See also: IRC log
<josb> I don't see many regrets
<ChrisW> Scribe: Harold
<ChrisW> scribenick: Harold
<ChrisW> PROPOSED: accept minutes of 17 Feb telecon
<ChrisW> RESOLVED: accept minutes of 17 Feb telecon
<ChrisW> Scribe: Axel Polleres
<AxelPolleres> scribe: AxelPolleres
<ChrisW> scribenick: AxelPolleres
chrisw: jos, any news from OWL datatypes?
jos: many people in OWL wg in favor of disjointness. not too much new.
axel: SPARQL telecons just started today, will be 1hr before RIF, axel might be late.
chrisw: next rif f2f ind cambridge, MA April 17-18, we need a web page.
chrisw: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/F2F13 needs to be filled.
ACTION 707 - completed by jos.
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 707
josw: action 707 is completed.
axel: action 704 completed.
... action 703 pending review.
<josb> can we have this discussion w/o DaveR?
csma: goes into safeness
discussion later on.
... next action goes in Pres Syn discussion next week.
leora: my "whiteboard" action continued.
chrisw: shall we drop paul vincent's action?
csma: paul wanted to keeep it.... will remind him.
chrisw: let's go for actions with
... action 653 can be closed.
chrisw: the issue is: should datatype iris map to datatypes themselves?
<ChrisW> If a constant c \in Const is an IRI constant "d"^^rif:iri and d is a
<ChrisW> datatype identifier, i.e., d \in DTS, then I_C(d) is the datatype 
<ChrisW> identified by d.
michael: I think this change is bad, because of now unforseeable consequences and lots of implied changes.
jos: now that we have predicates
which refer to datatypes, what datatype should the argument of
the second argument be? (definition of semantics now somewhat
... literal-equals, is-literal-of-type, etc.
<josb> isLiteralOfType("a", xsd:int)
jos: a strange consequence is
that if you write xsd:int = xsd:string that could have weird
consequences, if we equate datatypes and their uris, that would
fix the semantics and make that inconsistent.
... michael seemed to hav doubts for symbol spaces being sets of constants not of objects.
michael: "1"^^ xs:string would
not become the same as "1"^^xs:int if xs:int=xs:string at the
... because IRIs as datatypes are not IRI constants. Jos' proposal would equate the DT-IRIs with sets of constants, doesn't make sense to me.
jos: this is not by accident. I propose to fix the definition of datatypes.
<ChrisW> isLiteralOfType("a", "xsd:string"^^rif:iri)
(or isLiteralOfType("a", xsd:string) )
<josb> isLiteralOfType("a", "xsd:int"^^rif:iri)
jos: the second argument should be a datatype, i.e. the iris of datatypes should have a fixed interpreetation.
michael: this is what I wanted to
... I suggest to have the second argumant of isLiteralOfType being literals, I consider the current def wrong.
... e.g. use xs:string.
<csma> k csma
<josb> so it boils down to who finds what more elegant
csma: what is the definition in
... we cannot change the definiition of XML schema datatypes.
<csma> isLiteralOfType(xsd:string, rif:iri)
chrisw: we don't change XML schema DTs, but only talk about rif:iri here.
michael: I can send a proposal
per mail (please paste link)
... basically, second argument should be a (string) literal.
What's wrong about keeping it like we have it (side question)?
jos: why not do it in the same
way as RDF and OWL (where URIs denote datatypes)?
... we don't want xs:int, etc. to denote anything.
p("1"^^a) :- a=xs:int, p(1)
chrisw: maybe we should move on...
josb: both michael and I don't like the current definition, I personally would prefer even michael's solution to the current definition.
<josb> we allow the equivalent forms External( func:concat( str1, str2) ) and External( func:concat( str1 str2 str3 ) )
<josb> In my view it does change the bld syntax
<Harold> Polyadic syntax for associative binary functions should be not a problem.
axel, michael, jos: discussing multiple arity of external functions such as func:concat.
jos: originally the requirement for fixed arity and disjoint names came from the same restriction in FO-logic definitions.
chrisw: the quickest way to go is to leave it the way to go is to leave it the way it is and reword DTB just to reflect that this is just for explanatory purposes in DTB.
josb: quite sure that there are no problems if we do it for external preds/funcs, but not sure about logical preds/funcs.
csma: do not remember implementation discussion at this point.
chrisw: is there anyone on the
phone objecting arbitrary arity for anything?
... (anything means logical and external), implementations seem to support it perfectly well.
... noboddy objects, something to think about.
axel: agree that we can't leave the description of multiple arity like that.
csma: we should discuss issue-80 first.
last mail on that: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Feb/0072.html
chrisw: generic comparison should only work if datatypes are the same.
<josb> my feeling: not have generic comparison
axel: but if not, should they be false or undefined? (currently false)
<josb> if we have them: get rid of specific ones and make sure the generic ones behave exactly like the specific ones do now
csma: do we have an equality predicate that does not do propagation?
chrisw: yes "="
csma: that makes is-literal-equal redundant?
"Editor's Note: pred:literal-equal seems to be partially redundant w.r.t the usual equality in BLD."
jos: our current equality and neither is-literal-equal does not cover "=" in Xpath/XQuery, but the specific ones do
jos, it is not talking about 1.000 = 1.00, is it?
jos: equality is not identity in XML schema.
<ChrisW> ACTION: jos to find an example of equality between datatypes within the same value space that is not identity [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-rif-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - jos
<trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jdebruij2, jderoo)
jos: I will draft an example.
<ChrisW> ACTION: josb to find an example of equality between datatypes within the same value space that is not identity [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-rif-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-710 - Find an example of equality between datatypes within the same value space that is not identity [on Jos de Bruijn - due 2009-03-03].
chrisw: I have no problem with literal-equal being redundant, any problems with literal-not-equal.
josb: I would rather want to drop them both.
axel: can probably dial in next week earlier, but not all of the time.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/sent/can send/ Succeeded: s/it/the description of multiple arity/ Found Scribe: Harold Found ScribeNick: Harold Found Scribe: Axel Polleres Found Scribe: AxelPolleres WARNING: No scribe lines found matching ScribeNick pattern: <Harold> ... Found ScribeNick: AxelPolleres Scribes: Harold, Axel Polleres, AxelPolleres ScribeNicks: Harold, AxelPolleres Default Present: csma, ChrisW, josb, Gary, Leora_Morgenstern, Harold, AxelPolleres, +1.631.833.aaaa, Michael_Kifer Present: csma ChrisW josb Gary Leora_Morgenstern Harold AxelPolleres +1.631.833.aaaa Michael_Kifer Regrets: DaveReynolds HassanAitKaci Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Feb/0117.html Got date from IRC log name: 24 Feb 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-rif-minutes.html People with action items: jos josb[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]