14:51:35 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:51:35 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/07/17-rif-irc
14:52:12 <csma> Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
14:53:08 <csma> Regrets: JosDeBruijn AxelPolleres PaulVincent HassanAitKaci
14:55:27 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
14:56:10 <patranja> patranja has joined #rif
14:56:19 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
14:56:27 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
14:56:39 <Harold> zakim, NRCC is me
14:56:39 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
14:59:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
14:59:57 <JeffP> JeffP has joined #rif
15:00:44 <Zakim> +??P13
15:01:01 <csma> zakim, ??P13 is me
15:01:01 <Zakim> +csma; got it
15:01:03 <IgorMozetic> IgorMozetic has joined #rif
15:01:27 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:01:28 <johnhall> johnhall has joined #rif
15:01:32 <Zakim> +PaulaP
15:01:43 <Zakim> +??P17
15:01:59 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, ??P17 is me
15:01:59 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern; got it
15:02:11 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, please mute me
15:02:11 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:02:12 <Zakim> +??P21
15:02:14 <Zakim> +Dave_Reynolds (was ??P21)
15:02:18 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:02:28 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, unmute me
15:02:28 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should no longer be muted
15:03:18 <Zakim> +??P26
15:03:21 <csma> scribe: Leora Morgenstern
15:03:25 <Zakim> +??P25
15:03:34 <csma> scribenick: LeoraMorgenstern
15:03:39 <IgorMozetic> zakim, ??P25 is me
15:03:39 <Zakim> +IgorMozetic; got it
15:03:44 <csma> Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:44 <Zakim> On the phone I see Harold, csma, PaulaP (muted), LeoraMorgenstern, Dave_Reynolds, Sandro (muted), ??P26, IgorMozetic
15:03:46 <IgorMozetic> zakim, mute me
15:03:46 <Zakim> IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:03:52 <johnhall> zakim ??p25 is me
15:03:55 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
15:04:09 <Zakim> +Allen_Ginsberg
15:04:14 <Zakim> +Jeff_Pan
15:04:40 <Zakim> -??P26
15:05:00 <ChrisW> ChrisW has joined #rif
15:05:06 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:06 <Zakim> On the phone I see Harold, csma, PaulaP (muted), LeoraMorgenstern, Dave_Reynolds, Sandro (muted), IgorMozetic (muted), Allen_Ginsberg, Jeff_Pan
15:05:22 <Zakim> +??P26
15:05:32 <johnhall> zakim ??p26 is me
15:05:49 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum
15:06:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> Next meeting will be next week, July 24th.
15:06:10 <johnhall> zakim, ??p26 is me
15:06:10 <Zakim> +johnhall; got it
15:06:23 <johnhall> zakim,mute me
15:06:23 <Zakim> johnhall should now be muted
15:06:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 327 on cmsa DONE to be datasets on agena
15:06:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 325 DONE to publicize minutes of last F2F
15:07:08 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 324 on Chris to ask Deborah Nichols about minutes of 6-26 ?
15:07:16 <LeoraMorgenstern> Unclear if that was done or not.
15:07:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> PROPOSED: accept meetings of July 10 minutes telecon.
15:07:56 <LeoraMorgenstern> RESOLVED: accept meetings of July 10  minutes before telecon
15:08:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 324 CONTINUED since Chris is not here.
15:08:21 <LeoraMorgenstern> PROPOSED: accept meetings of F2F6 in Innsbruck
15:08:51 <LeoraMorgenstern> That will be kept open until next week since Harold and possibly others didn't have a chance to go through them,.
15:09:05 <LeoraMorgenstern> No amendments to agenda.
15:09:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> Next agendum
15:09:23 <DavidHirtle> DavidHirtle has joined #rif
15:09:27 <johnhall> SBVR - nothing to report
15:09:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> No actions for this item.
15:09:36 <LeoraMorgenstern> No news about liaison.
15:09:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> Next agendum
15:09:54 <LeoraMorgenstern> Next agendum
15:10:17 <Zakim> +??P31
15:10:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> Take up agendum 3
15:10:35 <Zakim> +Gary_Hallmark
15:10:37 <johnhall> zakim, unmute me
15:10:37 <Zakim> johnhall should no longer be muted
15:11:08 <LeoraMorgenstern> There are 2 proposal for F2F. One is Harold's, in Nova Scotia
15:11:31 <GaryHallmark> GaryHallmark has joined #rif
15:11:38 <LeoraMorgenstern> Possibility to collocate with (???) in Jacksonville (?) week of September 26th.
15:11:45 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/F2F7
15:12:01 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:12:13 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:12:13 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
15:12:15 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
15:12:27 <LeoraMorgenstern> s/(???)/ OMG meeting
15:12:32 <csma> zakim, who is talking?
15:12:42 <Zakim> csma, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 14 (70%), csma (69%), LeoraMorgenstern (49%), johnhall (32%)
15:12:51 <LeoraMorgenstern> John Hall is looking into the possibility of collocating with OMG.
15:12:56 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:13:05 <ChrisW> zakim, mute LeoraMorgenstern
15:13:05 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:13:06 <LeoraMorgenstern> No information yet on costs per person from wiki
15:14:01 <Zakim> +MichaelKifer
15:14:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: if we make decision next week, earliest for f2f is Sept. 18
15:14:13 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:14:13 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:14:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> If we make decision next week, earliest for f2f is Sept. 25.
15:15:03 <LeoraMorgenstern> s/If we make/cmsa:/If we make/
15:15:30 <johnhall> zakim, mute me
15:15:30 <Zakim> johnhall should now be muted
15:15:32 <LeoraMorgenstern> Chris: can have ff on Sept 27-28 or Oct. 3-4 (W, Th)
15:15:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> Chris: there would be no costs other than transportation
15:16:01 <johnhall> zakim, unmute me
15:16:01 <Zakim> johnhall should no longer be muted
15:16:30 <LeoraMorgenstern> Johnhall: costs would be approx. 120 per head per day
15:16:55 <johnhall> zakim, mute me
15:16:55 <Zakim> johnhall should now be muted
15:17:01 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, unmute me
15:17:01 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should no longer be muted
15:17:17 <LeoraMorgenstern> q+
15:17:49 <Zakim> +Sandro.a
15:17:54 <Zakim> -Sandro
15:19:52 <csma> ack leora
15:21:55 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:21:55 <Zakim> MichaelKifer was already muted, MichaelKifer
15:22:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> Discussion on dates for possibilities for f2f7 at IBM
15:22:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> ACTION on leora to find out what dates are available besides what dates that Chris has reserved.
15:22:59 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: we should close poll by July 23 and make decision by Juoy 24.
15:23:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: one week for decision, especially in vacation time, is too short.
15:23:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
15:23:29 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:23:44 <PaulaP> no objection
15:23:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: we've been discussing this for months
15:23:54 <LeoraMorgenstern> chris: agrees with sandro
15:24:06 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: any objection to closing poll on July 23?
15:24:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: hearing no objection, we'll close poll on July 23.
15:24:22 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum
15:24:28 <LeoraMorgenstern> take up agendum 4
15:24:41 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 26 June 07
15:24:42 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif
15:24:54 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 17 July 2007
15:25:04 <ChrisW> Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
15:25:12 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 323 on Sandro is due next week
15:25:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> Sandro: would like to put that off for one more week
15:25:22 <ChrisW> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jul/0074.html
15:25:39 <ChrisW> Scribe: Leora Morgenstern
15:25:53 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 309-311 are completed. will be discussed today
15:25:59 <ChrisW> Regrets: JosDeBruijn AxelPolleres PaulVincent HassanAitKaci
15:26:07 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
15:26:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/17-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
15:26:15 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action 303, 301 on Jos and Harold, and one on Michael to remove overlapping sorts
15:26:18 <LeoraMorgenstern> Harold: done
15:26:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> Michael: done
15:26:32 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: any objection to keeping it open until we discuss it?
15:26:32 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:26:32 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:26:45 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:26:45 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:26:47 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make logs public
15:26:53 <csma> q?
15:27:49 <LeoraMorgenstern> action 298 on Gary to show how to use xml schema  for app data model: completed and closed
15:28:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> Acdtion 260 to put short entry on data sets, outlining the issues on Dave: done
15:28:43 <LeoraMorgenstern> bunch of actions open in Arch. open until August
15:28:57 <Harold> Modularization: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/RIF_Components/RIF_Dialect_Structure
15:29:35 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, next agendum
15:29:35 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Liaison" taken up [from csma]
15:30:14 <LeoraMorgenstern> 3 resolutions:
15:30:30 <LeoraMorgenstern> to better understand RIF Core, create 2 task forces,
15:30:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> one focusing on Horn, one focusing on production rules
15:30:44 <MichaelKifer> q+
15:31:34 <csma>   PROPOSED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two
15:31:34 <csma> task forces in RIF, one ofcusing on Horn and one focusing on production
15:31:34 <csma> rules.
15:31:34 <csma>   PROPOSED: Rename the current "RIF Core" draft: "RIF Horn dialect".
15:31:34 <csma>   PROPOSED: Create a "RIF PR dialect". 
15:31:44 <MichaelKifer> q-
15:32:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: idea is not to have divergent dialects
15:32:48 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: idea is to have a better idea of what a PR dialect would be, what kind of extensions we'd need
15:32:55 <sandro> q?
15:33:06 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: it seems clear that PR dialect couldn't be an extension of current RIF Core i
15:33:35 <sandro> Harold, you're just saying you think the current Core should be *named* something other than "RIF Horn Dialect"?    Or you want it to BE something different?
15:33:49 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: have to go down to find common core, from which both HR dialect and PR dialect come
15:34:08 <LeoraMorgenstern> Harold: anyway, we have gone beyond Horn, with equality, etc.
15:34:18 <IgorMozetic> what about: RIF LP dialect ?
15:34:31 <sandro> Harold: "RIF Logic Dialect"
15:34:36 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:34:36 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:34:43 <LeoraMorgenstern> chris: Harold isn't saying to extend the core, merely to change the name
15:34:52 <LeoraMorgenstern> chris: since anyway, what's in core now is beyond Horn
15:35:00 <sandro> Michael: "RIF Logical Core Dialect"
15:35:02 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: that's why it makes sense to call it logic
15:35:19 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: we don't want to forego idea of having one common core
15:35:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> Michael: makes sense to develop a core for logic dialects, and a core for production rule dialects,  both of which come from a simpler common core
15:36:09 <DaveReynolds> Perhaps use "base" - "PR Base" and "LP Base"
15:36:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: we don't want the term core except for in the one core from which all PR and HR dialects spring forth.
15:36:36 <ChrisW> too close to "data base"
15:36:37 <sandro> you beat me, Dave, I was just going to suggest "base"   :-)
15:36:38 <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 Dave
15:36:51 <sandro> "RIF Logic Base Dialect" 
15:37:02 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: base too close to database
15:37:10 <LeoraMorgenstern> foundation?
15:37:14 <sandro> "RIF Logic Basis"
15:37:24 <sandro> "RIF Basic Logic Dialect"
15:37:25 <Harold> PROPOSED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two task forces in RIF, one focusing on a Logic Basis and one focusing on a PR Basis.
15:38:10 <ChrisW> "RIF Basic Logic Dialect"
15:38:18 <ChrisW> "RIF Basic PR Dialect"
15:38:19 <ChrisW> ?
15:38:28 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa:  to Michael --- you're not proposing to extend the basis logic dialect? PR will almost certainly have notion of negation.
15:38:39 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:38:39 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:38:42 <DaveReynolds> ChrisW: +1 (though if we only worry about the names we are home and dry :-))
15:38:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> Michael: No
15:39:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> Cmsa: except for name, any objection to creating these 2 task forces?
15:39:21 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: i.e., any objection to these 3 resolutions?
15:39:41 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: okay, hearing no objection, we'll pass the resolutions once we decide on the names.
15:40:34 <AllenGinsberg> 0) RIF COMMON CORE 1) RIF LOGICAL DIALECTS CORE 2) RIF PR DIALECTS CORE
15:41:12 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: we'll probably just use the names basic logic and basic pr in conversation.
15:41:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa to allen: basic or basis better than term "core"
15:41:40 <ChrisW> DaveR: naming discussions are usually longer than technicl ones
15:41:50 <ChrisW> ...because everyone understands the discussion
15:42:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> Allen: we should have a task force for the common core, at the same time as the other two task forces, otherwise it might seem as if we're abandoning idea of common core.
15:42:15 <DaveReynolds> ChrisW: agreed :-)
15:42:18 <sandro> (I like Allen's suggestions, too.)
15:42:25 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: we'd keep the plenary telecon
15:42:47 <Harold> Allen, Yes, we can have a 'twin core', and later (re)discover the 'common nucleus' underneath.
15:42:52 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: but some telecons would be more relevatnt ot logic task force; some more relevant to pr task force.
15:43:04 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: idea is not for two task forces to separate.
15:43:18 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: therefore, we don't want to have a core task force: that is the working group itself.
