IRC log of owl on 2008-04-30

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:54:18 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #owl
16:54:18 [RRSAgent]: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/30-owl-irc
16:56:19 [alanr]: alanr has joined #owl
16:57:03 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
16:57:03 [Zakim]: sorry, IanH, I don't know what conference this is
16:57:05 [Zakim]: On IRC I see alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten, trackbot-ng, sandro, ewallace
16:57:39 [bmotik]: bmotik has joined #owl
16:58:02 [bcuencagrau]: bcuencagrau has joined #owl
16:58:24 [IanH]: zakim, this is OWL
16:58:24 [Zakim]: ok, IanH; that matches SW_OWL()12:00PM
16:58:32 [bmotik]: Zakim, who is on call?
16:58:32 [Zakim]: I don't understand your question, bmotik.
16:58:32 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
16:58:33 [Zakim]: On the phone I see IanH, ??P8
16:58:34 [Zakim]: On IRC I see bcuencagrau, bmotik, alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten, trackbot-ng, sandro, ewallace
16:58:48 [bmotik]: Zakim, ??P8 is me
16:58:48 [Zakim]: +bmotik; got it
16:58:51 [bmotik]: Zakim, mute me
16:58:51 [Zakim]: bmotik should now be muted
16:59:00 [Zakim]: +??P10
16:59:01 [Zakim]: +MartinD
16:59:01 [Zakim]: +pfps
16:59:05 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, ??P8 is me
16:59:05 [Zakim]: I already had ??P8 as bmotik, bcuencagrau
16:59:11 [MartinD]: zakim, mute me
16:59:11 [Zakim]: MartinD should now be muted
16:59:15 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, ??P10 is me
16:59:15 [Zakim]: +bcuencagrau; got it
16:59:26 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, mute me
16:59:26 [Zakim]: bcuencagrau should now be muted
16:59:49 [Zakim]: +Carsten
16:59:54 [uli]: uli has joined #owl
16:59:56 [msmith]: msmith has joined #owl
17:00:03 [Zakim]: +??P14
17:00:41 [Zakim]: +??P15
17:00:48 [Zhe]: Zhe has joined #owl
17:00:54 [uli]: zakim, ??15 is me
17:00:54 [Zakim]: sorry, uli, I do not recognize a party named '??15'
17:01:00 [Zakim]: +Alan
17:01:03 [uli]: zakim, ??P15 is me
17:01:03 [Zakim]: +uli; got it
17:01:06 [JeremyCarroll]: zakim, ??P14 is me
17:01:06 [Zakim]: +JeremyCarroll; got it
17:01:23 [Carsten]: Can somebody (who knows how) pls make me the scribe?
17:01:25 [Zakim]: +??P18
17:01:27 [JeremyCarroll]: q-
17:01:34 [Achille]: Achille has joined #owl
17:01:35 [alanr]: q?
17:01:37 [MarkusK]: MarkusK has joined #owl
17:01:42 [uli]: zakim, mute me
17:01:42 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
17:01:46 [IanH]: q?
17:01:50 [Ivan]: zakim, dial ivan-voip
17:01:50 [Zakim]: ok, Ivan; the call is being made
17:01:52 [Zakim]: +Ivan
17:01:52 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:01:52 [Zakim]: On the phone I see IanH, bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), MartinD (muted), pfps (muted), Carsten, JeremyCarroll, uli (muted), Alan, ??P18, Ivan (muted)
17:01:56 [Zakim]: On IRC I see MarkusK, Achille, Zhe, msmith, uli, bcuencagrau, bmotik, alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten, trackbot-ng, sandro,
17:01:58 [Zakim]: ... ewallace
17:02:05 [Zakim]: +[IBM]
17:02:08 [Ratnesh]: zakim, ??P18 is me
17:02:08 [Zakim]: +Ratnesh; got it
17:02:15 [Carsten]: what kind of message is that?
17:02:18 [Achille]: Zakim. IBM is Achille
17:02:19 [Carsten]: "excellent" :)
17:02:23 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:02:23 [Zakim]: On the phone I see IanH, bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), MartinD (muted), pfps (muted), Carsten, JeremyCarroll, uli (muted), Alan, Ratnesh, Ivan, [IBM]
17:02:26 [Zakim]: On IRC I see MarkusK, Achille, Zhe, msmith, uli, bcuencagrau, bmotik, alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten, trackbot-ng, sandro,
17:02:28 [Zakim]: ... ewallace
17:02:30 [Ivan]: zakim, drop me
17:02:30 [Zakim]: Ivan is being disconnected
17:02:31 [Zakim]: -Ivan
17:02:44 [Achille]: Zakim, IBM is Achille
17:02:44 [Zakim]: +Achille; got it
17:02:46 [Ivan]: zakim, dial ivan-voip
17:02:46 [Zakim]: ok, Ivan; the call is being made
17:02:47 [pfps]: ScribeNick: Carsten
17:02:47 [Zakim]: +Ivan
17:02:55 [Zakim]: +msmith
17:03:08 [Ivan]: zakim, drop me
17:03:08 [Zakim]: Ivan is being disconnected
17:03:09 [Zakim]: -Ivan
17:03:14 [alanr]: It's ivan trying to have zakim call him
17:03:29 [Ivan]: zakim, code?
17:03:29 [Zakim]: the conference code is 69594 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Ivan
17:03:42 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:03:42 [Zakim]: On the phone I see IanH, bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), MartinD (muted), pfps (muted), Carsten, JeremyCarroll, uli (muted), Alan, Ratnesh, Achille, msmith
17:03:45 [Zakim]: On IRC I see MarkusK, Achille, Zhe, msmith, uli, bcuencagrau, bmotik, alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten, trackbot-ng, sandro,
17:03:47 [Zakim]: ... ewallace
17:03:50 [IanH]: zakim, unmute me
17:03:50 [Zakim]: IanH was not muted, IanH
17:04:00 [JeffP]: JeffP has joined #owl
17:04:15 [Zakim]: +??P29
17:04:16 [Zakim]: + +1.603.438.aaaa
17:04:20 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:04:20 [Zakim]: On the phone I see IanH, bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), MartinD (muted), pfps (muted), Carsten, JeremyCarroll, uli (muted), Alan, Ratnesh, Achille, msmith, +1.603.438.aaaa,
17:04:23 [Zakim]: ... ??P29
17:04:24 [Zakim]: On IRC I see JeffP, MarkusK, Achille, Zhe, msmith, uli, bcuencagrau, bmotik, alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten, trackbot-ng,
17:04:26 [Zakim]: ... sandro, ewallace
17:04:32 [JeffP]: (I am only on IRC)
17:04:33 [Zhe]: Zakim, +1.603.438.aaaa is me
17:04:33 [Zakim]: +Zhe; got it
17:04:40 [Carsten]: thanks, peter
17:04:51 [Ivan]: zakim, dial ivan-voip
17:04:51 [Zakim]: ok, Ivan; the call is being made
17:04:53 [Zakim]: +Ivan
17:05:14 [Ivan]: zakim, drop me
17:05:14 [Zakim]: Ivan is being disconnected
17:05:15 [Zakim]: -Ivan
17:05:23 [Carsten]: ian: roll call
17:05:33 [JeremyCarroll]: Ivan - it really isn't working, and it's quite disturbing
17:05:39 [alanr]: yes
17:05:53 [Carsten]: ian: f2f3, my understanding is we agreed 28./29. July at MIT
17:06:17 [pfps]: minutes are OK
17:06:20 [Carsten]: ian: previous minutes
17:06:32 [Zakim]: +Sandro
17:06:42 [Carsten]: PROPOSAL: to accept previous minutes
17:06:53 [msmith]: +1 to previous minutes
17:06:56 [MarkusK]: +1
17:06:58 [Zhe]: +1
17:06:59 [MartinD]: +1
17:07:00 [pfps]: +1
17:07:01 [alanr]: +1
17:07:06 [uli]: +1
17:07:08 [Carsten]: +1
17:07:09 [JeffP]: 0 (didn't attend)
17:07:19 [Zakim]: +Ivan
17:07:23 [Carsten]: RESOLVED: accept previous minutes
17:07:50 [sandro]: RRSAgent, pointer?
17:07:50 [RRSAgent]: See http://www.w3.org/2008/04/30-owl-irc#T17-07-50
17:08:23 [Carsten]: ian: new strategy for handling issues: chairs look at the and decide whether they will be accepted
17:08:40 [Carsten]: s/the/them/
17:09:04 [Carsten]: Ian: Action Item Status
17:09:19 [Carsten]: Ian: Actions 140 and 141 done
17:09:24 [Carsten]: Ian: Due and overdue Actions
17:09:31 [uli]: Bijan isn't there
17:09:54 [Carsten]: Ian: 129, 132 deferred since Bijan is not here
17:10:13 [Carsten]: Ian: Jeremy proposed to drop Action 135 (which was on him)
17:10:35 [pfps]: q+
17:10:53 [pfps]: -
17:10:56 [pfps]: q-
17:11:07 [IanH]: q?
17:11:16 [pfps]: q+
17:11:20 [Carsten]: Ian: action closed, Jeremy can created a new one later if necessary
17:11:25 [pfps]: q+
17:11:27 [Carsten]: s/created/create/
17:11:41 [Carsten]: Ian: 42 skipped, Bijan not here
17:11:45 [IanH]: q?
17:12:19 [pfps]: q-
17:12:26 [IanH]: q?
17:12:57 [Carsten]: Ian: Action 43: Bijan suggested he might be able to help; come back next week
17:13:11 [IanH]: q?
17:13:38 [alanr]: have pushed Bijan's actions to May 5 (so they will show as overdue when agenda planning next week)
17:14:36 [Carsten]: Jeremy: would appreciate early feedback from others in the group on preliminary review that I will provide soon (?)
17:14:44 [Zakim]: -bcuencagrau
17:14:46 [Carsten]: Ian: ISSUES
17:14:51 [Carsten]: Ian: Issue 82
17:15:02 [IanH]: q?
17:15:12 [Carsten]: Ian: really two issues; one is buggy diagrams which has been fixed by Boris and Conrad
17:15:26 [Carsten]: Ian: the second part is the general issue of what is going to happen w.r.t. OMG metamodel
17:15:28 [Zakim]: +??P7
17:15:37 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, ??P7 is me
17:15:37 [Zakim]: +bcuencagrau; got it
17:15:41 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:15:43 [bcuencagrau]: Zakim, mute me
17:15:43 [Zakim]: bcuencagrau should now be muted
17:15:51 [IanH]: q?
17:16:00 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:16:04 [Carsten]: Ian: I propose to close issue as first part is solved and more concrete issues can be raised later when needed
17:16:12 [alanr]: is evan here?
17:16:26 [bmotik]: Conrad was quite happy about the new diagrams.
17:16:26 [JeremyCarroll]: no is irc is a zombie
17:17:01 [Carsten]: ian: we talked to Evan and ??? (didn't get it) and they were happy with this
17:17:08 [JeremyCarroll]: ??? = ELisa
17:17:11 [Carsten]: PROPOSED: resolve issue 82 as per the email
17:17:17 [alanr]: +1
17:17:19 [IanH]: ??? = Elisa and Conrad
17:17:22 [pfps]: +1
17:17:29 [uli]: +1
17:17:35 [pfps]: email is http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Apr/0297.html)
17:17:40 [JeremyCarroll]: +1
17:17:47 [IanH]: +1
17:17:47 [Carsten]: +1
17:17:49 [MartinD]: +1
17:17:49 [Zhe]: +1
17:18:00 [sandro]: +1
17:18:03 [MarkusK]: +1
17:18:11 [Carsten]: RESOLVED issue 82
17:18:36 [Carsten]: Ian: Issue 107
17:18:56 [Carsten]: Ian: there is a proposal from Alan not to deprecate OWL Lite because there is no real need to do that
17:19:03 [IanH]: q?
17:19:43 [Carsten]: Alan: Jeremy's advice should be somewhere in the documents
17:19:50 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:19:55 [IanH]: q?
17:20:01 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:20:18 [uli]: q+
17:20:27 [IanH]: q?
17:20:28 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
17:20:28 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
17:20:35 [Carsten]: Jeremy: If we believe that people should think in terms of the new profiles and not of OWL lite, we should deprecate
17:20:45 [JeremyCarroll]: Jeremy was speaking personally - not for HP
17:20:50 [alanr]: but you might be doing it, even you do deprecate it, as it is valid owl 2
17:20:58 [IanH]: q?
17:21:02 [Carsten]: Uli: we should be careful not to make OWL lite users think they have to change sth
17:21:02 [JeremyCarroll]: agreed
17:21:04 [IanH]: ack uli
17:21:32 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
17:21:32 [Zakim]: uli was not muted, uli
17:21:35 [sandro]: +1 Uli ("deprecated" may make Lite users think they have to change something)
17:21:37 [uli]: zakim, mute me
17:21:37 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
17:21:53 [Ivan]: q+
17:21:59 [IanH]: q?
17:22:00 [Carsten]: Jeremy: agree with Uli in that the deprecation advice to OWL Lite users is "do nothing"
17:22:03 [IanH]: ack Ivan
17:22:06 [IanH]: q?
17:22:33 [uli]: ...but saying that, if they want to keep working with their ontologies, they should look into the profiles would be useful as well
17:22:38 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:22:39 [Carsten]: Ivan: in other areas, deprecation means that, although it is still valid, in a later version we may make in invalid. Didn't find examples in W3C docs. But it has this aspect. Thus I am in favour of what Alan says
17:22:42 [IanH]: q?
17:22:56 [JeffP]: [Does this mean OWL Lite will be one of the OWL 2 profiles?]
17:22:57 [alanr]: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Deprecation
17:23:07 [Carsten]: Jeremy: I am convinced by Ivans arguments
17:23:07 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarrroll
17:23:16 [Carsten]: PROPOSED: resolve issue 107 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Apr/0308.html
17:23:20 [Ivan]: +1
17:23:22 [IanH]: +1
17:23:23 [JeremyCarroll]: +1
17:23:25 [bcuencagrau]: +1
17:23:25 [alanr]: +1
17:23:26 [Carsten]: +1
17:23:26 [MarkusK]: +1
17:23:27 [pfps]: +1
17:23:31 [uli]: +1
17:23:34 [sandro]: +1
17:23:35 [Ratnesh]: +1
17:23:36 [alanr]: Action to add jeremy's comments somewhere?
17:23:38 [Carsten]: RESOLVED issue 107
17:23:40 [Zhe]: +1
17:23:40 [JeffP]: +1
17:23:44 [Carsten]: Ian: issue 47
17:23:56 [sandro]: (very cute, Alan, using the OWL def'n of deprecation. :-)
17:24:36 [IanH]: q?
17:24:43 [JeremyCarroll]: q-
17:25:14 [Carsten]: Alan will put Jeremy's comments as a note in the profiles document
17:25:19 [calvanese]: calvanese has joined #owl
17:25:28 [alanr]: action: Alan to put editorial note in profiles document re: Jeremy's advise about OWL Lite
17:25:28 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-143 - Put editorial note in profiles document re: Jeremy's advise about OWL Lite [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-05-07].
17:25:42 [alanr]: not moot - resolved
17:25:51 [JeremyCarroll]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Apr/0313
17:25:52 [Carsten]: Ian: Issue 47 is moot since compound keys are covered by easykeys
17:25:58 [IanH]: q?
17:26:22 [JeremyCarroll]: "Proposed to close the issue as addressed by EasyKeys."
17:26:22 [Zakim]: +diegoc
17:27:05 [Carsten]: PROPOSED: Issue 47 resolved as addressed by EasyKeys
17:27:10 [alanr]: +1
17:27:11 [pfps]: +1
17:27:12 [IanH]: +1
17:27:13 [JeremyCarroll]: +1
17:27:15 [Zhe]: +1
17:27:16 [Carsten]: +1
17:27:18 [JeffP]: +1
17:27:20 [uli]: +1
17:27:22 [MarkusK]: +1
17:27:28 [msmith]: +1
17:27:32 [Carsten]: RESOLVED Issue 47
17:27:57 [Carsten]: Ian: Issue 122
17:28:29 [JeremyCarroll]: q+ to ask what it is??
17:28:34 [Carsten]: Ian: it is already resolved; wasn't resolved when raised; but now resolved by the updates of the syntax and mapping documents after the F2F
17:28:38 [IanH]: Q?
17:29:03 [Ivan]: owl:qualifiedCardinality
17:29:32 [IanH]: Q?
17:29:36 [JeremyCarroll]: q-
17:29:40 [Carsten]: Jeremy: I have heard that people don't like it, but not from HP so no problem here
17:29:53 [Carsten]: PROPOSED: resolve issue 122 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Apr/0334.html
17:29:55 [Ivan]: +1
17:29:57 [JeremyCarroll]: +1
17:29:58 [IanH]: +1
17:29:59 [Carsten]: +1
17:30:00 [JeffP]: +1
17:30:01 [Zhe]: +1
17:30:01 [MarkusK]: +1
17:30:02 [Achille]: +1
17:30:02 [msmith]: +1
17:30:04 [pfps]: +1
17:30:07 [MartinD]: +1
17:30:10 [Ratnesh]: +1
17:30:11 [alanr]: +1
17:30:12 [uli]: +1
17:30:15 [Carsten]: RESOLVED: issue 122
17:30:38 [Carsten]: Ian: Issue Discussions
17:31:11 [alanr]: also, followup on feedback re: easy keys and top/bottom from implementors
17:31:16 [Carsten]: Ian: we reorder issues, start with Issue 71
17:31:48 [IanH]: http://www.w3.org/mid/480E0791.2030304%2540hpl.hp.com
17:32:13 [Carsten]: Jeremy: the paper mentioned in the issue was maybe too complicated
17:32:51 [Carsten]: Jeremy: there are linguist theries encoded in a language tag system in a bizarre fashion (?)
17:33:22 [Carsten]: Jeremy: We need access to the language tag in the model theory, which is possible neither in OWL DL nor OWL Full
17:33:40 [Carsten]: Jeremy: suggestion is to provide a property in OWL with a model-theoretic treatement that allows access to tags
17:34:17 [Carsten]: Jeremy: different approach is to provide a way of creating data ranges of those plain literals that have language tags that are of a particular form (?)
17:34:19 [JeremyCarroll]: _:a rdf:type owl:PlainLiterals .
17:34:19 [JeremyCarroll]: _:a owl:withLanguageTag "en-US"^^xsd:language .
17:34:38 [Carsten]: Ian: a subclass of literals, like englishliterals?
17:34:55 [bmotik]: Couldn't we use facets?
17:35:10 [alanr]: question, re: Peter's mail. Can we make have a range which is plain literals without a language tag?
17:35:13 [bmotik]: I think we can.
17:35:15 [bmotik]: q+
17:35:17 [Carsten]: Jeremy: yes; maybe we can do it (what? distorted) in facets
17:35:21 [IanH]: q?
17:35:32 [pfps]: plain literals without language tag is xsd:string
17:35:50 [bmotik]: Zakim, unmute me
17:35:50 [Zakim]: bmotik should no longer be muted
17:36:06 [alanr]: ok, peter - good point. Need a test case for that.
17:36:08 [pfps]: zakim, who is speaking?
17:36:18 [Zakim]: pfps, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Carsten (26%)
17:36:46 [Carsten]: boris: interesting issue we may want to address. two questions. First: for a bunch of objects, you have values connected via properties. If you want to single out all english literals, this can be done with facets
17:37:01 [IanH]: Carsten: you might want to mute yourself (typing noise)
17:37:05 [Carsten]: boris: that would allow to query all values in english
17:37:31 [Carsten]: boris: second question: do you really need to break down and get the actual language tag as a string?
17:37:40 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:37:44 [IanH]: q?
17:37:50 [bmotik]: Zakim, mute me
17:37:50 [Zakim]: bmotik should now be muted
17:37:53 [Carsten]: boris: the latter would require n-ary datatypes
17:38:35 [pfps]: q+
17:38:44 [IanH]: ack bmotik
17:38:52 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:39:45 [pfps]: q+ to suggest owl:langpattern as a datatype facet valid on language strings
17:39:52 [pfps]: ack me
17:39:53 [Zakim]: pfps, you wanted to suggest owl:langpattern as a datatype facet valid on language strings
17:39:56 [Carsten]: Jeremy: refers to what is needed in the paper cited in issue description. Unions play an imporant way, e.g. for different versions of chinese
17:40:17 [alanr]: q+
17:40:24 [Carsten]: peter: patterns should work fine for language tags, XSD patterns
17:40:25 [JeremyCarroll]: Seems plausible
17:40:34 [pfps]: zakim, mute me
17:40:34 [Zakim]: pfps should now be muted
17:40:36 [alanr]: q-
17:40:45 [pfps]: "01010"?
17:40:50 [Carsten]: Ian: why are literals not always a pair of language tag and content?
17:40:52 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:40:54 [IanH]: q?
17:41:02 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:41:32 [Carsten]: Jeremy: describes decision made by RDF group
17:41:33 [Zakim]: -Sandro
17:41:39 [alanr]: +1 to langpattern
17:41:55 [Carsten]: jeremy, I missed the details of your last remark, could you please put them in?
17:42:01 [Zakim]: +Sandro
17:42:03 [JeremyCarroll]: That plainliterals without lang tag are identical to xsd:string
17:42:09 [IanH]: q?
17:42:30 [alanr]: but would like example of pattern - is this clearly documented?
17:42:34 [JeremyCarroll]: OK
17:42:43 [Carsten]: Ian: this could be the basis for a solution that Jeremy could write up
17:43:07 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:43:10 [Carsten]: Alan: I like the idea
17:43:22 [Ivan]: q+
17:43:23 [bmotik]: I am not sure I understood both proposals.
17:43:27 [pfps]: its a go.
17:43:48 [Carsten]: Jeremy: I can write up sth that is likely to be consensus
17:44:09 [IanH]: q?
17:44:17 [Ivan]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:44:20 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:44:28 [Carsten]: Jeremy: will write a wiki page with texts that could then go into the documents
17:44:45 [IanH]: Can someone do the action?
17:45:00 [Carsten]: Ivan: It may be worth for Jeremy to talk to Felix Tasaki (sp?)
17:45:05 [IanH]: q?
17:45:09 [IanH]: ack Ivan
17:45:11 [Ivan]: s/Tasaki/Sasaki/
17:46:00 [JeremyCarroll]: ACTION: Jeremy, Start WIki page addressing lang tag issue, liasing with I18N activity (felix?)
17:46:00 [trackbot-ng]: Sorry, couldn't find user - Jeremy,
17:46:09 [Carsten]: Ian: Issue 97
17:46:24 [JeremyCarroll]: ACTION: Jeremy Start WIki page addressing lang tag issue, liasing with I18N activity (felix?)
17:46:24 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-144 - Start WIki page addressing lang tag issue, liasing with I18N activity (felix?) [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2008-05-07].
17:47:03 [IanH]: q?
17:47:12 [Carsten]: Alan: we were waiting for Ivan and Sandro to explain ramifications
17:47:28 [Carsten]: Ian: suggestion from Bijan was that we only need to provide some kind of hook
17:47:53 [IanH]: zakim, mute Carsten
17:47:53 [Zakim]: Carsten should now be muted
17:48:07 [IanH]: OK
17:48:34 [JeremyCarroll]: suggest ask GRDDL WG?
17:48:35 [Carsten]: Alan: we need an expert to help with that
17:48:44 [Carsten]: Ivan: my XSLT knowledge is not good enough
17:49:38 [JeremyCarroll]: q+
17:49:44 [IanH]: q?
17:49:49 [Carsten]: Ian: the belief is that we really need to have it
17:50:07 [Carsten]: Jeremy: we can send a message to the GRDDL WG and ask for volunteers
17:50:16 [Carsten]: Ivan: the GRDDL WG is hibernating
17:50:20 [Zakim]: -Alan
17:50:20 [Ivan]: q+
17:50:35 [Ivan]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:50:37 [alanr]: Action: Jeremy to send mail to GRDDL groups asking for volunteer (just in case)
17:50:37 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-145 - Send mail to GRDDL groups asking for volunteer (just in case) [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2008-05-07].
17:50:41 [IanH]: q?
17:50:47 [IanH]: ack Ivan
17:50:47 [Ivan]: ack Ivan
17:50:48 [Carsten]: Ian: bijan is not here to argue that we do not need it; in the meantime, we can ping people to help us
17:51:24 [Carsten]: Ivan: according to GRDDL, the transformation is not necessarily in XSLT; but all known implementations are XSLT
17:51:34 [IanH]: q?
17:51:43 [Zakim]: +Alan
17:51:43 [alanr]: q+
17:51:49 [IanH]: q?
17:52:43 [alanr]: ack alanr
17:52:49 [Carsten]: Alan: you can be conforming in the you return a generated XSLT; but we don't need a server that does the computation
17:52:56 [Carsten]: Sandro: IMHO, this is cheating
17:53:10 [IanH]: q?
17:53:13 [Carsten]: Alan: the server would be hosted at W3C
17:53:25 [Carsten]: Sandro: bad if you are behind firewall
17:53:37 [IanH]: q?
17:53:41 [Carsten]: Ivan: a GRDDL implementation might cache the transformation (?)
17:54:08 [alanr]: good point. I concur that it doesn't work to use the trick.
17:54:17 [Carsten]: Jeremy: I may not want to send my data over the internet to W3C
17:54:25 [JeremyCarroll]: Also security issue with W3C server
17:54:49 [alanr]: q+
17:54:57 [IanH]: q?
17:55:03 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
17:55:03 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
17:55:04 [JeremyCarroll]: q+ to point of order, on I18N issue
17:55:08 [Carsten]: Ian: Do we want to have the discussion on n-ary datatypes today or wait for Bijan?
17:55:29 [Carsten]: Alan: we could at least review the feedback by Achille, Zhe, et al
17:55:46 [IanH]: q?
17:55:51 [alanr]: ack alanr
17:55:52 [IanH]: ack alanr
17:56:07 [IanH]: q?
17:56:14 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
17:56:14 [Zakim]: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to point of order, on I18N issue
17:56:15 [alanr]: I believe the consensus was that we didn't want to handle lang in XML literals
17:56:24 [alanr]: not well defined
17:56:30 [uli]: zakim, mute me
17:56:30 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
17:56:40 [IanH]: q?
17:56:42 [Carsten]: which issue is this please?
17:56:51 [alanr]: issue 71
17:57:09 [IanH]: q?
17:57:41 [Carsten]: Jeremy: XHTML would be embedded as HTML
17:57:54 [Carsten]: Ivan: this is more relevant for RDF core than for OWL WG
17:58:23 [JeremyCarroll]: Jeremy: the lang proposal does not address XML Literals, in particular XHTML embedded in OWL
17:59:01 [IanH]: q?
17:59:15 [IanH]: zakim, who is here?
17:59:15 [Zakim]: On the phone I see IanH, bmotik, MartinD (muted), pfps (muted), Carsten (muted), JeremyCarroll, uli (muted), Ratnesh, Achille, msmith, Zhe, MarkusK, Ivan, bcuencagrau (muted),
17:59:18 [Carsten]: Alan: zhe, jeremy and achille; feedback on easykeys and top/bottomrole
17:59:19 [Zakim]: ... calvanese (muted), Sandro, Alan
17:59:20 [Zakim]: On IRC I see calvanese, JeffP, MarkusK, Achille, Zhe, msmith, uli, bcuencagrau, bmotik, alanr, RRSAgent, Zakim, Ratnesh, Ivan, IanH, MartinD, JeremyCarroll, pfps, Carsten,
17:59:22 [Zakim]: ... trackbot-ng, sandro, ewallace
18:00:13 [Carsten]: Achille: easykeys is fine with us; top/bottomproperty we don't really see strong concrete usecases; Markus sent feedback; I still have mixed feelings
18:00:20 [IanH]: q?
18:01:08 [Carsten]: Ian: if you have implemented OWL DL, you have implemented top/bottomrole anyway in a certain sense
18:01:16 [alanr]: q+
18:01:17 [Carsten]: Ian: so there is no implementation as such
18:01:19 [IanH]: q?
18:01:47 [alanr]: e.g I can see forward chaining reasoners having this cost
18:02:01 [IanH]: q?
18:02:19 [Carsten]: Achille: the question is whether we should encourage people to use that, and whether this will have performance impacts
18:02:29 [Carsten]: Alan: curious as well as to whether it is a performance issue
18:02:39 [uli]: q+
18:02:42 [alanr]: ack alanr
18:02:45 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
18:02:45 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
18:02:49 [IanH]: q?
18:02:53 [IanH]: ack uli
18:03:00 [JeremyCarroll]: q+ to answer alan's forward chaining qu
18:03:09 [Carsten]: Uli: it's just syntactic sugar, no blowup
18:03:21 [alanr]: ok thanks
18:03:26 [uli]: zakim, mute me
18:03:26 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
18:03:26 [IanH]: q?
18:03:27 [Carsten]: uli: in practical cases, things may become a bit more tricky
18:03:35 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
18:03:35 [Zakim]: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to answer alan's forward chaining qu
18:03:38 [IanH]: q?
18:03:42 [Zakim]: -Alan
18:04:04 [Zakim]: +Alan_Ruttenberg
18:04:04 [bmotik_]: bmotik_ has joined #owl
18:04:04 [Achille]: q+
18:04:07 [Carsten]: jeremy: our experience is that forward chaining itself is inadequate, and the right mixture of forward- and backward-chaining is the solution
18:04:17 [IanH]: q?
18:04:56 [Carsten]: zhe: no doubt that easykeys is practical; top/bottomrole people can represent it anyway so I have no strong feeling as long as we do not put a rule in OWL-R
18:05:20 [IanH]: q?
18:05:21 [Carsten]: Ian: it could just not be in the profile
18:05:50 [Carsten]: Achille: question is: potential impact on profiles
18:06:12 [uli]: q+
18:06:20 [alanr]: bottom has some implication in classification, but gut is that it isn't onerous
18:06:23 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
18:06:23 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
18:06:28 [IanH]: q?
18:06:32 [IanH]: ack Achille
18:06:35 [IanH]: ack uli
18:06:37 [IanH]: q?
18:06:51 [Carsten]: uli: the main motivation for having top/bottomrole was not urgent use cases; it was more to have a symmetric treatment of classes and properties
18:07:19 [Carsten]: uli: I do not think we should encourage people to use it a lot
18:07:33 [IanH]: q?
18:07:39 [uli]: zakim, mute me
18:07:39 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
18:07:45 [alanr]: q+
18:08:03 [IanH]: q?
18:08:29 [Carsten]: Ian: we should give people a bit more time to think about it
18:09:02 [JeremyCarroll]: I am happy to resolve, with Zhe's rider not in OWL-R
18:09:11 [Carsten]: Alan: I would say sth stronger; there are no objections, except some fear of performance impact, but it seems we are close consensus to add those to OWL-DL
18:09:24 [Carsten]: s/close/close to/
18:09:45 [msmith]: +1 to add to DL now, consider for profiles
18:09:46 [Carsten]: STRAW POLL: add top/bottomproperty to OWL-DL, take actions to check profiles
18:09:47 [JeremyCarroll]: +1 (as long as not in OWL-R)
18:09:47 [Achille]: +1
18:09:49 [uli]: +1
18:09:51 [MarkusK]: +1 to add top/bottomProperty to OWL DL now
18:09:52 [Carsten]: +1
18:09:53 [MartinD]: +1
18:09:54 [Ivan]: +1
18:09:55 [Zhe]: +1
18:09:59 [alanr]: Add EasyKeys too, Carsten
18:10:00 [pfps]: +1 to add to DL, and let the profiles fall where they may
18:10:01 [bcuencagrau]: +1
18:10:01 [alanr]: +1
18:10:02 [JeffP]: +1
18:10:03 [calvanese]: +1
18:10:11 [IanH]: q?
18:10:17 [alanr]: ack alanr
18:10:18 [IanH]: ack alan
18:10:38 [Carsten]: Ian: discussion about n-ary datatypes
18:11:01 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
18:11:01 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
18:11:16 [JeremyCarroll]: uli fills Bijan's shoes!
18:11:25 [msmith]: proposal: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_proposal
18:11:43 [msmith]: use cases, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case
18:11:43 [Carsten]: Uli explains current proposal
18:12:22 [IanH]: q?
18:12:28 [Carsten]: q+
18:12:31 [alanr]: bunch of the use cases are constraints
18:12:35 [IanH]: q?
18:12:37 [Carsten]: zakim, unmute me
18:12:37 [Zakim]: Carsten should no longer be muted
18:12:56 [IanH]: q?
18:13:01 [IanH]: ack Carsten
18:13:27 [msmith]: carsten: confusing in the proposal. reals vs. algebraic reals
18:14:01 [msmith]: carsten: in owl 1.0 strings are required, they are not in this proposal. and its not clear how they'd fit
18:14:03 [Carsten]: zakim, mute me
18:14:03 [Zakim]: Carsten should now be muted
18:14:04 [pfps]: q+
18:14:23 [pfps]: q-
18:14:25 [IanH]: q?
18:14:28 [alanr]: q+
18:14:32 [Carsten]: uli: have to recheck algebraic reals
18:14:36 [IanH]: q?
18:14:56 [Carsten]: uli: as to factes, we just took the most obvious ones
18:15:04 [Carsten]: s/factes/facets/
18:15:29 [Carsten]: Alan asks for decidability when we put all things together
18:15:33 [IanH]: q?
18:15:40 [IanH]: ack alanr
18:15:42 [Carsten]: Uli: didn't we agree that this happens everywhere in OWL and we can live with it?
18:15:53 [Carsten]: Alan: this brings us out of OWL DL
18:15:57 [IanH]: q?
18:16:20 [IanH]: q?
18:16:20 [MarkusK]: Re greater than for strings: strings in XSD are indeed unordered as per spec, though this "not preclude other applications from treating strings as being ordered"
18:16:27 [MarkusK]: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#string
18:16:43 [Carsten]: Alan: is the idea to have non-structural restrictions?
18:16:47 [IanH]: q?
18:16:53 [Carsten]: q+
18:17:05 [Ivan]: q+
18:17:25 [IanH]: q?
18:17:34 [Carsten]: zakim, unmute me
18:17:34 [Zakim]: Carsten should no longer be muted
18:17:39 [IanH]: ack Carsten
18:18:32 [msmith]: alanr - in the current proposal, inequalities are for reals only
18:18:34 [IanH]: q?
18:18:37 [Carsten]: zakim, mute me
18:18:37 [Zakim]: Carsten should now be muted
18:18:50 [Carsten]: as long as they are all in the "required" part, no problem
18:18:54 [IanH]: q?
18:19:11 [Carsten]: exactly
18:19:38 [JeremyCarroll]: q+ to ask about other XSD types ..
18:19:41 [IanH]: q?
18:19:46 [Carsten]: Alan: so we just say that: if you use optional and combine them, you are not guaranteed to be decidable
18:19:51 [IanH]: ack Ivan
18:19:57 [uli]: zakim, mute me
18:19:57 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
18:20:10 [Carsten]: Ivan: I am lost on how to express all that in RDF
18:20:29 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
18:20:29 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
18:20:45 [msmith]: q+ on mathml
18:20:56 [Carsten]: Uli: one of the various issues we have to address if people like the proposal in general
18:21:00 [JeremyCarroll]: q- on
18:21:00 [IanH]: q?
18:21:03 [JeremyCarroll]: q- mathml
18:21:12 [msmith]: q+ to respond on mathml
18:22:11 [IanH]: ack JeremyCarroll
18:22:11 [Zakim]: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to ask about other XSD types ..
18:22:35 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
18:22:35 [Zakim]: uli was not muted, uli
18:22:48 [Carsten]: Jeremy: how does the proposal constrain the interaction between these predicates and the XSD types
18:23:15 [IanH]: q?
18:23:25 [Carsten]: Uli: it doesn't constrain; as long as you use the required ones, you will be fine. When you use user-defined ones, it's your own responsibility
18:24:00 [Carsten]: Jeremy: we should encourage ontology designers to use mathematically more clean datatypes like real and integer, but not machine datatypes like byte and float
18:24:06 [Carsten]: Uli: yes
18:24:16 [JeremyCarroll]: ^we should^is this proposal that we should^
18:24:50 [uli]: zakim, mute me
18:24:50 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
18:24:56 [IanH]: q?
18:25:02 [IanH]: ack msmith
18:25:02 [Zakim]: msmith, you wanted to respond on mathml
18:25:05 [IanH]: q?
18:25:44 [Carsten]: mike: bijan left this open until there is support for the proposal by the group
18:25:56 [Carsten]: (this = RDF mapping)
18:26:05 [Ivan]: q+
18:26:08 [IanH]: q?
18:26:21 [uli]: zakim, unmute me
18:26:21 [Zakim]: uli should no longer be muted
18:26:41 [Carsten]: strawpoll formulation?
18:26:51 [sandro]: PROPOSED: Encourage Bijan and Uli to go off and do more work on ....
18:27:20 [uli]: zakim, mute me
18:27:20 [Zakim]: uli should now be muted
18:27:35 [msmith]: ivan, I don't really understand what the RDF rqmts might be. if you could send me an email outlining them, it'd help.
18:27:36 [Ivan]: +1
18:27:36 [JeremyCarroll]: -1
18:27:37 [pfps]: +1 (half a datatype, half a datatype, half a datatype onward)
18:27:38 [Carsten]: STRAWPOLL: carry on with n-ary datatypes?
