edit

Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 18 November 2013

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.11.18
Seen
Alexandre Bertails, Arnaud Le Hors, Ashok Malhotra, Cody Burleson, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Henry Story, John Arwe, Nandana Mihindukulasooriya, Reza B'Far, Roger Menday, Steve Speicher, Ted Thibodeau
Chair
Arnaud Le Hors
Scribe
Roger Menday
IRC Log
Original
Resolutions
  1. Minutes of November 11 approved link
  2. Leave the MAYs unchanged. This specifically concerns: first, last, and prev links. link
  3. Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81. link
  4. Close ISSUE-88 by making ldp:created mandatory when ldp:insertedContentRelation is different from ldp:MemberSubject link
  5. Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to do nothing: if the server allows the modification, it is up to the server to decide whether any other changes should be made. link
  6. Extend calls by 30mn until we hit 2nd LC link
Topics
15:00:31 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has  joined #ldp

RRSAgent IRC Bot: RRSAgent has joined #ldp

15:00:31 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/11/18-ldp-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/11/18-ldp-irc

15:00:33 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public

15:00:35 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be LDP

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, thI will be LDP

15:00:35 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start now

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_LDP()10:00AM scheduled to start now

15:00:36 <trackbot> Meeting: Linked Data Platform (LDP) Working Group Teleconference
15:00:36 <trackbot> Date: 18 November 2013
15:00:41 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has now started

15:00:48 <Zakim> +Arnaud

Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud

15:00:51 <Zakim> +JohnArwe

Zakim IRC Bot: +JohnArwe

15:01:12 <Zakim> +??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0

15:01:36 <Zakim> -??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P0

15:02:09 <Zakim> +??P3

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3

15:02:41 <Zakim> -??P3

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P3

15:02:46 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra

Zakim IRC Bot: +Ashok_Malhotra

15:02:48 <Zakim> +Alexandre

Zakim IRC Bot: +Alexandre

15:03:02 <Zakim> +[IBM]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM]

15:03:06 <Zakim> +Roger

Zakim IRC Bot: +Roger

15:03:13 <SteveS> Zakim, [IBM] is me

Steve Speicher: Zakim, [IBM] is me

15:03:13 <Zakim> +SteveS; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveS; got it

15:03:28 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software

Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software

15:03:33 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

15:03:33 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it

15:03:35 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

15:03:35 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted

15:03:51 <Zakim> +??P10

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10

15:03:53 <Zakim> +bblfish

Zakim IRC Bot: +bblfish

15:04:19 <bblfish> hi

Henry Story: hi

15:04:27 <JohnArwe> not hearing you verbally

John Arwe: not hearing you verbally

15:04:56 <TallTed> Zakim, who's here?

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's here?

15:04:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see Arnaud, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Roger, TallTed (muted), ??P10, bblfish

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Arnaud, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Roger, TallTed (muted), ??P10, bblfish

15:04:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see roger, bblfish, JohnArwe, Zakim, RRSAgent, Ashok, TallTed, betehess, bhyland, nmihindu, jmvanel, SteveS, thschee, davidwood, Arnaud, trackbot, Yves, sandro, ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see roger, bblfish, JohnArwe, Zakim, RRSAgent, Ashok, TallTed, betehess, bhyland, nmihindu, jmvanel, SteveS, thschee, davidwood, Arnaud, trackbot, Yves, sandro, ericP

15:05:11 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?

Arnaud Le Hors: zakim, who's on the phone?

15:05:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see Arnaud, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Roger, TallTed (muted), ??P10, bblfish

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Arnaud, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, SteveS, Roger, TallTed (muted), ??P10, bblfish

15:05:39 <Zakim> -??P10

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P10

15:06:09 <Zakim> +stevebattle7

Zakim IRC Bot: +stevebattle7

15:06:25 <Zakim> +??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13

15:06:35 <ericP> Zakim, stevebattle7 is temporarily ericP

Eric Prud'hommeaux: Zakim, stevebattle7 is temporarily ericP

15:06:35 <Zakim> +ericP; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +ericP; got it

15:07:53 <TallTed> sorry, local interrupt

Ted Thibodeau: sorry, local interrupt

15:07:54 <Zakim> -??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P13

15:08:07 <TallTed> interrupt persists...

Ted Thibodeau: interrupt persists...

15:08:59 <SteveS> Scribe: roger

(Scribe set to Roger Menday)

<roger> chair: Arnaud
<roger> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.11.18
15:08:55 <roger> Topic: Admin

1. Admin

<roger> Proposed: Approve Minutes of November 11

PROPOSED: Approve Minutes of November 11

<roger> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2013-11-11

http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/ldp/2013-11-11

15:09:04 <Zakim> +??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13

15:09:28 <roger> Resolved: Minutes of November 11 approved

RESOLVED: Minutes of November 11 approved

<roger> Arnaud: Next meeting is November 25, any conflict with US Thanksgiving?

