16:47:51 RRSAgent has joined #owl 16:47:51 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/10/24-owl-irc 16:47:53 RRSAgent, make logs public 16:47:54 Zakim has joined #owl 16:47:56 Zakim, this will be OWLWG 16:47:56 ok, trackbot-ng; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes 16:47:58 Meeting: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Working Group Teleconference 16:48:00 Date: 24 October 2007 16:48:44 vit has joined #owl 16:50:58 Rinke has joined #owl 16:51:07 jjc has joined #owl 16:51:19 hello 16:51:47 Hey, Jeremy. 16:52:06 SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started 16:52:13 + +1.312.052.aaaa 16:52:32 +Sandro 16:53:09 Zakim, aaaa is Rinke 16:53:09 +Rinke; got it 16:55:22 + +49.351.4.aabb 16:55:25 -Rinke 16:55:52 Zakim, aabb is Carsten 16:55:52 +Carsten; got it 16:56:07 +Rinke 16:56:12 TommieMeyer has joined #owl 16:56:13 zakim, mute me 16:56:13 Carsten should now be muted 16:56:20 MikeSmith has joined #owl 16:57:20 +Ian 16:57:45 Elisa has joined #owl 16:57:49 +MikeSmith 16:58:05 + +012736aacc 16:58:11 pfps has joined #owl 16:58:16 Zakim, aacc is me 16:58:16 +JeremyCarroll; got it 16:58:27 bmotik has joined #owl 16:58:33 +??P5 16:58:47 zakim, ??P5 is me 16:58:47 +bijan; got it 16:58:49 +??P10 16:58:58 zakim, mute me 16:58:58 bijan should now be muted 16:59:02 +Elisa_Kendall 16:59:04 Zakim, ??P10 is me 16:59:04 +??P38 16:59:05 +vit; got it 16:59:11 Ratnesh has joined #owl 16:59:17 Zakim, ??P38 is bmotik 16:59:17 +bmotik; got it 16:59:25 Zakim, mute me 16:59:25 bmotik should now be muted 16:59:41 +??P39 16:59:43 scribe: Elisa 16:59:48 alanr has joined #owl 16:59:50 zakim, ??p39 is me 16:59:50 +pfps; got it 17:00:04 FabienG has joined #owl 17:00:05 RRSAgent, make minutes 17:00:05 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/24-owl-minutes.html sandro 17:00:27 +Vipul_Kashyap 17:00:31 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:00:32 +??P41 17:00:34 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke, Ian, MikeSmith, JeremyCarroll (muted), bijan (muted), vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps, Vipul_Kashyap, ??P41 17:00:50 +Alan 17:01:09 Zakim, ??p41 is me 17:01:09 +TommieMeyer; got it 17:01:11 +[IBM] 17:01:20 alanr has joined #owl 17:01:23 +??P29 17:01:44 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:01:44 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke, Ian, MikeSmith, JeremyCarroll (muted), bijan (muted), vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps, Vipul_Kashyap, TommieMeyer 17:01:46 alanr_ has joined #owl 17:01:48 ... (muted), Alan, [IBM], ??P29 (muted) 17:01:51 +??P45 17:01:56 achille has joined #owl 17:02:03 + +1.603.897.aadd 17:02:07 zakim, ??P29 is me 17:02:07 +uli; got it 17:02:23 +??P46 17:02:26 Zakim, IBM is temporarily Achelle 17:02:26 +Achelle; got it 17:02:40 MarkusK has joined #owl 17:02:43 dlm has joined #owl 17:03:02 sandro, it is Achille - not AchElle. 17:03:17 Zakim, Achelle is Achille 17:03:17 +Achille; got it 17:03:28 Sorry, Achille! 17:03:32 no problem 17:03:36 +??P2 17:03:38 zakim, who is on the call? 17:03:38 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke, Ian, MikeSmith, JeremyCarroll (muted), bijan (muted), vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps, Vipul_Kashyap, TommieMeyer 17:03:40 ... (muted), Alan, Achille, uli (muted), ??P45, +1.603.897.aadd, ??P46, ??P2 17:03:55 ew has joined #owl 17:04:24 deborah mcguinness also just joined on the phone (and irc) 17:04:43 zakim, mute me 17:04:43 pfps should now be muted 17:04:45 vipul has joined #owl 17:04:51 present on unknown phone lines: Ratnesh Sahay (DERI), Zhe Wu (Oracle), and Bernardo Cuenca Grau (UM) 17:05:07 +Evan_Wallace 17:05:32 JeffP has joined #owl 17:05:35 +GiorgosStoilos 17:05:43 Zakim, aadd is Zhe_Wu 17:05:43 +Zhe_Wu; got it 17:05:53 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:05:53 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke, Ian, MikeSmith, JeremyCarroll (muted), bijan (muted), vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps (muted), Vipul_Kashyap, 17:05:57 ... TommieMeyer (muted), Alan, Achille, uli (muted), ??P45, Zhe_Wu, ??P46, ??P2, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos 17:06:04 GiorgosStoilos has joined #OWL 17:06:51 +JeffP 17:07:10 +FabienG 17:07:24 how can i check what p i am? 17:07:28 bmotik has joined #owl 17:07:55 -??P46 17:08:30 bmotik has joined #owl 17:08:37 Zakim, ??P2 is Deborah 17:08:37 +Deborah; got it 17:08:41 q- 17:08:54 zakim, who is on the call? 