IRC log of rif on 2008-03-25

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:28:45 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:28:45 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:28:54 [ChrisW]
zakim, this will be rif
14:28:54 [Zakim]
ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 32 minutes
14:29:12 [ChrisW]
Meeting: RIF Telecon 25-Mar-08
14:29:29 [ChrisW]
Chair: Chris Welty
14:29:54 [ChrisW]
14:30:17 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has changed the topic to: 25 March 2008 RIF Telecon Agenda
14:30:35 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:30:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ChrisW
14:30:43 [ChrisW]
agenda+ Admin
14:30:54 [ChrisW]
agenda+ Meetings
14:31:00 [ChrisW]
agenda+ Liason
14:31:02 [ChrisW]
agenda+ UCR
14:31:06 [ChrisW]
agenda+ Metadata
14:31:21 [ChrisW]
agenda+ Striping
14:31:30 [ChrisW]
agenda+ Action Review
14:31:41 [ChrisW]
agenda+ AOB
14:57:18 [josb]
josb has joined #rif
15:00:08 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
15:00:16 [Zakim]
+ +43.158.801.1aaaa
15:00:25 [Zakim]
15:00:32 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:01:02 [sandro]
rrsagent, make minutes public
15:01:02 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', sandro. Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:01:05 [Zakim]
15:01:10 [Zakim]
15:01:11 [Zakim]
+Dave_Reynolds (was ??P21)
15:01:27 [StellaMitchell]
StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:01:33 [ChrisW]
zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:01:33 [Zakim]
+ChrisW; got it
15:01:44 [sandro]
rrsagent, make record public
15:01:49 [ChrisW]
Chair: Sandro Hawke
15:01:56 [Zakim]
+ +1.817.262.aabb
15:02:02 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:02:02 [Hassan]
Hassan has joined #rif
15:02:03 [Zakim]
On the phone I see josb, Sandro, ChrisW, Dave_Reynolds, +1.817.262.aabb
15:02:03 [mdean]
mdean has joined #rif
15:02:04 [Harold]
Harold has joined #rif
15:02:15 [Zakim]
15:02:37 [DaveReynolds]
Scribe: Dave Reynolds
15:02:40 [Zakim]
+ +1.617.873.aacc
15:02:44 [DaveReynolds]
ScribeNick: DaveReynolds
15:03:28 [sandro]
Recent scribes - Igor 3-18, Leora 4 mar, Stella 11 mar
15:03:37 [Zakim]
15:03:47 [StellaMitchell]
zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
15:03:47 [Zakim]
+StellaMitchell; got it
15:03:48 [IgorMozetic]
IgorMozetic has joined #rif
15:04:21 [Zakim]
15:04:48 [Harold]
zakim, NRCC is me
15:04:48 [Zakim]
+Harold; got it
15:05:04 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:04 [Zakim]
On the phone I see josb, Sandro, ChrisW, Dave_Reynolds, +1.817.262.aabb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), +1.617.873.aacc, StellaMitchell, Harold
15:05:12 [Zakim]
15:05:20 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, ??P38 is me
15:05:20 [Zakim]
+IgorMozetic; got it
15:05:24 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, mute me
15:05:24 [Zakim]
IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:05:28 [sandro]
zakim, aabb is JamesOwen
15:05:30 [Zakim]
+JamesOwen; got it
15:05:30 [mdean]
zakim, aacc is me
15:05:30 [Zakim]
+mdean; got it
15:05:47 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:05:47 [Zakim]
On the phone I see josb, Sandro, ChrisW, Dave_Reynolds, JamesOwen, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), mdean, StellaMitchell, Harold, IgorMozetic (muted)
15:05:57 [sandro]
Topic: Meetings
15:06:06 [sandro]
PROPOSED: accept minutes of 18 March telecon
15:06:26 [sandro]
RESOLVED: accept minutes of 18 March telecon
15:06:44 [LeoraMorgenstern]
LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
15:06:47 [DaveReynolds]
No news on F2F10
15:06:51 [ChrisW]
zakim, list agenda
15:06:51 [Zakim]
I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
15:06:52 [Zakim]
1. Admin [from ChrisW]
15:06:52 [Zakim]
2. Meetings [from ChrisW]
15:06:53 [Zakim]
3. Liason [from ChrisW]
15:06:53 [Zakim]
4. UCR [from ChrisW]
15:06:55 [Zakim]
5. Metadata [from ChrisW]
15:06:55 [Zakim]
6. Striping [from ChrisW]
15:06:56 [Zakim]
7. Action Review [from ChrisW]
15:06:58 [Zakim]
8. AOB [from ChrisW]
15:07:16 [sandro]
Topic: Liaison
15:07:17 [Zakim]
+ +1.212.781.aadd
15:07:21 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 3
15:07:21 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Liason" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:07:51 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: no news from OWL task force
15:08:00 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, aadd is me
15:08:00 [Zakim]
+LeoraMorgenstern; got it
15:08:06 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, mute me
15:08:06 [Zakim]
LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:08:29 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: no discussion in OWL wg on this, there is a f2f next week, could push for time on this in the f2f agenda?