Arnaud Le Hors: Next meeting is November 25, any conflict with US Thanksgiving?

<roger> nope

nope

<roger> john: regrets

John Arwe: regrets

15:09:50 <SteveS> will be around next Monday

Steve Speicher: will be around next Monday

15:10:04 <SteveS> s/is will/I will/
15:10:30 <roger> Topic: Action Tracking

2. Action Tracking

15:11:56 <Zakim> +??P14

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14

15:12:04 <roger> John: updates about edits to the spec

John Arwe: updates about edits to the spec

15:12:11 <codyburleson> Zakim, ??P14 is me.

Cody Burleson: Zakim, ??P14 is me.

15:12:11 <Zakim> +codyburleson; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +codyburleson; got it

15:12:29 <nmihindu> Zakim, ??P13 is me

Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, ??P13 is me

15:12:29 <Zakim> +nmihindu; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +nmihindu; got it

15:12:43 <nmihindu> Zakim, mute me

Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: Zakim, mute me

15:12:43 <Zakim> nmihindu should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: nmihindu should now be muted

15:13:23 <roger> john: paging is the biggest change to the current spec

John Arwe: paging is the biggest change to the current spec

15:16:09 <JohnArwe> most significant easy-to-miss change from action-113's resolution is the removal of the collection link header, b/c after our 200 vs 209/303 decision that link on the first page would have been circular

John Arwe: most significant easy-to-miss change from ACTION-113's resolution is the removal of the collection link header, b/c after our 200 vs 209/303 decision that link on the first page would have been circular

<roger> Arnaud: unless there is any objections I'll close the 3 actions pending review

Arnaud Le Hors: unless there is any objections I'll close the 3 actions pending review

15:15:07 <roger> Topci: Proposal regarding Paging, Section 4.10.2

3. Proposal regarding Paging, Section 4.10.2

15:16:07 <Ashok> s/Topci/Topic/
<roger> Arnaud: as we modified the spec to move paging info from RDF content to HTTP headers the question arose as to what of all the possible links that can be provided ought to be mandatory

Arnaud Le Hors: as we modified the spec to move paging info from RDF content to HTTP headers the question arose as to what of all the possible links that can be provided ought to be mandatory

<roger> ... currently the only requirement is to provide the next link, the rest is optional

... currently the only requirement is to provide the next link, the rest is optional

15:17:43 <Arnaud> Proposed: Leave the MAYs unchanged. This specifically concerns: first, last, and prev links.

PROPOSED: Leave the MAYs unchanged. This specifically concerns: first, last, and prev links.

15:18:01 <SteveS> +1

Steve Speicher: +1

15:18:04 <betehess> 0

Alexandre Bertails: 0

15:18:05 <Ashok> +1

Ashok Malhotra: +1

15:18:08 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:18:08 <roger> +1

+1

15:18:10 <JohnArwe> +1

John Arwe: +1

15:18:13 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

15:18:16 <codyburleson> +0

Cody Burleson: +0

15:18:20 <nmihindu> +1

Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +1

15:18:28 <Arnaud> Resolved: Leave the MAYs unchanged. This specifically concerns: first, last, and prev links.

RESOLVED: Leave the MAYs unchanged. This specifically concerns: first, last, and prev links.

15:18:31 <bblfish> +0 was not able to follow the discussion

Henry Story: +0 was not able to follow the discussion

15:19:40 <JohnArwe> Henry, EricP had suggested at one point in the past requiring the prev and last link headers as well.

John Arwe: Henry, EricP had suggested at one point in the past requiring the prev and last link headers as well.

15:20:43 <Ashok> As had I.

Ashok Malhotra: As had I.

15:19:36 <roger> Topic: Proposal regarding ISSUE-81 Part II: Keeping the simple case simple

4. Proposal regarding ISSUE-81 Part II: Keeping the simple case simple

<roger> Arnaud: Steve proposed to make insertedContentRelation optional

Arnaud Le Hors: Steve proposed to make insertedContentRelation optional

<roger> ... but this would re-introduce the non-monotonicity issue Henry pointed out initially

... but this would re-introduce the non-monotonicity issue Henry pointed out initially

<roger> ... not everyone agrees this is a problem but I'd rather not have that fight

... not everyone agrees this is a problem but I'd rather not have that fight

<roger> ... there was an idea of using an anonymous blank node but that doesn't work with all the RDF serialization formats

... there was an idea of using an anonymous blank node but that doesn't work with all the RDF serialization formats

<roger> ... so I suggest we just stick to having no default values

... so I suggest we just stick to having no default values

15:20:44 <Arnaud>  Proposed: Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81.

Arnaud Le Hors: Proposed: Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81.

15:20:49 <bblfish> q+

Henry Story: q+

15:20:53 <bblfish> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/MembershipInferencing

Henry Story: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/MembershipInferencing

15:20:55 <Arnaud> ack bblfish

Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish

15:22:20 <Ashok> q+

Ashok Malhotra: q+

15:22:56 <Arnaud> ack ashok

Arnaud Le Hors: ack ashok

15:22:57 <roger> bblfish: taking all properties as a bunch, they could be dropped - if one understands LDP inferencing

Henry Story: taking all properties as a bunch, they could be dropped - if one understands LDP inferencing

15:23:31 <JohnArwe> ...and the definitions of the predicates asserted in the proposals.

John Arwe: ...and the definitions of the predicates asserted in the proposals.

15:25:22 <bblfish> yes, one can't have any default values for any of the memberhsipXXX properties, though depending on how one understands what these properties are doing, one could have a default that does not require any of them. Ie: if one takes the causal/contractual rule defined in http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/MembershipInferencing then LDPCs would not need to publish any of those triples - or if they do they must publish all of them.

Henry Story: yes, one can't have any default values for any of the memberhsipXXX properties, though depending on how one understands what these properties are doing, one could have a default that does not require any of them. Ie: if one takes the causal/contractual rule defined in http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/MembershipInferencing then LDPCs would not need to publish any of those triples - or if they do they must publish all of them.

15:25:30 <bblfish> Therefore I am +1 for this.

Henry Story: Therefore I am +1 for this.

15:26:19 <Arnaud> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html#ldpc-informative

Arnaud Le Hors: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ldpwg/raw-file/default/ldp.html#ldpc-informative

15:26:34 <Arnaud>  ldp:insertedContentRelation ldp:MemberSubject;

Arnaud Le Hors: ldp:insertedContentRelation ldp:MemberSubject;

15:27:05 <JohnArwe> q+

John Arwe: q+

15:27:13 <Arnaud> ack JohnArwe

Arnaud Le Hors: ack JohnArwe

15:28:11 <roger> JohnArwe: if the container is read-only, can we lose the insertedContentsRelation ?

John Arwe: if the container is read-only, can we lose the insertedContentsRelation ?

15:28:26 <bblfish> q+

Henry Story: q+

15:28:41 <betehess> well, it can explain why some triple is there...

Alexandre Bertails: well, it can explain why some triple is there...

15:28:44 <Arnaud> ack bblfish

Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish

15:28:49 <betehess> so read-only does not make a difference

Alexandre Bertails: so read-only does not make a difference

15:29:50 <JohnArwe> Technically I didn't ask if we could lose it. I asked what the implication is of accepting the proposal. Requiring a r/o container to expose content only useful for r/w containers is awkward.

John Arwe: Technically I didn't ask if we could lose it. I asked what the implication is of accepting the proposal. Requiring a r/o container to expose content only useful for r/w containers is awkward.

<roger> Arnaud: I don't agree with Henry's definition of a member,

Arnaud Le Hors: I don't agree with Henry's definition of a member,

<roger> ... the reason we added insertedContentRelation (then MembershipObject) was specifically to allow having as member of a container a resource different from the information resource created

... the reason we added insertedContentRelation (then MembershipObject) was specifically to allow having as member of a container a resource different from the information resource created

<roger> ... this was done to allow Roger to have a container with zaza the cat as the member rather than the information resource about zaza

... this was done to allow Roger to have a container with zaza the cat as the member rather than the information resource about zaza

15:30:18 <Arnaud> SELECT ?member

Arnaud Le Hors: SELECT ?member

15:30:18 <Arnaud> WHERE {

Arnaud Le Hors: WHERE {

15:30:18 <Arnaud>     ?c a ldp:Container;

Arnaud Le Hors: ?c a ldp:Container;

15:30:18 <Arnaud>        ldp:containingResource ?resource;

Arnaud Le Hors: ldp:containingResource ?resource;

15:30:18 <Arnaud>        ldp:containsRelation ?predicate;

Arnaud Le Hors: ldp:containsRelation ?predicate;

15:30:18 <Arnaud>     ?resource ?predicate ?member.

Arnaud Le Hors: ?resource ?predicate ?member.

