IRC log of rif on 2005-12-09

Timestamps are in UTC.

00:01:18 [mdean]
Slide: Semantic Community
00:02:23 [mdean]
Slide: 'Definition'
00:02:55 [mdean]
ISO 1087-1 and 24707 (Common Logic)
00:03:01 [mdean]
Slide: Business Vocabulary
00:03:09 [mdean]
separate meaning from notation
00:03:46 [mdean]
non-normative SBVR structured English
00:04:06 [mdean]
enforcement requires rules about rules
00:04:14 [mdean]
Slide: Semantic Formulation
00:04:45 [mdean]
Slide: Seamntic Formulation of a Simple Rule
00:05:01 [mdean]
strongly linguistics oriented
00:05:08 [mdean]
integrated with formal logic
00:05:48 [mdean]
Grosof: RIF must be able to support communication of non-automatable rules? comment field? support?
00:06:09 [mdean]
e.g. must wear hard had on construction site
00:06:26 [mdean]
enforcement can't be automated
00:06:54 [mdean]
Grosof: perhaps different term that non-automatable
00:07:25 [mdean]
can analyze for ambiguity, inconsistency, etc. even if machine can't enforce
00:07:56 [mdean]
?: rules should be in human readable form - XML is basically binary
00:08:05 [hak]
who spoke?
00:08:22 [MarkusK]
Igor Mozetic
00:09:51 [mdean]
Speaker: Gary , Oracle
00:09:58 [mdean]
DB glossary
00:10:40 [mdean]
Slide: query
00:10:53 [mdean]
optimize using algebraic rewrite rules
00:11:16 [mdean]
Gary Hallmark, Oracle
00:11:29 [mdean]
Slide: view
00:12:24 [mdean]
Slide: integrity constraints
00:12:44 [mdean]
conditions that must hold at transaction boundaries
00:12:49 [mdean]
perhaps add glossary term for transaction
00:13:00 [sandro]
glossary+ transaction
00:13:27 [mdean]
constraints resemble queries - same syntax, different interpretation
00:13:35 [mdean]
Slide: triggers
00:14:24 [mdean]
Slide: how to evolve the KB
00:14:46 [mdean]
Slide: role based access control
00:14:47 [mdean]
00:14:56 [mdean]
in scope for RIF?
00:15:31 [mdean]
Grosof: use of rules for security policy?
00:15:49 [mdean]
Grosof: kitchen sink, without distinguishing layers
00:16:16 [mdean]
Grosof: is this satisfactory?
00:16:51 [mdean]
Gary: arbitrary security requirements, minimum result set size, etc.
00:17:19 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: hoping for more about transactions
00:17:53 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: can't evaluate rule safely until everything available - unitary change
00:18:20 [mdean]
Gary: rules in database vs. rules in middle tier
00:18:32 [mdean]
Gary: ECA rules can't impact other rules
00:18:45 [hak]
There is no such verb as "to inference"! :-)
00:18:55 [mdean]
Speaker: Chris Welty leading open discussion
00:19:17 [mdean]
Welty: What are we doing? How are we doing it?
00:19:50 [mdean]
Boley: scalability to scope of the web?
00:20:10 [mdean]
Boley: hard to control or debug, particularly for active rules (production and reactive)
00:20:23 [mdean]
Welty: scalability is more of a requirement
00:20:44 [mdean]
RIF focus on interchange, not defining a new language
00:21:01 [hak]
00:21:06 [mdean]
understanding will emerge over time
00:21:16 [mdean]
should be less fuzzy as a result of this meeting
00:21:28 [mdean]
tomorrow reserved almost exclusively for discussion of use cases and requirements
00:21:45 [mdean]
Boley: are we concerned about efficient execution of interchanged rules?
00:21:56 [sandro]
Jon Pellant
00:22:11 [holger]
holger has joined #rif
00:22:32 [mdean]
big difference in scope for interchange of rules vs. rule instances running in live environment
00:22:47 [mdean]
Mala: like to see support for evolution of large rule bases
00:22:55 [mdean]
Welty: sounds like requirement
00:23:40 [mdean]
Cory Casanave: what isn't a rule? process modeling as rules about behavior? every UML element?
00:24:17 [mdean]
Dave Springgay: usability, human readability, authoring - outside RIF scope
00:25:05 [mdean]
Hassan: different conceptions of formal semantics logicians as model theory semantics - doesn't have to be model-theoretic; other formalisms possible
00:26:10 [mdean]
Hassan: rules discussed today mostly involve inference, vs. just flexible way to express computation (production rules)
00:26:20 [mdean]
Hassan: just changes of state
00:27:02 [mdean]
Hassan: business rules don't require inference, just agile computing - useful to distinguish evaluation/execution from forward/backward inference
00:27:44 [mdean]
?: not a response but elaboration - what are we going to do in this working group
00:27:57 [MarkusK]
?^Pascal Hitzler
00:28:11 [mdean]
00:30:04 [mdean]
Grosof: think we should identify KR expressiveness and type of generic computational tasks associated with clusters of systems and use cases, then identify superset of subsets that enables significant translation and interoperability between pairs with well-understood semantics
00:30:28 [mdean]
Grosof: model theory is good at specifying these functions
00:31:08 [mdean]
Grosof: could support multiple KRs - e.g. SWRL sits on cusp between Horn FOL and Horn LP
00:31:42 [mdean]
Grosof: behaviors/ground conclusions often identical
00:32:31 [mdean]
Grosof: a lot known theoretically - should have 1 or 2 umbrella KRs, at least for this phase
00:32:46 [mdean]
Grosof: perhaps annotated comments
00:33:21 [mdean]
Welty: clusters of existing rule languages and systems (with possible overlap)
00:33:31 [mdean]
Welty: classifying existing systems
00:33:53 [mdean]
Welty: may not achieve 100% interoperability - standard approach is to cluster things with common assumptions
00:34:38 [mdean]
Sandro: keeps the market for extensions simple (package per cluster)
00:34:59 [Zakim]
00:35:18 [sandro]
Is the speaker Joshua Engel?
00:35:27 [mdean]
00:35:54 [mdean]
Engel: also accommodates non-rule systems - queries are a special case of rules
00:36:31 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: different tasks: inference for the purpose of creating knowledge vs. immediate information vs. validation of information set
00:37:03 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: tools tend to cross between tasks (DBMS as kitchen sink)
00:37:17 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: 3 related but different axes
00:37:36 [mdean]
Welty: not hearing any dissent on classifying systems
00:37:45 [mdean]
Bijan: not sure - still assimilating
00:38:40 [mdean]
Bijan: worried about scope - job of working group to survey existing systems?
00:39:06 [mdean]
Welty: necessary for interchange?
00:39:40 [mdean]
Sandro: sides with Bijan - those communities are here, don't have to worry about others until Last Call
00:39:55 [mdean]
Bijan: would rather start with rule systems represented here
00:40:47 [mdean]
Christian: agree - but if some community is missing, may need to look outside for extensibility
00:41:09 [mdean]
Sandro: how does this relate to use cases? top down vs. bottom up?
00:41:28 [mdean]
Sandro: meet at features (systems) or requirements (use cases)
00:42:09 [mdean]
Ginsberg: clustering good - ontology about rules or reasoning may be helpful
00:42:57 [mdean]
Ginsberg: capturing features (e.g. types of nonmon) may help avoid confusion
00:43:31 [mdean]
Kifer: series of languages? interchange implies multiplicity
00:43:52 [mdean]
Kifer: define language(s) underlying format
00:44:02 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: define abstract concepts
00:44:06 [mdean]
Kifer: and concrete syntax
00:44:16 [hak]
00:44:19 [hak]
00:44:45 [mdean]
Welty: classification could drive requirements for syntax and semantics of interchange format
00:44:51 [mdean]
Kifer: OK
00:45:12 [mdean]
Bijan: use cases for rules vs. use cases for exchange
00:45:19 [mdean]
MDean: +1
00:45:42 [mdean]
Welty: most use cases for rule language not interchange between rule languages
00:46:29 [mdean]
Welty: use cases fairly standard in standards efforts - to assess coverage, etc.
00:46:43 [mdean]
Welty: no use cases focused on interchange
00:46:47 [bijan]
00:46:59 [mdean]
Dieter: use cases provide guidance on relevant features
00:47:08 [bijan]
Possible use cases from a interchange perspective
00:47:17 [bijan]
I don't agree with that :)
00:47:50 [mdean]
Grosof: agree, but how valuable/likely is exchange of certain rules?
00:48:10 [mdean]
Grosof: e.g. context required to run aprocs
00:48:45 [mdean]
Grosof: counter-argument is combination of local context with exchanged information - need to semantically integrate
00:49:12 [mdean]
Dieter: too limited notion of exchange - could be within processes/vendors locally
00:49:15 [mdean]
Grosof: agree
00:49:39 [mdean]
Paul: need to define "exchange"
00:50:22 [mdean]
Bijan: need to prioritize features?
00:50:57 [mdean]
Ginsberg: use case showing exchange discussed tomorrow
00:51:19 [mdean]
Ginsberg: also compare consistency of rules
00:51:24 [mdean]
Hassan: 1+
00:51:50 [sandro]
00:52:21 [mdean]
Welty: enumeration problem - use case for each rule engine
00:53:02 [mdean]
Welty: e.g. what kind of interopability can be achieved between systems with different semantics
00:53:58 [hak]
00:54:03 [mdean]
Boley: agree - should combine use cases - compare translated results - multiple groups working on same domain (e.g. bioinformatics)
00:55:03 [mdean]
Hassan: translate between formalisms preserving structure (homomorphism) - PRR started with this (meta-model)
00:55:48 [mdean]
Hassan: same issue here - PRR approach makes continuing sense
00:56:26 [mdean]
homomorphism can be forgetful - exchange only patterns
00:57:08 [mdean]
Hassan: first describe objects in common
00:57:44 [mdean]
Cory: relative stupidity of meta-models can be an advantage - simplify synthesize common meta-model
00:58:21 [mdean]
Cory: use cases for rules have probably been accommodated in existing languages
00:59:25 [mdean]
David Springgay: OMG goal to identify core then extend
00:59:37 [jrp]
jrp has joined #rif
00:59:42 [mdean]
David Springgay: solves goal of interoperability between vendors
01:00:27 [mdean]
Dave Reynolds: what do rule vendors expect from RIF that PRR with XML serialization doesn't provide?
01:00:30 [mdean]
Bijan: or RuleML?
01:01:19 [mdean]
Paul: excellent question - PRR aimed at OMG and modelling - clear need for more real-time non-modelling interchange closely related to modelling interchange
01:02:15 [mdean]
Paul: RIF should be run-time interchange format based on PRR - production rule support required, otherwise irrelevant
01:02:44 [mdean]
Paul: RIF in XMI possible, but other formats probably better
01:03:08 [mdean]
Reynolds: concrete syntax for PRR would meet requirement? semantics requires?
01:03:40 [hak]
01:03:46 [mdean]
Paul: no concrete syntax for PRR core (main meta-model) - what other concrete syntax will be required for RIF
01:04:01 [hak]
01:04:13 [mdean]
Welty: need concrete syntax for rule interchange - phase 1 for core subset
01:05:03 [mdean]
Paul: meta-model describes only semantics - e.g. doesn't define expression language (e.g. RDF)
01:06:03 [mdean]
Paul: concrete syntax provides hub
01:06:17 [mdean]
Grosof: what semantics will PRR have before RIF arrives?
01:07:16 [mdean]
Grosof: semantics expressed at level of meta-model rather than logical conclusions and actions from premises
01:07:33 [mdean]
Grosof: should RIF provide that kind of stuff? finer/deeper/different level
01:07:59 [mdean]
Welty: agree - PRR has different type of semantics
01:08:05 [hak]
01:08:11 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: model-theoretic semantics?
01:08:24 [mdean]
Welty: not necessary - but want to ensure same conclusions
01:08:34 [mdean]
Paul: rule vendors won't change engines
01:09:07 [mdean]
Welty: semantics should be specified, allowing rule engine to know how to translate into their system
01:09:58 [holger]
holger has joined #rif
01:10:22 [mdean]
Paul: requirement is purely compatibility - OMG uses annotated meta-model
01:11:21 [sandro]
01:11:26 [sandro]
ack hak
01:12:24 [mdean]
Hassan: converging - Structured Operational Semantics (SOS) are rules that transform syntactic constructs - formal semantics
01:12:30 [sandro] Structured Operational Semantics
01:12:45 [sandro]
by J.C.M. Baeten and C. Verhoef ?
01:14:05 [hak]
SOS is a formalism due to Gordon Plotkin
01:14:14 [sandro] ?
01:14:58 [hak]
yes !
01:15:04 [sandro]
G. Plotkin. A structured approach to operational semantics. Technical Report DAIMI FN-19, Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, 1981. 15
01:15:37 [mdean]
Uli: how many semantics of how many vendors of how many engines?
01:16:33 [hak]
01:16:39 [mdean]
Welty: scope of this WG is primarily its membership
01:17:10 [mdean]
Sandro: charter discussed standard and non-standard (vendor specific) extensions
01:18:12 [mdean]
Welty: non-member rule engine features could be addressed when designing extension mechanisms
01:18:18 [mdean]
Grosof: any Prolog vendors here?
01:18:21 [phitzler]
Concerning SOS I have some doubts whether this would cover e.g. non-monotonic logical semantics and other things important for logic-programming based rule languages. This is probably rather a case for research?
01:18:50 [mdean]
Paul: every PRR vendor has features not covered by PRR - subset/least common denominator
01:19:26 [mdean]
Engel: OntologyWorks is Prolog-like
01:19:45 [mdean]
Grosof: nice to interoperate with pure Prolog
01:20:57 [mdean]
Christian: need phase 1 use cases to identify extensibility mechanism requirements
01:21:35 [mdean]
Welty: how to proceed? classification of existing systems?
01:21:51 [hak]
About phitzler doubts re: SOS and non-motonicity - no problems at all. Read Plotkin's paper (cited above)
01:22:02 [mdean]
Sandro: worked some on "feature matrix" over summer, inspired by workshop
01:23:18 [mdean]
Bijan: could proponents provide (preferably semantic) descriptions of their languages, particularly vendor-unique features
01:23:23 [hak]
I second Chris Welty's "let's classify systems" initiative.
01:23:34 [mdean]
Bijan: free licenses helpful too :-)
01:24:35 [mdean]
Welty: need some documentation/understanding from vendors
01:24:35 [ekw]
ekw has joined #rif
01:24:57 [mdean]
pfps: user documents generally don't describe semantics - evocative not descriptive
01:26:00 [MarkusK]
Offtopic: where are the logs of this chat to be found?
01:26:07 [mdean]
Ginsberg: benchmark results may apply here
01:27:07 [mdean]
Bijan: what parts of languages aren't usefully covered by PRR, RuleML, etc.?
01:27:41 [mdean]
Welty: want clear agenda for tomorrow - sense relative satisfaction with classification
01:28:27 [mdean]
Welty: what about use cases? not interchange-centric? higher-level use cases?
01:28:52 [mdean]
Christian: should include test cases from specific applications as use cases
01:29:26 [hak]
01:29:33 [mdean]
Dieter: 80/20 rule - RIF needs to support common constructs
01:30:15 [sandro]
hand raised for you, hak
01:30:28 [mdean]
Grosof: use use cases to weight different features
01:31:25 [mdean]
Dieter: strange RDF features to cover PICS use case - over-design
01:32:13 [mdean]
Welty: use cases not carved in stone - don't commit to cover everything
01:32:31 [GaryH]
download a beta of Oracle Biz rules at
01:32:57 [GaryH]
in the .zip file, rl.pdf is a "spec" of the java-like technical rule language
01:34:02 [mdean]
?: half of use cases can be satisified by web services
01:34:18 [mdean]
?: when do rules need to be explicitly interchanged
01:34:40 [mdean]
?: constraint programming engines also important
01:34:45 [hak]
01:34:46 [MarkusK]
^?^Igor Mozetic^
01:34:55 [hak]
01:35:09 [MarkusK]
Last ?="Philippe Bernard"
01:35:30 [csma]
Philippe Bonnard
01:35:36 [MarkusK]
Oh, soory
01:35:50 [mdean]
Gary: 2 types of scenario: interchange (vendor/company/tool), rule use cases
01:36:17 [mdean]
Engel: another scenario - vendor-neutral authoring tool (e.g. Eclipse or SourceForge)
01:37:02 [mdean]
Engel: need to motivate exchange of rules - some engines may not be able to handle even if properly translated
01:37:42 [mdean]
Boley: collaborating rule engines on large distributed problem
01:39:14 [mdean]
Welty: challenge authors of existing use cases, etc. to think more generally and about how they relate to classification
01:40:17 [mdean]
Pellant: won't be here tomorrow - use case: very wide set of behaviors
01:40:22 [mdean]
Welty: please write up
01:41:01 [hak]
who spoke?
01:41:01 [mdean]
Bijan: don't want interchange language, want Semantic Web Rules Language - others may also - how to accommodate this
01:41:29 [mdean]
Welty: have this conversation at end of tomorrow, after more clear expectations
01:42:10 [mdean]
Welty: view question as largely irrelevant
01:42:30 [mdean]
Welty: interchange already complex, without introducing divide
01:43:10 [mdean]
Welty: can phrase desire as use case or requirement
01:43:44 [mdean]
Kifer: RIF not possible without defining (web) language
01:43:48 [hak]
I disagree!
01:44:22 [mdean]
Welty: gather requirements based on need to interchange - resulting spec can be viewed as language
01:44:43 [mdean]
Bijan: different between rules language and (semantic) web rules language
01:44:49 [mdean]
01:45:24 [mdean]
Welty: RIF will be web-savvy interchange format (URIs, interoperability with OWL/RDF)
01:48:09 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: distinguish desire for interchange with what to interchange
01:48:27 [mdean]
Barkmeyer: focus on capabilities
01:49:28 [mdean]
Pascal Hitzler: ambiguous terms between communities: model, etc.
01:50:23 [mdean]
Welty: on-going and evolving process - can adapt as necessary
01:51:41 [mdean]
close of meeting
01:51:46 [Deborah]
Deborah has left #rif
01:51:58 [mdean]
start promptly at 9am for "quick" 3 hour roundtable
01:52:02 [Zakim]
01:52:13 [csma]
csma has left #rif
01:52:31 [msintek]
msintek has left #rif
02:35:00 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, Meeting_Room, in SW_RIF()11:00AM
02:35:03 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
02:35:04 [Zakim]
Attendees were JeremyC, +1.650.696.aaaa, +1.604.930.aabb, meeting_room, jeremy, Giorgos_Stamou, hassan, Sandro, PedramAbrari
02:35:35 [sandro]
RRSAgent, generate minutes
02:35:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate sandro
03:45:27 [Mala_Mehrotra]
Mala_Mehrotra has joined #rif
09:02:21 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #rif
16:49:12 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif
16:49:12 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:49:12 [sandro]
zakim, this will be rif
16:49:12 [Zakim]
ok, sandro; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start 49 minutes ago
16:52:06 [hak]
hak has joined #rif
16:52:11 [msintek]
msintek has joined #rif
16:53:30 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:53:37 [Zakim]
16:56:10 [phitzler]
phitzler has joined #rif
16:58:08 [Zakim]
16:58:10 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:58:12 [Zakim]
Attendees were hassan
16:58:13 [Hirtle]
Hirtle has joined #rif
16:59:07 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:59:14 [Zakim]
16:59:57 [MarkusK]
MarkusK has joined #rif
17:00:03 [hak]
Anyone there yet? (Aren't we convening at 9:00 PST?)
17:00:11 [Zakim]
17:00:27 [Zakim]
17:00:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.347.aaaa
17:02:02 [Zakim]
17:02:37 [Mala_Mehrotra]
Mala_Mehrotra has joined #rif
17:02:53 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif
17:02:57 [Harold]
Harold has joined #rif
17:03:03 [der]
der has joined #rif
17:03:23 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone
17:03:23 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is on the phone', ChrisW
17:03:28 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:03:28 [Zakim]
On the phone I see hassan, +1.650.347.aaaa, Giorgos_Stamou
17:03:37 [w3c]
w3c has joined #rif
17:03:44 [ChrisW]
zakim, aaaa is meeting_room
17:03:46 [Zakim]
+meeting_room; got it
17:04:16 [w3c]
w3c has left #rif
17:05:34 [Hallmark]
Hallmark has joined #rif
17:05:45 [csma]
csma has joined #rif
17:06:30 [Allen]
Allen has joined #rif
17:07:26 [jeremy]
jeremy has joined #rif
17:09:09 [PaulV]
PaulV has joined #rif
17:09:11 [mdean]
mdean has joined #rif
17:09:16 [aharth]
aharth has joined #rif
17:09:38 [Donald]
Donald has joined #rif
17:09:57 [Deborah]
Deborah has joined #rif
17:10:43 [pfps]
pfps has joined #rif
17:11:00 [vassilis]
vassilis has joined #rif
17:11:46 [dlm]
dlm has joined #rif
17:12:16 [bijan]
bijan has joined #rif
17:12:27 [vassilis]
vassilis has joined #rif
17:12:32 [holger]
holger has joined #rif
17:12:44 [jos]
jos has joined #rif
17:12:58 [pfps-scribe]
Christian: is selling widgets w/o a web presence
17:13:27 [pfps-scribe]
Christian: pricing is determined by rules (e.g., discount for large orders or nice customers)
17:14:08 [pfps-scribe]
Christian: will accept legal (only) credit cards
17:14:16 [sandro]
zakim, give every speakinger 5 minutes
17:14:16 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'give every speakinger 5 minutes', sandro
17:14:21 [sandro]
zakim, give every speaker 5 minutes
17:14:21 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'give every speaker 5 minutes', sandro
17:14:29 [sandro]
zakim, give each speaker 5 minutes
17:14:29 [Zakim]
ok, sandro
17:15:05 [Zakim]
+ +1.506.444.aabb
17:15:23 [st]
st has joined #rif
17:15:25 [pfps-scribe]
Christian: part of the rule (order size) needs information from the web store
17:15:41 [Hirtle]
zakim, aabb is me
17:15:41 [Zakim]
+Hirtle; got it
17:16:05 [pfps-scribe]
Christian: part of the rules (customer status) needs information from Christian's local (and private) data
17:16:59 [pfps-scribe]
Christian: part of the rules (legal credit cards) needs information from the customer
17:17:06 [sandro]
scribe: pfps-scribe
17:18:46 [pfps-scribe]
Sandro: my pet use case has to do with CSCW
17:20:00 [pfps-scribe]
Sandro: I use Prolog, and find I need CW stuff
17:20:26 [sandro]
ack John_Hall
17:20:36 [sandro]
q+ John_Hall
17:20:37 [sandro]
17:20:43 [sandro]
ack John_Hall
17:20:54 [pfps-scribe]
John Hall: looking at privacy and data protection in EU
17:22:13 [pfps-scribe]
John Hall: wants regulations to be in rules, and machine processable
17:23:44 [pfps-scribe]
Said: fraud detection use case
17:24:38 [sandro]
q+ Said_Tabet
17:24:39 [sandro]
17:24:56 [sandro]
ack Said_Tabet
17:25:10 [pfps-scribe]
Said: problems with privacy, collaboration, etc.
17:25:43 [pfps-scribe]
Chris to John: are there extant systems that do anything for you
17:25:53 [sandro]
q+ Uga_Corda, Vassilis_Tzouvaras, Harold_Boley, Jing_Mei, Michael_Kifer
17:26:07 [pfps-scribe]
John Hall: vocabulary methods help
17:26:16 [sandro]
17:26:18 [pfps-scribe]
John Hall: there are tractability concerns
17:26:26 [sandro]
17:26:32 [sandro]
ack Uga_Corda
17:26:53 [sandro]
17:27:19 [saidtabet]
saidtabet has joined #rif
17:27:38 [pfps-scribe]
Ugo Corda: enterprise integration
17:28:18 [pfps-scribe]
Ugo Corda: express BPEL stuff in production rules
17:29:14 [Zakim]
17:29:16 [pfps-scribe]
Ugo Corda: BPEL of interest because of transportability
17:29:18 [jjc]
jjc has joined #rif
17:29:44 [pfps-scribe]
Ugo Corda: when rules are involved in BPEL, need a transport process for rules
17:29:57 [sandro]
zakim, who is one the phone
17:29:57 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is one the phone', sandro
17:30:04 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:30:04 [Zakim]
On the phone I see hassan, meeting_room, Giorgos_Stamou, Hirtle, ??P12
17:30:32 [sandro]
ack Vassilis_Tzouvaras
17:30:50 [pfps-scribe]
Vassilis: BPEL in medical applications require uncertainty handling in both KR and rules
17:31:33 [pfps-scribe]
Vassilis: we use a particular fuzzy representation
17:31:38 [sandro]
ack Harold_Boley
17:31:53 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: information integration with rules and taxonomies
17:32:16 [sandro]
Talking about
17:32:33 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: example is regional business development (done by Canadian federal government)
17:33:14 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: several information sources, one with less coverage but better, one with more coverage but not as good
17:33:58 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: rules used to determine how to combine the information
17:34:08 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: need for URI normalization engine
17:34:43 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: fuzzy and uncertainty was also needed
17:36:02 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: also co-reference determination, when URIs were not available
17:36:22 [pfps-scribe]
Harold Boley: co-reference determination was done by rules
17:36:31 [sandro]
ack Jing_Mei
17:36:45 [sandro]
Talking about
17:37:38 [pfps-scribe]
Jing Mei: personal information, particularly preferences (e.g., contact and schedule methods)
17:38:21 [sandro]
ack Michael_Kifer
17:39:07 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: applications evolve, including schema evolution, so language needs to support semi-structured data
17:39:53 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: policies also change, and quickly, particularly if they have internal temporal aspects
17:39:58 [sandro]
q+ Chris_Menzel
17:40:46 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: because of policy change support for rule manipulation (e.g., adding a new rule) is needed
17:41:09 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: one way to do this is reification
17:41:19 [sandro]
q+ "15Elisa Kendall, Sandpiper"
17:41:26 [pfps-scribe]
Chris to Michael: Do you need to get into the rules?
17:41:44 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: no, just describing them from the outside
17:42:02 [sandro]
q+ Elisa_Kendall, Dieter_Fensel, Gary_Hallmark
17:42:25 [sandro]
q+ Joshua_Engel
17:42:51 [sandro]
q+ Holger_Lausen,
17:43:15 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: aggregations of rules may need to be examined, e.g., to extract a rule
17:43:38 [pfps-scribe]
Ben Grosof to Michael: aren't there other ways of doing this?
17:44:39 [pfps-scribe]
Ben Grosof to Michael: e.g., preferences
17:44:46 [hak]
We can't hear the questions over the phone !!!
17:45:26 [pfps-scribe]
is that better?
17:46:11 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #rif
17:46:11 [pfps-scribe]
Michael Kifer: reification is not the only solution, just the most elegant
17:46:57 [hak]
17:47:03 [hak]
elegance ?
17:47:21 [sandro]
ack Chris_Menzel
17:48:38 [pfps-scribe]
Chris Menzel: ontology integration (in Boeing) needed more than OWL provided
17:49:19 [pfps-scribe]
Chris Menzel: mapping rules are needed between ontologies
17:50:03 [pfps-scribe]
Chris Menzel: how to proceed beyond OWL (to rules (SWRL?), to full first-order, to ....)
17:50:36 [sandro]
ack Elisa_Kendall
17:50:50 [pfps-scribe]
Elisa Kendall: ODM and OMG need interoperability
17:51:20 [pfps-scribe]
Elisa Kendall: want ontologies to express semantic constraints beyond ODM etc
17:51:51 [pfps-scribe]
Elisa Kendall: want SW rules to support software generation
17:52:06 [Hallmark]
17:52:09 [pfps-scribe]
Elisa Kendall: also interested in ontology mapping
17:52:12 [sandro]
ack Gary_Hallmark
17:52:55 [pfps-scribe]
Gary Hallmark: business rules
17:53:42 [pfps-scribe]
Gary Hallmark: use case - modelling a company in business rules
17:54:39 [pfps-scribe]
Gary Hallmark: tools for generating and analyzing and maintaining rules and rule sets, UI tools
17:55:44 [Zakim]
17:56:37 [chrisM]
chrisM has joined #rif
18:13:34 [pfps-scribe]
\nick pfps
18:13:42 [pfps-scribe]
Free, free, free at last!
18:14:20 [Mala_Mehrotra]
Mala_Mehrotra has joined #rif
18:15:03 [Hirtle]
18:15:42 [sandro]
18:15:57 [sandro]
ack Joshua_Engel
18:16:34 [Elisa]
Josh Engel, Odenton MD sharing customer scenario -- drug company example
18:16:54 [Elisa]
company had done clinical trials, multiple companies, no shared data representation
18:17:12 [Elisa]
did not share an ontology, could not share what ontologies might have meant
18:17:31 [Elisa]
mapping DBs into ontologies as part of the problem, shared rulesets another component
18:17:47 [Elisa]
intentional, extentional data, DBMS integrity constraints
18:18:10 [Elisa]
in order to apply software, you need to understand that integrity constraints are met, and
18:18:14 [JosD]
JosD has joined #rif
18:18:21 [Elisa]
can be applied across resources
18:18:46 [Elisa]
customer results were not meaningful as a result of not being able to share this data
18:19:00 [Elisa]
also included Bayesian reasoning, issues around equality
18:19:25 [sandro]
ack Holger_Lausen
18:20:07 [Elisa]
Holger -- Insbruck -- interested in inspection of rules, extraction, proximity
18:20:18 [Zakim]
18:20:46 [Elisa]
also interested in explanations related to rules, inspection of rules during interchange/transformation
18:20:56 [Elisa]
in human readable syntax
18:21:12 [Elisa]
Jos - DERI Innsbruck
18:21:18 [sandro]
q+ Jos_de_Bruijn
18:21:26 [sandro]
ack Jos_de_Bruijn
18:21:29 [Elisa]
Web service description w/preconditions, background ontology, background rules
18:21:44 [Elisa]
invoke web service under certain conditions that meet preconditions
18:21:53 [sandro]
q+ Pedram_Abrari
18:22:03 [Elisa]
constraints specified in WS description, not sufficient just to check description due to
18:22:06 [sandro]
q- Dieter_Fensel
18:22:18 [Elisa]
background ontology & background rules
18:22:21 [sandro]
q+ Jeff_Pan
18:22:39 [sandro]
q+ Allen_Ginsberg
18:22:45 [Elisa]
need to check those as well -- gave PO example that included needing PO ID, check whether the PO
18:22:49 [Elisa]
conforms to constraints
18:22:53 [sandro]
q+ Deborah_Nichols
18:23:13 [Elisa]
Pedram Abrari - Corticon
18:23:19 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
18:23:19 [Zakim]
On the phone I see meeting_room, Giorgos_Stamou, Hirtle, jjc (muted), hassan
18:23:53 [sandro]
ack Pedram_Abrari
18:24:04 [Elisa]
Based in San Mateo, #39 -- follow up on use case from Jos, interested in WS, used as true
18:24:21 [sandro]
q+ Guizhen_Yang
18:24:31 [Elisa]
service contract, which rules are an important part of, what is expected input, output, monitoring using
18:24:32 [Elisa]
18:25:11 [Elisa]
Christian -- does this mean that the rules should be embedded in the WSDL -- in the form of constraints
18:25:33 [Zakim]
18:25:43 [Elisa]
order total is required, e.g., thus needs to be specified in WSDL, also that it meets output constraints
18:25:55 [sandro]
ack Jeff_Pan
18:26:02 [Elisa]
for machine automation of services invocation
18:26:11 [sandro]
q+ Philippe_Bonnard
18:26:35 [Elisa]
Jeff Pan, Aberdeen -- would like to implement some degree of proximity
18:26:59 [sandro]
q+ Deborah_McGuinness
18:27:03 [Elisa]
so for example, table representing conference size, hotels that can accomodate that size
18:27:34 [sandro]
q+ Pascal_Hitzler
18:27:38 [Elisa]
multiple issues that need representation of "degrees"
18:27:49 [sandro]
ack Donald_Chapin
18:27:51 [giorgos]
Problem with my phone, try to get back in a while
18:27:55 [Elisa]
Don Chapin -- interchange between business people running organization and IT suppliers,
18:28:16 [sandro]
q+ Michael_SIntek
18:28:25 [Elisa]
interchange of rules with interchange of vocabularies -- so the terms and facts need to be interchanged in
18:28:31 [Elisa]
addition to the rules
18:28:49 [Elisa]
liked what Benjamin said yesterday regarding this interchange
18:29:21 [Elisa]
form of "linguistic logic" -- integrated FOL with these rules to support interchange
18:29:41 [phitzler]
no, its Pascal Hitzler
18:29:48 [phitzler]
Markus is sitting to the right of Michael Sintek
18:29:54 [Elisa]
SBVR not modeled in UML, self-specified and specified in structured English
18:30:17 [Elisa]
Pat Hayes & Terry Halpin worked on this together, basis is specified in CL, extension for modal
18:30:29 [dlm]
actually pascal is sitting between michael sintek and deborah mcguinness
18:30:41 [Elisa]
logic, necessities vs. obligations, EU-Rent example suggested for review
18:30:42 [sandro]
Pascal is pulling my leg.
18:30:44 [phitzler]
oops. sorry
18:31:15 [sandro]
I wonder if I can paste Markus' name.
18:31:20 [Elisa]
Core of RIF -- would like to see it use CL and complement or extend that
18:31:23 [MarkusK]
Me too.
18:31:45 [sandro]
ack Allen_Ginsberg
18:31:53 [sandro]
q+ Markus_Krötzsch
18:32:00 [Elisa]
Allen Ginsberg, MITRE, northern VA -- interested in policy for spectrum allocation related to software radios
18:32:21 [sandro]
(paste looks to me like it worked)
18:32:43 [Elisa]
background -- radio includes anything such as a cell phone, radio, tv, etc.; spectrum has been allocated previously
18:33:11 [Elisa]
but most is not used (e.g., for things such as wifi) where TV has a great deal of spectrum that is underused
18:33:21 [sandro]
q+ Paula-Lavinia_Patranjan
18:33:37 [sandro]
q+ Andreas_Harth
18:33:37 [Elisa]
the FCC is going to propose a capability allowing secondary use of spectrum, but secondary users must
18:33:49 [Elisa]
meet the policies of the primary user
18:33:56 [sandro]
q+ Igor Mozetic
18:34:05 [Elisa]
also some notion of cognitive capability of radio
18:34:19 [sandro]
q+ Masao_Okabe
18:34:27 [Zakim]
18:34:28 [Elisa]
international case -- has treaty status, ambassador level, every country has a right to define its
18:34:37 [Elisa]
own policies about spectrum
18:34:41 [sandro]
q+ Mala_Mehrotra
18:35:04 [Elisa]
suppose I want to use my cell phone in some other country, radio attempts to download it, discovers that
18:35:21 [Elisa]
there is an inconsistency in rules, thus you can't use your cell phone in this locale
18:35:46 [Elisa]
if you could translate the policies in to a phone that manufacturers could use, translated using RIF for
18:36:02 [Elisa]
specific devices
18:36:22 [Allen]
18:36:26 [Elisa]
Donald Chapin -- has SBVR
18:37:04 [Elisa]
Christian -- if i retrieve a policy that my cell phone cannot handle, is that because the RIF doesn't
18:37:17 [Elisa]
handle it or the inference engine can't understand it
18:37:28 [Benjamin]
Benjamin has joined #rif
18:37:28 [Elisa]
what makes sense -- should the cell phone crash
18:37:34 [Elisa]
what should happen in that case
18:38:18 [Elisa]
another way to do this is that the cell phone could contact another server to see if that server can use
18:38:24 [sandro]
ack Deborah_Nichols
18:38:27 [Elisa]
rif to determine whether or not rules are consistent
18:38:31 [Benjamin]
Benjamin has joined #rif
18:38:47 [Elisa]
Deborah Nichols -- interaction between ontologies and rule languages
18:39:09 [Elisa]
situation assessment includes convoy, ontologies describe battlespace, information is in various
18:39:45 [Elisa]
formats, infer features from that based on rules -- used OWL DL for ontology, used SWRL compared with RuleML
18:40:12 [Elisa]
if you have distinct individuals specified in the ontology, the rules need to be aware of that
18:40:38 [Elisa]
there are issues in translation from languages such as SWRL to Prolog that need to be addressed
18:41:32 [Elisa]
Michael Kifer -- RuleML failed to meet requirements, also OWL to Prolog (open vs. closed world issue)
18:41:49 [dlm]
where are the use cases that have been submitted? - is there a url with a mail archive?
18:41:59 [Elisa]
Deborah -- needed closed world, thus OWL failed to meet requirements; RuleML did not have existentials
18:42:13 [sandro]
18:42:27 [sandro]
ack Guizhen_Yang
18:42:34 [Elisa]
Guizhen Yang, SRI
18:43:09 [Elisa]
hybrid environment for reasoning, currently does manual translation since not all features for one
18:43:14 [Elisa]
are available in the other
18:43:39 [Elisa]
2nd case -- question answering in hybrid reasoning environment ... reasoner can return bindings or axioms that the
18:43:53 [Elisa]
requestor can use to create the query -- need for interoperability
18:43:53 [Benjamin]
Benjamin has joined #rif
18:44:07 [phitzler]
mailing liste archive:
18:44:10 [sandro]
ack Philippe_Bonnard
18:44:24 [Elisa]
Phillipe Bonnard, ILOG -- RIF as persistent language for rules
18:45:13 [Elisa]
rules deployed and executed -- cover wide array of current languages, incl datalog
18:45:27 [Elisa]
central language for rule interchange
18:45:48 [sandro]
ack Deborah_McGuinness
18:45:48 [Elisa]
Deborah McGuinness, KSL Stanford --
18:46:12 [Elisa]
projects on integrating scientific data, starting point is a mapping problem, mapping articulation axioms, etc.
18:46:35 [Elisa]
at least able to capture very expressive relationships between terms, wants the computed rules notion that CLASSIC
18:47:07 [Elisa]
had -- for configuration, scientific capabilities, spatial reasoning for overlapping regions, serious
18:47:32 [Elisa]
temporal reasoning, so at minimum needs to reach out to something that does serious calculation
18:48:07 [Elisa]
also needs hooks for instrumentation of systems, also capabilities to call native procedures, but if
18:48:31 [Elisa]
portions of that can be done in a rule language, it would be much better -- some were using rules in Prolog
18:49:11 [Elisa]
test functions that were hooked into TMS -- issue with test functions and relationship to procedural code & reasoner and how the
18:49:12 [phitzler]
Karlsruhe, Germany coordinates for Google earth: 49° N, 8°25' E
18:49:20 [Elisa]
reasoner has to work (patented)
18:49:40 [sandro]
18:49:49 [sandro]
18:50:00 [sandro]
ack Pascal_Hitzler
18:50:06 [Elisa]
several data sources that you want to merge into single database -- solution was in F-Logic
18:50:36 [Elisa]
lessons learned -- need to build predicates for data source access (Pascal Hitzler, Karlsruhe)
18:50:55 [Elisa]
generative rules, want to merge into single database, F-Logic came in handy in that case
18:51:24 [Elisa]
query language same as representation language was handy, WS was also important
18:51:28 [sandro]
ack Michael_SIntek
18:51:45 [phitzler]
number 34: Michael Sintek
18:51:56 [Elisa]
18:52:08 [Harold]
Re Deborah Nichols' need for existentials (in the head, I suppose): the Member Submission of SWRL FOL ( contains FOL RuleML (, which allows all (fo) kinds of existentials.
18:52:13 [Elisa]
elearning application, using topic ontologies, user has user agent and personal profile
18:52:36 [Elisa]
personal profile has prior knowledge of person in terms of local topic ontology, creates query and rules
18:52:50 [Elisa]
ruleset and query is formed in local ontology
18:53:12 [Elisa]
learning path based on prior knowledge is complicated, also application for fuzziness
18:53:25 [Elisa]
execution is based on learning material provided to the agent
18:53:40 [Elisa]
multiple agents may have different learning material
18:54:00 [Elisa]
several RIF languages, this agent understands recursion, other is stupid
18:54:26 [ekw]
ekw has joined #rif
18:54:34 [Elisa]
mediator agent analyses rules wrt capabilities of other agents to provide the right queries for the agent
18:54:48 [Elisa]
rewriting took ontologies from different representations
18:55:08 [Elisa]
had to understand the semantics of different representation ontologies, used query language similar to RDF
18:55:39 [Elisa]
since the RIF has to be compatible to RDF -- syntax similar to OWL would be sufficient to
18:56:03 [Elisa]
cannot just use java to do querying against complex ontologies
18:56:59 [Elisa]
Christian -- elearning -- how to you equate this to folks working on elearning in LONG, SCON, etc.
18:57:18 [dlm]
i looked up the patent chris asked about
18:57:20 [der]
18:57:25 [dlm]'5720008'.WKU.&OS=PN/5720008&RS=PN/5720008
18:57:28 [Elisa]
could not convince material providers to use these languages, case is that you need representation interoperability
18:58:15 [Elisa]
might be necessary to take the condition/action parts of rules for rewriting, what kinds of manipulations were
18:58:47 [Elisa]
needed over string manipulations as the tranformations are complicated -- need string operators
18:58:48 [sandro]
18:58:57 [sandro]
ack Markus_Krötzsch
18:59:39 [Elisa]
Markus Krtzsch, FZI -- provide users with search engines for distributed queries -- OWL ontologies,
19:00:03 [Elisa]
main role of rules is alignment, rules to describe how ontologies are related, like to have a rule language
19:00:35 [Elisa]
that is close in semantics or compatible w/OWL. also due to high degree of heterogeneity - need very expressive
19:00:39 [Elisa]
language to do so
19:01:01 [phitzler]
surname is Krötzsch. If you don't have the umlaut on the keyboard, proper alternative is Kroetzsch
19:01:03 [Elisa]
if you want to work in an automatic fashion, then you also need something tractable, so issue is search
19:01:11 [Elisa]
19:01:36 [Elisa]
collect rules to describe how ontologies are relate
19:01:58 [Elisa]
formalizm for such a setting that has a decidable fragment available, to determine consistency
19:02:19 [Elisa]
would not be useful to collect knowledge unless you can determine consistency
19:02:49 [Elisa]
DL safe rules used for some of these use cases, which is a decidable fragment of SWRL
19:03:13 [Elisa]
Chris Menzel - if you want a context where everything is automated - you're right
19:03:36 [Elisa]
at Boeing, the environment was computer assisted -- thus the language could be more expressive, using a
19:04:08 [Elisa]
more expressive theorem prover, drawing inferences that were more expressive than OWL then fed back to the OWL based environment
19:04:41 [Elisa]
easier for humans to have more expressivity, but need the human to assist in that case
19:05:04 [Elisa]
Ed -- federating ontologies, schemas, etc. question is how incremental is transformation ... there is a
19:05:29 [Elisa]
reference that is the target ontology -- one possibility is that the source goes directly into the integrating
19:06:04 [Elisa]
ontology, problem is when you have to augment the KB while applying the rules when adding new rules -- what will it
19:06:37 [Elisa]
affect, what types of rules are under consideration, e.g. productive rules, with dynamic effects; not as problematic
19:07:02 [Zakim]
19:07:08 [Elisa]
if you only have deductive rules
19:07:51 [sandro]
rrsagent, where is the log?
19:07:52 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. Sorry, nothing found for 'where is the log'
19:08:05 [sandro]
rrsagent, where?
19:08:05 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. Sorry, nothing found for 'where'
19:09:03 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
19:09:03 [Zakim]
On the phone I see meeting_room, Hirtle, jjc (muted), Giorgos_Stamou
19:10:06 [sandro]
rrsagent, help
19:25:31 [Deborah]
Deborah scribing
19:25:50 [Deborah]
Paula-Lavinia Patranjan from REWERSE
19:26:22 [Deborah]
use case on reactive behavior: business traveler using a personal organizer
19:26:37 [Deborah]
wants to react to changes that affect his plans, e.g. flights
19:26:48 [Deborah]
organizer has reactive rules in place
19:27:13 [Deborah]
first organizer tries to extend the hotel stay using company business rules
19:27:35 [Deborah]
such as expense limits, room types that should be booked, etc.
19:27:57 [Deborah]
Suppose flight cancellations affect both his business plans & private plans
19:28:20 [Zakim]
19:28:25 [Deborah]
on personal side, rules find to contact Barbie to cancel their date
19:28:48 [Deborah]
Andreas Harth from DERI Galway speaking
19:28:54 [Zakim]
19:29:08 [Deborah]
Use case has data sources that interoperate, collecting data from web sources
19:29:26 [sandro]
RRSAgent, log?
19:29:33 [Deborah]
Need to encode query to retrieve information from web sources
19:29:47 [Deborah]
Also interested in retrieving data from various contexts
19:29:57 [sandro]
RRSAgent, location?
19:29:57 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. Sorry, nothing found for 'location'
19:30:01 [Deborah]
Allow remote hookups with body of rules, to link sources among each other
19:30:10 [Deborah]
Igor Mozetic speaking
19:30:14 [sandro]
19:30:21 [sandro]
ack Paula-Lavinia_Patranjan
19:30:27 [sandro]
ack Andreas_Harth
19:30:38 [Deborah]
Igor has a class of use cases, for rules that can learn automatically from distributed,
19:30:41 [sandro]
19:30:42 [sandro]
19:30:42 [Deborah]
diverse data on the web
19:30:50 [sandro]
ack Igor_Mozetic
19:30:57 [Deborah]
data can include various media
19:31:11 [sandro]
q+ Dave_Reynolds
19:31:22 [sandro]
q- Igor
19:31:29 [sandro]
q- Mozetic
19:31:31 [Deborah]
data mining rules of various kinds. Want the results to be
19:31:38 [Deborah]
understandable in similar terms.
19:32:06 [Deborah]
most representations dont' require FOL but the background rules might require more expressive language
19:32:26 [JosD]
JosD has joined #rif
19:32:36 [sandro]
Hey, Jos!
19:32:36 [Deborah]
might need temporal relations for background knowledge, for prediction rules
19:32:56 [Deborah]
2 important points: representation should be explicit & human readable, too
19:33:45 [Deborah]
want the ability to profile organizations, to learn which are compatible with each other, or with shopping preferences
19:34:08 [Deborah]
Also, multi-media, and multi-lingual document management and translation
19:34:33 [Deborah]
Christian questioning: how can RIF help with translation?
19:35:18 [Deborah]
IM - depends on how rules are interpreted w/mapping to different languages
19:35:43 [Deborah]
need to interchange representations & recognize similarities btw representations
19:35:56 [Deborah]
Masao Okabe speaking
19:36:20 [sandro]
ack Masao_Okabe
19:36:28 [Deborah]
electric power company case - company has lots of power facilities and lots of suborganizations
19:36:30 [sandro]
q+ Mike_Dean
19:36:38 [sandro]
q+ pfps
19:36:42 [Deborah]
want to maintain facilities according to regulations
19:36:45 [sandro]
q+ Bijan_Parsia
19:37:01 [Deborah]
need to gather lots of information about regulations
19:37:03 [sandro]
q+ Uli_Sattler
19:37:25 [sandro]
q+ Don_Greist
19:37:29 [Deborah]
useful to have an ontology to tell us what to do next [process representation?]
19:37:32 [sandro]
q+ Paul_Vincent
19:37:39 [sandro]
q+ Benjamin_Grosof
19:37:44 [Deborah]
different regulations may be described in diff rule languages
19:37:48 [sandro]
ack Mala_Mehrotra
19:37:54 [Deborah]
Mala Mehrotra speaking
19:38:18 [Deborah]
interest is in rule based systems and ontologies.
19:38:33 [Deborah]
they do knowledge entry aids and mapping aids
19:38:49 [Deborah]
they have different ways of sucking in ontology and rule languages
19:39:13 [Deborah]
her use case is concerned with patterns they see in systems, which they capture as templates
19:39:29 [Deborah]
templates can be used for extending existing ontologies or creating new ones
19:39:45 [Deborah]
they annotate templates to express relationships between rule sets or ontologies
19:40:01 [Deborah]
the annotations can be used for mapping and maintenance of rules
19:40:24 [Deborah]
e.g., rules for pipes, conduits, passages may be related conceptually
19:40:45 [Deborah]
would like to have a way to capture this information about relations btw rules
19:40:55 [Deborah]
need a meta-annotation to express these relationships
19:41:16 [Deborah]
19:41:17 [sandro]
ack Dave_Reynolds
19:41:45 [Deborah]
service oriented architecture use case
19:42:24 [Deborah]
they want to use a common-ontology language to orchestrate services
19:42:44 [JeffP]
JeffP has joined #rif
19:42:55 [Deborah]
need a common rule language so different parties can describe features, so others can see if they are useful
19:43:14 [Deborah]
question of re-use and also cross-point translations
19:43:48 [Deborah]
also to provide guarantees and safeguards in migrating knowledge between parties
19:43:54 [Deborah]
speaker: Mike Dean
19:44:12 [Deborah]
translation from data sources to ontologies is most of his work
19:44:31 [sandro]
ack Mike_Dean
19:45:17 [Deborah]
use case involves providing precise definitions for terms, also for data type handling
19:46:37 [Deborah]
motivation for vendor-neutral interchange format, plus need to do periodic updates
19:46:48 [Deborah]
relevant to Josh Engel's authoring tool
19:47:11 [sandro]
ack pfps
19:47:12 [Deborah]
Peter Patel-Schneider speaking
19:47:38 [bijan] I have to go?
19:48:11 [Deborah]
a variation/explication of use cases sent out by enrico
19:48:17 [Deborah]
involves sending rules around on the SW
19:48:45 [Deborah]
information may be recorded at different levels of granularity
19:48:53 [Deborah]
and specificity
19:49:16 [Deborah]
may have data that identifies that someone pays by either cc or cash; other identifies which she actually uses
19:49:39 [Deborah]
we want to be able to use rules tolerant to diff levels of granularity
19:49:49 [Deborah]
Bijan Parsia does not believe in use cases
19:50:41 [Deborah]
Bijan will speak later to his goals for RIF
19:50:47 [Deborah]
Uli Sattler speaking
19:51:24 [Deborah]
wants RIF to be compatible with OWL-DL
19:51:39 [sandro]
ack Uli_Sattler
19:51:48 [Deborah]
might want to use rules to overcome limitations of OWL-DL, e.g. enhance expressivity
19:51:48 [sandro]
q- Bijan Parsia
19:52:04 [Deborah]
might want to add fuzziness, for example
19:52:28 [Deborah]
difference between adding expressivity and applying rules for different uses
19:52:38 [Deborah]
also might want to use different reasoners.
19:52:51 [Deborah]
need to make all these differences explicit and include in RIF the ability to record them
19:52:55 [sandro]
ack Paul_VIncent
19:52:57 [Deborah]
Paul Vincent speaking
19:53:21 [Deborah]
from Fair Isaac, rule vendor
19:53:27 [Deborah]
use case from insurance industry
19:53:49 [Deborah]
a standard for representing casualty, life, insurance info
19:54:08 [Deborah]
there are standardized schemas at the data level, with interchange rules
19:54:34 [Deborah]
his case concerns a mechanism for extending the interchange rules that deal with schemas,
19:54:44 [Deborah]
and adding validation rules
19:54:57 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
19:54:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see meeting_room, Hirtle, Giorgos_Stamou, jjc (muted)
19:55:09 [Deborah]
the validation rules can use information based on the data content, e.g., client location
19:55:22 [Deborah]
want schemas to incorporate standard rules
19:55:31 [Deborah]
Ben Grosof speaking
19:55:35 [sandro]
ack Benjamin_Grosof
19:56:10 [Deborah]
wants to contribute to RIF by use cases and also KR side
19:56:45 [Deborah]
has worked with collaborators handling many features from various rule-based systems
19:56:57 [Deborah]
use case area: e-contracts
19:57:14 [Deborah]
contracts require deep shared information between parties
19:57:42 [Deborah]
a rule-based approach captures contract knowledge; need interoperability, ability to capture
19:57:45 [Deborah]
19:58:05 [igor]
igor has joined #rif
19:58:07 [Deborah]
need to coordinate contract terms among parties
19:58:30 [Deborah]
there is financial gain/risk at stake, which motivates precision
19:58:44 [Deborah]
challenges include incorporating various contract provisions from diff parties
19:58:57 [Deborah]
need to merge information developed by diff authors at diff organizations
19:59:10 [Deborah]
need to manage the life-cycle of contract development
19:59:18 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
19:59:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see meeting_room, Hirtle, Giorgos_Stamou, jjc (muted)
19:59:41 [Deborah]
BG posted to the list today some references and use case descriptions
20:00:00 [Deborah]
one is merchant credit-card authorizations
20:00:14 [Deborah]
merchant needs to merge their rules with bank rules for cc authorization
20:00:22 [sandro]
ack Don_Greist
20:00:25 [Deborah]
Doug from Fair Isaacs
20:00:34 [Deborah]
sorry, Don Greist
20:00:57 [sandro]
Hirtle, do you want a turn?
20:01:07 [Deborah]
may need to shift rules between facilities and have them run at a facility remote from where rules were developed
20:01:17 [sandro]
giorgos, do you want a turn?
20:01:28 [Deborah]
e.g., rule author may not have the authority to see the data to which the rules are applied
20:02:00 [Deborah]
rule author sends rules to classified area, results are returned
20:02:37 [Deborah]
Jeremy Carrol speaking (on phone)
20:02:46 [jjc]
I am not a use case sort of person, not one of my skills.
20:02:46 [jjc]
(This does not mean that I don't value use cases)
20:02:46 [jjc]
The thing that I will do with a rule language is to help
20:02:46 [jjc]
implement it.
20:02:46 [jjc]
So, I would like it to be:
20:02:47 [jjc]
- well engineered (e.g. Gary's point about rule life cycle management)
20:02:49 [jjc]
- work well with Semantic Web stack (echos of Elisa here)
20:02:51 [jjc]
- work well with other W3C technology
20:02:53 [jjc]
- work well internationally
20:02:55 [jjc]
- work well with Jena Semantic Web Framework
20:02:57 [jjc]
- be of high quality (a usable and useful specification)
20:02:59 [jjc]
Also, since I represent HP, I will be looking for a rule language
20:03:01 [jjc]
that addresses the HP use cases.
20:04:02 [Deborah]
speaker: David Hirtle from NRC in New Brunswick, Canada
20:04:25 [Deborah]
he's involved with rule markup initiative
20:04:55 [Deborah]
also contributed to the w3c submissions for swrl, swsl
20:05:09 [Deborah]
current work is with attempto controlled english
20:05:52 [Deborah]
Giorgos Pavel [sp?] speaking (on phone)
20:06:01 [Hirtle]
Stamou, I believe
20:06:02 [phitzler]
speaker is Giorgos Stamou
20:06:14 [vassilis]
Giorgos Stamou of image video and multimedia lab
20:06:39 [vassilis]
thnx pascal
20:06:51 [igor]
igor has left #rif
20:06:53 [Zakim]
20:07:03 [Zakim]
20:07:18 [Hirtle]
Hirtle has left #rif
20:14:11 [Zakim]
20:48:33 [Mala_Mehrotra]
Mala_Mehrotra has joined #rif
21:01:05 [phitzler]
phitzler has joined #rif
21:01:10 [aharth]
aharth has joined #rif
21:02:18 [msintek]
msintek has joined #rif
21:03:52 [Jing]
Jing has joined #rif
21:08:13 [der]
der has joined #rif
21:08:46 [Allen]
Allen has joined #rif
21:09:38 [Mala_Mehrotra]
Mala_Mehrotra has joined #rif
21:11:19 [Zakim]
21:13:30 [MarkusK]
MarkusK has joined #rif
21:14:20 [jos]
jos has joined #rif
21:14:27 [PaulV]
PaulV has joined #rif
21:15:00 [Zakim]
21:15:00 [saidtabet]
saidtabet has joined #rif
21:15:15 [saidtabet]
Hi everyone :-)
21:15:16 [ekw]
ekw has joined #rif
21:15:18 [Hirtle]
Hirtle has joined #rif
21:16:26 [jjc]
Hello - things seem quiet ...
21:16:41 [Hirtle]
yes, indeed
21:16:44 [saidtabet]
Christian: Tuesday December 20, 1600 UTC first RIF telecon
21:17:07 [jjc]
Ahhh - have things started - it is silent on Zakim.
21:17:44 [Hirtle]
I hear silence also, Jeremy
21:17:55 [jjc]
We could sing to one another ... :)
21:18:10 [Zakim]
21:18:23 [saidtabet]
Christian: next telecon: January 3rd, same time 1600 UTC
21:18:25 [giorgos]
I do not hear anything too
21:18:45 [mdean]
mdean has joined #rif
21:18:48 [saidtabet]
Chairs are trying to fix the phone line
21:18:59 [giorgos]
OK thanks
21:19:03 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif
21:19:06 [ChrisW]
21:19:07 [JeffP]
JeffP has joined #rif
21:19:33 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #rif
21:19:52 [igor]
igor has joined #rif
21:19:52 [Hallmark]
Hallmark has joined #rif
21:19:54 [holger]
holger has joined #rif
21:20:03 [saidtabet]
Christian: encourages people who are not using IRC to join in
21:21:20 [Deborah]
Deborah has joined #rif
21:22:00 [johnhall]
johnhall has joined #rif
21:22:19 [saidtabet]
Sandro: f2f at tech planery: 2 days
21:22:21 [hak]
Phone please ?!?!
21:22:50 [saidtabet]
For those waiting on phone lines please be patient we are working on it
21:23:05 [hak]
Hooray - I can hear
21:23:29 [saidtabet]
F2F details will be announced on mailing list soon
21:23:30 [JosD]
JosD has joined #rif
21:24:24 [saidtabet]
End of June as a potential f2f, ideas for hosting are welcome
21:25:35 [saidtabet]
The group will be using a WIKI (there is one setup for the RIF)
21:26:32 [MarkusK]
21:26:36 [saidtabet]
Sandro: walk though using wiki
21:27:38 [edbark]
edbark has joined #rif
21:27:40 [sandro]
sandro has joined #rif
21:27:44 [Zakim]
21:28:01 [saidtabet]
the wiki is only writable by people in the WG
21:28:26 [saidtabet]
members are listed on the page
21:30:18 [saidtabet]
Sandro: suggest for people to go ahead and create a profile
21:32:57 [saidtabet]
Sandro: giving a quick quick tutorial on how to create and link pages.
21:33:08 [saidtabet]
Sandro: anyone who needs help with wiki please contact me
21:34:42 [bijan]
bijan has joined #rif
21:35:08 [saidtabet]
Christian: proposing 3 groups: group1: use cases group2: start working on proposing a classification scheme
21:35:24 [saidtabet]
group3: about OWL and RDF compatibility
21:36:13 [saidtabet]
Christian: After the break, each group will report on their results
21:36:38 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.347.aacc
21:38:04 [Zakim]
21:38:11 [saidtabet]
christian: if there are no questions, i suggest we split. There are 2 other breakout rooms: Boardroom 2 and Boardroom 3
21:39:12 [jjc]
Please tell us schedule for break out timings and break
21:39:22 [jjc]
us = remote participants
21:39:45 [saidtabet]
sorry no phons in other rooms, just this room for use cases
21:40:51 [saidtabet]
we are coming back after the break at 3:30pm PST
21:41:13 [jjc]
The break is from 3pm to 3.30pm??
21:41:24 [saidtabet]
21:41:46 [saidtabet]
yes, the break is from 3 to 3:30
21:41:47 [jjc]
21:42:14 [Hirtle]
but in the meantime, the use case folk are going to be in this room (with the phone)?
21:42:17 [saidtabet]
there will be a scribe for each group
21:42:22 [saidtabet]
21:42:27 [Hirtle]
thanks, Said
21:42:42 [saidtabet]
use case group will stay in this room with the phone
21:43:51 [Zakim]
21:44:23 [jjc]
I am dropping out now. The use case break out isn't the one I would go to, and I was planning to leave at 3.30 anyway.
21:44:25 [jjc]
Bye all
21:44:55 [saidtabet]
Vassilis Tzouvaras presenting use case: Fuzzy Reasoning with Brain Anatomical Structures
21:44:59 [ekw]
ekw has joined #rif
21:45:22 [saidtabet]
uncertainty exist in many apps
21:45:46 [saidtabet]
specific use case about neuro imaging applications
21:46:22 [ekw]
21:46:23 [saidtabet]
Knowledge of the brain anatomy has been created (ontologies)
21:46:43 [saidtabet]
we also need rules: capture dependencies and validate extracted info
21:46:51 [saidtabet]
why do we need uncertainty?
21:46:56 [phitzler]
phitzler has joined #rif
21:48:21 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: uncertainty in the rules or data?
21:48:33 [saidtabet]
Vassilis: data
21:49:46 [saidtabet]
language should be able to represent partially truth knowledge
21:50:54 [saidtabet]
3 types of uncertainty: incompleteness (lack of info), randomness (non-deterministic) and vagueness (non-specificity)
21:51:53 [saidtabet]
3 levels of uncertainty:
21:52:03 [saidtabet]
1. fuzzy truth values (from 0 to 1)
21:52:15 [saidtabet]
same syntax but different semantics
21:52:22 [pfps_]
pfps_ has joined #rif
21:52:59 [saidtabet]
2. different atoms have different importance in the computation of the truth value
21:53:45 [saidtabet]
in this case: different syntax and different semantics
21:54:07 [pfps_]
pfps_ has joined #rif
21:54:11 [saidtabet]
3. different rules have different importance in the computation of the truth value of the head
21:54:42 [saidtabet]
in RuleML 0.9: there is support
21:55:03 [pfps__]
pfps__ has joined #rif
21:55:19 [MarkusK]
MarkusK has joined #rif
21:55:38 [saidtabet]
link to task force:
21:55:48 [saidtabet]
end of presentations
21:56:00 [pfps__]
pfps__ has joined #rif
21:56:12 [saidtabet]
ugo: where is the need for interchange of these rules?
21:56:12 [Hallmark]
Hallmark has joined #rif
21:56:30 [saidtabet]
Ugo: have you guys identified concrete situations for this need?
21:56:30 [Hirtle]
correct URL seems to be:
21:56:39 [saidtabet]
thanks David
21:57:01 [phitzler]
phitzler has joined #rif
21:57:07 [pfps___]
pfps___ has joined #rif
21:57:21 [saidtabet]
Vassilis: we have many situations requiring interchange
21:58:11 [saidtabet]
Christian: clarifying things: this is a requirement for rule languages not interchange
21:58:25 [holger]
holger has joined #rif
21:59:00 [giorgos]
please unmute
22:00:17 [saidtabet]
Vassilis: requirements for interchange come from the languages involved
22:00:21 [pfps____]
pfps____ has joined #rif
22:00:54 [saidtabet]
Christian: maybe I am wrong, I would say that for the requirements that come from the languages to be covered we don't need use cases, the need is accepted (e.g. for fuzzy)
22:01:01 [Zakim]
22:01:07 [Jing]
Jing has joined #rif
22:01:41 [saidtabet]
Christian: we need to understand the specific features that need to be added to cover interchange
22:01:45 [hak]
hak has joined #rif
22:02:21 [saidtabet]
giorgos: here is a simple example: ontology alignment
22:02:53 [pfps_____]
pfps_____ has joined #rif
22:03:39 [saidtabet]
giorgos: you need fuzzy rules in order to define fuzzy mapping between the ontologies in use
22:03:58 [saidtabet]
since the mappings are created using rules, you need to interchange them between different systems using them
22:04:04 [PaulV]
PaulV has joined #rif
22:04:34 [saidtabet]
Ugo: how about a situation where the receiving system does not handle fuzzy rules?
22:04:44 [saidtabet]
christian: i think this is a very interesting use case
22:05:00 [saidtabet]
harold boley: the interchange can be partial in some cases
22:05:17 [dmg]
dmg has joined #rif
22:08:13 [saidtabet]
said: RIF as a protocol.
22:08:50 [saidtabet]
Christian: a use case should specify what happens in situations when there is a difference in the capabilities of the systems involved
22:09:27 [saidtabet]
paul vincent: transformation between systems is different from the issue of interchange
22:10:05 [saidtabet]
paul vincent: in production rules, we can support fuzziness as a subclass and possibly this can be handled at runtime but this is a different topic
22:11:19 [saidtabet]
paul vincent: are you saying that we want the usecase to clarify the behavior in such situations?
22:11:24 [saidtabet]
christian: yes
22:11:40 [saidtabet]
moving to next speaker.
22:12:01 [saidtabet]
christian: slides will be available on mailing list
22:12:58 [saidtabet]
Harold Boley: presenting a use case: RIF RuleML FOAF
22:13:27 [saidtabet]
Christian: I am about to send the slides to the mailing list
22:13:40 [saidtabet]
harold: this usecase is about social networking
22:13:51 [saidtabet]
this is a typical semweb app
22:14:08 [saidtabet]
FOAF = Friend-Of-A-Friend
22:14:27 [saidtabet]
currently contains facts only no rules
22:14:32 [csma]
csma has joined #rif
22:14:48 [saidtabet]
Focused Rule Languages and Engines:
22:15:08 [saidtabet]
22:15:16 [saidtabet]
OOJDREW engine
22:15:27 [saidtabet]
the idea is to publish rules as well as facts
22:15:46 [saidtabet]
FOAF vocabulary:
22:16:23 [saidtabet]
Rule_derived properties: generated by taxonomic derivations, also by general derivations
22:16:51 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: in term of the use case, is this where users will extend their ontology by adding new rules?
22:17:01 [saidtabet]
Harold: yes you can have local and general rules
22:17:29 [saidtabet]
Harold: currently working on some meta vocabulary
22:18:17 [saidtabet]
objectives: to develop general RIF RuleML FOAF
22:18:36 [saidtabet]
have XSLT translation of RIF RuleML facts to RDF
22:18:59 [saidtabet]
design FOAF vocabulary for local and global rules
22:19:17 [saidtabet]
christian: i don't understand if this can be in RDF why don't you write directly in RDF?
22:19:46 [saidtabet]
Harold: you need rules and facts.
22:20:10 [saidtabet]
Christian: if this use case is that you have facts in RDF and you won't to express rules as well, then this is a use case of combining RIF and RDF
22:20:25 [saidtabet]
Harold: yes interoperability between RIF and RDF
22:21:45 [saidtabet]
Harold: Normal Forms: Rule_Oriented Normal Form (includes facts and rules)
22:22:14 [saidtabet]
Fact-Oriented Normal forms: includes facts and derived facts but not rules
22:22:44 [saidtabet]
advantages: Fact-Oriented Normal Form corresponds to RDF FOAF facts
22:22:56 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: is this some kind of a static form?
22:23:14 [saidtabet]
Harold: yes, this is a way to be compatible with systems that don't have rules support
22:26:59 [saidtabet]
Harold: example of usage include also spam handling rules
22:27:35 [saidtabet]
christian: to clarify: you need to keep both rules and facts, not just the facts
22:28:23 [saidtabet]
harold: similarity with xslt (pages can keep the xslt online and translate on-demand, others keep the translator local and provide only the html result)
22:28:58 [saidtabet]
Christian: the last open issue item is very relevant to this group
22:29:27 [saidtabet]
Christian: which information using the vocabulary should be represented in ontology rather than rules?
22:29:51 [saidtabet]
Harold: there are many things that can be expressed in both OWL and in rules
22:30:12 [saidtabet]
Christian: it will be useful to include the info illustrating such situations
22:30:43 [saidtabet]
Harold: integration is important: Hybrid Approach
22:31:37 [saidtabet]
A Hybrid Approach has been presented in a paper at the RuleML 2005 conference by Jos De Bruin Michael Kifer Dieter Fensel and Harold Boley
22:33:16 [saidtabet]
Christian: scoping construct for positive queries: what kind of requirement is it?
22:33:42 [saidtabet]
Harold: this comes from metadata centered around people
22:34:20 [saidtabet]
Harold: person centric. There are also other social networks. Local rules can be applied to things such as books, not just persons
22:34:45 [saidtabet]
22:35:04 [saidtabet]
22:35:14 [saidtabet]
Christian: thanks Harold. Any questions?
22:36:17 [saidtabet]
Christian: The question where OWL can be used instead of RIF is important. It will be good to get this kind of information from the usecases
22:37:33 [saidtabet]
Christian: you may want to be able to explicitly scope your rules. Scalability needs to be clarified, we are not talking about scalability of engines
22:38:06 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: FOAF implies the mixture of data and Rules (e.g. RDF). In commercial engines, it is typical to separate data and rules.
22:38:27 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: we need to clarify if there is a need to pass data as well as rules
22:38:44 [saidtabet]
Christian: to Paul Vincent I don't understand please clarify
22:39:30 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: in this case we are looking at the idea where rules can replace some facts. The question: is that a requirement?
22:41:17 [saidtabet]
Said: to follow up on Paul's question. We need to clarify if there is a need (requirement) to exchange data, models, objects, etc...together with rules.
22:42:00 [saidtabet]
Next speaker: Paula Lavinia, from REWERSE
22:42:42 [saidtabet]
We proposed 6 usecases as we need various kinds of rules: deductive, integrity constraints, reactive rules, ECA, etc
22:43:18 [saidtabet]
Today, I am presenting a usecase on negotiation.
22:43:32 [saidtabet]
Title: Automated trust establishment for eCommerce
22:44:00 [saidtabet]
in this usecase we need codified policies for various aspects (cedentials, services)
22:44:14 [saidtabet]
sorry..: typo: credentials
22:44:41 [saidtabet]
to establish trust, the idea is to use a mechanism of exchange of policies between the parties involved
22:46:21 [saidtabet]
example: a gold card holder is given a 10 percent discount on any purchase
22:47:03 [saidtabet]
Christian: when you say the policies are disclosed by eShop to the buyer, are those for viewing only or executable?
22:47:22 [saidtabet]
Paula: to determine the credentials
22:49:13 [saidtabet]
Christian: why do you need rules, why not just query?
22:50:00 [saidtabet]
Paula: you don't keep the credentials at eShop. This is a mix between explanation and request
22:50:23 [Zakim]
22:51:26 [saidtabet]
Paula: this is a simplified version of the scenario we sent
22:51:38 [saidtabet]
Paula: hank you
22:51:47 [saidtabet]
sorry typo again :-(
22:51:54 [saidtabet]
Paula: Thank You!
22:52:20 [saidtabet]
Harold: what does that mean for the engines? do you run multiple? what if you don't want to show your rules to other parties?
22:52:32 [saidtabet]
Paula: you only show a subset of the rules
22:53:11 [saidtabet]
Harold: does this involve more than just firing rules? such as comparing between buyer and seller rules?
22:53:47 [saidtabet]
Paula: I am not sure. If they are not compatible, then the negotiation is aborted
22:54:56 [saidtabet]
Christian: in your use case, you want to run your data locally by getting the rules as you don't disclose your data
22:55:53 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: a natural extension of this usecase is that a consumer can collect rules and compare the results of running rules.
22:56:04 [saidtabet]
Next Speaker: Paul Vincent
22:57:15 [saidtabet]
Paul is presenting now
22:59:40 [saidtabet]
Use Case 1: Change PR Rule Engine: user determines they want to change from Engine A to engine B
22:59:56 [saidtabet]
case: rule migration between vendors
23:00:46 [saidtabet]
Paul Vincent: my analysis:
23:01:02 [saidtabet]
success factors: What % of rules could be covered by RIF
23:01:22 [saidtabet]
verification and validation of rules target vs host
23:01:35 [saidtabet]
only relevant for same class of platform?
23:01:46 [saidtabet]
e.g from 1 rete engine to another?
23:01:56 [saidtabet]
from CL compliant to another?
23:02:10 [saidtabet]
what's the business benefit of the interchange?
23:03:33 [saidtabet]
Christian: your point we need to make the case for interchange
23:04:30 [saidtabet]
Use case 2: realtime contract exchange
23:05:05 [saidtabet]
scenario: System A communicates rules to System B for execution
23:05:24 [saidtabet]
Case: supplychain/SLA/contract exchange...
23:05:53 [saidtabet]
interchange: realtime and rules are executable
23:06:05 [saidtabet]
Christian: what do you mean by executable?
23:06:18 [saidtabet]
Paul: rules are run by rule engines not just viewed
23:06:32 [saidtabet]
success factors for use case 2:
23:06:42 [saidtabet]
coverage of contract rules?
23:07:05 [saidtabet]
runtime cost of translating RIF
23:07:24 [saidtabet]
usecase 3: government take-up of BRE
23:07:51 [saidtabet]
Paul: Thank you!
23:11:47 [Allen]
Allen has joined #rif
23:24:43 [holger]
holger has joined #rif
23:24:51 [msintek]
msintek has joined #rif
23:27:33 [MarkusK]
MarkusK has joined #rif
23:28:43 [Jing]
Jing has joined #rif
23:28:49 [phitzler]
phitzler has joined #rif
23:30:09 [Guizhen]
Guizhen has joined #rif
23:30:35 [bijan]
bijan has joined #rif
23:31:46 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
23:31:46 [RRSAgent]
23:32:24 [igor]
igor has joined #rif
23:33:17 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #rif
23:33:43 [Philippe]
Philippe has joined #rif
23:33:55 [phitzler]
The protocol from the classification breakout is on the Wiki at
23:34:46 [PaulV]
CSMA: INtros next session: Use cases + discussions
23:35:09 [giorgos]
giorgos has joined #rif
23:35:17 [JeffP]
JeffP has joined #rif
23:36:02 [PaulV]
1st discussion: reqmts for existing rule lang + engine, for illustration / prioritization - for Phase 2
23:37:14 [PaulV]
2nd point: need specific interchange scenarios: rule may behave differently when used elsewhere
23:37:26 [Hallmark]
Hallmark has joined #rif
23:37:26 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
23:37:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Hirtle, +1.650.347.aacc
23:37:58 [PaulV]
Examples was: source uses uncertainty, target does not handle this: useful for describing interchange
23:38:42 [PaulV]
Example was: when rule sent elsewhere, data access is different so rule behaviour is different
23:39:04 [PaulV]
Issue is "graceful degradation" in rule interchange (requirement for)
23:39:45 [PaulV]
Another issue: specific cost factors for interchange / marshalling cost may be significant eg real time trading
23:40:56 [PaulV]
Other issues: data TF with RIF?; scaleability?
23:41:31 [PaulV]
Other issue: is there a use case for interchange between classes of rule? eg PROLOG to Production Rules
23:41:47 [PaulV]
Or not?
23:42:25 [PaulV]
Last issue: may exist another alternative to RIF eg RDF - why would RIF be preferred?
23:42:44 [PaulV]
CSMA calls for qus...
23:44:09 [PaulV]
Qu: what is needed from use cases? Ans: we don't need requirements for existing engines,but use cases for interchange
23:44:41 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif
23:44:42 [PaulV]
Ans ctd: interchange scenarios. and especially between diferent classes of platform
23:44:56 [PaulV]
CSMA offers to document summary
23:45:52 [PaulV]
Floor handed to Sandro for OWL task session
23:45:55 [vassilis]
vassilis has joined #rif
23:46:01 [PaulV]
OWL and RDF compatibility breakout
23:46:23 [Uli]
Uli has joined #rif
23:46:34 [PaulV]
OWL compatibility: with what? phase 1 RIF semantics?
23:47:02 [PaulV]
Concensus: std semantics in phase 1 / minimum model / FOL
23:47:44 [PaulV]
Qu: differences require std semantics (defined)
23:48:39 [PaulV]
OWL compatibility doc will be approaches listed in matrix form - there will be choices
23:48:55 [PaulV]
Separate task force / separate telcon recommended to handle
23:49:22 [PaulV]
For working group to decide...
23:50:13 [PaulV]
RDF compatibility: issues: RDF facts? syntax for rules? n-ary import? export? list structures? data types? triples view?
23:50:22 [PaulV]
... plus others
23:51:59 [PaulV]
BenG Qu: in classification decided separate week telcon / separate notes? Scribe notes to be posted...
23:52:26 [PaulV]
Pasquale takes floor (apols for sp) for classification of rules
23:52:51 [PaulV]
Time taken on brainstorming: WIKI page up already with protocol
23:53:04 [mdean]
mdean has joined #rif
23:53:10 [saidtabet]
saidtabet has joined #rif
23:53:15 [PaulV]
Result: OWL ontology to classify rule langs - some descriminators already defined
23:53:49 [PaulV]
Contains semantic dimensions, complexity etc
23:53:54 [PaulV]
Call for input
23:54:33 [PaulV]
Scribe notes will be on WIKI
23:55:11 [PaulV]
CSMA moves agenda on: open discussion...
23:56:13 [PaulV]
HB: good progress - what is next step - will telcon continue energy...
23:56:24 [Zakim]
23:57:33 [PaulV]
CSMA: Next step? Started work on classification / use case / RDF+OWL compat: 1st 2 need more contributions
23:58:26 [PaulV]
Another next step: will need to start work on tech spec: several ways to approach eg call for suggestions
23:59:20 [PaulV]
Call for views on proceeding from group - need proposals for next conf call in 10days [this is 1 way to start]