OWL Working Group

Minutes of 27 August 2008

Present
Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman Boris Motik Michael Schneider Sandro Hawke Zhe Wu Markus Krötzsch Uli Sattler Bernardo Cuenca Grau Peter Patel-Schneider Jie Bao Jeff Pan Achille Fokoue Bijan Parsia Mike Smith Bernardo Cuenca Grau Jeff Pan Evan Wallace Carsten Lutz Boris Motik
Regrets
Rinke Hoekstra Elisa Kendall
Chair
Ian Horrocks
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. accept 13th August minutes link
  2. accept 20th August minutes link
  3. resolve Issue 118 (anonymous individual semantics), per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0188.html link
  4. Authors are encouraged are prepare a WD on Manchester Syntax, which the WG expects to publish. At some point in the future we will figure out if this is REC-track or not (issue-139). link
Topics
00:00:00 <scribenick> PRESENT: IanH, Ivan, bmotik (muted), m_schnei (muted), Sandro, Zhe (muted), MarkusK, uli, bcuencagrau (muted), pfps, baojie, JeffP, Achille, bparsia, msmith, bcuencagrau, JeffP, ewallace, Carsten, bmotik
00:00:00 <scribenick> REGRETS: Rinke, Elisa
00:00:00 <scribenick> CHAIR: IanH
17:00:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/27-owl-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/27-owl-irc

17:00:45 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

17:08:24 <bparsia> Topic: Admin -- Roll call and agenda amendments

(No events recorded for 7 minutes)

1. Admin -- Roll call and agenda amendments

17:08:31 <bparsia> No amendments

Bijan Parsia: No amendments

17:08:43 <bparsia> Topic: Minutes approval

2. Minutes approval

17:09:08 <IanH> PROPOSED: accept 13th August minutes

PROPOSED: accept 13th August minutes

17:09:11 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:09:11 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:09:12 <msmith> +1

Mike Smith: +1

17:09:13 <baojie> +1

Jie Bao: +1

17:09:13 <bparsia> +1

Bijan Parsia: +1

17:09:18 <bcuencagrau> +1

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: +1

17:09:23 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace

Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace

17:09:23 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

17:09:24 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted

17:09:26 <IanH> RESOLVED: accept 13th August minutes

RESOLVED: accept 13th August minutes

17:09:44 <bparsia> PROPOSED: accept 20th August minutes

PROPOSED: accept 20th August minutes

17:10:09 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:10:10 <bparsia> +1

Bijan Parsia: +1

17:10:11 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:10:12 <Carsten> Zakim UK gives me a busy signal after entering the passcode, and Zakim France says that the key is not valid (both do that repeatedly) sigh.

Carsten Lutz: Zakim UK gives me a busy signal after entering the passcode, and Zakim France says that the key is not valid (both do that repeatedly) sigh.

17:10:14 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

17:10:31 <bparsia> RESOLVED: accept 20th August minutes

RESOLVED: accept 20th August minutes

17:10:40 <bparsia> Topic: Action Item status

3. Action Item status

17:10:44 <sandro> Carsten, can you try to US number, or is that not practical?

Sandro Hawke: Carsten, can you try to US number, or is that not practical?

17:11:05 <Zakim> +??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0

17:11:11 <Carsten> zakim, p0 is me

Carsten Lutz: zakim, p0 is me

17:11:11 <Zakim> sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named 'p0'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named 'p0'

17:11:15 <bparsia> IanH: Long list of pending review action. I've reviewd. Let's accept them.

Ian Horrocks: Long list of pending review action. I've reviewd. Let's accept them. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:11:17 <Carsten> zakim, ??p0 is me

Carsten Lutz: zakim, ??p0 is me

17:11:17 <Zakim> +Carsten; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Carsten; got it

17:11:23 <Carsten> aaaaahhhh

Carsten Lutz: aaaaahhhh

17:11:25 <bparsia> IanH: They are done.

Ian Horrocks: They are done. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:11:29 <Carsten> zakim, mute me

Carsten Lutz: zakim, mute me

17:11:29 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted

17:11:38 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

17:11:38 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted

17:12:14 <bparsia> ACTION 168: postponed for 2 weeks

Bijan Parsia: ACTION-168: postponed for 2 weeks

17:12:14 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 168

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 168

17:13:06 <bparsia> Bijan: actiosn 168, 170, and 174 postpone for 2, 1, and 1 weeks respectively

Bijan Parsia: actiosn 168, 170, and 174 postpone for 2, 1, and 1 weeks respectively [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:13:32 <bparsia> JieBao: 150 needs another week

Jie Bao: 150 needs another week [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:13:41 <bmotik> Shouldn't we close ACTION-150? After all, the discussion with RIF has been initiated.

Boris Motik: Shouldn't we close ACTION-150? After all, the discussion with RIF has been initiated.

17:14:24 <bparsia> IanH: Action 192 is a bit stalled due to Italian hols. Postponed a week.

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-192 is a bit stalled due to Italian hols. Postponed a week. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:14:35 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

17:14:35 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

17:14:59 <bparsia> IanH: 181 was delayed to due Michael illness, but seems done now?

