14:48:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
14:48:03 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-rif-irc
14:48:16 <csma> zakim, this will be RIF
14:48:16 <Zakim> ok, csma; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
14:48:29 <csma> Meeting: RIF telecon 14 October 08
14:48:39 <csma> Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
14:48:54 <csma> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0039.html
14:49:21 <StuartTaylor> StuartTaylor has joined #rif
14:49:29 <csma> csma has changed the topic to: 14 October RIF telecon; agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0039.html
14:49:37 <csma> Scribe: Stuart Taylor
14:49:49 <csma> scribenick: StuartTaylor
14:50:36 <csma> Regrets:  Hassan Aït-Kaci, Leora Morgenstern, MohamedZergaoui
14:51:10 <csma> zakim, reset agenda
14:51:10 <Zakim> I don't understand 'reset agenda', csma
14:51:18 <csma> zakim, clear agenda
14:51:18 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:51:28 <csma> agendum+ Admin
14:51:36 <csma> agendum+ Liaison
14:51:45 <csma> agendum+ Public comments
14:51:56 <csma> agendum+ Action review
14:52:07 <csma> agendum+ Action 577
14:52:19 <csma> agendum+ Test Cases
14:52:41 <csma> agendum+ Frames VS objects
14:52:53 <csma> agendum+ AOB (Pick scribe!)
14:55:34 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
14:55:41 <Zakim> + +0122427aaaa
14:57:52 <Zakim> +??P18
14:58:02 <StuartTaylor> zakim, aaaa is me
14:58:03 <Zakim> +StuartTaylor; got it
14:58:04 <csma> zakim, ??P18 is me
14:58:04 <Zakim> +csma; got it
14:59:36 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:59:36 <Zakim> On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma
15:00:22 <ChrisW> ChrisW has joined #rif
15:00:50 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
15:01:39 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:02:49 <josb> josb has joined #rif
15:03:14 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:03:27 <StellaMitchell> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:03:27 <Zakim> +StellaMitchell; got it
15:03:38 <Harold> zakim, NRCC is me
15:03:39 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
15:03:45 <Zakim> +josb
15:04:05 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:04:29 <Zakim> +??P0
15:04:48 <csma> Zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, Harold, StellaMitchell, josb, DaveReynolds
15:04:59 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
15:05:08 <Zakim> +[IBM]
15:05:13 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
15:05:16 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
15:05:16 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
15:05:38 <csma> next item
15:05:53 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #rif
15:05:57 <csma> PROPOSED: accept minutes of telecon October 7
15:06:06 <Gary_Hallmark> Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
15:06:14 <csma> RESOLVED: accept minutes of telecon October 7
15:06:34 <csma> PROPOSED: accept minutes of F2F11
15:06:51 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-26
15:07:03 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2008-09-27
15:07:13 <Zakim> +Gary
15:07:35 <csma> RESOLVED: accept minutes of F2F11
15:07:37 <Zakim> +??P8
15:07:57 <csma> next item
15:08:42 <csma> next item
15:09:02 <csma> zakim, take up item 3
15:09:02 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Public comments" taken up [from csma]
15:10:01 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2008Oct/0001.html
15:10:58 <PaulVincent> PaulVincent has joined #rif
15:12:59 <csma> next item
15:13:10 <csma> zakim, close item 2
15:13:10 <Zakim> agendum 2, Liaison, closed
15:13:11 <Zakim> I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:13:13 <Zakim> 4. Action review [from csma]
15:13:17 <csma> next item
15:21:40 <StuartTaylor> StuartTaylor: will work on test cases with yuting
15:22:11 <StuartTaylor> ... Yuting will post on the mailing list for feedback next week
15:23:04 <csma> agendum+ F2F12
15:23:14 <csma> zakim, open item 9
15:23:14 <Zakim> agendum 9. "F2F12" taken up [from csma]
15:23:27 <ChrisW> zakim, close item 4
15:23:27 <Zakim> agendum 4, Action review, closed
15:23:28 <Zakim> I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:23:29 <Zakim> 5. Action 577 [from csma]
15:24:52 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:24:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, Harold, StellaMitchell, josb, DaveReynolds, Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres
15:25:20 <StuartTaylor> csma: preferred date of Jan 15-16 means that Sandro cannot attend F2F12
15:26:18 <StuartTaylor> s/cannot attend/would miss part of/
15:28:14 <StuartTaylor> csma: most people would strongly prefer 15-16 rather than 14-15
15:28:59 <StuartTaylor> ... any objection that F2F12 is on 14 - 15?
