IRC log of dawg on 2004-07-15
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 00:00:35 [ericP]
- [discussion of 3.7 Limited Datatype Support]
- 00:01:44 [ericP]
- robS: are we talking about strings or data type representations?
- 00:03:19 [ericP]
- RESOLVED: accpet "4.8 Literal Search" as a DO
- 00:03:26 [ericP]
- abstentions from ericP and robS
- 00:09:53 [Yoshio]
- q+ to ask what do we mean "a subset" in requirement 3.7 Limited Datatype Support
- 00:10:21 [Yoshio]
- s/do we mean/we mean/
- 00:10:33 [Yoshio]
- s/mean/mean by/
- 00:11:14 [Yoshio]
- q-
- 00:13:47 [ericP]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
- 00:20:34 [Yoshio]
- q+ to ask if we don't have any problem when we apply path expression to RDF which the basic structure is not trees but meshes, even with loops
- 00:22:18 [Yoshio]
- s/which the/whose/
- 00:22:55 [ericP]
- [discussion of BRQL]
- 00:23:49 [ericP]
- robS: we don't have to adopt BRQL. prefer that we start with XQuery.
- 00:24:07 [ericP]
- ... builds on existing specs...
- 00:24:35 [Yoshio]
- by pathe expression I mean path-expression-based language like XQuery
- 00:25:29 [ericP]
- kendall: starting with an XQuery engine isn't sufficient for everyone
- 00:25:40 [ericP]
- ... no implementation in Python
- 00:25:46 [kendall]
- no, it isn't *possible* for everyone
- 00:26:27 [ericP]
- robS: not asserting that it's simple
- 00:27:11 [ericP]
- ... can't say we've impelemented the RDF query layer
- 00:27:15 [ericP]
- simon: we need a spec in front of us to work with
- 00:27:39 [ericP]
- danc: [gives history, back to query workshop]
- 00:28:02 [ericP]
- ... sounds like an argument to pause for a while.
- 00:29:59 [ericP]
- robS: going wtih an RDF-only query languge, NI will suffer
- 00:30:10 [ericP]
- jeff: the semweb in general will suffer
- 00:30:52 [ericP]
- simon: does that follow from not adopting XQuery, a language for querying hierarchical documents?
- 00:31:18 [ericP]
- ... the RDF stack is more similar
- 00:31:36 [ericP]
- jeff: not saying that out of the box, it's a solution
- 00:32:17 [ericP]
- kendall: it's not XQuery vs. start from scratch.
- 00:34:35 [ericP]
- robS: XQuery took a long time because they were designing a language that would be easy to write
- 00:35:09 [ericP]
- howard: i think it was the complexities of XQuery that made the spec so big.
- 00:35:57 [ericP]
- robS: the RDF query langs have crappy presentation over good calculus
- 00:37:50 [ericP]
- s/calculus/algebra/
- 00:52:39 [Yoshio]
- Hmm aren't we just looking at BRQL as ONE of candidates for the strawman?
- 00:52:59 [ericP]
- yes
- 00:53:16 [Yoshio]
- I think we're going to look into XsRQL or N3QL as well
- 00:59:03 [Yoshio]
- what is the definition of the word algebra? is it different from calculus?
- 00:59:20 [DanC_jam]
- good question, Yoshio. I'm actually not certain.
- 00:59:41 [Yoshio]
- (I don't know the definition of calculus, either, ;))
- 01:01:26 [Yoshio]
- and what's the difference from data model?
- 01:02:05 [Yoshio]
- As the data model, what we have is RDF (obvious?)
- 01:02:35 [Yoshio]
- I think it's quite different from that of XML (a tree like document model)
- 01:05:20 [Yoshio]
- * we have reached to a consensus that we are not likely to have a consensus easily
- 01:29:05 [AndyS]
- AndyS has joined #dawg
- 04:32:07 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #dawg
- 05:36:18 [AndyS]
- AndyS has joined #dawg
- 16:21:11 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #dawg
- 16:22:40 [SimonR]
- Considering the ebXML UC.
- 16:23:17 [DanC_jam]
- 6 Jun rev of ebXML http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0032.html
- 16:24:14 [DanC_jam]
- Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:26:20 -0400
- 16:26:56 [JosD]
- JosD has joined #dawg
- 16:27:34 [howardk]
- howardk has joined #dawg
- 16:31:18 [HiroyukiS]
- HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG
- 16:32:50 [SimonR]
- RobS: The drill-down mentioned in the UC is in the description logic domain rather than in basic RDF.