15:30:18 <Arnaud> }

Arnaud Le Hors: }

15:30:19 <roger> @JohnArwe, sorry for mis-representing you

@JohnArwe, sorry for mis-representing you

15:30:34 <Arnaud> SELECT ?member

Arnaud Le Hors: SELECT ?member

15:30:34 <Arnaud> WHERE {

Arnaud Le Hors: WHERE {

15:30:34 <Arnaud>     ?c a ldp:Container;

Arnaud Le Hors: ?c a ldp:Container;

15:30:34 <Arnaud>        ldp:containingResource ?resource;

Arnaud Le Hors: ldp:containingResource ?resource;

15:30:34 <Arnaud>        ldp:containedByRelation ?predicate;

Arnaud Le Hors: ldp:containedByRelation ?predicate;

15:30:34 <Arnaud>     ?member ?predicate ?resource.

Arnaud Le Hors: ?member ?predicate ?resource.

15:30:34 <Arnaud> }

Arnaud Le Hors: }

15:30:37 <JohnArwe> np roger just gettin minutes right

John Arwe: np roger just gettin minutes right

15:31:03 <bblfish> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Member

Henry Story: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Member

15:31:37 <bblfish> @prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#> .

Henry Story: @prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#> .

15:31:38 <bblfish> @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .

Henry Story: @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .

15:31:38 <bblfish> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org//2000/01/rdf-schema#> .

Henry Story: @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org//2000/01/rdf-schema#> .

15:31:39 <bblfish> @prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .

Henry Story: @prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .

15:31:41 <bblfish>  ldp:member a rdf:Property;

Henry Story: ldp:member a rdf:Property;

15:31:43 <bblfish>   skos:editorialNote "this relation could also be called ldp:manages."

Henry Story: skos:editorialNote "this relation could also be called ldp:manages."

15:31:45 <bblfish>   rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:member;

Henry Story: rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:member;

15:31:47 <bblfish>   rdf:domain ldp:Container;

Henry Story: rdf:domain ldp:Container;

15:31:49 <bblfish>   rdf:range ldp:Resource; //<- this is intended to refer to the set of LDPRs and LDP Binaries. Find a name for it.

Henry Story: rdf:range ldp:Resource; //<- this is intended to refer to the set of LDPRs and LDP Binaries. Find a name for it.

15:31:50 <codyburleson> Regrets; must drop due to crisis call just started (Critical Situation on servers)

Cody Burleson: Regrets; must drop due to crisis call just started (Critical Situation on servers)

15:31:51 <bblfish>   rdfs:comment """

Henry Story: rdfs:comment """

15:31:53 <bblfish>     An ldp:member of a ldp:Container is a Resource which is created when a POST succeeds

Henry Story: An ldp:member of a ldp:Container is a Resource which is created when a POST succeeds

15:31:55 <bblfish>     on it (creating also the membership triples in the LDPC) or which when DELETED

Henry Story: on it (creating also the membership triples in the LDPC) or which when DELETED

15:31:56 <Zakim> -codyburleson

Zakim IRC Bot: -codyburleson

15:31:57 <bblfish>    removes the membership triples as specified by the "Linked Data Platform 1.0" spec.""" .

Henry Story: removes the membership triples as specified by the "Linked Data Platform 1.0" spec.""" .

15:32:54 <JohnArwe> Henry, are you saying that your proposal (assuming it is accepted) requires ldp:insertedContentRelation even for a r/o LDPC?

John Arwe: Henry, are you saying that your proposal (assuming it is accepted) requires ldp:insertedContentRelation even for a r/o LDPC?

15:33:26 <SteveS> q+

Steve Speicher: q+

15:33:34 <bblfish>  ldp:insertedContentRelation ldp:MemberSubject;

Henry Story: ldp:insertedContentRelation ldp:MemberSubject;

15:33:50 <Arnaud> ack steves

Arnaud Le Hors: ack steves

15:34:37 <betehess> I fail to see why the conversation is now on a read-only problem...

Alexandre Bertails: I fail to see why the conversation is now on a read-only problem...

15:35:10 <bblfish> yes, you need it for R/O LDPCs otherwise how do you find its' ldp:member LDPRs?

Henry Story: yes, you need it for R/O LDPCs otherwise how do you find its' ldp:member LDPRs?

15:35:13 <betehess> q+

Alexandre Bertails: q+

15:35:25 <Arnaud> ack betehess

Arnaud Le Hors: ack betehess

15:36:32 <roger> betehess: even for the r/o case clients wants to know why the membership triple is how it is ..

Alexandre Bertails: even for the r/o case clients wants to know why the membership triple is how it is ..

15:37:31 <Arnaud> Proposed: Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81

PROPOSED: Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81

15:37:43 <betehess> +1

Alexandre Bertails: +1

15:37:49 <bblfish> +1

Henry Story: +1

15:37:51 <roger> +1

+1

15:37:53 <nmihindu> +1

Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +1

15:37:53 <SteveS> +1

Steve Speicher: +1

15:37:57 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

15:37:58 <JohnArwe> +1

John Arwe: +1

15:38:01 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:38:06 <Arnaud> Resolved: Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81.