Ian Horrocks: 181 was delayed to due Michael illness, but seems done now? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:15:19 <bparsia> m_schnei: I think I can finish tomorrow. Will send email.

Michael Schneider: I think I can finish tomorrow. Will send email. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:15:44 <bparsia> IanH: Peter said he wouldn't be able to review in a timely manner due to vacation...Peter?

Ian Horrocks: Peter said he wouldn't be able to review in a timely manner due to vacation...Peter? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:16:10 <bparsia> pfps: I can two it in two weeks from today if its ready by the end of this week

Peter Patel-Schneider: I can two it in two weeks from today if its ready by the end of this week [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

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

17:16:59 <bparsia> IanH: all core documents (except Profiles) are in good shape and I sent notification to the reviewerss

Ian Horrocks: all core documents (except Profiles) are in good shape and I sent notification to the reviewerss [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:17:08 <msmith> I'm able to meet schedule

Mike Smith: I'm able to meet schedule

17:17:08 <bparsia> ...Are reviewers able to meet the schedule.

Bijan Parsia: ...Are reviewers able to meet the schedule.

17:17:11 <bparsia> I'm fine

Bijan Parsia: I'm fine

17:17:11 <uli> sure

Uli Sattler: sure

17:17:17 <Achille> sure

Achille Fokoue: sure

17:17:19 <MarkusK> sure

Markus Krötzsch: sure

17:17:55 <bparsia> IanH: Reviewing seems in good shape.

Ian Horrocks: Reviewing seems in good shape. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:18:09 <bparsia> IanH: 202 postponed

Ian Horrocks: 202 postponed [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:18:15 <bparsia> Topic: Issues

4. Issues

17:18:28 <bparsia> Topic: Proposal to Resolve

5. Proposal to Resolve

17:18:39 <bmotik> ZAkim, unmute me

Boris Motik: ZAkim, unmute me

17:18:39 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

17:18:42 <bparsia> Topic: Proposal to resolve Issue 118

6. Proposal to resolve ISSUE-118

17:19:07 <bparsia> bmotik: We align bnodes exactly with RDF and impose syntactic restrictions (i.e., tree like patterns only)

Boris Motik: We align bnodes exactly with RDF and impose syntactic restrictions (i.e., tree like patterns only) [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:19:10 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:19:10 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

17:19:23 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:19:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:19:35 <IanH> ack bparsia

Ian Horrocks: ack bparsia

17:19:42 <bmotik> bparsia: I accept it is a workable solution, I don't think it is the best one

Bijan Parsia: I accept it is a workable solution, I don't think it is the best one [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ]

17:19:46 <ivan> bijan: I accept it as a workable, I am not sure it is best solution, let us see what comes from last call

Bijan Parsia: I accept it as a workable, I am not sure it is best solution, let us see what comes from last call [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ]

17:20:11 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:20:16 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:20:19 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

17:21:30 <bparsia> PROPOSED: resolve Issue 118 (anonymous individual semantics), per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0188.html

PROPOSED: resolve ISSUE-118 (anonymous individual semantics), per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0188.html

17:21:35 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

17:21:36 <bmotik> +1

Boris Motik: +1

17:21:38 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:21:40 <ewallace> +1

Evan Wallace: +1

17:21:41 <bcuencagrau> +1

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: +1

17:21:41 <MarkusK> +1

Markus Krötzsch: +1

17:21:42 <Zhe> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

17:21:42 <bparsia> +0.1

Bijan Parsia: +0.1

17:21:42 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:21:46 <baojie> +1

Jie Bao: +1

17:21:50 <msmith> +1

Mike Smith: +1

17:21:50 <Carsten> +1

Carsten Lutz: +1

17:22:08 <bparsia> RESOLVED: resolve Issue 118 (anonymous individual semantics), per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0188.html

RESOLVED: resolve ISSUE-118 (anonymous individual semantics), per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0188.html

17:22:25 <bmotik> ACTION to bmotik: Implement ISSUE-118

Boris Motik: ACTION to bmotik: Implement ISSUE-118

17:22:25 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - to

17:22:33 <bmotik> ACTION bmotik: to Implement ISSUE-118

Boris Motik: ACTION bmotik: to Implement ISSUE-118

17:22:33 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - bmotik

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - bmotik

17:22:37 <bmotik> ACTION bmotik2: to Implement ISSUE-118

Boris Motik: ACTION bmotik2: to Implement ISSUE-118

17:22:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-203 - Implement ISSUE-118 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-09-03].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-203 - Implement ISSUE-118 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-09-03].

17:23:06 <bparsia> Topic: Proposal to resolve Issue 139

7. Proposal to resolve ISSUE-139

17:23:22 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:23:34 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:24:36 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:24:41 <ivan> ack bparsia

Ivan Herman: ack bparsia

17:24:43 <sandro> to get it off the issue list

Sandro Hawke: to get it off the issue list

17:24:45 <uli> perhaps the benefit would be for the authors to know that they are not working in vain?

