IRC log of rif on 2008-12-02
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:52:22 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif
- 15:52:22 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-rif-irc
- 15:52:29 [ChrisW]
- zakim, this will be rif
- 15:52:29 [Zakim]
- ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
- 15:52:29 [csma]
- no, no scribe
- 15:52:41 [csma]
- I pay you a beer if you find me a scribe
- 15:52:50 [ChrisW]
- Meeting: RIF Telecon 2 Dec 2008
- 15:52:58 [csma]
- zakim, clear agenda
- 15:52:58 [Zakim]
- agenda cleared
- 15:53:00 [ChrisW]
- Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
- 15:53:07 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 15:53:07 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 15:53:14 [csma]
- agendum+ Admin
- 15:53:21 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 15:53:21 [csma]
- agendum+ liaison
- 15:53:30 [csma]
- agendum+ public comments
- 15:53:37 [csma]
- agendum+ F2F12
- 15:53:40 [ChrisW]
- ChrisW has changed the topic to: 2 Dec RIF Telecon agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/0005.html
- 15:53:43 [ChrisW]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/0005.html
- 15:53:45 [csma]
- agendum+ Publications
- 15:53:58 [csma]
- agendum+ DTB
- 15:54:31 [csma]
- Oops! I forgot the agendum "action review"
- 15:55:23 [csma]
- There is a way to move agenda items up and down, but I do not remember how
- 15:55:30 [csma]
- agendum+ Test cases
- 15:55:43 [csma]
- Agendum+ AOB (pick scribe)
- 15:56:08 [csma]
- agendum+ actions review
- 15:56:19 [csma]
- zakim, move up agendum 9
- 15:56:19 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'move up agendum 9', csma
- 15:56:57 [csma]
- zakim, you don't have to understand, just do it
- 15:56:57 [Zakim]
- I don't understand you, csma
- 15:56:59 [ChrisW]
- mike dean would be next if he comes
- 15:57:04 [csma]
- ok
- 15:57:09 [ChrisW]
- then stella
- 16:00:20 [StellaMitchell]
- StellaMitchell has joined #rif
- 16:00:59 [DaveReynolds]
- DaveReynolds has joined #rif
- 16:01:41 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
- 16:01:42 [Zakim]
- +[IBM]
- 16:02:05 [Zakim]
- +Sandro
- 16:02:06 [Zakim]
- -Sandro
- 16:02:06 [Zakim]
- +Sandro
- 16:02:08 [StellaMitchell]
- zakim, ibm is temporarily me
- 16:02:08 [Zakim]
- +StellaMitchell; got it
- 16:02:10 [Zakim]
- +??P57
- 16:02:12 [josb]
- josb has joined #rif
- 16:02:27 [Zakim]
- +??P61
- 16:02:43 [csma]
- zakim, ??P61 is me
- 16:02:43 [Zakim]
- +csma; got it
- 16:02:52 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
- 16:02:57 [DaveReynolds]
- :-)
- 16:03:16 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:03:16 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see StellaMitchell, Sandro, DaveReynolds, csma
- 16:03:29 [AxelPolleres]
- AxelPolleres has joined #rif
- 16:03:34 [Zakim]
- +LeoraMorgenstern
- 16:03:51 [csma]
- scribe: Stella Mitchell
- 16:04:08 [csma]
- scribenick: StellaMitchell
- 16:04:15 [AdrianP]
- AdrianP has joined #rif
- 16:04:27 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:04:27 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see StellaMitchell, Sandro, DaveReynolds, csma, LeoraMorgenstern
- 16:04:40 [Zakim]
- +josb
- 16:04:58 [Zakim]
- +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
- 16:04:59 [Hassan]
- Hassan has joined #rif
- 16:05:23 [csma]
- next item
- 16:05:37 [Zakim]
- +??P66
- 16:05:45 [ChrisW]
- having zakim problems
- 16:05:46 [csma]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Nov/att-0194/25-rif-minutes.html
- 16:05:50 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: any objections to accepting minutes from last week's telecon?
