14:59:09 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:59:09 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-rif-irc
14:59:24 <AdrianP> AdrianP has joined #rif
14:59:50 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 1 April 2008
14:59:55 <ChrisW> Chair: Chris Welty
15:00:00 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
15:00:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
15:00:06 <Zakim> +??P14
15:00:07 <Zakim> -??P14
15:00:09 <Zakim> +??P14
15:00:30 <Zakim> + +49.351.463.4.aaaa
15:00:36 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:00:38 <AdrianP> Zakim, aaaa is me
15:00:39 <Zakim> +AdrianP; got it
15:00:44 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:00:51 <AdrianP> Zakim, mute me
15:00:52 <Zakim> AdrianP should now be muted
15:00:55 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:01:00 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
15:01:10 <JamesOwen> JamesOwen has joined #rif
15:01:10 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make logs public
15:01:21 <Zakim> +Dave_Reynolds (was Guest P39 74394)
15:01:23 <Zakim> +Dave_Reynolds
15:01:29 <Harold> Zakim, [NRCC] is me
15:01:29 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
15:02:08 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:02:08 <Zakim> On the phone I see JamesOwen, AxelPolleres (muted), AdrianP (muted), [IBM], Harold, Dave_Reynolds
15:02:13 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:02:13 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
15:02:13 <josb> josb has joined #rif
15:02:14 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:02:22 <Zakim> + +39.047.101.aabb
15:02:28 <StellaMitchell> zakim, [ibm] is temporarily me
15:02:28 <Zakim> +StellaMitchell; got it
15:02:31 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:03:02 <markproctor> markproctor has joined #rif
15:03:50 <AxelPolleres> yes
15:04:02 <AxelPolleres> scribe Axel Pollere
15:04:05 <ChrisW> Scribe: AxelPolleres
15:04:10 <IgorMozetic> IgorMozetic has joined #rif
15:04:11 <johnhall> johnhall has joined #rif
15:04:13 <AxelPolleres> scribenick AxelPolleres
15:04:15 <Zakim> +Mark_Proctor
15:04:22 <sandro> scribenick: AxelPolleres 
15:04:30 <ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Mar/att-0113/25-rif-minutes.html
15:04:41 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: we have to approve minutes from last week, objections?
15:04:46 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept March 25 telecon minutes
15:04:52 <Zakim> +??P56
15:04:54 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept March 25 telecon minutes
15:05:01 <AxelPolleres> no objections, minutes accepted.
15:05:01 <IgorMozetic> zakim, ??P56 is me
15:05:01 <Zakim> +IgorMozetic; got it
15:05:13 <PaulVincent> PaulVincent has joined #rif
15:05:22 <Zakim> +??P27
15:05:33 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: One amendment to the agenda: Discuss structure of BLD document, to be added to pub-plan section of the agenda.
15:05:35 <ChrisW> TOPIC: F2F10
15:05:41 <johnhall> zakim p27 is me
15:05:43 <AxelPolleres> News for f2f?
15:05:53 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, unmute me
15:05:53 <Zakim> AxelPolleres should no longer be muted
15:05:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:06:09 <johnhall> zakim, mute me
15:06:09 <Zakim> sorry, johnhall, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
15:06:23 <sandro> sandro has changed the topic to: 1 April 2008 RIF Telecon http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Mar/0129.html
15:06:33 <johnhall> zakim, ??p27 is me
15:06:33 <Zakim> +johnhall; got it
15:06:44 <johnhall> zakim.mute me
15:06:54 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
15:07:01 <Zakim> +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
15:07:06 <johnhall> zakim, mute me
15:07:08 <Zakim> johnhall should now be muted
15:07:31 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: we should get f2f registration fomr out beginning of may.
15:07:39 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Action review
15:07:43 <AxelPolleres> ... close form around May 10th
15:07:56 <AxelPolleres> Axel: No news, all data is online on the f2f page.
15:08:06 <AxelPolleres> Action review
15:08:11 <sandro> yes
15:09:02 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Harols now maintaining XSD.
