17:55:03 RRSAgent has joined #owl 17:55:03 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/14-owl-irc 17:55:12 ewallace has joined #owl 17:55:28 IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.01.14/Agenda 17:55:41 Zakim, this will be owlwg 17:55:41 ok, IanH; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes 17:56:09 ScribeNick: Achille Fokoue 17:56:25 RRSAgent, make records public 17:58:05 schneid has joined #owl 17:58:30 bmotik has joined #owl 17:59:04 SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started 17:59:11 + +0186528aaaa 17:59:12 zakim, dial ivan-voip 17:59:12 ok, ivan; the call is being made 17:59:13 +Ivan 17:59:15 Zakim, this will be OWL 17:59:15 ok, bmotik, I see SW_OWL()1:00PM already started 17:59:37 MarkusK_ has joined #owl 17:59:54 Zakim, aaaa is me 17:59:54 +bmotik; got it 18:00:08 +IanH 18:00:09 Zakim, mute me 18:00:09 bmotik should now be muted 18:00:28 zakim, who is here? 18:00:28 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH 18:00:35 On IRC I see MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:00:37 Zhe has joined #owl 18:01:15 + +1.603.897.aabb 18:01:17 Achille has joined #owl 18:01:17 bcuencag has joined #owl 18:01:22 +[IPcaller] 18:01:32 zakim, +1.603.897.aabb is me 18:01:32 +Zhe; got it 18:01:35 zakim, who is here? 18:01:35 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH, Zhe, [IPcaller] 18:01:36 On IRC I see bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:01:37 zakim, mute me 18:01:37 Zhe should now be muted 18:01:51 zakim, [IPcaller] is me 18:01:51 +schneid; got it 18:01:52 +[IBM] 18:02:05 zakim, mute me 18:02:05 schneid should now be muted 18:02:07 + +1.518.276.aacc 18:02:08 Zakim, IBM is me 18:02:08 +Achille; got it 18:02:14 zakim, unmute me 18:02:14 schneid should no longer be muted 18:02:21 +Evan_Wallace 18:02:30 ScribeNick: Achille 18:02:31 ScribeNick: Achille 18:02:32 baojie has joined #owl 18:02:44 +??P15 18:02:49 uli has joined #owl 18:02:50 +??P12 18:02:54 Zakim, ??P12 is me 18:02:54 +bcuencag; got it 18:03:04 Zakim, mute me 18:03:04 bcuencag should now be muted 18:03:11 +??P16 18:03:19 zakim, ??P16 is me 18:03:19 +uli; got it 18:03:24 Zakim, who is on the phone 18:03:24 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', baojie 18:03:37 zakim, who is here? 18:03:37 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH, Zhe (muted), schneid, Achille, +1.518.276.aacc, Evan_Wallace, MarkusK_, bcuencag (muted), uli 18:03:39 On IRC I see uli, baojie, bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:03:42 zakim, mute me 18:03:42 uli should now be muted 18:03:45 zakim, mute me 18:03:45 schneid should now be muted 18:03:49 Zakim, aacc is baojie 18:03:49 +baojie; got it 18:03:51 scribenick: Achille 18:03:51 +Jonathan_Rees 18:03:59 scribe: Achille 18:04:34 zakim, aacc is baojie 18:04:34 sorry, IanH, I do not recognize a party named 'aacc' 18:04:46 msmith has joined #owl 18:04:53 zakim, who is here? 18:04:53 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH, Zhe (muted), schneid (muted), Achille, baojie, Evan_Wallace, MarkusK_, bcuencag (muted), uli (muted), Jonathan_Rees 18:04:56 On IRC I see msmith, uli, baojie, bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:05:05 alanr has joined #owl 18:05:23 topic: Agenda amendments? 18:05:24 zakim, who is here? 18:05:24 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH, Zhe (muted), schneid (muted), Achille, baojie, Evan_Wallace, MarkusK_, bcuencag (muted), uli (muted), Jonathan_Rees 18:05:27 On IRC I see alanr, msmith, uli, baojie, bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:05:32 +msmith 18:05:36 ian : no agenda amendments 18:05:41 zakim, Jonathan_Rees is alanr 18:05:41 +alanr; got it 18:05:49 topic: Accept Previous Minutes (07 January) 18:05:59 zakim, mute me 18:05:59 alanr should now be muted 18:06:00 ian: they are ok according to me 18:06:22 PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (07 January) 18:06:38 RESOLVED: Accept Previous Minutes (07 January) 18:06:53 topic: Pending Review Actions 18:07:08 subtopic: Action 250 Send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications / Sandro Hawke 18:07:27 I remember some mail this week from IETF people? 