16:49:57 RRSAgent has joined #owl 16:49:57 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/03/18-owl-irc 16:50:02 Zakim has joined #owl 16:50:24 alanr has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.03.18/Agenda 16:53:55 bcuencagrau has joined #owl 16:57:47 ivan has joined #owl 16:58:31 bmotik has joined #owl 16:58:56 IanH has joined #owl 16:59:14 Zakim, who is on call? 16:59:14 I don't understand your question, bmotik. 16:59:19 Zakim, who is on phone? 16:59:19 I don't understand your question, bmotik. 16:59:42 zakim, who is on the call? 16:59:42 sorry, sandro, I don't know what conference this is 16:59:43 On IRC I see IanH, bmotik, ivan, bcuencagrau, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, pfps, zimmer, sandro, trackbot 16:59:47 zakim, this is owl 16:59:47 ok, sandro; that matches SW_OWL()1:00PM 16:59:49 IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.03.18/Agenda 16:59:54 RRSAgent, make records public 17:00:01 Zakim, who is on the call? 17:00:01 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, ??P7, Sandro, bcuencagrau.a 17:00:11 Zakim, ??P7 is me 17:00:11 +bmotik; got it 17:00:13 Zakim, mute me 17:00:13 bmotik should now be muted 17:00:19 yes 17:00:29 Zakim, bcuencagrau.a is me 17:00:29 +bmotik; got it 17:00:32 Zakim, mute me 17:00:32 bmotik was already muted, bmotik 17:00:44 -bmotik.a 17:00:49 +Ian_Horrocks 17:00:52 +bmotik.a 17:01:01 Zakim, bmotik.a is bcuencagrau 17:01:01 +bcuencagrau; got it 17:01:05 zakim, Ian_Horrocks is IanH 17:01:05 +IanH; got it 17:01:05 Zakim, mute me 17:01:06 bcuencagrau should now be muted 17:01:08 +bcuencagrau.a 17:01:15 Zakim, bcuencagrau.a is me 17:01:15 +bmotik; got it 17:01:17 Zakim, mute me 17:01:17 bmotik was already muted, bmotik 17:01:23 baojie has joined #owl 17:01:23 zakim, dial ivan-voip 17:01:24 ok, ivan; the call is being made 17:01:26 +Ivan 17:01:27 zakum, unmute me 17:01:30 I am off site and can't be certain about connectivity. I'll hope for the best. 17:01:32 Zakim, unmute me 17:01:32 bmotik should no longer be muted 17:01:35 msmith has joined #owl 17:01:35 Zakim, mute me 17:01:35 bmotik should now be muted 17:01:37 zakim, mute me 17:01:37 Ivan should now be muted 17:01:38 ScribeNick: bcuencagrau 17:01:45 yes 17:02:03 +baojie 17:02:05 Zakim, bmotik.a is me 17:02:05 +bmotik; got it 17:02:08 +msmith 17:02:11 Zakim, mute me 17:02:11 bmotik was already muted, bmotik 17:02:12 Achille has joined #owl 17:02:13 q+ 17:02:15 Zakim, unmute me 17:02:15 bmotik should no longer be muted 17:02:18 q- 17:02:22 Zakim, mute me 17:02:22 bmotik should now be muted 17:02:55 +[IBM] 17:03:05 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:03:05 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik.aa, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, [IBM] 17:03:09 zakim, ibm is me 17:03:10 +Achille; got it 17:03:12 + +1.212.239.aaaa 17:03:14 Zakim, bmotik.aa is bmotik 17:03:14 +bmotik; got it 17:03:16 zakim, aaaa is me 17:03:16 +alanr; got it 17:03:22 Zakim, who is on the call? 17:03:22 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik.aaa, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr 17:03:23 zakim, mute me 17:03:24 alanr should now be muted 17:03:29 zakim, who is here? 17:03:30 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik.aaa, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted) 17:03:33 On IRC I see Achille, msmith, baojie, IanH, bmotik, ivan, bcuencagrau, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, pfps, zimmer, sandro, trackbot 17:03:54 zakim, drop bmotik 17:03:54 bmotik is being disconnected 17:03:55 -bmotik 17:04:02 Zakinm, bmotik.aaa is me 17:04:05 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:04:05 