17:54:42 RRSAgent has joined #owl 17:54:42 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-owl-irc 17:54:46 pfps has joined #owl 17:54:48 Ratnesh has joined #owl 17:54:49 zakim, this is OWL 17:54:49 alanr, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be OWL". 17:54:55 zakim, this will be OWL 17:54:55 ok, alanr; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 54 minutes ago 17:55:21 zakim, ouch 17:55:21 I don't understand 'ouch', alanr 17:55:37 sandro, why does zakim think this starts at 12? 17:57:02 SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started 17:57:04 +??P3 17:57:40 Elisa has joined #owl 17:57:54 + +31.20.525.aaaa 17:57:54 - +31.20.525.aaaa 17:57:54 + +31.20.525.aaaa 17:58:01 zakim, ??P3 is me 17:58:01 +Ratnesh; got it 17:58:03 + +1.202.408.aabb 17:58:04 Zakim, aaaa is me 17:58:05 +Rinke; got it 17:58:14 zakim, aabb is me 17:58:14 +msmith; got it 17:58:38 MarkusK has joined #owl 17:59:25 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 has joined #owl 17:59:29 Achille has joined #owl 17:59:44 +??P7 17:59:48 +??P8 17:59:50 zakim, ??P7 is me 17:59:50 +bijan; got it 17:59:56 zakim, mute me 17:59:56 bijan should now be muted 18:00:23 + +1.603.897.aacc 18:00:35 +Peter_Patel-Schneider 18:00:37 +Elisa_Kendall 18:00:40 +??P13 18:00:47 +[IBM] 18:00:49 zakim, ??P13 is me 18:00:49 +Zhe; got it 18:00:53 Zakim, IBM is Achille 18:00:53 +Achille; got it 18:00:57 +Sandro 18:01:08 + +0190827aadd 18:01:11 ivan has joined #owl 18:01:18 zakim, aadd is me 18:01:18 +MartinD; got it 18:01:23 zakim, mute me 18:01:23 MartinD should now be muted 18:01:26 JeffP has joined #owl 18:01:36 zakim, dial ivan-voip 18:01:36 ok, ivan; the call is being made 18:01:38 +Ivan 18:01:48 DougL has joined #owl 18:01:49 -Zhe 18:01:52 IanH has joined #owl 18:02:02 +Vipul_Kashyap 18:02:15 +Jeff_Pan 18:02:27 jeremy has joined #owl 18:02:32 +[IPcaller] 18:02:39 +DougL 18:02:47 zakim, [IPcaller] is me 18:02:47 +m_schnei; got it 18:02:53 vipul has joined #owl 18:02:58 bmotik has joined #owl 18:03:00 zakim, mute me 18:03:00 m_schnei should now be muted 18:03:11 + +0186527aaee 18:03:16 hendler has joined #owl 18:03:19 + +1.518.276.aaff 18:03:21 +Evan_Wallace 18:03:23 +Alan 18:03:26 zakim, aaff is me 18:03:26 +hendler; got it 18:03:28 zakim, aaee is IanH 18:03:28 +IanH; got it 18:03:37 +??P1 18:03:39 sandro: got it 18:03:47 zakim, who is here? 18:03:47 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 Zakim, ??p1 is me 18:03:51 ... Jeff_Pan, m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH, hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, ??P1 18:03:53 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 ... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng 18:03:55 +bmotik; got it 18:04:00 603 number unaccounted for 18:04:03 zakim, who is here? 18:04:03 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 ... Jeff_Pan, m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH (muted), hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, bmotik 18:04:09 Zakim, mute me 18:04:09 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 Zakim, +1.603.897.aacc is me 18:04:12 ... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng 18:04:14 bmotik should now be muted 18:04:16 +Zhe; got it 18:05:00 Alan: Rearrange agenda to get the fragments discussion earlier 18:05:09 ScribeNick: vipul 18:05:34 zakim, who is here? 18:05:34 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 ... m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH (muted), hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, bmotik (muted) 18:05:40 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 ... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng 18:05:51 I'm on 18:06:01 +q 18:06:05 q? 18:06:10 ack achille 18:06:33 that was Achille 18:06:45 Achille: Start the discussion on fragments earlier 18:07:31 +1 prev min 18:07:36 PROPOSED: approve previous minutes 18:07:37 +1 minutes 18:07:37 +1 prev minutes 18:07:38 0 (wasn't on the call) 18:07:40 +1 18:07:41 +1 to accept prev min 18:07:44 +1 18:07:49 0 (wasn't on the call either) 18:07:55 +1 mintues 18:08:06 0 (wasn't on the call) 18:08:13 RESOLVED: approved minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.02.27/Minutes 18:08:30 RRSAgent, pointer? 18:08:30 See http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-owl-irc#T18-08-30 18:09:00 Alan: Issue 95 discussion to resolve... Was the action item completed? 18:09:11 Alan: How to resolve Issue 3, Tabled for now 18:09:39 RRSAgent, make record public 18:09:43 Alan: seek feedback on Action IItems 18:09:52 Alan: Close pending action items 18:10:07 Alan: Status of action 86? 18:10:17 zakim, who is here? 18:10:17 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 ... m_schnei (muted), DougL, IanH (muted), hendler, Evan_Wallace, Alan, bmotik (muted) 18:10:23 Alan: Jeremy to respond? 18:10:23 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 ... ewallace, sandro, trackbot-ng 18:10:26 jeremy, you there? 18:10:47 Anticipating my overdue action...I've been posponing until we get closer to discussing hte proposal 18:10:53 I'll push it off a bit again 18:11:11 I expect to do it in the next few weeks but have been working on primer etc. 18:11:31 q+ 18:11:33 Alan: Issue 97, Adding GRDDL to the OWL XML syntax. 18:11:46 Alan: Transform OWL-XML into OWL-RDF 18:11:55 q+ to ask Jeremy how to do this 18:11:57 ack bijan 18:11:59 ack bijan 18:12:03 Alan: Do we accept this issue? 18:12:12 Bijan: OK with accepting the issue 18:12:33 ack pfps 18:12:33 pfps, you wanted to ask Jeremy how to do this 18:12:49 q+ 18:12:55 ack ivan 18:13:16 Ivan: Each XML dialect has a namespace 18:13:26 It doesn't have to be XSLT 18:13:50 Ivan: Describes how GRDDL transformations are identified and invoked using the GRDDL standard 18:13:53 + +0789107aagg 18:14:10 the main thing is that an HTTP-GET of an XML ontology document could automagically serve up an RDF version 18:14:20 right 18:14:28 "Non-XSLT transforms may indicate the RDF graph in some other, unspecified, fashion." 18:14:38 ok, thanks bijan 18:14:40 Alan: Schedule a discussion on the issue 18:14:43 +q issue96 18:14:57 zakim, unmute me 18:14:57 m_schnei should no longer be muted 18:15:00 The quote is from: http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#txforms 18:15:11 zakim, mute me 18:15:11 bijan should now be muted 18:15:22 zakim, mute me 18:15:22 m_schnei should now be muted 18:15:37 zakim, unmute me 18:15:37 m_schnei should no longer be muted 18:15:44 Alan: Issue 96 on next week's agenda 18:15:45 bcuencagrau has joined #owl 18:15:46 it's a raised issue 18:16:15 zakim, mute me 18:16:15 m_schnei should now be muted 18:16:52 Alan: Issue 95 to remove datatype restrictions to say things like complementOf? 18:17:00 +??P21 18:17:06 Alan: remove nested restrictions on datatype range 18:17:15 Zakim, ??P21 is me 18:17:15 +bcuencagrau; got it 18:17:43 Zakim, mute me 18:17:43 bcuencagrau should now be muted 18:17:47 Alan: Resolve this issue as is and add a new issue to name and further restrict datatypes 18:18:06 I would be happy with taken up Boris' suggestion as a new issue 18:18:09 +1 18:18:09 +1 18:18:12 +1 18:18:12 +1 18:18:12 +1 18:18:16 +1 18:18:16 +1 18:18:17 0 18:18:18 +1 18:18:19 +1 18:18:21 +1 18:18:22 +1 18:18:22 +1 18:18:25 +1 18:18:28 +1 18:18:45 0 18:19:25 0 18:20:14 PROPOSED resolved issue 95 per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0129.html and open new issue for discussion of Evan and other concerns re naming and further restricting datatypes 18:20:31 RESOLVED resolved issue 95 per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Feb/0129.html and open new issue for discussion of Evan and other concerns re naming and further restricting datatypes 18:20:57 (calling it ISSUE-95 help the auto-linking.) 