See also: IRC log
<ChrisW> sandro, nothing on the list
<ChrisW> did our reservation run out?
<csma> what can we do if we do not have a telecon booked?
<sandro> No -- it looks like the bridge itself is okay -- just the IRC part is broken.
<csma> does that mean that we just have to call with the usual code?
<sandro> We're all set.
<ChrisW> christian, we're in
<ChrisW> looks ok
<csma> yep, coming
<csma> Scribe: Hassan Ait-Kaci
<csma> scribenick: Hassan
Sandro joking ...
No minutes from last meeting ... Mike Dean is not here and was scribing
<AxelPolleres> I have one hour only., please move DTB forward.
Agenda amendment - future of WG?
<AxelPolleres> ... in the agenda.
Agenda amendment - hak to talk about his PS -> XML tool
<csma> next item
<csma> next item
Axel update about F2F10
Sandro 11 people have registered
Axel to take questions on F2F10 logistics ...
Axel - taxi is best option - see the wiki page
<csma> next item
I have pbs with my phone line ...
<AdrianP> Zakim who is on the phone
<AdrianP> added test cases - we need to discuss it
<csma> next item
No news from XQuery group
<AdrianP> no news.
<csma> list agenda
Axel: PS syntax discussion to
make it less verbose
... discusses his proposal
Sandro: MK has strong feelings about this issue, but he is not here and has no proxy present
CSMA- I think he would not object to one of the proposal
Sandro - which one?
Axel - I think MK is against macros for IRIs
Axel - he also feels it is too complex
<csma> Michael wrote: "My strong preference is to limit context sensitivity or completely
<csma> eliminate it, but in the spirit of reconciliation I am also willing to go
<csma> with majority :-)
Axel - but I (Axel) do not think it is (the grammar for it)
Context sensitivity of macro expansion for ^^ is apparently his worry
Axel - CURIEs are not a general macro definition facility
Sandro: views on the PS
... thinks is ok if it changes after last call
<AdrianP> depends if there are tools which map from the PS to the concrete syntax
<sandro> csma: is there anyone who would object to option-a or option-b in Axel's e-mail?
CSMA - does anyone object to Axel's proposals
<sandro> axel: I would strongly prefer a
<sandro> csma: write "a" or "b"
Straw poll for A or B
<DaveReynolds> a (but I don't really care)
Gary - prefers a
<DaveReynolds> Jos said b in his email
<sandro> PROPOSED: Presentation Syntax will follow option 1a in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008May/0042 (allowing <iri> for Const)
<LeoraMorgenstern> Yes, I'm looking at it now --- didn't see it before
<LeoraMorgenstern> no objection
<sandro> PROPOSED: Presentation Syntax will follow option 1a in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008May/0042 (where Const ::= ANGLEBRACKIRI | CURIE | STRING^^ANGLEBRACKIRI | STRING^^CURIE )
<sandro> RESOLVED: Presentation Syntax will follow option 1a in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008May/0042 (where Const ::= ANGLEBRACKIRI | CURIE | STRING^^ANGLEBRACKIRI | STRING^^CURIE )
<sandro> csma: any formal abstains?
<sandro> csma: none.
<ChrisW> same email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008May/0042.html
Axel: make our choice of
functions compatible with the sort of style follwoed by Xpath
... need to come up with prefixes that are missing
Axel: also error-handling ???
<AxelPolleres> PROPOSE: We define own namespace prefixes
<AxelPolleres> PREFIX("pred", "http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-builtin-predicates#").
<AxelPolleres> PREFIX("func", "http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-builtin-functions#").
Sandro: what about using a single rif prefix for everything?
Axel: not thought about, not discussed before
<sandro> Sandro: http://www.w3.org/2007/rif
<AdrianP> a default target name space "rif" which might be omitted is helpful
+1 with Sandro
CSMA: this looks simple - what's wrong with it?
Sandro: perhaps some cases could
be thought where we may want it
... it being more than one prefix
<sandro> rifop:sum and rifpred:sum
<sandro> rif:sumFunc and rif:sumPref
Are predicate boolean functions?
Sandro: do we need to decide right now? Can we proceed for now and settle this detail later?
<Harold> What about: Prefix("pred" "http://www.w3.org/2007/rif/builtins/predicates#")
CSMA: MK objected to having several prefixes
Axel: ok so what does it mean now?
CSMA: there are two issues one prefix for rif and others for other constructs
<AxelPolleres> +1 to allow PREFIX only in the preamble of a ruleset.
MK: explains his views
<DaveReynolds> Surely in the XML there would be no curies anyway?
MK: use it in directives in the PS
CSMA: there are two issues what prefix we use and how do we declare them
MK: the syntax is going to be the
... it will only appear as a directive
<sandro> PROPOSED: (on Axel's point 4) go with PREFIX as Axel proposes, as long as in the presentation syntax it is in a pre-amble, as a directive, so it is not easily confused with a fact.
<sandro> PROPOSED: (on Axel's point 4) go with PREFIX as Axel proposes, as long as in the presentation syntax it is in a pre-amble, as a directive, so it is not easily confused with a fact (and using space instead of comma).
<Harold> PROPOSED: (on Axel's point 4) go with Prefix as Axel proposes (whitespace between prefix name and uri), as long as in the presentation syntax it is in a pre-amble, as a directive, so it is not easily confused with a fact.
<sandro> PRefix -- to throw a bone to the PR community.
Dave Reynolds: need to clarify that this does not apply to the XML syntax
<sandro> DaveReynolds: this is only in the presentation syntax. it does not in any way carry over to XML.
MK: will guve a translation table
Dave Reynolds: no it should not ne there at all
<AxelPolleres> As we also used 'External' I am also fine with 'Prefix'
<sandro> Sandro: oh, right -- the prefix information is lost when you translate PS to XML.
MK: ok ...
<sandro> PROPOSED: (on Axel's point 4) go with Prefix as Axel proposes (whitespace between prefix name and uri), as long as in the presentation syntax it is in a pre-amble, as a directive, so it is not easily confused with a fact.
<AxelPolleres> 'External' is like that
Everyone: discussion on case sensitivity
<sandro> Sandro: as long as we can have it be case insensitive or something. I don't want to rule out matchin N3 and SPARQL at some point.
<sandro> Sandro: IE -- we're talking about this draft, -- not setting it for all time.
<sandro> RESOLVED: (on Axel's point 4) go with Prefix as Axel proposes (whitespace between prefix name and uri), as long as in the presentation syntax it is in a pre-amble, as a directive, so it is not easily confused with a fact.
MK: BTW in XML it would be translated as an entity - it would make things easier
Sandro: we should not worry about this that much
MK: still prefers entities
<AxelPolleres> I can do an update of the DTB document by the F2F, or by next friday.
<AxelPolleres> gotta rush now
<sandro> Sandro: how about go with axel's 2-a for now, until/unless some problem appears.
<AxelPolleres> fine to fo with 2)a) for the moment.
<sandro> ACTION: axel update DTB according to today's decisions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/13-rif-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-478 - Update DTB according to today's decisions [on Axel Polleres - due 2008-05-20].
CSMA: anything to add regarding DTB?
<csma> list agenda
CSMA: discusses consensus with Sandro closing issue 52 keeping the current draft of BLD as it is
this means that other issues can be moved out of BLD
CSMA: Any discussion?
<sandro> PROPOSED: to close issue 52  per the current version of BLD draft, with the understanding that issues 33  and 39  are movedout of BLD critical path as a consequence.
Dave Reynolds: discusses issues with multiple conflicting profiles
CSMA: see action on Jos
<Harold> IRC chat from last week: http://www.w3.org/2008/05/06-rif-minutes.html
<sandro> PROPOSED: to close issue 52 per the current version of BLD draft, with the understanding that issues 33 and 39, and the new issue to be raised about profile mixing, are moved out of BLD critical path as a consequence.
<sandro> PROPOSED: to close issue 52 per the current version of BLD and SWC drafts, with the understanding that issues 33 and 39, and the new issue to be raised about profile mixing, are moved out of BLD critical path as a consequence.
Dave Reynolds: worries about conflicting multiple profiles
Sandro: perhaps for now just issue an error
Dave: ok - I'll go along with that for now
Sandro: similar issues are being discussed in other WGs - we should coordinate with them
<sandro> RESOLVED: to close issue 52 per the current version of BLD and SWC drafts, with the understanding that issues 33 and 39, and the new issue to be raised about profile mixing, are moved out of BLD critical path as a consequence.
<csma> next item
<csma> next item
CSMA: reviews open issues about
... pls everybody should review that list and make all comments ASAP before F2F10
MK: metadata is the biggest issue left I think
CSMA: what about data type extensibility?
MK: yes I will take the issue as part of my action on compliance
CSMA: what to ensure that when this list is closed everything will be fine
MK: thinks of addding a reader's
orientation map to ease navigation
... this should be on the BLD todo list
Sandro: we should draft it
... agree on the idea, but not sure who's going to do it. I started looking into it
MK: also need discuss dialect extension (perhaps in the compliance issues document)
Sandro: difference between
documents and web page
... people get mistaken about document authorship
<sandro> Sandro: this roadmap document well be cited in papers as RIF.
Dave Reynolds: this issues list seems to lack some regarding on XML syntax (naming etc...)
CSMA: it is in the list
CSMA: there are 4 issues at the
bottom of the list on those issues
... XML syntax being not complete is not listed as issue - perhaps it should be listed explicitly
Harold: perhaps this is the last thing to do?
<csma> next topic
<csma> next item
Future on the WG? Sandro?
Sandro: discusses his email on this point overviewing possibilities
ChrisW: when do we need to decide that?
Sandro: we could discuss it now in the mailing list
CSMA: a resolution for next week is more sensible
Sandro: everyone needs to consult with their management regarding continuation
Dave Reynolds: asks about the proposal details
Sandro: the WG can only give a recommendation
<Harold> "The big question for each of you is whether this will work for you and
<Harold> your organization. Will you stay involved, contributing to this effort
<Harold> for another year?"
+1 on adjourning
scribe next week: Dave Reynolds
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/thinks/think/ Succeeded: s/erro/error/ Succeeded: s/use/using/ Succeeded: s/Evry/Every/ Succeeded: s/drafy/draft/ Succeeded: s/wnat/what/ Succeeded: s/disuss/discuss/ Succeeded: s/nee/need/ Succeeded: s/theor/their/ Found Scribe: Hassan Ait-Kaci Found ScribeNick: Hassan Present: Sandro ChrisW LeoraMorgenstern csma AdrianP_(muted) AxelPolleres Harold DaveReynolds Gary_Hallmark Hassan_Ait-Kaci Mark_Proctor Michael_(late) Regrets: MichaelKifer JosDeBruijn WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting Got date from IRC log name: 13 May 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/05/13-rif-minutes.html People with action items: according axel dtb update WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]