Uli Sattler: perhaps the benefit would be for the authors to know that they are not working in vain?

17:25:13 <bparsia> bparsia: Why do a predecision when we won't be publish it as a note until after the core language is done

Bijan Parsia: Why do a predecision when we won't be publish it as a note until after the core language is done [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:25:20 <sandro> q+

Sandro Hawke: q+

17:25:29 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan

17:25:43 <bparsia> ivan: We need to do some wg level publication but it's just a working draft, not saying anything about its terminal status

Ivan Herman: We need to do some wg level publication but it's just a working draft, not saying anything about its terminal status [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:25:45 <IanH> ack sandro

Ian Horrocks: ack sandro

17:26:10 <bparsia> sandro: People reviewing a working draft deserve to know whether something is rec track or not

Sandro Hawke: People reviewing a working draft deserve to know whether something is rec track or not [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:27:33 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:29:08 <bparsia> sandro: I don't care if we say that it *is not* a rec track or it's not clear, but we should be indicate

Sandro Hawke: I don't care if we say that it *is not* a rec track or it's not clear, but we should be indicate [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:29:10 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:30:11 <bparsia> [some discussion involving the scribe, but mostly scribe confusion so not critical]

Bijan Parsia: [some discussion involving the scribe, but mostly scribe confusion so not critical]

17:30:15 <sandro> PROPOSED: Authors are encouraged are prepare a WD on Manchester Syntax, which the WG expects to publish.  At some point in the future we will figure out if this is REC-track or not.

PROPOSED: Authors are encouraged are prepare a WD on Manchester Syntax, which the WG expects to publish. At some point in the future we will figure out if this is REC-track or not.

17:30:23 <bparsia> +1

Bijan Parsia: +1

17:30:28 <ivan> +1

Ivan Herman: +1

17:30:28 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:30:29 <uli> +1

Uli Sattler: +1

17:30:31 <baojie> +1

Jie Bao: +1

17:30:31 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

17:30:33 <msmith> +1

Mike Smith: +1

17:30:33 <MarkusK> +1

Markus Krötzsch: +1

17:30:34 <Zhe> +1

Zhe Wu: +1

17:30:39 <uli> ivan, sure!

Uli Sattler: ivan, sure!

17:30:41 <ewallace> +1

Evan Wallace: +1

17:30:50 <Carsten> +1

Carsten Lutz: +1

17:30:50 <bcuencagrau> +1

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: +1

17:30:55 <bparsia> RESOLVED: Authors are encouraged are prepare a WD on Manchester Syntax, which the WG expects to publish.  At some point in the future we will figure out if this is REC-track or not (issue-139).

RESOLVED: Authors are encouraged are prepare a WD on Manchester Syntax, which the WG expects to publish. At some point in the future we will figure out if this is REC-track or not (ISSUE-139).

17:31:13 <sandro> that closes issue-139

Sandro Hawke: that closes ISSUE-139

17:31:51 <bparsia> Topic: Other Issue discussion

8. Other Issue discussion

17:31:52 <ewallace> flights can't be reflexive?

Evan Wallace: flights can't be reflexive?

17:32:30 <bparsia> IanH: 130 and 131 deal with the profile document

Ian Horrocks: 130 and 131 deal with the profile document [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:32:42 <Zakim> -Peter

Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter

17:32:43 <bparsia> Topic: 130 and 131

9. 130 and 131

17:33:15 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:33:17 <bparsia> IanH: Alan and Sandro and I decided to produce a draft of profile and conformance as a basis of discussion for unification

Ian Horrocks: Alan and Sandro and I decided to produce a draft of profile and conformance as a basis of discussion for unification [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:33:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:33:41 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:33:41 <bparsia> I have and I think it's a good move.

Bijan Parsia: I have and I think it's a good move.

17:33:46 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:33:47 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me

Zhe Wu: zakim, unmute me

17:33:47 <Zakim> Zhe should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should no longer be muted

17:33:49 <Zhe> q+

Zhe Wu: q+

17:33:50 <uli> yes, me too

Uli Sattler: yes, me too

17:34:03 <m_schnei> I did not find the time yet to read the new texts

Michael Schneider: I did not find the time yet to read the new texts

17:34:05 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

17:34:42 <uli> ...this is not possible?

Uli Sattler: ...this is not possible?

17:35:09 <bparsia> ivan: Checking my understanding --- what happens when you get a graph that doesn't match the syntax but the rules are happy to run with them and michael's example

Ivan Herman: Checking my understanding --- what happens when you get a graph that doesn't match the syntax but the rules are happy to run with them and michael's example [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:35:32 <bparsia> ...the conformance are silent on both these cases?

Bijan Parsia: ...the conformance are silent on both these cases?

17:36:46 <bparsia> IanH: no, for Case 1 it certainly does. If you have a graph outside the syntactic subset, if the rule set finds an entailment then it's valid, but if it doesn't, you don't know if it's a non-entailment. If a system generates all the entailments the rule system does then it is conforment

Ian Horrocks: no, for Case 1 it certainly does. If you have a graph outside the syntactic subset, if the rule set finds an entailment then it's valid, but if it doesn't, you don't know if it's a non-entailment. If a system generates all the entailments the rule system does then it is conforment [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:36:52 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:37:46 <bparsia> ivan: Editorial point -- [[which the scribe didn't catch]] Is it possible to give a more precise description of what the rules do.

