IRC log of owl on 2008-03-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:53:12 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #owl
16:53:12 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-owl-irc
16:53:20 [Zakim]: On IRC I see bmotik, MarkusK, ivan, bcuencagrau, IanH, calvanese, ewallace, jjc, trackbot-ng, sandro
16:53:51 [jjc]: zakim, this will be owl
16:53:53 [Zakim]: ok, jjc; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 53 minutes ago
16:53:56 [ivan]: zakim, this will be owl
16:53:59 [Zakim]: SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started
16:54:01 [ivan]: :-)
16:54:03 [Zakim]: ok, ivan, I see SW_OWL()12:00PM already started
16:54:09 [Zakim]: + +39.047.101.aaaa
16:54:11 [Zakim]: + +0186527aabb
16:54:34 [IanH]: zakim, aabb is IanH
16:54:34 [Zakim]: +IanH; got it
16:54:41 [ivan]: rrsagent, set log public
16:54:48 [ivan]: zakim, code?
16:54:48 [Zakim]: the conference code is 69594 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), ivan
16:54:58 [Zakim]: +??P0
16:55:13 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
16:55:13 [Zakim]: On the phone I see +39.047.101.aaaa, IanH, MarkusK
16:55:14 [Zakim]: On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, bmotik, MarkusK, ivan, bcuencagrau, IanH, calvanese, ewallace, jjc, trackbot-ng, sandro
16:55:32 [Zakim]: +Ivan
16:55:40 [MarkusK]: ScribeNick: MarkusK
16:55:53 [uli_]: uli_ has joined #owl
16:56:19 [IanH]: Who is aaaa? It was the first person to dial in and is from +39
16:56:37 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
16:56:40 [Zakim]: On the phone I see +39.047.101.aaaa, IanH, MarkusK, Ivan
16:56:41 [Ratnesh]: Ratnesh has joined #owl
16:56:46 [Zakim]: On IRC I see uli_, RRSAgent, Zakim, bmotik, MarkusK, ivan, bcuencagrau, IanH, calvanese, ewallace, jjc, trackbot-ng, sandro
16:57:06 [calvanese]: zakim, this is aaaa
16:57:09 [Zakim]: sorry, calvanese, I do not see a conference named 'aaaa' in progress or scheduled at this time
16:57:27 [IanH]: zakim, aaaa is calvanese
16:57:27 [Zakim]: +calvanese; got it
16:57:35 [msmith]: msmith has joined #owl
16:57:35 [IanH]: Hi Diego
16:57:39 [Zakim]: +??P11
16:57:39 [calvanese]: hi ian
16:57:44 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, ??P11 is me
16:57:44 [Zakim]: +bcuencagrau; got it
16:57:45 [calvanese]: hi ian
16:57:55 [DougL]: DougL has joined #owl
16:58:01 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, mute me
16:58:01 [Zakim]: bcuencagrau should now be muted
16:58:09 [Zakim]: +Sandro
16:58:13 [Zakim]: +??P19
16:58:18 [bmotik]: Zakim, ??p19 is me
16:58:18 [Zakim]: +bmotik; got it
16:58:27 [bmotik]: Zakim, mute me
16:58:27 [Zakim]: bmotik should now be muted
16:58:37 [Zakim]: +??P20
16:58:43 [Zakim]: + +1.512.342.aacc
16:58:46 [uli_]: zakim, ??P20 is me
16:58:46 [Zakim]: +uli_; got it
16:58:50 [Zakim]: +??P25
16:58:51 [uli_]: zakim, mute me
16:58:52 [Zakim]: uli_ should now be muted
16:58:53 [DougL]: Zakim, aacc is me
16:58:53 [Zakim]: +DougL; got it
16:58:59 [Zakim]: +Evan_Wallace
16:59:03 [calvanese]: zakim, mute me
16:59:03 [Zakim]: calvanese should now be muted
16:59:23 [IanH]: If you precede such commands with /me it stops them going in the minutes
16:59:27 [Ratnesh]: Zakim, ??P25 is me
16:59:27 [Zakim]: +Ratnesh; got it
16:59:37 [Zhe]: Zhe has joined #owl
16:59:51 [alanr]: alanr has joined #owl
17:00:03 [Zakim]: +msmith
17:00:26 [Zakim]: + +0122341aadd
17:00:39 [jjc]: zakim, aadd is me
17:00:39 [Zakim]: +jjc; got it
17:00:40 [Zakim]: + +1.603.897.aaee
17:00:56 [Zhe]: Zakim, +1.603.897.aaee is me
17:00:56 [Zakim]: +Zhe; got it
17:02:01 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:02:01 [Zakim]: On the phone I see calvanese, IanH, MarkusK, Ivan, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bmotik (muted), uli_ (muted), DougL, Ratnesh, Evan_Wallace, msmith, jjc (muted), Zhe
17:02:05 [Zakim]: On IRC I see alanr, Zhe, DougL, msmith, Ratnesh, uli_, RRSAgent, Zakim, bmotik, MarkusK, ivan, bcuencagrau, IanH, calvanese, ewallace, jjc, trackbot-ng, sandro
17:02:30 [MarkusK]: Admin
17:02:36 [MarkusK]: Agenda Amendmends
17:02:53 [MarkusK]: s /Amendmends/amendments/
17:03:42 [msmith]: IanH, the amendment was added by pfps
17:03:57 [Zakim]: + +1.518.276.aaff
17:04:02 [Zakim]: + +1.617.253.aagg
17:04:09 [alanr]: zakim, aagg is me
17:04:09 [Zakim]: +alanr; got it
17:04:24 [alanr]: +1
17:04:24 [MarkusK]: Telcos will start at 19:00 CET again starting next telco (after F2F)
17:04:32 [Zhe]: +1
17:04:32 [cgi-irc]: cgi-irc has joined #owl
17:04:44 [DougL]: +1 on minutes
17:04:44 [MarkusK]: Previous minutes accepted
17:05:06 [Zakim]: +[IBM]
17:05:20 [Zakim]: +pfps
17:05:38 [pfps]: pfps has joined #owl
17:05:45 [Zhe]: cash only ?
