- From: Tom Adams <tom@tucanatech.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:23:01 -0500
- To: DAWG list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Minutes of RDF DAWG teleconference 2004-10-26T14:30Z for review
Agenda:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0173.html
IRC log:
http://www.w3.org/2004/10/26-dawg-irc
Scribe: Tom Adams
AGENDA
1. Convene, take roll, review record and agenda
Present:
Steve Harris
Kevin Wilkinson
Eric Prud'hommeaux
Dan Connolly
Pat Hayes
Tom Adams
Farrukh Najmi
Simon Raboczi
Alberto Reggiori
Dave Beckett
Jos De Roo
Regrets:
Andy Seaborne
Hiroyuki Sato
RESOLVED: to accept telcon minutes
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0171.html
as a true record.
Next meeting 2004-11-02 14:30 UTC
Regrets: ?
Chair: Dan Connolly
Scribe: Alberto Reggiori
All following actions continued:
ACTION KendallC: expose our walking tour data to SPARQL querying clients
ETA before F2F4
ACTION EricP: find logistics re F2F5 at tech plenary in Boston March
28 Feb - 4 Mar (2 days). Some WG preference to Mon/Tue of that week.
some progress:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
0144.html
ACTION AlbertoR: owns issue 'DESCRIBE'
ACTION SteveH: own (i.e. propose resolution to) disjunction issue
ACTION SteveH: owns issue 'nested optionals'
ACTION DanC: owner of issue 'yes or no questions'
ACTION DaveB: Update the source section 9, add more formal links,
update the examples, try to think about extra constraints as EricP
proposed (SOURCE ?s and ?s only in in SELECT). Look at various
people's source test cases.
New action summary:
ACTION: Eric to ask Kendall to put use case into UC&R or find a use
case that covers it
ACTION: SteveH to take rs:size out of expected results from all tests
ACTION: EricP to supply definitions for SELECT (vars ordered or not?)
ala
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
0151.html
2. Web Services Constraints and Capabilities
ACTION EricP: draft UC on overlap between RDF query and web service
constraints with respect to WS-Policy
Eric wrote something up [1], cited example, unsure of expressivity.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0145.html
Example query for web services constraints, written by EricP (DaveB:
page is unsigned). The matrix on the page is familiar to WS policy
people.
http://www.w3.org/2004/08/20-ws-pol-pos/#query
Expressing what you need to use our web server, must use a security
token, X509, etc. Expressed as simple value disjunction for this use
case. Not all use cases being kicked around in WS meeting can be
covered by value disjunction.
DaveB: replace with ... { ?assertion wss:tokentype ?t} AND (t =
"wsse:Kerberosv5TGT" or ?t = "wsse:X509v3" )
DavdB: ^- value disjunction
AlbertoR: simple disjunction as motivated by
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2004Sep/
0000.html use case
Another use case was offered: You need X509 or (SSL and basic auth)
DaveB asked a question of Eric last week on the decisions of the
ws-policy ppl.
A quick straw poll was conducted on whether to stick this into use
cases. 6 came back in the affirmative.
DaveB: If they stopped at disjunction, why did they?
DaveB: I heard eric say they were about 50/50 for adding/not adding
disjunction
Another quick straw poll was conducted on not bothering to include in
the use cases, 2 people in affirmative.
Dave and Steve suggest that we have enough use cases.
ACTION: Eric to ask Kendall to put use case into UC&R or find a use
case that covers it
ref to steveH's proposal on disjunction
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/
0604.html
SteveH: ref to my comment on CNF:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004JulSep/
0604.html
3. Feedback on the SPARQL design
Dirk provided details about DB interfaces, re '?' and '$'
Ref:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
0160.html
Note. Eric acted as editor on Andy's behalf
A quick strawpoll was conducted into the variable prefix character,
summary below.
SteveH: No pref
KevinW: no pref
SimonR: no particular required prefix character, $, ?, :. Specifically,
I liked the suggestion where there was no required prefix character.
And identifier that wasn't a qname (i.e. no colon) would be a variable.
DanC: No pref
patH: $ (patH: Suggest a design in which the user declares the
character, but has a default, which i $)
TomAdams: $
FarrukhNajmi: $
AlbertoR, $
DaveB, $
JosD: ?
ericP Sensed the way the wind is blowing and changed to $
SimonR: I agree with Farrukh about having either one or the other, at
least.
AlbertoR: can live with both - but preference (best practice) is $
SimonR: I sort of prefer $ because it's more like XPath/XQuery/XSLT.
Cont. action: PatH was to reviewed SPARQL def'ns post-publication
CONTINUED
Dan Connolly (Tuesday, 19 October)
definitions for SELECT, projection, substitution [was: [Fwd: Re: ...]]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0151.html
DanC: Will leave as input to editor, update as they see fit.
patH: Thought it was on hold, will do it this week.
DanC: Pat to work from editors draft at
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/
DanC sent defns for select (above), editor didn't read them...
4. PREFIX syntax
cf http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#prefixSyntax
ACTION: DaveB to illustrate prefix interaction details by example/test
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0161.html
and following thread, including a proposal:
COMPLETE
DanC: Thinks we should make the language smaller.
DaveB: example
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
0161.html
DaveB: proposal
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
0164.html
AlbertoR: Didn't digest grammar, like proposal, is this related to
serialisation of results
DaveB: Not aware of relation to result
AlbertoR: wondered if the proposal/solution would cover things like
select ?prefix:var ?prefix:var1
ericP : My position on the three-part proposal: +1 -2 +3
DanC: (hmm... why did I make prefix syntax a WG issue and not other
syntax details? chairing error.)
Eric P gave his decision, accpt 1 and 3, but not 2
Simon is for just doing prefixing at the beginning
SimonR: Now that I've read 164, I'd support part 1 and 3, but not 2. 2
is a special case which changes the consistent rule elsewhere that
qnames and URIs are interchangeable.
SimonR: +1 to EricP's position, as I understand it.
Dan opted to leave this as a he who does the work writes the rule, is
suggesting a use case
5. Toward adopting some tests
DaveB: If ? is chaging, all the tests are unapprovable
AlbertoR posted about some SOURCE tests details - i.e. my experience
while running tests
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0176.html
AlbertoR: me too - I have the machinery in place - it does not do
OPTIONAL though - results are checked "manually" to - but could use
some propose isomorphism utility
DaveB: DanC walsk through item 5, looking at dawg-triple-pattern-001
DaveB: has run it. steveh has translated to rdql and run it. josH has
done similar ot n3
AlbertoR: and Alberto is about to run some simple tests (a part the
SOURCE ones) - but OPTIONAL ones
DaveB: Not redundant if you have optional triples
DanC will think about results for optional triples
?? Not happy with result format, does p come before q?
AlbertoR: does SQL / ER models "demand" order on columns? not sure...
DaveB: "query results are a set of pattern solutions." -- sec 2, SPARQL
paragraph 2
SimonR: There is no order specified, so the ordering does not matter in
this case.
?? Sometimes order matters, such as in XSLT
SimonR: Points to
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#MultipleMatches
DanC: Suggests that the protocol does this, not SPARQL
AlbertoR: right - but XSLT is already outside the SPARQL protocol stack
I expect...good to sort RDF-for-XML syntax for example (we do that
actually)
A pattern solution is a set of bindings (no order), the results is a
set of query solns
The order of a given row is not order, the order of the rows is not
ordered
DanC: points to section 8:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#select
Spec says:
"Results can be thought of as a table, with one row per query solution.
Some cells may be empty because a variable is not bound in that
particular solution."
AlbertoR: yes - I can read (and implemented) un-order result sets (rows
or columns) - just a set of results
SimonR: Have redefined "results"
Simon is encouraged to look at wording and defn
AlbertoR: References earlier comment.
AlbertoR: Need to spell out clearly that we don't support ordering.
DanC: Expects result format to be in the protocol level, would expect
results to be deterministic.
DanC makes comments that for protocol format, columns are ordered
lexigraphically. Rows are a separate issue.
DanC: Asks Steve about taking size out of result format
ACTION SteveH: take rs:size out of expected results from all tests
ACTION EricP: supply definitions for SELECT (vars ordered or not?) ala
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/
0151.html
ericP: Points on barrier between protocol and query language.
ericP: QL specifies select, gives them back in order specified, rows
separate issue.
ericP: In terms of getting information fro QL spec to protocol spec,
can the protocol spec peak into the QL?
DanC: See similar issues, wants to see what Eric comes up with
ericP: Talking about removing the number of rows. If you remove the
number of rows and do a graph compare between an implementation and
that defined in the spec, if you don't have a distinct, won't be able
to automatically merge the tuples that have the same binding.
ericP: May be able to do it with a rule, but not tailored to the result
set.
DanC: The merged example graphs (texas) are isomorphic
??: Graph are logically equivalent
ericP: foo rs:result [ rs:variable "where"; rs:value "Texas"];
ericP: rs:result [ rs:variable "where"; rs:value "Boston"];
ericP: rs:result [ rs:variable "where"; rs:value "Texas"].
ericP: compare to:
ericP: foo rs:result [ rs:variable "where"; rs:value "Boston"];
ericP: rs:result [ rs:variable "where"; rs:value "Texas"].
DaveB: patH says they are not isomorphic, but are logically equivalent
DaveB: (rdf-entailed I guess)
The discussion continued on this topid, the meeting was adjourned at
5:32:43.
RESOLVED: Adjourn
--
Tom Adams | Tucana Technologies, Inc.
Support Engineer | Office: +1 703 871 5312
tom@tucanatech.com | Cell: +1 571 594 0847
http://www.tucanatech.com | Fax: +1 877 290 6687
------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 1 November 2004 15:23:04 UTC