IRC log of webont on 2003-09-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:50:22 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #webont
15:50:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #webont
15:50:29 [DanC]
Zakim, this will be webo
15:50:29 [Zakim]
ok, DanC; I see SW_WebOnt()12:00PM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
15:50:57 [DanC]
agenda + 11 Sep http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0091.html
15:51:07 [DanC]
DanC has changed the topic to: 11 Sep http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/
15:51:43 [baget]
baget has joined #webont
15:58:22 [sandro]
sandro has joined #webont
15:58:53 [Zakim]
SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has now started
15:59:01 [Zakim]
+Sandro
15:59:47 [Zakim]
+[INRIA]
16:01:04 [Zakim]
+Jeff_Heflin
16:01:09 [JimH_]
JimH_ has joined #webont
16:01:33 [seanb]
seanb has joined #webont
16:02:08 [Zakim]
+??P2
16:02:22 [Zakim]
+[UMD]
16:02:27 [IanH]
IanH has joined #webont
16:02:36 [JimH_]
zakim, [umd] is JimH
16:02:36 [Zakim]
+JimH; got it
16:02:38 [sandro]
zakim, ??P2 is Ian
16:02:38 [Zakim]
+Ian; got it
16:02:56 [sandro]
zakim, [INRIA] is Jean-Francois
16:02:56 [Zakim]
+Jean-Francois; got it
16:03:08 [Zakim]
+??P38
16:03:35 [Zakim]
+DanC
16:03:40 [sandro]
zakim, ??P38 is Sean
16:03:40 [Zakim]
+Sean; got it
16:04:04 [jjc]
jjc has joined #webont
16:04:11 [jjc]
joining shortly
16:04:50 [JimH_]
Resolved: accept minutes of last week's meeting
16:04:54 [Zakim]
+??P61
16:05:07 [Zakim]
-JimH
16:05:23 [Zakim]
+[UMD]
16:05:35 [JimH_]
zakim, [umd] is jimH
16:05:35 [Zakim]
+jimH; got it
16:05:53 [JimH_]
zakim, pick a scribe
16:05:53 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Sandro
16:06:14 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
16:06:14 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2003/09/11-webont-irc#T16-06-14
16:06:24 [sandro]
051 true record, resolved
16:06:30 [DanC]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:06:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Sandro, Jean-Francois, Jeff_Heflin, Ian, Sean, DanC, ??P61, jimH
16:06:58 [JimH_]
zakim, ??p61 is terHorst
16:06:58 [Zakim]
+terHorst; got it
16:07:38 [Zakim]
+??P65
16:07:48 [jjc]
Zakim, ?P65 is jjc
16:07:49 [Zakim]
sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named '?P65'
16:07:54 [jjc]
Zakim, ??P65 is jjc
16:07:54 [Zakim]
+jjc; got it
16:08:27 [sandro]
Ian:
16:08:44 [sandro]
Ian: by the fortnightly plan, this would be a week off
16:09:03 [sandro]
Jim: we're back to weekly. I'm hoping to cut them down to an hour, though.
16:09:31 [sandro]
RESOLVED Meeting 18 September, Chair Guus, focus: Outreach
16:10:07 [sandro]
JJC: agenda item: disagreement about what it means to pass a test
16:10:28 [sandro]
(no scribe picked for 18th)
16:11:16 [sandro]
JimH: re G.O.C. -- no such single thing which could endorse OWL. Lots of members (include Ian). I'm trying to learn who controls the domain name, etc.
16:11:35 [sandro]
DanC: I'd like them to talk about / recommend OWL on their website
16:11:39 [sandro]
JimH: mine too
16:11:55 [sandro]
... action: continued
16:12:17 [sandro]
JimH: so it doesnt get forgotten; later it can be refined.
16:12:42 [sandro]
--- 3. Approve Tests
16:13:00 [sandro]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0108.html
16:13:03 [DanC]
Proposal to approve twice-passed tests http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0108.html
16:13:46 [sandro]
DanC: strike the Syntax Tests from this bit
16:13:51 [sandro]
JJC, JimH: agreed
16:17:17 [sandro]
JimH: Any opposed to marking these tests Approved?
16:17:22 [sandro]
JimH: Any abstain
16:17:36 [sandro]
PASSED
16:17:46 [Zakim]
+Mike_Dean
16:17:57 [DanC]
yeah, we have the sexiest test suite around, I'm pretty sure.
16:18:00 [sandro]
Action: JJC change status of all these tests in the editor's draft.
16:18:24 [sandro]
---- 4. DL Syntax
16:18:37 [sandro]
action on Peter, DONE
16:18:42 [sandro]
action on DanC, DONE
16:19:18 [sandro]
JJC: summary: Peter found a flaw in the proof that will take time to patch
16:19:44 [sandro]
JJC: Since we now have enough syntax checkers, we may not need this. Does the WG want more work on this?
16:20:20 [sandro]
Ian: We agreed to try to a certain extent. It seems like JJC has reached that extent.
16:20:47 [sandro]
DanC: The people passing the tests kind of won this race. :-)
16:21:20 [sandro]
JimH: It's not implementing it that's hard, it's understanding the constraints that's hard.
16:21:35 [sandro]
JimH: (according to my folks who are trying)
16:21:50 [Zakim]
+??P68
16:22:33 [sandro]
JJC: OWL Implementor's Guide would be nice; maybe we can encourage it....
16:23:02 [JimH_]
zakim, ??p68 is charlesW
16:23:02 [Zakim]
+charlesW; got it
16:23:03 [sandro]
DanC: Document which were more implementor friendly would be nice, but... the test results suggest this is good enough.
16:23:09 [sandro]
zakim, who is here?
16:23:09 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Sandro, Jean-Francois, Jeff_Heflin, Ian, Sean, DanC, terHorst, jimH, jjc, Mike_Dean, charlesW
16:23:11 [Zakim]
On IRC I see jjc, IanH, seanb, JimH_, sandro, baget, Zakim, RRSAgent, DanC, logger
16:23:58 [sandro]
JimH: It would really nice to have a Implementor's Guide for the B1/B2 issue.
16:24:15 [sandro]
Sean: I expect to write something in this area, in the course of my work.
16:25:07 [sandro]
JJC: there's a possible test case here, as far as we got.
16:25:52 [DanC]
let the record show that the WG encourages folks to document the mapping in implementor-friendly terms and let us know.
16:26:15 [sandro]
JimH: you're always encouraged to propose tests
16:26:25 [seanb]
seanb has joined #webont
16:26:39 [sandro]
JimH: Do we need to close this officially?
16:26:44 [sandro]
DanC: No.
16:27:01 [sandro]
JimH: We could tell the world this is no longer at risk.
16:28:20 [sandro]
JimH:... but lets keep our options open.
16:28:51 [sandro]
jjc: Implementors might want to know the odds have changed....
16:29:11 [DanC]
"I've got to get my skates on and do some coding" ;-)
16:29:13 [DanC]
-- jjc
16:29:25 [sandro]
DanC: the impls report shows they're okay....
16:30:25 [sandro]
ACTION JimH: check process doc re: features at Risk
16:31:30 [sandro]
--- 5. Internationalization
16:31:37 [sandro]
actions done
16:31:51 [Zakim]
+ +1.323.444.aaaa
16:31:52 [sandro]
DanC: this was prep to a decision
16:32:09 [sandro]
zakim, +1.323.444.aaaa is Jos
16:32:09 [Zakim]
+Jos; got it
16:32:47 [sandro]
JimH: I'm not comfortable talking about this without Guus here
16:34:40 [jjc]
q+ to mention RDF Core WDs
16:34:56 [JosD]
JosD has joined #webont
16:35:14 [sandro]
ack jjc
16:35:14 [Zakim]
jjc, you wanted to mention RDF Core WDs
16:35:49 [sandro]
JJC: Now is the time to comment on RDF Core I18N issues.
16:36:53 [sandro]
--- 6. Test review
16:37:01 [sandro]
Done ACTION: Jeremy C. to study DL 909 and report back.
16:37:31 [Zakim]
+??P7
16:37:57 [JimH_]
zakim, ??p7 is McGuinness
16:37:57 [Zakim]
+McGuinness; got it
16:38:31 [sandro]
Zakim, who is here?
16:38:31 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Sandro, Jean-Francois, Jeff_Heflin, Ian, Sean, DanC, terHorst, jimH, jjc, Mike_Dean, charlesW, Jos, McGuinness
16:38:32 [dlm]
dlm has joined #webont
16:38:33 [Zakim]
On IRC I see JosD, seanb, jjc, IanH, JimH_, sandro, baget, Zakim, RRSAgent, DanC, logger
16:38:41 [JimH_]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0103.html
16:38:49 [dlm]
hi got on a bit earlier than anticipated
16:38:55 [JimH_]
is Jeremy's email about extra credit
16:39:34 [sandro]
Ian: Is this FULL Tests?
16:40:14 [sandro]
JJC: FULL PET/InC we can be satisfied by the passes, but the others....
16:40:24 [JimH_]
+
16:41:05 [Zakim]
+[EDS]
16:41:45 [JimH_]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
16:41:52 [JimH_]
m
16:41:55 [JimH_]
e
16:41:57 [JimH_]
a
16:41:59 [JimH_]
p
16:42:00 [JimH_]
o
16:42:02 [JimH_]
l
16:42:03 [JimH_]
o
16:42:33 [sandro]
DanC: you should not report those as passes.
16:43:34 [sandro]
Jos: agreed.
16:44:07 [sandro]
Sandro: so many of our twice-passed bits from earlier this meeting are only single-passed, really.
16:44:07 [sandro]
DanC: so be it.
16:44:18 [DanC]
when Jos updates his report to show "incomplete" for non-entailment tests, we may show more "approved tests without 2 systems".
16:46:01 [sandro]
DanC: JJC's proposal for making Extra Credit as status
16:46:52 [sandro]
JJC I'll move a few, provisionally, to see how it works out?
16:47:39 [sandro]
Jim: Sandro, can you do: Which proposed tests DONT have two....
16:49:36 [guus]
guus has joined #webont
16:51:25 [Zakim]
+??P3
16:51:45 [guus]
zakim, ??p3 is Guus
16:51:45 [Zakim]
+Guus; got it
16:52:44 [sandro]
Sandro: what exactly do we mean by 80% full, ... ?
16:53:03 [sandro]
DanC: we dont need to formalize it that much
16:53:18 [sandro]
JimH: Pellet doesnt claim to be Full, but it does lots of Full stuff
16:53:44 [sandro]
Jos: Euler's FAIL?
16:54:04 [sandro]
Sandro: don't even run that test, since it doesnt apply to your reasoner's semantics
16:54:15 [sandro]
DanC: there are two semantics; this test shows the difference between them.
16:54:29 [sandro]
JJC: it's not wholey satisfactory, but it's not wholey broken.
16:55:02 [sandro]
(When I say "dont run it" i mean youre test harness shouldn't give it to euler, since the semantics dont match.)
16:55:46 [sandro]
JimH: You CANT get 100% of all tests, since you'll be using one semantics or the other.
16:56:01 [sandro]
JimH: or you can, if you define things differently.
16:56:27 [sandro]
JJC: these two tests: one is Lite, one is Full. Other tests are both lite AND Full.
16:57:03 [sandro]
JJC: doc suggest you don't give a Lite reasoner a Full test, etc.
16:57:29 [sandro]
Sean: I just ignored all Full tests.
16:58:40 [DanC]
I dunno if the systems need to say whether they're full or not.
16:58:58 [DanC]
I'm happy with just "no data". I suppose "not applicable" is an improvement, but not a critical one.
16:59:02 [sandro]
Sandro: sounds like we need systems to be categorized (Lite/Full, and Datatype support); and we get true "N/A" not just "no data"
16:59:16 [sandro]
(actually JJC said half that)
17:00:33 [seanb]
"The extension of OWL Thing may be be *emtpy*" sp?
17:00:50 [sandro]
Ian/Sandro -- your system needs to advertise which semantics it uses: DL or Full.
17:01:17 [sandro]
... hybrid reasoners, dispatchers ...
17:01:39 [sandro]
-- 7 EXIT CRITERION
17:02:15 [sandro]
? ACTION: Jim Hendler - Report PELLET status re complete OWL Lite consistency checkers
17:02:22 [sandro]
Continued. Bijan making sure.
17:02:39 [sandro]
? ACTION: Ian Horrocks - Report Cerebra and Racer status re complete OWL Lite consistency checkers
17:02:48 [sandro]
Continued. In the next day or two
17:03:11 [sandro]
? ACTION: Charles White will collect data on test detail. Send him lists of test you have passed.
17:03:14 [sandro]
DONE
17:03:53 [sandro]
? ACTION: Sandro - Report reasoning status re useful subsets of OWL Full.
17:04:08 [sandro]
DanC: no claims that Surnia is "useful" yet....
17:05:22 [sandro]
CONTINUED re Surnia,
17:05:25 [sandro]
DONE re Euler
17:05:42 [sandro]
? ACTION: Jeremy - Will ask Dave Reynolds re reasoner status over useful subsets of OWL Full.
17:06:03 [sandro]
DONE. (Jena report promised.)
17:06:30 [sandro]
? ACTION: Sean B. - Report officially on species validation syntactic
17:06:35 [sandro]
DONE! Woo Hoo!
17:06:45 [sandro]
? action petere
17:06:46 [sandro]
DONE
17:06:53 [sandro]
? Action Ian:
17:06:54 [sandro]
DONE
17:07:03 [sandro]
? Action Jim
17:07:09 [DanC]
(Anybody have a pointer to Ian's results about syntax checking?)
17:07:12 [sandro]
CONTINUED (not yet)
17:07:36 [sandro]
---- Next Steps (DanC)
17:09:36 [sandro]
DanC: Ask for PR. Not before 20th.
17:09:47 [sandro]
DanC: It's okay to do another CR draft, if we want
17:10:13 [sandro]
JJC: We could change the links to RDF, now that their WDs are published
17:11:32 [sandro]
ACTION Ian: report back on whether RDF WDs are as expected by S&AS
17:12:21 [sandro]
JJC: if we have a long CR we should repub TEST
17:12:28 [sandro]
JimH: yeah
17:13:23 [sandro]
ACTION JimH: discuss PR schedule with CG
17:13:46 [sandro]
JimH: good time to update TEST when we think we're done with it, and ready for PR.
17:14:53 [sandro]
----- E-mail to RDF IG calling attention to OTR
17:15:09 [DanC]
(and rdf-logic, if you like)
17:15:25 [sandro]
ACTION Sandro: send email about http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out, asking for more data
17:15:32 [sandro]
------ FAQ
17:16:23 [sandro]
JimH: My FAQ is "about OWL", at the press-release level.
17:16:52 [sandro]
Deb: Mine was at the how-to-do-this-in-OWL level
17:17:12 [sandro]
Deb: Better mechanism at W3C?
17:17:17 [sandro]
DanC: I dunno...
17:17:17 [guus]
will put this on the agenda for next week
17:18:01 [sandro]
DanC: I'm inclined to take your Cookbook entry and put it on esw Wiki http://esw.w3.org/topic/
17:18:11 [guus]
Dan: action to propose this for next week?
17:18:13 [sandro]
Deb: that sounds fine
17:18:31 [sandro]
JimH: Having it keep running post WG (eg Wiki) would be good
17:19:39 [sandro]
ACTION DanC: Propose Wiki be used for FAQ
17:20:07 [sandro]
DanC: let's talk about ISWC next week too
17:23:57 [IanH]
URL for OntoWeb SIG meeting:
17:23:59 [IanH]
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/%7Ehorrocks/OntoWeb/SIG/node9.html
17:24:14 [sandro]
ACTION DanC: summarize OWL press coverage
17:24:14 [guus]
Action Guus: send overview of ISWC-related events
17:24:28 [sandro]
ADJOURN
17:24:32 [Zakim]
-jjc
17:24:35 [Zakim]
-[EDS]
17:24:40 [Zakim]
-terHorst
17:24:42 [Zakim]
-DanC
17:24:45 [Zakim]
-Guus
17:24:47 [Zakim]
-Sandro
17:24:49 [Zakim]
-jimH
17:24:50 [Zakim]
-Ian
17:24:53 [Zakim]
-Jeff_Heflin
17:24:54 [Zakim]
-Sean
17:24:55 [Zakim]
-Jean-Francois
17:24:58 [Zakim]
-Mike_Dean
17:24:59 [Zakim]
-charlesW
17:25:00 [Zakim]
-Jos
17:25:01 [Zakim]
-McGuinness
17:25:02 [Zakim]
SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended
19:04:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #webont