17:08:54 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke, Ian, MikeSmith, JeremyCarroll (muted), bijan (muted), vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps (muted), Vipul_Kashyap, 17:08:57 ... TommieMeyer (muted), Alan, Achille, uli (muted), ??P45, Zhe_Wu, Deborah, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos, JeffP, FabienG 17:09:09 bernardo has joined #owl 17:09:28 Zakim, ??P45 is Bernardo 17:09:28 +Bernardo; got it 17:09:54 zakim, who is on the call? 17:09:54 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke, Ian, MikeSmith, JeremyCarroll (muted), bijan (muted), vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps (muted), Vipul_Kashyap, 17:09:57 ... TommieMeyer (muted), Alan, Achille, uli (muted), Bernardo, Zhe_Wu, Deborah, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos, JeffP, FabienG 17:11:07 +??P35 17:11:26 Zakim, ??P35 is Ratnesh 17:11:26 +Ratnesh; got it 17:11:43 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2007.10.24/Agenda 17:12:39 Topic: Approval of Minutes 17:13:07 -Vipul_Kashyap 17:13:21 not: RESOLVED: Our first working drafts, to be published before the 3-month heartbeat, will be one: (1) Structural Specification, (2) Semantics. We may include (3) RDF Mapping in this list. These are based on the text for each of these at http://www.webont.org/owl/1.1/ 17:13:40 Resolved: based on email discussions, this issue is reopened at this meeting 17:13:41 RRSAgent, pointer? 17:13:41 See http://www.w3.org/2007/10/24-owl-irc#T17-13-41 17:14:16 Topic: Wiki 17:14:29 Resolved: accept minutes of meeting 10/24/2007 17:14:42 q+ 17:14:48 zakim, unmute me 17:14:48 pfps should no longer be muted 17:15:02 q- ??P2 17:15:06 ack pfps 17:15:22 Peter: with regard to ACTION 1 from last week, will need this resolved in the near future 17:15:34 How can we transition this to the wiki if this isn't resolved 17:15:47 Sandro: action 1 is the log-ins? 17:15:50 Peter: yest 17:16:19 while we can redirect links, but we can't merge at this point 17:16:35 strategy may be to rename accounts, use open id 17:17:03 if the history is attributed to your old login name rather than new, that may not be a big issue 17:17:16 Regrets: SkypeOut is broken (in Germany? worldwide?), my regrets for this telco. 17:17:37 Peter: it probably isn't too much of a problem if my inputs are split over two logins 17:18:09 Everyone can create logins with new names, since nothing has been edited yet 17:18:24 Sandro: maybe W3C logins are the proper logins to use 17:18:38 Alan: let's take this up this week and try to resolve it 17:19:02 ok, but I'm not going to wait to get the "right" login to start doing things then 17:19:06 Ian: there are more people on the call than have accounts on the wiki; everyone needs to create a wiki account 17:19:26 +Vipul_Kashyap 17:19:42 ACTION: Alan to send e-mail reminding and instructing people to make Wiki accounts 17:19:43 Created ACTION-4 - Send e-mail reminding and instructing people to make Wiki accounts [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2007-10-31]. 17:19:56 zakim, mute me 17:19:56 pfps should now be muted 17:20:06 agendum Front Page 17:20:28 Alan: the front page should represent consensus of what we all think it should be and what W3C would 17:20:32 like it to be 17:20:46 q+ 17:20:58 ack vipul 17:20:59 If someone wants to change the front page, they should send a request to the chairs and they will 17:21:02 +1 to prposal 17:21:06 address it accordingly 17:21:14 +1 to proposal 17:21:22 +1 to proposal 17:21:30 +1 to proposal 17:21:38 +1 proposal 17:21:38 Vipul: why is it a bad idea for anyone to add what they want (not disagreeing with guidelines, just asking) 17:22:01 when something is approved or disapproved, some sort of reasons should be given, and an alternative proposed 17:22:05 +1 to proposal 17:22:19 +1 to proposal 17:22:27 Alan: we should add these to the agenda and discuss 17:22:41 +1 17:22:55 I'm in favor of taking a wiki approach, that said, what does it mean to be as permissive as possible 17:23:04 +1 to proposal, as accidents can end up making it hard to find things (yes you can go to the history, but ...) 17:23:22 we should develop a set of policies that everyone can live with, but the front page may be special - 17:23:48 the front page may need to look a certain way depending on W3C policies, etc. 17:24:05 Vipul: I agree with what you're saying but this should evolve over time 17:24:29 Addition to agenda for next meeting to discuss further 17:24:47 zakim, unmute me 17:24:47 bijan should no longer be muted 17:24:59 zakim, mute me 17:24:59 bijan should now be muted 17:25:03 Bijan pointed out Michelle's table from use cases 17:25:15 q? 17:25:19 Alan: any other comments on this proposal? 17:25:20 +1 for the proposal 17:25:43 PROPOSED: Edits to the Front Page should be vetted by WG chairs 17:26:01 Alan: Resolved: Edits to Front Page should be vetted by WG chairs 17:26:07 Should there be a functional requirements section with links on the front page. proposed by Vipul 17:26:11 for next agenda 17:26:14 Blog post with Dumontier table: http://clarkparsia.com/weblog/2007/06/18/two-interesting-quotes/ 17:26:26 The original paper: http://webont.org/owled/2007/PapersPDF/submission_36.pdf 17:26:38 Vipul will work on functional requirements based on this for next time 17:26:48 Topic: Publication Schedule 17:27:12 Alan: there was a fair amount of discussion on this topic last week, that we would effectively put the 17:27:32 current set of documents as a public working draft, sometime before the heartbeat requirement for a public 17:27:46 working draft, around the 6th or 8th of January 17:28:10 Subsequently, there was discussion in email regarding both content and process issues 17:28:20 My discussion summary, which alan just recapped: http://www.w3.org/mid/AF17523E-0EAC-41BC-8289-76B763AEFFF1@cs.man.ac.uk 17:28:35 In light of this, we decided to slow down a bit and reconsider how we should proceed 17:28:38 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Oct/0170.html 17:28:42 Bijan, is it possible for you to post this link under publications or something on the wiki page? 17:28:51 The paper above 17:29:01 I presume so 17:29:06 Thanks 17:29:06 But I think it's possible for you too :) 17:29:11 Alan: what we're proposing is that the editing of the 3 docs, whatever comes out of this will be the first draft, but 17:29:26 Well, I just got one change of mine rolled back :) 17:29:28 we will migrate these to the wiki and effectively, everyone who has an interest in contributing would 17:29:45 That doesn't make me *more* inclined to try :) 17:29:46 be able to edit them in the wiki and make them our own. 17:29:46 BTW, I noticed that we need a publications/resources tab on the wiki 17:29:55 :) to bijan 17:30:08 The procedure would be to post an issue to the tracker 17:30:33 Use pages on the wiki to draft changes, issues will be discussed during meetings and changes made 17:30:39 based on resolutions 17:30:54 shortly before or during f2f we will make a decision about publication as first wd 17:31:08 bmotik_ has joined #owl 17:31:10 then sandro will take wiki contents and format back out as draft doc 17:31:27 +1 to proposal 17:31:30 q+ 17:31:31 depending on group consensus 17:31:35 zakim, unmute me 17:31:35 pfps should no longer be muted 17:31:36 q? 17:31:39 +1 to proposal 17:31:48 \nick bmotik 17:32:00 Peter: not that it's likely to come to pass, but I'm a bit uneasy about a decision to not publish 17:32:04 for some period of time 17:32:12 q+ 17:32:17 Alan: it is self-imposed, 17:32:38 Ian: I wouldn't describe this as a publication black-out - we'll decide before a certain date 17:32:41 zakim, unmute me 17:32:41 bijan should no longer be muted 17:32:45 Peter: well shortly before 17:32:50 q? 17:32:52 q+ 17:32:56 q- pfps 17:32:57 q- pfps 17:33:02 ack bijan 17:33:12 Bijan: one thing that caused a lot of difficulty - the proposal was to publish this week, then we 17:33:28 q+ 17:33:46 we might target the F2F instead, and say that's what we're going for, when we feel ready 17:33:49 Bijan: Maybe we should just set a goal for ourselves of trying to publish before the F2F. 17:33:57 ack dlm 17:33:57 zakim, mute me 17:33:58 q- bijan 17:33:58 bijan should now be muted 17:34:23 DLM: I was reading some of the email, are we now proposing that we're going to have three docs come out ... 17:34:24 zakim, mute me 17:34:24 pfps should now be muted 17:34:41 I want to make sure we don't have something that only theoreticians can read 17:34:55 s/I want/...I want/ 17:34:58 Is the structural specification something we expect to be readable by a broad audience 17:35:03 zakim, mute me 17:35:03 Rinke should now be muted 17:35:10 q+ 17:35:14 Many nontheoreticians were able to use and implement OWL 1.1 17:35:33 Alan: we were trying to triage to see which documents were available for publication first 17:35:43 +1 to bmotik 17:36:04 The reasoning wasn't to avoid publication of the more readable docs 17:36:31 We should take the same approach to the other docs, post issues, and publish them when they are ready 17:36:44 q? 17:37:04 DLM: Now matter how hard we work, we're not going to be able to make the semantics document, for example, readable for a large audience 17:37:15 q? 17:37:22 we need another document to come out at the same time that is readable by the broader audience 17:37:43 +1 to sense of urgency for more readable docs 17:37:49 Alan: what will the users go to as the ultimate set of docs we produce, and what are the steps in the process 17:38:09 I think what you're saying is that you want some kind of overview document to be in the first set we publish 17:38:11 There's a queue! 17:38:13 q? 17:38:19 DLM: yes or something that can take its place 17:38:21 q+ 17:38:37 q+ 17:38:43 q? 17:38:55 Alan: it might be confusing to have some version of user docs if there is flux in the set of features discussed 17:39:14 q+ to mention requirements 17:39:15 zakim, unmute me 17:39:16 bijan should no longer be muted 17:39:22 q? 17:39:24 DLM: But if there isn't something available that is readable, people won't be able to follow what's going on 17:39:28 ack alanr 17:39:40 ack bijan 17:40:03 Bijan: I'm strongly against this - reasons include that we don't have such a document available for OWL 1.1 yet, although quite a few people 17:40:11 have been able to comment on what we do have 17:40:29 There is a limit even with the OWL Guide on who can read it and comment effectively 17:41:05 Most working groups he has participated in recently publish tech docs first, long before publishing a guide, until the tech docs are farther along 17:41:38 He doesn't think that other WGs would have a problem with publishing the tech docs well in advance of the guide 17:41:50 zakim, mute me 17:41:50 bijan should now be muted 17:41:53 We can deal with some questions in email along the way 17:42:06 Vipul: I agree with Deborah and disagree with Bijan 17:42:16 zakim, unmute me 17:42:16 bijan should no longer be muted 17:42:30 I believe that this depends on who we believe our audience is 17:43:04 Bijan: I work with end users all the time on various lists, and my primary customer is the end user (people building and using ontologies) 17:43:24 zakim, mute me 17:43:24 bijan should now be muted 17:43:26 I want to provide sufficient infrastructure, including tools and documentation, that serves their needs 17:43:38 What? 17:43:42 I didn't say that 17:43:49 zakim, unmute me 17:43:49 bijan should no longer be muted 17:43:50 Vipul: this reinforces my claims, because he provides these things to implementors and technical teams 17:43:55 zakim, mute me 17:43:55 bijan should now be muted 17:44:00 Alan: he has clarified that this isn't his primary audience 17:44:18 zakim, unmute me 17:44:18 bijan should no longer be muted 17:44:28 q? 17:44:28 can I clarify? 17:44:31 Vipul: if you think your end user is someone using OWL, then that's not the same as an end user who is a business user presenting 17:44:32 wait pleae 17:44:42 this technology to a CIO or business users 17:44:46 bijan use q ? 17:45:14 q+ 17:45:17 Rinke, the IRC logging convention in use here has "/me" actions, like you just did, NOT included in the log. So you may want to re-enter that, if you want it in the record. 17:45:26 q? 17:45:28 I'm in favor of Deborah's position - the first thing in the SW dev lifecycle is to go out and develop use cases (end user use cases rather than technical use cases) 17:45:32 ack vipul 17:45:35 We had two years of collecting use cases at OWL-ED, as documented in 50+ papers 17:45:44 See survey at http://dme.uma.pt/jcardoso/sw-survey-2007.pdf -- seems that 80% edit OWL using Protege or SWOOP. Guide argument seems predicated on belief that "end users" will look directly at OWL. 17:45:48 we should bring this issue of use cases forward in the development cycle 17:45:50 I think the audience differs per document 17:45:52 Question for Vipul and Deb: what kind of feedback are you looking for from end users? 17:45:53 Including a panel of industry people 17:46:00 pfps has joined #owl 17:46:03 And a specific HCLS panel 17:46:12 Plus, all this is not remotely normal behavior for a working gorup 17:46:18 the table Michelle developed is fantastic - we need to do the same thing in [other domains] - we need to give 17:46:28 Plus if we look at the documents deb cites as models, they are not for CIOs 17:46:31 q? 17:46:34 ack IanH 17:46:39 primacy to the end user 17:46:46 q? 17:47:06 q+ 17:47:31 Ian: it seems to me that alot of this argument in favor of guides, etc. is predicated on the belief that end users will look at OWL; in a way they care less about OWL and more about the editors they use that are based on the standards 17:47:41 q+ 17:47:49 zhe has joined #owl 17:47:50 I believe that the goal is to bring all of these documents into the domain so that we can work on them as soon as possible 17:48:09 there is an overview document that isn't great but provides some idea of the features which we can point people to 17:48:38 q? 17:48:45 this whole discussion has drifted quite away from the agenda - if people believe that we should start working on a guide or other doc we should propose an agenda item for that for next week 17:48:52 ack JeremyCarroll 17:48:54 JeremyCarroll, you wanted to mention requirements 17:50:03 Jeremy: if the best way to move forward is to propose to create these end user facing documents ... 17:50:09 zakim, unmute me 17:50:09 bijan was not muted, bijan 17:50:11 q? 17:50:15 ack bijan 17:50:18 I believe that a requirements document would be useful, but agree with Ian ... 17:50:53 zakim, mute me 17:50:53 bijan should now be muted 17:51:13 zakim, unmute me 17:51:13 bijan should no longer be muted 17:51:24 zakim, mute me 17:51:24 bijan should now be muted 17:51:29 \me can we please move on? 17:51:35 Vipul: I was attempting to differentiate my view of an end user ... 17:51:39 call the question 17:51:54 Alan: there is broad agreement that we should have good user facing docs 17:52:08 +1 to Peter's (and my) request! 17:52:16 +1 peter! 17:52:21 the current procedure doesn't preclude that, but talks about focus on the tech docs and working on them via the wiki 17:52:31 +1 to Peter and Ian and to move on 17:52:33 +1 to peter 17:52:41 +1 to peter 17:53:03 q? 17:53:07 Do you believe that we have adequate support for these user docs (to Deb and Vipul) 17:53:21 It's not clear to me that Deb and Vipul mean the same documents 17:53:30 Vipul: the issue may be sequencing - we should add this to a future agenda 17:53:33 OWL overview, guide, and references are fairly narrowly targetd 17:54:08 Alan: do you agree that we can migrate the three proposed tech docs to the wiki as soon as possible, that people can raise issues, etc., and that we 17:54:20 can move forward to work on these between now and the F2F... 17:54:41 Charter already calls for "Descriptive specification" and "User guide", so clearly we as a group are committed to working on these. 17:54:43 Vipul: maybe we should consider trying to publish a use cases and requirements document at the same time, which we can 17:54:49 take up in the next agenda 17:54:59 i'm against delaying documents that are ready to wait for documents that are not 17:55:11 Charter also calls for "Overview" 17:55:16 DLM: I was pushing much more for the overview than the guide - updating the guide is a massive amount of work 17:55:23 +1 to peter 17:55:36 q? 17:55:37 A FPWD of an overview could just be the new bits for O|WL 1.1 does not to have OWL 1.0 part as well 17:55:48 my worry is that if the focus is just on the three docs that work on an overview would be relegated to the end of telecons and ultimately wont get addressed 17:55:54 q? 17:55:55 I would like some evidence of this broad user base. 17:56:01 ack vipul 17:56:03 ?q 17:56:07 ack alanr 17:56:17 With these specific complaints 17:56:17 I'm trying to support a broad user base of scientists and business people who are trying to work with this 17:56:29 something like an overview is really critical for them 17:56:41 But nobody doubts that both an overview and a user's guie should be produced by the WG 17:57:24 Boris, the question is the order of publication: what goes first/what waits? 17:57:28 (I would prefer not to work on user facing docs ... not really my skill set ... but I will cheer someone else on!!) 17:57:43 Alan: to address the issue of these getting short shrift on the agenda - Ian and Alan are responsible for the agenda, and will make sure it gets appropriate time 17:57:57 q? 17:58:17 I will take this seriously to make sure that all of the concerns of people in the group are considered 17:58:26 I'm all for working in parallel 17:58:30 are there any objections currently to adopting this proposal to the group 17:58:39 PROPOSED: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Oct/0170.html 17:58:48 second 17:59:10 +1 to proposal 17:59:19 Alan: objections? 17:59:21 +1 to proposal 17:59:22 +1 17:59:24 +1 17:59:26 +1 17:59:26 +1 17:59:27 +1 to proposal 17:59:27 +1 17:59:28 +1 17:59:30 +1 17:59:38 +1 17:59:46 +1 to proposal 17:59:53 +1 17:59:55 RRSAgent, make minutes 17:59:55 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/24-owl-minutes.html sandro 18:00:01 Alan: this document does not preclude an additional resolution that we would publish another document 18:00:04 +1 18:00:05 on a similar schedule 18:00:10 +1 conditionally to publishing the use cases document on the same schedule 18:00:11 +1 18:00:13 I don't think jim asbtains 18:00:22 not hearing any objections, and with one abstention from Jim 18:00:22 zakim, unmute me 18:00:22 bijan should no longer be muted 18:00:37 zakim, mute me 18:00:37 bijan should now be muted 18:00:47 He indicated support for the chairs proposal 18:00:49 If Jim wants to abstain he can abstrain by e-mail 18:01:13 RESOLVED: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Oct/0170.html 18:01:27 q+ 18:01:28 -Vipul_Kashyap 18:01:33 zakim, unmute me 18:01:33 pfps should no longer be muted 18:01:59 these meetings are scheduled for 90 minutes, not 60 18:02:17 Ian: we should take a quick stab at the next agenda item ... what form these docs are going to take in the wiki or otherwise 18:02:21 I propose we talk about task forces 18:02:35 1+ 18:02:36 Alan: there seems to be productive discussion on this in the mailing list at this point 18:02:37 er 18:02:38 q+ 18:02:47 q+ 18:03:01 ?q 18:03:08 Ian: I would like to get this moved forward as quickly as possible so that people can start working on the documents 18:03:10 q? 18:03:22 zakim, unmute me 18:03:24 bijan should no longer be muted 18:03:27 ack pfps 18:03:56 Peter: I would prefer that we keep the meetings to 90 minutes 18:04:07 one solution is shorter agendae 18:04:17 q? 18:04:29 Alan: there are a number of people that can only attend for 60 minutes, and this is an issue for the entire working group, so we should address it at the next meeting 18:04:31 ack bijan 18:04:32 Alan: Let's talk about meeting length next time. 18:04:37 zakim, mute me 18:04:37 pfps should now be muted 18:05:09 Bijan: I'd like to talk about the task forces - and have some guidance about how we are going to proceed with reviews 18:05:34 zakim, mute me 18:05:34 bijan should now be muted 18:05:44 ack JeremyCarroll 18:05:48 q- bijan 18:05:51 q? 18:06:16 Alan: So in between the wiki docs and task forces is the issues list, tracker, and so forth 18:06:20 +1 to talking about the issues list 18:06:29 +1 to talking about issues 18:06:30 should we address those first or skip to the task forces 18:06:31 zakim, umute me 18:06:31 I don't understand 'umute me', pfps 18:06:41 (i will leave in ten mins) 18:06:48 Zakim, unmute pfps 18:06:48 pfps should no longer be muted 18:07:22 Peter: I'd like to be able to have something happen before the next telecon - like moving docs to the wiki, or getting the issues list set up, or something 18:07:33 +1 to Peter -- let's get on with it! 18:07:50 Alan: the last discussion was on how we might mark up the docs 18:07:57 +1 to doing stuff 18:08:18 Peter: we have documents in html, let's just move them over to the wiki and figure out how to deal with the math tags later 18:08:44 Alan: when you say html, does that mean wiki vs. html? 18:08:48 +1 to Peter 18:08:50 q? 18:09:07 Sandro: right now the docs are pure html, for math will they use images or what 18:09:26 the images are used only for the diagrams in the strucutral specification 18:09:34 All other documents use plain HMTL 18:09:38 +1 to the migration simply and soonly 18:09:39 Ian: the structural spec uses images, so it would be possible to move the other two over that don't use images, and deal with the images later 18:09:56 How about moving to wiki markup over time? 18:10:09 Some participation and editing is better than none 18:10:10 Alan: I think use of wiki mark-up is alot cleaner, I'm concerned with broad participation in editing 18:10:21 zakim, list attendees 18:10:21 As of this point the attendees have been +1.312.052.aaaa, Sandro, Rinke, +49.351.4.aabb, Carsten, MikeSmith, +012736aacc, JeremyCarroll, bijan, Elisa_Kendall, vit, bmotik, pfps, 18:10:25 And we can move over time 18:10:25 ... Vipul_Kashyap, Alan, TommieMeyer, +1.603.897.aadd, uli, Achille, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos, Zhe_Wu, JeffP, FabienG, Deborah, Bernardo, Ratnesh, IanH 18:10:33 if it seems happy 18:10:37 to do so 18:10:38 q? 18:10:39 there is a converter that seems to do reasonably well, but we should be sure that we can use html if that's not the case 18:11:05 Sandro: we don't need full html to do the equations ... 18:11:06 It's not 18:11:09 No scripts 18:11:21 Peter: I would be very surprised if there were scripts 18:11:22 We are currently using a stylesheet for the fonts in the HTML, and we are using and . 18:11:30 No scripts whatsoever 18:11:46 Sandro: we would convert to wiki markup but not wiki math - math equations stay in html 18:11:56 as boris sat=ys, we are just using very simple stuff for the math 18:12:05 q+ to suggest doc-by-doc resolution 18:12:13 +1 to math in current html and every else in wiki syntax 18:12:14 Alan: the complicated stuff is in html, but the uncomplicated stuff goes to wiki markup 18:12:17 ace! 18:12:22 Sandro and I will do this before next week 18:12:46 Isn't this jsut an action? 18:12:55 We were fairly strict with usage of stylesheets, so this information might be used for migration into Wiki 18:12:58 Do we need a decision per se? Maybe so. 18:13:04 PROPOSED: Documents to be edited using wiki markup facilities, but leave complicated markup in html. Revisit if there are problems. Target: Next TC 18:13:15 q- 18:13:16 OK 18:13:19 "Strict" in the sense that we tried to use them everywhere in the same way 18:13:34 Zakim, unmute me 18:13:34 bmotik should no longer be muted 18:13:54 -JeremyCarroll 18:14:06 Boris: the important bits of markup in the documents are always in style sheets, so it may be possible to automate the process of migration 18:14:26 Zakim, mute me 18:14:26 bmotik should now be muted 18:14:28 Alan: that's our thought as well; the OWL WG front page was done in a similar way 18:14:33 Any objections? 18:14:36 Any abstensions? 18:14:46 RESOLVED: Documents to be edited using wiki markup facilities, but leave complicated markup in html. Revisit if there are problems. Target: Next TC 18:15:08 I am leaving in one mintute 18:15:21 unmute me 18:15:22 ACTION: Alan and Sandro will migrate documents to the wiki by the next telecon 18:15:22 Created ACTION-5 - And Sandro will migrate documents to the wiki by the next telecon [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2007-10-31]. 18:15:35 zakim, unmute me 18:15:35 bijan should no longer be muted 18:15:46 zakim, mute me 18:15:46 pfps should now be muted 18:15:47 agendum Task Forces 18:16:22 Alan: If we can get one or two of the activities identified for task forces we would be in good shape 18:16:34 q+ 18:16:57 if people can start working on issues related to backwards compatibility audits, for example, they can submit issues, comments 18:17:18 Bijan: we may want to create wiki pages for this 18:17:25 +1 to poking Jim 18:17:52 Alan: There are two people that should be involved in this - I'll poke at Jim and Jeremy 18:17:59 we should define what this means 18:18:18 As soon as we can start working on test cases against the specs the better as well 18:18:38 If we can start to create test cases, then a harness that can be run right out of the wiki 18:18:47 q? 18:18:56 if we can identify people who want to start working on this, that would be good 18:19:11 Bijan: I can start to send email out to people who might want to work on this 18:19:14 -Achille 18:19:29 q? 18:19:33 Alan: We should create a wiki page, and start adding these issues to the wiki 18:19:47 Sandro: the tracker doesn't support this yet 18:19:56 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/HowIssuesAreProcessed 18:20:01 On the tracker page - 18:20:11 q? 18:20:28 zakim, mute me 18:20:28 bijan should now be muted 18:20:36 Alan: the last thing i noticed is that the tracker didn't let me enter an issue due to permissions 18:20:37 q? 18:20:54 q? 18:20:56 ACTION: Sandro to edit http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/HowIssuesAreProcessed to document a REPORTED and ACCEPTED convention on issues 18:20:56 Created ACTION-6 - Edit http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/HowIssuesAreProcessed to document a REPORTED and ACCEPTED convention on issues [on Sandro Hawke - due 2007-10-31]. 18:21:09 sandro, the base of has group specific text...maybe we can pop some help in? 18:21:15 Alan: this is just an introduction to get the topic started 18:21:19 q? 18:21:37 Ian: we skipped over this issue list in order to get to the task forces, but getting the issues and tracker sorted out 18:21:45 is important to supporting the task forces 18:21:46 ack ianh 18:22:08 now we're in a position where we may end up with two parallel issues lists 18:22:29 Alan: my understanding was that we were going to migrate the OWL 1.1 issues to the tracker once it was working 18:22:39 Ian: so what is the issue with doing that 18:22:44 zakim, unmute me 18:22:44 bijan should no longer be muted 18:22:56 q+ 18:23:05 Alan: I think it means someone has to manually do this, so perhaps we should manually move them over once the tracker is up and running 18:23:15 Ian: ok, we can do this offline, but we need to get to it. 18:23:18 Alan: agreed 18:23:47 Is there some way to 'close' the google code page? 18:23:50 We wanted to have a publicly open place (the google site) for people to enter issues, but that the working group should use the tracker 18:24:07 (oops) 18:24:26 Ian: by moving issues to the tracker now, what happens to new issues added to the google site, and what is the status of those that are moved 18:24:35 I note that the tracker requires you to log in, but then doesn't know who you are. 18:24:50 Alan: they are all reported, and Alan and Ian have to decide how to address those 18:25:10 Indeed, pfps. :-( 18:25:15 It should be a lower priority to deal with new publicly added issues, but we should decide what to do with them going forward 18:25:34 I can do that, probably 18:25:36 Ian: it would be a big commitment to continue monitoring the other list and moving issues on an ongoing basis 18:25:40 zakim, who is on the phone? 18:25:40 On the phone I see Sandro, Carsten (muted), Rinke (muted), IanH, MikeSmith, bijan, vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik (muted), pfps (muted), TommieMeyer (muted), Alan, uli (muted), 18:25:44 ... Bernardo, Zhe_Wu, Deborah, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos, JeffP, FabienG, Ratnesh 18:25:50 zakim, unmute me 18:25:50 bijan was not muted, bijan 18:26:09 Alan: maybe what we can do is have people monitor this and move them accordingly 18:26:12 Wouldn't it be simpler to have just one issues list, let eveyone add issues then, but be able to flag different issues appropriately? 18:26:18 Time check? 18:26:22 zakim, mute me 18:26:22 bijan should now be muted 18:26:29 Bijan: maybe we can set it up so that they can be monitored automatically and moved 18:26:33 Attendees: Sandro, Carsten, Rinke, IanH, MikeSmith, bijan, vit, Elisa_Kendall, bmotik, pfps, TommieMeyer, Alan, uli, Bernardo, Zhe_Wu, Deborah, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos, JeffP, FabienG, Ratnesh 18:26:35 Ok 18:26:41 yep 18:26:46 zakim, unmute me 18:26:46 bijan should no longer be muted 18:26:47 Alan: we might be taking on more work that we are chartered to do, which I'm reluctant to do right now 18:26:51 zakim, mute me 18:26:51 bijan should now be muted 18:27:15 Ian: just to conclude, the initial action is that we will divvy up the work to manually move these issues 18:27:24 to the tracker once the tracker is working sufficiently to do so 18:27:36 Alan: anything else we want to cover at this point 18:27:37 +1 18:27:42 Bye 18:27:42 -GiorgosStoilos 18:27:42 bye 18:27:42 bye 18:27:43 Alan: move to adjourn 18:27:45 Bye 18:27:45 Chair: Alan 18:27:45 -Alan 18:27:45 Did Sandro's suggested convention for inserting into tracker get recorded somewhere? 18:27:46 -JeffP 18:27:47 -vit 18:27:48 Ian: second 18:27:48 -Rinke 18:27:48 -Carsten 18:27:50 -IanH 18:27:50 -uli 18:27:52 -Zhe_Wu 18:27:53 -MikeSmith 18:27:54 -Bernardo 18:27:54 -pfps 18:27:57 -Rinke 18:28:01 -TommieMeyer 18:28:05 bmotik has left #owl 18:28:13 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Backward_compatibility_audit 18:28:19 TommieMeyer has left #owl 18:28:20 sandro should have action to modify the http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/HowIssuesAreProcessed to reflect it 18:28:24 -bijan 18:28:27 -Deborah 18:28:32 -bmotik 18:28:58 Thanks 18:29:03 -FabienG 18:29:18 FabienG has left #owl 18:30:06 -Evan_Wallace 18:30:08 -Sandro 18:30:10 -Elisa_Kendall 18:30:21 RRSAgent, make minutes 18:30:21 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/10/24-owl-minutes.html sandro 18:30:26 -Ratnesh 18:30:27 SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended 18:30:29 Attendees were +1.312.052.aaaa, Sandro, Rinke, +49.351.4.aabb, Carsten, MikeSmith, +012736aacc, JeremyCarroll, bijan, Elisa_Kendall, vit, bmotik, pfps, Vipul_Kashyap, Alan, 18:30:34 ... TommieMeyer, +1.603.897.aadd, uli, Achille, Evan_Wallace, GiorgosStoilos, Zhe_Wu, JeffP, FabienG, Deborah, Bernardo, Ratnesh, IanH 18:30:41 bye 18:39:45 RRSAgent, pointer? 18:39:45 See http://www.w3.org/2007/10/24-owl-irc#T18-39-45 20:40:21 Zakim has left #owl 21:25:55 GiorgosStoilos has joined #OWL