W3C RDF Core Working Group IRC Chat Logs for 2002-09-20

13:00:04 Users on #rdfcore: @logger_1

13:51:17 <AaronSw> zakim, this will be rdfc

13:51:18 <Zakim> ok, AaronSw

13:55:10 <bwm> G'day Aaron

13:56:20 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM matches both rdfco and rdfc

13:57:22 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM matches both rdfco and rdfc

13:59:14 <DaveB> we've dialed in

13:59:28 <danb_lap> zakim, this is rdf_Core

13:59:29 <Zakim> sorry, danb_lap, I do not see a conference named 'rdf_Core'

13:59:40 <danb_lap> zakim, this will be RDFCore

13:59:41 <Zakim> ok, danb_lap, I see SW_RDFCore()10:00AM already started

13:59:50 <danb_lap> zakim, who is here?

13:59:51 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ??P1, ??P2

13:59:52 <Zakim> On IRC I see danb_lap, Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, bwm, logger_1

14:00:09 <danb_lap> zakim, ??P2 is Steve

14:00:10 <Zakim> +Steve; got it

14:00:21 <danb_lap> zakim, ??P1 is ILRT

14:00:22 <Zakim> +ILRT; got it

14:00:31 <danb_lap> zakim, ILRT holds bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:00:32 <Zakim> +Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri; got it

14:00:38 <danb_lap> zakim, who is here?

14:00:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve

14:00:39 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:00:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see danb_lap, Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, bwm, logger_1

14:01:19 <AaronSw> odd. My phone is refusing to turn on

14:01:41 <Zakim> +??P5

14:02:06 <Zakim> + +1.850.202.aaaa - is perhaps PatH?

14:02:08 <danb_lap> zakim, ??P5 is PatrickS

14:02:09 <Zakim> +PatrickS; got it

14:02:24 <danb_lap> Zakim, who is here?

14:02:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve, PatrickS, PatH?

14:02:25 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:02:26 <Zakim> On IRC I see DanC, danb_lap, Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, bwm, logger_1

14:02:27 <DanC> agenda + 19Sep http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0182.html

14:02:28 * Zakim notes agendum 1 added

14:02:34 <Zakim> +??P7

14:02:46 <danb_lap> zakim, PatH? is PatH

14:02:47 <Zakim> +PatH; got it

14:02:56 <danb_lap> zakim, ??P7 is Graham

14:02:57 <Zakim> +Graham; got it

14:03:01 <AaronSw> Zakim, what's your phone number

14:03:02 <Zakim> I don't understand 'what's your phone number', AaronSw. Try /msg Zakim help

14:03:31 <Zakim> +AaronSw

14:05:06 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean

14:05:21 <Zakim> +??P10

14:05:28 <jjc> Zakim, ??P10 is Jeremy.

14:05:30 <Zakim> +Jeremy.; got it

14:05:31 <AaronSw> zakim, ??P10 is jjc

14:05:32 <Zakim> sorry, AaronSw, I do not recognize a party named '??P10'

14:05:37 * DanC is having trouble dialing in

14:05:59 <jjc> Zakim, who is on the call?

14:06:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve, PatrickS, PatH, Graham, AaronSw, Mike_Dean, Jeremy.

14:06:01 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:06:06 <danb_lap> zakim, ??P10 is jjc

14:06:07 <Zakim> sorry, danb_lap, I do not recognize a party named '??P10'

14:06:13 <Zakim> +DanC

14:06:23 <danb_lap> ah; zakim already knew.

14:06:33 <jjc> jjc is now known as jjcscribe

14:07:10 <danb_lap> === RDFCore 2002-09-20 agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Sep/0182.html

14:07:17 <DanC> Zakim, pick a victim

14:07:18 * danb_lap tries to change /topic, fails

14:07:18 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose PatH

14:07:29 <DanC> Zakim, pick a victim

14:07:30 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Graham

14:07:36 <DanC> Zakim, pick a victim

14:07:37 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose PatrickS

14:07:40 <DanC> Zakim, pick a victim

14:07:41 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Bwm

14:08:02 * DanC thought he heard danbri volunteer

14:08:05 <DanC> Zakim, pick a victim

14:08:06 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Jeremy.

