15:59:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rdb2rdf
15:59:57 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-irc
15:59:59 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
15:59:59 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #rdb2rdf
16:00:01 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7322733
16:00:01 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_RDB2RDF()12:00PM scheduled to start now
16:00:02 <trackbot> Meeting: RDB2RDF Working Group Teleconference
16:00:02 <trackbot> Date: 04 May 2010
16:00:16 <mhausenblas> Chair:
16:00:21 <mhausenblas> Chair: Ahmed
16:00:30 <mhausenblas> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdb2rdf-wg/2010May/0002.html
16:00:43 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:00:49 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:00:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
16:00:53 <MacTed> Zakim, this is 7322733
16:00:53 <Zakim> ok, MacTed; that matches SW_RDB2RDF()12:00PM
16:00:54 <Zakim> +juansequeda
16:00:59 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
16:00:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see whalb, ??P1, OpenLink_Software, juansequeda
16:01:00 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Angela, whalb, hhalpin, MacTed, cygri, mhausenblas, nunolopes, LeeF, trackbot, ericP
16:01:08 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
16:01:08 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
16:01:11 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
16:01:11 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
16:01:17 <juansequeda> juansequeda has joined #RDB2RDF
16:01:19 <cygri_> cygri_ has joined #rdb2rdf
16:01:36 <Zakim> +mhausenblas
16:01:52 <Ashok> Ashok has joined #rdb2rdf
16:01:58 <mhausenblas> Zakim, cygri_ is with mhausenblas 
16:01:58 <Zakim> +cygri_; got it
16:02:06 <Zakim> + +39.046.128.aaaa
16:02:07 <mhausenblas> Zakim, nunolopes is with mhausenblas 
16:02:07 <Zakim> +nunolopes; got it
16:02:17 <soeren> soeren has joined #RDB2RDF
16:02:42 <lima> lima has joined #rdb2rdf
16:02:56 <Zakim> +??P21
16:02:59 <Zakim> -??P21
16:03:18 <mhausenblas> Zakim, cygri is with mhausenblas 
16:03:18 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
16:03:22 <Zakim> +soeren
16:04:04 <mhausenblas> regrets+ Marcelo
16:04:08 <Zakim> +Ashok_Malhotra
16:04:13 <Zakim> +??P25
16:04:15 <mhausenblas> regrets+ Seema
16:04:20 <Ahmed> Ahmed has joined #RDB2RDF
16:04:34 <mhausenblas> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:04:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
16:05:06 <mhausenblas> Topic: Admin
16:05:20 <harryhalpin> harryhalpin has joined #rdb2rdf
16:05:22 <mhausenblas> Zakim, who's here?
16:05:22 <Zakim> On the phone I see whalb, ??P1, MacTed (muted), juansequeda, mhausenblas, +39.046.128.aaaa, soeren, Ashok_Malhotra, ??P25
16:05:24 <Zakim> mhausenblas has mhausenblas, cygri_, nunolopes, cygri
16:05:25 <Zakim> On IRC I see harryhalpin, Ahmed, lima, soeren, Ashok, cygri, juansequeda, Zakim, RRSAgent, Angela, whalb, hhalpin, MacTed, mhausenblas, nunolopes, LeeF, trackbot, ericP
16:05:59 <Zakim> +??P27
16:06:19 <mhausenblas> regrets+ Souri
16:06:26 <mhausenblas> regrets+ Dan
16:07:11 <mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: accept minutes from last telecon http://www.w3.org/2010/04/27-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
16:07:28 <soeren> +1
16:07:29 <juansequeda> +1
