Chatlog 2008-$MONTH-$DAY

See original RRSAgent log and preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

08:10:52 <sandro> PRESENT: Ian, Boris, Peter, Bernardo, Sandro, MarkusK, m_schnei, Achille, Bijan, Evan, Christine, Rinke, Ivan
06:55:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #owl
06:55:50 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-owl-irc
06:56:07 <pfps> Zakim, this will be owlwg
06:56:07 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL(F2F)2:30AM scheduled to start 26 minutes ago
06:56:21 <pfps> RRSAgent, make records public
06:56:33 <pfps> ScribeNick: pfps
06:56:36 <Elisa> Elisa has joined #owl
06:56:59 <pfps> elisa?
06:58:12 <Zakim> SW_OWL(F2F)2:30AM has now started
06:58:19 <Zakim> +Elisa_Kendall
06:58:25 <Elisa> hi
07:04:19 <IanH> IanH has joined #owl
07:06:56 <bcueencagrau> bcueencagrau has joined #owl
07:07:07 <sandro> sandro has joined #owl
07:07:35 <MarkusK_> MarkusK_ has joined #owl
07:07:40 <pfps> IanH: Welcome (to ...)
07:07:51 <sandro> zakim, who is here?
07:07:51 <Zakim> On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall
07:07:52 <Zakim> On IRC I see MarkusK_, sandro, bcueencagrau, IanH, Elisa, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, ivan, trackbot
07:08:37 <wallace> wallace has joined #owl
07:10:20 <sandro> PRESENT: Ian, Boris, Peter, Bernardo, Sandro, MarkusK, m_schnei, Bijan, Evan, Ivan
07:12:45 <m_schnei> m_schnei has joined #owl
07:12:49 <sandro> zakim, call Riviera_B
07:12:49 <Zakim> ok, sandro; the call is being made
07:12:51 <Zakim> +Riviera_B
07:14:09 <dom> dom has joined #owl
07:14:09 <pfps> Sandro: nothing on local arrangement
07:14:30 <pfps> IanH: introductions
07:14:40 <pfps> ...: Hi, I'm me
07:14:42 <ivan> zakim, dial Riviera_B
07:14:42 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
07:14:43 <Zakim> +Riviera_B.a
07:15:03 <dom> dom has left #owl
07:15:31 <bmotik> bmotik has joined #owl
07:15:51 <pfps> Observers - Henson Graves, Jeremy Carroll
07:16:09 <sandro> Observers:  Henson_Graves, Jeremy_Carroll
07:16:41 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Timeline
07:16:42 <pfps> IanH: Timeline (follow link in agenda)
07:17:13 <pfps> IanH: I put a real timeine (not T0+)
07:17:38 <pfps> IanH: We are about 2 months behind the scheduled time for Last Call
07:17:53 <pfps> IanH: It thus would be good to move forward with due haste
07:18:43 <pfps> Bijan:  The schedule was designed to be aggressive (but with a bit of slack)
07:18:56 <pfps> Sandro:  The slack is ... two months
07:19:09 <pfps> Topic: Document Status
07:19:19 <pfps> Polycom:  Beep
07:19:34 <pfps> IanH:  This section is intended as a review
07:19:45 <pfps> IanH:   Can the editors say the status
07:19:45 <Zakim> -Riviera_B.a
07:19:49 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
07:19:49 <Zakim> On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, Riviera_B
07:20:23 <pfps> Boris: Syntax is up to date - there are some issues that will impact it
07:20:42 <pfps> IanH: There has been internal review (for last PWD)
07:20:47 <IanH> q?
07:20:55 <pfps> Ivan: There has been no major external comments
07:21:03 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
07:21:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, Riviera_B
07:21:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, m_schnei, wallace, MarkusK_, sandro, bcueencagrau, IanH, Elisa, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, ivan, trackbot
07:21:09 <pfps> Bijan:  Does current syntax document meet Evan's needs
07:21:29 <pfps> Evan: Way better than it was - usable - not great because of organization
07:22:00 <pfps> Evan: Reorganization is currently for the spec/implementation, not users
07:22:15 <pfps> Bijan: Not explicitly - we did have discussions on the order
07:22:29 <pfps> s/Reorganization/Organization
07:22:46 <pfps> Bijan:  There are various organizations of reference docs in the literature
07:22:59 <pfps> Boris:  Currently Syntax is a *reference* document 
07:23:00 <Zhe> Zhe has joined #owl
07:23:34 <pfps> Evan: Quick Reference Guide could be used as an index
07:23:47 <IanH> q?
07:24:04 <pfps> Bijan: Primer can serve as another "index"
07:24:42 <pfps> Bijan: Three "indexes" - ToC, QRG, Primer
07:24:50 <Zakim> + +1.978.692.aaaa
07:24:57 <IanH> q?
