IRC log of rif on 2007-09-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:44:44 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:44:44 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:45:04 [csma]
zakim, this will be RIF
14:45:04 [Zakim]
ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 15 minutes
14:45:33 [csma]
Meeting: RIF telecon 11 September 2007
14:45:51 [csma]
Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
14:47:48 [csma]
14:49:53 [csma]
zakim, list agenda
14:49:53 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
14:50:56 [csma]
agenda+ Admin
14:51:06 [csma]
agenda+ liaisons
14:51:47 [csma]
agenda+ F2F
14:51:57 [csma]
agenda+ Naming conventions
14:52:40 [csma]
agenda+ BLD: RDF in BLD
14:53:45 [csma]
agenda+ Arch: Meta-data
14:53:53 [csma]
agenda+ AOB
14:54:39 [csma]
agenda+ Worked out examples: UC9
14:55:21 [csma]
zakim, agenda order is 1-3, 8, 4-7
14:55:21 [Zakim]
ok, csma
14:55:27 [csma]
zakim, list agenda
14:55:27 [Zakim]
I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
14:55:28 [Zakim]
1. Admin [from csma]
14:55:29 [Zakim]
2. liaisons [from csma]
14:55:30 [Zakim]
3. F2F [from csma]
14:55:32 [Zakim]
8. Worked out examples: UC9 [from csma]
14:55:33 [Zakim]
4. Naming conventions [from csma]
14:55:34 [Zakim]
5. BLD: RDF in BLD [from csma]
14:55:35 [Zakim]
6. Arch: Meta-data [from csma]
14:55:36 [Zakim]
7. AOB [from csma]
14:58:20 [agiurca]
agiurca has joined #rif
14:58:38 [patranja]
patranja has joined #rif
14:59:25 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has joined #rif
14:59:48 [Harold]
Harold has joined #rif
15:00:09 [csma]
Adrian, will you be able to scribe today?
15:00:14 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
15:00:20 [Zakim]
+Dave_Reynolds (was Guest P33 74394)
15:00:22 [Zakim]
15:00:46 [StellaMitchell]
StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:00:55 [Zakim]
15:00:58 [Hassan]
Hassan has joined #rif
15:01:01 [agiurca]
sorry I cannot
15:01:18 [PaulVincent]
PaulVincent has joined #rif
15:01:19 [agiurca]
I did not follow the discussion for a time
15:01:20 [Harold]
zakim, [NRCC] is me
15:01:28 [Zakim]
+Harold; got it
15:01:29 [agiurca]
next week I will scribe
15:01:37 [Zakim]
15:01:39 [csma]
15:01:48 [csma]
zakim, ??P41 is me
15:02:05 [Zakim]
+csma; got it
15:02:09 [Zakim]
15:02:11 [Zakim]
15:02:27 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone
15:02:32 [Zakim]
+ +49.892.1.aaaa
15:02:32 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
15:02:39 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:02:42 [Zakim]
15:02:52 [josb]
josb has joined #rif
15:03:03 [Zakim]
15:03:13 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is on the phone', csma
15:03:13 [agiurca]
zakim, TU-Cottbus is me
15:03:21 [Zakim]
+StellaMitchell; got it
15:03:21 [DeborahNichols]
DeborahNichols has joined #rif
15:03:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Dave_Reynolds, Harold, csma, StellaMitchell, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), +49.892.1.aaaa, [IPcaller], [TU-Cottbus]
15:03:47 [agiurca]
zakim, [TU-Cottbus] is me
15:04:09 [cgi-irc]
cgi-irc has joined #rif
15:04:15 [Zakim]
+ +39.047.1.aabb
15:04:23 [agiurca]
zakim, mute me
15:04:26 [Zakim]
+agiurca; got it
15:04:57 [agiurca]
zakim, mute me
15:05:14 [Zakim]
sorry, agiurca, I do not recognize a party named '[TU-Cottbus]'
15:05:32 [PaulVincent]
Christian: I can volunteer to scribe...