15:43:53 <sandro> zakim, list attendees
15:43:53 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Harold, csma, PaulaP, LeoraMorgenstern, Dave_Reynolds, Sandro, IgorMozetic, Allen_Ginsberg, Jeff_Pan, johnhall, DavidHirtle, Gary_Hallmark,
15:43:57 <Zakim> ... ChrisW, Mike_Dean, MichaelKifer
15:44:23 <LeoraMorgenstern> proposed resolutions now become:
15:44:30 <sandro> csma: RIF Basic Logic Dialect, RIF Basic PR Dialect
15:44:35 <csma> PROPOSED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two
15:44:35 <csma> task forces in RIF, one ofcusing on Horn and one focusing on production
15:44:35 <csma> rules
15:44:38 <csma> PROPOSED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two
15:44:38 <csma> task forces in RIF, one ofcusing on Horn and one focusing on production
15:44:38 <csma> rules
15:45:03 <csma> PROPOSED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two
15:45:03 <csma> task forces in RIF, one ofcusing on
15:45:24 <csma> a logical dialect and the other one focusing on production rules
15:46:42 <csma> dialect
15:46:46 <sandro> PROPOSED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two task forces in RIF, one focussing on a logical dialect and the other one focusing on a production rules dialect
15:47:00 <LeoraMorgenstern> no objection so 
15:47:07 <sandro> RESOLVED: To better understand what RIF Core could be, create two task forces in RIF, one focusing on a logical dialect and the other one focusing on a production rules dialect
15:47:18 <LeoraMorgenstern> Onto second resolution
15:47:26 <csma> PROPOSED: Rename the current "RIF Core" draft: "RIF basic logic dialect"
15:47:48 <LeoraMorgenstern> RESOLVED: Rename the current "RIF Core" draft: "RIF basic logic dialect"
15:47:56 <LeoraMorgenstern> Onto third resolution
15:47:56 <csma> PROPOSED: Create a "RIF basic PR dialect"
15:48:17 <LeoraMorgenstern> RESOLVED: Create a "RIF basic PR dialect"
15:49:00 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: Regarding organization of these task forces, we'll continue as we have, but will have new email topics, and new sets of actions, so we can focus discussion on one or the other.
15:49:35 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: no need to go frurther, no need for formal organization
15:50:11 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: I've been working on strawman for basic PR dialect; hope to publish it before the end of the week, to start off the discussion.
15:50:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum
15:50:59 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum
15:51:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> take up agendum 6
15:51:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: sandro put out a strawman for this in email
15:52:00 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: In Innsbruck, we talked about requirements for RIF XML serialization. Not many requirements. 
15:52:05 <ChrisW> zakim, list agena
15:52:05 <Zakim> I don't understand 'list agena', ChrisW
15:52:11 <ChrisW> zakim, list agenda
15:52:11 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
15:52:12 <Zakim> 5. Technical design: Core, Horn and production rules [from csma]
15:52:13 <Zakim> 6. Technical design: RIF XML serialisation [from csma]
15:52:14 <Zakim> 7. technical design: Datasets [from csma]
15:52:15 <Zakim> 8. AOB [from csma]
15:52:18 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: One firm requirement: (Missed it)
15:52:46 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: could pick a language that was a subset of rdf/xml,. allowing use of rdf tools.
15:53:16 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: harold pointed out one flaw in the way rdf does data types (check)
15:53:33 <csma> q?
15:53:39 <MichaelKifer> q+
15:53:43 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: good to aim for both communities
15:54:05 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: didn't see relationship between xml syntax strawman and rif serizalizatoin strawman sent out yesterday
15:54:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: mapping from asm to xml schema
15:54:50 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: and mapping from the instance level
15:55:08 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: those 2 mappings are strongly connected, inform each other,
15:55:27 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: but don't subsume (??) one another
15:57:48 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: in oo language like ilog, and many java pr engine, we would have a rif object model conforming with asn syntax, systematically derived from  xml syntax, mapping would not  go from internal model for rules in engine to xml, but from internal representation in engine to abstract asn representation to xml document.
15:58:16 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: in that view, don't  think we need rif syntax data structure that Sandro proposed
15:59:12 <LeoraMorgenstern> s/from asm/from asn/
15:59:48 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, unmute me
15:59:48 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should no longer be muted
16:01:30 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: I would expect  that: xml syntax for rif dialect is concrete syntax for that rif dialect.
16:01:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: asn is abstract syntax for that same dialect.
16:02:01 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: so i understand the first xml syntax strawman because I understand how to derive xml syntax from asn abstract syntax
16:02:14 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: where asn syntax has classes like rules, ifx, onditions,
16:02:48 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: but now, in the serizalization strawman, I see yet another syntax for rif, w.ith not of these abstract concepts.
