See also: IRC log
ah, just from this client
<scribe> Scribe: Bijan Parsia
<scribe> ScribeNick: bijan
<clu> I just joined from Germany. Carsten Lutz, TU Dresden
<alanr> going to experiment with agenda
<Doug> [adding this to my Irony casefile: what we really need is a semantic web]
<sandro> zakim ??P15 is Uli
IanH: Procedural preliminaries;
everyone should get better at getting connected so as to not
take up telecon time with us getting connected
... Please check the using zakim and the ettiquette page.
<sandro> Meeting Etiquette Page
IanH: and most importantly, help the scribe!
IanH: the scribe is to be helped!
Bernadro is attending with me
<AnneCregan> no worries, mate!
<alanr> next item
<stoil> not me
<alanr> next item
<pfps> grumble, grumble, but its better than Friday
IanH: Anyone have a problem with this time? No, let's move on.
<Rinke> +1 to pfps
<sandro> RESOLVED: regular telecon time Wednesday 1300 East US
<AnneCregan> 3am Australian Eastern Standard Time !
IanH: no amendments
<pfps> It is best to sign on to the IRC before you phone in, so that you can see your phone call being added.
Sandro: Normally irc logs are public. So we need to decide that
<pfps> +1 to irc logs being public
<sandro> PROPOSED: irc logs default to public
IanH: Objections? no
<sandro> RESOLVED: irc logs default to public
<pfps> (It is a good idea to say what your +1's are for.)
<alanr> close item 2
<alanr> close item 3
<alanr> close item 4
<alanr> close item 6
<alanr> e.g. look at the bottom of http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2007.10.10/Agenda
IanH: For scribing, please check the list and let chairs know if you can't make your turn
alanr: if someone doesn't want to use the wiki for regrets, send email *directly* to Alan Ruttenberg (not to the list)
pfps: Problem with the wiki involving colons and usernames
<sandro> ACTION: Alan to clean up User: prefix on wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-owl-minutes.html#action01]
MarkusK: Something wikish the scribe can't follow
<sandro> Markus: tools like showing all-contributions-of-user require using User: namespace
<alanr> close item 7
<MarkusK> +1 to use proper names for wiki accounts
<Rinke> +1 idem
<alanr> peter has to be patelp123
discussion about names in wiki names
alanr: if you have issues with your wikiname, contact alanr or sandro *off list*
sandro: everyone should create a wiki account in the next few days
<sandro> Sandro: Everyone should go ahead and set up a wiki account in the next few days, using your full name (as on the participants list).
IanH: Accounts are important because much of the work of the group will be done via the wiki
alanr: Wiki authorship policy: Every page is editable by all users. If you want to protect a page from arbitrary edits *say so on the page*. Default is that all users are free to edit.
<MarkusK> as wikis track all changes, it is usually easier to undo changes than to make them anyway
alanr: question about who gets write access (e.g., out side of group
<pfps> We might want to have user pages editable by the user only.
<MarkusK> pfps: that is not easy to realise in MediaWiki
alanr: alanr has ambitious plans for using the wiki; e.g., doing the specs there; test cases; etc.
<pfps> I meant that the default community practise is not to edit other people's user pages.
sandro: If the edits are friendly, just do it. If you expect disputation, try the talk page first
alanr: keep an eye on the recent changes
<MarkusK> also note that you can watch pages in the wiki, and receive notiifcations if someone changes them
I have some experience
pfps: Is the wiki support full html?
<scribe> ACTION: alanr to check for HTML support in mediawiki, esp. to support the semantics document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-owl-minutes.html#action02]
<MarkusK> @pfps: full HTML is not possible, but you can get most formatting-related stuff
<pfps> I thought that there was an option to make MH be full HTML.
<sandro> There is -- we can turn on full-HTML in MW.
<alanr> don't know if we want to
<sandro> Alan: Wiki folks -- Sandro, Alan, Markus, Peter
<MarkusK> -1 to use talk pages for discussions
<alanr> close item 8
<alanr> close item 9
<alanr> close item 10
<alanr> close item 11
IanH: We're not going to do the charter review on the phone -- good homework. Participants shoudl read the charter very carefully and review the input documents for next week
<alanr> close item 12
IanH: and the issues list, etc.
alanr: we need to transistion the various issue lists
This was my question
<pfps> let's just look at the pointers, what are they?
IanH: The timeline is aggressive. Need first draft of the deliverables soon. So we need to identify potential land minds. Please review documents with an eye to these landmines.
