13:54:14 RRSAgent has joined #sparql 13:54:14 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/28-sparql-irc 13:54:16 RRSAgent, make logs world 13:54:16 Zakim has joined #sparql 13:54:18 Zakim, this will be 77277 13:54:18 ok, trackbot; I see SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes 13:54:19 Meeting: SPARQL Working Group Teleconference 13:54:19 Date: 28 April 2009 13:54:24 s/Date:/ Date: 13:54:29 Chair: LeeF 13:54:33 cgi-irc has joined #sparql 13:54:34 Regrets: Orri 13:55:01 hi, who just joined via the w3c Web IRC interface? 13:55:01 SW_(SPARQL)10:00AM has now started 13:55:09 +??P34 13:55:15 Zakim: ??P34 is me 13:55:29 LeeF: updated, relocating to meeting room... 13:55:38 sorry, LeeF, 13:55:46 Zakim: +??P34 is me 13:55:57 +john-l 13:56:00 -??P34 13:56:01 +??P34 13:56:01 +??P35 13:56:23 Zakim, +??P34 is me 13:56:23 sorry, AlexPassant, I do not recognize a party named '+??P34' 13:56:28 Zakim, ??P34 is me 13:56:28 +AlexPassant; got it 13:56:40 wow :) thanks LeeF , needs to update my irssi config 13:56:47 pgearon has joined #sparql 13:56:58 SteveH_ has joined #sparql 13:56:58 +kasei 13:57:00 zakim, please mute ??P35 13:57:00 ??P35 should now be muted 13:57:05 + +049261287aaaa 13:57:06 Zakim, mute me 13:57:06 kasei should now be muted 13:57:10 zakim, please unmute ??P35 13:57:10 ??P35 should no longer be muted 13:57:18 Zakim, aaaa is me 13:57:18 +SimonS; got it 13:57:19 zakim, ??P35 is me 13:57:20 +AndyS; got it 13:57:41 Good morning, Paul 13:58:03 +??P40 13:58:10 +??P41 13:58:10 Zakim, ??P40 is [Garlik] 13:58:12 +[Garlik]; got it 13:58:16 LukeWM has joined #sparql 13:58:20 zakim, ??p41 isme 13:58:20 I don't understand '??p41 isme', bijan 13:58:25 + +03539149aabb 13:58:25 Zakim, [Garlik] has SteveH and LukeWM 13:58:26 +SteveH, LukeWM; got it 13:58:27 zakim, ??p41 is me 13:58:27 +bijan; got it 13:58:37 +??P46 13:58:54 AndyS: Hi. Sorry, am trying to dial in 13:59:13 +LeeF 13:59:13 chimezie has joined #sparql 13:59:22 Zakim, passcode? 13:59:22 the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), chimezie 13:59:29 zakim, who's here? 13:59:29 On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, ??P46, LeeF 13:59:32 [Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM 13:59:33 On IRC I see chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, cgi-irc, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, AlexPassant, john-l, 13:59:35 ... KjetilK, ericP, trackbot 13:59:44 I'm on the phone too 13:59:59 zakim, ??P46 is pgearon 14:00:00 +pgearon; got it 14:00:03 zakim, dial ivan-voip 14:00:04 +Chimezie_Ogbuji 14:00:05 ok, ivan; the call is being made 14:00:07 +Ivan 14:00:36 Scribe: chimezie 14:00:41 Scribenick: chimezie 14:01:15 agenda + introductions 14:01:16 agenda + errata 14:01:26 Hi Lee, this is Prateek Jain from WSU 14:01:52 lots of scrolling noise 14:01:53 Hi Prateek, thanks - can you type "/nick Prateek" (without the quotes) 14:02:16 Zakim, what is the code? 14:02:16 the conference code is 77277 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), kjetil 14:02:44 +??P60 14:02:55 Zakim, ??P60 is me 14:02:55 +kjetil; got it 14:02:59 + +01212803aacc 14:03:22 JanneS has joined #sparql 14:03:25 zakim, +0121 is me 14:03:25 +iv_an_ru; got it 14:03:34 Zakim, mute me 14:03:35 zakim, who's here? 14:03:37 kjetil should now be muted 14:03:42 On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, pgearon, LeeF, Chimezie_Ogbuji, Ivan, kjetil (muted), iv_an_ru 14:03:45 [Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM 14:03:47 On IRC I see JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, Prateek, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, AlexPassant, 14:03:54 ... john-l, KjetilK, ericP, trackbot 14:03:56 +JanneS 14:04:26 LeeF: we have quite a bit to cover today perhaps we can have a 90 minute call? 14:04:37 +PrateekJain-WSU 14:04:40 agenda - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2009-04-28 14:04:47 topic: administrative 14:04:54 PROPOSED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-21 14:05:02 I had 1 issue with the mins 14:05:46 I think it was this: Eric Prud'hommeaux: it matters for portability between scripting and the bigger impls. [ Scribe Assist by Greg Williams ] ← 14:05:52 LeeF: perhaps we can update the minutes after the teleconference? 14:06:34 ... we can approve the minutes modulo this change 14:06:45 RESOLVED: Approve minutes at http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2009-04-21, modulo change noted by SteveH 14:06:54 ACTION: LeeF to talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21 14:06:54 Created ACTION-10 - Talk to Eric to confirm minutes change from April 21 [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05]. 14:08:07 LeeF: We will skip next weeks teleconference and resume a week from tommorow 14:08:27 Zakim, mute me 14:08:27 Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted 14:08:28 topic: introductions - Paul Gearon 14:09:12 Paul: I was one of the original developers on Mulgara. Currently working with Neurocommons with Mulgara 14:09:37 ... originally working on a storage system and query over the database. Worked on first implementation of SPARQL 14:10:27 open actions - http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/track/actions/open 14:10:47 LeeF: 3 open actions having to do with rdf:text. We will discuss this today (shortly) 14:11:05 ... Any additional review? 14:11:12 trackbot, close action-7 14:11:12 ACTION-7 Send a pointer to the mailinglist for rdf:text, when it's up to LC closed 14:11:14 SteveH: I consider it discharged 14:11:16 trackbot, close action-8 14:11:16 ACTION-8 Review rdf:text closed 14:11:18 trackbot, close action-9 14:11:18 ACTION-9 Try to review rdf:text closed 14:11:25 chimezie: sorry for audio quality. It's Fedora Commons : www.fedora-commons.org 14:11:34 s/chimezie:/chimezie, 14:11:47 topic: rdf:text 14:11:56 s/Neurocommons/Fedora Commons 14:12:42 LeeF: Jointly put forward by two WGs. Potentially impacts SPARQL. Andy has reviewed, so has SteveH. As a group we need to decide how to respond 14:12:56 q+ on status of the review. 14:13:14 LeeF: Best way forward on this? 14:13:24 ack AxelPolleres 14:13:24 AxelPolleres, you wanted to comment on status of the review. 14:14:02 AxelPolleres: Andy's comments are substantial and important cna can be addressed w/out to many changes. rdf:text should not discuss semantic equivalent besides D-entailment. 14:14:46 +dnewman2 14:14:55 ... We probably n eed a few mail cycles to finalized. Perhaps a short agenda item during the F2F 14:15:25 +1 to having it in record 14:15:29 LeeF: Can we ensure the discusdsion is mentioned on the WG list for the benefit of everyone else? 14:15:45 AxelPolleres: Agreed. 14:16:31 I'm trying to review the comments 14:16:34 I don't fully understand them 14:16:34 dnewman2 has joined #sparql 14:16:35 LeeF: Does RIF/OWL need official responses? Anyone here have issues with Andy/SteveH speaking on behalf of the WG? 14:16:46 q+ 14:16:51 SteveH: Andy's understanding is slightly better than mine 14:16:53 zakim, unmute me 14:16:53 bijan was not muted, bijan 14:17:23 AxelPolleres: We should try to clarify the last point regarding datatypes and ??string function?? 14:17:49 bijan: We are either working up an official response or send a personal comment. Please clarify 14:18:11 I feel that SPARQL should send an official response 14:18:12 LeeF: The WG hasn't sent an official repsonse, but we have a close relationship with these groups. I'm happy with current process. 14:18:27 ... Not sure if anyone else wants a more formal process? 14:18:31 IMHO a personal comment is enough. 14:19:00 bijan: There is some fatigue there. Want to make it light-weight. 14:19:41 ... not sure how D-entailment would help or what the substantive impact is regarding the suggested changes 14:19:50 ... want to understand the changes well enough 14:19:51 q+ 14:19:53 q+ to ask about the results format 14:19:56 ack bijan 14:20:00 ack SteveH 14:20:05 yes 14:20:27 SteveH: The changes are substantitive. It will probably cause another last call 14:20:30 ack AndyS 14:20:30 AndyS, you wanted to ask about the results format 14:20:38 AndyS: Trying to avoid any chance of a last call for rdf:text 14:20:49 Hurrah! 14:20:55 that's good 14:21:15 ... there should be a section specifically on SPARQL added 14:21:29 ... wouldn't be unhappy about framing as clarification 14:21:30 if that's true, agreed 14:21:35 but it wasn't my understanding 14:21:47 I don't see that Axel's proposed change addresses the Q's on functions. 14:21:57 AxelPolleres: Change from D-entailment to equivalence. Don't think it implies a new last call 14:22:48 q+ suggestion 14:22:54 Change is semantic equive to D-entailment (note there is notone singleD-entailment) 14:23:11 ack AxelPolleres 14:23:37 AxelPolleres: Fine with putting suggestion on Wiki page and decide next week ? 14:23:53 AndyS: Would appreciate replies to my email (which included examples) 14:24:22 ... Fine with putting it on Wiki page but it is not subsititute for discussion around the issue(s) 14:25:03 q? 14:25:09 ack suggestion 14:25:13 ... We still aren't discussing result set format 14:25:24 LeeF: AxelP can you take a look at this? 14:25:27 q+ 14:25:30 AxelPolleres: Sure 14:25:31 ack AndyS 14:25:36 ack bijan 14:26:07 bijan: It might be the case that wee disallow rdf:text in results. Some entailment regimes might want to do differently 14:26:32 AndyS: It is viable to say it is analagous to RDF graph exchange 14:26:58 bijan: if rdf:text takes off, we will have to revise anyways at some point 14:27:34 topic: face to face 14:27:45 zakim, who's here? 14:27:45 On the phone I see AlexPassant, john-l, AndyS, kasei (muted), SimonS, [Garlik], bijan, AxelPolleres, pgearon, LeeF, Chimezie_Ogbuji (muted), Ivan, kjetil (muted), iv_an_ru, JanneS, 14:27:48 ... PrateekJain-WSU, dnewman2 14:27:48 [Garlik] has SteveH, LukeWM 14:27:49 On IRC I see dnewman2, JanneS, chimezie, LukeWM, SteveH, pgearon, Prateek, Zakim, RRSAgent, kasei, bijan, AndyS, AxelPolleres, iv_an_ru, SimonS, AndyS_, ivan, kjetil, LeeF, 14:27:52 ... AlexPassant, john-l, KjetilK, ericP, trackbot 14:27:53 LeeF: Confirm attendance (in person versus on phone) 14:27:57 wiki page http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/F2F1 14:28:24 Zakim, unmute me 14:28:24 kjetil should no longer be muted 14:28:31 Zakim, unumte me 14:28:31 I don't understand 'unumte me', chimezie 14:28:37 I'll be in cambridge next week. 14:28:43 Zakim, unmute me 14:28:43 Chimezie_Ogbuji should no longer be muted 14:28:54 I will not be there in person, *may* be able to participate on phone (not sure) 14:28:56 -kasei 14:29:36 Zakim, mute me 14:29:36 Chimezie_Ogbuji should now be muted 14:30:46 LeeF: Timing of F2F. 14:30:57 ... an hour earlier? 14:31:47 ... Let us make it an hour earlier 14:32:27 face to face will be 7 - 3 EDT 12 - 8 Bristol time, break each day at 11:30 ET 14:32:53 LeeF: I put on the agenda a rough goal for the F2F 14:33:09 ... don't want to spend the entire time debating features but to begin the deep dive 14:33:30 Zakim, mute me 14:33:30 kjetil should now be muted 14:33:39 ... Perhaps we split the 2 days into 4 half-day blocks. In one of those we discuss deliverables, etc. 14:33:56 ... in the other 3, start diving into features we have consensus on already (by today possibly) 14:34:49 ... This way we can hit the ground running (WRT to features and our process) 14:35:37 ... Also want to discuss a naming convention 14:35:43 ... input/feedback? 14:35:47 +1, happy 14:35:50 Sounds like a reasonable agenda to me 14:35:54 +1 14:35:54 sounds ok to me 14:35:56 +1 14:35:57 +1 14:35:57 +1 14:35:58 +1 14:35:59 +1 14:36:06 +1 14:36:07 +1 to the organizational majesty of lee 14:36:07 +1 14:36:27 LeeF: Questions about logistics? 14:36:32 Zakim, unmute me 14:36:32 kjetil should no longer be muted 14:36:50 q+ 14:36:51 kjetil: Car pool from HP labs? 14:37:03 s/from/to 14:37:17 SteveH: I'm going by car, but it is quite small 14:37:28 I'm sorry, I had to escape right now. 14:37:33 -iv_an_ru 14:38:08 Zakim, unmute me 14:38:08 kjetil was not muted, kjetil 14:38:13 Zakim, mute me 14:38:13 kjetil should now be muted 14:38:15 Suggest aim to be at HPL 11:30am for setup. 14:38:16 ack JanneS 14:38:38 JanneS: ??HP?? providing a teleconference #? 14:39:09 should be the same teleconf facility... to be clarified by eric, I guess. 14:39:20 q+ 14:39:43 andy: normal phone in the room as "fallback" 14:39:53 ... (conversation continues regarding logistics) ... 14:40:03 ack ivan 14:40:28 ivan: We should not have a problem with Zakim 14:40:28 ACTION: LeeF to work with Ivan, ericP to reserve zakim for face to face days 14:40:28 Created ACTION-11 - Work with Ivan, ericP to reserve zakim for face to face days [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05]. 14:40:39 ACTION: LeeF to work with EricP to procure a phone for the Cambridge, MA location 14:40:39 Created ACTION-12 - Work with EricP to procure a phone for the Cambridge, MA location [on Lee Feigenbaum - due 2009-05-05]. 14:40:41 we shall request zakim for both days, eric should get the physical phone, that should work. 14:40:54 ... prefer to use/have Zakim 14:41:02 topic: feature survey 14:41:16 feature survey - http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/ 14:41:31 feature survey results - http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/results 14:41:49 q+ to ask about public/private-ness 14:41:53 q- 14:42:03 I wasn't able to decipher priority order from that page 14:42:20 LeeF: Inclincation to have votes on this survey be public, but wanted to run it by group 1st 14:42:24 ... concerns? 14:42:26 +1 on public 14:42:36 +1 from me 14:42:40 PROPOSED: have votes on featue survey be public 14:42:50 raw data: http://plugin.org.uk/misc/sparql-votes.ttl 14:42:50 chimezie, it was opaque with new results it's clear - may need to reload browser (I had caching weirdnesses) 14:42:59 RESOLVED: have votes on feature survey be public 14:43:05 +1 for public votes 14:43:26 http://plugin.org.uk/misc/votes.svg 14:43:45 Does the TTL record the "don't wants"? 14:43:59 SteveH: Rendering of another file. 14:44:05 http://plugin.org.uk/misc/sparql-vote-results.ttl 14:44:36 ... Process of taking the .ttl page, ran an algorithm to produce a graph 14:44:56 ... people should verify validity. The javascript is visible as well 14:45:11 ... SVG file captures the ???? relationships 14:45:24 s/????/Condorcet 14:45:37 q? 14:45:54 ... Condorcet method looks for pair-wise comparison of every feature voted for and counts how many times feature appear in each vote 14:45:54 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method 14:46:32 ... can get loops .. 14:46:53 ???? = beats 14:47:04 LeeF: one way of interpreting results 14:47:14 ... this was suggested as a good way to look at this 14:47:27 ... it is not quite cut and dry as appears in diagram 14:47:47 ... do we have consensus on the popular features? For example, Agg functions are at the top 14:48:58 note, my condorcet code doesn't take don't want into account, treats it as won't car 14:49:01 ... AggregateFuncs & Update are the two with consensus importance 14:49:30 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35463/features/results 14:49:56 ... Subselects are not top choice, but 11 WG members put it within top 10 ranking. 6 WG members put it in top 3 14:50:15 LeeF: Propose there is consensus on these 3 at least 14:50:46 I agree that these seem to represent consensus 14:50:46 +1 14:50:47 I support that idea 14:50:48 Zakim, unmute me 14:50:48 kjetil should no longer be muted 14:50:48 +1 14:50:50 +1 14:50:51 +1 14:50:52 I support these features 14:50:53 +1 14:50:54 +1 14:50:55 me too 14:51:58 LeeF: Hold off on making them requirements for further conversation 14:52:20 Agree not going to "required" until results are fully in. 14:52:38 PROPOSED: The SPARQL WG adopt AggregateFunctions, Subselects, and Update as three deliverables (either required or time-permitting) for the second phase of the group 14:52:42 seconded 14:52:50 +1 14:52:55 +1 14:52:58 +1 14:52:58 +1 14:52:59 +1 14:52:59 +1 14:53:01 +1 14:53:03 +1 14:53:14 RESOLVED: The SPARQL WG adopt AggregateFunctions, Subselects, and Update as three deliverables (either required or time-permitting) for the second phase of the group 14:53:56 Zakim, mute me 14:53:56 kjetil should now be muted 14:54:06 LeeF: would like to (for F2F) solicit volunteers for more design details. If you can give survey on designs, please let the Chair know 14:54:13 s/Chair/Chairs 14:55:29 LeeF: discussion on features with little support but for which we have champions who should discuss why or why not these should be included 14:55:34 Zakim, unmute me 14:55:34 kjetil should no longer be muted 14:56:31 ... there was discussion that limit per resource could be handled by subselects (which is currently a high-priority feature) 14:57:17 kjetil: Now with subselects it is a small thing to implement. It is extremely important feature because alot of cases we want to list the resources and limit them so we don't get too many solutions 14:57:31 q+ to talk abut FOAF 14:57:33 ... The main selling point is that RDF is suited for heterogenous data 14:58:00 ack SteveH 14:58:01 ... would like to hear from those who don't want it 14:58:02 SteveH, you wanted to talk abut FOAF 14:58:32 SteveH: This is a feature that is needed quite a bit with FOAF in exactly this case: trying to find up to 3 foaf:names and don't want to be overwhelmed with results 14:58:36 q+ to say I am fine with subselects, but do not want explicit syntax 14:58:45 ... prefer subselect aggregate behavior rather than specific syntax in case we get it wrong 14:59:46 SimonS: Time-permitting feature anyways. The ORGs that need it, if we do the whole work to specify the syntax, would that be acceptable to WG? 15:00:03 my ord needs it for frefernce 15:00:06 *org 15:00:18 wasn't me 15:00:28 q+ to ask about surface syntax 15:00:29 LeeF: Concerned with org-specific spec'ing 15:00:35 s/SimonS/kjetil/ 15:01:28 ... I feel it would be wise to wait and see if impl. add syntax even with the other features 15:01:34 ack SimonS 15:01:34 SimonS, you wanted to say I am fine with subselects, but do not want explicit syntax 15:01:35 ... that would make a stronger case for standardization 15:01:54 SimonS: I don't like introducing specific syntax, but happy with subselects addressing this issue 15:01:56 +1 to SimonS 15:02:06 ... makes sense to build into feature we standardize eventually 15:02:17 ack AxelPolleres 15:02:17 AxelPolleres, you wanted to ask about surface syntax 15:02:32 AxelPolleres: Do we want to subsume such things under surface syntax? 15:02:50 ... avote against surface syntax speaks generally about things like this 15:03:18 SurfaceSyntax is a bit of a catch-all. I'm wary of putting too much in it. 15:03:28 LeeF: There doesn't seem to be overwhelming support 15:04:02 kjetil: We might want to come back to this after discussion on surface syntax 15:04:38 LeeF: if we accept surface syntax we need a strict definiition 15:04:59 ... to me it is any feature that can be re-written with identical semantics w/out the new syntax 15:05:52 -kjetil 15:05:58 LeeF: SPARQL/OWL and Parameterized Inference there is confusion on how they are related 15:06:41 bijan: We have extensibility point on semantics of additional answers. We have a number of implementations 15:07:02 ... it would be nice to converge on SPARQL syntax / semantics. Have alot of users who want it that move to higher expressivity 15:07:29 ... a separate document and can envision more regimes , so this can be a 'starter' 15:07:32 Bijan, could you paste a link to the BGP extension proposed? 15:07:52 ... it's relation to parameterized inference is that it gives us more regimes to parameterized. Don't need p-inference to make use of SPARQL/OWL. 15:08:05 ... independent on how you indicate semantics 15:08:28 LeeF: It would be helpful to address priority 15:08:30 +q 15:08:36 ... there are 2 ORGs that don't want this 15:08:45 ack pgearon 15:08:58 q+ to further explain disambiguation of ParamInference and SPARQL/OWL 15:09:13 pgearon: Don't want to see it, because it could bring the server to its knees 15:09:26 LeeF: This would not be compulsory (and it's own document) 15:09:32 q+ to ask about WG Notes 15:09:39 q+ 15:09:40 bijan: compulsory only for systems that *want* to support this 15:10:02 q+ 15:10:03 s/to support OWL sensitive query/ 15:10:13 AxelPolleres: I agree with Bijan. They are complementary. SPARQL/OWL discusses one entailmemnt regime, p-inference is about requesting (in a query) for a certain entailment regime 15:10:18 s/to support this/to support OWL sensitive query/ 15:10:33 RDFS should fall out of it, yes 15:10:42 ... do we want to increment up from simple entailment (RDFS, etc..) 15:11:08 ... do we want the WG to work on whether it is requested , do we want the WG to specify advertization of entailment regime (service description) 15:11:13 ack AndyS 15:11:13 AndyS, you wanted to ask about WG Notes 15:11:18 ack AxelPolleres 15:11:18 AxelPolleres, you wanted to further explain disambiguation of ParamInference and SPARQL/OWL 15:11:42 AndyS: WG notes? Not confortable with WG members doing paralle work being injected later into REC track 15:11:56 +1 for the WG to specify advertising entailment regime (and optional features in general) 15:12:06 ... nervous about 'compulsory' implies tests to distinguish if services meet levels of compliance 15:12:19 ChrisW has joined #sparql 15:13:12 AndyS: Was picking up on the point Lee made about REC track. 15:13:17