There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.
It may be helpful to
14:00:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/07/27-sparql-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/07/27-sparql-irc ←
14:00:39 <LeeF> rrsagent, make logs world
Lee Feigenbaum: rrsagent, make logs world ←
14:00:52 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
14:01:05 <Zakim> +Souri
Zakim IRC Bot: +Souri ←
14:01:17 <Zakim> +MattPerry
Zakim IRC Bot: +MattPerry ←
14:01:28 <Zakim> +??P17
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←
14:01:31 <Zakim> + +1.617.553.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.553.aaaa ←
14:01:36 <LeeF> zakim, aaaa is me
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, aaaa is me ←
14:01:36 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF; got it ←
14:01:45 <AxelPolleres> trackbot, start meeting
Axel Polleres: trackbot, start meeting ←
14:01:48 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:01:48 <NicholasH> zakim, ??P17 is me
Nicholas Humfrey: zakim, ??P17 is me ←
14:01:48 <Zakim> +NicholasH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +NicholasH; got it ←
14:01:50 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 77277 ←
14:01:50 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start now ←
14:01:51 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
14:01:51 <trackbot> Date: 27 July 2010
14:02:04 <sandro> zakim, this is sparql
Sandro Hawke: zakim, this is sparql ←
14:02:04 <Zakim> ok, sandro; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, sandro; that matches SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM ←
14:02:10 <AxelPolleres> chair: Axel Polleres
14:02:35 <AxelPolleres> scribe: NicholasHumfrey
(Scribe set to Nicholas Humfrey)
14:02:44 <AxelPolleres> scribenick: NicholasH
14:02:44 <AxelPolleres> regrets: Chimezie Ogbujie, Gregory Williams
Scribe problem: the name 'Chimezie Ogbujie' does not match any of the 61 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Ahmed Ezzat Alexandre Passant Andrea Westerinen Andrei Lopatenko Andy Seaborne Axel Polleres Bijan Parsia Birte Glimm Bryan Thompson Carlos Buil Aranda Chimezie Ogbuji Cui Tao Daniel Schutzer Dave Beckett David Charboneau David Newman Davide Palmisano Dhanapalan Kulandai Vadivel Dirk Colaert Dirk-Willem van Gulik Edward Thomas Elias Torres Enrico Franconi Eric Prud'hommeaux Frank Careccia Fred Zemke Gregory Williams Hiroyuki Sato Ivan Mikhailov Ivan Herman Jacek Kopecký Jari Vänttinen Jean-François Baget Jeen Broekstra Jeff Pollock John Clark Jos De Roo Kendall Clark Kevin Wilkinson Lee Feigenbaum Luke Wilson-Mawer Matthew Perry Michael Smith Michele Minno Nicholas Humfrey Nophadol Jekjantuk Olivier Corby Orri Erling Paula Gearon Prateek Jain Rachel Yager Roland Schwaenzl Sandro Hawke Sergio Tessaris Simon Johnston Souripriya Das Steve Harris Sven Groppe Timo Westkämper Tommi Koivula Yoshio Fukushige
14:02:48 <sandro> zakim, mute AndyS
Sandro Hawke: zakim, mute AndyS ←
14:02:56 <pgearon_> I can't tell who I am
Paula Gearon: I can't tell who I am ←
14:02:56 <AxelPolleres> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-07-27
14:02:57 <Zakim> AndyS should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS should now be muted ←
14:03:16 <sandro> AndyS, you were the source of some wind/.breath noise. I muted you for the moment.
Sandro Hawke: AndyS, you were the source of some wind/.breath noise. I muted you for the moment. ←
14:03:25 <AndyS> zakim, unmute me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, unmute me ←
14:03:35 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call? ←
14:03:36 <Zakim> AndyS should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS should no longer be muted ←
14:03:45 <NicholasH> Axel: some disccussion on the mailing list and will be talking about the open ISSUES
Axel Polleres: some disccussion on the mailing list and will be talking about the open ISSUES ←
14:03:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, Souri, MattPerry, NicholasH, LeeF, +1.540.412.aabb, AxelPolleres, +3539149aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, Souri, MattPerry, NicholasH, LeeF, +1.540.412.aabb, AxelPolleres, +3539149aacc ←
14:03:50 <SteveH> is the uk line still down?
Steve Harris: is the uk line still down? ←
14:04:00 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-20
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-20 ←
14:04:02 <NicholasH> SteveH: working for me
Steve Harris: working for me ←
14:04:07 <pgearon_> Zakim, aabb is me
Paula Gearon: Zakim, aabb is me ←
14:04:07 <Zakim> +pgearon_; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgearon_; got it ←
14:04:15 <AndyS> seconded
Andy Seaborne: seconded ←
14:04:18 <sandro> SteveH, sorry, yeah, I think the UK line turns out to only have two circuits. We're trying to provision more.