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik.aaa, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted) 17:04:08 Zakim. bmotik.aaa is me 17:04:13 Zakim, bmotik.aaa is me 17:04:13 +bmotik; got it 17:04:13 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:04:14 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik, Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted) 17:04:23 Zakim, mute me 17:04:23 bmotik should now be muted 17:04:24 queue= 17:04:31 ack bmotik.a 17:04:34 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:04:34 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted) 17:04:36 q? 17:04:45 yes 17:04:55 roll call 17:04:56 zakim, who is here? 17:04:56 On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Sandro, IanH, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Ivan (muted), baojie, msmith, Achille, alanr (muted) 17:04:58 On IRC I see Achille, msmith, baojie, IanH, bmotik, ivan, bcuencagrau, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, pfps, zimmer, sandro, trackbot 17:05:08 agenda maendments? 17:05:20 ianH: previous minutes 17:05:24 me 17:05:25 +1 17:05:26 ianH: accept them? 17:05:28 they are perfect :-) 17:05:34 ianH: accepted 17:05:44 RESOLVED: accept previous minutes 17:05:53 +??P7 17:05:57 IanH: action item status 17:06:01 That's done 17:06:03 IanH: add new examples 17:06:05 Zakim, ??P7 is me 17:06:05 +zimmer; got it 17:06:15 all pending appear done to me 17:06:17 IanH: pending review actions 17:06:21 (as well as 300) 17:06:37 IanH: fine, move on to due actions 17:06:49 IanH: Sandro, did you talk to RIF? 17:07:03 IanH: Zhe, waht about Andy Seaborne? 17:07:11 Zhe: he's ok with all our changes 17:07:28 q+ 17:07:40 Zakim, unmute me 17:07:40 bmotik should no longer be muted 17:07:46 ack bmotik 17:07:53 bmotik: it seems that everything in the doc is now OK 17:08:01 schneid has joined #owl 17:08:03 bmotik: concerning rdf:text 17:08:18 Zhe: he wanted it said more explicitly 17:08:28 let's make Andy happy 17:08:53 sandro: he was also worried about future rdf syntaxes 17:08:53 +??P8 17:09:01 zakim, ??P8 is me 17:09:01 +schneid; got it 17:09:04 zakim, mute me 17:09:04 schneid should now be muted 17:09:05 q+ 17:09:06 :-) 17:09:07 christine has joined #owl 17:09:10 ack ivan 17:09:11 IanH: none of this is really problematical, so let's make him happy 17:09:13 ack ivan 17:09:16 Zakim, mute me 17:09:16 bmotik should now be muted 17:09:26 q+ 17:09:29 Zakim, unmute me 17:09:29 bmotik should no longer be muted 17:09:31 rdf:text -> LC is fine by me 17:09:49 Zakim, unmute me 17:09:49 bcuencagrau should no longer be muted 17:09:54 let's schedule a decision on this for next week 17:10:00 Zakim, mute me 17:10:00 bcuencagrau should now be muted 17:10:12 q+ 17:10:21 ivan: it seems that we are not quite ready to make publication decision on rdf:text doc 17:10:48 IanH: could we be ready next week to vote for last call? 17:11:00 ivan: we should first have reviewers 17:11:04 I'll review it. 17:11:12 IanH: volunteers 17:11:20 ack bmotik 17:11:31 bmotik: I have seen that the doc contains editorial comments 17:11:40 bmotik: when are they going to be resolved? 17:11:47 bmotik: should they be deleted? 17:12:01 Zhe: some of them are not strictly editorial 17:12:21 +??P13 17:12:40 zakim, ??P13 is me 17:12:40 +christine; got it 17:12:40 bmotik: we should delete most of the notes 17:12:51 IanH: can you review the doc? 17:12:55 where is the current draft of rdf:text? 17:12:55 bmotik: I am an author 17:13:08 I will 17:13:22 IanH: anyone else? 17:13:29 IanH: will 2 be enough? 17:13:29 I need a pointer to the document! 17:13:35 ditto 17:13:38 sandro: yes, enough 17:13:49 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec 17:13:51 ianH: could one of the authors post a pointer? 17:14:16 action pfps: review rdf:text document http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec 17:14:16 Created ACTION-310 - Review rdf:text document http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2009-03-25]. 17:14:27 Jie, can you send a note to us when the document is ready for review? 17:14:40 IanH: snadro, fix wiki links 17:14:49 action alanr: review rdf:text document http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec 17:14:49 Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr 17:14:54 baojie: I will be off next week 17:15:01 IanH: doesn't matter 17:15:22 sandro: i will do the wiki links when I deal with the publication stuff 17:15:31 IanH: the QRG review? 17:15:37 IanH: Christine? 17:15:42 christine: next week 17:15:55 IanH: Bijan is not on the call 17:16:25 IanH: the other docs are ready to be reviewed before the next publication 17:16:37 IanH: structural spec? 17:16:42 I think that SS&FS is ready for review 17:16:49 q+ 17:17:07 bmotik: there is still a problem with the HasKey syntax 17:17:09 zakim, unmute me 17:17:09 alanr should no longer be muted 17:17:15 ack alanr 17:17:18 bmotik: will post an email when it is ready for review 17:17:34 alanr: there is an unresolved issue concerning numeric datatypes 17:17:42 IanH: what is the issue? 17:18:04 q+ 17:18:06 alanr: the docs point to XML Schema, but the XML docs are not clear enough 17:18:23 ack ivan 17:18:25 zakim, mute me 17:18:25 alanr should now be muted 17:18:25 alanr: we should make the model theory explicit for those datatypes 17:18:36 ivan: we should refer to XML Schema docs 17:18:39 q+ 17:18:43 zakim, unmute me 17:18:43 alanr should no longer be muted 17:18:45 +1 to ivam 17:18:46 q? 17:18:49 ivan: if something is not clear, we should let them know 17:19:19 we are completely compatible with XML Schema 17:19:20 ack alanr 17:19:21 ivan: It is not up to us to fix those problems 17:19:35 alanr: by referring to that doc we expose ourselves to changes 17:20:06 q? 17:20:09 alanr: we didn't agree to be dependent on XML schema 17:20:30 ivan: we said that we would use xsd datatypes 17:20:46 zakim, mute me 17:20:46 alanr should now be muted 17:20:49 IanH: we shouldn't spend more time on it now and we should review the docs 17:21:03 march 31, IIRC 17:21:22 IanH: the deadline is 15th april for publication 17:21:35 IanH: the reviews should be done before 17:21:50 IanH: ivan 17:21:53 me 17:22:14 I think 2 is okay 17:22:19 IanH: two reviewers is enough? 17:22:35 action bernardo: review SS&FS by 1 April 17:22:35 Created ACTION-311 - Review SS&FS by 1 April [on Bernardo Cuenca Grau - due 2009-03-25]. 17:22:39 me : mapping 17:22:42 action ivan : review SS&FS by 1 April 17:22:42 Created ACTION-312 - : review SS&FS by 1 April [on Ivan Herman - due 2009-03-25]. 17:22:44 syntax reviewer - ivan and bernardo 17:22:46 IanH: mapping to RDF graphs 17:22:53 i think that it is ready 17:23:06 action michael: review RDF mapping 17:23:06 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - michael 17:23:06 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. msmith9, mschneid, msintek) 17:23:06 IanH: michael will review it 17:23:17 action msmith: review RDF mapping 17:23:17 Sorry, couldn't find user - msmith 17:23:24 IanH: anybody else? 17:23:33 me : direct 17:23:38 IanH: direct semantics 17:23:39 (really both!) 17:23:40 action mike: review RDF mapping 17:23:40 Created ACTION-313 - Review RDF mapping [on Michael Smith - due 2009-03-25]. 17:23:42 ! 17:23:49 direct semantics ready to go 17:23:51 msmith should have been schneid 17:23:52 1+ 17:24:06 q+ 17:24:07 action schneid: review RDF mapping 17:24:07 Sorry, couldn't find user - schneid 17:24:08 IanH: anyone else? 17:24:13 can we solicit one of the previous reviewers by mail? 17:24:17 q? 17:24:20 yes, because the both documents are important for my work on OWL Full 17:24:37 ack msmith 17:24:50 yes. that's right 17:25:09 IanH: schneid will review direct semantics and RDF mapping 17:25:23 IanH: I'll take this procedure offline 17:25:33 Markus and Tom Schneider were previous reviewers 17:25:43 ivan: what are the docs ready to review 17:25:50 zakim, unmute me 17:25:50 schneid should no longer be muted 17:25:55 q? 17:25:55 IanH: what about RDF semantics? 17:26:01 schneid: not quite 17:26:13 schneid: some editorial notes to do 17:26:19 schneid: next week 17:26:24 action schneider: review direct semantics 17:26:24 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - schneider 17:26:24 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. mschneid, tschneid) 17:26:28 q+ 17:26:36 q? 17:26:39 action mschneid: review direct semantics 17:26:39 Created ACTION-314 - Review direct semantics [on Michael Schneider - due 2009-03-25]. 17:26:52 action mschneid: review RDF mapping 17:26:52 Created ACTION-315 - Review RDF mapping [on Michael Schneider - due 2009-03-25]. 17:27:14 q? 17:27:17 ack ivan 17:27:33 ivan: I can review RDF semantics 17:27:36 action ivan: review RDF semantics 17:27:36 Created ACTION-316 - Review RDF semantics [on Ivan Herman - due 2009-03-25]. 17:27:42 I can review that 17:27:44 IanH: conformance and test cases? 17:27:46 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 q+ 17:28:18 msmith: next monday will be ready 17:28:21 q? 17:28:31 action alanr: reivew conformance 17:28:31 Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr 17:28:33 ack msmith 17:28:33 IanH: alan will be a reviewer 17:28:45 action alan: review conformance 17:28:45 Created ACTION-317 - Review conformance [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2009-03-25]. 17:28:50 IanH: anyone else? 17:28:56 IanH: profiles? 17:29:01 +1 17:29:04 profiles should be ready 17:29:05 q+ 17:29:10 ack alanr 17:29:11 zakim, unmute me 17:29:12 I can review the Profiles. I'll have my review ready in two weeks 17:29:12 IanH: profiles is ready 17:29:13 alanr was not muted, alanr 17:29:30 alanr: there is an issue with sameAs in OWL QL 17:29:51 q? 17:29:57 alanr: there is a paragraph to be inserted 17:29:57 I'll review RDF semantics (when it is ready) 17:30:03 action pfps: review RDF semantics 17:30:03 Created ACTION-318 - Review RDF semantics [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2009-03-25]. 17:30:09 Zakim, unmute me 17:30:09 bmotik was not muted, bmotik 17:30:10 zakim, mute me 17:30:10 alanr should now be muted 17:30:18 zakim, mute me 17:30:18 Ivan should now be muted 17:30:20 bmotik: did we promise to do that? 17:30:28 IanH: it may be useful 17:30:57 ok 17:31:00 IanH: this should be done by the end of the week 17:31:01 I can review profile too, but can not finish until the first week of April 17:31:05 s/did we promies to do that?/Uli promise to do that. 17:31:11 I'll review it 17:31:18 and jie 17:31:22 IanH: achille will review it 17:31:24 action achille: review Profiles 17:31:24 Created ACTION-319 - Review Profiles [on Achille Fokoue - due 2009-03-25]. 17:31:30 IanH: jie as well 17:31:35 action baojie: review profiles 17:31:35 Sorry, couldn't find user - baojie 17:31:43 action jie: review profiles 17:31:43 Created ACTION-320 - Review profiles [on Jie Bao - due 2009-03-25]. 17:31:45 I will review it in two weeks 17:31:49 IanH: manchester syntax 17:31:51 ready to review in my opinion 17:32:03 can review it, but 1st week of april 17:32:04 IanH: anyone volunteering? 