15:05:39 [Zakim]
15:05:39 [IgorMozetic]
IgorMozetic has joined #rif
15:05:56 [csma]
scribe: Paul Vincent
15:05:57 [Zakim]
agiurca should now be muted
15:06:05 [csma]
scribenick: PaulVincent
15:06:25 [Zakim]
agiurca was already muted, agiurca
15:06:26 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:06:35 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.342.aacc
15:06:54 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Dave_Reynolds, Harold, csma, StellaMitchell (muted), Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), PaulaP (muted), PaulVincent, agiurca (muted), josb, Deborah_Nichols,
15:06:57 [Zakim]
... +1.512.342.aacc
15:07:03 [Zakim]
15:07:14 [Zakim]
15:07:20 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, ??P64 is me
15:07:20 [Zakim]
+IgorMozetic; got it
15:07:25 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, mute me
15:07:25 [Zakim]
IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:07:46 [PaulVincent]
Christian calls meeting to order...
15:08:20 [PaulVincent]
Chrisitan: for Deborah - outstanding action 295 - continued
15:08:53 [PaulVincent]
Christian: action 324 obscolete
15:09:37 [DougL]
Zakim, aacc is me
15:09:37 [Zakim]
+DougL; got it
15:10:08 [PaulVincent]
Christian: call for agenda amendments: suggest 1 - naming conventions proposed by Sandro, 2 - RIF embed discussion
15:10:43 [PaulVincent]
Harold: suggest moving naming discussion to end in case late comers join call
15:11:14 [csma]
zakim, list agenda
15:11:14 [Zakim]
I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
15:11:15 [Zakim]
1. Admin [from csma]
15:11:16 [Zakim]
2. liaisons [from csma]
15:11:19 [Zakim]
3. F2F [from csma]
15:11:20 [sandro]
Zakim, who is here?
15:11:21 [Zakim]
8. Worked out examples: UC9 [from csma]
15:11:23 [Zakim]
4. Naming conventions [from csma]
15:11:25 [Zakim]
5. BLD: RDF in BLD [from csma]
15:11:27 [Zakim]
6. Arch: Meta-data [from csma]
15:11:27 [PaulVincent]
Christian: concur ... reordering agenda
15:11:29 [Zakim]
7. AOB [from csma]
15:11:31 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Dave_Reynolds, Harold, csma, StellaMitchell (muted), Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), PaulaP (muted), PaulVincent, agiurca (muted), josb, Deborah_Nichols (muted), DougL,
15:11:36 [Zakim]
... IgorMozetic (muted), Sandro
15:11:38 [Zakim]
On IRC I see IgorMozetic, DougL, DeborahNichols, josb, PaulVincent, Hassan, StellaMitchell, Harold, DaveReynolds, PaulaP, agiurca, RRSAgent, Zakim, csma, sandro, rifbot
15:11:51 [PaulVincent]
Christian: propose accept last weeks minutes
15:12:33 [PaulVincent]
Christian: no objections - Sept 4 minutes are accepted
15:13:38 [PaulVincent]
Christian: reordering of agenda cancelled - will keep as is
15:13:38 [GaryHallmark]
GaryHallmark has joined #rif
15:13:59 [sandro]
Zakim, take up agendum 2
15:13:59 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "liaisons" taken up [from csma]
15:14:04 [PaulVincent]
PRR liaison: no news except submission at OMG before next F2F
15:14:16 [Zakim]
15:15:03 [Deborah-Nichols]
Deborah-Nichols has joined #rif
15:15:20 [josb]
15:15:24 [PaulVincent]
Sandro: liaison with OWL WG (for OWL 1.1) TBA
15:15:29 [csma]
ack josb
15:15:58 [PaulVincent]
Jos: XML schema WG queried but no response
15:16:50 [PaulVincent]
Christian: Action is 399 closed
15:17:30 [sandro]
ACTION: Sandro to find out from XML Schema WG's staff contact how we should proceed with getting a response to Jos' email
15:17:30 [rifbot]
Created ACTION-342 - Find out from XML Schema WG\'s staff contact how we should proceed with getting a response to Jos\' email [on Sandro Hawke - due 2007-09-18].