18:27:39 [JeffP]: +1
18:27:40 [alanr]: 0
18:27:41 [Achille]: 0
18:27:41 [Carsten]: +1
18:27:42 [MarkusK]: +1
18:27:42 [msmith]: +1
18:27:44 [MartinD]: +1
18:27:44 [JeremyCarroll]: -1
18:27:47 [sandro]: +1
18:27:48 [Zhe]: 0 (need more time to understand)
18:27:52 [calvanese]: +1
18:27:55 [bcuencagrau]: +1
18:27:59 [Carsten]: explanation from Jeremy?
18:28:12 [Carsten]: yes
18:28:17 [Carsten]: I would be interested to know
18:28:45 [Carsten]: Jeremy: HP was very opposed; I can re-consult with colleagues to check; looks better now
18:29:04 [JeremyCarroll]: ^looks better now^not that much better^
18:29:08 [uli]: yes
18:29:23 [Carsten]: STRAWPOLL: should n-ary datatypes include optional datatype + predicates?
18:29:34 [Carsten]: +1
18:29:36 [JeremyCarroll]: ACTION: Jeremy clarify HP position on n-ary datatypes
18:29:36 [trackbot-ng]: Created ACTION-146 - Clarify HP position on n-ary datatypes [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2008-05-07].
18:29:40 [alanr]: 0
18:29:42 [Zhe]: 0
18:29:45 [bcuencagrau]: 0
18:29:46 [MartinD]: 0
18:29:46 [calvanese]: +1
18:29:46 [Ivan]: 0
18:29:47 [MarkusK]: +1
18:29:47 [Achille]: 0
18:29:48 [JeffP]: +1
18:29:49 [pfps]: +1 (minus some very small epsilon)
18:29:50 [sandro]: 0
18:29:51 [msmith]: +1
18:29:52 [JeremyCarroll]: 0
18:29:58 [uli]: zakim, mute me
18:29:58 [Zakim]: uli was already muted, uli
18:30:56 [Carsten]: Alan: a crucial point seems to be the RDF mapping
18:30:57 [sandro]: zakim, list attendees
18:30:57 [Zakim]: As of this point the attendees have been IanH, bmotik, MartinD, pfps, bcuencagrau, Carsten, Alan, uli, JeremyCarroll, Ivan, Ratnesh, Achille, msmith, Zhe, MarkusK, Sandro,
18:31:01 [Zakim]: ... calvanese, Alan_Ruttenberg
18:31:04 [Zhe]: thanks
18:31:05 [Ivan]: bye everybody
18:31:06 [alanr]: thanks Ian!
18:31:07 [MarkusK]: bye
18:31:08 [Zakim]: -bmotik
18:31:09 [Zakim]: -MarkusK
18:31:10 [calvanese]: bye
18:31:11 [Zakim]: -Ivan
18:31:12 [Zakim]: -msmith
18:31:12 [Zakim]: -Achille
18:31:13 [MartinD]: bye
18:31:13 [Zakim]: -Ratnesh
18:31:13 [Zakim]: -Zhe
18:31:14 [Ratnesh]: bye
18:31:15 [Zakim]: -calvanese
18:31:15 [JeffP]: bye
18:31:17 [Zakim]: -IanH
18:31:17 [uli]: bye
18:31:17 [Zakim]: -Alan_Ruttenberg
18:31:19 [Zakim]: -MartinD
18:31:20 [sandro]: Carsten, hang on 3 minutes for the minutes to be ready for you?>
18:31:21 [Zakim]: -Carsten
18:31:23 [Zakim]: -bcuencagrau
18:31:26 [Zakim]: -Sandro
18:31:50 [IanH]: Carsten: you still there?
18:31:52 [Zakim]: -JeremyCarroll
18:31:54 [Carsten]: Can anybody pls help me in moving the minutes to where they belong?
18:31:59 [IanH]: Yes
18:32:06 [Carsten]: Ian: yes, but only IRC, not phone
18:32:07 [IanH]: Sandro is doing this I think
18:32:14 [IanH]: IRC is enough
18:32:21 [Zakim]: -uli
18:32:22 [sandro]: Present: IanH, bmotik, MartinD, pfps, bcuencagrau, Carsten, Alan, uli, JeremyCarroll, Ivan, Ratnesh, Achille, msmith, Zhe, MarkusK, Sandro, calvanese, Alan_Ruttenberg
18:32:33 [IanH]: We need some magic invocation that I always forget
18:32:34 [Zakim]: -pfps
18:32:35 [Zakim]: SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
18:32:36 [Zakim]: Attendees were IanH, bmotik, MartinD, pfps, bcuencagrau, Carsten, Alan, uli, JeremyCarroll, Ivan, Ratnesh, Achille, msmith, Zhe, MarkusK, Sandro, calvanese, Alan_Ruttenberg
18:32:48 [IanH]: Sandro?
18:32:54 [sandro]: Yes, doing it, IanH
18:32:59 [Carsten]: thanks, sandro
18:33:01 [IanH]: Thanks
18:33:38 [MartinD]: MartinD has left #OWL
18:33:49 [sandro]: Okay. http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.04.30/Minutes is ready for editing, Carsten.
18:42:38 [uli]: uli has left #owl
18:45:51 [msmith]: msmith has left #owl
19:24:19 [JeremyCarroll]: JeremyCarroll has left #owl
21:33:05 [Zakim]: Zakim has left #owl