Ivan Herman: Editorial point -- [[which the scribe didn't catch]] Is it possible to give a more precise description of what the rules do. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:37:58 <bparsia> ...e.g., document everything the rules do and do not do.

Bijan Parsia: ...e.g., document everything the rules do and do not do.

17:38:24 <sandro> Test Cases!

Sandro Hawke: Test Cases!

17:38:28 <bparsia> IanH: I'm not sure what you want....you mean examples? But I don't see how useful that is.

Ian Horrocks: I'm not sure what you want....you mean examples? But I don't see how useful that is. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:38:32 <uli> good idea, Sandro

Uli Sattler: good idea, Sandro

17:38:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:38:42 <IanH> ack Zhe

Ian Horrocks: ack Zhe

17:39:29 <bparsia> Zhe: I read the conformance carefully and update profiles. I think Ian has done a great job. Conformance is defined in such a way so a vendor using the rule set can claim conformance. Yay! And they can add additional rules! Double yay! Ian is my oxfordian hero!

Zhe Wu: I read the conformance carefully and update profiles. I think Ian has done a great job. Conformance is defined in such a way so a vendor using the rule set can claim conformance. Yay! And they can add additional rules! Double yay! Ian is my oxfordian hero! [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:39:39 <sandro> q+ to make minor editorial suggestion re "An OWL 2 RL entailment checker MAY report a warning unless..."

Sandro Hawke: q+ to make minor editorial suggestion re "An OWL 2 RL entailment checker MAY report a warning unless..."

17:39:48 <bparsia> ...that's everything oracle wants.

Bijan Parsia: ...that's everything oracle wants.

17:40:09 <bparsia> IanH: so you're happy with the unification as described

Ian Horrocks: so you're happy with the unification as described [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:40:22 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:40:28 <bparsia> Zhe: yes.

Zhe Wu: yes. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:40:34 <bparsia> IanH: boris helped a lot too.

Ian Horrocks: boris helped a lot too. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:40:38 <msmith> +100 to Sandro

Mike Smith: +100 to Sandro

17:40:47 <bparsia> Zhe: Then I deeply admire his Oxfordian grace as well.

Zhe Wu: Then I deeply admire his Oxfordian grace as well. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:41:11 <Zhe> :)

Zhe Wu: :)

17:41:22 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:41:26 <sandro> ack sandro

Sandro Hawke: ack sandro

17:41:26 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to make minor editorial suggestion re "An OWL 2 RL entailment checker MAY report a warning unless..."

Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to make minor editorial suggestion re "An OWL 2 RL entailment checker MAY report a warning unless..."

17:41:28 <ivan> ack sandro

Ivan Herman: ack sandro

17:41:52 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:42:01 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

17:42:21 <bparsia> ivan: I'm very happy with what you guys did. Unification now. Unification tomorrow. Unification FOREVER!

Ivan Herman: I'm very happy with what you guys did. Unification now. Unification tomorrow. Unification FOREVER! [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:42:30 <sandro> sandro: change to something like  "An OWL 2 RL entailment checker MAY warn the user about any of these situations:   (1) ...   (2) ....   (3) .... "

Sandro Hawke: change to something like "An OWL 2 RL entailment checker MAY warn the user about any of these situations: (1) ... (2) .... (3) .... " [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:42:41 <sandro> Isn't there some big meeting in Denver about unification?

Sandro Hawke: Isn't there some big meeting in Denver about unification?

17:42:43 <m_schnei> not yet, yes!

Michael Schneider: not yet, yes!

17:43:18 <JeffP> OK

Jeff Pan: OK

17:43:27 <bparsia> IanH: If everyone is happy, we can propose a resolution for next time...how do people feel

Ian Horrocks: If everyone is happy, we can propose a resolution for next time...how do people feel [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:43:30 <bparsia> I love it!

Bijan Parsia: I love it!

17:43:35 <bparsia> Super love it!

Bijan Parsia: Super love it!

17:44:14 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:44:19 <bparsia> sandro: Has RPI had a chance to look at it? Jie?

Sandro Hawke: Has RPI had a chance to look at it? Jie? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:44:48 <bparsia> Jie: not sure

Jie Bao: not sure [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:44:57 <bparsia> sandro: we're curious about Jim.

Sandro Hawke: we're curious about Jim. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:45:05 <bparsia> Jie: I'll talk with jim to clarify.

Jie Bao: I'll talk with jim to clarify. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:45:29 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:45:33 <msmith> I will look at aligning the test doc to this

Mike Smith: I will look at aligning the test doc to this

17:45:35 <bparsia> ivan: More editorialness

Ivan Herman: More editorialness [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:45:44 <bparsia> ...which document will have the conformance

Bijan Parsia: ...which document will have the conformance

17:45:55 <bparsia> IanH: In the test document as with OWL 1.