17:32:13 agreed 17:32:19 IanH: let's get this offline 17:32:29 q+ 17:32:36 IanH: what about NF&R? 17:33:03 zakim, unmute me 17:33:03 alanr should no longer be muted 17:33:04 NF&R ready for review 17:33:05 NF&R ready for review 17:33:08 q? 17:33:12 ack alanr 17:33:19 alanr: I disagree with Christine 17:33:28 +q 17:33:31 alanr: I reviewed the doc and it is not quite ready 17:33:35 q? 17:33:48 alanr: there should be a run of editing 17:33:56 ack christine 17:34:10 christine: we should still have reviewers 17:34:14 zakim, mute me 17:34:14 alanr should now be muted 17:34:35 q? 17:34:42 IanH: I don't think NF&R is in so much worse shape than other docs 17:34:53 zakim, unmute 17:34:53 I don't understand 'unmute', alanr 17:34:57 zakim, unmute me 17:34:57 alanr should no longer be muted 17:34:58 q? 17:35:03 Ianh: alan, could you fix those little editorial issues? 17:35:10 alanr: some of them are not so minor 17:35:18 q? 17:35:24 alanr: the doc is long and there is a lot of repetition 17:35:36 please send it as review 17:35:41 alanr: the content is good but the presentation should be improved 17:35:43 q? 17:36:15 q? 17:36:21 I've said what I need to. 17:36:26 zakim, mute me 17:36:26 alanr should now be muted 17:36:30 q? 17:36:38 q 17:36:38 christine: could alan entr his comments? we should not delayed too much 17:36:52 christine: Elisa has already volunteered 17:37:05 ok 17:37:22 IanH: alan and Elisa will review it 17:37:28 action elisa: review NF&R (perhaps after some editing) 17:37:28 Created ACTION-321 - Review NF&R (perhaps after some editing) [on Elisa Kendall - due 2009-03-25]. 17:37:32 IanH: XML serialization 17:37:37 IanH: Bijan is not here 17:37:42 action alan: review NF&R 17:37:42 Created ACTION-322 - Review NF&R [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2009-03-25]. 17:37:46 q+ 17:37:52 q? 17:37:57 ack pfps 17:38:03 pfps: it needs to get pushed 17:38:25 IanH: last one is also a Bijan's issue, but it is only a note 17:38:30 q? 17:38:42 IanH: we should not spend too much time on this one 17:38:43 again, we need to make sure that it is ready for some pub by mid-Apr 17:39:09 IanH: xsd: double and sxd:float supported in OWL 2 RL? 17:39:31 q? 17:39:39 IanH; we agreed that xsd;float and xsd:doable should be removed from OWL 2 RL 17:39:47 PROPOSED: add xsd:float and xsd:double to datatypes supported in OWL RL 17:39:49 s/removed/added/!!!! 17:39:55 +1 17:39:55 +1 ALU 17:40:01 Thought we don't add action items for people who are not here 17:40:02 +1 17:40:06 +1 17:40:06 we have added one for elisa 17:40:06 +1 17:40:08 +1 17:40:09 +1 17:40:11 +1 17:40:11 +1 17:40:15 +1 17:40:21 Zhe's position is in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Mar/0271.html 17:40:38 +0 17:40:48 IanH: resolved 17:40:48 RESOLVED: add xsd:float and xsd:double to datatypes supported in OWL RL 17:41:13 elisa has joined #owl 17:41:14 IanH: last call comments 17:41:22 Reviewers: Actions are default due next week. Please set the due date to be realistic. 17:41:23 IanH: some of the comments are ready to send 17:41:30 q+ on MS8 17:41:35 IanH: any objections? 17:41:36 zakim, unmute me 17:41:36 schneid was not muted, schneid 17:41:39 q? 17:41:57 schneid: MS8 comment, I am not happy with one of the sentences 17:42:18 schneid: one of the sentences concerning named dataranges should be removed 17:42:28 zakim, mute me 17:42:28 schneid should now be muted 17:42:32 schneid: modulo that I am happy with it 17:42:35 I'll fix the wording for MS8 17:42:53 I should have removed the sentence when I added point 3 17:43:00 schneid: happy with MS8, but remove sentence about "contemplating about named data ranges" 17:43:05 IanH: anything else to say? 17:43:16 IanH: those should then be sent 17:43:51 yes, kudos to Peter for the number of responses he authored! 