None.
14:25:49 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-rdf-wg-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/04/20-rdf-wg-irc ←
14:25:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:25:53 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394 ←
14:25:53 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 35 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 35 minutes ←
14:25:54 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:25:54 <trackbot> Date: 20 April 2011
14:57:36 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 31 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has now started ←
14:57:44 <Zakim> +davidwood
Zakim IRC Bot: +davidwood ←
14:57:47 <SteveH> Zakim, what's the code
Steve Harris: Zakim, what's the code ←
14:57:47 <Zakim> I don't understand 'what's the code', SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'what's the code', SteveH ←
14:57:51 <davidwood> Chair: David Wood
14:57:57 <SteveH> Zakim, what is the code?
Steve Harris: Zakim, what is the code? ←
14:57:57 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), SteveH ←
14:58:00 <davidwood> SteveH: 73394
Steve Harris: 73394 [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
14:58:28 <Zakim> +??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8 ←
14:58:38 <Zakim> +Tony
Zakim IRC Bot: +Tony ←
14:58:48 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:58:58 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P8 is me
Steve Harris: Zakim, ??P8 is me ←
14:58:58 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it ←
14:59:05 <Zakim> +??P7
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P7 ←
14:59:18 <mischat_> zakim, ??P7 is me
Mischa Tuffield: zakim, ??P7 is me ←
14:59:18 <Zakim> +mischat_; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +mischat_; got it ←
14:59:20 <Scott> Zakim Tony is me
Scott Bauer: Zakim Tony is me ←
14:59:22 <mischat_> hello all
Mischa Tuffield: hello all ←
14:59:25 <gavinc> zakim, code?
Gavin Carothers: zakim, code? ←
14:59:25 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), gavinc ←
14:59:51 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: +AxelPolleres ←
14:59:57 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:59:58 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
15:00:09 <davidwood> Zakim, who is here?
David Wood: Zakim, who is here? ←
15:00:09 <Zakim> On the phone I see davidwood, SteveH, Tony, Sandro, mischat_, AxelPolleres, [IPcaller.a], [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see davidwood, SteveH, Tony, Sandro, mischat_, AxelPolleres, [IPcaller.a], [IPcaller] ←
15:00:11 <Zakim> +??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15 ←
15:00:13 <AndyS> zakim, IPcaller.a is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPcaller.a is me ←
15:00:13 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
15:00:14 <Zakim> +gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: +gavinc ←
15:00:17 <mbrunati> zakim, IPCaller is me
Matteo Brunati: zakim, IPCaller is me ←
15:00:17 <Zakim> +mbrunati; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +mbrunati; got it ←
15:00:20 <AndyS> (probably)
Andy Seaborne: (probably) ←
15:00:33 <Scott> Zakim Tony is Scott
Scott Bauer: Zakim Tony is Scott ←
15:00:49 <Zakim> +OlivierCorby
Zakim IRC Bot: +OlivierCorby ←
15:00:51 <Zakim> +Luca
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luca ←
15:01:03 <Scott> zakim, Tony is Scott
Scott Bauer: zakim, Tony is Scott ←
15:01:03 <Zakim> +Scott; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Scott; got it ←
15:01:11 <AZ> zakim, Luca may be me
Antoine Zimmermann: zakim, Luca may be me ←
15:01:11 <Zakim> +AZ?; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AZ?; got it ←
15:01:39 <cygri> zakim, what's the coe?
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, what's the coe? ←
15:01:39 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, cygri.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, cygri. ←
15:01:44 <cygri> zakim, what's the code?
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, what's the code? ←
15:01:44 <Zakim> the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 73394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), cygri ←
15:01:59 <Zakim> +AlexHall
Zakim IRC Bot: +AlexHall ←
15:02:07 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
15:02:07 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> +mhausenblas
Zakim IRC Bot: +mhausenblas ←
15:02:24 <cygri> zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, mhausenblas is temporarily me ←
15:02:24 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it ←
15:02:29 <Zakim> + +34.67.92.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +34.67.92.aaaa ←
15:02:36 <NickH> appologies, I can't make this meeting
Nicholas Humfrey: appologies, I can't make this meeting ←
15:02:47 <Zakim> +??P21
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21 ←
15:02:56 <webr3> Zakim, i am ??P21
Nathan Rixham: Zakim, i am ??P21 ←
15:02:57 <Zakim> +webr3; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +webr3; got it ←
15:03:11 <JFB> zakim, i am +34.67.92.aaaa
Jean-François Baget: zakim, i am +34.67.92.aaaa ←
15:03:13 <Zakim> +JFB; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +JFB; got it ←
15:03:55 <JFB> zakim, mute me
Jean-François Baget: zakim, mute me ←
15:03:55 <Zakim> JFB should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: JFB should now be muted ←
15:03:58 <Zakim> +LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF ←
15:04:12 <cygri> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.04.20
15:04:16 <Zakim> +zwu2
Zakim IRC Bot: +zwu2 ←
15:04:23 <zwu2> zakim, mute me
15:04:23 <Zakim> zwu2 should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: zwu2 should now be muted ←
15:04:33 <davidwood> Scribe: Olivier Corby
(Scribe set to Olivier Corby)
15:04:45 <davidwood> ScribeNick: OlivierCorby
15:04:49 <Zakim> + +20598aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +20598aabb ←
15:04:57 <danbri> zakim, aabb is danbri
Dan Brickley: zakim, aabb is danbri ←
15:04:57 <Zakim> +danbri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +danbri; got it ←
15:05:09 <cygri> AxelPolleres LOL
Richard Cyganiak: AxelPolleres LOL ←
15:05:15 <Zakim> +Souri
Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri ←
15:05:50 <Zakim> +tomayac
Zakim IRC Bot: +tomayac ←
15:06:00 <davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the FTF1:
David Wood: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the FTF1: ←
15:06:00 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-04-13
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-04-13 ←
15:06:00 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-04-14
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-04-14 ←
15:06:21 <OlivierCorby> there is an issue
there is an issue ←
15:06:31 <mischat> i haven't cleaned up my scribed session, I will definitely get round to that soon
Mischa Tuffield: i haven't cleaned up my scribed session, I will definitely get round to that soon ←
15:06:34 <OlivierCorby> note in the minutes
note in the minutes ←
15:06:54 <Zakim> +[Sophia]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[Sophia] ←
15:06:56 <OlivierCorby> two people would vote -1
two people would vote -1 ←
15:07:01 <LeeF> That doesn't seem like an issue with the minutes
Lee Feigenbaum: That doesn't seem like an issue with the minutes ←
15:07:26 <danbri> (can the dissent be linked from the issue tracker as a hub?)
Dan Brickley: (can the dissent be linked from the issue tracker as a hub?) ←
15:07:41 <FabGandon> zakim, [Sophia] is me
Fabien Gandon: zakim, [Sophia] is me ←
15:07:41 <Zakim> +FabGandon; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +FabGandon; got it ←
15:07:46 <LeeF> Thanks very much to the scribes from F2F -- minutes are very helpful
Lee Feigenbaum: Thanks very much to the scribes from F2F -- minutes are very helpful ←
15:07:52 <webr3> one of the -1's was mine I know that
Nathan Rixham: one of the -1's was mine I know that ←
15:08:27 <tomayac> LeeF: +1
Lee Feigenbaum: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Thomas Steiner ] ←
15:09:00 <AZ> this email is part of the thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0360.html
Antoine Zimmermann: this email is part of the thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0360.html ←
15:09:09 <webr3> see link: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html
Nathan Rixham: see link: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html ←
15:09:25 <gavinc> antoine.zimmermann@deri.org
Gavin Carothers: antoine.zimmermann@deri.org ←
15:09:29 <AZ> yes I did vote -1
Antoine Zimmermann: yes I did vote -1 ←
15:09:33 <cygri> http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/search?type-index=public-rdf-wg&index-type=t&keywords=-1&search=Search
Richard Cyganiak: http://www.w3.org/Search/Mail/Public/search?type-index=public-rdf-wg&index-type=t&keywords=-1&search=Search ←
15:09:55 <Zakim> +PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH ←
15:10:01 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software ←
15:10:01 <OlivierCorby> put the URLs in the minutes
put the URLs in the minutes ←
15:10:19 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me ←
15:10:19 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:10:22 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:10:22 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:11:15 <OlivierCorby> actions under review
actions under review ←
15:11:26 <cygri> davidwood, AZ: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0307.html
Richard Cyganiak: davidwood, AZ: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0307.html ←
15:11:35 <OlivierCorby> action 20
15:11:35 <trackbot> Sorry, bad ACTION syntax
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, bad ACTION syntax ←
15:11:40 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/20
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/actions/20 ←
15:12:21 <mischat> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON_Syntax_Options
Mischa Tuffield: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON_Syntax_Options ←
15:12:25 <mischat> it looks ok to me ^^
Mischa Tuffield: it looks ok to me ^^ ←
15:12:43 <PatH> we can close the opening.
Patrick Hayes: we can close the opening. ←
15:12:59 <tomayac> link correction: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON-Serialization-Examples
Thomas Steiner: link correction: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/JSON-Serialization-Examples ←
15:13:10 <mischat> sorry tomayac
Mischa Tuffield: sorry tomayac ←
15:13:22 <tomayac> yours was webr3's great work
Thomas Steiner: yours was webr3's great work ←
15:14:00 <cygri> davidwood, and here's the -1 from webr3: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html
Richard Cyganiak: davidwood, and here's the -1 from webr3: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html ←
15:14:14 <trackbot> ACTION-27 Make sure the resolution to issue-12 gets into semantics document notes added
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-27 Make sure the resolution to ISSUE-12 gets into semantics document notes added ←
15:14:48 <OlivierCorby> 27 and 28 are duplicated
27 and 28 are duplicated ←
15:17:10 <AndyS> wiki-ize?
Andy Seaborne: wiki-ize? ←
15:17:19 <cygri> OlivierCorby, feel free to interrupt us if you want to ask who's speaking
Richard Cyganiak: OlivierCorby, feel free to interrupt us if you want to ask who's speaking ←
15:18:18 <PatH> I had this vision of a *very* long action list...
Patrick Hayes: I had this vision of a *very* long action list... ←
15:19:17 <OlivierCorby> Topic: Poll for F2F2
Topic: Poll for F2F2 ←
15:19:23 <davidwood> Review the poll regarding location/dates and results:
David Wood: Review the poll regarding location/dates and results: ←
15:19:23 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/RDFWGFTF2/
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/RDFWGFTF2/ ←
15:19:23 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/RDFWGFTF2/results
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46168/RDFWGFTF2/results ←
15:19:56 <OlivierCorby> 19 people not responding
19 people not responding ←
15:20:30 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
15:20:35 <OlivierCorby> towards east cost early october
towards east cost early october ←
15:21:06 <OlivierCorby> please respond to the poll
please respond to the poll ←
15:21:24 <zwu2> Just realized a conflict, can I change my vote?
