14:58:37 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-ldp-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-ldp-irc ←
14:58:39 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
14:58:41 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be LDP ←
14:58:41 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot, I see SW_LDP()10:00AM already started ←
14:58:42 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
14:58:42 <trackbot> Date: 25 February 2013
14:59:03 <Zakim> +JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: +JohnArwe ←
14:59:26 <Zakim> +cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri ←
14:59:27 <Zakim> + +1.214.537.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.214.537.aaaa ←
14:59:33 <Zakim> +SteveBattle
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveBattle ←
15:00:00 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
15:00:21 <Arnaud> zakim, who's here?
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who's here? ←
15:00:22 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], JohnArwe, cygri, +1.214.537.aaaa, SteveBattle, Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [IPcaller], JohnArwe, cygri, +1.214.537.aaaa, SteveBattle, Arnaud ←
15:00:22 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, JohnArwe, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed, jmvanel, cody, Ruben, dret, SteveS, betehess, bhyland, bblfish, stevebattle, oberger, Yves, trackbot, sandro, ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, JohnArwe, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed, jmvanel, cody, Ruben, dret, SteveS, betehess, bhyland, bblfish, stevebattle, oberger, Yves, trackbot, sandro, ericP ←
15:00:23 <Zakim> +??P24
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P24 ←
15:00:29 <dret> zakim, IPcaller is me
Erik Wilde: zakim, IPcaller is me ←
15:00:30 <Zakim> +dret; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dret; got it ←
15:00:31 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[OpenLink] ←
15:00:35 <cody> (1 214 537.aaaa is Cody, who hasn't learned to change Zakim's prompt from phone # to name)
Cody Burleson: (1 214 537.aaaa is Cody, who hasn't learned to change Zakim's prompt from phone # to name) ←
15:00:38 <svillata> Zakim, ??P24 is me
Serena Villata: Zakim, ??P24 is me ←
15:00:38 <Zakim> +svillata; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +svillata; got it ←
15:00:43 <TallTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is OpenLink_Software
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, [OpenLink] is OpenLink_Software ←
15:00:43 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software; got it ←
15:00:47 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:00:47 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it ←
15:00:49 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:00:49 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted ←
15:01:21 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
15:01:43 <bblfish> hi, in train from Paris to Amsterdam
Henry Story: hi, in train from Paris to Amsterdam ←
15:02:23 <Arnaud> zakim, who's here?
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who's here? ←
15:02:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see dret, JohnArwe, cygri, +1.214.537.aaaa, SteveBattle, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed (muted), bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see dret, JohnArwe, cygri, +1.214.537.aaaa, SteveBattle, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed (muted), bblfish ←
15:02:25 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, JohnArwe, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed, jmvanel, cody, Ruben, dret, SteveS, betehess, bhyland, bblfish, stevebattle, oberger, Yves, trackbot, sandro, ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see RRSAgent, JohnArwe, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed, jmvanel, cody, Ruben, dret, SteveS, betehess, bhyland, bblfish, stevebattle, oberger, Yves, trackbot, sandro, ericP ←
15:02:30 <JohnArwe> zakim, aaaa is cody
John Arwe: zakim, aaaa is cody ←
15:02:30 <Zakim> +cody; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cody; got it ←
15:02:35 <bblfish> afternoon!
Henry Story: afternoon! ←
15:02:59 <Arnaud> chair: Arnaud
15:03:07 <Arnaud> scribe: svillata
(Scribe set to Serena Villata)
15:03:08 <svillata> scribe: svillata
15:03:15 <bblfish> svillata: you can use this: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/Scribing.html
Serena Villata: you can use this: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/Scribing.html [ Scribe Assist by Henry Story ] ←
15:03:28 <svillata> thanks bblfish
thanks bblfish ←
15:03:37 <dret> +1
Erik Wilde: +1 ←
15:03:46 <svillata> Topic: Approving minutes Feb 18
15:03:54 <svillata> Resolved: Minutes of Feb 18 approved
RESOLVED: Minutes of Feb 18 approved ←
15:04:11 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
15:04:12 <Kalpa> zakim, who is on the phone
Kalpa Gunaratna: zakim, who is on the phone ←
15:04:12 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', Kalpa
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who is on the phone', Kalpa ←
15:04:27 <SteveS> zakim, [IBM] is me
Steve Speicher: zakim, [IBM] is me ←
15:04:27 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it ←
15:04:28 <JohnArwe> zakim, who is on the phone?
John Arwe: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:04:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see dret, JohnArwe, cygri, cody, SteveBattle, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed (muted), bblfish, SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see dret, JohnArwe, cygri, cody, SteveBattle, Arnaud, svillata, TallTed (muted), bblfish, SteveS ←
15:04:32 <svillata> Arnaud: F2F is coming up
Arnaud Le Hors: F2F is coming up ←
15:04:37 <stevebattle> I'll be travelling
Steve Battle: I'll be travelling ←
15:05:08 <stevebattle> ..on the monday before the F2F
Steve Battle: ..on the monday before the F2F ←
15:05:09 <svillata> Arnaud: indicate your participation to F2F meeting
Arnaud Le Hors: indicate your participation to F2F meeting ←
<svillata> Topic: Tracking of issues and actions
15:05:53 <svillata> subtopic: Pending review ISSUE-47
15:05:56 <bblfish> Issue-47?
