IRC log of rif on 2007-10-23
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:30:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif
- 14:30:29 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-irc
- 14:30:37 [ChrisW]
- zakim, this will be rif
- 14:30:37 [Zakim]
- ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 30 minutes
- 14:30:48 [ChrisW]
- Meeting: RIF Telecon 23 Oct 2007
- 14:30:57 [ChrisW]
- Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
- 14:31:05 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 14:31:05 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 14:31:12 [ChrisW]
- zakim, clear agenda
- 14:31:12 [Zakim]
- agenda cleared
- 14:31:31 [ChrisW]
- Scribe: Igor
- 14:41:40 [csma]
- csma has joined #rif
- 14:42:32 [csma]
- zakim, this will be rif
- 14:42:33 [Zakim]
- ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes
- 14:43:08 [csma]
- Meeting: RIF telecon 23 October 2007
- 14:43:28 [csma]
- Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
- 14:43:43 [csma]
- Scribe: Igor Mozetic
- 14:44:31 [csma]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Oct/0097.html
- 14:45:10 [csma]
- Regrets: PaulaLaviniaPatranjan, ?AllenGinsberg
- 14:46:21 [csma]
- topic #rif 23 October RIF telecon agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Oct/0097.html
- 14:52:53 [csma]
- zakim, clear agenda
- 14:52:53 [Zakim]
- agenda cleared
- 14:53:07 [csma]
- agenda+ Admin
- 14:53:16 [csma]
- agenda+ Liaison
- 14:53:31 [csma]
- agenda+ F2F8
- 14:54:04 [csma]
- agenda+ BLD+SWC editors drafts
- 14:54:27 [csma]
- agenda+ Test cases
- 14:54:43 [csma]
- agenda+ Extensibility issues
- 14:57:05 [csma]
- Agenda+ AOB/Next meeting (incl. scribe)
- 14:57:34 [Harold]
- Harold has joined #rif
- 14:58:55 [DaveReynolds]
- DaveReynolds has joined #rif
- 14:59:23 [IgorMozetic]
- IgorMozetic has joined #rif
- 14:59:58 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
- 15:00:05 [Zakim]
- +??P34
- 15:00:13 [IgorMozetic]
- zakim, ??P34 is me
- 15:00:13 [Zakim]
- +IgorMozetic; got it
- 15:00:30 [Zakim]
- +??P33
- 15:00:37 [Zakim]
- +??P35
- 15:00:41 [Zakim]
- +Dave_Reynolds (was ??P35)
- 15:00:44 [csma]
- zakim, ??P35 is me
- 15:00:44 [Zakim]
- I already had ??P35 as Dave_Reynolds, csma
- 15:00:56 [csma]
- zakim, ??P33 is me
- 15:00:56 [Zakim]
- +csma; got it
- 15:01:01 [StellaMitchell]
- StellaMitchell has joined #rif
- 15:01:11 [csma]
- scribenick: IgorMozetic
- 15:01:35 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:01:35 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see IgorMozetic, csma, Dave_Reynolds
- 15:02:02 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 15:02:06 [StellaMitchell]
- zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
- 15:02:06 [Zakim]
- +StellaMitchell; got it
- 15:02:36 [Zakim]
- +[NRCC]
- 15:02:47 [josb]
- josb has joined #rif
- 15:02:56 [Harold]
- zakim, [NRCC] is me
- 15:03:02 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 15:03:05 [Zakim]
- +Harold; got it
- 15:03:07 [JeffP]
- JeffP has joined #rif
- 15:03:18 [Zakim]
- + +39.047.1.aaaa
- 15:03:34 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see IgorMozetic, csma, Dave_Reynolds, StellaMitchell (muted), Harold, +39.047.1.aaaa
- 15:03:34 [AxelPolleres]
- AxelPolleres has joined #rif
- 15:04:41 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:05:04 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from csma]
- 15:05:46 [csma]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Oct/att-0078/16-Oct-2007-rif-minutes.html
- 15:06:18 [IgorMozetic]
- accepted minutes of Oct 16 telecon
- 15:06:28 [Zakim]
- +JeffP
- 15:06:34 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:06:38 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "Liaison" taken up [from csma]
- 15:07:19 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
- 15:07:34 [IgorMozetic]
- no actions
- 15:07:35 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:07:35 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "F2F8" taken up [from csma]
- 15:08:14 [IgorMozetic]
- post regrets if you don't plan to attend
- 15:08:35 [csma]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/F2F8
- 15:08:38 [Zakim]
- +??P58
- 15:08:48 [josb]
- q+
- 15:08:50 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- zakim, ??P58 is me
- 15:08:50 [Zakim]
- +LeoraMorgenstern; got it
- 15:08:54 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:08:54 [Zakim]
- LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
- 15:09:14 [csma]
- q?