15:09:08 <AxelPolleres> Action ??? continued.
15:09:35 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Jos to review metadata in BLD
15:10:01 <AxelPolleres> ... action http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/456
15:10:13 <AxelPolleres> ... pending discussion
15:10:20 <AxelPolleres> Action 455 completed
15:10:30 <AxelPolleres> Action 454 continued
15:10:45 <AxelPolleres> Action 453 completed
15:11:04 <AxelPolleres> Action 452 continued
15:11:08 <AdrianP> Zakim, unmute me
15:11:08 <Zakim> AdrianP should no longer be muted
15:11:23 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Adrian, when do we have the next ucr version.
15:11:37 <AxelPolleres> AdrianP: in two weeks.
15:11:42 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:11:57 <AxelPolleres> Action 443 completed
15:12:03 <AxelPolleres> Action 442 completed
15:12:26 <Zakim> +Gary_Hallmark
15:12:49 <AdrianP> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case
15:12:55 <AxelPolleres> Action 440 pending discussion
15:13:05 <AdrianP> and also http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Arch/Test_Cases
15:13:08 <Zakim> +MichaelKifer
15:13:15 <AxelPolleres> Action 439 continued
15:13:34 <AxelPolleres> Action 435 continued
15:13:46 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:13:46 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:14:27 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:14:27 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:14:45 <AxelPolleres> Action 458 continued
15:14:59 <AxelPolleres> Action 433 will be discussed today
15:16:34 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Liason
15:16:51 <AdrianP> I'm in contact with Hugh Wallis, XBRL Director of Technical Standards
15:16:58 <AxelPolleres> Action 428 change to "Stabilize DTB" and change date to next wednesday (april 9th)
15:17:03 <AxelPolleres> Liaison:
15:17:07 <AdrianP> XBRL Formula Working Group relevant for RIF
15:17:15 <AxelPolleres> Adrian reports about XBRL
15:17:20 <AdrianP> Hugh Wallis will find a liaison partner
15:17:22 <josb> q+
15:17:35 <AxelPolleres> (adrian, can you type in what you said?)
15:17:49 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:17:49 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:18:05 <AxelPolleres> josb: OWL people will discuss at their coming f2f the RIF-OWL compatibility document.
15:18:18 <josb> q-
15:18:24 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Issues Review
15:18:30 <AdrianP> zakim, mute me
15:18:30 <Zakim> AdrianP should now be muted
15:18:41 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/open
15:19:36 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Would like next week to go through Phase2-requirements issues and maybe mark what we won't address.
15:19:52 <AxelPolleres> ... some of these issues are actually addressed already.
15:20:13 <AxelPolleres> ... we can clos some of them and mark others which we won't resolve anyway.
15:20:26 <AxelPolleres> ... will write that up in the next days.
15:20:39 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: critical path issues
15:21:06 <AxelPolleres> ... how are we going to address these things?
15:21:28 <AxelPolleres> ... current schedule asks for last call by end of may.
15:21:49 <AxelPolleres> ... jos you had a proposal for importing rulesets issues?
15:22:19 <AxelPolleres> josb: we have to choose an option directive or import clause.
15:22:34 <AxelPolleres> (jos, is rthere a mail, can you paste the link?)
15:23:07 <AxelPolleres> josb: we have rthe notion for rif:local, in import we have to rename the local constants.
15:23:19 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: is there a proposal for that?
15:23:35 <AxelPolleres> josb: only what I just sketched.
15:23:56 <JamesOwen> JamesOwen has joined #rif
15:24:02 <AdrianP> Zakim, mute me
15:24:02 <Zakim> AdrianP was already muted, AdrianP
15:24:03 <AxelPolleres> Harold: We have worked on nested rule sets. Will come back to that later.
15:24:21 <AxelPolleres> ... will send a pointer to that topic.
15:24:22 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
15:24:56 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern
15:25:09 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
15:25:09 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:25:12 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: do I undertand thsat you wrap metadata/rules?
15:25:29 <AxelPolleres> s/thsat/right that/
15:25:40 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: This is in the latest BLD?