18:07:34 ian: the applications have been made and it is ongoing 18:07:59 subtpic: Action 261 18:08:21 ianh: Peter has done his part. we are waiting for xml schema wg response 18:08:44 topic: Due and overdue Actions 18:08:45 tyes 18:08:46 yes 18:08:52 sorry - muted 18:09:09 ianh: Action 262 done! 18:09:35 topic: Soliciting reviews of and/or comments on LC documents 18:09:48 ianh: we did not receive a lot of comments 18:09:57 ... this should be a cause for concerns 18:10:02 at this point 18:10:03 q+ 18:10:20 q? 18:10:20 zakim, mute me 18:10:21 uli was already muted, uli 18:10:21 zakim, unmute me 18:10:21 Zhe should no longer be muted 18:10:29 ivan: i agree with ian concerns 18:10:42 zhe: Oracle is sending some comments in a few days 18:11:16 ... it is hard to get further comments given the size of the spec and the background needed to understand it 18:11:40 q+ 18:11:43 ack Zhe 18:11:49 ianh: important to get comments from companies and organizations outside the working group 18:11:54 ack zhe 18:11:57 ack ivan 18:12:03 zakim, mute me 18:12:03 Zhe should now be muted 18:12:22 I will do so again on the lists that I sent to. 18:12:25 ivan: need for an explicit call from the chair might have some positive effect 18:12:45 ianh: yes we will repeat the call for comment that we did initially 18:12:45 will do 18:12:56 ivan: great. cosign it with alan 18:13:09 ianh: personnal solicitation is even better 18:13:52 zakim, unmute me 18:13:52 alanr should no longer be muted 18:13:55 ivan: people with influencial blogs might also help by posting on their bogs 18:14:02 ... example Alan? 18:14:20 yes, it does 18:14:23 ianh: yes anybody with a blog 18:14:33 yes 18:14:34 alanr: example Clark & Parsia 18:14:36 will pas it on 18:14:45 zakim, mute me 18:14:45 alanr should now be muted 18:15:01 ianh: Alan and I will send a final reminder on the mailing lists 18:15:12 ... people should write to their blog 18:15:23 ... personal solicitation is also recommended 18:15:35 ianh: other ideas? 18:15:50 topic: F2F5 (23-24 February, 2009) 18:16:33 ianh: only 6 participants confirmed and 4 remote participants confirmed 18:16:51 topic: Last Call Comments 18:17:10 ianh: let's discuss Alan Rector's comment 18:17:11 but this time to the official list 18:17:17 zakim, unmute me 18:17:17 alanr should no longer be muted 18:17:21 + +1.781.271.aadd 18:17:24 i didn't see 2... 18:17:25 I agree, it seemed close to the same 18:17:30 ianh: is the latest version of the comment diff from the first one? 18:17:39 alanr: the same 18:17:40 I just updated the F2f5, I will join. 18:17:54 great, Zhe! 18:17:57 ... just added to the official list 18:18:19 zakim, who is here? 18:18:19 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH, Zhe (muted), schneid (muted), Achille, baojie, Evan_Wallace, MarkusK_, bcuencag (muted), uli (muted), alanr, msmith, +1.781.271.aadd 18:18:22 On IRC I see alanr, msmith, uli, baojie, bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:19:14 Who called in from USA area code 781? 18:19:24 alanr: i have proposed a solution to the comment at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/ALR1 18:19:31 what would the changes be? 18:19:35 .. it requires changes on our side 18:20:11 q+ 18:20:18 q? 18:21:09 ivan: warning for ourself: a major technical change will require a new LC 18:21:23 q+ 18:21:31 ack ivan 18:21:42 ianh: the change suggested by Alan will require a new LC 18:21:45 zakim, unmute me 18:21:45 uli should no longer be muted 18:21:45 ivan: yes 18:21:45 ack uli 18:22:03 q? 18:22:12 uli: what will be the required change? 18:22:24 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/ALR1 18:22:30 alanr: hte proposed serialization is at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/ALR1 18:22:35 ... change the mapping 18:22:43 q+ 18:23:20 q? 18:23:27 Joanne has joined #owl 18:23:42 uli: during parsing u will need to make sure that they survive the parsingf 18:24:03 q? 18:24:13 uli: it sounds complicated 18:24:37 alanr: the declaration for classes have no semantic impacts 18:24:49 s/declaration/declarations 18:25:03 q? 18:25:26 uli: the parser will have to make the class expression are correct according to the syntax 18:25:54 s/to make/to make sure that / 18:25:59 Zakim, unmute me 18:25:59 bmotik should no longer be muted 18:26:08 ack bmotik 18:26:18 zakim, mute me 18:26:18 uli should now be muted 18:28:01 q+ 18:28:05 q? 18:28:13 bmotik: not a good idea to put all these managarial information in annotation 18:28:29 s/these/this 