13:40:22 RRSAgent has joined #rif 13:40:22 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/02/27-rif-irc 13:40:36 rrsagent, make record public 13:40:41 csma has joined #rif 13:40:55 Meeting: RIF F2F 27 Feb 2007 13:41:12 bmoore3 has joined #rif 13:41:12 cgi-irc has joined #rif 13:41:41 PaulVincent has joined #rif 13:42:38 BobMoore has joined #rif 13:43:20 DaveReynolds has joined #rif 13:44:00 zakim, who is on the phone? 13:44:00 apparently SW_RIF(F2F)8:00AM has ended, sandro 13:44:01 On IRC I see DaveReynolds, BobMoore, PaulVincent, csma, RRSAgent, ChrisW, sandro, Hassan, rifbot, Zakim 13:44:47 josb has joined #rif 13:44:47 SW_RIF(F2F)8:00AM has now started 13:44:54 +meeting_room 13:45:10 johnhall has joined #rif 13:45:12 aharth has joined #rif 13:47:29 mdean has joined #rif 13:47:45 Harold has joined #rif 13:51:21 zakim, meeting_room contains Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG 13:51:21 +Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG; got it 13:58:28 +Hassan_Ait-Kaci 13:58:58 Scribe: Allen 13:59:05 discussion over what the leading "-" means on the UML diagrams? it seems to mean something about public/private -- something we don't care about here. 13:59:26 (prefixing the names of relations/properties) 13:59:43 allen has joined #rif 14:00:42 discussion about UML diagram for structure of RIF Core Rules 14:01:03 question why can't we rename implies to rule? 14:01:15 Christian shows outline of UML from PRR. 14:02:13 csma: why forall is a class? 14:02:25 Please everyone make sure to turn on your mikes! Thanks. 14:02:59 Thanks! 14:03:09 csma : what about rule-set? 14:03:20 harold: could be a level above 14:03:59 paul also questions forall class 14:04:17 mike? 14:04:29 LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif 14:04:58 Sandro: "forall" as a class comes from the standard FOL syntactic nesting 14:05:17 sandro: this maps to scoping 14:06:04 +Leora_Morgenstern 14:06:11 Allen: "forall" represents the class of universally quanitified formulas 14:06:17 zakim, please mute me 14:06:17 Leora_Morgenstern should now be muted 14:06:18 chris: this mirrors fol syntax 14:06:58 csma: why is the rule associated with forall instead of implies? 14:07:12 scribenick: Allen 14:07:12 harold: keep it general for extensibility 14:08:00 error in diagram --- forall can take either an implies or a positive --- diagram says it has to have both. 14:08:08 harold: positive is a disjunction? 14:08:46 csma: should we extend this arbitrary formulas? 14:08:54 sandro: at some point yes 14:09:13 harold: you need disjunctions for integrity constraints 14:10:06 csma: link from forall to postive? 14:10:21 hassan: likes this diagram 14:10:42 hassan: this covers prolog class of languagaes nicely 14:11:00 chris: but there is still a problem with the diagram 14:11:49 csma: that link allows for rules with empty body 14:12:03 harold: it is only a matter of brevity of expression 14:12:16 csma: straw poll on this 14:12:53 5 prefer as is 14:13:03 straw poll preference 5-to-3 for having facts as themselves, instead of as degenerate rules 14:13:09 3 prefer remove that link 14:13:15 2 don't care 14:13:26 Hereditary Harrop Formula: http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.PL/0404053 14:13:49 mike: why it a 1 on the formula side? 14:14:06 harold: to be consistent with horne 14:14:14 s/horne/Horn/ 14:14:52 csma: have the same problem as yesterday: syntax vs. metamodel points of view 14:15:26 hassan: to harold why do you want this "At all costs" 14:16:07 hassan: don't understand arg for having facts without implies? 14:16:20 harold: it make is simpler to write facts 14:17:03 csma: so we keep it as it for now 14:17:25 dave: but you do need to get the disjunction in there 14:17:45 jos: there is a way to do that in uml 14:18:16 chris: let's use an intermediate class like in first diagram 14:18:27 harold: ok, we can use "clause" 14:18:50 csma: clause is either a rule or a fact 14:19:22 csma draws diagram on whiteboard 14:20:34 sandro recommends some changes 14:21:24 mike: what about duplication of positive? 14:21:42 harold: it is just a readability thing 14:22:43 mikes??? 