OWL Working Group

Minutes of 08 October 2008

Present
Ian Horrocks Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Mike Smith Sandro Hawke Uli Sattler Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Zhe Wu Jie Bao Rinke Hoekstra Evan Wallace Bernardo Cuenca Grau Alan Ruttenberg Achille Fokoue Christine Golbreich Elisa Kendall Michael Schneider Carsten Lutz
Scribe
Zhe Wu
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. previous minutes accepted. link
  2. close Action-202 link
  3. close issue 130 as in T&C link
Topics
16:59:04 <scribenick> PRESENT: IanH, bijan (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Sandro, uli (muted), pfps, ratnesh, Zhe, baojie, Rinke, ewallace, bcuencagrau, alan_ruttenberg, Achille, Christine, Elisa, m_schnei, Carsten
17:02:42 <IanH> ScribeNick: Zhe

(Scribe set to Zhe Wu)

17:02:56 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here?

17:02:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, bijan (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Sandro, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ratnesh, Zhe, baojie, Rinke

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, bijan (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Sandro, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ratnesh, Zhe, baojie, Rinke

17:02:59 <Zakim> On IRC I see Rinke, baojie, ewallace, bcuencagrau, uli, Zhe, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, msmith, IanH, ratnesh, bijan, pfps, alanr, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Rinke, baojie, ewallace, bcuencagrau, uli, Zhe, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, msmith, IanH, ratnesh, bijan, pfps, alanr, sandro, trackbot

17:03:06 <Rinke> rrsagent, pointer?

Rinke Hoekstra: rrsagent, pointer?

17:03:06 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/10/08-owl-irc#T17-03-06

RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2008/10/08-owl-irc#T17-03-06

17:03:22 <Rinke> rrsagent, make records public

Rinke Hoekstra: rrsagent, make records public

17:03:24 <Zhe> Topic: Admin

1. Admin

17:03:35 <IanH> zakim, who is here?

Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here?

17:03:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see IanH, bijan (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Sandro, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ratnesh, Zhe, baojie, Rinke

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see IanH, bijan (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Sandro, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ratnesh, Zhe, baojie, Rinke

17:03:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see Rinke, baojie, ewallace, uli, Zhe, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, msmith, IanH, ratnesh, bijan, pfps, alanr, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Rinke, baojie, ewallace, uli, Zhe, bmotik, RRSAgent, Zakim, msmith, IanH, ratnesh, bijan, pfps, alanr, sandro, trackbot

17:03:58 <Zakim> +[IBM]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM]

17:04:36 <Zhe> Agenda amendments.

Agenda amendments.

17:04:36 <Zhe> IanH: add issue 127 to the agenda

Ian Horrocks: add ISSUE-127 to the agenda

17:04:45 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me

Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me

17:04:45 <Zakim> +Achille; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it

17:04:59 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace

Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace

17:05:17 <Zakim> +??P15

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P15

17:05:21 <Zhe> IanH: other suggestions?

Ian Horrocks: other suggestions?

17:05:37 <uli> they are a bit laconic, but what can we do

Uli Sattler: they are a bit laconic, but what can we do

17:05:38 <pfps> previous minutes are acceptable

Peter Patel-Schneider: previous minutes are acceptable

17:05:45 <Zhe> Proposed: accept previous minutes Oct 1, 2008

PROPOSED: accept previous minutes Oct 1, 2008

17:05:49 <cgolbrei> zakim, +??P15 is cgolbrei

Christine Golbreich: zakim, +??P15 is cgolbrei

17:05:49 <Zakim> sorry, cgolbrei, I do not recognize a party named '+??P15'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, cgolbrei, I do not recognize a party named '+??P15'

17:06:03 <Zhe> Resolved: previous minutes accepted.

RESOLVED: previous minutes accepted.

17:06:11 <uli> zakim, ??P15 is cgolbrei

Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P15 is cgolbrei

17:06:11 <Zakim> +cgolbrei; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +cgolbrei; got it

17:06:12 <Zhe> Topic: Action item status

2. Action item status

17:06:24 <Zhe> IanH: SKOS comments

Ian Horrocks: SKOS comments

17:06:31 <cgolbrei> zakim, ??P15 is cgolbrei

Christine Golbreich: zakim, ??P15 is cgolbrei

17:06:31 <Zakim> I already had ??P15 as cgolbrei, cgolbrei

Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P15 as cgolbrei, cgolbrei

17:06:44 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

17:06:58 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:07:17 <IanH> Alan?

Ian Horrocks: Alan?

17:07:20 <Zhe> IanH: action-189 review RDF Mapping

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-189 review RDF Mapping

17:07:34 <Zhe> IanH: suggest to Alan to drop it

Ian Horrocks: suggest to Alan to drop it

17:07:44 <pfps> suggest dropping 189 as overtaken by events

Peter Patel-Schneider: suggest dropping 189 as overtaken by events

17:07:59 <Zakim> +??P19

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P19

17:08:01 <Zhe> Alan:  I will do the review. So just leave it open. It does not have to be done before publishing.

Alan Ruttenberg: I will do the review. So just leave it open. It does not have to be done before publishing.

17:08:23 <Zhe> IanH: action-202: Alan Ruttenberg to have another try at punning proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-202: Alan Ruttenberg to have another try at punning proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases

17:08:23 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/202

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/202

17:08:40 <Zakim> -??P19

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P19

17:08:44 <Zhe> Alan: Boris has a proposal worth discussion

Alan Ruttenberg: Boris has a proposal worth discussion

17:08:47 <bijan> It's never going to get done

Bijan Parsia: It's never going to get done

17:08:52 <Zhe> Resolved: close Action-202

RESOLVED: close ACTION-202

17:08:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:08:57 <bijan> Mooted by events

Bijan Parsia: Mooted by events

17:09:01 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

17:09:02 <Zakim> +??P19

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P19

17:09:08 <Bernardo> Zakim, ??P19 is me

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P19 is me

17:09:08 <Zakim> +Bernardo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Bernardo; got it

17:09:11 <Zhe> IanH: Action-174: Bijan Parsia to provide an rdf serialization for his rich annotation proposal

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-174: Bijan Parsia to provide an rdf serialization for his rich annotation proposal

17:09:32 <Zhe> IanH: Action-207: Sandro Hawke to keep rdf:text publication on track

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-207: Sandro Hawke to keep rdf:text publication on track

17:09:32 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/207

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/207

17:09:34 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:10:13 <Zakim> +Elisa_Kendall

Zakim IRC Bot: +Elisa_Kendall

17:10:14 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:10:23 <Bernardo> I did

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: I did

17:10:24 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:10:55 <Zhe> IanH: under the impression that not much has happended

Ian Horrocks: under the impression that not much has happended

17:11:03 <Zhe> sandro: it is moving.

Sandro Hawke: it is moving.

17:11:10 <Zhe> IanH: we will then call the action done.

Ian Horrocks: we will then call the action done.