- 16:05:51 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, +??P66 is me
- 16:05:51 [Zakim]
- sorry, AdrianP, I do not recognize a party named '+??P66'
- 16:06:00 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, ??P66 is me
- 16:06:00 [Zakim]
- +AdrianP; got it
- 16:06:03 [StellaMitchell]
- ...none
- 16:06:06 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 16:06:06 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 16:06:23 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: resolved: accept minutes from last week's telecon
- 16:06:29 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: any agenda ammendments?
- 16:06:42 [csma]
- RESOLVED: accept minutes from last week's telecon
- 16:06:50 [Zakim]
- +??P25
- 16:06:50 [josb]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Nov/0187.html
- 16:06:58 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 16:06:58 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 16:06:58 [ChrisW]
- zakim, ??P25 is me
- 16:06:59 [Zakim]
- +ChrisW; got it
- 16:07:10 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: I would like to discuss the comments on the SWC document by Uli, but that will be covered in the public comments section
- 16:07:27 [csma]
- next item
- 16:07:30 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute mem
- 16:07:30 [Zakim]
- sorry, AdrianP, I do not know which phone connection belongs to mem
- 16:07:36 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 16:07:36 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 16:08:06 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: OWL hoping to have last call documents out today
- 16:08:23 [josb]
- q+
- 16:08:25 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 16:08:25 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 16:08:27 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: other liaisons?
- 16:08:32 [csma]
- ack josb
- 16:09:01 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: question for Sandro: how can we get things into the RDF errata document. I sent proposed changes to RIF list.
- 16:09:13 [csma]
- next item
- 16:09:15 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: haven't figured that out yet
- 16:09:52 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: I will send the OK1 response
- 16:10:05 [josb]
- My proposed text: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/0013.html
- 16:10:05 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: I drafted some comments to RAK1
- 16:10:36 [StellaMitchell]
- ...can someone review this?
- 16:10:53 [Harold]
- Harold has joined #rif
- 16:11:23 [StellaMitchell]
- ...Chris, can you look over my response to RAK1?
- 16:12:17 [Hassan]
- 8^D
- 16:12:35 [Zakim]
- +??P18
- 16:12:38 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: yes
- 16:12:47 [ChrisW]
- action: chris to look over reply to RAK
- 16:12:47 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-666 - Look over reply to RAK [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-12-09].
- 16:13:22 [Gary_Hallmark]
- Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
- 16:13:24 [Michael_Kifer]
- Michael_Kifer has joined #rif
- 16:13:32 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: comments by Uli S. are not yet on the wiki page, but will be added
- 16:13:34 [Zakim]
- +Harold
- 16:13:35 [josb]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Nov/0187.html
- 16:14:01 [Zakim]
- +Gary
- 16:14:07 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: These comments on SWC were sent to RIF mailing list, but not public comments list
- 16:14:47 [StellaMitchell]
- ...most comments are editorial, but there is one larger one that we should discuss. The first comment says that the document doesn't fully address OWL2, but OWL2 is now stable enough
- 16:15:21 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: the RDF compatibility document went to last call before OWL2 was sufficiently stable
- 16:15:46 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: we had asked Uli to say what changes would be needed for OWL2, and I didn't think she identified any
- 16:15:50 [Zakim]
- +Michael_Kifer
- 16:16:05 [StellaMitchell]
- Chris, Jos: don't agree with Sandro's assessment
- 16:16:37 [StellaMitchell]
- Jos: I expect it wouldn't be that much work, but there would be changes in the document
- 16:17:10 [StellaMitchell]
- Chris: I sent a message to Ian about this and related issues - given the timelines of both WG's, there is no excuse to not address this now.
- 16:17:37 [StellaMitchell]
- ...so I think the updates should be made if Jos has time, and we could consider re-opening the joint RIF-OWL task force
- 16:18:04 [StellaMitchell]
- ....and if the outcome that something needs to be changed in OWL, they should be open to doing that also
- 16:18:40 [StellaMitchell]
- jos; so, this would mean re-doing last call of RIF, RDF, OWL compatibility
- 16:18:56 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: did Ian respond?
- 16:19:02 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: no
- 16:19:26 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: if we are going to re-open the joint RIF OWL task force, we should do it as far as possible
- 16:19:38 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: Jos, do you have a sense of what changes would be needed?
- 16:19:48 [csma]
- s/far/early/
- 16:20:05 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: profiles....
- 16:20:40 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: We are not talking about changing, right., because there are lots of implementations of OWL1, but we are talking about adding a new section
- 16:21:03 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: depends somewhat on how backward compatible OWL2 is with OWL1
- 16:21:16 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: when could you do it?
- 16:21:59 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: I think I could have a reasonable draft by the end of December, and then would need reviews by OWL group
- 16:22:14 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: and you may have feedback to OWL
- 16:22:47 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: the joint task force should meet by the end of Dec or early Jan
- 16:23:20 [ChrisW]
- action: chris to set up call with OWL WG for joint RDF&OWL TF
- 16:23:20 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-667 - Set up call with OWL WG for joint RDF&OWL TF [on Christopher Welty - due 2008-12-09].
- 16:23:47 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: we should send an official response to Uli's comments?
- 16:24:04 [ChrisW]
- action: jdebruij2 to look at what it would take to add OWL-2 compatibility to RDF&OWL
- 16:24:04 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-668 - Look at what it would take to add OWL-2 compatibility to RDF&OWL [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2008-12-09].
- 16:24:23 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: I think starting the task force is enough, so we don't need an official response
- 16:25:01 [csma]
- zakim, take item 9
- 16:25:01 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'take item 9', csma
- 16:25:47 [csma]
- zakim, take up item 9
- 16:25:47 [Zakim]
- agendum 9. "actions review" taken up [from csma]
- 16:27:01 [StellaMitchell]
- action 665 is continued
- 16:27:01 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - 665
- 16:27:15 [StellaMitchell]
- 664 continued
- 16:27:25 [StellaMitchell]
- 663 continued
- 16:27:35 [StellaMitchell]
- 661 completed
- 16:27:37 [DaveReynolds]
- That wasn't 665, 665 was the problem with the frozen version which is fized.
- 16:27:45 [DaveReynolds]
- s/fized/fixed/
- 16:28:16 [StellaMitchell]
- 660 continued
- 16:28:20 [Hassan]
- Mostly done - will be done by the end of today ...
- 16:28:33 [StellaMitchell]
- 659 continued
- 16:29:45 [StellaMitchell]
- 658 continued, because will have to rereview changes before publication
- 16:29:49 [StellaMitchell]
- 657 completed
- 16:29:54 [StellaMitchell]
- 656 completed
- 16:30:11 [StellaMitchell]
- 653 continued
- 16:30:22 [StellaMitchell]
- 650 continued
- 16:30:53 [StellaMitchell]
- 646 closed, and Gary will review RAK1
- 16:31:09 [StellaMitchell]
- 644 completed
- 16:31:18 [StellaMitchell]
- 633 continued
- 16:31:25 [AxelPolleres]
- continued, still one full editing pass over DTB needed which I didn't find time yet :-( anyway for the current freeze, I am fine with the current Ed notes.
- 16:31:40 [StellaMitchell]
- 604 continued (as above)
- 16:31:55 [StellaMitchell]
- 592 continued
- 16:32:06 [StellaMitchell]
- 588 continued
- 16:32:18 [StellaMitchell]
- 579 continued
- 16:32:29 [StellaMitchell]
- 573 completed
- 16:32:39 [Hassan]
- continued - been off this issue for a while ...
- 16:32:49 [StellaMitchell]
- 564 as above
- 16:33:19 [StellaMitchell]
- 439, 152 continued
- 16:34:10 [StellaMitchell]
- no, it is not accepted
- 16:34:52 [ChrisW]
- action 632 closed
- 16:34:52 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - 632
- 16:34:52 [StellaMitchell]
- it is still in proposed state
- 16:36:39 [csma]
- next item
- 16:36:55 [csma]
- zakim, close item 3
- 16:36:55 [Zakim]
- agendum 3, public comments, closed
- 16:36:56 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 16:36:57 [Zakim]
- 4. F2F12 [from csma]
- 16:37:07 [ChrisW]
- zakim, next item
- 16:37:07 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "F2F12" taken up [from csma]
- 16:37:40 [csma]
- q?
- 16:37:41 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: there may be difficulties with travel policies
- 16:37:48 [DaveReynolds]
- I won't be able to make it, travel restrictions as you say.
- 16:37:55 [StellaMitchell]
- adrian: Does Gary have recommendations for hotels?
- 16:38:31 [AxelPolleres]
- I won't be able to attend, sorry.
- 16:38:34 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: I can't travel because of budget, but will attend remotely the whole time
- 16:39:34 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: ilog was been mostly acquired by ibm, which means that ibm travel policy might apply to ilog in january
- 16:40:00 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: I don't know yet what the travel policy for ibm will be early next year
- 16:40:59 [StellaMitchell]
- ....by the policy of this quarter, a working group for standards committee would have been acceptable
- 16:41:07 [StellaMitchell]
- dave: I won't be able to make it
- 16:41:57 [StellaMitchell]
- axel: won't attend because of other reasons
- 16:42:06 [AdrianP]
- I already booked my flight
- 16:42:12 [AdrianP]
- so can not change travel plans
- 16:42:54 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: there is a list of hotels on the meeting page
- 16:43:06 [StellaMitchell]
- gary: I just googled for hotels in the area
- 16:43:30 [csma]
- next item
- 16:43:51 [ChrisW]
- zakim, take up item 5
- 16:43:51 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Publications" taken up [from csma]
- 16:44:51 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: we have plans to publish UCR, Core, PRD, Test, DTB
- 16:45:16 [StellaMitchell]
- ...want to see if we can formally agree on some of these today
- 16:45:24 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: Adrian, UCR?
- 16:45:50 [StellaMitchell]
- Adrian: one of the new proposed requirements still has to be approved
- 16:46:23 [ChrisW]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 16:46:23 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see StellaMitchell, Sandro, DaveReynolds, csma, LeoraMorgenstern, josb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), AdrianP, ChrisW, AxelPolleres, Harold, Gary, Michael_Kifer
- 16:46:35 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: Are there any objections to publishing UCR as is? not a formal vote, just getitng an idea
- 16:46:38 [StellaMitchell]
- ...no objections
- 16:46:46 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: Core?
- 16:47:12 [StellaMitchell]
- ...Leora, can you summarize your comments?
- 16:47:51 [StellaMitchell]
- leora: I felt it's a good draft but could use some more examples, clarifying text, restructuings... I gave some specific examples
- 16:48:08 [StellaMitchell]
- ...this is a working draft, so it's fine to publish, but could benefit from changes
- 16:49:07 [StellaMitchell]
- harold: can we vote contingent on editorial changes?
- 16:49:11 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: what would the changes be?
- 16:49:30 [StellaMitchell]
- harold: leora would say which comments are editorial and others could be postponed to next WD
- 16:50:14 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 16:50:14 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 16:51:04 [StellaMitchell]
- leora: section 1, first comment is editorial
- 16:51:12 [StellaMitchell]
- section 2 postpone
- 16:51:34 [StellaMitchell]
- section 3 editorial
- 16:51:42 [StellaMitchell]
- section 5 ?
- 16:51:49 [StellaMitchell]
- section 6 editorial
- 16:52:34 [StellaMitchell]
- section 5 before section 5.1 is editorial
- 16:52:43 [StellaMitchell]
- section 5.1 can be postponed
- 16:52:57 [StellaMitchell]
- section 5.2 not sure, it could be simple or could need to rewrite
- 16:53:30 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: for the postponed ones, do you think we need an editor's note?
