14:57:54 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-irc ←
14:57:56 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:57:58 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394 ←
14:57:58 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes ←
14:57:59 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
14:57:59 <trackbot> Date: 22 May 2013
14:58:20 <Guus> chair: Guus
15:00:28 <Arnaud> Arnaud has changed the topic to: RDF WG -- current agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.05.22
Arnaud Le Hors: Arnaud has changed the topic to: RDF WG -- current agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.05.22 ←
15:00:48 <AZ> akim, who is here?
Antoine Zimmermann: akim, who is here? ←
15:00:52 <AZ> Zakim, who is here?
Antoine Zimmermann: Zakim, who is here? ←
15:00:52 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, AZ ←
15:00:53 <Zakim> On IRC I see ScottB, Arnaud, pfps, AZ, gkellogg, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, ivan, AndyS, davidwood, gavinc, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ScottB, Arnaud, pfps, AZ, gkellogg, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, ivan, AndyS, davidwood, gavinc, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat ←
15:00:56 <pfps> zakim, this is rdf-wg
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, this is rdf-wg ←
15:00:56 <Zakim> sorry, pfps, I do not see a conference named 'rdf-wg' in progress or scheduled at this time
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, pfps, I do not see a conference named 'rdf-wg' in progress or scheduled at this time ←
15:01:12 <Guus> zakim, this will be 73394
Guus Schreiber: zakim, this will be 73394 ←
15:01:12 <Zakim> ok, Guus; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start now
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Guus; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start now ←
15:01:27 <sandro> trackbot, start meeting
Sandro Hawke: trackbot, start meeting ←
15:01:28 <pfps> zakim, who is here?
Peter Patel-Schneider: zakim, who is here? ←
15:01:28 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, pfps
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, pfps ←
15:01:29 <Zakim> On IRC I see ScottB, Arnaud, pfps, AZ, gkellogg, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, ivan, AndyS, davidwood, gavinc, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ScottB, Arnaud, pfps, AZ, gkellogg, Zakim, RRSAgent, Guus, ivan, AndyS, davidwood, gavinc, manu1, sandro, trackbot, yvesr, manu, ericP, mischat ←
15:01:30 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
15:01:32 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 73394
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 73394 ←
15:01:32 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start now
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDFWG()11:00AM scheduled to start now ←
15:01:33 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
15:01:33 <trackbot> Date: 22 May 2013
15:01:51 <AndyS> zakim, this is 73394
Andy Seaborne: zakim, this is 73394 ←
15:01:51 <Zakim> ok, AndyS; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, AndyS; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM ←
15:02:02 <Zakim> +gkellogg
Zakim IRC Bot: +gkellogg ←
15:02:06 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?
Andy Seaborne: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
15:02:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus_Schreiber, ??P15, pfps, GavinC, Sandro, [IPcaller], gkellogg
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Guus_Schreiber, ??P15, pfps, GavinC, Sandro, [IPcaller], gkellogg ←
15:02:19 <AndyS> zakim, IPcaller is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPcaller is me ←
15:02:19 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
15:02:26 <AZ> Zakim, ??P15 is me
Antoine Zimmermann: Zakim, ??P15 is me ←
15:02:26 <Zakim> +AZ; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AZ; got it ←
15:02:30 <Guus> zakim, ??P15 is AZ
Guus Schreiber: zakim, ??P15 is AZ ←
15:02:30 <Zakim> I already had ??P15 as AZ, Guus
Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P15 as AZ, Guus ←
15:03:19 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:03:21 <Zakim> +Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: +Arnaud ←
15:03:22 <Zakim> +davidwood
Zakim IRC Bot: +davidwood ←
15:04:39 <pfps> i can scribe if necessary
Peter Patel-Schneider: i can scribe if necessary ←
15:05:04 <pfps> scribenick: pfps
(Scribe set to Peter Patel-Schneider)
15:05:32 <Zakim> +??P30
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P30 ←
15:05:56 <yvesr> Zakim, ??P30 is me
Yves Raimond: Zakim, ??P30 is me ←
15:05:56 <Zakim> +yvesr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +yvesr; got it ←
15:06:23 <Zakim> +Souri
Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri ←
15:06:28 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2008/04/scribe.html
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2008/04/scribe.html ←
15:06:48 <gkellogg> http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/manual.html
Gregg Kellogg: http://www.w3.org/2009/CommonScribe/manual.html ←
15:06:52 <AndyS> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.05.22
15:06:56 <pfps> scribe: pfps
15:06:59 <Zakim> + +1.707.874.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.707.874.aaaa ←
15:07:08 <pfps> topic: Admin
15:07:08 <cgreer> zakim, aaaa is me
Charles Greer: zakim, aaaa is me ←
15:07:08 <Zakim> +cgreer; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cgreer; got it ←
15:07:26 <pfps> subtopic: Minutes
15:07:46 <pfps> proposed: accept minutes of last meeting minus one resolution (see agenda)
PROPOSED: accept minutes of last meeting minus one resolution (see agenda) ←
15:07:49 <AZ> "There are some format problems with the chatlog" it says
Antoine Zimmermann: "There are some format problems with the chatlog" it says ←
15:08:12 <pfps> PROPOSED: accept minutes of last meeting minus one resolution (see agenda)
PROPOSED: accept minutes of last meeting minus one resolution (see agenda) ←
15:08:38 <pfps> pfps: minutes looked acceptable to me
Peter Patel-Schneider: minutes looked acceptable to me ←
15:08:56 <pfps> RESOLVED: accept minutes of last meeting
RESOLVED: accept minutes of last meeting ←
15:09:43 <AndyS> So we are opening issue-131 then? It's just "raised" currently.
