IRC log of rif on 2007-10-09
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:37:08 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif
- 14:37:08 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-rif-irc
- 14:37:30 [csma]
- Zakim, this will be rif
- 14:37:30 [Zakim]
- ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 23 minutes
- 14:38:02 [csma]
- Meeting: RIF telecon 9 October 2007
- 14:38:20 [csma]
- Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
- 14:39:02 [csma]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Oct/0026.html
- 14:40:07 [csma]
- csma has changed the topic to: 9 Oct RIF telecon agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Oct/0026.html
- 14:41:10 [csma]
- agenda+ Admin
- 14:41:19 [csma]
- zakim, reset agenda
- 14:41:19 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'reset agenda', csma
- 14:41:25 [csma]
- zakim, close agenda
- 14:41:25 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'close agenda', csma
- 14:41:35 [csma]
- zakim, cancel agenda
- 14:41:37 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'cancel agenda', csma
- 14:41:45 [csma]
- zakim, erase agenda
- 14:41:45 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'erase agenda', csma
- 14:41:52 [csma]
- agenda-
- 14:41:58 [csma]
- agenda?
- 14:42:11 [csma]
- agenda- 5
- 14:42:25 [csma]
- agenda- 4
- 14:42:48 [csma]
- agenda+ BLD WD2 issues
- 14:43:14 [csma]
- agenda+ Arch: naming conventions
- 14:43:31 [csma]
- agenda+ Arch: Test cases
- 14:43:39 [csma]
- agenda+ AOB
- 14:46:54 [patranja]
- patranja has joined #rif
- 14:52:38 [ChrisW]
- ChrisW has joined #rif
- 14:53:43 [barry_b]
- barry_b has joined #rif
- 14:58:52 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
- 14:58:58 [Zakim]
- +??P17
- 14:59:25 [csma]
- zakim, ??P17 is me
- 14:59:25 [Zakim]
- +csma; got it
- 14:59:29 [AllenGinsberg]
- AllenGinsberg has joined #rif
- 15:00:40 [Zakim]
- +Sandro
- 15:00:43 [Zakim]
- -csma
- 15:00:44 [Zakim]
- +csma
- 15:00:45 [Hassan]
- Hassan has joined #rif
- 15:00:57 [Zakim]
- + +1.703.453.aaaa
- 15:01:36 [AllenGinsberg]
- zakim, aaaa is me;
- 15:01:37 [Zakim]
- +me;; got it
- 15:01:37 [josb]
- josb has joined #rif
- 15:01:38 [Zakim]
- +josb
- 15:02:09 [Zakim]
- +PaulaP
- 15:02:09 [Doug]
- Doug has joined #rif
- 15:02:49 [AllenGinsberg]
- zakim, aaaa is AllenGinsberg
- 15:02:49 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:02:59 [Zakim]
- +DougL
- 15:03:01 [Zakim]
- sorry, AllenGinsberg, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
- 15:03:03 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, Sandro, me;, josb, +49.892.1.aacc, +1.512.342.aadd
- 15:03:11 [AllenGinsberg]
- zakim, me is AllenGinsberg
- 15:03:22 [Zakim]
- +AllenGinsberg; got it
- 15:03:29 [Doug]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:03:30 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, Sandro, AllenGinsberg, josb, +49.892.1.aacc, +1.512.342.aadd
- 15:03:40 [Doug]
- Zakim, aadd is me
- 15:03:40 [Zakim]
- +Doug; got it
- 15:03:49 [Doug]
- Zakim, who is on the phone
- 15:03:50 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'who is on the phone', Doug
- 15:03:59 [Doug]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:03:59 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, Sandro, AllenGinsberg, josb, PaulaP, Doug
- 15:04:09 [IgorMozetic]
- IgorMozetic has joined #rif
- 15:04:26 [Zakim]
- +??P24
- 15:04:56 [Hassan]
- zakim, ??P24 is Hassan
- 15:04:56 [Zakim]
- +Hassan; got it
- 15:05:43 [barry_b]
- I am having trouble phoning in. The usual conference key is not working.