17:05:48 [Zhe]: ;)
17:05:49 [Achille]: Achille has joined #OWL
17:06:09 [baojie]: RPI is baojie
17:06:14 [Achille]: Zakim. IBM is Achille
17:06:17 [MarkusK]: F2F registration fees must be paid, see http://www.webont.org/owled/2008dc/f2fregistration.html
17:06:25 [Achille]: Zakim, IBM is Achille
17:06:25 [Zakim]: +Achille; got it
17:06:29 [sandro]: zakim, who is on the call
17:06:29 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'who is on the call', sandro
17:06:30 [ivan]: zakim, IBM is Achille
17:06:30 [Zakim]: sorry, ivan, I do not recognize a party named 'IBM'
17:06:32 [sandro]: zakim, who is on the call?
17:06:32 [Zakim]: On the phone I see calvanese (muted), IanH, MarkusK, Ivan, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bmotik (muted), uli_ (muted), DougL, Ratnesh, Evan_Wallace, msmith, jjc, Zhe,
17:06:34 [Zakim]: ... +1.518.276.aaff, alanr, Achille, pfps
17:06:42 [sandro]: zakim, aaff is baojie
17:06:42 [Zakim]: +baojie; got it
17:06:45 [jjc]: Zakim, aaff is baojie
17:06:45 [Zakim]: sorry, jjc, I do not recognize a party named 'aaff'
17:06:54 [MarkusK]: Checks are also accepted on-site
17:07:08 [MarkusK]: Action items
17:07:49 [MarkusK]: ACTION 113 completed
17:07:49 [alanr]: Need to continue my actions 110, 114 - will adjust dates
17:08:06 [MarkusK]: ACTION 105 completed
17:08:16 [alanr]: s/110/101/
17:08:55 [MarkusK]: ACTION 72 due tomorrow
17:11:04 [MarkusK]: ACTION 76 delayed, to be done soon (before F2F2)
17:11:23 [MarkusK]: Action 86 delayed
17:12:08 [MarkusK]: Action 90 delayed, discussion scheduled for F2F2
17:12:26 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:12:26 [Zakim]: On the phone I see calvanese (muted), IanH, MarkusK, Ivan, bcuencagrau (muted), Sandro, bmotik (muted), uli_ (muted), DougL, Ratnesh, Evan_Wallace, msmith, jjc, Zhe, baojie, alanr,
17:12:29 [Zakim]: ... Achille, pfps (muted)
17:12:30 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Achille, pfps, baojie, alanr, Zhe, DougL, msmith, Ratnesh, uli_, RRSAgent, Zakim, bmotik, MarkusK, ivan, bcuencagrau, IanH, calvanese, ewallace, jjc, trackbot-ng,
17:12:33 [Zakim]: ... sandro
17:12:34 [calvanese]: hi uli, thanks
17:13:24 [MarkusK]: ACTION 100 remains open (James Hendler not on call)
17:13:39 [MarkusK]: Action 101 delayed, to be done for F2F2
17:14:06 [MarkusK]: ACTION 102 remains open (James Hendler not on call)
17:14:20 [MarkusK]: ACTION 104 completed
17:14:58 [pfps]: q+
17:15:15 [MarkusK]: ACTION 108 completed
17:15:54 [MarkusK]: s/108/109/
17:16:20 [MarkusK]: ACTION 93 completed
17:16:41 [MarkusK]: ACTION 114 completed
17:17:31 [MarkusK]: Issues
17:18:00 [msmith]: yes, this proposal was from alan
17:18:11 [MarkusK]: Issue 86 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/86 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Mar/0189.html
17:18:46 [pfps]: I just sent out a slight modification to the proposal (which should not change anyone's vote).
17:18:59 [pfps]: q+
17:19:04 [IanH]: q?
17:19:46 [bmotik]: q+
17:19:50 [IanH]: q?
17:20:18 [bmotik]: q-
17:20:26 [msmith]: q+
17:20:35 [IanH]: q?
17:21:03 [MarkusK]: alanr: new updated proposal is indeed editorial, minor correction only
17:21:06 [Zakim]: -jjc
17:21:22 [IanH]: q?
17:21:28 [IanH]: ack msmith
17:21:44 [alanr]: q?
17:21:45 [alanr]: q+
17:21:47 [IanH]: q?
17:22:04 [MarkusK]: msmith: inverse properties could also be handled in RDF mappnig by swapping object and subject and adding an annotation for enabling round-tripping
17:22:06 [Zakim]: +jjc
17:22:30 [MarkusK]: alanr: annotations should not have any logical meaning
17:22:53 [MarkusK]: ianh: the annotation was just for round-tripping, no logical impact
17:22:57 [Rinke]: Rinke has joined #owl
17:23:20 [MarkusK]: alanr: I doubt that exchanging subject and object always works
17:23:22 [msmith]: q+
17:23:25 [IanH]: q?