Andy Seaborne: So we are opening ISSUE-131 then? It's just "raised" currently. ←
15:10:00 <pfps> guus: resolution about blank nodes as graph names should be withdrawn
Guus Schreiber: resolution about blank nodes as graph names should be withdrawn ←
15:10:19 <sandro> guus: I'll make issue-131 "open"
Guus Schreiber: I'll make ISSUE-131 "open" [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:10:20 <Zakim> +??P7
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P7 ←
15:10:28 <manu> zakim, I am ??P7
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P7 ←
15:10:28 <Zakim> +manu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu; got it ←
15:10:29 <Zakim> +PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH ←
15:10:36 <Arnaud> I fixed the formatting errors in the minutes of May 15
Arnaud Le Hors: I fixed the formatting errors in the minutes of May 15 ←
15:11:10 <pfps> guus: resolution about blank nodes from last week is withdrawn and ISSUE-131 is opened to track the question
Guus Schreiber: resolution about blank nodes from last week is withdrawn and ISSUE-131 is opened to track the question ←
15:11:10 <pfps> RESOLVED: resolution about blank nodes from last week [ http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-05-15#resolution_2 ] is withdrawn and ISSUE-131 is opened to track the question
RESOLVED: resolution about blank nodes from last week [ http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/rdf-wg/2013-05-15#resolution_2 ] is withdrawn and ISSUE-131 is opened to track the question ←
15:11:21 <manu> zakim, who is making noise?
Manu Sporny: zakim, who is making noise? ←
15:11:32 <Zakim> manu, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus_Schreiber (14%), AndyS (100%), davidwood (9%)
Zakim IRC Bot: manu, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus_Schreiber (14%), AndyS (100%), davidwood (9%) ←
15:12:02 <pfps> subtopic: Actions
15:12:26 <pfps> pfps: I pushed quite a few actions to pending review - they all should be done by recent edits to Concepts or Semantics
Peter Patel-Schneider: I pushed quite a few actions to pending review - they all should be done by recent edits to Concepts or Semantics ←
15:12:56 <gavinc> Close ACTION-260
Gavin Carothers: Close ACTION-260 ←
15:12:56 <trackbot> Closed ACTION-260 Gather data for resolving the turtle feature-at-risk..
Trackbot IRC Bot: Closed ACTION-260 Gather data for resolving the turtle feature-at-risk.. ←
15:13:51 <sandro> close action-264
Sandro Hawke: close ACTION-264 ←
15:13:51 <trackbot> Closed ACTION-264 Find the history and suggest phrasing for Concepts.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Closed ACTION-264 Find the history and suggest phrasing for Concepts. ←
15:13:52 <pfps> Close ACTION-264
Close ACTION-264 ←
15:13:52 <trackbot> Closed ACTION-264 Find the history and suggest phrasing for Concepts.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Closed ACTION-264 Find the history and suggest phrasing for Concepts. ←
15:14:01 <pfps> sandro: action 264 is obsolete
Sandro Hawke: ACTION-264 is obsolete ←
15:14:24 <pfps> guus: please record status in action note
Guus Schreiber: please record status in action note ←
15:14:34 <pfps> Topic: Concepts and Semantics LC drafts
15:15:01 <pfps> Pat: Semantics needs some work to account for comments from peter
Patrick Hayes: Semantics needs some work to account for comments from peter ←
15:15:42 <pfps> Peter: I looked over Concepts and it looks in good shape, modulo one issue
Peter Patel-Schneider: I looked over Concepts and it looks in good shape, modulo one issue ←
15:16:25 <pfps> Guus: ISSUE-131 and language tags, language tags first
Guus Schreiber: ISSUE-131 and language tags, language tags first ←
15:17:01 <sandro> topic: Language Tags
15:17:52 <pfps> Andy: proposal is to define a value space for rdf:langString and do some more fixups
Andy Seaborne: proposal is to define a value space for rdf:langString and do some more fixups ←
15:17:55 <pfps> q+
q+ ←
15:17:56 <sandro> andy: rdf:LangString becomes a normal data type except for ...
Andy Seaborne: rdf:LangString becomes a normal data type except for ... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:17:58 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
15:18:08 <Guus> ack pfps
Guus Schreiber: ack pfps ←
15:18:09 <PatH> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
15:18:26 <pfps> peter: what's the difference?
