IRC log of rif-prd on 2008-11-04

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:00:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif-prd
18:00:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/04-rif-prd-irc
18:00:40 [csma]
rrsagent, make log public
18:00:45 [Zakim]
SW_RIF(PRD)1:00PM has now started
18:00:50 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:00:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/11/04-rif-prd-minutes.html csma
18:00:52 [Zakim]
+??P1
18:01:39 [Zakim]
+??P4
18:02:22 [csma]
zakim, ??P4 is me
18:02:22 [Zakim]
+csma; got it
18:02:33 [Zakim]
+??P5
18:02:35 [cke]
cke has joined #rif-prd
18:03:48 [csma]
zakim, clear agenda
18:03:48 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
18:03:56 [csma]
agendum+ Action review
18:04:05 [csma]
agendum+ Conflict resolution
18:04:14 [csma]
agendum+ Bind action
18:04:24 [csma]
agendum+ Publication planning
18:04:41 [Zakim]
+Gary
18:04:49 [Gary]
Gary has joined #rif-prd
18:05:02 [csma]
Scribe: Changhai
18:05:10 [csma]
scribenick: cke
18:05:23 [csma]
next item
18:07:31 [cke]
review of the actions
18:07:50 [cke]
Item 1: conflict resolution
18:08:09 [cke]
Review and validate the CR proposal , as agreed in Orlando
18:09:21 [csma]
PROPOSED: In RIF-PRD, the conflict resolution strategy that is intended for a set of rules will be indicated using keywords, at the group level. RIF-PRD 1.0 will specify one conflict resolution strategy (corresponding keyword to be determined) that can be summarize as follows: apply refraction to the conflict set, then order remaining instances by priority, the order top priority instances by recency (most recent first), then break remaing ties arbitrarily (precis
18:09:26 [cke]
About csma's emmail, feedback from Changhai & Gary, but not others
18:09:43 [Gary]
+1
18:12:26 [cke]
The corner cases discussion
18:14:03 [cke]
top level group vs. subgroups
18:15:08 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
18:15:48 [cke]
CR strategy associated only to toplevel group?
18:17:10 [PaulVincent]
PaulVincent has joined #rif-prd
18:17:40 [cke]
Proposed: specify the CR only to the toplevel group. Any CR in subgroups can be rejected
18:18:55 [csma]
PROPOSED: conflict resolution has to be associated with the top-level group, in PRD 1.0.
18:19:25 [csma]
RESOLVED: conflict resolution has to be associated with the top-level group, in PRD 1.0.
18:20:04 [cke]
What about one document with any CR strategy?
18:20:33 [cke]
s/with any/without any/
18:21:36 [csma]
PROPOSED: rif:standardForward is the mandatory default conflict resolution strategy is none is associated with the top level group.
18:22:12 [cke]
s/is none/if none/
18:22:28 [csma]
RESOLVED: rif:standardForward is the mandatory default conflict resolution strategy if none is associated with the top level group.
18:22:46 [cke]
Now about priority...
18:23:59 [csma]
priority can be any integer, positive or negative?
18:24:04 [Gary]
how about xsd:int (or the closest we have in DTB)/
18:24:13 [csma]
changhai: yes, and zero is the default
18:25:18 [cke]
is a priority a signed integer? with positive or negative integer?
18:28:41 [csma]
PROPOSED: priority is a signed integer, positive or negative and default is zero.
18:28:52 [csma]
RESOLVED: priority is a signed integer, positive or negative and default is zero.
18:31:26 [Gary]
[-1000..1000]
18:32:59 [csma]
[-1000000..1000000]
18:33:00 [cke]
I propose [-10000 ... 10000] to better suit coding convention
18:34:17 [csma]
PROPOSED: range is [-100000..+10000]
18:34:48 [csma]
PROPOSED: range is [-10000..+10000]
18:35:08 [csma]
RESOLVED: range is [-10000..+10000]
18:38:00 [csma]
rule R has priority 10
18:38:38 [csma]
<Group>...<Priority>10</Priority> R </Group>
18:39:58 [Gary]
PROPOSED: rule priority is given by the immediately containing Group. If that group has no explicit priority, then the priority is 0
18:43:15 [csma]
<Group><Group><Group>R</Group></Group></Group>
18:44:17 [Gary]
group p=1 (group p=2( rule1) rule2) => rule1 has pri=2, rule2 has pri=1
18:45:12 [csma]
<Group><Group>R1<Group>(priority = 1)R2</Group></Group></Group>
18:46:02 [cke]
or we can have: <Group><Group>R1<Group>(priority = default)R2</Group></Group></Group> in this case, you don't write the priority
18:46:55 [csma]
Group
18:47:01 [csma]
Group
18:47:08 [csma]
priority=1
18:47:12 [csma]
R1
18:47:19 [csma]
Group
18:47:26 [csma]
priority=2
18:47:31 [csma]
R2
18:48:20 [csma]
Group
18:48:24 [csma]
Group
18:48:31 [csma]
priority=1
18:48:35 [csma]
R2
18:48:39 [csma]
Group
18:48:45 [csma]
priority=2
18:48:49 [csma]
R1
18:49:19 [csma]
RESOLVED: rule priority is given by the immediately containing Group. If that group has no explicit priority, then the priority is 0.
18:49:22 [cke]
if "prority=2"is removed, then R2 will have the priority "default" (so zero)
18:50:42 [csma]
next item
18:50:53 [csma]
zakim, take up item 3
18:50:53 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Bind action" taken up [from csma]
19:07:48 [Zakim]
-[IPcaller]
19:07:50 [Zakim]
-??P5
19:07:52 [Zakim]
-Gary
19:07:53 [Zakim]
-csma
19:07:53 [Zakim]
-??P1
19:07:55 [Zakim]
SW_RIF(PRD)1:00PM has ended
19:07:56 [Zakim]
Attendees were csma, Gary, [IPcaller]
19:08:02 [csma]
rrsagent, list attendees
19:08:02 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'list attendees', csma. Try /msg RRSAgent help
19:08:11 [csma]
zakim, list attendees
19:08:11 [Zakim]
sorry, csma, I don't know what conference this is
19:08:20 [csma]
zakim, this is rifprd
19:08:20 [Zakim]
sorry, csma, I do not see a conference named 'rifprd' in progress or scheduled at this time
19:09:31 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
19:09:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/11/04-rif-prd-minutes.html csma