17:23:27 [jjc]: q+
17:23:30 [alanr]: ack aalnr
17:23:32 [alanr]: ack alanr
17:23:39 [MarkusK]: ianh: yes, it is obvious only for facts, but not for restrictions
17:23:47 [Zakim]: + +31.20.525.aahh
17:23:56 [IanH]: q?
17:24:03 [IanH]: ack msmith
17:24:04 [MarkusK]: msmith: I think facts are the only case where this applies, there is no problem with inversee in restrictions
17:24:04 [ivan]: ack msmith
17:24:19 [ivan]: ack jjc
17:24:21 [MarkusK]: s/inversee/inverses/
17:24:51 [MarkusK]: jjc: I agree with msmith, it is only a problem in facts
17:24:54 [alanr]: q+ to get rid of nested inverse
17:25:07 [IanH]: q?
17:25:19 [pfps]: Should we have a vote to go forward for now, but get a revised proposal?
17:26:02 [msmith]: we can separate nested inverses from this issue
17:26:08 [IanH]: q?
17:26:08 [MarkusK]: alanr: Jeremy referrred to the problem of mutliple (nested) inverses; I also think that this should be disallowed
17:26:14 [IanH]: ack alanr
17:26:14 [Zakim]: alanr, you wanted to get rid of nested inverse
17:26:17 [IanH]: q?
17:26:26 [MarkusK]: s/referrred/referred/
17:26:32 [pfps]: q+
17:26:42 [jjc]: i much prefer mike's
17:26:45 [pfps]: q-
17:26:45 [IanH]: q?
17:26:54 [msmith]: q+
17:26:59 [IanH]: q?
17:26:59 [jjc]: yes i am sure
17:26:59 [MarkusK]: ianh: there seem to be two competing proposals now
17:27:07 [msmith]: q-
17:27:32 [MarkusK]: alanr: if it is just about facts, then msmith's proposal might work as well
17:27:37 [alanr]: indeed
17:27:39 [jjc]: q+
17:27:53 [MarkusK]: ianh: does anybody doubt that msmith's proposal works?
17:27:54 [IanH]: ack jjc
17:27:57 [IanH]: q?
17:28:11 [alanr]: have to think about anonymous individuals and Mike's proposal
17:28:18 [MarkusK]: jjc: my problem with it is that the proposal requires annotating the triple for round-tripping
17:28:18 [uli_]: Jeremy, please repeat
17:28:27 [alanr]: push to email, I think
17:28:32 [alanr]: q?
17:28:53 [alanr]: 0 (want to think about Mike's first)
17:28:56 [MarkusK]: Ianh: Who thinks that alan's proposal is the way to go
17:28:58 [DougL]: 0
17:28:59 [Achille]: 0
17:28:59 [sandro]: STRAWPOLL: alan's proposal
17:29:02 [jjc]: -0.1
17:29:03 [pfps]: +1 for Alan
17:29:05 [Zhe]: 0
17:29:09 [calvanese]: 0
17:29:09 [MarkusK]: 0
17:29:11 [sandro]: 0
17:29:11 [baojie]: 0
17:29:16 [Ratnesh]: 0
17:29:18 [ivan]: 0
17:29:33 [msmith]: +1 to using annotations, but iff round-tripping is a rqmt
17:29:35 [sandro]: STRAWPOLL: who thinks that Mike's proposal is the way to go?
17:29:36 [pfps]: -1 for mike
17:29:37 [sandro]: 0
17:29:38 [jjc]: +0.4
17:29:39 [ewallace]: 0
17:29:41 [alanr]: 0 (want to think about it first)
17:29:41 [Zhe]: +0
17:29:42 [DougL]: -0.5
17:29:43 [Achille]: 0
17:29:43 [uli_]: 0 (the same, need to think)
17:29:44 [MarkusK]: -0
17:29:50 [bcuencagrau]: 0
17:30:03 [msmith]: q+
17:30:10 [IanH]: q?
17:30:28 [IanH]: q?
17:30:30 [bmotik]: q+
17:30:38 [IanH]: ack msmith
17:30:41 [IanH]: q?
17:30:42 [ivan]: ack msmith
17:30:47 [alanr]: not facts
17:30:49 [MarkusK]: msmith: could we have a strawpoll on whether we wish to support ObjectProperty assertions where porperties are inverses at all
17:30:50 [alanr]: only restrictions
17:31:03 [MarkusK]: ... it might be that we do not really need that
17:31:06 [bmotik]: Zakim, unmute me
17:31:06 [Zakim]: bmotik should no longer be muted
17:31:09 [ivan]: ack bmotik
17:31:09 [IanH]: q?
17:31:16 [MarkusK]: ... I suggested to disallow this in an email
17:31:44 [alanr]: objectAllValuesFrom := 'ObjectAllValuesFrom' '(' objectPropertyExpression description ')'
17:31:53 [MarkusK]: bmotik: support for inverse properties without explicitly naming it was requested from the DIG working group, and is used in many reasoners
17:32:05 [IanH]: q?
17:32:07 [MarkusK]: s/it/them/
17:32:08 [bmotik]: Zakim, mute me
17:32:08 [Zakim]: bmotik should now be muted
17:32:09 [alanr]: inverseObjectProperty := 'InverseObjectProperty' '(' objectPropertyExpression ')'
17:32:10 [alanr]: objectPropertyExpression := objectPropertyURI | inverseObjectProperty
17:32:38 [IanH]: q?
