See also: IRC log
<csma> "/invite zakim #channel-name
<csma> "zakim, room for 5?
<Hassan> me zakim, unmute me
resolved: csma chairs, we take turns scribing
I'll scribe now
<scribe> scribe: GaryHallmark
hassan: need a brainstorming
kickoff to this taskforce
... e.g. why do we need (to start with) an xml schema?
csma: attendance is
... taskforce job is to make proposals, not to make decisions
... today we need to organize work for WD2 to have freeze before F2F
finish/polish the model-theory of conditions
hassan: semantics is hard to
... (in latest wiki version)
hassan: unclear what the semantic structures are there for (confusing mix of denotational and operational)
csma: 1st WD was all operational, but did not define "matching theory" -- no links to DTB
now, we want a model-theory for the conditions but not for the rules
hassan: there will be extra-BLD condition constructs, e.g. aggregate, that must be added
should ask Michael how to do aggregates in FLD
harold: aggregates could be added to DTB
<Harold> I'd like to have a version of aggregates both in PRD and BLD, perhaps via DTB.
<Harold> Aggregate can be semantically treated similarly to external builtins.
I believe that PRD and BLD conditions (not rules) agree on NAF
csma: will PRD and SWC fit?
<Harold> I agree perhaps PRD could be considered a superset of BLD (with only Asserts in conclusions).
<Harold> So RIF-SWC would agree on the BLD subset of PRD.
but BLD is not a subset of PRD - we are still searching for a non-empty CORE
<Harold> Depends on how big PRD will ultimately be.
does current spec have model theory for NAF?
<Harold> (Re aggregates, also see "Aggregate functions in DLV" http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.10.4418 and later DLV work).
csma: a bind or let construct makes it easier to specify no-repeat
<Harold> "bind", "let", "where" are equivalent variable-scoping constructs similar to quantifiers.
<Harold> They may also benefit an extension of BLD.
<Hassan> On aggregates and comprehensions: http://lambda.uta.edu/monoid.ps.gz
I will add "assert new" and "object delete" to PRD
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/comprehions/comprehensions/ Found Scribe: GaryHallmark Inferring ScribeNick: GaryHallmark WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: GaryHallmark Hassan_Ait-Kaci NRCC aaaa csma harold hassan is perhaps You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0110.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 16 Sep 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/09/16-rif-prd-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]