18:21:05 Alan: Start with Fragments Discussion 18:21:26 Alan: Pragmatics of organizing work going forward 18:22:12 Alan: 3 fragments 18:22:23 Alan: Overlap between OWL Lite and OWL Prime 18:22:40 Alan: Overlap between DL Lite and OWL Prime 18:22:55 Alan: Task Force devoted to each Fragment 18:22:58 q+ 18:23:00 ? 18:23:03 q? 18:23:08 ack issue96 18:23:12 ack pfps 18:23:30 q+ 18:23:41 ack hendler 18:23:49 Peter: How much work needs to be done, given the work done by Bors and Bernardo? 18:24:10 Jim: Agree with Peter... Work of this document or have another task force? 18:24:35 +1 18:24:36 Jim: Far enough ahead, so probably put it in as a document of the workgroup? 18:24:40 +1 18:24:45 +1 18:24:45 sounds good 18:24:47 +1 18:24:50 +1 18:24:51 +1 18:24:53 +1 18:24:56 +1 18:24:57 +1 18:25:13 +1 18:25:40 Alan: Discuss document on the mailing list and work through issues that come up on the mailing list 18:25:42 q+ 18:26:22 Sandro: Is this a Rec track document? 18:26:28 I will need quite some time to read this new version, esp. on OWL-R. It's a *big* change! 18:26:29 q+ to support rec track-ing 18:26:33 Alan: Replace the document on the wiki? 18:26:34 ack IanH 18:26:49 I support replacement and rec-tracking 18:27:01 Ian: Replace the existing fragments document with the new one on the premise rec track? 18:27:12 Ian: What do you do with the existing one? 18:27:15 q+ 18:27:21 ack jeremy 18:27:22 jeremy, you wanted to support rec track-ing 18:27:22 ack jeremy 18:27:31 q? 18:27:33 q+ to discuss what to do with others 18:27:34 Jeremy: In favor rec tracking this document 18:27:36 q+ 18:27:48 ack ivan 18:27:59 Ivan: Favor to rec track 18:28:12 Ivan: Do not have to do this decision at the moment 18:28:17 OK -- fine by me 18:28:21 q? 18:28:25 ack me 18:28:25 ack bijan 18:28:26 bijan, you wanted to discuss what to do with others 18:28:42 Ivan: Turning the submission 1 into a note might make sense, but do not need to decide on this right now 18:28:59 Bijan: Agree with Ivan, Nice Template to describe fragments 18:29:07 ack hendler 18:29:11 zakim, mute me 18:29:11 bijan should now be muted 18:29:24 Bijan: Making this docuiment nice to read would be good 18:29:39 Link to the submission on the new one 18:29:40 Hendler: Current document should be somewhere accessible... 18:29:42 The old version will be in the Wiki history ;-) 18:29:46 wiki history is easy 18:30:15 wiki history not sufficient for this 18:30:17 Alan: Leave the document "tractable fragments" remain where it is and change the draft pointer to the new location 18:30:39 Jim: Need ability to look at both of them carefully 18:30:46 q+ 18:30:46 q? 18:30:49 pages are easily moved to other locations 18:31:23 Action for alan? Change sidebar fragments link to new proposal? 18:31:25 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 Action: Alan to change sidebar Fragments link to new page 18:31:56 Created ACTION-99 - Change sidebar Fragments link to new page [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-03-12]. 18:32:23 q? 18:32:26 ack ivan 18:32:41 q+ to ask about RIF 18:32:43 Jim: Entry recognized W3C format 18:32:52 Jim: built rules for the fragment in that 18:33:20 q? 18:33:22 zakim, unmute me 18:33:22 bijan should no longer be muted 18:33:23 ack Bijan 18:33:23 bijan, you wanted to ask about RIF 18:33:33 Jim: It is an executable format as engines can execute N3 descriptions 18:34:31 q? 18:34:51 Bijan: Separate what format vs how to coordinate/reference other W3C work such as RIF 18:35:27 Jim: N3 representation of the rules is useful and also gives mapping to RDF 18:35:42 Sandro: Wait for