16:51:28 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #webont
16:57:17 <guus> guus has joined #webont
16:59:35 <Zakim> SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has now started
16:59:36 <seanb> seanb has joined #webont
16:59:42 <Zakim> +??P6
17:00:52 <Zakim> +??P28
17:00:58 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
17:01:14 <guus> zakim, ??p28 is Guus
17:01:14 <Zakim> +Guus; got it
17:02:41 <guus> zakim, who is talking?
17:02:52 <Zakim> guus, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P6 (82%)
17:02:58 <Zakim> +??P32
17:03:05 <IanH> IanH has joined #webont
17:03:09 <Zakim> +Ian_Horrocks
17:03:23 <mdean> mdean has joined #webont
17:03:27 <jjc> jjc has joined #webont
17:03:33 <Zakim> +Deb_Mcguinness
17:03:40 <jjc> hi
17:03:47 <jjc> Zakim, who's on the call
17:03:47 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who's on the call', jjc
17:03:50 <jjc> Zakim, who's on the call?
17:03:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P6, Guus, Mike_Dean, ??P32, Ian_Horrocks, Deb_Mcguinness
17:04:02 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
17:04:16 <jjc> Zakim, mute ??P32
17:04:16 <Zakim> ??P32 should now be muted
17:04:30 <jjc> Zakim, ??P32 is jjc
17:04:30 <Zakim> +jjc; got it
17:04:38 <jjc> Zakim unmute jjc
17:04:43 <jjc> Zakim, unmute jjc
17:04:43 <Zakim> jjc should no longer be muted
17:04:48 <Zakim> +HermanT
17:05:02 <Zakim> +DanC
17:05:14 <Zakim> +??P66
17:05:29 <jjc> Zakim, who is talking?
17:05:40 <Zakim> jjc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Guus (25%), ??P66 (20%), HermanT (4%), DanC (4%)
17:05:48 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: WebOnt 18Dec. Chair: GuusS scribe: ? http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/
17:05:52 <guus> zakim, ??p32 is Jeremy
17:05:52 <Zakim> sorry, guus, I do not recognize a party named '??p32'
17:06:26 <guus> zakim, ??p26 is Yasser
17:06:26 <Zakim> sorry, guus, I do not recognize a party named '??p26'
17:06:34 <Zakim> +Sandro
17:06:55 <DanC> Zakim, who is on the phone?
17:06:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see Yasser, Guus, Mike_Dean, jjc, Ian_Horrocks, Deb_Mcguinness, Evan_Wallace, HermanT, DanC, SeanB, Sandro
17:08:08 <DanC> Zakim, agenda?
17:08:08 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
17:08:09 <Zakim> 1. 18Dec http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Dec/0067.html [from DanC]
17:08:18 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose SeanB
17:08:33 <DanC> DanC has changed the topic to: WebOnt 18Dec. Chair: GuusS scribe: jjc http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/
17:08:44 <jjcscribe> Guus chairs
17:08:59 <jjcscribe> rollcall above
17:09:22 <DanC> I'm available 8Jan
17:09:40 <Zakim> +[UMD]
17:09:42 <DanC> I'm available 15Jan
17:09:53 <jjcscribe> Next m,eeting Guus suggests 15th Jan? 
17:09:56 <Jhendler> Jhendler has joined #webont
17:10:21 <jjcscribe> JimH notes Jan 19th PR ends
17:10:24 <jjcscribe> Dan seonds proposal from Guus
17:10:31 <jjcscribe> Next meeting 15th Jan 2004
17:10:36 <jjcscribe> Agendum 2
17:10:54 <jjcscribe> Chair proposes thanks to DanC and Sandro
17:10:55 <Jhendler> zakim, [umd] is jimH
17:10:55 <Zakim> +jimH; got it
17:11:25 <jjcscribe> Also tashnks to Jeremy for extra effort and test
17:11:49 <jjcscribe> (and every editor, 
17:11:56 <jjcscribe> the whole group should feel proud
17:12:08 <jjcscribe> Zakim, mute jjc
17:12:08 <Zakim> jjc should now be muted
17:12:22 <jjcscribe> is that better soundwise?
17:12:27 <sandro> Yes, JJC
17:12:30 <jjcscribe> not for me
17:12:37 <Zakim> -jjc
17:12:48 <jjcscribe> scribe is lost ....
