IRC log of owl on 2008-05-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:53:01 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #owl
16:53:01 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:53:09 [Elisa]
Elisa has joined #owl
16:53:12 [Rinke]
RRSAgent, make records public
16:53:19 [Rinke]
Zakim, this will be owl
16:53:19 [Zakim]
ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 53 minutes ago
16:55:07 [JeremyCarroll]
JeremyCarroll has joined #owl
16:55:53 [ivan]
ivan has joined #owl
16:56:07 [JeremyCarroll]
JeremyCarroll has changed the topic to:
16:56:07 [alanr]
alanr has joined #owl
16:56:22 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, this will be OWL
16:56:22 [Zakim]
ok, JeremyCarroll; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 56 minutes ago
16:56:52 [bmotik]
bmotik has joined #owl
16:56:55 [Rinke]
RRSAgent, pointer?
16:56:55 [RRSAgent]
16:57:23 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started
16:57:30 [Zakim]
16:57:34 [ewallace]
ewallace has joined #owl
16:57:35 [bmotik]
Zakim, ??P14 is me
16:57:35 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
16:57:41 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
16:57:41 [Zakim]
sorry, bmotik, muting is not permitted when only one person is present
16:57:50 [Zakim]
16:57:54 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
16:57:54 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
16:58:00 [Zakim]
16:58:07 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
16:58:07 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
16:58:09 [Zakim]
16:58:09 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, ??P16 is me
16:58:09 [Zakim]
+JeremyCarroll; got it
16:58:14 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, mute me
16:58:14 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should now be muted
16:58:19 [Zakim]
+ +31.20.525.aaaa
16:58:22 [JeremyCarroll]
16:58:25 [Rinke]
zakim, aaaa is me
16:58:26 [Zakim]
+Rinke; got it
16:58:41 [ivan]
zakim, mute me
16:58:41 [Zakim]
Ivan should now be muted
16:58:45 [MartinD]
MartinD has joined #OWL
16:58:58 [pfps]
pfps has joined #owl
16:59:10 [Zakim]
16:59:16 [Zhe]
Zhe has joined #owl
16:59:16 [Zakim]
16:59:18 [JeffP]
JeffP has joined #owl
16:59:30 [Zakim]
+ +0190827aabb
16:59:32 [Zakim]
16:59:40 [MartinD]
zakim, aabb is me
16:59:40 [Zakim]
+MartinD; got it
16:59:43 [Zakim]
16:59:47 [MartinD]
zakim, mute me
16:59:47 [Zakim]
MartinD should now be muted
17:00:36 [m_schnei]
m_schnei has joined #owl
17:00:44 [msmith]
msmith has joined #owl
17:00:56 [alanr]
I see 1pm exactly. my time right?
17:01:00 [uli]
uli has joined #owl
17:01:12 [sandro]
alanr, sorry for late regrets (just e-mailed)
17:01:15 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.408.aacc
17:01:21 [Zakim]
17:01:30 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
17:01:30 [RRSAgent]
17:01:31 [Zakim]
17:01:43 [sandro]
alanr, I'll wikifiy the minutes later tonight.
17:02:00 [alanr]
ok, thanks sandro
17:02:03 [Achille]
Achille has joined #owl
17:02:16 [m_schnei]
zakim,Torbjorn is me
17:02:16 [Zakim]
+m_schnei; got it
17:02:27 [Zakim]
17:02:34 [uli]
zakim, ??P26 is me
17:02:34 [Zakim]
+uli; got it
17:02:45 [Zakim]
17:02:50 [uli]
zakim, mute me
17:02:50 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
17:02:55 [Rinke]
scribenick: Zhe
17:02:55 [Zhe]
ScibeNick: Zhe
17:02:59 [Achille]
Zakim, IBM is Achille
17:02:59 [Zakim]
+Achille; got it
17:03:07 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:03:08 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:03:38 [Zakim]
17:03:59 [JeffP]
zakim, qhreul is me
17:03:59 [Zakim]
+JeffP; got it
17:04:33 [alanr]
zakim, who is here?
