IRC log of webont on 2003-02-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:54:10 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #webont
16:54:19 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #webont
16:54:56 [DanC]
Zakim, this will be WEBO
16:54:58 [Zakim]
ok, DanC
16:55:53 [DanC]
DanC has changed the topic to: WebOnt 13Feb chair: DanC/Guus; scribe: Heflin
16:58:07 [DanC]
hmm... were the 30Jan minutes approved?
16:58:28 [heflin]
heflin has joined #webont
16:58:43 [Zakim]
SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has now started
16:58:52 [Zakim]
16:59:04 [heflin]
Hi Dan.
16:59:14 [Zakim]
16:59:39 [Zakim]
16:59:49 [Zakim]
16:59:59 [Zakim]
17:00:01 [Zakim]
17:00:02 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #webont
17:00:32 [Zakim]
17:00:38 [Zakim]
17:00:40 [Zakim]
17:00:53 [Zakim]
17:00:54 [ChrisW]
that's me
17:01:09 [pfps]
pfps has joined #webont
17:01:21 [ChrisW]
zakim, IBM is temporarily ChrisW
17:01:22 [Zakim]
sorry, ChrisW, I do not recognize a party named 'IBM'
17:01:31 [Zakim]
17:01:39 [Zakim]
17:01:41 [DanC]
zakim, [IBM] is temporarily ChrisW
17:01:42 [Zakim]
+ChrisW; got it
17:01:43 [Zakim]
17:01:48 [Zakim]
17:01:49 [ChrisW]
17:02:14 [IanH]
IanH has joined #webont
17:02:17 [ChrisW]
i can do it
17:02:28 [Zakim]
17:02:32 [Zakim]
17:02:35 [baget]
baget has joined #webont
17:02:43 [Zakim]
17:03:02 [pfps]
zakim, tim_finin is jeffHeflin
17:03:03 [Zakim]
+JeffHeflin; got it
17:03:24 [Zakim]
17:03:48 [pfps]
zakim, ??P45 is DeborahMcG
17:03:50 [Zakim]
+DeborahMcG; got it
17:03:58 [pfps]
zakim, ??P32 is IanH
17:04:00 [Zakim]
+IanH; got it
17:04:12 [pfps]
zakim, ??P33 is LeoObrst
17:04:13 [Zakim]
+LeoObrst; got it
17:04:31 [DeborahMc]
DeborahMc has joined #webont
17:04:33 [pfps]
zakim, ??P33 is Baget
17:04:34 [Zakim]
sorry, pfps, I do not recognize a party named '??P33'
17:04:53 [pfps]
zakim, ??P34 is Baget
17:04:55 [Zakim]
+Baget; got it
17:05:00 [DanC]
partial regrets from philips
17:05:05 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
17:05:06 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickG, DanC, PeterFPS, JeffHeflin, IanH, LeoObrst, ChrisW, Marwan_Sabbouh, ??P39, Baget, PatH, M_Smith, Evan_Wallace, DeborahMcG
17:05:16 [nmg]
nmg has joined #webont
17:06:00 [Zakim]
+ +1.858.565.aaaa
17:06:08 [pfps]
zakim, ??P39 is Yassar
17:06:09 [Zakim]
+Yassar; got it
17:06:17 [pfps]
zakim, aaaa is MikeDean
17:06:18 [Zakim]
+MikeDean; got it
17:06:20 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
17:06:21 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickG, DanC, PeterFPS, JeffHeflin, IanH, LeoObrst, ChrisW, Marwan_Sabbouh, Yassar, Baget, PatH, M_Smith, Evan_Wallace, DeborahMcG, MikeDean
17:06:37 [DanC]
17:07:09 [DanC]
PROPOSED 6feb record
17:07:38 [heflin]
POSTPONED: approval of minutes
17:07:44 [DanC]
1.3 Agenda Amendments
17:07:46 [mdean]
mdean has joined #webont
17:07:50 [DanC]
1.4 Telecon Schedule
17:08:04 [DanC]
Next telecon: February 20
17:08:09 [heflin]
17:08:38 [heflin]
Scribe will be: Leo Obrst
17:08:43 [ChrisW]
minutes look OK to me
17:09:02 [DanC]
1.5 Tech plenary
17:09:11 [heflin]
Minutes of 6 Feb approved
17:09:44 [heflin]
Deb request speaker phone for editor's meeting at tech plenary
17:10:04 [DanC]
17:10:37 [DanC]