- 15:05:50 [AllenGinsberg]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:05:50 [Zakim]
- AllenGinsberg should now be muted
- 15:05:55 [AdrianP]
- AdrianP has joined #RIF
- 15:06:23 [csma]
- barry, the code is rifwg
- 15:07:07 [Harold]
- Harold has joined #rif
- 15:07:18 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:07:18 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, Sandro, AllenGinsberg (muted), josb, PaulaP, Doug, Hassan (muted)
- 15:07:35 [PaulVincent]
- PaulVincent has joined #rif
- 15:07:43 [DaveReynolds]
- DaveReynolds has joined #rif
- 15:07:51 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
- 15:07:52 [Zakim]
- +[NRCC]
- 15:08:02 [AllenGinsberg]
- zakim, unmute me
- 15:08:02 [Zakim]
- AllenGinsberg should no longer be muted
- 15:08:05 [Zakim]
- +Gary_Hallmark
- 15:08:14 [Harold]
- zakim, [NRCC] is me
- 15:08:14 [Zakim]
- +Harold; got it
- 15:08:19 [Zakim]
- +??P31
- 15:08:35 [AllenGinsberg]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:08:35 [Zakim]
- AllenGinsberg should now be muted
- 15:08:46 [AdrianP]
- AdrianP has joined #RIF
- 15:08:48 [csma]
- Scribe:Gary Hallmark
- 15:08:59 [Zakim]
- +??P39
- 15:08:59 [GaryHallmark]
- GaryHallmark has joined #rif
- 15:09:00 [Zakim]
- +??P35
- 15:09:03 [csma]
- scribenick: GaryHallmark
- 15:09:31 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- ??P35 is me
- 15:09:38 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:09:38 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:09:52 [Zakim]
- +AdrianP
- 15:10:12 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- zakim, ??P35 is me
- 15:10:12 [Zakim]
- +LeoraMorgenstern; got it
- 15:10:16 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:10:16 [Zakim]
- LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
- 15:10:28 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:10:28 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, Sandro, AllenGinsberg (muted), josb, PaulaP (muted), Doug, Hassan (muted), Harold, Gary_Hallmark, DaveReynolds, PaulVincent, LeoraMorgenstern (muted),
- 15:10:32 [Zakim]
- ... +49.351.6.aaee
- 15:10:45 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, aaee is me
- 15:10:45 [Zakim]
- +AdrianP; got it
- 15:11:39 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:11:39 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 15:11:57 [GaryHallmark]
- resolved: f2f7 minutes accepted
- 15:12:07 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:12:07 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
- 15:12:53 [GaryHallmark]
- action 342 continued
- 15:13:12 [PaulVincent]
- No PRR news
- 15:13:31 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: who is owl liason?
- 15:13:46 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: 1st telecon tomorrow
- 15:14:02 [GaryHallmark]
- ... for new OWL WG
- 15:14:42 [Doug]
- I expect to
- 15:14:44 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro is OWL liason
- 15:16:09 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:16:09 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "BLD WD2 issues" taken up [from csma]
- 15:17:04 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: sandro, any f2f8 updates?
- 15:17:12 [ChrisW]
- zakim, list agenda
- 15:17:12 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
- 15:17:13 [Zakim]
- 6. BLD WD2 issues [from csma]
- 15:17:14 [Zakim]
- 7. Arch: naming conventions [from csma]
- 15:17:15 [Zakim]
- 8. Arch: Test cases [from csma]
- 15:17:16 [Zakim]
- 9. AOB [from csma]
- 15:19:10 [GaryHallmark]
- action on sandro to send reminder to register for f2f8
- 15:19:36 [GaryHallmark]
- action 355 completed
- 15:20:05 [GaryHallmark]
- action 354 continued
- 15:20:45 [GaryHallmark]
- action 353 continued
- 15:22:11 [GaryHallmark]
- action 352 continued, 351 dropped (duplicate)
- 15:22:19 [GaryHallmark]
- action 350 continued
- 15:22:29 [GaryHallmark]
- action 349 continued
- 15:23:19 [GaryHallmark]
- action 349, 250 deadline Oct 20
- 15:23:29 [GaryHallmark]
- s/250/350
- 15:24:27 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: split BLD?