17:13:36 <jjcscribe> what's the passcode?
17:13:42 <DanC> Zakim, passcode?
17:13:42 <Zakim> the conference code is 9326, DanC
17:13:51 <Zakim> +??P32
17:13:55 <jjcscribe> scribe back again
17:14:04 <jjcscribe> Zakim, ??P32 is jjc
17:14:04 <Zakim> +jjc; got it
17:14:11 <sandro> JimH: EVERYONE please encourage your AC reps to vote.
17:14:21 <DanC> Hendler: contact AC reps to give formal feedback on our proposed rec; both the org you work for an any W3C member orgs you work with
17:14:38 <sandro> vote at:  http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/owlpr/
17:15:01 <sandro> s/vote/give feedback
17:15:19 <jjcscribe> danc explains process
17:15:26 <jjcscribe> for PR and AC review
17:16:09 <Jhendler> The AC member gets to choose from
17:16:10 <Jhendler> [# be published as a W3C Recommendation as is.
17:16:16 <Jhendler> # be published as a W3C Recommendation with minor changes (your details below)
17:16:16 <Jhendler> # be returned for further work due to substantial issues (your details below)
17:16:16 <Jhendler> # not be published as a specification, and discontinued as a W3C work item (your details below)
17:16:17 <Jhendler> # My organization abstains from this review]
17:16:21 <sandro> (also RDF Core : http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/rdfpr/ )
17:17:28 <Jhendler> also an invitation to be involved with the publicity
17:18:13 <jjcscribe> Zakim, mute jjc
17:18:13 <Zakim> jjc should now be muted
17:18:44 <jjcscribe> AC vote advises director
17:19:11 <sandro> DanC: Things that mostly count are: My Org wants this (going to build products) and We don't want to this to go forward (and here's why).
17:19:48 <jjcscribe> detailed discussion of form
17:20:43 <jjcscribe> AOB entry sean's note added number 7
17:21:10 <jjcscribe> Approve minutes of last call ---
17:21:23 <jjcscribe> 3.0 Dan 2nds - approved
17:21:25 <DanC> minutes of last call  (Nov 13)
17:21:25 <DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Nov/0064.html
17:21:32 <jjcscribe> thanks dan
17:21:51 <jjcscribe> Action items 4.0 - amnesty on all actioons
17:22:10 <jjcscribe> Zakim, unmute jjc
17:22:10 <Zakim> jjc should no longer be muted
17:22:16 <Zakim> +??P40
17:22:18 <jjcscribe> People may do actions if they want
17:22:25 <dlm> dlm has joined #webont
17:22:43 <jjcscribe> Agendum 5 QA review
17:22:48 <jjcscribe> Zakim, mute jjc
17:22:48 <Zakim> jjc should now be muted
17:23:00 <jjcscribe> cf
17:23:21 <jjcscribe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Dec/0065.html
17:23:42 <jjcscribe> We were building a case study for their guidelines .... 
17:23:47 <jjcscribe> that was part II
17:24:02 <DanC> fyi, jeremy, Zakim has a new feature where it tells everybody that was on the phone at any time during the call when it's dismissed
17:24:13 <jjcscribe> Zakim, unmute jjc
17:24:13 <Zakim> jjc should no longer be muted
17:26:02 <jjcscribe> JimH suggest separating part I and II as two separate msgs
17:26:52 <jjcscribe> i.e. I and III in one msg and II in a separate piece
17:27:45 <Zakim> +[EDS]
17:28:02 <Jhendler> zakim, [eds] is mike smith
17:28:02 <Zakim> I don't understand '[eds] is mike smith', Jhendler
17:28:12 <jjcscribe> left as editorial decision for Evan and Jeremy ...
17:28:13 <Jhendler> zakim, [EDS] is mike smith
17:28:13 <Zakim> I don't understand '[EDS] is mike smith', Jhendler
17:28:25 <Jhendler> zakim, [EDS] is mikeSmith
17:28:25 <Zakim> +mikeSmith; got it
17:29:21 <jjcscribe> Jeremy suggests www-qa www-qa-wg
17:29:31 <jjcscribe> as places to send this comment
17:29:50 <DanC> "You may email comments on this document to www-qa@w3.org, the publicly archived list"
17:30:33 <jjcscribe> DanC "wholly endorses review"
17:31:17 <jjcscribe> Proposal to approve review with edits agreed, and editorial discretion to Evan
17:31:31 <jjcscribe> (will go out today or tomorrow)
17:31:37 <jjcscribe> Connolly seconds
17:31:54 <jjcscribe> No objections
17:32:16 <jjcscribe> Hendler Schriber Carroll 
17:32:20 <jjcscribe> lots in favour
17:32:33 <jjcscribe> no abstentions
17:33:05 <jjcscribe> Thanks to Evan and Jeremy for review
17:33:14 <jjcscribe> (particularly Evan! - scribe)
17:33:26 <jjcscribe> 6 Handling of errors
17:33:29 <jjcscribe> DanC:
17:34:11 <jjcscribe> Proposed Rec is end of WG works
17:34:18 <jjcscribe> the recs belong to director
17:34:54 <jjcscribe> Question: there is a type s/all/some/ in an example
17:35:16 <jjcscribe> DanC says make change in editors draft ... cost of change is high
17:36:13 <jjcscribe> AC reps may make comments which may include fixes
17:37:07 <jjcscribe> AC votes can add comments after having voted
17:37:28 <jjcscribe> fixing typos is OK - 
17:37:49 <jjcscribe> must not cross line where someone who voted for PR is unhappy with REC
17:39:34 <jjcscribe> there is a problem with minor versus major change ...
17:40:08 <jjcscribe> DanC prefers concrete discussion ...
17:40:29 <jjcscribe> First issue XMLLiteral - Herman
17:40:51 <jjcscribe> S&AS is normative description of OWL Semantics
17:41:42 <sandro> "They are intended to provide examples for, and clarification of, the normative definition of OWL found in [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax] to which this document is subsidiary."
17:41:59 <DanC> "They are intended to provide examples for, and clarification of, the normative definition of OWL found in [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax] to which this document is subsidiary."
17:42:34 <jjcscribe> Many members agree that S&AS is *the* normative defn
17:43:26 <DanC> "my message of a few days ago" is ambiguous; I'm aware of several
17:44:59 <jjcscribe> Herman makes the point that the text of test misc-201-204 needs to change in his position.
17:45:36 <jjcscribe> Herman suggests looking at msg 68
17:45:52 <jjcscribe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Dec/0068.html
17:48:12 <DanC> misc-201 to misc-205
17:48:21 <Jhendler> jeremy - discusses implicit vs. explicit nature of the XMLLiteral rec, and describes some test cases
17:48:55 <seanb> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/misc-200-xmlliteral#miscellaneous-201
17:49:21 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/misc-200-xmlliteral#misc-200-xmlliteral
17:51:10 <Zakim> -Yasser
17:51:13 <jjcscribe> horrocks I think it is explicit that rdf:XMLLiteral is not required
17:51:24 <jjcscribe> DanC what do our implementors think?
17:52:29 <jjcscribe> Hendler: if you have not added reasoning for rdf:XMLLiteral then test 205 comes out this way
17:52:32 <sandro> Note that test results have F-OWL, Pellet, OWLP, and Hoolet as passing misc-205, and ConVISor as failing it.
17:52:50 <jjcscribe> Herman: S&AS has normative ref to RDF Semantics
17:52:52 <sandro> (and no others)
17:55:41 <jjcscribe> Herman points to D interpretations being imported in section 5 of S&AS from RDF Semantics
17:55:57 <jjcscribe> D interpretations in RDF Semantics have rdf:XMLLiteral
17:59:15 <jjcscribe> Definition: Let D be a datatype map that includes datatypes for xsd:integer and xsd:string. An OWL interpretation, I = < RI, PI, EXTI, SI, LI, LVI >, of a vocabulary V, where V includes the RDF and RDFS vocabularies and the OWL vocabulary, is a D-interpretation of V that satisfies all the constraints in this section. 
17:59:54 <Jhendler> But... -- if I run test 205 through an RDF system which supports the RDF data map for XMLLiteral, that system will do the right thing as detailed in our test
18:00:09 <jjcscribe> D-interpretations must meet several other conditions, as detailed in the RDF semantics.
