Please add your F2F status to the wiki at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1
initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 1/12/2
initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 4/7/5
initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 7/6/3
initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 13/0/3
<LeeF> Present: Lee, Andy, Steve, Luke, ivanh, iv_an_ru, orri, DaveNewman, kjetil, JanneS, bijan, ericp, alex, simon, kasei, chime, john
13:47:59 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
13:47:59 <trackbot> Date: 31 March 2009
Trackbot IRC Bot: Date: 31 March 2009 ←
13:48:09 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, this will be SPARQL ←
14:02:11 <LeeF> Regrets: Axel, Souri
(No events recorded for 14 minutes)
Lee Feigenbaum: Regrets: Axel, Souri ←
14:02:14 <LeeF> Chair: Lee Feigenbaum
14:04:04 <LeeF> Scribenick: SteveH
(Scribe set to Steve Harris)
14:04:39 <LeeF> topic: administrivia
14:04:43 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-03-24
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-03-24 ←
14:04:49 <SteveH> LeeF: PROPOSED approved mins from last week
Lee Feigenbaum: PROPOSED approved mins from last week ←
14:05:02 <kjetil> +1
Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1 ←
14:05:07 <SteveH> SteveH: 2nd
Steve Harris: 2nd ←
14:05:16 <iv_an_ru> Nth
Ivan Mikhailov: Nth ←
14:05:27 <SteveH> scribenick: SteveH
14:05:38 <SteveH> scribe: SteveH
14:05:42 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-03-24
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-03-24 ←
14:05:54 <LeeF> topic: logistics
Summary: Please add your F2F status to the wiki at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1
<LeeF> summary: Please add your F2F status to the wiki at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1
14:06:17 <SteveH> LeeF: set for F2F on 6th and 7th of May, cambridge (U.S.) and bristol (U.K.)
Lee Feigenbaum: set for F2F on 6th and 7th of May, cambridge (U.S.) and bristol (U.K.) ←
14:06:37 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1
Lee Feigenbaum: -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1 ←
14:06:50 <SteveH> LeeF: do we prefer web survey to wiki
Lee Feigenbaum: do we prefer web survey to wiki ←
14:06:54 <ericP> looks like the wiki has it
Eric Prud'hommeaux: looks like the wiki has it ←
14:07:10 <SteveH> LeeF: everybody to add status to wiki
Lee Feigenbaum: everybody to add status to wiki ←
14:08:21 <SteveH> LeeF: need to juggle scibe list for 7th april
Lee Feigenbaum: need to juggle scibe list for 7th april ←
14:08:37 <SteveH> LeeF: compliments on not messing up time change
Lee Feigenbaum: compliments on not messing up time change ←
<LeeF> topic: Liaisons
14:09:05 <bijan> q+ to ask about HTML5
Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask about HTML5 ←
14:09:11 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
14:09:11 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
14:09:20 <ericP> q+ to say i implemented the SPARQL grammar with curies
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to say i implemented the SPARQL grammar with curies ←
14:09:37 <kjetil> ack bijan
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack bijan ←
14:09:37 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to ask about HTML5
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to ask about HTML5 ←
14:09:45 <SteveH> bijan: on CURIEs, don't think there's anything to talk about, WG has setup dependency on SPARQL re. CURIEs
Bijan Parsia: on CURIEs, don't think there's anything to talk about, WG has setup dependency on SPARQL re. CURIEs ←
14:09:59 <SteveH> AndyS: confused, SPARQL does not depend on CURIE
Andy Seaborne: confused, SPARQL does not depend on CURIE ←
14:10:04 <SteveH> LeeF: OWL also does not
Lee Feigenbaum: OWL also does not ←
14:10:07 <ivanh> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:10:22 <SteveH> bijan: suggest not to delegate to CURIE spec
Bijan Parsia: suggest not to delegate to CURIE spec ←
14:10:27 <ericP> -> http://www.w3.org/2005/01/yacker/uploads/SPARQL_CURIE?lang=perl&markup=html SPARQL grammar with CURIEs
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -> http://www.w3.org/2005/01/yacker/uploads/SPARQL_CURIE?lang=perl&markup=html SPARQL grammar with CURIEs ←
14:10:38 <LeeF> ack ericp
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ericp ←
14:10:38 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say i implemented the SPARQL grammar with curis
Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to say i implemented the SPARQL grammar with curis ←
14:10:45 <SteveH> ericP: ralph asked would they work, turns out they do
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ralph asked would they work, turns out they do ←
14:11:04 <john-l> We would support prefix:path/to/something with curies, right?
