15:58:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:58:08 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-rif-irc
15:58:12 <ChrisW> zakim, this will be rif
15:58:12 <Zakim> ok, ChrisW; I see SW_RIF()11:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
15:58:21 <ChrisW> Chair: Chris Welty
15:58:32 <ChrisW> Meeting: RIF Telecon 27-Jan-2009
15:58:47 <ChrisW> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0085.html
15:58:58 <ChrisW> ChrisW has changed the topic to: 27 Jan RIF Telecon Agenda http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/0085.html
15:59:46 <AdrianP> AdrianP has joined #rif
16:00:32 <ChrisW> Hi Adrian, can you scribe today?
16:00:50 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:51 <Zakim> +??P53
16:00:55 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
16:00:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
16:01:03 <AdrianP> Zakim, ??P53 is me
16:01:07 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make logs public
16:01:14 <Zakim> +AdrianP; got it
16:01:26 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
16:01:32 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
16:01:34 <Zakim> -[NRCC]
16:01:36 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
16:02:15 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
16:02:28 <Zakim> +[IBM]
16:02:31 <AxelPolleres> AxelPolleres has joined #rif
16:02:37 <Zakim> +Stella_Mitchell
16:02:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:02:48 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
16:02:54 <ChrisW> Scribe: Harold
16:03:00 <ChrisW> scribenick: Harold
16:03:08 <ChrisW> zakim, who is here?
16:03:43 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdrianP, [NRCC], ChrisW, Stella_Mitchell
16:04:00 <AxelPolleres> dialing
16:04:00 <ChrisW> zakim, nrcc is temporarily Harold
16:04:17 <ChrisW> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Jan/att-0007/06-rif-minutes.html
16:04:25 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern
16:04:35 <Zakim> On IRC I see LeoraMorgenstern, AxelPolleres, StellaMitchell, AdrianP, RRSAgent, Harold, ChrisW, sandro, trackbot, Zakim
16:04:56 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
16:05:08 <Zakim> +Sandro
16:05:14 <Zakim> +??P60
16:05:14 <Hassan> Hassan has joined #rif
16:05:32 <AxelPolleres> (I can scribe, if needed. feeling guilty for not having done quite some time)
16:05:49 <ChrisW> TOPIC: F2F13
16:05:54 <Harold> Im scribe today.
16:06:00 <Gary_Hallmark> Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
16:06:00 <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/38457/f2f13_dates/results
16:06:07 <Zakim> +Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:07:13 <Harold> Re F2F13:
16:07:30 <Zakim> +GaryHallmark
16:07:39 <Harold> Chris: Will be last f2f, if things go according to plan.
16:08:27 <AdrianP> would be great if we can fix dates as early as possible
16:08:54 <Harold> ... Most people who responded so far are ok if F2F13 will be in the US.
16:09:54 <Harold> Axel: Ideally closer to the AC meeting (Apr 24?).
16:10:17 <AxelPolleres> no, march 24th, that's why i said, I guess that's unrealistic.
16:11:23 <Harold> Axel: Perhaps near Madrid, collocated with WWW2009?
16:11:39 <Harold> ... could arrange a meeting room in Madrid.
16:11:52 <AxelPolleres> ok
16:11:58 <AxelPolleres> will check back
16:12:18 <Harold> Re Liasison:
16:12:19 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Liason
16:13:41 <Harold> Chris: Split OWL comment into two.
16:14:35 <Harold> ... Try to move fwd with OWL WG collaboration: Axel, Jos would be key.
16:14:48 <Harold> Axel: Yes.
16:15:03 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Public COmments
16:15:22 <Harold> Chris: Seems done?
16:15:45 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Action Review
16:15:50 <AxelPolleres> Sandro, when is the next OWL f2f? maybe some overlap or adjacent meeting would make sense?
16:17:11 <Harold> Gary: Still working on Core as specialization of PRD.
16:17:59 <Hassan> continued - will work on it this Feb. 
16:18:39 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Issue-50
16:20:31 <AdrianP> there was a discussion on the last F2F about using meta data to indicate multi-valued 
16:20:38 <AdrianP> frames
16:21:01 <Harold> Harold: Terminologically, let's separate the more specific "metadata" and more general "annotation".