2. STATUS RDFCore LC REVIEWS (15-20 min.)
17:12:09 [guus]
guus has joined #webont
17:12:45 [Zakim]
17:13:07 [DanC]
Zakim, ??P10 is ZivH
17:13:08 [Zakim]
+ZivH; got it
17:13:08 [Zakim]
17:13:58 [guus]
zakim, ??p14
17:14:00 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??p14', guus
17:14:15 [guus]
zakim, ??p14 is Guus
17:14:16 [Zakim]
+Guus; got it
17:15:30 [Zakim]
17:15:43 [pfps]
zakim, ??P25 is Jeremy
17:15:45 [Zakim]
+Jeremy; got it
17:17:21 [jjc]
jjc has joined #webont
17:18:11 [jjc]
Zakim, who's on the call?
17:18:12 [Zakim]
On the phone I see NickG, DanC, PeterFPS, JeffHeflin, IanH, LeoObrst, ChrisW, Marwan_Sabbouh, Yassar, Baget, PatH, M_Smith, Evan_Wallace, DeborahMcG, MikeDean, ZivH, Guus, Jeremy
17:18:14 [Zakim]
... (muted)
17:22:03 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #webont
17:22:32 [heflin]
Dan - WebOnt should report to RDF that "social meaning" section
17:22:45 [heflin]
causes problems for some in the WG
17:22:54 [heflin]
Wording should be clarified
17:23:47 [heflin]
??? - change normative parts to "non-normative"
17:25:38 [heflin]
ACTION: Guus will do summary review of RDF docs
17:25:52 [heflin]
2.3 RDF Concepts Review
17:26:50 [heflin]
Only issue was social meaning, as discussed under 2.1
17:27:26 [heflin]
Asserted vs. non-asserted forms of meaning is problematic
17:28:41 [JosD]
JosD has joined #webont
17:29:27 [Zakim]
17:29:35 [Zakim]
17:29:55 [JosD]
Zakim, ??P48 is JosD
17:29:56 [Zakim]
+JosD; got it
17:37:07 [DanC]
order? this is a matter of words, and we're not likely to get any useful words into our meeting record. And we've exhausted our scheduled time on item 2
17:39:24 [DanC]
baget's review of concepts, plus a couple other messages
17:40:04 [heflin]
Jeremy: Request to consider social meaning at tech plenary
17:41:39 [heflin]
17:41:51 [heflin]
3.1 Annotations
17:41:53 [jjc]
ACTION: jjc Send msg to RDFCore and WebOnt to get position statement on social meaning prior to Boston
17:42:03 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #webont
17:42:10 [DanC]
(hmm... to www-rdf-interest too, jeremy?)
17:42:37 [DanC]
proposals on annotations and imports
17:44:06 [heflin]
Peter: annotations should be 2nd class citizens, not facts
17:44:17 [DanC]
yes, annotations are facts. that appeals to me.
17:45:11 [Zakim]
17:47:05 [heflin]
Dan: What breaks if annotations are facts?
17:47:10 [jjc]
17:48:07 [heflin]
Ian: Wants to express things that don't affect semantics
17:49:24 [heflin]
Jeremy: Unrestricted use of annotations may allow metaclasses
17:49:44 [heflin]
in OWL-Lite/OWL-DL (which we decided previously are not allowed)
17:53:30 [DanC]
All entailment tests of the form P=>P *must* be positive, IMO.
17:53:51 [heflin]
Jeremy: could embed XML comment in RDFS comment (as an XML literal)
17:55:44 [heflin]
Pat: RDFS comments have no meaning; they have no entailments other than themselves
17:58:01 [DanC]
1st example in "Annotations and non-mon example" of 30Jan is unacceptable to me; is it in the test suite yet?
17:58:53 [jjc]
Zakim, who's talking?
17:59:04 [Zakim]
jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Jeremy (9%), JosD (15%)
18:02:02 [heflin]
Jeremy: Would like a way to indicate that a property is an AnnotationProperty
18:04:54 [heflin]
PROPOSAL: to adopt Peter's Proposal #2 (from Feb #0128)
18:05:06 [Zakim]
18:05:30 [DanC]
jjc, pls add that 0542 case to the test suite, ok? (I suppose I could, but can I play the busted finger card?)
18:05:37 [heflin]
AMMEND: add AnnototationProperty
18:06:11 [heflin]
ABSTAIN: Ian, Jos DeRoo, Mike Dean, Mike Smith
18:06:14 [DanC]
I concur (esp w jjc ;-)
18:06:21 [ChrisW]
I have to go...bye
18:06:29 [heflin]
ABSTAIN: Johnathan
18:06:47 [heflin]
ACTION: JJC to add 0542 case to test suite
18:06:57 [Zakim]
18:08:31 [heflin]
RESOLVED: Accept above proposal and ammendment
18:09:23 [DanC]
ACTION Schreiber: explain AnnototationProperty in ref
18:09:50 [heflin]
Pat: rdfs:comment, label, seeAlso, isDefinedBy should all be AnnotationProperty
18:10:05 [heflin]
Guus: can change owl.owl to include this
18:10:08 [DanC]
ACTION Schreiber: specify in owl.owl that label, seeAlso, isDefinedBy are AnnotationProperty
18:11:08 [heflin]
ACTION: Mike will update guide to discuss annotations
18:11:10 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #webont
18:12:48 [DanC]
== 3.2 Imports and entailments
18:13:07 [DanC]
proposal (3?) in pfps 10Feb
18:19:23 [heflin]
ACTION: Ian to get Sean to generate syntax checker test case for imports (on failure assume doc is OWL-FULL)
18:20:17 [heflin]
ACTION Jos: send negative experience on imports to list
18:20:41 [DanC]
== 3.3 rdf:XMLLiteral, xml:lang in OWL Lite
18:20:42 [heflin]
== 3.3 XMLLiteral
18:21:38 [DanC]
at the risk of sounding like a broken record, is there an example/test case I can look at?
18:21:51 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #webont
18:23:43 [nmg]
nmg has joined #webont
18:26:51 [jjc]
18:26:53 [Zakim]
18:30:14 [heflin]
Peter: Adding XML literals require a theory of equality
18:33:13 [Zakim]
18:37:59 [heflin]
Jeremy: Could go with an RDF solution that doesn't work for XSLT but does work for OWL
18:42:20 [heflin]
Dan: Use case for XML literals and cardinality constraints: A product has XML descriptions in different files, but can only have one description. Are the two files consistent?
18:50:42 [pfps]
proposal - abstract syntax uses same syntax as RDF for literals
18:51:19 [DanC]
Connolly abstains
18:51:41 [guus]
zakim, who is talking
18:51:43 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is talking', guus
18:51:47 [jjc]
Zakim, who's talking?
18:51:47 [DanC]
on the basis that I can't endorse the XMLLiteral design. 1/2 ;-)
18:52:00 [Zakim]
jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus (8%), Jeremy (17%), JosD (9%)
18:52:19 [heflin]
RESOLVED: abstract syntax uses same syntax as RDF for literals
18:53:47 [heflin]
ACTION Jeremy: to produce test case for XML literal
18:55:17 [heflin]
18:56:26 [Zakim]
18:56:28 [heflin]
18:56:29 [heflin]
(Semantics &
18:56:29 [heflin]
Abstract Syntax).
18:56:55 [heflin]
abstains: Pat
18:57:17 [heflin]
ACTION: Massimo publish reference (continued)
18:57:50 [heflin]
ACTION: Connolly get Tests published
18:59:52 [heflin]
ACTION: Jeremy make Test updates by Monday
19:00:23 [Zakim]
19:00:26 [Zakim]
19:00:30 [Zakim]
19:00:32 [Zakim]
19:00:36 [Zakim]
19:00:37 [Zakim]
19:00:40 [DanC]
RRSAgent, pointer?
19:00:41 [RRSAgent]
19:00:41 [Zakim]
19:00:41 [Zakim]
19:00:44 [Zakim]
19:00:45 [Zakim]
19:00:48 [Zakim]
19:00:50 [Zakim]
19:02:07 [baget]
what happened?
19:02:50 [Zakim]
19:02:50 [baget]
phone stopped, and trying to call back I had az message "conferebce restricted at this time"
19:03:06 [DanC]
we're adjouned
19:03:49 [baget]
19:04:08 [Zakim]
19:04:19 [heflin]
Zakim, actions?
19:04:20 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, heflin.
19:04:29 [heflin]
Zakim, list actions?
19:04:30 [Zakim]
I see SW_WebOnt()12:00PM
19:12:13 [Zakim]
19:12:24 [Zakim]
19:12:25 [Zakim]
SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended
19:35:54 [heflin]
heflin has left #webont
19:56:32 [jjc]
20:15:30 [DanC]
DanC has left #webont
21:29:58 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #webont