- 15:09:20 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:10:01 [Zakim]
- +??P62
- 15:10:52 [JeffP]
- should be in the minutes of last telecon
- 15:10:57 [csma]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2007Oct/0000.html
- 15:11:01 [IgorMozetic]
- public comments on WD2 (as of Oct 15):
- 15:11:19 [csma]
- q?
- 15:11:25 [IgorMozetic]
- by PFPS
- 15:12:24 [IgorMozetic]
- we will take publich commenst after the publications of WD2 on Oct 31
- 15:12:31 [Zakim]
- +Sandro
- 15:12:45 [IgorMozetic]
- s/take publich commenst/address public comments/
- 15:12:53 [sandro]
- many apologies for being so late.
- 15:13:43 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: no updates regarding F2F8
- 15:15:07 [IgorMozetic]
- the publication date, 31 Oct, of RIF-BLD WD2 is tentative
- 15:15:49 [IgorMozetic]
- send suggestions for the F2F8 agenda to the m-list
- 15:15:52 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:15:52 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "BLD+SWC editors drafts" taken up [from csma]
- 15:17:04 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: 15 and 17 people registered for the F2F8 meeting days, respectively
- 15:17:39 [IgorMozetic]
- next telecon: decide to publish or not the WD2
- 15:18:17 [josb]
- q+
- 15:18:23 [IgorMozetic]
- q+
- 15:18:47 [csma]
- ack jodb
- 15:19:37 [IgorMozetic]
- the intend is to publish BLD+SWC together
- 15:19:40 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:20:22 [sandro]
- q+ to ask about shortnames
- 15:20:37 [csma]
- ack igor
- 15:21:14 [Zakim]
- +Gary_Hallmark
- 15:21:30 [MichaelKifer_]
- MichaelKifer_ has joined #rif
- 15:21:42 [GaryHallmark]
- GaryHallmark has joined #rif
- 15:22:15 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: we should make clear that SWC is WD1
- 15:23:12 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: we will publish BLD WD2 and SWC WD1 separately
- 15:23:42 [sandro]
- csma: we can make the decisions separately
- 15:23:55 [Zakim]
- +Michael_Kifer
- 15:23:59 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: the point in publishing SWC is to make clear that we did work
- 15:24:12 [IgorMozetic]
- ... and want to get publich comments
- 15:24:37 [IgorMozetic]
- s/publich/publish/
- 15:24:37 [sandro]
- q?
- 15:24:52 [csma]
- ack sandro
- 15:24:52 [Zakim]
- sandro, you wanted to ask about shortnames
- 15:25:06 [MichaelKifer_]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:25:06 [Zakim]
- sorry, MichaelKifer_, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
- 15:25:30 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: we need short names for the documents
- 15:25:41 [Harold]
- q+
- 15:26:12 [MichaelKifer_]
- MichaelKifer_ has joined #rif
- 15:26:39 [Michael_Kifer]
- Michael_Kifer has joined #rif
- 15:26:47 [Michael_Kifer]
- zakim, mute me
- 15:26:47 [Zakim]
- Michael_Kifer should now be muted
- 15:27:22 [Harold]
- +1 to Christian
- 15:27:28 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: let's call it BLD WD2
- 15:27:40 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: will check if this is possible
- 15:27:50 [Harold]
- (as planned, just changing the name but not the versioning numbers)
- 15:28:28 [csma]
- ack harold
- 15:28:56 [josb]
- for the swc doc: http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl?