<ivan> OWL1.0 issues
<sandro> WebOnt issues (I think)
<alanr> charter says: The OWL1.1 member submission, the list of postponed issues of the WebOnt Working Group,
vipul: Combined issues list is a great idea, but many issues from the origianl list are closed. What should deal with it?
<ivan> I agree
vipul: Some closed issues weren't *accommodated* but deferred. How do we reopen?
IanH: Prefer to make a new issue for that
who's speaking? there's noise?
<pfps> If you go to the issue list, then to the issue, there should be a Resolution that closed it, and pointers to where the resolution came from.
vipul: Could the issue transfer person add all the resolutions and rationales?
IanH: prefer that the burden is on participants who want to champion an old closed issue should propose it fresh
sandro: Note about issues: chairs have discrestion about actually raising issues. Participants propose issues.
IanH: We must recall the timeline. So issues are better raised as early as possible.
<sandro> Homework: two issues lists, charter, owl 1.1 submission
IanH: A proposal for
organization: We should have subgroups for the
... And we would use the wiki heavily for the collab document editing/authoring.
vipul: How to create the subgroups? Divide by technology or by application.
IanH: We'd divide by *documents*.
IanH: i.e., each subgroup is "in charge" of a corresponding document
<sandro> Bijan: Maybe coordination would be difficult, if it's per-document sub-groups?
IanH: That's a point. If you look at the owl, there's a lot of overlap. Might be good.
<sandro> Ian: If you look at the OWL spec, you'll see there's lots of overlap between them, so ... yes, lots of overlap ... good thing? bad thing? different documents for different audiences?
I meant more that e.g., syntax changes affect the semantics document
<sandro> Joanne: How about people dedicated to cross-checking documents?
Joanne: Useful for getting crosschecks
<ekw> Describing the same things in different ways for different audiences is good.
I agree, but this is orthogonal to my point that the *language* decisions are separate
vipul: Can we have an overarching example or use case to drive the documents.
<sandro> Vipul: would it make sense to have an over-arching use case to drive the documents?
IanH: We do have a requirements document deliverable
<alanr> Added http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Issues and sidebar link under inputs: Issues
<ekw> Language design decisions should be the responsibility of the WG
IanH: but requirements can eat up
a lot of time so we can't presume that the other documents can
wait on them.
... any objections?
alanr: I agree with Ian that we have a clear set of goals for the language extensions (originally motivated from OWLED), but don't want to close off new use cases. Given the timeline, if you think there's something missing based on a use case
<AnneCregan> I think we have a very clear set of goals and we don't need to mill around considering requirements and use cases
alanr: please bring it to group attention
<Rinke> +1 to alanr's remarks
what's the construct?
<cbock> Logging off
Can we defer some of these discussion to the mailing list?
Oh I see
vipul: Perhaps a table mapping constructs to use cases? I.e., how each cosntruct meet the use cases
alanr: A user guide could incorporate that. It would be a good idea to have this connectability in the guide.
<alanr> opinion: #2
Bijan: Are subgroups "merely" editors or do they advance the technical work
IanH: function as traditional editors
<AnneCregan> Just clarify - I'm open to new use cases if needed
<alanr> do we need a resolution here?
So, we use the traditional proposal mechanism via email?
<alanr> anne: yess
<JeffP> +1 to keep it an hour
<pfps> +1 do all decisions be made by the full group, but I expect that the subgroups will be ironing out details that will be ratified later
I think that only an hour is hopeless
<achille> +1 do all decisions be made by the full group
<alanr> close item 13
<alanr> close item 14
IanH: There are a bunch of WG to coordinate with. People should look at the related groups in the charter and people should see if they are interested to be the contact person for select group
<pfps> there is supposed to be a new RIF BLD draft out this week. I'm planning on looking at it. Are we going to make review of this doc a part of this WG's process?
alanr: The role of the contact
person is to monitor the target group activity for things which
might affect owl and informing them about things from owl that
might affect them.
... Reviewing the RIF BLD should be an activity of owlwg. Peter would be a good person to do that.