14:22:45 sandro: forall vs. rule, 14:23:14 sandro: rules should be same as formula 14:23:49 csma: suppose we need existential rule variables (shared by body and head) 14:24:07 harold: that can definitely happen 14:24:21 harold: it would be side-by-side with forall 14:24:35 harold goes to whiteboard 14:25:33 harold: ruleset cotains 0 or more of univerally or existen clauses 14:26:40 csma redraws diagram 14:27:03 It's hard to follow : no mikes for most (except Christian) and no diagrams! 14:28:51 csma: postpone decision vis-a-avis core 14:29:20 csma describes simpler diagram 14:29:46 csma: does any object to having this in core wd1? 14:30:23 The description was too fast for me to catch all details ... :-( 14:30:37 sandro: where is rule? 14:31:13 jos: we need to be consistent. rename ruleset or use something called rule 14:32:52 mike: it is odd not to have "rule" 14:32:59 I second Mike's point... 14:33:05 Christian objects to my proposal that Rule==Formula on the grounds that recursion is too much for WD1. 14:33:36 csma redraws diagram with rule inserted btwn ruleset and forall 14:34:17 Christian proposes a replacement version where Rule is a superclass of Forall, but under Forall is the same as before, for now. 14:34:53 A pic of updated diagrams would be nice (anyone a camera)? 14:34:56 harold: rule is very general includes facts 14:35:34 harold: and integrity constraints 14:35:43 paul is taking a shot of the diagram 14:36:28 harold: allows non-ground facts 14:37:39 csma: any objections to new diagram? 14:38:16 sandro: can a ruleset directly contain a clause? 14:38:32 csma: yes 14:38:41 sandro: consider the xml 14:39:05 csma: concrete syntax not supplied by this diagram 14:39:27 (Thanks Paul!) 14:39:35 sandro: a fact would still need an empty forall list 14:40:28 sandro: can a clause be a rule? 14:40:37 sandro: you don't want to recurse on rule 14:40:54 csma: i don't understand the implications of that 14:41:12 csma: keep it like this for wd1 14:41:35 harold: I will add some "blue" explanatory text about this 14:41:44 csma: no new material 14:42:14 csma: add new comments to draft in progress, not to released wd1 14:42:44 I do not have the info yet to vote 14:42:45 paul: can we identify these diagrams somehow 14:44:22 sandro: is fact a superclass of postive? 14:44:33 csma: fact is a kind of clause 14:44:41 Is there a better name than "positive"? 14:45:19 harold: may be a bit redundant 14:46:17 csma: we can't resolve all the issues, but can we agree to publish "that one" for wd1 14:47:24 csma: prefers to keep "fact" and positive separate to avoid recursion 14:47:36 harold: wants to merge them 14:47:59 harold: but don't call it either of those, might use "litform" 14:48:52 csma: straw poll on replacing fact with positive, currently call the merger "positive" 14:48:56 straw poll: merge Fact and Positive 5 in favor, 3 against, 14:48:59 5 in favor, 3 against 14:49:21 csma: put this merger in 1st wd 14:49:39 mike objects 14:50:33 s/mike objects/mike does not object/ 14:50:40 no objects to changing 14:51:03 csma objects 14:51:40 csma withdraws objection 14:51:58 harold and michael: we like "Atom" 14:52:50 hassan: objects to other names too, like "uniterm" etc 14:52:59 csma: not discussing that now 14:53:14 csma describes change of fact to atom 14:54:05 hassan is ok with publishing in wd1 except for certain names 14:54:29 sandro: as its written here the role names are not in diagram 14:54:41 hassan : what about uniterm? 14:54:59 harold: a "universal term" atom or expression 14:55:19 csma: what do we need to add to diagram., roles? 14:55:35 harold: we need it to bridge communities 14:55:39 hassan: i differ 14:55:59 hassan: if-then in production rules is not implies 14:56:01 MoZ has joined #rif 14:56:43 paul: this is an "Abstract model" for an abstraction... 14:56:58 dave: but for not the xml syntax would contain these names 14:57:31 s/for not /for now 14:58:08 csma: don't add names for roles for now, avoid contention 14:58:28 harold: what about the minus signs 14:59:11 sandro: are you proposing giving up mapping to xml 14:59:25 csma: no, but don't include names for roles in wd1 14:59:26 I agree with Sandro 14:59:41 sandro: first wd should be implementable 15:00:04 sandro: i thought we had an xml syntax from these diagrams, fully striped 15:00:15 harold: we need the roles 15:00:56 paul: will the syntax use class or role names 15:01:02 sandro: both 15:01:19 paul: shouldn't class be generic roles specific