17:04:33 [Zakim]
On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Elisa_Kendall, JeremyCarroll (muted), Ivan (muted), Rinke, IanH (muted), Alan, MartinD (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, Evan_Wallace, msmith,
17:04:36 [Zakim]
... m_schnei (muted), Zhe, uli (muted), Achille, JeffP
17:04:37 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Achille, uli, msmith, m_schnei, JeffP, Zhe, pfps, MartinD, ewallace, bmotik, alanr, ivan, JeremyCarroll, Elisa, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, IanH, sandro, trackbot-ng
17:04:55 [Zhe]
Topic: accept previous minutes
17:05:06 [pfps]
minutes are not great
17:05:09 [Zhe]
PROPOSED: accept previous previous minutes
17:05:31 [Carsten]
Carsten has joined #owl
17:05:42 [msmith]
there was a lot of zakim-ness, but they were sufficient for me to understand what I missed.
17:05:44 [pfps]
potentially out-of-order stuff
17:06:09 [pfps]
also strange blue right parenthesis
17:06:10 [Zhe]
alanr: Jeff, need more work?
17:06:26 [Zhe]
JeffP: tried to incorporate Peter's comments
17:06:28 [pfps]
around issue-124 start
17:06:49 [Zhe]
alanr: consider it not ready
17:07:01 [alanr]
PROPOSED: Thank Jeremy Carroll for his exemplary service to the WG and wish him well in his new employment
17:07:07 [pfps]
the scribe should really be looking for problems related to the non-synchronous nature of the meeting
17:07:10 [Zhe]
alanr: Jeremy's last meeting. we all thank him!
17:07:11 [m_schnei]
17:07:13 [pfps]
17:07:16 [Rinke]
17:07:18 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, unmute me
17:07:18 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should no longer be muted
17:07:19 [alanr]
17:07:21 [JeffP]
17:07:23 [ivan]
17:07:24 [bmotik]
17:07:25 [msmith]
17:07:27 [IanH]
17:07:27 [uli]
17:07:29 [Elisa]
17:07:30 [ewallace]
17:07:30 [Zhe]
17:07:31 [pfps]
no - you can vote for yourself
17:07:32 [Zhe]
17:07:40 [alanr]
RESOLVED: Thanks Jeremy Carroll for his exemplary service to the WG and wish him well in his new employment
17:07:41 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, mute me
17:07:41 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should now be muted
17:07:42 [Zakim]
17:07:53 [Carsten]
zakim, p11 is me
17:07:53 [Zakim]
sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named 'p11'
17:08:00 [Carsten]
zakim, ??p11 is me
17:08:00 [Zakim]
+Carsten; got it
17:08:14 [Zhe]
Topic: Action items status
17:08:25 [Zhe]
alanr: pending review actions
17:08:28 [Carsten]
zakim, mute me
17:08:28 [Zakim]
Carsten should now be muted
17:08:45 [Zhe]
Action 143 Put editorial note in profiles document
17:09:06 [Zhe]
postpone action 42
17:09:31 [msmith]
that's fine, I already emailed sandro about it
17:09:42 [Zhe]
Action 43 Develop scripts to extract test cases from wiki. closed.
17:09:54 [Zhe]
Action 139 Sheperd/coordinate the patching process (per ISSUE 119)
17:10:12 [Zhe]
IanH: good progress made.
17:10:45 [Zhe]
... don't mind leaving it open
17:10:59 [Zhe]
alanr: estimation?
17:11:08 [Zhe]
IanH: something before next F2F
17:11:09 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:11:09 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:11:25 [Zhe]
m_schnei: itself can be closed
17:11:36 [Zhe]
... 109 should be left open
17:11:51 [Zhe]
... expect to have the first draft somewhere in June
17:12:08 [Zhe]
... so we have enough time before F2F. I am working on it.
17:12:16 [Rinke]
17:12:24 [Zhe]
17:12:50 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:12:50 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:12:58 [Zhe]
Topic: Issues
17:13:11 [Zhe]
Issue 21 and Issue 24 Imports and Versioning
17:13:13 [IanH]
zakim, unmute me
17:13:13 [Zakim]
IanH should no longer be muted
17:13:21 [Zhe]
IanH chair this
17:13:46 [Zhe]
IanH: already have text based on Peter, Boris, AlanR's discussion
17:13:53 [Zhe]
IanH: alanr has some issues
17:14:07 [alanr]
17:14:40 [IanH]
17:14:46 [alanr]
17:14:48 [Zhe]
alanr: first one, not importing multi version of the same ontology
17:15:07 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:15:07 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
17:15:08 [alanr]
17:15:23 [Zhe]
... second, owl:incompatibleWith
17:15:24 [bmotik]
Alan, can you please repeat the first point?
