IRC log of shapes on 2015-07-30

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:57:44 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #shapes
17:57:44 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/07/30-shapes-irc
17:57:46 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs rdf-data-shapes
17:57:46 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #shapes
17:57:48 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SHAPES
17:57:48 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
17:57:49 [trackbot]
Meeting: RDF Data Shapes Working Group Teleconference
17:57:49 [trackbot]
Date: 30 July 2015
17:58:15 [Arnaud]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2015.07.30
17:58:18 [Arnaud]
chair: Arnaud
17:59:22 [Arnaud]
regrets: ericP, dimitris, labra, simonstey
18:01:25 [pfps]
pfps has joined #shapes
18:01:33 [pfps]
present+ pfps
18:01:42 [Arnaud]
present+ Arnaud
18:01:51 [aryman]
aryman has joined #shapes
18:02:07 [Arnaud]
present+ hknublau
18:02:12 [kcoyle]
present+ kcoyle
18:03:09 [Arnaud]
present+ aryman
18:05:56 [TallTed]
present+ TallTed
18:06:49 [Dimitris]
Dimitris has joined #shapes
18:07:26 [aryman]
scribe: aryman
18:07:43 [aryman]
Topic: Admin
18:08:03 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: Approve minutes of the 23 July Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2015/07/23-shapes-minutes.html
18:08:14 [pfps]
minutes looked acceptable
18:08:22 [Arnaud]
RESOLVED: Approve minutes of the 23 July Telecon: http://www.w3.org/2015/07/23-shapes-minutes.html
18:11:39 [aryman]
Topic: ISSUE-2: Audience skills
18:12:39 [kcoyle]
q+
18:12:39 [pfps]
Let's close ISSUE-2, implicitly saying that the current document set is written at more-or-less the right level.
18:12:49 [Arnaud]
ack kcoyle
18:13:36 [aryman]
kcoyle: Is the ShEx-like language still in scope?
18:14:08 [aryman]
Arnaud: yes, we intend to define a more human-readable syntax
18:14:41 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-2, it is no longer relevant
18:14:46 [aryman]
+1
18:14:47 [hknublau]
+1
18:14:49 [Dimitris]
+1
18:14:53 [pfps]
+1
18:14:55 [kcoyle]
+1
18:14:56 [TallTed]
+1
18:15:02 [Arnaud]
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-2, it is no longer relevant.
18:15:20 [aryman]
Topic: ISSUE-23: punning
18:15:27 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-23, as currently specified in editor's draft.
18:15:29 [pfps]
q+
18:15:33 [Arnaud]
ack pfps
18:15:56 [aryman]
pfps: I need more time.
18:16:31 [aryman]
Topic: ISSUE-32: SHACL+-
18:17:38 [hknublau]
q+
18:17:43 [Arnaud]
ack hknublau
18:17:55 [pfps]
I'm happy closing this issue with no change to the document.
18:18:46 [pfps]
This issue was put forward when it was unclear whether the high-level language was going to be something like ShEx or an RDF vocabulary and syntax.
18:20:02 [aryman]
hknublau: High-level means not requiring knowledge of an extension language, Core means the High-Level language we define, Human-friendly means compact, e,g, ShExC
18:21:54 [aryman]
kcoyle: Need to be open to feedback about what we put in the Core. We need to include the most common user requirements (80-90%).
18:25:37 [aryman]
hknublau: The current document is split into two parts. Part 1 is High Level. Part 2 is about Extensions (SPARQL).
18:26:30 [aryman]
Note that some High Level commands are defined by templates.
18:26:55 [aryman]
q+
18:27:05 [Arnaud]
ack aryman
18:30:21 [aryman]
q+
18:30:31 [Arnaud]
ack aryman
18:31:31 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: High-level refers to the part of SHACL that does not require use of an extension language, Core is the built-in High-Level language we define as part of SHACL, Human-friendly means compact, e.g., ShExC
18:31:54 [hknublau]
+1
18:32:22 [TallTed]
+1
18:32:33 [Dimitris]
+1
18:34:34 [kcoyle]
+1
18:34:36 [aryman]
+1
18:35:00 [Arnaud]
RESOLVED: High-level refers to the part of SHACL that does not require use of an extension language, Core is the built-in High-Level language we define as part of SHACL, Human-friendly means compact, e.g., ShExC
18:35:08 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-32, it was addressed by the adoption of the current editor's draft.
18:35:13 [hknublau]
+1
18:35:20 [aryman]
+1
18:35:30 [Dimitris]
+1
18:35:34 [TallTed]
+1
18:35:47 [Arnaud]
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-32, it was addressed by the adoption of the current editor's draft.
18:36:03 [aryman]
Topic: ISSUE-51: Results Vocabulary
18:37:05 [pfps]
One problem with Section 1.4 of the document is that there are both vocabulary and phrases that are not used elsewhere in the document.
18:37:33 [pfps]
Therefore I do not think that Section 1.4 can be used as the basis for closing ISSUE-51.
18:42:06 [aryman]
Dimitris: concerned about how to count errors, do statistics
18:43:19 [pfps]
q+
18:43:42 [aryman]
Dimitris: if you let people subclass the Result class then you need to load the ontology in order to determine which results are subclasses of Error
18:44:33 [TallTed]
pfps - that seems to me a separate issue/concern -- it's not nothing, but not a reason that 1.4 cannot satisfy ISSUE-51
18:45:25 [aryman]
q+
18:45:43 [Arnaud]
http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl-ref/#results-vocabulary
18:45:56 [pfps]
Ted - that depends on what we are agreeing on - Holger just pointed to 1.4 - which has a lot of baggage - he didn't say that the resolution was to have the four classes
18:46:33 [Arnaud]
ack pfps
18:47:49 [aryman]
pfps: Please clarify what are supposed to be agreeing with? All of section 1.4?
18:48:37 [Arnaud]
ack aryman
18:49:39 [pfps]
Are we agreeing one four classes and their taxonomy, or are we agreeing on the entire contents of Section 1.4?
18:51:16 [aryman]
aryman: Suggest we add a required property for severity on the base class.
18:51:42 [aryman]
Dimitris: That would satisfy my immediate concern about doing statistics.
18:53:14 [aryman]
hknublau: Having an integer severity would be useful in some cases.
18:53:44 [pfps]
q+
18:53:56 [Arnaud]
ack pfps
18:55:33 [hknublau]
q+
18:55:39 [Arnaud]
ack hknublau
18:55:58 [aryman]
pfps: Section 1.4 contains a lot of content that needs discussion
18:56:04 [pfps]
All the stuff in Section 1.4 is in some sense related to the results vocabulary.
18:56:34 [pfps]
I do agree that a lot of the section need discussion - and a lot of it is new.
18:56:36 [pfps]
q+
18:56:56 [aryman]
hknublau: Need to start somewhere. I invite a counter-proposal.
18:57:21 [Arnaud]
ack pfps
18:58:13 [TallTed]
for consideration...
18:58:13 [TallTed]
ODBC has *disjoint* return codes --
18:58:13 [TallTed]
- SQL_SUCCESS = Function completed successfully ;
18:58:13 [TallTed]
- SQL_SUCCESS_WITH_INFO = Function completed successfully, possibly with a (retrievable) nonfatal error/warning ;
18:58:14 [TallTed]
- SQL_ERROR = Function failed. Details are retrievable. ;
18:58:14 [TallTed]
- SQL_INVALID_HANDLE = Function failed due to a programming error ;
18:58:16 [TallTed]
- SQL_NO_DATA_FOUND = No more data was available ;
18:58:18 [TallTed]
- SQL_NEED_DATA = More data is needed from consumer ;
18:58:20 [TallTed]
- SQL_STILL_EXECUTING = asynchronously executed op still running... (end)
18:58:22 [TallTed]
for SHACL, we might consider similar *disjoint* -- sh:success, sh:succinfo, sh:error, sh:what?, sh:missinginput, sh:inprogress ...
18:59:18 [aryman]
pfps: The spec has a lot of interdependencies so it requires a lot of work to make a consistent change. Need to allow partially worked-out proposals.