to domain 15:01:48 csma & paul: use body and head for roles 15:02:09 paul: the vocabulary can change for other dialects 15:03:21 paul: atomic formula ok, implies and forall no 15:04:45 hassan: antecedent, consequent, var to variable 15:05:19 sandro: sympathetic to it, but torn because everyone thinks in terms of if-then 15:06:04 john: if-part then-part 15:06:49 -Leora_Morgenstern 15:06:54 -Hassan_Ait-Kaci 15:30:17 +Hassan_Ait-Kaci 15:30:56 -Hassan_Ait-Kaci 15:31:59 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:31:59 On the phone I see meeting_room 15:32:00 meeting_room has Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG 15:32:00 scribe: Sandro 15:32:05 scribenick: sandro 15:32:37 zakim, meeting_room has DeborahN 15:32:37 +DeborahN; got it 15:32:44 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:32:44 On the phone I see meeting_room 15:32:45 meeting_room has DeborahN 15:32:56 zakim, meeting_room contains Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG, DeborahN 15:32:56 DeborahN was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 15:32:57 Because of their identical content models, Uniterm is unification/merger of an Atom (in the sense of a predicate applied to arguments) and an Expression. As a minor new point, instead of POSITIVE we could say ATOMICFORMULA (in the sense of Uniterm or Equal). 15:32:57 +Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG; got it 15:33:38 csma: (reviewing diagram) 15:33:48 csma: "decalre" renamed to "variable" 15:34:04 ... "implies" to "Conditional" (to match "Atomic") 15:34:14 ... "ifpart", "thenpart". 15:34:49 Harold: we're had many versions of these names. hard to see all the consequences..... 15:36:04 Harold: I'd object to "ifpart" 15:36:21 csma: so we stick with the old names for WD1 15:36:46 csma: so back to "if" and "then" and "implies", 15:36:51 csma: and still "atomic" 15:37:01 csma: and 'declare' instead of "variable". 15:37:29 csma: I want it on the record that this was discussed and may be discussed again. we are in no way committed to this version. 15:37:44 +Leora_Morgenstern 15:37:55 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:37:55 On the phone I see meeting_room, Leora_Morgenstern 15:37:56 meeting_room has Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG 15:38:23 Hassan, are you calling in? 15:40:22 csma is working on getting diagram out in e-mail. 15:40:27 vpn troubles. 15:40:47 +Hassan_Ait-Kaci 15:42:29 (Received - thanks Chris) 15:42:31 PROPOSED: in WD1 we'll publish this diagram, labeled as "still under discussion". 15:43:16 RESOLVED: Use diagram in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Feb/0134, in Core WD1, labeled "still under discussion" 15:47:23 I can't hear 15:49:32 Topic: Feedback from Moz on Core 15:49:33 Can someone post a pointer to the topic at hand if there is any (slides maybe?) 15:49:48 chris is working on it, Hassan, I think. 15:52:02 MikeDean: If there's a language designed for human consumption, than some people will implement it. 15:52:27 ChrisW: But it's not important in this WD. 15:52:28 The RIF Human Readable BNF Syntax was modeled on the OWL Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/syntax.html) regarding its Lisp-like prefix notation and its use of whitespace as separator. 15:53:35 csma: the question is how to address comments about BNF. 15:53:50 want to call in , MoZ? we're talking about your comments. 15:54:00 slides are up on the wiki 15:54:24 Zakim, what is the code ? 15:54:24 the conference code is 74394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), MoZ 15:54:29 csma: What is the proper way to deal with all these comments on the BNF? 15:55:07 (thanks - again! - Chris...) 15:55:07 Harold: DateTime may be more controvercial? 15:55:26 LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif 15:55:39 Harold: We just wanted to just have something like OWL's S&AS abstract syntax. 15:55:43 sandro, Zakim seems full for the moment... 15:55:57 s/Zakim/Zakim France/ 15:56:01 MoZ, press 0 for an operator and ask them to add you -- they can over-ride the limit. 