Peter Patel-Schneider: what's the difference? ←
15:18:50 <pfps> andy: currently abstract syntax doesn't correspond with what systems do
Andy Seaborne: currently abstract syntax doesn't correspond with what systems do ←
15:18:54 <sandro> andy: in the current rdf-concepts the abstract syntax messes around with the language tags
Andy Seaborne: in the current rdf-concepts the abstract syntax messes around with the language tags [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:19:23 <pfps> peter: the proposal is to do something different for language tags in the abstract syntax
Peter Patel-Schneider: the proposal is to do something different for language tags in the abstract syntax ←
15:19:53 <pfps> andy: yes, the abstract syntax doesn't mess with language tags
Andy Seaborne: yes, the abstract syntax doesn't mess with language tags ←
15:20:06 <pfps> andy: then it doesn't have to be built in
Andy Seaborne: then it doesn't have to be built in ←
15:20:16 <pfps> peter: I don't understand how this can be
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't understand how this can be ←
15:20:17 <gavinc> (The abstract syntax DOES mess with language tags today)
Gavin Carothers: (The abstract syntax DOES mess with language tags today) ←
15:20:52 <Zakim> +EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: +EricP ←
15:20:53 <sandro> pfps: The way to make langstring not built in, you have to make it not-special.
Peter Patel-Schneider: The way to make langstring not built in, you have to make it not-special. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:21:10 <Zakim> -manu
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu ←
15:21:14 <pfps> peter: rdf:langString is special the only way to make it not built-in is to make it completely non-special
Peter Patel-Schneider: rdf:langString is special the only way to make it not built-in is to make it completely non-special ←
15:21:33 <sandro> PatH: The weird part is that it has two strings in its lexical space instead of one.
Patrick Hayes: The weird part is that it has two strings in its lexical space instead of one. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:21:46 <pfps> peter: the proposal is then to make it half-special?
Peter Patel-Schneider: the proposal is then to make it half-special? ←
15:22:07 <pfps> andy: and also to remove lowercasing of language tags in the abstract syntax
Andy Seaborne: and also to remove lowercasing of language tags in the abstract syntax ←
15:22:15 <pfps> sandro: what is the difference?
Sandro Hawke: what is the difference? ←
15:22:19 <pfps> q+
q+ ←
15:22:25 <Guus> ack sandro
Guus Schreiber: ack sandro ←
15:22:39 <pfps> sandro: what are the testcases? number of triples? entailment? anything else??
Sandro Hawke: what are the testcases? number of triples? entailment? anything else?? ←
15:22:56 <ivan> issue-131?
15:22:56 <trackbot> ISSUE-131 -- How can one create an RDF dataset without being a web server? -- open
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-131 -- How can one create an RDF dataset without being a web server? -- open ←
15:22:56 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/131
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/131 ←
15:23:03 <Guus> ack PatH
Guus Schreiber: ack PatH ←
15:23:08 <pfps> peter: it appears to me that the number of triples will change but no entailments will
Peter Patel-Schneider: it appears to me that the number of triples will change but no entailments will ←
15:23:11 <sandro> { <a> <b> "chat"@fr, "chat"@FR }
Sandro Hawke: { <a> <b> "chat"@fr, "chat"@FR } ←
15:23:20 <sandro> that's two triples in andy's proposal
Sandro Hawke: that's two triples in andy's proposal ←
15:23:33 <ericP> q?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q? ←
15:23:47 <pfps> pat: several issues: 1/ upper vs lowercase 2/ unspecial 3/ built-in
Patrick Hayes: several issues: 1/ upper vs lowercase 2/ unspecial 3/ built-in ←
15:24:15 <pfps> pat: we could not require rdf:langString in RDF entailment
Patrick Hayes: we could not require rdf:langString in RDF entailment ←
15:24:21 <gavinc> sandro, that's two triples in raptor, 4store, jena, rdflib, ...
Gavin Carothers: sandro, that's two triples in raptor, 4store, jena, rdflib, ... ←
15:24:37 <ericP> q+ to add minor issues around case-preserving and impl burden of BCP-sensitive normalization
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to add minor issues around case-preserving and impl burden of BCP-sensitive normalization ←
15:24:51 <Guus> ack pfps
Guus Schreiber: ack pfps ←
15:24:52 <pfps> pat: I don't care about 1, we can't do 2, and I don't care about 3
Patrick Hayes: I don't care about 1, we can't do 2, and I don't care about 3 ←
15:25:50 <pfps> peter: the hardest thing from the point of Semantics is to handle language tags specially
Peter Patel-Schneider: the hardest thing from the point of Semantics is to handle language tags specially ←
15:26:14 <pfps> andy: isn't there special stuff for language tags?
Andy Seaborne: isn't there special stuff for language tags? ←
15:26:17 <pfps> peter: not really
Peter Patel-Schneider: not really ←
15:26:21 <Guus> ack ericP
Guus Schreiber: ack ericP ←
15:26:21 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to add minor issues around case-preserving and impl burden of BCP-sensitive normalization
Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to add minor issues around case-preserving and impl burden of BCP-sensitive normalization ←
15:26:44 <pfps> eric: implementers care about case
Eric Prud'hommeaux: implementers care about case ←
15:27:00 <gavinc> It isn't one triple! It's two triples, and I can't see any implementations that make it one :P
Gavin Carothers: It isn't one triple! It's two triples, and I can't see any implementations that make it one :P ←
15:27:06 <pfps> sandro: rdf 1.0 is confusing
Sandro Hawke: rdf 1.0 is confusing ←
15:27:21 <gavinc> I agree, RDF 1.0 says it's one.
Gavin Carothers: I agree, RDF 1.0 says it's one. ←
15:27:23 <pfps> andy: rdf 1.0 is clear that language tags are lowercased
Andy Seaborne: rdf 1.0 is clear that language tags are lowercased ←
15:27:30 <gavinc> But everyone doesn't.