15:05:56 <trackbot> ISSUE-47 -- publish ontology -- pending review
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-47 -- publish ontology -- pending review ←
15:05:56 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/47
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/47 ←
15:06:07 <Zakim> +??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P31 ←
15:06:44 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P31 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P31 is me ←
15:06:44 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
15:06:48 <svillata> Arnaud: do we want to close ISSUE-47?
Arnaud Le Hors: do we want to close ISSUE-47? ←
15:06:53 <stevebattle> q+
Steve Battle: q+ ←
15:06:55 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:07:00 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:07:13 <bblfish> makes sense to close it if the actions are taken. ( I can't hear much breaks up a lot in the train )
Henry Story: makes sense to close it if the actions are taken. ( I can't hear much breaks up a lot in the train ) ←
15:07:15 <Zakim> +roger
Zakim IRC Bot: +roger ←
15:07:31 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
15:07:59 <Arnaud> ack stevebattle
Arnaud Le Hors: ack stevebattle ←
15:08:11 <cody> Should it not have a date pattern in the URL like most W3C published schemas? How to handle new versions?
Cody Burleson: Should it not have a date pattern in the URL like most W3C published schemas? How to handle new versions? ←
<svillata> stevebattle: afraid publishing the ontology as linked data with hyperlinked classnames etc is overkilling
Steve Battle: afraid publishing the ontology as linked data with hyperlinked classnames etc is overkilling ←
15:08:23 <JohnArwe> arnaud: we now have a turtle document in the cvs ... that seems like linked data "enough"
Arnaud Le Hors: we now have a turtle document in the cvs ... that seems like linked data "enough" [ Scribe Assist by John Arwe ] ←
15:08:53 <JohnArwe> ...expect editors to update ontology based on future resolutions of issues
John Arwe: ...expect editors to update ontology based on future resolutions of issues ←
15:09:07 <TallTed> cody - those date patterns are associated with the start of the WGs, not the schemas
Ted Thibodeau: cody - those date patterns are associated with the start of the WGs, not the schemas ←
15:08:21 <svillata> Resolved: Close ISSUE-47
15:08:21 <trackbot> Closed ISSUE-47 publish ontology.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Closed ISSUE-47 publish ontology. ←
15:09:13 <svillata> Topic: LDP specification and publishing a second draft
15:09:39 <cody> thx
Cody Burleson: thx ←
15:10:07 <svillata> Arnaud: we have to discuss what we think we need to do for publishing the second draft
Arnaud Le Hors: we have to discuss what we think we need to do for publishing the second draft ←
15:10:21 <TallTed> TallTed has changed the topic to: Linked Data Platform WG -- http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/ -- current agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.02.25
Ted Thibodeau: TallTed has changed the topic to: Linked Data Platform WG -- http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/ -- current agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.02.25 ←
15:10:30 <JohnArwe> q+
15:10:31 <svillata> ... what do the editors need to publish a second draft?
... what do the editors need to publish a second draft? ←
15:10:41 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:11:24 <svillata> SteveS: pretty good shape wrt the resolved issues
Steve Speicher: pretty good shape wrt the resolved issues ←
15:11:39 <Zakim> -nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: -nmihindu ←
15:11:41 <Zakim> +??P29
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P29 ←
15:11:56 <krp> zakim, ??P29 is me
Kevin Page: zakim, ??P29 is me ←
15:11:56 <Zakim> +krp; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +krp; got it ←
15:12:07 <Zakim> +??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P31 ←
15:12:17 <svillata> Arnaud: how are we doing with regard to linking all the issues from the spec?
Arnaud Le Hors: how are we doing with regard to linking all the issues from the spec? ←
<svillata> steves: as of last week the spec was up to date so that shouldn't be a problem
Steve Speicher: as of last week the spec was up to date so that shouldn't be a problem ←
15:13:46 <Zakim> -??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P31 ←
15:13:50 <bblfish> concerning draft is the relative urls resolved?
Henry Story: concerning draft is the relative urls resolved? ←
15:14:09 <svillata> Arnaud: would be good to have a week to review the spec?
Arnaud Le Hors: would be good to have a week to review the spec? ←
15:14:13 <SteveS> bblfish: it is an open action, minor update we can do
Henry Story: it is an open action, minor update we can do [ Scribe Assist by Steve Speicher ] ←
15:14:16 <Zakim> +??P31
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P31 ←
15:14:38 <stevebattle> I'm happy to be transparent and publish internally and externally simultaneously.
Steve Battle: I'm happy to be transparent and publish internally and externally simultaneously. ←
15:14:49 <svillata> ... start review, and for March 11 decide whether to publish it
... start review, and for March 11 decide whether to publish it ←
15:15:05 <Arnaud> q?
