IRC log of dawg on 2007-03-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:26:23 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #dawg

14:26:24 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc

14:26:47 [LeeF]

zakim, this will be dawg

14:26:47 [Zakim]

ok, LeeF; I see SW_DAWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes

14:27:00 [LeeF]

Meeting: RDF Data Access Weekly

14:27:04 [LeeF]

Chair: LeeF

14:27:06 [LeeF]

Scribe: LeeF

14:27:50 [Zakim]

SW_DAWG()9:30AM has now started

14:27:57 [Zakim]

+MIT531

14:28:47 [patH]

patH has joined #dawg

14:28:53 [ericP]

Zakim, MIT531 has LeeF, ericP

14:28:53 [Zakim]

+LeeF, ericP; got it

14:29:21 [ericP]

Zakim, who is here?

14:29:21 [Zakim]

On the phone I see MIT531

14:29:22 [Zakim]

MIT531 has LeeF, ericP

14:29:23 [Zakim]

On IRC I see patH, RRSAgent, Zakim, LeeF, AndyS, SteveH, afs, ericP, iv_an_ru

14:29:37 [patH]

be there in a second

14:29:46 [LeeF]

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0162.html

14:30:00 [LeeF]

agenda + convene

14:30:02 [LeeF]

agenda + action items

14:30:25 [Zakim]

+??P2

14:30:27 [AndyS]

zakim, ??P2 is me

14:30:27 [Zakim]

+AndyS; got it

14:30:28 [Zakim]

+PatH

14:30:37 [LeeF]

agenda + Duplicate solution cardinality

14:30:45 [LeeF]

agenda + issue entailmentFramework

14:30:49 [Zakim]

+??P4

14:30:52 [jeen]

jeen has joined #dawg

14:30:54 [LeeF]

agenda + last call

14:30:56 [SteveH]

Zakim, ??P4 is SteveH

14:30:56 [Zakim]

+SteveH; got it

14:31:01 [SteveH]

Zakim, mute me

14:31:01 [Zakim]

SteveH should now be muted

14:31:05 [SteveH]

hi

14:31:06 [sdas2]

sdas2 has joined #dawg

14:31:07 [LeeF]

agenda + Test suite

14:32:25 [LeeF]

LeeF has changed the topic to: RDF Data Access Working Group weekly telecon. agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0162.html

14:32:31 [SimonR]

SimonR has joined #dawg

14:32:48 [Zakim]

+ +1.603.897.aaaa

14:33:13 [LeeF]

zakim, aaaa is sdas2

14:33:13 [Zakim]

+sdas2; got it

14:33:48 [sdas2]

zakim, sdas2 is souri

14:33:48 [Zakim]

+souri; got it

14:34:02 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

14:34:07 [jeen]

zakim, [IPcaller] is me

14:34:07 [Zakim]

+jeen; got it

14:34:57 [LeeF]

minutes from last week -> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/13-dawg-minutes

14:36:17 [SimonR]

SimonR has joined #dawg

14:36:36 [Zakim]

+[IBMCambridge]

14:36:37 [Zakim]

+??P28

14:36:50 [SimonR]

Zakim, ??P28 is me

14:36:50 [Zakim]

+SimonR; got it

14:37:04 [LeeF]

approved minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/03/13-dawg-minutes

14:37:29 [LeeF]

next meeting 27th of march, scribe: ericP

14:37:57 [LeeF]

agenda + active graph

14:38:03 [LeeF]

zakim, take up agendum 2

14:38:03 [Zakim]

agendum 2. "action items" taken up [from LeeF]

14:38:05 [EliasT]

EliasT has joined #dawg

14:38:14 [EliasT]

Zakim, IBM is me

14:38:14 [Zakim]

sorry, EliasT, I do not recognize a party named 'IBM'

14:38:18 [EliasT]

Zakim, IBMCambridge is me

14:38:18 [Zakim]

+EliasT; got it

14:38:23 [LeeF]

ACTION: ericP to draft text about a LOOSE keyword and run it by w3 folks

14:38:23 [LeeF]

to see if we're abusing the "at risk" mechanism [DONE]

14:38:31 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to seek guidance about at-risk features from the CG [DONE]

14:38:38 [EliasT]

Zakim, pointer?

14:38:38 [Zakim]

I don't understand your question, EliasT.

14:38:41 [LeeF]

ACTION: ericP to mark sections 2 and 3 informative, Appendices A, B and D

14:38:41 [LeeF]

normative in the text and table of contents and 1.1 document outline [DONE]

14:38:47 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to close bnodeRef issue [DONE]

14:38:52 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to close nested optionals issue [DONE]

14:39:00 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to close openWorldValueTesting issue [DONE]

14:39:19 [LeeF]

ACTION: PatH to investigate closing the entailment issue [DONE]

14:39:28 [LeeF]

ACTION: EricP to run the yacker tool over and annotate the existing tests [CONTINUES]

14:39:36 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF or EliasT to reply to Bjoern regarding (not) POSTing application/sparql-query documents [CONTINUES]

14:39:44 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to remember that the wee, lost filter tests should be put [CONTINUES]

14:39:50 [LeeF]

zakim, close agendum

14:39:50 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'close agendum', LeeF

14:39:55 [LeeF]

zakim, close this agendum

14:39:55 [Zakim]

agendum 2 closed

14:39:57 [Zakim]

I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

14:39:58 [Zakim]

1. convene [from LeeF]

14:40:00 [LeeF]

zakim, take up agendum 3

14:40:00 [Zakim]

agendum 3. "Duplicate solution cardinality" taken up [from LeeF]

14:43:18 [EliasT]

LeeF: I spoke to Ivan and Ralph and they agreed that we can make use of the at risk feature in our publication and mark LOOSE at risk.

14:43:24 [LeeF]

Scribe: EliasT

14:44:03 [EliasT]

... we can also make use of an informative section for LOOSE but that might not neccessarily fit this situation.

14:44:35 [EliasT]

ericP: LOOSE keyword shouldn't affect implementations too much since they only need to know how to parse it. They don't have to do any extra work when encountering it.

14:45:34 [EliasT]

patH: I'll keep my mute button on for this discussion.

14:45:45 [LeeF]

PROPOSE: SPARQL SELECT queries with no keyword following SELECT must

14:45:45 [LeeF]

return the precise cardinality of duplicate solutions specified by the

14:45:45 [LeeF]

algebra; SPARQL contains a @@ LOOSE keyword that allows duplicate

14:45:45 [LeeF]

solutions to be returned with cardinality of at least 1 and no greater

14:45:45 [LeeF]

than that specified by the algebra. The @@ LOOSE keyword will be marked as

14:45:46 [LeeF]

an at-risk feature of SPARQL.

14:46:18 [ericP]

i nominate "LAX" as the keyword

14:46:48 [sdas2]

DISTINCT PLUS

14:47:03 [sdas2]

zakim, sdas2 is Souri

14:47:03 [Zakim]

sorry, sdas2, I do not recognize a party named 'sdas2'

14:47:04 [EliasT]

AndyS: We should discuss the keyword because that will dictate the semantics

14:47:11 [LeeF]

LOOSE

14:47:12 [LeeF]

LAX

14:47:14 [LeeF]

INDISTINCT

14:47:17 [LeeF]

DISTINCT PLUS

14:47:23 [patH]

how about VOMIT

14:47:56 [LeeF]

"SOME" ?

14:47:56 [Souri]

Thanks Jeen

14:48:17 [patH]

'indistinct' sounds like you can't tell the difference betwen the answers.

14:48:28 [AndyS]

-1 to LAX : 0 to LOOSE

14:48:55 [patH]

LAX is an airport code, which might be a problem?

14:49:20 [LeeF]

AT-LEAST-ONE-OF-EACH

14:49:27 [EliasT]

WHATEVER?

14:49:36 [AndyS]

REDUCED?

14:49:42 [patH]

SILLY?

14:49:51 [Souri]

+q

14:50:03 [LeeF]

ack Souri

14:50:45 [patH]

MORE (seriously)

14:51:04 [SteveH]

what about LOOSE DISTINCT

14:51:20 [SimonR]

It's a little bit disturbing that there's no english word for this concept....

14:51:38 [SimonR]

BAG

14:52:29 [LeeF]

PARTIAL ? (same problem as SOME)

14:52:39 [ericP]

from www.wordsmyth.net:

14:52:39 [ericP]

lax[1]: not rigorous, strict, or careful; loose; lenient.

14:52:39 [ericP]

loose[1]: not restrained or confined; free.

14:52:39 [ericP]

reduce[1]:to make less in amount or size.

14:53:00 [SteveH]

I like REDUCE best I think

14:53:02 [patH]

how about FREE?

14:53:07 [SimonR]

DUPLICATED

14:53:25 [Souri]

REDUCED DUPLICATES ?

14:53:49 [EliasT]

LeeF: AndyS and Souri have a good comment that PARTIAL and SOME might imply that you are getting less than at least one for each unique answer.

14:54:21 [EliasT]

ericP: (answering to Lee's what about REDUCED) +0

14:54:36 [LeeF]

REDUCE or REDUCED

14:54:44 [SimonR]

REDUCTIBLE

14:54:55 [AndyS]

RUSTED

14:55:06 [Souri]

+q

14:55:08 [EliasT]

ericP: +1 REDUCED

14:55:09 [ericP]

+1 for REDUCED

14:55:14 [LeeF]

PROPOSE: SPARQL SELECT queries with no keyword following SELECT must

14:55:14 [LeeF]

return the precise cardinality of duplicate solutions specified by the

14:55:14 [LeeF]

algebra; SPARQL contains a REDUCED keyword that allows duplicate

14:55:14 [LeeF]

solutions to be returned with cardinality of at least 1 and no greater

14:55:14 [LeeF]

than that specified by the algebra. The REDUCED keyword will be marked as

14:55:16 [LeeF]

an at-risk feature of SPARQL.

14:55:26 [LeeF]

ack Souri

14:55:49 [SteveH]

REDUCE works better with DISTINCT, surely?

14:55:55 [SteveH]

otherwise it would be DISTINCTED

14:57:29 [SimonR]

DISTINGUISHED

14:57:43 [EliasT]

AndyS: Will the text highlight that this could affect future counting?

14:57:47 [EliasT]

ericP: I don't think it does.

14:58:08 [EliasT]

AndyS: If you do SELECT REDUCE DISTINCT COUNT is meaningless

14:58:27 [EliasT]

LeeF: I'm inclined to say no because we don't know what COUNT looks like

14:58:31 [AndyS]

SELECT REDUCE COUNT(*)

14:58:47 [EliasT]

SimonR: This is specifically for the case when you don't want to count things

14:59:16 [ericP]

second

14:59:18 [jeen]

second

14:59:34 [SimonR]

Abstaining.

14:59:39 [EliasT]

AndyS: Abstain

14:59:48 [EliasT]

RESOLVED

15:00:02 [ericP]

RESOLVED, AndyS and SimonR abstaining

15:00:21 [LeeF]

ACTION: Eric to incorporate text for REDUCED into rq25, including text noting that REDUCED does not play nicely with counting

15:00:36 [LeeF]

zakim, close this agendum

15:00:39 [Zakim]

agendum 3 closed

15:00:40 [Zakim]

I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

15:00:40 [LeeF]

zakim, take up agendum 4

15:00:41 [Zakim]

1. convene [from LeeF]

15:00:44 [Zakim]

agendum 4. "issue entailmentFramework" taken up [from LeeF]

15:00:49 [LeeF]

-> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#entailmentFramework

15:01:42 [EliasT]

LeeF: patH do you think we have address the entailment framework issue in the document?

15:01:47 [EliasT]

patH: yes

15:02:14 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: that version 1.59 of rq25 addresses and closes http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#entailmentFramework

15:02:23 [ericP]

second

15:02:35 [EliasT]

RESOLVED

15:02:44 [LeeF]

ACTION: LeeF to close #entailmentFramework issue

15:03:00 [LeeF]

zakim, close this agendum

15:03:01 [ericP]

Zakim, close agendum 1

15:03:03 [Zakim]

agendum 4 closed

15:03:04 [Zakim]

I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

15:03:06 [Zakim]

1. convene [from LeeF]

15:03:07 [Zakim]

agendum 1, convene, closed

15:03:09 [Zakim]

I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

15:03:11 [Zakim]

5. last call [from LeeF]

15:03:20 [LeeF]

zakim, take up agendum 7

15:03:21 [Zakim]

agendum 7. "active graph" taken up [from LeeF]

15:03:58 [LeeF]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0163.html

15:04:38 [ericP]

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0163 PatH's mail, Subject: comments on section 12 (and a little more)

15:06:13 [SimonR]

q+

15:06:22 [LeeF]

ACTION: AndyS to incorporate and explain the notion of active graph in section 8 and/or wherever else appropriate

15:06:28 [LeeF]

ack SimonR

15:07:30 [LeeF]

zakim, close this agendum

15:07:30 [Zakim]

agendum 7 closed

15:07:31 [Zakim]

I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

15:07:33 [Zakim]

5. last call [from LeeF]

15:09:50 [EliasT]

LeeF: Anybody who does not think it's a good idea to move to Last Call?

