18:57:22 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #shapes
18:57:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/02/12-shapes-irc
18:57:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
18:57:24 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #shapes
18:57:26 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SHAPES
18:57:26 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see DATA_RDFWG()2:00PM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
18:57:27 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
18:57:27 <trackbot> Date: 12 February 2015
18:58:47 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #shapes
18:58:50 <TallTed> TallTed has joined #shapes
19:00:30 <Labra> zakim, who is here?
19:00:30 <Zakim> DATA_RDFWG()2:00PM has not yet started, Labra
19:00:32 <Zakim> On IRC I see TallTed, kcoyle, Zakim, RRSAgent, Labra, Dimitris, pfps, hknublau, SimonSteyskal, SteveS, Arnaud, rhiaro, sandro, ericP, trackbot
19:00:33 <michel> michel has joined #shapes
19:01:05 <Arnaud> zakim, this is shapes
19:01:05 <Zakim> ok, Arnaud; that matches DATA_RDFWG()2:00PM
19:01:08 <Zakim> +michel
19:01:26 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?
19:01:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P12, [IPcaller], pfps, Dimitris, kcoyle, Arnaud, michel
19:01:41 <Labra> zakim, [IPCaller] is labra
19:01:41 <Zakim> +labra; got it
19:01:46 <SimonSteyskal> zakim, ??P12 is me
19:01:46 <Zakim> +SimonSteyskal; got it
19:03:37 <Zakim> +EricP
19:04:01 <Arnaud> scribe: michel
19:04:01 <kcoyle> i'm here
19:04:06 <Arnaud> chair: Arnaud
19:04:20 <Arnaud> agenda: http://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2015.02.12
19:04:39 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
19:04:46 <TallTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
19:04:46 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
19:04:55 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
19:04:56 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
19:06:54 <ericP> ericP: some stuff ericP said
19:07:03 <ericP> ... some more inane crap
19:07:04 <michel> topic: Minutes of last meeting
19:07:14 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 5 February Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2015/02/05-shapes-minutes.html
19:07:18 <pfps> minutes look fine by me
19:07:50 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 5 February Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2015/02/05-shapes-minutes.html
19:08:13 <michel> arnaud: no teleconference calll next week
19:08:28 <michel>  ... we will have our f2f
19:08:41 <michel>  ... asks everybody to indicate whether and how they will participate
19:08:47 <michel>  ... feedback on agenda is welcome
19:08:49 <hknublau> (I am not able to join the voice via Skype - it doesn’t react to the conference code).
19:09:35 <michel> F2F: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/F2F2
19:10:01 <hsolbrig> hsolbrig has joined #shapes
19:10:54 <pfps> It might be  nice to have some time devoted to discussion of underlying issues.  Maybe that is the point of the morning of the first Wednesday?
19:11:24 <michel> arnaud: will cover issues in the tracker
19:11:25 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
19:11:45 <pfps> q+
19:11:50 <Arnaud> ack pfps
19:12:17 <hsolbrig> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
19:12:17 <Zakim> +hsolbrig; got it
19:12:29 <michel> peter: lots of discussion of shapes vs classes recently, will wed be the time to discuss?
19:12:53 <michel> arnaud: yes that's the plan. two proposals on the table. hoping to focus on this and come to resolution
19:13:44 <michel> peter: each proposal has a different idea to what is a shape is.
19:14:07 <michel> ... getting hung up on what goes into a proposal rather than what is in the proposal itself
19:14:20 <michel> ... ldom suggests that shapes are classes
19:14:40 <michel> ... constraints proposal suggests that shapes are not classes, but both are not sufficiently explicit
19:14:47 <hknublau> hknublau has joined #shapes
19:15:16 <michel> arnaud: how to link to shapes, classes, etc
19:15:34 <michel> ... please feel free to propose any additional topics for discussion
19:16:00 <michel> pfps: will put together a document to "get us out of the weeds"
19:16:59 <michel> arnaud: feel free to raise issues as you see fit
19:17:10 <michel> topic: actions and issues
19:17:42 <michel> arnaud: no actions pending review
19:17:57 <michel> ... no open actions
19:18:27 <michel> ... no issues pending review or raised
19:18:40 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
19:18:44 <michel> topic: user stories/use cases
19:18:51 <hknublau> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
19:18:51 <Zakim> +hknublau; got it
19:19:10 <michel> arnaud: issues on user stories were not being addressed
19:19:15 <michel> ... contacted individuals responsible
19:20:28 <michel> ... S6 https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/8
19:21:27 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/User_Stories#S6:_Closed-world_recognition_for_e.g._for_partial_ontology_import
19:21:46 <michel> ... unsure who is responsible
19:22:47 <michel> hknublau: not Dean or me
19:23:06 <michel> ... check with Ralph
19:23:33 <michel> arnaud: issue 13 https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/track/issues/13
19:23:42 <michel> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/User_Stories#S12:_App_Interoperability
19:24:19 <michel> ... Sandro responded - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2015Feb/0126.html
19:24:37 <michel> pfps: will incorporate in user story
19:25:14 <michel> arnaud: Dean has responses to inquiries
19:25:30 <michel> pfps: user stories need to be fixed or removed
19:25:44 <michel> arnaud: will communicate this
19:26:17 <michel> topic: working draft
19:26:18 <Arnaud> http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/data-shapes-ucr/
19:27:01 <michel> kcoyle: 80-90% done
19:27:17 <michel> arnaud: hope that next week we can make progress on the remaining issues
19:27:25 <michel> ... have a clear plan to publish this draft
19:28:02 <michel> ... please read the document, we need to know the issues to discuss at the meeting
19:28:25 <michel> topic: requirements
19:28:43 <michel> arnaud: proposed a set of requirements for approval
19:29:05 <michel> ... pfps was expressing concerns, we agreed to remove it altogether
19:29:15 <michel> ... requirements were addressed
19:29:44 <michel> er - concerns were mostly addressed -
19:29:54 <Arnaud> PROPOSAL: Approve requirements 2.5.2, 2.5.4, 2.5.10, 2.5.11, 2.6, 2.7, 2.7.1, 2.7.4, 2.9.
19:30:13 <pfps> q+
19:30:18 <Arnaud> ack pfps
19:30:45 <michel> pfps: 2.5.4 has been changed
19:31:16 <michel> ... after objection was raised
19:31:59 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Requirements#Property_Type
19:32:29 <michel> ericP: had changed a few as a result of discussion
19:33:03 <TallTed> it's a wiki.... change history exists
19:33:04 <michel> pfps: property datatype
19:33:29 <michel> ... now 2.5.3
19:34:47 <michel> arnaud: ericP and hknublau
19:36:01 <michel> ericP: we should re-examine property datatype, property type, node rdf type and make sense of it
19:36:43 <michel> hsolbrig: numbering is very fragile
19:37:14 <michel> ... mediawiki uses tags, we should too
19:37:28 <michel> ericp: maybe we can work to get this functioning properly
19:37:39 <cygri> cygri has joined #shapes
19:38:10 <Arnaud> PROPOSAL: Approve requirements 2.5.2,2.5.10, 2.5.11, 2.6, 2.7, 2.7.1, 2.7.4, 2.9
19:38:41 <pfps> +1
19:38:48 <SimonSteyskal> +1
19:38:53 <michel> +1
19:39:13 <hsolbrig> +1
19:39:17 <ericP> +1
19:39:18 <TallTed> +1
19:39:21 <Labra> +1
19:39:36 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approve requirements 2.5.2,2.5.10, 2.5.11, 2.6, 2.7, 2.7.1, 2.7.4, 2.9
19:39:51 <michel> arnaud: discuss 2.5.3
19:40:10 <Arnaud> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Requirements#Property_Datatype
19:41:40 <michel> pfps: restriction should read - if you have a restriction xsd:integer, you could have xsd:int; as it is stated now it could fail
19:42:03 <michel> ... went from the value that the literal means to the syntactic form of the literal
19:42:34 <michel> ericP: two proposals: 1. you can constrain a property to have a literal with a particular datatype
19:43:22 <michel> ... 2. you can constain a property to a inferred datatype (?)
19:43:53 <ericP> -> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#built-in-datatypes XSD type herarchy
19:44:05 <ericP> s/herarchy/hierarchy/
19:44:47 <michel> pfps: the xml schema - basic datatypes are disjoint
19:45:17 <michel> arnaud: request that interested parties discuss offline
19:45:29 <pfps> proposal: have both restriction by datatype and by value
19:45:41 <michel> ericP: do people like restrict to xsd:integer and the byte does match, or rather that it does not match?
19:45:57 <kcoyle> q+
19:45:58 <michel> hsolbrig: prefers the latter. more work for implementers, but less work for users
19:46:03 <TallTed> I think they're both necessary...
19:46:08 <michel> ericP: i though the opposite...