Gavin Carothers: But everyone doesn't. ←
15:27:39 <pfps> andy: and there is a test case
Andy Seaborne: and there is a test case ←
15:27:53 <PatH> andy is muffled hard to hear
Patrick Hayes: andy is muffled hard to hear ←
15:27:57 <AZ> In RDF 1.0: "Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by [RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase"
Antoine Zimmermann: In RDF 1.0: "Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by [RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase" ←
15:28:12 <sandro> sandro: I don't think the language in the RDF 1.0 clear at all.
Sandro Hawke: I don't think the language in the RDF 1.0 clear at all. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:28:13 <pfps> eric: we could say normalize to BCP recommended form (which would be annoying)
Eric Prud'hommeaux: we could say normalize to BCP recommended form (which would be annoying) ←
15:28:53 <pfps> andy: i would like there to be two triples
Andy Seaborne: i would like there to be two triples ←
15:29:09 <gavinc> 4store is... amusing in this area ;)
Gavin Carothers: 4store is... amusing in this area ;) ←
15:29:12 <sandro> "Note: The case normalization of language tags is part of the description of the abstract syntax, and consequently the abstract behaviour of RDF applications. It does not constrain an RDF implementation to actually normalize the case."
Sandro Hawke: "Note: The case normalization of language tags is part of the description of the abstract syntax, and consequently the abstract behaviour of RDF applications. It does not constrain an RDF implementation to actually normalize the case." ←
15:29:13 <pfps> andy: if there is one, then there is the issue of what surface form to keep
Andy Seaborne: if there is one, then there is the issue of what surface form to keep ←
15:29:47 <Zakim> +??P7
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P7 ←
15:29:53 <manu> zakim, I am ??P7
Manu Sporny: zakim, I am ??P7 ←
15:29:53 <Zakim> +manu; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +manu; got it ←
15:29:53 <pfps> andy: but it is required to act as if it did normalize
Andy Seaborne: but it is required to act as if it did normalize ←
15:30:47 <ericP> q?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q? ←
15:30:52 <pfps> sandro: so in practice it's like 1 and 01 - sparql let's implementations vary
Sandro Hawke: so in practice it's like 1 and 01 - sparql let's implementations vary ←
15:31:21 <pfps> andy: the SPARQL test cases are quite specific
Andy Seaborne: the SPARQL test cases are quite specific ←
15:31:43 <gavinc> One reason why it "works" in RDF 1.0 is that XML says that language tags can only be BCP 47 valid language tags, which includes case... but is not the SAME case as the abstract syntax expects
Gavin Carothers: One reason why it "works" in RDF 1.0 is that XML says that language tags can only be BCP 47 valid language tags, which includes case... but is not the SAME case as the abstract syntax expects ←
15:31:48 <sandro> andy: SPARQL weasels around this by saying you can normalize on l0ading.
Andy Seaborne: SPARQL weasels around this by saying you can normalize on l0ading. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:31:54 <PatH> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
15:32:15 <Guus> ack PatH
Guus Schreiber: ack PatH ←
15:32:21 <sandro> sandro: I think we need to do something wealy like that in RDF as well.
Sandro Hawke: I think we need to do something wealy like that in RDF as well. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:32:48 <pfps> pat: where is the SPARQL test case that give two results, for 1 and 01
Patrick Hayes: where is the SPARQL test case that give two results, for 1 and 01 ←
15:33:04 <pfps> andy: it depends on where and whether entailment is in force
Andy Seaborne: it depends on where and whether entailment is in force ←
15:33:06 <sandro> andy: In a FILTER then value matching applies; in graph matching 1.0 and 1.00 look different.
Andy Seaborne: In a FILTER then value matching applies; in graph matching 1.0 and 1.00 look different. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:33:22 <pfps> pat: in practice then normalizing is wrong
Patrick Hayes: in practice then normalizing is wrong ←
15:33:32 <ericP> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#dfn-plain-literal Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by [RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/#dfn-plain-literal Plain literals have a lexical form and optionally a language tag as defined by [RFC-3066], normalized to lowercase. ←
15:33:47 <pfps> sandro: no, systems can normalize on input, so you can't figure out what is going on
Sandro Hawke: no, systems can normalize on input, so you can't figure out what is going on ←
15:33:47 <sandro> sandro: So what about SPARQL UPDATE? Insert 1.0 does it match 1.00 ???
Sandro Hawke: So what about SPARQL UPDATE? Insert 1.0 does it match 1.00 ??? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:33:49 <PatH> q-
Patrick Hayes: q- ←
15:33:57 <ericP> q+
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ ←
15:34:03 <pfps> guus: can we make progress?
Guus Schreiber: can we make progress? ←
15:34:35 <gavinc> I am happy with the proposal as is.
Gavin Carothers: I am happy with the proposal as is. ←
15:34:43 <pfps> sandro: compatability says we be permissive
Sandro Hawke: compatability says we be permissive ←
15:35:06 <ericP> q-
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q- ←
15:35:10 <pfps> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013May/0224.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2013May/0224.html ←
15:36:02 <ericP> +1 to Andy's #2
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 to Andy's #2 ←
15:36:09 <pfps> guus: second part of the proposal? any changes?
Guus Schreiber: second part of the proposal? any changes? ←
15:36:26 <ericP> +1 to the *spirit* of Andy's #2
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 to the *spirit* of Andy's #2 ←
15:36:40 <gavinc> It already IS an exceptional case.
Gavin Carothers: It already IS an exceptional case. ←
15:36:40 <pfps> pat: this doesn't fit into the standard datatype model, so it has to be exceptional
Patrick Hayes: this doesn't fit into the standard datatype model, so it has to be exceptional ←
15:37:11 <gavinc> +1 to defining the value space of langString
Gavin Carothers: +1 to defining the value space of langString ←
15:37:15 <pfps> andy: this is all about the value space of lang string
Andy Seaborne: this is all about the value space of lang string ←
15:37:42 <AndyS> sec 8:: IL(E)= < sss, ttt > ==> IL(E)= < sss, lowercase(ttt) >
Andy Seaborne: sec 8:: IL(E)= < sss, ttt > ==> IL(E)= < sss, lowercase(ttt) > ←
15:37:50 <pfps> pat: langString is a special case, and there is no proposal to make it not so
Patrick Hayes: langString is a special case, and there is no proposal to make it not so ←
15:38:00 <sandro> PROPOSED: The value space of rdf:langString is the set of pairs (string, LC-lang) where LC-lang is a lowercase language tag.
PROPOSED: The value space of rdf:langString is the set of pairs (string, LC-lang) where LC-lang is a lowercase language tag. ←
15:38:14 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
15:38:16 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
15:38:17 <Souri> +1
Souripriya Das: +1 ←
15:38:18 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
15:38:18 <sandro> +1 (but this doesn't settle everything about langString)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (but this doesn't settle everything about langString) ←
15:38:23 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
15:38:30 <gavinc> +1 (someone else gets to go see if langMatchs is unhappy with that)
Gavin Carothers: +1 (someone else gets to go see if langMatchs is unhappy with that) ←
15:38:31 <Guus> +1
Guus Schreiber: +1 ←
15:38:33 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
15:38:52 <gavinc> Yay
Gavin Carothers: Yay ←
15:38:53 <gavinc> :D
Gavin Carothers: :D ←
15:40:09 <AZ> In RDF 1.1 Concepts: "Language-tagged strings have the datatype IRI http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString. No datatype is formally defined for this IRI because the definition of datatypes does not accommodate language tags in the lexical space. The value space associated with this datatype IRI is the set of all pairs of strings and language tags."
Antoine Zimmermann: In RDF 1.1 Concepts: "Language-tagged strings have the datatype IRI http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#langString. No datatype is formally defined for this IRI because the definition of datatypes does not accommodate language tags in the lexical space. The value space associated with this datatype IRI is the set of all pairs of strings and language tags." ←
15:40:52 <AndyS> concepts : 3.3 and notes on sec 5
Andy Seaborne: concepts : 3.3 and notes on sec 5 ←
15:42:51 <davidwood> q+
David Wood: q+ ←
15:43:48 <pfps> -1, because this proposal doesn't match the discussion
-1, because this proposal doesn't match the discussion ←
15:44:01 <pfps> eric: let's make them two triples
Eric Prud'hommeaux: let's make them two triples ←
15:44:15 <pfps> sandro: no, the proposal is to make the number of triples ambiguous
Sandro Hawke: no, the proposal is to make the number of triples ambiguous ←
15:44:44 <AZ> The proposal makes <s> <p> "aaa"@EN and <s> <p> "aaa"@en two triples
Antoine Zimmermann: The proposal makes <s> <p> "aaa"@EN and <s> <p> "aaa"@en two triples ←
15:45:14 <pfps> eric: so a SPARQL query would give one triple in 2004, but now would be either one or two
Eric Prud'hommeaux: so a SPARQL query would give one triple in 2004, but now would be either one or two ←
15:45:51 <pfps> eric: the motivation for allowing two triples is that implementations work this way
Eric Prud'hommeaux: the motivation for allowing two triples is that implementations work this way ←
15:46:08 <pfps> eric: are there people who are counting on these two triples?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: are there people who are counting on these two triples? ←
15:46:14 <sandro> PROPOSED: The value space of rdf:langString has the language tag in lower case; the lexical form MAY be converted to lower case (as RDF 1.0 says, but not everyone does).
PROPOSED: The value space of rdf:langString has the language tag in lower case; the lexical form MAY be converted to lower case (as RDF 1.0 says, but not everyone does). ←
15:46:30 <pfps> eric: if there is enforcement then no one may care
Eric Prud'hommeaux: if there is enforcement then no one may care ←
15:46:36 <davidwood> q-
David Wood: q- ←
15:46:42 <sandro> q+
Sandro Hawke: q+ ←
15:47:22 <sandro> PROPOSED: The value space of rdf:langString has the language tag in lower case; in the lexical form, the language tag MAY be converted to lower case (as RDF 1.0 says, but not everyone does).
