept on it?
13:53:26 [cody]
roger: it seems that a lot of our issues, not just the pagination (update or patch, or for creation issues) ...
13:54:00 [SteveBattle]
13:54:25 [cody]
scribe is not yet understanding roger's point (hold on)
13:54:48 [Arnaud]
ack steveb
13:56:14 [cody]
steves: post to add. We closed an issue a few days ago to say that we wouldn't do that
13:56:27 [SteveBattle]
The example is about POSTing the literal string "Mary" to Peter; how would this generalize to other datatypes?
13:56:56 [SteveBattle]
13:59:06 [cody]
roger: I tried to identify useful concepts for pagination and updates. You essentially get something that looks like PATCH. A useful construct for both issues: patch and pagination
13:59:40 [cody]
arnaud: how is that telling me that the decision we made yesterday is not a good one?
13:59:49 [davidwood]
davidwood has joined #ldp
13:59:51 [cody]
roger: yeah - on face value it looks kind of the same
13:59:54 [Ashok]
13:59:58 [Arnaud]
ack steveb
14:00:45 [cody]
tallted: updates could different if you've paginated or haven't paginated
14:01:11 [cody]
arnaud: are we talking about robust pagination, which we have another issue for?
14:01:34 [roger]
roger has joined #ldp
14:01:41 [cody]
… still trying to figure out how they are linked together
14:02:15 [cody]
ted: it will benefit us if richard could summarize the discussion last night
14:02:21 [Arnaud]
ack ashok
14:03:09 [JohnArwe]
14:03:22 [JohnArwe]
14:03:33 [cody]
arnaud: agree - we need a debrief of last night
14:03:54 [cygri]
14:04:06 [cody]
… lets switch gears, forget ISSUE 33 for now, and discuss the informal break-out session from last night
14:04:23 [cody]
topic: LDP Model
14:04:41 [cody]
cygr: my way of explaining how LDP works
14:04:47 [cody]
… LDP has 2 parts to it:
14:06:04 [cody]
documented in wiki "The two things that LDP does"
14:06:51 [cody]
… Value sets : a set of triples with the same subject, same predicate, different object
14:07:21 [cody]
… let's not get hung up on the term though
14:07:30 [cody]
… you could call it a set of membership triples
14:07:44 [cody]
… there is also the inverse
14:07:55 [cody]
… same predicate, same object, but different subject
14:08:27 [cody]
… LDP names value sets with an IRI
14:08:50 [cody]
… and can be interacted with in various ways using HTTP.
14:09:45 [bblfish]
What is the point of making this restriction?
14:10:25 [bblfish]
I am assuming that the notion of triple set is being introduced in order to restrict what should go in an LDPR...
14:10:48 [bblfish]
14:10:51 [cody]
… /foo/p1 s the IRI for a Value Set. If you do a GET on that URL, you'll get back those 3 triples
14:11:14 [roger]
in my opinion it is being introduced to *partition* a LDPR
14:11:30 [cody]
… but the URI of the Value Set is NOT the subject in the triples (unless maybe in some rare special cases)
14:11:33 [bblfish]
to partition it into what?
14:11:53 [roger]
into groupings according to predicate names
14:11:56 [bblfish]
is this for Container membership?
14:11:59 [cody]
tallted: imagine that each one of those 3 positions is filled with a full URI
14:12:08 [bblfish]
s/Container/Pagination partition/
14:12:38 [cody]
cygri: the subject you have in the value sets is not the same as the URI of the value set
14:12:57 [rgarcia]
rgarcia has joined #ldp
14:13:08 [cody]
… the subject uri could be anything. It doesn't matter at all what the subject URI is (for this value et thing)
14:13:49 [bblfish]
Yes, I still don't know why this concept is being introduced. Did I miss something?
14:14:26 [cody]
… so in our example where the subject is foo, there could be other value sets that have foo as the subject
14:15:55 [cody]
… container: value sets are really handy for building these REST style containers. The term container may lead to a narrow view of what you can do with them
14:16:18 [Ashok]
Ashok has joined #ldp
14:16:24 [cody]
… Value Set is my current conceptual replacement for what we've been calling Container
14:16:51 [Ashok]
14:17:01 [cody]
… the spec says you can PUT and PATCH to put any triples into this container; I don't see how that's helpful.
14:18:02 [Arnaud]
ack ashok
14:18:16 [cody]
ashok: My worry is that if I want to create a container that has apples and oranges...
14:18:43 [cody]
cygri: VS has single subject, single predicate. If you want a diff predicate, that's a diff value set
14:18:55 [cody]
tallted: apples and oranges are objects, not predicates
14:20:17 [cody]
johnarwe: membership triples in a container have same subject and predicate (been in the spec since beginning)
14:20:45 [cody]
ashok: I'm hung up on the thing that the subject and predicate have to be the same in the collection
14:21:11 [cody]
sandro: thats a normal RDF graph, this is a special kind of RDF graph that is more constrained
14:21:28 [cody]
cygri: DELETE > two forms
14:22:13 [bblfish]
cygri wants to turn RDF into a plain OO system.
14:22:39 [bblfish]
You can see that he is thinking of URLs as objects with the methods and varialbes as the relations
14:23:33 [SteveBattle]
14:23:47 [bblfish]
But this removes a lot of flexibility from the system.
14:24:03 [cody]
cygri: and the third thing is pagination
14:24:20 [cody]
… you can follow a next pointer to get more triples in the value set
14:25:03 [cody]
… Roger wants to add a single member to a value set by posting to a URI
14:25:08 [krp]
krp has joined #ldp
14:26:04 [Arnaud]
ack steveb
14:26:18 [roger]
… also wants to do dynamic introspection of what is possible with a value set
14:26:47 [nmihindu]
14:27:10 [SteveS]
SteveS has joined #ldp
14:28:24 [Arnaud]
ack nmihindu
14:29:39 [SteveBattle]
If I have value-set <foo/p3> I'm still unsure about what I can do on <foo>
14:30:00 [cody]
cygri: in order to remove single member from a container in current spec, the only way is using PUT or PATCH
14:31:22 [SteveBattle]
14:31:46 [cody]
nandana: where does it differ from current spec, except for the naming changes?
14:32:05 [cody]
cygri: I'm folding in some changes I'd like to see in paging, but that's a separate issue.
14:32:14 [cody]
… what I'm trying to make clear is that
14:32:28 [cody]
… there is a distinction between this subject resource and the Value Set
14:32:50 [cody]
… by using the term Container, it doesn't make it mentally easy to keep those two things apart
14:33:23 [bblfish]
14:33:56 [Arnaud]
ack steveb
14:34:09 [JohnArwe]
what is your ? henry
14:34:24 [bblfish]
I don't understand where this is going.
14:34:34 [cody]
… this is just describing the current spec in different words
14:34:42 [cody]
arnaud: there are differences, that's not true
14:34:55 [cody]
cygri: with the exception of paging, I don't think so
14:35:09 [SteveBattle]
Do I get RDF if I do a GET on a value-set? (Yes)
14:36:00 [SteveBattle]
If I want to delete a single triple from a value set, I still have to do a PUT or PATCH? (still unanswered)
14:36:21 [JohnArwe]
henry: people had a sense that many of the disagreements were people talking past each other. at dinner several of those with widely different-sounding viewpoints came up with something we could all agree to.
14:37:04 [JohnArwe]
... to first order, the intent is that this is simply another way to speak about the same spec as we have today in terms more people can relate to.
14:37:19 [cody]
… GET on a value set also gives some metadata. (see Metadata triples in value sets)
14:37:52 [cody]
… GET on foo, you get some RDF and the met data triples about any value sets that use foo
14:37:55 [bblfish]
there seems to be a suggestion that a LDPR should only contian one value set.
14:37:58 [nmihindu_]
nmihindu_ has joined #ldp
14:38:08 [JohnArwe]
... what complicated things slightly is (1) not everyone has all the ins/outs of the spec in their forebrains, so when cyrgi made certain existing aspects more explicit people are surprised (Kevin's pt) (2) cygri did introduced a change or two around pagination.