15:56:15 Deborah_Nichols has joined #rif 15:56:17 zakim, who is on the call? 15:56:17 On the phone I see meeting_room, Leora_Morgenstern, Hassan_Ait-Kaci 15:56:18 meeting_room has Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG 15:56:31 Oh, Zakim France. Huh..... I dunno about that. 15:56:46 sandro, tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 15:56:50 allen has joined #rif 15:57:09 csma: concrete syntax for types...... we could remove this, or more clearly label it as an examples. 15:57:28 michaelKifer: the reason for those is to show people how they play out, in a concrete way. 15:57:45 BobMoore has joined #rif 15:57:49 + +33.9.52.47.aaaa 15:57:52 Sorry --- the irc had died on me for a while --- can you tell me which slides we're looking at now? 15:57:55 Zakim, aaaa is MoZ 15:57:57 +MoZ; got it 15:58:00 csma: the dangers is that it looks so thorough that it looks like the real syntax. 15:58:33 DaveR: Didn't we just agree we were using XML Schema datatypes? 15:58:43 Michael: please speek into your microphone - thanks. 15:59:21 (I did mean "speak" not "peek" :-) 15:59:42 MK: note it as "just for illustrative purposes" 16:00:03 csma: that not everything has been fixed, or decided by WG 16:00:34 csma: Maybe we need to label in the draft which things are decided and which are not...... 16:01:37 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:01:37 On the phone I see meeting_room, Leora_Morgenstern, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, MoZ 16:01:39 meeting_room has Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG 16:04:36 PROPOSED: The concrete human-readable syntax, described is BNF, is: work in progress and under discussion. (It was already resolved as being For Illustrative Purposes Only). 16:05:37 Sandro: (sarcastically) maybe we should label the whole things as a "Working Draft" 16:06:00 hearing noise on phone 16:06:02 PROPOSED: The concrete human-readable syntax, described in BNF, is: work in progress and under discussion. (It was already resolved as being For Illustrative Purposes Only). 16:06:32 csma: this resolution will let us skip many of the feedback comments. 16:07:46 RESOLVED: The concrete human-readable syntax, described in BNF, is: work in progress and under discussion. (It was already resolved as being For Illustrative Purposes Only). 16:08:23 csma: so we can skip some bullets. 16:09:19 csma: reserved words? 16:09:31 mk: not a problem in the XML -- problem in HR syntax. 16:10:20 ACTION: Harold to fix ForAll, FORALL inconsistencies 16:10:22 Created ACTION-244 - Fix ForAll, FORALL inconsistencies [on Harold Boley - due 2007-03-06]. 16:11:16 zakim, meeting_room contains Harold, MichealK, Andreas, JosB, JohnH, DaveR, BobM, PaulV, MikeD, Sandro, ChrisW, csma, AllenG, DeborahN, LeoObrst 16:11:16 Harold was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:17 MichealK was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:20 Andreas was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:21 JosB was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:23 JohnH was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:26 DaveR was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:28 BobM was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:29 PaulV was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:31 MikeD was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:32 Sandro was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:33 ChrisW was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:35 csma was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:39 AllenG was already listed in meeting_room, ChrisW 16:11:41 +DeborahN, LeoObrst; got it 16:11:48 ACTION: mkifer to delete DateTime text and use reference XSD instead 16:11:49 Created ACTION-245 - Delete DateTime text and use reference XSD instead [on Michael Kifer - due 2007-03-06]. 16:12:58 mk: You don't need to type uniterms because you already know type from signature 16:13:06 moz: But can you narrow the type? 16:13:12 mk: what's the point? 16:13:40 moz/mdean: something like integer 1..17 16:14:08 mk: that's already in the languages, as sorts are defined 16:14:58 -MoZ 16:15:25 points about xml syntax 16:15:59 dtd dropped. 16:16:27 default namespace rif = "http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#" 16:17:33 (sandro - pls speak UP! :-) 16:18:26 sandro: we can get rid of the 01 with permission. 