the RIF last call 18:36:34 q? 18:37:00 Jim: General discussion - What flavors of presentation of syntaxes etc are we going to use? 18:37:31 q+ 18:37:37 Jim: If we use different syntaxes - all syntaxes should be used in other documents 18:37:51 I don't understand the syntaxes part either 18:37:51 ack pfps 18:38:03 (of jim's comment) 18:38:04 -Ratnesh 18:38:07 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 is this ok http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2007/Talks/0110-rules-tbl/#(1) 18:38:40 for N3 rules 18:38:51 Jim: ... use of standard rule formats 18:39:07 Sandro: N3 Rules do not have stable documentation 18:39:18 Jim: some of it may be in the N3 document 18:39:36 +??P3 18:40:01 Zakim, ??P3 is me 18:40:01 +Ratnesh; got it 18:40:10 Action: Hendler to put n3 version of rules on wiki with pointer to documentation. All to review and discuss via email 18:40:10 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 Alan: Publication schedule: 3 documents - 3rd document is fragments document 18:41:35 http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/2008/SUBM-n3-20080114/ seems to have what we used in it 18:41:41 q? 18:41:47 q+ on XML doc 18:42:04 zakim, unmute me 18:42:04 m_schnei should no longer be muted 18:42:11 q? 18:42:15 What are the three documents? I missed that 18:42:51 Mike: For what applications is the XML doc needed? 18:42:55 the three documents are Primer, XML, Fragments 18:42:58 zakim, mute me 18:42:58 m_schnei should now be muted 18:43:02 q? 18:43:08 q+ to provide a use case 18:43:16 ack msmith 18:43:16 msmith, you wanted to provide a use case 18:43:32 q+ to point to existing uses 18:43:44 q+ to ask about Note v. rec track status 18:43:55 ack bijan 18:43:55 bijan, you wanted to point to existing uses 18:44:04 q+ 18:44:05 q+ to ask that xml not be able to do anything rdf/xml can't - poor motivation 18:44:05 MikeS: Implementation experience with XML format within DIG client/server architecture for passing explanation in the context of an NCI project 18:44:06 q+ 18:44:30 Bijan: Matthew used it in MyGRid experiments 18:44:33 ack hendler 18:44:33 hendler, you wanted to ask about Note v. rec track status 18:45:01 Jim: Useful, but confusion on status of various documents 18:45:03 anyone aware of this old W3C note: 18:45:09 ack ivan 18:45:15 Any FPWD can end up as a note 18:45:35 Jim: If published as a draft , can decide whether to stop it as a note or go to a rec 18:46:05 Jim: XML exchange syntax not to be published as rec 18:46:12 q+ 18:46:17 q+ 18:46:21 Ivan: What are the arguments for the above and what has changed since then? 18:46:29 q+ to reply 18:46:30 ack jeremy 18:46:42 ack jeremy 18:46:48 zakim, mute me 18:46:48 m_schnei was already muted, m_schnei 18:46:48 For jim: http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#tr-end 18:47:05 Scribe not: Lines -1, -2 by Ivan and not Jim 18:47:07 "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 ack pfps 18:47:23 pfps, you wanted to reply 18:47:38 ack alanr 18:47:39 alanr, you wanted to ask that xml not be able to do anything rdf/xml can't - poor motivation 18:47:48 Jeremy, Peter: If we got to rec, we would have to look for implementations 18:47:48 q+ to talk about "Selling owl" via the XML syntax 18:48:13 Alan: Things in XML you cannot do in RDF/XML - undue burden on RDF/XML clients 18:48:23 q+ to talk about RDF/XML problems 18:48:25 q+ 18:48:27 ack bmotik 18:48:28 Zakim, unmute me 18:48:28 bmotik was not muted, bmotik 18:48:33 q+ to respond to alan 18:48:36 Alan: Validate: GRDDL transformation can be written to correct the syntax errors 18:48:43 q+ to note known limitations 18:49:05 Boris: DIG simple protocol for DL reasoners, committed to use XML syntax 18:49:24 Boris: DIG is using XML syntax for updates ot KB, DIG is axiom based 