IRC log of owl on 2009-03-18

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:49:57 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #owl
16:49:57 [RRSAgent]
logging to
16:50:02 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #owl
16:50:24 [alanr]
alanr has changed the topic to:
16:53:55 [bcuencagrau]
bcuencagrau has joined #owl
16:57:47 [ivan]
ivan has joined #owl
16:58:31 [bmotik]
bmotik has joined #owl
16:58:56 [IanH]
IanH has joined #owl
16:59:14 [bmotik]
Zakim, who is on call?
16:59:14 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, bmotik.
16:59:19 [bmotik]
Zakim, who is on phone?
16:59:19 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, bmotik.
16:59:42 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the call?
16:59:42 [Zakim]
sorry, sandro, I don't know what conference this is
16:59:43 [Zakim]
On IRC I see IanH, bmotik, ivan, bcuencagrau, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, pfps, zimmer, sandro, trackbot
16:59:47 [sandro]
zakim, this is owl
16:59:47 [Zakim]
ok, sandro; that matches SW_OWL()1:00PM
16:59:49 [IanH]
IanH has changed the topic to:
16:59:54 [sandro]
RRSAgent, make records public
17:00:01 [bmotik]
Zakim, who is on the call?
17:00:01 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, ??P7, Sandro, bcuencagrau.a
17:00:11 [bmotik]
Zakim, ??P7 is me
17:00:11 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:00:13 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:00:13 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:00:19 [zimmer]
17:00:29 [bmotik]
Zakim, bcuencagrau.a is me
17:00:29 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:00:32 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:00:32 [Zakim]
bmotik was already muted, bmotik
17:00:44 [Zakim]
17:00:49 [Zakim]
17:00:52 [Zakim]
17:01:01 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, bmotik.a is bcuencagrau
17:01:01 [Zakim]
+bcuencagrau; got it
17:01:05 [IanH]
zakim, Ian_Horrocks is IanH
17:01:05 [Zakim]
+IanH; got it
17:01:05 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, mute me
17:01:06 [Zakim]
bcuencagrau should now be muted
17:01:08 [Zakim]
17:01:15 [bmotik]
Zakim, bcuencagrau.a is me
17:01:15 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:01:17 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:01:17 [Zakim]
bmotik was already muted, bmotik
17:01:23 [baojie]
baojie has joined #owl
17:01:23 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
17:01:24 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
17:01:26 [Zakim]
17:01:27 [bmotik]
zakum, unmute me
17:01:30 [alanr]
I am off site and can't be certain about connectivity. I'll hope for the best.
17:01:32 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:01:32 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
17:01:35 [msmith]
msmith has joined #owl
17:01:35 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:01:35 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:01:37 [ivan]
zakim, mute me
17:01:37 [Zakim]
Ivan should now be muted
17:01:38 [IanH]
ScribeNick: bcuencagrau
17:01:45 [ivan]
17:02:03 [Zakim]
17:02:05 [bmotik]
Zakim, bmotik.a is me
17:02:05 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:02:08 [Zakim]
17:02:11 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:02:11 [Zakim]
bmotik was already muted, bmotik
17:02:12 [Achille]
Achille has joined #owl
17:02:13 [pfps]
17:02:15 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:02:15 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
17:02:18 [pfps]
17:02:22 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:02:22 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:02:55 [Zakim]
17:03:05 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:03:05 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik.aa, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, [IBM]
17:03:09 [Achille]
zakim, ibm is me
17:03:10 [Zakim]
+Achille; got it
17:03:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.212.239.aaaa
17:03:14 [bmotik]
Zakim, bmotik.aa is bmotik
17:03:14 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:03:16 [alanr]
zakim, aaaa is me
17:03:16 [Zakim]
+alanr; got it
17:03:22 [bmotik]
Zakim, who is on the call?
17:03:22 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted),, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr
17:03:23 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:03:24 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:03:29 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:03:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted),, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted)
17:03:33 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Achille, msmith, baojie, IanH, bmotik, ivan, bcuencagrau, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, pfps, zimmer, sandro, trackbot
17:03:54 [sandro]
zakim, drop bmotik
17:03:54 [Zakim]
bmotik is being disconnected
17:03:55 [Zakim]
17:04:02 [bmotik]
Zakinm, is me
17:04:05 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:04:05 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted),, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted)
17:04:08 [bmotik]
Zakim. is me
17:04:13 [bmotik]
Zakim, is me
17:04:13 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:04:13 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:04:14 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted)
17:04:23 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:04:23 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:04:24 [sandro]
17:04:31 [pfps]
ack bmotik.a
17:04:34 [sandro]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:04:34 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted)
17:04:36 [IanH]
17:04:45 [bcuencagrau]
17:04:55 [bcuencagrau]
roll call
17:04:56 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:04:56 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted)
17:04:58 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Achille, msmith, baojie, IanH, bmotik, ivan, bcuencagrau, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, pfps, zimmer, sandro, trackbot
17:05:08 [bcuencagrau]
agenda maendments?