17:11:20 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:11:26 <Zhe> IanH: action-227: Alan Ruttenberg to email to Elisa and other interested person about metamodel

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-227: Alan Ruttenberg to email to Elisa and other interested person about metamodel

17:11:26 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/227

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/227

17:11:40 <Zhe> alanr: it is done

Alan Ruttenberg: it is done

17:11:45 <pfps> timeframe?

Peter Patel-Schneider: timeframe?

17:12:01 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:12:05 <Zhe> Alanr: is it feasible to get it done before F2F4

Alan Ruttenberg: is it feasible to get it done before F2F4

17:12:33 <pfps> the clock is ticking quite fast here

Peter Patel-Schneider: the clock is ticking quite fast here

17:12:42 <Zhe> Elisa: Not sure. I can get the latest models from them. Some portion depends on availability of other people

Elisa Kendall: Not sure. I can get the latest models from them. Some portion depends on availability of other people

17:12:35 <ewallace> What tool can load this?

Evan Wallace: What tool can load this?

17:12:44 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:13:02 <Zhe> IanH: action-217: Jie Bao to get to the RIF to ensure that RDF changes are done properly

Ian Horrocks: ACTION-217: Jie Bao to get to the RIF to ensure that RDF changes are done properly

17:13:02 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/217

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/217

17:13:32 <Zhe> Jie: I need one more week

Jie Bao: I need one more week

17:13:45 <Zhe> IanH: Are you confident it can be done by next week? I will then update the due date.

Ian Horrocks: Are you confident it can be done by next week? I will then update the due date.

17:13:55 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

17:14:05 <Zhe> Topic: Brief discussion on F2F4

3. Brief discussion on F2F4

17:14:09 <m_schnei> zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Michael Schneider: zakim, [IPcaller] is me

17:14:09 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it

17:14:13 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:14:13 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:14:34 <Zhe> IanH: Now there is a draft agenda. We need to get it out later today. We may come to it if anyone has comments/suggestion on the agenda

Ian Horrocks: Now there is a draft agenda. We need to get it out later today. We may come to it if anyone has comments/suggestion on the agenda

17:15:06 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:15:20 <Zhe> Topic: Reviewing and Publishing

4. Reviewing and Publishing

17:15:36 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

17:15:38 <Zhe> sandro: There is one more thing on the todo list. We need to fix broken links. Anyone wants to fix broken links?

Sandro Hawke: There is one more thing on the todo list. We need to fix broken links. Anyone wants to fix broken links?

17:15:42 <m_schnei> zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Michael Schneider: zakim, [IPcaller] is me

17:15:42 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it

17:15:47 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:15:47 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:15:57 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

17:16:00 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

17:16:00 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

17:16:00 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:16:15 <Zhe> Boris: what links are broken? in reference ?

Boris Motik: what links are broken? in reference ?

17:16:22 <Zhe> sandro: There are about 6~7 of them. Most are references. Just fix on the wiki, and run check links.

Sandro Hawke: There are about 6~7 of them. Most are references. Just fix on the wiki, and run check links.

17:16:50 <Zhe> Boris: I can do that

Boris Motik: I can do that

17:17:20 <Zhe> IanH: we are good to go then

Ian Horrocks: we are good to go then

17:17:39 <Zhe> sandro: I think so. I am generating another version now. Not sure if web master can publish today.

Sandro Hawke: I think so. I am generating another version now. Not sure if web master can publish today.

17:17:41 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

17:17:47 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:17:47 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

17:17:50 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:17:55 <Zhe> IanH: The expectation is to get it ready for pulibshing today.

Ian Horrocks: The expectation is to get it ready for pulibshing today.

17:18:00 <bmotik> q-

Boris Motik: q-

17:18:09 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:18:19 <Zhe> alanr: We are missing one editor comment on the conformance.

Alan Ruttenberg: We are missing one editor comment on the conformance.

17:18:29 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

17:18:33 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:18:36 <Zhe> IanH: I am not convinced when looking at the comment. Not sure if it is a problem.

Ian Horrocks: I am not convinced when looking at the comment. Not sure if it is a problem.

17:18:54 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

17:18:54 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

17:18:55 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:19:10 <Zakim> -Alan

Zakim IRC Bot: -Alan

17:19:23 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:19:23 <Zakim> bmotik was already muted, bmotik

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was already muted, bmotik

17:19:50 <Zhe> m_schnei: datatype map conformance requires at least all of the datatype from OWL 2 datatype maps

Michael Schneider: datatype map conformance requires at least all of the datatype from OWL 2 datatype maps

17:20:43 <Zhe> IanH: If you only use a subset, it does not make you inconsistent.

Ian Horrocks: If you only use a subset, it does not make you inconsistent.

17:21:06 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:21:17 <Zhe> m_schnei: I will have another look then.

Michael Schneider: I will have another look then.

17:21:26 <Zhe> IanH: Maybe I will put in an editor note anyway. If we agree it is ok, then we can take it out. I will do it right after the tele conf

Ian Horrocks: Maybe I will put in an editor note anyway. If we agree it is ok, then we can take it out. I will do it right after the tele conf

17:21:42 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:21:44 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:21:44 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:22:05 <m_schnei> works for me

Michael Schneider: works for me

17:22:06 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:22:13 <bmotik> q+ to ask a qustion to sandro

Boris Motik: q+ to ask a qustion to sandro

17:22:13 <m_schnei> q-

Michael Schneider: q-

17:22:18 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:22:20 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

17:22:20 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

17:22:26 <IanH> ack bmotik

Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik

17:22:31 <Zakim> bmotik, you wanted to ask a qustion to sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik, you wanted to ask a qustion to sandro

17:22:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:22:33 <Zhe> bmotik: Sandro, just a brief question, is it just the Profiles needs fixing?

Boris Motik: Sandro, just a brief question, is it just the Profiles needs fixing?

17:22:49 <Zhe> sandro: they are all in profiles doc.

Sandro Hawke: they are all in profiles doc.

17:22:33 <Zakim> +Alan

Zakim IRC Bot: +Alan

17:22:39 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:22:46 <alanr> sorry - had to attend to something

Alan Ruttenberg: sorry - had to attend to something

17:23:10 <alanr> q+ to ask if someone is taking notes

Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to ask if someone is taking notes

17:23:14 <Zhe> sandro: It is the fragments (part after URL #)

Sandro Hawke: It is the fragments (part after URL #)

17:23:24 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:23:35 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:23:35 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

17:23:36 <alanr> q-

Alan Ruttenberg: q-

17:23:40 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:23:42 <Zhe> IanH: I will add the note to the conformance

Ian Horrocks: I will add the note to the conformance

17:24:05 <Zhe> IanH: Is there anything else with publishing progress? Done then.

Ian Horrocks: Is there anything else with publishing progress? Done then.

17:24:22 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:24:22 <Zhe> IanH: Review Manchester Syntax doc

Ian Horrocks: Review Manchester Syntax doc

17:24:34 <Zhe> IanH: Do we want people to review?

Ian Horrocks: Do we want people to review?

