<holger> /me zakim, josb.a is probably me

<sandro> MarkusK, no + on that command.

<sandro> sure

<DonaldC> Zakim aacc is me

<pfps> Nice typing. :-)

<sandro> IanH, you forgot the comma after "zakim". :-)

<saidtabet> hello everyone!

<csma> biajn sent regrets

<csma> don greist

<Darko> I am here

<Darko> yes

<Allen> yes

<Darko> sorry I cann scribe

<ChrisWelty> go ahead darko

<Darko> Apologize but not this time

<sandro> amendment to minutes: change 'sandro' to ... someone ... in the PRR liason section.

<Allen> ok

<josb> Darko, speak out on the phone

<Allen> Minutes amendment: Please change the line in section 2 that says "liaison report from OMG SBVR - Allen Ginsberg: " to Donald Chapin

<Darko> nop

<Darko> sorry no this time

<csma> don greist is here

<FrankMcCabe> i can do it

<csma> +1

<sandro> +1

<PaulaP> +1

minutes from last meeting accepted

<csma> me zakim, unmute me

<sandro> ACTION: csma to ask ISO whether liaison is worthwhile for ISO IEC Joint Task Force 1, SC 32, Working Group 2: Metadata Standards US national body is ANSI L8 might be interesting for liaison. See [WWW] http://metadata-standards.org/ [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action01]

<sandro> (unless you want to do it, Frank. I'm pasting from the meeting page on the wiki, adding a note like [CONTINUED] or [DONE] on the end before hitting return.]

<Elisa> me zakim mute me

Selman says that there is no activity currently in JSR94

There are two mailing lists we can subscribe to

<csma> said could be the liaison?

said says that he follows the mailing list on JSR94

<johnhall> ??38 is me

<scribe> ACTION: send a message to JSR94 that the RIF is here [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action02]

<Elisa> me/ zakim mut me

<johnhall> zakim ??38 is me

Use Case & Requirements

use cases

<sandro> ACTION: Christian to send an email to announce the one week deadline for reviewing edited general use cases [DROPPED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action03]

<johnhall> zakim ??38 is johnhall

<sandro> discussing ACTION: Ian Horrocks to write scenario for RichKR including ?features?

IanH edited the Rich Knowledge Representation scenario

<sandro> ACTION: Ian Horrocks to write scenario for RichKR including ?features? [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action04]

IanH trieed to give a generic example of RKR

<sandro> ACTION: Chris Welty will come up with another example narrative for a RichKR use case [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action05]

<sandro> ACTION: Christian will propose another scenario for the publication use case [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action06]

<sandro> ACTION: Paul Vincent will do the detailed scenario for "Interoperability between rule engines" [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action07]

<sandro> ACTION: Frank will do the scenarios for information integration with Ed Barkmeyer assisting [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action08]

<sandro> ACTION: Leora will do the Decision Support detailed scenario [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action09]

<sandro> ACTION: Donald will submit an email about the use case for interchanging rules specified in different metamodels [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action10]

<johnhall> zakim IPcaller is me

Donald has updated the WIKI with human oriented rules

Allen Many of the scenarios just showed up today

<johnhall> Zakim +[ipcaller] is me

Allen latecomers not in first draft

More editing to do

cross platform, rule development deployment to be done by PVicent

group needs to decide about human oriented ruless

group should look at donald's recent post

email needs to be sent about reminding people to look at use cases for completeness

Christian: message seemed to be redundant based on minutes

Need an editors draft for F2F in february. Leave meeting with a pubished working draft

Editor's draft ready just before the F2F

<sandro> F2F2 is 27 February

Allen: in reasonable shape wrt use cases themselves
... no design goals and requirements at the moment

Start figuring out requirements now

Allen: Use cases need to be organized by next week. Then start on requriements
... to have an introduction etc. by next week's call?
... looking for closure on use cases

David: needs redaction

Allen: easily readable scenarios, with an intro, reduce to a few pages

ChrisW: Are there any undone use case categories

2.3 cross development and deployment not yet done. Human use case needs a group decision.

allen: in relatively good shape

chrisW: people needs to review the human oriented b rules

<LeoraMorgenstern> I'll volunteer to review

<JeffPan> me too

<StanD> I will review

<StanD> Stan Devitt

<scribe> ACTION: Leora, StanD, Jeeff will review and report on human oriented rules [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action11]

ChrisW: by Friday + reporting to group
... looking for feedback

<sandro> ACTION Leora, Stan, JeffP to review and report on human oriented rules section of UCR, sending e-mail by friday.

<sandro> ACTION: Leora, Stan, JeffP to review and report on human oriented rules section of UCR, sending e-mail by friday. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action12]

chrisW: will section 2 be ready by next week?

Allen: should be possible

chrisW: have readiness by next week as a goal so that we can get reviewers
... three people to review HOR, + use cases ready next week. Start reviewing next con call

OWL+RDF compatibility

<sandro> consider: ACTION: Christian will start an email discussion on "What part of the RIF vs. OWL/RDF Compatibility belongs to RIF and what part belong to OWL/RDF"

<sandro> ACTION: Christian will start an email discussion on "What part of the RIF vs. OWL/RDF Compatibility belongs to RIF and what part belong to OWL/RDF" [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action13]

<StanD> Jos DeRoo has reported on his action.

<sandro> ACTION: JosDeRoo to update RIF wrt SPARQL rdfSemantics issue and its pending resolution [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action14]

<sandro> ACTION: JosDeBruijn create a wiki page explaining the issue with bNode semantics and summarize the possible solutions which have come up during the discussions on the mailing list [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action15]

cw: active topic: discussion on query languages

<StanD> JosDeRoo has reported on the SPARQL action at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Jan/0138.html

chrisW: would like to see resolution on query language compatibility.

sandro does not feel the need to achieve consensus on query language compat.

at the moment

<sandro> ACTION: JosDeRoo to update RIF wrt SPARQL rdfSemantics issue and its pending resolution [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action16]

stan: Jos could not make the call. However, JosDeRoo feels that he has completed his action wrt SPARQL

mKifer: revolves on semantics of b-nodes.
... including SPARQL

<josb> +1

Query language discussion waiting on b-node discussion

csma: not sure if we should wait for bnode before talking sparql

relation between rif and query languages e.g. querying knowldge and databases

this is compat with RDF

<csma> +1

chrisW: need a new item on agenda for QL fitting into RIF

<saidtabet> +1

<PaulaP> +1

<saidtabet> Agree with Sandro

<scribe> done in context of use cases and not in abstract

<josb> +1 agree with Sandro

csma: also agrees

<sandro> sandro said -- let's only talk about this (query language -- acces to data issue) in the context of specific use cases

<josb> Why not add a use case?

sandro: looking for proposals relating QL and use cases
... should already be in use cases

<Allen> +queue

<Allen> +queue me

csma: when people discuss QL, specific topic on email, illustrate with examples

<PaulaP> there is a use case on querying XML and RDF data

<PaulaP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Rule-Based_Combined_Access_to_XML_and_RDF_Data

Allen: information integration does not mention SPARQL but should be big on QL

<PaulaP> the mentioned use case is in the information integration category

Classification

chrisw: not much on interchange
... needto understnad what is being changed
... what can be interchanged
... breakout sessions focused on classification in order to be able to uderstand what we can inerchange
... varying expectations on amount that we will be able to interchange
... please add to suggested reading list. How to classify KR semantics

<Allen> +queue me

<EvanWallace> When did Chris send this message?

allen: agrees with chrisw. Key is what can we facilitate.
... suggestion from email list: concrete way - specific example and how would you translate
... specific example from Jess, should be possible to tranlate to jrules but harder taks to translate to prolog (say)
... discussion on how to represent semantics of rules
... also translation across different meta-models/semantics

<sandro> +1 Allen (to look at some specific examples of translating between rule languages with very different semantics)

allen: there is no retract in Prolog (?)

retract is called retract in Prolog!

<sandro> real prolog does have retract, but pure prolog does not -- maybe that's the confusion.

chrisw: need to avoid reinvention of rule
... looking for utility not perfection

<sandro> ChrisWelty: even if we can't translate completely, it's still useful to translate

said: agrees with Allen & chrisW need to focus on what we are trying to interchange

commas are extra

harold: separate phase 1 from phase 2 issues. retract is a phase 2 issue
... could have phase 1 use cases. only pure KR

<EvanWallace> +1 on phase II continuity for Use Cases

<sandro> harold: use cases, marked up with what is phase 1, what is phase 2.

chrisw: what is slotted logic

harold: slotted logic = named arguments

<Allen> yes

allen: we need to be clear on what RIF guarantees in terms of interchange
... do we guarantee logical, operational equivalence

<csma> +1

stanD: wrt object of interchange key step is infrastructure allowing author to document what is being sent
... if you can clearly identify what the source of KR is, receiver can more easily determine how to interpret

csma: agrees

chrisW: need to move forward on this

<scribe> ACTION: will explain what Lloyd Topor extensions etc mean [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action17]

<scribe> ACTION: Harold will explain what Lloyd Topor extensions etc mean [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action18]

<sandro> ACTION: [DONE] chris clarify desiderata for list of classifications [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html#action19]

<JeffPan> +1

<holger> +1

<PaulaP> +1

<StanD> +1

<saidtabet> +1

<StanD> -StanD

<JeffPan> thanks bye

<igor> bye

<Darko> -Darko

<saidtabet> bye everyone!

<MichaelKifer> -MichaelKifer

<csma> bye

<JeffPan> \msg EvanWallace Hi

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/march/february/
Succeeded: s/Are/ChrisW: Are/
Succeeded: s/Jos/JosDeRoo/
Succeeded: s/should already/sandro: should already/
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: scribe
Inferring Scribes: scribe

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Allen_Ginsberg ChrisW ChrisWelty Christian Darko David David_Hirtle Deborah_Nichols DonGreist DonaldC Elisa EvanWallace Evan_Wallace FrankMcCabe Fujitsu GaryHallmark Gary_Hallmark GiorgosStoilos Harold HaroldB Helen_Chen IBM IPcaller IRH IVML IanH Igor_Mozetic JacekK JeffPan JeremyCarroll LeoraMorgenstern Leora_Morgenstern MarkusK MichaelKifer Michael_Kifer Michael_Sintek Mike_Dean MinsuJang NRCC P10 P26 P34 P38 P40 P9 PaulaP Peter_Patel-Schneider Said_Tabet Ugo_Corda Uli aaaa aabb aacc aadd allen consider csma cw ericP hirtle holger igor johnhall josb mKifer mdean msintek pfps said saidtabet sandro stan stanD ugo vassilis
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 31 Jan 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/01/31-rif-minutes.html
People with action items: chris christian csma frank harold jeffp josdebruijn josderoo leora paul send stan will

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.