15:17:59 [josb]
15:18:19 [csma]
ack josb
15:18:28 [PaulVincent]
Christian: no actions on F2F7: action on all RIF members to register attendance or not
15:18:57 [sandro]
15:19:15 [PaulVincent]
Christian: F2F objectives: to publish BLD as early as possible in Oct so issues must be settled as much as possible
15:19:34 [sandro]
-> F2F7 Registration/Regrets Form
15:19:42 [LeoraMorgenstern]
LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
15:19:44 [PaulVincent]
Christian: ... and BLD XML schema to be decided
15:20:45 [PaulVincent]
Christian: ... day 1: syntax, 2 semantics, 3 semantics
15:21:29 [Zakim]
15:21:41 [PaulVincent]
Christian: ... freeze BLD version ASAP and email link - action for Harold
15:21:42 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, ??P20 is me
15:21:42 [Zakim]
+LeoraMorgenstern; got it
15:21:47 [josb]
15:21:48 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, please mute me
15:21:48 [Zakim]
LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:22:20 [sandro]
ACTION: Harold to freeze and editors draft of BLD when he's ready (soon), and send the WG e-mail with the frozen version (or a pointer to it).
15:22:25 [rifbot]
Created ACTION-343 - Freeze and editors draft of BLD when he\'s ready (soon), and send the WG e-mail with the frozen version (or a pointer to it). [on Harold Boley - due 2007-09-18].
15:22:29 [PaulVincent]
Christian: ... after freeze pls send issues list to chairs
15:23:27 [Zakim]
15:24:39 [StellaMitchell]
I can in
15:24:45 [PaulVincent]
Sandro: Need to know issues to discuss
15:25:07 [PaulVincent]
Sandro: Need to know issues to discuss
15:25:10 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: let's try to minimize suprise issues at F2F
15:25:14 [csma]
15:25:26 [StellaMitchell]
... think about and raise any important issue beforehand
15:25:31 [PaulVincent]
PaulVincent has joined #rif
15:25:58 [StellaMitchell]
csma: we are aiming to have a frozen BLD draft by Friday
15:25:59 [PaulVincent]
Apologies: lost internet / IRC and VOIP for a while
15:26:34 [Zakim]
15:27:17 [StellaMitchell]
csma: possibility of f2f8 at tech plenary in Nov in Boston, what's the feeling of the group?
15:27:18 [DaveReynolds]
I would not be there
15:29:29 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: I think a f2f in Nov would be a good idea, because it will be a crucial time - the time when we will be making a case for extending the working group.
15:29:46 [PaulVincent]
Scribing: can carry on but my cnx is clearly poor today - Stella do you want to continue?
15:30:03 [PaulVincent]
+1 also to F2F8 in Nov
15:30:37 [StellaMitchell]
csma: poll in F2F8 on Nov 5 and 6 in Boston?
15:30:39 [sandro]
+1 to F2F8 Nov 5-6 in Boston
15:30:45 [DaveReynolds]
-1 (I would not be likely to make it)
15:30:46 [Harold]
I try to come.
15:30:46 [josb]
not yet sure
15:30:50 [csma]
+1 to F2F8 in Boston
15:31:02 [PaulaP]
I also try to be there
15:31:14 [agiurca]
I also try to be there
15:31:15 [IgorMozetic]
+1 to F2F8 in Boston
15:31:41 [StellaMitchell]
csma: We have to make a decision 8 weeks before having a f2f
15:31:57 [StellaMitchell]
csma: that's why it is important we decide soon
15:32:19 [GaryHallmark]
+1 to f2f8
15:32:21 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: need Chris's input to make the decision
15:32:49 [StellaMitchell]
csma; We will discuss at chair's meeting and let the wg know
15:33:37 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
15:33:37 [Zakim]
I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, StellaMitchell
15:33:47 [csma]
15:33:52 [josb]
15:33:57 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
15:33:57 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from csma]
15:34:02 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
15:34:02 [Zakim]
agendum 1 was just opened, StellaMitchell
15:34:08 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, close this item
15:34:08 [Zakim]
agendum 1 closed
15:34:08 [GaryHallmark]
we already discussed bpel orchestration
15:34:09 [Zakim]
I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:34:12 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
15:34:12 [Zakim]
3. F2F [from csma]
15:34:14 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "F2F" taken up [from csma]
15:34:21 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, close this item
15:34:21 [Zakim]
agendum 3 closed
15:34:22 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:34:23 [Zakim]
8. Worked out examples: UC9 [from csma]
15:34:27 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
15:34:27 [Zakim]
agendum 8. "Worked out examples: UC9" taken up [from csma]
15:34:37 [StellaMitchell]
gary: We already dicsussed my example
15:34:45 [StellaMitchell]
csma: and Axel is not here
15:34:59 [StellaMitchell]
daver: we can discuss mine, UC8
15:35:49 [StellaMitchell]
csma: any objection to discuss UC8, although it wasn't on agenda... none
15:35:49 [Harold]
15:36:12 [StellaMitchell]
daver: link is above. I wrote this a long time.
15:36:25 [StellaMitchell]
daver: so much of the syntax is out of date.
15:36:51 [StellaMitchell]
daver: this uc is about vocabulary mapping - typical use of rules with RDF
15:37:29 [StellaMitchell]
daver: the rules are simple: take triple patterns, and deduce a new type or new set of values in the target ontology
15:37:49 [StellaMitchell]
daver: I represented the rules in Jena Rules and then did the analysis
15:38:00 [StellaMitchell]
daver: issues: rules are mostly horn, so no issues
15:38:19 [StellaMitchell]
daver: some syn sugar in head <??>
15:39:01 [StellaMitchell]
daver: quantification over rdf predicates - with frames there is now no restriction on quantifying over rdf predicates - no longer an issue
15:39:12 [StellaMitchell]
daver: datatypes - also resolved
15:39:36 [StellaMitchell]
daver: builtins: we still need some nore, but shouldn't be too controversial
15:40:25 [StellaMitchell]
daver: bNodes: in examples like this (which are realistic), people are treating bnodes as skolem constants
15:40:42 [Harold]
Re builtins:
15:41:20 [StellaMitchell]
daver: would need gensym equivalent to do what jena rules does
15:42:32 [StellaMitchell]
daver: metadata: I had based my example on my proposal at that time, but that's not the way we're going now
15:42:54 [csma]
15:43:09 [StellaMitchell]
daver: the xml syntax doesn't match what we have right now, but it won't be hard to redo once the xml syntax is solidified
15:43:19 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: did you do this by hand, or automate?
15:43:39 [StellaMitchell]
daver: largely hand editied, but some generated
15:43:56 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: do you have a sense of how hard it would be to automate the translation
15:44:32 [StellaMitchell]
daver: handling the covered items wouldn't be too difficult, but there is much that isn't covered by RIF
15:45:33 [StellaMitchell]
csma: rule where condition would check against RDF data set, and modify the data set?
15:45:47 [Zakim]
15:45:56 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: it would be nice to go between N3 and JenaRules by November as a demonstration
15:46:12 [StellaMitchell]
daver: that would be difficult for me to do by then
15:46:34 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: anyone else you work with who could do it?
15:46:37 [StellaMitchell]
daver: maybe
15:47:28 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next topic
15:47:37 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
15:47:40 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'next topic', StellaMitchell
15:47:47 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Naming conventions" taken up [from csma]
15:48:13 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: I started with a strawman.
15:48:23 [sandro]
-> Proposed Naming Conventions
15:48:47 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: naming conventions make it easier for everyone to work with a vocabulary
15:49:30 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: easier for users, and easier for the people coming up with new names
15:49:35 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:49:59 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: In my proposal, I followed conventions of java
15:50:17 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: CamelCase for class names, and don't abbreviate
15:50:51 [Harold]
We had a WG decision to rename Con into Const.