PROPOSED: The value space of rdf:langString has the language tag in lower case; in the lexical form, the language tag MAY be converted to lower case (as RDF 1.0 says, but not everyone does). ←
15:47:50 <gavinc> BCP 47 says that en-US is a BCP language tag, and en-us isn't :P
Gavin Carothers: BCP 47 says that en-US is a BCP language tag, and en-us isn't :P ←
15:47:59 <sandro> eric: BCP-47 says language strings are case insensitive.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: BCP-47 says language strings are case insensitive. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:48:04 <pfps> sandro: BCP-47 says that language tags are case insensitive
Sandro Hawke: BCP-47 says that language tags are case insensitive ←
15:49:03 <davidwood> Section 2.1.1 of BCP 47: "At all times, language tags and their subtags, including private use
David Wood: Section 2.1.1 of BCP 47: "At all times, language tags and their subtags, including private use ←
15:49:03 <davidwood> and extensions, are to be treated as case insensitive"
David Wood: and extensions, are to be treated as case insensitive" ←
15:49:49 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
15:49:52 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
15:49:54 <gkellogg> +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1 ←
15:49:57 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
15:49:57 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
15:49:58 <AndyS> +0.5
Andy Seaborne: +0.5 ←
15:50:01 <PatH> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
15:50:02 <pfps> -0, because this is a change that I don't think needs to be made
-0, because this is a change that I don't think needs to be made ←
15:50:09 <yvesr> +0.5
Yves Raimond: +0.5 ←
15:50:13 <Souri> q+
Souripriya Das: q+ ←
15:50:20 <sandro> RESOLVED: The value space of rdf:langString has the language tag in lower case; in the lexical form, the language tag MAY be converted to lower case (as RDF 1.0 says, but not everyone does).
RESOLVED: The value space of rdf:langString has the language tag in lower case; in the lexical form, the language tag MAY be converted to lower case (as RDF 1.0 says, but not everyone does). ←
15:50:21 <AZ> +0.5
Antoine Zimmermann: +0.5 ←
15:50:22 <sandro> q-
Sandro Hawke: q- ←
15:50:31 <ericP> -> http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp47#section-2.1.1 "At all times, language tags and their subtags ... are to be treated as case insensitive: there exist conventions for the capitalization of some of the subtags, but these MUST NOT be taken to carry meaning.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -> http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp47#section-2.1.1 "At all times, language tags and their subtags ... are to be treated as case insensitive: there exist conventions for the capitalization of some of the subtags, but these MUST NOT be taken to carry meaning. ←
15:50:34 <Souri> question - if I use { ?x :attrName "color"@en-us} in SPARQL what is the expected output if data presented was: _:b1 :attrName "color"^^EN-us
Souripriya Das: question - if I use { ?x :attrName "color"@en-us} in SPARQL what is the expected output if data presented was: _:b1 :attrName "color"^^EN-us ←
15:50:36 <ericP> "
15:50:48 <pfps> david: I'll put this into concepts
David Wood: I'll put this into concepts ←
15:51:25 <sandro> action: david to implement the langString resolution in rdf-concepts AND ENJOY IT
ACTION: david to implement the langString resolution in rdf-concepts AND ENJOY IT ←
15:51:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-265 - Implement the langString resolution in rdf-concepts AND ENJOY IT [on David Wood - due 2013-05-29].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-265 - Implement the langString resolution in rdf-concepts AND ENJOY IT [on David Wood - due 2013-05-29]. ←
15:51:30 <gavinc> ericP, Yep :D
Gavin Carothers: ericP, Yep :D ←
15:51:40 <pfps> guus: section 3 of proposal
Guus Schreiber: section 3 of proposal ←
15:51:42 <PatH> souri, it has to match in that case.
Patrick Hayes: souri, it has to match in that case. ←
15:51:55 <gavinc> However the ABNF is case sensitive, and has lovely rules like sgn-BE-NL
Gavin Carothers: However the ABNF is case sensitive, and has lovely rules like sgn-BE-NL ←
15:52:21 <pfps> andy: section 1 loosens requirements for RDF processors
Andy Seaborne: section 1 loosens requirements for RDF processors ←
15:52:45 <pfps> andy: there are no conformance issues being raised
Andy Seaborne: there are no conformance issues being raised ←
15:53:08 <PatH> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
15:53:13 <pfps> sandro: syntax processors need to be able to handle the special syntax for rdf:langString
Sandro Hawke: syntax processors need to be able to handle the special syntax for rdf:langString ←
15:53:32 <pfps> andy: Semantics says that processors must recognize rdf:langString
Andy Seaborne: Semantics says that processors must recognize rdf:langString ←
15:53:36 <Souri> thx Pat, so every RDF implementation is required to at least keep it in the form _:b1 :attrName "color"^^en-us, but optionally, in addition, it may also store _:b1 :attrName "color"^^EN-us.
Souripriya Das: thx Pat, so every RDF implementation is required to at least keep it in the form _:b1 :attrName "color"^^en-us, but optionally, in addition, it may also store _:b1 :attrName "color"^^EN-us. ←
15:54:01 <pfps> pat: we now have something special that is being stuck in Semantics for rdf:langString
Patrick Hayes: we now have something special that is being stuck in Semantics for rdf:langString ←
15:54:08 <pfps> andy: but that's already in Section 8
Andy Seaborne: but that's already in Section 8 ←
15:54:16 <pfps> sandro: it already was a test case
Sandro Hawke: it already was a test case ←
15:54:26 <sandro> So RDF Simple Entailment: <a> <b> "chat"@FR ENTAILS <a> <b> "chat"@fr
Sandro Hawke: So RDF Simple Entailment: <a> <b> "chat"@FR ENTAILS <a> <b> "chat"@fr ←
15:54:29 <Zakim> -davidwood
Zakim IRC Bot: -davidwood ←
15:54:43 <pfps> andy: D-entailments include rdf:langString
Andy Seaborne: D-entailments include rdf:langString ←
15:54:51 <pfps> guus: time
Guus Schreiber: time ←
15:54:57 <pfps> pat: I don't care either way
Patrick Hayes: I don't care either way ←
15:55:27 <pfps> guus: part 3?