18:49:28 ack bijan 18:49:28 bijan, you wanted to talk about "Selling owl" via the XML syntax 18:49:29 +1 to boris' dig use case. he is describing it better than I did 18:49:33 Zakim, mute me 18:49:33 bmotik should now be muted 18:50:09 Bijan: People in XML groups do not like RDF/XML 18:50:25 Bijan: We are thought as XML hostile 18:50:28 +1 to bijan 18:51:14 Bijan: Have a transformation to RDF (not document) 18:51:17 q- 18:51:40 Bijan: Opens OWL to people who might be turned off by RDF/XML syntax 18:51:48 ack pfps 18:51:48 pfps, you wanted to talk about RDF/XML problems 18:52:00 +1 to Bijan - and I agree w/him that the GRDDL thing is very important 18:52:17 +1 to peter 18:52:18 +1 to Bijan 18:52:21 Peter: Task for XML to RDF is impossible 18:52:24 q+ to respond to peter 18:52:27 +1 to peter 18:52:31 +1 to peter 18:52:32 ack IanH 18:52:33 Peter: cannot transform everything 18:52:43 q+ 18:52:44 hendler, RDF/XML can't represent all rdf graphs 18:53:08 q+ to answer Ian too 18:53:09 Ian: GRDDL transformation to check if we can go from XML to RDF. 18:53:21 yes, I got that - but we're talking about OWL, I thought 18:53:22 Sandro, can you chair reminder of this discussion 18:53:29 Ian: Can map from structural syntax to RDF 18:53:50 q? 18:53:51 Alan: sandro, please chair the rest of the session 18:53:53 ack jeremy 18:53:54 jeremy, you wanted to note known limitations 18:54:05 q? 18:54:05 Jeremy: Agree with Peter 18:54:05 q+ 18:54:08 ack alanr 18:54:08 alanr, you wanted to respond to peter and to answer Ian too 18:54:11 zakim, mute me 18:54:11 jeremy should now be muted 18:54:21 hendler, if OWL/XML can express properties ending with a % then you cannot translate to RDF/XML 18:54:39 q? 18:54:47 This is true for Turtle 18:54:49 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 alanr: as a user I want to two formats to be in sync. 18:55:06 ack ivan 18:55:10 Alan: GRDDL transformation to kee in track and promote interoperability 18:55:36 Ivan: Gosh, we have a lot of syntaxes! 18:55:36 in alan's comment s/can/can't/ I think 18:55:47 ack Zhe 18:55:48 btw, I *do* think the xml syntax is a win (provided interoperability is maintained) 18:55:58 bijan, thanks, but it seems to me we're talking border cases, not major problems - is that right? 18:56:03 Yes 18:56:05 Ivan: understand the argument, Many things? N3, RDF/XML, OWL/XML, Functional synta 18:56:16 Zhe: n-triple with predicate URI ending with slash -- can't be in RDF/XML. what other limitations? 18:56:17 q? 18:56:22 I think if we're as good as Turtle to RDF/XML...no one will effectively notice 18:56:24 predicates have to be qnames 18:56:28 Zhe: Conditions of some triples not convertable into RDF 18:56:50 so http://example.org/foo#123 is invalid predicate 18:57:06 Peter: WG has list of issues related to transformations into RDF/XML 18:57:12 The last character of the URI must be a NCName legal character 18:57:28 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 i don't think i have any others ... 18:57:29 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 Alan: Predicates => Qnames => Start with digit character.... URL... 18:57:44 http://a.b.c/?afe=pqr&lo=pi is also an invalid URI for a predicate... 18:57:47 Alan: Minor restrictions and do not get in the way 18:57:51 q+ 18:58:02 ivan, really? I don't think so 18:58:14 i will leave too 18:58:15 Nothing from me 18:58:17 Alan: if the other syntax were more tollerant, then the not-serializable stuff would be a real problem. 18:58:21 ack JeffP 18:58:22 xmlns:d=http://a.b.c/?afe=pqr&lo= and d:pi 18:58:25 ack hendler 18:58:25 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 Rinke: Could you take over scribing now? 18:58:31 q- 18:58:32 Need to get going 18:58:32 q- 18:58:33 ack JeffP 18:58:37 ack jeremy 18:58:38 Have to leave now - sorry 18:58:38 ScribeNick: Rinke 18:58:45 -IanH 18:58:46 Thanks Rinke! 18:59:02 -Vipul_Kashyap 18:59:15 jeremy: we considered the predicate problem Zhe was alluding to. It's an RDF problem, not an OWL problem... 18:59:32 q? 18:59:33 q+ to remind jeremy about interoperability issue 18:59:34 jeremy: we decided not to fix it 18:59:45 q+ to suggest a solution 18:59:46 ack alanr 18:59:47 alanr, you wanted to remind jeremy about interoperability issue 18:59:50 jeremy: understand alan, but am against it. But that wasn't what RDF core decided 18:59:53 azakim , 19:00:01 zakim, mute me 19:00:01 jeremy should now be muted 19:00:05 Sorry, I also have to leave with Ian and Boris 19:00:06 m_schnei, I am chairing. 19:00:12 -bmotik 19:00:18 alanr: we have to live with the fact that RDF/XML might not be able to live with OWL/XML syntax 19:00:28 zakim, unmute me 19:00:28 bijan was not muted, bijan 19:00:35 q? 19:00:37 alanr: don't want anything in the OWL/XML syntax that would not be compatible with RDF/XML 19:00:43 -bcuencagrau 19:00:51 +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 zakim, unmute me 19:01:10 jeremy should no longer be muted 19:01:18 bijan: is it bad to ask for new features? 19:01:33 q? 19:01:49 Bijan: but you can use turtle *now*. and thus exclude rdf/xml-only folks. 19:01:50 q+ to agree w/Alan 19:01:58 situation on the ground is that rdf/xml is lingua franca 19:02:07 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 so in theory Bijan is correct, but in practice this will screw people 19:02:27 if not interoperable 19:02:29 ack bijan 19:02:29 bijan, you wanted to suggest a solution 19:02:42 choice shouldn't be on provider. 19:02:43 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 bijan: people should be allowed to write these things, and people already do this 19:03:00 ack hendler 19:03:00 hendler, you wanted to agree w/Alan 19:03:06 bijan: don't understand the problem 19:03:27 -1 19:03:29 +1 to continue 19:03:32 0 19:03:32 -1 let's do the other docs 19:03:33 0 19:03:33 STRAWPOLL: 5 more minutes on this 19:03:34 -1 to continue on this 19:03:35 sandro: who wants to give it 5 more minutes? 19:03:36 +0 19:03:36 0 19:03:38 -1 need to leave soon 19:03:40 -1 19:03:40 -0 19:03:41 0 19:03:44 sandro: (as we're out of time) 19:03:51 needs to be taken up next week 19:03:54 zakim, mute me 19:03:54 bijan should now be muted 19:03:57 sandro: chairs will have to think about this next week 19:04:03 zakim, who is talking? 19:04:05 s/next/for next 19:04:05 noise! 19:04:14 ivan, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (32%), hendler (5%), Alan (51%), Ivan (4%) 19:04:22 alanr: we're back 19:04:41 Topic: issues discussions 19:04:46 alanr: 5 minutes each 19:04:59 alanr: issue-69 as a 'larger' issue 19:05:05 what happened to discussion of the other docs? 19:05:05 alanr: if we have more time 19:05:17 alanr: ontology properties, issue-91 19:05:18 what happened to the other docs? 19:05:42 alanr: boris added the ontology properties to the docs... but ontology properties have Ontologies as their range 19:05:49 alanr: and domain 19:05:51 q+ to 91 and full 19:06:03 alanr: that's where we are right now 19:06:07 ack jeremy 19:06:08 We should be on Publication Schedule 19:06:22 s/plan/plane 19:07:20 q+ 19:07:31 zakim, unmute me 19:07:31 m_schnei should no longer be muted 19:07:32 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 jeremy: it's a finite list, so we could add them to the mapping rules (if necessary) 19:08:02 ack m_schnei 19:08:02 m_schnei, you wanted to 91 and full 19:08:10 jeremy: if someone could take this up, I'd be happy (busy until easter) 19:08:42 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 (easter monday = march 24) 19:08:56 q+ to note link to versioning issues 19:09:07 m_schnei: but if they are in the RDF/XML syntax