17:24:35 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:24:48 <Zhe> pfps: It has been reviewed.

Peter Patel-Schneider: It has been reviewed.

17:24:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:24:57 <Zhe> alanr: I am not toally done. Should be done today.

Alan Ruttenberg: I am not toally done. Should be done today.

17:25:03 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:25:35 <pfps> There are 2.5 reviews for Manchester.

Peter Patel-Schneider: There are 2.5 reviews for Manchester.

17:25:46 <pfps> One significant comment - using labels instead of names.

Peter Patel-Schneider: One significant comment - using labels instead of names.

17:26:40 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:26:41 <Rinke> Review comment from AlanRuttenberg 05:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Rinke Hoekstra: Review comment from AlanRuttenberg 05:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

17:26:41 <Rinke> The use of labels to to replace URIs is central to productive use of Manchester syntax when URIs are not meaningful, as is common in many ontologies. In addition it is often recommended that, in general, URIs not have meaninful information encoded in their strings (see e.g. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html). Given this and the goal of making the Manchester syntax readable and user friendly, this specification should say precisely how to use labels in

Rinke Hoekstra: The use of labels to to replace URIs is central to productive use of Manchester syntax when URIs are not meaningful, as is common in many ontologies. In addition it is often recommended that, in general, URIs not have meaninful information encoded in their strings (see e.g. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html). Given this and the goal of making the Manchester syntax readable and user friendly, this specification should say precisely how to use labels in

17:26:42 <Zhe> IanH: Regarding M Syntax, is it anything we can usefully discuss?

Ian Horrocks: Regarding M Syntax, is it anything we can usefully discuss?

17:27:00 <m_schnei> I don

Michael Schneider: I don

17:27:02 <Zhe> pfps: comment M Syntax use URI as name. Suggestion is to use rdfs:label as the name.

Peter Patel-Schneider: comment M Syntax use URI as name. Suggestion is to use rdfs:label as the name.

17:27:08 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:27:11 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

17:27:21 <bijan> I don't understand this

Bijan Parsia: I don't understand this

17:27:21 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:27:25 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:27:36 <m_schnei> I don't understand this, too

Michael Schneider: I don't understand this, too

17:27:51 <Zhe> alanr: In the Protege, many ontologies use opaque ids or URIs. It would be more user friendly if lables are used. I think we know how to do it. I have sent email about how.

Alan Ruttenberg: In the Protege, many ontologies use opaque ids or URIs. It would be more user friendly if lables are used. I think we know how to do it. I have sent email about how.

17:28:34 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:28:39 <pfps>   rdfs:label annotation value, not rdfs:comment annotation value

Peter Patel-Schneider: rdfs:label annotation value, not rdfs:comment annotation value

17:28:40 <uli> could you post a link to the email, Alan?

Uli Sattler: could you post a link to the email, Alan?

17:29:00 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:29:11 <Zhe> alanr: when you look at a class definition, it is not understandable from P4 (Protege)

Alan Ruttenberg: when you look at a class definition, it is not understandable from P4 (Protege)

17:29:14 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:29:17 <Zhe> uli: Is this an OWL or a P4/tools issue?

Uli Sattler: Is this an OWL or a P4/tools issue?

17:29:19 <bijan> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:29:22 <uli> zakim, unmute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me

17:29:22 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted

17:29:24 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

17:29:36 <alanr> I think so

Alan Ruttenberg: I think so

17:29:38 <Zhe> uli: are we sure this is really owl issue, but not P4 issue.

Uli Sattler: are we sure this is really owl issue, but not P4 issue.

17:29:41 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:29:42 <alanr> we are defining the format

Alan Ruttenberg: we are defining the format

17:29:46 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

17:29:46 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted

17:29:48 <Zhe> IanH: I don't know

Ian Horrocks: I don't know

17:29:50 <IanH> ack uli

Ian Horrocks: ack uli

17:29:50 <Zakim> uli, you wanted to ask whether this is an OWL or a P4/tools issue

Zakim IRC Bot: uli, you wanted to ask whether this is an OWL or a P4/tools issue

17:29:55 <m_schnei> I thought that I have used Manchester syntax many times in Topbraid, and never found something missing

Michael Schneider: I thought that I have used Manchester syntax many times in Topbraid, and never found something missing

17:29:57 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

17:29:57 <uli> zakim, mute me

Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me

17:29:58 <Zakim> uli should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted

17:30:08 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:30:30 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

17:30:49 <Zhe> bijan: This could be handled by smart editors. It is possible not to make this change.

Bijan Parsia: This could be handled by smart editors. It is possible not to make this change.

17:31:03 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:31:05 <bijan> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me

17:31:05 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted

17:31:53 <Zhe> pfps: This is largely due to editors using different presentation methods

Peter Patel-Schneider: This is largely due to editors using different presentation methods

17:32:00 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:32:01 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

17:32:06 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:32:22 <Zhe> alanr: the motivation to have M syntax is to have an accessible, useful syntax

Alan Ruttenberg: the motivation to have M syntax is to have an accessible, useful syntax

17:32:26 <bijan> Which is does

Bijan Parsia: Which is does

17:32:29 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

17:32:39 <bijan> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:32:47 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:32:54 <IanH> ack pfps

Ian Horrocks: ack pfps

17:33:00 <Zhe> pfps: we introduce a new, weird way to damage ontologies

Peter Patel-Schneider: we introduce a new, weird way to damage ontologies

17:33:10 <alanr> why do we need it?

Alan Ruttenberg: why do we need it?

17:33:24 <alanr> if just for the primer, not justified, imo

Alan Ruttenberg: if just for the primer, not justified, imo

17:33:31 <bijan> Oo, that's a good point (Peter's)

Bijan Parsia: Oo, that's a good point (Peter's)

17:33:38 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:33:41 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

17:33:41 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted

17:33:42 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

17:33:48 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

17:33:57 <Zhe> bijan: the current version does meet all criteria Alan said. It is unclear to me that this technique needs to be incorporated

Bijan Parsia: the current version does meet all criteria Alan said. It is unclear to me that this technique needs to be incorporated

17:34:39 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:34:43 <bijan> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me

17:34:43 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted

17:35:01 <bijan> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:35:10 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:35:10 <Zhe> alanr: If the sole use is for primer, then there is no need for publishing.

Alan Ruttenberg: If the sole use is for primer, then there is no need for publishing.

17:35:12 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

17:35:24 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

17:35:24 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted

17:35:53 <Zhe> IanH: just a few more comments and then we need to move on

Ian Horrocks: just a few more comments and then we need to move on

17:35:54 <m_schnei> +1 to ian, I first have to understand the basic problem

Michael Schneider: +1 to ian, I first have to understand the basic problem

17:36:05 <Zhe> bijan: it is 100% a spec.

Bijan Parsia: it is 100% a spec.

17:36:08 <alanr> I was reacting to Peter's comment. I propose to publish it as a note to supplement primer, meets our goal and primer requirement.

Alan Ruttenberg: I was reacting to Peter's comment. I propose to publish it as a note to supplement primer, meets our goal and primer requirement.