RESOLVED: Agree we can't re-introduce any default values and close ISSUE-81.

15:39:01 <betehess> q+

Alexandre Bertails: q+

15:39:12 <roger> Topic: Proposal regarding ISSUE-88: Lost link
15:40:01 <bblfish> This is summarised here: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Issue-88

Henry Story: This is summarised here: ISSUE-88">http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ISSUE-88

15:41:01 <bblfish> yes the lost link is the lost ldp:member link :-)

Henry Story: yes the lost link is the lost ldp:member link :-)

15:42:30 <betehess> hopefully, I'm in the queue to clarify that I never said that :-)

Alexandre Bertails: hopefully, I'm in the queue to clarify that I never said that :-)

15:43:25 <roger> Arnaud: if one posts a Document about the Thing 'zaza', this has consequence that 'zaza' Thing becomes linked from container. The problem is that the Document itself might get lost ...

Arnaud Le Hors: if one posts a Document about the Thing 'zaza', this has consequence that 'zaza' Thing becomes linked from container. The problem is that the Document itself might get lost ...

15:43:26 <Arnaud> ack betehess

Arnaud Le Hors: ack betehess

15:44:46 <bblfish> yes, there are two solutions proposed to this issue is the wiki http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Issue-88

Henry Story: yes, there are two solutions proposed to this issue is the wiki ISSUE-88">http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ISSUE-88

15:45:24 <betehess> Alex's proposal: Make ldp:created mandatory. The presence/absence of ldp:created triples in the LDPC is directly derived from the REST interactions.

Alexandre Bertails: Alex's proposal: Make ldp:created mandatory. The presence/absence of ldp:created triples in the LDPC is directly derived from the REST interactions.

15:45:33 <bblfish> q+

Henry Story: q+

15:45:38 <Arnaud> ack bblfish

Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish

<roger> bblfish: This is another problem that can be avoided if we have ldp:member mandatory, while this addresses the problem it also keeps making the spec more complicated

Henry Story: This is another problem that can be avoided if we have ldp:member mandatory, while this addresses the problem it also keeps making the spec more complicated

<roger> Arnaud: we can discuss whether it should be mandatory in all cases later, but for now I'd like to make sure we address the hole with that

Arnaud Le Hors: we can discuss whether it should be mandatory in all cases later, but for now I'd like to make sure we address the hole with that

15:48:12 <bblfish> q+

Henry Story: q+

15:48:57 <ericP> +1 to both process and proposal

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 to both process and proposal

15:49:12 <Arnaud> ack bblfish

Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish

15:49:12 <betehess> I'll give a -1 to any solution tying it to the current membership notion

Alexandre Bertails: I'll give a -1 to any solution tying it to the current membership notion

15:49:41 <betehess> they are different concepts, should be handled separately

Alexandre Bertails: they are different concepts, should be handled separately

15:49:54 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me

15:49:54 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted

15:49:55 <TallTed> q+

Ted Thibodeau: q+

15:50:28 <Arnaud> ack TallTed

Arnaud Le Hors: ack TallTed

<roger> TallTed: addressing the problem we have first makes sense to me, we can then discuss whether to make it mandatory in all cases

Ted Thibodeau: addressing the problem we have first makes sense to me, we can then discuss whether to make it mandatory in all cases

15:51:13 <bblfish> ok

Henry Story: ok

15:51:14 <Arnaud> Proposed: Close ISSUE-88 by making ldp:created mandatory when ldp:insertedContentRelation is different from ldp:MemberSubject

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-88 by making ldp:created mandatory when ldp:insertedContentRelation is different from ldp:MemberSubject

15:51:20 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

15:51:20 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted

15:51:28 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

15:51:33 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

15:51:36 <nmihindu> +1

Nandana Mihindukulasooriya: +1

15:51:45 <SteveS> +1

Steve Speicher: +1

15:51:49 <roger> +1

+1

15:51:50 <JohnArwe> +0.75

John Arwe: +0.75

15:52:06 <betehess> +0 because still think it should be "Make ldp:created mandatory"

Alexandre Bertails: +0 because still think it should be "Make ldp:created mandatory"

15:52:13 <bblfish> -0.9 because though it solves the local problem it makes the spec more difficult everywhere else.

Henry Story: -0.9 because though it solves the local problem it makes the spec more difficult everywhere else.

15:52:38 <Arnaud> Resolved: Close ISSUE-88 by making ldp:created mandatory when ldp:insertedContentRelation is different from ldp:MemberSubject

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-88 by making ldp:created mandatory when ldp:insertedContentRelation is different from ldp:MemberSubject

15:54:06 <roger> Topic: Proposal regarding ISSUE-87: Membership triples modification

6. Proposal regarding ISSUE-87: Membership triples modification

15:53:36 <roger> Arnaud: what are implications when the membershipXX properties change

Arnaud Le Hors: what are implications when the membershipXX properties change

<roger> ... the spec is silent on this issue for now

... the spec is silent on this issue for now

<roger> ... we can do nothing, prohibit it, or define exactly what happens

... we can do nothing, prohibit it, or define exactly what happens

15:53:56 <bblfish> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/Issue-87

Henry Story: ISSUE-87">http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/wiki/ISSUE-87

15:56:20 <Ashok> q+

Ashok Malhotra: q+

15:56:35 <Arnaud> ack Ashok

Arnaud Le Hors: ack Ashok

15:56:36 <bblfish> q+

Henry Story: q+

15:56:39 <roger> Arnaud: it is difficult to guard against this, it's a messy world, so clients need to be ready for such changes.

Arnaud Le Hors: it is difficult to guard against this, it's a messy world, so clients need to be ready for such changes.

15:57:29 <JohnArwe> I think we'd be selling ourselves short to just say "not doing anything" if the spoken intent is to draft something in Best Practices

John Arwe: I think we'd be selling ourselves short to just say "not doing anything" if the spoken intent is to draft something in Best Practices

15:58:06 <roger> Ashok: don't go into these details ... too hard

Ashok Malhotra: don't go into these details ... too hard

15:58:19 <JohnArwe> Remember Cody is not on the call any longer, so if we intend him to "find it" we need to make it clear.

John Arwe: Remember Cody is not on the call any longer, so if we intend him to "find it" we need to make it clear.

15:58:26 <Arnaud> ack bblfish

Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish

15:58:29 <ericP> I agree that it's hard, and probably over the next couple years, the market will evolve some good rules for 1.1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: I agree that it's hard, and probably over the next couple years, the market will evolve some good rules for 1.1

15:59:03 <bblfish> ON POSTING TO ?ldpc

Henry Story: ON POSTING TO ?ldpc

15:59:03 <bblfish> CREATING ?member

Henry Story: CREATING ?member

15:59:03 <bblfish> CONSTRUCT {

Henry Story: CONSTRUCT {

15:59:05 <bblfish>    ?subject ?relation ?object .

Henry Story: ?subject ?relation ?object .

15:59:07 <bblfish> } WHERE {

Henry Story: } WHERE {

15:59:09 <bblfish>    GRAPH ?ldpc {

Henry Story: GRAPH ?ldpc {

15:59:11 <bblfish>       ?ldpc ldp:containerResource ?subject;

Henry Story: ?ldpc ldp:containerResource ?subject;

15:59:13 <bblfish>             ldp:containsRelation ?relation;

Henry Story: ldp:containsRelation ?relation;

15:59:15 <bblfish>             ldp:insertedContentRelation ?memberRelation .

Henry Story: ldp:insertedContentRelation ?memberRelation .

15:59:17 <bblfish>    }

Henry Story: }

15:59:19 <bblfish>    GRAPH ?member {

Henry Story: GRAPH ?member {

15:59:21 <bblfish>      ?member ?memberRelation ?object

Henry Story: ?member ?memberRelation ?object

15:59:23 <bblfish>    }

Henry Story: }

15:59:25 <bblfish> }

Henry Story: }

16:01:04 <ericP> me thinks he sees a pattern

Eric Prud'hommeaux: me thinks he sees a pattern

16:01:10 <bblfish> I am ok

Henry Story: I am ok

16:01:17 <JohnArwe> I'm gone on time today

John Arwe: I'm gone on time today

16:01:26 <JohnArwe> have fun y'all

John Arwe: have fun y'all

16:01:26 <roger> call extended by 15 mins

call extended by 15 mins

16:01:31 <Zakim> -JohnArwe

Zakim IRC Bot: -JohnArwe

16:01:58 <roger> bblfish: argues that this argument invalidates previous argument, and therefore we should then make ldp:member mandatory.

Henry Story: argues that this argument invalidates previous argument, and therefore we should then make ldp:member mandatory.

16:03:38 <bblfish> CONSTRUCT {

Henry Story: CONSTRUCT {

16:03:38 <bblfish>   ?ldpc ldp:member ?resource . // <- the consequence

Henry Story: ?ldpc ldp:member ?resource . // <- the consequence

16:03:38 <bblfish> } WHERE {

Henry Story: } WHERE {

16:03:40 <bblfish>     ?ldpc ldp:containerResource ?subject;

Henry Story: ?ldpc ldp:containerResource ?subject;

16:03:42 <bblfish>           ldp:containsRelation ?relation;

Henry Story: ldp:containsRelation ?relation;

16:03:44 <bblfish>           ldp:insertedContentRelation ?memberRelation .