- 15:29:11 [IgorMozetic]
- harold: there was official decision to split core into two docs
- 15:29:35 [sandro]
- http://www.w3.org/News/2007
- 15:30:13 [sandro]
- http://www.w3.org/News/2007#item57
- 15:31:00 [IgorMozetic]
- harold: proposes the name change Core-> BLD and continue with versioning, i.e., WD2
- 15:31:27 [sandro]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-core/
- 15:31:49 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: the above is the first version
- 15:32:25 [sandro]
- rif-bld will refer to http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-rif-core-20070330/ as its "Previous Version", formally (if possibnle) or informally
- 15:33:15 [IgorMozetic]
- harold: proposes a master document to point to other docs
- 15:33:46 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: BLD WD2 should point back to Core WD1 as previous version
- 15:34:13 [josb]
- q?
- 15:34:24 [sandro]
- rif-swc ?
- 15:34:29 [josb]
- q+
- 15:35:00 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: proposes short names rif-bld and rif-swc
- 15:35:14 [sandro]
- rif-rdf-owl
- 15:35:17 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:35:22 [sandro]
- rif-rdf-owl-compat
- 15:36:04 [IgorMozetic]
- josb: prefers the above over SWC
- 15:36:22 [IgorMozetic]
- igor: +1
- 15:36:34 [sandro]
- rif-ucr, rif-core, rif-bld, rif-rdf-owl
- 15:37:06 [IgorMozetic]
- no objections to the above proposal
- 15:37:09 [csma]
- q?
- 15:37:12 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: Short name request for Jos' document will be rif-rdf-owl
- 15:37:27 [sandro]
- RESOLVED: Short name request for Jos' document will be rif-rdf-owl
- 15:37:48 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 15:37:53 [csma]
- ack axel
- 15:38:02 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: short name request for BLD will be rif-bld, with rif-core being republished as a trivial document referring people to rif-bld.
- 15:39:34 [IgorMozetic]
- no objections to the above proposal
- 15:39:34 [sandro]
- Axel: but what if we have an absyn for RIF that is written in RDF and OWL? Wont that name get confusing?
- 15:39:38 [Harold]
- I was referring to this farily official looking 'Core splitting' news/blog item, which could become a starting point of a stub document branching to rif-bld and later also to rif-prd: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2007/07/20/rif_wg_agrees_to_basic_logic_and_pr_dial
- 15:39:41 [sandro]
- Axel: but I can live with it.
- 15:39:49 [sandro]
- RESOLVED: short name request for BLD will be rif-bld, with rif-core being republished as a trivial document referring people to rif-bld.
- 15:40:24 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 15:40:24 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "Extensibility issues" taken up [from csma]
- 15:40:44 [csma]
- zakim, list agenda
- 15:40:44 [Zakim]
- I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
- 15:40:46 [Zakim]
- 6. Extensibility issues [from csma]
- 15:40:47 [Zakim]
- 7. AOB/Next meeting (incl. scribe) [from csma]
- 15:41:00 [sandro]
- Harold, I think the news item you saw was this: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2007/07/20/rif_wg_agrees_to_basic_logic_and_pr_dial
- 15:41:10 [csma]
- zakim, take up agendum 5
- 15:41:10 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Test cases" taken up [from csma]
- 15:41:26 [csma]
- zakim, take up agendum 5
- 15:41:26 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Test cases" taken up [from csma]
- 15:41:57 [sandro]
- RRSAgent, make record public
- 15:42:04 [sandro]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 15:42:04 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html sandro
- 15:42:35 [csma]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/
- 15:43:56 [csma]
- q?
- 15:43:57 [sandro]
- test cases as : input + output, or input+query+query-results
- 15:44:14 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: test cases should be of the form "input query" and +query results
- 15:45:31 [josb]
- q+
- 15:45:36 [IgorMozetic]
- q+
- 15:46:29 [IgorMozetic]
- q-
- 15:47:36 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:47:49 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 15:48:00 [sandro]
- Sandro: I don't think anyone has proposed intermixing print statements into the bodies of rules --- just a special kind of rule with a print body.