17:36:39 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

17:36:44 <pfps> Bijan covered my points. We need more compelling argument, if we don't have this feature then the value is gone

Peter Patel-Schneider: Bijan covered my points. We need more compelling argument, if we don't have this feature then the value is gone

17:36:56 <alanr> qq+

Alan Ruttenberg: qq+

17:36:57 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

17:37:04 <bijan> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me

17:37:04 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted

17:37:13 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:37:27 <bijan> I'm fine debating the feature

Bijan Parsia: I'm fine debating the feature

17:37:30 <Zhe> alanr: it seems quite easy to deal with it

Alan Ruttenberg: it seems quite easy to deal with it

17:37:37 <bijan> I strongly object to the esclation of the significance of it

Bijan Parsia: I strongly object to the esclation of the significance of it

17:37:38 <Zhe> IanH: We will come back to it.

Ian Horrocks: We will come back to it.

17:37:52 <Zhe> IanH: Quick reference guide status? Due by end of Oct?

Ian Horrocks: Quick reference guide status? Due by end of Oct?

17:37:52 <alanr> I strongly object to your strong objection ;-)

Alan Ruttenberg: I strongly object to your strong objection ;-)

17:38:11 <pfps> there are some reviews in already, but not all

Peter Patel-Schneider: there are some reviews in already, but not all

17:38:21 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:38:28 <bijan> I object on the grounds that the drama is counterproductive and based on clear inaccuracy (e.g., that it's not a spec).

Bijan Parsia: I object on the grounds that the drama is counterproductive and based on clear inaccuracy (e.g., that it's not a spec).

17:38:34 <Zhe> Elisa: we did get some feedback. Jie is going to respond. That card has been used many times. Feedback is fantastic. Need restructuring and more work. Peter has some good suggestions on re-org. We will try it. Hopefully we can get it done in the few weeks. Our goal is to complete a revision/re-org by f2f

Elisa Kendall: we did get some feedback. Jie is going to respond. That card has been used many times. Feedback is fantastic. Need restructuring and more work. Peter has some good suggestions on re-org. We will try it. Hopefully we can get it done in the few weeks. Our goal is to complete a revision/re-org by f2f

17:39:56 <uli> I would offer to have a look at the design before you implement it

Uli Sattler: I would offer to have a look at the design before you implement it

17:40:58 <alanr> uli: email was http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Sep/0248.html

Uli Sattler: email was http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Sep/0248.html [ Scribe Assist by Alan Ruttenberg ]

17:40:59 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:41:07 <uli> Elisa, if i wouldn't think that this would be a useful doc I wouldn't have offered

Uli Sattler: Elisa, if i wouldn't think that this would be a useful doc I wouldn't have offered

17:41:22 <baojie> Original card by Li and Tim: http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/resource/html/id/94/

Jie Bao: Original card by Li and Tim: http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/resource/html/id/94/

17:41:25 <Zakim> +??P26

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P26

17:41:25 <Zhe> IanH: leave it to you and uli to talk offine and work together

Ian Horrocks: leave it to you and uli to talk offine and work together

17:41:34 <Carsten> zakim, ??pp26 is me

Carsten Lutz: zakim, ??pp26 is me

17:41:34 <Zakim> sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named '??pp26'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named '??pp26'

17:41:34 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:41:42 <Carsten> zakim, ??p26 is me

Carsten Lutz: zakim, ??p26 is me

17:41:42 <Zakim> +Carsten; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Carsten; got it

17:41:45 <Carsten> zakim, mute me

Carsten Lutz: zakim, mute me

17:41:45 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted

17:41:45 <Zhe> Elisa: we can set a call to have Jie, Elisa, Uli to talk through re-org issues

Elisa Kendall: we can set a call to have Jie, Elisa, Uli to talk through re-org issues

17:41:46 <uli> sure

Uli Sattler: sure

17:41:54 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:42:11 <Zhe> Topic: Issue discussions

5. Issue discussions

17:42:44 <Zhe> IanH: proposal to resolve issue 130: Conformance, warnings, errors

Ian Horrocks: proposal to resolve ISSUE-130: Conformance, warnings, errors

17:42:48 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/130

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/130

17:43:26 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:43:38 <Zhe> IanH: anyone against resolving this issue?

Ian Horrocks: anyone against resolving this issue?

17:44:28 <pfps> PROPOSED: close issue 130 as in T&C

PROPOSED: close ISSUE-130 as in T&amp;C

17:44:41 <bmotik> +1

Boris Motik: +1

17:44:42 <pfps> +1

Peter Patel-Schneider: +1

17:44:44 <m_schnei> +1 (FZI)

Michael Schneider: +1 (FZI)

17:44:44 <msmith> +1

Mike Smith: +1

17:44:45 <sandro> +1

Sandro Hawke: +1

17:44:46 <ewallace> +1

Evan Wallace: +1

17:44:46 <alanr> +1

Alan Ruttenberg: +1

17:44:47 <IanH> +1

Ian Horrocks: +1

17:44:47 <bijan> +1

Bijan Parsia: +1

17:44:47 <uli> _1

Uli Sattler: _1

17:44:48 <Zhe> Zhe: +1

Zhe Wu: +1

17:44:48 <Rinke> +1

Rinke Hoekstra: +1

17:44:54 <Achille> +1

Achille Fokoue: +1

17:44:56 <uli> +1 that is

Uli Sattler: +1 that is

17:44:57 <Elisa> +1

Elisa Kendall: +1

17:45:06 <IanH> RESOLVED: close issue 130 as in T&C

RESOLVED: close ISSUE-130 as in T&amp;C

17:45:30 <Zhe> IanH: Issue discussions. lift issue 127

Ian Horrocks: Issue discussions. lift ISSUE-127

17:45:34 <Zhe> IanH: issue-127: documents contain bits of nary datatype but these are not yet in OWL 2

Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-127: documents contain bits of nary datatype but these are not yet in OWL 2

17:45:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/127

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/127

17:45:46 <bijan> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

17:45:49 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

17:45:50 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted

17:45:53 <Zhe> IanH: what are we going to do if we don't have nary in the SPEC?

Ian Horrocks: what are we going to do if we don't have nary in the SPEC?

17:45:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:46:00 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

17:46:15 <alanr> we have had discussion

Alan Ruttenberg: we have had discussion

17:46:18 <Zhe> bijan: We have hooks right now

Bijan Parsia: We have hooks right now

17:46:26 <Zhe> IanH: What are the hooks?

Ian Horrocks: What are the hooks?

17:46:29 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:46:42 <Zhe> bijan: For example, we can have a list of property restrictions and then we can have nary predicate, onProperties can take a list. That is the base level.

Bijan Parsia: For example, we can have a list of property restrictions and then we can have nary predicate, onProperties can take a list. That is the base level.