14:38:13 [TallTed]
14:38:30 [Arnaud]
ack tallted
14:38:59 [JohnArwe]
no, his intent is that one LDP*C* contains exactly one value set ... hence the stmts that "value set" can be thought of as just another name for today's "membership triples"
14:39:03 [Ashok]
14:39:57 [bblfish]
<> a foaf:PersonalProfileDocument;
14:39:57 [bblfish]
foaf:primaryTopic <#me> .
14:39:57 [bblfish]
<#me> a foaf:Person…
14:39:58 [bblfish]
foaf:knows [ = <../jack#me>; foaf:name "Joe" ]…
14:40:00 [bblfish]
How many value sets in there. How does this help?
14:40:02 [SteveBattle]
14:40:25 [cody]
… we have ability distinguish delete and recessive delete in the metadata
14:40:34 [JohnArwe]
how many containers are in your sample henry?
14:40:39 [cody]
sandro: essentially a domain-specific LDR
14:40:57 [cody]
14:40:59 [bblfish]
is this restricted to containers?
14:41:43 [cody]
cygri: one of these containers exists purely for managing the values of a certain property.
14:42:07 [SteveBattle]
14:42:20 [roger]
i.e. an LDPC is not a domain resource
14:42:40 [bblfish]
<> a ldp:Container;
14:42:40 [bblfish]
:member [ = <card>; :title "Foaf Profile"; author [ = <jack>; foaf:name "Jack"; ] ] .
14:43:08 [cody]
… container: managing the resource - not really a domain object. It exist in order to provide ability to add, remove, manipulate, page through members
14:43:11 [JohnArwe]
as cygri is using the term, "value set" is essentially equivalent to "container" (his wiki page explicitly asserts that) ... he agreed informally as well as here that "v s" also equiv to "membership triples" b/c for him that set of triples are a major feature of containers, but also a feature that would be useful in other contexts
14:43:21 [Arnaud]
ack ashok
14:43:36 [SteveBattle]
Can someone answer my PUT/PATCH question, "To change a value-set I still have to use PUT/PATCH?"
14:44:10 [cody]
ashok: we agreed containers can have containers within them
14:44:38 [cody]
… we've got to be able to put a value set in a value set
14:44:42 [JohnArwe]
SB, I think it's on "have to" that differences might emerge. can you? yes.
14:44:45 [bblfish]
Since Value set is a purely RDF graph centric thing, I don't see how it is related to containers. Containers is about resource creation. It happens to often be described by a pattern called a value set.
14:44:53 [cody]
cygri: there's nothing that stops you from using the URI of another Value Set
14:45:13 [cody]
stevebatlle: to modify a value set do I still use PUT and PATCH?
14:46:07 [JohnArwe]
Henry, that sounds like violent agreement with cygri. As he pointed out last night, some people come at this from a REST/interaction viewpoint (so they care about create etc more), others from a more purely RDF standpoint (and for them the membership triples are more important)
14:46:44 [bblfish]
Yes, but I don't see that you need restrictions to value sets.
14:46:51 [bblfish]
graphs are good enough
14:47:04 [cody]
tallted: this is the result of all of our conversation last night; doesn't lay the groundwork we began with. We discussed...
14:47:27 [JohnArwe]
14:47:30 [cody]
… current container: a factory, an enumerator, a modifier (including delete)
14:48:29 [bblfish]
you want a new HTTP DELETE method?
14:48:38 [bblfish]
14:48:43 [Arnaud]
ack john
14:51:11 [bblfish]
If you don't want a new HTTP delete method, then you want something like factory methods.
14:51:20 [JohnArwe]
Ted was suggesting that, assuming we keep recursive delete which he was not especially a fan of, it should be an option on the delete request (however we do that) rather than a choice baked into a container's implementation all the time. if a container impln chose to only offer one kind of delete, I suspect he'd be fine with that as well.
14:52:27 [bblfish]
14:53:05 [JohnArwe]
...while not part of cygri's page, informally ted mentioned that (as an example) http delete might always be NON recursive, and containers that offer recursive delete would advertise that by exposing a predicate we define whose object is a url that does the recursive delete
14:54:51 [SteveBattle]
DELETE <URI>?recursively ?
14:55:39 [SteveBattle]
(hoping zakim doesn't try to execute that!)
15:04:29 [TallTed]
TallTed has joined #ldp
15:05:51 [davidwood]
davidwood has joined #ldp
15:06:09 [Arnaud]
15:07:19 [rgarcia]
rgarcia has joined #ldp
15:07:30 [roger]
roger has joined #ldp
15:08:05 [roger]
arnaud: thanks cygri for the report
15:08:12 [JohnArwe]
Scribe: Roger
15:09:08 [SteveS]
SteveS has joined #ldp
15:09:18 [roger]
arnaud: wants to know what we can do with value-sets going forward
15:12:06 [davidwood]
q+ to ask Richard what a "REST-style container" is
15:12:15 [roger]
arnald: should the naming difference (container vs. value set) be carried forward ?
15:13:10 [davidwood]
+1 to cygri for figuring out that we are overloading a core concept ("One issue with LDP as currently designed is that it doesn't really give you flexibility to use these three abilities independently.")
15:13:23 [JohnArwe]
15:15:19 [Arnaud]
ack david
15:15:19 [Zakim]
davidwood, you wanted to ask Richard what a "REST-style container" is
15:15:34 [roger]
arnald: not everyone liked the filesystem analogy
15:17:03 [roger]
cygri: a REST-style container is something you post to create something new
15:17:58 [JohnArwe]
Note: not all "REST-style containers" support create, some are read/only
15:18:44 [roger]
yes, but, there are not part of the 'model' as such, they are there to support interaction.
15:19:54 [bblfish]
The sound is still very broken. Not sure if it is me, or something else
15:20:14 [roger]
SteveS: is there are link from Steve to his friends value-set
15:20:16 [roger]
15:20:18 [JohnArwe]
broken ... static? volume low?
15:20:27 [roger]
15:20:52 [bblfish]
the sound goes up and down, and so I hear 3 words out of 5
15:21:40 [SteveBattle]
15:21:50 [JohnArwe]
is that any better? I'm not convinced they're actually speaking any louder
15:22:21 [bblfish]
a very little bit better.
15:22:29 [bblfish]
Let me try reconnecting with skype just in case
15:22:37 [Zakim]
15:22:40 [JohnArwe]
arnaud is moving the mic closer
15:22:58 [Arnaud]
ack roger
15:23:40 [JohnArwe]
roger: issue-51 was exactly that issue - how to find container from member
15:23:41 [Zakim]
15:23:53 [bblfish]
15:23:53 [trackbot]
ISSUE-51 -- Linking from a Resource to its Containers (aka 'backlinks') -- raised
15:23:53 [trackbot]
15:24:10 [JohnArwe]
any better henry?
15:24:34 [Arnaud]
ack steveb
15:24:39 [bblfish]
a bit better but still very choppy. I hear steve well.
15:25:10 [JohnArwe]
steve B?
15:25:16 [bblfish]
So I hear cygri not so good.
15:25:35 [Ashok]
15:25:42 [roger]
roger: the addition to issue 51 is how to discover an empty value-set - to bootstrap it's manipulation
15:26:06 [Arnaud]
ack ashok
15:26:28 [SteveBattle]
15:26:39 [bblfish]
Ashok is choppy too.
15:26:41 [bblfish]
15:26:43 [roger]
ashok: if you access Steve you should get URI to each of its value-sets, right ?
15:28:19 [roger]
15:29:17 [roger]
where is the factory ?
15:29:29 [roger]
arnald: where is the factory ?
15:29:50 [Arnaud]
ack steveb
15:30:57 [TallTed]
hopefuly plausible example:
15:30:57 [TallTed]
15:30:57 [TallTed]
15:30:57 [TallTed]
membershipPredicate: foaf:knows
15:30:57 [TallTed]
to add/change/delete
15:30:58 [TallTed]
15:31:00 [TallTed]
15:31:02 [TallTed]