See also: IRC log
<LeoraMorgenstern> I think ?? P8 was me, but I got disconnected
<LeoraMorgenstern> Because when I got disconnected, it said - ??P8
<johnhall> zakim [ipcaller] is me
<johnhall> zakim [IPcaller] is me
<IanH> Yes
ok
<sandro> scribeNick: PaulaP
<ChrisW> +1
csma: accept minutes of last
week
... any comment?
... no comments
... minutes of last week accepted
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept minutes of last meeting (3/21)
csma: amendments to agenda?
... there are none
csma: F2F2 minutes late
... accept minutes of F2F2
... any requests for modifications?
+1
<igor> +1
<IanH> I object
ian: has a comment
... but thought iti is about F2F4
<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept minutes of F2F2 meeting
ian: no comment on F2F2
csma: minutes of F2F2 are
accepted
... news on F2F3?
<josb> No news
there are no news
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept minutes of F2F2 meeting [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Mar/att-0230/Feb27-rif-minutes.html] and [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Mar/att-0230/Feb28-rif-minutes.html]
csma: no news on F2F3
... move to F2F4
<johnhall> I have let BR Forum know that we don't need meeting space for F2F4
ian: I have no problem with the
proposal
... there is a wiki page for proposing hosting F2F
meetings
... chairs haven't replied with the fact that we have a
procedure on this
csma: we should be more careful about procedures
chris: solution is simple: take the proposal and put it on the wiki
allen: I can put the proposal on the wiki
<pfps> +q
chris: criticism accepted
csma: action on Allen to put the proposal on the wiki
<ChrisW> ACTION: Allen to put MITRE proposal on f2f4 wiki page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action01]
csma: people submitting such proposals should also inform us about deadlines for deciding about acceptance
allen: should go into the proposal on the wiki?
csma: yes
pfps: hotel information is needed
allen: is difficult to say
something about costs
... MITRE will look for a kind of arrangement for a rate
... there is a hotel for 119
... MITRE will give a couple of proposals for hotels and
arrange a MITRE rate for attendees
csma: it would be good to have an
idea for the price of hotels
... not necessarily for making the arrangements, just to give a
flavor
<IanH> Does it have to be North America, or just not Europe?
csma: following 2 F2F meetings in
Europe, we should have the next one in the US
... Just not Europe?
<IanH> North America is fine for *me*
csma: North America, not just not
Europe
... reason is the location of RIF participants
<JosDeRoo> Zakim. mute me
csma: any other comments on F2F
meetings?
... no comments
csma: sparql?
... xquery, xpath?
... common logic?
... prr?
paul: no news on prr
csma: sbvr?
donald: specification is
public
... comments on sbvr until July
csma: any comment on other groups
we should be aware of?
... no comments
csma: review actions
... our first working draft has been released
<ChrisW> ACTION: ChrisW tell commonlogic about UCR pub [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action02]
chris: my action is done
<ChrisW> ACTION: csma to publicise to Java Rules [DONE] [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action03]
csma: my action is also done
<ChrisW> ACTION: John Hall to publicise to BR community [DONE] [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action04]
<ChrisW> ACTION: JosB to publicise to SPARQL [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action05]
<josb> (be be done soon)
csma: jos' action is continued
<PaulV> PRR publication done
<Darko> JosB to publicise to SPARQL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/21-rif-minutes.html#action11] [CONTINUED]
<ChrisW> ACTION: Paul to publicize to PRR & BMI [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action06]
<ChrisW> ACTION: Donald to publicize to SBVR [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action07]
<ChrisW> ACTION: Elisa to publicize to ODM [DROPPED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action08]
evan: can take of Elisa's action
<ChrisW> ACTION: Evan to publicize to ODM [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action09]
<ChrisW> ACTION: Sandro to set up a wiki page to record dissemination actions [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action10]
csma: remind you that comments
are expected
... the comments on the UCR working draft will be answered by
the chairs
<Donald_Chapin> To Report an SBVR Bug/Issue to the OMG: http://www.omg.org/technology/agreement.htm
csma: the comments and answers are archived
sandro: nothing more to do after the UCR publication
csma: critical success factor and goals can be applied in an informal way
frank: this is not a formal methodology
<Donald_Chapin> OMG's "Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules" Interim Specification (http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?dtc/2006-03-02)
frank: it is in a sense a reason to believe in you and your work
csma: it is appealing to use this methodology
<ChrisW> "grokked" == "understood deeply"
frank: the information I've sent about this would be enough for using the methodology
csma: the idea is to start with the goals
frank: actually we need to
identify goals, critical success factors and requirements
... this is an ideal situation
<GaryHallmark> +1 use a 3 level outline to organize the large number of existing requirements we have collected
csma: I propose to start a
structured collection of design constraints
... continue this with an addition
... when someone proposes a new design constraint
... then also comment if this is a goal, a critical success
factor or a requirement
frank: you also need a
restrictive side of it
... need a quality control for this
... we have to review it
csma: of course, the next step
would be to discuss them
... and determine if they really are goals, requirements,
...
... we discuss them and need to converge
leora: we should also put up a kind of measure for requirements
frank: it should be obvious
csma: it depends on the design constraint
<LeoraMorgenstern> +1 with csma's design proposal
csma: and explain why and if a
requirement is a measurable one, give the measure
... there are no other comments
... we should start adding design constraints on the wiki
page
<GaryHallmark> does "design constraint" = "requirement"?
<DavidHirtle> no
dave: suggest to use the mailing list to discuss the design constraints
<ChrisW> all requirements are design constraints
csma: when adding design constraints, send also an email
<DavidHirtle> the OWL UC&R doc may make the distinction clear: http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-goals
dave: just use the email for starting the discussion on design constraints
<EvanWallace> +1 on discussing these things on email 1st
frank: it is hard to extract the information on email
csma: I agree with Frank
... we use the term design constraint to avoid limiting us to
requirements
... I prefer having a description on the wiki page
... their classification should be discussed through email
<FrankMcCabe> wiki + email conversation
csma: there are no other comments on this
<GaryHallmark> so requirements rollup to crit. success factors rollup to goals and all are design constaints?
csma: there are no design
constraints yet
... we can skip this for this telecon
... start working on the page on design constraints
... so as to have something to discuss on email and at the next
telecon
... we continue to discuss design constraints during the next
telecons
<ChrisW> ACTION: chair to put design for extensibility and discussion of proposals on agenda for next telecon [DONE] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action11]
csma: are there comments on the UCR work?
dave: there is enough material on
requirements
... why just another wiki page?
csma: I would like to have more
comments on how the requirements relate to the use cases
... also motivation for requirements or goals
... requirements can be taken from the existing lists
... do not add a new slightly different requirement, but
discuss the existing ones
... this way we can have a collective list
... it is just a way to consolidate the lists we have
<GaryHallmark> ideally some one with vision, time, and experience could take a crack at organizing the list we already have acording to the 3 level hierachy of goals, and crit. success factors
dave: we will end with a long
page on design constraints
... but it is fine with me
... let see how the work on the wiki evolves
csma: I propose to start to
organize the list
... we should not just reinvent the list
... look at what we have already
frank: could be helpful to have someone to structure the list
<DavidHirtle> +1 to dave's/frank's suggestion
+1
<MalaMehrotra> +1
csma: there is no suitable list at moment
harold: structuring is
important
... is better than having flat lists
... we could have a couple of clusters of requirements
csma: there are places to
reference the use cases in the template
... we added the structuring
harold: the template seems to
encourage flat lists
... an example is the list from the F2F2 brainstorming
... need to do it on the fly
csma: we have already structure in Paula's list
harold: perhaps we give names to constraints
<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to suggest people proposing design constraints should shoulder the burden of fitting them into Frank's Hierarchy, and arguing for them on a telecon and in e-mail
harold: we can then simpler reference and discuss them
sandro: the important thing here
is to motivate the requirements and having discussions during
the telecons
... not just a couple of sentences on the wiki page
... when you put something on the page, you need to be prepared
to discuss it in the next telecon
csma: need also to take
responsability for introduced design constraints
... put your name when you add a design constraint
... if you want to defend an existing requirement, take your
requirements from the existing lists
donald: we confuse people with the notion of design constraints
csma: a design constraint could be a requirement, a goal, a success factor
donald: it should be made clear on the wiki
csma: it is already
donald: is there an official
status of the existing requirements' lists
... it is important to understand where we are
csma: the idea is to consolidate the existing requirements and recognize new ones
donald: are we going to build on Paula's lists?
csma: we start with the existing lists (Paula's, Allen's work)
sandro: we should not forget the
existing work
... it is an evolving understanding
csma: we are at the end of our
telecon today
... start working on design constraints
harold: is the existing template a final one?
csma: no, it needs to be modified based on the discussion today
<ChrisW> ACTION: csma to modify design constraint template to take into acccount what was said today [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action12]
<DaveReynolds> The wiki page template already has name slot - the title
<ChrisW> ACTION: Chris to start email discussion about what issues are "fuzzy" wrt phase 1 & 2 [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action13]
<sandro> sandro: The idea is that we need to have focussed discussion on these things, one at a time, and we can draw on those previous pages as we need in shaping the decision process.
csma: there is another item on
the agenda
... we will discuss it during the next telecon
<johnhall> Sorry, have to go - bye
<ChrisW> ACTION: chair to put design for extensibility and discussion of proposals on agenda for next telecon [CONTINUED] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action14]
csma: any other comments?
... thank you for attending
<Darko> -Darko
yes
<Allen> bye
<igor> bye
end of telecon
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) Found ScribeNick: PaulaP Inferring Scribes: PaulaP Default Present: Leora_Morgenstern Present: Leora_Morgenstern WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list! Got date from IRC log name: 28 Mar 2006 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html WARNING: No person found for ACTION item: chair to put design for extensibility and discussion of proposals on agenda for next telecon [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/03/28-rif-minutes.html#action14] People with action items: allen chris csma evan hall john josb sandro WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]