Zhe Wu: Just realized a conflict, can I change my vote? ←
15:21:40 <davidwood> Please indicate attendance at: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/F2F2
David Wood: Please indicate attendance at: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/F2F2 ←
15:21:41 <OlivierCorby> wiki page for F2F 2 & 3
wiki page for F2F 2 & 3 ←
15:21:44 <sandro> yes. zwu2
Sandro Hawke: yes. zwu2 ←
15:21:48 <gavinc> Yes, just resubmit the form
Gavin Carothers: Yes, just resubmit the form ←
15:21:51 <AxelPolleres> Would there be an option to do a two site F2F with a European site connected via Video conf.?
Axel Polleres: Would there be an option to do a two site F2F with a European site connected via Video conf.? ←
15:21:55 <zwu2> thanks Sandro
15:22:02 <AndyS> +1 to Axel
Andy Seaborne: +1 to Axel ←
15:22:07 <yvesr> AxelPolleres, +1
Yves Raimond: AxelPolleres, +1 ←
15:22:09 <AxelPolleres> q+
Axel Polleres: q+ ←
15:22:13 <mischat> +1 to Axel
Mischa Tuffield: +1 to Axel ←
15:22:19 <OlivierCorby> Graph task force
Graph task force ←
15:23:30 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
15:23:30 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
15:23:31 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:23:36 <mischat> east coast US works well re: time difference
Mischa Tuffield: east coast US works well re: time difference ←
15:23:45 <zwu2> q+
15:23:51 <OlivierCorby> remote participation is possible ?
remote participation is possible ? ←
15:24:10 <LeeF> That room at MIT is cozy :)
Lee Feigenbaum: That room at MIT is cozy :) ←
15:24:27 <OlivierCorby> try with skype
try with skype ←
15:24:43 <PatH> I was impressed by how well the remote participation worked in the last F2F. Dont think that full video is really nfecessary.
Patrick Hayes: I was impressed by how well the remote participation worked in the last F2F. Dont think that full video is really nfecessary. ←
15:24:44 <LeeF> The nice thing about the 2-site F2F is that having multiple people at each site helps keep everyone more focused
Lee Feigenbaum: The nice thing about the 2-site F2F is that having multiple people at each site helps keep everyone more focused ←
15:24:50 <PatH> Skype is flaky.
Patrick Hayes: Skype is flaky. ←
15:24:59 <AxelPolleres> +! to ivan, skype not always reliable...
Axel Polleres: +! to ivan, skype not always reliable... ←
15:25:05 <OlivierCorby> bad experience with skype
bad experience with skype ←
15:25:09 <PatH> +1 to ivan.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to ivan. ←
15:25:24 <LeeF> AndyS ++
Lee Feigenbaum: AndyS ++ ←
15:25:35 <AxelPolleres> +1 to Andy
Axel Polleres: +1 to Andy ←
15:25:48 <mischat> AndyS++
Mischa Tuffield: AndyS++ ←
15:26:09 <zwu2> q?
15:26:13 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
15:26:27 <davidwood> Zakim, who is speaking?
David Wood: Zakim, who is speaking? ←
15:26:37 <davidwood> ack AxerPolleres
David Wood: ack AxerPolleres ←
15:26:38 <Zakim> davidwood, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: davidwood (33%), AxelPolleres (29%), PatH (14%)
Zakim IRC Bot: davidwood, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: davidwood (33%), AxelPolleres (29%), PatH (14%) ←
15:26:41 <Souri> 2-site F2F is very good (east coast 8-5pm is tolerable for western Europe time zone, but it does not work the other way :-))
Souripriya Das: 2-site F2F is very good (east coast 8-5pm is tolerable for western Europe time zone, but it does not work the other way :-)) ←
15:26:45 <LeeF> Everyone in the SPARQL group loved the 2-site, video-linked, F2F style.
Lee Feigenbaum: Everyone in the SPARQL group loved the 2-site, video-linked, F2F style. ←
15:26:47 <zwu2> zakim, unmute me
15:26:47 <Zakim> zwu2 should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: zwu2 should no longer be muted ←
15:26:49 <davidwood> ack zwu
David Wood: ack zwu ←
15:26:51 <gavinc> Remote to the F2F1 as fine, other then time zone ;)
Gavin Carothers: Remote to the F2F1 as fine, other then time zone ;) ←
15:26:57 <davidwood> ack AxelPolleres
David Wood: ack AxelPolleres ←
15:26:58 <AxelPolleres> zakim, ack me
Axel Polleres: zakim, ack me ←
15:26:59 <Zakim> I see AndyS on the speaker queue
Zakim IRC Bot: I see AndyS on the speaker queue ←
15:27:50 <davidwood> ack AndyS
David Wood: ack AndyS ←
15:27:50 <zwu2> zakim, mute me
15:27:51 <Zakim> zwu2 should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: zwu2 should now be muted ←
15:27:55 <OlivierCorby> Poll still open, can change vote
Poll still open, can change vote ←
15:28:31 <OlivierCorby> Site in Europe ?
Site in Europe ? ←
15:29:33 <PatH> mischat, good thought.
Patrick Hayes: mischat, good thought. ←
15:29:51 <mischat> i could ask ECS, and I could ask W3C UK offices
Mischa Tuffield: i could ask ECS, and I could ask W3C UK offices ←
15:29:55 <mischat> and will report back
Mischa Tuffield: and will report back ←
15:29:59 <mischat> yes
Mischa Tuffield: yes ←
15:30:04 <SteveH> mischat, ECS has the wrong system
Steve Harris: mischat, ECS has the wrong system ←
15:30:16 <mischat> but yes they have video geeks ...
Mischa Tuffield: but yes they have video geeks ... ←
15:30:19 <sandro> action: mischat look into soton video conf facilities
ACTION: mischat look into soton video conf facilities ←
15:30:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-40 - Look into soton video conf facilities [on Mischa Tuffield - due 2011-04-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-40 - Look into soton video conf facilities [on Mischa Tuffield - due 2011-04-27]. ←
15:30:20 <mischat> will ask anyways
Mischa Tuffield: will ask anyways ←
15:30:40 <mischat> zakim, who is making noise ?
Mischa Tuffield: zakim, who is making noise ? ←
15:30:49 <OlivierCorby> Skolemization
Skolemization ←
15:30:51 <Zakim> mischat, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (60%), gavinc (15%), davidwood (53%)
Zakim IRC Bot: mischat, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (60%), gavinc (15%), davidwood (53%) ←
15:30:57 <cygri> Topic: Skolemization
15:31:05 <OlivierCorby> Sandro proposal from F2F
Sandro proposal from F2F ←
15:31:26 <OlivierCorby> discussion on this
discussion on this ←
15:31:37 <OlivierCorby> move on resolution ?
move on resolution ? ←
15:31:46 <cygri> SteveH:
Steve Harris: [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
15:31:49 <cygri> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0357.html
Richard Cyganiak: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0357.html ←
15:31:53 <davidwood> Steve's Proposal:
David Wood: Steve's Proposal: ←
15:31:53 <davidwood> Systems wishing to skolemise bNodes, and expose those skolem constants to external systems (e.g. in query results) SHOULD mint fresh a "fresh" (globally unique) URI for each bNode.
David Wood: Systems wishing to skolemise bNodes, and expose those skolem constants to external systems (e.g. in query results) SHOULD mint fresh a "fresh" (globally unique) URI for each bNode. ←
15:31:53 <davidwood> All systems performing skolemisation SHOULD do so in a way that they can recognise the constants once skolemised, and map back to the source bNodes where possible.
David Wood: All systems performing skolemisation SHOULD do so in a way that they can recognise the constants once skolemised, and map back to the source bNodes where possible. ←
15:31:53 <davidwood> Systems which want their skolem constants to be identifiable by other systems SHOULD use the .well-known URI prefix.
David Wood: Systems which want their skolem constants to be identifiable by other systems SHOULD use the .well-known URI prefix. ←
15:33:02 <OlivierCorby> using a scheme to detect is it a bnode
using a scheme to detect is it a bnode ←
15:33:09 <cygri> SteveH: yves strongly opposed SHOULD requirement to .well-known
Steve Harris: yves strongly opposed SHOULD requirement to .well-known [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
15:33:40 <PatH> +q
Patrick Hayes: +q ←
15:33:43 <cygri> SteveH: tried to come up with careful wording to allow use cases
Steve Harris: tried to come up with careful wording to allow use cases [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
15:34:00 <yvesr> slightly happier about this wording, although still concerned with possible over-complexity and mis-interpretations
Yves Raimond: slightly happier about this wording, although still concerned with possible over-complexity and mis-interpretations ←
15:34:14 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:34:36 <davidwood> ack PatH
David Wood: ack PatH ←
15:34:58 <cygri> SteveH: having a URI that claims to be a bnode somewhere in the URI is nonsense
Steve Harris: having a URI that claims to be a bnode somewhere in the URI is nonsense [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
15:35:18 <cygri> PatH: we should not publish anything that discourages use of blank nodes
Patrick Hayes: we should not publish anything that discourages use of blank nodes [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
15:35:50 <MacTed> that seems incorrect, cygri... "we should not publish anything that discourages use of blank nodes" is not what I heard
Ted Thibodeau: that seems incorrect, cygri... "we should not publish anything that discourages use of blank nodes" is not what I heard ←
15:35:51 <sandro> pat: the only case that matters is where the publisher wants others to know that some of the URIs are special, that there is no other info to be had about this thing.
Patrick Hayes: the only case that matters is where the publisher wants others to know that some of the URIs are special, that there is no other info to be had about this thing. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:36:19 <cygri> MacTed then please correct it
Richard Cyganiak: MacTed then please correct it ←
15:36:23 <danbri> q+ to note the "But I didn't say that..." scenario; we shouldn't put URIs "into other's mouths"
Dan Brickley: q+ to note the "But I didn't say that..." scenario; we shouldn't put URIs "into other's mouths" ←
15:36:28 <sandro> steve: it matters for your own system to be able to recognize what was a bnode, but other systems dont need to be able to tell.
Steve Harris: it matters for your own system to be able to recognize what was a bnode, but other systems dont need to be able to tell. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:36:30 <pfps> So should it be kosher for a graph store to consume something like _:b :loves :Mary and then emit something like :Mary :loves :Mary (and consider these two to be somehow close in meaning)?
Peter Patel-Schneider: So should it be kosher for a graph store to consume something like _:b :loves :Mary and then emit something like :Mary :loves :Mary (and consider these two to be somehow close in meaning)? ←
15:36:34 <cygri> q-
Richard Cyganiak: q- ←
15:36:39 <sandro> pat: in that case, why do we need a standard here?