17:43:59 IanH: comments with some ongoing discussion 17:44:04 q+ 17:44:08 q- 17:44:11 ack alanr 17:44:13 ack alanr 17:44:13 IanH: disjointness of xsd: datatypes comments 17:44:33 alanr: I wanted to remove one of the lines in the response concerning implementation experience 17:44:36 q? 17:45:09 I will acceed to the change. 17:45:18 zakim, mute me 17:45:18 alanr should now be muted 17:45:28 IanH: peter will make that change and send it 17:45:39 ianH: OWL 2 RL datatypes 17:45:53 IanH: the questionnable part is...? 17:45:57 are we not waiting for sandro? 17:46:14 pfps: we had no decision at the time on those datatypes 17:46:45 q? 17:46:48 IanH: then, it should be ready to go, right? 17:46:53 q+ 17:46:58 q? 17:47:01 IanH: we are ready to go 17:47:02 ack pfps 17:47:04 zakim, mute me 17:47:04 alanr was already muted, alanr 17:47:21 pfps: we should write an addendum to oracle 17:47:32 I'd just like to point out that the Profiles document has already been updated with float and double 17:47:32 IanH: could you do that peter? 17:47:50 +Elisa_Kendall 17:47:58 IanH: responses to TopQuadrant 17:48:13 q+ 17:48:15 IanH: they seem ready to go 17:48:20 ack ivan 17:48:24 I concur - we expect some squawking, of course 17:48:41 "GRDDL: The working group has resolved to add GRDDL support to the OWL XML syntax (see [15]). " 17:48:47 ivan: the GRDDL thing seems to be open 17:49:08 IanH: that issue is closed 17:49:09 from 34b response GRDDL: The working group has resolved to add GRDDL support to the OWL XML syntax (see [15]). 17:49:50 IanH: anybody else? 17:50:41 IanH: we discuss 34 and 35 first 17:50:57 ianH: 40: restructuring of XML Schema 17:50:59 wait until done 17:51:08 IanH: Bijan is doing the restructuring 17:51:12 i agree 17:51:18 IanH: we cannot send it until the restructuring is done 17:51:21 q+ 17:51:24 IanH: 66 17:51:24 ack alanr 17:51:30 ack alanr 17:51:42 alanr: I have some concerns 17:52:01 alanr: the text has changed so conformance says that we are relying with XML schema 17:52:13 q? 17:52:13 alanr: there is an issue with n-ary datatypes 17:52:47 alanr: I am also not comfortable to rely completely on XML Schema 17:53:18 alanr: we should think about it again before drafting a response 17:53:27 q+ 17:53:28 q? 17:53:32 q- 17:54:48 ianH;: ypur issues are architectural 17:55:00 IanH: it is not our reponsibility 17:55:12 alanr: it is not covered by Web Architecture 17:55:19 q+ 17:55:26 zakim, unmute me 17:55:26 schneid should no longer be muted 17:55:33 ack schneid 17:56:07 q? 17:56:09 schneid: why should we not be in sync with XML Schema? 17:56:18 alanr: because of interoperability issues 17:56:30 q+ 17:56:57 q+ 17:56:59 q- 17:57:13 bijan has joined #owl 17:57:17 cgolbrei has joined #owl 17:57:36 q? 17:57:44 schneid: if they do something wrong is their problem 17:57:45 zakim, mute me 17:57:45 schneid should now be muted 17:57:51 q? 17:57:53 ack ivan 17:58:00 /me so embarressed 17:58:10 ivan: my understanding is that n-ary datatypes are not a part of the core language 17:58:12 +??P16 17:58:20 ivan: why are they a discussion issue? 17:58:31 zalo, ??p16 17:58:32 alanr: becuase we will have at least one implementation 17:58:38 zakim, ??p16 17:58:38 I don't understand '??p16', bijan 17:58:46 zakim, ??p16 is me 17:58:46 +bijan; got it 17:58:51 q? 17:58:54 ivan: we should not be discussing this 17:59:21 ivan: there are interoperability issues because the hooks will be implemented differently anyway 17:59:33 What?! 17:59:36 q+ 17:59:41 alanr: we hould revise then the conformance 17:59:45 q? 17:59:55 zakim, unmute me 17:59:55 bijan was not muted, bijan 18:00:00 ack bijan 18:00:02 IMHO, general extensibility of the core datatype map is a major market aspect 18:00:25 bijan: why are extensions non-confromant? 