16:03:12 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
16:03:12 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
16:03:13 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: let's forget about the serialization strawman for now, then.
16:03:22 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: I can go back to the way I was talking to it before.
16:03:33 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: similar question to sandro's
16:03:46 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: what' s the advantage of using the xml syntax? Just that you can use rdf tools?
16:03:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: that's kind of vague ... what problem are we trying to solve?
16:04:05 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
16:04:05 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
16:04:17 <csma> csma has joined #rif
16:04:33 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: and what are the advantage of your soluiton?
16:04:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: I'm having difficulty understanding what it's all about?
16:05:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: doesn't undersatnd michael's question
16:05:24 <LeoraMorgenstern> sanddro: michael thinks that inthe core doc, there's already a start at xml syntax
16:05:30 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: there isn't an existing syntax
16:05:37 <csma> q?
16:05:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: yes, there's something
16:05:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: but it doesn't give datatypes
16:05:54 <csma> ack michaelk
16:05:54 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: not in the examples
16:06:05 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: so, yes, we should do it better
16:06:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: so that's what I'm trying to do, to nail all that stuff down, and use what another working group has spent years working on.
16:06:30 <sandro> stuff like "$49" and "LeRif"
16:06:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: in the wd, there are proposals for xml syntax, but they haven't been furthered.
16:07:32 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: question is not just: what is xml syntax for the current draft, but how do we derive the xml syntax.
16:07:40 <GaryHallmark> the problem is we need some simple rules to transform a syntax in asn to a syntax in xml schema
16:08:03 <Harold> We already had discussed solutions for "$49" and "LeRif" here: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/A.1.1_Basis%3A_Positive_Conditions_over_Bipartitioned_Constants
16:08:09 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: regarding why xml/rd rather than not-rdf xml: if it gives us the possibility to use both kinds of tools, so that both rdf people and xml people can stay in their worlds, what's the drawback?
16:08:34 <GaryHallmark> the question is whether rdf/xml helps or hinders the solution to the problem
16:08:39 <csma> q?
16:08:55 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: up to members of the working group to advocate for the tools they want to use.
16:09:19 <GaryHallmark> JAXB
16:09:36 <GaryHallmark> acronym for Java API for Xml Binding
16:09:57 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: for example, gary has advocated for JAXB.
16:10:50 <MichaelKifer> q-
16:10:53 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
16:10:53 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
16:11:02 <GaryHallmark> pretty much any legal xml schema will "work" for jaxb, but it could yield a very cumbersome api
16:11:17 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jul/0058.html
16:11:34 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action on Gary to check whether there would be problems with JAXB if  the xml syntax would be derived from the asn in the email posted above?
16:11:56 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: Gary, problem hidden in the translator?
16:12:41 <Harold> The translator would also need to be maintained, as we develop RIF through its lifecyle.
16:14:41 <LeoraMorgenstern> Gary: some confusion about how the translation would work .. .. don't know enough now to produce the translation ... 
16:15:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: Sandro, can you clarify this for Gary?
16:15:33 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakkim, unmute me
16:15:38 <sandro> ACTION: Sandro to produce XML Schema following his Serialization Strawman proposal -- due Julu 27
16:15:38 <rifbot> Created ACTION-328 - Produce XML Schema following his Serialization Strawman proposal -- due Julu 27 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2007-07-24].
16:15:44 <ChrisW> I have to leave the call.  
16:15:48 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
16:15:48 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern was already muted, LeoraMorgenstern
16:15:58 <Zakim> -ChrisW
16:16:00 <Harold> I noticed asn07 now being often mentioned in the discussion instead of asn06, although at F2F6 I heard asn07 was still purely experimental.
16:16:25 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: there were a number of side discussions ...
16:17:03 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: (you (Sandro?)) proposed that the root of the document should be  one thing, Harold, that it should be another
16:17:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> Sandro: still useful to try to have this in RDF, but I know Harold doesn't agree.
16:17:45 <sandro> rdf:RDF to rif:RIF
16:18:06 <LeoraMorgenstern> Harold: it should be mappable to RDF 
16:18:29 <DaveReynolds> q+
16:19:23 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: we need to find a use case where the fact htat it is rdf xml and not pure xml is a problem.
16:19:29 <csma> q?
16:20:09 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, unmute me
16:20:09 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should no longer be muted
16:21:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> Dave: for the issue of how to extend on top of RDF: in the OWL world, the issue is not a syntax one, it's that OWL was trying to be a semantic extension of RDF --- doing the same sntax semantic extension of RDF caused semantic problems.
16:22:24 <LeoraMorgenstern> DAve: Proposal of RIF is not to do that. It's not that RIf doc would be in rDF; it's simply to use RDF to encode things .. therefore the semantic issues that the OWL community faced would not arise.
16:22:32 <sandro> Dave: We'd need to be very careful in getting advice from OWL community here, since they have semantic issues (with being an RDF extension) which don't seem to apply to us.
16:24:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: (following harold): if we use rdf/xml only as syntax, as a carrier, what's the benefit to the rdf people?
16:24:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
16:24:44 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
16:25:11 <Harold> RDF syntax would allow that a rule has 'extra parts', which are just not mentioned here.
16:25:16 <LeoraMorgenstern> dave: as sandro said, we have a well-defined syntax we can just get off the shelf.
16:25:27 <LeoraMorgenstern> dave: second,  we can use various tools.
16:26:00 <LeoraMorgenstern> dave: third, it's important that metadata be interpretable as rdf and if you already have your syntactic encoding in rdf, you have that.
16:26:00 <sandro> s/well-defined/well-defined self-describing/
16:26:25 <Harold> ... but RIF syntax should comply to a 'closed-property assumption'.
16:28:02 <LeoraMorgenstern> cmsa: to harold and/or sandro: in proposed serializatoin, for the examples in current draft, would serizalizatoin give different result from proposed syntax in draft?
16:28:12 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: yes, for some of hte leaves, liek $49?
16:28:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: for information already there, it shojuldn't be significantly different.
16:28:43 <Harold> DaveR, re: metadata, you had shown in your 'Worked example' how to embed a pure XML syntax into RDF.
16:28:50 <DaveReynolds> Harold: sure, if you take a RIF document and add additional RDF assertions then it would either be no longer a legal RIF document or the additions would be treated as metadata
16:29:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: we can show examples, so people can see this better.
16:29:26 <DaveReynolds> Harold: yes, my original proposal was to avoid the RDF/XML discussion for the build of the condition language but retain it at the top level to permit metadata
16:29:35 <DaveReynolds> s/build/bulk/
16:30:11 <Zakim> -PaulaP
16:30:44 <DaveReynolds> Leora - sorry I was trying to respond to Harold's IRC discussion .. I can see the abmiguity!
16:31:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum.
16:31:28 <JeffP> +1
16:31:30 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum
16:31:31 <sandro> +1 adjourn
16:31:34 <Zakim> -IgorMozetic
16:31:35 <LeoraMorgenstern> AOB: None
16:31:35 <Zakim> -johnhall
16:31:36 <Zakim> -Allen_Ginsberg
16:31:38 <Zakim> -Gary_Hallmark
16:31:39 <Zakim> -Harold
16:31:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, unmute me
16:31:40 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should no longer be muted
16:31:42 <Zakim> -MichaelKifer
16:31:43 <Zakim> -Jeff_Pan
16:31:44 <Zakim> -DavidHirtle
16:31:47 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
16:31:48 <Zakim> -Dave_Reynolds
16:31:50 <JeffP> JeffP has left #rif
16:32:16 <csma> q?
16:32:18 <LeoraMorgenstern> q?
16:32:21 <csma> ack dave
16:32:25 <sandro> zakim, list attendees
16:32:25 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Harold, csma, PaulaP, LeoraMorgenstern, Dave_Reynolds, Sandro, IgorMozetic, Allen_Ginsberg, Jeff_Pan, johnhall, DavidHirtle, Gary_Hallmark,
16:32:28 <Zakim> ... ChrisW, Mike_Dean, MichaelKifer
16:32:35 <LeoraMorgenstern> next agendum
16:32:41 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
16:32:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/07/17-rif-minutes.html csma
16:36:17 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
16:41:57 <Zakim> -Sandro.a
16:41:59 <Zakim> -csma
16:42:01 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:42:02 <Zakim> Attendees were Harold, csma, PaulaP, LeoraMorgenstern, Dave_Reynolds, Sandro, IgorMozetic, Allen_Ginsberg, Jeff_Pan, johnhall, DavidHirtle, Gary_Hallmark, ChrisW, Mike_Dean,
16:42:05 <Zakim> ... MichaelKifer
16:42:41 <csma> csma has left #rif