John Clark: We would support prefix:path/to/something with curies, right? ←
14:11:08 <SteveH> ericP: ~103 changes a bit
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ~103 changes a bit ←
14:11:12 <SteveH> LeeF: move to ML
Lee Feigenbaum: move to ML ←
14:11:20 <LeeF> ack ivanh
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivanh ←
14:11:45 <SteveH> ivanh: from now on OWL makes normative ref. to SPARQL as far as prefix is concerned
Ivan Herman: from now on OWL makes normative ref. to SPARQL as far as prefix is concerned ←
14:11:56 <SteveH> ivanh: is SPARQL wants to change that we have to be careful
Ivan Herman: is SPARQL wants to change that we have to be careful ←
14:12:41 <SteveH> bijan: HTML5 WG is considering RDFA, this group might have some input, it's in some sense relevent, wanted to raise
Bijan Parsia: HTML5 WG is considering RDFA, this group might have some input, it's in some sense relevent, wanted to raise ←
14:12:45 <bijan> Specifically on production [98], [99], [100]
Bijan Parsia: Specifically on production [98], [99], [100] ←
14:12:52 <ericP> bijan, hints as to what we might want to sniff at?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: bijan, hints as to what we might want to sniff at? ←
14:13:00 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
14:13:00 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
14:13:22 <bijan> Well, for example, if RDFa is in HTML5 we might want to support querying it directly
Bijan Parsia: Well, for example, if RDFa is in HTML5 we might want to support querying it directly ←
14:13:30 <SteveH> LeeF: disucuss on ML if you have an opinion on HTML5+RDFa
Lee Feigenbaum: disucuss on ML if you have an opinion on HTML5+RDFa ←
<LeeF> topic: tracker & actions
14:13:53 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/ tracker for SPARQL WG
Lee Feigenbaum: -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/ tracker for SPARQL WG ←
14:13:54 <SteveH> LeeF: we have tracker setup that keeps track of actions, ala DAWG v1
Lee Feigenbaum: we have tracker setup that keeps track of actions, ala DAWG v1 ←
14:14:13 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/open open actions
Lee Feigenbaum: -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/open open actions ←
14:14:36 <LeeF> trackbot, close action-1
Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ACTION-1 ←
14:14:36 <trackbot> ACTION-1 Ask EricP to setup a WBS for the F2F closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-1 Ask EricP to setup a WBS for the F2F closed ←
14:14:42 <ivanh> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:14:52 <kjetil> Zakim, unmute me
Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, unmute me ←
14:14:52 <Zakim> kjetil should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil should no longer be muted ←
14:15:10 <LeeF> action-4: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JanMar/0186.html
Lee Feigenbaum: ACTION-4: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JanMar/0186.html ←
14:15:10 <trackbot> ACTION-4 Summarise the vocabularies (DARQ, SADDLE, voiD) notes added
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-4 Summarise the vocabularies (DARQ, SADDLE, voiD) notes added ←
14:15:21 <LeeF> trackbot, close action-4
Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ACTION-4 ←
14:15:21 <trackbot> ACTION-4 Summarise the vocabularies (DARQ, SADDLE, voiD) closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-4 Summarise the vocabularies (DARQ, SADDLE, voiD) closed ←
14:15:54 <ivanh> q-
Ivan Herman: q- ←
14:16:04 <LeeF> trackbot, close action-5
Lee Feigenbaum: trackbot, close ACTION-5 ←
14:16:04 <trackbot> ACTION-5 Add security issues to query by reference feature closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-5 Add security issues to query by reference feature closed ←
14:19:18 <kjetil> action-2: Whoops, wrong link, this is it: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ReturnFormatKeyword#Related_Use_Cases.2FExtensions
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ACTION-2: Whoops, wrong link, this is it: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ReturnFormatKeyword#Related_Use_Cases.2FExtensions ←
14:19:18 <trackbot> ACTION-2 Update the wiki page with his experience (caveat: kjetil may be delayed in doing it) notes added
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-2 Update the wiki page with his experience (caveat: kjetil may be delayed in doing it) notes added ←
14:16:26 <kjetil> trackbot, close action-2
Kjetil Kjernsmo: trackbot, close ACTION-2 ←
14:16:26 <trackbot> ACTION-2 Update the wiki page with his experience (caveat: kjetil may be delayed in doing it) closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-2 Update the wiki page with his experience (caveat: kjetil may be delayed in doing it) closed ←
14:16:37 <LeeF> topic: ExecCommentsAndWarning
Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 1/12/2
<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 1/12/2
14:17:01 <kjetil> Zakim, mute me
Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me ←
14:17:01 <Zakim> kjetil should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil should now be muted ←
14:17:55 <SteveH> Orri: runtime exceptions, any possible number of errors, would like to be able to stream the results, with errors inline
Orri Erling: runtime exceptions, any possible number of errors, would like to be able to stream the results, with errors inline ←
14:18:21 <SteveH> Orri: would like to be able to send first row of results, but put errors after
Orri Erling: would like to be able to send first row of results, but put errors after ←
14:18:25 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:18:47 <SteveH> orri: we have cases where we need to stream the results
Orri Erling: we have cases where we need to stream the results ←
14:18:49 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
14:19:05 <LeeF> SteveH: Two of our internal engines do this using an ASCII-based result format
Steve Harris: Two of our internal engines do this using an ASCII-based result format [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:20:01 <SteveH> LeeF: my concern is that we don't have a lot of impl. experience, would need to play within the existing result format, dont see strainghtforward way to do that
Lee Feigenbaum: my concern is that we don't have a lot of impl. experience, would need to play within the existing result format, dont see strainghtforward way to do that ←
14:20:10 <SteveH> Orri: I can see straightforward way
Orri Erling: I can see straightforward way ←
14:20:19 <SteveH> Orri: I don't think it's difficult
Orri Erling: I don't think it's difficult ←
14:20:27 <SteveH> LeeF: how about CONSTRUCT
Lee Feigenbaum: how about CONSTRUCT ←
14:20:32 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:20:38 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
14:20:58 <SteveH> Orri: could include triples in dedicated namespace, some kind of convention with triples
Orri Erling: could include triples in dedicated namespace, some kind of convention with triples ←
14:21:19 <LeeF> SteveH: we do it in RDF/XML using XML comments
Steve Harris: we do it in RDF/XML using XML comments [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:21:21 <kjetil> ack SteveH
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack SteveH ←
14:21:24 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
14:21:49 <SteveH> AndyS: for SELECT, if it is a change to format to put in something other than a row, would be changing schema, so people may be affected
Andy Seaborne: for SELECT, if it is a change to format to put in something other than a row, would be changing schema, so people may be affected ←
14:22:07 <SteveH> also we do same in SPARQL XML res
also we do same in SPARQL XML res ←
14:22:14 <SteveH> (comment that i)
(comment that i) ←
14:22:33 <SteveH> LeeF: straw poll
Lee Feigenbaum: straw poll ←
14:23:15 <LeeF> zakim, who's here?