Ian Horrocks: In the test document as with OWL 1. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:46:24 <bparsia> ivan: That's not such a great idea. Test document isn't a very public place. Let's make it more public and acceptable. But where, I don't know.

Ivan Herman: That's not such a great idea. Test document isn't a very public place. Let's make it more public and acceptable. But where, I don't know. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:46:28 <sandro> +1 ivan Conformance is kind of misplaced being in Test Cases

Sandro Hawke: +1 ivan Conformance is kind of misplaced being in Test Cases

17:46:33 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:46:36 <ewallace> I used the test document from OWL 1 and I'm not an implementer

Evan Wallace: I used the test document from OWL 1 and I'm not an implementer

17:46:54 <m_schnei> but the testcases document looks the "least wrong" document to me

Michael Schneider: but the testcases document looks the "least wrong" document to me

17:46:59 <bparsia> IanH: It's not clear where to put it without splitting nup

Ian Horrocks: It's not clear where to put it without splitting nup [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:47:03 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:47:04 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:47:10 <sandro> Sandro: what about in Profiles?

Sandro Hawke: what about in Profiles? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:47:14 <IanH> ack bparsia

Ian Horrocks: ack bparsia

17:47:37 <MarkusK> +1 to bijan's proposal

Markus Krötzsch: +1 to bijan's proposal

17:47:38 <sandro> Bijan: How about calling the document "OWL 2 Conformance" which includes this stuff plus test cases

Bijan Parsia: How about calling the document "OWL 2 Conformance" which includes this stuff plus test cases [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:47:42 <ewallace> +1 to calling test, conformance

Evan Wallace: +1 to calling test, conformance

17:47:45 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:47:49 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

17:48:15 <bparsia> ivan: I like Bijan's proposal. he's great! But I also want to put it in the semantics document?

Ivan Herman: I like Bijan's proposal. he's great! But I also want to put it in the semantics document? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:48:23 <bparsia> IanH: But *which* semantics document

Ian Horrocks: But *which* semantics document [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:48:28 <bparsia> ivan: You win

Ivan Herman: You win [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:48:43 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:49:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:50:01 <sandro> Sandro: It might make sense to keep the test cases out of any printable document.

Sandro Hawke: It might make sense to keep the test cases out of any printable document. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:50:38 <bparsia> Topic: 116 Axiomatic triples

10. 116 Axiomatic triples

17:50:39 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:50:44 <bparsia> Kill them!

Bijan Parsia: Kill them!

17:50:56 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:51:03 <Zhe> q+

Zhe Wu: q+

17:51:08 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:51:14 <IanH> ack bparsia

Ian Horrocks: ack bparsia

17:51:34 <sandro> Ian: You don't have to have them to be conformant, but you can add them if you want and still be conformant.

Ian Horrocks: You don't have to have them to be conformant, but you can add them if you want and still be conformant. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:51:58 <sandro> Bijan: So far, people have had to sort through to figure out which rules make sense to have, in practice.

Bijan Parsia: So far, people have had to sort through to figure out which rules make sense to have, in practice. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:52:09 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:52:32 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:52:37 <ivan> ack Zhe

Ivan Herman: ack Zhe

17:53:14 <bparsia> Zhe: Now that conformance rocks, I agree with Bijan. We have all the rules, even the dumb ones, in RDFS, but we tell users to turn them off!

Zhe Wu: Now that conformance rocks, I agree with Bijan. We have all the rules, even the dumb ones, in RDFS, but we tell users to turn them off! [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:53:15 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:53:19 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

17:53:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:53:39 <bparsia> IanH: If we include them, then you *have* add them to be conformant!

Ian Horrocks: If we include them, then you *have* add them to be conformant! [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:53:43 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan

17:54:07 <m_schnei> and one for Simple Entailment

Michael Schneider: and one for Simple Entailment

17:54:12 <m_schnei> and one for D entailment

Michael Schneider: and one for D entailment

17:54:17 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:54:18 <bparsia> ivan: The issue (as I've raised it) is imprecise, because we have two RDF rulesets (one for RDF and one for RDFS and one for Simple Entailment)

Ivan Herman: The issue (as I've raised it) is imprecise, because we have two RDF rulesets (one for RDF and one for RDFS and one for Simple Entailment) [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:54:59 <bparsia> ...So I'm inclined to agree with Zhe [and BIJAN!] that these should be optional. Editorially, we should say something about these extra ones e.g., in the Primer.

Bijan Parsia: ...So I'm inclined to agree with Zhe [and BIJAN!] that these should be optional. Editorially, we should say something about these extra ones e.g., in the Primer.

17:55:21 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

17:55:21 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

17:55:21 <bparsia> IanH: It'd be better to have opt-in rather than opt-out

Ian Horrocks: It'd be better to have opt-in rather than opt-out [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:55:22 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:55:30 <IanH> ack m_schnei

Ian Horrocks: ack m_schnei

17:55:56 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:56:10 <bparsia> m_schnei: I agree we shouldn't make them part of the spec (for the above reasons) but there may be people who want this.

Michael Schneider: I agree we shouldn't make them part of the spec (for the above reasons) but there may be people who want this. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:56:13 <ivan> informational annex?

Ivan Herman: informational annex?

17:56:19 <bparsia> ...And we should tell them.

Bijan Parsia: ...And we should tell them.

17:56:41 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:56:50 <ivan> ack bparsia

Ivan Herman: ack bparsia

17:56:59 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:56:59 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:58:05 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

17:58:07 <bparsia> bparsia: I'm against a note, but some discussion is ok

Bijan Parsia: I'm against a note, but some discussion is ok [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:58:15 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan

17:58:17 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

17:58:26 <bparsia> IanH: but it'd be ok to have a little discussion including implementation costs.

Ian Horrocks: but it'd be ok to have a little discussion including implementation costs. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:58:28 <sandro> Ian: It would be okay to have a statement like "here are some extra rules you might want, but they have drawbacks", right?

Ian Horrocks: It would be okay to have a statement like "here are some extra rules you might want, but they have drawbacks", right? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

17:58:36 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:58:39 <Zhe> +1 to ivan

Zhe Wu: +1 to ivan

17:58:42 <bparsia> ivan: Don't even include the rules. Just point them to the RDF sematntics document

Ivan Herman: Don't even include the rules. Just point them to the RDF sematntics document [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

17:59:05 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:59:29 <sandro> +1 to having these extra rules in an appendix or something

Sandro Hawke: +1 to having these extra rules in an appendix or something

17:59:32 <bparsia> "Please note, the current rule set do not include *all* the rules necessary for RDF, or RDFS enatilment (see RDF semantics). The rules not included generally are not very useful and complicate the implementation unduely."

Bijan Parsia: "Please note, the current rule set do not include *all* the rules necessary for RDF, or RDFS enatilment (see RDF semantics). The rules not included generally are not very useful and complicate the implementation unduely."

18:00:15 <m_schnei> please no suggestions in the technical documents

Michael Schneider: please no suggestions in the technical documents

18:00:46 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:01:41 <bparsia> ivan: we should wait until the rest of the document finalized first.

Ivan Herman: we should wait until the rest of the document finalized first. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:01:46 <uli> +1 to Ian

Uli Sattler: +1 to Ian

18:01:49 <msmith> it seems very odd to make a note to ourselves but not put that note in the document

Mike Smith: it seems very odd to make a note to ourselves but not put that note in the document

18:02:05 <sandro> uli, not that when you do that as you did, with "/me" your nice words don't end up in the minutes.

Sandro Hawke: uli, not that when you do that as you did, with "/me" your nice words don't end up in the minutes.

18:02:07 <bparsia> IanH: isn't this orthogonal to the unification? Shouldn't we proceed.

Ian Horrocks: isn't this orthogonal to the unification? Shouldn't we proceed. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:02:10 <sandro> s/not/Note/

Sandro Hawke: s/not/Note/

18:02:24 <bmotik> The Profiles document is not that far away from being finished

Boris Motik: The Profiles document is not that far away from being finished

18:02:30 <uli> thanks, Sandro

Uli Sattler: thanks, Sandro

18:02:45 <bmotik> We could easily add this remark at the end of the rules section

Boris Motik: We could easily add this remark at the end of the rules section

18:03:07 <bparsia> I prefer concrete examples

Bijan Parsia: I prefer concrete examples

18:03:11 <bmotik> I can send an e-mail proposing resolution and then we can vote next week

Boris Motik: I can send an e-mail proposing resolution and then we can vote next week

18:03:44 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

18:03:44 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

18:04:30 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:04:32 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

18:04:32 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

18:04:41 <bparsia> IanH: We'll make changes to the draft and then discuss and resolve the issues at once.

Ian Horrocks: We'll make changes to the draft and then discuss and resolve the issues at once. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:05:15 <bmotik> ACTION bmotik2: to Insert some text into the Profiles document regarding axiomatic triples

Boris Motik: ACTION bmotik2: to Insert some text into the Profiles document regarding axiomatic triples

18:05:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-204 - Insert some text into the Profiles document regarding axiomatic triples [on Boris Motik - due 2008-09-03].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-204 - Insert some text into the Profiles document regarding axiomatic triples [on Boris Motik - due 2008-09-03].

18:05:32 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:05:34 <bparsia> Topic: 141 Rogue Literals

11. 141 Rogue Literals

18:06:21 <m_schnei> +1 to generalized RDF graphs

Michael Schneider: +1 to generalized RDF graphs

18:06:22 <sandro> +1 it's okay since these are just instances of t/3 predicate

Sandro Hawke: +1 it's okay since these are just instances of t/3 predicate

18:06:22 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:06:25 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

18:06:25 <bparsia> IanH: Peter says that it's not a problem since we need a slight generaliation of triples

Ian Horrocks: Peter says that it's not a problem since we need a slight generaliation of triples [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:06:33 <bparsia> ...appears in the rif document

Bijan Parsia: ...appears in the rif document

18:06:38 <bparsia> and the SPARQL document.