18:28:47 ack alanr 18:28:58 bmotik: not important from an interoperability perspective 18:28:59 q+ 18:29:04 q+ 18:29:14 q- 18:29:28 ack bmotik 18:29:30 alanr: we cannot say to such a world-class expert in modeling that his view on modeling is wrong 18:29:39 zakim, who is here? 18:29:39 On the phone I see bmotik, Ivan, IanH, Zhe (muted), schneid (muted), Achille, baojie, Evan_Wallace, MarkusK_, bcuencag (muted), uli (muted), alanr, msmith, +1.781.271.aadd 18:29:42 q+ 18:29:42 On IRC I see Joanne, alanr, msmith, uli, baojie, bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, MarkusK_, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:29:45 q- 18:29:47 bmotik: annotations are not about modeling 18:29:53 q? 18:30:01 ... use owl-dl for modeling 18:30:21 ... the list of his requirement has nothing to do with modeling 18:30:28 q? 18:30:42 ...but we can say even to world-leading expert that, given that the complications incurred by his workaround and (!) the fact that it will still be a work-around (and not a proper fix), this isn't worth it 18:30:52 ianh: should we continue this discussion on email 18:31:19 uli: Agree. Need a coherent explanation of what the complications are to support such. 18:31:19 q+ 18:31:23 q? 18:31:42 ack bmotik 18:31:46 ... people should look at Alanr's proposal and clarify the technical issues/difficulties 18:31:59 q+ 18:32:05 bmotik: those issues were already discussed at the last F2F 18:32:12 q+ 18:32:19 q- 18:32:23 q? 18:32:40 ianh: i agree, but could someone send an email about the issues 18:32:48 q? 18:32:51 ack alanr 18:32:59 ... example: summary or pointer to the minutes of the last F2F 18:33:15 q? 18:33:44 alanr: i would like a discussion about the alternative solutions 18:33:55 zakim, mute me 18:33:55 alanr should now be muted 18:34:19 ianh: how do we deal with internal LC comments? 18:34:42 q+ 18:34:50 ack ivan 18:34:51 ... should they be treated the exact same way as internal? 18:35:04 s/internal/external 18:35:42 ivan: the wiki page should contain all the comments (internal or external) 18:35:59 ... because the wiki will be used to track the changes to the spec 18:36:03 q? 18:36:10 ok by me 18:36:19 +1 18:37:06 q? 18:37:30 q? 18:38:26 q? 18:39:00 ianh: I will send an email for making and dealing with WG internal comments on LC documents 18:39:44 q? 18:39:46 q+ 18:39:46 action to IanH: send a mail to the group clarifying the deealing with WG internal comments on LC documents 18:39:46 Sorry, couldn't find user - to 18:39:56 ack msmith 18:39:58 action: ianh to send an email to clarify how to make and deal with WG comments on LC documents 18:39:58 Sorry, couldn't find user - ianh 18:40:19 q? 18:40:47 q? 18:41:00 topic: Comment from Tim Redmond 18:41:02 zakim, unmute me 18:41:02 alanr should no longer be muted 18:41:07 q? 18:41:30 ianh: send a note about the discussion we had on import issues 18:42:10 q? 18:42:16 alanr: I will call him to help clarify his understanding 18:42:41 ianh: i agree with alanr that he may not have fully understood the spec 18:42:49 q? 18:42:53 we agreed to disagree :) 18:42:53 yes 18:43:49 action: alanr to talk to tim redmond about his lc comment 18:43:49 Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr 18:43:59 subtopic: Comment from Andy Seaborne 18:44:11 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg//2009Jan/0025.html 18:44:13 q? 18:44:19 action: alanruttenberg to talk to tim redmond about his lc comment 18:44:19 Created ACTION-264 - Talk to tim redmond about his lc comment [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2009-01-21]. 18:44:31 -> http://www.w3.org/mid/b6b357670901140921j4be87090h76df1d20a00878d6@mail.gmail.com Baojie's answer 18:45:03 q? 18:45:43 boajie: my response is at http://www.w3.org/mid/b6b357670901140921j4be87090h76df1d20a00878d6@mail.gmail.com 18:45:46 q? 18:45:51 q+ 18:46:00 ack ivan 18:46:48 q? 18:46:57 ivan: there is another comment from Andy about RDF taking over some datatypes 18:47:09 q? 18:47:13 I agree that only an RDF working group may make such a statement 18:47:27 ivan: i agree with Andy that we should not have such a statement in our spec about RDF working group 18:47:49 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec#Definition_of_the_rdf:text_Datatype 18:47:49 The text in the rdf:text says: "In addition to the RIF and OWL specifications, this datatype is expected to supersede RDF's plain literals with language tags" 18:48:15 ivan: this should not be part of our document 18:48:38 q? 18:48:42 ianh: should we discuss this issue further? 