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's here? ←
14:23:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan (muted), john-l (muted), kasei (muted), SimonS, AlexPassant, ivanh, AndyS, [Garlik], Lee_Feigenbaum, Chimezie_Ogbuji, JanneS, kjetil (muted), Orri, EricP
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan (muted), john-l (muted), kasei (muted), SimonS, AlexPassant, ivanh, AndyS, [Garlik], Lee_Feigenbaum, Chimezie_Ogbuji, JanneS, kjetil (muted), Orri, EricP ←
14:23:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see AlexPassant, JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, bijan, Zakim, RRSAgent, AndyS, kasei, LeeF, SimonS, ivanh, AndyS_, kjetil, trackbot, iv_an_ru, john-l, sandro, KjetilK,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see AlexPassant, JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, bijan, Zakim, RRSAgent, AndyS, kasei, LeeF, SimonS, ivanh, AndyS_, kjetil, trackbot, iv_an_ru, john-l, sandro, KjetilK, ←
14:23:20 <Zakim> ... ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: ... ericP ←
14:23:25 <SteveH> -1, too early, compatibility issues
-1, too early, compatibility issues ←
14:23:25 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
14:23:26 <kasei> 0; but might support standarizing an xml ns URI for this use (outside spec)
Gregory Williams: 0; but might support standarizing an xml ns URI for this use (outside spec) ←
14:23:26 <kjetil> 0
Kjetil Kjernsmo: 0 ←
14:23:27 <AlexPassant> 0
14:23:27 <john-l> 0
John Clark: 0 ←
14:23:28 <chimezie> 0
Chimezie Ogbuji: 0 ←
14:23:29 <AndyS> 0 (-1 if it includes deciding errors that can be reported)
Andy Seaborne: 0 (-1 if it includes deciding errors that can be reported) ←
14:23:30 <ericP> 0
14:23:31 <LukeWM> -1
Luke Wilson-Mawer: -1 ←
14:23:32 <ivanh> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
14:23:32 <bijan> er.. -
Bijan Parsia: er.. - ←
14:23:33 <JanneS> 0
Janne Saarela: 0 ←
14:23:34 <bijan> 0
Bijan Parsia: 0 ←
14:23:34 <SimonS> 0
Simon Schenk: 0 ←
14:23:40 <LeeF> Orri: +1
Orri Erling: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:23:50 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
14:23:50 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
14:24:08 <bijan> REAL VOTE: +0
Bijan Parsia: REAL VOTE: +0 ←
14:24:11 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
14:24:11 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
14:24:11 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
14:24:31 <bijan> I would go +1 probably after examining the existing implementations
Bijan Parsia: I would go +1 probably after examining the existing implementations ←
14:24:30 <LeeF> topic: query response linking
Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 4/7/5
<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 4/7/5
14:24:40 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Query_response_linking
Lee Feigenbaum: -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Query_response_linking ←
14:25:13 <SteveH> SimonS: the idea is to add something to protocol to set links to additional information, eg. a licencse to an endpoint that prodiced, endpoint etc.
Simon Schenk: the idea is to add something to protocol to set links to additional information, eg. a licencse to an endpoint that prodiced, endpoint etc. ←
14:25:22 <SteveH> SimonS: can do it in SELECT, but not typed
Simon Schenk: can do it in SELECT, but not typed ←
14:25:32 <SteveH> SimonS: similar to HTML link tag
Simon Schenk: similar to HTML link tag ←
14:25:44 <ivanh> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:25:49 <SteveH> SimonS: has a number of relationship types that are listed, but we could do something else
Simon Schenk: has a number of relationship types that are listed, but we could do something else ←
14:26:00 <SteveH> SimonS: so it can be in CONSTRUCT
Simon Schenk: so it can be in CONSTRUCT ←
14:26:29 <SimonS> yes, was me
Simon Schenk: yes, was me ←
14:26:46 <Zakim> +DaveNewman
Zakim IRC Bot: +DaveNewman ←
14:26:50 <SteveH> ivanh: dont know all details, but there were discussions in HTML for categorising, wouldn't that cover it
Ivan Herman: dont know all details, but there were discussions in HTML for categorising, wouldn't that cover it ←
14:27:04 <SimonS> +q
Simon Schenk: +q ←
14:27:05 <SteveH> ivanh: do we have to do anything, or rely on HTTP
Ivan Herman: do we have to do anything, or rely on HTTP ←
14:27:10 <ivanh> q-
Ivan Herman: q- ←
14:27:25 <kasei> setting the http headers of a response is generally harder than changing the body content.
Gregory Williams: setting the http headers of a response is generally harder than changing the body content. ←
14:27:27 <SteveH> LeeF: would be a bit strange to do it in HTTP header for more expresivity
Lee Feigenbaum: would be a bit strange to do it in HTTP header for more expresivity ←
14:27:28 <chimezie> Isn't there a clog in the process of registering HTTP Link header?
Chimezie Ogbuji: Isn't there a clog in the process of registering HTTP Link header? ←
14:27:30 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:27:40 <LeeF> ack SimonS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SimonS ←
14:28:05 <SteveH> SimonS: I think having it in protocol would be better, we should have something like the thing in HTML4, should have something based on URIs
Simon Schenk: I think having it in protocol would be better, we should have something like the thing in HTML4, should have something based on URIs ←
14:28:10 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
14:28:40 <LeeF> SteveH: having this in the result format is wacky since it only applies to SELECT results, but nothing mandates that SPARQL be over HTTP
Steve Harris: having this in the result format is wacky since it only applies to SELECT results, but nothing mandates that SPARQL be over HTTP [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:28:48 <LeeF> ... on balance I'd rather see it in protocol
Lee Feigenbaum: ... on balance I'd rather see it in protocol ←
14:29:13 <SteveH> LeeF: if we accept this, we still have plenty of lattitude, so discussion could come later
Lee Feigenbaum: if we accept this, we still have plenty of lattitude, so discussion could come later ←
14:29:18 <kasei> the wiki page gives an example of using it in an RDF response (construct/describe)
Gregory Williams: the wiki page gives an example of using it in an RDF response (construct/describe) ←
14:30:22 <SteveH> orri: I think the usecase is has to do with data being returned, might be licencing, eg. if we repurpose, then sth like CC you have to reference source, it's probably better in protocol than HTTP
Orri Erling: I think the usecase is has to do with data being returned, might be licencing, eg. if we repurpose, then sth like CC you have to reference source, it's probably better in protocol than HTTP ←
14:30:22 <kjetil> q+
Kjetil Kjernsmo: q+ ←
14:30:31 <kjetil> ack me
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack me ←
14:31:06 <SteveH> kjetil: I think that I would have done it by having graph names for the licence, so this could be doe mostly at the endpoint without change to protocol
Kjetil Kjernsmo: I think that I would have done it by having graph names for the licence, so this could be doe mostly at the endpoint without change to protocol ←
14:31:16 <SteveH> ... not in the general case, but for many it doesn't need to go in
... not in the general case, but for many it doesn't need to go in ←
14:31:27 <SteveH> LeeF: 1 argument is for having a standard place to look
Lee Feigenbaum: 1 argument is for having a standard place to look ←
14:31:40 <SteveH> LeeF: is there value in specific types of metadata
Lee Feigenbaum: is there value in specific types of metadata ←
14:31:58 <SteveH> kjetil: thats a general problem with data discovery, a licence is just another triple
Kjetil Kjernsmo: thats a general problem with data discovery, a licence is just another triple ←
14:32:00 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:32:04 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
14:32:22 <AndyS> If in protocol, it will likely get split from the results if stored or passed on.