15:29:30 <AxelPolleres> I will have difficulties anyway in January, but I think I could join via phone some time at least.
15:30:13 <StuartTaylor> ... the problem with 14 - 15 is that people would have to wait until Sat 16th for flights
15:30:51 <StuartTaylor> s/Sat 16th/Sat 17th/
15:31:04 <Zakim> +??P20
15:31:05 <csma> Decision is: F2F12 will be 14-15 Jan 2009
15:31:14 <csma> next item
15:31:52 <ChrisW> action: Gary to start F2F12 wiki page
15:31:52 <trackbot> Created ACTION-621 - Start F2F12 wiki page [on Gary Hallmark - due 2008-10-21].
15:33:12 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html
15:34:03 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:34:06 <csma> PROPOSED: Core should keep safe disjunction in rule bodies.
15:34:06 <csma> Implementations can be direct or use a well-known preprocessing step.
15:34:06 <csma> Comment: An example of a solution to issue-70 is Option 2,
15:34:06 <csma> which will be able to cope with disjunction. (See
15:34:06 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Sep/0178.html
15:34:06 <csma> and follow up).
15:34:07 <StuartTaylor> AxelPolleres: disjunction and safety discussed yesterday
15:34:59 <StuartTaylor> s/AxelPolleres:/Harold:/
15:35:04 <StuartTaylor> thanks, Dave :)
15:35:12 <Zakim> +mkifer
15:35:32 <Harold> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/7
15:35:35 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/75
15:36:01 <StuartTaylor> csma: Harold, can you explain the link with issue 70
15:36:07 <AxelPolleres> ISSUE-70... basically both Option 2 and 3 are fine, but 2 is over-cautious.
15:36:13 <StuartTaylor> Harold: it is about safeness
15:36:46 <StuartTaylor> ... safeness can be retained using disjunction
15:38:28 <StuartTaylor> csma: the proposed resolution would be between Option 2 and 3 from Axel's email?
15:39:14 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
15:39:33 <AxelPolleres> Option 3 in the original mail has a typo in bullet 3 ( Or instead of And)
15:41:17 <Harold> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/48
15:41:17 <Harold> PROPOSED: RIF Core will include member (#) but syntactically
15:41:17 <Harold> restricted its use in rule conditions.
15:41:17 <Harold> Rationale 1: PRD rules almost always start with a member test
15:41:17 <Harold> in the condition.
15:41:17 <Harold> Rationale 2: PR leverages type system from host programming language
15:41:19 <Harold> and that is externally defined and immutable by rules.
15:41:21 <Harold> Comment 1: Note that in RIF-RDF the equivalent property rdf:type
15:41:23 <Harold> would still be permitted in rule conclusions.
15:41:25 <Harold> Comment 2: If PRD introduces member (#) in the conclusion,
15:41:27 <Harold> this restriction to conditions in Core should be reconsidered.
15:42:44 <DaveReynolds> Agreed - we did not take external-# into account in the discussion
15:43:29 <StuartTaylor> csma: this proposed resolution should be discussed in the PRD task force
15:44:05 <ChrisW> is it possible for something "ground" to not be a "fact"?
15:44:27 <DaveReynolds> A fact is surely just a rule conclusion without a rule condition, at least in Core.
15:45:03 <josb> q+
15:45:08 <csma> ack jos
15:45:14 <Gary> forall ?x (A(?x)) is not ground
15:45:29 <ChrisW> but it is a fact?
