00:00:00 <scribenick> PRESENT: msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, MarkusK_, Rinke, baojie, Zhe, Achille, Michael Schneider, Alan Ruttenberg, Christine
17:52:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/19-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/19-owl-irc ←
17:52:30 <pfps> Zakim, this will be owlwg
Peter Patel-Schneider: Zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:52:30 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes ←
17:52:40 <pfps> RRSAgent, make records public
Peter Patel-Schneider: RRSAgent, make records public ←
17:55:35 <msmith> zakim, this will be owlwg
Mike Smith: zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:55:35 <Zakim> ok, msmith; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, msmith; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes ←
17:55:45 <msmith> ScribeNick: msmith
(Scribe set to Mike Smith)
17:55:57 <msmith> RRSAgent, make records public
RRSAgent, make records public ←
17:56:29 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started ←
17:56:39 <Zakim> +msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: +msmith ←
17:56:59 <Zakim> +IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH ←
17:57:17 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:57:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH ←
17:57:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
17:57:57 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:58:01 <Rinke> (I cannot dial in, but will try to follow as much as I can on IRC)
Rinke Hoekstra: (I cannot dial in, but will try to follow as much as I can on IRC) ←
17:58:51 <Zakim> +??P10
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10 ←
17:59:01 <uli> zakim, ??P10 is me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P10 is me ←
17:59:01 <Zakim> +uli; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it ←
17:59:05 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:59:05 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:59:48 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
18:00:14 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
18:00:17 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
18:00:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ??P12 ←
18:00:20 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P12 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P12 is me ←
18:00:20 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
18:00:23 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
18:01:10 <msmith> ianh: regrets from Ivan, Alan
Ian Horrocks: regrets from Ivan, Alan ←
18:01:15 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
18:01:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau ←
18:01:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
18:01:21 <Zakim> +??P13
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13 ←
18:01:24 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
18:01:30 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P13 is me#
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P13 is me# ←
18:01:30 <Zakim> +me#; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +me#; got it ←
18:01:30 <msmith> Topic: Admin
18:01:37 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
18:01:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, me#, Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, me#, Sandro ←
18:01:37 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P13 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P13 is me ←
18:01:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
18:01:41 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:01:43 <Zakim> I already had ??P13 as me#, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P13 as me#, bmotik ←
18:01:44 <Zakim> sorry, bmotik, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bmotik, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
18:02:00 <msmith> ianh: no agenda ammendments
Ian Horrocks: no agenda ammendments ←
18:02:02 <uli> last week's minutes look fine
Uli Sattler: last week's minutes look fine ←
18:02:02 <bmotik> Zakim, me# is bmotik
Boris Motik: Zakim, me# is bmotik ←
18:02:02 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
18:02:03 <Zakim> +Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe ←
18:02:07 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:02:07 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
18:02:12 <pfps> last week's minutes look acceptable
Peter Patel-Schneider: last week's minutes look acceptable ←
18:02:15 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
18:02:15 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
18:02:17 <uli> oi!
Uli Sattler: oi! ←
18:02:24 <msmith> PROPOSED accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12
PROPOSED accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12 ←
18:02:25 <IanH> PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (12 November)
PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (12 November) ←
18:02:32 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
18:02:35 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:02:38 <Zhe> +1
18:02:41 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
18:02:44 <pfps> +1
18:02:48 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
18:02:50 <msmith> RESOLVED accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12
RESOLVED accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12 ←
18:03:04 <pfps> F2F4 day 2 minutes are now OK (after Alan's cleanup)
Peter Patel-Schneider: F2F4 day 2 minutes are now OK (after Alan's cleanup) ←
18:03:10 <msmith> PROPOSED accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24
PROPOSED accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24 ←
18:03:12 <Zakim> +baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie ←
18:03:14 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
18:03:19 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:03:19 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
18:03:21 <pfps> +1
18:03:25 <baojie> +1
18:03:26 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:03:26 <msmith> RESOLVED accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24
RESOLVED accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24 ←
18:03:51 <msmith> subtopic: pending review actions
18:03:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
18:04:01 <pfps> I think that the actions are OK (and some were OK last week)
Peter Patel-Schneider: I think that the actions are OK (and some were OK last week) ←
18:04:07 <msmith> ACTION-238 closed
ACTION-238 closed ←
18:04:08 <msmith> ACTION-242 closed
ACTION-242 closed ←
18:04:08 <msmith> ACTION-244 closed
ACTION-244 closed ←
18:04:08 <msmith> ACTION-246 closed
ACTION-246 closed ←
18:04:08 <trackbot> ACTION-238 Implement the resolutions from the 4F2F closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-238 Implement the resolutions from the 4F2F closed ←
18:04:08 <trackbot> ACTION-242 Will make a proposal regarding naming alignment between the functional syntax and RDF syntax based on the summary from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-242 Will make a proposal regarding naming alignment between the functional syntax and RDF syntax based on the summary from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html closed ←
18:04:09 <trackbot> ACTION-244 Come up with an analysis of whether OWL 2 should include XMLLiteral closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-244 Come up with an analysis of whether OWL 2 should include XMLLiteral closed ←
18:04:13 <trackbot> ACTION-246 Convert review comments to editors notes (except rinke's) closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-246 Convert review comments to editors notes (except rinke's) closed ←
18:04:25 <IanH> Q?
Ian Horrocks: Q? ←
18:04:29 <msmith> topic: reviewing and publishing
18:05:06 <msmith> ianh: dec 1 was tentative deadline for last call publishing. we are now getting close
Ian Horrocks: dec 1 was tentative deadline for last call publishing. we are now getting close ←
18:05:10 <IanH> Q?
Ian Horrocks: Q? ←
18:05:22 <msmith> ... last call checklist has been completed (excepting items already on agenda)
... last call checklist has been completed (excepting items already on agenda) ←
18:05:22 <sandro> q+ sotd
Sandro Hawke: q+ sotd ←
18:05:27 <msmith> ... any questions?
... any questions? ←
18:05:35 <IanH> Q?
Ian Horrocks: Q? ←
18:05:43 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 ←
18:05:44 <IanH> ack sandro
Ian Horrocks: ack sandro ←
18:05:52 <IanH> ack sotd
Ian Horrocks: ack sotd ←
18:06:04 <msmith> sandro: we should start on text describing status of documents
Sandro Hawke: we should start on text describing status of documents ←
18:06:08 <pfps> q+
18:06:17 <msmith> ... it should include changes from previous publish
... it should include changes from previous publish ←
18:06:25 <msmith> ... and some context for new documents
... and some context for new documents ←
18:06:31 <msmith> ianh: is this in each document?
Ian Horrocks: is this in each document? ←
18:06:51 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:06:54 <msmith> sandro: people should use the wiki link (provided above) and it will be put in the doc during publishing
Sandro Hawke: people should use the wiki link (provided above) and it will be put in the doc during publishing ←
18:07:07 <msmith> ianh: changes wrt last draft?