15:51:08 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:51:43 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: property names are more controversial: start with lowercase, and other than that are CamelCase noun phrases
15:52:23 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, mute me
15:52:23 [Zakim]
Michael_Kifer should now be muted
15:52:39 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: convention of industry is to keep them singular
15:52:53 [StellaMitchell]
ScribeNick: StellaMitchell
15:53:26 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: I propose that we don't use all caps for any names
15:53:32 [csma]
15:53:43 [DaveReynolds]
15:53:49 [csma]
ack daver
15:53:51 [StellaMitchell]
csma: any questions?
15:54:19 [StellaMitchell]
daver: I think these are useful things, but not critical, and I'm happy with this proposal
15:54:25 [StellaMitchell]
daver: but I would add one thing
15:54:57 [Harold]
In our fully striped XML syntax we followed the Java convention.
15:55:03 [StellaMitchell]
daver: for ambiguous things, add something to clarify
15:55:18 [StellaMitchell]
harold: we have followed java conventions in the BLD
15:55:21 [josb]
+1 to proposal Sandro and suggestion daver
15:55:38 [StellaMitchell]
harold: we have fully striped syntax with two types of stripes: classes and properties
15:56:05 [StellaMitchell]
harold: had a wg decision to change con to const
15:56:22 [Zakim]
15:56:27 [StellaMitchell]
csma: so, you are agreeing with Sandro?
15:56:38 [StellaMitchell]
harold: yes, basically
15:56:45 [Harold]
15:56:55 [agiurca]
we notice this to the WG for a long time. +1 to Sandro proposal
15:57:05 [StellaMitchell]
csma: complete phrases can result in excessively long names for classes and properties
15:57:07 [Harold]
only the basic java convention.
15:57:45 [Zakim]
15:57:53 [GaryHallmark]
then compress it
15:57:54 [csma]
15:57:57 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, ??P5 is me
15:57:57 [Zakim]
+IgorMozetic; got it
15:58:00 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, mute me
15:58:00 [Zakim]
IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:58:24 [StellaMitchell]
harold: things are never completely unambiguous anyways
15:58:55 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: I see your point
15:59:10 [StellaMitchell]
csma: I think UniversalTerm is much more clear than Uniterm
15:59:23 [Harold]
Christian, yes we dont want to expand Uniterm into UniversalTerm
15:59:44 [Harold]
since UniversalTerm is *still* ambigous
16:00:11 [sandro]
Maybe amend: If an abbreviated term is no more confusing or misleading than a longer term -- without external explanation -- to the target audience, then it may be used.
16:00:41 [StellaMitchell]
csma: So, we should keep and refine this page that Sando has started
16:01:30 [StellaMitchell]
csma: people can propose, and when we agree on them, we will resolve to adopt
16:01:30 [Zakim]
16:01:56 [josb]
16:01:58 [Hassan]
I second Sandro's point
16:02:05 [StellaMitchell]
harold: in BLD we are only following Java conventions; not everything Sandro proposed
16:02:26 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: no, you don't completely - e.g. noun phrases
16:02:56 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: this item (naming conventions) is critical for usable exchange format
16:03:11 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: I strenously object to not using noun phrases in the naming conventions
16:03:23 [GaryHallmark]
+1 naming conventions
16:03:45 [sandro]
PROPOSED: we will have naming conventions; people edit the page to propose theirs.
16:03:50 [josb]
16:04:00 [StellaMitchell]
csma: any objections to above proposal?
16:04:27 [StellaMitchell]
csma: if you modify or object to someone else's proposal, say why
16:04:30 [sandro]
PROPOSED: we will have naming conventions; people edit the page to propose theirs (with explanation and reasons for any differences from what's already on page)
16:04:52 [StellaMitchell]
csma: any objection to above? none
16:04:54 [sandro]
RESOLVED: we will have naming conventions; people edit the page to propose theirs (with explanation and reasons for any differences from what's already on page)
16:05:04 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
16:05:04 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "BLD: RDF in BLD" taken up [from csma]
16:05:41 [DaveReynolds]
I thought I voiced some reservation
16:06:01 [StellaMitchell]
csma: ill-typed literals
16:06:18 [StellaMitchell]
csma: do you have a counter proposal, Dave?