Bijan Parsia: and the SPARQL document.

18:06:41 <Zhe> q+

Zhe Wu: q+

18:06:49 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:06:51 <Carsten> Have to leave, sorry.

Carsten Lutz: Have to leave, sorry.

18:06:59 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan

18:07:03 <Zakim> -Carsten

Zakim IRC Bot: -Carsten

18:07:04 <bparsia> ivan: RIF says that they act on generalize graphs/triples

Ivan Herman: RIF says that they act on generalize graphs/triples [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:07:18 <bparsia> IanH: Yeah, that's basically what the T predicate does.

Ian Horrocks: Yeah, that's basically what the T predicate does. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:07:19 <IanH> ack Zhe

Ian Horrocks: ack Zhe

18:07:39 <bparsia> Zhe: Does this mean that implementors must filter out illegal triples.

Zhe Wu: Does this mean that implementors must filter out illegal triples. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:07:59 <bparsia> q+ to talk about sparql

Bijan Parsia: q+ to talk about sparql

18:08:09 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:08:21 <bparsia> IanH: conformance only talks about ground triples so the rogue ones never get in

Ian Horrocks: conformance only talks about ground triples so the rogue ones never get in [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:08:33 <bmotik> No

Boris Motik: No

18:08:35 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

18:08:37 <bparsia> ...If they return the rogue triples they might be unsound for owl full?

Bijan Parsia: ...If they return the rogue triples they might be unsound for owl full?

18:08:51 <ivan> ack bparsia

Ivan Herman: ack bparsia

18:08:51 <Zakim> bparsia, you wanted to talk about sparql

Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia, you wanted to talk about sparql

18:09:38 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

18:10:26 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

18:10:26 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

18:10:52 <bparsia> bparsia: You might have to filter (or might not) to conform with SPARQL...further investigation further.

Bijan Parsia: You might have to filter (or might not) to conform with SPARQL...further investigation further. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:11:27 <bparsia> bmotik: I don't think you'd *want* to filter them. They aren't unsound, but the question is how to *represent* the consequence in RDF, but they are *definitely* consequences.

Boris Motik: I don't think you'd *want* to filter them. They aren't unsound, but the question is how to *represent* the consequence in RDF, but they are *definitely* consequences. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:11:38 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:11:41 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

18:11:41 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

18:11:43 <ivan> ack bmotik

Ivan Herman: ack bmotik

18:11:53 <bparsia> more from bparsia: The problem is construct vs. select, potentially

Bijan Parsia: more from bparsia: The problem is construct vs. select, potentially

18:11:55 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

18:11:55 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

18:12:15 <bparsia> IanH: My conclusion is that this isn't a problem with our spec.

Ian Horrocks: My conclusion is that this isn't a problem with our spec. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:12:25 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:12:28 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

18:12:58 <bparsia> ivan: To muddy the water: There's another illegal triple: blank node as properties, can those come up?

Ivan Herman: To muddy the water: There's another illegal triple: blank node as properties, can those come up? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:13:45 <bparsia> IanH: Even that isn't an issue for our spec since we don't say what to return.

Ian Horrocks: Even that isn't an issue for our spec since we don't say what to return. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:14:00 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

18:14:20 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:14:23 <ivan> ack bparsia

Ivan Herman: ack bparsia

18:14:56 <m_schnei>  _:p inverse q . x q y --> y _:p x

Michael Schneider: _:p inverse q . x q y --&gt; y _:p x

18:15:35 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:15:40 <bmotik> Note that our spec doesn't say anything about what triples you should return to answers of queries

Boris Motik: Note that our spec doesn't say anything about what triples you should return to answers of queries

18:15:55 <uli> sounds fine to me

Uli Sattler: sounds fine to me

18:16:01 <bparsia> bparsia: I yield to IanH awesomeness

Bijan Parsia: I yield to IanH awesomeness [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:16:19 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:16:36 <bparsia> IanH: Everyone comfy? ivan?

Ian Horrocks: Everyone comfy? ivan? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:16:41 <bparsia> ivan:  Yes.

Ivan Herman: Yes. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:16:51 <bparsia> IanH: We'll aim for a resolution in the next week or so.

Ian Horrocks: We'll aim for a resolution in the next week or so. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:16:58 <bparsia> Topic: 109 namespaces

12. 109 namespaces

18:17:01 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

18:17:13 <IanH> ack bparsia

Ian Horrocks: ack bparsia

18:17:49 <sandro> Bijan: There are local names common to the XML syntax and the RDF serialization.  I forget which ones.   So there would be qnames where if you concat'd both parts you'd get something else with the same URI.

Bijan Parsia: There are local names common to the XML syntax and the RDF serialization. I forget which ones. So there would be qnames where if you concat'd both parts you'd get something else with the same URI. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

18:18:12 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:18:14 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

18:18:18 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:18:19 <ivan> ack ivan

Ivan Herman: ack ivan

18:18:22 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

18:18:34 <bparsia> ivan: I disagree but I have no new evidence.