Ian Horrocks: changes wrt last draft? ←
18:07:10 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:07:17 <msmith> sandro: yes, last published working draft
Sandro Hawke: yes, last published working draft ←
18:07:37 <msmith> pfps: we have a problem with location of features document
Peter Patel-Schneider: we have a problem with location of features document ←
18:07:49 <msmith> sandro: yes, but it doesn't matter for publication
Sandro Hawke: yes, but it doesn't matter for publication ←
18:08:10 <msmith> ianh: yes, and all non-correct locations being redirected (or some other resolution)
Ian Horrocks: yes, and all non-correct locations being redirected (or some other resolution) ←
18:08:19 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call? ←
18:08:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_ ←
18:08:27 <msmith> sandro: we need an action for this. we discussed it before and nothing happened
Sandro Hawke: we need an action for this. we discussed it before and nothing happened ←
18:08:45 <msmith> ianh: i can take an action. we also said requirements should occur in the name somewhere
Ian Horrocks: i can take an action. we also said requirements should occur in the name somewhere ←
18:09:16 <msmith> ... I remember "requirements and new features"
... I remember "requirements and new features" ←
18:09:46 <sandro> ACTION: ian consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document
ACTION: ian consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document ←
18:09:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-248 - Consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-248 - Consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26]. ←
18:09:57 <pfps> q-
18:10:22 <msmith> ianh: on Round 4 page, this is an action on each editor to handle their documents?
Ian Horrocks: on Round 4 page, this is an action on each editor to handle their documents? ←
18:10:27 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:10:29 <bmotik> I'll handle the documents I've been editing, no prolem.
Boris Motik: I'll handle the documents I've been editing, no prolem. ←
18:10:41 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
18:10:48 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me
Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me ←
18:10:48 <Zakim> +Achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←
18:10:49 <msmith> ... should we create actions explicitly? I will do so after the telecon (to avoid the time required now)
... should we create actions explicitly? I will do so after the telecon (to avoid the time required now) ←
18:11:34 <sandro> action: ian make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in
ACTION: ian make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in ←
18:11:34 <trackbot> Created ACTION-249 - Make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-249 - Make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26]. ←
18:11:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:12:11 <msmith> subtopic: Other considerations
18:12:16 <sandro> issue-145?
18:12:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-145 -- RESOLVED: Which serializations should have mime types and file extensions (and what should they be) -- CLOSED
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-145 -- RESOLVED: Which serializations should have mime types and file extensions (and what should they be) -- CLOSED ←
18:12:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/145
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/145 ←
18:12:21 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-145
18:12:32 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:12:37 <pfps> yay!
Peter Patel-Schneider: yay! ←
18:12:39 <msmith> ianh: I understand this to be resolved. Sandro considers himself the contact to IETF
Ian Horrocks: I understand this to be resolved. Sandro considers himself the contact to IETF ←
18:13:03 <sandro> action: sandro send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications
ACTION: sandro send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications ←
18:13:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-250 - Send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-250 - Send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-11-26]. ←
18:13:31 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:13:43 <sandro> Zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: Zakim, who is on the call? ←
18:13:43 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille ←
18:13:43 <msmith> subsubtopic: Check with XML Schema WG on name of dateTime ...
18:13:46 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:13:59 <msmith> ianh: pfps has been point man with XML Schema WG
Ian Horrocks: pfps has been point man with XML Schema WG ←
18:14:27 <msmith> pfps: I just sent a message to someone in that WG, asking for pointer to final resolution.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I just sent a message to someone in that WG, asking for pointer to final resolution. ←
18:14:39 <msmith> ... I will ask about publication schedule
... I will ask about publication schedule ←
18:15:02 <msmith> ianh: assuming no satisfactory answer on publication or datatype name. what's the plan?
Ian Horrocks: assuming no satisfactory answer on publication or datatype name. what's the plan? ←
18:15:15 <msmith> ... can we make the name of the datatype "at risk" or something?
... can we make the name of the datatype "at risk" or something? ←
18:15:15 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:15:22 <msmith> sandro: I think we can do that
Sandro Hawke: I think we can do that ←
18:15:32 <msmith> ianh: "subject to change", etc.
Ian Horrocks: "subject to change", etc. ←
18:15:51 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:15:53 <msmith> sandro: in general we want at risk to be binary (options are A or B), not be open ended
Sandro Hawke: in general we want at risk to be binary (options are A or B), not be open ended ←
18:16:02 <msmith> pfps: we can do that for the datatype name
Peter Patel-Schneider: we can do that for the datatype name ←
18:16:07 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:16:17 <bmotik> It already says that
Boris Motik: It already says that ←
18:16:31 <bmotik> It's not.
Boris Motik: It's not. ←
18:16:34 <bmotik> highlighted
Boris Motik: highlighted ←
18:16:36 <msmith> ianh: someone needs to make sure it is binary in document
Ian Horrocks: someone needs to make sure it is binary in document ←
18:16:42 <msmith> sandro: is it marked at risk?
Sandro Hawke: is it marked at risk? ←
18:16:49 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:16:53 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:16:53 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:16:54 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:16:58 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:16:58 <msmith> ianh: a couple other things are marked at risk
Ian Horrocks: a couple other things are marked at risk ←
18:17:19 <msmith> bmotik: is there a style for at risk? it's marked with an editor's note. is that sufficient
Boris Motik: is there a style for at risk? it's marked with an editor's note. is that sufficient ←
18:17:36 <msmith> sandro: take a look at the RIF BLD for a template
Sandro Hawke: take a look at the RIF BLD for a template ←
18:17:52 <msmith> bmotik: // reading from spec //
Boris Motik: // reading from spec // ←
18:18:07 <msmith> sandro: we should more formally call out "at risk"
Sandro Hawke: we should more formally call out "at risk" ←
18:18:25 <msmith> ... in the status of the document section
... in the status of the document section ←
18:18:54 <pfps> I made the change that the fallback is owl:dateTime
Peter Patel-Schneider: I made the change that the fallback is owl:dateTime ←
18:19:03 <msmith> ianh: we should explicitly say something about the outcome if the risked scenario comes to pass
Ian Horrocks: we should explicitly say something about the outcome if the risked scenario comes to pass ←
18:19:11 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:19:19 <msmith> ... take this offline
... take this offline ←
18:19:22 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:19:39 <pfps> q+
18:19:41 <msmith> bmotik: several other editorial notes are present. E.g., bug related to xs:decimal
Boris Motik: several other editorial notes are present. E.g., bug related to xs:decimal ←
18:19:43 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:12 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:13 <msmith> ianh: I suggest saying something more or less the same.
Ian Horrocks: I suggest saying something more or less the same. ←
18:20:16 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:20:23 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:20:23 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
18:20:29 <msmith> pfps: XML Schema WG has fixed this, they haven't published the fix
Peter Patel-Schneider: XML Schema WG has fixed this, they haven't published the fix ←
18:20:45 <msmith> ... I will ask for a pointer so that we can reuse their wording
... I will ask for a pointer so that we can reuse their wording ←
18:21:27 <msmith> sandro: procedural threat - we can't normatively reference less mature specifications
Sandro Hawke: procedural threat - we can't normatively reference less mature specifications ←
18:21:51 <msmith> ianh: this is the point of the next item. can we point to XML Schema 1.1
Ian Horrocks: this is the point of the next item. can we point to XML Schema 1.1 ←
18:22:07 <msmith> sandro: we can for last call and CR, but not for PR and Rec
Sandro Hawke: we can for last call and CR, but not for PR and Rec ←
18:22:37 <pfps> q+
18:22:37 <msmith> ... this could require a different URI for the property if the XML Schema WG can't move fast enough
... this could require a different URI for the property if the XML Schema WG can't move fast enough ←
18:22:43 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:22:48 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:22:49 <msmith> ... this is bone-headed and we look for a workaround
... this is bone-headed and we look for a workaround ←
18:23:07 <msmith> pfps: we could squat on xsd:our-datetime if we know what it is
Peter Patel-Schneider: we could squat on xsd:our-datetime if we know what it is ←
18:23:18 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:23:48 <msmith> ... for decimal, they will be changing the minimal implementation text. we will copy it. if it changes, its ugly but we don't expect that to happen
... for decimal, they will be changing the minimal implementation text. we will copy it. if it changes, its ugly but we don't expect that to happen ←
18:23:54 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:24:23 <msmith> subsubtopic: freezing features
18:24:38 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:24:44 <msmith> ianh: we have to decide that we're not going to introduce or change features at this point
Ian Horrocks: we have to decide that we're not going to introduce or change features at this point ←
18:24:55 <msmith> ... or we won't be able to keep our schedule
... or we won't be able to keep our schedule ←
18:25:00 <msmith> ... any objections to this?
... any objections to this? ←
18:25:08 <msmith> ... when are we going to freeze the documents?
... when are we going to freeze the documents? ←
18:25:09 <pfps> no objection from me
Peter Patel-Schneider: no objection from me ←
18:25:14 <uli> freeze, yes
Uli Sattler: freeze, yes ←
18:25:45 <msmith> sandro: any changes need to have more review. so, hopefully no more review
Sandro Hawke: any changes need to have more review. so, hopefully no more review ←
18:26:24 <msmith> ... there isn't a formal requirement to freeze for publishing. I make a snapshot (probably in the next few days)
... there isn't a formal requirement to freeze for publishing. I make a snapshot (probably in the next few days) ←
18:26:31 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:26:42 <msmith> ... I don't have a sense of the state editor's believe the documents to be in
... I don't have a sense of the state editor's believe the documents to be in ←
18:26:58 <msmith> ianh: I was expecting to say something like "by the end of this week"
Ian Horrocks: I was expecting to say something like "by the end of this week" ←
18:27:17 <msmith> ... then sandro can snapshot and we have one week for typos, etc.
... then sandro can snapshot and we have one week for typos, etc. ←
18:27:30 <msmith> sandro: ok, any changes after that require chair approval
Sandro Hawke: ok, any changes after that require chair approval ←
18:27:37 <pfps> fine by me
Peter Patel-Schneider: fine by me ←
18:27:39 <bmotik> Great!
Boris Motik: Great! ←
18:27:39 <bcuencagrau> Yes
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Yes ←
18:27:39 <msmith> ianh: editors, is this ok?
Ian Horrocks: editors, is this ok? ←
18:27:41 <MarkusK_> yes
Markus Krötzsch: yes ←
18:27:47 <msmith> yes
yes ←
18:28:02 <msmith> ianh: person that might object is mschnei
Ian Horrocks: person that might object is mschnei ←
18:28:20 <msmith> ... I will contact him after the telecon to confirm his consent
... I will contact him after the telecon to confirm his consent ←
18:28:38 <msmith> sandro: the one doc we're not republishing is primer. do we want to say something about that?
Sandro Hawke: the one doc we're not republishing is primer. do we want to say something about that? ←
18:29:01 <msmith> ... text that suggests we intend to update and publish it in the future.
... text that suggests we intend to update and publish it in the future. ←
18:29:04 <pfps> that sounds good to me
Peter Patel-Schneider: that sounds good to me ←
18:29:15 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:29:23 <msmith> sandro: Do I understand that correctly?
Sandro Hawke: Do I understand that correctly? ←
18:29:45 <msmith> .. maybe we put such text in the ref card status of document, since the docs are related
.. maybe we put such text in the ref card status of document, since the docs are related ←
18:30:09 <msmith> topic: Issues
18:30:33 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:30:40 <msmith> subtopic: ISSUE-87
18:30:59 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:31:02 <uli> confirm
Uli Sattler: confirm ←
18:31:04 <bmotik> Yep
Boris Motik: Yep ←
18:31:11 <msmith> ianh: I understood from minutes this was handled last week
Ian Horrocks: I understood from minutes this was handled last week ←
18:31:27 <msmith> PROPOSED resolve ISSUE-87 as in terms at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12#Mime_types
PROPOSED resolve ISSUE-87 as in terms at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12#Mime_types ←
18:31:48 <pfps> wrong section
Peter Patel-Schneider: wrong section ←
18:31:52 <sandro> if you put the colon after "proposed" then it gets nicely formatted.
Sandro Hawke: if you put the colon after "proposed" then it gets nicely formatted. ←
18:32:04 <msmith> PROPOSED close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience
PROPOSED close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience ←
18:32:27 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
18:32:33 <schneid> zakim, ??P1 is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, ??P1 is me ←
18:32:33 <Zakim> +schneid; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +schneid; got it ←
18:32:37 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:32:37 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
18:32:46 <msmith> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience ←
18:32:52 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
18:32:57 <pfps> +1 (ALU)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 (ALU) ←
18:32:59 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
18:33:00 <uli> +1 (Man)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Man) ←
18:33:00 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
18:33:04 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
18:33:05 <baojie> +1 (RPI)
18:33:07 <bmotik> +1 (Oxfrd)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxfrd) ←
18:33:08 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:33:10 <Rinke> +1 (UvA)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (UvA) ←
18:33:11 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
18:33:13 <bmotik> s/Oxfrd/Oxford
Boris Motik: s/Oxfrd/Oxford ←
18:33:24 <msmith> RESOLVED: close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience
RESOLVED: close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience ←
18:33:31 <Zhe> +1
18:33:57 <msmith> ianh: mschnei is present now, revert to publishing discussion
Ian Horrocks: mschnei is present now, revert to publishing discussion ←
18:34:18 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:34:18 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
18:34:23 <msmith> ... we agreed to freeze docs by end of week, modulo minor errors being fixed. can you live with that?
... we agreed to freeze docs by end of week, modulo minor errors being fixed. can you live with that? ←
18:34:45 <msmith> schneid: I've just started some changes. Sunday?
Michael Schneider: I've just started some changes. Sunday? ←
18:35:09 <msmith> ianh: we need to freeze fairly soon. Can you accept Sunday?
