14:58:39 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #csvw
14:58:39 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/01/14-csvw-irc
14:58:41 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:58:41 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #csvw
14:58:43 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be CSVW
14:58:43 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see DATA_CSVWG()10:00AM already started
14:58:44 <trackbot> Meeting: CSV on the Web Working Group Teleconference
14:58:44 <trackbot> Date: 14 January 2015
15:00:20 <gkellogg> zakim, code?
15:00:20 <Zakim> the conference code is 2789 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), gkellogg
15:00:27 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #csvw
15:01:22 <Zakim> +??P18
15:01:27 <gkellogg> zakim, I am ??P18
15:01:27 <Zakim> +gkellogg; got it
15:01:28 <Zakim> +??P22
15:01:30 <Zakim> -??P22
15:01:57 <jtandy> just waiting for fire alarm test to complete :-(
15:02:32 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:02:50 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
15:03:06 <danbri1> zakim, IPcaller is danbri
15:03:06 <danbri1> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:07 <Zakim> sorry, danbri1, I do not recognize a party named 'IPcaller'
15:03:07 <Zakim> On the phone I see JeniT, gkellogg
15:03:30 <Zakim> +??P0
15:03:41 <jtandy> zakim, I am ??P0
15:03:41 <Zakim> +jtandy; got it
15:04:09 <danbri2> danbri2 has joined #csvw
15:04:44 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:48 <danbri2> zakim, IPcaller is danbri
15:04:48 <Zakim> +danbri; got it
15:04:51 <danbri> danbri has joined #csvw
15:05:21 <JeniT> ScribeNick: JeniT
15:05:42 <danbri2> JeniT & al, sorry I massively blanked on the call - can't believe it's weds already
15:05:57 <JeniT> jtandy: we can simplify conversions if we’re just basing off the tabular data model
15:06:23 <JeniT> gkellogg: yes, precedence etc all gets taken care of in the model generation
15:07:33 <JeniT> JeniT: I’ve added standing agenda on the main page
15:07:36 <danbri> ScribeNick: danbri2
15:07:49 <JeniT> gkellogg: it would be good to still get emails to confirm that it’s going ahead
15:08:20 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues?q=is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Requires+telcon+discussion%2Fdecision%22+sort%3Aupdated-asc
15:08:23 <danbri> jenit: prioritising issues for today, trying to check off our big list by working thru from either old-to-new or least-recently-updated, ...
15:08:57 <Zakim> -danbri
15:08:57 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/55
15:09:34 <JeniT> JeniT: syntax for regular expressions
15:10:16 <JeniT> … any thoughts?
15:10:37 <JeniT> gkellogg: every language has a regex syntax, which big overlaps
15:10:49 <JeniT> … there are edge cases in particular languages
15:11:00 <JeniT> … this concerns me
15:11:12 <JeniT> … we should probably say a best practice for interop is to be conservative in use
15:11:17 <jtandy> q+
15:11:31 <JeniT> … the only reason for a regex is to determine whether the value of a cell is used or not
15:11:42 <JeniT> … there’s no componentisation
15:12:04 <JeniT> ack jtandy
15:12:12 <JeniT> jtandy: my impression is compatible with gkellogg’s
15:12:24 <JeniT> … I’m struggling where we actually decided to use regular expressions within the metadata
15:12:33 <JeniT> … we were talking about using regexs to parse difficult bits of strings
15:12:38 <JeniT> … so is this time-expired?
15:13:23 <jtandy> ok - so regexp is used for validating CSV files ...
15:13:48 <danbri1> danbri1 has joined #csvw
15:13:58 <JeniT> jtandy: so the main point is for validation, to make sure that CSV meets a schema
15:14:59 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:15:07 <danbri1> zakim, IPcaller is danbri
15:15:07 <Zakim> +danbri; got it
15:15:43 <danbri1> gkellogg: we have too many 'MAYs' in specs, w.r.t. testing
15:15:44 <JeniT> JeniT: there’s the option of making it ‘implementation defined’ and encouraging authors to be conservative
15:15:46 <danbri1> scribenick: danbri1
15:16:04 <danbri1> gkellogg: don't think we can say its impl defined, ...
15:16:14 <jtandy> q+
15:16:19 <danbri1> … but also don't want to go too overboard in testcases, cooking up weird ways of breaking things via regexes
15:16:25 <danbri1> jenit: where does this leave us?
15:16:37 <danbri1> … which of the regex options do we say that impl has to conform with?