- 16:53:49 [StellaMitchell]
- leora: yes, that would be good
- 16:54:13 [StellaMitchell]
- csma; harold, is this ok?
- 16:54:17 [StellaMitchell]
- harold: yes
- 16:55:34 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: I also reviewed Core and think there is no show-stopper. I do think though that section 6 should be replaced by an editor's notes saying that in a future draft, core will also be specified as a specialization of PRD
- 16:55:53 [StellaMitchell]
- ...currently the sections for BLD and PRD are not of the same level
- 16:55:56 [StellaMitchell]
- harold: ok
- 16:56:22 [AdrianP]
- q+
- 16:56:27 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: other comments on Core?
- 16:56:56 [AdrianP]
- q-
- 16:57:06 [StellaMitchell]
- ...would anyone object to publish conditional on the above comments?
- 16:57:14 [csma]
- Q?
- 16:57:18 [csma]
- q?
- 16:57:25 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 16:57:25 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 16:57:28 [csma]
- q?
- 16:57:34 [sandro]
- csma, hello...
- 16:58:29 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: how far are we from publishing PRD - what timeframe?
- 16:58:32 [AdrianP]
- section 6.1. in Core needs to be updated with the "new" construct
- 16:59:23 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: I looked over mk's comments, and I think that we can correct all of them easily, except for the definition of satisfaction
- 16:59:41 [StellaMitchell]
- ...but the Michael's review didn't go already to the end of the document
- 16:59:56 [StellaMitchell]
- s/already/all the way/
- 17:00:15 [StellaMitchell]
- Adrian: didn't look at items 12, 13 yet
- 17:00:24 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: we will discuss those 2 at the telcon today
- 17:00:35 [StellaMitchell]
- mk: cannot attend the PRD telecon today
- 17:01:09 [StellaMitchell]
- mk: I did read to the end, but just didn't write up comments on it...it was mostly XMLand execution strategy and I didn't comment on it
- 17:02:03 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: I think we can take all the comments into account by the end of tomorrow, Michael can rereview on the weekend
- 17:02:28 [StellaMitchell]
- mk: also, for such an important document I don't think it's enough to have just one review
- 17:02:58 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: I don't think we need conditional resolutions on other docs then, editor's can update and we can resolve next week
- 17:03:40 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: Test cases, we had 2 reviews, Gary and Sandro, Gary can you comment?
- 17:04:00 [StellaMitchell]
- Gary: my primary concern was the difficulty was building a test harness
- 17:04:47 [StellaMitchell]
- ....also I think people who aren't familiar with RDF will be confused by the manifest, so we should have a plain XML one
- 17:04:59 [StellaMitchell]
- Sandro: I agree and commented on this also
- 17:05:19 [csma]
- q?
- 17:05:23 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: can't we have both?
- 17:05:29 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: yes
- 17:05:41 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: is not having XML a show-stopper?
- 17:05:49 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: not for this draft, but we should have an editor's note
- 17:06:23 [StellaMitchell]
- gary: my other comments are not show-stoppers
- 17:07:04 [StellaMitchell]
- gary: conclusions are RIF condition formulas not RIF documents and I don't think it's obvious what should be done with those
- 17:07:17 [StellaMitchell]
- ....we should give some implementation advice
- 17:07:53 [StellaMitchell]
- ....I think every practical implementation will have a way to print a result or query the system, and we can describe how to implement a test harness using those
- 17:08:33 [StellaMitchell]
- ....combining conclusion and premise into one document could cause problems for some test cases (local document)
- 17:08:59 [StellaMitchell]
- ...but import could be used to include conclusions
- 17:09:10 [StellaMitchell]
- I think we could add some text about that
- 17:09:42 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 17:09:42 [Zakim]
- AdrianP was not muted, AdrianP
- 17:09:57 [StellaMitchell]
- gary: I don't think it has to stop publication
- 17:10:05 [StellaMitchell]
- adrian: point to repository?
