Action 42 Improve examples for rich annotations / Bijan Parsia
Action 156 Respond to the email along the lines Bijan suggests above / Alan Ruttenberg
action 158 Create first draft of requirements Document / Evan Wallace
action 161 Top and Bottom Role in various Profiles / Uli Sattler
action 162 Investigate top/bottom roles in DL-Lite / Diego Calvanese
action 165 Investigate easy keys in DL-Lite / Diego Calvenese
00:00:00 <ewallace> PRESENT: ivan, MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, alan ruttenberg, JeffP, m_schnei, zhe
00:00:00 <ewallace> CHAIR: IanH
00:00:00 <ewallace> REGRETS: Peter Patel-Schneider, Elisa Kendall, AchilleFokoue
16:48:43 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-irc ←
16:48:53 <Rinke> Zakim, this will be owl
Rinke Hoekstra: Zakim, this will be owl ←
16:48:53 <Zakim> ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 48 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 48 minutes ago ←
16:49:13 <Rinke> RRSAgent, make records public
Rinke Hoekstra: RRSAgent, make records public ←
16:54:49 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started ←
16:54:56 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
16:55:06 <bijan> zakim, ??P9 is me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, ??P9 is me ←
16:55:06 <Zakim> +bijan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bijan; got it ←
16:55:12 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
16:55:12 <Zakim> sorry, bijan, muting is not permitted when only one person is present
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bijan, muting is not permitted when only one person is present ←
16:56:38 <Zakim> + +31.20.525.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +31.20.525.aaaa ←
16:56:44 <Rinke> zakim, aaaa is me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, aaaa is me ←
16:56:44 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
16:56:46 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
16:56:46 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
16:56:49 <MartinD> MartinD has joined #OWL
Martin Dzbor: MartinD has joined #OWL ←
16:58:00 <Zakim> +calvanese
Zakim IRC Bot: +calvanese ←
16:58:02 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
16:58:10 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
16:58:12 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
16:58:12 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
16:58:14 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P12 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P12 is me ←
16:58:14 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
16:58:17 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
16:58:17 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
16:58:51 <Zakim> + +49.351.463.3.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +49.351.463.3.aabb ←
16:59:00 <Carsten> zakim, +aabb is me
Carsten Lutz: zakim, +aabb is me ←
16:59:00 <Zakim> sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named '+aabb'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named '+aabb' ←
16:59:01 <Zakim> +??P14
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14 ←
16:59:08 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P14 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P14 is me ←
16:59:08 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
16:59:13 <Carsten> zakim, aabb is me
Carsten Lutz: zakim, aabb is me ←
16:59:13 <Zakim> +Carsten; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Carsten; got it ←
16:59:20 <Carsten> zakim, mute me
Carsten Lutz: zakim, mute me ←
16:59:20 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted ←
16:59:26 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
16:59:26 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
16:59:52 <Zakim> +IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH ←
17:00:03 <Zakim> +??P17
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←
17:00:11 <Zakim> +baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie ←
17:00:24 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:00:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ??P17, baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ??P17, baojie ←
17:00:25 <ratnesh> zakim, ??P17 is ratnesh
Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, ??P17 is ratnesh ←
17:00:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot ←
17:00:29 <Zakim> +ratnesh; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ratnesh; got it ←
17:00:29 <Zakim> + +0190827aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +0190827aacc ←
17:00:38 <Zakim> +msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: +msmith ←
17:00:43 <MartinD> zakim, aacc is me
Martin Dzbor: zakim, aacc is me ←
17:00:43 <Zakim> +MartinD; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MartinD; got it ←
17:00:53 <MartinD> zakim, mute me
Martin Dzbor: zakim, mute me ←
17:00:53 <Zakim> MartinD should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MartinD should now be muted ←
17:01:26 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:02:19 <ewallace> scribeNick: ewallace
(Scribe set to Evan Wallace)
17:02:30 <ewallace> Topic: admin
17:02:34 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:02:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ratnesh, baojie, MartinD (muted), msmith,
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ratnesh, baojie, MartinD (muted), msmith, ←
17:02:37 <Zakim> ... MarkusK
Zakim IRC Bot: ... MarkusK ←
17:02:38 <Zakim> On IRC I see ivan, MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ivan, MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot ←
17:03:03 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
17:03:03 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
17:03:05 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
17:03:42 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:03:49 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:03:57 <m_schnei> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
17:03:58 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it ←
17:04:02 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:02 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:04:05 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:05 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:04:13 <Zakim> + +1.617.278.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.278.aadd ←
17:04:17 <alanr> zakim, aadd is alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, aadd is alanr ←
17:04:17 <Zakim> +alanr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr; got it ←
17:04:21 <ewallace> Zakim, this will be owlwg
Zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:04:21 <Zakim> ok, ewallace; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 64 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ewallace; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 64 minutes ago ←
17:04:26 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:26 <Zakim> sorry, ivan, I don't know what conference this is
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, ivan, I don't know what conference this is ←
17:04:31 <ivan> ???
Ivan Herman: ??? ←
17:04:50 <Rinke> zakim, this is owl
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, this is owl ←
17:04:50 <Zakim> ok, Rinke; that matches SW_OWL()12:00PM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Rinke; that matches SW_OWL()12:00PM ←
17:04:52 <ewallace> subtopic: accept previous minutes
17:04:54 <msmith> the scribee thinks they look good
Michael Smith: the scribee thinks they look good ←
17:05:01 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
17:05:02 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
17:05:17 <IanH> PROPOSED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25
PROPOSED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25 ←
17:05:20 <msmith> +1 to accept 2008-06-25 minutes
Michael Smith: +1 to accept 2008-06-25 minutes ←
17:05:23 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:05:26 <calvanese> +1
Diego Calvanese: +1 ←
17:05:26 <MartinD> +1
Martin Dzbor: +1 ←
17:05:27 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:05:28 <ewallace> +1
+1 ←
17:05:30 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:05:34 <Zakim> +JeffP
Zakim IRC Bot: +JeffP ←
17:05:48 <ewallace> RESOLVED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25
RESOLVED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25 ←
17:05:49 <JeffP> +1
17:06:20 <ewallace> subTopic: Action Items status
17:07:02 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Pending Review Actions
17:07:05 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: Action 163 Update the structural spec according to the resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24 / Boris Motick
17:07:07 <ewallace> Act 163 completed
Act 163 completed ←
17:07:10 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Due and overdue Actions
17:07:15 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: Action 42 Improve examples for rich annotations / Bijan Parsia
17:07:29 <bijan> Done and closed
Bijan Parsia: Done and closed ←
17:07:50 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:07:50 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:08:42 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System
Michael Smith: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System ←
17:08:50 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System#Simple_Syntax_Example
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System#Simple_Syntax_Example ←
17:08:51 <ewallace> Action-42 done
17:08:51 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 156
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 156 ←
17:09:20 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: Action 156 Respond to the email along the lines Bijan suggests above / Alan Ruttenberg
17:09:25 <ewallace> continued
continued ←
17:09:46 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 157 Confer with chairs list about how to get more information about what we need to do wrt accessibility / Alan Ruttenberg
17:10:03 <ewallace> continued
continued ←
17:10:03 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:10:03 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:10:34 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 158 Create first draft of requirements Document / Evan Wallace
17:10:42 <ewallace> done and closed
done and closed ←
17:11:00 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 159 Work wih M_schnei to collect, propose how to address issues in making rdf list vocabulary / Alan Ruttenberg
17:11:02 <ewallace> continued
continued ←
17:11:02 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 159
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 159 ←
17:11:10 <calvanese> zakim, unmute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, unmute me ←
17:11:11 <Zakim> calvanese should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should no longer be muted ←
17:11:12 <m_schnei> i step back from 159
Michael Schneider: i step back from 159 ←
17:11:15 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 161 Top and Bottom Role in various Profiles / Uli Sattler
17:11:17 <ewallace> action 161 continued
ACTION-161 continued ←
17:11:17 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 161
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 161 ←
17:11:48 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 162 Investigate top/bottom roles in DL-Lite / Diego Calvanese
17:11:57 <bmotik> OK, I'll just add it right away.
Boris Motik: OK, I'll just add it right away. ←
17:12:47 <ewallace> Diego will write up what his investigation revealed and send to WG
Diego will write up what his investigation revealed and send to WG ←
17:12:59 <bijan> Subject line containing ACTION-Number will be found by tracker
Bijan Parsia: Subject line containing ACTION-Number will be found by tracker ←
17:15:01 <ewallace> jeffP: cmt on inconsistancy
Jeff Pan: cmt on inconsistancy ←
17:15:32 <bcuencagrau> you need the data to have the inconsistency
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: you need the data to have the inconsistency ←
17:16:03 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 165 Investigate easy keys in DL-Lite / Diego Calvenese
17:16:20 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:16:20 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:16:30 <ewallace> Diego: Easy keys are compatible with key notion in DL-Lite
Diego Calvanese: Easy keys are compatible with key notion in DL-Lite ←
17:16:54 <ewallace> Diego: we need to restict these keys in the same way
Diego Calvanese: we need to restict these keys in the same way ←
17:17:11 <ewallace> Diego: the keys cannot be subtyped
Diego Calvanese: the keys cannot be subtyped ←
17:17:16 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
17:17:16 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
17:17:28 <Zakim> +Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe ←
17:17:35 <Zhe> Zakim, mute me
17:17:35 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should now be muted ←
17:17:53 <ewallace> diego to write up how easy-keys could be used in DL-lite
diego to write up how easy-keys could be used in DL-lite ←
17:18:01 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
17:18:03 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:18:53 <ewallace> msmith: asked if we described unique names assumption in the profile document
Michael Smith: asked if we described unique names assumption in the profile document ←
17:18:57 <msmith> I see, I didn't realize this had changed
Michael Smith: I see, I didn't realize this had changed ←
17:19:21 <ewallace> Boris: it is described
Boris Motik: it is described ←
17:19:38 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 164 Send email re: suggestions for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes / Alan Ruttenberg
17:19:39 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
17:19:39 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
17:19:47 <ewallace> done
done ←
17:19:53 <ewallace> topic: Issues
17:19:54 <ewallace> subtopic: Other Issue Discussions
17:20:42 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Issue 16 Entity Annotations
17:20:42 <alanr_> could we get a review of what the issue was?
Alan Ruttenberg: could we get a review of what the issue was? ←
17:21:17 <bijan> Peter's not here, and he's the issue raiser?
Bijan Parsia: Peter's not here, and he's the issue raiser? ←
17:21:41 <ewallace> IanH: the issue was - could you annotate annotations?
Ian Horrocks: the issue was - could you annotate annotations? ←
17:22:32 <ewallace> boris: problem - you can annotate entity annotations, because they are axioms, but not other kinds of annotation, because they are not axioms
Boris Motik: problem - you can annotate entity annotations, because they are axioms, but not other kinds of annotation, because they are not axioms ←
17:23:07 <ewallace> ... peter proposed various solutions, including one where annotations could contain a set of other annotations
... peter proposed various solutions, including one where annotations could contain a set of other annotations ←
17:24:35 <ewallace> boris: having an axiom that contains another axiom is hard in RDF
Boris Motik: having an axiom that contains another axiom is hard in RDF ←
17:25:04 <ewallace> ... my proposal is to can the issue because both proposed solutions are quite hard
... my proposal is to can the issue because both proposed solutions are quite hard ←
17:25:24 <ewallace> alanr: I wonder if the question might go away with rich annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: I wonder if the question might go away with rich annotations ←
17:26:01 <ewallace> ... there are motivating use cases for this
... there are motivating use cases for this ←
17:26:27 <bijan> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data:_URI_scheme
Bijan Parsia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data:_URI_scheme ←
17:26:29 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives ←
17:26:41 <ewallace> alanr: How is the reification in one of the proposed solutions harder than where we have done this elsewhere?
Alan Ruttenberg: How is the reification in one of the proposed solutions harder than where we have done this elsewhere? ←
17:26:58 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:26:58 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:28:00 <alanr_> Mcdermott was convincing to me....
Alan Ruttenberg: Mcdermott was convincing to me.... ←
17:28:13 <alanr_> one + level of indirection
Alan Ruttenberg: one + level of indirection ←
17:29:31 <ewallace> bijan: may need to recommend how to construct annotations for meta-annotations
Bijan Parsia: may need to recommend how to construct annotations for meta-annotations ←
17:29:55 <ewallace> bijan: set up your structure of annotations so that you always reify in a nice way
Bijan Parsia: set up your structure of annotations so that you always reify in a nice way ←
17:30:05 <ewallace> ... we could work out the pattern for this
... we could work out the pattern for this ←
17:30:06 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:30:06 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:30:39 <ewallace> alan: the idea of structuring annotations works for new annotation but not for old rdf annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: the idea of structuring annotations works for new annotation but not for old rdf annotations ←
17:30:47 <bijan> data: uris could solve this
Bijan Parsia: data: uris could solve this ←
17:30:51 <bijan> But they are ugly
Bijan Parsia: But they are ugly ←
17:30:57 <bijan> Literals as well
Bijan Parsia: Literals as well ←
17:31:40 <ewallace> ianH: are annotations inside annotations asserted in the KB?
Ian Horrocks: are annotations inside annotations asserted in the KB? ←
17:32:45 <ewallace> boris: the problem is that there is no way in rdf to say this axiom contains an axiom
Boris Motik: the problem is that there is no way in rdf to say this axiom contains an axiom ←
17:33:04 <ewallace> ... as soon as its in a bag of triples in rdf it is asserted
... as soon as its in a bag of triples in rdf it is asserted ←
17:33:43 <bijan> there's a queue!
Bijan Parsia: there's a queue! ←
17:33:45 <ewallace> ... can't tell after whether the triple occured at the top level or inside another triple
... can't tell after whether the triple occured at the top level or inside another triple ←
17:34:59 <ewallace> alan: I'd be happy to work through the example with Boris over email
Alan Ruttenberg: I'd be happy to work through the example with Boris over email ←
17:35:15 <alanr_> Note: I will have to leave at 2pm.
Alan Ruttenberg: Note: I will have to leave at 2pm. ←
17:35:44 <ewallace> bijan: this problem of not having syntactic context is something I considered
Bijan Parsia: this problem of not having syntactic context is something I considered ←
17:36:17 <ewallace> ... people who are tracking this should look at the reification table
... people who are tracking this should look at the reification table ←
17:36:33 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:36:33 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:37:30 <ewallace> skipping Issue 67
17:37:54 <ewallace> subsubtopic: issue 126 Normative datatypes
17:38:35 <ewallace> alan: it seemed like there was clear consensus on an underlying Real datatype
Alan Ruttenberg: it seemed like there was clear consensus on an underlying Real datatype ←
17:38:41 <msmith> q+ to disagree on type promotion
Michael Smith: q+ to disagree on type promotion ←
17:38:56 <ewallace> ... and floating point is promoted to this for reasoning
... and floating point is promoted to this for reasoning ←
17:39:16 <bijan> +1 to disagree with type promotion
Bijan Parsia: +1 to disagree with type promotion ←
17:39:35 <ewallace> ... there was a question on whether or not non-numeric values of float like +inf were also promoted
... there was a question on whether or not non-numeric values of float like +inf were also promoted ←
17:40:14 <ewallace> msmith: I agree we want an underlying real datatype, but disagree promoting xsd: float
Michael Smith: I agree we want an underlying real datatype, but disagree promoting xsd: float ←
17:40:15 <alanr_> is it clear what "promotion" means? Perhaps Boris should explain.
Alan Ruttenberg: is it clear what "promotion" means? Perhaps Boris should explain. ←
17:40:15 <bijan> I also thing Reals shouldn't have NaN. Those aren't reals! Why make a clean datatype and then crude it up!
Bijan Parsia: I also thing Reals shouldn't have NaN. Those aren't reals! Why make a clean datatype and then crude it up! ←
17:40:38 <alanr_> the argument is that floats are there to represent machine computations.
Alan Ruttenberg: the argument is that floats are there to represent machine computations. ←
17:40:39 <ewallace> ... don't understand the point of having both xsd:float and xsd:decimal
... don't understand the point of having both xsd:float and xsd:decimal ←
17:41:03 <alanr_> This is an important use case for Science Commons
Alan Ruttenberg: This is an important use case for Science Commons ←
17:41:04 <alanr_> 1+
Alan Ruttenberg: 1+ ←
17:41:10 <alanr_> not 1+
Alan Ruttenberg: not 1+ ←
17:41:16 <MartinD> +1
Martin Dzbor: +1 ←
17:41:42 <ewallace> boris: promotion means to restrict float values
Boris Motik: promotion means to restrict float values ←
17:42:06 <ewallace> boris: I'm pretty happy with ditching float and double, but this will look bad
Boris Motik: I'm pretty happy with ditching float and double, but this will look bad ←
17:42:12 <bijan> "Ditching"? Isn't it that we "aren't adding"
Bijan Parsia: "Ditching"? Isn't it that we "aren't adding" ←
17:42:23 <ewallace> boris: you might want to store these in an efficient way
Boris Motik: you might want to store these in an efficient way ←
17:42:50 <bijan> Floats aren't continuous
Bijan Parsia: Floats aren't continuous ←
17:42:52 <Carsten> +1000
Carsten Lutz: +1000 ←
17:42:55 <bijan> I'm confused
Bijan Parsia: I'm confused ←
17:43:17 <ewallace> boris: I would bet if we keep the continuous aspects of float, then now implementation will be correct
Boris Motik: I would bet if we keep the continuous aspects of float, then now implementation will be correct ←
17:43:20 <bijan> It's arbitrary sized decimals
Bijan Parsia: It's arbitrary sized decimals ←
17:43:34 <MarkusK> yes, I also think that xsd:decimal supports no exponent notation
Markus Krötzsch: yes, I also think that xsd:decimal supports no exponent notation ←
17:44:01 <bijan> It can't !
Bijan Parsia: It can't ! ←
17:44:13 <bijan> There's too much here
Bijan Parsia: There's too much here ←
17:44:16 <alanr_> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal ←
17:44:20 <bijan> Can we chunk the discussion a littl
Bijan Parsia: Can we chunk the discussion a littl ←
17:44:52 <ewallace> boris: a possible way out is to define an owl:float and owl:real
Boris Motik: a possible way out is to define an owl:float and owl:real ←
17:45:15 <bijan> http://www.java2s.com/Code/Oracle/Data-Type/IS-NAN.htm
Bijan Parsia: http://www.java2s.com/Code/Oracle/Data-Type/IS-NAN.htm ←
17:45:28 <ewallace> alan: wrt continuous aspect:
Alan Ruttenberg: wrt continuous aspect: ←
17:45:33 <MarkusK> (for the minutes) xsd:float also has non-numerical values, NaN and infinite
Markus Krötzsch: (for the minutes) xsd:float also has non-numerical values, NaN and infinite ←
17:46:17 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:46:17 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:47:08 <ewallace> alan: effect on floats, the only consequence to considering them real would be
Alan Ruttenberg: effect on floats, the only consequence to considering them real would be ←
17:47:26 <ewallace> ...
... ←
17:47:46 <ewallace> alan: asked some folk, they would prefer real
Alan Ruttenberg: asked some folk, they would prefer real ←
17:47:53 <m_schnei> (for the minutes, too) IEEE floats also have +/- 0, do xsd:float have too?
Michael Schneider: (for the minutes, too) IEEE floats also have +/- 0, do xsd:float have too? ←
17:48:05 <ewallace> alan: also asked about +-inf and NaN
Alan Ruttenberg: also asked about +-inf and NaN ←
17:48:18 <ewallace> alan: they considered these to be essential
Alan Ruttenberg: they considered these to be essential ←
17:48:46 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:48:46 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:48:57 <ewallace> alan: the objective is to be able to transmit and contain numeric data in an OWL file
Alan Ruttenberg: the objective is to be able to transmit and contain numeric data in an OWL file ←
17:49:18 <ewallace> bijan: the first step I have is if we are going to talk about something with a binary rep.
Bijan Parsia: the first step I have is if we are going to talk about something with a binary rep. ←
17:49:50 <ewallace> bijan: we can't avoid rounding, we can't separate the value space from the representation
Bijan Parsia: we can't avoid rounding, we can't separate the value space from the representation ←
17:49:53 <alanr_> OWL does not produce new floats in the course of reasoning.
Alan Ruttenberg: OWL does not produce new floats in the course of reasoning. ←
17:50:40 <ewallace> ianH: it seems to me that we are proposing in owl to have a virtual float that is continuous
Ian Horrocks: it seems to me that we are proposing in owl to have a virtual float that is continuous ←
17:50:59 <alanr_> So precision issues are external to OWL - OWL would not disturb any precision or do any rounding.
Alan Ruttenberg: So precision issues are external to OWL - OWL would not disturb any precision or do any rounding. ←
17:51:09 <ewallace> bijan: so you are just treating the float rep as an idiosyncratic rep of reals
Bijan Parsia: so you are just treating the float rep as an idiosyncratic rep of reals ←
17:51:31 <ewallace> boris: the value space is the set of real numbers between the min and max of float
Boris Motik: the value space is the set of real numbers between the min and max of float ←
17:52:30 <alanr_> Ian asked my question
Alan Ruttenberg: Ian asked my question ←
17:53:12 <alanr_> 2.0 float is not considered different than int float
Alan Ruttenberg: 2.0 float is not considered different than int float ←
17:53:46 <Carsten> zakim, unmute me
Carsten Lutz: zakim, unmute me ←
17:53:46 <Zakim> Carsten should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should no longer be muted ←
17:54:02 <ewallace> carsten: I like this proposal
Carsten Lutz: I like this proposal ←
17:54:24 <ewallace> ... either dropping float completely, or treating them as reals for reasoning
... either dropping float completely, or treating them as reals for reasoning ←
17:54:51 <alanr_> no float predicate, I think.
Alan Ruttenberg: no float predicate, I think. ←
17:54:54 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:54:54 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
17:55:14 <ewallace> boris: floats are a subset of reals
Boris Motik: floats are a subset of reals ←
17:55:49 <ewallace> carsten: treat float as a property of a real number?
Carsten Lutz: treat float as a property of a real number? ←
17:56:04 <msmith> q+ to ask about the benefit of this proposal
Michael Smith: q+ to ask about the benefit of this proposal ←
17:56:13 <ewallace> boris: the reason for doing this is so that you can ship data around as reals
Boris Motik: the reason for doing this is so that you can ship data around as reals ←
17:56:22 <Carsten> perfect
Carsten Lutz: perfect ←
17:56:27 <Carsten> zakim, mute me
Carsten Lutz: zakim, mute me ←
17:56:27 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted ←
17:56:28 <alanr_> consider: oracle than answers between a and b, how many values. For float we decide to answer: Infinity , always
Alan Ruttenberg: consider: oracle than answers between a and b, how many values. For float we decide to answer: Infinity , always ←
17:56:29 <bijan> One question at a time!
Bijan Parsia: One question at a time! ←
17:56:32 <bijan> Please!@
Bijan Parsia: Please!@ ←
17:56:43 <alanr_> q+ to mention nan as data bottom
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to mention nan as data bottom ←
17:56:46 <bijan> I wanted to respond to the carsten questiona nd now we're off track
Bijan Parsia: I wanted to respond to the carsten questiona nd now we're off track ←
17:56:54 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:56:54 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
17:56:57 <ewallace> boris: if you have something like 1 / 0 then the ontology is unsatisfiable
Boris Motik: if you have something like 1 / 0 then the ontology is unsatisfiable ←
17:59:13 <ewallace> bijan: there are 3 options for the predicate thing
Bijan Parsia: there are 3 options for the predicate thing ←
17:59:38 <alanr_> comment: Lexical float doesn't work - because of defined rounding.
Alan Ruttenberg: comment: Lexical float doesn't work - because of defined rounding. ←
17:59:42 <ewallace> ... no predicate
... no predicate ←
18:02:31 <ewallace> alan: we want to capture the result of an experiment and that may include NaN values
Alan Ruttenberg: we want to capture the result of an experiment and that may include NaN values ←
18:02:55 <Zakim> -alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr ←
18:02:59 <Zakim> alanr_, you wanted to mention nan as data bottom
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr_, you wanted to mention nan as data bottom ←
18:03:03 <ewallace> ... they don't care about how many discrete values between here and there
... they don't care about how many discrete values between here and there ←
18:03:27 <bijan> the �value space�s of all �primitive� datatypes are disjoint (they do not share any values)
Bijan Parsia: the �value space�s of all �primitive� datatypes are disjoint (they do not share any values) ←
18:03:32 <ewallace> msmith: people using XSD already make the choice between xsd:float and xsd:decimal
Michael Smith: people using XSD already make the choice between xsd:float and xsd:decimal ←
18:03:36 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#rf-fund-facets
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#rf-fund-facets ←
18:03:50 <bijan> (double and decimal are primitive datatypes in xsd)
Bijan Parsia: (double and decimal are primitive datatypes in xsd) ←
18:03:59 <ewallace> ... given the fact that they chose xsd:float, we ought to respect the choice
... given the fact that they chose xsd:float, we ought to respect the choice ←
18:04:00 <Zakim> msmith, you wanted to ask about the benefit of this proposal
Zakim IRC Bot: msmith, you wanted to ask about the benefit of this proposal ←
18:04:22 <bijan> q+ to point to 4.2
Bijan Parsia: q+ to point to 4.2 ←
18:04:38 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
18:04:38 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
18:04:44 <ewallace> boris: the reason that float is not put under decimal in xsd may be because of the 3 special values
Boris Motik: the reason that float is not put under decimal in xsd may be because of the 3 special values ←
18:05:12 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to point to 4.2
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to point to 4.2 ←
18:05:19 <JeffP> the spec is somehow inconsistent
Jeff Pan: the spec is somehow inconsistent ←
18:05:19 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#equal
Michael Smith: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#equal ←
18:06:07 <ewallace> bijan: the spec says the value spaces of float and decimal are disjoint
Bijan Parsia: the spec says the value spaces of float and decimal are disjoint ←
18:06:44 <alanr> Does it actually say they are disjoint, or does it not say they have a shared value space (negation or naf)
Alan Ruttenberg: Does it actually say they are disjoint, or does it not say they have a shared value space (negation or naf) ←
18:06:54 <msmith> it says disjoint
Michael Smith: it says disjoint ←
18:06:57 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Issue 131 Single OWL-R profile
18:07:07 <Zhe> yes
18:07:18 <Zhe> let boris go first
18:07:38 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me
18:07:38 <Zakim> Zhe should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should no longer be muted ←
18:07:52 <ewallace> boris: the problem with OWL R profile is that OWL R full version is not a syntactic fragment
Boris Motik: the problem with OWL R profile is that OWL R full version is not a syntactic fragment ←
18:08:43 <ewallace> ... the idea is to have basically 1 OWL R profile
... the idea is to have basically 1 OWL R profile ←
18:09:18 <ewallace> boris: if the ontology is written in triples it is in OWL R if it is parseable as OWL R
Boris Motik: if the ontology is written in triples it is in OWL R if it is parseable as OWL R ←
18:10:00 <ewallace> Zhe: Yes. I do agree with Boris on this. It seems a bit odd to have these two versions.
Zhe Wu: Yes. I do agree with Boris on this. It seems a bit odd to have these two versions. ←
18:10:14 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:10:14 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
18:10:17 <ewallace> ... I see the value of combining the syntactic restriction into the profile
... I see the value of combining the syntactic restriction into the profile ←
18:10:51 <ewallace> Michael Schneider: regarding confusion - it is not confusing from an rdf point of view because
Michael Schneider: regarding confusion - it is not confusing from an rdf point of view because ←
18:11:04 <ewallace> ... any sublanguage is a semantic sublanguage
... any sublanguage is a semantic sublanguage ←
18:11:09 <bijan> q+ to talk about user perspective
Bijan Parsia: q+ to talk about user perspective ←
18:11:16 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:11:16 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
18:11:17 <ewallace> ... I don't share the argument.
... I don't share the argument. ←
18:11:36 <ewallace> boris: I think what is confusing is from an ontology point of view.
Boris Motik: I think what is confusing is from an ontology point of view. ←
18:11:57 <ewallace> ... you don't know what it means. You can't interpret it in an unambiguous way.
... you don't know what it means. You can't interpret it in an unambiguous way. ←
18:12:08 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to talk about user perspective
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to talk about user perspective ←
18:12:17 <bijan> I'm still on the queue!
Bijan Parsia: I'm still on the queue! ←
18:12:20 <bijan> No no!
Bijan Parsia: No no! ←
18:12:25 <ewallace> ... what is the point also from a user's perspective, when the meaning is ill-defined.
... what is the point also from a user's perspective, when the meaning is ill-defined. ←
18:12:57 <ewallace> bijan: In my experience users find the semantic subsetting confusing.
Bijan Parsia: In my experience users find the semantic subsetting confusing. ←
18:13:20 <bcuencagrau> zakim, unmute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, unmute me ←
18:13:20 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should no longer be muted ←
18:13:20 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
18:13:21 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
18:13:26 <ewallace> ... In our spec.s, all the other profiles are syntactic subsets
... In our spec.s, all the other profiles are syntactic subsets ←
18:13:50 <ewallace> bernardo: I totally agree with Bijan on this. The purpose of OWL R is to define a language
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: I totally agree with Bijan on this. The purpose of OWL R is to define a language ←
18:14:11 <ewallace> ... that is easily implementable using production rules.
... that is easily implementable using production rules. ←
18:14:35 <ewallace> ... What people real care about is this ability to implement the reasoning using a rule engine.
... What people real care about is this ability to implement the reasoning using a rule engine. ←
18:14:36 <bcuencagrau> zakim, unmute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, unmute me ←
18:14:36 <Zakim> bcuencagrau was not muted, bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau was not muted, bcuencagrau ←
18:14:40 <bcuencagrau> zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, mute me ←
18:14:40 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
18:14:53 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:14:53 <Zakim> m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei ←
18:14:54 <bijan> Yes
Bijan Parsia: Yes ←
18:14:57 <JeffP> y
18:15:24 <ewallace> IanH: to M_schnei - what if they use some rdfs syntax and no rdfs interpretation is made
Ian Horrocks: to M_schnei - what if they use some rdfs syntax and no rdfs interpretation is made ←
18:15:34 <ewallace> ... wouldn't the user be surprised?
... wouldn't the user be surprised? ←
18:15:42 <Rinke> +q to ask about relation with DLP
Rinke Hoekstra: +q to ask about relation with DLP ←
18:16:37 <ewallace> Michael Schneider: you would restrict the reasoning to rdf in a tool like Jena, you would be explicitly aware of this
Michael Schneider: you would restrict the reasoning to rdf in a tool like Jena, you would be explicitly aware of this ←
18:17:05 <ewallace> Michael Schneider: run the reasoning and see what inference graph is produced
Michael Schneider: run the reasoning and see what inference graph is produced ←
18:17:24 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:17:24 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
18:17:26 <ewallace> ... you of course have to know which reasoner you are using
... you of course have to know which reasoner you are using ←
18:18:23 <ewallace> Bijan: you will still be able to do the RDF style reasoning
Bijan Parsia: you will still be able to do the RDF style reasoning ←
18:18:59 <Zakim> Rinke, you wanted to ask about relation with DLP
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke, you wanted to ask about relation with DLP ←
18:19:06 <ewallace> ... In OWL-land people are used to having certain syntax indicate the reasoning features in the interpretation
... In OWL-land people are used to having certain syntax indicate the reasoning features in the interpretation ←
18:19:30 <bijan> (DLP and hornSHIQ are also syntactic fragments)
Bijan Parsia: (DLP and hornSHIQ are also syntactic fragments) ←
18:19:34 <ewallace> rinke: when we started we had DLP, and hornSHIQ and others
Rinke Hoekstra: when we started we had DLP, and hornSHIQ and others ←
18:20:08 <ewallace> ... How will this impact people who use DLP like stuff
... How will this impact people who use DLP like stuff ←
18:20:17 <m_schnei> Motivation for OWL R was RDFS 3.0 / OWL-Prime
Michael Schneider: Motivation for OWL R was RDFS 3.0 / OWL-Prime ←
18:20:30 <ewallace> boris: HornSHIQ was dropped because there were too many fragments
Boris Motik: HornSHIQ was dropped because there were too many fragments ←
18:20:37 <bijan> And a champion in the working group :)
Bijan Parsia: And a champion in the working group :) ←
18:20:48 <ewallace> ... we just kept those that had larger user bases
... we just kept those that had larger user bases ←
18:21:04 <m_schnei> All the fragments in the beginning were *DL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments
Michael Schneider: All the fragments in the beginning were *DL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments ←
18:21:34 <bijan> All the fragments in the beginning were *OWL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments
Bijan Parsia: All the fragments in the beginning were *OWL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments ←
18:21:39 <ewallace> Boris: what remains is OWL R. You can still use production rules or other similar tools for it.
Boris Motik: what remains is OWL R. You can still use production rules or other similar tools for it. ←
18:21:59 <bijan> OWL lite is a syntactic fragment of OWL DL which is a syntactic fragment of OWL Full
Bijan Parsia: OWL lite is a syntactic fragment of OWL DL which is a syntactic fragment of OWL Full ←
18:22:04 <m_schnei> Full fragements are always semantic fragments, they are always applyable on every RDF graph
Michael Schneider: Full fragements are always semantic fragments, they are always applyable on every RDF graph ←
18:22:14 <ewallace> Boris: We are just saying there is a syntactic check that can indicate which profile is being used.
Boris Motik: We are just saying there is a syntactic check that can indicate which profile is being used. ←
18:22:43 <bijan> OWL DL and OWL Lite *are* fragments of full. What you say is false. And I'll stop the back chat ;)
Bijan Parsia: OWL DL and OWL Lite *are* fragments of full. What you say is false. And I'll stop the back chat ;) ←
18:22:44 <ewallace> Zhe: Oracle is planning to support this profile in the future and it is probable that we
Zhe Wu: Oracle is planning to support this profile in the future and it is probable that we ←
18:23:06 <ewallace> ... will include the capability to bypass the syntax check.
... will include the capability to bypass the syntax check. ←
18:23:29 <ewallace> ivan: what I would like to understand is if we go with Boris' proposal and I'm in RDF-land
Ivan Herman: what I would like to understand is if we go with Boris' proposal and I'm in RDF-land ←
18:23:35 <ewallace> ... what exactly do I lose?
... what exactly do I lose? ←
18:24:01 <ewallace> IanH: I guess you lose the ability to consider some graphs as OWL R.
Ian Horrocks: I guess you lose the ability to consider some graphs as OWL R. ←
18:24:31 <ewallace> IanH: Like if you include SomeValuesFrom constructs.
Ian Horrocks: Like if you include SomeValuesFrom constructs. ←
18:25:04 <ewallace> Boris: you don't lose anything. The rules will work exactly as they are. You don't lose any
Boris Motik: you don't lose anything. The rules will work exactly as they are. You don't lose any ←
18:25:55 <ewallace> ... expressive power. The syntax forbidden doesn't have rules for the corresponding reasoning.
... expressive power. The syntax forbidden doesn't have rules for the corresponding reasoning. ←
18:26:22 <ewallace> bijan: in a way the fragment is saying these are the things we know how to do something interesting with.
Bijan Parsia: in a way the fragment is saying these are the things we know how to do something interesting with. ←
18:27:08 <m_schnei> what is with the RDFS axiomatic triples?
Michael Schneider: what is with the RDFS axiomatic triples? ←
18:27:21 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me
18:27:21 <Zakim> Zhe was not muted, Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe was not muted, Zhe ←
18:27:22 <bcuencagrau> zakim, unmute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, unmute me ←
18:27:23 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should no longer be muted ←
18:27:26 <ewallace> Zhe: to Ivan's point, expressivity is not lost. Just some ontologies will be rejected, if syntactic checking is on.
Zhe Wu: to Ivan's point, expressivity is not lost. Just some ontologies will be rejected, if syntactic checking is on. ←
18:27:50 <ewallace> bernardo: we have an additional benefit from specifying this as a syntactic fragment
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: we have an additional benefit from specifying this as a syntactic fragment ←
18:28:25 <bcuencagrau> zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, mute me ←
18:28:25 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
18:28:26 <ewallace> ... you can know if you are in the fragment.
... you can know if you are in the fragment. ←
18:28:40 <ewallace> subtopic: Additional other business
18:28:41 <ewallace> None
None ←
18:28:42 <ewallace> Meeting Adjourned
Meeting Adjourned ←
18:29:13 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
18:29:17 <Zakim> -Carsten
Zakim IRC Bot: -Carsten ←
18:29:18 <Zakim> -JeffP
Zakim IRC Bot: -JeffP ←
18:29:19 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
18:29:19 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
18:29:20 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
18:29:21 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
18:29:23 <Zakim> -MarkusK
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK ←
18:29:25 <Zakim> -ratnesh
Zakim IRC Bot: -ratnesh ←
18:29:25 <ewallace> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
18:29:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-minutes.html ewallace
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-minutes.html ewallace ←
18:29:27 <Zakim> -MartinD
Zakim IRC Bot: -MartinD ←
18:29:29 <Zakim> -bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: -bijan ←
18:29:31 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:29:33 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
18:29:35 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:29:37 <Zakim> -calvanese
Zakim IRC Bot: -calvanese ←
18:29:39 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:29:41 <Zakim> -m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: -m_schnei ←
18:29:43 <ewallace> rrsagent, make log world-readable
rrsagent, make log world-readable ←
18:29:50 <MartinD> MartinD has left #OWL
Martin Dzbor: MartinD has left #OWL ←
18:29:56 <ewallace> rrsagent, make log public
rrsagent, make log public ←
18:30:55 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
18:30:56 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended ←
18:30:57 <Zakim> Attendees were bijan, +31.20.525.aaaa, Rinke, calvanese, Evan_Wallace, bmotik, +49.351.463.3.aabb, bcuencagrau, Carsten, IanH, baojie, ratnesh, +0190827aacc, msmith, MartinD,
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were bijan, +31.20.525.aaaa, Rinke, calvanese, Evan_Wallace, bmotik, +49.351.463.3.aabb, bcuencagrau, Carsten, IanH, baojie, ratnesh, +0190827aacc, msmith, MartinD, ←
18:30:59 <Zakim> ... MarkusK, Ivan, Sandro, m_schnei, +1.617.278.aadd, alanr, JeffP, Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: ... MarkusK, Ivan, Sandro, m_schnei, +1.617.278.aadd, alanr, JeffP, Zhe ←
This revision (#3) generated 2008-07-07 11:34:38 UTC by 'ihorrock2', comments: 'Edited minutes of Issue-16 discussion, where Boris summarised the issue and resolution proposals, so as to be consistent with my recollection of what was actually said'