IRC log of owl on 2008-03-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:54:42 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #owl
17:54:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to
17:54:46 [pfps]
pfps has joined #owl
17:54:48 [Ratnesh]
Ratnesh has joined #owl
17:54:49 [alanr]
zakim, this is OWL
17:54:49 [Zakim]
alanr, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be OWL".
17:54:55 [alanr]
zakim, this will be OWL
17:54:55 [Zakim]
ok, alanr; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 54 minutes ago
17:55:21 [alanr]
zakim, ouch
17:55:21 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'ouch', alanr
17:55:37 [alanr]
sandro, why does zakim think this starts at 12?
17:57:02 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started
17:57:04 [Zakim]
17:57:40 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #owl
17:57:54 [Zakim]
+ +31.20.525.aaaa
17:57:54 [Zakim]
- +31.20.525.aaaa
17:57:54 [Zakim]
+ +31.20.525.aaaa
17:58:01 [Ratnesh]
zakim, ??P3 is me
17:58:01 [Zakim]
+Ratnesh; got it
17:58:03 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.408.aabb
17:58:04 [Rinke]
Zakim, aaaa is me
17:58:05 [Zakim]
+Rinke; got it
17:58:14 [msmith]
zakim, aabb is me
17:58:14 [Zakim]
+msmith; got it
17:58:38 [MarkusK]
MarkusK has joined #owl
17:59:25 [sandro]
alanr, because we had some pre-telecon-telecons, and so I just made the reservation thus, so that pre-telecon-telecons wouldn't need any special work. If we're not doing those any more, we should probably change it back.
17:59:29 [Zhe]
Zhe has joined #owl
17:59:29 [Achille]
Achille has joined #owl
17:59:44 [Zakim]
17:59:48 [Zakim]
17:59:50 [bijan]
zakim, ??P7 is me
17:59:50 [Zakim]
+bijan; got it
17:59:56 [bijan]
zakim, mute me
17:59:56 [Zakim]
bijan should now be muted
18:00:23 [Zakim]
+ +1.603.897.aacc
18:00:35 [Zakim]
18:00:37 [Zakim]
18:00:40 [Zakim]
18:00:47 [Zakim]
18:00:49 [Zhe]
zakim, ??P13 is me
18:00:49 [Zakim]
+Zhe; got it
18:00:53 [Achille]
Zakim, IBM is Achille
18:00:53 [Zakim]
+Achille; got it
18:00:57 [Zakim]
18:01:08 [Zakim]
+ +0190827aadd
18:01:11 [ivan]
ivan has joined #owl
18:01:18 [MartinD]
zakim, aadd is me
18:01:18 [Zakim]
+MartinD; got it
18:01:23 [MartinD]
zakim, mute me
18:01:23 [Zakim]
MartinD should now be muted
18:01:26 [JeffP]
JeffP has joined #owl
18:01:36 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
18:01:36 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
18:01:38 [Zakim]
18:01:48 [DougL]
DougL has joined #owl
18:01:49 [Zakim]
18:01:52 [IanH]
IanH has joined #owl
18:02:02 [Zakim]
18:02:15 [Zakim]
18:02:27 [jeremy]
jeremy has joined #owl
18:02:32 [Zakim]
18:02:39 [Zakim]
18:02:47 [m_schnei]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
18:02:47 [Zakim]
+m_schnei; got it
18:02:53 [vipul]
vipul has joined #owl
18:02:58 [bmotik]
bmotik has joined #owl
18:03:00 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:03:00 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:03:11 [Zakim]
+ +0186527aaee
18:03:16 [hendler]
hendler has joined #owl
18:03:19 [Zakim]
+ +1.518.276.aaff
18:03:21 [Zakim]
18:03:23 [Zakim]
18:03:26 [hendler]
zakim, aaff is me
18:03:26 [Zakim]
+hendler; got it
18:03:28 [IanH]
zakim, aaee is IanH
18:03:28 [Zakim]
+IanH; got it
18:03:37 [Zakim]
18:03:39 [alanr]
sandro: got it
18:03:47 [alanr]
zakim, who is here?
18:03:47 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ratnesh, Rinke, msmith, bijan (muted), MarkusK, +1.603.897.aacc, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Achille, Sandro, MartinD (muted), Ivan, Vipul_Kashyap,
18:03:48 [bmotik]
Zakim, ??p1 is me
18:03:51 [Zakim]
... Jeff_Pan, m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH, hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, ??P1
18:03:53 [Zakim]
On IRC I see hendler, bmotik, vipul, jeremy, IanH, DougL, JeffP, ivan, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK, Elisa, Ratnesh, pfps, RRSAgent, MartinD, Zakim, alanr, msmith, Rinke, m_schnei, bijan,
18:03:55 [Zakim]
... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng
18:03:55 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
18:04:00 [alanr]
603 number unaccounted for
18:04:03 [alanr]
zakim, who is here?
18:04:03 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ratnesh, Rinke, msmith, bijan (muted), MarkusK, +1.603.897.aacc, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Achille, Sandro, MartinD (muted), Ivan, Vipul_Kashyap,
18:04:07 [Zakim]
... Jeff_Pan, m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH (muted), hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, bmotik
18:04:09 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
18:04:09 [Zakim]
On IRC I see hendler, bmotik, vipul, jeremy, IanH, DougL, JeffP, ivan, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK, Elisa, Ratnesh, pfps, RRSAgent, MartinD, Zakim, alanr, msmith, Rinke, m_schnei, bijan,
18:04:11 [Zhe]
Zakim, +1.603.897.aacc is me
18:04:12 [Zakim]
... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng
18:04:14 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
18:04:16 [Zakim]
+Zhe; got it
18:05:00 [vipul]
Alan: Rearrange agenda to get the fragments discussion earlier
18:05:09 [Rinke]
ScribeNick: vipul
18:05:34 [alanr]
zakim, who is here?
18:05:34 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ratnesh, Rinke, msmith, bijan (muted), MarkusK, Zhe, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Achille, Sandro, MartinD (muted), Ivan, Vipul_Kashyap, Jeff_Pan,
18:05:38 [Zakim]
... m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH (muted), hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, bmotik (muted)
18:05:40 [Zakim]
On IRC I see hendler, bmotik, vipul, jeremy, IanH, DougL, JeffP, ivan, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK, Elisa, Ratnesh, pfps, RRSAgent, MartinD, Zakim, alanr, msmith, Rinke, m_schnei, bijan,
18:05:42 [Zakim]
... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng
18:05:51 [IanH]
I'm on
18:06:01 [Achille]
18:06:05 [alanr]
18:06:10 [alanr]
ack achille
18:06:33 [sandro]
that was Achille
18:06:45 [vipul]
Achille: Start the discussion on fragments earlier
18:07:31 [hendler]
+1 prev min
18:07:36 [sandro]
PROPOSED: approve previous minutes
18:07:37 [pfps]
+1 minutes
18:07:37 [ivan]
+1 prev minutes
18:07:38 [DougL]
0 (wasn't on the call)
18:07:40 [IanH]
18:07:41 [msmith]
+1 to accept prev min
18:07:44 [Zhe]
18:07:49 [Rinke]
0 (wasn't on the call either)
18:07:55 [bijan]
+1 mintues
18:08:06 [Ratnesh]
0 (wasn't on the call)
18:08:13 [sandro]
RESOLVED: approved minutes
18:08:30 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
18:08:30 [RRSAgent]
18:09:00 [vipul]
Alan: Issue 95 discussion to resolve... Was the action item completed?
18:09:11 [vipul]
Alan: How to resolve Issue 3, Tabled for now
18:09:39 [sandro]
RRSAgent, make record public
18:09:43 [vipul]
Alan: seek feedback on Action IItems
18:09:52 [vipul]
Alan: Close pending action items
18:10:07 [vipul]
Alan: Status of action 86?
18:10:17 [alanr]
zakim, who is here?
18:10:17 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ratnesh, Rinke, msmith, bijan (muted), MarkusK, Zhe, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Achille, Sandro, MartinD (muted), Ivan, Vipul_Kashyap, Jeff_Pan,
18:10:20 [Zakim]
... m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH (muted), hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, bmotik (muted)
18:10:23 [vipul]
Alan: Jeremy to respond?
18:10:23 [Zakim]
On IRC I see hendler, bmotik, vipul, jeremy, IanH, DougL, JeffP, ivan, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK, Elisa, Ratnesh, pfps, RRSAgent, MartinD, Zakim, alanr, msmith, Rinke, m_schnei, bijan,
18:10:25 [Zakim]
... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng
18:10:26 [alanr]
jeremy, you there?
18:10:47 [bijan]
Anticipating my overdue action...I've been posponing until we get closer to discussing hte proposal
18:10:53 [bijan]
I'll push it off a bit again
18:11:11 [bijan]
I expect to do it in the next few weeks but have been working on primer etc.
18:11:31 [bijan]
18:11:33 [vipul]
Alan: Issue 97, Adding GRDDL to the OWL XML syntax.
18:11:46 [vipul]
Alan: Transform OWL-XML into OWL-RDF
18:11:55 [pfps]
q+ to ask Jeremy how to do this
18:11:57 [alanr]
ack bijan
18:11:59 [bijan]
ack bijan
18:12:03 [vipul]
Alan: Do we accept this issue?
18:12:12 [vipul]
Bijan: OK with accepting the issue
18:12:33 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:12:33 [Zakim]
pfps, you wanted to ask Jeremy how to do this
18:12:49 [ivan]
18:12:55 [alanr]
ack ivan
18:13:16 [vipul]
Ivan: Each XML dialect has a namespace
18:13:26 [bijan]
It doesn't have to be XSLT
18:13:50 [vipul]
Ivan: Describes how GRDDL transformations are identified and invoked using the GRDDL standard
18:13:53 [Zakim]
+ +0789107aagg
18:14:10 [hendler]
the main thing is that an HTTP-GET of an XML ontology document could automagically serve up an RDF version
18:14:20 [alanr]
18:14:28 [bijan]
"Non-XSLT transforms may indicate the RDF graph in some other, unspecified, fashion."
18:14:38 [Rinke]
ok, thanks bijan
18:14:40 [vipul]
Alan: Schedule a discussion on the issue
18:14:43 [m_schnei]
+q issue96
18:14:57 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
18:14:57 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
18:15:00 [bijan]
The quote is from:
18:15:11 [bijan]
zakim, mute me
18:15:11 [Zakim]
bijan should now be muted
18:15:22 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:15:22 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:15:37 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
18:15:37 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
18:15:44 [vipul]
Alan: Issue 96 on next week's agenda
18:15:45 [bcuencagrau]
bcuencagrau has joined #owl
18:15:46 [Rinke]
it's a raised issue
18:16:15 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:16:15 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:16:52 [vipul]
Alan: Issue 95 to remove datatype restrictions to say things like complementOf?
18:17:00 [Zakim]
18:17:06 [vipul]
Alan: remove nested restrictions on datatype range
18:17:15 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, ??P21 is me
18:17:15 [Zakim]
+bcuencagrau; got it
18:17:43 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, mute me
18:17:43 [Zakim]
bcuencagrau should now be muted
18:17:47 [vipul]
Alan: Resolve this issue as is and add a new issue to name and further restrict datatypes
18:18:06 [ewallace]
I would be happy with taken up Boris' suggestion as a new issue
18:18:09 [bmotik]
18:18:09 [ewallace]
18:18:12 [pfps]
18:18:12 [DougL]
18:18:12 [IanH]
18:18:16 [JeffP]
18:18:16 [jeremy]
18:18:17 [ivan]
18:18:18 [msmith]
18:18:19 [Rinke]
18:18:21 [MartinD]
18:18:22 [Elisa]
18:18:22 [Zhe]
18:18:25 [bijan]
18:18:28 [alanr]
18:18:45 [hendler]
18:19:25 [Achille]
18:20:14 [alanr]
PROPOSED resolved issue 95 per and open new issue for discussion of Evan and other concerns re naming and further restricting datatypes
18:20:31 [alanr]
RESOLVED resolved issue 95 per and open new issue for discussion of Evan and other concerns re naming and further restricting datatypes
18:20:57 [sandro]
(calling it ISSUE-95 help the auto-linking.)
18:21:05 [vipul]
Alan: Start with Fragments Discussion
18:21:26 [vipul]
Alan: Pragmatics of organizing work going forward
18:22:12 [vipul]
Alan: 3 fragments
18:22:23 [vipul]
Alan: Overlap between OWL Lite and OWL Prime
18:22:40 [vipul]
Alan: Overlap between DL Lite and OWL Prime
18:22:55 [vipul]
Alan: Task Force devoted to each Fragment
18:22:58 [pfps]
18:23:00 [alanr]
18:23:03 [alanr]
18:23:08 [alanr]
ack issue96
18:23:12 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:23:30 [hendler]
18:23:41 [alanr]
ack hendler
18:23:49 [vipul]
Peter: How much work needs to be done, given the work done by Bors and Bernardo?
18:24:10 [vipul]
Jim: Agree with Peter... Work of this document or have another task force?
18:24:35 [Achille]
18:24:36 [vipul]
Jim: Far enough ahead, so probably put it in as a document of the workgroup?
18:24:40 [IanH]
18:24:41 [Zhe]
second that
18:24:45 [pfps]
18:24:45 [DougL]
sounds good
18:24:47 [JeffP]
18:24:50 [bijan]
18:24:51 [MartinD]
18:24:53 [MarkusK]
18:24:56 [jeremy]
18:24:57 [msmith]
18:25:13 [Rinke]
18:25:40 [vipul]
Alan: Discuss document on the mailing list and work through issues that come up on the mailing list
18:25:42 [IanH]
18:26:22 [vipul]
Sandro: Is this a Rec track document?
18:26:28 [m_schnei]
I will need quite some time to read this new version, esp. on OWL-R. It's a *big* change!
18:26:29 [jeremy]
q+ to support rec track-ing
18:26:33 [vipul]
Alan: Replace the document on the wiki?
18:26:34 [alanr]
ack IanH
18:26:49 [bijan]
I support replacement and rec-tracking
18:27:01 [vipul]
Ian: Replace the existing fragments document with the new one on the premise rec track?
18:27:12 [vipul]
Ian: What do you do with the existing one?
18:27:15 [ivan]
18:27:21 [jeremy]
ack jeremy
18:27:22 [Zakim]
jeremy, you wanted to support rec track-ing
18:27:22 [alanr]
ack jeremy
18:27:31 [alanr]
18:27:33 [bijan]
q+ to discuss what to do with others
18:27:34 [vipul]
Jeremy: In favor rec tracking this document
18:27:36 [hendler]
18:27:48 [alanr]
ack ivan
18:27:59 [vipul]
Ivan: Favor to rec track
18:28:12 [vipul]
Ivan: Do not have to do this decision at the moment
18:28:17 [IanH]
OK -- fine by me
18:28:21 [alanr]
18:28:25 [bijan]
ack me
18:28:25 [alanr]
ack bijan
18:28:26 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to discuss what to do with others
18:28:42 [vipul]
Ivan: Turning the submission 1 into a note might make sense, but do not need to decide on this right now
18:28:59 [vipul]
Bijan: Agree with Ivan, Nice Template to describe fragments
18:29:07 [alanr]
ack hendler
18:29:11 [bijan]
zakim, mute me
18:29:11 [Zakim]
bijan should now be muted
18:29:24 [vipul]
Bijan: Making this docuiment nice to read would be good
18:29:39 [bijan]
Link to the submission on the new one
18:29:40 [vipul]
Hendler: Current document should be somewhere accessible...
18:29:42 [m_schnei]
The old version will be in the Wiki history ;-)
18:29:46 [msmith]
wiki history is easy
18:30:15 [hendler]
wiki history not sufficient for this
18:30:17 [vipul]
Alan: Leave the document "tractable fragments" remain where it is and change the draft pointer to the new location
18:30:39 [vipul]
Jim: Need ability to look at both of them carefully
18:30:46 [ivan]
18:30:46 [alanr]
18:30:49 [Rinke]
pages are easily moved to other locations
18:31:23 [alanr]
Action for alan? Change sidebar fragments link to new proposal?
18:31:25 [vipul]
Ivan: OWL 1.1 input submission links to Fragments document. 2 links away from wiki page... Don't need to do anything
18:31:56 [alanr]
Action: Alan to change sidebar Fragments link to new page
18:31:56 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-99 - Change sidebar Fragments link to new page [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-03-12].
18:32:23 [alanr]
18:32:26 [alanr]
ack ivan
18:32:41 [bijan]
q+ to ask about RIF
18:32:43 [vipul]
Jim: Entry recognized W3C format
18:32:52 [vipul]
Jim: built rules for the fragment in that
18:33:20 [alanr]
18:33:22 [bijan]
zakim, unmute me
18:33:22 [Zakim]
bijan should no longer be muted
18:33:23 [alanr]
ack Bijan
18:33:23 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to ask about RIF
18:33:33 [vipul]
Jim: It is an executable format as engines can execute N3 descriptions
18:34:31 [alanr]
18:34:51 [vipul]
Bijan: Separate what format vs how to coordinate/reference other W3C work such as RIF
18:35:27 [vipul]
Jim: N3 representation of the rules is useful and also gives mapping to RDF
18:35:42 [vipul]
Sandro: Wait for the RIF last call
18:36:34 [alanr]
18:37:00 [vipul]
Jim: General discussion - What flavors of presentation of syntaxes etc are we going to use?
18:37:31 [pfps]
18:37:37 [vipul]
Jim: If we use different syntaxes - all syntaxes should be used in other documents
18:37:51 [bijan]
I don't understand the syntaxes part either
18:37:51 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:38:03 [bijan]
(of jim's comment)
18:38:04 [Zakim]
18:38:07 [m_schnei]
I think that I have seen the old SKOS primer using Jena Rules syntax, but this might have changed in the meanwhile
18:38:29 [Zhe]
is this ok
18:38:40 [Zhe]
for N3 rules
18:38:51 [vipul]
Jim: ... use of standard rule formats
18:39:07 [vipul]
Sandro: N3 Rules do not have stable documentation
18:39:18 [vipul]
Jim: some of it may be in the N3 document
18:39:36 [Zakim]
18:39:53 [vipul]
Alan: Separate issues related to syntax versus putting the rules on wiki
18:40:01 [Ratnesh]
Zakim, ??P3 is me
18:40:01 [Zakim]
+Ratnesh; got it
18:40:10 [alanr]
Action: Hendler to put n3 version of rules on wiki with pointer to documentation. All to review and discuss via email
18:40:10 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-100 - Put n3 version of rules on wiki with pointer to documentation. All to review and discuss via email [on James Hendler - due 2008-03-12].
18:41:34 [vipul]
Alan: Publication schedule: 3 documents - 3rd document is fragments document
18:41:35 [hendler] seems to have what we used in it
18:41:41 [alanr]
18:41:47 [m_schnei]
q+ on XML doc
18:42:04 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
18:42:04 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
18:42:11 [alanr]
18:42:15 [bijan]
What are the three documents? I missed that
18:42:51 [vipul]
Mike: For what applications is the XML doc needed?
18:42:55 [pfps]
the three documents are Primer, XML, Fragments
18:42:58 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:42:58 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:43:02 [alanr]
18:43:08 [msmith]
q+ to provide a use case
18:43:16 [alanr]
ack msmith
18:43:16 [Zakim]
msmith, you wanted to provide a use case
18:43:32 [bijan]
q+ to point to existing uses
18:43:44 [hendler]
q+ to ask about Note v. rec track status
18:43:55 [bijan]
ack bijan
18:43:55 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to point to existing uses
18:44:04 [ivan]
18:44:05 [alanr]
q+ to ask that xml not be able to do anything rdf/xml can't - poor motivation
18:44:05 [vipul]
MikeS: Implementation experience with XML format within DIG client/server architecture for passing explanation in the context of an NCI project
18:44:06 [bmotik]
18:44:30 [vipul]
Bijan: Matthew used it in MyGRid experiments
18:44:33 [alanr]
ack hendler
18:44:33 [Zakim]
hendler, you wanted to ask about Note v. rec track status
18:45:01 [vipul]
Jim: Useful, but confusion on status of various documents
18:45:03 [m_schnei]
anyone aware of this old W3C note: <>
18:45:09 [alanr]
ack ivan
18:45:15 [bijan]
Any FPWD can end up as a note
18:45:35 [vipul]
Jim: If published as a draft , can decide whether to stop it as a note or go to a rec
18:46:05 [vipul]
Jim: XML exchange syntax not to be published as rec
18:46:12 [jeremy]
18:46:17 [pfps]
18:46:21 [vipul]
Ivan: What are the arguments for the above and what has changed since then?
18:46:29 [pfps]
q+ to reply
18:46:30 [jeremy]
ack jeremy
18:46:42 [alanr]
ack jeremy
18:46:48 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:46:48 [Zakim]
m_schnei was already muted, m_schnei
18:46:48 [bijan]
For jim:
18:47:05 [vipul]
Scribe not: Lines -1, -2 by Ivan and not Jim
18:47:07 [bijan]
"Work on a technical report may cease at any time. When a Working Group completes its work on a technical report, it publishes it either as a Recommendation or a Working Group Note."
18:47:23 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:47:23 [Zakim]
pfps, you wanted to reply
18:47:38 [alanr]
ack alanr
18:47:39 [Zakim]
alanr, you wanted to ask that xml not be able to do anything rdf/xml can't - poor motivation
18:47:48 [vipul]
Jeremy, Peter: If we got to rec, we would have to look for implementations
18:47:48 [bijan]
q+ to talk about "Selling owl" via the XML syntax
18:48:13 [vipul]
Alan: Things in XML you cannot do in RDF/XML - undue burden on RDF/XML clients
18:48:23 [pfps]
q+ to talk about RDF/XML problems
18:48:25 [IanH]
18:48:27 [alanr]
ack bmotik
18:48:28 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
18:48:28 [Zakim]
bmotik was not muted, bmotik
18:48:33 [hendler]
q+ to respond to alan
18:48:36 [vipul]
Alan: Validate: GRDDL transformation can be written to correct the syntax errors
18:48:43 [jeremy]
q+ to note known limitations
18:49:05 [vipul]
Boris: DIG simple protocol for DL reasoners, committed to use XML syntax
18:49:24 [vipul]
Boris: DIG is using XML syntax for updates ot KB, DIG is axiom based
18:49:28 [alanr]
ack bijan
18:49:28 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to talk about "Selling owl" via the XML syntax
18:49:29 [msmith]
+1 to boris' dig use case. he is describing it better than I did
18:49:33 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
18:49:33 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
18:50:09 [vipul]
Bijan: People in XML groups do not like RDF/XML
18:50:25 [vipul]
Bijan: We are thought as XML hostile
18:50:28 [jeremy]
+1 to bijan
18:51:14 [vipul]
Bijan: Have a transformation to RDF (not document)
18:51:17 [hendler]
18:51:40 [vipul]
Bijan: Opens OWL to people who might be turned off by RDF/XML syntax
18:51:48 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:51:48 [Zakim]
pfps, you wanted to talk about RDF/XML problems
18:52:00 [hendler]
+1 to Bijan - and I agree w/him that the GRDDL thing is very important
18:52:17 [jeremy]
+1 to peter
18:52:18 [JeffP]
+1 to Bijan
18:52:21 [vipul]
Peter: Task for XML to RDF is impossible
18:52:24 [alanr]
q+ to respond to peter
18:52:27 [bijan]
+1 to peter
18:52:31 [MarkusK]
+1 to peter
18:52:32 [alanr]
ack IanH
18:52:33 [vipul]
Peter: cannot transform everything
18:52:43 [ivan]
18:52:44 [bijan]
hendler, RDF/XML can't represent all rdf graphs
18:53:08 [alanr]
q+ to answer Ian too
18:53:09 [vipul]
Ian: GRDDL transformation to check if we can go from XML to RDF.
18:53:21 [hendler]
yes, I got that - but we're talking about OWL, I thought
18:53:22 [alanr]
Sandro, can you chair reminder of this discussion
18:53:29 [vipul]
Ian: Can map from structural syntax to RDF
18:53:50 [sandro]
18:53:51 [vipul]
Alan: sandro, please chair the rest of the session
18:53:53 [jeremy]
ack jeremy
18:53:54 [Zakim]
jeremy, you wanted to note known limitations
18:54:05 [sandro]
18:54:05 [vipul]
Jeremy: Agree with Peter
18:54:05 [Zhe]
18:54:08 [sandro]
ack alanr
18:54:08 [Zakim]
alanr, you wanted to respond to peter and to answer Ian too
18:54:11 [jeremy]
zakim, mute me
18:54:11 [Zakim]
jeremy should now be muted
18:54:21 [bijan]
hendler, if OWL/XML can express properties ending with a % then you cannot translate to RDF/XML
18:54:39 [sandro]
18:54:47 [bijan]
This is true for Turtle
18:54:49 [vipul]
Alan: If I get OWL-XML which my OWL tools can grok, then I will have to retool. XML document should remain in track with them
18:55:02 [sandro]
alanr: as a user I want to two formats to be in sync.
18:55:06 [sandro]
ack ivan
18:55:10 [vipul]
Alan: GRDDL transformation to kee in track and promote interoperability
18:55:36 [sandro]
Ivan: Gosh, we have a lot of syntaxes!
18:55:36 [pfps]
in alan's comment s/can/can't/ I think
18:55:47 [sandro]
ack Zhe
18:55:48 [alanr]
btw, I *do* think the xml syntax is a win (provided interoperability is maintained)
18:55:58 [hendler]
bijan, thanks, but it seems to me we're talking border cases, not major problems - is that right?
18:56:03 [bijan]
18:56:05 [vipul]
Ivan: understand the argument, Many things? N3, RDF/XML, OWL/XML, Functional synta
18:56:16 [sandro]
Zhe: n-triple with predicate URI ending with slash -- can't be in RDF/XML. what other limitations?
18:56:17 [sandro]
18:56:22 [bijan]
I think if we're as good as Turtle to RDF/ one will effectively notice
18:56:24 [alanr]
predicates have to be qnames
18:56:28 [vipul]
Zhe: Conditions of some triples not convertable into RDF
18:56:50 [alanr]
so is invalid predicate
18:57:06 [vipul]
Peter: WG has list of issues related to transformations into RDF/XML
18:57:12 [bijan]
The last character of the URI must be a NCName legal character
18:57:28 [hendler]
q+ to respond to Peter - no WG decisions yet with respect to whether the final OWL 1.1 DL will have anything that cannot map to RDF
18:57:28 [jeremy]
i don't think i have any others ...
18:57:29 [m_schnei]
I would say we have just *two* syntaxes: RDF and Functional. The rest are all serializations of either RDF or Functional. Just my point of view.
18:57:32 [vipul]
Alan: Predicates => Qnames => Start with digit character.... URL...
18:57:44 [ivan]
http://a.b.c/?afe=pqr&lo=pi is also an invalid URI for a predicate...
18:57:47 [vipul]
Alan: Minor restrictions and do not get in the way
18:57:51 [jeremy]
18:58:02 [bijan]
ivan, really? I don't think so
18:58:14 [jeremy]
i will leave too
18:58:15 [IanH]
Nothing from me
18:58:17 [sandro]
Alan: if the other syntax were more tollerant, then the not-serializable stuff would be a real problem.
18:58:21 [sandro]
ack JeffP
18:58:22 [bijan]
xmlns:d=http://a.b.c/?afe=pqr&lo= and d:pi
18:58:25 [sandro]
ack hendler
18:58:25 [Zakim]
hendler, you wanted to respond to Peter - no WG decisions yet with respect to whether the final OWL 1.1 DL will have anything that cannot map to RDF
18:58:27 [vipul]
Rinke: Could you take over scribing now?
18:58:31 [hendler]
18:58:32 [vipul]
Need to get going
18:58:32 [JeffP]
18:58:33 [sandro]
ack JeffP
18:58:37 [sandro]
ack jeremy
18:58:38 [IanH]
Have to leave now - sorry
18:58:38 [Rinke]
ScribeNick: Rinke
18:58:45 [Zakim]
18:58:46 [vipul]
Thanks Rinke!
18:59:02 [Zakim]
18:59:15 [Rinke]
jeremy: we considered the predicate problem Zhe was alluding to. It's an RDF problem, not an OWL problem...
18:59:32 [sandro]
18:59:33 [alanr]
q+ to remind jeremy about interoperability issue
18:59:34 [Rinke]
jeremy: we decided not to fix it
18:59:45 [bijan]
q+ to suggest a solution
18:59:46 [sandro]
ack alanr
18:59:47 [Zakim]
alanr, you wanted to remind jeremy about interoperability issue
18:59:50 [Rinke]
jeremy: understand alan, but am against it. But that wasn't what RDF core decided
18:59:53 [jeremy]
azakim ,
19:00:01 [jeremy]
zakim, mute me
19:00:01 [Zakim]
jeremy should now be muted
19:00:05 [bcuencagrau]
Sorry, I also have to leave with Ian and Boris
19:00:06 [sandro]
m_schnei, I am chairing.
19:00:12 [Zakim]
19:00:18 [Rinke]
alanr: we have to live with the fact that RDF/XML might not be able to live with OWL/XML syntax
19:00:28 [bijan]
zakim, unmute me
19:00:28 [Zakim]
bijan was not muted, bijan
19:00:35 [sandro]
19:00:37 [Rinke]
alanr: don't want anything in the OWL/XML syntax that would not be compatible with RDF/XML
19:00:43 [Zakim]
19:00:51 [hendler]
+1 to Alan - if maximally interoperable, then I'm in favor; if not so (and it is a judgment call) then I'm against it
19:01:10 [jeremy]
zakim, unmute me
19:01:10 [Zakim]
jeremy should no longer be muted
19:01:18 [Rinke]
bijan: is it bad to ask for new features?
19:01:33 [alanr]
19:01:49 [sandro]
Bijan: but you can use turtle *now*. and thus exclude rdf/xml-only folks.
19:01:50 [hendler]
q+ to agree w/Alan
19:01:58 [alanr]
situation on the ground is that rdf/xml is lingua franca
19:02:07 [Rinke]
bijan: it is perfectly possible to push out some RDF that cannot be serialised into rdf/xml, but is valid RDF (turtle)
19:02:20 [alanr]
so in theory Bijan is correct, but in practice this will screw people
19:02:27 [alanr]
if not interoperable
19:02:29 [sandro]
ack bijan
19:02:29 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to suggest a solution
19:02:42 [alanr]
choice shouldn't be on provider.
19:02:43 [Rinke]
bijan: it wouldn't be so difficult to provide a schema that would be able to check for compatibility with RDF/XML
19:02:57 [Rinke]
bijan: people should be allowed to write these things, and people already do this
19:03:00 [sandro]
ack hendler
19:03:00 [Zakim]
hendler, you wanted to agree w/Alan
19:03:06 [Rinke]
bijan: don't understand the problem
19:03:27 [alanr]
19:03:29 [hendler]
+1 to continue
19:03:32 [DougL]
19:03:32 [pfps]
-1 let's do the other docs
19:03:33 [ewallace]
19:03:33 [sandro]
STRAWPOLL: 5 more minutes on this
19:03:34 [msmith]
-1 to continue on this
19:03:35 [Rinke]
sandro: who wants to give it 5 more minutes?
19:03:36 [Zhe]
19:03:36 [MartinD]
19:03:38 [JeffP]
-1 need to leave soon
19:03:40 [Ratnesh]
19:03:40 [MarkusK]
19:03:41 [bijan]
19:03:44 [Rinke]
sandro: (as we're out of time)
19:03:51 [alanr]
needs to be taken up next week
19:03:54 [bijan]
zakim, mute me
19:03:54 [Zakim]
bijan should now be muted
19:03:57 [Rinke]
sandro: chairs will have to think about this next week
19:04:03 [ivan]
zakim, who is talking?
19:04:05 [Rinke]
s/next/for next
19:04:05 [alanr]
19:04:14 [Zakim]
ivan, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (32%), hendler (5%), Alan (51%), Ivan (4%)
19:04:22 [Rinke]
alanr: we're back
19:04:41 [Rinke]
Topic: issues discussions
19:04:46 [Rinke]
alanr: 5 minutes each
19:04:59 [Rinke]
alanr: issue-69 as a 'larger' issue
19:05:05 [hendler]
what happened to discussion of the other docs?
19:05:05 [Rinke]
alanr: if we have more time
19:05:17 [Rinke]
alanr: ontology properties, issue-91
19:05:18 [pfps]
what happened to the other docs?
19:05:42 [Rinke]
alanr: boris added the ontology properties to the docs... but ontology properties have Ontologies as their range
19:05:49 [Rinke]
alanr: and domain
19:05:51 [m_schnei]
q+ to 91 and full
19:06:03 [Rinke]
alanr: that's where we are right now
19:06:07 [alanr]
ack jeremy
19:06:08 [ewallace]
We should be on Publication Schedule
19:06:22 [alanr]
19:07:20 [pfps]
19:07:31 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
19:07:31 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
19:07:32 [Rinke]
jeremy: I am still suffering HP overload. Domain and range can be specified in OWL full, but don't know how this works out in the FS
19:07:51 [Rinke]
jeremy: it's a finite list, so we could add them to the mapping rules (if necessary)
19:08:02 [alanr]
ack m_schnei
19:08:02 [Zakim]
m_schnei, you wanted to 91 and full
19:08:10 [Rinke]
jeremy: if someone could take this up, I'd be happy (busy until easter)
19:08:42 [Rinke]
m_schnei: I assume that the ontology properties will be in the syntax, but in OWL DL they will be interpreted as annotations
19:08:45 [ivan]
(easter monday = march 24)
19:08:56 [alanr]
q+ to note link to versioning issues
19:09:07 [Rinke]
m_schnei: but if they are in the RDF/XML syntax they have domain and range as OWL Full
19:09:16 [alanr]
ack pfps
19:09:18 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
19:09:18 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
19:09:22 [Rinke]
m_schnei: won't change anything to add the ontology range
19:09:34 [Rinke]
pfps: it's not really the case that they have a domain and range in OWL DL
19:09:46 [Rinke]
pfps: (1.0) it was not something you could talk about in OWL DL
19:10:11 [alanr]
ack alanr
19:10:11 [Zakim]
alanr, you wanted to note link to versioning issues
19:10:18 [Rinke]
pfps: in a certain sense, historically this discussion is incorrect... don't think that anything extra needs to be done on these properties that is any different from annotaiton properties
19:10:45 [Rinke]
alanr: there have been various discussions on versioning issues. It would be desirable to have versions have more actual impact than be rather advisory
19:10:58 [m_schnei]
peter, I don't know whether this was an answer to me: Anyway, I only talked about OWL-1.0-Full, not DL
19:11:33 [alanr]
19:11:37 [alanr]
ack jeremy
19:11:49 [Rinke]
alanr: have a proposal that I will bring up when we have our versioning discussion.... for the moment what I'm hearing is ok, but would like to at least discuss whether they could in some sense 'signal' something when something is 'bad'
19:12:16 [alanr]
19:12:21 [Rinke]
jeremy: answer to pfps, if I recall correctly, at least syntactically the range and domain have to be there, could be an issue with punning
19:13:07 [Rinke]
alanr: propose to leave it as is for OWL DL except to the extent that we have to say something about how it relates to Full.... for full we clould to followup on Michaels' issues
19:13:14 [m_schnei]
+1 to alan
19:13:15 [hendler]
-1 to close and then open different later - let's just leave it open
19:13:25 [Zakim]
19:13:29 [pfps]
+1 to dispatch the actual issue
19:13:31 [Rinke]
alanr: suggest to close the issue with the note that the 'issue' (or similar) will re-arise in the future
19:13:35 [JeffP]
need to go too, sorry
19:13:39 [pfps]
19:13:43 [Zakim]
19:13:52 [hendler]
19:13:55 [hendler]
19:13:55 [alanr]
19:13:59 [alanr]
ack pfps
19:14:02 [Zakim]
19:14:12 [Rinke]
pfps: to respond to jim in advance, the issue
19:14:36 [alanr]
19:14:38 [Rinke]
pfps: under consideration says the spec lacks ontology properties. It doesn't anymore... that is different from the domain and range of said ontology properties
19:14:40 [alanr]
ack hendler
19:15:03 [Rinke]
hendler: I disagree with you peter, but we're up to close to a 100 issues, just closing this to open up another one doesn't seem to help
19:15:11 [Rinke]
hendler: we can put the issue off for a long time
19:15:47 [alanr]
19:15:56 [Rinke]
alanr: don't see any harm in doing as peter suggest, with the blabla to at least send an email about why and how
19:16:02 [Rinke]
alanr: strong objections?
19:16:04 [DougL]
in that case +1
19:16:28 [Rinke]
alanr: no reason not to keep it open, just send an email so that we know where we are
19:16:30 [alanr]
Action: Alanr to summarize current state of issue 91
19:16:30 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Alanr
19:16:34 [hendler]
-1 => 0 with Alan's action
19:16:36 [alanr]
Action: Alan to summarize current state of issue 91
19:16:36 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-101 - Summarize current state of issue 91 [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-03-12].
19:16:48 [alanr]
we will keep 91 open
19:16:55 [Rinke]
alanr: Issue-16
19:17:01 [Rinke]
alanr: entity annotations status
19:17:12 [Rinke]
alanr: raised by jeremy
19:17:14 [m_schnei]
jeremy isn't there anymore
19:17:15 [Rinke]
who just left
19:17:18 [pfps]
+1 to defer
19:17:26 [Rinke]
alanr: defer?
19:17:34 [m_schnei]
+1 to peter
19:17:34 [Rinke]
alanr: ok, let's defer Issue-16
19:17:37 [Rinke]
19:17:51 [Rinke]
alanr: Issue-90, spec lacks deprecated marker
19:18:22 [pfps]
19:18:29 [alanr]
ack pfps
19:18:41 [Rinke]
pfps: no change, specs have not changed...
19:18:49 [Rinke]
pfps: proposed myself to deprecate deprecation
19:19:13 [bijan]
Deprecation doesn't eliminate yes?
19:19:19 [Rinke]
alanr: heard some objections related to backwards compatibility
19:19:32 [Rinke]
pfps: deprecation in the sense 'simply not say anything about it'
19:19:42 [alanr]
<deprecatedclas rdf:resource
19:19:43 [Rinke]
alanr: wouldn't that lead to syntax errors?
19:19:44 [hendler]
19:19:45 [bijan]
19:20:08 [alanr]
ack hendler
19:20:15 [Rinke]
alanr: deprecation would mean 'we keep it here as a courtesy, but expect it to be gone in owl 2.0'
19:20:21 [m_schnei]
we have precedence: usage of owl:DataRange is deprecated, but it's not dropped from the vocabulary!
19:20:40 [Zakim]
19:20:41 [Rinke]
hendler: I sort of like to see a package on the whole issue of 'non-semantic' elements properties classes
19:20:54 [Rinke]
hendler: have a confusion on the status of things we don't comment on
19:21:01 [Rinke]
hendler: do these still apply or not?
19:21:37 [Rinke]
alanr: meta comment... the authoritative wording on any of this are the specifications. To the extent that you are concerned about this... read the specs and bring up the issues one at a time
19:21:52 [Rinke]
alanr: stop reading the emails (to this purpose)... only look at the spec
19:21:54 [Zakim]
19:21:57 [alanr]
19:22:03 [bijan]
ack bijan
19:22:20 [Ratnesh]
zakim, ??P2 is me
19:22:20 [Zakim]
+Ratnesh; got it
19:22:50 [alanr]
19:23:09 [Rinke]
bijan: I think I support the 'deprecation' in the sense that we say that they are deprecated (i.e. they were not sufficiently defined for the purpose of implementation in applications, we leave them in the notes and will probably come up with something that superseeds them)
19:23:20 [m_schnei]
+1 to bijan ... to write this note
19:23:26 [Rinke]
hendler: object to any such resolution, see them as valuable in many applications.
19:23:34 [Rinke]
hendler: leave them as is
19:24:07 [Rinke]
bijan: if I want to do deprecation, I cannot resort to the specs, because they don't specify it properly. We won't achieve compatibility across applications
19:24:27 [alanr]
19:24:35 [Rinke]
hendler: there's a big difference between saying what this does, and specifying what it does. For humans2humans it works
19:24:40 [alanr]
q+ to ask if there is a problem with including it
19:24:52 [pfps]
that's not my understanding of DeprecatedClass
19:24:58 [Rinke]
bijan: I'm not talking about formalization, only specification. would you expect it to affect the class tree?
19:25:13 [Rinke]
hendler: no, don't expect it to, but in a future version
19:25:33 [bijan]
Where is this specced?
19:25:57 [Rinke]
alanr: you can simply read it as owlClass... the person reading it may take note that the class may be removed
19:26:12 [hendler]
I like
19:26:14 [bijan]
I don't want an action that is likely to produce an objection
19:26:19 [pfps]
I do
19:26:24 [Rinke]
alanr: what would the harm be in leaving them in there, and provide better documentation
19:26:54 [alanr]
deprecatedclass sameas class?
19:27:03 [m_schnei]
19:27:06 [Rinke]
pfps: I would not see a problem if such declarations did not carry semantic weight in RDF. Unfortunately they do, and therefore I strongly believe that they need to specced much better than wishy washy human consumption only stuff
19:27:20 [bijan]
Here, a specific identifier is said to be of type owl:DeprecatedClass or owl:DeprecatedProperty, where owl:DeprecatedClass is a subclass of rdfs:Class and owl:DeprecatedProperty is a subclass of rdf:Property.
19:27:23 [alanr]
ack alanr
19:27:23 [Zakim]
alanr, you wanted to ask if there is a problem with including it
19:27:25 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
19:27:25 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
19:27:30 [alanr]
ack m_schnei
19:27:40 [Rinke]
pfps: If one augmented the owl spec with that, then everything becomes hunky dory
19:28:01 [Rinke]
m_schnei: they don't have specific semantics in OWL full apart from being classes
19:28:02 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
19:28:02 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
19:28:19 [hendler]
19:28:28 [Rinke]
alanr: might be a reasonable and not incompatible repair to add in the owl full semantics that owlDeprecatedClass sameAs Class
19:28:47 [alanr]
ack hendler
19:28:49 [Rinke]
hendler: have a separate fix... would want them to be some kind of annotation
19:29:05 [msmith]
the problem with annotation is rdf:type predicate right?
19:29:20 [Rinke]
alanr: could you work with michael on the owl full semantics to see how this would work out
19:29:32 [Rinke]
msmith, I think so too
19:29:43 [pfps]
fine by me
19:29:53 [m_schnei]
19:29:54 [Rinke]
alanr: and see how this works out wrt peter's proposal
19:30:07 [Rinke]
alanr: last comment
19:30:15 [Rinke]
alanr: meeting can be considered closed
19:30:25 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
19:30:25 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
19:30:27 [Rinke]
scribe needs to leave soon as well
19:30:27 [Zakim]
19:30:37 [Zakim]
19:30:38 [Rinke]
m_schnei: what am I expected to do?
19:30:48 [Zakim]
19:31:03 [Ratnesh]
19:31:06 [Zakim]
19:31:11 [Zakim]
19:31:59 [alanr]
Action: Hendler to work with Michael to clarify semantics of deprecatedclass so that peter becomes happy
19:32:02 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-102 - Work with Michael to clarify semantics of deprecatedclass so that peter becomes happy [on James Hendler - due 2008-03-12].
19:32:24 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
19:32:24 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
19:33:25 [Zakim]
19:33:33 [Zhe]
19:33:35 [Zakim]
19:33:36 [MarkusK]
19:33:38 [Zakim]
19:33:39 [Zakim]
19:33:41 [Zakim]
19:33:41 [Zakim]
19:33:43 [Zakim]
19:33:43 [m_schnei]
19:33:44 [Zakim]
19:33:50 [MartinD]
MartinD has left #OWL
19:33:51 [alanr]
rrsagent, draft minutes
19:33:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate alanr
19:33:53 [Zakim]
19:34:01 [alanr]
rrsagent make log public
19:34:05 [sandro]
alanr, those minutes are not used for anything.......
19:34:11 [alanr]
19:34:19 [alanr]
rrsagent, make log public
19:35:11 [alanr]
zakim, who is on the call?
19:35:11 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Ivan, Alan
19:35:19 [sandro]
zakim, list attendees
19:35:19 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been +31.20.525.aaaa, Ratnesh, +1.202.408.aabb, Rinke, msmith, bijan, MarkusK, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Zhe, Achille, Sandro,
19:35:23 [Zakim]
... +0190827aadd, MartinD, Ivan, Vipul_Kashyap, Jeff_Pan, DougL, m_schnei, +0186527aaee, +1.518.276.aaff, Evan_Wallace, Alan, hendler, IanH, bmotik, +0789107aagg, jeremy,
19:35:26 [Zakim]
... bcuencagrau
19:35:57 [Zakim]
19:35:58 [Zakim]
19:36:00 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
19:36:01 [Zakim]
Attendees were +31.20.525.aaaa, Ratnesh, +1.202.408.aabb, Rinke, msmith, bijan, MarkusK, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Zhe, Achille, Sandro, +0190827aadd, MartinD, Ivan,
19:36:05 [Zakim]
... Vipul_Kashyap, Jeff_Pan, DougL, m_schnei, +0186527aaee, +1.518.276.aaff, Evan_Wallace, Alan, hendler, IanH, bmotik, +0789107aagg, jeremy, bcuencagrau
19:36:15 [sandro]
Present: Ratnesh, Rinke, msmith, bijan, MarkusK, Peter_Patel-Schneider, Elisa_Kendall, Zhe, Achille, Sandro, MartinD, Ivan, Vipul_Kashyap, Jeff_Pan, DougL, m_schnei, Evan_Wallace, Alan, hendler, IanH, bmotik, jeremy, bcuencagrau
19:36:28 [sandro]
Chair: Alan
19:38:03 [sandro]
Minutes available at
21:13:21 [jeremy]
jeremy has left #owl
21:18:12 [alanr]
alanr has left #owl
21:40:42 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #owl
22:19:04 [hendler]
hendler has joined #owl