- 17:10:22 [StellaMitchell]
- gary: it already does point to repository, but not clear what to make of premise and conclusion document
- 17:10:34 [StellaMitchell]
- ...the section saying you have to build a test harness should be expanded
- 17:11:04 [StellaMitchell]
- Yes, this sounds like a good idea to add to section 6
- 17:11:09 [Hassan]
- user manual
- 17:11:49 [AdrianP]
- "RIF test cases for dummies" ;-)
- 17:12:49 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: don't require for FPWD, but will be good to have, and maybe we can add it before publication anyway
- 17:13:02 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: I think my comments have been addressed, but I have not verified that yet
- 17:13:32 [StellaMitchell]
- stella: if we are waiting until next week, do we want to address Core in Test document then?
- 17:13:36 [josb]
- q+
- 17:13:45 [csma]
- ack jos
- 17:13:59 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: DTB?
- 17:14:18 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: A week ago, I sent comments on DTB to the list, but I didn't see a response
- 17:14:36 [josb]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Nov/0190.html
- 17:15:01 [StellaMitchell]
- axel: I need to do one more pass over the document, I still need to address some of Jos' comments
- 17:15:08 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: can you do it before the end of the week?
- 17:15:24 [StellaMitchell]
- axel: yes
- 17:15:45 [ChrisW]
- action: axel to incorporate and address Jos' comments from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Nov/0190.html
- 17:15:45 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-669 - Incorporate and address Jos' comments from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Nov/0190.html [on Axel Polleres - due 2008-12-09].
- 17:15:56 [StellaMitchell]
- jos: and please respond to my email
- 17:16:31 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, mute me
- 17:16:31 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should now be muted
- 17:16:33 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: what was the decision for test?
- 17:16:48 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: Sandro has to verify his comments, then it could be ready to go.
- 17:17:03 [StellaMitchell]
- sandro: we don't have to wait until next week for that
- 17:17:31 [AdrianP]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 17:17:31 [Zakim]
- AdrianP should no longer be muted
- 17:17:58 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: if we resolve now, we could avoid the discussion again next week
- 17:18:18 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: does anyone have something to add or objections about the test cases document?
- 17:18:43 [csma]
- PROPOSED: to publish the test case document (conditionned on Sandro's approval of modifications)
- 17:19:13 [csma]
- PROPOSED: to publish the test case document as FPWD (conditionned on Sandro's approval of modifications)
- 17:19:23 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: this is the only public fpwd, and it takes more process, which is why it's good to resolve today
- 17:20:20 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 17:20:20 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see StellaMitchell, Sandro, DaveReynolds, csma, LeoraMorgenstern, josb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), AdrianP, ChrisW, AxelPolleres, Harold, Gary, Michael_Kifer
- 17:20:46 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- +1
- 17:20:50 [LeoraMorgenstern]
- +1, IBM
- 17:20:52 [josb]
- +1 (FUB)
- 17:20:53 [sandro]
- +1 (W3C)
- 17:20:56 [DaveReynolds]
- +1 (HP)
- 17:20:57 [AxelPolleres]
- +1 (DERI)
- 17:21:02 [AdrianP]
- +1 (FUB)
- 17:21:04 [Harold]
- +1 (NRC)
- 17:21:04 [Michael_Kifer]
- +1, self
- 17:21:06 [Gary]
- +1 Oracle
- 17:21:08 [sandro]
- RRSAgent, pointer?
- 17:21:08 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-rif-irc#T17-21-08
- 17:21:23 [AxelPolleres]
- :-)
- 17:21:26 [josb]
- +1 (UNIBZ)
- 17:21:27 [AdrianP]
- +1, (Free University Berlin)
- 17:22:02 [Hassan]
- zakim, unmute me
- 17:22:02 [Zakim]
- Hassan_Ait-Kaci should no longer be muted
- 17:22:23 [csma]
- ILOG +1
- 17:22:25 [Hassan]
- ilog +1
- 17:23:05 [csma]
- RESOLVED: to publish the test case document as FPWD (conditionned on Sandro's approval of modifications)
- 17:23:07 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, pointer?