19:46:14 <michel> s/though/thought
19:46:17 <Arnaud> ack kcoyle
19:46:23 <kcoyle> can
19:46:27 <kcoyle> can't unmute
19:47:10 <michel> kcoyle: in the datatypes that we'll be working with, simply limiting to a particular datatype would be sufficient, without looking at the value
19:47:18 <michel> ... used for providing forms for input
19:47:29 <hknublau> I am also in favor of the simple direct matching.
19:47:46 <pfps> I don't understand - validation always has the value available
19:47:47 <hknublau> and if I remember correctly, Arthur was too
19:47:52 <TallTed> if I require an xsd:integer, even though in many senses xsd:byte might be thought a sub-set of xsd:integer, this might not be so for me.
19:47:57 <michel> ksolbrig: if you receive an instance of a datatype of "byte", but would that pass a constraint that specifies an "integer"
19:47:58 <Dimitris> I am also in favor of strict matching but we can have both as different types of restrictions
19:48:15 <SimonSteyskal> i second karen on that
19:48:21 <pfps> Well, XML Schema datatypes says that xsd:byte is a subset of xsd:integer
19:48:51 <michel> hsolbrig: if you restrict to xsd:integer, then xsd:byte should validate
19:49:21 <hknublau> Let’s add both variations and let people vote?
19:49:36 <michel> I think that both are needed
19:49:56 <michel> it's similar to what i was articulating from choosing a specific term in a hierarchy versus using any inferred subtype
19:50:55 <hsolbrig> q+
19:51:03 <michel> topic: Eric's proposal
19:51:11 <michel> arnaud: revision of Holger's proposal a few weeks ago
19:51:50 <michel> ... had a straw poll to determine where people stand
19:51:59 <pfps> I have mentioned several issues that I have even with the current version of the  document.
19:52:00 <michel> ... have spent more time talking about it
19:52:40 <michel> ... a vote on the proposal is meant to stimulate discussion as a starting point
19:52:47 <Arnaud> STRAWPOLL: Does Eric's proposal look to you like a good starting point?
19:53:36 <ericP> +1
19:53:38 <Labra> +1
19:53:40 <hsolbrig> +1
19:53:44 <SimonSteyskal> +1
19:53:45 <michel> +1
19:53:50 <pfps> -0
19:53:55 <kcoyle> +0 (don't really understand)
19:54:14 <Dimitris> 0 (didn't have time to read in detail)
19:54:23 <hknublau> 0 (fine as a discussion base of course)
19:54:27 <pfps> -0 lots of work is still needed
19:54:42 <TallTed> +0 (only skimmed)
19:55:52 <michel> topic: Holger's proposal
19:56:04 <michel> arnaud: shape selectors
19:56:09 <michel> https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Shape_Selectors
19:56:14 <hknublau> +q
19:56:29 <Arnaud> ack hsolbrig
19:56:54 <michel> hsolbrig: clarification on meeting agenda
19:57:03 <Arnaud> ack hknublau
19:57:40 <michel> hnublau: appears to be two approaches - use rdf:type, or separate data structure
19:58:09 <michel> ... other WG have tried to accomodate both
19:58:26 <michel> ... we may not know what is the best approach
19:58:33 <michel> ... came up with a generalization
19:58:42 <michel> ... the validation can be parameterized
19:59:51 <michel> ... one of the main motiviations to have shapes separate from classes is to avoid clashes.
20:00:31 <michel> ... users may want to be able to slice and dice across dimensions
20:00:38 <michel> ... add their own properties in their own namespace
20:00:47 <michel> ... mixture of these shape selectors could be possible
20:01:20 <michel> pfps: disagree with the approach; we will end up with different input... challenging for users
20:01:53 <michel> arnaud: we'll get more opportunities to discuss this
20:02:36 <Zakim> -hsolbrig
20:02:38 <Zakim> -labra
20:02:40 <hknublau> I agree with Peter, but this is the last resort if we fail to compromise and have vetoes
20:02:42 <Zakim> -TallTed
20:02:43 <Zakim> -SimonSteyskal
20:02:44 <Zakim> -michel
20:02:44 <Zakim> -pfps
20:02:45 <Zakim> -Arnaud
20:02:48 <Zakim> -kcoyle
20:02:50 <Zakim> -Dimitris
20:03:03 <Zakim> -EricP
20:03:13 <Dimitris> Dimitris has left #shapes
20:08:04 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, hknublau, in DATA_RDFWG()2:00PM
20:08:05 <Zakim> DATA_RDFWG()2:00PM has ended
20:08:05 <Zakim> Attendees were pfps, Dimitris, kcoyle, Arnaud, michel, labra, SimonSteyskal, EricP, TallTed, hsolbrig, hknublau
21:13:45 <cygri> cygri has joined #shapes