Sandro Hawke: SteveH, sorry, yeah, I think the UK line turns out to only have two circuits. We're trying to provision more. ←
14:04:26 <SteveH> sandro, doh :(
Steve Harris: sandro, doh :( ←
14:04:32 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-20
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-07-20 ←
14:04:33 <AndyS> two !!??!!
Andy Seaborne: two !!??!! ←
14:04:40 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
14:04:40 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
14:04:41 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
14:04:56 <AlexPassant> Zakim: +353149aacc is me
14:05:03 <AlexPassant> Zakim, +353149aacc is me
Alexandre Passant: Zakim, +353149aacc is me ←
14:05:06 <NicholasH> Axel: still some difficulties on the UK phone line
Axel Polleres: still some difficulties on the UK phone line ←
14:05:09 <Zakim> sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '+353149aacc'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '+353149aacc' ←
14:05:15 <AlexPassant> Zakim, +3539149aacc is me
Alexandre Passant: Zakim, +3539149aacc is me ←
14:05:21 <AxelPolleres> sandro: we might switch providers for UK number again
Sandro Hawke: we might switch providers for UK number again [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:05:22 <NicholasH> Axel: looking at chaning to a new provider due to there only being two phone lines
Axel Polleres: looking at chaning to a new provider due to there only being two phone lines ←
14:05:23 <Zakim> +AlexPassant; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AlexPassant; got it ←
14:05:42 <NicholasH> Axel: next regular meeting will be in one week
Axel Polleres: next regular meeting will be in one week ←
14:06:13 <AxelPolleres> don't miss the Update semantics call this friday
Axel Polleres: don't miss the Update semantics call this friday ←
14:06:34 <AndyS> @16:00 WEST
Andy Seaborne: @16:00 WEST ←
14:06:40 <SteveH> Zakim, what's the phone number
Steve Harris: Zakim, what's the phone number ←
14:06:40 <Zakim> I don't understand 'what's the phone number', SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'what's the phone number', SteveH ←
14:06:53 <NicholasH> Axel: looked through the issues lists and there are some old issues relating to Protocol that needs to be looked at
Axel Polleres: looked through the issues lists and there are some old issues relating to Protocol that needs to be looked at ←
14:07:12 <AxelPolleres> lee, you there?
Axel Polleres: lee, you there? ←
14:07:14 <NicholasH> Axel: anyone interested in a seperate phone call to disccuss them?
Axel Polleres: anyone interested in a seperate phone call to disccuss them? ←
14:07:20 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, who is on the phone?
Axel Polleres: Zakim, who is on the phone? ←
14:07:20 <Zakim> On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, Souri, MattPerry, NicholasH, LeeF, pgearon_, AxelPolleres, AlexPassant, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see AndyS, Sandro, Souri, MattPerry, NicholasH, LeeF, pgearon_, AxelPolleres, AlexPassant, Ivan ←
14:07:45 <AndyS> Maybe better to start some material to discuss first ??
Andy Seaborne: Maybe better to start some material to discuss first ?? ←
14:08:03 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: axel to evaluate with LEe necessity of protocol dedicated TC, and in case send out doodle poll
ACTION: axel to evaluate with LEe necessity of protocol dedicated TC, and in case send out doodle poll ←
14:08:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-284 - Evaluate with LEe necessity of protocol dedicated TC, and in case send out doodle poll [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-03].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-284 - Evaluate with LEe necessity of protocol dedicated TC, and in case send out doodle poll [on Axel Polleres - due 2010-08-03]. ←
14:08:12 <AndyS> Maybe better to start with some material to discuss first ?? even if just a reasonably complete issues list
Andy Seaborne: Maybe better to start with some material to discuss first ?? even if just a reasonably complete issues list ←
14:08:49 <AxelPolleres> topic: shortcuts in update
14:08:51 <NicholasH> Axel: look at issues that don't have an obvious issue and put them on the aggenda for seperate call
Axel Polleres: look at issues that don't have an obvious issue and put them on the aggenda for seperate call ←
14:08:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:09:03 <SteveH> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Steve Harris: Zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
14:09:03 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it ←
14:09:42 <AxelPolleres> alex: suggestion for 3 for moving data between graphs (mv,cp, cat)
Alexandre Passant: suggestion for 3 for moving data between graphs (mv,cp, cat) [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:10:02 <AndyS> MOVE, COPY, ADD
Andy Seaborne: MOVE, COPY, ADD ←
14:10:49 <NicholasH> alex: will make it easier to teach
Alexandre Passant: will make it easier to teach ←
14:11:00 <AxelPolleres> alex: concerns raised, shortcuts for language not yet existing, increased learning curve ... I still think that these operations are so common that shortcuts are justified.