17:33:09 [bcuencagrau]: Ivan, Description Logics Implementors group
17:33:09 [msmith]: more email sounds good
17:33:13 [MarkusK]: ianh: further discussion needed, to be taken to email
17:33:22 [jjc]: q+
17:33:34 [IanH]: q?
17:33:54 [bcuencagrau]: A group of people that have implemented DL reasoners. it includes the people who have developed the major DL reasoners
17:34:16 [MarkusK]: jjc: can we have a strawpoll on disallowing inverses as proposed by msmith?
17:34:20 [alanr]: disallowing means no InverseObjectProperties inside Fact constructs
17:34:33 [bmotik]: -1
17:34:34 [jjc]: +1
17:34:34 [bcuencagrau]: ivan, Peter is a member; I think so is Ian
17:34:34 [uli_]: -1
17:34:35 [MarkusK]: -1
17:34:35 [pfps]: -1 AIPs have their place in the world
17:34:38 [alanr]: 0
17:34:43 [Zhe]: +0.1
17:34:44 [baojie]: 0
17:34:44 [Achille]: +1
17:34:45 [bcuencagrau]: -1
17:34:47 [ewallace]: -1
17:34:49 [sandro]: STRAWPOLL: disallow anonymous inverse properties in facts
17:34:50 [calvanese]: 0
17:34:52 [DougL]: 0 (need to think about it)
17:34:52 [Rinke]: 0
17:34:52 [ivan]: 0
17:34:52 [calvanese]: 0
17:34:56 [msmith]: +1 to disallowing anonym in obas
17:34:59 [sandro]: 0
17:35:37 [MarkusK]: Issue 12
17:35:55 [IanH]: q?
17:35:55 [MarkusK]: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/12 http://www.w3.org/mid/20080318.213218.171431830.pfps@research.bell-labs.com
17:36:54 [alanr]: q+ to discuss http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Mar/0254.html
17:37:06 [IanH]: q?
17:37:13 [jjc]: q-
17:37:52 [MarkusK]: alanr: I suggested a modification for improving efficiency (see link above)
17:37:57 [IanH]: q?
17:38:05 [IanH]: ack alanr
17:38:05 [Zakim]: alanr, you wanted to discuss http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Mar/0254.html
17:38:10 [pfps]: q+
17:38:44 [IanH]: q?
17:38:51 [jjc]: q+
17:38:51 [MarkusK]: pfps: alan's proposal might be problematic, since it adds totally new different individuals
17:38:59 [jjc]: q-
17:39:01 [IanH]: q?
17:39:07 [MarkusK]: alanr: but it is only an existential (a bnode)
17:39:09 [IanH]: ack pfps
17:39:20 [MarkusK]: pfps: yes, but it still might increase the size of the domain
17:39:31 [MarkusK]: pfps: this creates a burdon on round-tripping
17:39:46 [IanH]: q?
17:39:59 [MarkusK]: ... but the creation of new individuals as such is the main problem
17:40:26 [IanH]: q?
17:40:42 [MarkusK]: alanr: for equivalent class and equivalent properties it should not be such a problem
17:41:00 [MarkusK]: ianh: not sure without having a closer look
17:41:29 [IanH]: q?
17:41:37 [MarkusK]: ... it seems we cannot resolve the isue with that solution without further investigation
17:41:46 [MarkusK]: s/isue/issue/
17:41:53 [jjc]: q+
17:42:01 [IanH]: q?
17:42:06 [MarkusK]: alanr: my proposal for possible optimisation might be a separate issue
17:42:13 [ivan]: ack jjc
17:42:17 [IanH]: q?
17:43:16 [MarkusK]: jjc: the issue touches other issues, and I would currently abstain on this issue until the relations are clearer
17:44:08 [MarkusK]: STRAWPOLL: should this issue by closed according to pfps's proposal?
17:44:16 [alanr]: +1
17:44:17 [uli_]: 1
17:44:18 [pfps]: +1 (surprise)
17:44:18 [jjc]: +0 concur
17:44:25 [DougL]: If asked I would respond +1
17:44:27 [Zhe]: 1
17:44:27 [baojie]: +1
17:44:28 [ewallace]: +1
17:44:30 [bmotik]: +1
17:44:32 [MarkusK]: +1
17:44:34 [ivan]: 0
17:44:34 [bmotik]: +1
17:44:38 [msmith]: +1
17:44:39 [bmotik]: +1
17:44:40 [Rinke]: +1
17:44:45 [Ratnesh]: 0
17:45:11 [pfps]: PROPOSAL; close 12 as in pfps's email provided that new informatoin does not come in and noting that this does not close the general reification issue
17:46:11 [alanr]: considering http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Mar/0254.html as possible = new information
17:46:13 [pfps]: +1 ..................................................