18:48:49 -MarkusK_ 18:49:02 ivan: boajie, did you also have a discussion with the RIF group? 18:49:07 not yet 18:49:20 q? 18:49:33 ianh: let's add that in our todo list on the topic of coordination with RIF group 18:49:46 topic": Test Cases 18:49:56 ianh: Problems with approved test cases? 18:49:59 ianh: no 18:50:30 ianh: tests are coming in fast. it is not clear how to run the approval process 18:50:34 q+ 18:50:38 zakim, unmute me 18:50:38 alanr was not muted, alanr 18:50:40 q? 18:50:42 ... does anyone look at the tests? 18:50:43 ack alanr 18:50:58 alanr: we should split the labor 18:51:14 q? 18:51:19 ... to make sure that every test is looked at by at least one person 18:52:39 q+ 18:52:41 q? 18:52:46 ianh: should be fine if all reasoners pass successfully a test 18:52:46 ack msmith 18:53:20 mike: if there is no table entry, it means that the test cannot be tested by a OWL-DL reasoner (OWL Full test) 18:53:45 q? 18:54:03 mike: there are also tests meant to illustrate the diff between DL and Full 18:54:16 q? 18:54:19 q+ 18:54:21 q+ 18:54:22 q- 18:54:28 zakim, unmute me 18:54:28 schneid should no longer be muted 18:54:29 ack schneid 18:54:36 MarkusK_ has joined #owl 18:55:03 q? 18:55:39 I don't know of tests that touch these cases 18:55:40 +[IPcaller] 18:55:44 schneid: they are some corner cases that will cease to be valid OWL DL 18:55:51 s/they/there 18:55:58 q? 18:56:05 zakim, mute me 18:56:05 schneid should now be muted 18:56:11 Zakim, mute me 18:56:11 bmotik should now be muted 18:56:12 q? 18:56:28 that's one way 18:57:03 I'll take 5 18:57:06 ianh: how to process tests validation by reasoners? 18:57:09 q? 18:57:14 ok 18:57:15 I will take 5 18:57:26 I've already eye-balled them all, so can do it again, but that won't help. 18:57:45 no objection from me 18:58:02 ...why doesn't eye-balling help 18:58:04 zakim, who is here? 18:58:04 On the phone I see bmotik (muted), Ivan, IanH, Zhe (muted), schneid (muted), Achille, baojie, Evan_Wallace, bcuencag (muted), uli (muted), alanr, msmith, +1.781.271.aadd, MarkusK_ 18:58:05 ? 18:58:08 On IRC I see MarkusK_, Joanne, alanr, msmith, uli, baojie, bcuencag, Achille, Zhe, bmotik, schneid, ewallace, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, sandro, trackbot 18:58:10 ianh: anybody objects from receiving 5 testcases to evaluate 18:58:11 I missed the discussion -- I also will check some further tests 18:58:11 zakim, aadd is Joanne 18:58:11 +Joanne; got it 18:58:20 q? 18:58:23 zakim, unmute me 18:58:23 uli should no longer be muted 18:58:23 please let me know which 5 though :) 18:58:36 schneid: there might be old test cases about the reserved vocabulary: OWL 2 DL is now more restrictive, cancelling out almost /all/ names from the rdf, rdfs, owl and xsd namespaces, where in OWL 1 many names were actually not disallowed. But these are corner cases. 18:58:42 Christine has joined #owl 18:58:55 yes. 18:59:02 you can check my sanity :) 18:59:17 ianh: i am not convince that it will help 18:59:39 q? 18:59:43 q+ 18:59:56 alanr: make sure that they are not OWL DL 19:00:07 q? 19:00:16 ack msmith 19:00:23 ianh: if all three reasoners say there are not OWL DL. that should be good enough? 19:00:48 +??P24 19:01:12 Zakim, ??P24 is Christine 19:01:12 +Christine; got it 19:01:28 q? 19:01:35 mike: the entries in the table are the ones that are now OWL DL. 19:02:02 q? 19:02:06 mike: the only one handle to the reasoner were the OWL DL examples 19:03:08 will do shortly 19:03:52 http://owl.cs.manchester.ac.uk/converter/ 19:03:54 i do not have a practice in m'ter syntax, sorry 19:04:16 q+ 19:04:22 q? 19:04:27 ack msmith 19:04:43 +5, this would be nice 19:04:58 @alan regarding declarations http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Entity_Declarations_and_Typing 19:05:08 zakim, mute me 19:05:08 uli should now be muted 19:05:32 ianh: we can use the converter as a species checker provided that the repair functionality is disable 19:05:51 topic: Plans for non-LC documents 19:05:55 q? 19:06:53 ianh: last week strawpoll on ManchesterSyntax Rectrac was not conclusive 19:07:16 ianh: has anyone changed his/her mind since then? 19:07:26 q+ 19:07:30 q+ 19:07:55