15:45:39 <DaveReynolds> Part of the conformance clause
15:46:18 <Harold> <Harold> > > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/70
15:46:18 <Harold> <Harold> PROPOSED: Parameterize the conformance clauses of Core with safeness requirements "strict" and "none" (default: "none").
15:46:18 <Harold> <Harold> (modulo nice word for "none")
15:47:23 <StuartTaylor> Harold: we have excluded weak, only none or strong
15:47:43 <cke> cke has joined #rif
15:48:47 <csma> q?
15:49:42 <csma> next item
15:49:47 <Zakim> +??P7
15:50:35 <csma> zakim, take up item 7
15:50:35 <Zakim> agendum 7. "Frames VS objects" taken up [from csma]
15:50:59 <ChrisW> zakim, list agenda
15:50:59 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
15:51:01 <Zakim> 6. Test Cases [from csma]
15:51:01 <Zakim> 7. Frames VS objects [from csma]
15:51:02 <Zakim> 8. AOB (Pick scribe!) [from csma]
15:51:53 <ChrisW> zakim, who is talking?
15:52:03 <Zakim> ChrisW, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P7 (1%), csma (74%), ??P20 (35%)
15:52:20 <ChrisW> zakim, ?p20 is Adrian
15:52:20 <Zakim> sorry, ChrisW, I do not recognize a party named '?p20'
15:52:21 <StuartTaylor> csma: there is a problem with PRD and the semantics of frames
15:52:26 <ChrisW> zakim, p20 is Adrian
15:52:26 <Zakim> sorry, ChrisW, I do not recognize a party named 'p20'
15:52:29 <ChrisW> zakim, ??p20 is Adrian
15:52:29 <Zakim> +Adrian; got it
15:52:35 <josb> q+
15:52:42 <ChrisW> zakim, ??p7 is cke
15:52:42 <Zakim> +cke; got it
15:52:47 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:52:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, Harold, StellaMitchell, josb, DaveReynolds, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres, Adrian, mkifer, cke
15:53:12 <ChrisW> q?
15:54:10 <ChrisW> changkai: main difference between frames and objects is multi-valued slots
15:54:33 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
15:55:44 <csma> ack jos
15:55:47 <MichaelKifer> q+
15:56:33 <csma> o[p->1]
15:57:14 <csma> o[p->1] O[p->2]
15:57:26 <csma> o[p->1] o[p->2]
15:58:07 <StuartTaylor> csma: the first, above would be translated to PRD as an object that contains p with the value 1. if I assert the third example the value for p would be related by 2, which is not the semantics of frames
15:58:10 <csma> o[p->(1 2]]
15:58:29 <DaveReynolds> s/related/replaced/
15:59:42 <ChrisW> just extend the syntax to indicate single-valued slots in PRD
16:00:04 <csma> ack michaelk
16:01:34 <StuartTaylor> MichaelKifer: we need to decide on single or multivalued slots in core
16:02:11 <csma> o[p->(1 2)] o[p->3]
16:02:40 <csma> o[p->(1 2 3)] or o[p->((1 2) 3)]?
16:03:07 <DaveReynolds> o[p->{(1 2) 3}] where {} is set not list, no ordering
16:04:00 <csma> I used () for sets, sorry; replace with {} everywhere
16:04:16 <DaveReynolds> csma - ah sorry
16:06:01 <csma> the problem is, if PRD understands only single-valued slots and interprets multi-valued slots as single, collection-typed, values, then, how to differentiate between single values that are collections and collections that represent multiple values?
16:06:13 <ChrisW> just extend the syntax to indicate single-valued slots in PRD
16:06:30 <csma> Frames: o[p->v]
16:06:45 <csma> Object: o[p=v]
16:06:57 <csma> objects are frames of a special kind?
16:07:15 <MichaelKifer> c[p=>person]
16:07:44 <ChrisW> you need a syntax to indicate the difference
16:07:54 <MichaelKifer> c[p {0:1}=>person]
16:07:54 <StuartTaylor> csma: the problem is that if you import a document from BLD
16:08:03 <ChrisW> otherwise you are creating a new schema language
16:08:07 <StuartTaylor> MichaelKifer: you would assume that it is multivalued
16:09:17 <ChrisW> we have no "way" to handle cardinality constraints
16:10:16 <MichaelKifer> john[children->bob] and john[children->mary]
16:11:28 <cke> In OO world, we write: john[children->{bob,mary}]
16:11:48 <DaveReynolds> Agree with Michael - Core should support BLD frame semantics (multivalued) otherwise we break the semweb compatibility
16:11:59 <ChrisW> there is no way - "replacement" is non-monotonic
16:12:19 <Gary> java like syntax:  class Person [ children=> collection|individual ]
16:12:30 <StuartTaylor> csma: using a PRD-specific construct will limit in-operability with BLD
16:14:05 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Oct/0053.html
16:14:11 <DaveReynolds> Agreed - frame slots represent sets of values not bags of values, at least I hope so
16:14:40 <josb> they do (represent sets of values)
16:16:11 <csma> q?
16:16:15 <josb> who not just extend the PRD syntax?
16:16:37 <josb> BLD does not need to be extended if something like this is needed in PRD
16:17:04 <ChrisW> q+
16:17:47 <Gary> Isn't the notion of frame explained in BLD?
16:18:30 <csma> ack chrisw
16:19:13 <Gary> ?x=?y :- ?o[single->?x single->?y]
16:20:11 <Harold> What about named-argument terms?
16:23:31 <Harold> A term with named arguments is of the form t(s1->v1 ... sn->vn), where n=0, t ? Const and v1, ..., vn are base terms and s1, ..., sn are pairwise distinct symbols from the set ArgNames. 
16:24:26 <josb> q+
16:24:46 <csma> ack josb
16:25:27 <josb> o[p=a], o[p=b]
16:25:30 <josb> a=b
16:25:50 <AxelPolleres> aren't slotted *predicates* anyway single-valued... but you don't want that probably either.
16:26:21 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
16:27:06 <Harold> Axel, I just said that using 'named-argument'  instead of 'slotted'.
16:28:15 <AxelPolleres> yeah,but fixed arity maked them probably unusable here.
16:28:16 <josb> yes
16:28:26 <Gary> slotted predicates don't work because we want to change a single slot
16:28:33 <ChrisW> +1 PRD specific solution
16:29:45 <csma> q?
16:29:54 <Zakim> -Harold
16:30:30 <csma> scribe next: Hassan?
16:30:44 <ChrisW> Regrets: Hassan Aït-Kaci Leora Morgenstern MohamedZergaoui
16:30:46 <Zakim> -josb
16:30:50 <Zakim> -StellaMitchell
16:30:50 <ChrisW> zakim, list attendees
16:30:51 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +0122427aaaa, StuartTaylor, csma, StellaMitchell, Harold, josb, DaveReynolds, Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres, mkifer, Adrian, cke
16:30:51 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
16:30:54 <Zakim> -Adrian
16:30:55 <Zakim> -Gary
16:30:55 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
16:30:56 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:30:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/14-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:30:58 <Zakim> -mkifer
16:31:03 <Zakim> -cke
16:31:05 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make logs public
16:32:47 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:32:47 <Zakim> On the phone I see StuartTaylor, csma, ChrisW
16:33:03 <Zakim> -StuartTaylor
16:54:57 <Zakim> -ChrisW
16:54:59 <Zakim> -csma
16:55:00 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
16:55:01 <Zakim> Attendees were +0122427aaaa, StuartTaylor, csma, StellaMitchell, Harold, josb, DaveReynolds, Mike_Dean, ChrisW, Gary, AxelPolleres, mkifer, Adrian, cke
17:01:49 <csma> csma has left #rif