17:15:26 [IanH]
17:15:48 [m_schnei]
17:15:51 [pfps]
q+ to talk about timing
17:15:52 [IanH]
17:15:56 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:15:56 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:15:56 [Zhe]
IanH: not clear that we can resolve it now
17:16:02 [alanr]
first point in 0176.html
17:16:16 [Zhe]
m_schnei: issue 21 about import, not clear to me
17:16:33 [bmotik]
17:16:34 [Rinke]
my questions were adequately answered by Boris' answer
17:16:41 [Rinke]
to my email
17:17:00 [pfps]
17:17:02 [alanr]
17:17:04 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:17:04 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:17:06 [Zhe]
... if two onotlogies are marked incompatible,
17:17:10 [IanH]
17:17:25 [JeremyCarroll]
q- m_schnei
17:17:28 [Zhe]
bmotik: answer to alanr's comment
17:18:08 [Zhe]
... it is better to say nothing when multi version imported
17:18:15 [JeremyCarroll]
+1 to emphasising positives
17:18:21 [m_schnei]
issue 24 is actually: "Make it be that importing two ontologies which are noted to be incompatible leads to an
17:18:22 [m_schnei]
inconsistent ontology."
17:18:31 [Zhe]
... current spec says nothing when multi version imported
17:18:44 [alanr]
17:18:47 [alanr]
17:18:51 [alanr]
ack bmotik
17:19:00 [IanH]
17:19:05 [Zhe]
IanH: all versions are treated as advisory, rather than formal
17:19:36 [Zhe]
bmotik: you get the union of multi versions. spec provides no mechanism for detecting this
17:19:43 [IanH]
17:19:45 [alanr]
17:19:54 [Zhe]
... you can implement on top of OWL 2.
17:20:05 [m_schnei]
17:20:17 [IanH]
17:20:25 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:21:08 [Zhe]
bmotik: i implemented what I thought we agreed.
17:22:25 [Zhe]
IanH: alanr, are you arguing about what you want, or the process
17:22:26 [IanH]
17:23:19 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:23:19 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:23:21 [Zhe]
alanr: at the workshop, we did not have a solution
17:23:27 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:23:27 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:23:33 [Zhe]
... but peter sent a followup email
17:23:55 [alanr]
An ontology SHOULD NOT import multiple versions of the same ontology,
17:23:56 [alanr]
i.e., different ontology documents with the same ontology URI but that
17:23:56 [alanr]
do not share an owl:versionInfo annotation value
17:23:59 [Zhe]
IanH: alanr, you like the SPEC to include precise statement on what will happen if two versions of the same ontology are imported
17:24:04 [Zhe]
... ?
17:24:47 [JeremyCarroll]
q+ to respond to SHOULD
17:25:00 [IanH]
17:25:14 [Zhe]
alanr: like to say what peter said that ontology should not import multi versions
17:25:29 [Zhe]
bmotik: spec is precise on that.
17:25:33 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:25:33 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:26:13 [alanr]
17:26:18 [pfps]
q+ to respond to inconsistent issue
17:26:38 [bmotik]
17:26:48 [alanr]
although, I am not suggesting now necessarily that there is inconsistent. This would require more work.
17:26:50 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:26:50 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:26:53 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, unmute me
17:26:53 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should no longer be muted
17:26:57 [IanH]
17:27:00 [ewallace]
are different versions of the same ontology implicitly incompatibleWith each other?
17:27:01 [msmith]
For SHOULD NOT, see bullet 4.
17:27:03 [IanH]
ack m_schnei
17:27:09 [IanH]
17:27:16 [m_schnei]
17:27:20 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:27:20 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:27:28 [Zakim]
17:27:28 [Zakim]
17:27:30 [Zakim]
17:27:32 [Zakim]
17:27:35 [Rinke]
oh dear
17:27:41 [IanH]
17:27:44 [Zhe]
JeremyCarroll: import TF is not decisive
17:27:59 [alanr]
17:28:10 [Zhe]
IanH: to be fair, everyone thought we agreed. and implemented what agreed.
17:28:10 [IanH]
17:28:13 [bmotik]
I got kicked off the phone line and can't dial back in
17:28:17 [Rinke]
me too
17:28:42 [pfps]
is W3C Bristol link down?
17:28:48 [IanH]
what are the symptoms?
17:28:51 [JeffP]
I am still in
17:28:53 [Rinke]
I'm calling france
17:28:56 [JeremyCarroll]
I am coming through US
17:28:56 [IanH]
I am via Bristol with no problems
17:28:58 [alanr]
17:28:58 [Zakim]
17:29:04 [bmotik]
Zakim, ??p4 is me
17:29:04 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:29:04 [JeremyCarroll]
17:29:07 [JeffP]
using the UK number I mean
17:29:08 [bmotik]
I'm back
17:29:08 [Carsten]
kicked out by France as well
17:29:38 [Zhe]
keep trying
17:29:39 [JeremyCarroll]
Boris redialled a few times but got back in
17:29:40 [IanH]
Keep trying -- works eventually
17:29:57 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, mutes me
17:29:57 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'mutes me', JeremyCarroll
17:30:02 [alanr]
zakim, who is here?
17:30:02 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Elisa_Kendall, JeremyCarroll, Ivan (muted), IanH, Alan, MartinD (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, Evan_Wallace, msmith, m_schnei (muted), Zhe, Achille, JeffP,
17:30:02 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, mute me
17:30:06 [Zakim]
... bmotik
17:30:07 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Carsten, Achille, uli, msmith, m_schnei, JeffP, Zhe, pfps, MartinD, ewallace, bmotik, alanr, ivan, JeremyCarroll, Elisa, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, IanH, sandro,
17:30:09 [Zakim]
... trackbot-ng
17:30:09 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should now be muted
17:30:10 [JeremyCarroll]
17:30:23 [JeremyCarroll]
Rinke Carsten
17:30:24 [IanH]
17:30:31 [uli]
I am trying to come back...
17:30:41 [Rinke]
me too
17:30:55 [Zhe]
IanH: Jeremy said that SHOULD is the right thing to say
17:31:00 [Zakim]
17:31:03 [uli]'s occupied
17:31:04 [Zhe]
pfps: agree with Jeremy
17:31:07 [Carsten]
zakim, ??p11 is me
17:31:07 [Zakim]
+Carsten; got it
17:31:13 [Carsten]
zakim, mute me
17:31:13 [Zakim]
Carsten should now be muted
17:31:22 [bmotik]
17:31:26 [Zhe]
pfps: happy with the way it is. Put SHOULD in to make some folks happy
17:31:30 [uli]
17:31:36 [Zakim]
17:31:38 [Zakim]
17:31:39 [Zhe]
... right now, SHOULD is not there
17:31:40 [Rinke]
I'm back!
17:31:48 [uli]
zakim, ??P13 is me
17:31:48 [Zakim]
+uli; got it
17:31:52 [ivan]
17:31:53 [IanH]
17:31:54 [uli]
zakim, mute me
17:31:55 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
17:32:02 [IanH]
ack bmotik
17:32:03 [pfps]
17:32:09 [alanr]
17:32:11 [alanr]
17:32:12 [Rinke]
Should should make me happy
17:32:17 [Zhe]
bmotik: sure. that is ok. if we can close the issue
17:32:17 [IanH]
17:32:19 [JeremyCarroll]
for me the should is quite ugly too ...
17:32:23 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:32:43 [IanH]
17:32:48 [alanr]
17:33:11 [Zhe]
IanH: think it is useful. maybe we can converge and resolve it
17:33:15 [IanH]
17:34:52 [Zhe]
alanr: think it is just editorial.
17:34:53 [IanH]
17:35:17 [Zhe]
... owl:incompatibleWith, shall we discuss it as a separate issue?
17:35:57 [m_schnei]
currently, AFAIU, all ontology properties are treated as annotations, in particular owl:incompatibleWith
17:36:16 [IanH]
17:36:16 [Zhe]
IanH: it is semantic free
17:36:34 [Zhe]
alanr: it carries some weight on what people think their tools should do
17:37:03 [IanH]
17:37:05 [bmotik]
17:37:05 [alanr]
17:37:06 [Rinke]
+1 to IanH on explaining the SHOULDs, MAYs and MUSTs
17:37:07 [Zhe]
IanH: like to have some text clarifying "SHOULD"
17:37:18 [JeremyCarroll]
17:37:20 [uli]
perhaps we can have a brief explanation that explain why this "should"
17:37:22 [Zhe]
... at least add a pointer.
17:37:32 [JeremyCarroll]
zakim, unmute me
17:37:32 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should no longer be muted
17:37:39 [alanr]
17:37:39 [uli]
e.g., that different version could lead to inconsistencies
17:37:40 [m_schnei]
distinguishing between model-theoretic "reasoning" semantics, and "usage" semantics
17:37:44 [IanH]
17:38:16 [Zhe]
bmotik: I changed the text. took out the offending paragraph. add "SHOULD NOT"...
17:38:26 [Zhe]
... hope it solves the problem
17:38:56 [IanH]
17:38:58 [bmotik]
17:38:59 [Zhe]
Jeremy: IanH raised a good point that SHOULD is advisory
17:39:06 [IanH]
17:39:20 [bmotik]
17:39:21 [bmotik]
17:39:35 [alanr]
but why should we say anything about what happens when you don't do a SHOULD
17:39:39 [alanr]
17:39:58 [JeremyCarroll]
17:40:01 [IanH]
17:40:08 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, mute me
17:40:08 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should now be muted
17:40:21 [Zhe]
bmotik: for SHOULD, MAY, ..., there is a disclaimer at the beginning
17:40:30 [IanH]
17:40:36 [IanH]
ack bmotik
17:40:39 [IanH]
17:40:45 [alanr]
nono not suggesting that!
17:40:56 [Zhe]
... against chaning model theory for incompatibleWith
17:41:10 [alanr]
17:41:14 [Rinke]
that would be great
17:41:14 [m_schnei]
i would also be against giving a model-theoretic semantics to owl:incompatibleWith
17:41:20 [IanH]
17:41:31 [pfps]
+1 to boris's suggestion
17:41:32 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:41:37 [Zhe]
alanr: don't want to change semantics as well
17:41:53 [m_schnei]
(but in OWL Full, this property of course *has* a model-theoretic semantics ;-))
17:42:32 [Zhe]
bmotik: prefer lower case and do a review. Later, change systematically
17:42:39 [JeremyCarroll]
I prefer that 'should' doesn't occur except as SHOULD
17:42:47 [IanH]
17:42:52 [Rinke]
+1 to JeremyCarroll
17:42:59 [ewallace]
If we know we mean SHOULD now lets say it
17:43:20 [JeremyCarroll]
17:43:22 [alanr]
17:43:25 [IanH]
17:43:25 [alanr]
17:43:26 [JeremyCarroll]
zakim, unmute me
17:43:26 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should no longer be muted
17:43:35 [alanr]
17:43:42 [alanr]
17:43:44 [Zhe]
JeremyCarrol: you can always rephrase "should"
17:43:58 [Zhe]
... make things simple for the readers
17:44:46 [IanH]
17:45:10 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, mute me
17:45:10 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should now be muted
17:45:23 [Zhe]
IanH: we all in agreement now?
17:45:25 [IanH]
17:45:42 [JeremyCarroll]
17:45:46 [Zhe]
alanr: bmotik, are you going to put something similar for incompatibleWith?
17:46:30 [pfps]
+1 to taking a vote :-)
17:46:37 [Rinke]
+1 to vote
17:47:14 [uli]
...and in this case?
17:47:20 [uli]
me too!
17:47:27 [Zhe]
IanH: are we voting on should => SHOULD,
17:47:33 [Zhe]
... or incompatibleWith?
17:47:42 [alanr]
resolve SHOULD NOT import multiple ontologies or owlIncompatibleWith
17:47:43 [Rinke]
I suggest we vote on the issues first
17:47:59 [JeremyCarroll]
+1 to caps or something
17:48:13 [ewallace]
+1 to caps
17:49:12 [IanH]
PROPOSED: spec should state that an ontology SHOULD not import two incompatible versions
17:49:22 [Rinke]
We have two official issues, let's vote on them separately.
17:49:25 [pfps]
17:49:34 [m_schnei]
17:49:43 [Rinke]
This is to resolve ISSUE-24 right?
17:49:45 [bmotik]
Proposed text: Furthermore, O should not import an ontology O' with a version URI vu if O contains an ontology annotation owl:incompatibleWith with the value vu.
17:49:58 [JeremyCarroll]
+0 to proposal
17:50:38 [IanH]
ROPOSED: spec should state that an ontology SHOULD NOT q?
17:50:43 [IanH]
17:51:00 [Zhe]
IanH: getting too much details in wording
17:51:08 [ivan]
+1 to Ian
17:51:10 [Carsten]
17:51:12 [Zhe]
... it would be better if you guys figure this out precisely offline
17:51:15 [Zhe]
17:51:15 [uli]
17:51:16 [JeffP]
+1 Ian
17:51:18 [alanr]
17:51:23 [m_schnei]
+1, this is a wording issue
17:51:35 [ewallace]
+1 on narrowly wordsmithing this res offline
17:52:09 [JeffP]
17:52:10 [Zhe]
IanH: enough discussion on this issue. come back next week
17:52:24 [m_schnei]
do we want an action on this?
17:52:35 [Zhe]
Issue 124 (newly open) The complement of a datarange is defined relative to the whole data domain
17:53:02 [Zhe]
alanr: consensus is this is how things are.
17:53:07 [m_schnei]
17:53:12 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:53:12 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:53:17 [alanr]
ack m_schnei
17:53:35 [Zhe]
m_schnei: bmotik's comments are valid. The only thing is
17:53:43 [m_schnei]
17:54:02 [bmotik]
17:54:03 [Zhe]
... we could have this thing in the primer.
17:54:27 [Zhe]
... suspect people will ask how to do complement on just the data type
17:54:29 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:54:29 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:54:41 [alanr]
PROPOSED: The complement of a datarange is defined relative to the whole data domain (close as resolved issue 124)
17:54:41 [bmotik]
17:54:50 [JeremyCarroll]
17:54:50 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:54:50 [alanr]
17:54:51 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:55:00 [JeremyCarroll]
Zakim, unmute me
17:55:00 [Zakim]
JeremyCarroll should no longer be muted
17:55:31 [Zhe]
alanr: m_schnei can put a comment in the primer
17:55:35 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:55:35 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:56:06 [m_schnei]
17:56:10 [uli]
17:56:15 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
17:56:15 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
17:56:15 [ewallace]
Need to advise users about this somewhere.
17:56:19 [Zhe]
JeremyCarroll: for OWL2 FULL, complementOf should be on the data type.
17:56:28 [alanr]
ack JeremyCarroll
17:56:35 [alanr]
ack m_schnei
17:56:56 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
17:56:56 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
17:57:00 [alanr]
ack uli
17:57:02 [uli]
zakim, ack me
17:57:02 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
17:57:04 [Zhe]
m_schnei. in owl full, if you take complement of xsd:integer, then you get owl:Thing minus xsd:integer
17:57:17 [bmotik]
17:57:23 [Zhe]
uli: this piece of advice perhaps is too detailed for primer
17:57:39 [m_schnei]
my example would be the same in OWL Full
17:57:40 [Zhe]
... should go somewhere indeed
17:57:43 [alanr]
cookbook ;-)
17:57:48 [ivan]
+1000 to Uli
17:58:00 [ivan]
17:58:04 [alanr]
17:58:11 [alanr]
ack bmotik
17:58:12 [uli]
zakim, mute me
17:58:13 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
17:58:13 [JeremyCarroll]
17:58:25 [JeremyCarroll]
_:x rdf:type rdfs:Datatype
17:58:25 [JeremyCarroll]
_:x owl:complementOf T(DR)
17:58:30 [alanr]
17:58:45 [IanH]
17:58:50 [alanr]
ack JeremyCarroll
17:59:25 [Zhe]
Zhe has joined #owl
17:59:34 [Zhe]
scribenick: Zhe
17:59:35 [IanH]
17:59:42 [IanH]
18:00:13 [IanH]
18:00:20 [alanr]
18:00:24 [JeremyCarroll]
(I am leaving now ... bye)
18:00:25 [Zhe]
alanr: time is past. let us continue on email
18:00:35 [ewallace]
18:00:35 [Zakim]
18:00:50 [Zhe]
Issue easy keys
18:01:20 [Zhe]
alanr: just to check we are on the same page on easy keys
18:01:43 [Zhe]
... both easy keys/top bottom added to spec, with formal addition to language based on vote
18:01:59 [pfps]
18:02:09 [Zhe]
... can we do a straw poll
18:02:11 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:02:28 [Zhe]
pfps: don't think your description match minutes
18:03:25 [Zhe]
pfps: the straw poll working in the minutes does not mention documentation change
18:03:28 [IanH]
18:03:29 [pfps]
the straw poll in the minutes does not mention document changes at all
18:03:33 [IanH]
18:03:40 [alanr]
ack ianH
18:03:42 [Zhe]
18:03:44 [IanH]
zakim, unmute me
18:03:44 [Zakim]
IanH was not muted, IanH
18:03:45 [m_schnei]
lets have to distinct polls
18:03:58 [Rinke]
That's issue-112
18:03:58 [Zhe]
IanH: one question on top/bottom, do we agree on the name?
18:04:00 [Zhe]
18:04:02 [Zhe]
alanr: not
18:04:06 [Rinke]
(names, I mean)
18:04:24 [JeremyCarroll]
JeremyCarroll has left #owl
18:04:26 [bmotik]
18:04:39 [alanr]
ack bmotik
18:04:40 [Zhe]
alanr: add them as top and bottom,
18:04:46 [Zhe]
... and an editorial note
18:05:05 [Zhe]
bmotik: implementing universal role is hard
18:05:16 [Zhe]
... not convinced it is "easy"
18:05:25 [Zhe]
... like to keep it separate from easy keys
18:05:31 [Zhe]
alanr: where do we stand on easy keys?
18:05:34 [pfps]
18:05:46 [m_schnei]
18:05:49 [alanr]
ack pfps
18:05:53 [Zhe]
... should we add easy key?
18:06:05 [Zhe]
pfps: not aware of implementation of easy keys
18:06:16 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
18:06:16 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
18:06:19 [ivan]
18:06:20 [alanr]
ack m_schnei
18:06:57 [Zhe]
m_schnei: missing major stakeholders, defer?
18:07:08 [pfps]
so I feel that the documents should mention that easy keys may be yanked if implementations are not produced
18:07:15 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:07:15 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:07:18 [alanr]
ack ivan
18:07:18 [bmotik]
18:07:21 [alanr]
18:07:23 [Zhe]
alanr: my sense that majority of this WG are stakeholders and they are for it
18:07:41 [IanH]
18:07:43 [pfps]
18:07:48 [alanr]
ack bmotik
18:08:20 [pfps]
18:08:30 [Zhe]
bmotik: thinking about implementing easy keys. not trivial, should not be impossible
18:08:42 [Zhe]
... should have larger scale evaluation,
18:09:05 [pfps]
agree with Boris that implementation situation wrt easy keys is different from the vast bulk of OWL 2
18:09:11 [Zhe]
alanr: we should have general discussion on these next week
18:09:21 [Zhe]
issue 109: What is the namespace for elements and attributes in the XML serialization
18:09:36 [Zhe]
alanr: 1) namespace itself
18:09:44 [Zhe]
... 2) should we reuse the same namespace
18:10:13 [IanH]
Sorry, but I have to leave now.
18:10:19 [alanr]
bye ian
18:10:27 [Zakim]
18:10:29 [Zhe]
ivan: namespace in terms of XML, and namespace used in RDF/OWL are very different
18:10:33 [alanr]
18:10:34 [JeffP]
bye Ian
18:10:36 [Zhe]
... in favor of two different namespaces
18:11:01 [Rinke]
+1 to ivan
18:11:03 [Zhe]
... to avoid problems for OWL/XML
18:11:04 [bmotik]
18:11:12 [alanr]
18:11:12 [alanr]
18:11:13 [alanr]
18:11:13 [alanr]
18:11:17 [m_schnei]
+1 to ivan: different things want different URIs
18:11:22 [pfps]
I don't see any problems with sharing, but I really don't care
18:11:57 [Zhe]
ivan: we decided to use owl namespace for the whole thing. so 1) is ruled out
18:12:06 [Rinke]
prefer 'xml' to be in there
18:12:07 [Zhe]
... don't care other three
18:12:12 [Zhe]
alanr: suggest 3)
18:12:18 [uli]
I guess Bijan has, but he isn't here today
18:12:25 [Zhe]
... year there give us possibltiy to evolve
18:12:39 [Rinke]
but history shows that we don't evolve
18:12:43 [uli]
18:12:52 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
18:12:52 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
18:12:59 [alanr]
straw poll : how about for the OWL-XML namespace
18:13:13 [Zhe]
uli: just curious to hear what problems will come up if we only have one namespace
18:13:47 [Zhe]
ivan: there are lots of discussion in XML world of what exactly the semantics of namespace is
18:13:47 [alanr]
18:13:51 [alanr]
ack uli
18:13:59 [Rinke]
sidenote: the owl namespace has a month in it as well
18:14:03 [Zhe]
... a word of caution is not to mix up things
18:14:21 [Zhe]
uli: then it seems like something we should not decide. need more info
18:14:31 [uli]
zakim, mute me
18:14:31 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
18:14:32 [Rinke]
e.g. and currently in the syntax spec
18:14:42 [Zhe]
ivan: why it is a big problem to separate the two?