<pfps> OK by me, as I'm going to read it anyway, but they might not like what I have to say. :-)
<pfps> I'm also willing to produce a personal review and a WG review.
sandro: Whenever we do a review as a group, we generally delegate but they can publish that individually or as a group. A group decision is needed for the latter
IanH: Everyone is personally welcome to review RIF
<pfps> Ask the people who were in RDF Core. :-)
<alanr> PROPOSED there will be WG Review of RIF BLD
sandro: It's a lot of wg work to do a group review
IanH: but given the importance of the relationahip it's worth doing a group review
<alanr> close item 15
RESOLVED there will be WG review of RIF BLD
<scribe> ACTION: pfps to produce a draft review of the RIF BLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-owl-minutes.html#action03]
<pfps> but it might be a good idea to get our dibs in so that there might be changes before publication.
sandro: publishing morotoriam meants that the BLD will not formally published for a few weeks
<alanr> +1 to pfps dibs
<sandro> ACTION: Peter to Review the RIF BLD draft and report back to OWL-WG for discussion [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-owl-minutes.html#action04]
<alanr> postpone item 16
<alanr> close item 16 take it up next week
<alanr> close item 16
<sandro> sorry, Bijan!
<alanr> close item 17
<sandro> (I think just manually fix it later)
<ekw> I will attend FTF1
<pfps> I'll be there
<alanr> f2f yes
<sandro> +1 mancheseter
<Doug> sorry 50-50
<Rinke> yes (most likely)
bernardo and bijan are
<Tommie> regrettably no
<vipul> No, Sorry!
<achille> not sure yet
<alanr> who is stoil?
<JeffP> Giorgos Stoilos
<pfps> you can set up a poll (vote?)
<alanr> close item 18
<alanr> close item 19
IanH: Objectives of the f2f: Time is pressing (again). F2F can get a lot of work done.
alanr: A big concern is getting
everyone up to speed technically on all aspects of the
... so we should find out how much tutorialness is needed
... an example, I didn't understand declarations until talking to people. How many issues are like that? How much prep should we do
IanH: People should feel free to ask questions on the mailing list, esp. if there's something they don't understand.
<alanr> close item 20
<pfps> +1 to having some documents for discussion at F2F1
Bijan: Are we aiming for FWD before the f2f or decide there? what's the publication schedule.
IanH: we'll take that up next week. I'll add it on the agenda.
<alanr> minutes to be posted at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Teleconference.2007.10.10/Minutes (even if just a link to log)
ivan: have the local arrangements page been updated?
IanH: Yes. There is a new la page linked from the wiki
<JeffP> +1 bye
I forget what I have to do re: mintues now
<alanr> who is here?
<alanr> we're on the call, but almost finished
<alanr> did the minutes get closed? Can you?
<alanr> sandro: how to create minutes?
<sandro> Bijan should know.
<sandro> run the irc log through scribe.perl.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.128 of Date: 2007/02/23 21:38:13 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: Bijan Parsia Found ScribeNick: bijan WARNING: Replacing list of attendees. Old list: pfps Sandro Ivan +018652aaaa +1.312.052.aabb IanH +49.351.4.aacc Carsten Vipul_Kashyap +1.617.253.aadd JeffP alan MarkusK Doug stoil +1.301.975.aaee Conrad +1.408.774.aaff Rinke Evan_Wallace Achille_Fokoue Elisa Joanne_Luciano Uli AnneCregan bmotik TommieMeyer +1.301.975.aagg Conrad_Bock Jeff_Pan Bernado New list: pfps Sandro Ivan +018652aaaa +1.312.052.aabb IanH +49.351.4.aacc Carsten Vipul_Kashyap +1.617.253.aadd JeffP alan MarkusK Doug +1.301.975.aaee Conrad +1.408.774.aaff Rinke Evan_Wallace Achille_Fokoue Elisa Joanne_Luciano Uli AnneCregan bmotik TommieMeyer +1.301.975.aagg Conrad_Bock Jeff_Pan Bernado GiorgosStoilos Default Present: pfps, Sandro, Ivan, +018652aaaa, +1.312.052.aabb, IanH, +49.351.4.aacc, Carsten, Vipul_Kashyap, +1.617.253.aadd, JeffP, alan, MarkusK, Doug, +1.301.975.aaee, Conrad, +1.408.774.aaff, Rinke, Evan_Wallace, Achille_Fokoue, Elisa, Joanne_Luciano, Uli, AnneCregan, bmotik, TommieMeyer, +1.301.975.aagg, Conrad_Bock, Jeff_Pan, Bernado, GiorgosStoilos Present: pfps Sandro Ivan bmotik IanH Rinke Carsten Vipul_Kashyap alan Conrad MarkusK Doug Achille_Fokoue GiorgosStoilos Bijan Elisa Evan_Wallace Uli Joanne_Luciano AnneCregan TommieMeyer Conrad_Bock Jeff_Pan Bernado Got date from IRC log name: 10 Oct 2007 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2007/10/10-owl-minutes.html People with action items: alan alanr peter pfps[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]