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

Agenda for today in 2 hours

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:08:22 -0500
Message-ID: <4B964846.5000105@thefigtrees.net>
To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Again, apologies for the delay.

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-03-09

     *  Date of Call: Tuesday March 09, 2010
     * Time of Call: 15:00 UK, 10:00 (East US)
     * Dial-In #: +1.617.761.6200 (Cambridge, MA)
     * Dial-In #: +33.4.89.06.34.99 (Nice, France)
     * Dial-In #: +44.117.370.6152 (Bristol, UK)
     * Participant Access Code: 77277# (SPARQ)
     * IRC Channel: irc.w3.org port 6665 channel #sparql 
([irc:irc.w3.org:6665/sparql])
     * Web-based IRC (member-only): http://www.w3.org/2001/01/cgi-irc 
(Firefox IRC addon: chatzilla)
     * Duration: 60 minutes
     * Chair: Lee Feigenbaum
     * Scribe: Souri (Scribe List)
     * Link to Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Agenda-2010-03-09

[edit] Agenda

     * Admin
           o PROPOSED: Approve minutes at 
http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2010-03-02
           o Next meeting: 2010-03-16 @ 14:00 UK / 10:00 EST (scribe: 
Matt) - NOTE ONE HOUR EARLIER THAN USUAL OUTSIDE OF THE US
     * Comment handling - see http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments
     * Liaisons - Is there anything to report of relevance to the SPARQL WG?
           o RIF WG (Sandro)
           o RDB2RDF WG (Orri)
           o eGov (Sandro)
     * Update - open issues
           o ISSUE-51 Shall dataset clauses be allowed in SPARQL/Update?
                 + See Lee's message at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0165.html 
and surrounding thread & links
           o Blank nodes in DELETE
                 + See 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0428.html 
& surrounding thread
                 + Decide between two proposals:
                       # 1. No blank nodes in DELETE template
                       # 2. Blank nodes in DELETE templates act as "wild 
cards"--effectively variables pre-bound to all RDF terms
     * Protocol - open issues
           o Dataset for update - currently the spec allows a dataset to 
be defined for an update operation. This needs to be brought in line 
with the Update specification.
                 + This probably follows pretty directly from the 
resolution of the update dataset operation.
           o Update fault types - what faults should be defined for update?
                 + See Andy's message of 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2010JanMar/0432.html 
-- Does it even make sense to have more than 2 faults when the protocol 
is mainly bound to HTTP?
                       # MalformedUpdate (a la query)
                       # UpdateRequestRefused (a la query)
                       # GraphDoesNotExist
                       # GraphAlreadyExists
     * To Last Call
           o HTTP Update Protocol (next week?)
           o Property Paths (next week?)
           o Query
           o Entailment

[edit] Regrets

     * Chimezie
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 13:08:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:41 GMT