17:46:43 <alanr> q+ to ask instead what is the status of the n-ary

Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to ask instead what is the status of the n-ary

17:46:53 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:47:07 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:47:08 <m_schnei> datatype complements also

Michael Schneider: datatype complements also

17:47:23 <Zhe> alanr: Those are the kinds of things I was referring to

Alan Ruttenberg: Those are the kinds of things I was referring to

17:47:25 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

17:47:31 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:47:31 <Zakim> alanr, you wanted to ask instead what the status of the n-ary

Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to ask instead what the status of the n-ary

17:47:55 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

17:47:55 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

17:48:08 <IanH> ack bmotik

Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik

17:48:27 <Zhe> bmotik: To be precise, the hooks is the datarange class

Boris Motik: To be precise, the hooks is the datarange class

17:48:41 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:48:46 <Zhe> IanH: What if we don't have it?

Ian Horrocks: What if we don't have it?

17:49:00 <alanr> We have extensibility of datatype map

Alan Ruttenberg: We have extensibility of datatype map

17:49:06 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

17:49:23 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me

17:49:23 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted

17:49:34 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

17:49:34 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

17:49:35 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:50:05 <bmotik> bmotik: The Syntax document contains an explanation of what the hooks are in Section 7 and Section 8.4

Boris Motik: The Syntax document contains an explanation of what the hooks are in Section 7 and Section 8.4 [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ]

17:50:29 <Zhe> m_schnei: I want to add that the hook is also on compelmentOf

Michael Schneider: I want to add that the hook is also on compelmentOf

17:50:31 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:50:31 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:50:38 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:50:40 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

17:50:40 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

17:50:47 <Zhe> IanH: Would it be a problem if all have arity 1

Ian Horrocks: Would it be a problem if all have arity 1

17:50:51 <IanH> ack m_schnei

Ian Horrocks: ack m_schnei

17:51:07 <Zhe> m_schnei: maybe fine

Michael Schneider: maybe fine

17:51:15 <alanr> q?

Alan Ruttenberg: q?

17:51:16 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:51:16 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:51:17 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:51:48 <ewallace> So why don't we just put N-ary in OWL 2?

Evan Wallace: So why don't we just put N-ary in OWL 2?

17:52:09 <alanr> If there is progress made and hope for a spec by f2f, then I suggest we postpone in anticipation.

Alan Ruttenberg: If there is progress made and hope for a spec by f2f, then I suggest we postpone in anticipation.

17:52:13 <msmith> I believe Bijan is referring to this document http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Data_Range_Extension:_Linear_Equations

Mike Smith: I believe Bijan is referring to this document http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Data_Range_Extension:_Linear_Equations

17:52:17 <Zhe> bijan: Have a paper on how to compute satisfiability. I don't know who else objects the hooks.

Bijan Parsia: Have a paper on how to compute satisfiability. I don't know who else objects the hooks.

17:52:30 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:52:36 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

17:52:42 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:53:11 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:53:16 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:53:17 <Zhe> alanr: I am happy to know the progress. I object because we don't want to add things that are not understandble by reasoners.

Alan Ruttenberg: I am happy to know the progress. I object because we don't want to add things that are not understandble by reasoners.

17:53:34 <bijan> q+ to ask if this is datatypes

Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask if this is datatypes

17:53:41 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:54:17 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:54:59 <msmith> discussion at f2f3 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-07-29#N__2d_ary_datatype

Mike Smith: discussion at f2f3 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-07-29#N__2d_ary_datatype

17:55:00 <Zhe> bijan: there were objections (from Boris) on difficulty ground to add nary datatype

Bijan Parsia: there were objections (from Boris) on difficulty ground to add nary datatype

17:55:10 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

17:55:16 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:55:21 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

17:55:21 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to ask if this is datatypes

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to ask if this is datatypes

17:55:34 <bmotik> I look forward to learning about your results!

Boris Motik: I look forward to learning about your results!

17:55:38 <Zhe> bijan: I hope to convince Boris to include it after working out details. We already have extension point for data type

Bijan Parsia: I hope to convince Boris to include it after working out details. We already have extension point for data type

17:55:41 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

17:55:41 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

17:55:43 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:55:59 <alanr> over objection

Alan Ruttenberg: over objection

17:56:15 <alanr> and still under discussion

Alan Ruttenberg: and still under discussion

17:56:42 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:57:00 <alanr> +1

Alan Ruttenberg: +1

17:57:15 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:57:18 <Zhe> IanH: Maybe we can postpone once we make further progress with document

Ian Horrocks: Maybe we can postpone once we make further progress with document

17:57:19 <alanr> (and is hopeful that document will be completed)

Alan Ruttenberg: (and is hopeful that document will be completed)

17:58:00 <Zhe> m_schnei: I think I remember from last F2F, putting concrete n-ary datatype in has big impact on implementors

Michael Schneider: I think I remember from last F2F, putting concrete n-ary datatype in has big impact on implementors

17:58:07 <sandro> [ Apologies, I need to run off to another meeting.   Enjoy.... ]

Sandro Hawke: [ Apologies, I need to run off to another meeting. Enjoy.... ]

17:58:11 <bijan> Yes, we're there :)

Bijan Parsia: Yes, we're there :)

17:58:17 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

17:58:20 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

17:58:24 <bijan> The conformance problem would be solved by pointing to an additional recommendation

Bijan Parsia: The conformance problem would be solved by pointing to an additional recommendation

17:58:34 <bijan> Yes!

Bijan Parsia: Yes!

17:58:42 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

17:58:47 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

17:58:47 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

17:59:01 <IanH> ack m_schnei

Ian Horrocks: ack m_schnei

17:59:05 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

17:59:31 <Zhe> alanr: I object to leave it completely open in the document

Alan Ruttenberg: I object to leave it completely open in the document

17:59:33 <uli> I don't think that this will happen, Alan

Uli Sattler: I don't think that this will happen, Alan

17:59:41 <alanr> uli: great!

Uli Sattler: great! [ Scribe Assist by Alan Ruttenberg ]

17:59:48 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/144

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/144

17:59:51 <m_schnei> m_schnei: I remember the idea was that we put the hooks in the core OWL 2 language, and then (either we or a different WG) specifies certain n-ary datatypes (comparisons, etc.) as "standard extensions"

Michael Schneider: I remember the idea was that we put the hooks in the core OWL 2 language, and then (either we or a different WG) specifies certain n-ary datatypes (comparisons, etc.) as "standard extensions" [ Scribe Assist by Michael Schneider ]

17:59:48 <Zhe> IanH: issue-144: missing base triple in serialization of axioms with annotations.

Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-144: missing base triple in serialization of axioms with annotations.

17:59:53 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:00:01 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

18:00:04 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:00:05 <bijan> Let's dump reificatioN!

Bijan Parsia: Let's dump reificatioN!

18:00:05 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

18:00:05 <Zakim> m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei

18:00:07 <pfps> no change from last time :-)

Peter Patel-Schneider: no change from last time :-)

18:00:12 <IanH> ack m_schnei

Ian Horrocks: ack m_schnei

18:00:36 <Zhe> m_schnei: Not having the base triple  will cause some syntatic non-monotonicity. After adding annotations will remove original assertions, it is not a problem for FULL semantics because base triple will be re-created.