16:06:43 [StellaMitchell]
daver: it has to do whether this applies to embedding or combined case
16:06:48 [sandro]
Zakim, Sandro is Sandro-A
16:06:48 [Zakim]
+Sandro-A; got it
16:06:53 [StellaMitchell]
daver: it's ok in the embedding case, but not in combined case
16:07:28 [Zakim]
16:07:38 [Zakim]
16:07:43 [StellaMitchell]
daver: should be a flag that says whether it's ok to let an ill-typed literal through the translation
16:08:09 [josb]
16:08:17 [StellaMitchell]
csma: in the combining situation, it doesn't make sense because you would not translate rdf graph into rules
16:08:23 [StellaMitchell]
daver: exactly
16:08:26 [csma]
ack josb
16:08:42 [StellaMitchell]
jos: in combining you migtht encounter this type of thing if you query
16:08:50 [StellaMitchell]
jos: but you would not have it in the rules themselves
16:09:16 [StellaMitchell]
csma: you would query to check entailment of the condition, and would never have that with ill-typed literal
16:09:45 [StellaMitchell]
jos: you can think of any type of query one might write. there might be variables and one of the variables subs could be an ill-typed literal
16:10:22 [StellaMitchell]
daver: e.g. rule that queuies an rdf graph to query type of literal (and the literal is ill-typed)
16:11:05 [StellaMitchell]
daver: if I queury rdf graph in it's native form...
16:11:26 [StellaMitchell]
jos: syntactic correspondence between symbols in rdf and symbols in rif
16:13:08 [StellaMitchell]
csma: if rif is used only for interchange, then this is not an issue
16:13:46 [StellaMitchell]
csma: issue when embed an rdf graph in a rule set, but not when you have rules that are about rdf graphs
16:14:10 [StellaMitchell]
jos: there are still entailments
16:14:42 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: you could have a rule that says ' if x worked for ilog then x works in france'
16:14:59 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: if x is an ill-typed literal... then the conclusion will have one
16:15:42 [StellaMitchell]
csma: in RIF, you will never have an instance of that in RIF, because it will be translated to a rule language before being applied to the RDF data
16:16:07 [Hassan]
16:16:13 [StellaMitchell]
csma: RIF has an entailment relation beccause it tells you how to translate
16:16:26 [StellaMitchell]
csma: so you can presever the entailment relation
16:16:55 [StellaMitchell]
sandro: you are saying that that aspect should be left up to the implementation
16:17:13 [StellaMitchell]
jos: I don't understand - how can you specify part of entailment relation and not another part?
16:17:36 [StellaMitchell]
jos: entailment either holds or doesn't hold
16:17:41 [Hassan]
16:17:57 [StellaMitchell]
daver: (something about well-formed document)
16:18:25 [StellaMitchell]
csma: my points is that it is specified in rdf, and the rif semantics doesn't have to handle that case
16:18:31 [csma]
ack hassan
16:18:34 [Hassan]
16:18:55 [StellaMitchell]
hassan: I strongly support csma and what mk has been advocating
16:19:51 [StellaMitchell]
hassan: making the combined model normative is not a good idea
16:20:23 [StellaMitchell]
csma: I'm confused: I though in the combined model, we do not care about ill-typed literals
16:20:44 [StellaMitchell]
csma: but in the embedding case (which mk supports) we would have to deal with ill-typed literal
16:21:17 [csma]
16:21:24 [StellaMitchell]
hassan: i'm not sure about ill-typed. But, the semantics of RDF is not relevent here
16:22:15 [StellaMitchell]
csma: I would like to ask if others are confused?
16:22:49 [StellaMitchell]
daver: hassan is addressing the question of embedding vs. combined model, not specificall ill-typed
16:23:07 [StellaMitchell]
csma: am I right that ill-typed is issue in embedded and not in combined models?
16:23:15 [StellaMitchell]
jos: it is an issue in both cases
16:24:02 [StellaMitchell]
csma: I agree with Dave then, that a flag (for whether ill-typed literals are ok) is a good idea
16:24:27 [StellaMitchell]
csma: any more on this topic?