Guus Schreiber: part 3? ←
15:56:10 <Guus> ack sandro
Guus Schreiber: ack sandro ←
15:56:18 <Souri> q-
Souripriya Das: q- ←
15:56:48 <Guus> ack PatH
Guus Schreiber: ack PatH ←
15:56:50 <AndyS> PROPOSAL: remove "other than rdf:langString and xsd:string"
PROPOSED: remove "other than rdf:langString and xsd:string" ←
15:57:03 <sandro> agreed observation: <a> <b> "chat"@FR ENTAILS <a> <b> "chat"@fr IF you recognize rdf:langString. Whether that's in RDF Simple Entailment isn't decided yet.
Sandro Hawke: agreed observation: <a> <b> "chat"@FR ENTAILS <a> <b> "chat"@fr IF you recognize rdf:langString. Whether that's in RDF Simple Entailment isn't decided yet. ←
15:57:10 <AndyS> PROPOSAL: remove "other than rdf:langString and xsd:string" in "RDF processors are not REQUIRED to recognize any datatype IRIs other than rdf:langString and xsd:string"
PROPOSED: remove "other than rdf:langString and xsd:string" in "RDF processors are not REQUIRED to recognize any datatype IRIs other than rdf:langString and xsd:string" ←
15:57:26 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
15:57:28 <pfps> -1
-1 ←
15:57:29 <Souri> +1
Souripriya Das: +1 ←
15:57:42 <pfps> -0.5
-0.5 ←
15:57:48 <PatH> 0
Patrick Hayes: 0 ←
15:58:02 <Souri> +0
Souripriya Das: +0 ←
15:58:05 <yvesr> 0
Yves Raimond: 0 ←
15:58:07 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
15:58:08 <AZ> +0
Antoine Zimmermann: +0 ←
15:58:09 <gkellogg> 0
Gregg Kellogg: 0 ←
15:58:15 <AndyS> (section 7 of MT)
Andy Seaborne: (section 7 of MT) ←
15:58:19 <pfps> pfps: there is all this stuff for rdf:langString so we should require it
Peter Patel-Schneider: there is all this stuff for rdf:langString so we should require it ←
15:58:20 <AZ> actually +0.5
Antoine Zimmermann: actually +0.5 ←
15:58:31 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
15:58:33 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
15:58:56 <PatH> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
15:59:21 <gavinc> note that xsd:strings are NOT for binaries
Gavin Carothers: note that xsd:strings are NOT for binaries ←
15:59:31 <pfps> pfps: there was a discussion last week about using strings for binaries, and this change validates that very, very, very bad usage
Peter Patel-Schneider: there was a discussion last week about using strings for binaries, and this change validates that very, very, very bad usage ←
15:59:31 <sandro> pfps: The reason to keep it: discussion last week on xsd:string for binaries. This change validates that.
Peter Patel-Schneider: The reason to keep it: discussion last week on xsd:string for binaries. This change validates that. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:00:02 <sandro> pfps: If you allow RDF implementations to treat strings as uninterpreted, then you're allowing zeros in them.
Peter Patel-Schneider: If you allow RDF implementations to treat strings as uninterpreted, then you're allowing zeros in them. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:00:13 <sandro> andy: By you can put NUL into integers!
Andy Seaborne: By you can put NUL into integers! [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:00:28 <sandro> pat: It's just an ill formed integer
Patrick Hayes: It's just an ill formed integer [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:00:37 <AZ> BTW, currently, Simple semantics implies: {<s> <p> "chat"@FR} does not entail {<s> <p> "chat"@fr}
Antoine Zimmermann: BTW, currently, Simple semantics implies: {<s> <p> "chat"@FR} does not entail {<s> <p> "chat"@fr} ←
16:00:53 <sandro> <a> <b> "\u0000"^^xs:int is a syntactically valid RDF triple.
Sandro Hawke: <a> <b> "\u0000"^^xs:int is a syntactically valid RDF triple. ←
16:01:14 <Zakim> -manu
Zakim IRC Bot: -manu ←
16:01:24 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
16:01:30 <sandro> guus: Not comfortable accepting this resolution yet.
