14:42:09 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-sparql-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/02/23-sparql-irc ←
14:42:11 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:42:13 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 77277
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be 77277 ←
14:42:13 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes ←
14:42:14 <trackbot> Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference
14:42:14 <trackbot> Date: 23 February 2010
14:42:16 <LeeF> zakim, this will be SPARQL
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, this will be SPARQL ←
14:42:16 <Zakim> ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, LeeF; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes ←
14:42:25 <LeeF> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-23
14:42:39 <LeeF> Regrets: AlexP
14:55:38 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started
(No events recorded for 13 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started ←
14:55:45 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum
Zakim IRC Bot: +Lee_Feigenbaum ←
14:55:55 <LeeF> zakim, Lee_Feigenbaum is me
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, Lee_Feigenbaum is me ←
14:55:55 <Zakim> +LeeF; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +LeeF; got it ←
14:55:57 <LeeF> Chair: LeeF
14:56:40 <LeeF> dcharbon2, any update on whether you'll be able to make the face to face in March?
Lee Feigenbaum: dcharbon2, any update on whether you'll be able to make the face to face in March? ←
14:56:42 <Zakim> +bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: +bglimm ←
14:57:57 <Zakim> +??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8 ←
14:58:09 <AndyS> zakim, ??P8 is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, ??P8 is me ←
14:58:09 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
14:58:56 <Zakim> +pgearon
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgearon ←
14:59:07 <dcharbon2> Hi Lee, I'm working on arranging the travel - it hinges on having a customer to talk to while I'm in Boston. The outlook is good at this point, but still not fixed
David Charboneau: Hi Lee, I'm working on arranging the travel - it hinges on having a customer to talk to while I'm in Boston. The outlook is good at this point, but still not fixed ←
14:59:12 <Zakim> +OlivierCorby
Zakim IRC Bot: +OlivierCorby ←
14:59:21 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.603.897.aaaa ←
14:59:31 <Zakim> +kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: +kasei ←
15:00:04 <LeeF> zakim, aaaa is MattPerry
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, aaaa is MattPerry ←
15:00:04 <Zakim> +MattPerry; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MattPerry; got it ←
15:00:34 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's on the phone? ←
15:00:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see LeeF, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see LeeF, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, kasei ←
15:00:45 <bglimm> Zakim, mute me
Birte Glimm: Zakim, mute me ←
15:00:45 <Zakim> bglimm should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should now be muted ←
15:00:56 <kasei> Zakim, mute me
Gregory Williams: Zakim, mute me ←
15:00:56 <Zakim> kasei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: kasei should now be muted ←
15:01:39 <LeeF> Before we get started, suggest people take a look at last week's minutes - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-02-16
Lee Feigenbaum: Before we get started, suggest people take a look at last week's minutes - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-02-16 ←
15:02:17 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
15:02:18 <Zakim> + +1.919.332.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.919.332.aabb ←
15:02:32 <dcharbon2> zakim, aabb is me
David Charboneau: zakim, aabb is me ←
15:02:32 <Zakim> +dcharbon2; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dcharbon2; got it ←
15:03:01 <kasei> not really
Gregory Williams: not really ←
15:03:02 <bglimm> no
Birte Glimm: no ←
15:03:07 <kasei> sure
Gregory Williams: sure ←
15:03:07 <bglimm> Zakim, unmute me
Birte Glimm: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:03:16 <Zakim> bglimm should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bglimm should no longer be muted ←
15:03:23 <kasei> scribenick: kasei
(Scribe set to Gregory Williams)
15:03:41 <Zakim> +Chimezie_Ogbuji
Zakim IRC Bot: +Chimezie_Ogbuji ←
15:03:45 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
15:03:47 <Zakim> +??P34
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P34 ←
15:03:50 <SteveH> Zakim, ??P34 is SteveH
Steve Harris: Zakim, ??P34 is SteveH ←
15:04:03 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
15:04:07 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
15:04:13 <Zakim> +SteveH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SteveH; got it ←
15:04:25 <Zakim> +AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: +AxelPolleres ←
15:04:27 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, I don't know who I am ;-)
Axel Polleres: Zakim, I don't know who I am ;-) ←
15:04:31 <Zakim> I'm glad that smiley is there, AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: I'm glad that smiley is there, AxelPolleres ←
15:06:07 <kasei> topic: admin
15:06:08 <LeeF> PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-02-16
PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-02-16 ←
15:06:38 <LeeF> RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-02-16
RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-02-16 ←
15:06:53 <sandro> ok
Sandro Hawke: ok ←
15:07:16 <AxelPolleres> ouch, I can't be there next week!
Axel Polleres: ouch, I can't be there next week! ←
15:07:17 <kasei> LeeF: update on f2f. axel and lee to start coming up with agenda
Lee Feigenbaum: update on f2f. axel and lee to start coming up with agenda ←
15:07:35 <AxelPolleres> ... so regrets
Axel Polleres: ... so regrets ←
15:07:37 <kasei> ... nail down big open issues, use f2f time to sort through them. work on test cases.
... nail down big open issues, use f2f time to sort through them. work on test cases. ←
15:07:53 <chimezie> Zakim, mute me
Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, mute me ←
15:07:53 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted ←
15:07:56 <kasei> ... start to think about last call.
... start to think about last call. ←
15:08:24 <kasei> LeeF: some new comments coming in. doing pretty well at dealing with them.
Lee Feigenbaum: some new comments coming in. doing pretty well at dealing with them. ←
15:08:38 <kasei> ... will do a once over on the comments next week to make sure we're in good shape.
... will do a once over on the comments next week to make sure we're in good shape. ←
15:08:56 <kasei> topic: liaisons
15:09:19 <kasei> topic: update
15:09:34 <kasei> LeeF: pgearon sent out an email summarizing open issues.
Lee Feigenbaum: pgearon sent out an email summarizing open issues. ←
15:09:55 <kasei> ... I'll summarize my understanding of the issues, then let pgearon take over.
... I'll summarize my understanding of the issues, then let pgearon take over. ←
15:09:57 <AndyS> Paul's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0323.html
Andy Seaborne: Paul's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0323.html ←
15:10:09 <kasei> pgearon: some discussion on mailing list, but didn't see concensus on them.
Paul Gearon: some discussion on mailing list, but didn't see concensus on them. ←
15:10:37 <kasei> LeeF: issue in editor's draft about ambiguous delete syntax
Lee Feigenbaum: issue in editor's draft about ambiguous delete syntax ←
15:10:49 <kasei> ... proposal to seperate update statements in single request with semicolons.
... proposal to seperate update statements in single request with semicolons. ←
15:10:57 <LeeF> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0298.html
Lee Feigenbaum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0298.html ←
15:11:08 <kasei> ... discussion on the list, most up to date from AndyS.
... discussion on the list, most up to date from AndyS. ←
15:11:38 <AxelPolleres> q+ to mention small side issue, which is why not allow the same shortcut that we allwo for INSERT/DELETE for CONSTRUCT as well?
Axel Polleres: q+ to mention small side issue, which is why not allow the same shortcut that we allwo for INSERT/DELETE for CONSTRUCT as well? ←
15:11:39 <kasei> ... summary: shortcut form (deletes everything matched in the pattern)
... summary: shortcut form (deletes everything matched in the pattern) ←
15:11:46 <LeeF> instead of the shortcut being "DELETE { template }" it would be "DELETE WHERE { template pattern }"
Lee Feigenbaum: instead of the shortcut being "DELETE { template }" it would be "DELETE WHERE { template pattern }" ←
15:11:57 <kasei> ... DELETE WHERE { template pattern }
... DELETE WHERE { template pattern } ←
15:11:57 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:11:59 <AxelPolleres> aside from that +1 to make WHERE obligatory
Axel Polleres: aside from that +1 to make WHERE obligatory ←
15:12:13 <AxelPolleres> fine
Axel Polleres: fine ←
15:12:32 <kasei> pgearon: nothing to add to this summary
Paul Gearon: nothing to add to this summary ←
15:12:33 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
15:12:54 <kasei> SteveH: wanted to emphatically add +1, been playing with this recently and much more pleasant to deal with
Steve Harris: wanted to emphatically add +1, been playing with this recently and much more pleasant to deal with ←
15:13:12 <SteveH> DELETE WHERE { xxx } ; DELETE WHERE { yyy }
Steve Harris: DELETE WHERE { xxx } ; DELETE WHERE { yyy } ←
15:13:40 <kasei> SteveH: as human found easier to process visually with semicolons
Steve Harris: as human found easier to process visually with semicolons ←
15:13:47 <ivan> +1 to SteveH
Ivan Herman: +1 to SteveH ←
15:13:54 <sandro> as a human, wouldn't you put each on its own line?
Sandro Hawke: as a human, wouldn't you put each on its own line? ←
15:14:10 <kasei> LeeF: hearing general agreement for DELETE WHERE as shortcut form
Lee Feigenbaum: hearing general agreement for DELETE WHERE as shortcut form ←
15:14:18 <SteveH> sandro, yeah, but I have newlines in there anyway
Steve Harris: sandro, yeah, but I have newlines in there anyway ←
15:14:19 <ivan> yes :-)
Ivan Herman: yes :-) ←
15:14:22 <AxelPolleres> @Steve... similar/related to question for ',' in SELECT?
Axel Polleres: @Steve... similar/related to question for ',' in SELECT? ←
15:14:28 <AndyS> s/triple patterns/quad templates/
Andy Seaborne: s/triple patterns/quad templates/ ←
15:14:35 <kasei> ... advice to editor is shortcut form should be DELETE WHERE
... advice to editor is shortcut form should be DELETE WHERE ←
15:15:03 <kasei> ... summarizing steveh, semicolons aren't necessary but nice to have
... summarizing steveh, semicolons aren't necessary but nice to have ←
15:15:34 <kasei> ... probably just a matter of taste. any other strong feelings?
... probably just a matter of taste. any other strong feelings? ←
15:15:39 <AxelPolleres> -1 to require
Axel Polleres: -1 to require ←
15:15:41 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
15:15:51 <pgearon> +1 for allowing (not requiring)
Paul Gearon: +1 for allowing (not requiring) ←
15:15:53 <kasei> ivan: thought steve was wanting to allow, not require.
Ivan Herman: thought steve was wanting to allow, not require. ←
15:16:04 <AxelPolleres> 0 to allow
Axel Polleres: 0 to allow ←
15:16:05 <kasei> SteveH: wanted to require, not forbid.
Steve Harris: wanted to require, not forbid. ←
15:16:25 <kasei> AndyS: don't like them. if you append a statement, you have to go back to add semicolons.
Andy Seaborne: don't like them. if you append a statement, you have to go back to add semicolons. ←
15:16:32 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
15:16:32 <pgearon> +q
Paul Gearon: +q ←
15:16:37 <LeeF> ack pgearon
Lee Feigenbaum: ack pgearon ←
15:16:54 <kasei> pgearon: if we're talking about allowing, doesn't matter if it's there or not.
Paul Gearon: if we're talking about allowing, doesn't matter if it's there or not. ←
15:17:09 <kasei> SteveH: not talking about allowing, but requiring.
Steve Harris: not talking about allowing, but requiring. ←
15:17:27 <kasei> pgearon: if it's optional, people who find it appealing can use it, others dont' have to.
Paul Gearon: if it's optional, people who find it appealing can use it, others dont' have to. ←
15:17:44 <kasei> SteveH: then queries written by others are hard to read. doesn't help anybody.
Steve Harris: then queries written by others are hard to read. doesn't help anybody. ←
15:18:01 <kasei> ... not an opinion from others. just a personal preference.
... not an opinion from others. just a personal preference. ←
15:18:25 <kasei> LeeF: inclined to proceed without allowing them.
Lee Feigenbaum: inclined to proceed without allowing them. ←
15:18:54 <kasei> axel: all on the same side on not wanting to require them, but what about allowing?
Axel Polleres: all on the same side on not wanting to require them, but what about allowing? ←
15:19:07 <kasei> LeeF: no strong agreement on making them optional. don't want to float that as a suggestion.
Lee Feigenbaum: no strong agreement on making them optional. don't want to float that as a suggestion. ←
15:19:14 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres ←
15:19:14 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to mention small side issue, which is why not allow the same shortcut that we allwo for INSERT/DELETE for CONSTRUCT as well?
Zakim IRC Bot: AxelPolleres, you wanted to mention small side issue, which is why not allow the same shortcut that we allwo for INSERT/DELETE for CONSTRUCT as well? ←
15:19:41 <kasei> Axel: shortcut notation for DELETE, why not also for CONSTRUCT?
Axel Polleres: shortcut notation for DELETE, why not also for CONSTRUCT? ←
15:19:42 <SteveH> +1 to AxelPolleres
Steve Harris: +1 to AxelPolleres ←
15:20:02 <kasei> LeeF: decided not to because it doesn't accomplish anything. it's a noop.
Lee Feigenbaum: decided not to because it doesn't accomplish anything. it's a noop. ←
15:20:05 <AndyS> q+ to ask about protocol
Andy Seaborne: q+ to ask about protocol ←
15:20:14 <kasei> ... discussion about this on the mailing list.
... discussion about this on the mailing list. ←
15:20:25 <ivan> just for my understanding: CONSTRUCT WHERE XXX would mean CONSTRUCT {?s ?p ?o} WHERE XXX
Ivan Herman: just for my understanding: CONSTRUCT WHERE XXX would mean CONSTRUCT {?s ?p ?o} WHERE XXX ←
15:20:41 <kasei> Axel: allowing arbitrary where patterns, unclear what it means. if you only allow restricted templates, it looks reasonable.
Axel Polleres: allowing arbitrary where patterns, unclear what it means. if you only allow restricted templates, it looks reasonable. ←
15:20:42 <SteveH> ivan, I thin it's
Steve Harris: ivan, I thin it's ←
15:20:44 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
15:20:44 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to ask about protocol
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to ask about protocol ←
15:20:53 <SteveH> ... CONSTRUCT XXX WHERE XXX
Steve Harris: ... CONSTRUCT XXX WHERE XXX ←
15:21:07 <kasei> AndyS: unclear about the proposal. construct returns a result. what is the return type from construct?
Andy Seaborne: unclear about the proposal. construct returns a result. what is the return type from construct? ←
15:21:14 <LeeF> I believe the proposal is "CONSTRUCT WHERE { XXX }"""
Lee Feigenbaum: I believe the proposal is "CONSTRUCT WHERE { XXX }""" ←
15:21:34 <ivan> aha
Ivan Herman: aha ←
15:21:37 <kasei> LeeF: shortcut form would limit what's in the where clause.
Lee Feigenbaum: shortcut form would limit what's in the where clause. ←
15:21:59 <kasei> AndyS: slightly different restriction. pattern would have to be triple patterns. in DELETE the pattern allows quad patterns.
Andy Seaborne: slightly different restriction. pattern would have to be triple patterns. in DELETE the pattern allows quad patterns. ←
15:22:12 <kasei> Axel: having quad patterns in CONSTRUCT would be worth discussing.
Axel Polleres: having quad patterns in CONSTRUCT would be worth discussing. ←
15:22:33 <kasei> LeeF: we don't have any way to return quad results. can't point at any syntax.
Lee Feigenbaum: we don't have any way to return quad results. can't point at any syntax. ←
15:22:53 <kasei> ... discussed quads in construct in the past, and not in a position to do it right now.
... discussed quads in construct in the past, and not in a position to do it right now. ←
15:22:53 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:23:00 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
15:23:36 <kasei> SteveH: seems like a natural thing to do. leaves it open for next WG when there is a quad syntax they can point at.
Steve Harris: seems like a natural thing to do. leaves it open for next WG when there is a quad syntax they can point at. ←
15:23:52 <kasei> LeeF: falls within syntactic sugar. does anybody have reservations about this?
Lee Feigenbaum: falls within syntactic sugar. does anybody have reservations about this? ←
15:24:04 <kasei> AndyS: entirely around protocol issues.
Andy Seaborne: entirely around protocol issues. ←
15:24:11 <kasei> LeeF: not sure I see them. what are they?
Lee Feigenbaum: not sure I see them. what are they? ←
15:24:38 <kasei> AndyS: setting expectations that we can return quads. happy to return quads, but that affects protocol and APIs.
Andy Seaborne: setting expectations that we can return quads. happy to return quads, but that affects protocol and APIs. ←
15:25:04 <kasei> LeeF: so it's an expectation thing.
Lee Feigenbaum: so it's an expectation thing. ←
15:25:35 <kasei> SteveH: if we say it's not a valid 1.1 query if it includes the GRAPH keyword, don't see the problem.
Steve Harris: if we say it's not a valid 1.1 query if it includes the GRAPH keyword, don't see the problem. ←
15:25:41 <AxelPolleres> we would essentially need to push forward to rubbber-stamp NQuads or TriG ... to be able to return something... is that the concern?
Axel Polleres: we would essentially need to push forward to rubbber-stamp NQuads or TriG ... to be able to return something... is that the concern? ←
15:25:46 <LeeF> zakim, who's on the phone?
Lee Feigenbaum: zakim, who's on the phone? ←
15:25:46 <Zakim> On the phone I see LeeF, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, kasei, Sandro, dcharbon2, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), SteveH, Ivan, AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see LeeF, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, MattPerry, kasei, Sandro, dcharbon2, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), SteveH, Ivan, AxelPolleres ←
15:25:57 <SteveH> AxelPolleres, if we allowed GRAPH, yeah
Steve Harris: AxelPolleres, if we allowed GRAPH, yeah ←
15:26:00 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:26:04 <kasei> LeeF: are others indifferent? passively in favor?
Lee Feigenbaum: are others indifferent? passively in favor? ←
15:26:12 <LeeF> ack ivan
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivan ←
15:26:15 <AndyS> q+ about NQ and TriG
Andy Seaborne: q+ about NQ and TriG ←
15:26:26 <kasei> ivan: like CONSTRUCT shortcut, but nervous about quad issue.
Ivan Herman: like CONSTRUCT shortcut, but nervous about quad issue. ←
15:26:26 <AndyS> q+ to speak to NQ and TriG
Andy Seaborne: q+ to speak to NQ and TriG ←
15:26:33 <AxelPolleres> yes, I am afraid that is beyond our scope. :-(
Axel Polleres: yes, I am afraid that is beyond our scope. :-( ←
15:26:36 <kasei> ... we don't have a standard in this direction. we shouldn't get into that.
... we don't have a standard in this direction. we shouldn't get into that. ←
15:26:51 <pgearon> q+
Paul Gearon: q+ ←
15:27:02 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
15:27:02 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to speak to NQ and TriG
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to speak to NQ and TriG ←
15:27:05 <kasei> ... that's a SPARQL 2 issue. if we have a WG that handles quad issue, SPARQL can come back and deal with it. not the other way around.
... that's a SPARQL 2 issue. if we have a WG that handles quad issue, SPARQL can come back and deal with it. not the other way around. ←
15:27:09 <AxelPolleres> q+
Axel Polleres: q+ ←
15:27:37 <kasei> AndyS: both nquads and trig aren't sufficiently defined to work as reliable transfer formats. details like bnodes.
Andy Seaborne: both nquads and trig aren't sufficiently defined to work as reliable transfer formats. details like bnodes. ←
15:27:50 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
15:27:55 <kasei> ... solvable problems, but not enough detail right now for interop.
... solvable problems, but not enough detail right now for interop. ←
15:28:14 <kasei> LeeF: taking as a given that there aren't any sufficient quad formats at this time.
Lee Feigenbaum: taking as a given that there aren't any sufficient quad formats at this time. ←
15:28:27 <LeeF> ack pgearon
Lee Feigenbaum: ack pgearon ←
15:28:34 <kasei> AndyS: wanted to raise issue that we're raising expectations.
Andy Seaborne: wanted to raise issue that we're raising expectations. ←
15:28:34 <AndyS> ack me
Andy Seaborne: ack me ←
15:28:38 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:29:04 <kasei> pgearon: agree that quad format will be coming. we should look at doing something when that happens. until then can't consider it.
Paul Gearon: agree that quad format will be coming. we should look at doing something when that happens. until then can't consider it. ←
15:29:14 <kasei> ... future WG should deal with it.
... future WG should deal with it. ←
15:29:17 <AndyS> Good news: the SPARQL spec already has triple template.
Andy Seaborne: Good news: the SPARQL spec already has triple template. ←
15:29:23 <kasei> ... symmetry between CONSTRUCT and insertion.
... symmetry between CONSTRUCT and insertion. ←
15:29:46 <kasei> ... already have graphs inside pattern. can insert into multiple graphs at the same time. want symmetry with CONSTRUCT.
... already have graphs inside pattern. can insert into multiple graphs at the same time. want symmetry with CONSTRUCT. ←
15:29:51 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres ←
15:30:27 <kasei> Axel: maybe we could resolve that like sparql 1 did triple patterns (literals in subject position).
Axel Polleres: maybe we could resolve that like sparql 1 did triple patterns (literals in subject position). ←
15:30:36 <AndyS> Different issue - literals in subject can't be stopped due to variables.
Andy Seaborne: Different issue - literals in subject can't be stopped due to variables. ←
15:30:51 <AndyS> and owl:sameAs :-)
Andy Seaborne: and owl:sameAs :-) ←
15:30:51 <kasei> ... spec shouldn't say it supports GRAPH in CONSTRUCT, but could still allow the shortcut.
... spec shouldn't say it supports GRAPH in CONSTRUCT, but could still allow the shortcut. ←
15:30:56 <LeeF> q?
Lee Feigenbaum: q? ←
15:30:59 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
15:31:00 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:31:24 <kasei> SteveH: can see AndyS' concern, but don't agree.
Steve Harris: can see AndyS' concern, but don't agree. ←
15:31:31 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#sparqlTriplePatterns also allows more than current RDF allows.
Axel Polleres: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/query-1.1/rq25.xml#sparqlTriplePatterns also allows more than current RDF allows. ←
15:31:34 <kasei> ... does raise expectation, but INSERT does that all on its own.
... does raise expectation, but INSERT does that all on its own. ←
15:31:40 <LeeF> ack ivan
Lee Feigenbaum: ack ivan ←
15:32:08 <kasei> ivan: not in favor of that. shouldn't do anything which will make it possible later to add it. but not kosher to add it now.
Ivan Herman: not in favor of that. shouldn't do anything which will make it possible later to add it. but not kosher to add it now. ←
15:32:17 <kasei> LeeF: don't understand why not kosher now?
Lee Feigenbaum: don't understand why not kosher now? ←
15:32:26 <kasei> ivan: talking about GRAPH in CONSTRUCT.
Ivan Herman: talking about GRAPH in CONSTRUCT. ←
15:32:35 <chimezie> Zakim, unmute me
Chimezie Ogbuji: Zakim, unmute me ←
15:32:35 <Zakim> Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted ←
15:32:40 <AxelPolleres> I asked (not suggested ;-) ) Why wouldn't it be kosher with leaving the return format undefined?
Axel Polleres: I asked (not suggested ;-) ) Why wouldn't it be kosher with leaving the return format undefined? ←
15:32:45 <SteveH> AndyS, yeah, well you know my opinion on the optional WHERE...
Steve Harris: AndyS, yeah, well you know my opinion on the optional WHERE... ←
15:32:57 <AxelPolleres> ... but fair enough to not go that far
Axel Polleres: ... but fair enough to not go that far ←
15:33:20 <kasei> LeeF: even if spec says CONSTRUCT has to use triple patterns, leads people to think they can use more complex patterns.
Lee Feigenbaum: even if spec says CONSTRUCT has to use triple patterns, leads people to think they can use more complex patterns. ←
15:33:29 <AndyS> I'd say don't have WHERE at all - it adds nothing and the {} are more than enough.
Andy Seaborne: I'd say don't have WHERE at all - it adds nothing and the {} are more than enough. ←
15:33:41 <kasei> ... straw poll to see where people stand?
... straw poll to see where people stand? ←
15:33:42 <SteveH> AndyS, yeah, except that it's needed in INSERT shortcut
Steve Harris: AndyS, yeah, except that it's needed in INSERT shortcut ←
15:34:13 <LeeF> straw poll: support for adding a CONSTRUCT WHERE { triple patterns } construct as a short cut for CONSTRUCT {XXX} WHERE {XXX}
Lee Feigenbaum: straw poll: support for adding a CONSTRUCT WHERE { triple patterns } construct as a short cut for CONSTRUCT {XXX} WHERE {XXX} ←
15:34:16 <SteveH> +1
Steve Harris: +1 ←
15:34:22 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
15:34:26 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
15:34:28 <AxelPolleres> +1
Axel Polleres: +1 ←
15:34:30 <dcharbon2> 0
15:34:31 <MattPerry> 0
Matthew Perry: 0 ←
15:34:32 <bglimm> +1
Birte Glimm: +1 ←
15:34:32 <kasei> +1
+1 ←
15:34:34 <AndyS> +0.5
Andy Seaborne: +0.5 ←
15:34:34 <chimezie> +1
Chimezie Ogbuji: +1 ←
15:34:41 <pgearon> +1
Paul Gearon: +1 ←
15:34:53 <kasei> LeeF: reasonable concensus in favor of adding shortcut.
Lee Feigenbaum: reasonable concensus in favor of adding shortcut. ←
15:35:14 <pgearon> +q
Paul Gearon: +q ←
15:35:15 <SteveH> action?
Steve Harris: action? ←
15:35:39 <AndyS> Added to my ToDo list. Steve and I can work the detailed chnages out later.
Andy Seaborne: Added to my ToDo list. Steve and I can work the detailed chnages out later. ←
15:35:54 <LeeF> ACTION: Steve to work with Andy to add CONSTRUCT WHERE { triple pattern } shortcut to query spec
ACTION: Steve to work with Andy to add CONSTRUCT WHERE { triple pattern } shortcut to query spec ←
15:35:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-200 - Work with Andy to add CONSTRUCT WHERE { triple pattern } shortcut to query spec [on Steve Harris - due 2010-03-02].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-200 - Work with Andy to add CONSTRUCT WHERE { triple pattern } shortcut to query spec [on Steve Harris - due 2010-03-02]. ←
15:36:11 <kasei> pgearon: wanted to confirm that shortcut will be like selecting *.
Paul Gearon: wanted to confirm that shortcut will be like selecting *. ←
15:36:28 <AndyS> Concrete example?
Andy Seaborne: Concrete example? ←
15:36:44 <kasei> having trouble following this and scribing :\
having trouble following this and scribing :\ ←
15:36:58 <kasei> LeeF: request for more details on mailing list
Lee Feigenbaum: request for more details on mailing list ←
15:37:07 <LeeF> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/20
Lee Feigenbaum: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/issues/20 ←
15:37:13 <kasei> ... next update issue is ISSUE-20.
... next update issue is ISSUE-20. ←
15:37:25 <kasei> ... graph aware vs. quad stores vs. update.
... graph aware vs. quad stores vs. update. ←
15:37:32 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:37:47 <kasei> ... not sure exactly what it means. graphs that exist without anything in them.
... not sure exactly what it means. graphs that exist without anything in them. ←
15:38:00 <kasei> ... creating empty graphs and droping potentially empty graphs.
... creating empty graphs and droping potentially empty graphs. ←
15:38:19 <kasei> ... what's the current state of the update spec?
... what's the current state of the update spec? ←
15:38:29 <LeeF> ack pgearon
Lee Feigenbaum: ack pgearon ←
15:38:33 <kasei> pgearon: right now we allow graphs that have nothing in them.
Paul Gearon: right now we allow graphs that have nothing in them. ←
15:38:50 <kasei> ... create graph will create a named graph with nothing in it.
... create graph will create a named graph with nothing in it. ←
15:39:06 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
15:39:07 <kasei> ... nothing in spec says INSERT into a graph that doesn't exist will succeed, but note talking about it.
... nothing in spec says INSERT into a graph that doesn't exist will succeed, but note talking about it. ←
15:39:26 <kasei> SteveH: to halves to this. distinction between empty graph and a non-existent graph. no strong feelings on this.
Steve Harris: to halves to this. distinction between empty graph and a non-existent graph. no strong feelings on this. ←
15:39:44 <kasei> ... do feel strongly that it shouldn't be error to try to insert a triple into a graph that doesn't exist.
... do feel strongly that it shouldn't be error to try to insert a triple into a graph that doesn't exist. ←
15:39:54 <kasei> ... should create the graph. strong user feedback that this should work.
... should create the graph. strong user feedback that this should work. ←
15:40:20 <kasei> LeeF: so shouldn't require the graph is created before triples can be put into it?
Lee Feigenbaum: so shouldn't require the graph is created before triples can be put into it? ←
15:40:23 <kasei> SteveH: yes.
Steve Harris: yes. ←
15:40:34 <kasei> pgearon: current spec says error if the graph doesn't exist.
Paul Gearon: current spec says error if the graph doesn't exist. ←
15:40:44 <kasei> pgearon, did I get that right?
pgearon, did I get that right? ←
15:40:48 <AndyS> +1 to SteveH : example INSERT { GRAPH ?g { <s> <p> <o> } WHERE { ... ?g .... } } -- can't create ?g at present.
Andy Seaborne: +1 to SteveH : example INSERT { GRAPH ?g { <s> <p> <o> } WHERE { ... ?g .... } } -- can't create ?g at present. ←
15:40:57 <SteveH> AndyS, exactly that case
Steve Harris: AndyS, exactly that case ←
15:40:59 <kasei> LeeF: does anybody think UPDATE shouldn't have CREATE and DROP?
Lee Feigenbaum: does anybody think UPDATE shouldn't have CREATE and DROP? ←
15:41:12 <SteveH> DROP, yes, CREATE, don't care
Steve Harris: DROP, yes, CREATE, don't care ←
15:41:20 <SteveH> yes = should have
Steve Harris: yes = should have ←
15:41:21 <kasei> sandro: is there some way to find out if an empty graph exists?
Sandro Hawke: is there some way to find out if an empty graph exists? ←
15:41:39 <AxelPolleres> Steve, you mean CREATE could be implicit by inserting?
Axel Polleres: Steve, you mean CREATE could be implicit by inserting? ←
15:41:40 <LeeF> ASK FROM NAMED g1 { GRAPH <g1> { } }
Lee Feigenbaum: ASK FROM NAMED g1 { GRAPH <g1> { } } ←
15:41:46 <SteveH> AxelPolleres, yes
Steve Harris: AxelPolleres, yes ←
15:42:03 <kasei> LeeF: not clear if, in this query, g1 exists or not.
Lee Feigenbaum: not clear if, in this query, g1 exists or not. ←
15:42:29 <kasei> AndyS: GRAPH with empty pattern asks if g1 is in the dataset names, regardless if there are any triples.
Andy Seaborne: GRAPH with empty pattern asks if g1 is in the dataset names, regardless if there are any triples. ←
15:42:46 <kasei> LeeF: if g1 doesn't exist in store, unclear what the query should do.
Lee Feigenbaum: if g1 doesn't exist in store, unclear what the query should do. ←
15:43:02 <kasei> AndyS: that will always return true.
Andy Seaborne: that will always return true. ←
15:43:15 <kasei> LeeF: my impl would reject query if g1 doesnt' exist. but that's the FROM NAMED part.
Lee Feigenbaum: my impl would reject query if g1 doesnt' exist. but that's the FROM NAMED part. ←
15:43:33 <kasei> ... short answer is not strictly according to the standard.
... short answer is not strictly according to the standard. ←
15:44:02 <AndyS> ASK { GRAPH ?g { } }
Andy Seaborne: ASK { GRAPH ?g { } } ←
15:44:25 <kasei> LeeF: depends on impl-defined details.
Lee Feigenbaum: depends on impl-defined details. ←
15:44:32 <AxelPolleres> this query asks "is this graph in the dataset"
Axel Polleres: this query asks "is this graph in the dataset" ←
15:44:37 <kasei> ... doesn't ask what graphs are potentially available.
... doesn't ask what graphs are potentially available. ←
15:45:05 <kasei> didn't catch that last bit from chimezie(?)
didn't catch that last bit from chimezie(?) ←
15:45:13 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
15:45:17 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
15:45:30 <chimezie> You can determine if the dataset that is active for the query includes a named graph (even if it is empty)
Chimezie Ogbuji: You can determine if the dataset that is active for the query includes a named graph (even if it is empty) ←
15:45:38 <kasei> AndyS: sandro's question is good, raises larger question: what about conditional things in update generally?
Andy Seaborne: sandro's question is good, raises larger question: what about conditional things in update generally? ←
15:45:55 <kasei> ... pre conditions? do we need an IF statement?
... pre conditions? do we need an IF statement? ←
15:46:14 <kasei> ... at the moment you can kind of do it with multiple requests modulo atomicity issues.
... at the moment you can kind of do it with multiple requests modulo atomicity issues. ←
15:46:17 <kasei> ... is that acceptable?
... is that acceptable? ←
15:46:20 <chimezie> In which case, I do think we *do* need to have a way to create and drop graphs (but that is orthogonal with the implicit behavior SteveH wants)
Chimezie Ogbuji: In which case, I do think we *do* need to have a way to create and drop graphs (but that is orthogonal with the implicit behavior SteveH wants) ←
15:46:38 <kasei> LeeF: speaking for myself, acceptable. anything more significant would be a big change from where we are right now.
Lee Feigenbaum: speaking for myself, acceptable. anything more significant would be a big change from where we are right now. ←
15:47:26 <kasei> chimezie: seems like we do have a distinction between not having a graph and having a named graph that's empty.
Chimezie Ogbuji: seems like we do have a distinction between not having a graph and having a named graph that's empty. ←
15:47:33 <kasei> ... can't determine if a dataset has a named graph.
... can't determine if a dataset has a named graph. ←
15:47:38 <AxelPolleres> q+ to ask about graphstore vs default dataset
Axel Polleres: q+ to ask about graphstore vs default dataset ←
15:47:41 <kasei> ... need to have ops for creating and dropping graphs.
... need to have ops for creating and dropping graphs. ←
15:47:52 <kasei> ... can still have default behaviour of creating graphs implicitly.
... can still have default behaviour of creating graphs implicitly. ←
15:47:57 <LeeF> ack AxelPolleres
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AxelPolleres ←
15:47:57 <Zakim> AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about graphstore vs default dataset
Zakim IRC Bot: AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about graphstore vs default dataset ←
15:48:36 <kasei> Axel: akward that we don't have anythign specified that if i insert something it isn't guaranteed to be in the default dataset.
Axel Polleres: akward that we don't have anythign specified that if i insert something it isn't guaranteed to be in the default dataset. ←
15:48:51 <kasei> LeeF: default dataset isn't a standardized concept in SPARQL 1.0.
Lee Feigenbaum: default dataset isn't a standardized concept in SPARQL 1.0. ←
15:49:15 <kasei> Axel: do we want that to be undefined? what would be a usecase for doing an insert and a subsequent query doesn't get an answer?
Axel Polleres: do we want that to be undefined? what would be a usecase for doing an insert and a subsequent query doesn't get an answer? ←
15:49:57 <kasei> LeeF: my thought on broader question, only way to provide a guarantee would be to revise query spec and provide formal notion of default dataset.
Lee Feigenbaum: my thought on broader question, only way to provide a guarantee would be to revise query spec and provide formal notion of default dataset. ←
15:50:07 <kasei> ... more than we can handle at this point.
... more than we can handle at this point. ←
15:50:33 <AndyS> Disagree - it's defined as "what the impl chooses to provide" - a common usage.
Andy Seaborne: Disagree - it's defined as "what the impl chooses to provide" - a common usage. ←
15:50:37 <kasei> ... if spec had said from day 1 an impl needs to have a universal graph, would have implemented that, but that's not the case.
... if spec had said from day 1 an impl needs to have a universal graph, would have implemented that, but that's not the case. ←
15:51:06 <kasei> AndyS: i think default dataset concept is defined in the protocol document.
Andy Seaborne: i think default dataset concept is defined in the protocol document. ←
15:51:20 <kasei> LeeF: there's no concept of what the default dataset *is*. up to the implementation.
Lee Feigenbaum: there's no concept of what the default dataset *is*. up to the implementation. ←
15:52:04 <kasei> Axel: motivated by question about inserting into a named graph, then pose a query to the default dataset, should you get back the inserted graph?
Axel Polleres: motivated by question about inserting into a named graph, then pose a query to the default dataset, should you get back the inserted graph? ←
15:52:18 <kasei> ... by not having specified the behaviour, we wouldn't have this guarantee.
... by not having specified the behaviour, we wouldn't have this guarantee. ←
15:52:37 <kasei> ... LeeF convinced me that there's not a universal desired behaviour.
... LeeF convinced me that there's not a universal desired behaviour. ←
15:53:22 <kasei> missed most of that, AndyS
missed most of that, AndyS ←
15:53:25 <AxelPolleres> ... at least there are implementations that don't do that (as their default dataeset is always empty)
Axel Polleres: ... at least there are implementations that don't do that (as their default dataeset is always empty) ←
15:53:36 <kasei> noisy office all of a sudden.
noisy office all of a sudden. ←
15:54:04 <kasei> LeeF: like to know if the rest of the group shares SteveH's preference?
Lee Feigenbaum: like to know if the rest of the group shares SteveH's preference? ←
15:54:07 <AxelPolleres> AndyS: default dataset = graphstore is still a common use case
Andy Seaborne: default dataset = graphstore is still a common use case [ Scribe Assist by Axel Polleres ] ←
15:54:15 <pgearon> I think it's always clear where the data is going
Paul Gearon: I think it's always clear where the data is going ←
15:54:20 <kasei> ... is it always explicit where the triples end up?
... is it always explicit where the triples end up? ←
15:54:29 <kasei> SteveH: yes. either a graph keyword or going into the default graph.
Steve Harris: yes. either a graph keyword or going into the default graph. ←
15:54:37 <kasei> LeeF: and the default graph already exists?
Lee Feigenbaum: and the default graph already exists? ←
15:54:40 <kasei> SteveH: yes.
Steve Harris: yes. ←
15:54:49 <kasei> thanks Axel
thanks Axel ←
15:54:49 <AndyS> Can we draft proposal (devil, detail etc)?
Andy Seaborne: Can we draft proposal (devil, detail etc)? ←
15:54:50 <SteveH> q+
Steve Harris: q+ ←
15:55:00 <kasei> pgearon: not sure what insertion into default graph as union of other graphs means.
Paul Gearon: not sure what insertion into default graph as union of other graphs means. ←
15:55:10 <kasei> chimezie: agree that's a problem.
Chimezie Ogbuji: agree that's a problem. ←
15:55:12 <AndyS> q+
Andy Seaborne: q+ ←
15:55:16 <LeeF> ack SteveH
Lee Feigenbaum: ack SteveH ←
15:55:25 <AxelPolleres> so, if you an implementation doesn't have a default graph, what if you insert into it?
Axel Polleres: so, if you an implementation doesn't have a default graph, what if you insert into it? ←
15:55:32 <kasei> SteveH: same situation. no default graph, just a union.
Steve Harris: same situation. no default graph, just a union. ←
15:55:37 <kasei> ... haven't decided what to do.
... haven't decided what to do. ←
15:55:55 <SteveH> ack me
Steve Harris: ack me ←
15:55:57 <kasei> pgearon: more general problem than just this issue.
Paul Gearon: more general problem than just this issue. ←
15:55:58 <LeeF> ack AndyS
Lee Feigenbaum: ack AndyS ←
15:56:10 <kasei> AndyS: graphs might be read only anyway.
Andy Seaborne: graphs might be read only anyway. ←
15:56:37 <kasei> LeeF: hearing general concesus that shouldn't be an error to insert into a graph that doesn't exist.
Lee Feigenbaum: hearing general concesus that shouldn't be an error to insert into a graph that doesn't exist. ←
15:56:38 <AxelPolleres> I'd suppose that implementations could reject insertions into the default graph?
Axel Polleres: I'd suppose that implementations could reject insertions into the default graph? ←
15:56:50 <AxelPolleres> (those that don't have a default graph)
Axel Polleres: (those that don't have a default graph) ←
15:56:55 <kasei> ... since current draft is the other way around, let's make it a proposal.
... since current draft is the other way around, let's make it a proposal. ←
15:57:28 <LeeF> PROPOSED: SPARQL Update should make it legal to insert triples into a graph that does not yet exist, with the result being that the graph now exists and has those triples in it
PROPOSED: SPARQL Update should make it legal to insert triples into a graph that does not yet exist, with the result being that the graph now exists and has those triples in it ←
15:57:33 <SteveH> seconded
Steve Harris: seconded ←
15:57:37 <dcharbon2> +1
David Charboneau: +1 ←
15:57:39 <AxelPolleres> +1
Axel Polleres: +1 ←
15:57:40 <MattPerry> +1
Matthew Perry: +1 ←
15:57:41 <pgearon> +0
Paul Gearon: +0 ←
15:57:44 <LeeF> 0
Lee Feigenbaum: 0 ←
15:57:48 <chimezie> +1
Chimezie Ogbuji: +1 ←
15:57:49 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
15:57:49 <AndyS> +1
Andy Seaborne: +1 ←
15:57:49 <kasei> +1
+1 ←
15:57:52 <bglimm> +1
Birte Glimm: +1 ←
15:57:58 <LeeF> RESOLVED: SPARQL Update should make it legal to insert triples into a graph that does not yet exist, with the result being that the graph now exists and has those triples in it
RESOLVED: SPARQL Update should make it legal to insert triples into a graph that does not yet exist, with the result being that the graph now exists and has those triples in it ←
15:58:05 <AxelPolleres> (exception being the default graph...)
Axel Polleres: (exception being the default graph...) ←
15:58:29 <kasei> LeeF: heard that create and drop should stick around. might return when we continue discussion about datasets.
Lee Feigenbaum: heard that create and drop should stick around. might return when we continue discussion about datasets. ←
15:58:35 <kasei> ... will discuss with protocol issues.
... will discuss with protocol issues. ←
15:58:43 <AndyS> and LOAD ... INTO ...
Andy Seaborne: and LOAD ... INTO ... ←
15:59:16 <kasei> LeeF: didn't get to blank nodes in template for delete, and dataset clauses.
Lee Feigenbaum: didn't get to blank nodes in template for delete, and dataset clauses. ←
15:59:21 <kasei> ... will do them next week.
... will do them next week. ←
15:59:24 <AxelPolleres> just to put it in again... regrets for next week from me, BTW
Axel Polleres: just to put it in again... regrets for next week from me, BTW ←
15:59:55 <Zakim> -pgearon
Zakim IRC Bot: -pgearon ←
15:59:58 <pgearon> sorry,
Paul Gearon: sorry, ←
16:00:05 <pgearon> yes, I'm comfortable with that
Paul Gearon: yes, I'm comfortable with that ←
16:00:14 <kasei> LeeF: will follow up with pgearon.
Lee Feigenbaum: will follow up with pgearon. ←
16:00:28 <bglimm> bye
Birte Glimm: bye ←
16:00:30 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
16:00:31 <Zakim> -Chimezie_Ogbuji
Zakim IRC Bot: -Chimezie_Ogbuji ←
16:00:31 <Zakim> -dcharbon2
Zakim IRC Bot: -dcharbon2 ←
16:00:32 <AxelPolleres> bye all
Axel Polleres: bye all ←
16:00:35 <AndyS> ADJOURNED
Andy Seaborne: ADJOURNED ←
16:00:37 <Zakim> -MattPerry
Zakim IRC Bot: -MattPerry ←
16:00:43 <Zakim> -bglimm
Zakim IRC Bot: -bglimm ←
16:00:47 <Zakim> -SteveH
Zakim IRC Bot: -SteveH ←
16:00:53 <Zakim> -LeeF
Zakim IRC Bot: -LeeF ←
16:00:57 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: -AxelPolleres ←
16:00:59 <Zakim> -kasei
Zakim IRC Bot: -kasei ←
16:01:01 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
16:01:11 <Zakim> -OlivierCorby
Zakim IRC Bot: -OlivierCorby ←
16:01:13 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
16:01:15 <Zakim> SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has ended ←
16:01:17 <Zakim> Attendees were LeeF, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, +1.603.897.aaaa, kasei, MattPerry, Sandro, +1.919.332.aabb, dcharbon2, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, SteveH, AxelPolleres
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were LeeF, bglimm, AndyS, pgearon, OlivierCorby, +1.603.897.aaaa, kasei, MattPerry, Sandro, +1.919.332.aabb, dcharbon2, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, SteveH, AxelPolleres ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2010-02-23 16:18:16 UTC by 'gwilliam', comments: 'formatted for commonscribe'