Alexandre Passant: concerns raised, shortcuts for language not yet existing, increased learning curve ... I still think that these operations are so common that shortcuts are justified. [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:11:04 <AxelPolleres> q?
Axel Polleres: q? ←
14:11:38 <NicholasH> axel: issues relating to the HTTP protocol document
Axel Polleres: issues relating to the HTTP protocol document ←
14:12:06 <NicholasH> if we agree on the shortcuts then they should also be in the HTTP document
if we agree on the shortcuts then they should also be in the HTTP document ←
14:12:31 <NicholasH> should also be available for use with the semicolon operators
should also be available for use with the semicolon operators ←
14:12:32 <SteveH> I think it's a bad idea
Steve Harris: I think it's a bad idea ←
14:12:50 <AxelPolleres> ack SteveH
Axel Polleres: ack SteveH ←
14:13:03 <NicholasH> SteveH: it is a new language, alsomost nobody is using it in nager
Steve Harris: it is a new language, alsomost nobody is using it in nager ←
14:13:03 <LeeF> I feel pretty strongly about this, but I will not object
Lee Feigenbaum: I feel pretty strongly about this, but I will not object ←
14:13:07 <AlexPassant> agreed on your 2 comments re. HTTP protocol + use of �[C;
Alexandre Passant: agreed on your 2 comments re. HTTP protocol + use of �[C; ←
14:13:18 <NicholasH> SteveH: we don't know what operations those verbs should map to
Steve Harris: we don't know what operations those verbs should map to ←
14:13:35 <NicholasH> SteveH: move could map to almost anything
Steve Harris: move could map to almost anything ←
14:13:51 <NicholasH> SteveH: can't guaranteee atomisity
Steve Harris: can't guaranteee atomicity ←
14:14:06 <NicholasH> SteveH: syntactic sugar crazyness
Steve Harris: syntactic sugar crazyness ←
14:14:20 <Souri> s/atomisity/atomicity/
14:15:03 <NicholasH> Axel: wouldn't not change anything, because we already have multiple statement problems
Axel Polleres: wouldn't not change anything, because we already have multiple statement problems ←
14:15:48 <AxelPolleres> SteveH: we introduce a new problem, because we could have engines that can deal with single statement requests atomically, but not the shortcuts
Steve Harris: we introduce a new problem, because we could have engines that can deal with single statement requests atomically, but not the shortcuts [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:15:58 <NicholasH> SteveH: the shortcut could be an alias, so no guarantee of atomicity, confusing to users
Steve Harris: the shortcut could be an alias, so no guarantee of atomicity, confusing to users ←
14:16:01 <AlexPassant> SteveH: is your issue (besides atomicity) related to MOVE only or to the 3 proposals ?
Steve Harris: is your issue (besides atomicity) related to MOVE only or to the 3 proposals ? [ Scribe Assist by Alexandre Passant ] ←
14:16:47 <AndyS> My position has changed -
Andy Seaborne: My position has changed - ←
14:17:00 <NicholasH> Alex: Steve and AndyS have concerns but not objections
Alexandre Passant: Steve and AndyS have concerns but not objections ←
14:17:37 <NicholasH> AndyS: initially I wasn't a support but not I think that it is intuative to what users want to do
Andy Seaborne: initially I wasn't a support but not I think that it is intuative to what users want to do ←
14:17:47 <SteveH> MOVE is clearly not intuative
Steve Harris: MOVE is clearly not intuative ←
14:18:18 <NicholasH> AndyS: it is intuative to me
Andy Seaborne: it is intuitive to me ←
14:18:19 <ivan> s/intuative/intuitive/
14:18:19 <AlexPassant> SteveH: it's mapped to unix mv
Steve Harris: it's mapped to unix mv [ Scribe Assist by Alexandre Passant ] ←
14:19:16 <Souri> minor comment: Do we really need MOVE? or is it just a RENAME?
Souripriya Das: minor comment: Do we really need MOVE? or is it just a RENAME? ←
14:19:24 <SteveH> exactly
Steve Harris: exactly ←
14:19:25 <NicholasH> Alex: it is not clear if people would object to it
Alexandre Passant: it is not clear if people would object to it ←
14:19:28 <LeeF> exactly indeed
Lee Feigenbaum: exactly indeed ←
14:19:40 <LeeF> we don't know what we need because this language doesn't exist yet
Lee Feigenbaum: we don't know what we need because this language doesn't exist yet ←
14:19:42 <NicholasH> Alex: rename would have more support than move?
Axel Polleres: rename would have more support than move? ←
14:19:51 <AlexPassant> s/Alex/axel
14:19:57 <NicholasH> sorry :(
sorry :( ←
14:20:13 <LeeF> SteveH++++
Lee Feigenbaum: SteveH++++ ←
14:20:19 <NicholasH> SteveH: language isn't old enough to need shortcuts
Steve Harris: language isn't old enough to need shortcuts ←
14:20:39 <NicholasH> SteveH: not know if it is needed yet. And can't change seantics in 12 months time
Steve Harris: not know if it is needed yet. And can't change seantics in 12 months time ←
14:21:03 <NicholasH> Axel: too controversal right now
Axel Polleres: too controversal right now ←
14:21:30 <NicholasH> Axel: put +1 if you are in favour of shortcuts, -1 if you are against
Axel Polleres: put +1 if you are in favour of shortcuts, -1 if you are against ←
14:21:31 <SteveH> -1
Steve Harris: -1 ←
14:21:31 <AxelPolleres> strawpoll, +1 for shortcuts, 0 neutral, -1 if against
Axel Polleres: strawpoll, +1 for shortcuts, 0 neutral, -1 if against ←
14:21:32 <NicholasH> -1
-1 ←
14:21:36 <AxelPolleres> 0
Axel Polleres: 0 ←
14:21:37 <LeeF> Straw poll: Including MOVE, COPY, ADD shortcuts in update
Lee Feigenbaum: Straw poll: Including MOVE, COPY, ADD shortcuts in update ←
14:21:46 <LeeF> -1
Lee Feigenbaum: -1 ←
14:21:47 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
14:21:47 <AndyS> +1 (for editors to draft some text)
Andy Seaborne: +1 (for editors to draft some text) ←
14:21:51 <pgearon> 0
Paula Gearon: 0 ←
14:21:53 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
14:21:55 <MattPerry> -1
Matthew Perry: -1 ←
14:21:57 <Souri> 0.1
Souripriya Das: 0.1 ←
14:21:57 <AlexPassant> +1
Alexandre Passant: +1 ←
14:22:56 <SteveH> there are other things I would prefer the update editors work on
Steve Harris: there are other things I would prefer the update editors work on ←
14:23:03 <SteveH> given limited time
Steve Harris: given limited time ←
14:23:27 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
14:23:35 <NicholasH> Axel: agrees that we would like to see other issues worked on more than shortcuts
Axel Polleres: agrees that we would like to see other issues worked on more than shortcuts ←
14:23:50 <NicholasH> Axel: should prioritise other issues
Axel Polleres: should prioritise other issues ←
14:24:18 <NicholasH> SteveH: reserve right to change his mind, if spec doesn't get published within 9 months
Steve Harris: reserve right to change his mind, if spec doesn't get published within 9 months ←
14:24:45 <NicholasH> SteveH: concern is that it is too soon to add
Steve Harris: concern is that it is too soon to add ←
14:25:16 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE: Shall we add shortcuts for update as proposed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0053.html
ISSUE: Shall we add shortcuts for update as proposed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0053.html ←
14:25:16 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-59 - Shall we add shortcuts for update as proposed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0053.html ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/59/edit .
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ISSUE-59 - Shall we add shortcuts for update as proposed in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0053.html ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/59/edit . ←
14:25:19 <NicholasH> Axel: will open an issue to re-look at it later
Axel Polleres: will open an issue to re-look at it later ←
14:25:28 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
14:25:38 <NicholasH> Axel: thanks for the disussion
Axel Polleres: thanks for the disussion ←
14:26:00 <NicholasH> Axel: made a summary of the issues
Axel Polleres: made a summary of the issues ←
14:26:02 <AxelPolleres> topic: issues list
14:26:03 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/open
Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/open ←
14:26:53 <LeeF> I saw Andy's latest mail and agree with it.
Lee Feigenbaum: I saw Andy's latest mail and agree with it. ←
14:27:08 <NicholasH> Axel: There has been some disscussion on ISSUE-1 already
Axel Polleres: There has been some disscussion on ISSUE-1 already ←
14:27:45 <NicholasH> Axel: should name it as an extension
Axel Polleres: should name it as an extension ←
14:28:17 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: dig out results on previous discussion on ISSUE-1
ACTION: dig out results on previous discussion on ISSUE-1 ←
14:28:17 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - dig
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - dig ←
14:28:37 <NicholasH> Axel: next ISSUE-16
Axel Polleres: next ISSUE-16 ←
14:28:56 <NicholasH> Axel: had a lot of discussion at the last face-to-face
Axel Polleres: had a lot of discussion at the last face-to-face ←
14:29:06 <NicholasH> Axel: left open to monitor it
Axel Polleres: left open to monitor it ←
14:30:15 <NicholasH> Axel: ISSUE-18 is strongly connected to the disccussion about atomicity and transactions
Axel Polleres: ISSUE-18 is strongly connected to the disccussion about atomicity and transactions ←
14:30:38 <NicholasH> Axel: any implementation SHOULD guarantee atomicity
Axel Polleres: any implementation SHOULD guarantee atomicity ←
14:30:50 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-26 Conjunction of operation vs atomocity, transactions
Axel Polleres: ISSUE-26 Conjunction of operation vs atomocity, transactions ←
14:30:53 <pgearon> I believe that we've addressed several of issues for Update, but the issues have remained open
Paula Gearon: I believe that we've addressed several of issues for Update, but the issues have remained open ←
14:31:26 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: to close ISSUE-18 and ISSUE-26 with the insight that we require that any compliant implementation SHOULD treat every HTTP request atomically, and that we don't want to go any further in specifying transacionality and concurrency
PROPOSED: to close ISSUE-18 and ISSUE-26 with the insight that we require that any compliant implementation SHOULD treat every HTTP request atomically, and that we don't want to go any further in specifying transacionality and concurrency ←
14:31:59 <SteveH> +1
Steve Harris: +1 ←
14:32:05 <pgearon> +1
Paula Gearon: +1 ←
14:32:06 <ivan> 1
Ivan Herman: 1 ←
14:32:09 <NicholasH> +1
+1 ←
14:32:10 <AxelPolleres> +!
Axel Polleres: +! ←
14:32:16 <AxelPolleres> +1
Axel Polleres: +1 ←
14:32:18 <MattPerry> +1
Matthew Perry: +1 ←
14:32:23 <AlexPassant> +1
Alexandre Passant: +1 ←
14:32:24 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
14:32:28 <Souri> +1
Souripriya Das: +1 ←
14:32:38 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: to close ISSUE-18 and ISSUE-26 with the insight that we require that any compliant implementation SHOULD treat every HTTP request atomically, and that we don't want to go any further in specifying transacionality and concurrency
RESOLVED: to close ISSUE-18 and ISSUE-26 with the insight that we require that any compliant implementation SHOULD treat every HTTP request atomically, and that we don't want to go any further in specifying transacionality and concurrency ←
14:32:46 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-18
Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-18 ←
14:32:46 <trackbot> ISSUE-18 Concurrency in SPARQL/update closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-18 Concurrency in SPARQL/update closed ←
14:32:54 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-26
Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-26 ←
14:32:55 <trackbot> ISSUE-26 Conjunction of operation vs atomocity, transactions closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-26 Conjunction of operation vs atomocity, transactions closed ←
14:33:13 <NicholasH> Axel: next ISSUE-19
Axel Polleres: next ISSUE-19 ←
14:33:30 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-19 Security issues on SPARQL/UPdate
Axel Polleres: ISSUE-19 Security issues on SPARQL/UPdate ←
14:33:57 <pgearon> The current text is: "Exposing RDF data for update creates many security issues which any deployment must be aware of, and consider the risks involved. This submission does not describe such issues."
Paula Gearon: The current text is: "Exposing RDF data for update creates many security issues which any deployment must be aware of, and consider the risks involved. This submission does not describe such issues." ←
14:34:14 <NicholasH> Axel: should there be a seperate section on Security?
Axel Polleres: should there be a seperate section on Security? ←
14:34:19 <AndyS> c.f. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#security
Andy Seaborne: c.f. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#security ←
14:34:52 <AxelPolleres> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0141.html
Axel Polleres: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JulSep/0141.html ←
14:35:16 <SteveH> -1 to being vague here
Steve Harris: -1 to being vague here ←
14:35:23 <SteveH> that doesn't sound like a good thing to do
Steve Harris: that doesn't sound like a good thing to do ←
14:35:31 <AlexPassant> proposal is "the specification does not address security concerns related to SPARQL/Update and that implementers and users MUST be aware of security concerns when allowing SPARQL/Update on their dataset"
Alexandre Passant: proposal is "the specification does not address security concerns related to SPARQL/Update and that implementers and users MUST be aware of security concerns when allowing SPARQL/Update on their dataset" ←
14:35:33 <AxelPolleres> "the specification does not address security concerns related to SPARQL/Update and that implementers and users MUST be aware of security concerns when allowing SPARQL/Update on their dataset" from Alex' mail
Axel Polleres: "the specification does not address security concerns related to SPARQL/Update and that implementers and users MUST be aware of security concerns when allowing SPARQL/Update on their dataset" from Alex' mail ←
14:35:33 <NicholasH> Axel: should not attempt to list all the secutiry issues, but should outline some of the high level problems
Axel Polleres: should not attempt to list all the security issues, but should outline some of the high level problems ←
14:35:35 <AxelPolleres> q?
Axel Polleres: q? ←
14:35:39 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
14:35:46 <AlexPassant> SteveH: my concern is why mention issue X and not issue Y
Steve Harris: my concern is why mention issue X and not issue Y [ Scribe Assist by Alexandre Passant ] ←
14:36:10 <AlexPassant> q+
Alexandre Passant: q+ ←
14:36:20 <SteveH> ack me
Steve Harris: ack me ←
14:36:24 <NicholasH> SteveH: there are a number of very serious security issues which should be addressed, such as putting server in DMZ
Steve Harris: there are a number of very serious security issues which should be addressed, such as putting server in DMZ ←
14:36:48 <AxelPolleres> ack AlexPassant
Axel Polleres: ack AlexPassant ←
14:37:00 <SteveH> we should mention all of them!
Steve Harris: we should mention all of them! ←
14:37:08 <NicholasH> Alex: my concern is that if you list some issues but not others, it might confuse people
Alexandre Passant: my concern is that if you list some issues but not others, it might confuse people ←
14:37:39 <AndyS> Something like: "there are security issues, that include, but are not limited to, .... (some important ones) ..."
Andy Seaborne: Something like: "there are security issues, that include, but are not limited to, .... (some important ones) ..." ←
14:37:42 <NicholasH> Axel: just say "some issues include"
Axel Polleres: just say "some issues include" ←
14:37:46 <AxelPolleres> Axel: we could say" issue include, but are not limited to"
Axel Polleres: we could say" issue include, but are not limited to" [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:37:50 <Souri> s/secutiry/security/
14:37:55 <pgearon> +q
Paula Gearon: +q ←
14:38:14 <AndyS> .... and if you want something listed, you get to propose text.
Andy Seaborne: .... and if you want something listed, you get to propose text. ←
14:38:14 <NicholasH> Axel: need someone to take an action to summarise these issues
Axel Polleres: need someone to take an action to summarise these issues ←
14:38:30 <NicholasH> p
p ←
14:38:48 <NicholasH> pgearon: not trying to enumerate the issues but gives people a starting point
Paula Gearon: not trying to enumerate the issues but gives people a starting point ←
14:38:50 <SteveH> +1 to pgearon
Steve Harris: +1 to pgearon ←
14:39:03 <AxelPolleres> Paul: a central section to collect issues in the draft may actually be a good idea.
Paula Gearon: a central section to collect issues in the draft may actually be a good idea. [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:39:23 <NicholasH> pgearon: in favour creating a security section
Paula Gearon: in favour creating a security section ←
14:40:03 <NicholasH> pgearon: I am the Update editor, it should be me
Paula Gearon: I am the Update editor, it should be me ←
14:40:16 <AxelPolleres> Action: Paul to collect update security issues and report back to mailinglist regarding ISSUE-19
ACTION: Paul to collect update security issues and report back to mailinglist regarding ISSUE-19 ←
14:40:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-285 - Collect update security issues and report back to mailinglist regarding ISSUE-19 [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-03].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-285 - Collect update security issues and report back to mailinglist regarding ISSUE-19 [on Paul Gearon - due 2010-08-03]. ←
14:40:51 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-22 Support of SOAP/WSDL in protocol for SPARQL/Update
Axel Polleres: ISSUE-22 Support of SOAP/WSDL in protocol for SPARQL/Update ←
14:41:46 <NicholasH> Axel: think this issue just need closing after checking minor changes
Axel Polleres: think this issue just need closing after checking minor changes ←
14:41:58 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: to close ISSUE-22 with the understanding that SPARQL1.1 only standardizes HTTP bindings, and will specify these in WSDL2.0.
PROPOSED: to close ISSUE-22 with the understanding that SPARQL1.1 only standardizes HTTP bindings, and will specify these in WSDL2.0. ←
14:42:52 <NicholasH> AndyS: if it is defined in WSDL2, what is the difference between that and SOAP
Andy Seaborne: if it is defined in WSDL2, what is the difference between that and SOAP ←
14:43:33 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:43:41 <pgearon> q-
Paula Gearon: q- ←
14:44:35 <NicholasH> ivan: What ever was defined for SOAP in SPARQL Query 1.0 will that be supported in SPARQL 1.1? (for query?)
Ivan Herman: What ever was defined for SOAP in SPARQL Query 1.0 will that be supported in SPARQL 1.1? (for query?) ←
14:45:24 <NicholasH> ivan: if am a user of SPARQL 1.0 with SOAP, will I still be able to do that in a years time?
Ivan Herman: if am a user of SPARQL 1.0 with SOAP, will I still be able to do that in a years time? ←
14:45:57 <NicholasH> ivan: are we dropping a feature from SPARQL 1.0?
Ivan Herman: are we dropping a feature from SPARQL 1.0? ←
14:46:06 <AxelPolleres> ivan: are we chopping a feature of SPARQL1.0 here?
Ivan Herman: are we chopping a feature of SPARQL1.0 here? [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
14:46:25 <AxelPolleres> ... and how large is the usage of SPARQL1.0 SOAP?
Axel Polleres: ... and how large is the usage of SPARQL1.0 SOAP? ←
14:46:27 <pgearon> +q
Paula Gearon: +q ←
14:46:46 <ivan> ack ivan
Ivan Herman: ack ivan ←
14:47:02 <AlexPassant> should we poll the community re. SOAP ?
Alexandre Passant: should we poll the community re. SOAP ? ←
14:47:04 <AxelPolleres> lee, are you in a position to say somthing about the SOAP issue?
Axel Polleres: lee, are you in a position to say somthing about the SOAP issue? ←
14:47:17 <NicholasH> pgearon: when this issue came up before, nobody on the working group was using the SOAP bindings
Paula Gearon: when this issue came up before, nobody on the working group was using the SOAP bindings ←
14:47:49 <NicholasH> LeeF: procedurally this has to go into the draft
Sandro Hawke: procedurally this has to go into the draft ←
14:47:59 <NicholasH> pgearon: should also ask on the mailing lists
Paula Gearon: should also ask on the mailing lists ←
14:48:14 <AxelPolleres> s/LeeF/sandro/
14:48:18 <pgearon> q-
Paula Gearon: q- ←
14:48:25 <NicholasH> anyone who has a problem with this, please let us know
anyone who has a problem with this, please let us know ←
14:49:04 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:49:16 <AndyS> sec 5 : "Removed the section on SOAP bindings, and referred to other WSDL bindings in general"
Andy Seaborne: sec 5 : "Removed the section on SOAP bindings, and referred to other WSDL bindings in general" ←
14:49:21 <sandro> sandro: it should be a big, red, editor's note saying "Hey, we're dropping this because we think no one's using it. If you are using it, please let us know!"
Sandro Hawke: it should be a big, red, editor's note saying "Hey, we're dropping this because we think no one's using it. If you are using it, please let us know!" [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
14:49:34 <AndyS> and some text mention of SOAP ... so to Sandro's Q: no.
Andy Seaborne: and some text mention of SOAP ... so to Sandro's Q: no. ←
14:50:50 <AxelPolleres> ACTION: LeeF add a note on dropping of SOAP binding to next WD of protocol11 and explicitly solicit feedback on usage of SOAP in SPARQL
ACTION: LeeF add a note on dropping of SOAP binding to next WD of protocol11 and explicitly solicit feedback on usage of SOAP in SPARQL ←
14:50:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-286 - Add a note on dropping of SOAP binding to next WD of protocol11 and explicitly solicit feedback on usage of SOAP in SPARQL [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-08-03].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-286 - Add a note on dropping of SOAP binding to next WD of protocol11 and explicitly solicit feedback on usage of SOAP in SPARQL [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2010-08-03]. ←
14:51:12 <ivan> [[[For all new features, backwards compatibility with the current version of SPARQL is of great importance. All queries, that are valid in the January 2008 version of SPARQL, should remain valid in the new version and should produce identical results. For each new feature, if there is doubt or a perceived problem with respect to this, the guideline should be to not include the feature in the set of additions.
Ivan Herman: [[[For all new features, backwards compatibility with the current version of SPARQL is of great importance. All queries, that are valid in the January 2008 version of SPARQL, should remain valid in the new version and should produce identical results. For each new feature, if there is doubt or a perceived problem with respect to this, the guideline should be to not include the feature in the set of additions. ←
14:51:13 <ivan> ]]
Ivan Herman: ]] ←
14:51:14 <AxelPolleres> leef, hope that's ok.
Axel Polleres: leef, hope that's ok. ←
14:51:47 <NicholasH> ivan: sorry for going very formal. I want back to the charter. It doesn't not given clear text on if we are allowed to drop the SOAP binding, if you like it or not
Ivan Herman: sorry for going very formal. I want back to the charter. It doesn't not given clear text on if we are allowed to drop the SOAP binding, if you like it or not ←
14:52:29 <NicholasH> Axel: but we don't have to add update suppport for the SOAP bindings
Axel Polleres: but we don't have to add update suppport for the SOAP bindings ←
14:53:05 <NicholasH> Axel: if the SPARQL protocol, says that just one of the other needs to be supported
Axel Polleres: if the SPARQL protocol, says that just one of the other needs to be supported ←
14:53:29 <NicholasH> Axel: I don't think that the old spec says that both have to be supported
Axel Polleres: I don't think that the old spec says that both have to be supported ←
14:53:57 <NicholasH> Axel: I will add this to the protocol issue that we have for seperate telecon
Axel Polleres: I will add this to the protocol issue that we have for seperate telecon ←
14:54:17 <NicholasH> Axel: will keep this open for the moment
Axel Polleres: will keep this open for the moment ←
14:54:20 <AxelPolleres> we can't close this issue for now
Axel Polleres: we can't close this issue for now ←
14:54:48 <NicholasH> ISSUE-23 Content negotiation/switch for mediatype
ISSUE-23 Content negotiation/switch for mediatype ←
14:54:50 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-23 Content negotiation/switch for mediatype
Axel Polleres: ISSUE-23 Content negotiation/switch for mediatype ←
14:56:29 <NicholasH> Axel: could close this issue with the insight that the Content negotiation text in the protocol document is good enough
Axel Polleres: could close this issue with the insight that the Content negotiation text in the protocol document is good enough ←
14:56:31 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-23 with the insight that the current content HTTP negotiation mechanism (as discussed in sparql11-protocol) is sufficient.
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-23 with the insight that the current content HTTP negotiation mechanism (as discussed in sparql11-protocol) is sufficient. ←
14:57:11 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
14:57:18 <ivan> ack ivan
Ivan Herman: ack ivan ←
14:57:37 <LeeF> FYI I've explicitly sought SOAP experiences in the past and completely failed to find any
Lee Feigenbaum: FYI I've explicitly sought SOAP experiences in the past and completely failed to find any ←
14:57:47 <NicholasH> AndyS: slight issue with the wording, we don't do Content negotiation, the HTTP protocol does
Andy Seaborne: slight issue with the wording, we don't do Content negotiation, the HTTP protocol does ←
14:58:03 <AxelPolleres> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-23 with the insight that HTTP negotiation mechanism (as discussed in sparql11-protocol) is sufficient.
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-23 with the insight that HTTP negotiation mechanism (as discussed in sparql11-protocol) is sufficient. ←
14:58:07 <AndyS> q-
Andy Seaborne: q- ←
14:58:17 <AndyS> seconded
Andy Seaborne: seconded ←
14:58:22 <AxelPolleres> +1
Axel Polleres: +1 ←
14:58:24 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
14:58:25 <NicholasH> +1
+1 ←
14:58:35 <pgearon> +1
Paula Gearon: +1 ←
14:58:36 <ivan> +0
Ivan Herman: +0 ←
14:58:37 <pgearon> +1
Paula Gearon: +1 ←
14:58:59 <AxelPolleres> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-23 with the insight that HTTP negotiation mechanism (as discussed in sparql11-protocol) is sufficient.
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-23 with the insight that HTTP negotiation mechanism (as discussed in sparql11-protocol) is sufficient. ←
14:59:08 <AxelPolleres> close ISSUE-23
Axel Polleres: close ISSUE-23 ←
14:59:08 <trackbot> ISSUE-23 Content negotiation/switch for mediatype closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-23 Content negotiation/switch for mediatype closed ←
14:59:17 <Zakim> -LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF ←
14:59:19 <ivan> zakim, drop me
Ivan Herman: zakim, drop me ←
14:59:19 <Zakim> Ivan is being disconnected
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan is being disconnected ←
14:59:21 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
14:59:30 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
14:59:32 <Zakim> -pgearon_
Zakim IRC Bot: -pgearon_ ←
14:59:32 <AxelPolleres> adjourned
Axel Polleres: adjourned ←
14:59:33 <Zakim> -AlexPassant
Zakim IRC Bot: -AlexPassant ←
14:59:36 <Zakim> -MattPerry
Zakim IRC Bot: -MattPerry ←
14:59:37 <AxelPolleres> (time's up)
Axel Polleres: (time's up) ←
14:59:38 <Zakim> -SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH ←
14:59:42 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
14:59:48 <AndyS> ADJOURNED
Andy Seaborne: ADJOURNED ←
14:59:49 <Zakim> -Souri
Zakim IRC Bot: -Souri ←
15:00:28 <AxelPolleres> reminder ... TC on Update formal semantics ... Fri 30th July 4pm UK time, 11am Eastern time
Axel Polleres: reminder ... TC on Update formal semantics ... Fri 30th July 4pm UK time, 11am Eastern time ←
15:00:29 <Zakim> -NicholasH
Zakim IRC Bot: -NicholasH ←
15:00:32 <AxelPolleres> bye all
Axel Polleres: bye all ←
15:00:33 <NicholasH> wow, that was hard!
wow, that was hard! ←
15:00:58 <AxelPolleres> Nicholas, thanks for scribing, I will take care ofpublishing the minutes!
Axel Polleres: Nicholas, thanks for scribing, I will take care ofpublishing the minutes! ←
15:01:14 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records, public
Axel Polleres: rrsagent, make records, public ←
15:01:14 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make records, public', AxelPolleres. Try /msg RRSAgent help
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I'm logging. I don't understand 'make records, public', AxelPolleres. Try /msg RRSAgent help ←
15:01:25 <AxelPolleres> rrsagent, make records public
Axel Polleres: rrsagent, make records public ←
Formatted by CommonScribe