Andy Seaborne: If in protocol, it will likely get split from the results if stored or passed on. ←
14:32:37 <LeeF> SteveH: a bit concerned about oversimplification - consider the case in which an end point is serving data from multiple sources with multiple licenses
Steve Harris: a bit concerned about oversimplification - consider the case in which an end point is serving data from multiple sources with multiple licenses [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:33:21 <kasei> +1
Gregory Williams: +1 ←
14:33:23 <SteveH> 0
0 ←
14:33:23 <LukeWM> 0
14:33:23 <kjetil> -1
Kjetil Kjernsmo: -1 ←
14:33:28 <chimezie> +1
Chimezie Ogbuji: +1 ←
14:33:30 <SimonS> +1
Simon Schenk: +1 ←
14:33:30 <dnewman2> 0
David Newman: 0 ←
14:33:32 <john-l> 0
John Clark: 0 ←
14:33:32 <kjetil> Zakim, mute me
Kjetil Kjernsmo: Zakim, mute me ←
14:33:32 <Zakim> kjetil should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: kjetil should now be muted ←
14:33:32 <AndyS> -1
Andy Seaborne: -1 ←
14:33:33 <AlexPassant> +1
Alexandre Passant: +1 ←
14:33:35 <ivanh> -1 (trying to set priorities)
Ivan Herman: -1 (trying to set priorities) ←
14:33:37 <LeeF> Orri: 0
Orri Erling: 0 [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:33:39 <JanneS> -1
Janne Saarela: -1 ←
14:33:44 <ericP> -1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: -1 ←
14:33:44 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
14:33:45 <bijan> 0
Bijan Parsia: 0 ←
14:34:16 <SteveH> Topic: assignment
Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 7/6/3
<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 7/6/3
14:34:19 <LeeF> -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Assignment
Lee Feigenbaum: -> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Assignment ←
14:35:18 <SteveH> AndyS: the idea is to have explicit statement when you want to bind a variable to a value, strongly related to expressions in subselects, similar but assgnments can be said to be clearer, assignment could be a syntactic way of doing the other thing
Andy Seaborne: the idea is to have explicit statement when you want to bind a variable to a value, strongly related to expressions in subselects, similar but assgnments can be said to be clearer, assignment could be a syntactic way of doing the other thing ←
14:35:22 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:35:33 <SteveH> AndyS: implemented in ARQ, it's quite popular
Andy Seaborne: implemented in ARQ, it's quite popular ←
14:36:04 <SteveH> LeeF: is assingment purely syntactic if we have susbselect and named projection
Lee Feigenbaum: is assingment purely syntactic if we have susbselect and named projection ←
14:36:14 <SteveH> AndyS: not sure about scoping, but they're clearly related
Andy Seaborne: not sure about scoping, but they're clearly related ←
14:36:15 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
14:36:44 <LeeF> SteveH: Assignment as a native feature rather than syntactic sugar scares me - doesn't seem to fit into a query language
Steve Harris: Assignment as a native feature rather than syntactic sugar scares me - doesn't seem to fit into a query language [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:36:53 <LeeF> SteveH: ...given my background
Steve Harris: ...given my background [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:37:22 <Zakim> -Orri
Zakim IRC Bot: -Orri ←
14:37:27 <SteveH> AndyS: similar thing is the ability to put an expression inline, syntactic sugar for putting a [something] in there
Andy Seaborne: similar thing is the ability to put an expression inline, syntactic sugar for putting a [something] in there ←
14:37:47 <ericP> q+
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ ←
14:37:50 <SteveH> AndyS: it doesn't introduce a binding, but it's in the same space
Andy Seaborne: it doesn't introduce a binding, but it's in the same space ←
14:37:50 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ScalarExpressionsInTriplePatterns
Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:ScalarExpressionsInTriplePatterns ←
14:37:58 <LeeF> ack ericP
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ericP ←
14:38:13 <SteveH> ericP: I would argue that creating a varaible is doable in SQL, but you name it with the expression name
Eric Prud'hommeaux: I would argue that creating a varaible is doable in SQL, but you name it with the expression name ←
14:38:16 <bijan> XQuery has lots of variables :)
Bijan Parsia: XQuery has lots of variables :) ←
14:38:19 <chimezie> My main concern (in addition to possible redundancy with subselects) is control of recursion which is handled 'naturaly' by sub-select and grouped graph patterns
Chimezie Ogbuji: My main concern (in addition to possible redundancy with subselects) is control of recursion which is handled 'naturaly' by sub-select and grouped graph patterns ←
14:38:20 <bijan> For...Let...
Bijan Parsia: For...Let... ←
14:38:24 <SteveH> ericP: in SPARQL we would just name it with a bound variable name
Eric Prud'hommeaux: in SPARQL we would just name it with a bound variable name ←
14:38:28 <SteveH> q+ to reply
q+ to reply ←
14:38:45 <SteveH> AndyS: you cant write a recursive expression
Andy Seaborne: you cant write a recursive expression ←
14:38:55 <bijan> But I share SteveH's inclination toward fear. But I also share his sense that it might be an unwarrented fear :)
Bijan Parsia: But I share SteveH's inclination toward fear. But I also share his sense that it might be an unwarrented fear :) ←
14:39:03 <Zakim> +??P14
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14 ←
14:39:12 <LeeF> zakim, ??P14 is Orri
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, ??P14 is Orri ←
14:39:12 <Zakim> +Orri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Orri; got it ←
14:39:30 <SteveH> chimezie: doesn't it depend on evaluation model, you could assign to an expression that is refered to outside
Chimezie Ogbuji: doesn't it depend on evaluation model, you could assign to an expression that is refered to outside ←
14:39:37 <SteveH> AndyS: the prosoal doesnt cover that
Andy Seaborne: the proposal doesnt cover that ←
14:39:45 <LeeF> s/prosoal/proposal
14:39:55 <kjetil> ack SteveH
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack SteveH ←
14:39:55 <Zakim> SteveH, you wanted to reply
Zakim IRC Bot: SteveH, you wanted to reply ←
14:39:58 <JanneS> AndyS, can/could there be function calls on the right side of the assignment? Or do you implement that in ARQ?
Janne Saarela: AndyS, can/could there be function calls on the right side of the assignment? Or do you implement that in ARQ? ←
14:40:01 <ericP> SteveH: in SQL it doesn't *look* like a variable assignment
Steve Harris: in SQL it doesn't *look* like a variable assignment [ Scribe Assist by Eric Prud'hommeaux ] ←
14:40:16 <LeeF> SteveH: +1 to Eric that you can do similar in SQL, but it doesn't look like assignment - it's the syntax that scares me since it looks like an assignment, it's non-obvious how it works
Steve Harris: +1 to Eric that you can do similar in SQL, but it doesn't look like assignment - it's the syntax that scares me since it looks like an assignment, it's non-obvious how it works [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:40:21 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
14:40:22 <ericP> ... i don't know the scope. is it pure functional?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ... i don't know the scope. is it pure functional? ←
14:40:29 <bijan> q+ to ask for pointers to examples
Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask for pointers to examples ←
14:40:31 <ericP> ... worried about user expectations
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ... worried about user expectations ←
14:41:03 <SteveH> AndyS: can have functions on RHS
Andy Seaborne: can have functions on RHS ←
14:41:23 <SteveH> AndyS: these issues will all arise, but now talking about details of mechanism, quaestion is do we want this feature
Andy Seaborne: these issues will all arise, but now talking about details of mechanism, quaestion is do we want this feature ←
14:41:29 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
14:41:29 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
14:41:32 <LeeF> ack bijan
Lee Feigenbaum: ack bijan ←
14:41:32 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to ask for pointers to examples
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to ask for pointers to examples ←
14:41:42 <kjetil> ack AndyS
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack AndyS ←
14:41:50 <SteveH> bijan: wondering if andy has pointers to examples from users, having trouble wrapping mind around standard functions
Bijan Parsia: wondering if andy has pointers to examples from users, having trouble wrapping mind around standard functions ←
14:41:58 <AndyS> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Assignment
Andy Seaborne: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:Assignment ←
14:42:24 <SteveH> bijan: looking for app examples, where used in anger
Bijan Parsia: looking for app examples, where used in anger ←
14:42:44 <JanneS> If functions are allowed on right side, maybe those who map SPARQL to SQL could not evaluate such expressions?
Janne Saarela: If functions are allowed on right side, maybe those who map SPARQL to SQL could not evaluate such expressions? ←
14:42:47 <SteveH> AndyS: used particularly in the case where there's a CONTRCUT
Andy Seaborne: used particularly in the case where there's a CONTRCUT ←
14:42:53 <chimezie> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2009Mar/0009.html Holger's commets
Chimezie Ogbuji: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2009Mar/0009.html Holger's commets ←
14:43:00 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
14:43:00 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
14:43:00 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
14:43:09 <AndyS> Janne - yes and same as FILTER situation isn't it?
Andy Seaborne: Janne - yes and same as FILTER situation isn't it? ←
14:43:21 <JanneS> yup
Janne Saarela: yup ←
14:43:24 <SteveH> LeeF: anyone else implemented it
Lee Feigenbaum: anyone else implemented it ←
14:43:33 <LeeF> SimonS: we did it but only internally - very useful
Simon Schenk: we did it but only internally - very useful [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:43:34 <SteveH> SimonS: we did it internally, but can't say anything about user requirements
Simon Schenk: we did it internally, but can't say anything about user requirements ←
14:43:48 <SteveH> LeeF: straw poll
Lee Feigenbaum: straw poll ←
14:43:49 <SteveH> -1
-1 ←
14:43:54 <kjetil> +1
Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1 ←
14:43:56 <kasei> +1
Gregory Williams: +1 ←
14:43:57 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:43:57 <AlexPassant> +1
Alexandre Passant: +1 ←
14:44:00 <chimezie> -1
Chimezie Ogbuji: -1 ←
14:44:00 <LukeWM> 0
14:44:02 <SteveH> q-
q- ←
14:44:02 <john-l> 0
John Clark: 0 ←
14:44:05 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
14:44:07 <bijan> +0
Bijan Parsia: +0 ←
14:44:09 <SimonS> +1
Simon Schenk: +1 ←
14:44:11 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
14:44:14 <ivanh> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
14:44:14 <JanneS> +1
Janne Saarela: +1 ←
14:44:27 <dnewman2> 0
David Newman: 0 ←
14:44:34 <LeeF> Orri: -1 un-query-language like
Orri Erling: -1 un-query-language like [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:44:38 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
14:44:52 <SteveH> LeeF: fan of feature, but happy to be able to do it other ways
Lee Feigenbaum: fan of feature, but happy to be able to do it other ways ←
14:45:16 <LeeF> topic: accesing rdf lists
Summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 13/0/3
<LeeF> summary: initial straw poll gives (+/0/-): 13/0/3
14:45:16 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:AccessingRdfLists
Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Feature:AccessingRdfLists ←
14:45:34 <SteveH> AndyS: desire i to access all memers of a list in a length-neutral way
Andy Seaborne: desire i to access all memers of a list in a length-neutral way ←
14:45:47 <SteveH> AndyS: can do it with fixed length lists in some caes, but it gets burdensome
Andy Seaborne: can do it with fixed length lists in some caes, but it gets burdensome ←
14:46:04 <ericP> q+ to say this will be a bit difficult, but is probably the most important thing we could do for the semantic web
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to say this will be a bit difficult, but is probably the most important thing we could do for the semantic web ←
14:46:13 <SteveH> AndyS: have some way in lang. to get one member per row, could also do most of it with property paths, except that the tail is isself a list
Andy Seaborne: have some way in lang. to get one member per row, could also do most of it with property paths, except that the tail is isself a list ←
14:46:21 <SteveH> AndyS: so you get duplicates
Andy Seaborne: so you get duplicates ←
14:46:22 <ivanh> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:46:40 <SteveH> AndyS: implemented in ARQ, looks like rdfs:member, but applies to lists
Andy Seaborne: implemented in ARQ, looks like rdfs:member, but applies to lists ←
14:46:58 <SteveH> AndyS: used where you don't have closed lists
AndyS, used where you don't have closed lists ←
14:47:16 <SteveH> Orri: we have general transitive subquery, maybe be macro expanded into subquery
Orri Erling: we have general transitive subquery, maybe be macro expanded into subquery ←
14:47:22 <SteveH> orri: no special synta
Orri Erling: no special syntax ←
14:47:22 <john-l> Is that transitive subquery feature listed on the Wiki?