16:21:26 <Harold> ... Ok with no semantic import on annotations.
16:22:02 <AxelPolleres> adrian, would such metadata be "per frame" or "per ruleset"?
16:22:02 <Harold> Adrian: Maybe metadata for multi-valued frames.
16:22:14 <Harold> ... proposed by Michael Kifer?
16:22:35 <Harold> Chris: Cardinality with metadata?
16:22:44 <Michael_Kifer> Michael_Kifer has joined #rif
16:23:04 <Harold> Sandro: Was just in response to PRD discussion.
16:23:27 <Zakim> +Michael_Kifer
16:23:38 <AdrianP> yes, agree too
16:24:10 <Harold> Michael: fine.
16:25:03 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: Core, BLD, PRD will not have semantic metadata; removing metadata from a ruleset will not change the entailments - closing ISSUE-50
16:25:07 <AdrianP> +1
16:25:27 <Harold> +1
16:25:33 <Gary> +1
16:25:33 <Michael_Kifer> +1
16:25:35 <Hassan> 0
16:25:36 <ChrisW> Sandro: +1
16:25:40 <AxelPolleres> +1
16:25:40 <ChrisW> +1
16:25:56 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: Core, BLD, PRD will not have semantic metadata; removing metadata from a ruleset will not change the entailments - closing ISSUE-50
16:26:22 <ChrisW> action: Chris to close issue-50
16:26:22 <trackbot> Created ACTION-699 - Close issue-50 [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-02-03].
16:26:32 <ChrisW> TOPIC: ISSUE-83
16:26:46 <ChrisW> Ambiguity in PS
16:27:57 <Harold> Hassan: As far as I can remember, all remaining ambiguities are mild.
16:28:55 <Harold> ... First, canonical PS has no serious ambiguity. 
16:29:53 <Harold> ... Then, Abridged PS, which is even less binding, may have more (e.g. dash as minus vs. in identifiers)
16:29:59 <AdrianP> yes, abridge syntax as compact representation, e.g., 2 - 1 (numbers) vs. "2" - "1" (text) 
16:30:35 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-83 - the existing presentation syntax ambiguities are resolvable
16:30:36 <Harold> Chris: Let's deal with ambiguities in Abridged PS as they arise.
16:30:43 <AdrianP> +1
16:30:45 <Hassan> +1
16:30:51 <Harold> +1
16:30:51 <AxelPolleres> +1
16:31:08 <ChrisW> +1
16:31:22 <Michael_Kifer> +1
16:31:22 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-83 - the existing presentation syntax ambiguities are resolvable
16:31:31 <ChrisW> TOPIC: DTB
16:33:08 <Harold> Chris: Dave had suggested a meta-predicate for equality.
16:33:28 <Harold> Axel: For normal equality, we have all we need.
16:33:47 <Harold> ... For negated, we may need what Dave suggested.
16:33:56 <ChrisW> pred:isLiteralEqual(?l1 ?l2)
16:34:40 <ChrisW> pred:isLiteralNotEqual(?l1 ?l2)
16:34:42 <Harold> Chris: Is this false if I1 or I2 are not a literal?
16:34:46 <Harold> Axel: Yes.
16:36:40 <Harold> Chris: What does it solve?
16:39:30 <Harold> Harold: Would isLiteralEqual's mapping to false of both "wrong arguments" and "non equal arguments" be acceptable to RIF users (and other communities)?
16:40:03 <Harold> Axel: Perhaps parameterize.
16:40:31 <Harold> Chris: maybe type as first arg?
16:41:01 <Harold> Axel: Def of built-ins could depend on underlying datatypes.
16:41:28 <AxelPolleres> literalNotEqual
16:41:42 <AxelPolleres> isLiteral, isNotLiteral ?
16:42:15 <Harold> Hassan: Either parameterized type args or already instantiated in built-in identifier.
16:42:26 <Harold> ... (from Jos)
16:42:43 <Harold> Axel: fair enough.
16:43:01 <Harold> Chris: There are equal preds for all datatypes?
16:43:23 <Harold> Axel: Yes, even though not named completely uniformly as such.