15:10:11 [EliasT]

LeeF: Is anybody uncomfortable the way we are moving towards last call?

15:10:56 [EliasT]

LeeF: Nobody raised any issues or concerns with my two questions. Fantastic.

15:11:34 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: To publish as a Last Call working draft rq25 v1.59 plus text added for relevant action items (REDUCED and active graph)

15:12:12 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: To publish as a Last Call working draft rq25 v1.59 plus text added for relevant action items (REDUCED and active graph) and text for remainder of PatH's Section 12 review

15:13:37 [LeeF]

PROPOSED: To publish as a Last Call working draft rq25 v1.59 plus text added for relevant action items (REDUCED and active graph) and text for remainder of PatH's Section 12 review plus query results for example query at beginning of section 11

15:14:32 [EliasT]

AndyS: I think it's OK

15:14:34 [EliasT]

second

15:14:41 [EliasT]

ericP: second, much later after Elias

15:15:22 [EliasT]

LeeF: Good job everybody. I appreciate all of your hard work.

15:15:30 [EliasT]

... but you are not off the hook just yet

15:17:03 [LeeF]

last bytes editorial call at 15:00 UTC on Friday

15:17:03 [Souri]

What's corr EDT?

15:17:14 [LeeF]

11:00AM EDT

15:17:15 [AndyS]

DAWG telecon +30mins

15:18:38 [EliasT]

LeeF: Over the next few weeks we are going to be focusing on answering comments and the test suite.

15:18:50 [EliasT]

... If everything goes well, we'll be working on the implementation report.

15:18:57 [EliasT]

ADJOURNED

15:19:02 [Zakim]

-souri

15:19:03 [EliasT]

RRSAgent, please generate minutes

15:19:03 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-minutes.html EliasT

15:19:05 [SteveH]

bye

15:19:07 [Zakim]

-PatH

15:19:08 [Zakim]

-SteveH

15:19:09 [SimonR]

15:20Z

15:19:18 [Zakim]

-SimonR

15:19:24 [EliasT]

ACTION: ericP schedule teleconf for Friday

15:19:27 [EliasT]

RRSAgent, please generate minutes

15:19:27 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-minutes.html EliasT

15:22:58 [Zakim]

-jeen

15:24:20 [Zakim]

-EliasT

15:27:07 [ericP]

RRSAgent, please draft minutes

15:27:07 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-minutes.html ericP

15:27:29 [ericP]

RRSAgent, please make logs world-visible

15:27:47 [AndyS]

zakim, please leave

15:27:47 [Zakim]

leaving. As of this point the attendees were LeeF, ericP, AndyS, PatH, SteveH, +1.603.897.aaaa, souri, jeen, SimonR, EliasT

15:27:47 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #dawg

15:28:12 [AndyS]

rrsagent, please leave

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

I see 14 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-actions.rdf :

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: ericP to draft text about a LOOSE keyword and run it by w3 folks [1]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-38-23

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF to seek guidance about at-risk features from the CG [DONE] [2]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-38-31

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: ericP to mark sections 2 and 3 informative, Appendices A, B and D [3]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-38-41

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF to close bnodeRef issue [DONE] [4]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-38-47

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF to close nested optionals issue [DONE] [5]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-38-52

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF to close openWorldValueTesting issue [DONE] [6]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-39-00

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: PatH to investigate closing the entailment issue [DONE] [7]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-39-19

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: EricP to run the yacker tool over and annotate the existing tests [CONTINUES] [8]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-39-28

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF or EliasT to reply to Bjoern regarding (not) POSTing application/sparql-query documents [CONTINUES] [9]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-39-36

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF to remember that the wee, lost filter tests should be put [CONTINUES] [10]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T14-39-44

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: Eric to incorporate text for REDUCED into rq25, including text noting that REDUCED does not play nicely with counting [11]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T15-00-21

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: LeeF to close #entailmentFramework issue [12]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T15-02-44

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: AndyS to incorporate and explain the notion of active graph in section 8 and/or wherever else appropriate [13]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T15-06-22

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: ericP schedule teleconf for Friday [14]

15:28:12 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-irc#T15-19-24