John Clark: Is that transitive subquery feature listed on the Wiki? ←
14:47:31 <ivanh> s/synta/syntax/
14:47:33 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
14:47:34 <SteveH> Orri: we would not mid making shorthand
Orri Erling: we would not mid making shorthand ←
14:47:36 <LeeF> ack ericP
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ericP ←
14:47:36 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to say this will be a bit difficult, but is probably the most important thing we could do for the semantic web
Zakim IRC Bot: ericP, you wanted to say this will be a bit difficult, but is probably the most important thing we could do for the semantic web ←
14:48:31 <SteveH> ericP: useful impl. requires ordered results, probably. added in two different implementations to get members of a list, to match any memmbers of a list, to treat as unordered, its not that hard to do, just hard to spec
Eric Prud'hommeaux: useful impl. requires ordered results, probably. added in two different implementations to get members of a list, to match any memmbers of a list, to treat as unordered, its not that hard to do, just hard to spec ←
14:48:33 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
14:48:35 <LeeF> ack ivanh
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivanh ←
14:48:55 <ericP> members(?x) ordered("1" "2") unordered("2" "1")
Eric Prud'hommeaux: members(?x) ordered("1" "2") unordered("2" "1") ←
14:49:00 <ericP> +1 to ivanh's point
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 to ivanh's point ←
14:49:22 <SteveH> ivanh: i really believe its important, I've seen several people defineing vocabs, wanted to use lists, but instead they do something convoluted because lists cannot be sparql'd
Ivan Herman: i really believe its important, I've seen several people defineing vocabs, wanted to use lists, but instead they do something convoluted because lists cannot be sparql'd ←
14:49:33 <AlexPassant> +1 wrt vocabulary design
Alexandre Passant: +1 wrt vocabulary design ←
14:49:33 <SteveH> ivanh: so had negative effect on the way vocabs were defined
Ivan Herman: so had negative effect on the way vocabs were defined ←
14:49:33 <chimezie> AndyS�:� assuming we had property paths, couldn't the fact tha the list tail is also a list be handled by excluding it from the results?
Chimezie Ogbuji: AndyS�:� assuming we had property paths, couldn't the fact tha the list tail is also a list be handled by excluding it from the results? ←
14:49:40 <chimezie> since the tail is always rdf:nil
Chimezie Ogbuji: since the tail is always rdf:nil ←
14:49:48 <LeeF> s/AndyS:/AndyS,
14:50:12 <SteveH> chimezie: q for AndyS about property paths, if you had prop paths you could overcome by filtering out the tail
Chimezie Ogbuji: q for AndyS about property paths, if you had prop paths you could overcome by filtering out the tail ←
14:50:22 <SteveH> AndyS: it's the rdf:nil that's that issue
Andy Seaborne: it's not the rdf:nil that's that issue ←
14:50:31 <SteveH> LeeF: any subset of the list, looks like a list
Lee Feigenbaum: any subset of the list, looks like a list ←
14:50:34 <AndyS> s/it's/it's not/
14:50:35 <ericP> (1 2 3) => (2 3) => (3) => ()
Eric Prud'hommeaux: (1 2 3) => (2 3) => (3) => () ←
14:50:41 <bijan> I.e., lists aren't objects with distinct boundaries in RDF
Bijan Parsia: I.e., lists aren't objects with distinct boundaries in RDF ←
14:50:54 <SteveH> chimezie: I'm pretty familiar with path-based, been able to get all the entries
Chimezie Ogbuji: I'm pretty familiar with path-based, been able to get all the entries ←
14:51:11 <SteveH> LeeF: my experiance has been that I'm mostly querying for a specific member
Lee Feigenbaum: my experiance has been that I'm mostly querying for a specific member ←
14:51:15 <SteveH> +1 to LeeF
+1 to LeeF ←
14:51:16 <AndyS> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JanMar/0100.html
Andy Seaborne: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2009JanMar/0100.html ←
14:51:41 <SimonS> +q any example, where you do not know the head?
Simon Schenk: +q any example, where you do not know the head? ←
14:51:45 <bijan> Redundant answers can also be a problem
Bijan Parsia: Redundant answers can also be a problem ←
14:51:55 <LeeF> ack SimonS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SimonS ←
14:52:10 <SteveH> SimonS: can you give an example of realworld query where don't know the head
Simon Schenk: can you give an example of realworld query where don't know the head ←
14:52:19 <SteveH> SimonS: whenever I query a list I know the head
Simon Schenk: whenever I query a list I know the head ←
14:52:26 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
14:52:43 <SteveH> AndyS: to some extent it's a corner case, but can produce a lot of questions
Andy Seaborne: to some extent it's a corner case, but can produce a lot of questions ←
14:52:48 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
14:52:48 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
14:52:54 <LeeF> ack bijan
Lee Feigenbaum: ack bijan ←
14:52:55 <SteveH> AndyS: if you try to get into explaining then it causes confusion
Andy Seaborne: if you try to get into explaining then it causes confusion ←
14:53:15 <SteveH> bijan: I would have thought that problem is that when you think you have the query, you're actually punching into the middle
Bijan Parsia: I would have thought that problem is that when you think you have the query, you're actually punching into the middle ←
14:53:26 <SteveH> bijan: you could end up querying the tail, that would be a worry
Bijan Parsia: you could end up querying the tail, that would be a worry ←
14:53:44 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
14:53:44 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
14:53:58 <ivanh> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
14:53:59 <kjetil> +1
Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1 ←
14:54:01 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
14:54:01 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
14:54:02 <AlexPassant> +1
Alexandre Passant: +1 ←
14:54:02 <SteveH> LeeF: strawpoll on rdf lists query mechanism
Lee Feigenbaum: strawpoll on rdf lists query mechanism ←
14:54:02 <LukeWM> +1
Luke Wilson-Mawer: +1 ←
14:54:04 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
14:54:04 <john-l> +1
John Clark: +1 ←
14:54:04 <SteveH> +1
+1 ←
14:54:04 <kasei> +1
Gregory Williams: +1 ←
14:54:06 <JanneS> +1
Janne Saarela: +1 ←
14:54:07 <chimezie> -1 (I'm not convinced that property-path based querying doesn't resolve the real world issue with accessinglists)
Chimezie Ogbuji: -1 (I'm not convinced that property-path based querying doesn't resolve the real world issue with accessinglists) ←
14:54:12 <dnewman2> +1
David Newman: +1 ←
14:54:17 <bijan> (and I hate rdf:lists :))
Bijan Parsia: (and I hate rdf:lists :)) ←
14:54:20 <SimonS> -1 ack with chimezie
Simon Schenk: -1 ack with chimezie ←
14:54:25 <LeeF> Orri: +1
Orri Erling: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:54:41 <LeeF> -1 (with Simon & Chime)
Lee Feigenbaum: -1 (with Simon & Chime) ←
14:55:01 <ivanh> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:55:06 <bijan> q+ to ask about the property path solution people
Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask about the property path solution people ←
14:55:34 <SteveH> ivanh: if it works with prop paths, the q I have is if prop paths doesn't do it would you still have -1
Ivan Herman: if it works with prop paths, the q I have is if prop paths doesn't do it would you still have -1 ←
14:55:50 <SteveH> ?: if it doesn't I would
?: if it doesn't I would ←
14:56:01 <ivanh> ack ivanh
Ivan Herman: ack ivanh ←
14:56:04 <SteveH> LeeF: I'm indifferent if we do property paths or not
Lee Feigenbaum: I'm indifferent if we do property paths or not ←
14:56:08 <bijan> q-
Bijan Parsia: q- ←
14:56:09 <SteveH> thanks
thanks ←
14:56:20 <bijan> I had ivanh's question :)
Bijan Parsia: I had ivanh's question :) ←
14:56:23 <SteveH> ericP: +1 on having list access as a requirement, however we do it
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 on having list access as a requirement, however we do it ←
14:56:34 <SteveH> ivanh: if property paths work, then I happy to sump special syntax
Ivan Herman: if property paths work, then I happy to sump special syntax ←
14:56:36 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
14:56:38 <bijan> Though, special syntax should be evaluated separately
Bijan Parsia: Though, special syntax should be evaluated separately ←
14:56:50 <SteveH> orri: it seems that property paths would have to be extended
Orri Erling: it seems that property paths would have to be extended ←
14:56:58 <SteveH> orri: email about that on the list
Orri Erling: email about that on the list ←
14:57:03 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
14:57:03 <bijan> Property Paths are way more heavyweight than special list handling
Bijan Parsia: Property Paths are way more heavyweight than special list handling ←
14:57:20 <bijan> +1 SteveH
Bijan Parsia: +1 SteveH ←
14:57:24 <LeeF> SteveH: counterpoint - in favor of accessing lists, not in favor of property paths
Steve Harris: counterpoint - in favor of accessing lists, not in favor of property paths [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
14:57:38 <ericP> SteveH: in favor of accessing lists, opposed to property paths as they seem complicated
Steve Harris: in favor of accessing lists, opposed to property paths as they seem complicated [ Scribe Assist by Eric Prud'hommeaux ] ←
14:57:40 <bijan> I could see implementations wanting to support lists but not property paths
Bijan Parsia: I could see implementations wanting to support lists but not property paths ←
14:57:46 <SteveH> yup
yup ←
<LeeF> topic: wiki maintenance
14:58:12 <SteveH> LeeF: bijan asked if anyone would object to moving feature pages so they're not in feature:
Lee Feigenbaum: bijan asked if anyone would object to moving feature pages so they're not in feature: ←
14:58:21 <ericP> don't all of our features start with F?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: don't all of our features start with F? ←
14:58:26 <JanneS> sorry, could only do 60mins today - cu
Janne Saarela: sorry, could only do 60mins today - cu ←
14:58:26 <Zakim> -JanneS
Zakim IRC Bot: -JanneS ←
14:58:44 <SteveH> LeeF: rationale: feature: makes it hard to read, wouldn't change anything because of categories
Lee Feigenbaum: rationale: feature: makes it hard to read, wouldn't change anything because of categories ←
14:59:01 <ericP> +!