Patrick Hayes: in that case, why do we need a standard here? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:36:58 <MacTed> PatH: we should not publish anything that discourages replacement of blank nodes with URIs of whatever coinage
Patrick Hayes: we should not publish anything that discourages replacement of blank nodes with URIs of whatever coinage [ Scribe Assist by Ted Thibodeau ] ←
15:37:06 <MacTed> cygri ^^^^^
Ted Thibodeau: cygri ^^^^^ ←
15:37:15 <MacTed> (is what I get from his words...)
Ted Thibodeau: (is what I get from his words...) ←
15:37:59 <gavinc> I think it is worth the WG mentioning as folks keep inventing it on their own
Gavin Carothers: I think it is worth the WG mentioning as folks keep inventing it on their own ←
15:38:05 <sandro> steve: consequences to sparql update: if you skolemize at export time, then you have to be able to recognize uris coming in as those, so you can unify them with the bnodes in your store.
Steve Harris: consequences to sparql update: if you skolemize at export time, then you have to be able to recognize uris coming in as those, so you can unify them with the bnodes in your store. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:38:14 <MacTed> and that's (yet another) reason to avoid bnodes
Ted Thibodeau: and that's (yet another) reason to avoid bnodes ←
15:39:01 <sandro> pat: we're defining a spec about publishing content. what you're talking about is a private matter.
Patrick Hayes: we're defining a spec about publishing content. what you're talking about is a private matter. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:39:03 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
15:39:23 <sandro> steve: sure, it doesn't add something, but it's worth pointing out.
Steve Harris: sure, it doesn't add something, but it's worth pointing out. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:39:34 <mischat> perhaps for the primer ?
Mischa Tuffield: perhaps for the primer ? ←
15:39:45 <sandro> andy: I like it as a practical experience note.
Andy Seaborne: I like it as a practical experience note. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:40:03 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:40:12 <PatH> I guess Im worried that if we talk about "skolemization" and use SHOULD language, what we write gets to be holy writ.
Patrick Hayes: I guess Im worried that if we talk about "skolemization" and use SHOULD language, what we write gets to be holy writ. ←
15:40:30 <davidwood> ack danbri
David Wood: ack danbri ←
15:40:30 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to note the "But I didn't say that..." scenario; we shouldn't put URIs "into other's mouths"
Zakim IRC Bot: danbri, you wanted to note the "But I didn't say that..." scenario; we shouldn't put URIs "into other's mouths" ←
15:40:46 <sandro> NICE.
Sandro Hawke: NICE. ←
15:40:55 <sandro> +1 danbri for this usecase
Sandro Hawke: +1 danbri for this usecase ←
15:41:35 <sandro> danbri: if I take a graph from someone, skolemize, and republish, it's nice to be able to be clear that you've done this.
Dan Brickley: if I take a graph from someone, skolemize, and republish, it's nice to be able to be clear that you've done this. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:41:53 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
15:41:59 <PatH> danbri: yes, but that issue is, who is responsible for the 'new' URIs. And the rule surely is, whoevewr coins the URis is responsible for them.
Dan Brickley: yes, but that issue is, who is responsible for the 'new' URIs. And the rule surely is, whoevewr coins the URis is responsible for them. [ Scribe Assist by Patrick Hayes ] ←
15:42:06 <davidwood> ack sandro
David Wood: ack sandro ←
15:42:22 <danbri> ivan, we lost you in audio?
Dan Brickley: ivan, we lost you in audio? ←
15:42:27 <PatH> I dont think danbri's case is a use case.
Patrick Hayes: I dont think danbri's case is a use case. ←
15:42:41 <danbri> it's a mis-use case
Dan Brickley: it's a mis-use case ←
15:42:46 <PatH> :-)
Patrick Hayes: :-) ←
15:43:01 <PatH> +q
Patrick Hayes: +q ←
15:43:02 <danbri> dan loads pat's graph, does some trivial transform, republishes it, sandro consumes it, and wants to know what pat actually said
Dan Brickley: dan loads pat's graph, does some trivial transform, republishes it, sandro consumes it, and wants to know what pat actually said ←
15:43:19 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:43:20 <danbri> (much as we might care to avoid muddle if dan retransmitted pat's sayings via rdf'99 reification?)
Dan Brickley: (much as we might care to avoid muddle if dan retransmitted pat's sayings via rdf'99 reification?) ←
15:43:23 <davidwood> Why is SHOULD considered holy writ? Surely MUST is...
David Wood: Why is SHOULD considered holy writ? Surely MUST is... ←
15:43:30 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:43:30 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
15:43:32 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
15:43:32 <MacTed> q+
Ted Thibodeau: q+ ←
15:43:39 <davidwood> ack PatH
David Wood: ack PatH ←
15:43:40 <OlivierCorby> problem with multigraph that may share bnodes
problem with multigraph that may share bnodes ←
15:44:51 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:45:03 <pfps> My action-27 cannot be done until issue-12 is closed, so I've extended the due date for a while.
Peter Patel-Schneider: My ACTION-27 cannot be done until ISSUE-12 is closed, so I've extended the due date for a while. ←
15:45:34 <Souri> q+
Souripriya Das: q+ ←
15:46:06 <davidwood> ack SteveH
David Wood: ack SteveH ←
15:46:13 <sandro> pat: what about just saying the one who mints an IRI is responsible for it?
Patrick Hayes: what about just saying the one who mints an IRI is responsible for it? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:46:27 <sandro> sandro: yeah, that could work.
Sandro Hawke: yeah, that could work. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:46:41 <webr3> if people are talking about a specific something by name, then what is the difference between that and a uri-ref, as soon as anybody skolemizes and somebody else uses that uri, then people are talking about a specific thing rather than just something, surely?
Nathan Rixham: if people are talking about a specific something by name, then what is the difference between that and a uri-ref, as soon as anybody skolemizes and somebody else uses that uri, then people are talking about a specific thing rather than just something, surely? ←
15:46:53 <PatH> +1 to speaker.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to speaker. ←
15:46:56 <zwu2> why does it need to be globally unique?
Zhe Wu: why does it need to be globally unique? ←
15:46:57 <sandro> steve: I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Skolemizing is what the vast majority of stores now, and I don't like everyone ignoring the standard.
Steve Harris: I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Skolemizing is what the vast majority of stores now, and I don't like everyone ignoring the standard. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:47:03 <pfps> Umm, what is the standard specifying??
Peter Patel-Schneider: Umm, what is the standard specifying?? ←
15:47:16 <pfps> ... that is being ignored?
Peter Patel-Schneider: ... that is being ignored? ←
15:47:16 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
15:47:20 <ivan_> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
15:47:20 <Zakim> ok, ivan_; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan_; the call is being made ←
15:47:22 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:47:27 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
15:47:57 <sandro> steve: "systems that issues URIs are responsible for them"
Steve Harris: "systems that issues URIs are responsible for them" [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:48:18 <sandro> steve: I just think it makes sense to codify the common practice.
Steve Harris: I just think it makes sense to codify the common practice. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:48:26 <AlexHall> pfps, that a blank node label is not valid outside the scope of the graph in which it appears?
Alex Hall: pfps, that a blank node label is not valid outside the scope of the graph in which it appears? ←
15:48:28 <cygri> q-
Richard Cyganiak: q- ←
15:49:06 <sandro> david: Steve, can you write a new proposal that attempts to capture that?
David Wood: Steve, can you write a new proposal that attempts to capture that? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:49:09 <danbri> re responsibility, yeah i tihnk that's part of the issue
Dan Brickley: re responsibility, yeah i tihnk that's part of the issue ←
15:49:46 <webr3> AlexHall, but there's no way you can prevent people from using that uri in another doc?
Nathan Rixham: AlexHall, but there's no way you can prevent people from using that uri in another doc? ←
15:49:47 <sandro> steve: "if you want your URIs to be identified as sk bno then you should..." is what Pat doesn't like
Steve Harris: "if you want your URIs to be identified as sk bno then you should..." is what Pat doesn't like [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:49:47 <danbri> so if i ascribe to pat as author of a graph, but am actually pointing at a graph full of skolem'd bnodes i interfered with, ... is that misrepresenting pat?
Dan Brickley: so if i ascribe to pat as author of a graph, but am actually pointing at a graph full of skolem'd bnodes i interfered with, ... is that misrepresenting pat? ←
15:49:58 <pfps> I think that I would be unhappy.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I think that I would be unhappy. ←
15:50:00 <davidwood> ack MacTed
David Wood: ack MacTed ←
15:50:14 <ivan> q-
Ivan Herman: q- ←
15:50:51 <pfps> consistent??
Peter Patel-Schneider: consistent?? ←
15:51:06 <davidwood> q+ to suggest we have a theory vs practice argument
David Wood: q+ to suggest we have a theory vs practice argument ←
15:51:07 <pfps> q+
15:51:37 <PatH> For practical purposes, systems might wish to replace blank nodes by URIs. If done, the responsibility for the meaning of these newly introduced URIs lies with the publisher of the modified data.
Patrick Hayes: For practical purposes, systems might wish to replace blank nodes by URIs. If done, the responsibility for the meaning of these newly introduced URIs lies with the publisher of the modified data. ←
15:51:53 <sandro> ted: bnodes are nothing but trouble
Ted Thibodeau: bnodes are nothing but trouble [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:52:06 <sandro> sandro: this group isn't saying anything of the sort
Sandro Hawke: this group isn't saying anything of the sort [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:52:17 <danbri> minting open-ended descriptive promises to the planet - also can be troubling
Dan Brickley: minting open-ended descriptive promises to the planet - also can be troubling ←
15:52:20 <AndyS> Can we have the wording for any proposal (= evolving working draft) on the wiki please - easier to point to at resolution. It took me some time (error prone?) creating a single, consolidated view.
Andy Seaborne: Can we have the wording for any proposal (= evolving working draft) on the wiki please - easier to point to at resolution. It took me some time (error prone?) creating a single, consolidated view. ←
15:52:34 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:52:48 <PatH> Whoa. this is not to do woth names being 'variable'.
Patrick Hayes: Whoa. this is not to do woth names being 'variable'. ←
15:53:02 <sandro> +1 AndyS -- we need a stable on-wiki wording for any proposal
Sandro Hawke: +1 AndyS -- we need a stable on-wiki wording for any proposal ←
15:53:14 <davidwood> ack Souri
David Wood: ack Souri ←
15:53:23 <SteveH> q-
Steve Harris: q- ←
15:53:24 <pfps> q-
15:53:41 <PatH> Cant draft text and listen at the same time.
Patrick Hayes: Cant draft text and listen at the same time. ←
15:53:47 <sandro> Souri: bnodes are nothing but local-scope variables. once you make it, it's not visible outside the scope.
Souripriya Das: bnodes are nothing but local-scope variables. once you make it, it's not visible outside the scope. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:55:10 <sandro> Souri: let the externalizer map the bnode to a URI and then it's normal, and can be used outside.
Souripriya Das: let the externalizer map the bnode to a URI and then it's normal, and can be used outside. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:55:11 <PatH> souri: agreed. Our role as a WG is not to rule on private mappings used inside tools. Its only our business when it gets published.