18:16:14 [Rinke]
Ivan is right wrt the hash mark
18:16:49 [Zhe]
ivan: if we decide to have a different one. I don't care which
18:16:52 [m_schnei]
people will click on the XML URI, and will expect to get to something related to the XML, not related to OWL in general
18:16:53 [alanr]
straw poll : how about for the OWL-XML namespace
18:16:55 [uli]
I think Bijan could be one
18:17:02 [uli]
ok ok
18:17:13 [uli]
18:17:17 [alanr]
18:17:18 [Zhe]
18:17:20 [Achille]
18:17:21 [bmotik]
18:17:22 [m_schnei]
+1 to have distinct URIs
18:17:23 [pfps]
18:17:24 [msmith]
18:17:26 [ivan]
I have a slight preference for alt. 2
18:17:28 [JeffP]
18:17:30 [Rinke]
+0.5 the separate namespace is fine, but I think Sandro 'd like a month in there
18:17:34 [Carsten]
18:17:46 [ewallace]
+1 for URI 3 for now
18:18:37 [Zhe]
alanr: issue 112 What name to give to Universal Property
18:18:50 [bmotik]
18:18:51 [uli]
but this is related to the discussion before and thus deferred?
18:18:52 [Rinke]
... but what if we won't have a UP?
18:19:01 [Zhe]
... consensus: not trying meaningful name
18:19:10 [bmotik]
18:19:17 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
18:19:17 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
18:19:19 [uli]
18:19:22 [Zhe]
Issue 104 disallowed vocabulary OWL 1.1 DL does not have a disallowed vocabulary
18:19:33 [bmotik]
18:19:35 [Zhe]
m_schnei: in old OWL SPEC,
18:19:43 [Zhe]
... have disallowed vocabulary.
18:20:14 [Zhe]
... in the new RDF mapping, don't have something similar
18:20:42 [alanr]
ack bmotik
18:20:43 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:20:44 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:20:48 [Zhe]
... e.g. having rdf:List is allowed in the new spec
18:20:54 [Zhe]
... but not in the old spec
18:21:40 [ivan]
must not ...
18:21:45 [alanr]
18:21:48 [alanr]
18:21:59 [m_schnei]
18:22:16 [ivan]
18:22:55 [m_schnei]
zakim, unmute me
18:22:55 [Zakim]
m_schnei should no longer be muted
18:22:56 [alanr]
ack m_schnei
18:23:03 [Zhe]
need scribe help, Boris
18:23:26 [Zhe]
bmotik: don't think this belong to the mapping document.
18:23:34 [Zhe]
... in section 2.2.of FS
18:23:34 [m_schnei]
zakim, mute me
18:23:34 [Zakim]
m_schnei should now be muted
18:23:36 [alanr]
ack ivan
18:24:16 [Zhe]
ivan: boris, fully agree. OWL/XML namespace should not have any new terms. it is irrelevant
18:24:40 [Zhe]
bmotik: it does have elements from OWL/XMl schema
18:25:00 [Zhe]
... will change it after tele conf
18:25:27 [alanr]
18:25:54 [Zhe]
msmith: on tests
18:26:22 [Zhe]
... make progress next week (before next F2F)
18:26:37 [Zhe]
... willing to be aggregation point
18:26:51 [Zakim]
18:26:52 [Zakim]
18:26:52 [Zakim]
18:26:53 [Rinke]
18:26:53 [JeffP]
18:26:54 [Zakim]
18:26:54 [Rinke]
18:26:54 [m_schnei]
18:26:55 [Zakim]
18:26:55 [uli]
bye bye
18:26:57 [ivan]
zakim, drop me
18:26:57 [Zakim]
Ivan is being disconnected
18:26:59 [Zakim]
18:26:59 [Zakim]
18:26:59 [Zakim]
18:26:59 [uli]
uli has left #owl
18:27:03 [Zakim]
18:27:04 [Zakim]
18:27:05 [ivan]
ivan has left #owl
18:27:06 [Zakim]
18:27:08 [Zakim]
18:27:10 [Zakim]
18:27:23 [MartinD]
MartinD has left #OWL
18:29:28 [Zakim]
18:29:29 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
18:29:30 [Zakim]
Attendees were bmotik, Elisa_Kendall, Ivan, JeremyCarroll, +31.20.525.aaaa, Rinke, IanH, Alan, +0190827aabb, Peter_Patel-Schneider, MartinD, Evan_Wallace, +1.202.408.aacc, msmith,
18:29:32 [Zakim]
... Zhe, m_schnei, uli, Achille, JeffP, Carsten
18:31:35 [msmith]
msmith has left #owl
18:49:57 [alanr]
alanr has left #owl
20:43:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #owl