16:44:07 <Harold> Chris: The issue is for numeric-equal if args are of different type.
16:44:59 <Harold> s/ different type/ different numeric types/
16:45:17 <Harold> Sandro: XPath tells you how to do the type promotion.
16:46:03 <Harold> Chris: Yes, e.g. equal for integer and double.
16:47:04 <Harold> Axel: Idea was to back up each datatype with an equal and a notequal predicate.
16:47:15 <Harold> ... We could have done differently.
16:47:16 <csma> csma has joined #rif
16:47:27 <Harold> ... Will draft something.
16:47:32 <Harold> ... For email discussion.
16:48:07 <AxelPolleres> ... will draft something on both the generic guards and the generic equals/notequals predicate.
16:48:13 <Zakim> +??P0
16:48:23 <csma> zakim, ??P) is me
16:48:23 <Zakim> sorry, csma, I do not recognize a party named '??P)'
16:48:24 <ChrisW> action: axel to report on possibility of closing literal-not-equal issue-80
16:48:24 <trackbot> Created ACTION-700 - Report on possibility of closing literal-not-equal issue-80 [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-02-03].
16:48:36 <csma> zakim, ??P0 is me
16:48:36 <Zakim> +csma; got it
16:48:44 <csma> zakim, mute me
16:48:44 <Zakim> csma should now be muted
16:49:10 <Harold> Postpone to next week's telecon ISSUE-81 [10] (Support for additional OWL-RL data types)
16:49:29 <Harold> ISSUE-81 [10] (Support for additional OWL-RL data types)
16:50:34 <ChrisW> TOPIC: Test cases
16:50:43 <Harold> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Category:Test_Case
16:50:51 <ChrisW> Test case: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_1
16:53:50 <Harold> Name           ::= UNICODESTRING
16:54:01 <Harold> UNITERM        ::= Const '(' (TERM* | (Name '->' TERM)*) ')'
16:55:46 <Michael_Kifer> maybe call negative syntax examples "syntax errors"?
16:56:01 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: Accept test case http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_1
16:56:04 <csma> +1 to look them all first
16:57:10 <csma> q+
16:57:29 <AxelPolleres> What about this one: _p(http://example.com/example->color->"green") 
16:57:32 <AxelPolleres> ?!?
16:57:39 <csma> ak csma
16:57:55 <csma> ack csma
16:58:20 <csma> zakim, mute me
16:58:20 <Zakim> csma should now be muted
16:58:47 <AxelPolleres> or this one:
16:59:05 <AxelPolleres> _p(http://ex"ampl"e.com/exam"ple#color->"green") 
16:59:12 <AxelPolleres> q+
17:00:00 <Harold> Stella: Arg names are defined 'negatively': every UNICODESTRING that's not a constant is ok.
17:01:02 <Harold> Chris: Hassan, does this meet your expectation?
17:01:22 <Harold> Hassan: Would have been easier to quote them, but it's ok.
17:01:49 <Harold> Michael: Wasn't this a different case?
17:01:59 <Harold> Hassan: Right.
17:02:17 <Harold>  Michael: Maybe find a universal solution, maybe single quotes.
17:02:33 <Harold> Hassan: yes.
17:03:14 <Harold> Sandro: A valid name could have a space inside, so need single quotes.
17:03:30 <Harold> Chris: Why not double quotes?
17:04:40 <AxelPolleres> again the two ugly examples, which seem awkward to parse:  _p(http://example.com/example->color->"green")    _p(http://ex"ampl"e.com/exam"ple#color->"green") 
17:05:13 <Harold> s/Chris: Why not double quotes?/...  Why not double quotes?/
17:05:30 <Harold> Hassan: Keep the grammar as is. Fine.
17:05:44 <Harold> Michael: Looks a bit strange.
17:06:01 <Hassan> No - not keep the grammar as is - modify it to allow for STRING there
17:06:05 <AxelPolleres> ncnames only?
17:06:15 <Harold> Chris: If 'strangeness' bothers you then the whole named-arg thing should bother you.
17:06:19 <AxelPolleres> how bout that?
17:07:21 <Harold> Hassan: Grammar should allow string as arg name.