Arnaud Le Hors: q? ←
15:15:12 <Arnaud> ack john
Arnaud Le Hors: ack john ←
15:15:13 <SteveS> q+
Steve Speicher: q+ ←
15:15:17 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P31 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P31 is me ←
15:15:17 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
15:15:20 <Arnaud> ack steve
Arnaud Le Hors: ack steve ←
15:17:17 <svillata> Arnaud: maybe next week spec will be in a good shape, and we can decide then whether to publish it
Arnaud Le Hors: maybe next week spec will be in a good shape, and we can decide then whether to publish it ←
15:19:44 <stevebattle> q+
Steve Battle: q+ ←
<svillata> Topic: Open Issues
15:20:29 <svillata> subtopic: Composition vs Aggregation ontology (related to ISSUE-34)
15:21:03 <svillata> JohnArwe: the ontology itself is subject to change
John Arwe: the ontology itself is subject to change ←
15:21:06 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
15:21:11 <SteveS> Think this is more narrowly issue-32 and somewhat a part of it
Steve Speicher: Think this is more narrowly ISSUE-32 and somewhat a part of it ←
15:21:18 <Arnaud> ack stevebattle
Arnaud Le Hors: ack stevebattle ←
15:21:59 <svillata> stevebattle: issue-34 brings to an ontology about aggregation and composition
Steve Battle: ISSUE-34 brings to an ontology about aggregation and composition ←
15:22:30 <Zakim> -nmihindu
Zakim IRC Bot: -nmihindu ←
15:23:00 <Zakim> +??P28
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P28 ←
15:23:21 <JohnArwe> ashok's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Feb/0014.html item 2
John Arwe: ashok's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Feb/0014.html item 2 ←
15:23:34 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P28 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P28 is me ←
15:23:34 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
15:23:49 <svillata> Arnaud: proposal now is to have two subclasses for composition and aggregation
Arnaud Le Hors: proposal now is to have two subclasses for composition and aggregation ←
15:24:46 <svillata> ... container is a useful notion independently from aggregation/composition
... container is a useful notion independently from aggregation/composition ←
15:25:03 <SteveS> q+
Steve Speicher: q+ ←
15:25:28 <svillata> ... we are discussing how many classes to define, which properties
... we are discussing how many classes to define, which properties ←
15:25:29 <Arnaud> ack steves
Arnaud Le Hors: ack steves ←
15:26:19 <roger> q+
Roger Menday: q+ ←
15:26:21 <stevebattle> q+
Steve Battle: q+ ←
15:26:27 <Arnaud> ack roger
Arnaud Le Hors: ack roger ←
15:26:49 <svillata> ISSUE-34?
15:26:49 <trackbot> ISSUE-34 -- Adding and removing arcs in weak aggregation -- closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-34 -- Adding and removing arcs in weak aggregation -- closed ←
15:26:49 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/34
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/34 ←
15:27:07 <Arnaud> ack stevebattle
Arnaud Le Hors: ack stevebattle ←
15:27:28 <svillata> stevebattle: important to make a distinction in the ontology
Steve Battle: important to make a distinction in the ontology ←
15:28:50 <Arnaud> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Feb/0115.html
Arnaud Le Hors: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Feb/0115.html ←
15:29:09 <roger> It would be good to get feedback from Richard about issue 34 (because he originally raised the issue).
Roger Menday: It would be good to get feedback from Richard about ISSUE-34 (because he originally raised the issue). ←
15:29:16 <svillata> Arnaud: email JohnArwe sent out on Friday with a proposal
Arnaud Le Hors: email JohnArwe sent out on Friday with a proposal ←
15:29:50 <JohnArwe> SteveB: as long as real behavioral difference, happy to have different classes in ontology
Steve Battle: as long as real behavioral difference, happy to have different classes in ontology [ Scribe Assist by John Arwe ] ←
15:29:52 <SteveS> roger: I believe cygri opened on behalf of us at F2F1…but would be good to get feedback, not arguing that
Roger Menday: I believe cygri opened on behalf of us at F2F1…but would be good to get feedback, not arguing that [ Scribe Assist by Steve Speicher ] ←
15:30:56 <svillata> Proposed: adopting ontology proposed by JohnArwe (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Feb/0115.html)
PROPOSED: adopting ontology proposed by JohnArwe (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Feb/0115.html) ←
15:30:57 <Zakim> +bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish ←
15:31:06 <stevebattle> +1
Steve Battle: +1 ←
15:31:24 <SteveS> +1
Steve Speicher: +1 ←
15:32:06 <stevebattle> No - they have different deletion behaviour.
Steve Battle: No - they have different deletion behaviour. ←
15:32:21 <svillata> cygri: reading the ontology I have no idea of what the difference is
Richard Cyganiak: reading the ontology I have no idea of what the difference is ←
15:32:52 <JohnArwe> @cygri: the example in the email ontology is (as resolved in 34) currently the only difference between them.
John Arwe: @cygri: the example in the email ontology is (as resolved in 34) currently the only difference between them. ←
15:32:52 <TallTed> I'd suggest changing :Aggregation to :aggregateContainer and :Composition to :compositeContainer
Ted Thibodeau: I'd suggest changing :Aggregation to :aggregateContainer and :Composition to :compositeContainer ←
15:33:17 <stevebattle> That sounds a bit verbose to me.
Steve Battle: That sounds a bit verbose to me. ←
15:33:21 <svillata> Arnaud: when you delete the container, different behaviors about the deletion of the resources it contains
Arnaud Le Hors: when you delete the container, different behaviors about the deletion of the resources it contains ←
15:33:27 <stevebattle> It's going to be used a lot
Steve Battle: It's going to be used a lot ←
15:33:41 <TallTed> but otherwise I'm OK with the suggested change *as a start* ... I agree with cygri that the specific differences in behavior must be explicitly noted.
Ted Thibodeau: but otherwise I'm OK with the suggested change *as a start* ... I agree with cygri that the specific differences in behavior must be explicitly noted. ←
15:34:27 <Zakim> +??P33
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P33 ←
15:34:52 <bblfish> back in new train
Henry Story: back in new train ←
15:34:56 <svillata> cygri: having two subclasses which differ only for a sentence does not make sense, my feeling is that just using the super-class would be sufficient
Richard Cyganiak: having two subclasses which differ only for a sentence does not make sense, my feeling is that just using the super-class would be sufficient ←
15:35:19 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P33 is me
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P33 is me ←
15:35:19 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it ←
15:35:33 <svillata> Arnaud: think richard is suggesting parent is aggregation and the subclass is the composition
Arnaud Le Hors: think richard is suggesting parent is aggregation and the subclass is the composition ←
15:35:54 <bblfish> the question I would have is what happens when something is changed from an Aggregation to a Container, especially concerning the members.
Henry Story: the question I would have is what happens when something is changed from an Aggregation to a Container, especially concerning the members. ←
15:35:59 <svillata> cygri: members may continue to exist is not a constraint
Richard Cyganiak: members may continue to exist is not a constraint ←
15:36:15 <svillata> ... it doen't commit the server
... it doen't commit the server ←
15:36:20 <Arnaud> q?
Arnaud Le Hors: q? ←
15:36:22 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:36:25 <bblfish> q+
Henry Story: q+ ←
15:36:25 <TallTed> q+
Ted Thibodeau: q+ ←
15:36:31 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:36:34 <bblfish> please see my question above:
Henry Story: please see my question above: ←
15:36:35 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:36:35 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted ←
15:37:06 <svillata> Arnaud: how do we insert this aggregation concept?
Arnaud Le Hors: how do we insert this aggregation concept? ←
15:37:17 <Arnaud> q?
Arnaud Le Hors: q? ←
15:37:19 <bblfish> please see above
Henry Story: please see above ←
15:37:23 <bblfish> the question I would have is what happens when something is changed from an Aggregation to a Container, especially concerning the members.
Henry Story: the question I would have is what happens when something is changed from an Aggregation to a Container, especially concerning the members. ←
15:37:45 <stevebattle> q+
Steve Battle: q+ ←
15:38:08 <bblfish> ack me
Henry Story: ack me ←
15:38:20 <JohnArwe> I don't know if we'd allow a change in container behavior dynamically... new conversation?
John Arwe: I don't know if we'd allow a change in container behavior dynamically... new conversation? ←
15:38:24 <Arnaud> ack TallTed
Arnaud Le Hors: ack TallTed ←
15:38:26 <roger> that (in my opinion) is a very dodgy thing
Roger Menday: that (in my opinion) is a very dodgy thing ←
15:38:40 <svillata> SteveS: we can open an issue and address the question of bblfish
Steve Speicher: we can open an issue and address the question of bblfish ←
15:39:20 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:39:29 <bblfish> my guess is that this will only work if you add a :contains relation
Henry Story: my guess is that this will only work if you add a :contains relation ←
15:39:48 <svillata> Arnaud: we have to make concrete proposals
Arnaud Le Hors: we have to make concrete proposals ←
15:39:50 <Arnaud> ack stevebattle
Arnaud Le Hors: ack stevebattle ←
15:39:57 <JohnArwe> Ted: if (in the end) there is no behavioral difference between Container and AggregateContainer, would you like cygri want to collapse them?
John Arwe: Question for Ted: if (in the end) there is no behavioral difference between Container and AggregateContainer, would you like cygri want to collapse them? ←
15:40:12 <svillata> stevebattle: cygri's proposal appealing
Steve Battle: cygri's proposal appealing ←
15:40:23 <JohnArwe> s/Ted:/Question for Ted:/
15:40:54 <svillata> Arnaud: changing container to something else change the spec quite a lot, John's proposal is trying to minimize the change
Arnaud Le Hors: changing container to something else changesthe spec quite a lot, John's proposal is trying to minimize the change ←
15:41:05 <stevebattle> In OOD, composition is not (typically) a subclass of aggregation. They're commonly subclasses of association.
Steve Battle: In OOD, composition is not (typically) a subclass of aggregation. They're commonly subclasses of association. ←
15:41:16 <Arnaud> q?
Arnaud Le Hors: q? ←
15:41:20 <svillata> s/change /changes
15:42:00 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:42:18 <stevebattle> Isn't Container an abstract superclass that is useful for property definitions?
Steve Battle: Isn't Container an abstract superclass that is useful for property definitions? ←
15:42:46 <svillata> TallTed: propose to use aggregate containers and composite containers
Ted Thibodeau: propose to use aggregate containers and composite containers ←
15:43:07 <svillata> ... superclass Container
... superclass Container ←
15:43:17 <sandro> q+ to ask a naive question (can't we just use URLs?)
Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask a naive question (can't we just use URLs?) ←
15:43:18 <SteveS> stevebattle: agree, we can multi-type if we even wanted to say it is a ldp:Container and a ldp:Aggregation
Steve Battle: agree, we can multi-type if we even wanted to say it is a ldp:Container and a ldp:Aggregation [ Scribe Assist by Steve Speicher ] ←
15:43:29 <SteveS> q+
Steve Speicher: q+ ←
15:43:33 <stevebattle> Yes - agreed that Aggregation and Composition are mutually exclusive classes.
Steve Battle: Yes - agreed that Aggregation and Composition are mutually exclusive classes. ←
15:43:35 <Arnaud> q?
Arnaud Le Hors: q? ←
15:43:44 <svillata> TallTed: proposal to change aggregation VS composition into aggregate containers/composite containers
Ted Thibodeau: proposal to change aggregation VS composition into aggregate containers/composite containers ←
15:43:44 <Arnaud> ack sandro
Arnaud Le Hors: ack sandro ←
15:43:44 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask a naive question (can't we just use URLs?)
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask a naive question (can't we just use URLs?) ←
<svillata> sandro: after weeks of discussion we still don't seem to have a resolution, so why not instead rely on the structure of the URLs to determine whether member resources should be deleted or not?
Sandro Hawke: after weeks of discussion we still don't seem to have a resolution, so why not instead rely on the structure of the URLs to determine whether member resources should be deleted or not? ←
15:44:25 <stevebattle> I proposed that at the last F2F and got voted down :)
Steve Battle: I proposed that at the last F2F and got voted down :) ←
15:44:28 <bblfish> I think it is an interesting idea
Henry Story: I think it is an interesting idea ←
15:44:31 <Arnaud> ack steves
Arnaud Le Hors: ack steves ←
<svillata> steves: this would go against the opacity principle
Steve Speicher: this would go against the opacity principle ←
15:44:51 <bblfish> I was going to propose that urls ending in / are LDPCs
Henry Story: I was going to propose that urls ending in / are LDPCs ←
15:45:09 <Ruben> mmm, I don't like "urls ending in"
Ruben Verborgh: mmm, I don't like "urls ending in" ←
15:45:16 <Ruben> should be opaque
Ruben Verborgh: should be opaque ←
15:45:18 <bblfish> we spoke about this at the last F2F, but since then I have changed my mind.
Henry Story: we spoke about this at the last F2F, but since then I have changed my mind. ←
15:46:02 <bblfish> Ruben, URLs are opaque as far as emantics goes, but in fact the URI spec does give / a special significance
Henry Story: Ruben, URLs are opaque as far as semantics goes, but in fact the URI spec does give / a special significance ←
15:46:09 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:46:14 <bblfish> s/emantics/semantics/
15:46:22 <Arnaud> ack cygri
Arnaud Le Hors: ack cygri ←
15:46:44 <svillata> cygri: think one issue that was discussed at F2F1 and that led us to where we are was the idea of using the url structure to indicate composition
Richard Cyganiak: think one issue that was discussed at F2F1 and that led us to where we are was the idea of using the url structure to indicate composition ←
15:47:22 <svillata> ... can't give any special semantics to the relations to keep the implementation really simple
... can't give any special semantics to the relations to keep the implementation really simple ←
15:47:56 <stevebattle> q+
Steve Battle: q+ ←
15:47:59 <sandro> I see that, but I don't find that compelling, giving the simplicity provided.
Sandro Hawke: I see that, but I don't find that compelling, giving the simplicity provided. ←
15:48:09 <svillata> q?
q? ←
15:48:41 <Arnaud> ack stevebattle
Arnaud Le Hors: ack stevebattle ←
15:49:26 <sandro> I probably voted against stevebattle at the F2F, but now that I see how long we've spent trying to figure this out, I lean more toward simplicity.
Sandro Hawke: I probably voted against stevebattle at the F2F, but now that I see how long we've spent trying to figure this out, I lean more toward simplicity. ←
15:49:43 <bblfish> I can make a proposal
Henry Story: I can make a proposal ←
15:49:44 <svillata> stevebattle: is it possible to re-open the issue?
Steve Battle: is it possible to re-open the issue? ←
15:49:52 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
15:50:02 <SteveS> q+
Steve Speicher: q+ ←
15:50:14 <svillata> Arnaud: possible but better to re-open issues when new information comes
Arnaud Le Hors: possible but better to re-open issues when new information comes ←
15:50:14 <bblfish> stevebattle: I have an idea on how to do this in a way that is uncontroversial
Steve Battle: I have an idea on how to do this in a way that is uncontroversial [ Scribe Assist by Henry Story ] ←
15:50:19 <Arnaud> ack sandro
Arnaud Le Hors: ack sandro ←
15:50:19 <sandro> q-
Sandro Hawke: q- ←
15:50:26 <Arnaud> ack steves
Arnaud Le Hors: ack steves ←
15:50:28 <bblfish> ro was that Sandro
Henry Story: ro was that Sandro ←
15:50:58 <stevebattle> An aggregate could generate URIs at the same level at the aggregation.
Steve Battle: An aggregate could generate URIs at the same level at the aggregation. ←
15:51:15 <sandro> sandro: I think it might be new information that this is so hard to us to figure out.
Sandro Hawke: I think it might be new information that this is so hard to us to figure out. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:51:21 <stevebattle> They wouldn't be nested below the Aggregation
Steve Battle: They wouldn't be nested below the Aggregation ←
15:51:42 <stevebattle> ..In the URI structure
Steve Battle: ..In the URI structure ←
15:51:53 <JohnArwe> I think Sandro was proposing that "if the URL is structured ..., then the client Knows the behavior is delete (or not) members."
John Arwe: I think Sandro was proposing that "if the URL is structured ..., then the client Knows the behavior is delete (or not) members." ←
15:52:07 <SteveS> I think we are arguing over minor details of class hierarchy and not fundamental behavioral difference
Steve Speicher: I think we are arguing over minor details of class hierarchy and not fundamental behavioral differences ←
15:52:09 <bblfish> sandro, we should get together on this.
Henry Story: sandro, we should get together on this. ←
15:52:19 <sandro> yes, JohnArwe
Sandro Hawke: yes, JohnArwe ←
15:52:23 <SteveS> s/difference/differences/
15:52:39 <Arnaud> proposed: use John's proposed ontology with Aggregation renamed as AggregateContainer, Composition as CompositeContainer, and better documentation
PROPOSED: use John's proposed ontology with Aggregation renamed as AggregateContainer, Composition as CompositeContainer, and better documentation ←
15:52:45 <svillata> Arnaud: TallTed proposal from JohnArwe proposal
Arnaud Le Hors: TallTed proposal from JohnArwe proposal ←
15:52:50 <sandro> in fact -- I probably shouldn't be in the lead or critical path for this
Sandro Hawke: in fact -- I probably shouldn't be in the lead or critical path for this ←
15:53:07 <stevebattle> +0 (not convinced about the long names)
Steve Battle: +0 (not convinced about the long names) ←
15:53:18 <svillata> Arnaud: how do we feel with TallTed's proposal?
Arnaud Le Hors: how do we feel with TallTed's proposal? ←
15:53:20 <TallTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
15:53:21 <JohnArwe> When we talk about URL structures yielding client assumptions, we'd be making it harder for any existing implementations to comply.
John Arwe: When we talk about URL structures yielding client assumptions, we'd be making it harder for any existing implementations to comply. ←
15:53:30 <SteveS> +0 (I go back to my +1 for JohnArwe's proposal)
Steve Speicher: +0 (I go back to my +1 for JohnArwe's proposal) ←
15:53:40 <roger> +0
Roger Menday: +0 ←
15:53:48 <sandro> +0
Sandro Hawke: +0 ←
15:53:51 <JohnArwe> +1 (rename things at will - I hate arguing over them, you'll win all the time )
John Arwe: +1 (rename things at will - I hate arguing over them, you'll win all the time ) ←
15:53:59 <cody> +0
Cody Burleson: +0 ←
15:54:01 <svillata> +1
+1 ←
15:54:08 <cygri> -0 not convinced that aggregate is needed. ted's names are an improvement
Richard Cyganiak: -0 not convinced that aggregate is needed. ted's names are an improvement ←
15:54:23 <nmihindu> +0
Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +0 ←
15:54:36 <stevebattle> vote on the original proposal?
Steve Battle: vote on the original proposal? ←
15:54:39 <svillata> Arnaud: we don't seem to have consensus
Arnaud Le Hors: we don't seem to have consensus ←
15:54:56 <dret> +/-0
Erik Wilde: +/-0 ←
<svillata> TallTed: I think we do, nobody has voted against it
Ted Thibodeau: I think we do, nobody has voted against it ←
15:54:59 <Zakim> -bblfish
Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish ←
15:55:17 <svillata> Arnaud: JohnArwe proposal?
Arnaud Le Hors: JohnArwe proposal? ←
15:55:49 <stevebattle> +1 (use namespaces for disambiguation)
Steve Battle: +1 (use namespaces for disambiguation) ←
15:56:52 <stevebattle> I prefer the shorter local names - we don't need to append 'Container'
Steve Battle: I prefer the shorter local names - we don't need to append 'Container' ←
15:56:56 <svillata> TallTed: what do you mean stevebattle as using namespaces for disambiguation?
Ted Thibodeau: what do you mean stevebattle as using namespaces for disambiguation? ←
15:57:24 <stevebattle> yez
Steve Battle: yes ←
15:57:52 <stevebattle> s/z/s/
15:58:56 <Arnaud> resolved: Go with John's proposal amended by Ted
RESOLVED: Go with John's proposal amended by Ted ←
15:58:21 <svillata> subTopic: LDP model section
16:00:59 <svillata> Arnaud: maybe we should leave to the editors to choose among the two proposals
Arnaud Le Hors: maybe we should leave to the editors to choose among the two proposals ←
16:01:23 <Zakim> -cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri ←
16:01:30 <stevebattle> q+
Steve Battle: q+ ←
16:01:39 <Arnaud> ack stevebattle
Arnaud Le Hors: ack stevebattle ←
16:02:03 <svillata> stevebattle: the two proposals are materially the same, but I prefer Henry's proposal
Steve Battle: the two proposals are materially the same, but I prefer Henry's proposal ←
16:02:22 <dret> yeah, that was just a proposal.
Erik Wilde: yeah, that was just a proposal. ←
16:02:36 <svillata> Arnaud: do we have any text to put in the second draft of the spec?
Arnaud Le Hors: do we have any text to put in the second draft of the spec? ←
16:02:38 <dret> no complete text yet, but i can take an action for that.
Erik Wilde: no complete text yet, but i can take an action for that. ←
16:03:48 <SteveS> agree that editors can take the pen, using the feedback that is there now
Steve Speicher: agree that editors can take the pen, using the feedback that is there now ←
16:03:55 <svillata> dret: we can write a complete section
Erik Wilde: we can write a complete section ←
16:04:12 <dret> in that case, can i have an action?
Erik Wilde: in that case, can i have an action? ←
16:04:41 <Zakim> -SteveS
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS ←
16:04:41 <svillata> ACTION: dret to create complete section
ACTION: dret to create complete section ←
16:04:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-38 - Create complete section [on Erik Wilde - due 2013-03-04].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-38 - Create complete section [on Erik Wilde - due 2013-03-04]. ←
<svillata> Arnaud: Meeting adjourned
Arnaud Le Hors: Meeting adjourned ←
16:04:43 <Zakim> -roger
Zakim IRC Bot: -roger ←
16:04:45 <stevebattle> Thanks, bye.
Steve Battle: Thanks, bye. ←
16:04:49 <dret> thanks everybody!
Erik Wilde: thanks everybody! ←
16:04:52 <Zakim> -cody
Zakim IRC Bot: -cody ←
16:04:53 <Zakim> -TallTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed ←
16:04:53 <Zakim> -SteveBattle
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveBattle ←
16:04:54 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
16:04:56 <Zakim> -svillata
Zakim IRC Bot: -svillata ←
16:04:56 <Zakim> -dret
Zakim IRC Bot: -dret ←
16:04:56 <cody> One question
Cody Burleson: One question ←
16:04:57 <Zakim> -krp
Zakim IRC Bot: -krp ←
16:04:57 <Zakim> -JohnArwe
Zakim IRC Bot: -JohnArwe ←
16:05:03 <cody> regarding the face to face coming up
Cody Burleson: regarding the face to face coming up ←
16:05:20 <JohnArwe> what's your q cody?
John Arwe: what's your q cody? ←
16:05:34 <cody> The line opens at 2:00 AM - 12:00 PM Boston time.
Cody Burleson: The line opens at 2:00 AM - 12:00 PM Boston time. ←
16:05:44 <cody> Is this because of overseas participation?
Cody Burleson: Is this because of overseas participation? ←
16:05:55 <cody> And is that the actual meeting start/end time?
Cody Burleson: And is that the actual meeting start/end time? ←
16:06:02 <JohnArwe> probably - and probably copied from F2F1
John Arwe: probably - and probably copied from F2F1 ←
16:06:34 <JohnArwe> ...when it was in France. Usually they run 8 (or later) to 5 (or later) local time.
John Arwe: ...when it was in France. Usually they run 8 (or later) to 5 (or later) local time. ←
16:07:19 <cody> Just seems like a face to face hosted in the U.S. would require the overseas participants to join at the odd times.
Cody Burleson: Just seems like a face to face hosted in the U.S. would require the overseas participants to join at the odd times. ←
16:07:26 <JohnArwe> Eric P one of the staff contacts made the arrangements - suggest email the list so he'll see your q and respond.
John Arwe: Eric P one of the staff contacts made the arrangements - suggest email the list so he'll see your q and respond. ←
16:07:59 <cody> OK. Thx.
Cody Burleson: OK. Thx. ←
16:08:19 <JohnArwe> the assumption is most participants will be local, so local time is "it". I can attest to the effect you describe (I was in NY during the Lyon F2F)
John Arwe: the assumption is most participants will be local, so local time is "it". I can attest to the effect you describe (I was in NY during the Lyon F2F) ←
16:09:32 <JohnArwe> ...local time also tends to dictate when rooms can be booked, when meals are available (espec in a case like F2F2 when it appears there will be no sponsors so lunch is a "go out and get it" thing)
John Arwe: ...local time also tends to dictate when rooms can be booked, when meals are available (espec in a case like F2F2 when it appears there will be no sponsors so lunch is a "go out and get it" thing) ←
16:10:20 <cody> I still think I am confused. 2:00 AM to start a meeting in the U.S.?
Cody Burleson: I still think I am confused. 2:00 AM to start a meeting in the U.S.? ←
16:10:31 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, nmihindu, in SW_LDP()10:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, nmihindu, in SW_LDP()10:00AM ←
16:10:32 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended ←
16:10:32 <Zakim> Attendees were JohnArwe, cygri, +1.214.537.aaaa, SteveBattle, Arnaud, dret, svillata, TallTed, bblfish, cody, SteveS, nmihindu, roger, Sandro, krp
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were JohnArwe, cygri, +1.214.537.aaaa, SteveBattle, Arnaud, dret, svillata, TallTed, bblfish, cody, SteveS, nmihindu, roger, Sandro, krp ←
16:11:07 <Arnaud> hmm, I wish I knew who was 1.214.537.aaaa
Arnaud Le Hors: hmm, I wish I knew who was 1.214.537.aaaa ←
16:11:17 <cody> That is Cody
Cody Burleson: That is Cody ←
16:11:23 <Arnaud> ah, thanks
Arnaud Le Hors: ah, thanks ←
16:11:32 <cody> I do not know yet how to tell Zakim to use my name
Cody Burleson: I do not know yet how to tell Zakim to use my name ←
16:11:39 <Arnaud> zakim is supposed to learn over time
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim is supposed to learn over time ←
16:12:00 <Arnaud> zakim, aaaa is cody
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, aaaa is cody ←
16:12:00 <Zakim> sorry, Arnaud, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Arnaud, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa' ←
16:12:15 <sandro> 214 537 is appears to be Richardson, TX
Sandro Hawke: 214 537 is appears to be Richardson, TX ←
16:12:17 <sandro> dunno if that helps.
Sandro Hawke: dunno if that helps. ←
16:12:41 <cody> Someone already said "zakim aaaa is cody", so maybe that is why the statement no longer works
Cody Burleson: Someone already said "zakim aaaa is cody", so maybe that is why the statement no longer works ←
16:12:43 <Arnaud> cody is saying it's him
Arnaud Le Hors: cody is saying it's him ←
16:13:02 <sandro> ah. i'm slow.
Sandro Hawke: ah. i'm slow. ←
16:13:39 <Arnaud> I think it's because the call is over
Arnaud Le Hors: I think it's because the call is over ←
16:13:51 <Arnaud> zakim, +aaaa is cody
Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, +aaaa is cody ←
16:13:51 <Zakim> sorry, Arnaud, I do not recognize a party named '+aaaa'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Arnaud, I do not recognize a party named '+aaaa' ←
16:13:55 <Arnaud> right
Arnaud Le Hors: right ←
16:14:21 <Arnaud> it's ok I can fix the minutes to reflect it anyway
Arnaud Le Hors: it's ok I can fix the minutes to reflect it anyway ←
16:14:39 <cody> Thx.
Cody Burleson: Thx. ←
16:15:29 <JohnArwe> arnaud your transcript should show that we attributed aaaa to cody in zakim Very Shortly after he joined. he said he did not know how to do so, so I did it.
John Arwe: arnaud your transcript should show that we attributed aaaa to cody in zakim Very Shortly after he joined. he said he did not know how to do so, so I did it. ←
16:15:50 <Arnaud> ok
Arnaud Le Hors: ok ←
16:16:10 <JohnArwe> remember that zakim for attendees unions them all together. I forget if the minuting script collapsing resolved aliases or not.
John Arwe: remember that zakim for attendees unions them all together. I forget if the minuting script collapsing resolved aliases or not. ←
16:18:06 <JohnArwe> cody, wrt to the 0200 start that is Very Likely wrong, copied from Lyon (where 0800 CET would be 0200 ET)
John Arwe: cody, wrt to the 0200 start that is Very Likely wrong, copied from Lyon (where 0800 CET would be 0200 ET) ←
16:19:01 <JohnArwe> ...hence: email to list on it. EricP presumably will then check whatever he booked at MIT and make Zakim's times align, then reflect that on the page (correctly)
John Arwe: ...hence: email to list on it. EricP presumably will then check whatever he booked at MIT and make Zakim's times align, then reflect that on the page (correctly) ←
16:19:12 <cody> OK
Cody Burleson: OK ←
16:19:28 <cody> Is there a private list email? I seem to only have the public-ldp@
Cody Burleson: Is there a private list email? I seem to only have the public-ldp@ ←
16:20:38 <sandro> The charter says the group will work in public, so that's the main list. There is also member-ldp-wg for confidentail stuff like phone numbers, but that's rarely used.
Sandro Hawke: The charter says the group will work in public, so that's the main list. There is also member-ldp-wg for confidentail stuff like phone numbers, but that's rarely used. ←
16:20:39 <Arnaud> there are two lists: public-ldp and public-ldp-wg
Arnaud Le Hors: there are two lists: public-ldp and public-ldp-wg ←
16:20:50 <JohnArwe> all our emails are public. there is another list (public) for non-members to append to if needed.
John Arwe: all our emails are public. there is another list (public) for non-members to append to if needed. ←
16:20:56 <sandro> (and you are on member-ldp.wg too.)
Sandro Hawke: (and you are on member-ldp.wg too.) ←
16:21:00 <cody> Ok- got it. Thanks!
Cody Burleson: Ok- got it. Thanks! ←
16:21:59 <Arnaud> as a member you can post to either list
Arnaud Le Hors: as a member you can post to either list ←
16:22:03 <JohnArwe> cody: you in vegas next week?
Cody Burleson: you in vegas next week? [ Scribe Assist by John Arwe ] ←
16:22:14 <Arnaud> non members can subscribe to both but only post to public-ldp
Arnaud Le Hors: non members can subscribe to both but only post to public-ldp ←
16:24:44 <cody> No. I'm in Dallas/Fort Worth next week. Was unaware of Vegas. (Sorry, I am just really, really green at this).
Cody Burleson: No. I'm in Dallas/Fort Worth next week. Was unaware of Vegas. (Sorry, I am just really, really green at this). ←
16:25:25 <cody> What is going on in Las Vegas? IBM conf?
Cody Burleson: What is going on in Las Vegas? IBM conf? ←
16:25:29 <JohnArwe> cody: (2) I also see you posed a question in IRC that may have been missed. Short answer on dates is that the month/year gets added very close to the end, because they are taken from the date it hits Rec. Until then all ns values we own should be thought of as provisional.
Cody Burleson: (2) I also see you posed a question in IRC that may have been missed. Short answer on dates is that the month/year gets added very close to the end, because they are taken from the date it hits Rec. Until then all ns values we own should be thought of as provisional. [ Scribe Assist by John Arwe ] ←
16:26:02 <JohnArwe> cody: (1) yeah Pulse Conf. if you were going to be there would be an opp for F2F meeting was the thought. NP.
Cody Burleson: (1) yeah Pulse Conf. if you were going to be there would be an opp for F2F meeting was the thought. NP. [ Scribe Assist by John Arwe ] ←
16:27:13 <cody> Got it on the URL. Thanks. And enjoy the conference!
Cody Burleson: Got it on the URL. Thanks. And enjoy the conference! ←
16:27:36 <JohnArwe> cody: (2) ...also the email contents were an excerpt; in the ttl file in mercurial the ns we're using for now is <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.
Cody Burleson: (2) ...also the email contents were an excerpt; in the ttl file in mercurial the ns we're using for now is <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>. [ Scribe Assist by John Arwe ] ←
Formatted by CommonScribe