- 16:33:05 [DaveB]
- I wonder if it's time to think about defining terms. A triple pattern is .... A graph pattern is a cnjunction of triple patterns. etc.
- 16:34:01 [AndyS]
- +1
- 16:34:12 [kendall]
- seems relatively undangerous
- 16:34:48 [SimonR]
- I think we've reached a point where a formal, abstract model of what a query is will be useful, and there's general agreement that this is the case.
- 16:43:13 [ericP]
- agenda request: winter f2f schduling and spring tech plen -- ask if "the next 2-4 weeks" is sufficient notification to schedule our winter f2f.
- 16:43:47 [kendall]
- heh, reschedule :>
- 16:43:58 [SimonR]
- Issue with drill-down is that querying for what counts as a direct descendant in a hierarchy rather simply a descendant in a hierarchy. To do this would require being able to query to non-existence of any intermediate points in the hierarchy.
- 16:45:17 [SimonR]
- (...rather than simply...)
- 16:47:05 [ericP]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/15-dawg-irc has been chacl'd
- 16:49:10 [DanC_jam]
- regrep tc http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=regrep
- 16:49:50 [JosD]
- RIM 2.5 http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/regrep/documents/2.5/specs/ebrim-2.5.pdf
- 16:57:12 [AndyS]
- Discussing :: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/att-0087/_DAPD_PaperMain.pdf
- 17:03:13 [SimonR]
- ebXML use case motivates interactive browsing; Kendall feels that 2.10 already implies interaction browsing, but some disagreement that this is clearly implied.
- 17:03:55 [SimonR]
- ACTION: Kendall add ebXML UC
- 17:04:52 [SimonR]
- ACTION: RobS write email to Farrukh
- 17:05:19 [DanC_jam]
- 1.5 Relationship to XQuery http://www.w3.org/2003/12/swa/dawg-charter#XQueryBinding
- 17:09:48 [SimonR]
- EricP: Describes a UC involving querying the Edgar database and integrating XML and RDF sources into the one query.
- 17:19:10 [DanC_jam]
- ... exploration of XQuery/RDF query integration scenarios: is loose coupling sufficient? is there motivation for anything more than string concatenation to make up queries, and XML to return results?
- 17:21:25 [ericP]
- example FA query: http://www.w3.org/2001/11/13-RDF-Query-Rules/#XQueryFA
- 17:22:02 [DaveB-lap]
- DaveB-lap has joined #dawg
- 17:30:10 [SimonR]
- Break at 10:30 until 10:45.
- 17:46:47 [HiroyukiS]
- HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG
- 17:50:49 [ericP]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/16-FA/
- 18:00:43 [DanC_jam]
- Zakim, this is dawg
- 18:00:43 [Zakim]
- ok, DanC_jam; that matches SW_DAWG(f2f)2:00PM
- 18:00:52 [DanC_jam]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 18:00:52 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see RobS
- 18:01:00 [DanC_jam]
- Zakim, RobS is temporarily MeetingRoom
- 18:01:00 [Zakim]
- +MeetingRoom; got it
- 18:02:01 [AndyS]
- Resuming ...
- 18:02:42 [DaveB]
- DaveB has joined #dawg
- 18:02:44 [howardk]
- FYI: code for traversing a possibly cyclic foaf:knows network in XsRQL: http://www.fatdog.com/CyclicFoafs.html
- 18:03:55 [Zakim]
- + +17907aaaa
- 18:04:06 [DaveB-lap]
- that's me
- 18:04:12 [DanC_jam]
- Zakim, aaaa is DaveB
- 18:04:12 [Zakim]
- +DaveB; got it
- 18:09:53 [DanC_jam]
- AndyS tweaks title page... author/editor stuff...
- 18:10:38 [Yoshio]
- what's the URI?
- 18:10:49 [DaveB-lap]
- editing http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
- 18:11:17 [Yoshio]
- thank you, dave
- 18:12:06 [DaveB-lap]
- w00f
- 18:13:43 [DaveB-lap]
- BARQ?
- 18:15:33 [Yoshio]
- BBQ :)
- 18:19:15 [DanC_jam]
- DanC gave editorial input on TOC and argued against SOURCE
- 18:19:36 [DanC_jam]
- (slightly longer version is recorded by AndyS in the live copy)
- 18:25:00 [TomAdams]
- TomAdams has joined #dawg
- 18:34:45 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION: Jos: explain log:includes to inform the discussion of SOURCE (nee provenance)
- 18:35:15 [DaveB-lap]
- the SOURCE thing could be an extension point
- 18:35:50 [DaveB-lap]
- I kinda like the way that algae allows it (triple) {foo:bar} where they are extensions, annotations of the triple, kinda
- 18:36:18 [kendall]
- triple facets, i keep calling them.
- 18:36:54 [DaveB-lap]
- ptr to jos's test http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0037.html
- 18:36:59 [DanC_jam]
- jos refers us to example 2 in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0037.html
- 18:42:01 [DanC_jam]
- DaveB: I like the the way that algae does it [optionals] too. [pointer, please?]
- 18:42:26 [DaveB-lap]
- I was saying I like the way the result triples are built up
- 18:42:30 [DaveB-lap]
- in algae, and here
- 18:42:46 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION AndyS: explain DESCRIBE design implicit in BRQL spec
- 18:42:53 [DaveB-lap]
- if it means lessspecial features in the language, great
- 18:43:20 [DanC_jam]
- a pointer to the relevant algae docs would be nice, daveb.
- 18:43:27 [DaveB-lap]
- looking
- 18:44:14 [DaveB-lap]
- algae2 result sets description: http://www.w3.org/2004/05/06-Algae/#resultSet
- 18:51:18 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION DanC: explain evolution of log:semantics/log:includes from uri-is-graph to uri-is-doc in cwm, to inform discussion of SOURCE
- 18:51:41 [DaveB-lap]
- I'm willing to take an action to explain the two uses of redland contexts I see most.
- 18:52:02 [DanC_jam]
- very well, dave. pls write the action
- 18:52:43 [DaveB-lap]
- ACTION DaveB: explain the main uses seen for redland contexts with respect to the provenance
- 18:53:15 [DanC_jam]
- (I just discovered http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/ .)
- 18:53:39 [DaveB-lap]
- yeah, they use the 4th item as something else, but they recently changed. from bnode|uri to just allowing a uri
- 18:58:56 [Yoshio]
- q+ to clarify if NOT operator can have multiple triples as operands
- 19:00:51 [Yoshio]
- q-
- 19:00:56 [DaveB-lap]
- Yoshio: as I understand it, no
- 19:02:07 [JosD]
- Re nested optionals see also test case in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0737.html
- 19:04:05 [Yoshio]
- q+ to ask the meaning of DISTINCT
- 19:04:53 [DaveB-lap]
- Yoshio, as I recall we based it on SeRQL - duplicate triples are removed from the output graph
- 19:05:08 [DaveB-lap]
- or duplicate binding resutls
- 19:05:09 [Yoshio]
- Yes, but is it optional?
- 19:05:28 [DaveB-lap]
- if not given, you may get duplicates
- 19:05:57 [Yoshio]
- Hmm, I'm not sure what's the use of having duplicates
- 19:06:45 [DaveB-lap]
- it's a performance thing partially
- 19:07:02 [DaveB-lap]
- the server (or something) can filter it for the end user
- 19:07:29 [DaveB-lap]
- see SeRQL manual for lots of this http://www.openrdf.org/doc/users/ch05.html
- 19:07:39 [Yoshio]
- Thank you, I'll check it
- 19:07:54 [Yoshio]
- q-
- 19:07:54 [AndyS]
- http://jena.hpl.hp.com/~afs/DAWG/Tests/dawg-tests.n3
- 19:08:03 [DanC_jam]
- ^ a test manifest
- 19:08:56 [DanC_jam]
- DanC: what test coverage do we have?
- 19:09:09 [DanC_jam]
- A: for RDQL, a test suite that some developers are happy with. For other BRQL features, a start.
- 19:10:17 [Yoshio]
- BTW, where are ericP, Simon, Kendall and Rob?
- 19:11:01 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION Jos: discuss test suite documentation and maintenance with Steve, EricP, AndyS, ...
- 19:13:56 [kendall]
- Yoshio: I had to use the phone for a second. My boss called, wanted to know what was going on. :>
- 19:14:16 [DanC_jam]
- Jos: in the case of bindings, results can just be a list
- 19:14:19 [Yoshio]
- welcome back, kendall, nice to have you again :)
- 19:14:27 [DanC_jam]
- AndyS: need the names too. [explains why...]
- 19:15:38 [DaveB-lap]
- q+ agenda for after lunch? f2f page isn't updated
- 19:15:40 [Yoshio]
- what do you mean by "need the names too", Andy, I think I missed your comment
- 19:16:21 [kendall]
- Yos: thanks :>
- 19:16:42 [DaveB-lap]
- q+ to ask about the agenda for after lunch? f2f page isn't updated for day2
- 19:17:15 [DanC_jam]
- (my mind hasn't been updated either)
- 19:17:45 [DaveB-lap]
- q-
- 19:19:30 [Yoshio]
- * After lunch? Dessert! :)
- 19:21:02 [kendall]
- a cuppa!
- 19:31:22 [DanC_jam]
- (discussion of editorial structure)
- 19:33:34 [Yoshio]
- From my own experience, it was very good that I could find the Concepts and Abstract Syntax document for RDF as a separate document
- 19:35:01 [Yoshio]
- It helps me to understand clearly that RDF/XML is just one way of serialization (wrong?)
- 19:35:28 [DaveB-lap]
- we clearly needed that since peoplw ere confused seeing the XML as the RDF
- 19:36:22 [Yoshio]
- Yes, one of the members of INTAP Semantic Web Committee is one of them
- 19:39:03 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + strawman ql
- 19:39:09 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + protocols
- 19:39:17 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + bookmarking requirement/objective
- 19:44:37 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + toward a 1 Aug requirements/use cases update. recruit reviewers
- 19:47:23 [TomAdams]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 19:47:24 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see MeetingRoom, DaveB
- 19:47:51 [Zakim]
- -DaveB
- 19:47:52 [Zakim]
- -MeetingRoom
- 19:47:52 [Zakim]
- SW_DAWG(f2f)2:00PM has ended
- 19:47:53 [Zakim]
- Attendees were MeetingRoom, +17907aaaa, DaveB
- 19:51:24 [DanC_jam]
- $Revision: 1.11 $ of $Date: 2004/07/15 19:51:01 $ http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
- 19:51:25 [DanC_jam]
- saved
- 20:08:29 [DanC_jam]
- Zakim, agenda?
- 20:08:29 [Zakim]
- I see nothing on the agenda
- 21:34:27 [AndyS]
- AndyS has joined #dawg
- 21:34:57 [kendall]
- kendall has joined #dawg
- 21:36:21 [DanC_jam]
- DanC_jam has joined #dawg
- 21:36:41 [Yoshio]
- Yoshio has joined #dawg
- 21:38:22 [afs]
- afs has joined #dawg
- 21:40:20 [afs_]
- afs_ has joined #dawg
- 21:41:08 [ericP]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/16-FA/
- 21:41:25 [SimonR]
- SimonR has joined #dawg
- 21:47:35 [HiroyukiS]
- HiroyukiS has joined #DAWG
- 21:47:52 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + UC&R publication update, pending updates
- 21:48:04 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + Strawman Syntax
- 21:48:09 [DanC_jam]
- agenda + Protocols (GetData), etc.
- 21:49:11 [JosD_scribe]
- =========== discussing UC&R proposed text changes
- 21:49:28 [JosD_scribe]
- expected next publishing date aug 1
- 21:50:15 [JosD_scribe]
- going document order and then new ones? no, go through Kendall's todo list
- 21:51:25 [JosD_scribe]
- ... walking through Kendall's list
- 21:53:42 [JosD_scribe]
- ... finished the list
- 21:53:56 [JosD_scribe]
- === bookmarkable queries
- 21:54:24 [JosD_scribe]
- suggested text:
- 21:54:31 [DanC_jam]
- on 3.8 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0098.html
- 21:56:26 [JosD_scribe]
- DanC: hope to make that testable
- 21:57:09 [JosD_scribe]
- no objections; astaining 1 (SimonR)
- 21:58:51 [JosD_scribe]
- RESOLVED: adopt suggested text in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0098.html as objective 4...
- 22:00:57 [JosD_scribe]
- === XQuery compatible surface syntax
- 22:01:30 [JosD_scribe]
- EricP will project the 2 examples
- 22:03:04 [DanC_jam]
- query syntax proposal http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0091.html
- 22:04:50 [JosD_scribe]
- (takes some tome to boot the projector :))
- 22:05:01 [JosD_scribe]
- s/tome/time
- 22:06:02 [ericP]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/16-FA/
- 22:11:22 [JosD_scribe]
- discussing http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0091.html
- 22:17:27 [JosD_scribe]
- quting from the message "Therefore, NI proposes that a new requirement be considered by this group: The query language shall have an XQuery compatible concrete language syntax"
- 22:17:41 [JosD_scribe]
- s/quting/quoting
- 22:18:49 [JosD_scribe]
- RobS: "XQuery compatible concrete language syntax" is syntax plus more??
- 22:19:35 [JosD_scribe]
- RobS: suggesting "srface syntax"
- 22:20:36 [JosD_scribe]
- s/srface/surface
- 22:22:28 [JosD_scribe]
- straw poll shows that support as requirement is 1 and about 4 as an objective
- 22:29:15 [JosD_scribe]
- EricP: copy wording from charter - Eric now gives some background...
- 22:30:47 [JosD_scribe]
- ... produce a binding for XQuery
- 22:32:33 [JosD_scribe]
- DanC: propsed req "syntax we choose should exploit people knowledge of SQL"
- 22:32:40 [DanC_jam]
- s/req/objective/
- 22:32:47 [DanC_jam]
- 1 or 2 in support, per straw poll
- 22:34:06 [JosD_scribe]
- disculling http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/att-0091/DAWG_req_proposal.pdf
- 22:34:24 [JosD_scribe]
- s/disculling.discussing
- 22:41:52 [JosD_scribe]
- after discussion no shift in positions
- 22:44:36 [AndyS]
- . ACTION: SimonR Track the work of the WG to keep a current, discussable XQuery syntax document
- 22:46:10 [DanC_jam]
- write a document discussing tradeoffs with adapting XQuery to do [...?]
- 22:46:55 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION: write a document discussing tradeoffs with adapting XQuery as an RDF query language
- 22:47:15 [AndyS]
- Action on SimonR
- 22:47:53 [JosD_scribe]
- === requirement on disjunction
- 22:48:35 [AndyS]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/Talks/tp-robie/Overview.html
- 22:48:36 [Yoshio]
- * what kind of hats are we wearing now?
- 22:48:57 [DanC_jam]
- on disjuction... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0085.html
- 22:50:15 [JosD_scribe]
- stated as requirement, appeals to 4 to 5
- 22:50:40 [Yoshio]
- appeals to Yoshio, too
- 22:52:51 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION RobS: help kendal find supporting use cases for disjuction
- 22:53:01 [Yoshio]
- q+ to ask if we take disjunction of matching pattern, will it reduce the number of the match?
- 22:57:08 [JosD_scribe]
- Yoshio: ask if we take disjunction of matching pattern, will it reduce the number of the match?
- 22:57:27 [JosD_scribe]
- DanC: it is Q2 V Q1
- 22:59:34 [AndyS]
- q+ On last clause of req - unclear on ASK queries implication
- 22:59:51 [AndyS]
- q+ to ask On last clause of req - unclear on ASK queries implication
- 23:00:37 [DaveB]
- I'd like to know if there is complexity when optionals & disjunction are used together.
- 23:01:00 [DaveB]
- well, I bet there is, but can it be explained
- 23:01:31 [AndyS]
- Maybe optionals is actually the disjunction effect but done in a different way.
- 23:02:22 [JosD_scribe]
- AndyS: On last clause of req - unclear on ASK queries implication
- 23:03:33 [JosD_scribe]
- DanC proposes his test case of last night
- 23:04:46 [DanC_jam]
- "The query language must include the capability to restrict matches on a
- 23:04:47 [DanC_jam]
- queried graph based on a disjunction of graph patterns, at least one of
- 23:04:47 [DanC_jam]
- which must be satisfied"
- 23:05:49 [ericP]
- annotea use case: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004AprJun/0247.html
- 23:05:54 [JosD_scribe]
- RESOLVED disjunction as requirement
- 23:05:54 [ericP]
- (RobS)
- 23:06:15 [JosD_scribe]
- no objections, 1 abstention (JosD)
- 23:06:47 [Yoshio]
- I'm happy with the disjunction being adopted as a requirement, but I fell more clarification in its wording
- 23:06:59 [Yoshio]
- s/fell/feel/
- 23:07:17 [Yoshio]
- s/clarification/clarification needed/
- 23:07:59 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION Kendal: draft revision, toward updating our public WD, delivery ~next wed.
- 23:08:03 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION RobS: review it.
