16:02:08 <trackbot> Meeting: RDF Working Group Teleconference
16:02:08 <trackbot> Date: 21 December 2011
16:02:13 <AndyS> zakim, who is on the phone?
Andy Seaborne: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:02:13 <Zakim> SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_RDFWG()11:00AM has not yet started, AndyS ←
16:02:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see Scott_Bauer, cygri, pfps, AndyS, AZ, pchampin, JeremyCarroll, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, gavinc, Guus, MacTed, mischat, manu, trackbot, davidwood, mdmdm, manu1, NickH,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Scott_Bauer, cygri, pfps, AndyS, AZ, pchampin, JeremyCarroll, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, gavinc, Guus, MacTed, mischat, manu, trackbot, davidwood, mdmdm, manu1, NickH, ←
16:02:15 <gavinc> zakim, this is 73394
Gavin Carothers: zakim, this is 73394 ←
16:02:17 <Zakim> ... sandro, ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: ... sandro, ericP ←
16:02:17 <Zakim> ok, gavinc; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, gavinc; that matches SW_RDFWG()11:00AM ←
16:02:41 <gavinc> there we go!
Gavin Carothers: there we go! ←
16:02:51 <Guus> zakim, who is here?
Guus Schreiber: zakim, who is here? ←
16:02:51 <Zakim> On the phone I see +31.20.598.aaaa, Sandro, Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.540.898.aabb, [IPcaller], +1.707.861.aacc, +1.415.586.aadd, ??P9, ??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see +31.20.598.aaaa, Sandro, Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.540.898.aabb, [IPcaller], +1.707.861.aacc, +1.415.586.aadd, ??P9, ??P11 ←
16:02:53 <Zakim> On IRC I see Scott_Bauer, cygri, pfps, AndyS, AZ, pchampin, JeremyCarroll, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, gavinc, Guus, MacTed, mischat, manu, trackbot, davidwood, mdmdm, manu1, NickH,
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Scott_Bauer, cygri, pfps, AndyS, AZ, pchampin, JeremyCarroll, Zakim, RRSAgent, LeeF, gavinc, Guus, MacTed, mischat, manu, trackbot, davidwood, mdmdm, manu1, NickH, ←
16:02:55 <Zakim> ... sandro, ericP
Zakim IRC Bot: ... sandro, ericP ←
16:02:56 <AndyS> scribe: AndyS
(Scribe set to Andy Seaborne)
16:03:28 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus, Sandro, Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.540.898.aabb, AndyS, gavinc, JeremyCarroll, ??P9, ??P11, MacTed (muted), cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Guus, Sandro, Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.540.898.aabb, AndyS, gavinc, JeremyCarroll, ??P9, ??P11, MacTed (muted), cygri ←
16:03:37 <AndyS> scribenick: AndyS
16:04:17 <AndyS> topic: Admin
16:05:42 <AndyS> david: admin section then discussion of the path forward for [graph]
David Wood: admin section then discussion of the path forward for [graph] ←
16:05:46 <davidwood> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 14 Dec telecon:
David Wood: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the 14 Dec telecon: ←
16:05:46 <davidwood> http://dristachi.site/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-12-14
David Wood: http://dristachi.site/2011/rdf-wg/meeting/2011-12-14 ←
16:05:51 <Guus> zakim, who is on the phone?
Guus Schreiber: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
16:05:51 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus, Sandro, Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.540.898.aabb, AndyS, gavinc (muted), JeremyCarroll (muted), yvesr, AZ, MacTed (muted), cygri, Scott_Bauer, AlexHall
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Guus, Sandro, Peter_Patel-Schneider, +1.540.898.aabb, AndyS, gavinc (muted), JeremyCarroll (muted), yvesr, AZ, MacTed (muted), cygri, Scott_Bauer, AlexHall ←
16:06:10 <davidwood> zakim, aabb is me
David Wood: zakim, aabb is me ←
16:06:10 <Zakim> +davidwood; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +davidwood; got it ←
16:06:28 <AndyS> topic: Action item review
16:06:35 <AndyS> No pending action items
No pending action items ←
16:06:45 <AndyS> David: 13 open actions
David Wood: 13 open actions ←
16:07:06 <Zakim> + +1.760.705.aaff
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.760.705.aaff ←
16:07:13 <pchampin> zakim, aaff is me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, aaff is me ←
16:07:13 <Zakim> +pchampin; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pchampin; got it ←
16:07:16 <pchampin> zakim, mute me
Pierre-Antoine Champin: zakim, mute me ←
16:07:16 <Zakim> pchampin should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: pchampin should now be muted ←
16:08:15 <gavinc> Zakim, unmute me
Gavin Carothers: Zakim, unmute me ←
16:08:15 <Zakim> gavinc should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: gavinc should no longer be muted ←
16:09:07 <AndyS> david: action 117 - jeremy ...
David Wood: ACTION-117 - jeremy ... ←
16:09:13 <AndyS> ... duration datatypes
... duration datatypes ←
16:09:27 <AndyS> jeremy: will do action
Jeremy Carroll: will do action ←
16:09:37 <AndyS> ... action 118 similar
... ACTION-118 similar ←
16:10:09 <AndyS> david: gavin - action on formatted text literals
David Wood: gavin - action on formatted text literals ←
16:10:14 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
16:10:55 <AndyS> ack cygri
ack cygri ←
16:11:08 <AndyS> cygri: pls expand on action 124
Richard Cyganiak: pls expand on ACTION-124 ←
16:11:28 <AndyS> gavin: it's because of xml literal downplayed ... what about formatted text?
Gavin Carothers: it's because of xml literal downplayed ... what about formatted text? ←
16:11:55 <AndyS> topic: next meeting
16:12:01 <AndyS> Jan 4
Jan 4 ←
16:12:07 <AndyS> topic: path forward
16:12:45 <AndyS> david: Named graphs has been a major matter for the WG ... but also now see there are concerns about how people view the web
David Wood: Named graphs has been a major matter for the WG ... but also now see there are concerns about how people view the web ←
16:13:09 <AndyS> ... lot of perspectives in WG and these all be considered valid.
... lot of perspectives in WG and these all be considered valid. ←
16:13:34 <AndyS> ... new uses of RDF (Linked Data Ent Workshop)
... new uses of RDF (Linked Data Ent Workshop) ←
16:13:50 <AndyS> ... not just for one thing
... not just for one thing ←
16:14:09 <AndyS> ... pls keep in mind that other people's perspective are valid
... pls keep in mind that other people's perspective are valid ←
16:14:42 <AndyS> ... WG needs to find a compromiose
... WG needs to find a compromiose ←
16:15:00 <AndyS> ... sandros has suggested we focus on the use cases
... sandros has suggested we focus on the use cases ←
16:15:13 <AndyS> ... starting with Richard
... starting with Richard ←
16:15:44 <PatH> Sorry Im late, having a problem phoning in.
Patrick Hayes: Sorry Im late, having a problem phoning in. ←
16:16:22 <AndyS> ... email dec 21 at 13:43 UTC (??)
... email dec 21 at 13:43 UTC (??) ←
16:16:42 <AndyS> ... Richard, where is the key issues here?
... Richard, where is the key issues here? ←
16:17:20 <AndyS> sandro: for now, just think about UC, not analysis one UC until several looked at
Sandro Hawke: for now, just think about UC, not analysis one UC until several looked at ←
16:17:35 <AndyS> ... and we may see the common elements
... and we may see the common elements ←
16:18:01 <AndyS> david: need to look sufficiently deeply
David Wood: need to look sufficiently deeply ←
16:18:19 <Zakim> +PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: +PatH ←
16:18:22 <Zakim> -cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri ←
16:18:49 <AndyS> cygri: this UC was about the exchange of ... really 2 UC ... and a Higgs boson was seen
Richard Cyganiak: this UC was about the exchange of ... really 2 UC ... and a Higgs boson was seen ←
16:20:25 <AndyS> sandro: what are other people hoping to get out of NG
Sandro Hawke: what are other people hoping to get out of NG ←
16:20:44 <Guus> q+ to suggest BBC one to take on, if it takes some time for Richard to come back
Guus Schreiber: q+ to suggest BBC one to take on, if it takes some time for Richard to come back ←
16:20:55 <AndyS> david: Jeremy suggested a text case approach
David Wood: Jeremy suggested a text case approach ←
16:21:02 <PatH> maybe if i leave...?
Patrick Hayes: maybe if i leave...? ←
16:21:05 <AndyS> ... will get to that on the hour
... will get to that on the hour ←
16:21:30 <PatH> pchampi, not knowingly.
Patrick Hayes: pchampi, not knowingly. ←
16:23:01 <AndyS> Jeremy: previously, have found that test cases stress the common ground, not the conceptualisms around it
Jeremy Carroll: previously, have found that test cases stress the common ground, not the conceptualisms around it ←
16:23:10 <PatH> +1 to jeremy
Patrick Hayes: +1 to jeremy ←
16:23:16 <Guus> +1
Guus Schreiber: +1 ←
16:23:17 <PatH> zakim, mute me
Patrick Hayes: zakim, mute me ←
16:23:17 <Zakim> PatH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH should now be muted ←
16:23:42 <Zakim> +??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8 ←
16:23:50 <cygri> zakim, ??P8 is me
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, ??P8 is me ←
16:23:50 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it ←
16:23:58 <AndyS> ... I suggested on test case. We can formally resolve on that then move to next test case. 100 small steps.
... I suggested on test case. We can formally resolve on that then move to next test case. 100 small steps. ←
16:24:10 <AndyS> (link please)
(link please) ←
16:24:13 <PatH> richard is back :-)
Patrick Hayes: richard is back :-) ←
16:24:38 <Guus> +1 to the ill-formedness of that test case
Guus Schreiber: +1 to the ill-formedness of that test case ←
16:24:53 <gavinc> { ( {a:b c:d e:f}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ), ( {}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ) }
Gavin Carothers: { ( {a:b c:d e:f}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ), ( {}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ) } ←
16:25:16 <Guus> q+ to syggest to do the strawpoll first
Guus Schreiber: q+ to syggest to do the strawpoll first ←
16:25:38 <JeremyCarroll> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Dec/0123.html
Jeremy Carroll: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2011Dec/0123.html ←
16:25:41 <davidwood> ack Guus
David Wood: ack Guus ←
16:25:41 <Zakim> Guus, you wanted to suggest BBC one to take on, if it takes some time for Richard to come back and to syggest to do the strawpoll first
Zakim IRC Bot: Guus, you wanted to suggest BBC one to take on, if it takes some time for Richard to come back and to syggest to do the strawpoll first ←
16:26:03 <AndyS> q+
q+ ←
16:26:04 <gavinc> STRAWPOLL: RDF 1.1 Recommendation will not recommend the use { ( {a:b c:d e:f}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ), ( {}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ) }
STRAWPOLL: RDF 1.1 Recommendation will not recommend the use { ( {a:b c:d e:f}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ), ( {}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ) } ←
16:26:42 <AndyS> q+ to ask if this is syntax or abstract data model?
q+ to ask if this is syntax or abstract data model? ←
16:26:53 <davidwood> ack AndyS
David Wood: ack AndyS ←
16:26:53 <Zakim> AndyS, you wanted to ask if this is syntax or abstract data model?
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS, you wanted to ask if this is syntax or abstract data model? ←
16:27:28 <AndyS> AndyS: Is this syntax?
Andy Seaborne: Is this syntax? ←
16:27:33 <AndyS> Jeremy: Yes.
Jeremy Carroll: Yes. ←
16:27:38 <PatH> lets stick to abstract model first.
Patrick Hayes: lets stick to abstract model first. ←
16:27:40 <Guus> it is not TriG syntax, btw
Guus Schreiber: it is not TriG syntax, btw ←
16:27:59 <pfps> q+
16:28:06 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
16:28:13 <davidwood> ack pfps
David Wood: ack pfps ←
16:28:25 <AndyS> pfps: is this an RDF dataset?
Peter Patel-Schneider: is this an RDF dataset? ←
16:28:46 <Zakim> +Eric
Zakim IRC Bot: +Eric ←
16:28:49 <AndyS> jeremy: syntax wrong -it is an RDF dataset that has a repeated label on two graphs
Jeremy Carroll: syntax wrong -it is an RDF dataset that has a repeated label on two graphs ←
16:29:21 <cygri> RDF Dataset definition includes: "Graph names are unique within an RDF dataset."
Richard Cyganiak: RDF Dataset definition includes: "Graph names are unique within an RDF dataset." ←
16:29:31 <AndyS> pfps: RDF dataset has a label only once.
Peter Patel-Schneider: RDF dataset has a label only once. ←
16:29:36 <cygri> so, that's a negative test case.
Richard Cyganiak: so, that's a negative test case. ←
16:30:28 <gavinc> https://gist.github.com/1506664
Gavin Carothers: https://gist.github.com/1506664 ←
16:30:31 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
16:30:34 <gavinc> Not A Dataset https://gist.github.com/1506664
Gavin Carothers: Not A Dataset https://gist.github.com/1506664 ←
16:30:39 <PatH> Jeremy is trying to locate the shore by first putting a pole clearly in the water.
Patrick Hayes: Jeremy is trying to locate the shore by first putting a pole clearly in the water. ←
16:31:05 <AndyS> david: Negative test, concept, not synatx,
David Wood: Negative test, concept, not synatx, ←
16:31:18 <JeremyCarroll> STRAWPOLL: RDF 1.1 Recommendation will not recommend the use { ( {a:b c:d e:f}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ), ( {}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ) }
STRAWPOLL: RDF 1.1 Recommendation will not recommend the use { ( {a:b c:d e:f}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ), ( {}, mailto:ivan@w3.org ) } ←
16:31:33 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
16:31:35 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
16:31:40 <MacTed> (will not recommend? or will disrecommend?)
Ted Thibodeau: (will not recommend? or will disrecommend?) ←
16:31:41 <JeremyCarroll> +1
Jeremy Carroll: +1 ←
16:31:41 <Guus> +1
Guus Schreiber: +1 ←
16:31:44 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
16:31:46 <pchampin> +1
16:31:52 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:31:53 <davidwood> Sandro: +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
16:31:53 <AZ> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
16:31:53 <AndyS> +1
+1 ←
16:31:55 <Guus> we can formulate this stronger, I think
Guus Schreiber: we can formulate this stronger, I think ←
16:31:56 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
16:31:56 <pfps> +1 to what david is saying, not to the strawpoll per se
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to what david is saying, not to the strawpoll per se ←
16:32:00 <MacTed> +1 for not recommending ... but I think that's not the right expression
Ted Thibodeau: +1 for not recommending ... but I think that's not the right expression ←
16:32:07 <AlexHall> +1
16:33:03 <pfps> STRAWPOLL: In an RDF dataset, there must be a function (and not a general relation) from "tags" to graphs
STRAWPOLL: In an RDF dataset, there must be a function (and not a general relation) from "tags" to graphs ←
16:33:09 <ericP> q?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q? ←
16:33:16 <AndyS> guus: test suite
Guus Schreiber: test suite ←
16:33:29 <ericP> i think a test suite would be bound to a serialization
Eric Prud'hommeaux: i think a test suite would be bound to a serialization ←
16:33:33 <AndyS> ... we need a owner/manager
... we need a owner/manager ←
16:33:44 <AndyS> q+
q+ ←
16:34:18 <AndyS> david: if we can't get a test case, keep proposal and not loose it
David Wood: if we can't get a test case, keep proposal and not loose it ←
16:34:21 <gavinc> PROPOSAL : In a TriG document a graph IRI must not be used to label more then one graph.
Gavin Carothers: PROPOSAL : In a TriG document a graph IRI must not be used to label more then one graph. ←
16:34:51 <AndyS> q-
q- ←
16:34:57 <Guus> proposal to use TriG as test-suite serialization language
Guus Schreiber: proposal to use TriG as test-suite serialization language ←
16:35:00 <PatH> English version: the WG will not recommend any construction in which two different graphs are assigned the same label.
Patrick Hayes: English version: the WG will not recommend any construction in which two different graphs are assigned the same label. ←
16:35:26 <PatH> zakim, unmute me.
Patrick Hayes: zakim, unmute me. ←
16:35:26 <Zakim> PatH should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH should no longer be muted ←
16:35:30 <AndyS> why not have "tests" being text files for now, pending syntax?
why not have "tests" being text files for now, pending syntax? ←
16:35:34 <ericP> a SPARQL-style test suite of a set of a mapping of turtle docs to unique graph names (and default graph) would capture this test without steaking out an interpretation of TriG
Eric Prud'hommeaux: a SPARQL-style test suite of a set of a mapping of turtle docs to unique graph names (and default graph) would capture this test without steaking out an interpretation of TriG ←
16:35:56 <davidwood> PROPOSAL : In a TriG document or similar syntax constituting an RDF dataset, a graph IRI must not be used to label more then one graph.
David Wood: PROPOSAL : In a TriG document or similar syntax constituting an RDF dataset, a graph IRI must not be used to label more then one graph. ←
16:36:02 <AndyS> +1 to ericP as SPARQL tests can write these down
+1 to ericP as SPARQL tests can write these down ←
16:36:27 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
16:36:28 <PatH> steaking out, nice. we can try roasting out as well.
Patrick Hayes: steaking out, nice. we can try roasting out as well. ←
16:36:34 <davidwood> ack cygri
David Wood: ack cygri ←
16:36:46 <PatH> sounds much better
Patrick Hayes: sounds much better ←
16:36:56 <PatH> zakim, mute me.
Patrick Hayes: zakim, mute me. ←
16:36:56 <Zakim> PatH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH should now be muted ←
16:37:02 <AndyS> cygri: option for different relationships of a "name" and a graph
Richard Cyganiak: option for different relationships of a "name" and a graph ←
16:37:17 <AndyS> ... may or may not be mixed in an RDF dataset
... may or may not be mixed in an RDF dataset ←
16:37:46 <AndyS> ... ??allow the name multiple times for different relationships
... ??allow the name multiple times for different relationships ←
16:38:01 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to speak against Richard
Jeremy Carroll: q+ to speak against Richard ←
16:38:10 <gavinc> <mailto:ivan@w3.org> <relation1> {
Gavin Carothers: <mailto:ivan@w3.org> <relation1> { ←
16:38:11 <gavinc> <a> <b> <c> .
Gavin Carothers: <a> <b> <c> . ←
16:38:13 <gavinc> }
Gavin Carothers: } ←
16:38:14 <gavinc> <mailto:ivan@w3.org> <relation2> {
Gavin Carothers: <mailto:ivan@w3.org> <relation2> { ←
16:38:16 <gavinc>
16:38:17 <gavinc> }
Gavin Carothers: } ←
16:38:23 <AndyS> <labeluri> :p1 {} . <labeluri> :p2 {}
<labeluri> :p1 {} . <labeluri> :p2 {} ←
16:38:25 <ericP> <G1> :logSemantics { <s1> <p1> <o1> } ; :signs { <s2> <p2> <o2> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: <G1> :logSemantics { <s1> <p1> <o1> } ; :signs { <s2> <p2> <o2> } ←
16:38:39 <davidwood> ack JeremyCarroll
David Wood: ack JeremyCarroll ←
16:38:39 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to speak against Richard
Zakim IRC Bot: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to speak against Richard ←
16:38:47 <MacTed> tweaked PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, whether expressed by a TriG document or any other syntax, a single graph IRI (1) MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph; (2) MAY ONLY be used to label one graph.
Ted Thibodeau: tweaked PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, whether expressed by a TriG document or any other syntax, a single graph IRI (1) MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph; (2) MAY ONLY be used to label one graph. ←
16:38:58 <Zakim> -cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri ←
16:39:03 <AndyS> Jeremy: we can revise if we decide that. Test case is more concrete probe. Not too many choices.
Jeremy Carroll: we can revise if we decide that. Test case is more concrete probe. Not too many choices. ←
16:39:15 <Zakim> +??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8 ←
16:39:18 <cygri> zakim, ??P8 is me
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, ??P8 is me ←
16:39:18 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it ←
16:39:18 <PatH> i see what richard is saying, but agree with jeremy
Patrick Hayes: i see what richard is saying, but agree with jeremy ←
16:39:55 <PatH> any decision will rule out some possibilities.
Patrick Hayes: any decision will rule out some possibilities. ←
16:40:14 <MacTed> intentionally so
Ted Thibodeau: intentionally so ←
16:40:22 <PatH> are they different?
Patrick Hayes: are they different? ←
16:41:06 <Guus> PROPOSAL Within a single RDF dataset MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph
Guus Schreiber: PROPOSAL Within a single RDF dataset MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph ←
16:41:07 <davidwood> PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI (1) MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph; (2) MAY ONLY be used to label one graph.
David Wood: PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI (1) MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph; (2) MAY ONLY be used to label one graph. ←
16:41:19 <PatH> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
16:41:20 <MacTed> (1) and (2) are intentionally redundant. the first conforms more to RFC grammar; the second is more clear to many readers.
Ted Thibodeau: (1) and (2) are intentionally redundant. the first conforms more to RFC grammar; the second is more clear to many readers. ←
16:41:27 <AndyS> Jeremy: multiple labelled blocks is still one graph is a possibility
Jeremy Carroll: multiple labelled blocks is still one graph is a possibility ←
16:41:27 <ericP> PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI (1) MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph
Eric Prud'hommeaux: PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI (1) MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph ←
16:41:31 <davidwood> ack PatH
David Wood: ack PatH ←
16:41:34 <PatH> zakim, unmute me
Patrick Hayes: zakim, unmute me ←
16:41:34 <Zakim> PatH was not muted, PatH
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH was not muted, PatH ←
16:42:19 <AndyS> PatH: one reason for not doing this is where identity is expensive
Patrick Hayes: one reason for not doing this is where identity is expensive ←
16:42:20 <cygri> we just need to detect identity of the URIs, not of the graphs
Richard Cyganiak: we just need to detect identity of the URIs, not of the graphs ←
16:42:36 <PatH> zakim, mute me
Patrick Hayes: zakim, mute me ←
16:42:36 <Zakim> PatH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH should now be muted ←
16:42:57 <davidwood> PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph
David Wood: PROPOSAL : Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph ←
16:43:06 <ericP> +1
Eric Prud'hommeaux: +1 ←
16:43:06 <MacTed> +1
Ted Thibodeau: +1 ←
16:43:07 <pfps> +1
16:43:10 <davidwood> Sandro: +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
16:43:11 <Guus> +1
Guus Schreiber: +1 ←
16:43:11 <davidwood> +1
David Wood: +1 ←
16:43:12 <PatH> +1
Patrick Hayes: +1 ←
16:43:12 <gavinc> +1
Gavin Carothers: +1 ←
16:43:15 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
16:43:15 <AZ> +1
Antoine Zimmermann: +1 ←
16:43:15 <AlexHall> +1
16:43:18 <pchampin> +1
16:43:22 <yvesr> +1
Yves Raimond: +1 ←
16:43:22 <AndyS> +1
+1 ←
16:43:57 <AndyS> RESOLVED: Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph
RESOLVED: Within a single RDF dataset, regardless of syntax, a single graph IRI MUST NOT be used to label more then one graph ←
16:44:00 <PatH> cygri, yes of course. sorry.
Patrick Hayes: cygri, yes of course. sorry. ←
16:44:24 <AndyS> david: The use case ... richard
David Wood: The use case ... richard ←
16:44:41 <AndyS> cygri: UC about web crawling and crawling RDF data
Richard Cyganiak: UC about web crawling and crawling RDF data ←
16:45:02 <AndyS> ... at the time of crawl may not know the use to be made of the data
... at the time of crawl may not know the use to be made of the data ←
16:45:12 <AndyS> ... i.e. crawler grabs stuff
... i.e. crawler grabs stuff ←
16:45:24 <AndyS> ... so keep things in separate graphs
... so keep things in separate graphs ←
16:45:29 <AndyS> ... keep source info
... keep source info ←
16:46:22 <AndyS> ... at this stage, data considered is by source only, nothing outside
... at this stage, data considered is by source only, nothing outside ←
16:46:28 <Guus> remark about the resolution: you can interpret it as an implicit resolution that graph names must be IRIs. Should we make this explicit?
Guus Schreiber: remark about the resolution: you can interpret it as an implicit resolution that graph names must be IRIs. Should we make this explicit? ←
16:46:40 <AndyS> ... important - store this in a SPARQL store for query using GRAPH
... important - store this in a SPARQL store for query using GRAPH ←
16:47:15 <AndyS> ... important - crawls can be exchanged (practical reasons) - nquads where 4th slot is the source
... important - crawls can be exchanged (practical reasons) - nquads where 4th slot is the source ←
16:47:22 <AndyS> ... source URL
... source URL ←
16:47:49 <AndyS> david: Are you using the source URL as the graph URI?
David Wood: Are you using the source URL as the graph URI? ←
16:47:59 <davidwood> q?
David Wood: q? ←
16:48:31 <AndyS> cygri: In several examples, inc billion triples dump, and Sindice, then source URL is 4th slot in the dump
Richard Cyganiak: In several examples, inc billion triples dump, and Sindice, then source URL is 4th slot in the dump ←
16:48:43 <AndyS> ... makes it easy to understand
... makes it easy to understand ←
16:49:17 <AndyS> sandro: similar : tabulator and ?? but they use tag as a retriveal event
Sandro Hawke: similar : tabulator and ?? but they use tag as a retriveal event ←
16:49:35 <AndyS> ... if higher costs are acceptable
... if higher costs are acceptable ←
16:49:47 <PatH> do these systems use RDF metadata in which the graph identifiers are used to identify the graphs?
Patrick Hayes: do these systems use RDF metadata in which the graph identifiers are used to identify the graphs? ←
16:50:20 <cygri> q+ to answer pat
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to answer pat ←
16:50:30 <AndyS> david: how does this inform you?
David Wood: how does this inform you? ←
16:51:25 <AndyS> cygri: to PatH: they refer to the source, not the graph
Richard Cyganiak: to PatH: they refer to the source, not the graph ←
16:51:26 <PatH> great.
Patrick Hayes: great. ←
16:51:59 <AndyS> cygri: does not make much sense about the merge of all the graphs
Richard Cyganiak: does not make much sense about the merge of all the graphs ←
16:52:34 <AndyS> ... or consistency. It data management to keep them separate. May subset and do other stuff later.
... or consistency. It data management to keep them separate. May subset and do other stuff later. ←
16:52:35 <PatH> that really is very nice, and allows an elegant semantic 'gloss' to account for this being conformant.
Patrick Hayes: that really is very nice, and allows an elegant semantic 'gloss' to account for this being conformant. ←
16:53:08 <AndyS> ... semantics is "not good" lots of things wrong and need to be sorted out by the app on top later
... data is "not good" lots of things wrong and need to be sorted out by the app on top later ←
16:53:23 <AndyS> ... we want a way to split the triples by source
... we want a way to split the triples by source ←
16:53:26 <PatH> q+
Patrick Hayes: q+ ←
16:53:35 <PatH> zakim, unmute me
Patrick Hayes: zakim, unmute me ←
16:53:35 <Zakim> PatH should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH should no longer be muted ←
16:53:54 <davidwood> ack cygri
David Wood: ack cygri ←
16:53:54 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to answer pat
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to answer pat ←
16:54:06 <davidwood> ack PatH
David Wood: ack PatH ←
16:54:40 <Zakim> -cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri ←
16:54:40 <AndyS> PatH: The sticking point for me has been the way URIs are used in difefrent ways - now clear in Richards UC that this is not the case
Patrick Hayes: The sticking point for me has been the way URIs are used in difefrent ways - now clear in Richards UC that this is not the case ←
16:54:55 <Zakim> +??P8
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8 ←
16:55:00 <cygri> zakim, ??P8 is me
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, ??P8 is me ←
16:55:00 <Zakim> +cygri; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +cygri; got it ←
16:55:01 <ericP> AggregateDB GETs <http://a.example/doc1.ttl> at with headers <H>, could create any of these DBs:
Eric Prud'hommeaux: AggregateDB GETs <http://a.example/doc1.ttl> at with headers <H>, could create any of these DBs: ←
16:55:04 <ericP> snapshot: <http://a.example/doc1.ttl>: { <s1> <p1> <o1> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: snapshot: <http://a.example/doc1.ttl>: { <s1> <p1> <o1> } ←
16:55:07 <ericP> with-metadata: default graph: { <http://a.example/doc1.ttl> http:headers <H> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: with-metadata: default graph: { <http://a.example/doc1.ttl> http:headers <H> } ←
16:55:09 <AndyS> ... so we can add metadata etc
... so we can add metadata etc ←
16:55:09 <ericP> <http://a.example/doc1.ttl>: { <s1> <p1> <o1> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: <http://a.example/doc1.ttl>: { <s1> <p1> <o1> } ←
16:55:12 <ericP> with history: default graph: { </2011-12-21T11:50/http://a.example/doc1.ttl> http:resource <http://a.example/doc1.ttl> ; http:headers <H> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: with history: default graph: { </2011-12-21T11:50/http://a.example/doc1.ttl> http:resource <http://a.example/doc1.ttl> ; http:headers <H> } ←
16:55:15 <ericP> </2011-12-21T11:50/http://a.example/doc1.ttl>: { <s1> <p1> <o1> }
Eric Prud'hommeaux: </2011-12-21T11:50/http://a.example/doc1.ttl>: { <s1> <p1> <o1> } ←
16:55:19 <ericP> does that capture likely designs?
Eric Prud'hommeaux: does that capture likely designs? ←
16:55:28 <AndyS> s/semantics/data/
16:55:49 <AndyS> PatH: Will write up my point.
Patrick Hayes: Will write up my point. ←
16:56:27 <PatH> did we lose richard again?
Patrick Hayes: did we lose richard again? ←
16:56:34 <ericP> q+
Eric Prud'hommeaux: q+ ←
16:56:42 <davidwood> zakim, who is talking?
David Wood: zakim, who is talking? ←
16:56:42 <AndyS> scribe+
scribe+ ←
16:56:54 <Zakim> davidwood, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (64%), Eric (14%)
Zakim IRC Bot: davidwood, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (64%), Eric (14%) ←
16:57:11 <PatH> zakim, mute me
Patrick Hayes: zakim, mute me ←
16:57:11 <Zakim> PatH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: PatH should now be muted ←
16:57:23 <MacTed> scribe was breaking up
Ted Thibodeau: scribe was breaking up ←
16:57:30 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
16:57:42 <AndyS> Oh dear
Oh dear ←
16:58:33 <PatH> scrumpy rules.
Patrick Hayes: scrumpy rules. ←
16:58:36 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
16:58:46 <AndyS> zakim, IPcaller is me
zakim, IPcaller is me ←
16:58:46 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
16:58:48 <PatH> noise...
Patrick Hayes: noise... ←
16:58:54 <JeremyCarroll> Zakim, mute AndyS
Jeremy Carroll: Zakim, mute AndyS ←
16:58:54 <Zakim> AndyS should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: AndyS should now be muted ←
16:59:30 <AndyS> ericP: try to cover 3 cases
Eric Prud'hommeaux: try to cover 3 cases ←
16:59:40 <AndyS> ... stores in RDF DB
... stores in RDF DB ←
16:59:49 <AndyS> ... store in doc 1 and add header to dft graph
... store in doc 1 and add header to dft graph ←
16:59:55 <davidwood> EricP: See his syntax above, where someone GETs graphs.
Eric Prud'hommeaux: See his syntax above, where someone GETs graphs. [ Scribe Assist by David Wood ] ←
17:00:11 <cygri> it covers mine
Richard Cyganiak: it covers mine ←
17:00:12 <AndyS> ... store in doc1 in an dft doc nfo on this
... store in doc1 in an dft doc nfo on this ←
17:00:25 <AndyS> I am scribing
I am scribing ←
17:00:40 <PatH> it covers enough to give rise to much discussion...
Patrick Hayes: it covers enough to give rise to much discussion... ←
17:01:00 <AndyS> sandro (is unclear to the scribe)
sandro (is unclear to the scribe) ←
17:01:15 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
17:01:36 <PatH> sandro: may be other cases.
Sandro Hawke: may be other cases. [ Scribe Assist by Patrick Hayes ] ←
17:01:42 <davidwood> EricP has covered the two variants of the use case as I have seen them.
David Wood: EricP has covered the two variants of the use case as I have seen them. ←
17:01:55 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:01:58 <AndyS> ack me
ack me ←
17:02:01 <ericP> ack me
Eric Prud'hommeaux: ack me ←
17:02:22 <AndyS> I'll pass
I'll pass ←
17:02:36 <davidwood> ack Sandro
David Wood: ack Sandro ←
17:02:38 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
17:02:50 <ericP> scribenick: ericP
(Scribe set to Eric Prud'hommeaux)
17:03:22 <ericP> sandro: [silence]
Sandro Hawke: [silence] ←
17:03:58 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:04:01 <davidwood> Zakim must be forked. I hear some.
David Wood: Zakim must be forked. I hear some. ←
17:04:03 <AndyS> zakim, IPCAller is me
Andy Seaborne: zakim, IPCAller is me ←
17:04:03 <Zakim> +AndyS; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +AndyS; got it ←
17:04:08 <PatH> Zakim is getting tired.
Patrick Hayes: Zakim is getting tired. ←
17:04:23 <AndyS> david: bad conditions
David Wood: bad conditions [ Scribe Assist by Andy Seaborne ] ←
17:04:38 <AndyS> ... regards for the holidays
Andy Seaborne: ... regards for the holidays ←
17:04:43 <AndyS> ADJOURNED
Andy Seaborne: ADJOURNED ←
17:04:47 <yvesr> bye!
Yves Raimond: bye! ←
17:04:47 <pchampin> thanks
Pierre-Antoine Champin: thanks ←
17:04:48 <Zakim> -davidwood
Zakim IRC Bot: -davidwood ←
17:04:49 <AndyS> next meeting Jan 4.
Andy Seaborne: next meeting Jan 4. ←
17:04:50 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
17:04:50 <Zakim> -JeremyCarroll
Zakim IRC Bot: -JeremyCarroll ←
17:04:51 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
17:04:52 <Guus> bye
Guus Schreiber: bye ←
17:04:53 <Zakim> -yvesr
Zakim IRC Bot: -yvesr ←
17:04:54 <AZ> bye
Antoine Zimmermann: bye ←
17:04:54 <PatH> eric, can you email that example?
Patrick Hayes: eric, can you email that example? ←
17:04:55 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
17:04:56 <cygri> thanks david!
Richard Cyganiak: thanks david! ←
17:04:59 <Zakim> -AndyS
Zakim IRC Bot: -AndyS ←
17:04:59 <Zakim> -gavinc
Zakim IRC Bot: -gavinc ←
17:05:01 <Zakim> -pchampin
Zakim IRC Bot: -pchampin ←
17:05:02 <Zakim> -cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: -cygri ←
17:05:05 <Zakim> -Eric
Zakim IRC Bot: -Eric ←
17:05:10 <Zakim> -AlexHall
Zakim IRC Bot: -AlexHall ←
17:05:14 <Zakim> -AZ
Zakim IRC Bot: -AZ ←
17:05:15 <Zakim> -Scott_Bauer
Zakim IRC Bot: -Scott_Bauer ←
17:05:16 <PatH> muted merry Xmas to all.
Patrick Hayes: muted merry Xmas to all. ←
17:06:02 <Zakim> -Guus
Zakim IRC Bot: -Guus ←
Formatted by CommonScribe