17:05:20 [bcuencagrau]
ianH: previous minutes
17:05:24 [ivan]
17:05:25 [alanr]
17:05:26 [bcuencagrau]
ianH: accept them?
17:05:28 [pfps]
they are perfect :-)
17:05:34 [bcuencagrau]
ianH: accepted
17:05:44 [IanH]
RESOLVED: accept previous minutes
17:05:53 [Zakim]
17:05:57 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: action item status
17:06:01 [bmotik]
That's done
17:06:03 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: add new examples
17:06:05 [zimmer]
Zakim, ??P7 is me
17:06:05 [Zakim]
+zimmer; got it
17:06:15 [pfps]
all pending appear done to me
17:06:17 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: pending review actions
17:06:21 [pfps]
(as well as 300)
17:06:37 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: fine, move on to due actions
17:06:49 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: Sandro, did you talk to RIF?
17:07:03 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: Zhe, waht about Andy Seaborne?
17:07:11 [bcuencagrau]
Zhe: he's ok with all our changes
17:07:28 [bmotik]
17:07:40 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:07:40 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
17:07:46 [IanH]
ack bmotik
17:07:53 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: it seems that everything in the doc is now OK
17:08:01 [schneid]
schneid has joined #owl
17:08:03 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: concerning rdf:text
17:08:18 [bcuencagrau]
Zhe: he wanted it said more explicitly
17:08:28 [pfps]
let's make Andy happy
17:08:53 [bcuencagrau]
sandro: he was also worried about future rdf syntaxes
17:08:53 [Zakim]
17:09:01 [schneid]
zakim, ??P8 is me
17:09:01 [Zakim]
+schneid; got it
17:09:04 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
17:09:04 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
17:09:05 [ivan]
17:09:06 [pfps]
17:09:07 [christine]
christine has joined #owl
17:09:10 [ivan]
ack ivan
17:09:11 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: none of this is really problematical, so let's make him happy
17:09:13 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:09:16 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:09:16 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:09:26 [bmotik]
17:09:29 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:09:29 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
17:09:31 [pfps]
rdf:text -> LC is fine by me
17:09:49 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, unmute me
17:09:49 [Zakim]
bcuencagrau should no longer be muted
17:09:54 [pfps]
let's schedule a decision on this for next week
17:10:00 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, mute me
17:10:00 [Zakim]
bcuencagrau should now be muted
17:10:12 [bmotik]
17:10:21 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: it seems that we are not quite ready to make publication decision on rdf:text doc
17:10:48 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: could we be ready next week to vote for last call?
17:11:00 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we should first have reviewers
17:11:04 [pfps]
I'll review it.
17:11:12 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: volunteers
17:11:20 [IanH]
ack bmotik
17:11:31 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: I have seen that the doc contains editorial comments
17:11:40 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: when are they going to be resolved?
17:11:47 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: should they be deleted?
17:12:01 [bcuencagrau]
Zhe: some of them are not strictly editorial
17:12:21 [Zakim]
17:12:40 [christine]
zakim, ??P13 is me
17:12:40 [Zakim]
+christine; got it
17:12:40 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: we should delete most of the notes
17:12:51 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: can you review the doc?
17:12:55 [pfps]
where is the current draft of rdf:text?
17:12:55 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: I am an author
17:13:08 [alanr]
I will
17:13:22 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anyone else?
17:13:29 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: will 2 be enough?
17:13:29 [pfps]
I need a pointer to the document!
17:13:35 [alanr]
17:13:38 [bcuencagrau]
sandro: yes, enough
17:13:49 [baojie]
17:13:51 [bcuencagrau]
ianH: could one of the authors post a pointer?
17:14:16 [pfps]
action pfps: review rdf:text document
17:14:16 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-310 - Review rdf:text document [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2009-03-25].
17:14:27 [alanr]
Jie, can you send a note to us when the document is ready for review?
17:14:40 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: snadro, fix wiki links
17:14:49 [ivan]
action alanr: review rdf:text document
17:14:49 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr
17:14:54 [bcuencagrau]
baojie: I will be off next week
17:15:01 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: doesn't matter
17:15:22 [bcuencagrau]
sandro: i will do the wiki links when I deal with the publication stuff
17:15:31 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: the QRG review?
17:15:37 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: Christine?
