15:48:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:48:57 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-irc
15:49:16 <csma> Meeting: RIF telecon 6 January 2009
15:49:25 <csma> Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
15:50:07 <csma> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0001.html
15:50:59 <csma> csma has changed the topic to: RIF telecon 6 January, agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0001.html
15:51:52 <csma> Regrets: MohamedZergaoui, LeoraMorgenstern, PaulVincent
15:52:14 <csma> rrsagent, make log public
15:52:21 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
15:52:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-minutes.html csma
15:52:34 <csma> zakim, reset agenda
15:52:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'reset agenda', csma
15:52:39 <csma> zakim, clear agenda
15:52:41 <Zakim> agenda cleared
15:52:56 <csma> agendum administration
15:53:04 <csma> agendum+ Admin
15:53:14 <csma> agendum+ Liaison
15:53:24 <csma> agendum+ Public Comments
15:53:37 <csma> agendum+ Action review
15:53:46 <csma> agendum+ F2F12
15:53:54 <csma> agendum+ DTB
15:54:04 <csma> agendum+ ACTION-546
15:54:14 <csma> agendum+ Test Cases
15:54:21 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
15:54:22 <csma> Agendum+ AOB
15:54:40 <csma> Hi Harold!
15:58:36 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
16:00:02 <josb> josb has joined #rif
16:00:59 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:59 <Zakim> + +39.047.101.aaaa
16:01:04 <Zakim> +??P50
16:01:05 <Zakim> -??P50
16:01:05 <Zakim> +??P52
16:01:06 <Zakim> +??P50
16:02:08 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
16:02:27 <csma> zakim, ??P50 is me
16:02:27 <Zakim> +csma; got it
16:02:34 <csma> ack ??P50
16:02:42 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
16:02:54 <Zakim> +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:03:13 <Zakim> +[IBM]
16:03:15 <StellaMitchell> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
16:03:15 <Zakim> +StellaMitchell; got it
16:03:26 <Michael_Kifer> Michael_Kifer has joined #rif
16:03:35 <Zakim> +ChrisW
16:03:36 <ChrisW> ChrisW has joined #rif
16:03:52 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:03:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see csma, josb, DaveReynolds, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), StellaMitchell, ChrisW
16:04:27 <csma> Harold, Can you scribe today?
16:04:56 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #rif
16:04:57 <Zakim> +Sandro
16:05:08 <Harold> sorry, no, im still in another meeting.
16:05:20 <Zakim> + +1.631.833.aabb
16:05:32 <Michael_Kifer> zakim, aabb is me
16:05:32 <Zakim> +Michael_Kifer; got it
16:05:48 <ChrisW> scribe: Michael_Kifer
16:06:14 <csma> zakim, next item
16:06:14 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from csma]
16:06:15 <Zakim> +??P69
16:07:19 <csma> PROPOSED: to approve the minutes of telecon December 9
16:07:21 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0092/RIF_Telecon_9-Dec-08.htm
16:07:55 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: Accept Dec 16 minutes
16:08:01 <csma> RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of telecon December 9
16:08:12 <Zakim> + +1.503.533.aacc
16:08:14 <ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0096/RIF_Telecon_16-Dec-08.html
16:08:15 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0096/RIF_Telecon_16-Dec-08.html
16:08:24 <Gary_Hallmark> Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
16:08:27 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: Accept Dec 16 minutes
16:08:44 <csma> PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of December 23
16:08:55 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Dec/att-0125/2008-12-23-rif-minutes.html
16:09:12 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:09:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see csma, josb, DaveReynolds, Hassan_Ait-Kaci (muted), StellaMitchell, ChrisW, Sandro, Michael_Kifer, AxelPolleres, +1.503.533.aacc
16:09:17 <csma> RESOLVED: to accept the minutres of December 23
16:09:43 <ChrisW> zakim, aacc is GaryHallmark
16:09:44 <Zakim> +GaryHallmark; got it
16:09:53 <csma> next item
16:10:29 <csma> zakim, close item 2
16:10:29 <Zakim> agendum 2, Liaison, closed
16:10:30 <Zakim> I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:10:32 <Zakim> 3. Public Comments [from csma]
16:10:40 <csma> next item
16:15:08 <csma> zakim, close item 3
16:15:08 <Zakim> agendum 3, Public Comments, closed
16:15:09 <Zakim> I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:15:10 <Zakim> 4. Action review [from csma]
16:15:13 <csma> next item
16:20:38 <ChrisW> i've updated: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_TK2
16:20:48 <ChrisW> AXEL and Michael, please take a look
16:21:05 <ChrisW> action: Chris to send response to TK2
16:21:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-678 - Send response to TK2 [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-01-13].