Ian Horrocks: we need to freeze fairly soon. Can you accept Sunday? ←
18:35:34 <msmith> schneid: yes, since RDF semantics is just second draft
Michael Schneider: yes, since RDF semantics is just second draft ←
18:35:44 <msmith> ... I can branch the doc and make larger changes on branch
... I can branch the doc and make larger changes on branch ←
18:35:49 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:35:59 <msmith> ianh: reluctant to suggest a branch given problems with rqmts doc
Ian Horrocks: reluctant to suggest a branch given problems with rqmts doc ←
18:36:10 <msmith> schneid: ok, I will focus on the smaller changes
Michael Schneider: ok, I will focus on the smaller changes ←
18:36:24 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:36:24 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
18:36:51 <msmith> ianh: back to issues
Ian Horrocks: back to issues ←
18:36:56 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:37:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:37:18 <msmith> PROPOSED: remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html
PROPOSED: remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html ←
18:37:23 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
18:37:27 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
18:37:29 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
18:37:30 <msmith> +1 (C&P)
+1 (C&P) ←
18:37:35 <bmotik> +1 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
18:37:36 <pfps> +1 (ALU)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 (ALU) ←
18:37:37 <uli> +1 (Man)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Man) ←
18:37:45 <Zhe> +1 (ORACLE)
18:37:45 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
18:37:55 <Rinke> +1 (Uva)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (Uva) ←
18:37:58 <msmith> RESOLVED: remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html
RESOLVED: remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html ←
18:37:59 <baojie> +1 (RPI)
18:38:19 <msmith> ianh: last issue, proposal to simplify structure of annotations
Ian Horrocks: last issue, proposal to simplify structure of annotations ←
18:38:41 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:38:46 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:38:46 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:38:50 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:39:05 <msmith> bmotik: several aspects to this change
Boris Motik: several aspects to this change ←
18:39:30 <msmith> ... first, introduce one class AnnotationValue to avoid AnnotationByIndividual AnnotationByLiteral ...
... first, introduce one class AnnotationValue to avoid AnnotationByIndividual AnnotationByLiteral ... ←
18:39:40 <msmith> then unify the syntax
then unify the syntax ←
18:40:22 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:40:35 <alanr> wondering about alternatives to "URI"
Alan Ruttenberg: wondering about alternatives to "URI" ←
18:40:35 <msmith> ... second, currently you can have several annotation values per axiom. this is complex. I propose to require separate axioms for multiple annotations
... second, currently you can have several annotation values per axiom. this is complex. I propose to require separate axioms for multiple annotations ←
18:40:51 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:40:56 <msmith> ianh: this wouldn't change the RDF?
Ian Horrocks: this wouldn't change the RDF? ←
18:40:59 <pfps> sounds good to me
Peter Patel-Schneider: sounds good to me ←
18:41:10 <msmith> bmotik: correct, but it would make things more round-trippable
Boris Motik: correct, but it would make things more round-trippable ←
18:41:23 <uli> sounds fine to me too
Uli Sattler: sounds fine to me too ←
18:41:35 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:41:41 <alanr> only on IRC
Alan Ruttenberg: only on IRC ←
18:41:48 <msmith> ack alanr
ack alanr ←
18:41:49 <IanH> alan - go ahead
Ian Horrocks: alan - go ahead ←
18:41:56 <pfps> q?
18:42:03 <alanr> Sent mail re: using "URI" in annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: Sent mail re: using "URI" in annotations ←
18:42:14 <bmotik> I saw this e-mail, but I didn't understand it.
Boris Motik: I saw this e-mail, but I didn't understand it. ←
18:42:14 <ewallace> See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0120.html
Evan Wallace: See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0120.html ←
18:42:17 <alanr> and mentioned at f2f
Alan Ruttenberg: and mentioned at f2f ←
18:42:40 <IanH> Looks like a positive change to me. I'm still uncomfortable with the
Ian Horrocks: Looks like a positive change to me. I'm still uncomfortable with the ←
18:42:40 <IanH> URI as name for "entities which we may have different 'views' of".
Ian Horrocks: URI as name for "entities which we may have different 'views' of". ←
18:42:41 <IanH> Perhaps there is some variant of URI (that uses the term "view" in it)
Ian Horrocks: Perhaps there is some variant of URI (that uses the term "view" in it) ←
18:42:41 <IanH> that better expresses that it is something identified that we are
Ian Horrocks: that better expresses that it is something identified that we are ←
18:42:41 <alanr> We aren't annotating a URI, which is a syntactic element, we are annotating a resource, but without specifying a view
Alan Ruttenberg: We aren't annotating a URI, which is a syntactic element, we are annotating a resource, but without specifying a view ←
18:42:41 <IanH> talking about, rather than the identifier of that thing. i.e. in
Ian Horrocks: talking about, rather than the identifier of that thing. i.e. in ←
18:42:41 <IanH> productions about properties, we use ObjectProperty := URI, not
Ian Horrocks: productions about properties, we use ObjectProperty := URI, not ←
18:42:43 <IanH> ObjectPropertyURI := URI
Ian Horrocks: ObjectPropertyURI := URI ←
18:42:45 <IanH> possibilities: AnyView, AllViews, SomeView, Entity, Resource...
Ian Horrocks: possibilities: AnyView, AllViews, SomeView, Entity, Resource... ←
18:42:50 <alanr> tks
Alan Ruttenberg: tks ←
18:42:54 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:42:57 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:42:57 <Zakim> bmotik was not muted, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was not muted, bmotik ←
18:42:59 <alanr> Resource is most clear
Alan Ruttenberg: Resource is most clear ←
18:43:03 <pfps> ... but they are ... (wait for it) ... URIs (or at least IRIs)
Peter Patel-Schneider: ... but they are ... (wait for it) ... URIs (or at least IRIs) ←
18:43:11 <alanr> so is a property, then
Alan Ruttenberg: so is a property, then ←
18:43:25 <msmith> bmotik: I didn't understand this question.
Boris Motik: I didn't understand this question. ←
18:43:39 <pfps> oooh, good point
Peter Patel-Schneider: oooh, good point ←
18:43:54 <alanr> We have several views currently
Alan Ruttenberg: We have several views currently ←
18:43:54 <msmith> sandro: I believe he's saying that we're not talking about the URI, we're talking about the thing denoted by the URI
Sandro Hawke: I believe he's saying that we're not talking about the URI, we're talking about the thing denoted by the URI ←
18:44:00 <alanr> yes
Alan Ruttenberg: yes ←
18:44:11 <alanr> But we don't have a specific view
Alan Ruttenberg: But we don't have a specific view ←
18:44:19 <alanr> "view" is the language used by Boris
Alan Ruttenberg: "view" is the language used by Boris ←
18:44:31 <alanr> This annotation is to all the "views"
Alan Ruttenberg: This annotation is to all the "views" ←
18:44:32 <msmith> sandro: I think alanr is saying that using URI in the syntax is likely to mislead and that alternative names for the productions could be helpful
Sandro Hawke: I think alanr is saying that using URI in the syntax is likely to mislead and that alternative names for the productions could be helpful ←
18:44:38 <alanr> yes
Alan Ruttenberg: yes ←
18:44:48 <alanr> sorry - this is hard over text
Alan Ruttenberg: sorry - this is hard over text ←
18:44:52 <msmith> bmotik: entity is already used in the structural spec
Boris Motik: entity is already used in the structural spec ←
18:45:04 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:45:10 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:45:11 <pfps> the non-terminals could be "Resource" instead of "URI", a la RDF
Peter Patel-Schneider: the non-terminals could be "Resource" instead of "URI", a la RDF ←
18:45:16 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
18:45:50 <pfps> no just for these things that are on the "URI"
Peter Patel-Schneider: no just for these things that are on the "URI" ←
18:45:56 <pfps> q+
18:45:58 <msmith> ianh: we're talking just about the proposal here.