Guus Schreiber: Not comfortable accepting this resolution yet. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
16:01:35 <pfps> guus: there does not appear to be obvious consensus
Guus Schreiber: there does not appear to be obvious consensus ←
16:02:00 <pfps> pfps: it would be nice to have some consensus forming via email
Peter Patel-Schneider: it would be nice to have some consensus forming via email ←
16:02:12 <pfps> guus: can we have discussion of 131 via email this week
Guus Schreiber: can we have discussion of 131 via email this week ←
16:02:13 <pfps> topic: Moving Forward
16:02:24 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
16:02:40 <pfps> guus: we want LC drafts of Concepts and Semantics by mid-June
Guus Schreiber: we want LC drafts of Concepts and Semantics by mid-June ←
16:03:08 <pfps> andy: W3C team please remind us what happens if we miss the end of the extension
Andy Seaborne: W3C team please remind us what happens if we miss the end of the extension ←
16:03:14 <pfps> ivan: we will be in deep trouble
Ivan Herman: we will be in deep trouble ←
16:03:25 <AndyS> ack me
Andy Seaborne: ack me ←
16:03:35 <gavinc> Turtle? :(
Gavin Carothers: Turtle? :( ←
16:03:46 <pfps> guus: we need to resolve these issues next week
Guus Schreiber: we need to resolve these issues next week ←
16:04:16 <pfps> pat: these issues need to implemented in documents, so they need to be implemented
Patrick Hayes: these issues need to implemented in documents, so they need to be implemented ←
16:04:32 <pfps> ivan: if Semantics isn't ready by the end of next week then I can't review it
Ivan Herman: if Semantics isn't ready by the end of next week then I can't review it ←
16:04:36 <AndyS> ack ivan
Andy Seaborne: ack ivan ←
16:04:38 <pfps> guus: is Semantics close?
Guus Schreiber: is Semantics close? ←
16:04:54 <pfps> pfps: there are a few things that need to be resolved
Peter Patel-Schneider: there are a few things that need to be resolved ←
16:05:15 <pfps> pat: I hope that these can be fixed on Friday
Patrick Hayes: I hope that these can be fixed on Friday ←
16:05:22 <AZ> I will review Semantics
Antoine Zimmermann: I will review Semantics ←
16:06:03 <pfps> guus: the initial review can be done next week
Guus Schreiber: the initial review can be done next week ←
16:06:11 <pfps> ivan: i will do my best
Ivan Herman: i will do my best ←
16:06:12 <pfps> topic: PrEfIx
16:06:30 <gavinc> PrEfIx?
Gavin Carothers: PrEfIx? ←
16:06:46 <ericP> wHaT AbOuT It?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: wHaT AbOuT It? ←
16:06:55 <PatH> thanks antoine
Patrick Hayes: thanks antoine ←
16:07:16 <pfps> gavin: we are trying to wrap things up
Gavin Carothers: we are trying to wrap things up ←
16:07:29 <pfps> sandro: it's not a complete blocking issue
Sandro Hawke: it's not a complete blocking issue ←
16:07:51 <pfps> gavin: test cases is waiting on a resolution
Gavin Carothers: test cases is waiting on a resolution ←
16:08:26 <PatH> +1 to whatever y'all are talking about.
Patrick Hayes: +1 to whatever y'all are talking about. ←
16:08:40 <pfps> sandro: I don't think everyone has looked at it
Sandro Hawke: I don't think everyone has looked at it ←
16:08:46 <pfps> gavin: please comment on the mailing list
Gavin Carothers: please comment on the mailing list ←
16:09:06 <pfps> pat: can we get a summary
Patrick Hayes: can we get a summary ←
16:09:31 <pfps> sandro: we should follow the W3C recommendation
Sandro Hawke: we should follow the W3C recommendation ←
16:09:38 <pfps> ivan: I don't buy that
Ivan Herman: I don't buy that ←
16:09:38 <Zakim> -cgreer
Zakim IRC Bot: -cgreer ←
16:10:06 <pfps> gavin: OK I'll write a message
Gavin Carothers: OK I'll write a message ←
16:10:19 <Zakim> -yvesr
Zakim IRC Bot: -yvesr ←
16:11:11 <pfps> gavin: I haven't seen arguments on the positions
Gavin Carothers: I haven't seen arguments on the positions ←
16:11:12 <pfps> topic: Adjourn
16:11:23 <pfps> guus: adjourn !
Guus Schreiber: adjourn ! ←
16:11:24 <Zakim> -PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: -PatH ←
16:11:26 <Zakim> -GavinC
Zakim IRC Bot: -GavinC ←
16:11:28 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
16:11:30 <Zakim> -Arnaud
Zakim IRC Bot: -Arnaud ←
16:11:33 <Zakim> -gkellogg
Zakim IRC Bot: -gkellogg ←
16:11:37 <Zakim> -AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ ←
16:11:38 <Zakim> -Souri
Zakim IRC Bot: -Souri ←
16:11:42 <Guus> trackbot, end meeting
Guus Schreiber: trackbot, end meeting ←
16:11:42 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←
16:11:42 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Guus_Schreiber, pfps, GavinC, Sandro, gkellogg, AndyS, AZ, Ivan, Arnaud, davidwood, yvesr, Souri, +1.707.874.aaaa, cgreer, manu, PatH,
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Guus_Schreiber, pfps, GavinC, Sandro, gkellogg, AndyS, AZ, Ivan, Arnaud, davidwood, yvesr, Souri, +1.707.874.aaaa, cgreer, manu, PatH, ←
16:11:46 <Zakim> ... EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: ... EricP ←
16:11:50 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
16:11:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-minutes.html trackbot ←
16:11:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
16:11:51 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-actions.rdf :
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-actions.rdf : ←
16:11:51 <RRSAgent> ACTION: david to implement the langString resolution in rdf-concepts AND ENJOY IT [1]
ACTION: david to implement the langString resolution in rdf-concepts AND ENJOY IT [1] ←
16:11:51 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-irc#T15-51-25
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/22-rdf-wg-irc#T15-51-25 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe