W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Agenda - 13 Mar @ 14:30 UTC

From: Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 00:18:45 -0500
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF7EA9239.E611D26C-ON8525729B.001BB7B3-8525729B.001D2E9A@us.ibm.com>

U.S. MEMBERS PLEASE NOTE: The DAWG meeting remains at 14:30 UTC! This 
week, this means 10:30 EDT, 7:30 PDT. That's one hour later than normal, 
*for U.S. members only*. 

Hi Everyone,

I'm on vacation until Monday late night, so a detailed agenda may not make 
it out before the meeting on Tuesday. This one should suffice. The long 
and the short of it is that we are getting very close to deciding whether 
we are ready to publish a LC document, and if not, what remains to be 
done. So please attend on Tuesday if you can!

0. Convene [1]RDF Data Access WG meeting of Tuesday, 6 March, 2007
at 14:30:00 UTC
+ LeeF chairing
+ teleconference bridge: tel:+1.617.761.6200
tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152 code:7333
+ on irc at: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
+ Scribe: EricP ?
+ Regrets:
+ roll call
+ approve 6 Feb minutes [ link? ]
+ next meeting 20 Mar., @@ recruit scribe
+ agenda comments?

1. Review ACTION Items


2. Unexpected/auto DISTINCT

We discussed this a lot last week and there wasn't much consensus reached. 
Five possibilities were discussed...

  'default' means queries with no keyword after SELECT
  'strict counting' means implementations must return duplicate solutions 
in the cardinality given by the algebra
  'loose counting' means implementations are free to return N solutions, 
where 1 <= N <= # solutions given by the algebra

1) default is strict counting as per the algebra, no keyword to loosen the 
2) default is strict counting as per the algebra, add a DISTINCTABLE 
(exact keyword up in the air) keyword that allows loose counting
3) default is loose counting, no keyword to force strict counting
4) default is loose counting, add an ALL keyword that forces strict 
5) default is always DISTINCT (no duplicate solutions permitted)

...and no single one received significantly more support than the others. 

There was a good deal of conversation on the issue after last week's 
telecon adjourned. If any of the participants in that conversation would 
like to share any thoughts on the matter, messages to the mailing list in 
advance of Tuesday's teleconference would surely help us on Tuesday. 

3. Normative and informative, formal and informal parts of rq25

Kendall's review of rq25:

...raised the question of which parts of rq25 are normative and which are
informative. Andy replied that in general, numbered sections are normative
and appendixes are not unless otherwise specified. Andy also indicated the
need for WG discussion:

(midway through)

We will be discussing and deciding on this issue.

4. Last Call

Are there any WG reviews pending? Are there any reservations about moving 
rq25 to Last Call (pending the outcome of the above two decisions and the 
editors' addressing any remaining editorial @@'s in the document)? 

Please come prepared to discuss and decide on this. As always, if you are 
reviewing the document, please get your review comments in as soon as 

5. Test suite (not this week)

Jeen moved some query evaluation tests to the new testing environment...

...and Andy corrected a typo and reports that ARQ passes the tests.

Please try to take a look at these tests in advance so that we can approve

Eric proposed a syntax test similar to what we approved last week to note
that OPTIONAL clauses break up BGPs. He also suggested similar tests for
the GRAPH keyword.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
Received on Sunday, 11 March 2007 05:18:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:53 UTC