16:19:25 mdean has joined #rif 16:19:28 sandro: 01 is the month 16:19:52 PROPOSED: that xmlns in WD1 is "http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#" 16:20:04 PROPOSED: that xmlns in WD1 is "http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#" (consdiered preliminary) 16:21:10 mk: How do namespaces change when standards change, eg for XML Schema Datatypes? 16:21:20 DaveR: There haven't been any new versions... 16:22:05 DaveR: in RDF, they decided not to change the namespace, even though they changed the spec --- or you could change the namespace. 16:22:29 DaveR: There's no painless answer -- there are tradeoffs. 16:22:56 Hassan: We'll need to face that someday -- some kind of versioning control. 16:23:42 Hassan: if there are examples in the draft, they should use the NS 16:23:55 Harold: No, they'll make it look too official. 16:24:30 DaveR: We could just state it wherever we mention the NS -- say that it's implied everywhere else. 16:25:15 RESOLVED: the xmlns to use for WD1 is "http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#" 16:27:23 ACTION Harold: change Core to include the xmlns namespace "http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#" 16:27:36 ACTION: Harold to change Core to include the xmlns namespace "http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#" 16:27:36 Created ACTION-246 - Change Core to include the xmlns namespace \"http://www.w3.org/2007/01/rif#\" [on Harold Boley - due 2007-03-06]. 16:28:31 s/Feedback from Moz on Core/Reader Feedback on Core/ 16:28:50 "The sort name should be a URI" 16:29:29 DaveR: so use "xsd:integer" instead of "integer" in draft. 16:30:10 noise on the phone (Hassan are you muted?) 16:30:17 Jos: *can* be URIs or *must* be URIs? 16:31:10 mk: Why? 16:31:25 Sandro: It's simpler to *always* use URIs 16:31:43 Harold: "import" will need to turn things into URIs. 16:31:49 Jos: That's normal & natural 16:31:52 AxelPolleres has joined #rif 16:32:58 PROPOSED: all sorts will be named with URIs 16:34:20 Chris: Are there use-defined sorts? 16:34:30 s/use/user/ 16:34:45 mk: I have some language, X, and I have my own sort -- how do I exchange it with someone else. 16:35:48 csma: If I defined shopping cards and customers, etc, am I defining sorts??? 16:35:58 mk: I don't think so..... (hesitantly) 16:37:15 ChrisW: i thought sorts were there for how symbols are categorized in dialects -- in which case requiring URIs is fine. I don't want to force URIs for user-defined types. 16:38:21 ... If you want to load in some data model for your application, are you including as sorts ........ 16:38:35 ... you do treat user defined types as sorts? 16:38:44 mk: The document is silent about that. 16:39:02 csma: We said earlier that identifiers would be URIs if they were not local. 16:39:23 sandro: sounds like that should extend to sorts. 16:39:45 sandro: if they are local -- you don't interchange them....? 16:39:47 Sorted logic example -- Schubert's steamroller: http://www.inferenzsysteme.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de/~walther/Paper/Schuberts_Steamroller_by_Many-Sorted_Resolution-AIJ-25-2-1985.pdf 16:40:06 csma: depends what you means by "local", cf, local variables. 16:40:21 mk: How about we say the sorts RIF-WG defines will be given URIs. 16:40:54 DaveR: Sorts as a mechanisms for extending syntaxes .... is different from application-specific types. 16:41:29 PROPOSED: Any sort defined in CORE MUST BE identified by a URI. 16:41:37 PROPOSED: Any sort defined in Core MUST BE identified by a URI. 16:41:45 RESOLVED: Any sort defined in Core MUST BE identified by a URI. 16:42:54 mdean: Will we use URIs or cURIs, so you can tell whether http is a prefix or a URI scheme? 16:43:38 mdean: so examples should say xsd:integer now. 16:44:46 ACTION: kifer to make sure sorts are named with curis 16:44:46 Created ACTION-247 - Make sure sorts are named with curis [on Michael Kifer - due 2007-03-06]. 16:47:58 [i3] done. 16:48:05 [i4] already done 16:49:03 [i5] what is the sort URI --- is it essenially the string (ie xsd:anyURI), or something else.... 16:49:54 mk: I meant it in the sense of xs:anyURI -- an URI is a kind of string. 16:50:32 jos: then we don't have a way to use URI to refer to abstract objects. 16:51:41 DaveR: there's a big difference between "Jos" and Jos himself -- the signature of a predicate might say it pertains to strings or people.... 16:52:47 Allen: (workshop) 16:53:14 Dave: There's some muddyness about things vs pages -- that's not what we're talking about here. 16:53:36 Jos: this is well understood in RDF (example of different URIs) 16:54:21 csma: (incomprehensible) 16:55:00 csma: a predicate will be in a boolean sort and if it's identified by a URI, then..... 16:55:35 predicate-name can be a URI 16:56:14 mk: constants that identify cars, constants that identify people, constants that idenfity pencils, ..... 16:56:55 mk: a database is a bunch of a symbols --- it's in the mind of the creator of the DB that those symbols are associated with people, etc. 16:57:54 Following up on the discussion yesterday, and what Jos just indicated, the URIs http://example.org, http://example.org/ and http://example.org/index.html are all different as xsd:anyURIs but equivalent as RDF URIrefs. 16:57:57 DaveR: Suppose I'm writing a library of builtins. I'd write signatures for those functions. I want to create a strlen builtin, and some that apply to real-world things. 16:59:50 csma: first case sort is URI, second case sort is a Resource. 17:00:57 Dave: I think we need "Resource" as another sort. 17:02:26 mk: anyURI --- elements of the sort have internal structure (eg schema, path, host), and may have a method toString, and it can have a method "fetch". URI and String are different, but can be converted to each other. 17:02:38 Dave: Fine -- but that's all different from Resource. 17:03:01 mk: If you are using a URI to denote a person, that's your business, as in a db. 17:03:19 jos: Not true. In XSD an anyURI denotes itself, it cannot denote a person. 17:03:42 mk: but in a database it can. 17:03:49 Jos: We are not talking about databases here. 17:04:13 if I might hook in here, I think that making this difference between resource and URI-typed literals in RDF doesn't seem to be such a good idea and makes quite some troubles, IMO. but this just as a side note. 17:04:56 Besides proceeding from string-like anyURIs to equivalence URIrefs classes, we need also need 'dereference' URIrefs. The semantics for this dereferencing depends on the URI sort: for URIs denoting individuals, dereferencing just moves towards the semantic domain element; for URIs denoting another RIF Ruleset, dereferencing could be regarded as a importing it. 17:05:11 ... well, but I see the point (of jos, dave) 17:05:39 Dave: example of RDF: "someURI"^^xs:anyURI vs someuri 17:06:07 Jos: I'm not sure we need a sort for this. These are just constants. 17:06:29 sandro: is there a universal sort? 17:06:43 Sandro, we considered to introduce a universal rif:Any sort. 17:06:56 owl:Thing? 17:07:03 maybe not.... 17:07:35 mk: I we're making statements about Chris, and he has a URI, why can't I say he's an anyURI ? 17:07:55 Jos: This is the usual way. Abstract domain and concrete domain. 17:08:15 Axel, there was a discussion about 2 months ago with Dave about owl:Thing perhaps being rif:Any, but then he brought in rdf:Resource... 17:08:17 Jos: people are in abstract domain, concrete domain might have a URI in it. 17:08:55 csma: two separate discussions. 1 -- "URI" sort in core is xs:anyURI -- agreement **YES** 17:09:14 csma: 2 -- do we need a Resource sort some day -- unknown. 17:09:42 thanks harold, can you paste the uri to the thread maybe? 17:10:33 Dave: the sort here might be rdfs:Resource, but I'm not sure that's exactly what we need here. 17:10:51 Dave: but I think we're tabling this for now. 17:11:25 Jos: Why have anyURI in there? It's pretty obscure. Just have strings. 17:12:07 For what it is worth, I agree with Jos... 17:12:16 Axel and Dave, I guess it was off-line, so if Dave is fine, I will search my mailbox and forward to you and everyone interested. 17:12:18 Sandro: it's just a subclass of string. Why bother? 17:12:29 MikeDean: Actually it's not a subclass of string. 17:12:40 Sandro: Ah, okay. Still, it' kind of obscure. 17:14:05 Jos: I think all the text about URIs in the Core is based on this misunderstanding. 17:14:27 In http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#built-in-datatypes anyURI is *a sibling of* string (it's not *a* string). 17:14:47 Chris: We just recently agreed that sorts in Core would be named with URIs..... is that related? 17:14:50 mk: No. 17:15:39 mk: it's a name which looks like a URI 17:16:21