18:59:40 [Dimitris]
fyi, this was my draft suggestion on May https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-data-shapes-wg/2015May/0145.html
18:59:55 [hknublau]
q+
18:59:56 [aryman]
Topic: ISSUE-69: rdf:langString
19:00:02 [Arnaud]
ack hknublau
19:01:19 [aryman]
+1 to align with RDF 1.1
19:02:18 [Dimitris]
+1 to stick with rdf1.1 too and fine with adding sh:string
19:03:03 [aryman]
pfps: We should respect the definition of xsd:string
19:04:24 [aryman]
hknublau: Agreed. So we should introduce sh:string or sh:text instead of using the SHACL union mechanism, sh:or
19:06:21 [elf-pavlik]
elf-pavlik has joined #shapes
19:06:26 [aryman]
pfps: Too bad that RDF 1.1 did not define a datatype for this purpose. We should define one and try to get it put in the RDF vocabulary.
19:07:17 [aryman]
q+
19:07:27 [Arnaud]
ack aryman
19:07:32 [Dimitris]
*sh:text Holger proposed would be less confusing actually*
19:07:45 [pfps]
q+
19:07:52 [Arnaud]
ack pfps
19:08:11 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-69, defining a new datatype sh:string
19:09:26 [hknublau]
+0.8
19:09:42 [pfps]
+1 with the provisio to try to do better if possible
19:09:51 [kcoyle]
+1
19:09:54 [aryman]
+1 to the spirit
19:10:44 [pfps]
sh:text might be a better name
19:10:53 [Arnaud]
PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-69, defining a new datatype sh:text
19:10:58 [hknublau]
+1
19:11:02 [aryman]
+1
19:11:04 [Dimitris]
+1
19:11:08 [kcoyle]
+1
19:11:10 [TallTed]
+1
19:11:21 [Arnaud]
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-69, defining a new datatype sh:text
19:12:46 [aryman]
Topic:ISSUE-76: commutability
19:12:47 [pfps]
rdf:PlainLiteral was proposed as a datatype to cover both strings and language-tagged strings, but it was not picked up by RDF
19:12:50 [aryman]
q+
19:13:16 [aryman]
q-
19:14:31 [aryman]
q+
19:14:40 [Arnaud]
ack aryman
19:16:23 [pfps]
q+
19:18:26 [Arnaud]
ack pfps
19:19:21 [aryman]
hknublau: Order of execution is important so that users always get the same results in error situations.
19:19:59 [aryman]
Arnaud: need to get user input on importance of execution order - Karen please
19:20:48 [aryman]
aryman: Recursion should be require fixed order of execution
19:21:13 [aryman]
pfps: SPARQL allows booleans to return ERROR and defines operations
19:21:50 [aryman]
pfps: SPARQL allows changed execution order to enable optimization
19:23:40 [aryman]
s/should be/should not/
19:24:08 [aryman]
q+
19:24:10 [pfps]
SQL has a different solution, but also one that does not specify execution order
19:24:18 [Arnaud]
ack aryman
19:25:58 [pfps]
RDF graphs are not good for syntax - rdf:List was added to RDF to get around some of the problems with RDF containers when used for syntax - its initial use (in OWL) did not have any execution ordering implications
19:26:34 [aryman]
Arnaud: let's resume discussion next week. Karen - will you have input?
19:26:55 [pfps]
QCRs?
19:27:41 [aryman]
Topic: ISSUE-3: Shape association
19:27:56 [aryman]
Arnaud: need to clarify what the issue is
19:28:48 [aryman]
hknublau: This issue is about how to tell the engine what to do.
19:29:34 [pfps]
I agree with Holger here - some of the recent comments on ISSUE-3 were related to ISSUE-5
19:30:49 [pfps]
I also agree with the change
19:32:39 [Arnaud]
trackbot, end meeting
19:32:39 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
19:32:39 [Zakim]
sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
19:32:47 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:32:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/07/30-shapes-minutes.html trackbot
19:32:48 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
19:32:48 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items