Souripriya Das: agreed. Our role as a WG is not to rule on private mappings used inside tools. Its only our business when it gets published. [ Scribe Assist by Patrick Hayes ] ←
15:55:38 <SteveH> proposal: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation
PROPOSED: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation ←
15:55:41 <sandro> Souri: ... and then provide a predicate to connect generated URI to the bnode.
Souripriya Das: ... and then provide a predicate to connect generated URI to the bnode. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:55:44 <PatH> souri just summarized the entire idea of skolemization, using programming terminology.
Patrick Hayes: souri just summarized the entire idea of skolemization, using programming terminology. ←
15:55:45 <Souri> How about externalizing a bNode by specifying a mapping from bNode to a URI => _:b1 rdf:graphIRI <G1> . _:b1 rdf:bNode2IRI :someUriExternalizerChooses . (or we can use the owl:sameAs property, but that could be an overkill)
Souripriya Das: How about externalizing a bNode by specifying a mapping from bNode to a URI => _:b1 rdf:graphIRI <G1> . _:b1 rdf:bNode2IRI :someUriExternalizerChooses . (or we can use the owl:sameAs property, but that could be an overkill) ←
15:56:05 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
15:56:12 <PatH> Exactly, it is up to the app. designer. NOt our business to een know about that.
Patrick Hayes: Exactly, it is up to the app. designer. NOt our business to een know about that. ←
15:56:14 <webr3> fair to summarize as: skolemization should happen behind the interface before data hits the wire (so no bnodes show to the outside world)?
Nathan Rixham: fair to summarize as: skolemization should happen behind the interface before data hits the wire (so no bnodes show to the outside world)? ←
15:56:50 <PatH> +1 webr3
Patrick Hayes: +1 webr3 ←
15:57:01 <PatH> It **is** skolemization.
Patrick Hayes: It **is** skolemization. ←
15:57:06 <sandro> ehhh, skeptical about rdf:bNode2IRI. wrong level.
Sandro Hawke: ehhh, skeptical about rdf:bNode2IRI. wrong level. ←
15:58:16 <PatH> Aaargh, don't say URI **represents** a bnode, please...
Patrick Hayes: Aaargh, don't say URI **represents** a bnode, please... ←
15:58:29 <davidwood> q-
David Wood: q- ←
15:58:30 <zwu2> +1 to separate what and how
Zhe Wu: +1 to separate what and how ←
15:58:34 <webr3> PatH, if everybody did that, then there would be no bnodes on the wire, as in no bnodes in serializations or in "visible" rdf ?
Nathan Rixham: PatH, if everybody did that, then there would be no bnodes on the wire, as in no bnodes in serializations or in "visible" rdf ? ←
15:58:40 <davidwood> ack cygri
David Wood: ack cygri ←
15:58:53 <PatH> If everybody did that, yes. BUt of course they wont ALL do it.
Patrick Hayes: If everybody did that, yes. BUt of course they wont ALL do it. ←
15:59:11 <PatH> cygri, nooooo.
Patrick Hayes: cygri, nooooo. ←
16:01:27 <sandro> cygri: In practice you're often confronted with other people's bnodes -- by saying something about sk in our docs, ("look here's a process for when you get bnodes you didnt want...") ... I see Pat's point about it's your own private business, as long as you keep to your own URIs in the process, then why would anyone ned to know about it? I think, however, there is value in writing down the fact that it is okay to do so. It is NOT obvious. YOu have to s
Richard Cyganiak: In practice you're often confronted with other people's bnodes -- by saying something about sk in our docs, ("look here's a process for when you get bnodes you didnt want...") ... I see Pat's point about it's your own private business, as long as you keep to your own URIs in the process, then why would anyone ned to know about it? I think, however, there is value in writing down the fact that it is okay to do so. It is NOT obvious. YOu have to s [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:01:27 <sandro> pend a lot of time with RDF before you know that.
Sandro Hawke: pend a lot of time with RDF before you know that. ←
16:01:35 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
16:01:39 <webr3> other people skolemizing my data worries me, because for every person that does it the bnode is effectively forked, has multiple identifiers, which makes it impossible to manage, you can't merge or diff graphs fromt he same source, manage data over time etc - which completely invalidates the point of skolemizing afaict
Nathan Rixham: other people skolemizing my data worries me, because for every person that does it the bnode is effectively forked, has multiple identifiers, which makes it impossible to manage, you can't merge or diff graphs fromt he same source, manage data over time etc - which completely invalidates the point of skolemizing afaict ←
16:02:03 <MacTed> webr3 - that's the reason for *you* to not use bnodes...
Ted Thibodeau: webr3 - that's the reason for *you* to not use bnodes... ←
16:02:10 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
16:02:11 <webr3> MacTed, exactly
Nathan Rixham: MacTed, exactly ←
16:02:22 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
16:02:24 <mischat> i don't think people get confused between whether to use a bnode or not. If you don't want your data to be dereferencable via a URI, you use a bnode ...
Mischa Tuffield: i don't think people get confused between whether to use a bnode or not. If you don't want your data to be dereferencable via a URI, you use a bnode ... ←
16:02:30 <sandro> cygri: This doesn't speak to making the skolem constants reconginizable. But it's nice to have a simple recipe that avoids one having to think too much.
Richard Cyganiak: This doesn't speak to making the skolem constants reconginizable. But it's nice to have a simple recipe that avoids one having to think too much. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:03:07 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation ←
16:03:08 <mischat> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation
Mischa Tuffield: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Skolemisation ←
16:03:10 <PatH> webr3, I think that managing over time is made tricky just by there being multiple copies.
Patrick Hayes: webr3, I think that managing over time is made tricky just by there being multiple copies. ←
16:03:38 <zwu2> q+
16:03:43 <zwu2> q?
16:03:53 <zwu2> zakim, unmute me
16:03:54 <danbri> q+ to suggest a use case: dan publishes a previously private graph. it has some bnodes / skolems representing objects that dan didn't know good public URIs for, and didn't host his own. Sandro loads up that document and reading the properties of the objects it describes, figures out some good replacement URIs. Because he can see which URIs are transient bnode-derrived skolem URIs, Sandro can now REPLACE those in the graph, rather than complicate
Dan Brickley: q+ to suggest a use case: dan publishes a previously private graph. it has some bnodes / skolems representing objects that dan didn't know good public URIs for, and didn't host his own. Sandro loads up that document and reading the properties of the objects it describes, figures out some good replacement URIs. Because he can see which URIs are transient bnode-derrived skolem URIs, Sandro can now REPLACE those in the graph, rather than complicate ←
16:03:54 <danbri> the graph with sameAs links to the 'better' well known URIs.
Dan Brickley: the graph with sameAs links to the 'better' well known URIs. ←
16:04:00 <Souri> q+
Souripriya Das: q+ ←
16:04:04 <Zakim> zwu2 should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: zwu2 should no longer be muted ←
16:04:10 <PatH> Would like to say all this without using 'skolem' anywhere. DOn't need to revert to logic-jargon for the general reader.
Patrick Hayes: Would like to say all this without using 'skolem' anywhere. DOn't need to revert to logic-jargon for the general reader. ←
16:04:16 <MacTed> in other words -- other people will skolemize (and here's a reasonable way to do that...), when they want to reuse data sets that came to them including bnodes. That causes problems down the line. So it's best not to use bnodes.... :-)
Ted Thibodeau: in other words -- other people will skolemize (and here's a reasonable way to do that...), when they want to reuse data sets that came to them including bnodes. That causes problems down the line. So it's best not to use bnodes.... :-) ←
16:04:30 <webr3> PatH, or just by having bnodes at all, it requires the ability to say "something, let us all call it X all the time" afaict
Nathan Rixham: PatH, or just by having bnodes at all, it requires the ability to say "something, let us all call it X all the time" afaict ←
16:04:44 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
16:04:47 <davidwood> ack Zhe
David Wood: ack Zhe ←
16:05:00 <davidwood> ack zwu
David Wood: ack zwu ←
16:05:38 <sandro> zwu2: I'm in favor of skolemizing, but isn't globally unique too strong? why not just locally unique to your store? globally unique is harder.
Zhe Wu: I'm in favor of skolemizing, but isn't globally unique too strong? why not just locally unique to your store? globally unique is harder. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:06:33 <sandro> UUID solves this pretty well.
Sandro Hawke: UUID solves this pretty well. ←
16:06:43 <mischat> but then why not just use a URI
Mischa Tuffield: but then why not just use a URI ←
16:07:04 <PatH> The skolem name has to be a URI. What does it mean to say that a URI is only locally unique?
Patrick Hayes: The skolem name has to be a URI. What does it mean to say that a URI is only locally unique? ←
16:07:08 <gavinc> e.g, urn:bnode:<UUID>:<localsegment>
Gavin Carothers: e.g, urn:bnode:<UUID>:<localsegment> ←
16:07:27 <gavinc> Federated Query too
Gavin Carothers: Federated Query too ←
16:07:42 <AndyS> +1 to gavinc
Andy Seaborne: +1 to gavinc ←
16:07:43 <PatH> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
16:07:48 <davidwood> ack danbri
David Wood: ack danbri ←
16:07:48 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest a use case: dan publishes a previously private graph. it has some bnodes / skolems representing objects that dan didn't know good public URIs for, and
Zakim IRC Bot: danbri, you wanted to suggest a use case: dan publishes a previously private graph. it has some bnodes / skolems representing objects that dan didn't know good public URIs for, and ←
16:07:51 <Zakim> ... didn't host his own. Sandro loads up that document and reading the properties of the objects it describes, figures out some good replacement URIs. Because he can see which URIs
Zakim IRC Bot: ... didn't host his own. Sandro loads up that document and reading the properties of the objects it describes, figures out some good replacement URIs. Because he can see which URIs ←
16:07:56 <Zakim> ... are transient bnode-derrived skolem URIs, Sandro can now REPLACE those in the graph, rather than complicate
Zakim IRC Bot: ... are transient bnode-derrived skolem URIs, Sandro can now REPLACE those in the graph, rather than complicate ←
16:08:00 <pfps> I think that the SHOULD should be a MUST for globally unique.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I think that the SHOULD should be a MUST for globally unique. ←
16:08:48 <cygri> for reference, RFC 2119: SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
Richard Cyganiak: for reference, RFC 2119: SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. ←
16:09:26 <davidwood> Zakim, close the queue
David Wood: Zakim, close the queue ←
16:09:27 <Zakim> ok, davidwood, the speaker queue is closed
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, davidwood, the speaker queue is closed ←
16:09:31 <PatH> What danbri is talking about might be called data quality improvement. I agree, people will do this, and its a good thing. But its not skolemization.
Patrick Hayes: What danbri is talking about might be called data quality improvement. I agree, people will do this, and its a good thing. But its not skolemization. ←
16:09:48 <sandro> +1 danbri: the flagging might be useful because it lets you throw away the URIs, BUT there may well be other data that grows up using it, so maybe you can't throw it away.