16:21:57 <csma> next item
16:22:56 <sandro> action: sandro open registration poll for f2f12
16:22:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-679 - Open registration poll for f2f12 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-01-13].
16:23:23 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
16:24:11 <csma> next item
16:25:15 <Michael_Kifer> *PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (based on resolution of issue-79) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:25:28 <sandro> +1
16:25:29 <josb> q+
16:25:36 <csma> ack josb
16:25:43 <AxelPolleres> q+
16:26:41 <Michael_Kifer> Jos: not clear how this proposed resolution is related to issue 79.
16:27:00 <Michael_Kifer> The main idea in 79 was a change in the semantics.
16:27:16 <csma> PROPOSED: Change all negative guards to return true only for literals that are not of the type, false for non-literals (closing ISSUE-79).
16:27:17 <josb> yes
16:27:48 <csma> Ack axel
16:28:40 <DaveReynolds> q+
16:28:47 <Michael_Kifer> Jos: include the semantics explicitly in the resolution on isLiteralNotOfType etc.
16:28:47 <csma> ack dave
16:29:59 <josb> *PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:30:45 <josb> +1
16:30:48 <DaveReynolds> *PROPOSED:* add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:30:48 <AxelPolleres> just let me confirm, we wanted "isLiteralNotOfType" really not "isNotLiteralOfType", yes?
16:30:48 <Hassan> +1
16:30:52 <Michael_Kifer> +1
16:31:17 <josb> Axel: the phrasing in the proposal is what we want
16:31:37 <AxelPolleres> +1 (right, rethought it)
16:31:39 <sandro> (BTW, please drop the "*" around proposed.   It wont be recognized by the scripts that way.)
16:31:45 <Harold> +1
16:31:46 <sandro> +1
16:32:23 <csma> PROPOSED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger).
16:32:46 <DaveReynolds> q+
16:33:25 <csma> PROPOSED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79.
16:33:30 <DaveReynolds> q-
16:33:34 <csma> ack dave
16:34:53 <Michael_Kifer> ISSUE-79 closed + membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80
16:34:56 <csma> PROPOSED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79 and the membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80.
16:35:31 <csma> RESOLVED: add isLiteralOfType and isLiteralNotOfType (Changing guards to return true only for literals that are/are not of the type, false for non-literals) and remove specific type-named guards (e.g. isInteger, isNotInteger). Closing ISSUE-79 and the membership/non-membership part of ISSUE-80.
16:36:01 <ChrisW> action: Chris to close issue-79 and update issue-80 to reflect closing of membership part
16:36:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-680 - Close issue-79 and update issue-80 to reflect closing of membership part [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-01-13].
16:36:18 <ChrisW> action: axel to update DTB to reflect resolution on guards
16:36:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-681 - Update DTB to reflect resolution on guards [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-01-13].
16:38:54 <josb> Dave, could you point to the place where you would need them?
16:39:42 <ChrisW> AXEL: can you scribe next week?
16:39:45 <AxelPolleres> q+
16:40:13 <csma> ack axel
16:40:41 <Michael_Kifer> Dave: Wants LiteralsNotEqual
16:43:04 <josb> q+
16:43:11 <DaveReynolds> Jos: See http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWLRL#Rules_for_supported_datatypes for the inequality rules in the absence of the proposed builtins and just one line in the simplified version.