Michael Schneider: Not having the base triple will cause some syntatic non-monotonicity. After adding annotations will remove original assertions, it is not a problem for FULL semantics because base triple will be re-created.

18:02:04 <Zhe> m_schnei: However, it will be a problem for SPARQL, you have to re-create it

Michael Schneider: However, it will be a problem for SPARQL, you have to re-create it

18:01:58 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:02:03 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

18:02:16 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:02:17 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me

Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me

18:02:18 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted

18:02:19 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

18:02:19 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

18:02:21 <IanH> ack bmotik

Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik

18:02:34 <Zhe> bmotik: It still does not solve the problem if the triple is not there. adding a reification rule.

Boris Motik: It still does not solve the problem if the triple is not there. adding a reification rule.

18:03:53 <Zhe> ... tools can always add it.

... tools can always add it.

18:04:14 <Zhe> ... we should say tool should put related triples together in serialization, to address efficiency problem

... we should say tool should put related triples together in serialization, to address efficiency problem

18:04:46 <Zhe> ... for triple stores

... for triple stores

18:02:34 <alanr> what tool would remove the triple?

Alan Ruttenberg: what tool would remove the triple?

18:03:08 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

18:03:11 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:03:35 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

18:03:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:04:12 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

18:04:29 <Zhe> alanr: having a de-reification rule is not feasible. Two versions of ontologies will require two versions of query

Alan Ruttenberg: having a de-reification rule is not feasible. Two versions of ontologies will require two versions of query

18:04:43 <bijan> q+ to ask about this "common scenarios"

Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask about this "common scenarios"

18:04:57 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

18:05:02 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:05:06 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

18:05:06 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

18:05:10 <uli> when would we then have trouble, Alan?

Uli Sattler: when would we then have trouble, Alan?

18:05:13 <IanH> ack m_schnei

Ian Horrocks: ack m_schnei

18:06:11 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

18:06:11 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan

18:06:14 <Zhe> m_schnei: why not just put it in?

Michael Schneider: why not just put it in?

18:06:15 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

18:06:15 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

18:06:24 <Zhe> bijan: i don't know

Bijan Parsia: i don't know

18:06:28 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

18:06:28 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to ask about this "common scenarios"

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to ask about this "common scenarios"

18:06:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:06:54 <msmith> m_schnei, just putting it in breaks the RDF -> functional mapping

Mike Smith: m_schnei, just putting it in breaks the RDF -&gt; functional mapping

18:06:57 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

18:07:01 <alanr> its not just axioms. it's entity annotations as well

Alan Ruttenberg: its not just axioms. it's entity annotations as well

18:07:27 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:08:05 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:08:06 <bijan> zakim, mute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me

18:08:07 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted

18:08:08 <IanH> ack bmotik

Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik

18:08:17 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

18:08:18 <Zhe> bijan: it is new and not well supported by RDF. we still need some smart technique to process it

Bijan Parsia: it is new and not well supported by RDF. we still need some smart technique to process it

18:08:45 <Zhe> bmotik: cannot distinguish axiom wo annotation and axiom with annotation

Boris Motik: cannot distinguish axiom wo annotation and axiom with annotation

18:08:54 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:08:55 <uli> Bijan, in the above, did "it" mean "OWL"?

Uli Sattler: Bijan, in the above, did "it" mean "OWL"?

18:09:07 <bijan> Axiom annotations

Bijan Parsia: Axiom annotations

18:09:08 <alanr> they should not be!

Alan Ruttenberg: they should not be!

18:09:15 <bijan> +1 to boris

Bijan Parsia: +1 to boris

18:09:29 <msmith> e.g., SubClassOf(A B) and SubClassOf( Annotation( dc:creator "msmith" ) A B)

Mike Smith: e.g., SubClassOf(A B) and SubClassOf( Annotation( dc:creator "msmith" ) A B)

18:09:41 <uli> thanks, Bijan

Uli Sattler: thanks, Bijan

18:09:55 <alanr> msmiths - smileys mess up your message

Alan Ruttenberg: msmiths - smileys mess up your message

18:10:07 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:10:19 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me

18:10:19 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted

18:10:30 <IanH> ack m_schnei

Ian Horrocks: ack m_schnei

18:11:13 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:11:22 <msmith> it would add axioms that didn't exist

Mike Smith: it would add axioms that didn't exist

18:11:42 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

18:11:47 <Zhe> m_schnei: I don't see the problem

Michael Schneider: I don't see the problem

18:11:55 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:11:56 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me

Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me

18:11:56 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted

18:11:56 <bmotik> Consider the following axioms:

Boris Motik: Consider the following axioms:

18:11:58 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

18:12:01 <bmotik> SubClassOf( A B )

Boris Motik: SubClassOf( A B )

18:12:03 <bmotik> and

Boris Motik: and

18:12:12 <msmith> q+

Mike Smith: q+

18:12:15 <bmotik> SubClassOf( Label("bla") A B )

Boris Motik: SubClassOf( Label("bla") A B )

18:12:32 <bmotik> The first gets translated into one triple only

Boris Motik: The first gets translated into one triple only

18:12:45 <Zhe> alanr: I am confused. it does not even make sense to have an un-annotated axiom and an annotated version in one ontology

Alan Ruttenberg: I am confused. it does not even make sense to have an un-annotated axiom and an annotated version in one ontology

18:12:48 <bmotik> The second gets translated into the four triples only.

Boris Motik: The second gets translated into the four triples only.

18:13:00 <uli> Alan, we won't be able to prevent these "duplicate axioms" and I don't think we should!

Uli Sattler: Alan, we won't be able to prevent these "duplicate axioms" and I don't think we should!

18:13:00 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:13:02 <m_schnei> yes, thats fine

Michael Schneider: yes, thats fine

18:13:08 <IanH> ack bmotik

Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik

18:13:09 <bijan> q+ to support distinguishing it

Bijan Parsia: q+ to support distinguishing it

18:13:11 <Zhe> bmotik: what do you mean by adding annotation

Boris Motik: what do you mean by adding annotation

18:13:37 <Zhe> ... P4 will retract and add a new one

... P4 will retract and add a new one

18:13:47 <Zhe> ... however it is beyond the point

... however it is beyond the point

18:13:41 <m_schnei> at least, the original semantics have to be the same after a roundtrip through RDF

Michael Schneider: at least, the original semantics have to be the same after a roundtrip through RDF

18:13:51 <alanr> so you have 4 annotations and you add a fifth and you "retract" the 4 annotations and add a *new* axiom with 5 annotations?

Alan Ruttenberg: so you have 4 annotations and you add a fifth and you "retract" the 4 annotations and add a *new* axiom with 5 annotations?