15:08:43 [Zakim]
15:09:00 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: haven't had feedback yet
15:09:21 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: suggest OWL wg find a couple of reviewers for the SWC document
15:09:23 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has joined #rif
15:09:40 [Zakim]
15:09:40 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: there will be some changes resulting from changes in BLD, should wait for frozen version
15:10:02 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 4
15:10:02 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "UCR" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:10:03 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:10:03 [Zakim]
On the phone I see josb, Sandro, ChrisW, Dave_Reynolds, JamesOwen, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), mdean, StellaMitchell, Harold, IgorMozetic (muted), LeoraMorgenstern (muted),
15:10:06 [Zakim]
... Gary_Hallmark, ??P41
15:11:03 [DaveReynolds]
Axel: f2f10 process is running
15:11:27 [sandro]
re ACTION-443 the page is still in the voting stage. Axel, can you make it read better for where we really are.
15:11:29 [DaveReynolds]
Chris: updated wiki page a little but needs to be checked and improved
15:11:44 [DaveReynolds]
Axel to scribe next week
15:11:59 [DaveReynolds]
Topic: back to UCR
15:12:04 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 5
15:12:05 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "Metadata" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:12:17 [sandro]
(oops, Zakim)
15:12:19 [sandro]
15:12:30 [Harold]
15:12:38 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: summary of review, clear that it has not been updated, no link from use cases to the solution, at best it is irrelevant but worse is potentially misleading
15:12:55 [sandro]
Gary: UCR is currently very misleading.
15:13:18 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: e.g. for the OWL use cases they show direct link from use case to OWL/RDF need similar linkage for the RIF part of the solution
15:13:32 [sandro]
Sandro: sounds like more stuff is needed, but is what's there wrong?
15:13:42 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:14:06 [sandro]
Gary: now we have solutions to link to. why don't we use the uniform new syntax?
15:14:17 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: right. For example, the rule examples are all different syntax should use new presentation syntax
15:14:33 [sandro]
ack Harold
15:14:38 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: doesn't link to the technical content of the specs
15:15:08 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: the worked examples are not up to date but in several cases we did have some worked examples but more on XML syntax, should look back at these
15:15:19 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, unmute me
15:15:19 [Zakim]
IgorMozetic should no longer be muted
15:15:26 [Hassan]
+1 with Gary all the way
15:15:32 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: use a simplified presentation syntax? "Tutorial presentation syntax"?
15:15:33 [Zakim]
+ +1.631.833.aaee
15:15:51 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, aaee is me
15:15:51 [Zakim]
+MichaelKifer; got it
15:15:55 [sandro]
15:16:14 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: would this be better as a primer or separate document?
15:16:17 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: no
15:16:35 [sandro]
q+ to ask about using covered rule languages
15:17:04 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: just annotate each example with solution from FLD as jumping off point to help people understand what we have done
15:17:07 [ChrisW]
15:18:16 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: RDF and OWL mapping is clear, XML mapping is less definitive but clear enough we can illustrate how the data maps and so what the rules would look like in RIF
15:18:22 [AxelPolleres]
AxelPolleres has joined #rif
15:18:45 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: also gives some examples to help people get into RIF without the need for a full blown primer
15:18:47 [sandro]
ack sandro
15:18:47 [Zakim]
sandro, you wanted to ask about using covered rule languages
15:19:26 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: makes sense for use case examples to be in vendor language, separately show how they translate to RIF
15:20:00 [Harold]
Worked Examples:
15:20:01 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: might be nice but too many different languages and the readers won't be familiar with them
15:20:27 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:20:27 [Zakim]
On the phone I see josb, Sandro, ChrisW, Dave_Reynolds, JamesOwen, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), mdean, StellaMitchell, Harold, IgorMozetic, LeoraMorgenstern (muted), Gary_Hallmark,
15:20:29 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: want to teach people about RIF rather than all the languages and how the translation works
15:20:31 [Zakim]
... AxelPolleres, MichaelKifer
15:20:55 [sandro]
15:20:58 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: some use cases weak, perhaps through those out, leaves maybe 15-20 rules in total
15:20:59 [sandro]
ack ChrisW
15:21:13 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: partially agree with Gary but doesn't want UCR to become a tutorial
15:21:31 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: not a full tutorial but the OWL one goes somewhat that way
15:22:01 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: OWL started out as real requirements doc, then refered back and updated that as issues were classified
15:22:14 [Harold]
OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements:
15:22:16 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: but for OWL already had DAML+OIL as uniform starting place
15:22:58 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: then turned into explanation of the problems that OWL was designed to solve, and so has some tutorial aspect but that's not the purpose
15:22:59 [sandro]
15:23:11 [ChrisWelty]
ChrisWelty has joined #rif
15:23:31 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: agreed, move our UCR to closer to OWL style, advertise what RIF is good for
15:24:11 [sandro]
15:24:47 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: need to consult with Adrian how much of this task he can take on
15:25:14 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, mute me
15:25:14 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:25:36 [Zakim]
15:25:57 [ChrisW]
action: chris to send email about UCR
15:25:57 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-453 - Send email about UCR [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-04-01].
15:26:14 [ChrisW]
zakim, list agenda
15:26:14 [Zakim]
I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
15:26:15 [Zakim]
1. Admin [from ChrisW]
15:26:15 [Zakim]
2. Meetings [from ChrisW]
15:26:17 [Zakim]
3. Liason [from ChrisW]
15:26:17 [Zakim]
4. UCR [from ChrisW]
15:26:18 [Zakim]
5. Metadata [from ChrisW]
15:26:18 [Zakim]
6. Striping [from ChrisW]
15:26:19 [Zakim]
7. Action Review [from ChrisW]
15:26:21 [Zakim]
8. AOB [from ChrisW]
15:26:28 [sandro]
zakim, take up agendum 5
15:26:29 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "Metadata" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:26:30 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 5
15:26:31 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "Metadata" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:27:24 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, unmute me
15:27:24 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:27:45 [Harold]
RE action 442: and
15:27:54 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: need to be able to provide metadata which affects the semantics of the rule data
15:28:10 [DaveReynolds]
Michail: Jos' response is that those are directives rather than metadata
15:28:10 [sandro]
semantic metadata vs non-semantic metadata
15:28:18 [DaveReynolds]
15:28:55 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: procedurally, thought the group had decide to leave semantic-metadata for later
15:29:05 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: yes but need to prepare ground
15:29:16 [IgorMozetic]
zakim, mute me
15:29:16 [Zakim]
IgorMozetic should now be muted
15:29:32 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: agreed on simple part at f2f, decided to put that in next WD and continue talking about directives
15:29:56 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: but at the moment directives are too simple
15:30:23 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: should be able to attach directives to queries, and individual rules, should be keeping this in mind
15:30:35 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: is there an issue being tracked on this?
15:31:02 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: there is modules, import/inclusion but not a separate one specifically for the directives machinery
15:31:24 [DaveReynolds]
Action Chris: to open issue on semantic metadata
15:31:36 [ChrisW]
action: chris to open an issue on semantic metadata
15:31:36 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-454 - Open an issue on semantic metadata [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-04-01].
15:31:56 [ChrisW]
action: Chris to stop giving himself actions...
15:31:56 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-455 - Stop giving himself actions... [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-04-01].
15:32:08 [Zakim]
15:32:22 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: incorporated the metadata in the BNF grammars (see above URLs)
15:32:51 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: next to put it in XML, depends on current discussions
15:33:27 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: but concerned that they duplicate some things, e.g. sequences
15:33:56 [GaryHallmark]
GaryHallmark has joined #rif
15:34:23 [sandro]
ACTION: Jos to look over Harold's BNF for metadata
15:34:23 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Jos
15:34:23 [trackbot-ng]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
15:34:34 [sandro]
ACTION: jedbruij2 to look over Harold's BNF for metadata
15:34:34 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, couldn't find user - jedbruij2
15:34:39 [sandro]
ACTION: jdebruij2 to look over Harold's BNF for metadata
15:34:39 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-456 - Look over Harold's BNF for metadata [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2008-04-01].
15:34:59 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 6
15:34:59 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "Striping" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:34:59 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, mute me
15:35:00 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:35:51 [Harold]
15:36:51 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: tried to show how this works in graph form in email (see URL above)
15:37:05 [GaryHallmark]
15:37:26 [sandro]
ack GaryHallmark
15:37:38 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: Sandro's version 3 is sort of a reification of the properties (scribe couldn't follow that)
15:37:51 [jco]
jco has joined #rif
15:38:00 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: isn't RDF layout a sort of defn for striping?
15:38:15 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: also Henry Thompson paper on alternating normal form
15:38:32 [sandro]
15:38:38 [Harold]
15:38:44 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: striping is interesting because then can treat rules as RDF data and so rules can process the XML representation of other rules
15:38:51 [sandro]
ack Harold
15:39:01 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: which would be a reason for defining striping in an RDF compatible way
15:39:06 [sandro]
q+ to say this isn't RDF/XML for a couple of reasons
15:39:22 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: could RDF parsers be extended to cope with user defined slots?
15:39:30 [DaveReynolds]
Gary: why would you want to that?
15:40:03 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: RDF parse could only handle bare bones, but couldn't understand extra attributes inside class forms (?)
15:40:33 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: need to fix the RDF schema in order to give an XML schema to RDF (?)
15:41:06 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: disagree, the name of a slot in RIF syntax should be just a literal
15:42:07 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: even though fully striped is analogous to RDF we won't be able to parse RIF as RDF due to other decisions (ordering, typing) which he argued against but lost
15:42:33 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: slots can in general be terms not just simple literals
15:42:48 [jco]
jco has joined #rif
15:43:28 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: tend for a version of solution 3
15:43:42 [sandro]
Harold: (if we can't have user-level slots)
15:44:51 [DaveReynolds]
[Discussion between Harold and Sandro on whether this is reification or simply a data model, couldn't follow details.]
15:45:17 [sandro]
STRAWPOLL: Go with solution 3 in Sandro/Harold's e-mail
15:45:38 [Harold]
s/ tend for a version of solution 3/ if cannot use direct slots, then tend for a version of solution 3/
15:45:43 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif
15:45:44 [josb]
15:45:52 [sandro]
ack sandro
15:45:52 [Zakim]
sandro, you wanted to say this isn't RDF/XML for a couple of reasons
15:45:55 [sandro]
ack josb
15:46:17 [Hassan]
I agree with Jos
15:46:18 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: favour making syntax slightly less verbose, but not strong opinion
15:47:23 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: proposing a *version* of solution 3
15:47:45 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: avoids word pair
15:48:17 [DaveReynolds]
Sandro: suspects Christian might prefer solution2
15:48:40 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: but that has problems, it is positionalizing as two vectors that you then have to match up
15:49:14 [Harold]
Going "fully striped" was a long process.
15:49:18 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: favour solution1, stop being fully striped, would not object to others
15:49:27 [sandro]
15:50:11 [GaryHallmark]
I'm not sure being 99% striped will serve us well...
15:50:40 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: propose pick one for next WD, seek feedback from implementors
15:50:54 [sandro]
PROPOSED: Use fully-striped syntax for next WD (option 3 in
15:51:13 [Harold]
15:51:14 [AxelPolleres]
15:51:15 [sandro]
(not ruling on name "Slot" vs "Pair" vs whatever.)
15:51:16 [sandro]
15:51:17 [Hassan]
15:51:18 [GaryHallmark]
15:51:19 [IgorMozetic]
15:51:20 [DaveReynolds]
15:51:20 [mdean]
15:51:25 [ChrisW]
15:51:38 [sandro]
RESOLVED: Use fully-striped syntax for next WD (option 3 in
15:51:58 [JamesOwen]
JamesOwen has joined #rif
15:52:37 [ChrisW]
action: harold to update xml syntax to reflect "option 3" resolution
15:52:37 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-457 - Update xml syntax to reflect \"option 3\" resolution [on Harold Boley - due 2008-04-01].
15:52:42 [sandro]
zakim, list agenda?
15:52:42 [Zakim]
I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
15:52:43 [Zakim]
1. Admin [from ChrisW]
15:52:43 [Zakim]
2. Meetings [from ChrisW]
15:52:44 [Zakim]
3. Liason [from ChrisW]
15:52:44 [Zakim]
4. UCR [from ChrisW]
15:52:45 [Zakim]
5. Metadata [from ChrisW]
15:52:45 [Zakim]
6. Striping [from ChrisW]
15:52:47 [Zakim]
7. Action Review [from ChrisW]
15:52:49 [Zakim]
8. AOB [from ChrisW]
15:52:57 [sandro]
zakim, take up item 7
15:52:57 [Zakim]
agendum 7. "Action Review" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:54:09 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, unmute me
15:54:09 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:54:20 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: plan had been to do WDs for end of these week, what is the current reasonable schedule?
15:54:46 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: 1 more week
15:54:46 [sandro]
Harold -- freeze on Apr 4th?
15:55:12 [Harold]
15:55:23 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: much of datatype text is moved to DTB but this document will take longer to get ready, it has progressed much recently
15:55:32 [DaveReynolds]
s/has/has not/
15:56:00 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: suggest leaving text in place for next WD and put a note saying it will be moved to DTB in future
15:57:11 [DaveReynolds]
Axel: so far it is not done but could still be feasible in the next week
15:57:14 [JamesOwen]
JamesOwen has joined #rif
15:57:44 [josb]
15:58:09 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: the problem is not the moving, but the fact that DTB is not ready to be published so the moved pieces would then not be included in the WD set
15:58:16 [Harold]
Because of this, Axel and I want to have Michael as a third co-editor of DTB, and Michael is fine.
15:58:27 [DaveReynolds]
Axel: what about bulitins not decided yet?
15:58:39 [DaveReynolds]
Chairs: leave in and mark them
15:59:00 [DaveReynolds]
Axel: given that could get DTB cleaned up by end of next week ready for WG review
15:59:00 [josb]
15:59:40 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: leave in BLD, postpone deciding on move until see the DTB doc, mark the sections as planned to move
16:00:17 [DaveReynolds]
action-425 complete
16:00:35 [DaveReynolds]
Action-427 complete
16:00:57 [sandro]
syntax example from OWL is: {{EdNote|~~~~|See [ Issue-4] (syntax reordering) and [ Issue-82] (Metamodel diagrams).}}
16:01:25 [DaveReynolds]
Action-430 done differently, separated out, not as appendices
16:03:26 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: people felt the doc should be focussed on helping people implement BLD so the FLD derivation would be better in an appendix for readability
16:04:26 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: should in document and still normative, just want it out of normal flow of reading
16:04:29 [Harold]
Chris, could a kind of "Readers' Guide" in the Overview do the trick?
16:04:38 [Harold]
16:04:57 [sandro]
from F2F9: RESOLVED: make "specialization of FLD" sections (of BLD) appendices, leaving standalone sections in place, and making both normative
16:07:49 [josb]
section 2.0.9 were the sub-dialects
16:08:33 [DaveReynolds]
Chairs - stick to the resolution or open a discussion to reverse it, starting with argument in email
16:09:38 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: semantics of BLD is ready except for builtins, not expecting any changes to the rest
16:10:51 [josb]
16:10:59 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: have added IRIs in the presentation syntax for action-441
16:11:57 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: the metadata specification should be in the specification in section 3.4, and it's not there yet
16:12:18 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: maybe it is not needed there
16:12:29 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: so which bit is the *specification* of the RIF syntax
16:12:56 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: the ebnf is almost 1-1 with XML but the "mathematical english" omits the IRIs and metadata
16:13:32 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: the condition and rule language parts are still separate, would like one place to see whole of the syntax for BLD
16:14:09 [Hassan]
+1 with ChrisW
16:14:10 [josb]
16:14:40 [DaveReynolds]
ChrisW: one place for EBNF, could colour different parts, could duplicate sections but have one place where it is complete
16:14:45 [Hassan]
But make sure to keep redundant parts consistent...
16:16:49 [Harold]
I guess we want no metadata at places like Rule implication: If f is an well-formed atomic formula and ? is a RIF-BLD condition then f :- ? is a well-formed formula, provided that f is not externally defined (i.e., does not have the form External(...)).
16:17:00 [DaveReynolds]
Harold: sections 3.2 to 3.4 are the mathematical english and don't see need for metadata in there
16:17:09 [Harold]
16:17:26 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, mute me
16:17:26 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should now be muted
16:18:31 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: but have different bits of the specification which differ - the mathematical english, the ebnf but no single specification, for example some of the well-formedness constraints are not represented in the ebnf
16:19:03 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, unmute me
16:19:03 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
16:19:17 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: so suggest making the mathematical english consistent with ebnf by including metadata and iris, just for completeness
16:20:36 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: would require thought, all the syntax for the metadata would have to be defined in that math eng section
16:21:16 [JamesMac]
JamesMac has joined #rif
16:22:52 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: but what is this metadata, they are not terms, what is metadata value for example?
16:23:25 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: see the doc, defines as const etc
16:23:55 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: but the derivation from FLD is normative so need to decide how and where to add this stuff to FLD. Just needs care.
16:23:56 [Harold]
If we add a sentence like "A RIF-BLD rule can have an optional absolute-IRI and zero or more Metadata...", then we could use a different color or font to show clearly that this has no semantic import.
16:24:28 [Harold]
16:24:29 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: this is lower priority than semantics for builtins
16:25:56 [Harold]
Corresponds to EBNF: RULE ::= 'Forall' absolute-IRI? Metadata* Var* '(' CLAUSE ')' | CLAUSE
16:26:03 [ChrisW]
action: michael to add metadata and iris for rules/rulesets to the "mathematical english"
16:26:03 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - michael
16:26:03 [trackbot-ng]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. mkifer, msintek, merdmann)
16:26:14 [ChrisW]
action: mkifer to add metadata and iris for rules/rulesets to the "mathematical english"
16:26:14 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-458 - Add metadata and iris for rules/rulesets to the \"mathematical english\" [on Michael Kifer - due 2008-04-01].
16:27:01 [josb]
not with me
16:27:35 [DaveReynolds]
jos: just want want consistent specification of what the language is
16:27:48 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: but the actual language is the XML right?
16:28:32 [DaveReynolds]
Jos: but the XML can be defined by mapping from the presentation syntax
16:28:39 [josb]
16:28:48 [DaveReynolds]
Michael: in the semantics section this metadata will be ignored
16:28:55 [JamesMac]
16:29:19 [JamesMac]
Is this still applicable
16:30:09 [DaveReynolds]
action-432 is done, see mailing list
16:30:20 [DaveReynolds]
action-441 done
16:30:59 [josb]
16:30:59 [Hassan]
16:31:04 [sandro]
16:31:06 [Zakim]
16:31:08 [Zakim]
16:31:09 [Zakim]
16:31:09 [Zakim]
16:31:10 [Zakim]
16:31:10 [Zakim]
16:31:14 [Zakim]
16:31:16 [Zakim]
16:31:16 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:31:21 [Zakim]
16:31:29 [Zakim]
16:31:31 [ChrisW]
Regrets: PaulVincent Christian de Sainte Marie
16:31:42 [ChrisW]
zakim, list attendees
16:31:42 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been +43.158.801.1aaaa, Sandro, josb, Dave_Reynolds, ChrisW, +1.817.262.aabb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, +1.617.873.aacc, StellaMitchell, Harold,
16:31:46 [Zakim]
... IgorMozetic, JamesOwen, mdean, +1.212.781.aadd, LeoraMorgenstern, Gary_Hallmark, AxelPolleres, +1.631.833.aaee, MichaelKifer
16:31:47 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:31:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ChrisW
16:32:12 [JamesMac]
it's there now
16:32:19 [Zakim]
16:34:04 [sandro]
16:34:10 [JamesMac]
16:34:15 [JamesMac]
16:37:20 [Zakim]
16:37:25 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone
16:37:25 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'who is on the phone', sandro
16:37:29 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:37:29 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Sandro, ChrisW
16:40:16 [Zakim]
16:40:17 [Zakim]
16:40:17 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:40:18 [Zakim]
Attendees were +43.158.801.1aaaa, Sandro, josb, Dave_Reynolds, ChrisW, +1.817.262.aabb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, +1.617.873.aacc, StellaMitchell, Harold, IgorMozetic, JamesOwen, mdean,
16:40:21 [Zakim]
... +1.212.781.aadd, LeoraMorgenstern, Gary_Hallmark, AxelPolleres, +1.631.833.aaee, MichaelKifer