- 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