17:15:42 [bcuencagrau]
christine: next week
17:15:55 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: Bijan is not on the call
17:16:25 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: the other docs are ready to be reviewed before the next publication
17:16:37 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: structural spec?
17:16:42 [pfps]
I think that SS&FS is ready for review
17:16:49 [alanr]
17:17:07 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: there is still a problem with the HasKey syntax
17:17:09 [alanr]
zakim, unmute me
17:17:09 [Zakim]
alanr should no longer be muted
17:17:15 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:17:18 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: will post an email when it is ready for review
17:17:34 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: there is an unresolved issue concerning numeric datatypes
17:17:42 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: what is the issue?
17:18:04 [ivan]
17:18:06 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: the docs point to XML Schema, but the XML docs are not clear enough
17:18:23 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:18:25 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:18:25 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:18:25 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: we should make the model theory explicit for those datatypes
17:18:36 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we should refer to XML Schema docs
17:18:39 [alanr]
17:18:43 [alanr]
zakim, unmute me
17:18:43 [Zakim]
alanr should no longer be muted
17:18:45 [bmotik]
+1 to ivam
17:18:46 [IanH]
17:18:49 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: if something is not clear, we should let them know
17:19:19 [pfps]
we are completely compatible with XML Schema
17:19:20 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:19:21 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: It is not up to us to fix those problems
17:19:35 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: by referring to that doc we expose ourselves to changes
17:20:06 [IanH]
17:20:09 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: we didn't agree to be dependent on XML schema
17:20:30 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we said that we would use xsd datatypes
17:20:46 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:20:46 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:20:49 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we shouldn't spend more time on it now and we should review the docs
17:21:03 [alanr]
march 31, IIRC
17:21:22 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: the deadline is 15th april for publication
17:21:35 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: the reviews should be done before
17:21:50 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: ivan
17:21:53 [bcuencagrau]
17:22:14 [sandro]
I think 2 is okay
17:22:19 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: two reviewers is enough?
17:22:35 [pfps]
action bernardo: review SS&FS by 1 April
17:22:35 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-311 - Review SS&FS by 1 April [on Bernardo Cuenca Grau - due 2009-03-25].
17:22:39 [schneid]
me : mapping
17:22:42 [pfps]
action ivan : review SS&FS by 1 April
17:22:42 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-312 - : review SS&FS by 1 April [on Ivan Herman - due 2009-03-25].
17:22:44 [sandro]
syntax reviewer - ivan and bernardo
17:22:46 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: mapping to RDF graphs
17:22:53 [pfps]
i think that it is ready
17:23:06 [pfps]
action michael: review RDF mapping
17:23:06 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - michael
17:23:06 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. msmith9, mschneid, msintek)
17:23:06 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: michael will review it
17:23:17 [pfps]
action msmith: review RDF mapping
17:23:17 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - msmith
17:23:24 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anybody else?
17:23:33 [schneid]
me : direct
17:23:38 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: direct semantics
17:23:39 [schneid]
(really both!)
17:23:40 [pfps]
action mike: review RDF mapping
17:23:40 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-313 - Review RDF mapping [on Michael Smith - due 2009-03-25].
17:23:42 [msmith]
17:23:49 [pfps]
direct semantics ready to go
17:23:51 [msmith]
msmith should have been schneid
17:23:52 [msmith]
17:24:06 [msmith]
17:24:07 [pfps]
action schneid: review RDF mapping
17:24:07 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - schneid
17:24:08 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anyone else?
17:24:13 [alanr]
can we solicit one of the previous reviewers by mail?
17:24:17 [IanH]
17:24:20 [schneid]
yes, because the both documents are important for my work on OWL Full
17:24:37 [IanH]
ack msmith
17:24:50 [msmith]
yes. that's right
17:25:09 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: schneid will review direct semantics and RDF mapping
17:25:23 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: I'll take this procedure offline
17:25:33 [alanr]
Markus and Tom Schneider were previous reviewers
17:25:43 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: what are the docs ready to review
17:25:50 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
17:25:50 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
17:25:55 [IanH]
17:25:55 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: what about RDF semantics?
17:26:01 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: not quite
17:26:13 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: some editorial notes to do
17:26:19 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: next week
17:26:24 [pfps]
action schneider: review direct semantics
17:26:24 [trackbot]
Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - schneider
17:26:24 [trackbot]
Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. mschneid, tschneid)
17:26:28 [ivan]
17:26:36 [IanH]
17:26:39 [pfps]
action mschneid: review direct semantics
17:26:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-314 - Review direct semantics [on Michael Schneider - due 2009-03-25].
17:26:52 [pfps]
action mschneid: review RDF mapping
17:26:52 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-315 - Review RDF mapping [on Michael Schneider - due 2009-03-25].