16:24:52 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, next item
16:24:52 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "Arch: Meta-data" taken up [from csma]
16:25:06 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, move to item 5
16:25:06 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "BLD: RDF in BLD" taken up [from csma]
16:25:28 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, show agenda
16:25:28 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
16:25:30 [Zakim]
6. Arch: Meta-data [from csma]
16:25:31 [Zakim]
7. AOB [from csma]
16:25:56 [Harold]
As I mentioned in the previous telecon, handling ill-typed literals need to be dealt with at least in the (partial) interoperability part of RIF.
16:26:09 [StellaMitchell]
Topic: RDF: embedding vs. combined models
16:27:03 [josb]
16:27:13 [csma]
16:28:27 [StellaMitchell]
csma: it talks about correspondence between rdf triples and rif molecules
16:28:31 [josb]
16:28:32 [StellaMitchell]
dave: ok, I hadn't seen that
16:28:46 [StellaMitchell]
daver: but I think bnode discussion is only in informative part
16:28:55 [csma]
ack josb
16:29:12 [StellaMitchell]
jos: re: bnodes the embedding is only used for reasoning, and when you reason
16:29:25 [StellaMitchell]
jos: you can skolemize existentially quantified varialbes
16:29:58 [StellaMitchell]
jos: if you want to use them for representation and not reasoning, then you are deviated from the semantics of bnodes
16:30:16 [StellaMitchell]
daver: but we need rules that operate over RDF data
16:30:44 [StellaMitchell]
daver: and such rules will need builtins such as sparql has, to test various things about the data
16:30:53 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, move to item 7
16:30:53 [Zakim]
agendum 7. "AOB" taken up [from csma]
16:30:53 [PaulaP]
16:30:58 [Hassan]
16:31:04 [PaulaP]
16:31:13 [StellaMitchell]
csma: adjourn? any objections?
16:31:17 [Zakim]
16:31:21 [PaulVincent]
16:31:24 [Zakim]
16:31:25 [DougL]
16:31:26 [Zakim]
16:31:27 [Zakim]
16:31:28 [agiurca]
16:31:28 [Zakim]
16:31:29 [Zakim]
16:31:30 [Zakim]
16:31:30 [Zakim]
16:31:32 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, unmute me
16:31:32 [Zakim]
StellaMitchell should no longer be muted
16:31:34 [Zakim]
16:31:38 [Zakim]
16:31:40 [Zakim]
16:31:51 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:31:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
16:31:58 [StellaMitchell]
csma: frozen BLD draft will be available by Friday
16:31:59 [Zakim]
16:32:31 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:32:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
16:32:50 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes public
16:32:50 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', csma. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:33:13 [csma]
rrsagent, make record public
16:34:25 [csma]
zakim, who attended?
16:34:25 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, csma.
16:34:49 [sandro]
Zakim, list attendees
16:34:49 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Dave_Reynolds, Harold, csma, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, +49.892.1.aaaa, StellaMitchell, PaulaP, PaulVincent, +39.047.1.aabb, agiurca,
16:34:52 [Zakim]
... Deborah_Nichols, josb, +1.512.342.aacc, IgorMozetic, DougL, Gary_Hallmark, LeoraMorgenstern, Michael_Kifer, Sandro-A, Sandro
16:35:25 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:35:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
16:36:22 [Zakim]
16:36:25 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:36:25 [Zakim]
On the phone I see csma, Sandro.a
16:37:55 [Zakim]
16:37:58 [Zakim]
16:37:59 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:38:00 [Zakim]
Attendees were Dave_Reynolds, Harold, csma, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, +49.892.1.aaaa, StellaMitchell, PaulaP, PaulVincent, +39.047.1.aabb, agiurca, Deborah_Nichols, josb, +1.512.342.aacc,
16:38:03 [Zakim]
... IgorMozetic, DougL, Gary_Hallmark, LeoraMorgenstern, Michael_Kifer, Sandro-A, Sandro
16:38:15 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:38:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
16:44:08 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has joined #rif
17:11:37 [csma]
csma has left #rif