IRC log of webont on 2002-07-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:00:05 [jhendler]
deadline for raising editorial comments with respect to the documents is July 15.
00:00:34 [mdean]
mdean has joined #webont
00:00:53 [DeborahMc]
editors prefer suggestions to have the form of an operational suggestion:
00:01:10 [DeborahMc]
i.e., instead of saying "xxx" I suggest saying "yyy"
00:09:10 [GuusS]
Raphael: should we define our "owl" version of Dublin Core features?
00:09:49 [GuusS]
DanC: strongly agianst, tools like Adobe may have dificulties interpreting owl:title
00:10:13 [GuusS]
Deb: confirms that her current wording about DC is OK
00:10:23 [DanC]
an RCS ontology I happend to need enough to make it up:
00:10:41 [GuusS]
Raphael: use CVS format for versioning information
00:24:54 [GuusS]
Jeff: ability to state backward compatibility
00:27:46 [GuusS]
discussion about the logical implications
00:32:02 [GuusS]
no normative lagnauge features for ontology metadata
00:36:59 [GuusS]
Jim: are the internationalization solved?
00:37:10 [GuusS]
DanC: done by RDF Core
00:37:59 [GuusS]
Other issues that are solved: character model,, ....(scribe forgot)
00:45:22 [GuusS]
discussion about extensibility mechanism
00:45:33 [GuusS]
Jim: summary
00:45:54 [GuusS]
time needs to spent on versioning and import
00:48:47 [GuusS]
Req: attachment of info to statements
00:49:24 [GuusS]
It will have to be clear tomorrow wether there is an issue here
00:57:25 [jhendler]
jhendler has left #webont
07:36:51 [herman]
herman has joined #webont
07:37:25 [herman]
15:33:45 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #webont
15:39:35 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #webont
15:39:39 [DanC]
Zakim, this will be webo
15:39:42 [Zakim]
ok, DanC
15:39:47 [DanC]
Zakim, what's the passcode?
15:39:48 [Zakim]
sorry, DanC, I don't know what conference this is
15:39:54 [DanC]
oh well.
15:39:56 [DanC]
you will.
15:45:07 [JonB]
JonB has joined #webont
15:46:30 [DanC]
see the ftf page
15:46:34 [DanC]
it's the usual #/passcode
15:46:49 [DanC]
15:46:50 [DanC]
09.00 - 09.45 Telecon
15:46:50 [DanC]
Zakim (tel:+1-617-6200), code 9326"
15:46:54 [DanC]
15:50:19 [Zakim]
SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has now started
15:50:26 [Zakim]
15:58:13 [jhendler]
jhendler has joined #webont
15:58:35 [jhendler]
we're waiting on a telephone at this end -- telecon may start late
15:59:19 [jhendler]
zakim, who is here
15:59:22 [Zakim]
jhendler, you need to end that query with '?'
15:59:36 [jhendler]
zakim, who is here?
15:59:37 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Jonathan_Borden
15:59:43 [Zakim]
On IRC I see jhendler, JonB, Zakim, RRSAgent, herman, las1
16:00:06 [jhendler]
zakim, if you knew it was a question, why didn't you answer it?
16:00:10 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, jhendler.
16:00:53 [Zakim]
16:01:16 [heflin]
heflin has joined #webont
16:01:47 [JonB]
Zakim JonB is Jonathan_Borden
16:01:58 [JonB]
16:02:13 [JonB]
zakim, JonB is Jonathan_Borden
16:02:14 [Zakim]
sorry, JonB, I do not recognize a party named 'JonB'
16:02:40 [JonB]
zakim, Jonathan_Borden is JonB
16:02:42 [Zakim]
+JonB; got it
16:02:46 [Zakim]
16:04:27 [Zakim]
16:04:39 [Zakim]
16:04:45 [Zakim]
+ +1.705.756.aaaa
16:08:19 [jhendler]
deb mcguinness coming with a speaker phone - stay tuned.
16:08:59 [jhendler]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:09:01 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JonB, ??P12, ??P3, +1.705.756.aaaa
16:09:19 [jhendler]
zakim, ??P12 is chris welty
16:09:21 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??P12 is chris welty', jhendler. Try /msg Zakim help
16:10:07 [jhendler]
zakim, ??p12 is welty
16:10:09 [Zakim]
+Welty; got it
16:10:33 [jhendler]
working on the speaker phone...
16:11:27 [Zakim]
16:11:29 [jhendler]
getting closer...
16:11:47 [jhendler]
can someone on the phone and IRC let folks know we should be ready in a couple of minutes
16:12:15 [GuusS]
GuusS has joined #webont
16:14:36 [jhendler]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:14:37 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JonB, Welty, ??P3, +1.705.756.aaaa, Stein
16:15:53 [Chris]
Chris has joined #webont
16:16:14 [Chris]
Wow! I'm in!
16:16:19 [Zakim]
16:16:50 [Zakim]
16:17:35 [Zakim]
16:17:45 [DeborahMc]
DeborahMc has joined #webont
16:18:21 [jhendler]
Peter. Chris, Herman, Lynn, Jon
16:18:28 [jhendler]
zakim, who is here?
16:18:29 [Zakim]
On the phone I see JonB, Welty, ??P3, +1.705.756.aaaa, Stein, ??P4
16:18:35 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DeborahMc, Chris, GuusS, heflin, jhendler, JonB, Zakim, RRSAgent, herman, las1
16:20:03 [logger_1]
logger_1 has joined #webont
16:27:29 [DanC]
DanC has joined #webont
16:30:03 [mdean]
mdean has joined #webont
16:30:18 [DeborahMc]
16:30:19 [jhendler]
Recap of discussion of document
16:30:24 [DeborahMc]
this is my working version
16:30:37 [heflin]
PPS expresses concern about whether docs will be ready for publication
16:30:41 [DanC]
supplement to yesterday's record: * a few WebOnt notes from 1Jul (Tue, Jul 02 2002)
16:30:42 [DeborahMc]
it took into account real time updates from yesterday
16:31:30 [heflin]
PPS: Okay if people can make objections after new drafts are available
16:32:36 [heflin]
Hendler: Re reference description - mostly editorial changes
16:33:32 [heflin]
Ian: doesn't think enough time to make editorial changes
16:36:13 [heflin]
A few group members express desire for an extra week before release
16:38:19 [heflin]
Sufficient consensus for extra week
16:38:47 [DanC]
[I don't recall any 11July editorial deadline]
16:40:08 [heflin]
PPS proposal: 7/11 versions, comments by 7/15, decision? by 7/18
16:40:35 [heflin]
PPS: if no consensus on 7/18, then extend by 1 week to 7/25
16:40:43 [DanC]
i.e. if we have consensus 18July, we can publish; else we take another week to decide.
16:40:56 [DanC]
16:41:23 [heflin]
Jim: extra logical features
16:41:31 [heflin]
Jim: versioning needs time
16:41:48 [heflin]
Jim: internationalization go with RDF although not big fan of it
16:42:13 [heflin]
Jim: imports has an issue that will be discussed
16:42:57 [jhendler]
summary on extra-logical:
16:43:04 [heflin]
Jim: tagging of statements- must raise issue, remove from requirements, or decide it is already handled in some way
16:45:06 [DanC]
DanC explains mapping decision, recorded in
16:45:11 [heflin]
DanC: other resolution from yesterday was a RESOLUTION that abstract syntax document provide a mapping to/from the language description
16:46:19 [heflin]
PPS: has issue that we are adding lots of "syntactic fluff"
16:46:30 [heflin]
Ian: thinks documents are mostly "PR"
16:46:37 [JosD]
JosD has joined #webont
16:48:47 [heflin]
PPS: wants some current issues to be opened
16:48:56 [heflin]
DanC: requests that 5.10 be opened
16:50:31 [heflin]
PPS: Would like 5.3 and 5.10 referenced in language description
16:50:54 [heflin]
DanC: maybe formal spec should be where these issues are referenced
16:52:11 [heflin]
Jim: next conversation is about abstract syntax
16:52:35 [DanC]
(I think peter just noticed the lack of mention of 5.3 and 5.10 in the language description; he didn't say they belonged; I think he said that was sorta the point; those issues aren't touched by that document)
16:53:32 [heflin]
Jim: last telecon discussed abstract syntax, sent e-mail to mailing list
16:54:06 [heflin]
one issue addressed by mapping resolution
16:54:37 [heflin]
PPS: semantics have been out already
16:54:56 [heflin]
comment that many semantics are out, which should be published?
16:55:05 [DanC]
# SEM: semantics for the abstract syntax Peter F. Patel-Schneider (Tue, Jun 11 2002)
16:55:06 [JonB]
16:55:29 [DanC]
# layering (5.3,5.10): a first-order same-syntax model theory Dan Connolly (Wed, Jun 19 2002)
16:56:58 [heflin]
PPS: prefers that semantics go out with other documents
16:57:36 [heflin]
DanC: good to point out what positions docs take on open issues
16:58:04 [heflin]
Jim: proposal to take abstract sytanx and turn into semantics doc
16:59:22 [heflin]
DanC: has an alternative proposal he would prefer to publish
17:00:16 [JonB]
17:00:35 [JonB]
DanC's proposal from June 19
17:02:38 [heflin]
705-756-3029 number to call PPS at
17:02:46 [Zakim]
17:03:01 [DanC]
oops; I cited the wrong model thoery
17:03:31 [Zakim]
17:04:05 [DanC]
Re: layering (5.3,5.10): a first-order same-syntax model theory Dan Connolly (Fri, Jun 28 2002)
17:04:12 [Zakim]
17:04:13 [Zakim]
17:04:14 [Zakim]
- +1.705.756.aaaa
17:04:15 [Zakim]
17:04:17 [Zakim]
SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended
17:04:23 [DanC]
17:09:26 [heflin]
I'm still scribing - whoopee!
17:11:19 [heflin]
Beginning call with PPS
17:12:30 [heflin]
Ian: suggests that abstract syntax and mapping published before adding semantics
17:12:58 [heflin]
DanC: objects to position abstract syntax takes on layering
17:15:02 [heflin]
Deb: wants documents to separate out OWL lite from full OWL
17:15:20 [DanC]
I think the relevant issues here are 5.1 Uniform treatment of literal data values, 5.3 Semantic Layering, 5.10 DAML+OIL semantics is too weak
17:16:06 [DanC]
17:17:04 [heflin]
Straw poll: add mapping to abstract syntax but no model theory
17:17:13 [heflin]
release on same schedule as other documents
17:19:23 [heflin]
17:19:32 [heflin]
17:20:09 [heflin]
OPPOSED (DanC) can live with
17:21:35 [heflin]
RESOLVED: see Straw poll. Abstain Danc, Jos, Jeff, who else?
17:21:46 [DeborahMc]
the followon to my proposal was a separate section for owl lite with the additions pulled out for full owl
17:21:59 [DanC]
"no model theory" doesn't preclude adding one in this meeting
17:22:30 [heflin]
Proposal: have abstract syntax have specific section for OWL lite
17:23:10 [heflin]
Revised Proposal: pull out section for OWL lite, distinguish differences for OWL
17:31:55 [heflin]
DanC: Asks for preference of editor
17:32:47 [heflin]
PPS: prefers defining OWL lite by substraction
17:34:44 [heflin]
PROPOSAL: define OWL by addition from OWL lite
17:35:10 [heflin]
In favor: 11
17:35:30 [heflin]
Opposed: 3
17:36:28 [heflin]
This was a straw-poll
17:38:22 [heflin]
RESOLVED: with 7 abstains
17:41:14 [heflin]
Jim: move to discussion of model theory
17:42:45 [heflin]
"Formal Spec" is misleading, at least until it has a model theory
17:43:44 [DanC]
"An OWL model theory layered on RDF"
17:43:54 [DanC]
$Id: owlsem55.txt,v 1.2 2002/06/28 17:41:12 connolly Exp $
17:49:55 [heflin]
DanC: has no comprehension axioms
17:50:18 [heflin]
i.e, x in A intersect B does not imply x in B intersect A
17:58:21 [heflin]
Issue is how we can have integration with this
17:59:40 [heflin]
DanC says he could add an axiom to conclude that classes defined in this way are equal
18:04:15 [Chris]
Chris has joined #webont
18:23:00 [heflin]
Straw Poll: Take Peter's model theory and releasing subject to addressing Dan's concerns
18:23:51 [heflin]
+ to be done by August 1
18:25:33 [heflin]
New Straw Poll: Put Peter's model theory through the standard editorial process
18:27:18 [heflin]
(this means official reviewers must be solicited)
18:27:36 [heflin]
In favor: 8
18:27:39 [heflin]
Opposed: 5
18:27:46 [heflin]
Abstain: 3
18:28:42 [GuusS]
18:52:23 [jhendler]
JimH scribes - session on Guide
18:53:08 [jhendler]
18:53:23 [jhendler]
Guus' proposal for the outcomes of the GUIDE activity
18:53:43 [jhendler]
1) Presentation syntaxes: XML, UML
18:53:55 [jhendler]
2) Language primer/walkthrough
18:54:12 [jhendler]
main change- should have more realistic ontology examples
18:55:00 [jhendler]
we should use examples from our use cases
18:56:04 [jhendler]
3) How to do it document -- guidelines on how we might handle things in the objectives (example part/whole, schemas, defined classes, etc.)
18:56:14 [DeborahMc]
gates 167 has been signed up as a breakout room
18:56:16 [jhendler]
possible walkthrough and guideline merge
19:01:11 [jhendler]
Guus: we need to produce these documents by Bristol (walkthru/primer; how-to-do-it )
19:01:31 [jhendler]
Guus: what can we realistically achieve?
19:02:24 [jhendler]
JimH: perhaps the articles -- by Roxane Ouellet, Uche Ogbuji - would be of use
19:02:50 [jhendler]
JimH: possibility of doing the second as a FAQ - Deb: says she may have a starting place on that document
19:11:58 [jhendler]
suggestion - maybe walkthru should be a document, how-to-do-it might be a web-based FAQ or other non-document
19:12:46 [DeborahMc]
19:12:52 [DeborahMc]
this is a pointer to the paper i mentioned
19:16:43 [GuusS]
datatypes -> walktru doc
19:16:52 [jhendler]
discussion of what goes in each document
19:18:26 [jhendler]
Mike Smith volunteers to lead the walkthru activity - Ora, Deb, Lynn have previously mentioned interest. Guus volunteers to help w/examples
19:18:34 [jhendler]
Chairs accept Mike's offer
19:20:28 [jhendler]
Evan: suggestion - let's collect examples and etc. and put on our web page
19:20:40 [jhendler]
Guus agrees to maintain if Dan can work out access issues.
19:23:36 [jhendler]
Deb - suggestion, let's convert the old walkthru
19:24:04 [DeborahMc]
i also posted the how and when document to webont
19:24:20 [DeborahMc]
on examples, i also suggest a set of wines examples i did for a recent article
19:26:11 [jhendler]
Some people volunteering for pieces of "How to do document"
19:26:53 [jhendler]
ACTION: Guus will generate a structure in which the examples should appear by July 11
19:27:09 [jhendler]
this will also include one example
19:27:31 [jhendler]
Larry is willing to write part/whole example
19:29:47 [jhendler]
ACTION: Jim will work with Dan to set up structure for this. Guus will be the contact person for sending these things to.
19:31:49 [jhendler]
Guus: presentation syntaxes
19:43:43 [jhendler]
discussion of how to do UML - Evan notes that DAML+OIL based UML tools exist, meaning implementation is important
19:45:44 [jhendler]
ACTION: Evan will writeup a description of a recent OMG meeting that concerned UML and OWL, and the process he is running at OMG, and will post that to the WG
19:47:43 [jhendler]
19:47:48 [DeborahMc]
lunch until 2
20:32:22 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #webont
21:06:17 [mdean]
meeting resumed at 14:00
21:08:34 [mdean]
discussing requirement 4.1 Ontologies as distinct objects
21:08:44 [mdean]
Raphael expressed concern with using rdf:about=""
21:09:05 [mdean]
changes if you move the ontology
21:11:27 [mdean]
could use any URI in rdf:about="", but that loses binding with relative IDs or about's in that ontology
21:12:47 [mdean]
xml:base would help here
21:13:31 [mdean]
can't really have multiple ontologies (with common prefixes to Classes and properties) on the same page
21:14:27 [mdean]
this could relate to imports
21:14:46 [mdean]
Jim asked if anyone wanted to open an issue for this
21:17:34 [mdean]
Raphael: propose that we use xml:base in documents and our .owl files
21:19:18 [mdean]
ACTION (Raphael): send Guus paragraph suggesting preferred usage for owl:Ontology
21:19:38 [mdean]
discussing unambiguous term referencing with URIs
21:19:42 [mdean]
no known problems
21:19:53 [mdean]
requirement: explicit ontology extension
21:20:36 [mdean]
probably depends upon import issue
21:20:59 [mdean]
for transitivity
21:22:25 [mdean]
currently no strong notion of ontology extension
21:23:03 [mdean]
can add restrictions to existing classes
21:23:17 [mdean]
ontologies are not really first class objects
21:31:19 [mdean]
plan to approve release of this Requirements document at end of this session
21:32:39 [mdean]
could change a requirement to an objective
21:32:58 [mdean]
WD updates include lists of substantive and editorial changes
21:33:06 [mdean]
requirement: commitment to ontologies
21:34:51 [mdean]
confusion over resources
21:35:38 [mdean]
requirement: ontology metadata
21:35:46 [mdean]
21:35:54 [mdean]
currently can put anything in ontology headers
21:36:05 [mdean]
we should provide some examples
21:36:59 [mdean]
ACTION (Mike): use DC attributes in owl.owl
21:37:04 [mdean]
(Mike Dean)
21:37:16 [mdean]
requirement: versioning
21:37:22 [mdean]
open issue, discussed yesterday
21:37:32 [mdean]
requirement: class definition primitives
21:37:42 [mdean]
21:37:49 [mdean]
requirement: property definition primitives
21:37:52 [mdean]
21:37:59 [mdean]
requirement: data types
21:38:00 [mdean]
open issue
21:38:12 [mdean]
requirement: class and property equivalance
21:38:14 [mdean]
21:38:21 [mdean]
open issue to mix classes and properties
21:38:32 [mdean]
requirement: individual equivalance
21:38:35 [mdean]
21:38:49 [mdean]
requirement: local unique names
21:39:40 [mdean]
motivates owl:differentIndividualFrom
21:40:57 [mdean]
abstract syntax provides macro function for many individuals
21:44:04 [mdean]
role of UnambiguousProperty?
21:44:48 [mdean]
this is currently being treated as a solved requirement -- otherwise needs a new issue
21:46:24 [mdean]
ACTION (Deb): open issue
21:46:35 [mdean]
could be resolved by guidelines
21:47:24 [mdean]
when all issues are postponed or closed, we're done
21:48:30 [jhendler]
ACTION: (Deb) write up an issue with respect to the unique names assumption requirement
21:49:21 [mdean]
requirement: attaching information to statements
21:50:19 [mdean]
currently only mechanism is RDF reification
22:04:09 [mdean]
Mike showed example of using RDF statementIDs to show that Deb's hair was red on Tuesday
22:05:35 [mdean]
not addressed by OWL model theory
22:16:34 [mdean]
Jim suggests using owl:tag as an uninterpreted standard property
22:17:16 [mdean]
see issue 4.4 extra-logical feature set
22:17:20 [mdean]
issue not yet opened
22:17:52 [mdean]
requirement: classes as instances
22:18:12 [mdean]
Guus has a very nice use case for interoperability
22:18:22 [mdean]
posted a couple days ago to www-rdf-interest
22:18:46 [mdean]
Sergey Melnik's WordNet implementation
22:19:05 [mdean]
hierarchy is hidden in instances and properties
22:19:45 [mdean]
everything is just a Word, with properties like hyponymOf
22:19:57 [mdean]
want to treat these instances as classes
22:20:39 [mdean]
Michael Sintek: DLs will not be decidable with this feature
22:21:36 [mdean]
22:22:34 [mdean]
Evan: do we need another issue (besides equivalentTo)?
22:31:39 [mdean]
possible open new issue and subsume equivalentTo into it
22:31:46 [mdean]
ACTION: (Raphael) raise issue
22:32:23 [mdean]
ACTION: (Raphael) raise superissue to subsume equivalentTo
22:33:26 [mdean]
RESOLVED: close issue 4.6 equivalentTo to be subsumed by the new issue Raphael will raise
22:34:42 [mdean]
requirement: complex data types
22:34:45 [mdean]
pending issues
22:34:49 [mdean]
requirement: cardinality constraints
22:34:53 [mdean]
22:35:10 [mdean]
various requirements satisfied
22:35:33 [mdean]
charmod, etc: satisfied with RDF solutions
23:02:01 [jhendler]
Resolved: Release the new draft of the requirements document as is
23:02:12 [jhendler]
(way to go Jeff Heflin!)
23:02:33 [jhendler]
23:02:59 [jhendler]
report back of the Model Theory team
23:03:12 [jhendler]
Pat: may be light at the end of the tunnel
23:03:45 [jhendler]
Doing a model theory from scratch is dangerous -- should stick to conventionally understood techniques
23:04:05 [jhendler]
Some of Dan's proposal maybe problematic with respect to that
23:04:39 [jhendler]
Way in which Peter's model theory is phrased may help make relation to RDF (and RDF MT) more clear
23:04:43 [jhendler]
major problems:
23:07:48 [jhendler]
1) what happens when you use a RDFS notion with a primitive from Owl - can you take "rdf:subproperty of owl:intersection"? should it be legal (probably yes), should the RDF inference apply to the owl vocabulary (three views - (a) NO, (b) sure, but if you do you are outside the semantic domain of owl, (c) syntactically restrict those - i.e. owl graph could be simply "illegal" by owl)
23:09:33 [jhendler]
possibility - put these together - i.e. something could say "if you are owl legal graph" you will work w/a tool like fact, but if you use RDF you may not get right inferences - but you'll still be legal owl.
23:10:59 [jhendler]
i.e. consider a well-formed RDF graph that is "not sanctioned" by the OWL model - we could say it is legal, but not "owl coherent" or something like that
23:13:33 [jhendler]
for example - some tools could say "if you are syntactically in owl (plus RDF etc.)" then my tool will work. Someone else could say "my tool is 'smarter' but you must use a restricted graph if you want guaranteed results
23:14:24 [jhendler]
the hard part -- unclear exactly where we must "darken" what to acieve this. There is consensus we should strive to make this set as small as possible.
23:15:53 [jhendler]
RDFS vs OWL issue w/respect to what are classes and etc - so there may be things in RDFS that OWL cannot handle "properly" -- open question - what do you say about these?
23:16:33 [jhendler]
should we sanction the mixing or restrict it?
23:31:47 [jhendler]
(several examples - photo will be taken for record)
23:34:48 [jhendler]
Discussion of various programs with respect to how they treat various things
23:42:40 [heflin]
heflin has joined #webont
23:43:53 [jhendler]
discussion of various tools and their needs, and use cases
23:44:01 [jhendler]
miked - did you discuss Lbase?
23:44:34 [jhendler]
Pat - yes, describes it (a proposal w/Guha to map RDF, RDFS, DAML into a common specification lang - FOL plus a bit of XML and a couple other nice things)
23:45:16 [jhendler]
then each tool can map to that logic - provides an axiomatic semantics and to provide a way of relating content in the different languages
23:46:02 [jhendler]
RDF Core will have a non-normative mapping into Lbase as part of their semantic document
23:46:50 [jhendler]
document about Lbase will be a W3C NOTE
23:47:43 [jhendler]
makes it clearer what the differences between the languages is and how to map them
23:51:18 [DeborahMc]
pat -this wont fix the layering problems - they just come from needing to represent the same things in two languages
23:52:02 [jhendler]
MikeD - should we do Lbase for OWL? Pat - sure, probably in same way as RDF Core (as an appendix to the MT)
23:53:07 [jhendler]
Pat in fact, mapping to Lbase and creating a model theory are very similar -- a good way to be clear and to get the issues resolved
23:53:15 [jhendler]
(but doesn't solve the issues necessarily)
23:54:00 [JosD]
JosD has joined #webont
23:57:57 [jhendler]
ACTION: Pat will attempt to take abstract syntax, and Peter's MT and the mapping into RDF and will write a model theory in the Connolly style (i.e. as an extension to RDF MT) and see if he can identify the exact issues.
23:59:23 [jhendler]
RRSAgent, show action items
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
I see 7 open action items:
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Guus will generate a structure in which the examples should appear by July 11 [1]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Jim will work with Dan to set up structure for this. Guus will be the contact person for sending these things to. [2]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Evan will writeup a description of a recent OMG meeting that concerned UML and OWL, and the process he is running at OMG, and will post that to the WG [3]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: (Deb) write up an issue with respect to the unique names assumption requirement [4]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: (Raphael) raise issue [5]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: (Raphael) raise superissue to subsume equivalentTo [6]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Pat will attempt to take abstract syntax, and Peter's MT and the mapping into RDF and will write a model theory in the Connolly style (i.e. as an extension to RDF MT) and see if he can identify the exact issues. [7]
23:59:23 [RRSAgent]
recorded in