18:13:52 <bijan> I wrote SubClassOf( A B ). Then I merge with an ontology that had SubClassOf(Label("bla") A B)

Bijan Parsia: I wrote SubClassOf( A B ). Then I merge with an ontology that had SubClassOf(Label("bla") A B)

18:14:03 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

18:14:08 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:14:09 <bijan> SubClassOf(Label("Bla" A  B )

Bijan Parsia: SubClassOf(Label("Bla" A B )

18:14:09 <uli> e.g., we could have "the same axiom" from different imports and that have been created by different people

Uli Sattler: e.g., we could have "the same axiom" from different imports and that have been created by different people

18:14:21 <Zhe> bmotik: from a pure definition's perspective, it can happen. It will be strange to forbid it.

Boris Motik: from a pure definition's perspective, it can happen. It will be strange to forbid it.

18:14:21 <bijan> It'd be nice to notice that there are two!

Bijan Parsia: It'd be nice to notice that there are two!

18:14:22 <alanr> They should be considered the *same* axiom

Alan Ruttenberg: They should be considered the *same* axiom

18:14:29 <msmith> q-

Mike Smith: q-

18:14:35 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

18:14:38 <bijan> E.g., that one was written by me (without a label).

Bijan Parsia: E.g., that one was written by me (without a label).

18:14:40 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:14:42 <m_schnei> q-

Michael Schneider: q-

18:14:47 <bijan> The other one wasn't (and has a label)

Bijan Parsia: The other one wasn't (and has a label)

18:14:55 <bijan> zakim, unmute me

Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me

18:14:55 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted

18:15:12 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:15:17 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

18:15:17 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to support distinguishing it

Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to support distinguishing it

18:15:20 <uli> how far would we go? E.g., how much normalization/rewriting would we consider to decide "equality of axioms"?

Uli Sattler: how far would we go? E.g., how much normalization/rewriting would we consider to decide "equality of axioms"?

18:15:20 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:15:26 <alanr> if you compare you should see that there is an added annotation to *the* axiom

Alan Ruttenberg: if you compare you should see that there is an added annotation to *the* axiom

18:15:44 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:15:48 <uli> +1 to Bijan

Uli Sattler: +1 to Bijan

18:15:49 <alanr> Second case is not at risk

Alan Ruttenberg: Second case is not at risk

18:15:51 <Zhe> q+

q+

18:16:18 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

18:16:37 <bijan> I didn't undersatnd what alan said was "very clear"

Bijan Parsia: I didn't undersatnd what alan said was "very clear"

18:16:37 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

18:16:49 <bijan> I meant *merge* not import

Bijan Parsia: I meant *merge* not import

18:16:51 <m_schnei> q+

Michael Schneider: q+

18:16:53 <bijan> That's why I said *merge*

Bijan Parsia: That's why I said *merge*

18:17:04 <bijan> You are kidding

Bijan Parsia: You are kidding

18:17:09 <m_schnei> we have an imports closure

Michael Schneider: we have an imports closure

18:17:25 <bijan> I merge ontologies all the time

Bijan Parsia: I merge ontologies all the time

18:17:29 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:17:30 <bijan> Cut and paste

Bijan Parsia: Cut and paste

18:17:32 <pfps> q+ to ask why the "know"

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+ to ask why the "know"

18:17:33 <bijan> i've written tools to do it

Bijan Parsia: i've written tools to do it

18:17:36 <bijan> P4 does it

Bijan Parsia: P4 does it

18:17:50 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:17:55 <uli> I have done it and seen people doing it (the cut and paste)

Uli Sattler: I have done it and seen people doing it (the cut and paste)

18:18:00 <m_schnei> ok, I will write down my points and send it to the list

Michael Schneider: ok, I will write down my points and send it to the list

18:18:05 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

18:18:09 <m_schnei> q-

Michael Schneider: q-

18:18:19 <IanH> ack Zhe

Ian Horrocks: ack Zhe

18:18:27 <bijan> Refactor>>Extract/Remove Axioms will move sets of axioms from one ontology to the other

Bijan Parsia: Refactor&gt;&gt;Extract/Remove Axioms will move sets of axioms from one ontology to the other

18:18:48 <uli> Zhe: I have been stressing efficiency for a long time, I don't know whether Boris's suggestion (on putting relevant triples together) is feasible in practice.

Zhe Wu: I have been stressing efficiency for a long time, I don't know whether Boris's suggestion (on putting relevant triples together) is feasible in practice. [ Scribe Assist by Uli Sattler ]

18:18:53 <pfps> a number of people have produced countering efficiency claims

Peter Patel-Schneider: a number of people have produced countering efficiency claims

18:19:01 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:19:37 <IanH> Zhe: why is it useful to distinguish axioms with and without annotations?

Zhe Wu: why is it useful to distinguish axioms with and without annotations? [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ]

18:19:52 <alanr> I am the same when a few skin cells slough off

Alan Ruttenberg: I am the same when a few skin cells slough off

18:20:07 <alanr> one can certainly redefine identity appropriately

Alan Ruttenberg: one can certainly redefine identity appropriately

18:20:10 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:20:15 <IanH> ack bmotik

Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik

18:20:35 <uli> Alan, I think your comparisons don't work

Uli Sattler: Alan, I think your comparisons don't work

18:20:41 <alanr> because?

Alan Ruttenberg: because?

18:20:45 <msmith> +1 to boris, the current definition of structural consistency is very nice from a software implementation perspective

Mike Smith: +1 to boris, the current definition of structural consistency is very nice from a software implementation perspective

18:21:03 <uli> if we have the same axiom from different authors in different files, we might care

Uli Sattler: if we have the same axiom from different authors in different files, we might care

18:21:16 <m_schnei> we don't care about perfect roundtrip anymore, remember!

Michael Schneider: we don't care about perfect roundtrip anymore, remember!

18:21:18 <alanr> not an issue when in different files

Alan Ruttenberg: not an issue when in different files

18:21:23 <m_schnei> we have "semantic" roundtripping

Michael Schneider: we have "semantic" roundtripping

18:21:26 <bijan> I care about roudntripping

Bijan Parsia: I care about roudntripping

18:21:28 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:21:34 <bijan> And preserving it as much as possible

Bijan Parsia: And preserving it as much as possible

18:21:35 <uli> oups, i forgot

Uli Sattler: oups, i forgot

18:21:43 <alanr> if merging two files and you want to preserve source file, then annotate with provenance

Alan Ruttenberg: if merging two files and you want to preserve source file, then annotate with provenance

18:21:46 <uli> but still, when you copy and paste, then you need this

Uli Sattler: but still, when you copy and paste, then you need this

18:21:54 <uli> this distinction, i mean

Uli Sattler: this distinction, i mean

18:21:56 <alanr> you can do anything with cut and paste

Alan Ruttenberg: you can do anything with cut and paste

18:22:07 <IanH> STRAWPOLL: we should add the base triple?

STRAWPOLL: we should add the base triple?