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +! ←
14:59:03 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
14:59:03 <bijan> MediaWiki is good that way
Bijan Parsia: MediaWiki is good that way ←
14:59:06 <SteveH> ivanh: just minor, places where I've seen references to feature:, but will forward
Ivan Herman: just minor, places where I've seen references to feature:, but will forward ←
14:59:15 <ericP> +ℑ
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +ℑ ←
14:59:21 <kjetil> +1 only if there is redirect, -1 if not
Kjetil Kjernsmo: +1 only if there is redirect, -1 if not ←
14:59:22 <SteveH> AndyS: I like them all coming up together
Andy Seaborne: I like them all coming up together ←
15:00:19 <SteveH> LeeF: inclined to say I don't really care
Lee Feigenbaum: inclined to say I don't really care ←
15:00:35 <SteveH> LeeF: bijan, if you want to do it go ahead
Lee Feigenbaum: bijan, if you want to do it go ahead ←
<LeeF> topic: next week and beyond
15:01:19 <SteveH> LeeF: next week will look at non-other boxes stuff, eg. XML syntax for queries, RDF synatx for SPARQL, semantics of SPARQL/OWL queries. may also look at other features
Lee Feigenbaum: next week will look at non-other boxes stuff, eg. XML syntax for queries, RDF synatx for SPARQL, semantics of SPARQL/OWL queries. may also look at other features ←
15:01:50 <SteveH> LeeF: aroudn end of next telecon, want survey for a couple of weeks to get formal positions on pioritising features
Lee Feigenbaum: aroudn end of next telecon, want survey for a couple of weeks to get formal positions on pioritising features ←
15:01:57 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
15:02:11 <kjetil> ack SteveH
Kjetil Kjernsmo: ack SteveH ←
15:02:39 <kjetil> condorcet voting
Kjetil Kjernsmo: condorcet voting ←
15:02:52 <SteveH> LeeF: outcome would be a small set of 3-4 things that we will do, plus a prioritised set of things we might do time permitting
Lee Feigenbaum: outcome would be a small set of 3-4 things that we will do, plus a prioritised set of things we might do time permitting ←
15:03:05 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
15:03:05 <Zakim> bijan was already muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was already muted, bijan ←
15:03:50 <SteveH> AndyS: does that lead to the idea that you do the 3 or 4 things, then move on the other set, things in initial set, if they're orthogonal and there's enough energy then it's better to put them in the required set
Andy Seaborne: does that lead to the idea that you do the 3 or 4 things, then move on the other set, things in initial set, if they're orthogonal and there's enough energy then it's better to put them in the required set ←
15:03:57 <SteveH> AndyS: telecon is a contraint
Andy Seaborne: telecon is a contraint ←
15:04:16 <bijan> Task forces!
Bijan Parsia: Task forces! ←
15:04:31 <SteveH> LeeF: say we did XML SPARQL serialisation, somewhat orthogonal, if the groups interested were seperate in a some way then they could have seperate telecon
Lee Feigenbaum: say we did XML SPARQL serialisation, somewhat orthogonal, if the groups interested were seperate in a some way then they could have seperate telecon ←
15:04:46 <ivanh> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:04:54 <SteveH> LeeF: task force of 1-3 people not always best
Lee Feigenbaum: task force of 1-3 people not always best ←
15:04:55 <LeeF> ack ivanh
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivanh ←
15:05:03 <AndyS> Bijan, can work but in our short timescale we have to come back together again.
Andy Seaborne: Bijan, can work but in our short timescale we have to come back together again. ←
15:05:11 <ericP> q+ to suggest that the queue should be closed
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ to suggest that the queue should be closed ←
15:05:12 <bijan> AndyS: for sure
Bijan Parsia: AndyS, for sure ←
15:05:22 <LeeF> s/AndyS:/AndyS,
15:05:34 <SteveH> ivanh: the problem I have is that, yes it works up to a certain point, but at some point all the results have to properly synchronised (in various ways), that is a major drawback somewhere down the line, we hould be careful
Ivan Herman: the problem I have is that, yes it works up to a certain point, but at some point all the results have to properly synchronised (in various ways), that is a major drawback somewhere down the line, we hould be careful ←
15:05:38 <SteveH> q+
q+ ←
15:05:38 <bijan> I was being somewhat ironic
Bijan Parsia: I was being somewhat ironic ←
15:05:52 <SteveH> LeeF: we've clearly indentifed some important features
Lee Feigenbaum: we've clearly indentifed some important features ←
15:06:18 <LeeF> SteveH: concern about task forces having decisions and then re-having those decisions with the main group
Steve Harris: concern about task forces having decisions and then re-having those decisions with the main group [ Scribe Assist by Lee Feigenbaum ] ←
15:06:24 <ericP> SteveH: concearned that TFs will have a discussion within the TF and have to have it again in the greater WG
Steve Harris: concearned that TFs will have a discussion within the TF and have to have it again in the greater WG [ Scribe Assist by Eric Prud'hommeaux ] ←
15:06:55 <SteveH> LeeF: agreed, but I think we can get around it by documenting discussions, and not opening debate, and people can show up at task forces, aware and a little concerned but I think we can deal with it
Lee Feigenbaum: agreed, but I think we can get around it by documenting discussions, and not opening debate, and people can show up at task forces, aware and a little concerned but I think we can deal with it ←
15:07:09 <Zakim> -ivanh
Zakim IRC Bot: -ivanh ←
15:07:17 <Zakim> -DaveNewman
Zakim IRC Bot: -DaveNewman ←
15:07:17 <ericP> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Eric Prud'hommeaux: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
15:07:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/31-sparql-minutes.html ericP
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/03/31-sparql-minutes.html ericP ←
15:07:20 <Zakim> -john-l
Zakim IRC Bot: -john-l ←
15:07:22 <Zakim> -Chimezie_Ogbuji
Zakim IRC Bot: -Chimezie_Ogbuji ←
15:07:25 <Zakim> -Orri
Zakim IRC Bot: -Orri ←
15:07:27 <Zakim> -Lee_Feigenbaum
Zakim IRC Bot: -Lee_Feigenbaum ←
15:07:30 <Zakim> -kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: -kasei ←
15:07:30 <LeeF> adjourned.
Lee Feigenbaum: adjourned. ←
Formatted by CommonScribe