Henry Story: ldp:insertedContentRelation ?memberRelation .

16:03:46 <bblfish>    ?subject ?relation ?object . // <- the membership triples

Henry Story: ?subject ?relation ?object . // <- the membership triples

16:03:48 <bblfish>

Henry Story:

16:03:50 <bblfish>    GRAPH ?resource {

Henry Story: GRAPH ?resource {

16:03:52 <bblfish>       ?resource ?memberRelation ?object .

Henry Story: ?resource ?memberRelation ?object .

16:03:54 <bblfish>    }

Henry Story: }

16:03:56 <bblfish> }

Henry Story: }

16:07:16 <betehess> that's why we should not conflate the current notion of membership and the need we have with ldp:created

Alexandre Bertails: that's why we should not conflate the current notion of membership and the need we have with ldp:created

16:07:48 <betehess> I guess ldp:created is more about resource management

Alexandre Bertails: I guess ldp:created is more about resource management

16:07:57 <betehess> not resource membership

Alexandre Bertails: not resource membership

16:09:09 <bblfish> ok, can we speak instead of ldp:member talk of ldp:manages

Henry Story: ok, can we speak instead of ldp:member talk of ldp:manages

16:09:28 <betehess> or ldp:created for now :-)

Alexandre Bertails: or ldp:created for now :-)

16:10:06 <SteveS> I'd be for calling it ldp:xyz and once we figure out what we agree it should do, we give it an appropriate name

Steve Speicher: I'd be for calling it ldp:xyz and once we figure out what we agree it should do, we give it an appropriate name

16:10:20 <Ashok> q+

Ashok Malhotra: q+

16:11:23 <Arnaud> ack Ashok

Arnaud Le Hors: ack Ashok

16:11:44 <JohnArwe> @SteveS: +1 on ldp:xyz.  When I started "writing" I went in that direction.  Figure out desired behavior first, name after.

John Arwe: @SteveS: +1 on ldp:xyz. When I started "writing" I went in that direction. Figure out desired behavior first, name after.

16:13:30 <bblfish> q+

Henry Story: q+

16:14:46 <Arnaud> ack bblfish

Arnaud Le Hors: ack bblfish

16:16:04 <betehess> ontology fight :-)

Alexandre Bertails: ontology fight :-)

16:16:32 <JohnArwe> am I missing a hockey game?  darnit!

John Arwe: am I missing a hockey game? darnit!

16:16:43 <ericP> "ldp:manages" does seem to clarify

Eric Prud'hommeaux: "ldp:manages" does seem to clarify

16:17:10 <ericP> then we can ask the question "do we want containers to manage resources?"

Eric Prud'hommeaux: then we can ask the question "do we want containers to manage resources?"

16:19:55 <betehess> http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/89

Alexandre Bertails: http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/issues/89

16:19:59 <betehess> just created an issue

Alexandre Bertails: just created an issue

16:20:20 <betehess> can we discuss that next week?

Alexandre Bertails: can we discuss that next week?

16:20:26 <betehess> I'm making things clearer

Alexandre Bertails: I'm making things clearer

16:20:49 <ericP> trakcbot, add ISSUE: too many issues

Eric Prud'hommeaux: trakcbot, add ISSUE: too many issues

16:21:13 <JohnArwe> strategic typo there ericp

John Arwe: strategic typo there ericp

16:22:37 <betehess> SteveS, that was a question of mine

Alexandre Bertails: SteveS, that was a question of mine

16:22:43 <betehess> re: PATCH on LDPC

Reza B'Far: PATCH on LDPC [ Scribe Assist by Alexandre Bertails ]

16:23:08 <betehess> and yes, we had this question *because* of the membership thing

Alexandre Bertails: and yes, we had this question *because* of the membership thing

16:23:18 <bblfish> yes I agree if one is not careful then one can create more and more such issues.

Henry Story: yes I agree if one is not careful then one can create more and more such issues.

16:23:40 <Arnaud> Proposed: Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to add a warning that servers are not likely to allow modification of any of the membership properties

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to add a warning that servers are not likely to allow modification of any of the membership properties

16:24:03 <bblfish> I'd rather they do allow changes

Henry Story: I'd rather they do allow changes

16:24:35 <TallTed> Zakim, unmute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me

16:24:35 <Zakim> TallTed should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should no longer be muted

16:25:32 <Arnaud> Proposed: Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to do nothing: if the server  allows the modification, it is up to the server to decide whether any  other changes should be made

PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to do nothing: if the server allows the modification, it is up to the server to decide whether any other changes should be made

16:25:41 <betehess> +0

Alexandre Bertails: +0

16:26:04 <SteveS> +1 to say we don't spec out mod of membership triples, saying it is impl dependent

Steve Speicher: +1 to say we don't spec out mod of membership triples, saying it is impl dependent

16:26:04 <roger> +1 I prefer this 2nd way

+1 I prefer this 2nd way

16:26:11 <TallTed> +0.8

Ted Thibodeau: +0.8

16:26:24 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

16:27:09 <bblfish> -0.8 we need to then specify how a client finds the ldp:manages relations discussed when such chances are made - my proposal publish all the ldp:manages relations

Henry Story: -0.8 we need to then specify how a client finds the ldp:manages relations discussed when such chances are made - my proposal publish all the ldp:manages relations

16:27:20 <Arnaud> Resolved: Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to do nothing: if the server  allows the modification, it is up to the server to decide whether any  other changes should be made.

RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-87 by agreeing to do nothing: if the server allows the modification, it is up to the server to decide whether any other changes should be made.

16:27:45 <betehess> we need another 30 minutes for that one

Alexandre Bertails: we need another 30 minutes for that one

16:28:33 <bblfish> is ldp:manages ok?

Henry Story: is ldp:manages ok?

16:28:36 <betehess> I think my proposal is a less controversial approach for Henry's proposal

Alexandre Bertails: I think my proposal is a less controversial approach for Henry's proposal

16:28:56 <betehess> I propose that we don't speak about the URI first, just the feature, to avoid any misconception

Alexandre Bertails: I propose that we don't speak about the URI first, just the feature, to avoid any misconception

16:29:01 <SteveS> bblfish, I care what it does....then we can talk about the name

Steve Speicher: bblfish, I care what it does....then we can talk about the name

16:30:24 <Arnaud> Proposed: Extend calls by 30mn until we hit 2nd LC

PROPOSED: Extend calls by 30mn until we hit 2nd LC

16:30:34 <bblfish> Fine by me

Henry Story: Fine by me

16:30:42 <Ashok> ok

Ashok Malhotra: ok

16:30:58 <SteveS> +1 for focusing on getting this done and ending early if we can

Steve Speicher: +1 for focusing on getting this done and ending early if we can

16:31:01 <TallTed> +1

Ted Thibodeau: +1

16:31:01 <betehess> I'm not against

Alexandre Bertails: I'm not against

16:31:12 <Arnaud> Resolved: Extend calls by 30mn until we hit 2nd LC

RESOLVED: Extend calls by 30mn until we hit 2nd LC

16:31:13 <ericP> +1

Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1

16:31:52 <roger> bblfish: 'manages' is a more flexible than 'created', because it is expresses an ongoing relationship, rather than the initial event

Henry Story: 'manages' is a more flexible than 'created', because it is expresses an ongoing relationship, rather than the initial event

16:32:06 <bblfish> +1 roger thanks

Henry Story: +1 roger thanks

16:32:12 <Zakim> -SteveS

Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveS

16:32:13 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ashok_Malhotra

16:32:16 <bblfish> bye

Henry Story: bye

16:32:16 <betehess> bye guys

Alexandre Bertails: bye guys

16:32:20 <Zakim> -Alexandre

Zakim IRC Bot: -Alexandre

16:32:21 <Arnaud> meeting adjourned

Arnaud Le Hors: meeting adjourned

16:32:23 <Zakim> -Roger

Zakim IRC Bot: -Roger

16:32:37 <Zakim> -TallTed

Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed

16:32:46 <Zakim> -bblfish

Zakim IRC Bot: -bblfish

16:33:05 <betehess> Arnaud should be happy, we've started implementing the last resolution (1.5 hours meetings) even before we voted on it :-)

Alexandre Bertails: Arnaud should be happy, we've started implementing the last resolution (1.5 hours meetings) even before we voted on it :-)

16:33:44 <Zakim> -ericP

Zakim IRC Bot: -ericP

16:33:46 <Zakim> -Arnaud

Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud

16:38:46 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, nmihindu, in SW_LDP()10:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, nmihindu, in SW_LDP()10:00AM

16:38:47 <Zakim> SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_LDP()10:00AM has ended

16:38:47 <Zakim> Attendees were Arnaud, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, Roger, SteveS, TallTed, bblfish, ericP, codyburleson, nmihindu

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were Arnaud, JohnArwe, Ashok_Malhotra, Alexandre, Roger, SteveS, TallTed, bblfish, ericP, codyburleson, nmihindu



Formatted by CommonScribe