17:27:14 [IanH]
17:27:17 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:27:33 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: I can review RDF semantics
17:27:36 [pfps]
action ivan: review RDF semantics
17:27:36 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-316 - Review RDF semantics [on Ivan Herman - due 2009-03-25].
17:27:42 [alanr]
I can review that
17:27:44 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: conformance and test cases?
17:27:46 [schneid]
schneid: RDF-Based Semantics will be finished someday next week, but I can't tell /when exactly/ next week; worst case end of next week, but not later
17:27:53 [msmith]
17:28:18 [bcuencagrau]
msmith: next monday will be ready
17:28:21 [IanH]
17:28:31 [pfps]
action alanr: reivew conformance
17:28:31 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr
17:28:33 [IanH]
ack msmith
17:28:33 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: alan will be a reviewer
17:28:45 [pfps]
action alan: review conformance
17:28:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-317 - Review conformance [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2009-03-25].
17:28:50 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anyone else?
17:28:56 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: profiles?
17:29:01 [bmotik]
17:29:04 [bcuencagrau]
profiles should be ready
17:29:05 [alanr]
17:29:10 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:29:11 [alanr]
zakim, unmute me
17:29:12 [Achille]
I can review the Profiles. I'll have my review ready in two weeks
17:29:12 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: profiles is ready
17:29:13 [Zakim]
alanr was not muted, alanr
17:29:30 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: there is an issue with sameAs in OWL QL
17:29:51 [IanH]
17:29:57 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: there is a paragraph to be inserted
17:29:57 [pfps]
I'll review RDF semantics (when it is ready)
17:30:03 [pfps]
action pfps: review RDF semantics
17:30:03 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-318 - Review RDF semantics [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2009-03-25].
17:30:09 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:30:09 [Zakim]
bmotik was not muted, bmotik
17:30:10 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:30:10 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:30:18 [ivan]
zakim, mute me
17:30:18 [Zakim]
Ivan should now be muted
17:30:20 [bcuencagrau]
bmotik: did we promise to do that?
17:30:28 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: it may be useful
17:30:57 [alanr]
17:31:00 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: this should be done by the end of the week
17:31:01 [baojie]
I can review profile too, but can not finish until the first week of April
17:31:05 [bmotik]
s/did we promies to do that?/Uli promise to do that.
17:31:11 [Achille]
I'll review it
17:31:18 [alanr]
and jie
17:31:22 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: achille will review it
17:31:24 [pfps]
action achille: review Profiles
17:31:24 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-319 - Review Profiles [on Achille Fokoue - due 2009-03-25].
17:31:30 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: jie as well
17:31:35 [pfps]
action baojie: review profiles
17:31:35 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - baojie
17:31:43 [pfps]
action jie: review profiles
17:31:43 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-320 - Review profiles [on Jie Bao - due 2009-03-25].
17:31:45 [Achille]
I will review it in two weeks
17:31:49 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: manchester syntax
17:31:51 [pfps]
ready to review in my opinion
17:32:03 [alanr]
can review it, but 1st week of april
17:32:04 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anyone volunteering?
17:32:13 [alanr]
17:32:19 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: let's get this offline
17:32:29 [alanr]
17:32:36 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: what about NF&R?
17:33:03 [alanr]
zakim, unmute me
17:33:03 [Zakim]
alanr should no longer be muted
17:33:04 [christine]
NF&R ready for review
17:33:05 [christine]
NF&R ready for review
17:33:08 [IanH]
17:33:12 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:33:19 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: I disagree with Christine
17:33:28 [christine]
17:33:31 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: I reviewed the doc and it is not quite ready
17:33:35 [IanH]
17:33:48 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: there should be a run of editing
17:33:56 [IanH]
ack christine
17:34:10 [bcuencagrau]
christine: we should still have reviewers
17:34:14 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:34:14 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:34:35 [IanH]
17:34:42 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: I don't think NF&R is in so much worse shape than other docs
17:34:53 [alanr]
zakim, unmute
17:34:53 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'unmute', alanr
17:34:57 [alanr]
zakim, unmute me
17:34:57 [Zakim]
alanr should no longer be muted
17:34:58 [IanH]
17:35:03 [bcuencagrau]
Ianh: alan, could you fix those little editorial issues?
17:35:10 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: some of them are not so minor
17:35:18 [IanH]
17:35:24 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: the doc is long and there is a lot of repetition
17:35:36 [christine]
please send it as review
17:35:41 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: the content is good but the presentation should be improved
17:35:43 [IanH]
17:36:15 [IanH]
17:36:21 [alanr]
I've said what I need to.