they have domain and range as OWL Full 19:09:16 ack pfps 19:09:18 zakim, mute me 19:09:18 m_schnei should now be muted 19:09:22 m_schnei: won't change anything to add the ontology range 19:09:34 pfps: it's not really the case that they have a domain and range in OWL DL 19:09:46 pfps: (1.0) it was not something you could talk about in OWL DL 19:10:11 ack alanr 19:10:11 alanr, you wanted to note link to versioning issues 19:10:18 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 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 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 q? 19:11:37 ack jeremy 19:11:49 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 q? 19:12:21 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 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 +1 to alan 19:13:15 -1 to close and then open different later - let's just leave it open 19:13:25 -jeremy 19:13:29 +1 to dispatch the actual issue 19:13:31 alanr: suggest to close the issue with the note that the 'issue' (or similar) will re-arise in the future 19:13:35 need to go too, sorry 19:13:39 q+ 19:13:43 -Jeff_Pan 19:13:52 q 19:13:55 q+ 19:13:55 1? 19:13:59 ack pfps 19:14:02 -Achille 19:14:12 pfps: to respond to jim in advance, the issue 19:14:36 +1 19:14:38 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 ack hendler 19:15:03 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 hendler: we can put the issue off for a long time 19:15:47 q? 19:15:56 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 alanr: strong objections? 19:16:04 in that case +1 19:16:28 alanr: no reason not to keep it open, just send an email so that we know where we are 19:16:30 Action: Alanr to summarize current state of issue 91 19:16:30 Sorry, couldn't find user - Alanr 19:16:34 -1 => 0 with Alan's action 19:16:36 Action: Alan to summarize current state of issue 91 19:16:48 we will keep 91 open 19:16:55 alanr: Issue-16 19:17:01 alanr: entity annotations status 19:17:12 alanr: raised by jeremy 19:17:14 jeremy isn't there anymore 19:17:15 who just left 19:17:18 +1 to defer 19:17:26 alanr: defer? 19:17:34 +1 to peter 19:17:34 alanr: ok, let's defer Issue-16 19:17:37 Issue-90 19:17:51 alanr: Issue-90, spec lacks deprecated marker 19:18:22 q+ 19:18:29 ack pfps 19:18:41 pfps: no change, specs have not changed... 19:18:49 pfps: proposed myself to deprecate deprecation 19:19:13 Deprecation doesn't eliminate yes? 19:19:19 alanr: heard some objections related to backwards compatibility 19:19:32 pfps: deprecation in the sense 'simply not say anything about it' 19:19:42 alanr: wouldn't that lead to syntax errors? 19:19:44 q+ 19:19:45 q+ 19:20:08 ack hendler 19:20:15 alanr: deprecation would mean 'we keep it here as a courtesy, but expect it to be gone in owl 2.0' 19:20:21 we have precedence: usage of owl:DataRange is deprecated, but it's not dropped from the vocabulary! 19:20:40 -Ratnesh 19:20:41 hendler: I sort of like to see a package on the whole issue of 'non-semantic' elements properties classes 19:20:54 hendler: have a confusion on the status of things we don't comment on 19:21:01 hendler: do these still apply or not? 19:21:37 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 alanr: stop reading the emails (to this purpose)... only look at the spec 19:21:54 +??P2 19:21:57 q? 19:22:03 ack bijan 19:22:20 zakim, ??P2 is me 19:22:20 +Ratnesh; got it 19:22:50 q? 19:23:09 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 +1 to bijan ... to write this note 19:23:26 hendler: object to any such resolution, see them as valuable in many applications. 19:23:34 hendler: leave them as is 19:24:07 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 q? 19:24:35 hendler: there's a big difference between saying what this does, and specifying what it does. For humans2humans it works 19:24:40 q+ to ask if there is a problem with including it 19:24:52 that's not my understanding of DeprecatedClass 19:24:58 bijan: I'm not talking about formalization, only specification. would you expect it to affect the class tree? 19:25:13 hendler: no, don't expect it to, but in a future version 19:25:33 Where is this specced? 19:25:57 alanr: you can simply read it as owlClass... the person reading it may take note that the class may be removed 19:26:12 I like http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Deprecation 19:26:14 I don't want an action that is likely to produce an objection 19:26:19 I do 19:26:24 alanr: what would the harm be in leaving them in there, and provide better documentation 19:26:54 deprecatedclass sameas class? 19:27:03 +q 19:27:06 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 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 ack alanr 19:27:23 alanr, you wanted to ask if there is a problem with including it 19:27:25 zakim, unmute me 19:27:25 m_schnei should no longer be muted 19:27:30 ack m_schnei 19:27:40 pfps: If one augmented the owl spec with that, then everything becomes hunky dory 19:28:01 m_schnei: they don't have specific semantics in OWL full apart from being classes 19:28:02 zakim, mute me 19:28:02 m_schnei should now be muted 19:28:19 q+ 19:28:28 alanr: might be a reasonable and not incompatible repair to add in the owl full semantics that owlDeprecatedClass sameAs Class 19:28:47 ack hendler 19:28:49 hendler: have a separate fix... would want them to be some kind of annotation 19:29:05 the problem with annotation is rdf:type predicate right? 19:29:20 alanr: could you work with michael on the owl full semantics to see how this would work out 19:29:32 msmith, I think so too 19:29:43 fine by me 19:29:53 q+ 19:29:54 alanr: and see how this works out wrt peter's proposal 19:30:07 alanr: last comment 19:30:15 alanr: meeting can be considered closed 19:30:25 zakim, unmute me 19:30:25 m_schnei should no longer be muted 19:30:27 scribe needs to leave soon as well 19:30:27 -DougL 19:30:37 -bijan 19:30:38 m_schnei: what am I expected to do? 19:30:48 -Elisa_Kendall 19:31:03 bye 19:31:06 -Ratnesh 19:31:11 -Rinke 19:31:59 Action: Hendler to work with Michael to clarify semantics of deprecatedclass so that peter becomes happy 19:32:02 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 zakim, mute me 19:32:24 m_schnei should now be muted 19:33:25 -Peter_Patel-Schneider 19:33:33 bye 19:33:35 -Evan_Wallace 19:33:36 bye 19:33:38 -MarkusK 19:33:39 -Zhe 19:33:41 -msmith 19:33:41 -hendler 19:33:43 -MartinD 19:33:43 bye 19:33:44 -Sandro 19:33:50 MartinD has left #OWL 19:33:51 rrsagent, draft minutes 19:33:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-owl-minutes.html alanr 19:33:53 -m_schnei 19:34:01 rrsagent make log public 19:34:05 alanr, those minutes are not used for anything....... 19:34:11 oh 19:34:19 rrsagent, make log public 19:35:11 zakim, who is on the call? 19:35:11 On the phone I see Ivan, Alan 19:35:19 zakim, list attendees 19:35:19 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 ... +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 ... bcuencagrau 19:35:57 -Ivan 19:35:58 -Alan 19:36:00 SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended 19:36:01 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 ... Vipul_Kashyap, Jeff_Pan, DougL, m_schnei, +0186527aaee, +1.518.276.aaff, Evan_Wallace, Alan, hendler, IanH, bmotik, +0789107aagg, jeremy, bcuencagrau 19:36:15 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 Chair: Alan 19:38:03 Minutes available at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.03.05/Minutes 21:13:21 jeremy has left #owl 21:18:12 alanr has left #owl 21:40:42 Zakim has left #owl 22:19:04 hendler has joined #owl