Sandro Hawke: +1 danbri: the flagging might be useful because it lets you throw away the URIs, BUT there may well be other data that grows up using it, so maybe you can't throw it away. ←
16:10:06 <pfps> yes, but I think that there is a big distinction between this SHOULD and later SHOULDs in the proposal
Peter Patel-Schneider: yes, but I think that there is a big distinction between this SHOULD and later SHOULDs in the proposal ←
16:10:20 <PatH> pfps, +1
Patrick Hayes: pfps, +1 ←
16:11:13 <PatH> q-
Patrick Hayes: q- ←
16:11:16 <davidwood> ack Souri
David Wood: ack Souri ←
16:11:18 <cygri> sandro, in data that's all bnodes, this is literally impossible
Richard Cyganiak: sandro, in data that's all bnodes, this is literally impossible ←
16:11:34 <sandro> sandro: steve, I agree the sparql-loop is useful but I don't think it's compelling, since users can just write a better query.
Sandro Hawke: steve, I agree the sparql-loop is useful but I don't think it's compelling, since users can just write a better query. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:11:39 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
16:11:39 <AndyS> because the store is changing? Want to "pin" previous query results.
Andy Seaborne: because the store is changing? Want to "pin" previous query results. ←
16:12:03 <pfps> but then you are *not* doing skolemization, you are doing something else (which might be fine, of course)!!
Peter Patel-Schneider: but then you are *not* doing skolemization, you are doing something else (which might be fine, of course)!! ←
16:12:03 <davidwood> General Concept
David Wood: General Concept ←
16:12:03 <davidwood> Systems wishing to skolemise bNodes, and expose those skolem constants to external systems (e.g. in query results) SHOULD mint fresh a "fresh" (globally unique) URI for each bNode. All systems performing skolemisation SHOULD do so in a way that they can recognise the constants once skolemised, and map back to the source bNodes where possible.
David Wood: Systems wishing to skolemise bNodes, and expose those skolem constants to external systems (e.g. in query results) SHOULD mint fresh a "fresh" (globally unique) URI for each bNode. All systems performing skolemisation SHOULD do so in a way that they can recognise the constants once skolemised, and map back to the source bNodes where possible. ←
16:12:16 <cygri> AndyS, yes
Richard Cyganiak: AndyS, yes ←
16:12:33 <sandro> davidwood, Can we do a straw poll on the general concept to see where everyone stands?
Sandro Hawke: davidwood, Can we do a straw poll on the general concept to see where everyone stands? ←
16:12:38 <PatH> David, delete second sentence. This is a private issue for the system, not required.
Patrick Hayes: David, delete second sentence. This is a private issue for the system, not required. ←
16:12:46 <danbri> PatH, yes I wasn't arguing that the cleanup / improvement is skolem18n, but rather that it is made easier by being able to recognise which URIs are the result of skolemisation [but i've not convinced myself, since even these funny skolem'd URIs might end up popular/useful]
Dan Brickley: PatH, yes I wasn't arguing that the cleanup / improvement is skolem18n, but rather that it is made easier by being able to recognise which URIs are the result of skolemisation [but i've not convinced myself, since even these funny skolem'd URIs might end up popular/useful] ←
16:12:55 <Souri> I feel better if "globally unique" is just a suggestion (because I think sometimes I may not need it and sometimes I may want a bNode to map to a specific URI (or two or more bNodes from different graphs to map to the same URI))
Souripriya Das: I feel better if "globally unique" is just a suggestion (because I think sometimes I may not need it and sometimes I may want a bNode to map to a specific URI (or two or more bNodes from different graphs to map to the same URI)) ←
16:13:12 <webr3> I'm frequently getting confused with this, if you have { <u> a Foo } that entails that something exists which is a Foo . So I hear lots of people saying they want a persistent name for a blanknode (as something), isn't the definition of saying that just using a URI. It sounds to me like most uses of bnodes are people saying "this thing" rather than "something", why they using bnodes?
Nathan Rixham: I'm frequently getting confused with this, if you have { <u> a Foo } that entails that something exists which is a Foo . So I hear lots of people saying they want a persistent name for a blanknode (as something), isn't the definition of saying that just using a URI. It sounds to me like most uses of bnodes are people saying "this thing" rather than "something", why they using bnodes? ←
16:13:18 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←
16:13:18 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should no longer be muted ←
16:13:20 <danbri> "what you do in the privacy of your own database is your own business"
Dan Brickley: "what you do in the privacy of your own database is your own business" ←
16:13:36 <Souri> +1 to Pat
Souripriya Das: +1 to Pat ←
16:13:41 <AndyS> Agree with PatH: SHOULD -> should (=we suggest)
Andy Seaborne: Agree with PatH: SHOULD -> should (=we suggest) ←
16:13:47 <sandro> sandro: Yes, we can weaken the second sentence.
Sandro Hawke: Yes, we can weaken the second sentence. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:14:13 <PatH> David, dont be discouraged. We will get this done, honestly.
Patrick Hayes: David, dont be discouraged. We will get this done, honestly. ←
16:14:22 <PatH> :-)
Patrick Hayes: :-) ←
16:14:28 <webr3> but why indicate it? bob a man entails that something exists that is a man - why do you even need to know "it was a bnode" because it entails all the same stuffs surely :s
Nathan Rixham: but why indicate it? bob a man entails that something exists that is a man - why do you even need to know "it was a bnode" because it entails all the same stuffs surely :s ←
16:14:31 <danbri> i was uncomfortable with an unqualified 'should' and remain so; at one point the sentence seemed to be more qualified
Dan Brickley: i was uncomfortable with an unqualified 'should' and remain so; at one point the sentence seemed to be more qualified ←
16:14:36 <SteveH> +1 to PatH
Steve Harris: +1 to PatH ←
16:14:47 <mischat> bye all
Mischa Tuffield: bye all ←
16:14:49 <Zakim> -Souri
Zakim IRC Bot: -Souri ←
16:14:49 <LeeF> bye
Lee Feigenbaum: bye ←
16:14:50 <zwu2> bye
16:14:50 <Zakim> -cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri ←
16:14:50 <Zakim> -mischat_
Zakim IRC Bot: -mischat_ ←
16:14:51 <davidwood> Adjourned
David Wood: Adjourned ←
16:14:52 <PatH> byeeee
Patrick Hayes: byeeee ←
16:14:53 <Zakim> -SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH ←
16:14:54 <Zakim> -LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF ←
16:14:54 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
16:14:54 <sandro> webr3, I think there are practical engineering reasons. there are no firm logic reasons.
Sandro Hawke: webr3, I think there are practical engineering reasons. there are no firm logic reasons. ←
16:14:55 <mbrunati> bye
Matteo Brunati: bye ←
16:14:56 <Zakim> -JFB
Zakim IRC Bot: -JFB ←
16:14:56 <AZ> bye
Antoine Zimmermann: bye ←
16:14:58 <Zakim> -webr3
Zakim IRC Bot: -webr3 ←
16:15:00 <Zakim> -tomayac
Zakim IRC Bot: -tomayac ←
16:15:02 <Zakim> -danbri
Zakim IRC Bot: -danbri ←
16:15:04 <Zakim> -zwu2
Zakim IRC Bot: -zwu2 ←
16:15:06 <Zakim> -OlivierCorby
Zakim IRC Bot: -OlivierCorby ←
16:15:06 <ivan> zakim, drop me
Ivan Herman: zakim, drop me ←
16:15:08 <Zakim> -PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH ←
16:15:10 <Zakim> -AlexHall
Zakim IRC Bot: -AlexHall ←
16:15:12 <Zakim> -??P15
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P15 ←
16:15:14 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan is being disconnected ←
16:15:16 <Zakim> -Scott
Zakim IRC Bot: -Scott ←
16:15:18 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
16:15:20 <Zakim> -mbrunati
Zakim IRC Bot: -mbrunati ←
16:15:22 <Zakim> -gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: -gavinc ←
16:15:24 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
16:15:38 <gavinc> make it possible for isBlank() to do the "right" thing?
Gavin Carothers: make it possible for isBlank() to do the "right" thing? ←
16:15:42 <Zakim> -davidwood
Zakim IRC Bot: -davidwood ←
16:15:43 <webr3> @sandro, if there are no firm logic reasons, and the practical engineering reasons are that they want a persistent name, then where does the notion of a blank node come in to it at all?
Nathan Rixham: @sandro, if there are no firm logic reasons, and the practical engineering reasons are that they want a persistent name, then where does the notion of a blank node come in to it at all? ←
16:15:44 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: -AxelPolleres ←
16:15:47 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
16:16:28 <cygri> webr3, because a URI may give raise to different expectations w.r.t stability etc compared to a blank node
Richard Cyganiak: webr3, because a URI may give raise to different expectations w.r.t stability etc compared to a blank node ←
16:16:31 <SteveH> webr3, [butting in] mostly syntax - but it what people often use bNode syntax for as it stands
Steve Harris: webr3, [butting in] mostly syntax - but it what people often use bNode syntax for as it stands ←
16:17:07 <sandro> RRSAgent, make minutes public
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, make minutes public ←
16:17:07 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', sandro. Try /msg RRSAgent help
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', sandro. Try /msg RRSAgent help ←
16:17:15 <Zakim> -FabGandon
Zakim IRC Bot: -FabGandon ←
16:17:16 <sandro> RRSAgent, make logs public
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
16:17:17 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has ended ←
16:17:19 <Zakim> Attendees were davidwood, Sandro, SteveH, mischat_, AxelPolleres, AndyS, gavinc, mbrunati, OlivierCorby, Scott, AZ?, AlexHall, Ivan, cygri, +34.67.92.aaaa, webr3, JFB, LeeF, zwu2,
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were davidwood, Sandro, SteveH, mischat_, AxelPolleres, AndyS, gavinc, mbrunati, OlivierCorby, Scott, AZ?, AlexHall, Ivan, cygri, +34.67.92.aaaa, webr3, JFB, LeeF, zwu2, ←
16:17:21 <Zakim> ... +20598aabb, danbri, Souri, tomayac, FabGandon, PatH, MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: ... +20598aabb, danbri, Souri, tomayac, FabGandon, PatH, MacTed ←
16:17:55 <webr3> cygri, stability in what sense? a blank node is just saying something exists, not this thing, so there's nothing to be stable w/ a blank node ?
Nathan Rixham: cygri, stability in what sense? a blank node is just saying something exists, not this thing, so there's nothing to be stable w/ a blank node ? ←
16:18:07 <sandro> I'm really seeing this as an "experimental" thing, but then tag: URIs are "experimental" as well.
Sandro Hawke: I'm really seeing this as an "experimental" thing, but then tag: URIs are "experimental" as well. ←
16:18:29 <SteveH> I'm seeing it more as codifying common practice
Steve Harris: I'm seeing it more as codifying common practice ←
16:18:33 <cygri> webr3, exactly. but once you skolemize it to a uri, it looks more stable but probably isnt
Richard Cyganiak: webr3, exactly. but once you skolemize it to a uri, it looks more stable but probably isnt ←
16:19:18 <SteveH> URIs aren't guaranteed to be stable, it's not a promise or anything
Steve Harris: URIs aren't guaranteed to be stable, it's not a promise or anything ←
16:19:25 <sandro> webr3, I think the main thing about a skolem node is that you have much greater confidence you can throw away the URI. This is important if you've read the same graph many times and thus have many copies of what should have been the same triple.
Sandro Hawke: webr3, I think the main thing about a skolem node is that you have much greater confidence you can throw away the URI. This is important if you've read the same graph many times and thus have many copies of what should have been the same triple. ←
16:19:47 <SteveH> yup, that's a fair point
Steve Harris: yup, that's a fair point ←
16:19:55 <sandro> shall we get back on the phone? :-)
Sandro Hawke: shall we get back on the phone? :-) ←
16:20:05 <SteveH> probably wouldn't hurt
Steve Harris: probably wouldn't hurt ←
16:20:16 <cygri> SteveH, not guaranteed of course, but minting a URI is a promise
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, not guaranteed of course, but minting a URI is a promise ←
16:20:16 <SteveH> but I think we've lost critical mass
Steve Harris: but I think we've lost critical mass ←
16:20:17 <webr3> @sandro, in which case what was the point in skolemizing in the first place
Nathan Rixham: @sandro, in which case what was the point in skolemizing in the first place ←
16:20:27 <webr3> if you're just going to throw the name away
Nathan Rixham: if you're just going to throw the name away ←
16:20:56 <sandro> webr3, because you wanted to pass it through something (like sparql-results-loop or graph-delta) that can't handle bnodes.
Sandro Hawke: webr3, because you wanted to pass it through something (like sparql-results-loop or graph-delta) that can't handle bnodes. ←
16:20:57 <SteveH> noones making you throw it away
Steve Harris: noones making you throw it away ←
16:20:58 <cygri> SteveH, if it weren't, how could you ever hyperlink to someone else's web page? (of course, some promises stronger than others)
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, if it weren't, how could you ever hyperlink to someone else's web page? (of course, some promises stronger than others) ←
16:21:07 <davidwood> webr3, reading http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html you seem to be saying −1 to a proposal that was not resolved that way. Am I missing something?
David Wood: webr3, reading http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Apr/0310.html you seem to be saying −1 to a proposal that was not resolved that way. Am I missing something? ←
16:21:26 <SteveH> cygri, well, it's just a best effort thing, I've got URIs from domains that I've lost control of
Steve Harris: cygri, well, it's just a best effort thing, I've got URIs from domains that I've lost control of ←
16:21:42 <webr3> davidwood, perhaps I am missing something, if it wasn't resolved then no -1 from me counts :0
Nathan Rixham: davidwood, perhaps I am missing something, if it wasn't resolved then no -1 from me counts :0 ←
16:21:46 <cygri> SteveH, a promise to best effort ;-)
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, a promise to best effort ;-) ←
16:21:57 <davidwood> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/15 is still open
David Wood: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/15 is still open ←
16:22:12 <SteveH> cygri, right, and best effort for a bnode skolemisation is "until I have a better idea", *shrug*
Steve Harris: cygri, right, and best effort for a bnode skolemisation is "until I have a better idea", *shrug* ←
16:22:15 <cygri> SteveH, a blank node label is not even a best effort thing. it might change anytime as far as i know
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, a blank node label is not even a best effort thing. it might change anytime as far as i know ←
16:22:27 <SteveH> bnoe label != skolem constant
Steve Harris: bnoe label != skolem constant ←
16:23:18 <webr3> @sandro, yes that's why i thought one would skolemize, but for the name to be useful for delta's / over time, then it has to be reliable over time, not just throw away, and in you can have multiple names for the same blank node and not be able to tell they are the same blank node, then i don't follow how that helps at all, surely it just compounds with the illussion of stability
Nathan Rixham: @sandro, yes that's why i thought one would skolemize, but for the name to be useful for delta's / over time, then it has to be reliable over time, not just throw away, and in you can have multiple names for the same blank node and not be able to tell they are the same blank node, then i don't follow how that helps at all, surely it just compounds with the illussion of stability ←
16:23:34 <webr3> and that illussion of stability is the whole problem that blank node identifiers introduced int he first place
Nathan Rixham: and that illussion of stability is the whole problem that blank node identifiers introduced int he first place ←
16:23:45 <webr3> so it only makes it worse afaict
Nathan Rixham: so it only makes it worse afaict ←
16:23:55 <SteveH> not in our experience
Steve Harris: not in our experience ←
16:23:57 <cygri> SteveH, if I see a bnode in your data, i know i can't link to it. if i see a URI, it's reasonable for me to expect that I can link to it. if it's a .well-known/bnode URI, then i know i probably shouldn't
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, if I see a bnode in your data, i know i can't link to it. if i see a URI, it's reasonable for me to expect that I can link to it. if it's a .well-known/bnode URI, then i know i probably shouldn't ←
16:24:14 <SteveH> cygri, no argument from me
Steve Harris: cygri, no argument from me ←
16:24:20 <sandro> +1 cygri
Sandro Hawke: +1 cygri ←
16:24:25 <sandro> nicely put.
Sandro Hawke: nicely put. ←
16:24:29 <cygri> webr3, see above :-)
Richard Cyganiak: webr3, see above :-) ←
16:24:45 <SteveH> cygri, but people who have very stable data (inc. bNodes), and are precious of their HTTP URI space disagree
Steve Harris: cygri, but people who have very stable data (inc. bNodes), and are precious of their HTTP URI space disagree ←
16:24:52 <sandro> and you probably shouldn'y BECAUSE folks downstream are likely to de-skolemize and throw the sk iri away.
Sandro Hawke: and you probably shouldn'y BECAUSE folks downstream are likely to de-skolemize and throw the sk iri away. ←
16:25:10 <yvesr> cygri, relying on the shape of a URI to know whether I should link to it or not...
Yves Raimond: cygri, relying on the shape of a URI to know whether I should link to it or not... ←
16:25:16 <SteveH> sandro, likely is a bit strong, "free too" maybe
Steve Harris: sandro, likely is a bit strong, "free too" maybe ←
16:25:26 <cygri> yvesr, i'm relying on an RFC, not the shape of the URI
Richard Cyganiak: yvesr, i'm relying on an RFC, not the shape of the URI ←
16:25:43 <SteveH> if the URI starts http: you should feel free to link to it, if it's not dereferencable, use tag:
Steve Harris: if the URI starts http: you should feel free to link to it, if it's not dereferencable, use tag: ←
16:25:43 <yvesr> cygri, on an RFC? the one that defines well-known?
Yves Raimond: cygri, on an RFC? the one that defines well-known? ←
16:25:44 <SteveH> natch
Steve Harris: natch ←
16:25:45 <davidwood> +1 to cygri
David Wood: +1 to cygri ←
16:25:49 <sandro> SteveH, can we settle on "more likely to" (than with normal IRI) ?
Sandro Hawke: SteveH, can we settle on "more likely to" (than with normal IRI) ? ←
16:26:01 <yvesr> cygri, there's nothing in that RFC that says i shouldn't link to a .well-known uri
Yves Raimond: cygri, there's nothing in that RFC that says i shouldn't link to a .well-known uri ←
16:26:05 <SteveH> sandro, sure
Steve Harris: sandro, sure ←
16:26:19 <SteveH> yvesr, no, quite right
Steve Harris: yvesr, no, quite right ←
16:26:24 <yvesr> cygri, so you're relying on something built on top of it, not the RFC itself
Yves Raimond: cygri, so you're relying on something built on top of it, not the RFC itself ←
16:26:37 <davidwood> Updated minutes in relation to ISSUE-12 (Lee's comments). Nathan's −1 related to a proposal that was not adopted.
David Wood: Updated minutes in relation to ISSUE-12 (Lee's comments). Nathan's −1 related to a proposal that was not adopted. ←
16:26:43 <SteveH> if the URI starts http: you should feel free to link to it, if it's not dereferencable, use tag:
Steve Harris: if the URI starts http: you should feel free to link to it, if it's not dereferencable, use tag: ←
16:26:47 <SteveH> [repost] :)
Steve Harris: [repost] :) ←
16:26:49 <sandro> btw, SteveH I was reading about the 5 versions of UUIDs and seems like you can probably generate them cheaply enough--- 128 bits is a lot of room.
Sandro Hawke: btw, SteveH I was reading about the 5 versions of UUIDs and seems like you can probably generate them cheaply enough--- 128 bits is a lot of room. ←
16:27:08 <webr3> cyngri, that makes no sense to me
Nathan Rixham: cyngri, that makes no sense to me ←
16:27:17 <SteveH> sandro, yeah... but lets not dictate identifier syntax
Steve Harris: sandro, yeah... but lets not dictate identifier syntax ←
16:27:23 <sandro> sure.
Sandro Hawke: sure. ←
16:27:44 <SteveH> I suspect we (garlik) want .../$uuid/$localid
Steve Harris: I suspect we (garlik) want .../$uuid/$localid ←
16:27:51 <SteveH> oir something of that nature
Steve Harris: oir something of that nature ←
16:27:57 <webr3> cygri, if you want to provide a uri and say no more info to get about this thing, just don't give any more info or use a scheme that can't be looked up for more info - i don't see how that has anything to do w/ bnodes ?
Nathan Rixham: cygri, if you want to provide a uri and say no more info to get about this thing, just don't give any more info or use a scheme that can't be looked up for more info - i don't see how that has anything to do w/ bnodes ? ←
16:28:38 <SteveH> webr3, the problem comes when you do want to say more about it
Steve Harris: webr3, the problem comes when you do want to say more about it ←
16:28:52 <SteveH> if you don't want to say anything about it, then there's no issue
Steve Harris: if you don't want to say anything about it, then there's no issue ←
16:29:28 <webr3> but when you use a bnode you're not talking about a specific thing, you're making a general statement like "a man exists in the world" not "this specific man exists in the world"
Nathan Rixham: but when you use a bnode you're not talking about a specific thing, you're making a general statement like "a man exists in the world" not "this specific man exists in the world" ←
16:32:07 <webr3> I'm ever tempted to agree w/ pats original proposal, just loose blank nodes - I can barely see a case where people are actually using bnodes as existentials tbh, seems like peopel are just using them as a quick way of not giving soemthing a proper name (at this time) but might do later
Nathan Rixham: I'm ever tempted to agree w/ pats original proposal, just loose blank nodes - I can barely see a case where people are actually using bnodes as existentials tbh, seems like peopel are just using them as a quick way of not giving soemthing a proper name (at this time) but might do later ←
16:33:09 <webr3> everytime somebody see's _:b1 they think a specific think called "_:b1 in this graph only" is being talked about anyway, isn't that the problem here?
Nathan Rixham: everytime somebody see's _:b1 they think a specific think called "_:b1 in this graph only" is being talked about anyway, isn't that the problem here? ←
16:37:27 <sandro> webr3, the most we can POSSIBLY do there is issue some strongly worded text about why one might want to avoid bnodes. Feel free to start drafting that text..... ?
Sandro Hawke: webr3, the most we can POSSIBLY do there is issue some strongly worded text about why one might want to avoid bnodes. Feel free to start drafting that text..... ? ←
16:38:36 <webr3> @sandro, yup - perhaps the issue is less about skolemizing and more about avoiding blank nodes in the first place
Nathan Rixham: @sandro, yup - perhaps the issue is less about skolemizing and more about avoiding blank nodes in the first place ←
16:39:15 <sandro> well, for you. For me, it's about providing an intermediary service (federated query, delta) that doesn't mangle the data too badly.
Sandro Hawke: well, for you. For me, it's about providing an intermediary service (federated query, delta) that doesn't mangle the data too badly. ←
16:40:18 <webr3> @sadnro, I'd like that too.. but unsure if it's possible (when you scale up to there being two intermediaries trying to do that for the same graph and one person using both)
Nathan Rixham: @sadnro, I'd like that too.. but unsure if it's possible (when you scale up to there being two intermediaries trying to do that for the same graph and one person using both) ←
16:40:36 <sandro> Agreed. Thus it's "experimental". :-
Sandro Hawke: Agreed. Thus it's "experimental". :- ←
16:40:38 <sandro> :-)
Sandro Hawke: :-) ←
16:40:40 <webr3> agree
Nathan Rixham: agree ←
16:43:32 <webr3> related, have been looking at whether it'd possible to do an object based rdf (like json-ld etc) which didn't have any notion of blank nodes or "anonymous objects", and it seems anonymous objects are very common - /however/ when you do diff/patch or anything over time with nested objects structures which include anonymous objects, there's no problems..
Nathan Rixham: related, have been looking at whether it'd possible to do an object based rdf (like json-ld etc) which didn't have any notion of blank nodes or "anonymous objects", and it seems anonymous objects are very common - /however/ when you do diff/patch or anything over time with nested objects structures which include anonymous objects, there's no problems.. ←
16:43:32 <webr3> it's only when you try to break it down in to triples that you get the problems..
Nathan Rixham: it's only when you try to break it down in to triples that you get the problems.. ←
16:45:01 <webr3> *although merge can still be tricky
Nathan Rixham: *although merge can still be tricky ←
16:45:57 <sandro> right -- triples == merge, I think.
Sandro Hawke: right -- triples == merge, I think. ←
16:50:27 <cygri> yvesr, W3C will register a namespace under .well-known, and in that registration it can say you shouldn't link to those URIs. or at least I can infer from the registration that those aren't stable IDs
Richard Cyganiak: yvesr, W3C will register a namespace under .well-known, and in that registration it can say you shouldn't link to those URIs. or at least I can infer from the registration that those aren't stable IDs ←
16:53:13 <SteveH> cygri, disagree, if you don't want people to link it, use tag:
Steve Harris: cygri, disagree, if you don't want people to link it, use tag: ←
16:53:20 <SteveH> if it starts http: I think it should be linkable
Steve Harris: if it starts http: I think it should be linkable ←
16:53:29 <sandro> cygri, can you put that more crisply? because obviously we want to use that URIs in more than one place for several of the use cases....
Sandro Hawke: cygri, can you put that more crisply? because obviously we want to use that URIs in more than one place for several of the use cases.... ←
16:53:59 <cygri> SteveH, you're right, it shouldn't say that you shouldn't link to it
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, you're right, it shouldn't say that you shouldn't link to it ←
16:54:30 <SteveH> there's perfectly valid usecases for follow-your-nose on skolemised bnodes, e.g. FOAF
Steve Harris: there's perfectly valid usecases for follow-your-nose on skolemised bnodes, e.g. FOAF ←
16:55:31 <sandro> I think cygri is saying I shouldn't say eg:sandro foaf:knows <http://example.org/.well-known/bnode/da042129-a2ac-461c-b8c8-471eb25713e7>
Sandro Hawke: I think cygri is saying I shouldn't say eg:sandro foaf:knows <http://example.org/.well-known/bnode/da042129-a2ac-461c-b8c8-471eb25713e7> ←
16:55:32 <AndyS> UUIDs are very cheap to generate - can amortize overhead arbitrarily and do it with a integer 32 bit +1 + a 16 byte copy. OSs support epochs and clocks going backwards.
Andy Seaborne: UUIDs are very cheap to generate - can amortize overhead arbitrarily and do it with a integer 32 bit +1 + a 16 byte copy. OSs support epochs and clocks going backwards. ←
16:55:33 <cygri> SteveH, the point is I can tell that they have been auto-generated by some process that doesn't know anything about the identity of the things identified
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, the point is I can tell that they have been auto-generated by some process that doesn't know anything about the identity of the things identified ←
16:55:48 <SteveH> cygri, yup, agreed
Steve Harris: cygri, yup, agreed ←
16:56:43 <SteveH> cygri, but there are usecases (where the data is generated internally, and only exposed over SPARQL for e.g.) when you don't need to own up that the URIs originated from bNodes
Steve Harris: cygri, but there are usecases (where the data is generated internally, and only exposed over SPARQL for e.g.) when you don't need to own up that the URIs originated from bNodes ←
16:56:55 <SteveH> personally, I don't really care, but some peopel do
Steve Harris: personally, I don't really care, but some peopel do ←
16:57:09 <sandro> what do you think about that foaf:knows example? is that an open thing to do?
Sandro Hawke: what do you think about that foaf:knows example? is that an open thing to do? ←
16:57:44 <cygri> SteveH, sandro, in absence of� any further information from the publisher, i'd expect a .well-known URI to be just as volatile as a blank node label
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, sandro, in absence of� any further information from the publisher, i'd expect a .well-known URI to be just as volatile as a blank node label ←
16:58:01 <SteveH> cygri, fair enough
Steve Harris: cygri, fair enough ←
16:58:14 <sandro> I think so too, yeah.
Sandro Hawke: I think so too, yeah. ←
16:58:15 <cygri> SteveH, sandro, but publishers can make them more stable for their internal use
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, sandro, but publishers can make them more stable for their internal use ←
16:58:28 <SteveH> cygri, sure
Steve Harris: cygri, sure ←
16:59:54 <cygri> so in absence of further information from the publisher i probably wouldn't link to them
Richard Cyganiak: so in absence of further information from the publisher i probably wouldn't link to them ←
17:00:30 <SteveH> cygri, which is an argument, for people who know that their skolem constants are just as stable as "normal" URIs to not advertise the fact
Steve Harris: cygri, which is an argument, for people who know that their skolem constants are just as stable as "normal" URIs to not advertise the fact ←
17:01:02 <cygri> SteveH, i think they'd be better off using a different namespace, that makes it look just like normal URIs
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, i think they'd be better off using a different namespace, that makes it look just like normal URIs ←
17:01:31 <cygri> SteveH, in practice I'd hope that my store comes pre-configured with something like .well-known, but lets me override it if i want to
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, in practice I'd hope that my store comes pre-configured with something like .well-known, but lets me override it if i want to ←
17:01:32 <SteveH> cygri, yes
Steve Harris: cygri, yes ←
17:01:38 <SteveH> cygri, yes
Steve Harris: cygri, yes ←
17:01:50 <SteveH> exactly
Steve Harris: exactly ←
17:02:19 <sandro> sounds like a pretty good plan.
Sandro Hawke: sounds like a pretty good plan. ←
17:02:42 <cygri> sandro, SteveH: so what document should all this go into?
Richard Cyganiak: sandro, SteveH: so what document should all this go into? ←
17:02:49 <SteveH> yeah, I'm not quite sure who the dissenters are
Steve Harris: yeah, I'm not quite sure who the dissenters are ←
17:02:55 <SteveH> cygri, right now, the wiki page I think
Steve Harris: cygri, right now, the wiki page I think ←
17:03:20 <sandro> A short WG note which includes the syntax spex, I think.
Sandro Hawke: A short WG note which includes the syntax spex, I think. ←
17:05:29 <davidwood> SteveH: Everyone :)
Steve Harris: Everyone :) [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
17:06:00 <SteveH> davidwood, I'm not convinced, I think there's too much violent agreement
Steve Harris: davidwood, I'm not convinced, I think there's too much violent agreement ←
17:06:01 <davidwood> cygri: +1 to good store defaults and overrides.
Richard Cyganiak: +1 to good store defaults and overrides. [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
17:06:28 <davidwood> Perhaps, Steve. That's why I thought we might be close to consensus for the last week.
David Wood: Perhaps, Steve. That's why I thought we might be close to consensus for the last week. ←
17:06:51 <SteveH> a note would probably be idea, /if/ the current documents don't explicitly forbid it, which i'm not clear on. by my reading they do
Steve Harris: a note would probably be idea, /if/ the current documents don't explicitly forbid it, which i'm not clear on. by my reading they do ←
17:07:12 <SteveH> but PatH said otherwise, I think
Steve Harris: but PatH said otherwise, I think ←
17:07:15 <cygri> SteveH, do you think so? which parts?
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, do you think so? which parts? ←
17:07:35 <SteveH> cygri, don't remember, I quoted it in email
Steve Harris: cygri, don't remember, I quoted it in email ←
17:08:15 <cygri> gross
Richard Cyganiak: gross ←
17:08:18 <SteveH> davidwood, I think we were very close to consensus, again :)
Steve Harris: davidwood, I think we were very close to consensus, again :) ←
17:08:31 <cygri> just had a spider running over my desk. squished it with a printout of RDF Semantics
Richard Cyganiak: just had a spider running over my desk. squished it with a printout of RDF Semantics ←
17:08:46 <SteveH> poor spider :-|
Steve Harris: poor spider :-| ←
17:09:11 <cygri> not a nice way to go
Richard Cyganiak: not a nice way to go ←
17:09:17 <sandro> ha!
Sandro Hawke: ha! ←
17:09:52 <SteveH> sadly probably not the first or last death that will be attributable to that document
Steve Harris: sadly probably not the first or last death that will be attributable to that document ←
17:11:01 <cygri> any recent suicides among the members of recent WGs?
Richard Cyganiak: any recent suicides among the members of recent WGs? ←
17:11:09 <cygri> anyway
Richard Cyganiak: anyway ←
17:12:23 <cygri> SteveH, so the wiki currently says: "All systems performing skolemisation SHOULD do so in a way that they can recognise the constants once skolemised, and map back to the source bNodes where possible."
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, so the wiki currently says: "All systems performing skolemisation SHOULD do so in a way that they can recognise the constants once skolemised, and map back to the source bNodes where possible." ←
17:12:25 <sandro> do you count marriages...? (never mind....)
Sandro Hawke: do you count marriages...? (never mind....) ←
17:13:56 <cygri> SteveH, perhaps sufficient: "Systems may wish to perform skolemisation in a way that they can recognise ..."
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, perhaps sufficient: "Systems may wish to perform skolemisation in a way that they can recognise ..." ←
17:14:40 <SteveH> cygri, yes, that's better
Steve Harris: cygri, yes, that's better ←
17:21:52 <cygri> should there be something like: "Systems that encounter skolem constants generated by other systems SHOULD NOT assume that the skolem URIs are permanent."
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Richard Cyganiak: should there be something like: "Systems that encounter skolem constants generated by other systems SHOULD NOT assume that the skolem URIs are permanent." ←
17:24:07 <SteveH> cygri, no, I think that's not neccesary
Steve Harris: cygri, no, I think that's not neccesary ←
17:24:56 <cygri> SteveH, clarification, i'm talking about .well-known URIs there. still disagree?
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, clarification, i'm talking about .well-known URIs there. still disagree? ←
17:25:25 <SteveH> cygri, I don't disagree, I just don't think it adds anything
Steve Harris: cygri, I don't disagree, I just don't think it adds anything ←
17:25:33 <SteveH> and it may turn out not to be true
Steve Harris: and it may turn out not to be true ←
17:26:00 <SteveH> preguessing stuff like that has been a bit of a downfall in the past
Steve Harris: preguessing stuff like that has been a bit of a downfall in the past ←
17:27:25 <cygri> SteveH, would it be better with some language about "unless you know otherwise because the publisher makes some sort of guarantee"?
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, would it be better with some language about "unless you know otherwise because the publisher makes some sort of guarantee"? ←
17:27:43 <SteveH> cygri, no, I think it's best to just leave it unsaid
Steve Harris: cygri, no, I think it's best to just leave it unsaid ←
17:28:19 <SteveH> and not trying to second-guess deployments
Steve Harris: and not trying to second-guess deployments ←
17:30:03 <SteveH> not at all, I want to be able to use them
Steve Harris: not at all, I want to be able to use them ←
17:30:04 <mischat> :(
Mischa Tuffield: :( ←
17:30:29 <SteveH> I dislike having to explicitly mint URIs for everything
Steve Harris: I dislike having to explicitly mint URIs for everything ←
17:30:45 <SteveH> the [ ... ] syntax in turtle is very handy
Steve Harris: the [ ... ] syntax in turtle is very handy ←
17:30:52 <SteveH> but not SPARQL friendy
Steve Harris: but not SPARQL friendy ←
17:30:56 <SteveH> *friendly
Steve Harris: *friendly ←
17:31:55 <cygri> SteveH sure but the URIs you're going to see for those skolemised blank nodes are likely to change each time you edit something
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH sure but the URIs you're going to see for those skolemised blank nodes are likely to change each time you edit something ←
17:32:30 <cygri> i'm concerned with naive users who assume that those URIs must be sort of stable (because they are URIs) and try to link to them
Richard Cyganiak: i'm concerned with naive users who assume that those URIs must be sort of stable (because they are URIs) and try to link to them ←
17:33:14 <SteveH> ie, tag:
Steve Harris: ie, tag: ←
17:33:19 <SteveH> v's http:
Steve Harris: v's http: ←
17:33:24 <SteveH> don't use http: if you don't mean it
Steve Harris: don't use http: if you don't mean it ←
17:33:27 <cygri> SteveH, no that's a different issue
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, no that's a different issue ←
17:33:33 <SteveH> ah, I see what you mean
Steve Harris: ah, I see what you mean ←
17:33:40 <SteveH> yeah, that's a concern
Steve Harris: yeah, that's a concern ←
17:33:41 <cygri> i mean link to in the sense of assuming they are stable names
Richard Cyganiak: i mean link to in the sense of assuming they are stable names ←
17:33:42 <mischat> if i had to use a URI for a blanknode, i would use the most useless uri i can think of
Mischa Tuffield: if i had to use a URI for a blanknode, i would use the most useless uri i can think of ←
17:33:47 <mischat> namely either urn or tag
Mischa Tuffield: namely either urn or tag ←
17:33:59 <mischat> as they are pretty much local variables anyways
Mischa Tuffield: as they are pretty much local variables anyways ←
17:34:29 <cygri> mischat, the .well-known thing is pretty much that, just easier to register
Richard Cyganiak: mischat, the .well-known thing is pretty much that, just easier to register ←
17:34:41 <mischat> yeah but it starts with http:
Mischa Tuffield: yeah but it starts with http: ←
17:34:45 <mischat> which would make me want to resolve it
Mischa Tuffield: which would make me want to resolve it ←
17:34:51 <mischat> but that is a different matter
Mischa Tuffield: but that is a different matter ←
17:35:17 <SteveH> if you use http: it should really be resolvable, but that was my point when I misunderstood cygri
Steve Harris: if you use http: it should really be resolvable, but that was my point when I misunderstood cygri ←
17:35:32 <SteveH> instability is an issue, but it's all relative
Steve Harris: instability is an issue, but it's all relative ←
17:36:01 <SteveH> I'd prefer not to gaze into a crystal ball to guess what the right response is
Steve Harris: I'd prefer not to gaze into a crystal ball to guess what the right response is ←
17:36:26 <SteveH> if we issue a note in short order, chances are we can update it with more experience down the line
Steve Harris: if we issue a note in short order, chances are we can update it with more experience down the line ←
17:36:36 <SteveH> for the URIs that 4store mints, it's not been an issue that I know of
Steve Harris: for the URIs that 4store mints, it's not been an issue that I know of ←
17:36:42 <cygri> SteveH, mischat: in my experience, many users balk at funny uri schemes, that's why i prefer http://. "should be resolvable" is an issue, that's true
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, mischat: in my experience, many users balk at funny uri schemes, that's why i prefer http://. "should be resolvable" is an issue, that's true ←
17:36:51 <SteveH> but there's quite clearly not "normal" URIs, which /may/ make a difference
Steve Harris: but there's quite clearly not "normal" URIs, which /may/ make a difference ←
17:37:14 <SteveH> machines don't care about URI schemes, users may
Steve Harris: machines don't care about URI schemes, users may ←
17:39:24 <mischat> i see the point, but humans author the systems which write out data
Mischa Tuffield: i see the point, but humans author the systems which write out data ←
17:39:42 <mischat> but yeah, meh ... as long as bnodes dont get chucked out i am happy
Mischa Tuffield: but yeah, meh ... as long as bnodes dont get chucked out i am happy ←
17:40:59 <cygri> mischat, SteveH: any reason why the note shouldn't list both http://...well-known AND tag:/urn:/whatever?
Richard Cyganiak: mischat, SteveH: any reason why the note shouldn't list both http://...well-known AND tag:/urn:/whatever? ←
17:41:06 <cygri> as options?
Richard Cyganiak: as options? ←
17:41:23 <cygri> "Systems which want their skolem constants to be identifiable by other systems SHOULD use one of the following two options:"
Richard Cyganiak: "Systems which want their skolem constants to be identifiable by other systems SHOULD use one of the following two options:" ←
17:41:38 <SteveH> cygri, no, no reason at all
Steve Harris: cygri, no, no reason at all ←
17:41:51 <SteveH> I'd still liek to see <genid:...>, but it's maybe too optimistiic
Steve Harris: I'd still liek to see <genid:...>, but it's maybe too optimistiic ←
17:42:14 <SteveH> I still think we could say that we're aiming to register it in a note, as a none-to-subtle hint
Steve Harris: I still think we could say that we're aiming to register it in a note, as a none-to-subtle hint ←
17:42:30 <mischat> something like, if the system decides to use a URI it is free to, but if the authors want to use an http URI it should be of form .well-known/foozle/
Mischa Tuffield: something like, if the system decides to use a URI it is free to, but if the authors want to use an http URI it should be of form .well-known/foozle/ ←
17:43:44 <cygri> mischat, what's the difference in intent between your wording and the wording i gave above?
Richard Cyganiak: mischat, what's the difference in intent between your wording and the wording i gave above? ←
17:43:54 <mischat> nothing
Mischa Tuffield: nothing ←
17:44:00 <cygri> mischat ok :-)
Richard Cyganiak: mischat ok :-) ←
17:44:06 <cygri> SteveH: I would prefer <bnode:...> to be honest
Steve Harris: I would prefer <bnode:...> to be honest [ Scribe Assist by Richard Cyganiak ] ←
17:44:09 <mischat> trying to stress the fact that you can use any uri scheme
Mischa Tuffield: trying to stress the fact that you can use any uri scheme ←
17:44:19 <mischat> i mean ftp should work right ?
Mischa Tuffield: i mean ftp should work right ? ←
17:44:47 <cygri> mischat, yeah sure, the sentence is just about the case where a system wants its URIs to be recognizable by others
Richard Cyganiak: mischat, yeah sure, the sentence is just about the case where a system wants its URIs to be recognizable by others ←
17:44:51 <SteveH> mischat, not all URI schemes support /.well-known/
Steve Harris: mischat, not all URI schemes support /.well-known/ ←
17:44:53 <cygri> if you don't care about that, use whatever you like
Richard Cyganiak: if you don't care about that, use whatever you like ←
17:44:58 <SteveH> quite
Steve Harris: quite ←
17:45:02 <mischat> sure
Mischa Tuffield: sure ←
17:45:41 <mischat> my only contribution here, is that uri schemes such as tag/urn which are not resolvable are bnodes if you look at them from a certain point of view
Mischa Tuffield: my only contribution here, is that uri schemes such as tag/urn which are not resolvable are bnodes if you look at them from a certain point of view ←
17:45:51 <cygri> SteveH how about <nodeid:...>? as per RDF/XML terminology?
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH how about <nodeid:...>? as per RDF/XML terminology? ←
17:46:04 <SteveH> cygri, a nodeid is a bNode label, so NO!
Steve Harris: cygri, a nodeid is a bNode label, so NO! ←
17:46:16 <cygri> SteveH, ok fair point
Richard Cyganiak: SteveH, ok fair point ←
17:46:28 <SteveH> c.f. bnode:
Steve Harris: c.f. bnode: ←
17:47:17 <cygri> mischat, well i'd expect that a tag: uri survives reloading the document; with a blank node label, not necessarily
Richard Cyganiak: mischat, well i'd expect that a tag: uri survives reloading the document; with a blank node label, not necessarily ←
17:48:02 <cygri> mischat, in other words, it's easy to make long-lived tag: uris, but hard (and sort of discouraged by the specs) with blank nodes
Richard Cyganiak: mischat, in other words, it's easy to make long-lived tag: uris, but hard (and sort of discouraged by the specs) with blank nodes ←
17:52:21 <SteveH> "I'm looking forward to using them as graph names, actually." hehe, quite
Steve Harris: "I'm looking forward to using them as graph names, actually." hehe, quite ←
Formatted by CommonScribe