- 23:08:24 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION 10= Kendall: draft revision, toward updating our public WD, delivery ~next wed.
- 23:09:00 [DanC_jam]
- agenda?
- 23:09:04 [Yoshio]
- q?
- 23:09:07 [DanC_jam]
- Zakim, close agendum 1
- 23:09:07 [Zakim]
- agendum 1 closed
- 23:09:08 [Zakim]
- I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 23:09:08 [Yoshio]
- q-
- 23:09:09 [Zakim]
- 2. Strawman Syntax [from DanC_jam]
- 23:09:11 [AndyS]
- q-
- 23:09:16 [JosD_scribe]
- now we have a plan for publishing an updated UC&R document
- 23:09:47 [Yoshio]
- q+ to ask if you feel some means to easily search for items in a collection
- 23:12:41 [DanC_jam]
- . ACTION DanC: notify Semantic Web CG of risks around the "1.5 Relationship with XQuery" scope of our charter.
- 23:20:35 [DanC_jam]
- ACTION DanC: notify Semantic Web CG of risks around the "1.5 Relationship with XQuery" scope of our charter.
- 23:21:01 [Yoshio]
- agenda?
- 23:21:15 [JosD_scribe]
- ============ strawman syntax
- 23:21:16 [DanC_jam]
- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/ 1.11
- 23:23:03 [DanC_jam]
- 30 oct RDQL http://www.w3.org/Submission/2003/SUBM-RDQL-20031030/
- 23:23:54 [DaveB]
- the above isn't public, you likely mean http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-RDQL-20040109/
- 23:24:38 [JosD_scribe]
- who would prefer RDQL: 3
- 23:25:41 [JosD_scribe]
- who would prefer BRQL over RDQL: about 6
- 23:26:52 [JosD_scribe]
- advive from chair is that RDQL will bring us faster to REC
- 23:27:05 [JosD_scribe]
- s/advive/advice
- 23:29:20 [JosD_scribe]
- there are now issues raised in http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/
- 23:29:54 [Yoshio]
- q-
- 23:31:08 [JosD_scribe]
- critical mass for support of http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/ 1.11
- 23:32:54 [JosD_scribe]
- RESOLVED: adopt http://www.w3.org/2004/07/08-BRQL/ 1.11 as strawman - objection NI - abstention HowardK
- 23:33:46 [DaveB]
- congrats all
- 23:33:47 [DanC_jam]
- NEW ISSUES: re CONSTRUCT: what happens when variable are not bound?
- 23:34:05 [DanC_jam]
- NEW ISSUE: BARQL 1.11 does not support yes/no queries sufficiently
- 23:34:26 [DanC_jam]
- s/BARQL/BRQL/
- 23:34:28 [Yoshio]
- q+ to ask if we're going to have other strawmen
- 23:35:06 [DanC_jam]
- ack yoshio
- 23:35:06 [Zakim]
- Yoshio, you wanted to ask if we're going to have other strawmen
- 23:35:18 [DanC_jam]
- yes, we have an action on parallel XQuery design
- 23:36:31 [SimonR]
- *sigh*
- 23:37:40 [DanC_jam]
- Kendall: if requirements settle down, I might be willing to maintain the issues list
- 23:37:40 [JosD_scribe]
- Kendall: make it easier to find the issues; Kendall is offering himself to maintain an issue list!!!
- 23:38:08 [JosD_scribe]
- ======== protocols
- 23:39:22 [kendall]
- http://tap.stanford.edu/tap/getdata.html
- 23:39:30 [DanC_jam]
- # evalutate TAP's GetData? Dan Connolly (Sunday, 4 July) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/0019.html
- 23:40:30 [DanC_jam]
- http://tap.stanford.edu/tap/getdatadetails.html
- 23:45:27 [kendall]
- dan would like getdata folks to support what we do
- 23:45:44 [kendall]
- seems unlikely since we may be more complex, and they've tried to maximize simplicity
- 23:47:02 [JosD]
- Motivation for GetData http://tap.stanford.edu/tap/motivation.html
- 23:49:14 [DanC_jam]
- cf TAP: A System for integrating Web Services into a Global Knowledge Base. R.V.Guha and Rob McCool
- 23:49:23 [DanC_jam]
- http://tap.stanford.edu/sw002.html
- 23:55:06 [JosD]
- Joseki test suite is Junit based; does graph isomorphism matching; ...