17:36:26 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:36:26 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:36:30 [IanH]
17:36:38 [christine]
17:36:38 [bcuencagrau]
christine: could alan entr his comments? we should not delayed too much
17:36:52 [bcuencagrau]
christine: Elisa has already volunteered
17:37:05 [alanr]
17:37:22 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: alan and Elisa will review it
17:37:28 [pfps]
action elisa: review NF&R (perhaps after some editing)
17:37:28 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-321 - Review NF&R (perhaps after some editing) [on Elisa Kendall - due 2009-03-25].
17:37:32 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: XML serialization
17:37:37 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: Bijan is not here
17:37:42 [pfps]
action alan: review NF&R
17:37:42 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-322 - Review NF&R [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2009-03-25].
17:37:46 [pfps]
17:37:52 [IanH]
17:37:57 [IanH]
ack pfps
17:38:03 [bcuencagrau]
pfps: it needs to get pushed
17:38:25 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: last one is also a Bijan's issue, but it is only a note
17:38:30 [IanH]
17:38:42 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we should not spend too much time on this one
17:38:43 [pfps]
again, we need to make sure that it is ready for some pub by mid-Apr
17:39:09 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: xsd: double and sxd:float supported in OWL 2 RL?
17:39:31 [IanH]
17:39:39 [bcuencagrau]
IanH; we agreed that xsd;float and xsd:doable should be removed from OWL 2 RL
17:39:47 [IanH]
PROPOSED: add xsd:float and xsd:double to datatypes supported in OWL RL
17:39:49 [pfps]
17:39:55 [bmotik]
17:39:55 [pfps]
+1 ALU
17:40:01 [alanr]
Thought we don't add action items for people who are not here
17:40:02 [baojie]
17:40:06 [ivan]
17:40:06 [alanr]
we have added one for elisa
17:40:06 [bcuencagrau]
17:40:08 [alanr]
17:40:09 [schneid]
17:40:11 [sandro]
17:40:11 [msmith]
17:40:15 [zimmer]
17:40:21 [pfps]
Zhe's position is in
17:40:38 [Achille]
17:40:48 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: resolved
17:40:48 [IanH]
RESOLVED: add xsd:float and xsd:double to datatypes supported in OWL RL
17:41:13 [elisa]
elisa has joined #owl
17:41:14 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: last call comments
17:41:22 [alanr]
Reviewers: Actions are default due next week. Please set the due date to be realistic.
17:41:23 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: some of the comments are ready to send
17:41:30 [schneid]
q+ on MS8
17:41:35 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: any objections?
17:41:36 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
17:41:36 [Zakim]
schneid was not muted, schneid
17:41:39 [IanH]
17:41:57 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: MS8 comment, I am not happy with one of the sentences
17:42:18 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: one of the sentences concerning named dataranges should be removed
17:42:28 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
17:42:28 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
17:42:32 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: modulo that I am happy with it
17:42:35 [pfps]
I'll fix the wording for MS8
17:42:53 [pfps]
I should have removed the sentence when I added point 3
17:43:00 [schneid]
schneid: happy with MS8, but remove sentence about "contemplating about named data ranges"
17:43:05 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anything else to say?
17:43:16 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: those should then be sent
17:43:51 [alanr]
yes, kudos to Peter for the number of responses he authored!
17:43:59 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: comments with some ongoing discussion
17:44:04 [alanr]
17:44:08 [schneid]
17:44:11 [alanr]
ack alanr
17:44:13 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:44:13 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: disjointness of xsd: datatypes comments
17:44:33 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: I wanted to remove one of the lines in the response concerning implementation experience
17:44:36 [IanH]
17:45:09 [pfps]
I will acceed to the change.
17:45:18 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:45:18 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
17:45:28 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: peter will make that change and send it
17:45:39 [bcuencagrau]
ianH: OWL 2 RL datatypes
17:45:53 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: the questionnable part is...?
17:45:57 [alanr]
are we not waiting for sandro?
17:46:14 [bcuencagrau]
pfps: we had no decision at the time on those datatypes
17:46:45 [IanH]
17:46:48 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: then, it should be ready to go, right?
17:46:53 [pfps]
17:46:58 [IanH]
17:47:01 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we are ready to go
17:47:02 [IanH]
ack pfps
17:47:04 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
17:47:04 [Zakim]
alanr was already muted, alanr
17:47:21 [bcuencagrau]
pfps: we should write an addendum to oracle
17:47:32 [bmotik]
I'd just like to point out that the Profiles document has already been updated with float and double
17:47:32 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: could you do that peter?
17:47:50 [Zakim]
17:47:58 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: responses to TopQuadrant
17:48:13 [ivan]
17:48:15 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: they seem ready to go
17:48:20 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:48:24 [pfps]
I concur - we expect some squawking, of course
17:48:41 [schneid]
"GRDDL: The working group has resolved to add GRDDL support to the OWL XML syntax (see [15]). "
17:48:47 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: the GRDDL thing seems to be open
17:49:08 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: that issue is closed
17:49:09 [pfps]
from 34b response GRDDL: The working group has resolved to add GRDDL support to the OWL XML syntax (see [15]).
17:49:50 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: anybody else?
17:50:41 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we discuss 34 and 35 first
17:50:57 [bcuencagrau]
ianH: 40: restructuring of XML Schema
17:50:59 [pfps]
wait until done
17:51:08 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: Bijan is doing the restructuring
17:51:12 [alanr]
i agree
17:51:18 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we cannot send it until the restructuring is done
17:51:21 [alanr]
17:51:24 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: 66
17:51:24 [alanr]
ack alanr
17:51:30 [IanH]
ack alanr
17:51:42 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: I have some concerns
17:52:01 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: the text has changed so conformance says that we are relying with XML schema
17:52:13 [IanH]
17:52:13 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: there is an issue with n-ary datatypes
17:52:47 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: I am also not comfortable to rely completely on XML Schema
17:53:18 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: we should think about it again before drafting a response
17:53:27 [pfps]
17:53:28 [IanH]
17:53:32 [pfps]
17:54:48 [bcuencagrau]
ianH;: ypur issues are architectural
17:55:00 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: it is not our reponsibility
17:55:12 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: it is not covered by Web Architecture
17:55:19 [schneid]
17:55:26 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
17:55:26 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
17:55:33 [IanH]
ack schneid
17:56:07 [IanH]
17:56:09 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: why should we not be in sync with XML Schema?
17:56:18 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: because of interoperability issues
17:56:30 [pfps]
17:56:57 [ivan]
17:56:59 [pfps]
17:57:13 [bijan]
bijan has joined #owl
17:57:17 [cgolbrei]
cgolbrei has joined #owl
17:57:36 [IanH]
17:57:44 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: if they do something wrong is their problem
17:57:45 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
17:57:45 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
17:57:51 [IanH]
17:57:53 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:58:00 [bijan]
/me so embarressed
17:58:10 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: my understanding is that n-ary datatypes are not a part of the core language
17:58:12 [Zakim]
17:58:20 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: why are they a discussion issue?
17:58:31 [bijan]
zalo, ??p16
17:58:32 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: becuase we will have at least one implementation
17:58:38 [bijan]
zakim, ??p16
17:58:38 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??p16', bijan
17:58:46 [bijan]
zakim, ??p16 is me
17:58:46 [Zakim]
+bijan; got it
17:58:51 [IanH]
17:58:54 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we should not be discussing this
17:59:21 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: there are interoperability issues because the hooks will be implemented differently anyway
17:59:33 [bijan]
17:59:36 [bijan]
17:59:41 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: we hould revise then the conformance
17:59:45 [IanH]
17:59:55 [bijan]
zakim, unmute me
17:59:55 [Zakim]
bijan was not muted, bijan
18:00:00 [IanH]
ack bijan
18:00:02 [schneid]
IMHO, general extensibility of the core datatype map is a major market aspect
18:00:25 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: why are extensions non-confromant?
18:00:34 [msmith]
the objection is only w.r.t. the *name* of the nary predicate
18:00:54 [msmith]
alan wants to be sure its not in owl: , xsd: , etc.
18:01:00 [IanH]
18:01:01 [schneid]
and I understand this to be the idea behind the RDF datatype map: it is (almost) empty, and vendors can add to it whatever they want
18:01:04 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: I said that the core spec is silent wrt n-ary datatypes except for the hooks
18:01:17 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: they can also appear on teh datatype maps
18:01:17 [msmith]
18:01:23 [bijan]
18:01:27 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: the datatype map is part of the hook
18:01:30 [IanH]
ack msmith
18:02:14 [bcuencagrau]
msmith: I think alan's concerns are related to certain namespaces
18:02:39 [IanH]
18:02:40 [pfps]
How is this germane to LC Comment 66, which reads I believe that it is our intention that implementation specific
18:02:42 [pfps]
datatype maps don't define behavior for, e.g. future datatypes added
18:02:44 [pfps]
to XML Schema (or datatypes we have rejected). AFAIK, there is no
18:02:45 [IanH]
ack bijan
18:02:46 [pfps]
proscription against this and I would like to have there be.
18:02:46 [schneid]
we only guarantee interop on systems that have our spec'ed datatype map, for everything else, it's the business of the vendor
18:03:30 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: we can say that some namespaces are reserved
18:03:37 [IanH]
18:03:51 [pfps]
we no longer reserve the XSD namespace
18:04:06 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: we should stick with standard mechanisms
18:04:07 [pfps]
we just say "be nice to XML Schema datatypes"
18:04:28 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: let's get this one offline
18:04:53 [alanr]
18:05:00 [IanH]
ack alanr
18:05:11 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: responses to 34
18:05:23 [bijan]
zakim, mute me
18:05:23 [Zakim]
bijan should now be muted
18:05:55 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: there is an unresolved issue concerning how we refer to OWL 2 Full anf DL
18:06:08 [bcuencagrau]
alnr: whether we refer to syntax or to semantics or both
18:06:10 [IanH]
18:06:39 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we agreed to use the term OWL 2 Full as little as possible
18:07:34 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: the note doesn't state what OWl 2 Full referred to before
18:07:34 [schneid]
18:07:39 [IanH]
18:07:44 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
18:07:44 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
18:07:46 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: could we rewrite this very clearly?
18:07:48 [IanH]
ack schneid
18:08:20 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: I did a poll in my institutwe
18:08:48 [pfps]
having at least some email notice of objections to LC responses before the TC would be *very* nice
18:08:51 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: almost everyone daid `the combination of syntax and semantics'
18:09:01 [alanr]
18:09:33 [bcuencagrau]
schneid: there seems to be clear objection to use OWL 2 Full and DL only as `Syntax'
18:10:07 [alanr]
18:10:07 [IanH]
ack alanr
18:10:17 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we were just suggesting that we could use OWL 2 instead of OWL 2 Full
18:10:46 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: there is no consensus on this
18:10:54 [schneid]
18:10:54 [IanH]
18:11:09 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: let's have an email discussion then
18:11:11 [alanr]
18:11:31 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: GRDDL discussion
18:11:43 [IanH]
18:12:52 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we could create a GRDDL file that would refer to several implementations
18:13:14 [schneid]
I cannot tell what the people in my institute department will say, if I tell them that we decide to call the syntax "OWL 2 DL", so I cannot talk about formal objections here; I can only tell you what I have learnt to be the general opinion in my institute department
18:13:27 [IanH]
18:13:35 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we also need a pure XLST GRDDL transformation
18:13:51 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: that transformation should be done by someone
18:13:54 [pfps]
18:13:58 [IanH]
18:14:06 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
18:14:06 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
18:14:08 [IanH]
ack pfps
18:14:13 [sandro]
18:14:27 [bcuencagrau]
pfps: what about the non-executable GRDDL?
18:14:56 [IanH]
18:15:41 [alanr]
so we have to get one. qed.
18:15:45 [pfps]
ivan: TQ will not be happy if there is no XSLT transform
18:16:06 [pfps]
+1 to asking TQ to provide same
18:16:09 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: peter is right
18:16:23 [pfps]
18:16:38 [pfps]
18:16:52 [alanr]
18:17:01 [IanH]
ack sandro
18:17:02 [sandro]
ian: Suggestion is to tell TQ: if you want one, please help us provide one
18:17:03 [bcuencagrau]
bcuencagrau has joined #owl
18:17:16 [alanr]
and i to help
18:17:25 [IanH]
18:17:35 [bijan]
18:17:43 [bijan]
+1 to Sandro
18:17:53 [bcuencagrau]
bcuencagrau has joined #owl
18:17:54 [pfps]
sandro: asking TQ may not be effective
18:18:00 [bcuencagrau]
I am back
18:18:08 [bcuencagrau]
but lost
18:18:21 [pfps]
ianh: but if TQ says no, that may weaken their case
18:18:22 [sandro]
sandro: Sure, it's worth a try, asking TQ to provide one.
18:18:28 [bcuencagrau]
18:18:33 [alanr]
ack alanr
18:18:37 [IanH]
ack alanr
18:18:58 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: We should approach TopQuadrant offline
18:19:00 [ivan]
18:19:05 [sandro]
alan: Let's not imply "if you don't provide it, no one will".
18:19:10 [bcuencagrau]
alanr: to see if they support the proposal
18:19:16 [IanH]
18:19:24 [alanr]
zakim, mute me
18:19:24 [Zakim]
alanr should now be muted
18:19:52 [IanH]
18:19:52 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we should determine whether we can send the responses to TopQuadrant
18:20:14 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we could be more specific about certain issues than we were at the F2F
18:20:20 [bijan]
zakim, unmute me
18:20:20 [Zakim]
bijan should no longer be muted
18:20:20 [IanH]
18:20:24 [IanH]
ack bijan
18:20:26 [ivan]
18:20:37 [ivan]
18:20:44 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: we shouldn't sollicit from TopQuadrant
18:20:58 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: they could use that to beat us
18:21:13 [IanH]
18:21:33 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: we should be as minimalist as possible
18:21:35 [bijan]
zakim, mute me
18:21:35 [Zakim]
bijan should now be muted
18:21:38 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:21:55 [bijan]
18:22:01 [alanr]
In any case JC1a can go through as it doesn't depend on this issue
18:22:01 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we are short of manpower to do this
18:22:15 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: to have the XSLT transformation
18:22:19 [IanH]
18:22:27 [alanr]
say "we're not sure we can do it" rather than "we can't do it"
18:22:28 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we could ask the community to produce it
18:22:57 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: I feel nervous about that
18:23:09 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: it would mean that we are not done until we have it
18:23:16 [IanH]
18:23:17 [bijan]
zakim, unmute me
18:23:18 [Zakim]
bijan should no longer be muted
18:23:18 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: we should not have external dependencies
18:23:22 [IanH]
ack bijan
18:23:36 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: I could do it even if I do not want to do it
18:23:52 [alanr]
what is the difference between proof of concept and real thing?
18:24:01 [IanH]
18:24:16 [alanr]
then we should do it
18:24:26 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: it is not that we are saying that it is `too hard'; it is just tedious
18:24:34 [sandro]
18:24:36 [alanr]
can you not delegate some to sandro and I?
18:24:38 [IanH]
18:24:46 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: I don't think it is useful anyway
18:25:05 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: would you still be willing to do it?
18:25:35 [bcuencagrau]
sandro: the problem is that I don't know XSLT
18:25:49 [alanr]
be willing to take questions ....
18:25:51 [bcuencagrau]
sandro: if you can produce an example of a feature, i could produce the rest
18:26:19 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: this is a reasonable compromise
18:26:19 [IanH]
18:26:25 [IanH]
ack sandro
18:26:46 [alanr]
sounds good!
18:26:54 [bcuencagrau]
bijan: I can provide advise on XSLT but not do it myself
18:26:55 [IanH]
18:27:05 [IanH]
18:27:14 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: bijan will produce an example and sandro will do the rest
18:27:15 [alanr]
we're on the same page.
18:27:46 [alanr]
18:27:53 [alanr]
q- alanr
18:28:05 [bijan]
ACTION: bijan help sandro
18:28:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-323 - Help sandro [on Bijan Parsia - due 2009-03-25].
18:28:11 [sandro]
18:28:23 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: it seems that we have a concrete action plan wrt to GRDDL
18:28:33 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: and there are a few responses dependent on that
18:28:37 [ivan]
18:28:39 [pfps]
LC 17 is 'what about GRDDL?"
18:28:52 [pfps]
LC 17 *is* TM1
18:29:03 [pfps]
18:29:11 [pfps]
ack ivan
18:29:31 [bcuencagrau]
ivan: we should say that the WG is planning to provide a GRDDL tranformation
18:29:39 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: I will fix up those responses
18:29:45 [pfps]
ready by me
18:29:53 [IanH]
IanH has joined #owl
18:29:55 [bcuencagrau]
IanH: other than that, are we ok with 34a and 34b?
18:30:03 [bcuencagrau]
pfps: ok by me
18:30:07 [bijan]
I'm fine
18:30:07 [schneid]
/I/ am ready to go, now :) sorry, have to get my train
18:30:09 [bijan]
Ship it
18:30:10 [alanr]
They are as good as we can do
18:30:20 [alanr]
so ship
18:30:20 [Zakim]
18:30:24 [pfps]
ship them
18:30:59 [pfps]
18:31:01 [ivan]
ivan has left #owl
18:31:06 [alanr]
bye all!
18:31:07 [msmith]
18:31:16 [Zakim]
18:31:17 [Zakim]
18:31:31 [elisa]
18:31:41 [Zakim]
18:31:42 [Zakim]
18:31:42 [Zakim]
18:31:42 [zimmer]
18:31:43 [Zakim]
18:31:44 [Zakim]
18:31:45 [Zakim]
18:31:45 [Zakim]
18:31:47 [Zakim]
18:31:49 [Zakim]
18:31:55 [Zakim]
18:31:57 [Zakim]
18:32:05 [Zakim]
18:32:07 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
18:32:08 [Zakim]
Attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, IanH, Ivan, baojie, msmith, Achille, +1.212.239.aaaa, alanr, zimmer, schneid, christine, Elisa_Kendall, bijan
18:32:08 [emwallace]
emwallace has joined #owl
18:35:13 [msmith]
msmith has left #owl
18:41:37 [bmotik]
bmotik has left #owl
19:39:25 [bijan]
bijan has joined #owl
21:36:50 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #owl