16:43:17 <csma> ack jos
16:43:19 <Michael_Kifer> and LiteralsEqual (just for symmetry, but not strictly necessary)
16:44:16 <AxelPolleres> CHRIS: I am not 100% sure for next week, I will be in vienna, need to check phone availability, but normally, it should work. will there be a teleconf? (people travelling to F2F12?)
16:45:42 <josb> error :- ?lt1[owl:differentFrom->?lt2] and
16:45:44 <josb>                                        ?l1=?l2
16:47:07 <josb> nevermind, this does not work
16:47:30 <josb> q+
16:48:31 <sandro> s/CHRIS:/Chris, /
16:49:27 <ChrisW> axel - never mind, no telecon next week!
16:50:17 <josb> q+
16:51:19 <ChrisW> i am about to close action 666
16:51:24 <ChrisW> prepare yourselves
16:52:17 <DaveReynolds> q+
16:52:45 <ChrisW> rrsagent, pointer
16:52:45 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-irc#T16-52-45
16:53:03 <josb> q?
16:53:11 <csma> ack jos
16:54:08 <Michael_Kifer> Jos: not a good idea to have equal/not equal for individual data types
16:54:32 <AxelPolleres> I think we just need the mapping of operators (lt, gt, eq, neq) for datatypes to built-ins, just as XPAth/XQuery seem to do it implicitly...
16:54:55 <Michael_Kifer> Jos: are u proposing LiteralNotEqual/LiteralEqual?
16:55:04 <csma> ack dave
16:55:58 <josb> I am saying we don't need individual equal/not-equal for datatypes if we have generic (not-)equal predicates
16:57:23 <Michael_Kifer> yes, I agree. Individual type-based builtins are problematic
16:57:55 <josb> If we go for generic we should remove individual
16:58:04 <josb> I am still leaning towards keeping the individual ones, though
17:00:36 <csma> PROPOSED: add LiteralNotEqual/LiteralEqual predicates and remove the equality/inequality predicates for individual data types.
17:01:06 <DaveReynolds> I would prefer to keep the individual ones as well, what's the argument for removing them?
17:02:53 <Michael_Kifer> Axel: predicates DateEqual are not expressible through LiteralEqual
17:03:39 <Michael_Kifer> Jos: we just need to adjust LiteralEqual
17:05:14 <AxelPolleres> sounds nice!
17:05:28 <csma> PROPOSED: add LiteralNotEqual/LiteralEqual predicates and remove the equality/inequality predicates for individual data types.
17:05:50 <josb> F2F
17:06:21 <Michael_Kifer> Axel: we need to write the semantics of these predicates precisely
17:06:31 <josb> Axel: I think I know how we can make it extensible
17:07:00 <josb> Do we really need a straw proposal?
17:07:52 <josb> q+
17:07:59 <csma> ack jos
17:09:50 <josb> late afternoon should work? would be morning in Vienna
17:10:20 <josb> oops, is the other way around
17:10:42 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
17:10:54 <sandro> issue-81?
17:10:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-81 -- Support for additional OWL-RL datatype -- OPEN
17:10:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/81
17:11:18 <AxelPolleres> summary: what it boils down to is that the semantics of the following built-ins needs to be worded such that it is parametric with respect tot the supported datatypes:  isLiteralOfType, isLiteralNotOfType, isLiteralEqual, isLiteralNotEqual 
17:11:48 <josb> Axel: for isLiteralOfType, DT would be a parameter
17:12:14 <josb> for (not-)equal, we don't need the parameter; indeed, it would not be very generic in that case
17:12:33 <sandro> PROPOSED: Add to RIF Core all the XML Schema datatypes in OWL-RL (as listed in http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/81)
17:12:55 <josb> q+
17:13:01 <csma> ack jos
17:13:03 <Michael_Kifer> minua the last 3?
17:13:15 <Michael_Kifer> s/minua/minus/
17:14:07 <Michael_Kifer> Jos: issue with integer/float data types in OWL
17:14:09 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWLRL#Datatypes_supported
17:15:47 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#Feature_Overview_3    
17:15:55 <csma> Jos would object to owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary unless technical issue resolved
17:16:06 <josb> q+
17:16:36 <AxelPolleres> jos: all others are ok?
17:17:13 <sandro> Jos: I would prefer we change our datatypes to work the OWL way (non-disjoint value spaces)
17:18:49 <csma> ACTION: Jos to edit ISSUE-81 to explain the technical reason that make  owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary incompatible with RIF current data types
17:18:49 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - Jos
17:18:49 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
17:18:57 <josb> Axel: xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary, owl:real are problematic
17:19:15 <csma> ACTION: Jdebruij2 to edit ISSUE-81 to explain the technical reason that make  owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary incompatible with RIF current data types
17:19:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-682 - Edit ISSUE-81 to explain the technical reason that make  owl:real, xsd:hexBinary, xsd:base64Binary incompatible with RIF current data types [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-13].
17:19:33 <josb> q+
17:20:42 <josb> q?
17:21:24 <csma> ack jos
17:22:32 <sandro> Sandro: So the implementation burden of "the owl way" is like this:  when you compare an int and real for equality, you can't just say "no", you have to convert to compatible numeric types and then compare.
17:22:55 <csma> ACTION: jdebruij2 to ask Dave to have a look at ISSUE-81 before F2F12
17:22:56 <trackbot> Created ACTION-683 - Ask Dave to have a look at ISSUE-81 before F2F12 [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-01-13].
17:23:22 <csma> next item
17:23:40 <josb> s/ISSUE-81/implementation burden for non-overlapping numeric types, related to ISSUE-81/
17:23:45 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/546
17:25:52 <csma> next item
17:26:27 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0000.html
17:27:09 <Hassan> I prefer it!
17:27:20 <josb> yes, it is
17:27:28 <AxelPolleres> +1
17:27:57 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/581
17:28:56 <Michael_Kifer> No telecon on Jan 13
17:28:56 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Chaining_strategy_numeric-add_1, ...
17:29:22 <Michael_Kifer> But there will be a telecon on Jan 20
17:30:15 <Zakim> -[NRCC]
17:30:39 <Hassan> +1 to adjourn
17:30:49 <Zakim> -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
17:30:52 <Zakim> -StellaMitchell
17:30:54 <Zakim> -GaryHallmark
17:31:01 <Zakim> -josb
17:31:13 <csma> zakim, list attendees
17:31:13 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, DaveReynolds, csma, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, StellaMitchell, ChrisW, Sandro, +1.631.833.aabb, Michael_Kifer, AxelPolleres,
17:31:16 <Zakim> ... +1.503.533.aacc, GaryHallmark, [NRCC]
17:31:27 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:31:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/06-rif-minutes.html csma
17:32:21 <Zakim> -AxelPolleres
17:32:48 <Zakim> -Michael_Kifer
17:34:35 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:34:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see csma, ChrisW, Sandro
17:35:14 <ChrisW> zakim, who is talking?
17:35:26 <Zakim> ChrisW, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: csma (74%), Sandro (46%)
17:35:30 <ChrisW> zakim, mute sandro
17:35:30 <Zakim> Sandro should now be muted
17:36:34 <ChrisW> zakim, unmute sandro
17:36:34 <Zakim> Sandro should no longer be muted
17:37:18 <Zakim> -csma
17:37:27 <Zakim> -ChrisW
17:43:08 <Zakim> -Sandro
17:43:10 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:43:11 <Zakim> Attendees were +39.047.101.aaaa, josb, DaveReynolds, csma, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, StellaMitchell, ChrisW, Sandro, +1.631.833.aabb, Michael_Kifer, AxelPolleres, +1.503.533.aacc,
17:43:14 <Zakim> ... GaryHallmark, [NRCC]
17:57:53 <csma> csma has left #rif
18:02:27 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
19:37:26 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif