00:41:55 logster has joined #swhack 00:41:55 topic is: rdf:value a :Joke . 00:41:55 Users on #swhack: logster tav AaronSw deltab tav` 00:42:05 hmmph, where's xena 00:47:31 [GlobalNotice] Hello everyone. We're going to be freezing the services database at around 4AM UTC (In about three hours and 15 minutes). Services will go down for a few minutes and will come back online soon after. All changes to NickServ and ChanServ registrations from then on will be lost. Drop by in #openprojects if you have any questions. 01:04:14 sbp has joined #swhack 01:05:55 hi there 01:06:00 Hi Aaron 01:06:06 Did you have a nice Saturday? 01:06:14 Yes, how about you? 01:06:18 I just sent a rant about XHTML 2.0: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/wai-tech-comments/2001Sep/0024 01:06:25 it was alright 01:07:28 Keyboards should have smiley buttons! :-) 01:07:35 :-) 01:08:13 * sbp listens to "I'm Gonna Crawl" at very low volume, being 2:09AM 01:08:29 I'm trying to think of the word for gift economy... I thoug it was agorics, but that doesn't seem right. It's used more to describe creating a market-based system for computing resources. 01:09:10 how about just doing a Germanism, and having "gifteconomy" 01:09:22 :-) 01:09:39 or invent a word. That would be cool too 01:09:54 I distinctly remember it being ago-something... perhaps my memory is corrupted again. :-( 01:10:15 * AaronSw apologizes in advance for having led tav astray... 01:10:47 agouti? 01:10:56 a small rabbit like creature from South America 01:11:00 :-) 01:11:12 no... don't think that was it ;-) 01:11:24 There aren't many words that start with "ago" 01:11:36 ago-go 01:11:37 it's in my meail somewhere, but I haven't coppied over the archives far enough to get at it. :-( 01:11:46 blargh 01:11:55 it had a domain name... so netcraft should find it 01:11:55 tried the Web? 01:12:07 yeah... 01:15:21 hmm 01:16:11 Pfffff... how can "deeley" not be in the dictionary? http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=deeley 01:16:57 heh 01:17:32 it's outrageous 01:18:12 Ooh, a new Sean-coinage: 01:18:13 "that are erndered visually is their aspect ratios" 01:18:36 Hmm... only one page on Google has both the words "deeley" and "doohickey" on it 01:18:46 yeah, I messed that up a bit 01:18:56 I meant "rendered" or something 01:19:00 google: Yours? 01:19:11 how *did* you guess? :-) 01:19:17 http://www.google.com/search?q=deeley+doohickey&hl=en 01:19:23 Well, now we have two ;-) 01:19:34 two what? 01:19:41 two pages with both those words 01:19:50 but not two pages on Google! 01:19:59 give it some time! 01:20:05 O.K.! 01:20:14 He he he 01:20:31 Google probably updates the archives of this channel pretty regularly... 01:20:51 Are they in there at all? 01:22:20 Hmm, you're right! They aren't. 01:22:23 We must remedy this... 01:22:24 thought not 01:22:55 I'll point to it from my website, that'll give them authority. 01:23:51 Why don't you just enter it in their Add URL form deeley? 01:23:58 I'll do that too. 01:25:38 where's googler gone? 01:25:54 I figured xena replaced it. 01:25:58 But now xena's gone... :-( 01:26:06 ... again 01:27:16 Gmgpmgpmgpmh 01:28:20 acronyms: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=RDF+N3+URI+XML+XHTML+SW+DAML+CSS+CWM 01:29:27 wow: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Semantic+Web%22&hl=en&start=10&sa=N 01:29:44 swintro has gradually risen to the top of the second page for "Semantic Web" 01:30:28 wow 01:30:45 It'll be above the SW homepage soon! Maybe not 01:31:59 Ooh, I redesigned SBP SWAD! I have to upload it... 01:32:08 swintro: Perhaps it's just the after effects of dave pointing to it? 01:33:05 I don't think Google 01:33:10 's picked up on that yet 01:33:21 It says that no page even links to swintro yet 01:33:23 ta da: http://infomesh.net/2001/05/sw/ 01:33:33 the links to thing is weird 01:34:30 What's that weird thing on the new SBP SWAD? 01:34:51 what weird thing? 01:34:59 the thing on the top 01:35:19 Um... it's a torn page: a scrap of paper 01:35:32 is it really that non-obvious? Eek 01:35:52 It looks like evil setting in over the page.. 01:36:27 Erm... is your screen on a weird setting or something? 01:38:18 No... I see what you mean -- it just looks weird. 01:38:39 Gmbrggmbmgm; I've got rid of it, Mr. Aaron "rip the fun out of anything" Swartz :-) 01:38:53 Ugh, and now the stylesheet doesn't work 01:39:03 * sbp mumbles som'ore 01:39:26 heh 01:39:36 There, that's better 01:41:09 * sbp does more barely audiable mumbling 01:42:19 Note that I put the befunge93 SW program on there 01:42:29 [[[ 01:42:29 Semantic Web: Befunge93 Programs 01:42:30 I wrote what may be the shortest and most obfuscated Semantic Web program to date:- 01:42:30 0v_^#-3:+1,,"> "< - 01:42:30 >"<" >,~:25#$*^ 01:42:30 >".",@^ _^#< 01:42:31 It takes in three URIs from user input, and outputs an NTriple. 01:42:33 ]]] 01:42:59 heh 01:45:00 * sbp thinks of a way in which he might make it shorter 01:45:07 hmm, the CSS hasn't updated... 01:46:42 Nah, I was wrong 01:46:46 hit refresh 01:46:51 46... hmm 01:47:06 LCF's are 2 and 23. Crap 01:47:18 59*1+ 01:47:41 heh, two characters longer 01:47:48 I still see: 01:47:48 background: url(back.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; 01:48:01 yeah, but I removed back.gif 01:48:13 well, pfff that's no good 01:48:33 Come on sbp, 404s! 01:48:36 * sbp comments that bit out too 01:48:53 and I've restored back.gif 01:48:55 That's better 01:50:40 crap, I thought I had another way to make it smaller then... 01:51:30 ooh! I may have it 01:52:37 er no... that didn't make it any shorter whatsoever. Duh 01:54:20 Befunge is so cool... 01:57:01 ah... I could turn it upside down 02:00:27 that didn't help much 02:00:32 0v >".",@v _v#< 02:00:32 >"<" >,~:25#$*v 02:00:32 ^_v#-3:+1,,"> "< - 02:02:10 aha! 02:02:47 v_^#-3:+1,,"> "< - 02:02:47 >"<" >,~:25#$*^ 02:02:47 >".",@^ _^#< 02:03:13 you don't need to put 0 in the stack, because it's there implicitly anyway. A quirk of Befunge 02:04:06 weird 02:05:09 not it's just 18x3 02:06:20 Ooh! I can duplicate the comma 02:06:37 No I can't... 02:11:31 the ^, $, and < need to align, so I don't think it can get any shorter 02:11:34 Gotta run 02:11:41 bye 02:14:35 sbp has quit 02:25:19 sbp has joined #swhack 02:25:37 I made it 15x3! 02:25:39 Hooray! 02:25:41 >"<" ,>~:25#$*v 02:25:43 |-3:+1,,"> "< - 02:25:45 >".",@v, _v#< 02:25:59 neat 02:26:06 thank you :-) 02:26:16 in multiple senses of the word :-) 02:26:26 :-) 02:26:34 I figured that I could use a vertical if, as long as I turned the program upside down 02:26:51 hehe 02:27:05 then I realised that it's a torus, and that instead of directing the pointer down and then along, I could just put that line at the top 02:27:21 and then I realised that if I duplicated a comma, I'd save another space 02:27:29 so that's three spaces I saved 02:30:57 it's a shame that there isn't a character that lets you pop two values as alpha 02:31:06 then I could compact the double comma 02:37:13 Hmm, it seems Mark Bernstein agrees with me about Bush's "war"...: 02:37:22 """I don't agree with most people. But I'm part of a small minority, a fringe, like the folks who thought Nixon wasn't a crook. 02:37:23 People are talking about wild things. Completely reconstructing the Middle East. Occupation. Nuclear weapons. """ 02:42:53 * sbp wonders if anyone has actually tried to draw a befunge93 program on a donut 02:44:49 Hmm... 02:46:15 >"<" ,>~:25#$*v 02:46:15 |-3:+1,,"> "< - 02:46:15 >".",@^ _v#< 02:46:17 works too 02:46:30 one less comma, but it's no smaller 02:47:07 this is like an obsession... 02:47:40 OK, I'm going to play Escape from Monkey Island -- c'yas later 02:47:44 try it: you'll find out just how frustrating it is to have spaces in a b93 program! 02:47:46 c'ya 02:49:57 Gotta run 02:52:57 sbp has quit 03:47:53 fwump 03:54:10 sbp has joined #swhack 03:54:25 hullo 03:58:31 HI 03:58:35 Hi even 03:58:37 Gotta run 03:59:03 That was quick. 04:01:37 sbp has quit 04:49:11 [GlobalNotice] Hi all. Services will be returning in a moment, accompanied by a fair number of splits. Please bear with us. Thanks for your patience. 04:49:47 AaronSw has quit 04:49:47 tav` has quit 04:49:47 deltab has quit 04:49:47 tav has quit 04:50:07 deltab has joined #swhack 04:50:07 tav` has joined #swhack 04:50:07 AaronSw has joined #swhack 04:50:07 tav has joined #swhack 04:59:08 AaronSw has changed the topic to: Everything we do is art. 13:17:56 AaronSw has changed the topic to: I have an urge not merely to be an architect but a builder too. | Everything we do is art. 13:18:19 AaronSw has changed the topic to: At no time is freedom of speech more precious than when a man hits his thumb with a hammer. - Todat's fortune message | I have an urge not merely to be an architect but a builder too. - tav | Everything we do is art. - some native tribe 15:15:23 Morbus has joined #swhack 15:15:33 Morbus has quit 15:16:00 * AaronSw hopes to go to New York soon. 15:16:05 cf. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/21/opinion/21FRI2.html 15:16:22 Morbus has joined #swhack 15:17:44 hi 15:17:51 hey there. won't be staying long. 15:21:08 have you gotten your three o'reilly books? only ... a week left, i think. 15:23:04 till ? 15:23:20 end of september. 15:23:22 Huh? 15:23:27 buy 2, get 1 free 15:23:57 oh... i can't think of any o'reilly books i really want 15:25:19 alright, well, i have to go now. ciao all... 15:25:32 Morbus has quit 15:25:58 heh 15:55:19 sbp has joined #swhack 15:57:05 Ping 15:57:07 pong 15:57:52 wassup? 15:58:49 I just wanted to know if you'd gone stark bollock raving mad or not 15:59:38 [[[ 15:59:38 I believe that these "URI-views", or 15:59:38 whatever we wish to call them, should be removed from the RDF 15:59:38 spec. 15:59:40 ]]] 15:59:56 tav, what the fuck are ya doin'? 16:00:12 tav? 16:00:21 He he he 16:00:27 * AaronSw has not gone stark raving mad. 16:00:47 [[[ 16:00:48 [tav PONG!] 16:00:48 - 16:00:48 [tav MWAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!] 16:00:48 - 16:00:48 [tav FEAR_ME_HUMAN!] 16:00:50 ]]] 16:00:57 Where'd you get that? 16:01:07 From my status window 16:01:09 :-) 16:01:19 d'oh! 16:01:21 status window? 16:01:35 Yeah, my status window 16:01:50 sbp: SG-1 fan? 16:01:54 Unknown CTCP request CTCP_FLOOD from tav: 16:02:00 I wondered what on earth was going on for a second... 16:02:07 SG-1: nope 16:02:23 anyways 16:02:26 "SG-1" != "The Simpsons" 16:02:32 ah 16:02:36 :-) 16:02:46 that go for futurama too? 16:02:57 Futurama just slips by 16:03:02 Matt Groening 16:03:07 anyway, back to Aaron's lunacy... 16:03:12 SG? 16:03:22 type: !help in the channel 16:03:54 ahh 16:04:03 [[[ 16:04:04 > This seems to imply that URI references (that is, URIs with fragment 16:04:05 > identifiers) are not bound to a resource themselves. 16:04:05 Careful... it does not imply that URI references are 16:04:05 bound to resources; but nor does it imply that they are *not* 16:04:05 bound to resources. RFC2396 is silent on what 16:04:06 a URI reference is bound to. 16:04:09 ]]] - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2001May/0018 16:04:17 AaronSw: Stargate SG-1 16:04:28 ahh 16:04:53 [[[ 16:04:55 That definition is wrong. So are the definitions used by RDF. That's 16:04:55 why they keep having semantic problems with the Web. 16:05:02 ]]] - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2001May/0019 16:05:57 When Roy Fielding says "Just shoot me." then something is wrong. 16:06:39 But the logic of the argument simply doesn't make sense 16:06:50 Hey, I thought you agreed with me on this. 16:07:06 no way! not if it means deprecating URI views 16:07:31 Why do you like URI-views? 16:07:31 if #a and #b are different views of some URI identified resource, then they must identify distinct "things". we just call those things RDF resources 16:07:41 because they're being used, and they work 16:07:52 But they don't work with everyone else. 16:08:02 I'm not the worlds biggest fan... but they still work 16:08:11 with everyone else? who else is there? 16:08:25 HTTP, URI spec, etc. 16:08:28 they work with RDF, that's all they need to work with 16:08:33 Pfft! 16:08:41 why is it incompatable with HTTP and the URI spec.? 16:08:46 Fine, well just change the name to Deely Description Format and I won't care. 16:08:59 But as long as you claim to be describing Resources, then you better well be. 16:09:01 * sbp agrees 16:09:23 Ah, so it's just a terminology thing. Well, that's easy to fix, and I very much agree that it should be 16:09:24 It's incompatible with HTTP because fragments are not sent in an HTTP request. 16:09:51 It's incompatible with URIs because URIs claim that they are not bound to resources and the fragment receives its semantics from the mime type in a data transfer 16:10:19 But if the RDF fragments identify soem view of an RDF document (which they should do) then there isn't even a the... 16:10:54 There isn't? What about RDF embedded in HTML... Shouldn't it receive semantics from XPointer? 16:11:03 XPointer says it's a location-set or something 16:12:31 sorry, got called away 16:12:53 RDF in HTML: then if you have , "#blargh" identifes that deeley 16:13:35 if you have , then you have some additional information about that (well, you don't really, and RDF-in-XHTML is nuts anyway) 16:13:57 if you embed RDF in XHTML, you'll have to send it as a new MIME type 16:14:05 "if you have , "#blargh" identifes that deeley" what deeley? the thing the contents of the describe? 16:14:35 whatever the HTML 4.01 specification (reference from the text/html RFC) says it identifies 16:14:52 s/reference/referenced 16:19:34 Hmm... I think you should go through some of DanC's mails on the subject: very insightful 16:19:43 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2001May/0020 16:19:56 I have gone thru all of them. 16:20:04 I've studied a lot on this subject, trust me. 16:20:07 that's a response to Roy Fielding, who actually didn't understand the problem first of all 16:20:20 Pfft! Roy understands this all very well. 16:20:27 I consider him the foremost authority on the subject. 16:20:29 So does Dan 16:20:33 hmz 16:20:43 Roy wrote a dissertation on the subject, for goodness sake! 16:20:50 He wrote the book! 16:20:54 He wrote the spec! 16:20:57 He wrote the software! 16:21:03 No, he *co*-wrote the spec 16:21:19 Fine. 16:21:23 Point still stands. 16:21:32 He wrote both specs, mind you. 16:21:36 err, co-wrote 16:21:47 Dan Connolly wrote... neither? 16:21:58 err, co-wrote 16:22:04 I'm not saying that he didn't understand URI architecture, I'm saying that he didn't understand initially what was being discussed in that thread. He must have read your email too fast or something 16:22:25 so just because he didn't write the spec means that he knows nothing about URIs? 16:22:41 writing specifications is no indication of how much or how little one knows about a subject 16:23:08 What indicates to you that he didn't understand what was being discussed 16:23:09 ? 16:23:32 read http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2001May/0020 16:23:40 I have! 16:23:41 I just did! 16:23:50 [[[ 16:23:51 > > I don't think so; I think you're reading more into RFC2396 16:23:51 > > than is there. (you're certainly not the first, and 16:23:51 > > I don't expect you'll be the last.) 16:23:51 > 16:23:51 > No, that is correct. 16:23:53 The interpretation he's asking about says that 16:23:55 http://example.org/q#foo 16:23:57 and 16:23:59 http://example.org/q#bar 16:24:01 identify the same resource. 16:24:03 ]]] 16:24:05 he had to point out what the question was 16:24:25 Pff, you're reading too much into that. 16:24:39 and you'd know all about that... :-) 16:24:40 It's DanC's debate tactics again. 16:26:43 tav has quit 16:31:29 Anyway, what's the problem with deprecating URI views? 16:31:58 the problem is that loads of current software supports and implements it, and it works 16:32:25 So? If we take it out, none of that software will break. 16:32:35 Loads of current software doesn't support it. 16:32:51 If RDF is to build on top of URIs and HTTP, it can't very well go around changing them! 16:33:21 If we just want to make RDF 1.0 random loser language instead of the foundation for the Semantic Web, it'd be OK. But we're supposed to be making it the foundation of the Semantic Web! 16:34:15 it works (the URI-views work... some other parts are messed up)! 16:35:21 tav has joined #swhack 16:36:13 You keep saying that it's incompatable with URIs and HTTP, and yet I see no evidence for that 16:36:30 * sbp has to run soon 16:37:08 You can't ask an HTTP server for a URI-view. 16:37:18 The URI spec doesn't give them any semantics. 16:37:41 The URI spec doesn't define their semantics. So what? 16:38:02 Well, they're not URIs. 16:38:07 And so what if you can't ask a server for a URI view? Does that mean URI-views in total are broken 16:38:16 OF course they're not URIs. So? 16:38:23 Well, yes, insofar as they are part of web architecture. They're broken. 16:38:29 They're not part of the Web. 16:38:38 They're a screwed up legacy mistake that no one knows how to fix 16:38:46 To be quite honest. 16:39:45 I think that thwey do exactly what they were intended to do, and I don't know how you can call that broken 16:40:39 What were they intended to do? 16:40:52 point to a view of a document 16:41:12 And how does that make sense in a web where not all resources are documents?! 16:41:28 s/document/resource 16:41:37 It made sense at the beginnings of the Web, when we just had documents sent over wires, but now it no longer fits. 16:41:41 What's a view of a resource? 16:41:46 It's meaningless. 16:41:49 The URI spec says so. 16:41:58 If not in so many words. 16:42:12 "the URI spec does not ascribe a meaning to it" != "it is meaningless" 16:43:12 But it does ascribe a meaning! 16:43:16 Read the section of the URI spec. 16:45:21 many apologies, I really do have to run now 16:45:30 c'ya 16:46:29 bye! 16:48:31 sbp has quit 17:34:26 xena has joined #swhack 18:15:32 xena has quit 18:15:36 sbp has joined #swhack 18:31:25 sbp has quit 19:09:00 sbp has joined #swhack 19:17:40 Wow... 19:17:41 [[[ 19:17:42 At the heart of the Access US network is a Cisco GSR 12000 series router capable of transferring over 1.5 Gigs of data per second. That is 1,000 T-1 lines! 19:17:46 ]]] - http://www.accessus.net/hostingcolocation/hosting.asp 19:22:18 hi 19:22:37 Hi 19:22:59 What's Access US? 19:23:20 Or rather, why are you interested in them? 19:24:33 I was looking for a site on busprod.com, but it seems that all of the busprod.com sites have gone, and busprod.com itself redirects to Access US 19:47:35 "We apologize for the inconvenience of this, but it is imperative that we ensure our network is not assisting in the propagation of this, or any, worm. All of us are part of a larger community, and it really isn't cool to infect your neighbors." , http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,47037,00.html 19:47:41 Heh! "Patrick being the king of QName doom" - mid:020101c14462$971f9e00$55ed93c3@y0r1d9 19:47:49 Heh: "BTW, this isn't IRC; you might want to lurk before using such a l33t name." - http://wmf.editthispage.com/discuss/msgReader$5780 19:47:54 /nick ==l333tman!== 19:48:06 l33t? 19:48:07 3l337 == eleet = elite 19:48:07 31337, rather 19:48:07 oh yeah. How ever did I miss that? :-) 19:48:07