IRC log of rif on 2006-11-14
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:07:16 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif
- 15:07:16 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/11/14-rif-irc
- 15:07:25 [ChrisW]
- Meeting: RIF Telecon 14 Nov 06
- 15:07:25 [ChrisW]
- Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
- 15:07:25 [ChrisW]
- Agenda:http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Nov/0052.html
- 15:07:43 [ChrisW]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Nov/0052.html
- 15:07:57 [ChrisW]
- Zakim, read agenda from http://www.w3.org/2006/10/17-rif-agenda.rdf
- 15:07:58 [Zakim]
- working on it, ChrisW
- 15:07:58 [Zakim]
- agenda+ Admin' [ChrisW]
- 15:07:59 [Zakim]
- agendum 1 added
- 15:08:00 [Zakim]
- agenda+ F2F [ChrisW]
- 15:08:01 [Zakim]
- agendum 2 added
- 15:08:02 [Zakim]
- agenda+ Liason [ChrisW]
- 15:08:03 [Zakim]
- agendum 3 added
- 15:08:04 [Zakim]
- agenda+ Technical Design [ChrisW]
- 15:08:06 [Zakim]
- agendum 4 added
- 15:08:08 [Zakim]
- agenda+ RIF-RAF [ChrisW]
- 15:08:09 [Zakim]
- agendum 5 added
- 15:08:11 [Zakim]
- agenda+ UCR [ChrisW]
- 15:08:13 [Zakim]
- agendum 6 added
- 15:08:15 [Zakim]
- agenda+ AOB [ChrisW]
- 15:08:18 [Zakim]
- agendum 7 added
- 15:08:19 [Zakim]
- done reading agenda, ChrisW
- 15:43:15 [Francois]
- Francois has joined #rif
- 15:54:30 [patranja]
- patranja has joined #rif
- 15:55:06 [ChrisW]
- zakim, this will be rif
- 15:55:06 [Zakim]
- ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
- 15:55:53 [fgm]
- fgm has joined #rif
- 15:56:16 [csma]
- csma has joined #rif
- 15:57:25 [csma]
- Who is FGM?
- 15:57:43 [DaveReynolds]
- DaveReynolds has joined #rif
- 15:57:57 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
- 15:58:04 [Zakim]
- +??P20
- 15:58:08 [csma]
- Francois, can you scribe?
- 15:58:19 [Hassan]
- Hassan has joined #rif
- 15:58:51 [Zakim]
- +??P27
- 15:58:55 [Zakim]
- -??P20
- 15:58:56 [Zakim]
- +??P20
- 15:59:03 [Zakim]
- +??P29
- 15:59:06 [Zakim]
- +Dave_Reynolds (was ??P29)
- 15:59:11 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 15:59:25 [ChrisW]
- zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
- 15:59:25 [Zakim]
- +ChrisW; got it
- 15:59:33 [Zakim]
- +??P28
- 15:59:34 [Deborah_Nichols]
- Deborah_Nichols has joined #rif
- 15:59:43 [Zakim]
- +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
- 15:59:54 [Zakim]
- +Deborah_Nichols
- 15:59:59 [Francois]
- ??P28 is me.
- 16:00:03 [csma]
- zakim, ??P20 is sandro
- 16:00:03 [Zakim]
- +sandro; got it
- 16:00:21 [Francois]
- zakim, mute me.
- 16:00:23 [Zakim]
- sorry, Francois, I do not see a party named 'Francois'
- 16:00:28 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
- 16:00:29 [csma]
- zakim, ??P27 is me
- 16:00:29 [Zakim]
- +csma; got it
- 16:00:43 [DavidHirtle]
- DavidHirtle has joined #rif
- 16:00:45 [Harold]
- Harold has joined #rif
- 16:00:46 [Francois]
- zakim, ??P28 is me.
- 16:00:46 [Zakim]
- +Francois; got it
- 16:01:18 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:01:33 [ChrisW]
- Scribe: Francois Bry
- 16:01:33 [ChrisW]
- ScribeNick: Francois
- 16:01:43 [Zakim]
- +Jos_de_Bruijn
- 16:01:44 [Zakim]
- +[NRCC]
- 16:01:46 [josb]
- josb has joined #rif
- 16:01:58 [Harold]
- zakim, [NRCC] is me
- 16:01:58 [Zakim]
- +Harold; got it
- 16:02:04 [Zakim]
- +LeoraMorgenstern
- 16:02:26 [Zakim]
- +[LMU]
- 16:02:35 [cgi-irc]
- cgi-irc has joined #rif
- 16:03:01 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:03:01 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see sandro, csma, Dave_Reynolds, ChrisW, Francois, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), Deborah_Nichols (muted), DavidHirtle, josb (muted), Harold, LeoraMorgenstern (muted),
- 16:03:04 [Zakim]
- ... PaulaP (muted)
- 16:03:35 [StellaMitchell]
- StellaMitchell has joined #rif
- 16:04:41 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 16:04:46 [StellaMitchell]
- zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
- 16:04:46 [Zakim]
- +StellaMitchell; got it
- 16:05:07 [Francois]
- Christian: Next meeting is next week.
- 16:05:12 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 16:05:12 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Admin'" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 16:06:04 [Francois]
- Christian: actions 164 done, 165, 171 also done.
- 16:06:06 [ChrisW]
- action-165 and action 171 continued
- 16:06:09 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:06:24 [ChrisW]
- PROPOSED: Approve 24/10 telecon minutes
- 16:06:24 [ChrisW]
- [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Nov/att-0002/meeting-2006-10-24.html]
- 16:06:28 [Francois]
- Christian: minutes of Oct. 24 accepted.
- 16:06:36 [ChrisW]
- RESOLVE: accept Oct 24 minutes
- 16:06:42 [ChrisW]
- RESOLVED: accept Oct 24 minutes
- 16:06:49 [Francois]
- Christian: minutes of Oct. 31 approved.
- 16:06:50 [ChrisW]
- PROPOSED: Approve 31/10 telecon minutes
- 16:06:50 [ChrisW]
- [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Oct/att-0126/rif-minutes-31-Oct-2006.html]
- 16:07:02 [ChrisW]
- RESOLVED: accept Oct 31 minutes
- 16:07:11 [Francois]
- Christian: Amendments to the agenda? None.
- 16:07:12 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 16:07:12 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "F2F" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 16:07:35 [Francois]
- Christian: move to item F2F meetings.
- 16:08:22 [Francois]
- Christian: F2F 5 will not be already in Jan.
- 16:08:40 [Francois]
- Sandro: Still no answer on room at MIT for F2F 5.
- 16:09:25 [ChrisW]
- ACTION-121 continued (reworded)
- 16:09:33 [ChrisW]
- ACTION-122 continued
- 16:10:25 [Francois]
- Deborah: I have no material from Allen on room available for F2F 5.
- 16:10:46 [Francois]
- Christian: Allen told me he booked a room for 3 days.
- 16:11:00 [Francois]
- Deborah: no additional room available.
- 16:11:10 [Francois]
- Sandro: Which dates.
- 16:11:22 [Francois]
- Chris: 26, 27, 28 Feb 2007.
- 16:11:38 [Francois]
- Christian: either 3 days or 2 days.
- 16:11:40 [ChrisW]
- Possible dates for next f2f: McLean, VA. Feb 26-28
- 16:12:05 [Francois]
- Christian: let us decide on dates for F2F 5 asap.
- 16:12:21 [Francois]
- Christian: Are there other proposals?
- 16:12:30 [Zakim]
- +Gary_Hallmark
- 16:12:48 [Francois]
- Chris: Let us give up till 21 Nov for further proposals.
- 16:13:16 [Francois]
- Christian: Decision on place for F2F 5 in 2 weeks from now.
- 16:13:16 [agiurca]
- agiurca has joined #rif
- 16:13:24 [ChrisW]
- zakim, who is talking?
- 16:13:34 [Zakim]
- ChrisW, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: sandro (54%), csma (10%), Francois (9%)
- 16:13:34 [Francois]
- Christian: Registration forms should be ready next week.
- 16:13:55 [Francois]
- Sandro: Feedback desirable on whether people like dates for F2F.
- 16:14:05 [Francois]
- hrisitan: already discussed at last F2F.
- 16:14:16 [ChrisW]
- action: christian to send email about f2f5 process
- 16:14:16 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-183 - Send email about f2f5 process [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2006-11-21].
- 16:14:23 [GaryHallmark]
- GaryHallmark has joined #rif
- 16:14:26 [JosD]
- JosD has joined #rif
- 16:14:28 [Francois]
- s/hrisitan/Christian/
- 16:14:36 [Zakim]
- +agiurca
- 16:15:04 [GiorgosStoilos]
- GiorgosStoilos has joined #rif
- 16:15:25 [Francois]
- Chris: At last F2F people did not wanted to have F2F in Jan but in Feb, there has been only one proposal for location, as malready mentioned.
- 16:15:39 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 16:15:39 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 16:15:45 [Francois]
- Christian: move to item liaison.
- 16:16:02 [Zakim]
- +Giorgos_Stamou
- 16:16:03 [agiurca]
- agiurca zakim, mute me
- 16:16:03 [Francois]
- Christian: any reports from liaison?
- 16:16:21 [Francois]
- Christian: we should change liaisons because of rare attendance.
- 16:16:22 [PaulVincent]
- PRR: submission deferred to next year
- 16:16:24 [GiorgosStoilos]
- zakim, Giorgos_Stamou is me
- 16:16:24 [Zakim]
- +GiorgosStoilos; got it
- 16:16:46 [Francois]
- Chris: let us defer decision on XQuery liaison.
- 16:17:17 [Francois]
- Christian: Final draft differed to 3 months from now.
- 16:17:53 [Francois]
- Sandro: current state of RIF being able to see what PRR is doing?
- 16:18:03 [Francois]
- Chris: we got permission from OMG.
- 16:18:16 [Francois]
- Chris: ... to see draft.
- 16:18:24 [csma]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/FrontPage?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=PRR-draft-010606.pdf
- 16:18:26 [Francois]
- Christian: it is on a wiki.
- 16:19:12 [fgm]
- zakim, what is the code?
- 16:19:12 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 74394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), fgm
- 16:19:29 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 16:19:29 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "Technical Design" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 16:19:41 [Francois]
- Christian: move to item technical design.
- 16:19:47 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 16:19:52 [fgm]
- zakim, ipcaller is me
- 16:19:52 [Zakim]
- +fgm; got it
- 16:20:04 [fgm]
- zakim, I am frankMcCabe
- 16:20:04 [Zakim]
- sorry, fgm, I do not see a party named 'frankMcCabe'
- 16:20:19 [Francois]
- Christian: On the F2F wiki Chris copied reszolutions taken at last F2F.
- 16:20:35 [Francois]
- Christian: we also have a large number of actions.
- 16:20:49 [Hassan]
- continued
- 16:20:54 [agiurca]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:20:54 [Zakim]
- agiurca should now be muted
- 16:20:55 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: action on Hassan to produce an implementation of RIF.
- 16:21:09 [Francois]
- s/Chrisitan/Christian/
- 16:21:23 [Hassan]
- continued
- 16:21:34 [Francois]
- Christian: Hassan's action continued.
- 16:21:36 [ChrisW]
- action 142 continued
- 16:21:50 [Francois]
- Christian: Laura rule example for UC 6?
- 16:22:08 [Francois]
- Laura: action continued.
- 16:22:15 [ChrisW]
- action 159 continued
- 16:22:19 [PaulaP]
- continued
- 16:22:25 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Paula examples for UC 2? continued.
- 16:22:34 [ChrisW]
- action 160 continued
- 16:22:35 [PaulVincent]
- UC1 continued
- 16:22:39 [Francois]
- Christian: actions on Paul examples for UC 1? continued.
- 16:22:41 [ChrisW]
- action 152 continued
- 16:22:51 [ChrisW]
- action 153 continued
- 16:22:56 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Allen examples for UC 3: continued.
- 16:22:57 [ChrisW]
- action 154 continued
- 16:23:02 [ChrisW]
- action 154 completed
- 16:23:03 [agiurca]
- he have them
- 16:23:05 [Francois]
- Christian: action 154 done.
- 16:23:20 [agiurca]
- we have them. We will put them into wiki
- 16:23:24 [ChrisW]
- action 156 completed
- 16:23:25 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Sandro examples on UC 5? continued.
- 16:23:41 [Francois]
- Sandro: does someone to take it over?
- 16:23:46 [agiurca]
- http://oxygen.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/rewerse-i1/?q=node/22
- 16:23:54 [ChrisW]
- action 156 continued
- 16:24:05 [ChrisW]
- action 157 continued
- 16:24:06 [Francois]
- Christian: action 157 on Gary examples for UC 9: continued.
- 16:24:06 [agiurca]
- http://oxygen.informatik.tu-cottbus.de/rewerse-i1/?q=node/24
- 16:24:26 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Axel; examples for UC 10? Axel not here.
- 16:24:58 [Francois]
- Chris: Axel's action is done.
- 16:24:59 [ChrisW]
- action 158 completed
- 16:25:33 [Francois]
- Christian: actions on Harold to work with Hassan to reconcile proposals: done.
- 16:25:40 [ChrisW]
- action 163 completed
- 16:26:04 [Francois]
- Christian: action 166 on Sandro: continued.
- 16:26:04 [ChrisW]
- action 166 continued
- 16:26:17 [Francois]
- Sandro: more talk about it needed.
- 16:26:32 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 16:26:34 [Hassan]
- what action is that?
- 16:27:20 [DaveReynolds]
- ack me
- 16:27:20 [csma]
- ack ??P27
- 16:27:44 [Francois]
- Dave: I understand SPARQL group has been speaking about a related issue.
- 16:28:07 [Francois]
- Christian: Dave, have you a reference on this?
- 16:28:19 [Francois]
- Dave: I'll try to find and give it.
- 16:28:40 [Francois]
- Chris: We drop action 166 because it is more an issue than an action.
- 16:28:54 [ChrisW]
- action 166 dropped
- 16:29:39 [Francois]
- Christian: action 170 on Alex to list and clarify issues raised by extensibility requirements? Alex not here.
- 16:29:40 [ChrisW]
- action 170 continued
- 16:29:48 [Francois]
- Christian: action 170 continued.
- 16:30:05 [Francois]
- Christian: action 182 on Sandro: continued.
- 16:30:13 [ChrisW]
- action 182 continued
- 16:30:28 [ChrisW]
- action 180 continued
- 16:30:32 [Francois]
- Christian: action 180 on Harold?
- 16:30:45 [Francois]
- Harold: firstr verision ready, action continued.
- 16:30:59 [Francois]
- s/verision/version/
- 16:31:25 [Francois]
- Christian: Item Forward-Compatibility.
- 16:31:38 [Francois]
- ... and asn06.
- 16:31:55 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: Sandro what offer asn06 what EBNF does not offer.
- 16:32:01 [Francois]
- Sandro: role names.
- 16:32:18 [Francois]
- Sandro: relates to rule ontologie.
- 16:32:22 [Francois]
- q+
- 16:32:53 [Francois]
- Sandro: asn06 more abstract than EBNF.
- 16:32:54 [Harold]
- Sandro, role names can also be given explicitly in the EBNF: they are already in the DTD.
- 16:33:06 [Francois]
- Sandro: asn06 adds meta data.
- 16:33:11 [csma]
- ack francois
- 16:33:41 [Zakim]
- +GerdWagner
- 16:34:02 [GerdWagner]
- GerdWagner has joined #rif
- 16:34:25 [PaulaP]
- +1 to Francois' comment
- 16:34:29 [Francois]
- Francois: meta data to EBNF fine. Stronger statements dangerous.
- 16:34:48 [Francois]
- Christian: people reading the spec will have to understand the formalism.
- 16:34:56 [GerdWagner]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:34:56 [Zakim]
- GerdWagner should now be muted
- 16:35:24 [Francois]
- Harold: EBNF can coexists withg a metalanguage.
- 16:35:48 [Francois]
- Harold: meta language should be spearated from the spec., formalism we use.
- 16:36:15 [fgm]
- q+
- 16:36:21 [Francois]
- Sandro: other issues: sequencing, ordering terms, role names, concrete syntax.
- 16:36:24 [Francois]
- q+
- 16:36:34 [Hassan]
- q+
- 16:36:35 [Francois]
- Christian: role name is no problem.
- 16:36:42 [Francois]
- Sandro: I think it is a problem.
- 16:37:24 [Francois]
- Sandro: I could not find any proposal with role names.
- 16:37:40 [Francois]
- Christian: EBNF is well understood and well established.
- 16:37:54 [Harold]
- Sandro, the DTD has <head> and <body> role names and uses "|" for allowing unorderedness
- 16:37:58 [Francois]
- Christian: Harold could propose an extension to EBNF with role names.
- 16:38:02 [csma]
- q?
- 16:38:15 [csma]
- ask fgm
- 16:38:21 [ChrisW]
- ack fgm
- 16:38:29 [Francois]
- Frank (fgm): Sandro you dismissed using UML. Why?
- 16:38:47 [Francois]
- Sandro: because we cannot send it in email or on IRC.
- 16:39:14 [Francois]
- Christian: Would be your only problem with UML?
- 16:39:24 [Francois]
- Sandro: I do not know.
- 16:39:28 [Francois]
- q+
- 16:40:12 [Francois]
- Frank: UML has additional features thar are usefull. All kinds of things can be done in UML.
- 16:40:27 [csma]
- ack francoi
- 16:41:42 [csma]
- ack hassan
- 16:41:56 [Francois]
- Francois: we should not initiate to much work on side issues.
- 16:42:17 [Francois]
- Hassan: All theses notations, UML, asn01, asn 06 often complecated.
- 16:42:42 [csma]
- q?
- 16:42:43 [Francois]
- Hassan: we need something we can write. Position vs. roles is indeed important.
- 16:43:01 [Francois]
- Hassan: Many other issues are important as well.
- 16:43:22 [Francois]
- Hassan: Defining a API is done at ILOG using CaML.
- 16:43:46 [Francois]
- Hassan: I like Sandro's proposal because it can be mapped to LIFE, to EBNF, etc.
- 16:43:49 [Harold]
- Sandro, basically <!ELEMENT Implies ((head, body) | (body, head)> can be used, where <!ELEMENT head (%LITFORM;)> and <!ELEMENT body (%CONDIT;)> (cf. http://www.jdrew.org/rif/HornRules.dtd).
- 16:44:11 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: Resistance is againt yet another notation that might make proposal difficult to graps.
- 16:44:12 [GiorgosStoilos]
- GiorgosStoilos has joined #rif
- 16:44:19 [Francois]
- s/graps/grasp/
- 16:44:33 [Francois]
- Hassan: If it can be mapped, no problems.
- 16:44:51 [agiurca]
- May be is better to keep both EBNF and UML for a while
- 16:45:03 [Francois]
- Christian: If we do not want to waste time, can we decide to start with EBNF with annotations?
- 16:45:07 [Francois]
- +1.
- 16:45:14 [Hassan]
- q-
- 16:45:26 [GerdWagner]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:45:26 [Zakim]
- GerdWagner should no longer be muted
- 16:45:45 [GerdWagner]
- q+
- 16:45:56 [ChrisW]
- q+ to propose a compromise
- 16:45:59 [csma]
- ack gerd
- 16:46:33 [Francois]
- Gerd: If we start with EBNF, this ok. But we should strive for an EBNF style in the spirit of Sandro's proposal.
- 16:46:43 [Francois]
- Sandro: EBNF is no standard.
- 16:47:07 [Francois]
- Gerd: asn06 is hardly recognizable.
- 16:47:23 [Francois]
- Sandro: there are other issues.
- 16:47:30 [ChrisW]
- ack me
- 16:47:30 [Zakim]
- ChrisW, you wanted to propose a compromise
- 16:47:46 [Francois]
- Sandro: for adding things EBNF prductions mnust be modified.
- 16:47:46 [GerdWagner]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:47:46 [Zakim]
- GerdWagner should now be muted
- 16:48:29 [Francois]
- Chris: No need to decide right now. Sandro could continue maintaining asn06, other could gain experience with it. No decision needed at this point.
- 16:48:53 [Francois]
- Christian: This was my proposal.
- 16:49:11 [GerdWagner]
- q+
- 16:49:21 [GerdWagner]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:49:21 [Zakim]
- GerdWagner should no longer be muted
- 16:49:51 [csma]
- ack gerd
- 16:49:56 [Francois]
- Hassan: If Sandro can make it more explicit?
- 16:50:51 [Francois]
- Sandro: I would like to understand the various issues expressed by Francois and Gerd.
- 16:51:08 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: Michael also has provisos.
- 16:51:20 [Francois]
- Gerd: We should not duplicate syntaxes.
- 16:51:21 [PaulaP]
- Michael and Axel also sent comments on the proposal
- 16:51:52 [Harold]
- BTW, finding a better metasyntax (not 'abstract syntax') is relevant for most W3C specs, not only for RIF.
- 16:52:03 [Francois]
- Christian: Let us investigate issues parts of rules, how they are related, etc. relates to extension/extensability.
- 16:52:13 [ChrisW]
- q?
- 16:52:48 [GerdWagner]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:52:48 [Zakim]
- GerdWagner should now be muted
- 16:52:55 [Harold]
- Perhaps a topic of collaboration between W3C and OMG?
- 16:52:58 [Francois]
- Christian: Urgent remakrs on asn06? none. Decision we continue to interchange views on notations and Sandro continues to clarify asn06. Decision on formalism to be used will be taken later.
- 16:53:39 [Francois]
- Christian: Was there anythinhg in asn06 on the content of abstract syntax to be discussed right now? No.
- 16:54:17 [Francois]
- Christian: Second proposal on extensibility.
- 16:54:39 [Francois]
- Sandro: I think the requirement is that RIF should be designed so as to be forward compatible.
- 16:55:25 [PaulVincent]
- q+
- 16:55:25 [Francois]
- Sandro: Questions are consequences if content (from extensions) ignored.
- 16:55:51 [Francois]
- q+
- 16:55:58 [csma]
- ack paul
- 16:56:03 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 16:56:19 [Francois]
- Paul: Sanmdro says in his comments "implementation can be forward compatible".
- 16:56:32 [Francois]
- s/Sanmdro/Sandro/
- 16:56:48 [Francois]
- Paul: we must be prcise on forwardcompatibility.
- 16:57:16 [fgm]
- q+
- 16:57:20 [Francois]
- Christian: We must required that unknown extensions do not break extensions that do not understand them.
- 16:57:24 [Francois]
- q+
- 16:57:32 [Francois]
- q+
- 16:57:47 [Francois]
- Christian: this should apply at least for standard extensions.
- 16:57:54 [Francois]
- Sandro: I think we can say more.
- 16:58:08 [csma]
- ack franco
- 17:00:17 [PaulVincent]
- +1
- 17:00:19 [Francois]
- Francois: let discuss the issue on concrete cases, not abstractly.
- 17:00:26 [PaulVincent]
- q+
- 17:00:28 [DaveReynolds]
- q-
- 17:02:30 [Francois]
- Sandro: Presentation are things like names of variables.
- 17:02:35 [Harold]
- q+
- 17:03:10 [Francois]
- Sandro: In case of negation, I mean "if a and not be then c". If you do not understand not, you might get the wrong result.
- 17:03:40 [Hassan]
- q+
- 17:04:29 [Harold]
- "... an extension which affects the semantics, but ignoring it wont
- 17:04:29 [Harold]
- give you any incorrect results -- just fewer results"
- 17:04:59 [Harold]
- This has been studied as 'incompleteness'.
- 17:05:03 [Francois]
- SAndro: all open formats have to proceed this way: ignore what they do not understand and proceed.
- 17:05:23 [fgm]
- in the context of closed world, incomplete == wrong
- 17:05:24 [Hassan]
- I agree with Sandro - his scheme makes sense to me
- 17:06:04 [Francois]
- Christian: The point is what an application is expected to do when it encounter smething it does not understand.
- 17:06:28 [csma]
- ack fgm
- 17:06:32 [Harold]
- "... an extension which affects performance, so you'll get the same
- 17:06:32 [Harold]
- answers/actions, but the performance will be significantly worse
- 17:06:36 [Francois]
- Christian: The point is about telling applications what to do when they do not understand.
- 17:06:37 [Harold]
- "
- 17:07:00 [Harold]
- This could be called 'pragmatics'.
- 17:07:10 [Francois]
- FRank: There are other things that can be done. The choice of behavior in case one does not understand could be specified at the agent level.
- 17:07:29 [Francois]
- Frank: I do not like thinking of systems processinbg rules they do not understand.
- 17:07:34 [Harold]
- q
- 17:07:52 [Harold]
- q?
- 17:07:59 [Francois]
- Sandro: There is a class of users who will proceed if they do not understand, other will stop.
- 17:08:21 [Francois]
- Frank: annotation could be added to ru;les themselves instead of to the language.
- 17:08:51 [Francois]
- s/ru;les/rules/
- 17:09:12 [Francois]
- Frank: there is an ontology of things you can do (if some contructs are not understood).
- 17:09:40 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Frank to propose extensions to Sandro's proposal.
- 17:09:43 [Francois]
- q+
- 17:09:47 [Francois]
- q+
- 17:09:50 [Francois]
- q+
- 17:09:51 [ChrisW]
- action: francis to propose extension to Sandro's proposal for extensibility at the level of rules, rulesets
- 17:09:51 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-184 - Propose extension to Sandro\'s proposal for extensibility at the level of rules, rulesets [on Francis McCabe - due 2006-11-21].
- 17:09:53 [Harold]
- "... an extension which offers syntactic sugar."
- 17:10:16 [Francois]
- Frank: distinction between syntactic sugar, prsentation and semantics is harder than you think.
- 17:10:32 [Harold]
- This is sometimes called 'conservative extension'.
- 17:10:38 [Francois]
- Christian: Can you give example in email?
- 17:11:07 [Francois]
- Frank: people use conventions for variable names. They often are needed for understanding rulers.
- 17:11:13 [Francois]
- s/rulers/rules/
- 17:11:26 [ChrisW]
- q?
- 17:11:28 [csma]
- ack paulv
- 17:11:30 [Harold]
- E.g., if the source language has n-ary lists, but the target language doesn't, but does have complex terms, then the lists can be 'simulated
- 17:11:54 [Harold]
- in the the target language via 'cons' complex terms.
- 17:12:09 [Francois]
- Paul: FRancois seems to think of another kind of upwar compatibility. My concern is updating domains in production rules.
- 17:12:22 [Francois]
- Paul: this is different issue.
- 17:13:30 [Francois]
- Paul: upward compatibilty important in practice.
- 17:13:47 [csma]
- ack harold
- 17:13:48 [Zakim]
- -fgm
- 17:13:49 [Francois]
- Paul: forward compatibilty is a must in commercial world.
- 17:14:26 [fgm]
- zakim, what is the code
- 17:14:26 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'what is the code', fgm
- 17:14:26 [Francois]
- Harold: extensions that affect semantics, fewer results refers to completeness.
- 17:14:53 [Francois]
- Harold: 3 aspects: syntax, semantics and pragmatics.
- 17:14:53 [csma]
- ack hassan
- 17:15:03 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 17:15:07 [fgm]
- zakim, ipcaller is me
- 17:15:07 [Zakim]
- +fgm; got it
- 17:15:11 [Francois]
- Hassan: I agree with Sandro. There a 3 points.
- 17:15:22 [csma]
- q?
- 17:15:46 [Francois]
- Hassan: remember inconsistent predicates. In practice, they igonre them ... and it worked.
- 17:16:07 [Francois]
- Hassan: Why not to provide it as an extensibility machanism if it works?
- 17:16:26 [Harold]
- s/completeness/incompleteness/
- 17:16:44 [Francois]
- Hassan: Another thing. If you have a system that does not understand negation but there is a proof system that can do it.
- 17:16:58 [csma]
- q?
- 17:17:15 [Francois]
- Hassan: All this is important. Ignore features might make sense.
- 17:17:28 [csma]
- ack franc
- 17:17:39 [Hassan]
- q-
- 17:17:52 [Francois]
- Hassan: delegation to proof mechanisms are meaningful and important.
- 17:18:56 [Francois]
- Christian: I propose to first get an idea of the components of a rule, e.g. ehat harold will propose tommorrow. SEcond, examples of forward compatibility are needed, expressed in Harold's formalism.
- 17:19:18 [Francois]
- Christian: who wolunteers to work ourt such examples for next week?
- 17:20:24 [Francois]
- Hassan: What about Pascal's example at the RuleML 2006?
- 17:20:50 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Hassan to explain Pascal's example?
- 17:21:02 [Francois]
- Hassan: I do not have time. I can send an email to Pascal.
- 17:21:16 [ChrisW]
- action: hasson to send email to Pascal about his example from RuleML
- 17:21:16 [rifbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - hasson
- 17:21:20 [Francois]
- Christian: more examples?
- 17:21:24 [ChrisW]
- action: hassan to send email to Pascal about his example from RuleML
- 17:21:24 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-185 - Send email to Pascal about his example from RuleML [on Hassan Ait-Kaci - due 2006-11-21].
- 17:21:48 [Harold]
- We already have one fwd compatibility example: the current CORE contains only one kind of constants (we were asked to keep it that simple, eg for Prolog compatibility). The 'bipartitioned' extension splits constants into individuals vs. data.
- 17:21:55 [Francois]
- Harold: We should split constants into individuals instead of data.
- 17:22:06 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Harold to do this?
- 17:23:12 [Francois]
- Harold
- 17:23:26 [ChrisW]
- action: harold to provide example of how his proposal could deal with uniform constants, etc
- 17:23:26 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-186 - Provide example of how his proposal could deal with uniform constants, etc [on Harold Boley - due 2006-11-21].
- 17:23:32 [Francois]
- Harold: constants become individual vs. data.
- 17:24:13 [Francois]
- Christian: action on Harold on this very issue.
- 17:24:18 [csma]
- q?
- 17:24:44 [Francois]
- Christian: any more remark on forward compatibility? No.
- 17:24:59 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 17:24:59 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "RIF-RAF" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 17:24:59 [Francois]
- Christian: let us have a quick look at other topics.
- 17:25:11 [Zakim]
- -GiorgosStoilos
- 17:25:18 [ChrisW]
- action-148 continued
- 17:25:27 [ChrisW]
- action-149 continued
- 17:25:39 [ChrisW]
- action-172 continued
- 17:25:39 [Francois]
- Christian: action review RIFRAF. Gary's action: continued. Paul's action: continued. Sandro's action: continued.
- 17:25:55 [Francois]
- Christian: Laura's action: continued.
- 17:25:55 [ChrisW]
- action-173 continued
- 17:26:08 [ChrisW]
- action-175 continued
- 17:26:09 [Francois]
- Christian: Allen's action: continued.
- 17:26:16 [ChrisW]
- action-176 continued
- 17:26:19 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: Sandro's continued.
- 17:26:41 [ChrisW]
- action-177 continued
- 17:26:44 [ChrisW]
- action-178 continued
- 17:27:05 [Francois]
- Christian: Axel's action given to Frank? yes.
- 17:27:07 [ChrisW]
- action-178 complete
- 17:27:18 [ChrisW]
- action: frank to revise and ontologive Section 6
- 17:27:19 [rifbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - frank
- 17:27:19 [PaulaP]
- continued
- 17:27:24 [ChrisW]
- action: francis to revise and ontologive Section 6
- 17:27:24 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-187 - Revise and ontologive Section 6 [on Francis McCabe - due 2006-11-21].
- 17:27:24 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: action 178 done. Paula's two actions continuied.
- 17:27:37 [Hassan]
- contineued
- 17:27:39 [Francois]
- Chrisitan: action on Hassan continued.
- 17:27:39 [ChrisW]
- action-174 continued
- 17:27:53 [Francois]
- Christian: anything to add on RIFRAF? No.
- 17:27:57 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 17:27:57 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "UCR" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 17:28:19 [Francois]
- Christian: no urgent action on UCR? Yes on UC 4 and 5.
- 17:28:19 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:28:19 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/11/14-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 17:28:34 [ChrisW]
- action 144 continued
- 17:28:40 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 17:29:07 [ChrisW]
- action-38 continued
- 17:29:17 [ChrisW]
- action-41 continued
- 17:29:23 [Francois]
- Christian: action on me continued.
- 17:29:43 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 17:29:43 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "AOB" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 17:29:54 [Francois]
- Christian: no urgent matters. We adjourn.
- 17:29:56 [Francois]
- +1
- 17:29:59 [Zakim]
- -Gary_Hallmark
- 17:30:02 [Zakim]
- -Harold
- 17:30:06 [Zakim]
- -Dave_Reynolds
- 17:30:07 [Zakim]
- -DavidHirtle
- 17:30:08 [Zakim]
- -StellaMitchell
- 17:30:08 [PaulaP]
- bye
- 17:30:09 [Zakim]
- -sandro
- 17:30:11 [Zakim]
- -josb
- 17:30:12 [Zakim]
- -Deborah_Nichols
- 17:30:12 [Hassan]
- quit
- 17:30:13 [Zakim]
- -PaulaP
- 17:30:15 [Zakim]
- -GerdWagner
- 17:30:16 [Zakim]
- -PaulVincent
- 17:30:18 [agiurca]
- -agiurca
- 17:30:18 [Zakim]
- -fgm
- 17:30:21 [Zakim]
- -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
- 17:30:53 [ChrisW]
- zakim, bye
- 17:30:53 [Zakim]
- leaving. As of this point the attendees were Dave_Reynolds, ChrisW, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Deborah_Nichols, sandro, csma, Francois, DavidHirtle, Harold, LeoraMorgenstern, josb, PaulaP,
- 17:30:53 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #rif
- 17:30:56 [Zakim]
- ... StellaMitchell, PaulVincent, Gary_Hallmark, agiurca, GiorgosStoilos, fgm, GerdWagner
- 17:31:09 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:31:09 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/11/14-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 17:32:06 [GerdWagner]
- quit
- 17:32:26 [GerdWagner]
- -GerdWagner
- 17:33:33 [ChrisW]
- Regrets: AllenGinsberg, IgorMozetic, JohnHall, MichaelKifer, AlexKozlenkov, MarkusKrötzsch, JeffPan, MichaelSintek
- 17:33:36 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:33:36 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/11/14-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 17:33:50 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 17:35:01 [ChrisW]
- sandro, still there?
- 17:49:26 [csma]
- csma has left #rif
- 18:11:22 [MoZ]
- MoZ has joined #rif
- 18:44:57 [MoZ_]
- MoZ_ has joined #rif