Minutes: XDI TC Telecon Thursday 1-2:00PM PT 2010-12-23

[Drummond Reed <drummond.reed@xdi.org>]

Following are the minutes of the unofficial telecon of the XDI TC at:

Date:  Thursday, 23 December 2010 USA
Time:  1:00PM - 2:30PM Pacific Time (21:00-22:30 UTC)

ATTENDING

Drummond Reed 
Michael Schwartz 
Giovanni Bartolomeo 
Joseph Boyle 
Markus Sabadello 
Kaliya Hamlin

GUESTS

Jay Glasgow

REGRETS

Bill Barnhill (vacation)


THE GOTOMEETING FOR TODAY IS:
     https://www2.gotomeeting.com/join/969244355

THE IDEARPAD LINK FOR TODAY IS:
     http://xdi.idearpad.org/16


1) CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF XDI GRAPH PATTERNS

The topic for the call is continuing discussion of the patterns on:

  http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/XdiGraphPatterns

Giovanni has posted several additional patterns, and Drummond will post more comments tomorrow before the call.

We began by focusing on the Single Valued Pattern graph and the difference between the left and right graphs. Mike asked that since the graph on the left has fewer nodes, is there any reason not to use it? Giovanni said that it is okay to use it since it there is no semantic inconsistency problem. However he felt it is important to understand the differences in semantics between the two graphs.

Giovanni drew illustrations of the two different options (the left and right graphs) and gave an explanation of why he prefers the ability to model a property of a property using a context node. 

We also discussed how this same set of choices is faced in the multi-valued property pattern.

We had a long discussion of the pros and cons of the two approaches. Almost everyone in attendance was active in the discussion so we did not take detailed notes, but some of the key points that were made include:

 * Both the left graph (that uses the subject/+property+subproperty pattern) and the right graph (that uses the subject+property/+subproperty pattern) offer some advantages.
 * There is a third option, suggested by Joseph, of using a property context node (e.g., =abc+age) as the source of both an arc for the property value (e.g., =abc+age/!) and for the property value metadata, such as a datestamp (e.g., =abc+age/$d).
 * Having a standard pattern that applies to both single-valued predicates and multi-valued predicates would be prefered by many TC members. Mike made the point that the difference between single-valued and multi-valued predicates in LDAP is not very helpful.
 * Drummond pointed out that all the patterns need to be analyzed by their ability to support the versioning pattern, which is not yet illustrated in the set of patterns on the page.

# ACTION: ALL TC MEMBERS to work on a consolidated proposal to see if we can combine the suggestions from all of these proposals into a single set of patterns that will work for all of these common use cases.


2) PLANNED UPDATE TO XDI MODEL DOC

Drummond said he plans to draft between this call and our next call in two weeks an update to the XDI Model doc that uses the new diagrams and patterns we are developing.


3) GIOVANNI'S XRI/URI EQUIVALENCE DOCUMENT

Giovanni posted a short document on XRI/URI equivalence. See:

  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/201012/msg00025.html

TC members are encouraged to look it over and we will put it on the agenda for the next call.


4) NEXT CALL

Due to the holidays, we will NOT have a call next week. The next call will be Thursday January 6 2011.

Happy Holidays!


------------
ONGOING ISSUES LIST

Each of these is a candidate for the agenda for future calls.

* PROPOSED CONSTRUCTS/OPERATORS FOR XDI

Discuss the following wiki page originally posted by Giovanni:

  http://wiki.oasis-open.org/xdi/XdiNewFoundation

* DICTIONARY STRUCTURE

Mike would like an example of the PDX dictionary as soon as we can do it.

*   EQUIVALENCE SEMANTICS

Close on whether we need an additional $ word   that is the equivalent
of Higgins Personal Data Model (PDM)  semantics   of h:correlation,
which is not as strong as $is.

      http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/201006/msg00036.html

* COOL URIS

Continue previous discussion about the use of standard RDF URIs in XDI:

  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xdi/201006/msg00023.html