Ian Horrocks: we're talking just about the proposal here. ←
18:46:05 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:46:07 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:46:23 <msmith> pfps: the only change would be for non-terminals ... are there any ... no
Peter Patel-Schneider: the only change would be for non-terminals ... are there any ... no ←
18:46:35 <msmith> ianh: I don't see any non-terminals with URI in them
Ian Horrocks: I don't see any non-terminals with URI in them ←
18:46:50 <IanH> Alan: we don't see any productions with URI in them anymore.
Alan Ruttenberg: we don't see any productions with URI in them anymore. [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ] ←
18:46:53 <msmith> pfps: URI annotation is gone, so changing URI annotation to Resource annotation isn't helpful
Peter Patel-Schneider: URI annotation is gone, so changing URI annotation to Resource annotation isn't helpful ←
18:46:58 <IanH> So we can't understand your point.
Ian Horrocks: So we can't understand your point. ←
18:47:17 <IanH> Alan?
Ian Horrocks: Alan? ←
18:47:17 <alanr> Will review and get back on email.
Alan Ruttenberg: Will review and get back on email. ←
18:47:18 <alanr> tks
Alan Ruttenberg: tks ←
18:47:32 <IanH> But we need to resolve it now.
Ian Horrocks: But we need to resolve it now. ←
18:47:42 <uli> tks?
Uli Sattler: tks? ←
18:47:45 <alanr> thanks
Alan Ruttenberg: thanks ←
18:47:48 <IanH> We have agreed to finalise documents by end of this week.
Ian Horrocks: We have agreed to finalise documents by end of this week. ←
18:48:15 <alanr> looking now
Alan Ruttenberg: looking now ←
18:48:24 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
18:48:30 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:48:33 <msmith> ianh: given alan is basically in favor...
Ian Horrocks: given alan is basically in favor... ←
18:48:43 <uli> q-
Uli Sattler: q- ←
18:48:53 <msmith> sandro: we should make the decision, alan can decide to amend the decision
Sandro Hawke: we should make the decision, alan can decide to amend the decision ←
18:48:58 <msmith> PROPOSED: simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html
PROPOSED: simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html ←
18:49:00 <sandro> s/decide/propose/
Sandro Hawke: s/decide/propose/ ←
18:49:10 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:49:11 <alanr> e.g. AnnotationPropertyRange := 'PropertyRange' '(' axiomAnnotations AnnotationProperty URI ')'
Alan Ruttenberg: e.g. AnnotationPropertyRange := 'PropertyRange' '(' axiomAnnotations AnnotationProperty URI ')' ←
18:49:17 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:49:34 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:49:36 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
18:49:39 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:49:40 <schneid> 0
18:49:41 <pfps> +1
18:49:42 <Zhe> 0
18:49:42 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
18:49:42 <baojie> 0
18:49:47 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
18:49:51 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
18:50:05 <msmith> RESOLVED: simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html
RESOLVED: simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html ←
18:50:22 <msmith> ianh: we will talk to alan offline. to better understand his point
Ian Horrocks: we will talk to alan offline. to better understand his point ←
18:50:31 <sandro> (Alan, if you're not happy with this resolution, we can consider some ammendment.)
Sandro Hawke: (Alan, if you're not happy with this resolution, we can consider some ammendment.) ←
18:50:49 <alanr> ok
Alan Ruttenberg: ok ←
18:50:57 <msmith> subsubtopic: Deprecation
18:51:17 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:51:19 <msmith> ianh: after investigation, the deprecation problem seems to have gone away
Ian Horrocks: after investigation, the deprecation problem seems to have gone away ←
18:51:32 <uli> i agree
Uli Sattler: i agree ←
18:51:33 <msmith> ... does anyone have something to say?
... does anyone have something to say? ←
18:51:41 <msmith> ... no, ok. we move on.
... no, ok. we move on. ←
18:51:42 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:51:50 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:51:51 <alanr> yes, I am happy enough with current situation now.
Alan Ruttenberg: yes, I am happy enough with current situation now. ←
18:51:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:51:54 <msmith> subsubtopic: rdf:XMLLiteral
18:51:58 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:52:11 <msmith> bmotik: it is not necessarily difficult conceptually
Boris Motik: it is not necessarily difficult conceptually ←
18:52:32 <alanr> there is a possible connection with POWDER which refers to XML Literal
Alan Ruttenberg: there is a possible connection with POWDER which refers to XML Literal ←
18:52:37 <msmith> ... it contains a design flaw - lexical space requires normalization
... it contains a design flaw - lexical space requires normalization ←
18:52:41 <sandro> yeah, wtf were the RDF Core folks thinking? :-(
Sandro Hawke: yeah, wtf were the RDF Core folks thinking? :-( ←
18:52:44 <msmith> q+
q+ ←
18:52:56 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-powder-formal-20081114/#regexSemantics
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-powder-formal-20081114/#regexSemantics ←
18:53:06 <msmith> ... it would be more useful if canonical form were for value space
... it would be more useful if canonical form were for value space ←
18:53:22 <msmith> q?
q? ←
18:53:32 <IanH> ack msmith
Ian Horrocks: ack msmith ←
18:54:23 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:54:31 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:54:50 <baojie> q+
18:54:59 <pfps> q+
18:55:02 <schneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:55:03 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:55:17 <msmith> msmith: I believe OWL 2 should support it. It is useful and can be supported. I think the canonicalization issue is for easy comparison
Mike Smith: I believe OWL 2 should support it. It is useful and can be supported. I think the canonicalization issue is for easy comparison ←
18:55:29 <msmith> ianh: what's the current state? it was in OWL 1 but isn't in OWL 2?
Ian Horrocks: what's the current state? it was in OWL 1 but isn't in OWL 2? ←
18:56:08 <msmith> bmotik: OWL 1 was contradictory. one spec (RDF?) said it is included. another spec (semantics) said only string & integer
Boris Motik: OWL 1 was contradictory. one spec (RDF?) said it is included. another spec (semantics) said only string & integer ←
18:56:25 <msmith> ... we should probably make an estimation if this would make people object.
... we should probably make an estimation if this would make people object. ←
18:56:32 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:56:38 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:56:44 <msmith> ... if there's a non-zero probability of this, then what's one more datatype
... if there's a non-zero probability of this, then what's one more datatype ←
18:57:02 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:57:09 <IanH> ack baojie
Ian Horrocks: ack baojie ←
18:57:29 <baojie> * owl:DataRange (alternative rdfs:Datatype)
Jie Bao: * owl:DataRange (alternative rdfs:Datatype) ←
18:57:29 <baojie> * owl:distinctMembers (alternative owl:members)
Jie Bao: * owl:distinctMembers (alternative owl:members) ←
18:57:35 <msmith> baojie: I believe we have suggested replacing rdfs:Datatype with owl:DataRange
Jie Bao: I believe we have suggested replacing rdfs:Datatype with owl:DataRange ←
18:57:49 <msmith> ... this is a different issue
... this is a different issue ←
18:58:05 <msmith> ianh: no, we're now on rdf:XMLLiteral
Ian Horrocks: no, we're now on rdf:XMLLiteral ←
18:58:08 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:58:17 <msmith> ... but I didn't understand the point on deprecation
... but I didn't understand the point on deprecation ←
18:58:30 <msmith> baojie: do we have a list of terms that will be deprecated?
Jie Bao: do we have a list of terms that will be deprecated? ←
18:58:34 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:58:41 <schneid> we only deprecate owl:DataRange at the moment
Michael Schneider: we only deprecate owl:DataRange at the moment ←
18:58:49 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:58:56 <msmith> ianh: it was suggested we do a backwards compatibility audit. is that what you mean?
Ian Horrocks: it was suggested we do a backwards compatibility audit. is that what you mean? ←
18:58:59 <msmith> baojie: yes.
18:59:36 <msmith> pfps: on OWL 1 built-in datatypes. It means if you implement it, you should implement in accordance with the spec
Peter Patel-Schneider: on OWL 1 built-in datatypes. It means if you implement it, you should implement in accordance with the spec ←
18:59:45 <msmith> ... it doesn't require implementation
... it doesn't require implementation ←
18:59:55 <bmotik> +q
Boris Motik: +q ←
18:59:58 <msmith> ianh: so, for conformance it wasn't obligatory to support it
Ian Horrocks: so, for conformance it wasn't obligatory to support it ←
19:00:04 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
19:00:05 <msmith> pfps: yes.
Peter Patel-Schneider: yes. ←
19:00:13 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:00:15 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:00:15 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:00:22 <IanH> ack schneid
Ian Horrocks: ack schneid ←
19:00:33 <schneid> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/syntax.html#owl_built_in_datatypes
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/syntax.html#owl_built_in_datatypes ←
19:01:00 <msmith> schneid: re OWL 1 S&AS, I agree with pfps comments
Michael Schneider: re OWL 1 S&AS, I agree with pfps comments ←
19:01:31 <msmith> ... but its unclear if it is MUST or not.
... but its unclear if it is MUST or not. ←
19:01:46 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:01:58 <msmith> ... but I think it wasn't really in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2
... but I think it wasn't really in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2 ←
19:02:15 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:02:18 <msmith> ianh: I think it wasn't required in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2
Ian Horrocks: I think it wasn't required in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2 ←
19:02:30 <msmith> bmotik: I think this depends on last call
Boris Motik: I think this depends on last call ←
19:02:31 <msmith> q+
q+ ←
19:02:35 <schneid> my email regarding rdf:XMLLiteral: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0112.html
Michael Schneider: my email regarding rdf:XMLLiteral: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0112.html ←
19:02:49 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:02:54 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:03:13 <msmith> ... this is an easier datatype to implement. to msmith, why does lexical state assume document is normalized?
... this is an easier datatype to implement. to msmith, why does lexical state assume document is normalized? ←
19:03:57 <schneid> one can even create RDFS-inconsistent documents with non-canonicalized literals :)
Michael Schneider: one can even create RDFS-inconsistent documents with non-canonicalized literals :) ←
19:04:00 <msmith> ianh: I suggest tabling the discussion of sensibility of datatype
Ian Horrocks: I suggest tabling the discussion of sensibility of datatype ←
19:04:13 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:04:13 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:04:15 <pfps> +1
19:04:23 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:05:15 <msmith> msmith: can we say if implemented, it should be implemented in accordance with...
Mike Smith: can we say if implemented, it should be implemented in accordance with... ←
19:05:24 <pfps> +1 to putting this in conformance
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to putting this in conformance ←
19:05:30 <msmith> ianh: it could be said in the conformance document.
Ian Horrocks: it could be said in the conformance document. ←
19:05:32 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:05:38 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
19:05:39 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:05:44 <IanH> ack msmith
Ian Horrocks: ack msmith ←
19:05:48 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:06:07 <msmith> bmotik: why don't we add to Syntax
Boris Motik: why don't we add to Syntax ←
19:06:23 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:06:28 <msmith> ianh: that would make it mandatory, not optional
Ian Horrocks: that would make it mandatory, not optional ←
19:06:35 <msmith> bmotik: are there many that use it
Boris Motik: are there many that use it ←
19:06:47 <uli> i have seen a couple
Uli Sattler: i have seen a couple ←
19:06:50 <schneid> really? I have never seen it anywhere
Michael Schneider: really? I have never seen it anywhere ←
19:06:54 <alanr> I think there are people who use it. IIRC I've seen it in BioPAX files
Alan Ruttenberg: I think there are people who use it. IIRC I've seen it in BioPAX files ←
19:06:58 <alanr> am looking
Alan Ruttenberg: am looking ←
19:07:11 <schneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
19:07:17 <msmith> bmotik: I proposed adding 4.7 to syntax, adding rdf:XMLLiteral
Boris Motik: I proposed adding 4.7 to syntax, adding rdf:XMLLiteral ←
19:07:36 <msmith> ianh: I'd like to make it at risk, because we have little implementation experience
Ian Horrocks: I'd like to make it at risk, because we have little implementation experience ←
19:07:41 <bmotik> +1 to at risk
Boris Motik: +1 to at risk ←
19:07:42 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:07:44 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:07:44 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:07:49 <IanH> ack schneid
Ian Horrocks: ack schneid ←
19:08:05 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:08:05 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:08:09 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:08:09 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:09:00 <msmith> schneid: I don't like rdf:XMLLiteral because it is covered in the RDF semantics by several conditions. we would need to avoid conflicting with other specifications
Michael Schneider: I don't like rdf:XMLLiteral because it is covered in the RDF semantics by several conditions. we would need to avoid conflicting with other specifications ←
19:09:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:09:47 <msmith> ianh: wasn't this exactly the same problem in OWL 1
Ian Horrocks: wasn't this exactly the same problem in OWL 1 ←
19:09:57 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:10:24 <msmith> schneid: I believe it was only a suggestion in OWL 1, not mandatory
Michael Schneider: I believe it was only a suggestion in OWL 1, not mandatory ←
19:10:38 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:10:45 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:10:46 <msmith> ianh: but a semantics was specified. if supported, it had a specific semantics.
Ian Horrocks: but a semantics was specified. if supported, it had a specific semantics. ←
19:10:48 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:10:50 <Zakim> +??P0
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0 ←
19:11:02 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:11:02 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:11:24 <msmith> bmotik: rdf mt, section 3.1 suggests this is not a standard datatype. I'm not sure I understand how this impacts things.
Boris Motik: rdf mt, section 3.1 suggests this is not a standard datatype. I'm not sure I understand how this impacts things. ←
19:11:26 <schneid> +1 to boris
Michael Schneider: +1 to boris ←
19:11:33 <christine> zakim, +??P0 is christine
Christine Golbreich: zakim, +??P0 is christine ←
19:11:33 <Zakim> sorry, christine, I do not recognize a party named '+??P0'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, christine, I do not recognize a party named '+??P0' ←
19:11:46 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:11:47 <msmith> ... and it may change RDF interpretations
... and it may change RDF interpretations ←
19:12:01 <uli> zakim, ??P0 is christine
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P0 is christine ←
19:12:01 <Zakim> +christine; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +christine; got it ←
19:12:11 <pfps> q+
19:12:16 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:12:17 <msmith> bmotik: maybe we shouldn't say anything
Boris Motik: maybe we shouldn't say anything ←
19:12:19 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
19:12:29 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
19:12:29 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
19:12:42 <msmith> pfps: bad news. at end of WebOnt, XMLLiteral was made mandatory
Peter Patel-Schneider: bad news. at end of WebOnt, XMLLiteral was made mandatory ←
19:12:51 <msmith> ... see S&AS C5
... see S&AS C5 ←
19:13:15 <schneid> we're back at RDF Semantics :)
Michael Schneider: we're back at RDF Semantics :) ←
19:13:25 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/#changes-since-PR
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/#changes-since-PR ←
19:14:01 <msmith> sandro: maybe way to procede is to do it at risk and solicit more feedback
Sandro Hawke: maybe way to procede is to do it at risk and solicit more feedback ←
19:14:07 <uli> ...I will check what kind of "literal" I remember seeing
Uli Sattler: ...I will check what kind of "literal" I remember seeing ←
19:14:56 <msmith> ianh: I'd like it to be at risk, with default being take it out
Ian Horrocks: I'd like it to be at risk, with default being take it out ←
19:15:05 <msmith> sandro: I think we can do that
Sandro Hawke: I think we can do that ←
19:15:19 <schneid> peter, an RDF compatible datatype map has rdf:XMLLiteral in, anyway, with or without being explicit :)
Michael Schneider: peter, an RDF compatible datatype map has rdf:XMLLiteral in, anyway, with or without being explicit :) ←
19:16:03 <IanH> PROPOSED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems.
PROPOSED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems. ←
19:16:09 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
19:16:12 <bcuencagrau> +1
19:16:17 <pfps> +1
19:16:18 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
19:16:20 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
19:16:21 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
19:16:22 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
19:16:22 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
19:16:24 <Zhe> +1
19:16:24 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
19:16:26 <baojie> +1
19:16:27 <schneid> -0.5
Michael Schneider: -0.5 ←
19:16:33 <alanr> BioPAX doesn't use XML Literal - it uses a string that is documented to be in XML format
Alan Ruttenberg: BioPAX doesn't use XML Literal - it uses a string that is documented to be in XML format ←
19:16:40 <alanr> 0
Alan Ruttenberg: 0 ←
19:17:06 <schneid> no, not an objection
Michael Schneider: no, not an objection ←
19:17:11 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:17:38 <alanr> like most it was probably arbitrary
Alan Ruttenberg: like most it was probably arbitrary ←
19:17:46 <IanH> RESOLVED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems.
RESOLVED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems. ←
19:18:00 <sandro> yeah, alan, that's the patterns I see in most RDF.
Sandro Hawke: yeah, alan, that's the patterns I see in most RDF. ←
19:18:13 <schneid> ok
Michael Schneider: ok ←
19:18:13 <bmotik> ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed
ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed ←
19:18:13 <trackbot> Created ACTION-251 - Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed [on Boris Motik - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-251 - Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed [on Boris Motik - due 2008-11-26]. ←
19:18:37 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:18:55 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:19:00 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:19:01 <msmith> subtopic: alignment of syntaxes
19:19:06 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:19:09 <pfps> q+
19:19:16 <bmotik> ZAkim, unmtue me
Boris Motik: ZAkim, unmtue me ←
19:19:16 <Zakim> I don't understand 'unmtue me', bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'unmtue me', bmotik ←
19:19:17 <msmith> ianh: it seems that few of the proposed changes had universal agreement
Ian Horrocks: it seems that few of the proposed changes had universal agreement ←
19:19:19 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:19:20 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
19:19:20 <Zakim> bmotik was not muted, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was not muted, bmotik ←
19:20:04 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
19:20:15 <msmith> bmotik: reiterating... I think we are serving two communities with different expectations. conforming one syntax to another is not nice. I think we can unify ExistsSelf and leave it at that
Boris Motik: reiterating... I think we are serving two communities with different expectations. conforming one syntax to another is not nice. I think we can unify ExistsSelf and leave it at that ←
19:20:24 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
19:20:25 <msmith> pfps: I agree with bmotik
Peter Patel-Schneider: I agree with bmotik ←
19:20:33 <IanH> Alan?
Ian Horrocks: Alan? ←
19:20:40 <msmith> ianh: alan and ivan aren't present, this is tricky to discuss
Ian Horrocks: alan and ivan aren't present, this is tricky to discuss ←
19:20:42 <alanr> I think the sentiment was that it was too hard to agree
Alan Ruttenberg: I think the sentiment was that it was too hard to agree ←
19:20:59 <uli> whose sentiment?
Uli Sattler: whose sentiment? ←
19:21:01 <alanr> However I don't agree with the idea that we serve 2 communities therefore things should be different
Alan Ruttenberg: However I don't agree with the idea that we serve 2 communities therefore things should be different ←
19:21:08 <schneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
19:21:08 <IanH> OK, so Boris's proposal is only to change ExistsSelf
Ian Horrocks: OK, so Boris's proposal is only to change ExistsSelf ←
19:21:08 <alanr> Ivan, Myself - principal instigators
Alan Ruttenberg: Ivan, Myself - principal instigators ←
19:21:18 <alanr> Does't matter
Alan Ruttenberg: Does't matter ←
19:21:19 <IanH> Would you be OK with this
Ian Horrocks: Would you be OK with this ←
19:21:29 <uli> Alan, I think it's rather we serve 2 communities therefore things may not be unifiable
Uli Sattler: Alan, I think it's rather we serve 2 communities therefore things may not be unifiable ←
19:21:38 <alanr> I will say -1 without objection
Alan Ruttenberg: I will say -1 without objection ←
19:21:42 <alanr> (formal)
Alan Ruttenberg: (formal) ←
19:21:45 <pfps> many of the proposed changes change things from the OWL 1 abstract syntax, which seems to be rather less than optimal
Peter Patel-Schneider: many of the proposed changes change things from the OWL 1 abstract syntax, which seems to be rather less than optimal ←
19:21:50 <alanr> I think our job is to bring together communities
Alan Ruttenberg: I think our job is to bring together communities ←
19:22:00 <IanH> (Let's not get into the philosophy of who we serve.)
Ian Horrocks: (Let's not get into the philosophy of who we serve.) ←
19:22:02 <alanr> Names appeal to small segment
Alan Ruttenberg: Names appeal to small segment ←
19:22:13 <alanr> And seem to Boris taste rather to any standard
Alan Ruttenberg: And seem to Boris taste rather to any standard ←
19:22:16 <uli> sure - but we don't want to loose them through this bringing together business
Uli Sattler: sure - but we don't want to loose them through this bringing together business ←
19:22:39 <alanr> DL standard is logical notation
Alan Ruttenberg: DL standard is logical notation ←
19:22:47 <alanr> Add a syntax for that if desired
Alan Ruttenberg: Add a syntax for that if desired ←
19:22:56 <uli> ?
Uli Sattler: ? ←
19:23:02 <uli> for what?
Uli Sattler: for what? ←
19:23:04 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:23:06 <alanr> But i (personally) see no reason to differ as we do now
Alan Ruttenberg: But i (personally) see no reason to differ as we do now ←
19:23:07 <IanH> You mean you want *another* syntax?
Ian Horrocks: You mean you want *another* syntax? ←
19:23:22 <bmotik> -q
Boris Motik: -q ←
19:23:26 <alanr> I don't care. I'm objecting to the argument that the functional syntax is standard to some community
Alan Ruttenberg: I don't care. I'm objecting to the argument that the functional syntax is standard to some community ←
19:23:30 <alanr> q-
Alan Ruttenberg: q- ←
19:23:33 <IanH> ack alanr
Ian Horrocks: ack alanr ←
19:23:35 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:23:35 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:23:39 <IanH> ack schneid
Ian Horrocks: ack schneid ←
19:23:48 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:23:58 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
19:24:00 <msmith> schneid: if we change existself I favor changing the RDF side
Michael Schneider: if we change existself I favor changing the RDF side ←
19:24:29 <msmith> ... so that it is consistent with other Restrictions in rdf
... so that it is consistent with other Restrictions in rdf ←
19:24:35 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:24:45 <alanr> I think SOTD should solicit input and list the disagreement as one we couldn't agree on
Alan Ruttenberg: I think SOTD should solicit input and list the disagreement as one we couldn't agree on ←
19:25:04 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:25:08 <msmith> ... something like deprecation [ a owl:Restriction ; owl:onProperty :p ; owl:existSelf "true"^^xsd:boolean ]
... something like deprecation [ a owl:Restriction ; owl:onProperty :p ; owl:existSelf "true"^^xsd:boolean ] ←
19:25:14 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:25:23 <msmith> bmotik: I wanted to propose something like :hasSelf
Boris Motik: I wanted to propose something like :hasSelf ←
19:25:29 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:25:29 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:25:47 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:25:56 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:25:56 <uli> ack /me
Uli Sattler: ack /me ←
19:25:59 <IanH> ack uli
Ian Horrocks: ack uli ←
19:26:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:27:02 <msmith> uli: disagree with Alan regarding the functional syntax. It is a different syntax because it doesn't have the restrictions of RDF
Uli Sattler: disagree with Alan regarding the functional syntax. It is a different syntax because it doesn't have the restrictions of RDF ←
19:27:08 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:27:21 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:27:21 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:27:39 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
19:27:39 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
19:27:54 <msmith> schneid: hasSelf, existSelf, doesn't matter much. I have more concern about similarity to other restrictions
Michael Schneider: hasSelf, existSelf, doesn't matter much. I have more concern about similarity to other restrictions ←
19:28:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:28:16 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:28:16 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:28:16 <msmith> ianh: other opinions on RDF form of existself?
Ian Horrocks: other opinions on RDF form of existself? ←
19:28:37 <bmotik> HasSelf is more symmetric
Boris Motik: HasSelf is more symmetric ←
19:28:45 <bmotik> with the rest of the FS
Boris Motik: with the rest of the FS ←
19:28:53 <msmith> ... I have preference to keeping one of the ones we have rather than pick a new one
... I have preference to keeping one of the ones we have rather than pick a new one ←
19:29:19 <uli> will this be the only choice?
Uli Sattler: will this be the only choice? ←
19:29:30 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
19:29:30 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
19:29:31 <msmith> ianh: I understand proposal to be to change both FS and RDFSyntax to be HasSelf. then change nothing else
Ian Horrocks: I understand proposal to be to change both FS and RDFSyntax to be HasSelf. then change nothing else ←
19:29:58 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
19:29:58 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
19:30:00 <msmith> uli: in the sense that one could use either current RDF or FS for self restriction
Uli Sattler: in the sense that one could use either current RDF or FS for self restriction ←
19:30:25 <IanH> PROPOSED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else.
PROPOSED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else. ←
19:30:32 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
19:30:37 <schneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
19:30:38 <pfps> +1
19:30:40 <bcuencagrau> +1
19:30:43 <ewallace> 0
Evan Wallace: 0 ←
19:30:44 <msmith> +1
+1 ←
19:30:46 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
19:30:46 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
19:30:46 <alanr> -1 (but not formally objecting)
Alan Ruttenberg: -1 (but not formally objecting) ←
19:30:53 <baojie> 0
19:31:11 <uli> 0
Uli Sattler: 0 ←
19:31:16 <IanH> RESOLVED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else.
RESOLVED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else. ←
19:31:17 <msmith> ianh: last chance to speak on this...
Ian Horrocks: last chance to speak on this... ←
19:32:00 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
19:32:01 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
19:32:02 <Zakim> -Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille ←
19:32:04 <msmith> ianh: End of Agenda. We're out of time. No additional business. Thanks. Next week we'll be frozen and ready to roll out docs.
Ian Horrocks: End of Agenda. We're out of time. No additional business. Thanks. Next week we'll be frozen and ready to roll out docs. ←
19:32:04 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
19:32:05 <Zakim> -MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK_ ←
19:32:06 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
19:32:06 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
19:32:07 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
19:32:08 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
19:32:10 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
19:32:13 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
19:32:14 <Zakim> -christine
Zakim IRC Bot: -christine ←
19:32:16 <Zakim> -schneid
Zakim IRC Bot: -schneid ←
19:32:20 <uli> bye
Uli Sattler: bye ←
19:32:36 <Zakim> -uli
Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←
19:32:37 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended ←
19:32:38 <Zakim> Attendees were msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli, Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille, schneid, christine
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli, Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille, schneid, christine ←
This revision (#1) generated 2008-11-21 12:36:52 UTC by 'ihorrock2', comments: None