18:22:09 <alanr> it's a matter of comparing what's priority

Alan Ruttenberg: it's a matter of comparing what's priority

18:22:10 <pfps> -1 down with base triples

Peter Patel-Schneider: -1 down with base triples

18:22:23 <Zhe> Zhe: +1 with base triples

Zhe Wu: +1 with base triples

18:22:27 <msmith> -1

Mike Smith: -1

18:22:28 <Bernardo> -1 to base triples

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: -1 to base triples

18:22:28 <bijan> -1

Bijan Parsia: -1

18:22:31 <m_schnei> +1 to base triple (we do not care about roundtripping since 6 months or so)

Michael Schneider: +1 to base triple (we do not care about roundtripping since 6 months or so)

18:22:32 <baojie> 0 (need to think more)

Jie Bao: 0 (need to think more)

18:22:32 <Achille> 0

Achille Fokoue: 0

18:22:34 <bmotik> -1 to base triples

Boris Motik: -1 to base triples

18:22:34 <alanr> +1 to base triples

Alan Ruttenberg: +1 to base triples

18:22:38 <uli> -1

Uli Sattler: -1

18:22:41 <ewallace> 0

Evan Wallace: 0

18:22:47 <Rinke> -0

Rinke Hoekstra: -0

18:22:47 <IanH> -1

Ian Horrocks: -1

18:22:49 <ratnesh> -1

Ratnesh Sahay: -1

18:22:50 <Carsten> 0

Carsten Lutz: 0

18:22:52 <alanr> (one of Sandro or Ivan would vote +1, I expect)

Alan Ruttenberg: (one of Sandro or Ivan would vote +1, I expect)

18:23:01 <pfps> q+

Peter Patel-Schneider: q+

18:23:09 <pfps> q-

Peter Patel-Schneider: q-

18:23:14 <bmotik> q+

Boris Motik: q+

18:23:19 <Zhe> IanH: we are kind of split

Ian Horrocks: we are kind of split

18:23:25 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:23:31 <Carsten>  7:2 = split in the middle?

Carsten Lutz: 7:2 = split in the middle?

18:23:38 <Zhe> bmotik: if I see a convincing way to roundtrip it

Boris Motik: if I see a convincing way to roundtrip it

18:23:40 <alanr> I'm not guessing

Alan Ruttenberg: I'm not guessing

18:23:48 <msmith>  7:3 I think

Mike Smith: 7:3 I think

18:23:55 <Carsten> sorry

Carsten Lutz: sorry

18:24:05 <uli>  8:3?

Uli Sattler: 8:3?

18:24:08 <msmith>  8:3

Mike Smith: 8:3

18:24:26 <Zhe> IanH: the point is that it is not just one person against the rest

Ian Horrocks: the point is that it is not just one person against the rest

18:24:38 <alanr> different if we count by institution ;-)

Alan Ruttenberg: different if we count by institution ;-)

18:24:55 <Zhe> IanH: issue-137: Table 4 in RDF mapping introduces incompatibility with OWL 1

Ian Horrocks: ISSUE-137: Table 4 in RDF mapping introduces incompatibility with OWL 1

18:24:56 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/137

Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/137

18:24:57 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:25:03 <alanr> q+

Alan Ruttenberg: q+

18:25:04 <bmotik> -q

Boris Motik: -q

18:25:07 <bmotik> q-

Boris Motik: q-

18:25:14 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:25:19 <IanH> ack alanr

Ian Horrocks: ack alanr

18:26:03 <bijan> Er... that's not a use case

Bijan Parsia: Er... that's not a use case

18:26:16 <bijan> "RDF not an XML solution" just isn't a use case

Bijan Parsia: "RDF not an XML solution" just isn't a use case

18:26:45 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:27:00 <Zhe> alanr: there is no reason to have additional inclusion mechnism other than owl import

Alan Ruttenberg: there is no reason to have additional inclusion mechnism other than owl import

18:27:56 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:28:04 <Zhe> bijan: i don't agree with it. I am not convinced.

Bijan Parsia: i don't agree with it. I am not convinced.

18:28:32 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:28:33 <Zhe> bijan: use xml include

Bijan Parsia: use xml include

18:28:37 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:28:42 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:28:53 <Zhe> alanr: not happy with it.

Alan Ruttenberg: not happy with it.

18:29:16 <pfps> n-triples as a rec?  where is it coming from?

Peter Patel-Schneider: n-triples as a rec? where is it coming from?

18:29:25 <bijan> n-triples is already a rec

Bijan Parsia: n-triples is already a rec

18:29:26 <bijan> q+

Bijan Parsia: q+

18:29:31 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:29:54 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:30:16 <alanr> yes - turtle

Alan Ruttenberg: yes - turtle

18:30:19 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:30:27 <alanr> it's not a turtle problem

Alan Ruttenberg: it's not a turtle problem

18:30:33 <IanH> q?

Ian Horrocks: q?

18:30:38 <IanH> ack bijan

Ian Horrocks: ack bijan

18:30:43 <alanr> we can do this in owl, folks don't like the solution

Alan Ruttenberg: we can do this in owl, folks don't like the solution

18:31:03 <alanr> so there is a compromise offered

Alan Ruttenberg: so there is a compromise offered

18:31:06 <bijan> I don't see any movement will happen...we'll problaby not get consensus

Bijan Parsia: I don't see any movement will happen...we'll problaby not get consensus

18:31:12 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace

Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace

18:31:14 <Zakim> -msmith

Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith

18:31:15 <Zakim> -bijan

Zakim IRC Bot: -bijan

18:31:17 <Zakim> -Bernardo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Bernardo

18:31:21 <Rinke> stop don't go!

Rinke Hoekstra: stop don't go!

18:31:35 <pfps> F2F agenda looks good

Peter Patel-Schneider: F2F agenda looks good

18:31:36 <Zhe> IanH: F2F4 agenda? anyone looked at it?

Ian Horrocks: F2F4 agenda? anyone looked at it?

18:31:37 <uli> Yes, But i need to look again

Uli Sattler: Yes, But i need to look again

18:31:38 <Rinke> +1

Rinke Hoekstra: +1

18:31:46 <m_schnei> not yet looked at it

Michael Schneider: not yet looked at it

18:31:51 <Zakim> -baojie

Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie

18:31:55 <bijan> you'll have to explain (in email) how the compromise isn't just your position ...I don't see how it's different

Bijan Parsia: you'll have to explain (in email) how the compromise isn't just your position ...I don't see how it's different

18:32:12 <alanr> my position was to fix the mapping to handle it

Alan Ruttenberg: my position was to fix the mapping to handle it

18:32:19 <Zhe> IanH: please get back to me with your comments in the next hour.

Ian Horrocks: please get back to me with your comments in the next hour.

18:32:20 <alanr> peter offered to have some inclusion mechanism instead

Alan Ruttenberg: peter offered to have some inclusion mechanism instead

18:32:35 <uli> oh, yes: I was wondering whether the second session of Day 2 is really reserved to repairs...this seems really long

Uli Sattler: oh, yes: I was wondering whether the second session of Day 2 is really reserved to repairs...this seems really long


This revision (#2) generated 2008-10-14 21:25:59 UTC by 'zwu2', comments: 'Please review. Thanks.'