18:00:45 <jjcscribe> Herman: "this is a sumamry section to help the reader" this is not a complete repeat of RDF semantics
18:01:02 <jjcscribe> they allows S&AS to be read on its own
18:01:15 <Jhendler> or should I say - run it through an RDF parser w functional added...
18:03:28 <jjcscribe> Horrocks: section3 definitely does not contain this condition
18:05:14 <jjcscribe> Herman: tests depend on section 5
18:05:24 <jjcscribe> Carroll: no Lite and DL tests depend on section 3
18:06:53 <jjcscribe> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#testConsistency
18:07:28 <sandro> Stepping back of a sec, I'm really worried about this idea that every OWL system MUST supposed XML Literal.  Supporting XML Literal is likely to be a royal pain.
18:07:52 <guus> guus has joined #webont
18:08:01 <Jhendler> q
18:08:02 <DanC> when the WG considered that explicitly, sandro, we decided XML Literal support is not necessary. but it seems that perhaps a bug has crept in somewhere
18:08:16 <sandro> "somewhere" == "RDF COre".
18:08:54 <DanC> well, I don't think RDF Core created a bug; I think they changed something, and we didn't fully consider the impact of the change on our earlier decisions
18:08:56 <sandro> They said every RDF system must support XML Literal; we only said OWL (Full?) systems were RDF systems.
18:08:59 <guus> q?
18:09:16 <jjcscribe> Herman: if OWL DL does not support rdf:XMLLiteral then it is not a semantic ext of RDFS
18:09:35 <sandro> Right -- but it strikes me as a bad idea for RDF Core to require XMLLiteral of very RDF systems.
18:10:48 <Zakim> +Sandro.a
18:11:13 <Zakim> -Sandro
18:11:50 <jjcscribe> DanC: what changes do people want?
18:12:48 <jjcscribe> Herman: add rdf:XMLLiteral to ... list of datatypes in section3 
18:14:57 <jjcscribe> Carroll, could support change technically but not at cost of going back
18:15:34 <jjcscribe> Horrocks we have explicitly voted to not support rdf:XMLLiteral
18:15:58 <jjcscribe> ter Horst This is a deviation from what S&AS says
18:17:33 <jjcscribe> Herman claims to have a test case, Horrocks believes it
18:18:25 <jjcscribe> Herman's example msg 58
18:18:42 <jjcscribe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Dec/0058.html
18:18:48 <DanC> Horrocks: ill-formed XML literal is inconsitent in an RDF D-interpretation but not in OWL Lite/DL
18:21:25 <jjcscribe> (that is same as herman's example)
18:22:26 <jjcscribe> DanC reiterates that cost of change is high
18:23:22 <jjcscribe> Carrroll asks about s/datatype tehory/datatype map/
18:24:03 <jjcscribe> Herman proposed change in section 3
18:24:10 <jjcscribe> Carroll suggested only in section 5
18:25:00 <jjcscribe> Herman believes Carroll proposal is better than no change
18:25:21 <Jhendler> test 201 says - Datatypes that may or may not be supported:
18:25:52 <Jhendler> which is ambiguous enough to be fine (i.e. can be interepreted as supported in Full, not supported in Lite)
18:27:45 <DanC> Carrol: [my proposal?] is mainly taking "full" out of test 205
18:28:50 <jjcscribe> ACTION carroll expand proposal to modify 205 without Full
18:28:57 <jjcscribe> Ian can't make the 8th
18:31:39 <jjcscribe> Carroll - business arguments take precedence over technical arguments
18:31:58 <DanC> in general, business and technical interact in non-linear ways
18:32:41 <jjcscribe> Chair moved an extension
18:32:53 <jjcscribe> ACTION carroll propose theory to map change
18:33:32 <Jhendler> I second the proposal to make Sean's doc a WG Note if team contact will support hat
18:33:36 <Jhendler> s/hat/that
18:33:42 <jjcscribe> SeanB's note
18:33:55 <jjcscribe> Zakim, who's on the call?
18:33:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see Guus, Mike_Dean, Ian_Horrocks, Deb_Mcguinness, Evan_Wallace, HermanT, DanC, SeanB, jimH, jjc, CharlesW, mikeSmith, Sandro
18:34:13 <seanb> we can hear you!
18:34:17 <Jhendler> we hear sandro - he doesn't hear us
18:34:53 <jjcscribe> reuest to sandro to act as team contact for publishing WG note (SeanB's doc)
18:35:16 <jjcscribe> Guus proposes publishing Sean's note
18:35:21 <jjcscribe> as WG note
18:35:25 <jjcscribe> Carroll and others second
18:35:31 <jjcscribe> no objection, no abstention
18:35:35 <jjcscribe> thanks to Sean
18:35:52 <jjcscribe> ACTION Sandro To act as team contact for WG note.
18:35:56 <DanC> (jjc, note that who seconds isn't important for W3C process; a 2nd helps the chair detect non-trivial support for a proposal)
18:36:34 <jjcscribe> Annotations left til 15th
18:36:44 <jjcscribe> ACTION chairs Add annotationproperties to agenda for 15th
18:36:49 <jjcscribe> FYI DanC
18:37:10 <jjcscribe> There is charter for Best practice WG 
18:37:36 <DanC> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/#Current
18:37:46 <DanC> $Revision: 1.42 $
18:37:59 <jjcscribe> Tentative date for kick off for best practices at tehc plenary
18:39:05 <jjcscribe> Call for discussion on charter of BP group to take places in Cannes
18:39:12 <jjcscribe> WebOnt WG will not be meeting in Cannes
18:39:37 <jjcscribe> There will be a party for WebOnt WG members at Cannes
18:39:51 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
18:39:53 <Zakim> -mikeSmith
18:39:53 <jjcscribe> (Carroll complains that party is not part of the process)
18:39:56 <Zakim> -DanC
18:39:57 <Zakim> -jimH
18:39:58 <Zakim> -Ian_Horrocks
18:40:01 <Zakim> -HermanT
18:40:02 <Zakim> -Deb_Mcguinness
18:40:03 <Zakim> -Sandro
18:40:04 <Zakim> -jjc
18:40:05 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
18:40:06 <Zakim> -Guus
18:40:07 <Zakim> -CharlesW
18:40:08 <Zakim> -SeanB
18:40:09 <Zakim> SW_WebOnt()12:00PM has ended
18:40:11 <Zakim> Attendees were Mike_Dean, Guus, Ian_Horrocks, Deb_Mcguinness, Evan_Wallace, jjc, HermanT, DanC, Sandro, SeanB, Yasser, jimH, CharlesW, mikeSmith
18:40:20 <DanC> hmm... jeremy, clearly we need an ISO9000-certified party, yes?
18:40:38 <DanC> ;-)
18:40:52 <Jhendler> point to RalphS for "attendees were..."   nice zakim change!!
18:41:07 <DanC> yeah, Zakim's got some new features.
18:41:09 <DanC> Zakim, help?
18:41:09 <Zakim> Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot for more detailed help.
18:41:11 <Zakim> Some of the commands I know are:
18:41:12 <Zakim>  xxx is yyy       - establish yyy as the name of unknown party xxx
18:41:14 <Zakim>                     if yyy is 'me' or 'I', your nick is substituted
18:41:16 <Zakim>  xxx may be yyy   - establish yyy as possibly the name of unknown party xxx
18:41:18 <Zakim>  I am xxx         - establish your nick as the name of unknown party xxx
18:41:20 <Zakim>  xxx holds yyy [, zzz ...] - establish xxx as a group name and yyy, etc. as participants within that group
18:41:22 <Zakim>  xxx also holds yyy - add yyy to the list of participants in group xxx
18:41:24 <Zakim>  who's here?      - lists the participants on the phone
18:41:26 <Zakim>  who's muted?     - lists the participants who are muted
18:41:28 <Zakim>  mute xxx         - mutes party xxx (like pressing 61#)
18:41:30 <Zakim>  unmute xxx       - reverses the effect of "mute" and of 61#
18:41:32 <Zakim>  is xxx here?     - reports whether a party named like xxx is present
18:41:34 <Zakim>  list conferences - reports the active conferences
18:41:35 <Zakim>  this is xxx      - associates this channel with conference xxx
18:41:36 <Zakim>  excuse us        - disconnects from the irc channel
18:41:37 <Zakim> I last learned something new on $Date: 2003/12/18 18:58:51 $
18:41:45 <Jhendler> very nice
18:56:51 <Jhendler> Jhendler has joined #webont