W3C

- DRAFT -

RIF Telecon 12-Feb-08

12 Feb 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Mike_Dean, Gary_Hallmark, ChrisW, Sandro, josb, Harold, Stella_Mitchell, Hassan, csma, +1.212.781.aaaa, IgorMozetic, +1.212.781.aabb, AxelPolleres, MichaelKifer, Jeff_Pan, LeoraMorgenstern, apaschke
Regrets
DaveReynolds, PaulVincent, PaulaLaviniaPatranjan, Fran´┐ŻoisBry
Chair
Chris Welty
Scribe
JeffPan

Contents


 

 

<ChrisW> Scribe: JeffPan

<sandro> scribenick: sandro

<ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Feb/att-0022/05-rif-minutes.html

Chris: Minutes from last week. Any objections to approving them?

<AxelPolleres> hmmm, I thought I was ?p45. no clue who I am ;-)

Admin

RESOLUTION: approve http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Feb/att-0022/05-rif-minutes.html as true record of last weeks' meeting

raise hand is 41#

chris: ACTION-413

Action review

ACTION-412 continued -- by tomorrow

ACTION-411 continued

ACTION-409, Jos? On schedule?

Jos: Yes.

<csma> ACTION-410 done

ACTION-382, Sandro?

Sandro: I haven't come across any yet. *shrug*

ACTION-373, Sandro?

<JeffP> (sorry for the late - just finished other meetings)

Sandro: new deadline?

Chris: 20th.

Sandro: okay.

<csma> yes

<csma> continued

Chris: csma, ACTION-413?

<csma> done

Chris: csma, ACTION-410 Direction to Hotel?

JeffP, are you ready to scribe?

<JeffP> yes

<scribe> scribenick: JeffP

<ChrisW> ack ??

Liason

Harold, about hotel for the FTF

<sandro> csma: Port D'Italie is close to ILOG -- Place D'Italie is not so close.

<sandro> Harold: (both are Holiday Inn Express)

<josb> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC/OWL-Compatibility

josb: progress of OWL task force is fine

Harold: how about common logic?

Chris: good idea, but unfortunately no one is working on both at the moment
... maybe I could do it but not in the near future

Harold: will the ISO standard be free?

Chris: sort of

<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to raise question of XBRL liason

Chris: but it is not available now yet

<Harold> the RuleML Chat

<Harold> came up with questions

<Harold> about the upcoming Symposium:

<Harold> http://2008.ruleml.org/

<sandro> (David vun Kannon)

<sandro> http://xbrl.org/

<scribe> ACTION: Adrian to be the liason of XBRL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Adrian

<trackbot-ng> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. agiurca, apaschke)

<scribe> ACTION: apaschke to be the liason of XBRL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-414 - Be the liason of XBRL [on Adrian Paschke - due 2008-02-19].

F2F

4. F2F [3]

JeffP: I will attend FTF too

<IgorMozetic> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/F2F10

<Harold> Colleagues from the WG are encouraged to submit papers to RuleML-2008: Practically-oriented papers including use cases, implementations, interoperation experiments, ...

<Harold> (also to submit to the Challenge...)

Chris: we will discuss F2F10 in the coming F2F

<AxelPolleres> yes!

AxelPolleres: we would like to propose but need to know the dates first

Chris: we will be looking at the second half of May

<scribe> ACTION: AxelPolleres to post a proposal on F2F10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - AxelPolleres

PRD

(what is ur user name, AxelPolleres?)

<csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Feb/0040.html

<AxelPolleres> negation as failure under which semantics?

<AxelPolleres> ok, for conditions only doesn't matter probably...

csma descrbes the content of the above link

csma: I proposed a different syntax than BLD
... that's becuase the dicussions on the XML syntax haven't been finalised

<Harold> He seems to have said: some small changes in the syntax from BLD

<GaryHallmark> I volunteer

<GaryHallmark> yes

<ChrisW> ACTION: Gary to review PRD by Friday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-415 - Review PRD by Friday [on Gary Hallmark - due 2008-02-19].

<ChrisW> ACTION: Adrian to review PRD by Friday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot-ng> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Adrian

<trackbot-ng> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. agiurca, apaschke)

<ChrisW> ACTION: apaschke to review PRD by Friday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action06]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-416 - Review PRD by Friday [on Adrian Paschke - due 2008-02-19].

<apaschke> I also could not read it yet

csma: the main change of the syntax is about the frame construct

Publication Plan

<ChrisW> Frozen PRD - Monday, Feb 18

Chris: what about FLD?

MichaelKifer: Frozen FLD now

Chris: Frozen BLD now

<ChrisW> ACTION: Harold to finish BLD appendices by thursday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action07]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-417 - Finish BLD appendices by thursday [on Harold Boley - due 2008-02-19].

<Harold> Table Of Contents

<Harold> 1.

<Harold> RIF Overview

<Harold> 2.

<Harold> RIF-BLD Syntax

<Harold> 3.

<Harold> RIF-BLD Semantics

<ChrisW> ACTION: sandro to freeze BLD and put on wiki page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action08]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-418 - Freeze BLD and put on wiki page [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-02-19].

<Harold> 4.

<Harold> References

<Harold> 5.

<Harold> Appendix: Specification

<Harold> 6.

Chris: what about FLD?

<Harold> Appendix: List of Builtins

<Harold> 1.

<Harold> Numerics

<Harold> 2.

<Harold> Strings

<Harold> 3.

<Harold> Dates and Times

Chris: josb, how about the RDF compatibility doc?

<ChrisW> RDF & OWL Compat: frozen by friday

josb: by this Friday, including the OWL stuffs

Chris calls for more reviewers?

<AxelPolleres> I can review SW-compatibility.

scribe: The reviews should be ready by F2F

<scribe> ACTION: Igor to review both BLD and FLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action09]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-419 - Review both BLD and FLD [on Igor Mozetic - due 2008-02-19].

<scribe> ACTION: Axel to review SW-compatibility. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action10]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-420 - Review SW-compatibility. [on Axel Polleres - due 2008-02-19].

<LeoraMorgenstern> ok,

<LeoraMorgenstern> i could review bld

<Hassan> Sorry - I am rather booked ...

<StellaMitchell> at editorial level

BLD - Issue 44

<scribe> ACTION: Leora to review BLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action11]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-421 - Review BLD [on Leora Morgenstern - due 2008-02-19].

<scribe> ACTION: Stella to review FLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action12]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-422 - Review FLD [on Stella Mitchell - due 2008-02-19].

<csma> I did not include them in PRD

<csma> You want them?

<csma> :-)

<josb> unhappy, but not object

<apaschke> PRD: to support CLIPS?

<csma> Adrain: not at a cost for everybody else (that is, better CLIPS only bearing the cost)

<Harold> Common Logic also has named-arguments. E.g.: (married (roleset:(husband Jack)(wife Jill)))

<GaryHallmark> the reason I'm unhappy is there are 2 separate interp. fcns for slotted and positional, indicating that we don't really know how to map between the two

BLD - Issue 40

<GaryHallmark> ... but somehow implementers will have to figure it out

<ChrisW> PROPOSED: Fixed interpretation functions will be represented as TERMs and fixed interpretation relations as ATOMICs.

<MichaelKifer> Gary, there are always many choices (with or without named args). The implementors have to pick whatever they think is most suitable.

Chris: which action should we start with?

csma: Action 408

http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/408

<ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Feb/0005.html

<apaschke> =boolean-valued relations?

Igor: are we talking about using equality for assignment?

<AxelPolleres> being TERMs, it means built-ins may appear in all TERM positions. What do you mean Igor?

<Harold> Igor, Christian, Yes Equal can be used for assiging evaluation results from functional builtins to logic Vars.

<IgorMozetic> do we use ?X = add(1,2)

<apaschke> +1 for chris

josb: why do we need assignment at all?

<apaschke> ?X = add(1,2) is fully declarative

<AxelPolleres> +1 to jos, if we have functions as TERMs, they may appear in equality or any other predicate.

<Harold> Yes, something like And(?X = add(1,2), p(Seq(?X ?X)))

<ChrisW> PROPOSED: Fixed interpretation functions will be represented as TERMs and fixed interpretation relations as ATOMICs.

<apaschke> e.g if X is bound it reduce to eqality otherwise it is assignment

<sandro> Chris: These are syntactically different from logic functions.

<Harold> For "Small RIF Dialects" we can use a signature for Equal corresponding to Prolog's "is" primitive.

<IgorMozetic> not using add(1,2,?X)

<Harold> Something like Equal ( Var, Exterm ).

Sandro: what are the alternatives?

<josb> PROPOSED: Fixed interpretation functions will be represented as functions and fixed interpretation relations as predicates, rather than representing functions as predicates

<sandro> Chris: This excludes having only "builtin" predicates. We'll use some of each.

<sandro> Chris: Some predicates and some functions. Not JUST predicates.

<sandro> +1

<Harold> +1

<AxelPolleres> +1

<IgorMozetic> +1

<josb> +1

<MichaelKifer> +0

0

<apaschke> +1

<GaryHallmark> +1, assuming fixed interp. is syntactically distinguished from logical terms

<josb> RESOLVED: Fixed interpretation functions will be represented as functions and fixed interpretation relations as predicates, rather than representing functions as predicates

http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/List_of_BLD_built-ins

<ChrisW> ATOMIC ::= Uniterm | Equal | ExtTerm

<ChrisW> ATOMIC ::= Uniterm | Equal | ExtTerm

<ChrisW> TERM ::= Const | Var | Uniterm | ExtTerm

<ChrisW> ExtTerm ::= 'Builtin ( ' Uniterm ' ) '

<IgorMozetic> So we will use ?X = Buildin(add(1,2))

<josb> That's why it's good :)

<AxelPolleres> as long as this is not ambiguous with a normal uniterm...

<ChrisW> ACTION: harold to incorporate new builtin syntax in bld [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action13]

<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-423 - Incorporate new builtin syntax in bld [on Harold Boley - due 2008-02-19].

<AxelPolleres> ie. is "Builtin" forbidden as a local name, yes????

<AxelPolleres> hello?

<josb> local names are written "Builtin"^^rif:local

<josb> so, it's not forbidden and not ambiguous

Lists

AOB

<sandro> Frozen version of FLD: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/draft/ED-rif-fld-20080212/

MichaelKifer: I will add a link

<LeoraMorgenstern> i will volunteer

ok

<apaschke> bye

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Adrian to be the liason of XBRL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Adrian to review PRD by Friday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: apaschke to be the liason of XBRL [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: apaschke to review PRD by Friday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: Axel to review SW-compatibility. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: AxelPolleres to post a proposal on F2F10 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Gary to review PRD by Friday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Harold to finish BLD appendices by thursday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: harold to incorporate new builtin syntax in bld [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action13]
[NEW] ACTION: Igor to review both BLD and FLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: Leora to review BLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action11]
[NEW] ACTION: sandro to freeze BLD and put on wiki page [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action08]
[NEW] ACTION: Stella to review FLD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html#action12]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/02/12 17:23:40 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Jos/josb/
Found Scribe: JeffPan
WARNING: No scribe lines found matching ScribeNick pattern: <JeffPan> ...
Found ScribeNick: sandro
Found ScribeNick: JeffP
ScribeNicks: sandro, JeffP
Default Present: Mike_Dean, Gary_Hallmark, ChrisW, Sandro, josb, Harold, Stella_Mitchell, Hassan, csma, +1.212.781.aaaa, IgorMozetic, +1.212.781.aabb, AxelPolleres, MichaelKifer, Jeff_Pan, LeoraMorgenstern, apaschke
Present: Mike_Dean Gary_Hallmark ChrisW Sandro josb Harold Stella_Mitchell Hassan csma +1.212.781.aaaa IgorMozetic +1.212.781.aabb AxelPolleres MichaelKifer Jeff_Pan LeoraMorgenstern apaschke
Regrets: DaveReynolds PaulVincent PaulaLaviniaPatranjan Fran´┐ŻoisBry
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Feb/0041.html
Got date from IRC log name: 12 Feb 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/02/12-rif-minutes.html
People with action items: adrian apaschke axel axelpolleres gary harold igor leora sandro stella

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]