W3C

- DRAFT -

RIF Telecon 9 May 2006

9 May 2006

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Regrets
Chair
ChrisW
Scribe
StanDevitt

Contents


 

 

<ChrisW> did everyone just get bumped?

I just connected.

<ChrisW> stan, are you all set?

Yes.

<ChrisW> scribenick: StanDevitt

<ChrisW> minutes of last meeting: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006May/att-0013/2006-05-02-rif-minutes.html

AGENDA item 1

Minutes accepted - no objections.

No additions to the Agenda

<PaulaP> no news

ITEM: Update on FacetoFace in Montenegro

Discussion: Hotel confirmation problems.

Paula thinks they are just a bit slow.

<DavidHirtle> This happened to me also, but I got in touch with them today by phone

<Francois> /me zakim, ??P9 is me.

Local organizers know about it.

<scribe> ACTION: All attendees check their reservations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action01]

NOTE: update on colocation with IWC - no update at this time.

ITEM: Liason activities

NOTE: SPARQL has a new chair

SPARQL is in ? last review?

<sandro> :-( :-( (Jos de Roo having less time to spend on W3C and open-source work)

Jos Deroo: cannot attend SPARQL .

Searching for representative to coordinate with SPARQL.

<sandro> Sandro: I believe DAWG uses UTC because of some Australians who are no longer in the group.

<scribe> ACTION: Jos DeRoo will identify someone. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action02]

No reps for XQUERY

<Hassan> Who is scribing today?

<sandro> Hassan, StanDevitt is scribing.

no reps present for other SBVR

no news from ODM

who is speaking?

<johnhall> SBVR - still on schedule, issues close in July

<LeoraMorgenstern> Yes,

ITEM 4: Use cases and Requirements.

<LeoraMorgenstern> I emailed two things

<LeoraMorgenstern> just a few minutes ago

<LeoraMorgenstern> I have laryngitis

<LeoraMorgenstern> so it's hard for me to speak

<LeoraMorgenstern> Is it okay for me to type?

<sandro> typing is good

<LeoraMorgenstern> Right --- the only thing is that I have put them in text

LEORA has completed her two ACTIONS.

<LeoraMorgenstern> and not as wikis

<LeoraMorgenstern> So, my question is .... should I put them as wikis as well?

<JosDeRoo> ChrisW: Re DAWG: The formal overlap is: Enrico Franconi, Dan Connolly, Sergio Tessaris, Jos De Roo, Sven Groppe, and Bijan Parsia.

<LeoraMorgenstern> Sandro, do I need to have these as wikis?

<LeoraMorgenstern> or is email good enough?

<sandro> I think e-mail is good enough for now. If we need them in the wiki, anyone can put them there.

ACTIONS 9 10 and 12 still open. The rest are closed.

Action on Frank is still active from Friday.

<ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Goals%2C_Critical_Success_Factors_and_Requirements

ITEM: Frank's version of document

Question: small group has a conscensus on these goals. What does the larger group think?

This is an informal poll.

who is speaking?

<sandro> me, StanDevitt

Request for a discussion for why these three goals are important from Sandro.

Discussion led by Sandro:

Why important - there is a trade off.

What makes interchange easy versus wide deployment.

Common problem in W3C specs development.

By making these 3 top level the trade-offs are more obvious.

<DavidHirtle> I think they look good.

David Reynolds: too passive a way of phrasing it. Should be more a goal of enabling semantic web ...

Sandro: thinks this is a 4th goal. There may be more.

There is no conscencus on a 4th goal yet .

<sandro> Goal: 1: Rule Interchange, 2: Widespead Adoption, 3: Consistency with W3C Specs,

<sandro> Possible Goal 4: Consistency with W3C / Semantic Web Vision ?

Dave not opposed to finding a 4th goal out of this.

ITem: first goal

any objections ? NONE

second goal: any comments - objections?

none

objections as a goal?

comment: seems like a different sort of goal - higher level

Isn't this goal common to all W3C work?

answer: Sandro? similar to the first goals in that they are sort of obvious but needs stating.

criteria is that if you ignore it - you fail

Peter talking:

If wide scale adoption is a goal shouldnt the actions be publicity.

comment: action yet to be decided
... not the only goal.

Peter: question - what is activity of the group - as determined by goals so He is concerned if the goal leads to the wrong activity.

<Allen> How about "widescale adoptabilITY"

<Hassan> Isn't Wide Scale Adoption a CSF rather than a goal?

arising out of discussion: rephrase design something that can be adopted widely.

risk: Working group will not be finished till we achieve wide adoption.

Requirement must be met. Goals need not.

A goal is not measurable? Requirements are.

There is a distinction where you want to be and what you need to do to get there.

Allan:

Changing it to something that indicates the intention of building something that can serve the role of widescale adoption is preferred.

<sandro> "Design for Widespread Adoption" ?

Agrees with Peter's point that there is a difference.

<sandro> Allen, are you arguing for the goal being " Design for Widespread Adoption " ?

He is generally in favour of trying to get to wide scale adoption.

<Allen> Sandro, that sounds better

A success factor is not a goal.

examples of goals - simplicity ... etc.

sandro: thinks the terminolgy is being used differently by the two individuals ?who?

<DaveReynolds> +1 to Sandro, in this methodology this is a goal

<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to argue that we need to do more than design for W.A.

why the goal needs to be wide spread adoption is because there will be activities outside of the design that will be important and should be included.

may be activities by our companies.

all would feel a sense of failure if it is not wide spread.

<EvanWallace> 2 individuals: Frank McCabe and Hassan

Does the rewording as "design for" work better for everyone?

Peter = yes

Hassan = yes

<PaulaP> I can do that

<johnhall> I like it as it is. If we don't achieve wide-scale adoption, we will in the broader sense have failed

who?

<sandro> (design for) widespread adoption

Sandro:

Samdro not happy with rewording ...

ITEM: Second goal

<sandro> semi-resolved: " (design for) widespread adoption " ?

request for comments - no response.

<scribe> NEW DISCUSSION:

Critical Success factor?

Exchange of rules: coverage

<sandro> looking at http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Goals%2C_Critical_Success_Factors_and_Requirements

?? what was the second factor?

factor: soundess

Coverage is okay in general, but needs flushing out.

Second one needs a better title - too much of a technical meaning.

observes that Frank had commented that we need to be careful to avoid confusion.

Chris - mentions goal of semantic aware exchange in this sense too.

Allen is not happy with the wording of Soundness. Suggests something like Meaning preserving.

<Hassan> I prefer "Meaning Preserving" as well (like Allen mentioned) rather than "Soundness"

Discussion about a new action to help with wording .

preference to finish an action first ...

Allen comments that there is still a lot of disussion and is a broad topic. Does it still mean what it did when Sandro proposed the term?

There is a lot here that are all points under discussion.

Sandro feels these are not the critical factors but not sure yet what they are.

Ian: need to understand the problem before saying it solved.

Axel: Extensibility is not in this list? Why?

<Hassan> +1 on extensibility (indeed)

Is it coverage? probably not.

<sandro> ChrisW -- does it make a lot of sense to have this discussion without Frank?

comment: extensibility is somewhere in Paula's document - but a good point.

(by ChrisW)

ITEM 5: Technical Design

<ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Apr/0068.html

introduction: a lot of discussion on email

Chris is not clear where people stand on this as a syntax for condition rules?

Peter: What is the syntax? Is it more than syntax of functional style first order logic?

If not, why is it causing a problem?

<DavidHirtle> (not many are here)

comments from authors?

<AxelPolleres> Alex is.

note: authors are not well represented on the call.

<Hassan> Jeff Giorgos and Alex are listed as present

<GiorgosStoilos> GiorgosStamou was an author

<Hassan> I already wrote my position ...

<sandro> maybe you should speak it, Hassan.....

<sandro> Sandro: I wont be able to evaluate this proposal without trying to implement it

<sandro> Hassan: what's interesting is that it relies on RIFRAF

comments: we need to work on the language structure to capture the structure

the technology of getting to a linear syntax is standard technology.

<AxelPolleres> -1 on OWL sufficient to describe conditions, but not sure whether I understand this question right?!?

<Francois> Sorry, I must leave now... See/hear you later...

Is owl sufficient?

<sandro> Ciao, Francois.

ChrisW: suggests leaving this discussion till the authors are present.

<sandro> AxelPolleres, I wasn't suggesting OWL for describing conditions -- but for describing RIFRAF.

proposes to go back to the success factors.

<AxelPolleres> thnx for clarification.

<AxelPolleres> +1

There are still to success factors two discuss.

<Hassan> +1 on waiting for the authors, but we need to bite the bullet of RIFRAF at one point!

ChrisW wants suggestions for actions to prepare for next week.

<pfps> Is there a pointer to RIFRAF?

<ChrisW> RIFRAF: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Rulesystem_Arrangement_Framework

<sandro> current status of rifraf: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Rulesystem_Arrangement_Framework

<sandro> jynx!

hassan suggests ACTION: take a ILOG and LIFE and looking at RIFRAF and trying to see how they match.

Everyone should try out the concept in the language they have in mind.

<scribe> ACTION: Hassan will finish this comparison exercise [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action03]

<sandro> ACTON: Hassan analyse how RIFRAF applies to J-Rules

<sandro> ACTION: Hassan analyse how RIFRAF applies to J-Rules, to help us evaluate RIFRAF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action04]

keep in mind - can I represent my constructs using this proposal?

We want more people and more languages to do this review?

<PaulaP> Xcerpt and XChange

<sandro> ACTION: Paula to try to apply RIFRAF to Xcerpt and XChange [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action05]

Search for someone to do this for SWRL?

<sandro> Chris: The exercise is to see if the RIFRAF represents all the properties of rulesystems that people in this WG care about.

<sandro> Peter: why would anyone want to do this?

Doubt expressed about why one would do it for this particular language?

<sandro> Chris offers a beer

<AxelPolleres> Probably the authors can exemplify by FLORA-2, WSML, SWSL-Rules, etc. I myself could do something on the DLV language, which is essentially datalog with various useful extensions such as aggregates, external predicates, etc. if this would be of interest.

<sandro> Chris: I would be good to know if RIFRAF is adequate to the task of figuring out if RIF will cover rule languages.

<AxelPolleres> I mean the authors of the Exensible design doc.

who?

<sandro> ACTION: Peter, apply RIFRAF to SWRL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action06]

<Hassan> What about a beer for me??? :-)

<sandro> Chris: Beer for Hassan, too.

<AxelPolleres> ack

Other volunteers?

Axel comments that the authors will probably be doing this against the languages they represent.

<sandro> ACTION: Axel, apply RIFRAF to DLV [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action07]

Still needs to check.

Other volunteers?

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/DLV

<sandro> +1 end early

ChrisW: return to CSF or end early?

Paula: leave it for next call as we need to merge documents, and incorporate discussions?

<sandro> Paula: let's wait, since Frank and I have work to do on the CSF document first.

Other business?

<sandro> +1 adjourn

none

Adjourn

<Allen> bye

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: All attendees check their reservations [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Axel, apply RIFRAF to DLV [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: Hassan analyse how RIFRAF applies to J-Rules, to help us evaluate RIFRAF. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Hassan will finish this comparison exercise [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Jos DeRoo will identify someone. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Paula to try to apply RIFRAF to Xcerpt and XChange [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Peter, apply RIFRAF to SWRL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html#action06]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
$Date: 2006/05/09 16:12:26 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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/SCVR/SBVR/
Succeeded: s/work for/ work better for/
Succeeded: s/Dave/Sandro/
Succeeded: s/to/two/
Succeeded: s/LIGHT/LIFE/
Found ScribeNick: StanDevitt
Inferring Scribes: StanDevitt

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: ACTON Allan Allen Allen_Ginsberg Axel AxelPolleres Axel_Polleres Chris ChrisW DaveReynolds Dave_Reynolds DavidHirtle David_Hirtle Deborah_Nichols Discussion Elisa Elisa_Kendall EvanWallace Evan_Wallace Francois GaryHallmark Gary_Hallmark GiorgosStoilos Goal Guest Hassan Hassan_Ait-Kaci IBM IPcaller ITEM IVML Ian IanH JeffP Jeff_Pan JosDeRoo Jos_De_Roo Keeper LeoraMorgenstern Leora_Morgenstern MarkusK NOTE P19 P29 P40 P45 P9 Paula PaulaP Peter PhilippeB Philippe_Bonnard RIFRAF StanDevitt Stella_Mitchell answer comment comments der factor johnhall patranja pfps risk sandro scribenick semi-resolved was
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Got date from IRC log name: 9 May 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/05/09-rif-minutes.html
People with action items: all analyse applies apply axel hassan how jos paula peter rifraf

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


WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]