16:07:35 <mhausenblas> RESOLUTION: WG accepted minutes from last telecon http://www.w3.org/2010/04/27-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
16:07:51 <mhausenblas> Zakim, pick victim
16:07:51 <Zakim> I don't understand 'pick victim', mhausenblas
16:08:07 <mhausenblas> scribenick: nunolopes 
16:08:31 <cygri> for next time
16:08:44 <Ahmed> Ahmed has joined #RDB2RDF
16:08:48 <nunolopes> Topic: Goal of the WG re mapping
16:09:08 <juansequeda> http://is.gd/bTNFm
16:09:08 <mhausenblas> http://docs.google.com/drawings/pub?id=1de31u5wBUheygJTXbxXE7e7H7QI_is9hEXi5dOO5knE&w=960&h=720
16:09:13 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:09:23 <hhalpin> Zakim, [IPcaller] is hhalpin
16:09:23 <Zakim> +hhalpin; got it
16:09:29 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
16:09:29 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
16:09:35 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: new picture from juansequeda
16:10:08 <nunolopes> juansequeda: the picture describes our two options
16:10:21 <nunolopes> … option 1 uses the putative ontology
16:10:43 <nunolopes> … option 2 uses the domain ontology
16:10:58 <nunolopes> … and the result will be subset (non-isomorphic)
16:11:08 <nunolopes> … with the relational database schema
16:11:34 <nunolopes> … hopefully this image will give us a clear picture of where we are
16:12:01 <nunolopes> Ahmed: we have been talking about the second option since before MacTed joined
16:12:05 <hhalpin> q+
16:12:21 <MacTed> q+
16:12:36 <mhausenblas> ack hhalpin 
16:12:37 <hhalpin> ack hhalpin
16:12:57 <nunolopes> Orri: I agree with Ahmed that we should support more "expressive"? translations
16:13:12 <Zakim> -hhalpin
16:13:29 <nunolopes> hhalpin: is there a vocabulary problem with the group?
16:13:31 <mhausenblas> ack MacTed 
16:13:40 <Zakim> -soeren
16:13:44 <Ashok> q-
16:13:50 <nunolopes> MacTed: I am not saying that option 2 should dissapear
16:13:53 <Zakim> +Lee_Feigenbaum
16:14:05 <nunolopes> … option 2 actually is included in option 1
16:14:16 <Zakim> +soeren
16:14:19 <Ashok> q+
16:14:23 <mhausenblas> q?
16:14:31 <juansequeda> There were some typos. I just corrected the image: http://docs.google.com/drawings/edit?id=1de31u5wBUheygJTXbxXE7e7H7QI_is9hEXi5dOO5knE
16:14:36 <nunolopes> … where this step is visible from the tool or not it is still required
16:14:58 <Ahmed> q
16:15:04 <juansequeda> Apologies, the link is http://docs.google.com/drawings/pub?id=1de31u5wBUheygJTXbxXE7e7H7QI_is9hEXi5dOO5knE&w=960&h=720
16:15:07 <mhausenblas> q?
16:15:10 <Ahmed> q+
16:15:10 <nunolopes> … iterating/separating the steps all is satisfied
16:15:11 <LeeF> q+ to ask what explciit inclusion of the local ontology stuff adds to the specification
16:15:26 <nunolopes> … the local ontology mapping should not be disregarded
16:15:33 <mhausenblas> ack Ashok 
16:15:48 <mhausenblas> Zakim, who's here?
16:15:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see whalb, ??P1, MacTed, juansequeda, mhausenblas, +39.046.128.aaaa, Ashok_Malhotra, ??P25, ??P27, Lee_Feigenbaum (muted), soeren
16:15:50 <Zakim> mhausenblas has mhausenblas, cygri_, nunolopes, cygri
16:15:51 <Zakim> On IRC I see Ahmed, harryhalpin, lima, soeren, Ashok, cygri, juansequeda, Zakim, RRSAgent, Angela, whalb, hhalpin, MacTed, mhausenblas, nunolopes, LeeF, trackbot, ericP
16:16:04 <LeeF> +1 to Ashok's observation
16:16:07 <mhausenblas> +1
16:16:08 <nunolopes> Ashok: Anyone disagrees that what we are to standardize is option 2, with option 1 being a subset of option 2?
16:16:08 <soeren> +1
16:16:10 <cygri> +1 to ashok
16:16:23 <mhausenblas> ack Ahmed 
16:16:42 <harry2halpin> harry2halpin has joined #rdb2rdf
16:16:59 <nunolopes> Ahmed: I …?. with ashok. 
16:17:13 <harry2halpin> but basically, I think we should do option 2.
16:17:33 <nunolopes> … nobody said that specifing the domiain ontology is static
16:17:44 <harry2halpin> it's just that the vocabulary in the use-case document needs to be neutral about *how* to do it, i.e. neutral between ericP's sparql construct approach or a SQL view approach
16:17:50 <mhausenblas> s/...?/agree
16:17:51 <nunolopes> s/…?./agree/
16:18:02 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:18:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
16:18:10 <mhausenblas> q?
16:18:12 <LeeF> ack me
16:18:13 <Zakim> LeeF, you wanted to ask what explciit inclusion of the local ontology stuff adds to the specification
16:18:15 <mhausenblas> ack LeeF 
16:18:22 <nunolopes> LeeF: I agree with Ashok
16:18:48 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:19:01 <harry2halpin> Zakim, [IPcaller] is harry2halpin
16:19:01 <Zakim> +harry2halpin; got it
16:19:21 <nunolopes> … MacTed do you say that there is some value in explicitly doing the transformation from the local ontology to the domain ontology
16:19:30 <nunolopes> … what is that value?
16:19:56 <nunolopes> s/… MacTed/MacTed/
16:20:15 <harry2halpin> no-one is saying that a central isomorphic transformation will not be part of the spec
16:20:26 <nunolopes> MacTed: the simple transformation is a vital part of the mapping
16:21:36 <mhausenblas> q?
16:21:39 <Ahmed> q+
16:21:40 <nunolopes> ?? : if the final specification requires a more complex transformation such that the direct mapping is a specific case of it why is it still needed to call it directly
16:21:56 <LeeF> s/??/LeeF
16:21:56 <mhausenblas> q?
16:22:25 <nunolopes> harry2halpin: I would like that the direct mapping should be part of the use case document
16:22:30 <nunolopes> … but not necessary
16:22:42 <nunolopes> MacTed: yes, tools may hide this direct mapping
16:22:48 <mhausenblas> ack Ahmed 
16:23:04 <harry2halpin> but that R2ML should allow this direct mapping.
16:23:13 <nunolopes> Ahmed: we should select option 2
16:23:34 <nunolopes> … are you saying that we should do option 2?
16:24:13 <nunolopes> MacTed: I belive option 2 contains option 1
16:24:17 <LeeF> Sounds like everyone is in agreement thta Option 2 contains Option 1
16:24:24 <nunolopes> … and that option 1 should not be made invisible
16:24:30 <mhausenblas> yes, indeed, we seem to agree
16:24:39 <harry2halpin> We agree with that MacTed, R2ML should be able to do a local ontology mapping.
16:24:39 <mhausenblas> I'd propose to move to the UCR document now
16:24:41 <LeeF> I think what MacTed is asking for is that the specification explicitly calls out 1 particular transformation: the direct mapping transform
16:24:57 <nunolopes> Ahmed: we should have a mechanism that allows the user not only to use the local ontology but also the domain ontology mapping
16:25:11 <nunolopes> Topic: use case document
16:25:20 <mhausenblas> PROPOSAL send out http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/use-cases/ as FPWD
16:25:51 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: In the current stage, do you have any objections (specifically for MacTed)
16:25:59 <Ashok> q+
16:26:02 <nunolopes> MacTed: yes, there are some changes
16:26:25 <nunolopes> … I would like to express the following cases
16:26:40 <harry2halpin> Note that Juan has added texts to make it more use-case like MacTed.
16:26:41 <nunolopes> … it still feels more like case studies than a use cases document
16:27:21 <nunolopes> MacTed: can you write a mail with some concrete changes?
16:27:30 <nunolopes> s/MacTed/mhausenblas/
16:27:39 <juansequeda> juansequeda has joined #RDB2RDF
16:27:42 <nunolopes> MacTed: I can do that
16:27:42 <MacTed> tthibodeau
16:28:05 <mhausenblas> ACTION: tthibodeau to write up changes for UCR document and send to the list
16:28:05 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - tthibodeau
16:28:27 <harry2halpin> Note that this is a problem with your AC Rep.
16:28:39 <harry2halpin> So MacTed, please have your AC rep approve of your membership in the group!
16:28:45 <soeren> +q
16:28:49 <harry2halpin> There is nothing W3C staff can do until your AC Rep approves.
16:28:54 <nunolopes> Ashok: publishing the document does not mean we cannot change it
16:29:00 <nunolopes> … it's a first public draft
16:29:04 <mhausenblas> ACTION: mhausenb to take MacTed's changes into account before issuing FPWD
16:29:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-52 - Take MacTed's changes into account before issuing FPWD [on Michael Hausenblas - due 2010-05-11].
16:29:14 <nunolopes> … we can further work on it
16:29:22 <mhausenblas> q?
16:29:27 <mhausenblas> ack Ashok 
16:29:30 <Ashok> q-
16:29:31 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: yes, we just waited for a few changes
16:29:35 <ericP> Zakim, please dial ericP-office
16:29:35 <Zakim> ok, ericP; the call is being made
16:29:37 <Zakim> +EricP
16:29:47 <ericP> Zakim, please disconnect ericP 
16:29:47 <Zakim> EricP is being disconnected
16:29:48 <LeeF> q+
16:29:48 <Zakim> -EricP
16:29:50 <LeeF> ack me
16:29:53 <ericP> Zakim, please dial ericP-mobile
16:29:53 <Zakim> ok, ericP; the call is being made
16:29:53 <nunolopes> soeren: I feel that uc5 and uc6 are not use-cases but requirements
16:29:55 <Zakim> +EricP
16:29:58 <harry2halpin> q+
16:30:02 <mhausenblas> ack soeren 
16:30:29 <nunolopes> …  the labeling 'functional' and non-functional is also a problem
16:30:33 <mhausenblas> PROPOSAL" move UC5 and UC6 to reqs
16:30:34 <LeeF> Note that UC5 and UC6 are my use cases - I mainly care that they be included as requirements
16:30:54 <nunolopes> LeeF: in the end I care that they are accepted as requirements
16:31:13 <nunolopes> … but it doesn't make sense to have requirements that don't derive from use-cases
16:31:40 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:31:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
16:32:05 <soeren> +q
16:32:36 <mhausenblas> ack harry2halpin 
16:32:46 <Zakim> - +39.046.128.aaaa
16:32:53 <nunolopes> harry2halpin: the functional and non functional seem ok
16:33:06 <harry2halpin> q- harry2halpin
16:33:09 <mhausenblas> ack soeren 
16:33:10 <LeeF> I've always used (for better or for worse) http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-dawg-uc/#uc as my guide for UC&R gathering
16:33:15 <Ahmed> q+
16:33:35 <nunolopes> soeren: reg uc5 and 6 are more requirements since all the other use cases are regarding a specific domain
16:33:39 <MacTed> q+
16:33:41 <mhausenblas> ack Ahmed
16:33:43 <nunolopes> … these are more domain independent
16:33:49 <mhausenblas> q?
16:34:00 <nunolopes> Ahmed: the uc6 is not clear to me what is the use case
16:34:09 <mhausenblas> q?
16:34:28 <nunolopes> LeeF: I can clarify but need to go
16:34:32 <Zakim> -Lee_Feigenbaum
16:34:36 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: let's sort it out via mail
16:34:56 <mhausenblas> q?
16:35:18 <mhausenblas> ack MacTed 
16:35:33 <nunolopes> MacTed: the closest  thing to a use case is 5 and 6 together
16:35:48 <nunolopes> Ahmed: when I read n6 I don't see that
16:36:07 <LeeF> (FWIW, whoever it was who expressed UC6 as dealing with conflations of shema data and instance data had it exactly right - the idea is that we see many DB tables where some sort of indicator value in the row denotes the specific type of instance that the row represents - we need to be able to map that to an appropriate rdf:type when mapping from the RDB data to the RDF data)
16:36:08 <nunolopes> … this should be sent for formal feedback soon
16:36:23 <nunolopes> … after that the editors can just do some changes
16:36:32 <harry2halpin> +1 to be made public 
16:36:47 <nunolopes> harry2halpin: if this is only a public draft I'm ok with it
16:36:57 <nunolopes> s/harry2halpin/MacTed/
16:37:06 <mhausenblas> q?
16:37:15 <nunolopes> Ahmed: it should be more than that
16:37:32 <harry2halpin> Releasing a document for the sake of releasing a document is W3C process.
16:37:33 <nunolopes> … we spent a lot of time to release it
16:38:09 <nunolopes> MacTed: we should have the document released but with what we agree on
16:38:22 <harry2halpin> q+
16:38:31 <mhausenblas> q?
16:38:49 <mhausenblas> ack harry2halpin
16:39:06 <harry2halpin> ack harry2halpin
16:39:08 <nunolopes> Ahmed: the document is a milestone, we should finalise and send it for review, 1 week feedback
16:39:27 <nunolopes> harry2halpin: it's normal W3C process to release working drafts
16:39:43 <nunolopes> … we should release it asap
16:40:16 <nunolopes> … a brief discussion on some notations should be in order
16:40:24 <soeren> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-functional_requirement
16:40:40 <Zakim> -soeren
16:40:49 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: regarding renaming of function requirements to core requirements and non functional to auxiliary
16:40:54 <Ahmed> q+
16:40:55 <mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: change func req to core and non-functional to ausiliary
16:41:02 <mhausenblas> ack Ahmed 
16:41:13 <Zakim> +soeren
16:41:22 <Ashok> s/ausiliary/auxiliary/
16:41:30 <nunolopes> Ahmed: let's see what other people say but I disagree with the change
16:41:38 <juansequeda> q+
16:41:48 <nunolopes> … let's send the document and wait for comments
16:42:08 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: in that case the version 1.24 will be for one week under working group review?
16:42:14 <nunolopes> … what will be the process?
16:42:31 <nunolopes> Ahmed: let's set some time to reconcile the emails as a group
16:42:51 <mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: send out current version 1.24 for WG internal review, 1 week, feedback via mailing list
16:43:02 <ericP> second
16:43:15 <nunolopes> juansequeda: only for internal review
16:43:21 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: yes
16:43:32 <juansequeda> +1
16:43:51 <harry2halpin> +1, but then we really have to get consensus on it next week to publish.
16:43:58 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: please make sure that you do send a mail to the list so we have a record to work on next week
16:44:03 <mhausenblas> yes, harry2halpin 
16:44:32 <harry2halpin> +1 ericP, let's discuss this now.
16:44:59 <nunolopes> ericP: juansequeda was making a case for direct mapping with no remaning would be the putative ontology?
16:45:12 <nunolopes> juansequeda: 3.1.1  direct 
16:45:54 <harry2halpin> q+
16:45:55 <nunolopes> ACCEPTED: send out current version 1.24 for WG internal review, 1 week, feedback via mailing list
16:46:26 <nunolopes> juansequeda: does everyone understand 3.1.1 and 3.1.2?
16:46:42 <harry2halpin> it was simple enough for me to understand, but I'm more comfortable with using graph/isomorphism terminology than domain/putative ontology talk.
16:46:43 <nunolopes> RESOLUTION: the current version of the UCR at  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/use-cases/ (v1.24) is under review for 1 week, WG internally. All members should review and send in comments via the RDB2RDF mailing list.
16:46:50 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft mintues
16:46:50 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft mintues', mhausenblas.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:46:53 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:46:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
16:47:42 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:47:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
16:48:28 <nunolopes> MacTed: there seems to be a slight inconsistency in the headings
16:49:12 <nunolopes> … 3.1.1 isomorphic
16:49:22 <nunolopes> … 3.1.2 non isomorphic
16:49:22 <mhausenblas> MacTed: please note that our resolution somehow has superseded our actions - will remove them again
16:49:40 <nunolopes> … 3.1.2 a is currrently 3.1.3 (SQLTran)
16:50:21 <nunolopes> juansequeda:  so 3.1.4 would be part of the direct
16:50:30 <nunolopes> MacTed: yes, think so
16:50:59 <nunolopes> … I think label generation comes from the schema and is part of the direct translation
16:51:09 <Ahmed> q+
16:51:20 <nunolopes> … label transformation doesn't seem to be described
16:52:29 <mhausenblas> ack juansequeda 
16:52:38 <mhausenblas> ack harry2halpin
16:52:42 <mhausenblas> q?
16:53:08 <nunolopes> harry2halpin: a direct transformation from the relational schema to a graph
16:53:24 <ericP> q+ to clarify SQLGEN
16:53:30 <nunolopes> … which terminology should we use? 
16:53:42 <harry2halpin> domain/putative ontology?
16:53:48 <nunolopes> … domain/putative?
16:53:51 <mhausenblas> ack Ahmed 
16:54:15 <nunolopes> Ahmed: local and domain ontology are well understood outside the RDF comunity
16:54:21 <harry2halpin> so we need to make an edit to the spec to use domain/putative ontology rather than purely direct/non-direct transform.
16:54:31 <nunolopes> … I suggest we use those
16:54:48 <mhausenblas> ack ericP 
16:54:48 <Zakim> ericP, you wanted to clarify SQLGEN
16:55:12 <nunolopes> ericP: this literature comes from 1992
16:55:25 <nunolopes> … not necessarially reg RDF
16:55:46 <MacTed> the beauty of this is we can define the term in the document.
16:56:01 <harry2halpin> we can then specify what precisely we mean in terms of RDF.
16:56:02 <nunolopes> mhausenblas: I also suggest local and domain ontology
16:56:04 <harry2halpin> q+
16:56:14 <mhausenblas> ack harry2halpin 
16:56:46 <harry2halpin> ack harry2halpin
16:56:57 <nunolopes> ericP: where dumping the data into a graph that can be described by an ontology
16:57:57 <nunolopes> ? : we should use a vocabulary widely used like from the database comunity
16:58:05 <nunolopes> s/?/harry2halpin
16:58:34 <nunolopes> … but we can use the terms if we define them properly
16:59:08 <nunolopes> juansequeda: we translate the data which is an instance of the ontology
16:59:24 <nunolopes> … option 1 uses a putative/local ontology
16:59:37 <nunolopes> … option 2 uses a domain ontology
17:00:23 <mhausenblas> PROPOSAL: use local and domain ontology throughout the document and make clear that the data is an instance
17:00:34 <nunolopes> ericP: we should be able to run the transform in both ways.
17:00:45 <nunolopes> … take a sparql query and turn it into a SQL query
17:01:00 <nunolopes> MacTed:  the transformation should be reversible?
17:01:04 <nunolopes> ericP: yes
17:01:12 <harry2halpin> +1
17:01:14 <juansequeda> +1
17:01:40 <nunolopes> RESOLVED: use local and domain ontology throughout the document and make clear that the data is an instance
17:01:56 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:01:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
17:02:23 <harry2halpin> q+
17:02:59 <mhausenblas> ack harry2halpin 
17:03:24 <harry2halpin> "Coercing the relational graph into this pattern requires graph transformation."
17:03:44 <harry2halpin> dump to RDF->then use SPARQL constructs that direct RDF graph.
17:04:09 <harry2halpin> coercing the relational data into this pattern requires non-isomorphic graph transformations, i.e. transformation into a domain ontology
17:04:16 <harry2halpin> "coercing the relational data into this pattern requires non-isomorphic graph transformations, i.e. transformation into a domain ontology"
17:04:22 <mhausenblas> q?
17:06:00 <Zakim> -whalb
17:06:05 <mhausenblas> [adjourned]
17:06:08 <ericP> ACTION: ericP to send a READ ME request
17:06:08 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - ericP
17:06:13 <Zakim> -??P25
17:06:14 <Zakim> -soeren
17:06:14 <Zakim> -??P27
17:06:14 <Zakim> -MacTed
17:06:14 <ericP> ACTION: eric to send a READ ME request
17:06:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-53 - Send a READ ME request [on Eric Prud'hommeaux - due 2010-05-11].
17:06:16 <Zakim> -mhausenblas
17:06:28 <nunolopes1> nunolopes1 has joined #RDB2RDF
17:06:28 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:06:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
17:06:42 <Zakim> -juansequeda
17:06:55 <mhausenblas> Zakim, list attendees
17:06:55 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been whalb, juansequeda, MacTed, mhausenblas, cygri_, +39.046.128.aaaa, nunolopes, cygri, soeren, Ashok_Malhotra, hhalpin, Lee_Feigenbaum,
17:06:58 <Zakim> ... harry2halpin, EricP
17:07:02 <mhausenblas> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:07:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/05/04-rdb2rdf-minutes.html mhausenblas
17:07:37 <mhausenblas> Zakim. who's here?
17:07:42 <mhausenblas> Zakim, who's here?
17:07:42 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P1, Ashok_Malhotra, harry2halpin, EricP
17:07:43 <Zakim> On IRC I see nunolopes1, juansequeda, lima, soeren, Ashok, cygri, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, mhausenblas, LeeF, trackbot, ericP
17:08:11 <Zakim> -Ashok_Malhotra
17:08:43 <Zakim> -??P1
17:09:56 <nunolopes> nunolopes has joined #RDB2RDF
17:10:00 <mhausenblas> Zakim. who's here?
17:10:04 <mhausenblas> Zakim, who's here?
17:10:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see harry2halpin, EricP
17:10:05 <Zakim> On IRC I see nunolopes, juansequeda, soeren, Ashok, cygri, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, mhausenblas, LeeF, trackbot, ericP
17:10:54 <mhausenblas> Zakim, who's here?
17:10:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see harry2halpin, EricP
17:10:55 <Zakim> On IRC I see nunolopes, juansequeda, soeren, Ashok, cygri, Zakim, RRSAgent, MacTed, mhausenblas, LeeF, trackbot, ericP
17:22:31 <cygri> cygri has joined #rdb2rdf
17:25:43 <Zakim> -harry2halpin
17:25:44 <Zakim> -EricP
17:25:46 <Zakim> SW_RDB2RDF()12:00PM has ended
17:25:47 <Zakim> Attendees were whalb, juansequeda, MacTed, mhausenblas, cygri_, +39.046.128.aaaa, nunolopes, cygri, soeren, Ashok_Malhotra, hhalpin, Lee_Feigenbaum, harry2halpin, EricP
17:26:32 <cygri> cygri has left #rdb2rdf
19:30:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #rdb2rdf
19:52:43 <cygri_> cygri_ has joined #rdb2rdf
19:52:47 <cygri_> cygri_ has left #rdb2rdf
19:56:17 <nunolopes> nunolopes has joined #RDB2RDF