15:16:52 <danbri1> gkellogg: i expect the XML Schema one will be the most broadly available
15:17:08 <danbri1> … versus probably need to load a js env within ruby
15:17:16 <danbri1> … not v appealing
15:17:49 <JeniT> ack jtandy
15:17:51 <danbri1> … don't want to repeat their test suites to ensure all and every detail followed
15:18:33 <Zakim> -jtandy
15:18:59 <danbri1> gkellogg: i share j's concern w/ datetime strings and formats
15:19:13 <danbri1> jenit: propose we go fwd with speccing
15:19:23 <danbri1> … i don't think it's true that everyone has an xml schema impl handy
15:19:29 <danbri1> … it is an extra impl on top
15:19:34 <danbri1> (+1 on that —dan)
15:19:41 <danbri1> jenit: my pref is to go for ecmascript
15:19:42 <danbri1> +1
15:19:49 <danbri1> gkellogg: ok
15:20:01 <danbri1> jenit fills out github issue
15:20:29 <jtandy> sorry - lost connection via zakim - trying to get back in!
15:20:52 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/65
15:20:59 <danbri1> jenit: next one is about datetime picture string
15:21:07 <Zakim> +??P0
15:21:07 <danbri1> "Register of recognised date-time picture string formats"
15:21:12 <jtandy> zakim, I am ??P0
15:21:12 <Zakim> +jtandy; got it
15:21:16 <danbri1> gkellogg: i was unable to find an impl that uses them for parsing
15:21:24 <danbri1> they are more often used for formatting
15:21:44 <danbri1> jenit: interesting. that suprises me a bit. Doesn't moment.js use it?
15:21:47 <danbri1> …for parsing
15:22:01 <JeniT> http://momentjs.com/docs/#/parsing/string-format/
15:22:02 <danbri1> gkellogg: I didn't find one (but there may be impl out there)
15:22:48 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/54
15:23:21 <danbri1> issue: it would be better  to just have a list of known datetime formats
15:23:22 <trackbot> Created ISSUE-2 - It would be better  to just have a list of known datetime formats.  Please complete additional details at <http://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/track/issues/2/edit>.
15:23:29 <danbri1> gah, bot.
15:23:53 <danbri1> jenit: this github i**ue is about the idea that it would be better  to just have a list of known datetime formats
15:24:12 <danbri1> … some that were hardcoded, this is what the format means, ...
15:24:41 <danbri1> jtandy: yes, spec would identify a registry/page, which says "this is how to identify the … datetime string, moment.js etc"
15:24:50 <gkellogg> q+
15:24:57 <danbri1> jenit: i was misinterpreting. This is about the syntaxes you recognise for the strings
15:25:05 <danbri1> jtandy: if you look at -
15:25:09 <jtandy> { "datatype" : "date", "format" { "python" : "%m/%d/%Y", # standard python format "javascript" : "M/D/YYYY", # javascript's moment.js format etc. } }
15:25:58 <danbri1> … register of known values effectively saying e.g. that the key 'python' refers to the python datetime string as spec'd at [url]
15:26:05 <JeniT> ack gkellogg
15:26:06 <danbri1> gkellogg: this didn't appeal to me. ugly!
15:26:26 <danbri1> … my u/standing of it has just changed, … but it is not even clear that these, the python and js, do same thing
15:26:54 <danbri1> … trying to enumerate all the ways, … editors won't do this, will only specify the ones of interest to them
15:27:28 <danbri1> … my main concern is w.r.t. interoperability
15:27:34 <jtandy> "datatype": "date",
15:27:34 <jtandy> "format": {
15:27:34 <jtandy>   "picture-strings": [
15:27:34 <jtandy>     "unicode": "dd MMM yyyy",
15:27:34 <jtandy>     "xpath": "[D01] [MN,*-3] [Y0001]"
15:27:34 <jtandy>   ]
15:27:34 <jtandy> }
15:27:41 <danbri1> jtandy: there's a better eg in the csv2json doc, pasted above here.
15:28:00 <danbri1> … we assume that the metadata publisher cares enough about unicode version, xpath version, perhaps not about other options
15:28:22 <danbri1> q in terms of software impl, "do i understand the unicode thing?  xpath?" "i can't read the datetime format anyway"
15:28:47 <danbri1> jenit: reading datetime format is pretty important for conversions, unlike regex which is more for validating
15:29:02 <danbri1> jtandy: same applies for number formats that we also discussed
15:29:14 <danbri1> gkellogg: I disagree that the regex stuff is just for validators
15:29:33 <danbri1> … that was my interpretation of it. If cell doesn't match some regex, it was … use a null or default value.
15:29:39 <danbri1> jenit: i don't think it says that anywhere
15:30:29 <danbri1> …rather than try parse all datetime formats have list of popular ones, e.g. lists from excel, google spreadsheets etc.
15:30:45 <danbri1> gkellogg: I think that is more likely to get good impl
15:30:54 <danbri1> … perhaps ns doc could contain registry of these formats?
15:31:01 <danbri1> … so we could update that without updating the spec?
15:31:23 <danbri1> jenit: is*ue there is impl conformance. … how often would it need to check the registry?
15:31:53 <danbri1> jtandy: are we anticipating then, that validating + parsing software would try to detect which of the blessed formats it used?
15:32:04 <JeniT> “datatype”: “date”, “format”: “ISO”
15:32:17 <danbri1> jenit: you'd have something like this [above], … col is a datetype date, format is ISO
15:32:18 <JeniT> YYYY-MM-DD
15:32:25 <danbri1> (iso8601?)
15:32:53 <danbri1> jenit: there would be a builtin list within each impl for such formats, we could name them after the unicode picture string
15:33:03 <danbri1> maybe later we could move towards fully supporting
15:33:43 <danbri1> jtandy: we give a particular list of pic strings, … beyond those you might be stuck
15:33:48 <danbri1> jenit: or fall back to regex
15:33:51 <danbri1> jtandy: seems workable
15:33:56 <danbri1> gkellogg: agree, best way fwd
15:33:57 <danbri1> +1
15:34:15 <danbri1> jenit: maybe not enough of us to make a formal resolution but i'll update issues
15:34:31 <danbri1> [no audio]
15:34:37 <Zakim> -danbri
15:34:43 <jtandy> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/54
15:35:02 <danbri1> [skype has kicked me off.]
15:35:26 <danbri> danbri has joined #csvw
15:35:32 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:35:41 <danbri> zakim, IPcaller is danbri1
15:35:41 <Zakim> +danbri1; got it
15:36:10 <Zakim> -jtandy
15:36:11 <danbri> jtandy: conversion doc will need to reflect [metadata doc] when that's done
15:36:29 <danbri> jenit: conv doc will need to say to use the value parsed per metadata spec
15:36:31 <jtandy> sorry - booted off the call again!!!
15:36:34 <danbri> … use the semantic value of the cell
15:37:06 <danbri> q?
15:37:08 <Zakim> +??P0
15:37:09 <jtandy> zakim, I am ??P0
15:37:09 <Zakim> +jtandy; got it
15:37:26 <danbri> gkellogg: place to handle this is in the metadata doc
15:37:35 <danbri> … transform docs should just reference that
15:37:36 <danbri> +1
15:37:49 <danbri> jenit: putting that as a comment on the is*ue
15:38:12 <danbri> summary: metadata doc will talk about how string values are parsed into a semantic value, i.e. an actual structured date
15:38:28 <danbri> …based off these formats. All the conversion docs must say is that you're using this
15:38:48 <danbri> gkellogg: following this logic, if [something regex] there'd be a null value
15:39:07 <danbri> jenit: maybe needs to be added to model, if an error on cell, …
15:39:18 <danbri> …then conversion doc can define error behaviour for cells
15:39:37 <danbri> (dan: I like this granular validity model)
15:39:49 <danbri> jenit: adding to issue
15:39:57 <danbri> *an
15:40:45 <danbri> jtandy: if can't recognise, then the literal value will need to be used as no other options
15:41:12 <danbri> gkellogg: e.g. if it was a datetime, … and we didn't recognise it, would rdf conversion use a datetime datatype, vs as a literal
15:41:20 <danbri> … i think in rdfa it would've gone to plain literal
15:41:30 <danbri> jenit: makes sense
15:41:37 <danbri> jtandy: same issue is relevant to parsing numbers
15:41:48 <danbri> jenit: the issue we put it on (#54) covers that
15:42:06 <danbri> …reasonable middle ground
15:42:16 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/66
15:42:27 <danbri> #66 "Composite primary keys and foreign key references"
15:43:24 <danbri> nice fiddly issue!
15:43:39 <danbri> skipping for now.
15:44:19 <JeniT> ACTION: JeniT to add foreign key discussion to F2F agenda
15:44:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-60 - Add foreign key discussion to f2f agenda [on Jeni Tennison - due 2015-01-21].
15:45:14 <danbri> https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/F2F_Agenda_2015-02
15:45:14 <JeniT> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/49