- 15:24:29 [josb]
- q+
- 15:24:36 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:24:55 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: defer until after WD2
- 15:25:14 [Zakim]
- +Sandro.a
- 15:25:25 [Zakim]
- -Sandro
- 15:25:36 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: docs may not be complete enough to split
- 15:26:46 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: is OWL/RDF separable (and ignorable)?
- 15:27:18 [Harold]
- q+
- 15:27:23 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: they are completely separable
- 15:27:39 [GaryHallmark]
- ... no dependencies from main doc
- 15:28:20 [csma]
- ack harol
- 15:28:44 [josb]
- q+
- 15:29:09 [MichaelKifer]
- MichaelKifer has joined #rif
- 15:29:09 [GaryHallmark]
- harold: also concerned about separability
- 15:30:35 [Zakim]
- +??P40
- 15:30:43 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: split may not take much effort
- 15:30:52 [IgorMozetic]
- zakim, ??P40 is me
- 15:30:52 [Zakim]
- +IgorMozetic; got it
- 15:30:57 [IgorMozetic]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:30:57 [Zakim]
- IgorMozetic should now be muted
- 15:31:26 [Zakim]
- +??P20
- 15:31:36 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: editor's note could describe possible future doc split
- 15:31:39 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, P20 is me
- 15:31:39 [Zakim]
- sorry, MichaelKifer, I do not recognize a party named 'P20'
- 15:32:12 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, ??P20 is me
- 15:32:12 [Zakim]
- +MichaelKifer; got it
- 15:32:20 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:32:20 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 15:33:15 [GaryHallmark]
- ... editor's notes to call out sections that are not required for specific purposes
- 15:34:07 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:35:15 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: confident of semantic independence of owl/rdf section
- 15:35:42 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: good idea to split now
- 15:36:34 [PaulaP]
- +1
- 15:36:36 [PaulVincent]
- +1
- 15:36:38 [Doug]
- +1
- 15:36:39 [Hassan]
- +1
- 15:36:40 [GaryHallmark]
- who is in favor of splitting?
- 15:36:41 [sandro]
- +1 splitting
- 15:36:44 [MichaelKifer]
- +1
- 15:36:47 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- 1
- 15:36:49 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- +1
- 15:36:52 [IgorMozetic]
- +1
- 15:36:57 [GaryHallmark]
- +1
- 15:37:06 [AdrianP]
- -1
- 15:37:14 [josb]
- 0
- 15:37:18 [GaryHallmark]
- no splitting indicated by -1
- 15:37:21 [Harold]
- 0
- 15:37:22 [csma]
- 0
- 15:37:26 [DaveReynolds]
- 0
- 15:37:27 [AllenGinsberg]
- 0
- 15:37:43 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: clear preference to split
- 15:37:48 [ChrisW]
- i didn't hear jos' argument
- 15:38:00 [ChrisW]
- but I think I am opposed to spitting
- 15:38:11 [sandro]
- worth being clear -- in this case "-1" did NOT mean "object". It was already set that no one was objecting.
- 15:38:37 [csma]
- PROPOSED: to split RDF compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously
- 15:39:15 [ChrisW]
- wait ten minutes for this vote please
- 15:39:23 [csma]
- ok
- 15:40:10 [sandro]
- shortname "rif-rdf-owl" not "bld-rdf-owl"
- 15:40:10 [Harold]
- I gather we are talking only about RIF-RDF Compatibility
- 15:40:21 [Harold]
- not about RIF-OWL Compatibility, for now.
