- From: Simon Raboczi <raboczi@tucanatech.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:03:51 +1000
- To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
On 23/10/2004, at 4:19, Dan Connolly wrote: > http://www.w3.org/2004/10/19-dawg-irc > > If we don't get a record better than that for > last week's telcon by the time I do the agenda > Monday morning, I'm likely to just use the IRC log. > > (Simon, poke poke, again.) Shamefacedly and much belatedly, I offer the following: Minutes of RDF Data Access Working Group (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/) teleconference for Tuesday 2004-10-19T14:30:00Z, for review. Supplementary chat log from irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg available at http://www.w3.org/2004/10/19-dawg-irc Scribe: Simon Raboczi 1. Convene, take roll, review record and agenda roll call Present: Tom Adams Dave Beckett Kendall Clark Dan Connolly Yoshio Fukushige Steve Harris Pat Hayes Eric Prud'hommeaux Simon Raboczi Alberto Reggiori Hiroyuki Sato Andy Seaborne Regrets: Jos De Roo Howard Katz Farrukh Najmi PROPOSED: to accept minutes for 10-12-2004 meeting http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0132.html as a true record of our meeting 2004-10-12 RESOLVED to adopt http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0132.htm with two amendments: 1) the re-addition of Kendall's ACTION to produce a protocol draft 2) Alberto's amendments from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/ 0143.html next meeting: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 Tom Adams tentatively volunteers to scribe, with Alberto Reggiori as backup. Sundry ACTIONs not warranting their own agenda: ACTION KendallC: expose walking tour data to SPARQL querying clients CONTINUES without discussion, 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. EricP responds in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0144.html with: 28 February - 4 March 2005 (Monday - Friday) meetings Monday/Tuesday 28 Feb-1 March and Thursday/Friday 3-4 March Hyatt Harborside Hotel http://www.harborside.hyatt.com/property/index.jhtml Boston, MA, USA ACTION DanC: talk with Kendall about issues list maintenance DONE. 2. Publication of SPARQL design and Data Access UC&R Thanks offered to EricP, AndyS, Kendall and all. SPARQL Query Language for RDF http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20041012/ RDF Data Access Use Cases and Requirements http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-rdf-dawg-uc-20041012/ AndyS suggests another WD circa December, before the January meeting. EricP: W3C December holidays publishing moritorium: last request on 20-Dec, last pub: 22-Dec 3. Feedback on the SPARQL design [Fwd: Coments on first working draft of SPARQL] Seaborne, Andy (Sunday, 17 October) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0130.html and a few others. Peter Patel-Schneider commented that "bound" is something procedural -- AndyS to discuss in email. Peter P-S raised an issue about the definition of subgraph. DanC suggests asking for a test case to clarify the subgraph issue. ACTION: PatH review SPARQL def'ns post-publication CONTINUES ACTION Dirk: provide details about DB interfaces, re '?' and '$' CONTINUES for one more week -- proposed to drop if no progress by then To what extent are these issues addressed by the 2004-Oct-12 drafts? ACTION AlbertoR: owns issue 'DESCRIBE' AlbertoR hasn't gone through the draft yet to be able to determine whether the DESCRIBE issue is addressed by the 12Oct draft. AlbertoR expects he'll take 2-3 weeks to get to it. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#describe AndyS believes that there is more work to be done on DESCRIBE. AndyS intends to post to the list. AndyS would like the retract the CBD suggestion in section 11.3 of the WD because CBD is still fluid. ACTION SteveH: own (i.e. propose resolution to) disjunction issue SteveH on disjunction: he's currently only happy with removing disjunction. patH: Disjunction is logically troublesome unless stated veeeery carefully. AndyS is inclined to re-include disjunction. ACTION SteveH: owns issue 'nested optionals' DaveB: end of section 5 has a nested optional example ACTION: Tom to send sample iTQL queries and result formats for subqueries vs. disjunction DONE http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/ 0148.html ACTION DanC: owner of issue 'yes or no questions' http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#ask DanC said he's satisfied with the current spec, however Kendall doesn't feel the current ASK definition is satisfactory. Eric proposed that this will be best handled with a protocol document on the table next to the query lang. Kendall asserted the the present SPARQL ql draft satisfied him re: PREFIX, which he was issue owner of. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#prefixSyntax DaveB however then raised issues with prefix: prefix can current appear in two places in the grammar according to the production Query ::= PrefixDecl* ReportFormat PrefixDecl* and it's not specified in which order repeated instances override each other. DaveB took an ACTION to illustrate prefix interaction details by example/test DanC requests for all to be ready to resolve next week the PREFIX issue. AndyS has done writing on value testing which he'd like to get comments upon. AndyS is inclined to drop the UNSAID feature, based on it being procedural. Kendall and SimonR both have uses within their respective organizations for UNSAID and were reluctant to see it dropped. 4. Web Services Constraints and Capabilities ACTION EricP: draft UC on overlap between RDF query and web service constraints with respect to WS-Policy CONTINUES http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0145.html http://www.w3.org/2004/08/20-ws-pol-pos/#query DaveB requested a summary of the WS requirements (e.g. conjunction now, disjunction eventually), which Eric agreed to supply. Eric noted that neither policies not capabilities are expressed in RDF. 5. SOURCE ACTION: SteveH to turn his SOURCE tests into SPARQL ones dawg-source-simple-* Steve Harris (Friday, 15 October) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2004OctDec/0124.html 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. DanC assessed that we have progress on SOURCE tests, but there's still haggling in progress on the actual definition. DaveB noted that the current syntax contains all the syntax for named containers. DanC asks whether the various different designs for SOURCE are indeed equivalent or not? SteveH replied negatively, that he can produce a test case that would behave differently between his implementation and AndyS's. SteveH: Andy and I disagree about http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/#dawg-source-simple-001 Discussion continued on until after the meeting about whether the current behavior in the tests was tenable (i.e. that returning duplicate rows in a result is different from a result with just one copy of the same row) Meeting adjourned at 15:38:00Z. Recapping, for next time: - Dan wants us to be able to resolve PREFIX at the next teleconference. - Andy wants feedback on his value testing material.
Received on Monday, 25 October 2004 16:31:14 UTC