07:25:05 <pfps> Evan: The problem is using it as a reference
07:25:13 <Zhe> zakim, +1.978.692.aaaa is me
07:25:13 <pfps> Evan: The ordering is wrong
07:25:13 <Zakim> +Zhe; got it
07:25:19 <pfps> Boris:  What is needed?
07:25:20 <IanH> Hello Zhe!
07:25:25 <Zhe> zakim, mute me
07:25:25 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted
07:25:28 <Zhe> Hi Ian!
07:25:41 <IanH> q?
07:25:48 <pfps> Evan: Things related to object properties grouped together
07:26:11 <pfps> Boris:  But what about domain axioms - they are related to both classes and object properties
07:27:41 <IanH> q?
07:27:41 <pfps> Christine: What is under discussion now?
07:28:09 <IanH> q?
07:28:11 <pfps> Bijan: We are now discussing the Syntax document - but are also pulling in relationships to other documents
07:28:47 <pfps> Bijan: Old reference has informal discussions, which are not in the QRG
07:28:59 <sandro> PRESENT: Ian, Boris, Peter, Bernardo, Sandro, MarkusK, m_schnei, Bijan, Evan, Christine, Rinke, Ivan
07:29:04 <IanH> q?
07:29:11 <pfps> IanH:  A complete redesign of Syntax is a major effort
07:29:12 <bmotik> bmotik has joined #owl
07:29:39 <pfps> Evan: A complete redesign is not in the cards
07:30:00 <sandro> Evan: I'm fine with using the Quick Reference Guide as the index to Syntax.
07:30:05 <IanH> q?
07:30:06 <pfps> Evan: A reference index is needed - either QRG or part of the document
07:30:40 <pfps> IanH:  OK, syntax is in pretty good shape, modulo outstanding issues and perhaps an index
07:30:49 <pfps> SubTopic: Semantics Document
07:30:59 <IanH> q?
07:31:13 <pfps> Boris: Similar status to syntax - up to date - outstanding issues may need changes
07:31:35 <bijan> bijan has joined #owl
07:31:38 <sandro> pfps: It's our contention that the Direct Semantics current correctly describes the meaning of OWL.
07:32:02 <sandro> ian; Finished, modulo outstanding issues.
07:32:05 <pfps> SubTopic: RDF Semantics
07:32:06 <IanH> q?
07:32:15 <pfps> Michael: RDF Semantics is a bit behind
07:32:18 <sandro> s/ian;/ian:/
07:32:30 <pfps> Michael: There are a couple of minor things that need to be added
07:32:43 <pfps> Michael:  The two documents are structurally aligned
07:33:31 <IanH> q?
07:33:44 <pfps> Michael: Outstanding issues - correspondence theorem, test cases that exercise rdf semantics
07:33:51 <sandro> m_schnei: the correspondence theorem proof still needs work.
07:34:10 <pfps> Bijan: Do we believe that the theorem is correct - if so then we should be able to go to last call - if not then we need to worry
07:34:19 <IanH> q?
07:34:32 <pfps> Michael:  I believe the theorem and that it is a good as we can get
07:34:55 <sandro> bijan: Are any proof errors such that the language would have to change?
07:35:00 <IanH> q?
07:35:05 <sandro> m_schnei: I don't think the language will have to change.
07:35:28 <pfps> Bijan:  Do you think that the semantics is OK
07:35:29 <Rinke> Rinke has joined #owl
07:35:35 <pfps> Michael: 95 per cent
07:35:56 <pfps> Subtopic: Conformance and Test Cases
07:36:07 <pfps> IanH:  This could be more contentious
07:36:15 <pfps> Ivan: We need more test cases
07:36:34 <IanH> q?
07:36:42 <pfps> IanH: Mike Smith wants to participate
07:37:00 <pfps> Bijan:  When I wanted to submit test cases the structure wasn't redy
07:37:12 <pfps> Ivan: What is the experience of the OWL 1 test cases
07:37:47 <pfps> Bijan: They are great, much better than before, they help a lot in checking initial part of implementation
07:38:13 <IanH> q?
07:38:16 <pfps> Markus:  Most OWL 1 test cases have been copied over
07:38:35 <pfps> Ivan: We might only need tests for the new features
07:38:49 <pfps> Bijan: We could do more, but getting to the OWL 1 level is adequate
07:39:17 <pfps> IanH:  There was also fitting into Lite, DL, Full, so the tests need to be remarked
07:39:33 <IanH> q?
07:39:44 <pfps> IanH: We also probably need test cases to check the boundaries of the profiles
07:39:46 <MarkusK_> Test cases http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_cases
07:40:08 <MarkusK_> This page contains links to lists showing all test cases, by various criteria
07:40:59 <pfps> Pfps:  What about the status of T&C itself
07:41:09 <pfps> Bijan:  We will ask for tests at OWLED
07:41:22 <pfps> Ivan:  We need test cases ready for CR
07:41:41 <pfps> Bijan:  Not so - test cases could come out of CR - we need a reasonable set going in
07:41:45 <IanH> q?
07:42:23 <pfps> Jeremy: OWL 1 test cases lagged going into LC by two months
07:42:33 <IanH> q?
07:42:55 <pfps> Sandro: At some time there has to be a set of approved test cases
07:43:10 <pfps> IanH:  Mike Smith wants a process for approving new test cases
07:43:27 <pfps> Sandro: Initially by hand, then we can use implementations to help approval process
07:43:51 <pfps> Jeremy:  OWL 1 document included the process for approving test cases
07:44:20 <pfps> IanH:  Conformance part has been approved - and has no outstanding issues
07:44:32 <pfps> Subtopic: RDF Mapping
07:44:39 <pfps> IanH:  What about RDF Mapping?
07:45:10 <pfps> Boris: Same status as Syntax and Semantics - up to date - some outstanding issues
07:45:23 <IanH> q?
07:46:13 <pfps> Ivan:  Looking at the QRG there appear to be some mismatches between functional and RDF syntaxes
07:47:01 <IanH> q?
07:47:27 <pfps> Boris: There are reasons for some of the mismatches
07:47:36 <IanH> q?
07:47:44 <pfps> ACTION: pfps to check differences between functional and RDF syntaxes
07:47:44 <trackbot> Created ACTION-232 - Check differences between functional and RDF syntaxes [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-10-30].
07:48:12 <IanH> q?
07:48:19 <pfps> Ivan: also XML syntax
07:48:54 <pfps> Bijan:  XML syntax mirrors functional syntax
07:49:04 <pfps> Subtopic: XML serialization
07:49:17 <schneid> schneid has joined #owl
07:50:13 <IanH> q?
07:50:27 <pfps> Bijan: Document is up to date - potential outstanding issues
07:50:49 <pfps> Bijan: Would be nice to have a non-normative RelaxNG syntax
07:51:10 <IanH> q?
07:51:26 <pfps> Bijan: This would an editorial addition - non critical - could even be after last call
07:51:49 <IanH> q?
07:52:20 <pfps> Bijan: Issues with aspects of design - too verbose - need to check with Matt Horridge
07:52:42 <pfps> IanH:  There was a query from Alan related to the MOF metamodel - can we generate the syntax from the MOF?
07:53:25 <Elisa> What would be generated from the MOF metamodel is XMI, which is an OMG specification for XML schema interchange
07:53:32 <pfps> Bijan: Not a good idea - no evidence that it would work - know that conversion to RelaxNG works
07:53:46 <pfps> Bijan: MOF conversion to XML might result in an unreadable schema
07:53:58 <pfps> Boris:  Could end up very close
07:54:06 <Elisa> This could be mapped to various other surface syntaxes in an automated way
07:54:28 <IanH> q?
07:54:41 <pfps> Bijan: I want to see the output before I determine whether it is a good idea
07:55:02 <sandro> Sandro: We can just wait until someone comes forward wanting this, and see if they're offering to do it.
07:55:24 <pfps> Elisa:  Lots of tools generate XML Schema from a metamodel - could be verbose
07:55:32 <bijan> q+
07:55:36 <sandro> elisa: The XMI -- the automatic XML schema -- will be generated automatically by any decent UML tool -- but the XMI has extra cruft, which you'd have to map out of it.
07:55:51 <IanH> q?
07:55:56 <pfps> Elisa:  What does the WG want to do with the result?
07:56:08 <bijan> q-
07:56:35 <pfps> Boris:  Why do we want XMI?  We then get an automatically-generated syntax
07:56:47 <pfps> Boris: Depends on result of metamodel issue
07:57:17 <sandro> Bijan: The question is whether this would result in a better schema.    More accurate, ...?
07:57:21 <pfps> Bijan:  I can see point related to above claim.  However, is the result a better schema? 
07:57:52 <pfps> Bijan:  I would prefer RelaxNG but I'm not proposing to change at this point.
07:57:59 <pfps> Bijan:  We need to be sure of the benefit.
07:58:24 <pfps> Boris:  Peter Hasse sent me an automatically generated schema - it wasn't pretty.
07:58:52 <pfps> Boris:  Peter Hasse said that the generation can be controlled, so maybe a good schema could result
07:59:15 <pfps> Boris:  In any case this depends on the metamodel issue and then a benefits analysis
07:59:21 <pfps> Bijan: Agree
07:59:35 <pfps> IanH:  Agree and also worry about timeline
07:59:45 <pfps> Bijan: Can we test whether our schema matches the metamodel
08:00:09 <pfps> Elisa:  Yes, but I'm not up on the tools - I do know someone who knows how to do this
08:00:26 <pfps> Bijan:  Testing our Schema would be a good idea
08:00:47 <IanH> q?
08:01:16 <pfps> Elisa:  This can also be a debugging tool
08:01:52 <pfps> Elisa: ECLIPSE has tools that help working on ontologies
08:03:19 <pfps> Evan: The tools check XMI not Schema
08:04:06 <pfps> Bijan: But tools turn metamodels into XML Schema - what about doing the reverse?
08:04:31 <pfps> Evan:  The tools result in ugly schema
08:04:41 <pfps> Bijan:  So there are no recognizers?
08:04:55 <sandro> wikipedia says "exchanging files between UML modeling tools using XMI is rarely possible."
08:05:18 <IanH> q?
08:05:40 <pfps> Boris: If we can automatically generate a nice Schema from the metamodel then we get automatic correspondence
08:05:53 <Rinke> (sandro, that's my personal experience as well)
08:06:25 <IanH> q?
08:06:36 <pfps> Bijan: Correctness (consistence) is the only benefit, I believe the schema over the metamodel
08:07:17 <pfps> Sandro:  If what Boris is saying works, then we get some increment to confidence
08:07:25 <pfps> IanH:  Not critical path 
08:08:03 <pfps> Rinke: There are tools that generate metamodel from XML Schema
08:08:07 <sandro> Sandro: If we can generate a schema from the metamodel, then run it against all the test cases, that would be a nice validation of the metamodel.
08:08:16 <pfps> IanH:  Also a good idea, but not on our critical path
08:08:27 <pfps> Evan: What is the canonical form of an OWL 2 ontology
08:08:51 <pfps> Boris:  The metamodel (but this is not completely formally defined)
08:09:33 <pfps> Subtopic: Profiles
08:09:33 <sandro> Boris: the metamodel -- in natural language, UML, functional syntax etc -- spread through all these bits -- that's the metamodel, and it's the canonical form.
08:09:47 <pfps> Boris: Up to date - some outstanding issues
08:09:57 <IanH> q?
08:10:11 <pfps> Bijan: What about descriptive stuff on the various profiles?
08:10:25 <pfps> IanH:  I added some of this stuff - it is controversial
08:10:52 <sandro> PRESENT: Ian, Boris, Peter, Bernardo, Sandro, MarkusK, m_schnei, Achille, Bijan, Evan, Christine, Rinke, Ivan
08:10:54 <pfps> Ivan: Want full grammars for each profile
08:10:57 <bijan> Editor's Note: This appendix will contain the full grammars of each of the profiles. The grammar will be completed when the technical work on each of the profiles has been finished.
08:11:01 <IanH> q?
08:11:10 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profiles#Appendix:_Complete_Grammars_for_Profiles
08:11:17 <pfps> Boris:  Editorial note - will be done before Last Call - don't want to do before final changes
08:11:23 <pfps> Ivan:  What about Theorem 1
08:11:41 <pfps> IanH: Up for discussion later
08:11:50 <pfps> IanH:  Some issues related to RL
08:12:00 <IanH> q?
08:12:04 <pfps> Subtopic: Primer
08:12:23 <pfps> Bijan:  I'm waiting for the other documents to stabilize
08:12:41 <pfps> Bijan:  I might want to change the example - traditional families might be controversial
08:13:17 <pfps> Ivan: For me the example works - I propose not to change unless there are major objections
08:13:52 <IanH> q?
08:14:27 <pfps> Sandro: Stay biological - social is controversial
08:15:09 <pfps> Ivan: Turtle examples are not nice - I will work on them
08:15:50 <pfps> Bijan:  I can't commit to Primer before end of year
08:16:33 <pfps> Ivan:  What is the status of the primer - rec track vs note - undetermined so far
08:16:49 <pfps> Ivan:  What about profiles in primer?
08:16:53 <IanH> q?
08:17:13 <pfps> Bijan:  As little as possible - bulks up the primer too much
08:17:22 <IanH> q?
08:17:35 <pfps> Ivan: How about using the same example for all profiles?
08:17:43 <pfps> Bijan: Could be a good idea
08:17:54 <pfps> Ivan: Appendices?
08:18:12 <pfps> Bijan: Profiles in text - non-starter - overwhelming
08:18:24 <IanH> q?
08:18:26 <pfps> Bijan: Profiles in appendices - better
08:18:30 <pfps> Ivan: More useful