18:00:34 the objection is only w.r.t. the *name* of the nary predicate 18:00:54 alan wants to be sure its not in owl: , xsd: , etc. 18:01:00 q? 18:01:01 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 ivan: I said that the core spec is silent wrt n-ary datatypes except for the hooks 18:01:17 alanr: they can also appear on teh datatype maps 18:01:17 q+ 18:01:23 q+ 18:01:27 bijan: the datatype map is part of the hook 18:01:30 ack msmith 18:02:14 msmith: I think alan's concerns are related to certain namespaces 18:02:39 q? 18:02:40 How is this germane to LC Comment 66, which reads I believe that it is our intention that implementation specific 18:02:42 datatype maps don't define behavior for, e.g. future datatypes added 18:02:44 to XML Schema (or datatypes we have rejected). AFAIK, there is no 18:02:45 ack bijan 18:02:46 proscription against this and I would like to have there be. 18:02:46 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 bijan: we can say that some namespaces are reserved 18:03:37 q? 18:03:51 we no longer reserve the XSD namespace 18:04:06 bijan: we should stick with standard mechanisms 18:04:07 we just say "be nice to XML Schema datatypes" 18:04:28 IanH: let's get this one offline 18:04:53 q+ 18:05:00 ack alanr 18:05:11 IanH: responses to 34 18:05:23 zakim, mute me 18:05:23 bijan should now be muted 18:05:55 alanr: there is an unresolved issue concerning how we refer to OWL 2 Full anf DL 18:06:08 alnr: whether we refer to syntax or to semantics or both 18:06:10 q? 18:06:39 IanH: we agreed to use the term OWL 2 Full as little as possible 18:07:34 alanr: the note doesn't state what OWl 2 Full referred to before 18:07:34 q+ 18:07:39 q? 18:07:44 zakim, unmute me 18:07:44 schneid should no longer be muted 18:07:46 alanr: could we rewrite this very clearly? 18:07:48 ack schneid 18:08:20 schneid: I did a poll in my institutwe 18:08:48 having at least some email notice of objections to LC responses before the TC would be *very* nice 18:08:51 schneid: almost everyone daid `the combination of syntax and semantics' 18:09:01 q+ 18:09:33 schneid: there seems to be clear objection to use OWL 2 Full and DL only as `Syntax' 18:10:07 q? 18:10:07 ack alanr 18:10:17 IanH: we were just suggesting that we could use OWL 2 instead of OWL 2 Full 18:10:46 IanH: there is no consensus on this 18:10:54 q- 18:10:54 q? 18:11:09 IanH: let's have an email discussion then 18:11:11 +1 18:11:31 IanH: GRDDL discussion 18:11:43 q? 18:12:52 ivan: we could create a GRDDL file that would refer to several implementations 18:13:14 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 q? 18:13:35 ivan: we also need a pure XLST GRDDL transformation 18:13:51 ivan: that transformation should be done by someone 18:13:54 q+ 18:13:58 q? 18:14:06 zakim, mute me 18:14:06 alanr should now be muted 18:14:08 ack pfps 18:14:13 q+ 18:14:27 pfps: what about the non-executable GRDDL? 18:14:56 q? 18:15:41 so we have to get one. qed. 18:15:45 ivan: TQ will not be happy if there is no XSLT transform 18:16:06 +1 to asking TQ to provide same 18:16:09 ivan: peter is right 18:16:23 q- 18:16:38 OK 18:16:52 q+ 18:17:01 ack sandro 18:17:02 ian: Suggestion is to tell TQ: if you want one, please help us provide one 18:17:03 bcuencagrau has joined #owl 18:17:16 and i to help 18:17:25 q? 18:17:35 q+ 18:17:43 +1 to Sandro 18:17:53 bcuencagrau has joined #owl 18:17:54 sandro: asking TQ may not be effective 18:18:00 I am back 18:18:08 but lost 18:18:21 ianh: but if TQ says no, that may weaken their case 18:18:22 sandro: Sure, it's worth a try, asking TQ to provide one. 18:18:28 ok 18:18:33 ack alanr 18:18:37 ack alanr 18:18:58 alanr: We should approach TopQuadrant offline 18:19:00 q+ 18:19:05 alan: Let's not imply "if you don't provide it, no one will". 