17:07:32 <AxelPolleres> we could say: ncnames OR (singlequote uc-strings singlequote)
17:07:33 <Harold> Chris: Examples?
17:08:01 <Harold> Axel: Any issues with single quotes?
17:08:29 <Harold> Chris: Would be (even) harder to read.
17:08:48 <Harold> Sandro: Bad idea to use up single quotes for corner case.
17:09:00 <Harold> Michael: agree with Sandro.
17:09:13 <StellaMitchell> can you just limit it to alphanumeric characters, no spaces, etc
17:09:15 <StellaMitchell> something like that
17:09:20 <Gary> of course, we could remove NAUs...
17:09:29 <AxelPolleres> so, you say: Name           ::= UNICODESTRING
17:09:49 <Harold> Hassan: Suggest to postpone until we finish use cases.
17:10:06 <Harold> ... So can look for solutions for all issues.
17:10:54 <Hassan> I agree
17:11:31 <Harold> Chris: Before we decide test case we need to decide syntax.
17:11:45 <Harold> ... No on against stings?
17:11:56 <Harold> Sandro/Axel: Well, we.
17:12:01 <AxelPolleres> :-)
17:12:21 <Harold> s/stings/strings/
17:12:57 <Harold> s/No on/No one/
17:13:38 <AxelPolleres> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#NCName
17:14:38 <Harold> Chris: Would those in favor of named args be fine with specializing Name ::= UNICODESTRING with Name ::= CIDENTIFIER.
17:14:48 <Harold> ... Or just use quotes.
17:15:19 <Harold> Harold: Yes.
17:15:31 <Harold> (specialized names)
17:16:19 <AxelPolleres> oh my, full URIs only, no abbreviations? 
17:16:26 <Harold> Chris: Which ones are URIs and which ones only look like URIs?
17:16:27 <ChrisW> Prefer NCNAMES
17:16:37 <LeoraMorgenstern> which is the choice that doesn't allow abbreviations?
17:16:54 <LeoraMorgenstern> Something that forces you to do full URIs
17:17:20 <StellaMitchell> +1 ncnames
17:17:28 <AxelPolleres> +1 NCNames
17:17:28 <Harold> +1 (to specialized names, which we have anyway, albeit defined 'negatively')
17:17:40 <Gary> _p is an ncname
17:17:52 <LeoraMorgenstern> I'm still confused about what an nc name is.
17:18:00 <Hassan> 0 - not sure at this point
17:18:01 <LeoraMorgenstern> I looked at Axel's link, but need more time.
17:18:10 <AxelPolleres> -1 to negatively defined (see weird corner cases above)
17:18:36 <Michael_Kifer> I prefer quotation
17:19:16 <Hassan> I agree with Axel's proposal (NCNAME or else quoted)
17:19:23 <StellaMitchell> Gary raised a problem with ncname?
17:19:53 <Harold> Gary, this is interesting but they can occur elsehwere in an expression, too.
17:20:31 <Harold> _p(_p->1) might be a problem.
17:20:42 <ChrisW> straw poll: is this worth redoing last call?
17:20:45 <StellaMitchell> so, Harold, it would be ncname that is not a valid constant?
17:20:48 <AxelPolleres> Sandro, why would (ncname or quotetdstring) not work for you, except taste?
17:20:57 <AdrianP> -1
17:20:57 <Harold> -1
17:20:59 <LeoraMorgenstern> -1
17:21:02 <Hassan> -1
17:21:04 <Michael_Kifer> -1
17:21:19 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif
17:21:33 <LeoraMorgenstern> Given that it's already 12:21, let's accept the 2 test cases we have looked at,
17:21:33 <ChrisW> _p(2->"green")
17:21:39 <LeoraMorgenstern> rather than looking at all test cases first.
17:22:03 <sandro> am I finally connected?
17:22:18 <Michael_Kifer> +1 accept case 2
17:22:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> +1 accept case 1 and accept case 2 
17:22:38 <Hassan> +1 accept both
17:22:55 <ChrisW> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_3'
17:23:14 <Harold> Stella, some parsers might not notice that both _p's in _p(_p->1) have the same name.