15:26:00 <AxelPolleres> Harold: yes in the latest version of the grammar.
15:26:03 <JamesOwen> Is there a question on whether we should or should NOT allow recursive rulesets?
15:26:11 <Harold> Ruleset  ::= 'Ruleset' IRIMETA? '(' (RULE | Ruleset)* ')'
15:26:17 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: that seems orthogonal to imports.
15:26:28 <Harold> Ruleset  ::= 'Ruleset' IRIMETA? '(' (RULE | import(Ruleset))* ')'
15:26:49 <MichaelKifer> what does it have to do with recursion? this is just a grammar
15:26:52 <JamesOwen> For Goal-Oriented type programming, you must have recursive rulesets 
15:26:52 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: jos raised trhe issue on dealing with local names on imports, any proposals on that?
15:27:16 <MichaelKifer> this is unrelated to recursive rules
15:27:24 <AxelPolleres> ... Jos can you take an action to flash out a proposal?
15:27:31 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
15:27:31 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:27:41 <JamesOwen> recursive - meaning that a ruleset calls a ruleset that calls itself
15:27:50 <AxelPolleres> DaveR: Wasn't there previously a proposal on modules which could capture thsat?
15:27:50 <JamesOwen> maybe
15:28:06 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: I don't think we have time left for modules.
15:28:15 <sandro> JamesOwen, this is abot having a ruleset physically or logically INSIDE another ruleset. 
15:28:48 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: I think having some import notion is critical path. What's the diff between modules and imports?
15:28:49 <DaveReynolds> +1 some form of import is needed
15:28:50 <JamesOwen> Correct - and that would be necessary for Goal-oriented rulebase programming
15:29:13 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: modules much more general, allows query on modules without complete import.
15:29:13 <sandro> mk: a module is more general than imports -- it's another KB, and you can issue queries to the KB, rather than importing the rules.
15:29:21 <PaulVincent> +1 on some form of "ruleset reference" is that is the same as "import"
15:29:48 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: How's that more general than imports?
15:30:14 <sandro> q?
15:30:21 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: you can represent/simulate imports with modules.
15:31:04 <AxelPolleres> ... all we need is the same semantics as "imports"
15:31:20 <Harold> Regarding local names, this issues comes up already when dealing with the *union* of two explicitly given Rulesets, not only when one of them is referenced indirectly through an 'import' statement.
15:31:30 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: It sounds like you have something in mind which you can write up quickly.
15:31:32 <JamesOwen> In the insurance industry, a ruleset has to import a ruleset as opposed to just "calling" another ruleset
15:31:49 <AxelPolleres> ... would it make sense to write it down or discuss now?
15:32:05 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: don't know if I have enough time before final draft.
15:32:09 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
15:32:11 <Harold> James, I agree with your points.
15:32:37 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern
15:32:53 <LeoraMorgenstern> zakim, mute me
15:32:53 <Zakim> LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
15:33:01 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Semantics you had in mind was basically like "copy" with renaming/changing local symbols somehow, yes?
15:33:07 <AxelPolleres> josb: right.
15:33:19 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: modules more general.
15:33:33 <sandro> Chris: Would there be harm in starting with imports and later generalizing to modules.
15:33:34 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: couls modules be added later or are they interferring?
15:33:54 <Harold> The just "calling" aspect is now handled for builtins with 'External' calls. The "import" aspect is harder, since the rules (with local names) need be consolidated.
15:33:58 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: We could later on redefine the semantics of "imports" wrt. "modules"
15:34:03 <sandro> ACTION: jdebruij to propose a solution for Imports
15:34:03 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - jdebruij
15:34:09 <sandro> ACTION: jos to propose a solution for Imports
15:34:09 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - jos
15:34:09 <trackbot-ng> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
15:34:20 <Harold> q+
15:34:23 <sandro> ACTION: jdebruij2 to propose a solution for Imports
15:34:23 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-459 - Propose a solution for Imports [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2008-04-08].
15:34:29 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Can we give an action to Jos on writing up imports.
15:34:40 <AxelPolleres> Josb: fine.
15:34:52 <sandro> mk: There's a solution -- Peer-to-peer knowledge bases -- from the Romans
15:34:58 <AxelPolleres> ... I think michael has something like flora-2 modules in mind.
15:35:07 <JamesOwen> (Romans?)
15:35:27 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: deadline for action 459 next telecon.
15:35:30 <josb> q+
15:35:37 <MichaelKifer> zakim, mute me
15:35:37 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:35:53 <Harold> Maurizio Lenzerini's nice slides on Hyper: http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~diis/arise/workshop.html
15:35:57 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Issue 34, extensibility of datatype support.
15:36:02 <josb> q-
15:36:08 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/34
15:36:43 <AxelPolleres> Harold: still for previous point: we discussed differenct between external calls and modules.
15:36:56 <AxelPolleres> (who spoke?)
15:37:14 <sandro> JamesOwen, 
15:37:25 <AxelPolleres> James: (can you type in what you just said?)
15:37:30 <AdrianP> and there are sometimes also distinctions between "include vs. import"
15:37:54 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: do we have a proposal about what extensibility actually means?
15:38:43 <AxelPolleres> ... one point was what to do when getting a datatype which you don't support?
15:38:58 <JamesOwen> we have two or three things going on right now.  Extensibility is (I would think) a UML problem that we have to address in ruls
15:39:01 <AxelPolleres> ... "just reject" would be one approach.
15:39:15 <josb>  rejecting is the current approach, as far as I know
15:39:20 <DaveReynolds> +q
15:39:28 <Harold> q-
15:39:28 <AxelPolleres> sandro: I was hoping we would fix this with fallbacks, but we didn't talk about it in the context of fallbacks yet.
15:39:36 <JamesOwen> An un-supported data type should throw an exception
15:39:53 <AxelPolleres> ... e.g. fallbacks from one datatype to another.
15:40:44 <AxelPolleres> ... there are strategies which work in certain cases, not quite sure about general.
15:41:42 <AxelPolleres> ... fallbacks are triggered by presence of syntactic properties.
15:41:47 <AdrianP> for fall back we probably would need to define some default type casting rules
15:42:28 <AxelPolleres> ... xs:int could be used as a kind of constant, instead of taking the datatype into account.
15:42:50 <AxelPolleres> ... I should probably take an action to solve issue 34.
15:44:13 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: should this go into DTB? Where does extensibility go?
15:45:15 <Harold> Let's take an example/uc: If you get a set but can only handle lists, you could try to represent sets as lists without duplicates in lexicographic order. However, set *unification* ist very different from set *unification*.
15:45:24 <Zakim> -Gary_Hallmark
15:45:52 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: I can take the action within 2 weeks.
15:47:00 <AxelPolleres> DaveR: part of the reason why extensibility works in RDF is that non-understood parts are passed-through "as is"
15:47:06 <sandro> ACTION: sandro to propose solution to ISSUE-34 -- what do you do when you get a ruleset with data values and/or built-in types you don't know?
15:47:07 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-460 - Propose solution to ISSUE-34 -- what do you do when you get a ruleset with data values and/or built-in types you don't know? [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-04-08].
15:47:19 <AxelPolleres> ... can we have something like that in RIF?
15:48:21 <Zakim> -JamesOwen
15:48:30 <ChrisW> q?
15:48:34 <AxelPolleres> DaveR: reject is the easy default. but we could also say it is an implementation issue
15:48:44 <AxelPolleres> Issue 33:
15:49:04 <AxelPolleres> Specification of data sources in RIF [CP]
15:49:10 <josb> q+
15:49:22 <Zakim> +JamesOwen
15:49:31 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: that's pretty close to imports.
15:50:02 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: not sure. (because beforehand translation to rif necessary)
15:50:08 <AdrianP> Zakim, unmute me
15:50:08 <Zakim> AdrianP should no longer be muted
15:51:04 <josb> q?
15:51:18 <AxelPolleres> AdrianP: could also be some query-builtin which gets data on from an external database.
15:51:30 <sandro> Sandro: it's kind of a paramaterized import --- attach this to your-local-whatever.
15:51:40 <AdrianP> building a constructive view over external data
15:51:41 <AdrianP> Zakim, mute me
15:51:41 <Zakim> AdrianP should now be muted
15:51:49 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: I would like to agree to sandro, if we can treat it as imports, it should be easy, otherwise, hard.
15:51:57 <AxelPolleres> ... other discussion on that?
15:52:13 <AxelPolleres> josb: we need to refer to RDF graphs and OWL ontologies.
15:52:27 <Harold> Jos, Yes, also we should consider RDF Named Graphs.
15:52:36 <AxelPolleres> ... not necessarily obligatory, but often needed.
15:52:55 <Harold> Named Graphs are like modules.
15:53:13 <AxelPolleres> ... first we need to include the references to those graphs/ontologies.
15:53:23 <AxelPolleres> sandro: same as imports?
15:53:38 <AxelPolleres> josb: not the same, because rdf graphs and ontologies are no rulesets.
15:54:44 <AxelPolleres> sandro: you point is if the data/ontology doesn't tell you enough how to imprort, e.g. OWL DL vs OWL full import.
15:54:59 <AxelPolleres> josb: yes, several possibilities.
15:55:46 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: in the reference statement you should mention the semantics for the import/combination as well?
15:56:08 <sandro> maybe these are flags you throw onto import....    <imports><Ruleset><location>http://....             or   <imports><Ontology><variant>Full<...>   .
15:56:35 <AxelPolleres> josb: I was thinking of import through additional directives.
15:56:49 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: imports is a directive.
15:57:10 <AxelPolleres> ... can you do that in your proposal for imports?
15:57:20 <Zakim> +Gary_Hallmark
15:57:34 <johnhall> Sorry, have to go to another meeting. Bye
15:57:44 <Zakim> -johnhall
15:57:56 <AxelPolleres> sandro: for the user it should be the same, flags should be allowed and some defaults. 
15:58:10 <ChrisW> q?
15:58:13 <ChrisW> ack j
15:58:19 <AxelPolleres> josb: that's possible, I would personally prefer separate tags.
15:59:16 <AxelPolleres> ... i can do the following: assume that "imports" is also used for RDF and OWL and flash out an additional flag for the import-semantics
15:59:52 <JamesOwen> Is this the UML Round Tripping?
16:00:03 <AxelPolleres> chrisw: last CP issue: roundtripping (issue 26)
16:00:52 <AxelPolleres> ... anything specific? 
16:00:58 <sandro> q?
16:01:01 <AxelPolleres> ... anyone object to close this?
16:01:21 <AxelPolleres> sandro: I keep picturing this as a case for 3rd party extensibility.
16:01:50 <markproctor> without round tripping you get import only. so I think that round tripping is useful for the industry.
16:02:12 <AxelPolleres> ... how can 3rd parties with dialects beyond BLD still use RIF as an exchange formats such that rules are sound-trippable importable and re-exportable.
16:02:25 <Hassan> I think metadata is adequate for this purpose
16:02:45 <AxelPolleres> ... could be done by stuffing in custom metadata, probably.
16:02:47 <markproctor> round tripping also allows you to test the soundness of your parser.
16:03:08 <markproctor> if you can import and export something and the results are the same, you know things are working.
16:03:43 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: the fallback mechanism is a part of this.
16:03:57 <AdrianP> could be some kind of annotations as used e.g. in model transformations, refactoring
16:03:58 <AxelPolleres> s/this/roundtripping
16:04:32 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: but there is additionally the medadata part (e.g. could be used for order of rules, etc.)
16:04:57 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: we need some text maybe in UCR talking about the concept of roundtripping. 
16:06:03 <AxelPolleres> DaveR: if we say rif preserves nothing but the metadata, than we have to put it there.
16:06:48 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: anything thsat doesn't matter to the semantics, that might change, is not (?) a matter for roundtripping
16:07:05 <AxelPolleres> s/thsat/that/
16:07:53 <AxelPolleres> sandro: OWL and RDF people would have waeker concerns about roundtripping than XML people, probably. 
16:08:11 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: strawpoll on CP issues.
16:08:46 <josb> +-1
16:08:46 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: Addressing Roundtripping is critical path for BLD Last Call
16:09:01 <Harold> -1
16:09:02 <Hassan> -1 (roundtripping is like a unversal rule translator!)
16:09:02 <sandro> -1
16:09:03 <AdrianP> -1
16:09:03 <PaulVincent> 0
16:09:05 <IgorMozetic> -1
16:09:06 <DaveReynolds> 0
16:09:09 <josb> -1
16:09:12 <AxelPolleres> 0
16:09:19 <LeoraMorgenstern> .3
16:09:19 <ChrisW> -1
16:09:24 <AxelPolleres> 0 (don't know)
16:09:30 <GaryHallmark> GaryHallmark has joined #rif
16:09:34 <LeoraMorgenstern> (That is, I do think it's important, but I also think it's an impossible task.)
16:09:39 <JamesOwen> +1
16:09:43 <AxelPolleres> ... instead of "don't care"
16:10:09 <sandro> Chris: maybe the chairs will take this off the critical path, thanks.
16:10:10 <AdrianP> we could say that this can be handeled by test cases which implementer define
16:10:12 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: thinking about removing this from critical path.
16:10:20 <ChrisW> q?
16:10:25 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Metadata
16:10:59 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: new syntax in BLD for metadata.
16:11:25 <AxelPolleres> Harold: we found a simple twist to the EBNF by allowing nesting of rulesets.
16:11:34 <DaveReynolds> q+
16:11:45 <AxelPolleres> ... so we have only a single place where we can attach metadata.
16:12:12 <MichaelKifer> zakim, unmute me
16:12:12 <Zakim> MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
16:12:32 <AxelPolleres> DaveR: I would have thought the canonical case was attaching metadata to single rules.
16:12:33 <josb> +1 to Dave
16:12:48 <PaulVincent> Comment: Existing BRMS tools tend to apply metadata on a per rule basis...
16:12:55 <sandro> DaveReynolds: I don't see the advantage of forcing everyone to wrap a rule in a ruleset.
16:12:58 <AxelPolleres> Harold: you can put a single rule in a ruleset.
16:13:26 <Hassan> Metadata should be allow at BOTH the ruleset and individual rule level
16:13:26 <sandro> zakim, who is talking?
16:13:30 <josb> Why should we make things more complicated than they should be?  Nesting of rule sets in BLD is a very bad idea.
16:13:37 <Zakim> sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ChrisW (14%), Harold (87%), IgorMozetic (29%)
16:13:53 <AxelPolleres> Harold: attaching metadata to a ruleset which can also be a single rule.
16:13:53 <sandro> zakim, who is talking?
16:14:00 <IgorMozetic> zakim, mute me
16:14:00 <Zakim> IgorMozetic should now be muted
16:14:04 <Zakim> sandro, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
16:14:09 <josb> we still want to assign identifiers to individual rules
16:14:29 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: think of just having a single tag for rulesets or rules to attach metadata.
16:14:36 <AxelPolleres> ... or anything else.
16:14:58 <josb> q+
16:15:03 <AxelPolleres> ... with our new proposal we can now use rulesets to process metadata.
16:15:12 <AxelPolleres> ... overall syntax is much more uniform now.
16:15:13 <ChrisW> (Ruleset A->B (Ruleset B->C))
16:15:38 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW explains his reading of that.
16:15:53 <AxelPolleres> ... ok, misread.
16:15:57 <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#Direct_Specification_of_RIF-BLD_Syntax
16:16:20 <GaryHallmark> what does the ruleset nesting imply about scope of local symbols?
16:16:27 <MichaelKifer> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#EBNF_for_RIF-BLD_Rule_Language
16:16:49 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: in order to put metadata in a rule you need to wrap it in a ruleset in this syntax.
16:17:11 <AxelPolleres> ... the base case for metadata is single rules.
16:17:41 <sandro> No, DONT AVOID THAT.      Allow MetaData on Everything.
16:17:52 <AxelPolleres> Harold: looking downwards in our grammar, we could have metadata anywhere, but we wanted to avoid that.
16:18:12 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: but we can now only use it at rulesets.
16:18:30 <AxelPolleres> Harold: but now with nested rulesets we can again have it anywhere.
16:19:21 <Hassan> +1 on Sandro (metadata should be allowed on everything)
16:19:38 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: every single thing in the syntax has URIs, shouldn't we also allwow for metadata anywhere? 
16:19:39 <PaulVincent> +1 on moving RIF metadata to RIF version 2
16:20:26 <sandro> PaulVincent, did you hear someone say that?    ("+1" is usually for agreeing with something you just heard.)
16:20:36 <sandro> (not that I disagree)
16:21:28 <Hassan> I also wonder what the real issue is here?...
16:21:35 <PaulVincent> Sorry: it was a variation on the discussion: should be: Proposal: ...
16:21:55 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: Why  do I need to call anything ruleset where I want to add metadata.
16:22:11 <AxelPolleres> Harold: that was similar in jos' proposal.
16:22:17 <AxelPolleres> Jos: no.
16:22:33 <Harold> Just a different 'wrapper name'.
16:22:51 <AxelPolleres> ... you need to assign an identifier to a rule, if you want to talk about it - as a rule.
16:23:27 <Harold> "One man's metadata is another man's data"
16:23:41 <AxelPolleres> (jos can you type in the differences agian?)
16:23:48 <sandro> Jos: I used different syntax for metadata to help clarify that the data is not part of the ruleset.
16:23:51 <Harold> "meta" is a relation between two levels.
16:24:34 <ChrisW> q?
16:24:38 <Harold> We have already the Frame notion, and know to map it to RDF.
16:24:45 <AxelPolleres> sandro: while jos proposal is maybe logically more complicated, it is more usable. 
16:25:09 <Harold> So, it would be ironic to not use our RDF-like Frames for metadata.
16:25:11 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: I don't see the big difference between the two metadata proposals.
16:25:14 <sandro> chris: use of frame syntax is an aesthetic or communication choice there.
16:25:28 <AdrianP> not necessarily, the new proposal is much more general and supports a set of rules or a singel rule attached with metadata and allows to process meta data with rules
16:25:44 <AxelPolleres> jos: another important difference: in michaels proposal the ruleset identifier is hidden inside the frame.
16:26:02 <sandro> Chris: how do you assign a URI to a ruleset?
16:26:08 <MichaelKifer> iri[]
16:26:08 <AxelPolleres> s/michaels/michael's/
16:26:48 <AxelPolleres> MichaelK: the main idea is that the metadata is RIF itself, to make metadata processeable.
16:27:04 <sandro> Um, NO, we don't need to process the metadata using rules.   That's NOT a requirement.
16:27:14 <AxelPolleres> ... we can use frames, constants, that's not the point.
16:27:18 <ChrisW> (Ruleset iri[value -> http://rule1] (A :- B))
16:27:50 <AxelPolleres> ... our approach is more uniform and more powerful.
16:27:56 <IgorMozetic> I think it's a good idea to process the metadata by rules.
16:28:13 <MichaelKifer> iri[](A:-B)
16:28:20 <sandro> I agree, IgorMozetic, but it's *not* a requirement, and may be less important than other issues.
16:28:23 <AdrianP> +1 to Michael and Igor. 
16:28:57 <AxelPolleres> Sandro: Let's see the XML of this.
16:29:17 <AxelPolleres> ... before making a decision on this.
16:29:19 <AdrianP> e.g. for building a constructive view / scope on a set of rules, e.g. all rules from a particular author
16:29:27 <MichaelKifer> "http://rule1"^^iri(A :- B)
16:29:39 <AxelPolleres> josb: michael or harold should send a mail explaining the proposal to the list.
16:29:59 <AxelPolleres> harold: there is already an example.
16:30:00 <Harold> <Ruleset>
16:30:01 <Harold>  <meta>
16:30:01 <Harold>    <Frame>
16:30:01 <Harold>      <object>
16:30:01 <Harold>        <Const type="rif:iri">w3:homepage</Const>
16:30:01 <Harold>      </object>
16:30:01 <MichaelKifer> "http://rule1"^^iri[](A :- B)
16:30:03 <Harold>      <slot>
16:30:05 <Harold>        <Prop>
16:30:07 <Harold>          <key><Const type="rif:iri">dc:publisher</Const></key>
16:30:09 <Harold>          <val><Const type="rif:iri">w3:W3C</Const></val>
16:30:11 <Harold>        </Prop>
16:30:13 <Harold>      </slot>
16:30:15 <Harold>      <slot>
16:30:17 <Harold>        <Prop>
16:30:19 <Harold>          <key><Const type="rif:iri">dc:date</Const></key>
16:30:21 <Harold>          <val><Const type="xsd:date">2008-04-04</Const></val>
16:30:22 <AxelPolleres> ... example 5 of BLD
16:30:23 <Harold>        </Prop>
16:30:25 <Harold>      </slot>
16:30:27 <Harold>    </Frame>
16:30:29 <Harold>  </meta>
16:30:31 <Harold>  <rule>
16:30:33 <Harold>  . . .
16:30:35 <Harold>  </rule>
16:30:37 <Harold> </Ruleset>
16:30:42 <AxelPolleres> ... in section 5.2.
16:30:57 <josb> Wasn't it possible to make this more complex?
16:31:01 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: is there a presentation syntax version of this example.
16:31:12 <AxelPolleres> Harold: we should bring it back, yes.
16:31:21 <sandro> josb  :-)
16:31:27 <ChrisW> q?
16:31:31 <josb> q-
16:31:43 <AxelPolleres> ChrisW: we are over time.
16:31:50 <josb> +1
16:31:53 <AxelPolleres> ....adjourn
16:31:56 <Zakim> -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:31:58 <Zakim> -Mark_Proctor
16:31:59 <Zakim> -Sandro
16:32:01 <Zakim> -Dave_Reynolds
16:32:01 <Zakim> -josb
16:32:02 <Zakim> -Harold
16:32:02 <Zakim> -PaulVincent
16:32:02 <Zakim> -MichaelKifer
16:32:03 <AdrianP> bye
16:32:03 <Zakim> -StellaMitchell
16:32:05 <Zakim> -IgorMozetic
16:32:07 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
16:32:09 <Zakim> -Gary_Hallmark
16:32:11 <Zakim> -AdrianP
16:32:20 <AxelPolleres> Zakim, unmute me
16:32:20 <Zakim> AxelPolleres was not muted, AxelPolleres
16:32:24 <ChrisW> zakim, list attendees
16:32:24 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been JamesOwen, AxelPolleres, +49.351.463.4.aaaa, AdrianP, Dave_Reynolds, Harold, ChrisW, +39.047.101.aabb, josb, StellaMitchell, Sandro,
16:32:27 <Zakim> ... Mark_Proctor, IgorMozetic, PaulVincent, johnhall, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, MichaelKifer, LeoraMorgenstern
16:32:32 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:32:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/01-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:32:45 <AxelPolleres> Where is the URI of the minutes... ah, yes
16:33:02 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:33:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see AxelPolleres, ChrisW
16:33:07 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
16:33:17 <Zakim> -ChrisW
16:33:18 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:33:19 <Zakim> Attendees were JamesOwen, AxelPolleres, +49.351.463.4.aaaa, AdrianP, Dave_Reynolds, Harold, ChrisW, +39.047.101.aabb, josb, StellaMitchell, Sandro, Mark_Proctor, IgorMozetic,
16:33:22 <Zakim> ... PaulVincent, johnhall, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, Gary_Hallmark, MichaelKifer, LeoraMorgenstern