- 15:41:05 [josb]
- Harold, the document will also contain OWL compatibility (not in working draft 2, but it should in working graph 3)
- 15:41:29 [josb]
- s/graph/draft/
- 15:42:30 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: prefer rif-bld rather than superscript notation
- 15:42:32 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 15:42:46 [ChrisWelty]
- ChrisWelty has joined #rif
- 15:43:10 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:43:10 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, AllenGinsberg (muted), josb, PaulaP (muted), Doug, Hassan (muted), Harold, Gary_Hallmark, DaveReynolds, PaulVincent, LeoraMorgenstern (muted), AdrianP
- 15:43:13 [Zakim]
- ... (muted), Sandro.a, IgorMozetic (muted), MichaelKifer (muted), [IBM]
- 15:43:22 [ChrisWelty]
- zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
- 15:43:22 [Zakim]
- +ChrisWelty; got it
- 15:43:22 [MichaelKifer]
- i dont care. rif-bld is fine
- 15:43:55 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, unmute me
- 15:43:55 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
- 15:44:11 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: any objections to RIF Basic Logic Dialect and RIF-BLD
- 15:44:12 [ChrisW]
- zakim, ChrisWelty is ChrisW
- 15:44:12 [Zakim]
- +ChrisW; got it
- 15:44:20 [ChrisW]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:44:20 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see csma, AllenGinsberg (muted), josb, PaulaP (muted), Doug, Hassan (muted), Harold, Gary_Hallmark, DaveReynolds, PaulVincent, LeoraMorgenstern (muted), AdrianP
- 15:44:24 [Zakim]
- ... (muted), Sandro.a, IgorMozetic (muted), MichaelKifer, ChrisW
- 15:44:38 [PaulVincent]
- +1 for RIF-BLD assuming no logicians will be injured...
- 15:45:37 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:45:37 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 15:45:39 [csma]
- PROPOSED: the name of the dialect is RIF basic logic dialect and the short notation is RIF BLD
- 15:45:42 [Harold]
- (Sorry for being late with this: Jos, I see. So what would be the short name of the working draft 2 (actually *its* working draft 1) of RIF-RDF Compatibility?)
- 15:45:45 [ChrisW]
- how about RiFbLd
- 15:46:21 [sandro]
- roflbld
- 15:46:36 [ChrisW]
- R-FB*D
- 15:46:48 [GaryHallmark]
- csma's proposal is resolved
- 15:47:05 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, unmute me
- 15:47:05 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
- 15:47:13 [Harold]
- rif:text
- 15:47:28 [Harold]
- Michael, RIF-BLD
- 15:47:52 [josb]
- It could be called "RIF Semantic Web Compatibility" or "RDF and OWL compatibility of RIF"
- 15:47:54 [GaryHallmark]
- csma's resolution ammended to RIF-BLD
- 15:48:06 [josb]
- q+
- 15:48:15 [josb]
- q-
- 15:48:55 [josb]
- q+
- 15:49:07 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: do we keep OWL compatibility in WD2?
- 15:49:08 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:49:22 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: should be out, because there is no substance yet
- 15:49:45 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: subclass and membership in BLD?
- 15:49:57 [GaryHallmark]
- ... keep and mark as open issues
- 15:50:40 [Harold]
- Subclass and membership: Keep it and mark it.
- 15:50:47 [GaryHallmark]
- no objections to keep and mark
- 15:50:52 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 15:51:04 [csma]
- ack dave
- 15:51:12 [josb]
- there should be a link to the issues tracker
- 15:51:21 [GaryHallmark]
- dave: rif:text issues
- 15:51:35 [josb]
- q+
- 15:52:21 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:52:27 [GaryHallmark]
- .. <rif:text> vs. string@lang
- 15:52:58 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: lexical space is unicode strings, not pairs (string, tag)
- 15:54:21 [sandro]
- this is very weird.....
- 15:54:41 [GaryHallmark]
- dave: withdraws objection
- 15:54:49 [sandro]
- +1 DaveReynolds, I have a worry.... but it's not specific enough to object.
- 15:55:29 [sandro]
- Jos: This is a result of putting language tags into the datatype mechanism
- 15:55:46 [ChrisW]
- issue for the issues list?
- 15:56:07 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: let others raise the issue if they are worried
- 15:56:31 [sandro]
- (very very weakly.)