18:19:10 alanr: to see if they support the proposal 18:19:16 q? 18:19:24 zakim, mute me 18:19:24 alanr should now be muted 18:19:52 q? 18:19:52 IanH: we should determine whether we can send the responses to TopQuadrant 18:20:14 ivan: we could be more specific about certain issues than we were at the F2F 18:20:20 zakim, unmute me 18:20:20 bijan should no longer be muted 18:20:20 q? 18:20:24 ack bijan 18:20:26 q- 18:20:37 q+ 18:20:44 bijan: we shouldn't sollicit from TopQuadrant 18:20:58 bijan: they could use that to beat us 18:21:13 q? 18:21:33 bijan: we should be as minimalist as possible 18:21:35 zakim, mute me 18:21:35 bijan should now be muted 18:21:38 ack ivan 18:21:55 q+ 18:22:01 In any case JC1a can go through as it doesn't depend on this issue 18:22:01 ivan: we are short of manpower to do this 18:22:15 ivan: to have the XSLT transformation 18:22:19 q? 18:22:27 say "we're not sure we can do it" rather than "we can't do it" 18:22:28 ivan: we could ask the community to produce it 18:22:57 IanH: I feel nervous about that 18:23:09 IanH: it would mean that we are not done until we have it 18:23:16 q? 18:23:17 zakim, unmute me 18:23:18 bijan should no longer be muted 18:23:18 IanH: we should not have external dependencies 18:23:22 ack bijan 18:23:36 bijan: I could do it even if I do not want to do it 18:23:52 what is the difference between proof of concept and real thing? 18:24:01 q? 18:24:16 then we should do it 18:24:26 bijan: it is not that we are saying that it is `too hard'; it is just tedious 18:24:34 q+ 18:24:36 can you not delegate some to sandro and I? 18:24:38 q? 18:24:46 bijan: I don't think it is useful anyway 18:25:05 IanH: would you still be willing to do it? 18:25:35 sandro: the problem is that I don't know XSLT 18:25:49 be willing to take questions .... 18:25:51 sandro: if you can produce an example of a feature, i could produce the rest 18:26:19 bijan: this is a reasonable compromise 18:26:19 q? 18:26:25 ack sandro 18:26:46 sounds good! 18:26:54 bijan: I can provide advise on XSLT but not do it myself 18:26:55 q? 18:27:05 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/97 18:27:14 IanH: bijan will produce an example and sandro will do the rest 18:27:15 we're on the same page. 18:27:46 q+ 18:27:53 q- alanr 18:28:05 ACTION: bijan help sandro 18:28:05 Created ACTION-323 - Help sandro [on Bijan Parsia - due 2009-03-25]. 18:28:11 rofl 18:28:23 IanH: it seems that we have a concrete action plan wrt to GRDDL 18:28:33 IanH: and there are a few responses dependent on that 18:28:37 q+ 18:28:39 LC 17 is 'what about GRDDL?" 18:28:52 LC 17 *is* TM1 18:29:03 q? 18:29:11 ack ivan 18:29:31 ivan: we should say that the WG is planning to provide a GRDDL tranformation 18:29:39 IanH: I will fix up those responses 18:29:45 ready by me 18:29:53 IanH has joined #owl 18:29:55 IanH: other than that, are we ok with 34a and 34b? 18:30:03 pfps: ok by me 18:30:07 I'm fine 18:30:07 /I/ am ready to go, now :) sorry, have to get my train 18:30:09 Ship it 18:30:10 They are as good as we can do 18:30:20 so ship 18:30:20 -schneid 18:30:24 ship them 18:30:59 :-( 18:31:01 ivan has left #owl 18:31:06 bye all! 18:31:07 bye 18:31:16 -baojie 18:31:17 -msmith 18:31:31 bye! 18:31:41 -Ivan 18:31:42 -Elisa_Kendall 18:31:42 -Sandro 18:31:42 bye 18:31:43 -IanH 18:31:44 -bijan 18:31:45 -alanr 18:31:45 -bmotik 18:31:47 -bcuencagrau 18:31:49 -Peter_Patel-Schneider 18:31:55 -zimmer 18:31:57 -Achille 18:32:05 -christine 18:32:07 SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended 18:32:08 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 has joined #owl 18:35:13 msmith has left #owl 18:41:37 bmotik has left #owl 19:39:25 bijan has joined #owl 21:36:50 Zakim has left #owl