W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: [TF-ENT] Agenda 24th Feb teleconf

From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:51:26 +0000
Message-ID: <492f2b0b1002240951i6f0d727and61cb70baa6438f8@mail.gmail.com>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi all,
the access code for the TF-ENT teleconf today is:

See you soon,

On 21 February 2010 21:45, Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi all,
> here is a proposal for the agenda. If you have additional suggestions
> or suggestions for amendments, let me know.
> Birte
>    *  Date of Call: Wednesday February 24, 2010
>    * Time of Call: 18:00 UK, 13:00 (East US)
>    * Dial-In #: +1.617.761.6200 (Cambridge, MA)
>    * Dial-In #: + (Nice, France)
>    * Dial-In #: +44.117.370.6152 (Bristol, UK)
>    * Participant Access Code:
>     Zakim will tell us when the ad hoc conference is set up
>    * IRC Channel: irc.w3.org port 6665 channel #sparql-ent
>     ([irc:irc.w3.org:6665/sparql-ent])
>    * Duration: 60 minutes
>    * Chair: Birte Glimm
>    * Scribe: ?
>    * Link to Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-02-24
> * Admin
>  o Do we need a scribe?
> * General entailment regimes issues
>  o Should we have a finite vocabulary from which bindings can be taken
>    for all variables and not just the ones in subject position. This
>    allows for defining the scoping graph as graph equivalent to the active
>    graph even in the case of an inconsistency and would mean a modified C2
>    condition.
>    Current C2 in PWD:
>    (C2) Each variable x that occurs in the subject position of a triple in
>         BGP is such that sk(μ(x)) occurs in sk(SG).
>    Proposed C2:
>    (C2) For each variable x in V(BGP), sk(μ(x)) occurs in sk(SG) or in
>         Vocab.
>    Here vocal is defined as the reserved vocabulary for the entailment
>    regime (e.g., the RDF vocabulary for RDF entailment) minus terms of the
>    form rdf:_n with n in {1, 2, …}.
> * RIF issues
>  o Will/should RIF be marked as "at risk" depending on the RIF WG note
>    about the RIF-to-RDF mapping? What is the status of the RIF to RDF
>    mapping? Will there be something like rif:import?
>  o Entailment regimes have to define which graphs the accept. Will the RIF
>    entailment regime work with all RDF graphs? Different lists in RDF and
>    RIF?
>  o Will each rule set be an entailment regime, e.g., the SD says something
>    like: myEndpoint sd:EntailmentRegime <http://example.org/myRules.rif>?
>    Or is there a suitable RIF entailment relation (RIF+RDF semantics) and
>    one specifies a rule set in a from clause or in the data set? Which RIF
>    profiles does that cover? This might affect the condition on extensions
>    to BGP matching that requires that
>    SG E-entails (SG union P1(BGP1) union ... union Pn(BGPn))
>  o How are blank nodes defined in RIF? Will skolemization/mapping to RIF
>    local symbols work as for the other regimes?
>  o Not all RIF dialects are based on a model-theory (e.g., RIF PRD), so
>    they do not come with an entailment relation, but have a procedural
>    semantics. Can we still use the procedural semantics to define
>    something like an entailment regime?
>  o Which RIF profiles should be included? Only RIF Core? Does RIF Core
>    coincide with OWL RDF-Based or Direct Semantics? How many profiles are
>    there?
>  o What effects do the non-monotonic features of some RIF dialects have?
>    E.g., RIF PRD and (anticipated) RIF dialects with default negation.
>    How does that interact with SPARQL's non-monotonic features?
>    This probably affects issue-43: Should entailment-regimes be declared
>    over the whole dataset or individual graphs?
>  o RIF production rules: it is no even clear how conjunctive queries work.
>  o What is our timeline for RIF?
> --
> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
> Computing Laboratory
> Parks Road
> Oxford
> OX1 3QD
> United Kingdom
> +44 (0)1865 283529

Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
Computing Laboratory
Parks Road
United Kingdom
+44 (0)1865 283529
Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2010 17:51:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:59 UTC