- 15:48:00 [IgorMozetic]
- josb: rif doesn't define query language
- 15:48:20 [AxelPolleres]
- q+
- 15:48:25 [sandro]
- Jos: test entailments, but these are not queries.
- 15:48:26 [csma]
- ack daver
- 15:49:14 [sandro]
- Maybe conclude "output(....)" which can be seen as an action or a conclusion fact.
- 15:49:16 [sandro]
- q?
- 15:49:17 [josb]
- sure
- 15:49:42 [csma]
- ack axel
- 15:50:10 [josb]
- right
- 15:50:17 [DaveReynolds]
- yes
- 15:50:38 [josb]
- also conditions with existential quantifiers
- 15:51:13 [sandro]
- So -- PositiveEntailmentTests and NegativeEntailmentTests ?
- 15:51:44 [Harold]
- Jos, DaveR, the Condition Language is mentioned to be usable as a query language. Usually you write a query rule of the form answer(?x1 ... ?xN) :- rdf-query-expression-with-free-variables(?x1 ... ?xN).
- 15:52:15 [sandro]
- q?
- 15:52:32 [josb]
- q+
- 15:53:19 [DaveReynolds]
- q-
- 15:53:22 [DaveReynolds]
- q+
- 15:54:15 [Harold]
- The N variables of answer(?x1 ... ?xN) will then be printed by the rule engine.
- 15:54:49 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:54:57 [sandro]
- We need to clarify the difference between print, query, and entailment testing.
- 15:55:02 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: we have the print and the entailment approaches
- 15:55:24 [DaveReynolds]
- Harold - that is getting into notions of API and query that we don't want to standardize and is not necessary. We can just use the rule language to express the condition and whose conclusion is a simple ground predicate so we don't need to include variable bindings.
- 15:55:27 [sandro]
- Jos: what we specify is entailment, so that's what should be checked.
- 15:55:40 [DaveReynolds]
- q-
- 15:56:16 [IgorMozetic]
- q+
- 15:56:29 [csma]
- ack igor
- 15:57:18 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: We'll use PositiveEntailmentTests and NegativeEntailmentTests, and we can explain them in terms of Queries and Rrints for the relevant communities.
- 15:58:43 [josb]
- q+
- 15:58:58 [csma]
- ack josb
- 15:58:59 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: We'll use PositiveEntailmentTests and NegativeEntailmentTests, and we can explain them in terms of Queries and Prints for the relevant communities.
- 15:59:20 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: We'll use PositiveEntailmentTests and NegativeEntailmentTests (along with syntactic tests, and maybe others), and we can explain them in terms of Queries and Prints for the relevant communities.
- 15:59:35 [IgorMozetic]
- josb: agrees with Igor to have also separate syntactis tests
- 16:00:02 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 16:01:26 [sandro]
- Sandro: This document {....} is / is-not a syntactically valid BLD document.
- 16:01:49 [sandro]
- Sandro: This is separate from conformance, which speaks to what you actually DO on getting one of those.
- 16:02:11 [csma]
- q?
- 16:03:16 [JeffP]
- Sorry - I have to leave now.
- 16:03:25 [JeffP]
- Bye
- 16:03:37 [Zakim]
- -JeffP
- 16:05:03 [ChrisW]
- igor, a little more detail on scribing would be helpful
- 16:05:18 [sandro]
- Sandro: There is a subtle (and perhaps unimportant) difference between saying "X is a syntactically valid BLD document", and "All implementations must correctly report that X is a syntactically valid BLD document"
- 16:05:33 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: We'll use PositiveEntailmentTests and NegativeEntailmentTests (along with syntactic tests, and maybe others), and we can explain them in terms of Queries and Prints for the relevant communities.
- 16:06:15 [IgorMozetic]
- PROPOSED: also include syntactic tests
- 16:07:07 [Harold]
- Sandro, Christian, while validity tests can be used for all kinds of XML-based specs (SVG, SOAP, WSDL, ...), entailment tests can only be used for logic-based languages (RDF, SPARQL, OWL, RIF, ...).
- 16:07:22 [IgorMozetic]
- dave: test if a specified predicate is entailed or not
- 16:07:45 [sandro]
- PROPOSED: We'll use PositiveEntailmentTests, NegativeEntailmentTests, PositiveSyntaxTests, NegativeSyntaxTests, (and maybe others). We'll explain that entailment tests can be implemented by rules which conclude a ground fact which you check for.
- 16:08:21 [Harold]
- ... only after validity is ensured, can you move on to entailment tests.
- 16:08:59 [sandro]
- Dave: I was understanding the ground-fact would be in the test case
- 16:10:06 [IgorMozetic]
- proposal: use only ground queries, and the entailement test is yes/no
- 16:10:46 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: expect the output to list all the entailed ground facts
- 16:10:57 [Harold]
- Christian, "all the ground facts" works only for finite models.
- 16:11:06 [sandro]
- csma: A BLD input document, and an output document which contains a set of all the ground facts which are entailed.
- 16:11:08 [Harold]
- ... so only for the Datalog subset of RIF.
- 16:11:10 [ChrisW]
- uh oh
- 16:11:16 [ChrisW]
- lost the scribe
- 16:11:43 [IgorMozetic]
- IgorMozetic has joined #rif
- 16:12:14 [sandro]
- sandro: should not be ALL entailments -- but a specific one.
- 16:12:27 [josb]
- q+
- 16:12:28 [sandro]
- sandro: so you only want to be able to test Ground entailments???
- 16:12:42 [csma]
- ack josb
- 16:13:23 [IgorMozetic]
- josb: we should test all closed condition formulas
- 16:13:29 [sandro]
- Jos: I think we should test what the def'n allows us to test.
- 16:13:57 [sandro]
- Jos: The defn of entailment defines when a particular BLD ruleset entails a closed bld condition formula.
- 16:14:22 [sandro]
- Jos: So an entailment test case has the same elements.
- 16:14:24 [IgorMozetic]
- josb: we should have also exist. quantified formulas to test
- 16:15:09 [csma]
- q?
- 16:15:47 [sandro]
- Dave: could be --- that closed formula is the body of another rule.
- 16:16:28 [josb]
- q+
- 16:16:38 [csma]
- ack josb
- 16:16:47 [sandro]
- Jos: I agree that they are equivalent.
- 16:17:11 [IgorMozetic]
- josb: if we make the equivalence clear in the test cases, jos is fne
- 16:17:16 [IgorMozetic]
- s/fne/fine/
- 16:17:51 [sandro]
- Sandro: My inclination is to keep that extra rule out of the entailment tests.
- 16:17:56 [GaryHallmark]
- q+ to ask why we are avoiding just adding queries
- 16:18:04 [csma]
- ack gary
- 16:18:04 [Zakim]
- GaryHallmark, you wanted to ask why we are avoiding just adding queries
- 16:18:20 [IgorMozetic]
- gary: why not include queries?
- 16:19:13 [sandro]
- zakim, agenda?
- 16:19:13 [Zakim]
- I see 2 items remaining on the agenda:
- 16:19:14 [Zakim]
- 6. Extensibility issues [from csma]
- 16:19:16 [Zakim]
- 7. AOB/Next meeting (incl. scribe) [from csma]
- 16:19:43 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: doesn't agree to include queries in RIF
- 16:21:05 [IgorMozetic]
- gary: seems simple, and one can write a portable test case
- 16:21:05 [Harold]
- For getting a Query Language from the Condition Language, the found bindings of the top-level Exists in Condition Language formulas need be just be printed.
- 16:21:08 [csma]
- q?
- 16:22:24 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: there is no portable way to talk to any RIF system (no API)
- 16:22:37 [Harold]
- Gary, doing printing only on the top-level is no problem, not even semantically (also see 'monads' in functional programming).
- 16:23:13 [GaryHallmark]
- if you have a query that returns a RIF document containing ground facts, then you have a portable test
- 16:23:20 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: create a wiki page with test cases proposal, examples
- 16:23:54 [csma]
- zakim, pick a victim
- 16:23:54 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Sandro
- 16:24:13 [csma]
- zakim, pick a victim
- 16:24:13 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Michael_Kifer (muted)
- 16:24:27 [csma]
- zakim, pick a victim
- 16:24:27 [Zakim]
- Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose StellaMitchell (muted)
- 16:24:38 [csma]
- ack stella
- 16:24:44 [StellaMitchell]
- I could try
- 16:25:11 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:25:11 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see IgorMozetic, csma, Dave_Reynolds, StellaMitchell, Harold, josb, LeoraMorgenstern (muted), AxelPolleres, Sandro, Gary_Hallmark, Michael_Kifer (muted)
- 16:25:13 [IgorMozetic]
- action: stella will create the wiki page on test cases
- 16:25:13 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-360 - Will create the wiki page on test cases [on Stella Mitchell - due 2007-10-30].
- 16:25:43 [sandro]
- ACTION: StellaMitchell to update the Test Cases wiki page to give us a more concrete proposal (or proposals) with one or more examples.
- 16:25:43 [rifbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - StellaMitchell
- 16:25:52 [sandro]
- ACTION: Stella to update the Test Cases wiki page to give us a more concrete proposal (or proposals) with one or more examples.
- 16:25:52 [rifbot]
- Created ACTION-361 - Update the Test Cases wiki page to give us a more concrete proposal (or proposals) with one or more examples. [on Stella Mitchell - due 2007-10-30].
- 16:26:16 [StellaMitchell]
- yes
- 16:27:24 [csma]
- unmute leora
- 16:27:39 [csma]
- zakim, unmute leora
- 16:27:39 [Zakim]
- LeoraMorgenstern should no longer be muted
- 16:27:52 [IgorMozetic]
- to scribe next week: Leora
- 16:28:29 [sandro]
- http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/Extensibility_Design_Choices
- 16:28:48 [csma]
- zakim, pick up agendum 6
- 16:28:48 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'pick up agendum 6', csma
- 16:29:06 [csma]
- zakim, next agendum
- 16:29:06 [Zakim]
- agendum 6. "Extensibility issues" taken up [from csma]
- 16:29:21 [GaryHallmark]
- GaryHallmark has joined #rif
- 16:30:07 [IgorMozetic]
- sandro: have a look at the above page and comment, pros/cons, ...
- 16:30:31 [Harold]
- Also see http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/RIF_Components/RIF_Dialect_Structure">http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/RIF_Components/RIF_Dialect_Structure for a system of such extensions (Naf etc.): http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/RIF_Components/RIF_Dialect_Structure
- 16:30:39 [Zakim]
- -josb
- 16:30:42 [IgorMozetic]
- csma: next week telecom in Europe at 16:00 (instead of 17:00)
- 16:31:04 [Zakim]
- -LeoraMorgenstern
- 16:31:06 [Zakim]
- -Harold
- 16:31:07 [IgorMozetic]
- adjurned
- 16:31:08 [Zakim]
- -Gary_Hallmark
- 16:31:09 [Zakim]
- -StellaMitchell
- 16:31:10 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Kifer
- 16:31:12 [Zakim]
- -Dave_Reynolds
- 16:31:13 [Zakim]
- -Sandro
- 16:31:15 [Zakim]
- -AxelPolleres
- 16:31:19 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:31:19 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see IgorMozetic, csma
- 16:31:35 [csma]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:31:35 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html csma
- 16:33:06 [Zakim]
- -csma
- 16:33:34 [csma]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:33:34 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html csma
- 16:33:46 [Zakim]
- -IgorMozetic
- 16:33:48 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
- 16:33:49 [Zakim]
- Attendees were IgorMozetic, Dave_Reynolds, csma, StellaMitchell, Harold, +39.047.1.aaaa, josb, JeffP, LeoraMorgenstern, AxelPolleres, Sandro, Gary_Hallmark, Michael_Kifer
- 16:34:42 [csma]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:34:42 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html csma
- 16:37:54 [csma]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:37:54 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html csma
- 16:51:31 [csma]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:51:31 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/23-rif-minutes.html csma
- 16:52:03 [csma]
- csma has left #rif