edit

RDF Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 20 April 2011

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.04.20
Seen
Alex Hall, Andy Seaborne, Antoine Zimmermann, Axel Polleres, Dan Brickley, David Wood, Fabien Gandon, Gavin Carothers, Ivan Herman, Jean-François Baget, Lee Feigenbaum, Matteo Brunati, Mischa Tuffield, Nathan Rixham, Nicholas Humfrey, Olivier Corby, Patrick Hayes, Peter Patel-Schneider, Richard Cyganiak, Sandro Hawke, Scott Bauer, Souripriya Das, Steve Harris, Ted Thibodeau, Thomas Steiner, Yves Raimond, Zhe Wu
Chair
David Wood
Scribe
Olivier Corby
IRC Log
Original
Resolutions

None.

Topics
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

Zhe Wu: 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

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

Zhe Wu: 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+

Zhe Wu: 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?

Zhe Wu: 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

Zhe Wu: 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

Zhe Wu: 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

1. 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+

Peter Patel-Schneider: 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-

Peter Patel-Schneider: 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+

Zhe Wu: q+

16:03:43 <zwu2> q?

Zhe Wu: q?

16:03:53 <zwu2> zakim, unmute me

Zhe Wu: 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

Zhe Wu: 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