14:08:07 * danb_lap didn't

14:08:18 <jjcscribe> Scribe next week: Graham - but might send regrets.

14:08:36 <jjcscribe> Agenda review:

14:08:46 <jjcscribe> Regrets: Jos, EricM

14:09:03 <jjcscribe> Agenda OK, telecon OK

14:09:08 <Zakim> +??P11

14:09:13 <jjcscribe> minutes approved

14:09:19 <danb_lap> zakim, ??P11 is Sergey

14:09:20 <jjcscribe> Zakim, ?p11 is sergey.

14:09:20 <Zakim> +Sergey; got it

14:09:21 <Zakim> sorry, jjcscribe, I do not recognize a party named '?p11'

14:09:38 <jjcscribe> complete actions ok.

14:10:19 <jjcscribe> (ACTION7 went to ACTION7A)

14:11:15 <jjcscribe> namespaces: DanC "namespace is a collection of names"

14:12:46 <gk> Jeremy points out that RDF abstract model uses URIs only, not namespaces

14:12:48 <jjcscribe> jeremy: we don't use the namespace abstract model

14:12:57 <jjcscribe> danc; we can't see their abstract model

14:13:07 <jjcscribe> agendum: semantics of untyped literals

14:13:38 <jjcscribe>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2002Sep/0011.html

14:13:44 <jjcscribe> was the namespaces uri

14:14:00 <DanC> Zakim, who's on the phone?

14:14:04 <danb_lap> zakim, who is on the phone?

14:14:04 <jjcscribe> bwm: lets go to straw poll.

14:14:05 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve, PatrickS (muted), PatH, Graham, AaronSw, Mike_Dean, Jeremy., DanC, Sergey

14:14:09 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:14:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve, PatrickS (muted), PatH, Graham, AaronSw, Mike_Dean, Jeremy., DanC, Sergey

14:14:17 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:14:25 <jjcscribe> tidy vs untidy

14:14:41 * AaronSw wonders if who's speaking could be used to do a "press 1 now to vote for tidy" thing

14:15:49 <DanC> poll: U A A T A U T U T U U T A

14:16:02 <DanC> poll: U A A T A U T U T U U T A

14:16:24 * DanC doesn't see much consensus

14:16:27 <jjcscribe> 5 to 4 in favour of untidy with 4 abstentions

14:16:42 <AaronSw> steve: tidy

14:17:00 <AaronSw> daveb: i've implemented tidy, but can see advantages of other

14:17:02 <AaronSw> bwm: you're abstaining

14:17:33 <AaronSw> sergey: i see tidy conceptually but think we'd do untidy if we do it right [?]

14:17:54 * gk Can we decide to not decide?

14:18:12 <AaronSw> jang: patricks compelling, could live with either, existing imps like tidy... what sergey says

14:18:19 * DanC thinks that's another way to do the poll: ask each person for (a) their preference, (b) anything they cannot live with

14:18:20 <AaronSw> bwm: that's an untidy

14:18:24 <jjcscribe> q+

14:18:26 * Zakim sees Jjcscribe on the speaker queue

14:18:34 * AaronSw thinks danc's proposal sounds like condorcet

14:18:45 <danb_lap> what's condorcet?

14:19:10 <AaronSw> the objectively best voting system. each voter ranks the things they can live with in order of preference

14:19:22 <AaronSw> and then you just run off each option to see who likes it best

14:20:01 <DanC> huh? what syntax would one use for a bnode for the type of a literal?

14:20:06 <jjcscribe> PatH: we could allow bnodes as datatype, and then we get both tidy and untidy

14:20:27 <gk> q+ to say in response to Pat that bnode datatypes sounds rather like untidy option

14:20:28 <AaronSw> DanC, _:b"foo" has been discussed

14:20:29 * Zakim sees Jjcscribe, Gk on the speaker queue

14:20:37 <AaronSw> oh, did you mean in rdf/xml

14:20:43 <DanC> yeah in rdf/xml

14:22:02 <AaronSw> pat: we could put datatype matching in the query system, not rdf

14:22:03 <AaronSw> +1

14:22:04 * Zakim wonders where 1 is

14:22:19 <DanC> er... if the app assumes something contrary to the spec, it's busted.

14:22:19 <AaronSw> patrick: then we have different stuff at different levels

14:22:49 <DanC> have we heard from Adobe on this matter?

14:22:55 <bwm> no

14:23:29 * DanC would like the chair to collect "can't live with" data

14:23:35 <DanC> Zakim, who's talking?

14:23:44 <bwm> getting there

14:23:46 <Zakim> DanC, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: FrankM (64%), ILRT (95%), PatrickS (53%), PatH (4%), Jeremy. (50%)

14:23:55 <AaronSw> danbri: dublin core won't break if we go tidy

14:24:01 <AaronSw> pat: point about adobe well taken

14:24:05 <jjcscribe> zakim, mute Jeremy.

14:24:07 <Zakim> Jeremy. should now be muted

14:24:24 <bwm> ack jjc

14:24:25 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

14:24:26 <jjcscribe> zakim, unmute jeremy

14:24:27 <Zakim> Jeremy. should no longer be muted

14:24:40 <AaronSw> ack jer

14:24:41 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

14:24:48 <DanC> pls let the record show that we haven't heard from adobe, and that danbri doesn't think we can conclude much about their implementation.

14:25:09 <danb_lap> Yes, JJC pls ack that for the minutes.

14:25:52 <jjcscribe> jack

14:25:58 <AaronSw> jjc: i'm prepared to switch sides to make a decision

14:25:59 <AaronSw> ( ^ sounds like we should collect live-with data)

14:26:07 <danb_lap> also that RDFS never was a REC, while M+S was; my three M+S implementations break if we go Untidy; my draft RDF Schemas don't if we go tidy.

14:26:07 <jjcscribe> jjc - I am happy to change sides to make a decision

14:26:09 <DanC> er... are we having a design session? or are we deciding between two already-specified alternatives?

14:26:34 <danb_lap> DanC, are you on the call or just irc?

14:26:38 <DanC> I'm on the phone

14:26:41 <gk> q-

14:26:42 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:27:51 <gk> q+ to say I don't think Pat's solution helps, but I am prepared to change to make a decision

14:27:52 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

14:28:03 * DanC notes danbri's out of order; the chair asked if anybody had changed sides

14:28:27 <danb_lap> No, he asked if they'd changed views.

14:28:35 <jjcscribe> mike: please clarify?

14:28:49 <jjcscribe> mike: global typing in pat's proposal

14:28:51 <AaronSw> danbri: untidy seems cleaner, but tidy is more practical since we don't have the time to design untidy

14:29:46 <jjcscribe> pat: one response to my proposal was "very nice but doesn't work in xml"

14:29:48 <bwm> ack gk

14:29:50 <Zakim> Gk, you wanted to say I don't think Pat's solution helps, but I am prepared to change to make a decision

14:29:51 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:29:55 <danb_lap> [call-process] Folks, we're hearing a lot of noise, echo. Can people try muting themselves locally or w/ Zakim unless talking?

14:30:04 <jjcscribe> zakim, mute jeremy.

14:30:05 <Zakim> Jeremy. should now be muted

14:30:23 <jjcscribe> gk: it comes down to what we are doing now.

14:30:35 <jjcscribe> last lineis wrong

14:30:54 <jjcscribe> gk: it comes down to what are we going to do with the RDF that is already out there.

14:31:09 * DanC wonders who's in the busy room?

14:31:21 <jjcscribe> zakim, who is talking?

14:31:21 <AaronSw> patricks is on a boat

14:31:33 <bwm> zakim, who is on the phone?

14:31:33 <Zakim> jjcscribe, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: FrankM (55%), ILRT (70%), AaronSw (4%)

14:31:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve, PatrickS (muted), PatH, Graham, AaronSw, Mike_Dean, Jeremy. (muted), DanC, Sergey

14:31:36 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:32:31 <jjcscribe> zakim, unmute jeremy.

14:32:32 <Zakim> Jeremy. should no longer be muted

14:32:51 * danb_lap hears strange b/g noise (sratching...)

14:32:58 <jjcscribe> zakim, mute jeremy.

14:32:59 <Zakim> Jeremy. should now be muted

14:34:05 <DanC> poll tidy/untidy: U T U U T U T U T T U A U

14:34:07 <AaronSw> U T U~ U T U T U T T U A U

14:34:29 <jjcscribe> DanC can't live with Untidy.

14:34:53 <jjcscribe> DanBri can't live with.

14:34:58 * DanC didn't hear the chair as for a speech

14:35:03 <jjcscribe> (Dan2 both w3c)

14:35:09 <jjcscribe> Patrick can't live with tidy

14:35:10 <danb_lap> I said that I could't; DanC noted that objections are per-Org

14:36:22 <sergey> +q

14:36:23 * Zakim wonders where q is

14:36:46 <sergey> q+

14:36:47 * Zakim sees Sergey on the speaker queue

14:38:33 * DanC asks that the chair either put the question or move on to the next agendum

14:38:44 <Zakim> -AaronSw

14:39:23 <jjcscribe> bwm: i don't know any implementations that have implemented untidy

14:39:52 * DanC asks that the chair ask folks not to point out, again, things they've pointed out N times already

14:39:53 <gk> How many implementations have included entailment?

14:40:09 <danb_lap> (aside) hmm, http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/fig9.gif seems to illustrate Tidy quite graphically.

14:40:50 <Zakim> +AaronSw

14:40:56 <jjcscribe> (aside) that's muddled with reifiication

14:41:03 <danb_lap> (indeed)

14:42:07 <jjcscribe> danbri: schema never reached rec, M&S did.

14:42:09 * DanC q+ to make a point of order: either put the question or let's please move on to the next agendum

14:42:10 * Zakim sees Sergey, DanC on the speaker queue

14:42:59 <jjcscribe> jan: i would implement untidy the way that Pat described tidy

14:43:13 <bwm> ack sergey

14:43:14 * Zakim sees DanC on the speaker queue

14:43:20 <bwm> ack danc

14:43:21 <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to make a point of order: either put the question or let's please move on to the next agendum

14:43:22 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:43:27 <jjcscribe> sergey: introduce a new node with identity

14:43:51 <bwm> zakim, who is here?

14:43:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, Steve, PatrickS, PatH, Graham, Mike_Dean, Jeremy. (muted), DanC, Sergey, AaronSw

14:43:53 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

14:43:54 <Zakim> On IRC I see sergey, mdean, jjcscribe, gk, DanC, danb_lap, Zakim, AaronSw, DaveB, bwm, logger_1

14:44:06 <bwm> <age>10</age>

14:44:08 <danb_lap> (baby b/g noise)

14:44:11 <jjcscribe> Chair: non-datatyped literals tidy or untidy.

14:44:55 <jjcscribe> The question: where you have an rdf;descipriton element containing a property element of <age>10</age> is that tidy or untidy.

14:45:27 <jjcscribe> DanC: this is two options and you are going to take a majority?

14:45:32 <jjcscribe> Frank: untidy.

14:45:38 <DanC> in the XML WGs, the chair could only put yes/no questions.

14:45:52 <jjcscribe> ILRT Dave, Jan: tidy

14:45:58 <jjcscribe> Steve: tidy

14:46:05 <jjcscribe> PatrickS: untidy

14:46:21 <jjcscribe> Pat: tidy

14:46:25 <DanC> abstentions are in order, btw.

14:46:31 <jjcscribe> Graham: untidy

14:46:34 <jjcscribe> Mike: untidy

14:46:40 <jjcscribe> Jeremny: untidy

14:46:53 <jjcscribe> Zakim, unmute Jeremy

14:46:54 <Zakim> Jeremy. should no longer be muted

14:46:55 <jjcscribe> .

14:47:03 <jjcscribe> DanC, tidy.

14:47:09 <jjcscribe> Sergey, tidy.

14:47:17 <jjcscribe> Aaron, tidy.

14:47:24 <jjcscribe> Sergey, untidy (correction)

14:48:03 <jjcscribe> Vote: untidy 7, tidy 5.

14:48:11 <jjcscribe> DECIDED: untidy semantics.

14:48:22 <jjcscribe> DanC has outstanding dissent.

14:48:31 <danb_lap> (...for untyped literals)

14:48:38 <jjcscribe> (mistake) Vote: 6 to 5

14:50:35 <gk> Agendum 9.

14:50:37 <DanC> er... any actions resulting from the datatyping decision? I guess the editors already have relevant actions?

14:50:47 <bwm> yes

14:50:50 <gk> Document issue: http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/DocIssues/RDF-Concepts/009-DatatypingSyntax.html

14:51:44 <jjcscribe> Question about xml:lang on typed literals

14:51:50 <Zakim> -AaronSw

14:51:53 <jjcscribe> DanC: literals are unions

14:52:09 <jjcscribe> DanC: integers don't have langs, plain strings don't have langs

14:53:08 <jjcscribe> Jeremy: xml:lang="en" xsd:string="foo" the lang is lost

14:53:14 <jjcscribe> Patrcik: I have problems with that

14:53:22 <gk> q+ to say I think M&S does have language on string (non-XML) literals

14:53:23 * Zakim sees Gk on the speaker queue

14:54:00 <DanC> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">knob</rdfs> <- that has a lang thingy, no?

14:54:11 <jjcscribe> Patrick: we have deployed code that relies on the language tagging

14:54:16 <DaveB> yes, but patrickS is discussing a datatyped literal

14:54:34 <DaveB> <foo:bar rdf:datatype="uri of something">blah</>

14:54:35 <DanC> er... yeah, if you have a datatyped string, no langy.

14:54:40 <DaveB> he says he needs it

14:54:48 <bwm> ack gk

14:54:49 <Zakim> Gk, you wanted to say I think M&S does have language on string (non-XML) literals

14:54:50 * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue

14:55:01 <jjcscribe> PatH: the lang component can be in the graph and the l2v mapping just pulls out the string

14:55:10 <gk> <rdf:li xml:lang="en">The Coolest Web Page</rdf:li>

14:55:11 <gk> <rdf:li xml:lang="it">Il Pagio di Web Fuba</rdf:li>

14:55:42 <gk> M&S example from sect 7.2

14:55:56 <jjcscribe> jeremy to circulate draft

14:56:09 <jjcscribe> next agendum: changes to MT

14:56:51 <jjcscribe> PatH I am not very sure at the moment

14:57:16 <jjcscribe> This things are visible in tests

14:57:36 <jjcscribe> ACTION jjc Produce test case domaina nd range.

14:58:06 <jjcscribe> agendum 11:

14:58:14 <jjcscribe> gk: I have an action

14:58:25 <jjcscribe> danC: let's keep it omn the agenda for next week.

14:59:06 <Zakim> -Steve

14:59:07 <jjcscribe> ACTION gk Post references to his previous actions on "assertion"

14:59:13 <DanC> note that the concepts issues list doesn't have the same status as the WG issues list.

14:59:17 <jjcscribe> meeting closes

14:59:19 <Zakim> -Sergey

14:59:20 <Zakim> -PatH

14:59:35 <jjcscribe> Zakim, who's on the phone?

14:59:36 <Zakim> On the phone I see FrankM, ILRT, PatrickS (muted), Graham, Mike_Dean (muted), Jeremy., DanC

14:59:38 <Zakim> ILRT has Bwm, DaveB, JanG, DanBri

15:06:23 <jjcscribe> REQUEST jan (from danc) please do datatype test case (literal to bnode)

15:07:17 <jjcscribe> test case showing CC/PP and RDF agreemnt

15:11:15 <Zakim> -Jeremy.

15:20:44 <Zakim> -PatrickS

15:20:49 <Zakim> -ILRT

15:20:50 <Zakim> -Graham

15:20:51 <Zakim> -DanC

15:20:52 <Zakim> -FrankM

15:49:35 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean

15:49:37 <Zakim> SW_RDFCore()10:00AM has ended