- 17:23:07 [RRSAgent]
- See http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-rif-irc#T17-23-07
- 17:23:13 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: we will publish together with other documents that we decide on next week
- 17:24:00 [AdrianP]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/0016.html
- 17:24:13 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: time remaining is too short for DTB issues. Let's discuss the proposed new requirement for UCR
- 17:24:22 [csma]
- Rule language coverage
- 17:24:22 [csma]
- Because of the great diversity of rule languages, no one interchange language is likely to be able to bridge between all. Instead, RIF provides dialects which are each targeted at a cluster of similar rule languages. Within that cluster, each feature of each rule language will have some degree of commonality with corresponding features of other rule languages in that cluster. The RIF dialect targeting a cluster must support, at a minimum, interchange of rules using al
- 17:25:29 [josb]
- q+ on vote
- 17:26:22 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: the way that this is written, it is more than just a requirement, it also talks about how we will fulfill the requirement
- 17:26:31 [csma]
- q?
- 17:26:32 [StellaMitchell]
- ...can't we shorten it?
- 17:26:52 [csma]
- Because of the great diversity of rule languages, no one interchange language is likely to be able to bridge between all. Instead, RIF provides dialects which are each targeted at a cluster of similar rule languages.
- 17:26:54 [csma]
- RIF must allow intra-dialect interoperation, i.e. interoperability between semantically similar rule languages (via interchange of RIF rules) within one dialect, and it should support inter-dialect interoperation, i.e. interoperation between dialects with maximum overlap.
- 17:28:11 [StellaMitchell]
- cw: we could move the design oriented text out of the requirement into the beginning of the section
- 17:28:36 [csma]
- ack jos
- 17:28:36 [Zakim]
- josb, you wanted to comment on vote
- 17:29:07 [AdrianP]
- +1, self
- 17:29:59 [ChrisW]
- +1, self
- 17:30:03 [Hassan]
- +1 to adhourn
- 17:30:07 [AxelPolleres]
- +1 bye
- 17:30:08 [StellaMitchell]
- csma: propose to adjourn
- 17:30:15 [AxelPolleres]
- AxelPolleres has left #rif
- 17:30:15 [AdrianP]
- bye
- 17:30:16 [Zakim]
- -Gary
- 17:30:17 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Kifer
- 17:30:17 [Zakim]
- -DaveReynolds
- 17:30:19 [Zakim]
- -Harold
- 17:30:19 [Zakim]
- -josb
- 17:30:20 [Zakim]
- -AdrianP
- 17:30:20 [Zakim]
- -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
- 17:30:21 [Zakim]
- -LeoraMorgenstern
- 17:30:23 [Zakim]
- -AxelPolleres
- 17:30:28 [csma]
- zakim, list attendees
- 17:30:28 [Zakim]
- As of this point the attendees have been Sandro, StellaMitchell, DaveReynolds, csma, LeoraMorgenstern, josb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, AdrianP, ChrisW, AxelPolleres, Harold, Gary,
- 17:30:30 [Zakim]
- ... Michael_Kifer
- 17:30:53 [ChrisW]
- Regrets: PaulVincent
- 17:31:04 [ChrisW]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:31:04 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/12/02-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
- 17:32:07 [Zakim]
- -StellaMitchell
- 17:32:20 [ChrisW]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 17:32:20 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Sandro, csma, ChrisW
- 17:33:02 [Zakim]
- -Sandro
- 17:33:06 [Zakim]
- -csma
- 17:33:07 [Zakim]
- -ChrisW
- 17:33:07 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
- 17:33:08 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Sandro, StellaMitchell, DaveReynolds, csma, LeoraMorgenstern, josb, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, AdrianP, ChrisW, AxelPolleres, Harold, Gary, Michael_Kifer
- 18:02:16 [csma]
- csma has left #rif
- 18:13:40 [Gary_Hallmark]
- Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
- 20:12:30 [Gary_Hallmark]
- Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
- 20:34:13 [Gary_Hallmark]
- Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif