17:58:44 RRSAgent has joined #owl 17:58:44 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-owl-irc 17:58:46 zakim, who's here? 17:58:46 On the phone I see ??P11, +1.212.239.aaaa 17:58:47 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, bijan, Carsten, IanH, sandro, alanr, pfps, ivan, MartinD, trackbot-ng 17:58:56 zakim, aaaa is me 17:58:56 +alanr; got it 17:58:57 zakim, ??P11 is me 17:58:58 +bijan; got it 17:59:01 zakim, dial ivan-voip 17:59:01 ok, ivan; the call is being made 17:59:03 +Ivan 17:59:05 msmith has joined #owl 17:59:10 -alanr 17:59:17 zakim, who is here? 17:59:17 On the phone I see bijan, Ivan 17:59:19 RRSAgent, pointer? 17:59:19 See http://www.w3.org/2008/01/16-owl-irc#T17-59-19 17:59:23 zakim, mute me 17:59:27 On IRC I see msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, bijan, Carsten, IanH, sandro, alanr, pfps, ivan, MartinD, trackbot-ng 17:59:31 bijan should now be muted 17:59:39 bmotik has joined #owl 17:59:40 bcuencag has joined #owl 17:59:41 +alanr 17:59:43 +??P13 17:59:48 zakim, ??p13 is me 17:59:53 +pfps; got it 17:59:59 +Sandro 18:00:05 + +8652aabb 18:00:06 zakim, mute me 18:00:21 pfps should now be muted 18:00:22 zakim, aabb is me 18:00:36 + +1.202.408.aacc 18:00:41 +??P21 18:00:42 +IanH; got it 18:00:46 + +9082aadd 18:00:58 +??P8 18:01:05 zakim, who is here? 18:01:05 On the phone I see bijan (muted), Ivan, alanr, pfps (muted), Sandro, IanH, msmith, ??P21, +9082aadd, ??P8 18:01:06 zakim, aadd is me 18:01:06 zakim ??P18 is me 18:01:08 +MartinD; got it 18:01:10 On IRC I see bcuencag, bmotik, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, bijan, Carsten, IanH, sandro, alanr, pfps, ivan, MartinD, trackbot-ng 18:01:10 Zakim, ??P21 is me 18:01:10 +bmotik; got it 18:01:19 zakim, ??P18 is me 18:01:19 I already had ??P18 as Sandro, bcuencag 18:01:37 zakim, mute me 18:01:37 MartinD should now be muted 18:02:03 Zakim, +9082aadd is me 18:02:03 sorry, bcuencag, I do not recognize a party named '+9082aadd' 18:02:13 -??P8 18:02:17 + +49.351.4.aaee 18:02:34 q- bmotik 18:02:35 zakim, aaee is me 18:02:35 +Carsten; got it 18:02:35 q- 18:02:35 zakim, +9082aadd is me 18:02:36 Zakim, mute me 18:02:37 sorry, MartinD, I do not recognize a party named '+9082aadd' 18:02:38 +DougL 18:02:39 DougL has joined #owl 18:02:41 bmotik should now be muted 18:02:42 zakim, mute me 18:02:42 Carsten should now be muted 18:02:42 q- bmotik 18:02:48 + +018652aaff 18:03:07 Achille has joined #owl 18:03:37 zakim, who is on the call? 18:03:37 On the phone I see bijan (muted), Ivan, alanr, pfps (muted), Sandro, IanH, msmith, bmotik (muted), MartinD (muted), Carsten (muted), DougL, +018652aaff 18:03:41 I put issue-93 into play 18:03:46 +01865 is a UK number, bernardo, so might be yours? 18:03:48 +[IBM] 18:03:53 yes 18:04:01 but zakim didn't see me 18:04:06 Zakim, aaff is bcuencag 18:04:06 +bcuencag; got it 18:04:09 Zakim, IBM is Achille 18:04:09 +Achille; got it 18:04:23 +??P24 18:04:32 Zhe has joined #owl 18:04:35 zakim, ??P24 is jeremy 18:04:35 +jeremy; got it 18:04:36 zakim, ??P24 is Jeremy 18:04:36 I already had ??P24 as jeremy, sandro 18:05:09 zakim, who is on the call? 18:05:09 On the phone I see bijan (muted), Ivan, alanr, pfps (muted), Sandro, IanH, msmith, bmotik (muted), MartinD (muted), Carsten (muted), DougL, bcuencag, Achille, jeremy (muted) 18:05:35 so, shoould i be typing? 18:06:12 zakim, mute me 18:06:12 bcuencag should now be muted 18:06:12 ian, I can do it (martin) = and I am not around next week 18:06:19 Present: Bijan, Ivan, alanr, pfps, Sandro, IanH, msmith, bmotik, MartinD, Carsten, DougL, bcuencag, Achille, jeremy 18:06:43 scribenick: MartinD 18:06:50 I guess I am fairly to the top 18:07:02 scribenick: MartinD 18:07:04 + +1.603.897.aagg 18:07:17 Topic: agenda amendments 18:07:21 jjc has joined #owl 18:07:29 If there's primer or restructuring comments I'd love to hear them 18:07:31 q+ 18:07:32 Ian: set this scribing business up on mailing list 18:07:33 as an agenda amendments 18:07:35 zakim, unmute me 18:07:38 pfps should no longer be muted 18:07:43 -1, and I read them 18:07:45 +1 18:07:57 PROPOSED: accept last week's minutes 18:08:11 JeffP has joined #owl 18:08:16 Aren't Wikis fun 18:08:16 Bullwinkle: Watch me pull a rabbit out of this hat! 18:08:16 Rocky: Bullwinkle, that trick never works! 18:08:16 Bullwinkle: I gotta get me a new hat! 18:08:18 q- 18:08:22 q- jeremy 18:08:31 Ian: do the minutes need more cleaning up? 18:08:33 q- 18:08:37 Jim 18:08:41 zakim, mute me 18:08:41 pfps should now be muted 18:08:41 +1 (accept) 18:08:52 zakim, who is on the call? 18:08:52 On the phone I see bijan (muted), Ivan, alanr, pfps (muted), Sandro, IanH, msmith, bmotik (muted), MartinD (muted), Carsten (muted), DougL, bcuencag (muted), Achille, jeremy 18:08:55 ... (muted), +1.603.897.aagg 18:09:01 Ian: let's put it off until next week, ask Jim to clean it up 18:09:19 +??P27 18:09:27 still missing pointers to talks in F2F minutes 18:09:30 zakim, ??P27 is me 18:09:30 +Zhe; got it 18:09:33 Ian, are the minutes accepted = resolved?? 18:10:18 PROPOSED: Manchester minutes are also postponed for later 18:10:22 action: Alan to add links to presentations to F2F minutes 18:10:22 Created ACTION-66 - Add links to presentations to F2F minutes [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-01-23]. 18:10:24 +0 18:10:26 +1 18:10:28 zakim, who is here? 18:10:28 On the phone I see bijan (muted), Ivan, alanr, pfps (muted), Sandro, IanH, msmith, bmotik (muted), MartinD (muted), Carsten (muted), DougL, bcuencag (muted), Achille, jeremy 18:10:28 Perhaps some other volunteer to help with thte F2f minutes? 18:10:31 ... (muted), +1.603.897.aagg, Zhe 18:10:32 Alan alraedy has to do a lot 18:10:32 On IRC I see JeffP, jeremy, Zhe, Achille, DougL, bcuencag, bmotik, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, bijan, Carsten, IanH, sandro, alanr, pfps, ivan, MartinD, trackbot-ng 18:10:42 +0 18:10:47 PROPOSED: Accept F2F1 minutes with presentation links being added later 18:10:47 zakim, unmute me 18:10:47 pfps should no longer be muted 18:11:00 zakim, mute me 18:11:00 pfps should now be muted 18:11:04 +1 accept minutes 18:11:06 q+ 18:11:08 +1 18:11:09 +0 18:11:11 zakim, unmute me 18:11:11 bijan should no longer be muted 18:11:16 Zhe, is +1603897.. your number? 18:11:26 jeffp: yes 18:11:26 mschnei has joined #owl 18:11:29 ack bijan 18:11:44 zakim, aagg is Zhe 18:11:44 +Zhe; got it 18:12:14 Present: Bijan, Ivan, alanr, pfps, Sandro, IanH, msmith, bmotik, MartinD, Carsten, DougL, bcuencag, Achille, jeremy, Zhe 18:12:16 Alan: links and presentations were communicate via mailing list 18:12:21 zakim, ??P27 is me 18:12:22 I already had ??P27 as Zhe, JeffP 18:12:47 Zakim, Zhe is really JeffP 18:12:49 +JeffP; got it 18:12:49 s/-;)/;-)/ 18:12:58 jeremy, thanks! 18:13:00 zakim, mute me 18:13:01 bijan should now be muted 18:13:08 -Zhe.a 18:13:40 RESOLVED: Accept Manchester mintues subject to clean-up and finalization 18:13:41 +Zhe 18:13:50 PROPOSED: Accept F2F1 minutes with presentation links being added later 18:14:15 RESOLVED: Accept F2F1 minutes with presentation links being added later 18:14:16 +1 18:14:20 +1 18:14:21 +1 18:14:25 My presentation is linked from some minutes (may be last weeks) I will find the link and post again 18:14:35 Topic: Pending review actions 18:14:45 Ian: most are in a good shape 18:14:47 all pending review actions look OK 18:14:48 yes 18:14:55 Ian: Bijan has completed his action 18:14:58 zakim, unmute me 18:14:58 bijan should no longer be muted 18:15:32 Bijan: three actions concluded, scenario is under control... 18:15:42 zakim, mute me 18:15:42 bijan should now be muted 18:15:45 Ian: action for Jeremy, also completed? 18:15:49 Zakim, unmute me 18:15:49 jeremy should no longer be muted 18:15:55 Zakim, mute me 18:15:55 jeremy should now be muted 18:16:19 Zakim, unmute me 18:16:19 jeremy should no longer be muted 18:16:24 Ian: actions were completed adequetaly, so are there any problems with them? 18:16:52 ?: what we need to the with these actions pending review? 18:18:13 Topic: overdue actions 18:18:40 My slides http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Dec/att-0097/dl-and-full.pdf 18:18:41 Sandro: working on action 43, in progress... no specific date yet 18:18:57 Sandro: will try to fix it by Feb 5th (?) 18:19:14 It's done 18:19:18 zakim, mute me 18:19:18 bijan was already muted, bijan 18:19:22 zakim, unmute me 18:19:22 bijan should no longer be muted 18:19:28 s/Feb 5th/Jan 25/ 18:19:38 Ian: action 56 overdue is probably done -> Bijan says: has been rolled into n-ary proposal... 18:19:57 Bijan: action should be closed, more info to be circulated this week 18:20:10 +[IPcaller] 18:21:01 k 18:21:08 Topic: Proposals to resove issues 18:21:15 hi there, am I finally in? 18:21:24 PROPOSED: Issue 29 (datatype vs. data range) 18:21:41 zakim, unmute me 18:21:41 pfps should no longer be muted 18:21:46 Ian: peter refreshes what proposal is about 18:22:09 god thanks ;-) 18:22:21 zakim, mute me 18:22:21 bijan should now be muted 18:22:32 zakim, mute me 18:22:32 pfps should now be muted 18:22:37 q+ 18:22:41 q+ to ask about point 4 18:22:46 Zakim, unmute me 18:22:46 jeremy should no longer be muted 18:22:56 ack jeremy 18:22:57 I didn't understand: has this been already implemented in the documents? 18:22:58 PFPS: proposal is to move to rdf data type, we checked rdf semantics, datarange is deprecated 18:23:06 q? 18:23:43 PROPOSED; ISSUE-29 move from owl:Datarange to rdfs:Datatype 18:23:50 Jeremy: we use data range before, we may want to think about the past use 18:23:57 Hmm, I think that Jeremy's point needs thought 18:23:58 Jeremy: only noticed now 18:24:07 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jan/0147 18:24:12 q- 18:24:17 zakim, mute me 18:24:17 pfps was already muted, pfps 18:24:18 +1 18:24:32 Zakim, mute me 18:24:32 jeremy should now be muted 18:24:43 Issue 73: owl:thing being infinte 18:24:50 +1 to reject 73 18:24:51 I raised issue and concur on rejection 18:24:53 +1 18:24:56 +1 to reject 73 18:24:58 Ian: this seems to be unanimous, people agree to reject 18:25:02 PROPOSED: close (as REJECTED) Issue 73 (Should owl:Thing be necessarily infinite?) as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jan/0059.html 18:25:04 -1 18:25:11 +1 to close as rejected ISSUE-73 18:25:15 Zakim, unmute me 18:25:15 jeremy should no longer be muted 18:25:17 +1 to close 18:25:20 Elisa has joined #owl 18:25:24 as rejected 18:25:31 +1 to close as rejected 18:25:43 +1 18:25:48 q+ 18:26:02 zakim, unmute me 18:26:02 bijan should no longer be muted 18:26:03 +Elisa_Kendall 18:26:05 +1 18:26:08 +1 18:26:16 Jeremy: if nobody can support Jeremy's position, Jeremy notes his opposition, but sees no point in contiunuing debate 18:26:18 q? 18:26:19 +1 to close issue as rejected 18:26:32 Bijan: is this an objection from HP? or the status... 18:26:38 Jeremy: this is NOT a formal objection. 18:26:41 Jeremy: it's not a formal objection 18:27:22 zakim, mute me 18:27:22 bijan should now be muted 18:27:28 Jeremy: there may be enough small problems like this, that it may total to a formal objection...... 18:28:05 Ian: close the issue, record Jeremy/HP voting against... 18:28:19 ian: ongoing discussion of this is not likely to get us to consensus. Jeremy seems to agree with this assessment -- he just wants a "no" vote recorded. 18:28:24 +1 18:28:29 Jeremy: maybe HP should review the vote against, but perhaps at the next publication stage 18:28:33 +1 18:28:33 +1 18:28:42 0 18:28:45 0 18:28:55 Ian: make sure we record everybody's voice, incl. abstaining 18:29:21 RESOLVED: close (as REJECTED) Issue 73 (Should owl:Thing be necessarily infinite?) as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jan/0059.html 18:29:54 Moving to issue 74, xsd facets 18:29:57 PROPOSED: close (as RESOLVED) Issue 74 (Use the xsd namespace for the facet names) as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jan/0050.html 18:30:06 Ian: discussed last time, everybody seems happy along the above lines 18:30:06 +1 18:30:10 +1 18:30:10 Ian: quick vote 18:30:11 +1 to resolve 74 18:30:12 +1 18:30:14 +1 18:30:14 +1 18:30:15 +1 18:30:15 +q to ask about scope 18:30:17 +1 18:30:19 q? 18:30:23 +1 18:30:27 q- 18:30:29 +1 18:30:36 ack bijan 18:30:41 ack msmith 18:30:41 msmith, you wanted to ask about scope 18:31:25 +1 18:31:29 MSmith: asking about the scope... there might be some contentious item.. 18:31:39 Clarified all A-D 18:31:40 Ian: discussed last time, 18:31:50 +1 18:32:01 RESOLVED: close (as RESOLVED) Issue 74 (Use the xsd namespace for the facet names) as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jan/0050.html 18:32:46 Topic: Discussion, Blank nodes and Skolems (issue 3) 18:32:56 Ian: some discussion on the mailing list... 18:32:57 (bijan first?) 18:33:04 zakim, unmute me 18:33:04 bijan was not muted, bijan 18:33:29 Bijan: responded to Jeremy's msg., 18:33:58 Bijan: ffrom the beginnning, in owl 1.0 we could represent tree-like patterns of anonymous 18:34:05 Bijan: serialized as blank nodes 18:34:43 Bijan: RDF extensionally qualifies all b-nodes, which in OWL would mean undecidability 18:35:13 Bijan: possibly have them as syntactic sugar, to handle RDF graphs as users expect 18:35:34 Bijan: Karsten proposed a spec. role to represent true extensionals 18:35:43 (I'm behind on the universal prop and existentials) 18:35:44 Bijan: objections, question? 18:35:54 Zakim, unmute me 18:35:57 jeremy should no longer be muted 18:36:19 Jeremy: discussed issue and it's clear that many implementations use skolems... 18:36:28 q+ to ask about "implementation techniques" 18:36:37 q? 18:37:17 q+ 18:37:20 Jeremy: there were implementations in previous wg, that's why we defined certain checks 18:37:24 q+ to talk about what the OWL 1.0 specs imply 18:37:41 Ian: is this the case that we define conformance w.r.t consistency check, not being able to tell diff 18:38:00 q? 18:38:10 Jeremy: basically yes, diff parts of rdf graph correspond to dl constructs 18:38:19 Jeremy, I didn't udnerstand that 18:38:33 Jeremy: b-nodes treated diff in owl-full = its semantics becomes more difficult 18:38:50 ack bijan 18:38:50 bijan, you wanted to ask about "implementation techniques" 18:38:57 ack bijan 18:39:34 Bijan: not understanding what is meant by impl. techniques, skolemization is a common one, but we're proposing something stronger, so taht some entailments hold, 18:40:00 Bijan: if we reason about abox, we recognize the items as individuals, as people expect should happen 18:40:16 Bijan: owl-full seems a bit hypothetical problem? 18:41:03 q? 18:41:11 Bijan: need to reconcile arguments that in some cases keep the old approach vs. cases that change semantics (of owl full), which could break reasoners 18:41:33 Bijan: we're trying to bridge the gap between dl and full, at the cost of some abstract parts of the theory 18:41:38 Zakim, unmute me 18:41:38 bmotik should no longer be muted 18:41:43 zakim, mute me 18:41:43 bijan should now be muted 18:41:45 ack boris 18:41:45 ack bmotik 18:41:54 q- 18:42:28 Boris: reiterating Jeremy, if we treat skolems as individuals or exist. variables, doesn't matter... as long as we maintain consistency criteria? correct? 18:42:59 Boris: we may actually strengthen this, in rdf we can have b-nodes on syntax level 18:43:20 can't tell the difference in owl1.0 afaik - needed negated property assertions ? 18:43:25 Boris: b--nodes in entailed ontologies? 18:43:37 q? 18:43:39 Boris: treat b-nodes as existentials? 18:43:58 q? 18:44:13 Boris: if it's on the right hand side... if it's in the graph part it's something else 18:44:40 q+ to disagree 18:45:10 What is the opposite of "b-bode in the data"? 18:45:11 Ian: interesting thing = worried about the case when everything is skolemized, incl b-nodes? 18:45:19 Good point by Ian....though they are alrady skolemized! 18:45:31 Carsten, tbox axioms use bnodes for syntax 18:45:45 q+ for Jeremy 18:45:51 e.g., C subClassOf [a restriction; onProperty P; someValuesFrom C] 18:45:52 Jeremy: coming from owl-full impl... 18:45:52 q- for 18:45:53 hmm, skolemizing syntax on the RHS would have grave consequences 18:45:56 q- 18:45:58 bijan: in which case does this happen? 18:46:04 the brackets are bnodes 18:46:20 q? 18:46:22 Carsten, pervasively...any class expression really 18:46:30 Ian: when skolemizing individuals would cause problems... it's a thing what other people talk about? 18:46:31 q? 18:46:34 zakim, unmute me 18:46:34 bijan should no longer be muted 18:46:45 Jeremy: Do I understand that you are worried that Full would make non-entailments if this was adoped? 18:47:21 or rather without doing more work in Jena 18:47:31 q? 18:47:33 q+ 18:47:35 Bijan: thought that in owl-dl there is a way of skolemizing syntax... we already use, everybody using rdf is already using those things 18:47:41 q+ to respond to boris's question? 18:47:44 q? 18:47:56 Bijan: in SPARQL, b-nodes can in answers and can be treated as skolems... 18:48:14 if you skolemize syntax, then john in >=1 C won't entail john in >=1 C in OWL Full 18:48:26 Bijan: supporting sparql syntax over ontologies, it matters a lot how we treat it 18:48:39 q? 18:48:42 Bijan: might not be variables, just funny renaming conditions 18:48:45 ack bijan 18:48:45 bijan, you wanted to disagree 18:48:51 q+ to ask a question 18:48:55 Bijan: example of rdf syntax which is highly visible and has impact 18:49:24 FZI is pro "bNodes as skolems" in /DL/ 18:49:24 q? 18:49:31 ack alanr 18:50:01 Alan: wants to clarify = concern is because of role impl. that generates entailments in owl-full... would be incorrect if skolemization is used? 18:50:02 zakim, mute me 18:50:02 bijan should now be muted 18:50:10 q? 18:50:34 q? 18:50:38