- 15:56:50 [GaryHallmark]
- hassan: issue should be raised
- 15:57:03 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:57:03 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 15:57:13 [GaryHallmark]
- action on dave to frame the issue
- 15:57:24 [sandro]
- ACTION: Dave to raise an issue about xml:lang in rif:text
- 15:57:24 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-356 - Raise an issue about xml:lang in rif:text [on Dave Reynolds - due 2007-10-16].
- 15:57:29 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, unmute me
- 15:57:29 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
- 15:57:41 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:57:44 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 15:58:39 [GaryHallmark]
- csma: any objects to rif constants being scoped to ruleset?
- 15:59:01 [GaryHallmark]
- ... rif local constants
- 15:59:22 [GaryHallmark]
- s/objects/objection
- 15:59:52 [Harold]
- Constants rif:local should be scoped to an entire ruleset, otherwise you could not express even simple Prolog textbook examples.
- 16:00:36 [PaulVincent]
- +1 to Hassans concerns
- 16:00:46 [GaryHallmark]
- no objections to ruleset scope
- 16:00:49 [josb]
- one can also use URIs for textbook examples
- 16:01:05 [GaryHallmark]
- hassan: but other scopes could be reasonable as well
- 16:01:07 [csma]
- c =/= c()
- 16:01:09 [Harold]
- likes(john,X) :- likes(X,wine).
- 16:01:10 [Harold]
- likes(mary,wine).
- 16:01:28 [Harold]
- wine must be scoped to the entire ruleset,
- 16:02:21 [josb]
- q+
- 16:02:27 [csma]
- ack josb
- 16:02:41 [GaryHallmark]
- should a constant be distinct from 0-arity function with same name?
- 16:02:49 [Hassan]
- q+
- 16:03:14 [Harold]
- current-time() would an (active) built-in!
- 16:03:53 [Harold]
- current-time would be just a (passive) constant.
- 16:03:58 [GaryHallmark]
- harold: they are different in current signature formalism
- 16:04:10 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:04:10 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
- 16:04:17 [ChrisW]
- this is sounding like the "treatment of builtins" issue
- 16:04:28 [GaryHallmark]
- hassan: but logically they are the same (both constants)
- 16:05:22 [csma]
- ack hassan
- 16:05:40 [ChrisW]
- q+
- 16:05:56 [csma]
- ack chrisw
- 16:05:57 [GaryHallmark]
- michael: should not have 2 different things that are really the same
- 16:06:00 [IgorMozetic]
- leave both, a and a()
- 16:06:37 [Harold]
- Prolog dosn't have nullary because it's relational. Functional languages do have such nullary functions, e.g. for builtins.
- 16:07:18 [GaryHallmark]
- chrisw: distinguish between builtins and functions rather than between constants and functions
- 16:07:47 [GaryHallmark]
- ... (rhetorically)
- 16:08:00 [Harold]
- Also for mapping operator arguments to lists, it's necessary to keep zero arguments corresponding to the empty list [].
- 16:08:12 [Zakim]
- -csma
- 16:09:32 [Harold]
- f(...) can be mapped to unary f([...]).
- 16:09:36 [ChrisW]
- zakim, list agenda
- 16:09:36 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
- 16:09:37 [Zakim]
- 6. BLD WD2 issues [from csma]
- 16:09:38 [Zakim]
- 7. Arch: naming conventions [from csma]
- 16:09:39 [Zakim]
- 8. Arch: Test cases [from csma]
- 16:09:40 [Zakim]
- 9. AOB [from csma]
- 16:09:51 [Harold]
- f() can be mapped to unary f([]).
- 16:10:06 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:10:06 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 16:10:18 [Harold]
- PROPOSED: to split RIF-RDF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF-RDF (WD 1).
- 16:10:55 [Harold]
- q+
- 16:11:00 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:11:00 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
- 16:11:15 [GaryHallmark]
- chrisw: either 2nd doc is part of BLD or a new dialect
- 16:11:44 [josb]
- q+
- 16:11:49 [GaryHallmark]
- ...what does 2nd doc describe?