17:23:14 <LeoraMorgenstern> Chris, the link doesn't work for me
17:23:23 <sandro> link worked for me.
17:23:42 <LeoraMorgenstern> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_3
17:23:46 <Harold> +1
17:23:56 <ChrisW> _p("http://example.com/example#color"->"green") 
17:23:57 <LeoraMorgenstern> Right, I have the case; just pointing out that clicking on that link isn't working for me.
17:24:35 <AxelPolleres> 3 and 4 are problematic with respect to what we discussed now.
17:24:35 <sandro> ewwwwwww
17:25:07 <AxelPolleres>  _p(http://example.com/example->color->"green")    _p(http://ex"ampl"e.com/exam"ple#color->"green") are similar to 4.
17:25:25 <Hassan> Stella, Harold, Gary: solution is to tokenize _foo as as Local no matter what and reject _p as named-argument 
17:26:07 <AxelPolleres> q+
17:26:35 <csma> ack axel
17:26:52 <Harold> Sandro: Just editorial change, since onely changing non-normative PS, not changing normative XML.
17:27:42 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: Accept http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_1
17:27:52 <AxelPolleres> +1
17:27:54 <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
17:27:54 <ChrisW> +1
17:27:55 <Harold> +1
17:27:58 <Hassan> +1
17:27:58 <sandro> sandro: My preference is for a solution where argument names can be  (ncname|string) -- users get to pick whether to have quotes.
17:27:59 <sandro> +1
17:28:09 <Michael_Kifer> +1
17:28:13 <Gary> +1
17:28:14 <StellaMitchell> yes
17:28:22 <ChrisW> PROPOSED: Accept http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_2
17:28:29 <sandro> +1
17:28:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
17:28:33 <Harold> +1
17:28:38 <Gary> +1
17:28:40 <ChrisW> +1
17:28:41 <AdrianP> +1
17:28:42 <Hassan> +1
17:28:43 <AxelPolleres> +1
17:28:44 <csma> RESOLVED: Accept http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_1
17:28:54 <csma> RESOLVED: Accept http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_@
17:28:54 <ChrisW> RESOLVED: Accept http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Argument_names_in_uniterms_2
17:29:09 <ChrisW> AOB?
17:29:36 <csma> yes
17:29:53 <csma> yes to accept the action
17:30:03 <ChrisW> action: csma to put this on agenda (syntax discussion on NAU names)
17:30:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-701 - Put this on agenda (syntax discussion on NAU names) [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-02-03].
17:30:04 <sandro> note that ncnames are allowed to contain minus signs.
17:30:08 <Harold> Chris: put on agenda for next week  Sandro's My preference is for a solution where argument names can be  (ncname|string).
17:30:16 <Zakim> -AdrianP
17:30:18 <Hassan> +1 to adjourn
17:30:22 <ChrisW> zakim, list attendees
17:30:22 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been AdrianP, Stella_Mitchell, ChrisW, LeoraMorgenstern, Harold, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, GaryHallmark, Michael_Kifer, csma
17:30:25 <Zakim> -Hassan_Ait-Kaci
17:30:25 <Zakim> -Michael_Kifer
17:30:27 <Zakim> -GaryHallmark
17:30:27 <Zakim> -Stella_Mitchell
17:30:28 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
17:30:29 <Zakim> -??P60
17:30:34 <ChrisW> Regrets: DaveReynolds PaulVincent JosDeBruijn
17:30:41 <ChrisW> rrsagent, make minutes
17:30:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
17:31:19 <csma> zakim unmute me
17:31:19 <Zakim> -Harold
17:31:26 <ChrisW> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:31:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see ChrisW, Sandro, csma (muted)
17:31:37 <ChrisW> ack csma
17:33:05 <Zakim> -ChrisW
17:33:08 <Zakim> -csma
17:33:10 <Zakim> -Sandro
17:33:11 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:33:13 <Zakim> Attendees were AdrianP, Stella_Mitchell, ChrisW, LeoraMorgenstern, Harold, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, GaryHallmark, Michael_Kifer, csma
17:57:50 <csma> csma has left #rif
18:02:44 <Gary_Hallmark> Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
19:35:50 <sandro> sandro has joined #rif