Ivan Herman: I disagree but I have no new evidence. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:18:35 <m_schnei> there was no discussion on this at F2F§

Michael Schneider: there was no discussion on this at F2F§

18:18:49 <m_schnei> s/F2F§/F2F3/

Michael Schneider: s/F2F§/F2F3/

18:19:03 <bparsia> ...It'd be repeating the mistake of RDF.

Bijan Parsia: ...It'd be repeating the mistake of RDF.

18:19:15 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:19:42 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:21:48 <bparsia> Sandro: I'm with Ivan on borderline objecting

Sandro Hawke: I'm with Ivan on borderline objecting [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:21:59 <bparsia> bparsia: bparsia: I'd probably object

Bijan Parsia: bparsia: I'd probably object [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:22:25 <bparsia> IanH: Could you (sandro) check with the w3c.

Ian Horrocks: Could you (sandro) check with the w3c. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:22:35 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:23:54 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:24:11 <bparsia> bparsia: Do actual users matter more?

Bijan Parsia: Do actual users matter more? [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:24:27 <bparsia> sandro: There is a tag finding saying it's ok and I'd have trouble objecting in light of that.

Sandro Hawke: There is a tag finding saying it's ok and I'd have trouble objecting in light of that. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:24:58 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:24:59 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

18:25:05 <bparsia> sandro: And I get Bijan's point that the users of the XML syntax are critical here.

Sandro Hawke: And I get Bijan's point that the users of the XML syntax are critical here. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:25:11 <IanH> ack ivan

Ian Horrocks: ack ivan

18:25:50 <bparsia> ivan: I don't fully agree with sandro, but I am extrapolating from the RDF/XML experience when people have had confusion.

Ivan Herman: I don't fully agree with sandro, but I am extrapolating from the RDF/XML experience when people have had confusion. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:26:06 <bparsia> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

18:26:12 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:26:20 <ivan> ack bparsia

Ivan Herman: ack bparsia

18:26:24 <m_schnei>  rdf:ID, rdf:about, ...

Michael Schneider: rdf:ID, rdf:about, ...

18:27:10 <sandro> Bijan: Ivan, in my experience, that's not a prevalent error -- most people understand the situation okay.    Is it big in your judgement?

Bijan Parsia: Ivan, in my experience, that's not a prevalent error -- most people understand the situation okay. Is it big in your judgement? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

18:27:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:27:39 <bparsia> ivan: I see it as a problem for learning.

Ivan Herman: I see it as a problem for learning. [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ]

18:27:42 <sandro> ivan: I have seen it a lot.    It's a learning problem.  They do understand it eventually.

Ivan Herman: I have seen it a lot. It's a learning problem. They do understand it eventually. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

18:28:03 <sandro> Bijan: So it's ease-of-learning vs ease-of-use.

Bijan Parsia: So it's ease-of-learning vs ease-of-use. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

18:28:25 <m_schnei> funny is "rdf:resource" and "rdfs:Resource" :-)

Michael Schneider: funny is "rdf:resource" and "rdfs:Resource" :-)

18:28:32 <uli> throw a dice?

Uli Sattler: throw a dice?

18:29:02 <sandro> http://www.flip-coin.com/

Sandro Hawke: http://www.flip-coin.com/

18:29:11 <uli> can we have Bijan and Ivan discuss during this week and then report back?

Uli Sattler: can we have Bijan and Ivan discuss during this week and then report back?

18:29:17 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace

Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace

18:29:21 <JeffP> thanks, bye

Jeff Pan: thanks, bye

18:29:22 <Zakim> -msmith

Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith

18:29:22 <Zhe> bye

Zhe Wu: bye

18:29:23 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau

Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau

18:29:23 <Zakim> -Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan

18:29:24 <MarkusK> bye

Markus Krötzsch: bye

18:29:25 <Zakim> -bmotik

Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik

18:29:25 <Zakim> -Achille

Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille

18:29:28 <uli> bye

Uli Sattler: bye

18:29:29 <Zakim> -JeffP

Zakim IRC Bot: -JeffP

18:29:30 <Zakim> -Zhe

Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe

18:29:32 <bparsia> How about uli and sandro :)_

Bijan Parsia: How about uli and sandro :)_

18:29:32 <Zakim> -MarkusK

Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK

18:29:36 <sandro> :-)

Sandro Hawke: :-)

18:29:39 <Zakim> -uli

Zakim IRC Bot: -uli

18:29:43 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

18:29:44 <Zakim> -m_schnei

Zakim IRC Bot: -m_schnei

18:29:45 <Zakim> -bparsia

Zakim IRC Bot: -bparsia

18:29:46 <Zakim> -IanH

Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH

18:29:47 <sandro> flip-coin.com said "same ns".

Sandro Hawke: flip-coin.com said "same ns".

18:29:56 <bparsia> YAY!

Bijan Parsia: YAY!

18:30:14 <sandro> (but I should still check with some of my co-workers.   :-(    )

Sandro Hawke: (but I should still check with some of my co-workers. :-( )


This revision (#1) generated 2008-08-28 11:54:39 UTC by 'ihorrock2', comments: None