- 16:12:12 [GaryHallmark]
- harold: its a bridge for interoperability, not a dialect
- 16:12:36 [GaryHallmark]
- ... also applies to dialects other than BLD
- 16:12:58 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: 2nd doc describes how 2 languages work together
- 16:13:35 [GaryHallmark]
- ... also don't have to read RDF doc if you don't care to interoperate with RDF
- 16:14:06 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: not a dialect, but a bridge
- 16:14:22 [Harold]
- It starts like this:
- 16:14:23 [Harold]
- This section defines combinations of RIF rules with RDF graphs, taking into account the various (normative) entailment regimes defined by RDF. A typical case where RIF rules and RDF graphs are combined is when an RIF rule set refers to one or more RDF data sets or RDFS ontologies (which are also RDF graphs).
- 16:14:50 [Harold]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/RIF-RDF_Compatibility
- 16:15:01 [PaulVincent]
- ?? Why is RDF more important to RIF-BLD versus say XML - not sure I get the rationale for embedding RDF into BLD doc...
- 16:15:05 [GaryHallmark]
- chrisw: do I need a bridge doc for FLORA, or for XML Schema?
- 16:15:36 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: need such a doc to roundtrip FLORA <-> RIF
- 16:16:02 [Harold]
- We are a chartered to produce docs for RIF-RDF Compatibility and RIF-OWL Compatibility. Not *chartered* for any other language.
- 16:16:22 [GaryHallmark]
- chrisw: proliferation of "bridge docs" seems antithetical to RIF
- 16:16:56 [ChrisW]
- q?
- 16:17:33 [GaryHallmark]
- ... RDF doc creates questionable precedent
- 16:17:34 [Harold]
- Chris, this may be only since RDF, OWL and RIF would be the enhanced *uniform* basis for the semweb.
- 16:17:57 [GaryHallmark]
- ... ok to be part of BLD due to special semantic web status of RDF
- 16:18:18 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 16:18:20 [Hassan]
- q+
- 16:18:30 [Hassan]
- q-
- 16:18:51 [Harold]
- (Other languages would not be part of that enhanced W3C SemWeb 'triad'.)
- 16:19:20 [GaryHallmark]
- chrisw: if not a dialect, then it creates new category of "bridge" documents
- 16:19:32 [Harold]
- Chris, soon we may need another 'bridge' doc:
- 16:19:39 [Harold]
- PRD and BLD.
- 16:19:55 [Hassan]
- not exactly chris: we do have a charter to treat RDF and OWL specially
- 16:20:16 [PaulVincent]
- +1 to Chris' concerns - this is why this should be out of the base BLD doc ...
- 16:20:21 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: no matter what you call it, it has to be specified
- 16:20:44 [GaryHallmark]
- ... i.e. how will RIF work with data language "X"
- 16:20:57 [Harold]
- RIF Core = BLD --bridge-- PRD
- 16:20:59 [josb]
- q-
- 16:21:02 [ChrisW]
- ack jos
- 16:21:04 [ChrisW]
- ack harold
- 16:21:05 [Harold]
- q-
- 16:21:16 [Doug]
- Yes, that was the general consensus
- 16:21:23 [GaryHallmark]
- +1 to Harold's description of CORE
- 16:21:52 [GaryHallmark]
- Dave: back to the question of working with external data models
- 16:22:10 [GaryHallmark]
- ... we support XML schema and RIF
- 16:22:19 [GaryHallmark]
- ... not unbounded
- 16:22:43 [sandro]
- sandro has joined #rif
- 16:22:46 [GaryHallmark]
- ... FLORA is "out of bounds"
- 16:23:23 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 16:23:23 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should now be muted
- 16:23:46 [GaryHallmark]
- s/and RIF/and RDF/
- 16:24:30 [GaryHallmark]
- chrisw: combine RDF interop doc with Architecture doc?
- 16:24:34 [GaryHallmark]
- josb: not sure
- 16:25:06 [GaryHallmark]
- dave: need more work on Arch doc
- 16:25:49 [Harold]
- PROPOSED: to split RIF-RDF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF-RDF (WD 1).
- 16:26:29 [josb]
- q+
- 16:26:36 [DaveReynolds]
- q-
- 16:26:43 [josb]
- q-
- 16:26:49 [Harold]
- PROPOSED: to split RIF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF-RDF (WD 1).
- 16:27:25 [Harold]
- PROPOSED: to split RIF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF (WD 1).
- 16:27:45 [sandro]
- chris, "rif-comp"
- 16:27:51 [sandro]
- s/,/:/
- 16:27:56 [ChrisW]
- zakim, list agenda
- 16:27:56 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
- 16:27:57 [Zakim]
- 6. BLD WD2 issues [from csma]
- 16:27:58 [Zakim]
- 7. Arch: naming conventions [from csma]
- 16:28:00 [Zakim]
- 8. Arch: Test cases [from csma]
- 16:28:01 [Zakim]
- 9. AOB [from csma]
- 16:28:02 [Harold]
- PROPOSED: to split RIF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF (WD 1).
- 16:28:02 [Harold]
- <sandro>
- 16:28:25 [GaryHallmark]
- zakim, next agendum
- 16:28:25 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "Arch: naming conventions" taken up [from csma]
- 16:28:26 [Harold]
- PROPOSED: to split RIF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF-COMP (WD 1).
- 16:28:41 [GaryHallmark]
- sandro: not required for WD2
- 16:29:11 [MichaelKifer]
- zakim, unmute me
- 16:29:11 [Zakim]
- MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
- 16:30:31 [GaryHallmark]
- issues with IE browser rendering special symbols in our docs
- 16:30:36 [sandro]
- RESOLVED: to split RIF Compatibility from BLD and publish 2 drafts simultaneously: RIF-BLD (WD 2) and RIF-COMP (WD 1).
- 16:31:05 [Harold]
- Sandro, WIKI-TR currently doesn't process BLD: >>Warning: SGML2PL(sgml): []:2: Element "p" not allowed here<< etc. (cf. my Friday email)
- 16:31:40 [sandro]
- Yes, Harold, I'm working on that. (and hating prolog. :-)
- 16:31:44 [Zakim]
- -PaulaP
- 16:31:51 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 16:31:51 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 16:31:59 [Zakim]
- -AdrianP
- 16:32:12 [Zakim]
- -Hassan
- 16:32:14 [Zakim]
- -MichaelKifer
- 16:32:16 [Zakim]
- -IgorMozetic
- 16:32:17 [Zakim]
- -LeoraMorgenstern
- 16:32:17 [Zakim]
- -PaulVincent
- 16:32:22 [Zakim]
- -Harold
- 16:32:24 [Zakim]
- -AllenGinsberg
- 16:32:28 [ChrisW]
- zakim, list attendees
- 16:32:28 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been csma, Sandro, +1.703.453.aaaa, me;, josb, PaulaP, DougL, AllenGinsberg, Doug, Hassan, Gary_Hallmark, Harold, DaveReynolds, AdrianP,
- 16:32:31 [Zakim]
- ... PaulVincent, LeoraMorgenstern, IgorMozetic, MichaelKifer, ChrisW
- 16:32:31 [Zakim]
- -Doug
- 16:32:33 [Zakim]
- -DaveReynolds
- 16:32:35 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:32:35 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 16:32:42 [Zakim]
- -josb
- 16:33:09 [ChrisW]
- Regrets: MohamedZergaoui
- 16:33:12 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:33:12 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/09-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 16:33:27 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 16:34:17 [Zakim]
- -Gary_Hallmark
- 16:35:25 [Zakim]
- -ChrisW
- 16:35:26 [Zakim]
- -Sandro.a
- 16:35:27 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
- 16:35:28 [Zakim]
- Attendees were csma, Sandro, +1.703.453.aaaa, me;, josb, PaulaP, DougL, AllenGinsberg, Doug, Hassan, Gary_Hallmark, Harold, DaveReynolds, AdrianP, PaulVincent, LeoraMorgenstern,
- 16:35:30 [Zakim]
- ... IgorMozetic, MichaelKifer, ChrisW
- 16:40:51 [AdrianP]
- AdrianP has joined #RIF