17:46:14 [DougL]: +1 (peter's typing might be that new info of course)
17:46:16 [alanr]: +1
17:46:21 [msmith]: +1
17:46:22 [IanH]: +1
17:46:23 [MarkusK]: +1
17:46:24 [uli_]: +1
17:46:25 [Rinke]: +1
17:46:26 [Achille]: +1
17:46:29 [jjc]: +0 concur
17:46:30 [Zhe]: +1
17:46:30 [bmotik]: +1
17:46:31 [ewallace]: +1
17:46:32 [bcuencagrau]: +1
17:46:39 [Ratnesh]: 0
17:46:41 [sandro]: 0
17:46:42 [calvanese]: 0
17:46:52 [ivan]: 0
17:47:01 [pfps]: RESOLVED: as per the proposal
17:47:02 [IanH]: RESOLVED: as per above proposal
17:47:13 [pfps]: PROPOSAL; close 12 as in pfps's email provided that new informatoin does not come in and noting that this does not close the general reification issue
17:47:40 [MarkusK]: s/PROPOSAL;/RESOLVED:/
17:47:53 [pfps]: RESOLVED: close 12 as in pfps's email provided that new informatoin does not come in and noting that this does not close the general reification issue
17:49:00 [IanH]: q?
17:49:19 [sandro]: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/owl11-syntax/
17:49:25 [MarkusK]: Ianh: Time for issues is up, proceed with reviews of candidate worknig drafts first
17:50:07 [IanH]: q?
17:50:58 [bmotik]: ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the RDF mapping with the accepted resolution of ISSUE-12 as per Peter's suggestion
17:50:58 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-115 - Update the RDF mapping with the accepted resolution of ISSUE-12 as per Peter's suggestion [on Boris Motik - due 2008-04-02].
17:51:10 [MarkusK]: Fragments document
17:51:35 [MarkusK]: Achille: I corrected minor problems, and raised issues where needed
17:51:50 [MarkusK]: Msmith: mostly editorial comments, not put into wiki page yet
17:52:37 [MarkusK]: Alanr: uncontroversial editorial changes can be made directly in the document
17:53:00 [MarkusK]: Msmith: OK, I will shortly incorporate my comments then
17:53:11 [sandro]: q+ to comment on wiki page name, document title
17:53:15 [IanH]: q?
17:53:37 [alanr]: "Fragments of OWL"
17:53:47 [MarkusK]: Sandro: we might want to change the title
17:53:54 [sandro]: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/owl11-fragments/
17:54:01 [MarkusK]: Alanr: "Fragments of OWL" seems to be a good name
17:54:02 [IanH]: q?
17:54:12 [sandro]: "Language Fragments"
17:54:12 [IanH]: q?
17:54:14 [sandro]: ack sandro
17:54:14 [Zakim]: sandro, you wanted to comment on wiki page name, document title
17:54:15 [pfps]: owl pieces / owl bones
17:54:22 [MarkusK]: ianh: I would just say "OWL Fragments"
17:54:36 [jjc]: q+ to mention abstract
17:54:45 [alanr]: "Fragments" ok by me
17:54:51 [MarkusK]: ... even just "Fragments" would be good
17:54:55 [Zhe]: "OWL Fragments" sounds good
17:54:55 [bcuencagrau]: To be consistent with the other documents we should simply say ``Fragments''
17:55:01 [pfps]: syntax is Syntax, so fragments should be .... Fragments
17:55:03 [Rinke]: "Fragments"
17:55:26 [Achille]: q+
17:55:28 [Zhe]: thanks
17:55:47 [IanH]: q?
17:56:10 [MarkusK]: jjc: the abstract of the fragments doc is insufficient
17:56:38 [pfps]: -1
17:56:40 [uli_]: "species"
17:56:45 [MarkusK]: ... the term "fragment" may have a negative connotation
17:56:46 [bcuencagrau]: no species
17:57:05 [MarkusK]: alanr: "profiles"?
17:57:08 [bmotik]: "Fragment" is a standard term from logic.
17:57:18 [bcuencagrau]: Yes
17:57:20 [pfps]: To change the name requires moving the page, I think
17:57:40 [jjc]: fragment may be a term from logic, but ...
17:57:48 [calvanese]: q+
17:58:00 [IanH]: q?
17:58:08 [MarkusK]: ianh: this discussion shold be continued offline
17:58:09 [IanH]: ack jjc
17:58:10 [Zakim]: jjc, you wanted to mention abstract
17:58:14 [MarkusK]: s/shold/should/
17:58:56 [pfps]: An abstract is, by definition, one paragraph. (Yes this is often violated.)
17:59:12 [IanH]: q?
17:59:18 [alanr]: q+
17:59:22 [jjc]: q-
17:59:38 [alanr]: q- alanr to say +1 to last thing sandro said
17:59:40 [IanH]: q?
17:59:57 [IanH]: ack Achille
18:00:21 [bmotik]: I can review Achille's changes.
18:00:27 [MarkusK]: Achille: I would like an additional review of the changes I made recently
18:00:42 [IanH]: q?
18:00:56 [msmith]: achille, I will review again with your edits in mind
18:01:22 [MarkusK]: Calvanese: regarding the DL Lite fragment, I think major changes are still required in the document
18:01:33 [MarkusK]: ... for example function properties should be there
18:01:41 [bcuencagrau]: Diego, remember that we have role hierarchies
18:01:44 [pfps]: q+
18:01:46 [MarkusK]: ... several other additions could be made
18:01:51 [bcuencagrau]: Wouldn't functionality be problematic?
18:02:27 [IanH]: ack
18:02:34 [IanH]: q?
18:02:35 [msmith]: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/80
18:02:41 [IanH]: ack calvanese
18:03:09 [alanr]: +1 to pfps
18:03:19 [DougL]: good point
18:03:27 [calvanese]: +1 to pfps
18:03:29 [MarkusK]: pfps: we acan note in the current version that the presented DL Lite fragment is a conservative fragment that is likely to be extended later on
18:03:40 [bmotik]: I can do ti
18:03:49 [calvanese]: ok
18:04:06 [msmith]: bmotik, Suggest merging note about ISSUE-80 into it
18:04:09 [calvanese]: ok
18:04:12 [IanH]: q?
18:04:21 [IanH]: q?
18:04:23 [pfps]: q-
18:04:42 [MarkusK]: ACTION: bmotik to add a note to the fragments document regarding possible later extension of DL Lite
18:04:42 [trackbot-ng]: Sorry, couldn't find user - bmotik
18:04:48 [MarkusK]: ACTION: bmotik2 to add a note to the fragments document regarding possible later extension of DL Lite
18:04:48 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-116 - Add a note to the fragments document regarding possible later extension of DL Lite [on Boris Motik - due 2008-04-02].
18:04:59 [IanH]: q?
18:05:44 [MarkusK]: XML serialisation
18:05:44 [IanH]: q?
18:06:04 [MarkusK]: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/XML_Serialization
18:06:30 [MarkusK]: Achille: my comments were already addressed by pfps
18:06:45 [MarkusK]: ... the document is in a good shape overall
18:07:08 [bmotik]: Msmith, good point about ISSUE-80; will do.
18:07:09 [IanH]: q?
18:07:20 [MarkusK]: Sandro: I noticed inconsistent uses of namespaces
18:07:27 [alanr]: q+ to say s/owl11xml:/ox:/
18:07:41 [MarkusK]: ... maybe we should add a note that the namespaces might be changed later
18:07:51 [IanH]: q?
18:07:59 [alanr]: q+ for a couple other non-showstopping comments
18:08:04 [alanr]: q+ to for a couple other non-showstopping comments
18:08:08 [MarkusK]: ianh: it would be good to have a sensible solution eaerly on, so as to prevent people using placeholders that are changed later
18:08:39 [pfps]: ox is a namespace name not a namespace
18:08:48 [MarkusK]: alanr: minor comment to change the namespace prefix in the schema to the one used in the text
18:08:59 [alanr]: owl11xml:EntityAnnotation
18:09:04 [alanr]: ox:EntityAnnotation
18:09:17 [MarkusK]: ... there are still inconsitent namespace prefixes in the codument
18:09:27 [MarkusK]: s/codument/document/
18:10:01 [IanH]: q?
18:10:12 [MarkusK]: ... my second comment is about "abstract" and "concrete" classes; the use of those terms is not fully clear yet
18:10:13 [IanH]: ack alanr
18:10:13 [Zakim]: alanr, you wanted to say s/owl11xml:/ox:/ and to for a couple other non-showstopping comments
18:10:23 [alanr]: Each abstract class (i.e., a class that is not intended to be instantiated, but is used to define a class hierarchy) is mapped to a global element group.
18:10:48 [msmith]: on namespaces, I've verified that we've been using http://www.w3.org/2006/12/owl11-xml , because this what is what the OWLAPI uses
18:10:51 [MarkusK]: ... (above note in IRC is an example case)
18:11:00 [bmotik]: Yes.
18:11:05 [sandro]: q?
18:11:07 [bmotik]: Zakim, unmute me
18:11:07 [Zakim]: bmotik should no longer be muted
18:11:09 [IanH]: q?
18:11:23 [msmith]: q+
18:11:24 [MarkusK]: ianh: who has implemented OWL 1.1 software? Which namespaces would users prefer?
18:11:40 [IanH]: q?
18:11:46 [MarkusK]: boris: I do not think users would care much; I have not received any user comments on that
18:11:57 [MarkusK]: s/boris/bmotik/
18:12:19 [MarkusK]: alanr: we still should not change the namespace if there are already OWL 1.1 ontologies
18:12:25 [bmotik]: Zakim, mute me
18:12:25 [Zakim]: bmotik should now be muted
18:12:36 [MarkusK]: bmotik: I think there are not so many OWL 1.1 ontologies that would be affected there
18:12:51 [MarkusK]: msmith: I posted the namespaces used in the OWL API into IRC
18:13:17 [MarkusK]: ... I also think that there is no problem in changing the namespace now
18:13:26 [Rinke]: +1 to undated namespace
18:13:34 [MarkusK]: sandro: I would prefer a non-dated namespace now
18:13:51 [MarkusK]: ianh: yes, I also would like to not have dates in the namespace
18:13:59 [sandro]: http://www.w3.org/ns/owl11-xml
18:14:07 [MarkusK]: sandor: yes, the dates were only used to generate unique names, the are not really needed
18:14:15 [pfps]: OK by me
18:14:15 [alanr]: +1
18:14:19 [IanH]: +1
18:14:22 [Zhe]: looks good
18:14:24 [DougL]: +1
18:14:25 [bcuencagrau]: +1
18:14:26 [uli_]: +1
18:14:29 [baojie]: +1
18:14:32 [ivan]: +1
18:14:35 [Rinke]: looks ok, what does the rdf namespace look like?
18:14:36 [Achille]: +1
18:14:37 [MarkusK]: Strawpoll: use http://www.w3.org/ns/owl11-xml as a namespace
18:14:46 [calvanese]: 0
18:14:48 [MarkusK]: +1
18:14:50 [Zhe]: Is OWL 1.1 name itself fixed?
18:14:50 [sandro]: PROPOSED: use http://www.w3.org/ns/owl11-xml as the XML namespace name for OWL 1.1 XML serialization
18:14:57 [pfps]: +1
18:14:58 [MarkusK]: +1
18:15:00 [IanH]: +1
18:15:06 [DougL]: +1 again
18:15:09 [Rinke]: +1
18:15:10 [sandro]: RESOLVED: use http://www.w3.org/ns/owl11-xml as the XML namespace name for OWL 1.1 XML serialization
18:15:23 [Zhe]: q?
18:15:27 [Zhe]: q+
18:15:31 [msmith]: q-
18:15:34 [IanH]: q?
18:15:43 [MarkusK]: sandro: relaetd question is where to publish the schema, but I need to do some more research on this
18:15:51 [alanr]: q+ to ask about GRDDL
18:15:55 [MarkusK]: s/relaetd/related/
18:16:11 [IanH]: q?
18:16:17 [Zhe]: q-
18:16:17 [IanH]: ack Zhe
18:16:17 [MarkusK]: Zhe: does this namespace decision imply that the new standrad is called OWL 1.1
18:16:24 [alanr]: http://www.w3.org/ns/2008/04/xml
18:16:27 [IanH]: ack alanr
18:16:27 [Zakim]: alanr, you wanted to ask about GRDDL
18:16:39 [sandro]: Yes, good point.... maybe not "owl11". just "owl"?
18:16:46 [jjc]: q+
18:16:47 [MarkusK]: s/standrad/standard/
18:16:48 [ivan]: alan: no
18:17:08 [IanH]: q?
18:17:51 [MarkusK]: ianh: should we rather change the namespace to drop the 11?
18:17:52 [IanH]: q?
18:18:14 [pfps]: I prefer .../owl-xml
18:19:04 [MarkusK]: jjc: we can still change our minds on the namespace later on, since this is just a working draft
18:19:08 [IanH]: q?
18:19:12 [IanH]: ack jjc
18:19:50 [MarkusK]: ianh: indeed, we can go with the current resolution for the early working draft now
18:19:59 [MarkusK]: Primer
18:20:06 [baojie]: +q
18:20:07 [MarkusK]: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Primer
18:20:21 [IanH]: q?
18:20:37 [IanH]: q?
18:20:43 [IanH]: ack baojie
18:20:57 [MarkusK]: Jie: there is still some work to do. The main question is who will read the Primer.
18:21:20 [MarkusK]: ... I think the document needs to be restructured to become accessible for users of different levels of expertise
18:21:48 [alanr]: q+ to say OWA is not advanced topic
18:22:10 [IanH]: q?
18:22:12 [MarkusK]: ... advanced topics like Open World Asumption should go to later sections
18:22:13 [alanr]: q+ to say also commonly messed up
18:22:20 [MarkusK]: s/Asumption/Assumption/
18:22:28 [DougL]: q+
18:23:06 [IanH]: q?
18:23:11 [MarkusK]: ianh: Jie, could you and Deborah cooperate with the authors to fix the perceived problems with the Primer until F2F2?
18:23:46 [MarkusK]: Jie: I think Sec 3 and 4 are mostly our problem, but fixing that might not require much time
18:23:51 [IanH]: q?
18:24:17 [uli_]: +1 to alanr
18:24:21 [Rinke]: +1 too
18:24:26 [bmotik]: +1
18:24:27 [MarkusK]: alanr: I object that OWA is considered an advanced topic. It is in fact a major point in using OWL
18:24:30 [baojie]: q+
18:24:41 [MarkusK]: ... I therefore would object to moivng that to the appendix
18:24:58 [IanH]: q?
18:25:02 [IanH]: ack alanr
18:25:02 [Zakim]: alanr, you wanted to say OWA is not advanced topic and to say also commonly messed up
18:25:05 [IanH]: q?
18:25:12 [IanH]: ack DougL
18:25:13 [MarkusK]: DougL: the Primer is far frmo being ready to be published
18:25:20 [MarkusK]: ... whole sections are mostly blank
18:25:29 [IanH]: q?
18:25:35 [IanH]: ack baojie
18:25:47 [MarkusK]: ... e.g., the advanced features section is not containing advanced features
18:25:50 [baojie]: q+
18:25:57 [IanH]: sorry!
18:26:09 [MarkusK]: ... more people from this group should review the Primer, since it is important for the perception of OWL
18:26:23 [MarkusK]: ... the current content of the Primier is good, but more is n eeded
18:26:32 [MarkusK]: s/n eeded/needed/
18:26:45 [IanH]: q?
18:26:53 [IanH]: ack baojie
18:26:56 [MarkusK]: Jie: I agree with DougL
18:27:21 [MarkusK]: ... I think that an incremental presentation would be better
18:27:31 [alanr]: q+ to remind of UFDTF meeting this monday up coming
18:27:49 [IanH]: q?
18:28:23 [MarkusK]: pfps: we have onyl two days left to make changes, which seems to preclude any substantial changes before F2F2
18:28:28 [alanr]: question is: Should we wait on publishing this?
18:28:30 [MarkusK]: s/onyl/only/
18:28:34 [IanH]: q?
18:28:40 [sandro]: q+
18:28:48 [MarkusK]: pfps: the missing sections are "Using OWL" and "Using OWL Tools"
18:28:51 [sandro]: q+ to address WD vs LC
18:28:57 [jjc]: q+
18:29:00 [IanH]: q?
18:29:02 [MarkusK]: ... not sure whether "Using OWL" is needed
18:29:25 [MarkusK]: ... I do not agree, though, that the Primer is not publishable as is
18:29:32 [baojie]: I may help, but will be minor as Peter and Bijan are the authors
18:29:34 [pfps]: Monday is a travel day!
18:29:52 [MarkusK]: Alanr: there is a UFDTF meeting this monday where we might discuss this issue
18:30:06 [MarkusK]: ... would it be harmful to not publish now but in two weeks?
18:30:11 [IanH]: q?
18:30:17 [IanH]: ack alanr
18:30:17 [Zakim]: alanr, you wanted to remind of UFDTF meeting this monday up coming
18:30:19 [alanr]: ack alanr
18:30:20 [MarkusK]: Ianh: we can consider that at the F2F
18:30:20 [IanH]: q?
18:30:27 [IanH]: ack sandro
18:30:27 [Zakim]: sandro, you wanted to address WD vs LC
18:30:30 [MarkusK]: Sandro: Publish early, publish often!
18:30:40 [DougL]: It's not "harmful",;we can make it very clear that it is a first draft.
18:30:41 [IanH]: q?
18:30:44 [MarkusK]: ... we could publish an incomplete document as a working draft
18:31:23 [MarkusK]: jjc: It would be useful to add a one-sentence summary of the review comments, to indicate open points that are still worked on
18:32:01 [MarkusK]: ... in general we can have comment inline to indicate work in progress
18:32:21 [DougL]: that sounds like a workable idea. peter should probably summarize the revies, not point at them
18:32:32 [MarkusK]: pfps: It will be hard to point to the distributed reviews from the Primer
18:33:04 [MarkusK]: sandro: we should not point to the reviews, but reach a consensus on what needs to be done, and state that in the document
18:33:20 [DougL]: Let me reiterate that what *is* there is quite good.
18:33:44 [uli_]: +1 to Doug
18:34:05 [DougL]: sure
18:34:24 [pfps]: The reviewers could come up with such a statement, Bijan and I could "fix" it.
18:34:52 [DougL]: Fixing dogs means...
18:35:21 [MarkusK]: Additional other business?
18:35:26 [jjc]: -- bye
18:35:30 [Zakim]: -jjc
18:36:04 [MarkusK]: pfps: agenda amendment: RIF statement on OWL compatibility
18:36:13 [Zhe]: bye
18:36:15 [Zakim]: -DougL
18:36:15 [Rinke]: bye
18:36:17 [Zakim]: -Evan_Wallace
18:36:17 [uli_]: bye
18:36:17 [Zakim]: -bmotik
18:36:18 [baojie]: bye
18:36:18 [calvanese]: bye
18:36:18 [Zakim]: -Ivan
18:36:19 [Ratnesh]: bye
18:36:20 [Zakim]: -Zhe
18:36:20 [Zakim]: -Sandro
18:36:21 [baojie]: --bye
18:36:21 [Zakim]: -alanr
18:36:23 [Zakim]: -bcuencagrau
18:36:24 [Zakim]: -Ratnesh
18:36:25 [Zakim]: -uli_
18:36:26 [Zakim]: -msmith
18:36:27 [alanr]: thanks ian!
18:36:28 [Zakim]: -Rinke
18:36:30 [Zakim]: -IanH
18:36:32 [Zakim]: -baojie
18:36:33 [sandro]: MarkusK, give me a minute to get the minutes ready on the wiki.
18:36:34 [Zakim]: -pfps
18:36:42 [Zakim]: -calvanese
18:36:51 [MarkusK]: ok
18:38:27 [msmith]: msmith has left #owl
18:40:37 [sandro]: Chair: Ian
18:40:45 [sandro]: Zakim, list attendees
18:40:45 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been +39.047.101.aaaa, +0186527aabb, IanH, MarkusK, Ivan, calvanese, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, +1.512.342.aacc, uli_, DougL, Evan_Wallace,
18:40:49 [Zakim]: ... Ratnesh, msmith, +0122341aadd, jjc, Zhe, +1.518.276.aaff, +1.617.253.aagg, alanr, pfps, Achille, baojie, +31.20.525.aahh, Rinke
18:41:43 [sandro]: Present: IanH, MarkusK, Ivan, calvanese, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, uli_, DougL, Evan_Wallace, Ratnesh, msmith, jjc, Zhe, alanr, pfps, Achille, baojie, Rinke
18:41:54 [Zakim]: disconnecting the lone participant, Achille, in SW_OWL()12:00PM
18:41:57 [Zakim]: SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
18:41:58 [Zakim]: Attendees were +39.047.101.aaaa, +0186527aabb, IanH, MarkusK, Ivan, calvanese, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, +1.512.342.aacc, uli_, DougL, Evan_Wallace, Ratnesh, msmith,
18:42:01 [Zakim]: ... +0122341aadd, jjc, Zhe, +1.518.276.aaff, +1.617.253.aagg, alanr, pfps, Achille, baojie, +31.20.525.aahh, Rinke
18:42:34 [sandro]: Okay, MarkusK -- http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.03.26/Minutes is all yours.
18:42:46 [MarkusK]: ok, thanks Sandro
18:43:15 [sandro]: no problem. thanks for scribing! :-)
19:01:33 [ivan]: ivan has left #owl
19:23:26 [jjc]: jjc has left #owl
20:57:09 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #owl