IRC log of owl on 2009-03-25

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:54:29 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #owl

16:54:29 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/03/25-owl-irc

16:54:35 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #owl

16:54:59 [pfps]

pfps has joined #owl

16:55:13 [pfps]

pfps has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.03.25/Agenda

16:56:44 [schneid]

schneid has joined #owl

16:58:01 [bmotik]

bmotik has joined #owl

16:58:07 [bmotik]

Zakim, this will be owl

16:58:07 [Zakim]

ok, bmotik, I see SW_OWL()1:00PM already started

16:58:09 [bcuencag2]

bcuencag2 has joined #owl

16:58:35 [Zakim]

+bmotik

16:58:40 [bmotik]

Zakim, mute me

16:58:40 [Zakim]

bmotik should now be muted

16:58:56 [Zakim]

+bmotik.a

16:59:02 [uli]

uli has joined #owl

16:59:10 [bmotik]

Zakim, bmotik.a is bcuencagrau

16:59:10 [Zakim]

+bcuencagrau; got it

16:59:12 [bcuencag2]

Zakim bmotik.a is becuencag2

16:59:32 [bmotik]

Zakim, bcuencagrau is becuencag2

16:59:33 [Zakim]

+becuencag2; got it

16:59:36 [IanH]

IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.03.25/Agenda

16:59:52 [Zhe]

Zhe has joined #owl

16:59:53 [Rinke]

Rinke has joined #owl

16:59:58 [Zakim]

+IanH

17:00:02 [Zakim]

+ +0161868aaaa

17:00:03 [Zakim]

+Zhe

17:00:03 [Zakim]

+Sandro

17:00:05 [ivan]

zakim, dial ivan-voip

17:00:05 [Zakim]

ok, ivan; the call is being made

17:00:06 [Zakim]

+Ivan

17:00:12 [Zakim]

+??P10

17:00:17 [IanH]

RRSAgent, make records public

17:00:19 [uli]

zakim, ??P10 is me

17:00:19 [Zakim]

+uli; got it

17:00:24 [bparsia]

zakim, 0161868aaaa is me

17:00:24 [Zakim]

sorry, bparsia, I do not recognize a party named '0161868aaaa'

17:00:30 [pfps]

zakim, who is on the phone?

17:00:30 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), becuencag2, IanH, +0161868aaaa, Sandro, Zhe, Ivan, uli

17:00:33 [bparsia]

zakim, + 0161868aaaa is me

17:00:33 [Zakim]

I don't understand '+ 0161868aaaa is me', bparsia

17:00:37 [pfps]

are we starting now?

17:00:43 [uli]

zakim, mute me

17:00:43 [Zakim]

uli should now be muted

17:00:44 [bparsia]

zakim, aaaa is me

17:00:44 [Zakim]

+bparsia; got it

17:00:49 [Zakim]

+??P25

17:00:52 [bparsia]

zakim, mut me

17:00:52 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'mut me', bparsia

17:00:56 [Rinke]

zakim, ??P25 is me

17:00:56 [Zakim]

+Rinke; got it

17:00:57 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

17:00:58 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

17:01:01 [Rinke]

zakim, mute me

17:01:01 [Zakim]

Rinke should now be muted

17:01:13 [MarkusK_]

MarkusK_ has joined #owl

17:01:23 [uli]

zakim doesn't seem to tbe very understanding today, doesn't he?

17:01:35 [pfps]

time is a-wasting

17:01:35 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, mute me

17:01:35 [Zakim]

sorry, bcuencag2, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

17:01:38 [IanH]

zakim, who is here?

17:01:38 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), becuencag2, IanH, bparsia (muted), Sandro, Zhe, Ivan, uli (muted), Rinke (muted)

17:01:41 [Zakim]

On IRC I see MarkusK_, Rinke, Zhe, uli, bcuencag2, bmotik, schneid, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, bparsia, ivan, IanH, sandro, trackbot

17:01:53 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, bcuencagrau is bcunecag2

17:01:53 [Zakim]

sorry, bcuencag2, I do not recognize a party named 'bcuencagrau'

17:01:58 [uli]

Alan seems to be in the irc

17:02:04 [alanr]

I'm here

17:02:04 [Zakim]

-becuencag2

17:02:08 [alanr]

Calling in now

17:02:15 [Zhe]

me?

17:02:21 [Zhe]

scribenick: Zhe

17:02:23 [Zhe]

yes

17:02:27 [IanH]

zakim, who is here?

17:02:27 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), IanH, bparsia (muted), Sandro, Zhe, Ivan, uli (muted), Rinke (muted)

17:02:30 [Zakim]

On IRC I see MarkusK_, Rinke, Zhe, uli, bcuencag2, bmotik, schneid, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, bparsia, ivan, IanH, sandro, trackbot

17:02:38 [Zakim]

+Jonathan_Rees

17:02:45 [alanr]

zakim, Jonathan_Rees is alanr

17:02:45 [Zakim]

+becuencag2

17:02:48 [Zhe]

Topic: Admin

17:02:51 [Zakim]

+alanr; got it

17:02:53 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, mute me

17:02:55 [ivan]

zakim, mute me

17:03:04 [Zakim]

sorry, bcuencag2, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

17:03:07 [msmith]

msmith has joined #owl

17:03:09 [Zakim]

Ivan should now be muted

17:03:09 [pfps]

what is this "five past"?

17:03:18 [pfps]

q+

17:03:24 [zimmer]

zimmer has joined #owl

17:03:33 [alanr]

ack pfps

17:03:40 [Zakim]

+msmith

17:03:41 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, bmotik.a is bcuencag2

17:03:43 [Zakim]

sorry, bcuencag2, I do not recognize a party named 'bmotik.a'

17:03:50 [alanr]

zakim, who is here

17:03:50 [Zakim]

alanr, you need to end that query with '?'

17:03:55 [alanr]

zakim, who is here?

17:03:55 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), IanH, bparsia (muted), Sandro, Zhe, Ivan (muted), uli (muted), Rinke (muted), alanr, becuencag2, msmith

17:03:55 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, mute me

17:04:01 [Zakim]

sorry, bcuencag2, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you

17:04:04 [Zakim]

On IRC I see zimmer, msmith, MarkusK_, Rinke, Zhe, uli, bcuencag2, bmotik, schneid, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, bparsia, ivan, IanH, sandro, trackbot

17:04:21 [bcuencag2]

Zakim becuencag2 is bcuencag2

17:04:25 [Zhe]

PROPOSED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2009-03-18

17:04:34 [pfps]

minutes are minimally acceptable

17:04:40 [alanr]

+1

17:04:41 [schneid]

sorry, possibly only on IRC today

17:04:42 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, becuencag2 is bcuencag2

17:04:42 [Zakim]

+bcuencag2; got it

17:04:48 [bcuencag2]

Zakim, mute me

17:04:48 [Zakim]

bcuencag2 should now be muted

17:04:51 [Zhe]

RESOLVED: accept minutes of http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2009-03-18

17:04:58 [jar]

jar has joined #owl

17:05:00 [pfps]

actually they look much better than when I looked at them last time.

17:05:06 [Zhe]

Topic: Action items status

17:05:22 [Zakim]

+??P9

17:05:34 [pfps]

it appears to me that some of these were approved as done last week

17:05:37 [Zhe]

alanr: any comments?

17:05:37 [zimmer]

Zakim, ??P9 is me

17:05:37 [Zakim]

+zimmer; got it

17:05:41 [msmith]

yes, I thought 283 was already closed

17:05:43 [ivan]

bijan did his review on the quick ref guide

17:05:47 [Zhe]

... one question to Jie. wasn't clear on 301 status

17:05:51 [ivan]

so did christine

17:06:09 [pfps]

no one is updating the status

17:06:18 [pfps]

301 was approved as done last week

17:06:31 [sandro]

action-301 done

17:06:39 [sandro]

action-301?

17:06:39 [trackbot]

ACTION-301 -- Jie Bao to contact Andy Seaborn and try to make sure he's happy with our work on rdf:text, and will talk to use about any remaining issues. -- due 2009-03-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW

17:06:39 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/301

17:06:58 [Zhe]

Topic: Due and Overdue actions

17:07:22 [Zhe]

action 309 done

17:07:22 [trackbot]

Sorry, couldn't find user - 309

17:07:29 [sandro]

action-292 closed

17:07:29 [trackbot]

ACTION-292 Talk to RIF to see what datatypes in OWL must not be in OWL-RL. closed

17:07:34 [Zhe]

action-299?

17:07:34 [trackbot]

ACTION-299 -- Sandro Hawke to find and fix the to-wiki-links Jeremy complains about -- due 2009-03-03 -- OPEN

17:07:34 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/299

17:07:48 [pfps]

last week Sandro said that this would happen at pub time

17:07:53 [Zhe]

action 310?

17:07:53 [trackbot]

Sorry, bad ACTION syntax

17:07:59 [Zhe]

action-310?

17:07:59 [trackbot]

ACTION-310 -- Peter Patel-Schneider to review rdf:text document http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec -- due 2009-03-25 -- OPEN

17:07:59 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/310

17:08:40 [pfps]

action-307?

17:08:40 [trackbot]

ACTION-307 -- Christine Golbreich to review QRG -- due 2009-03-25 -- PENDINGREVIEW

17:08:40 [trackbot]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/307

17:08:42 [Zhe]

Zhe has joined #owl

17:08:48 [Zhe]

scribenick: Zhe

17:09:03 [alanr]

zakim, who is here?

17:09:03 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), IanH, bparsia (muted), Sandro, Zhe, Ivan (muted), uli (muted), Rinke (muted), alanr, bcuencag2 (muted), msmith, zimmer

17:09:06 [Zakim]

On IRC I see Zhe, jar, zimmer, msmith, Rinke, uli, bcuencag2, bmotik, schneid, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, bparsia, ivan, IanH, sandro, trackbot

17:09:09 [Zhe]

alanr: action-321 postponed

17:09:11 [pfps]

the due date should have been later - I'll move it

17:09:16 [Zhe]

Topic: Document and Reviewing

17:09:29 [Zhe]

alanr: the only one not ready is rdf text

17:09:52 [ivan]

is the rdf semantics ready for review? I am not sure

17:09:59 [Zhe]

... there is one involves our group.

17:10:21 [bmotik]

q+

17:10:23 [bmotik]

Zakim, unmute me

17:10:23 [Zakim]

bmotik should no longer be muted

17:10:34 [bparsia]

I am!

17:10:36 [pfps]

why are we hearing this at TC time?

17:10:38 [Zhe]

bmotik: who is arguing against making it infinite

17:10:39 [bparsia]

q+

17:10:43 [Zhe]

... RDF or RIF foks?

17:10:45 [ivan]

ack bmotik

17:10:48 [ivan]

addison

17:11:02 [Zhe]

It is the i18n folks

17:11:02 [bparsia]

zakim, unmute me

17:11:02 [Zakim]

bparsia should no longer be muted

17:11:03 [bmotik]

q+

17:11:07 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:11:12 [ivan]

ack bparsia

17:11:36 [Zhe]

bparsia: want to reuse existing regular expression libraries

17:11:54 [pfps]

I'm confused, why can't regular regexp libraries be used?

17:11:58 [Zhe]

... allow people to indicate which unicode version

17:12:07 [alanr]

q?

17:12:30 [Zakim]

+[IPcaller]

17:12:49 [schneid]

zakim, [IPcaller] is me

17:12:49 [Zakim]

+schneid; got it

17:12:54 [schneid]

zakim, mute me

17:12:54 [Zakim]

schneid should now be muted

17:12:55 [MarkusK_]

MarkusK_ has joined #owl

17:13:01 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

17:13:01 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

17:13:21 [Zakim]

+??P1

17:13:27 [Zhe]

alanr: goal is that we want to move forward with rdf text... not a tech discussion

17:13:28 [alanr]

ack bmotik

17:13:33 [Zhe]

... how to resolve it asap

17:13:39 [bparsia]

Toolkit I want to use: http://www.brics.dk/automaton/

17:13:40 [Zhe]

bmotik: a few tech questions

17:13:57 [bparsia]

I meant in OWL

17:14:05 [bparsia]

rdf:text:unicode3.1

17:14:10 [Zhe]

... did not understand bijan, what is the semantics if you indicate unicode version

17:14:12 [bparsia]

Oh! Nice!

17:14:35 [ivan]

q+

17:14:39 [Zhe]

... if we go with finite alphabet,

17:14:46 [bparsia]

q+

17:14:48 [alanr]

ack ivan

17:14:54 [Zhe]

... do we really know how many is in the unicode version.

17:15:10 [Zhe]

ivan: there is an upper limit for unicode characters

17:15:24 [Zhe]

... some of those are not properly defined.

17:15:25 [bmotik]

q+

17:15:27 [sandro]

"The largest Unicode code point is 0x10FFFF. Period. There is not an infinity of Unicode code points. "

17:15:33 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:15:51 [Zhe]

bparsia: it is nice to know about the libraries. makes me happy

17:15:59 [sandro]

-- from Addison Phillips, Chair -- W3C Internationalization WG

17:16:16 [Zhe]

... my proposal is that in the ontology, when I define a class, I am using a particular unicode version

17:16:23 [alanr]

q?

17:16:27 [alanr]

ack bmotik

17:16:34 [Zhe]

... however, if it is finite, then all problems are solved

17:17:12 [bparsia]

We need to know the number

17:17:15 [IanH]

An ecstatic Boris -- scary prospect

17:17:16 [alanr]

q?

17:17:28 [Zhe]

alanr: bmotik communicate with Jie to get the issue resolved

17:17:33 [bparsia]

Pointer to that rdf:text emial?

17:17:49 [schneid]

zakim, unmute me

17:17:49 [Zakim]

schneid should no longer be muted

17:17:53 [Zhe]

alanr: RDF semantics

17:18:09 [Zhe]

schneid: 3 or 4 more days

17:18:20 [Zhe]

... should be done by end of this week

17:18:31 [Zhe]

... (weekend)

17:18:44 [Zhe]

alanr: will you notify your reviewers

17:18:55 [Zhe]

schneid: will send out email once it is done

17:19:00 [alanr]

q?

17:19:03 [schneid]

zakim, mute me

17:19:03 [Zakim]

schneid should now be muted

17:19:18 [Zhe]

Topic: Changes since last call

17:19:24 [sandro]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reviewing#Documents_and_Reviewers

17:19:46 [Zhe]

sandro: does not show correct deadline

17:19:54 [bparsia]

n-ary is not ready right now

17:19:57 [Zhe]

... about n-ary

17:20:02 [bparsia]

Probablynext week

17:20:07 [Zhe]

alanr: can we talk about n-ary

17:20:10 [bparsia]

I couldn't last week

17:20:17 [bparsia]

But I can do it for next week

17:20:20 [Zhe]

... bjian mentioned that we can put in a small example

17:20:32 [Zhe]

... when is it going to be ready?

17:20:37 [alanr]

q?

17:20:38 [Zhe]

... next meeting or weekend?

17:20:38 [bparsia]

zakim, unmute me

17:20:38 [Zakim]

bparsia was not muted, bparsia

17:20:55 [Zhe]

bparsia: not sure.

17:21:09 [ivan]

q+

17:21:18 [alanr]

ack ivan

17:21:18 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

17:21:19 [Zhe]

alanr: I will update that page with right due dates

17:21:20 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

17:21:53 [bmotik]

Zakim, mute me

17:21:53 [Zakim]

bmotik should now be muted

17:22:05 [Zhe]

sandro: it will be published Friday.

17:22:31 [Zhe]

ivan: this means we do have something that we want to change on that document

17:22:37 [alanr]

q?

17:22:48 [Zhe]

... until that is done, the document is not ready for reviewing

17:23:08 [IanH]

Anticipated changes vis a vis naming should be very small

17:23:31 [Zhe]

ivan: the bottom line is that that document is not ready for reviewing

17:23:51 [Zhe]

alanr: hopefully it is a small change

17:24:01 [Zhe]

... any more for document set?

17:24:12 [Zhe]

Topic: Last Call Comments

17:24:41 [Zhe]

alanr: AR1 is delegated to Jonathan

17:25:03 [bparsia]

BTW: http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.0.0/ch01.pdf

17:25:05 [bparsia]

page 2

17:25:15 [pfps]

Isn't this the sort of thing that should be done by email?

17:25:19 [bparsia]

"The Unicode Standard contains 1,114,112 code points,"

17:25:36 [IanH]

I'm doing it now

17:25:39 [uli]

q+

17:25:44 [alanr]

ack uli

17:26:06 [Zhe]

uli: a few changes have been made

17:26:11 [IanH]

I looked -- looks fine to me

17:26:15 [Zhe]

... I can post the diff I have made

17:26:24 [Zhe]

alanr: these are ready to go

17:26:26 [uli]

zakim, mute me

17:26:26 [Zakim]

uli should now be muted

17:26:52 [Zhe]

alanr: one more related to this. Ivan suggested that we add some text to the intro in profiles document

17:27:09 [Zhe]

ivan: it is all in the email

17:27:10 [alanr]

http://www.w3.org/mid/49C350F4.6000200@w3.org

17:27:25 [Zhe]

... the intro to QL is very tech oritented...

17:27:52 [Zhe]

... need to have more understandable rationale in profiles

17:27:55 [pfps]

Document editor discretion seems to cover this point.

17:27:57 [alanr]

q?

17:27:59 [Zhe]

alanr: any objection?

17:28:05 [uli]

i think i added a bit

17:28:20 [Zhe]

alanr: Ivan can communicate with editors to get it done

17:28:42 [pfps]

-> Ian

17:28:43 [Zhe]

... can one editor stand up

17:28:58 [IanH]

I'm

17:28:59 [Zhe]

... zhe, can you do it?

17:29:01 [Zhe]

ok

17:29:06 [IanH]

I'm willing to help

17:29:06 [alanr]

q?

17:29:17 [Zhe]

thanks Ian

17:29:25 [bparsia]

+1

17:29:26 [Zhe]

alanr: comment on XML syntax,

17:29:31 [Zhe]

... looks ready to me

17:29:37 [schneid]

q+

17:29:53 [ivan]

q+

17:29:54 [Zhe]

alanr: one on rdf semantics, one on OWL DL the language.

17:29:54 [schneid]

q-

17:29:57 [alanr]

q?

17:30:11 [schneid]

JR6a should be checked by people

17:30:15 [Zhe]

ivan: on the rdf semantics, michael did more than required

17:30:29 [Zhe]

... it is not even last call

17:30:34 [alanr]

q?

17:30:39 [alanr]

ack ivan

17:30:41 [pfps]

the response is fine - ship it

17:30:48 [alanr]

+1

17:30:53 [Zhe]

ivan: I think Michael's reponse is great and ready to go

17:30:55 [schneid]

ah, I understand! ok

17:31:09 [Zhe]

alanr: not hearing object to sending out these two responses

17:31:18 [Zhe]

... JR6a, 6b can be sent as is

17:31:33 [alanr]

q?

17:31:40 [ivan]

zakim, who is here?

17:31:40 [Zakim]

On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik (muted), IanH, bparsia (muted), Sandro, Zhe, Ivan, uli (muted), Rinke (muted), alanr, bcuencag2 (muted), msmith, zimmer, schneid

17:31:40 [Zhe]

Jonathan: regarding AR1

17:31:43 [Zakim]

... (muted), MarkusK_

17:31:44 [Zakim]

On IRC I see MarkusK_, Zhe, jar, zimmer, msmith, Rinke, uli, bcuencag2, bmotik, schneid, pfps, Zakim, RRSAgent, alanr, bparsia, ivan, IanH, sandro, trackbot

17:31:51 [Zhe]

... looks like there are some extension point

17:31:54 [ivan]

zakim, alanr has jonathan

17:31:54 [Zakim]

+jonathan; got it

17:32:04 [Zhe]

... to define new data types in new namespaces as long as they are

17:32:14 [bparsia]

q+

17:32:16 [pfps]

q+

17:32:17 [Zhe]

... compatible with other SPECs

17:32:18 [sandro]

q+

17:32:31 [bmotik]

(Aside: Bijan and I managed to convince ourselves that Unicode indeed has 1,114,112 code points)

17:32:49 [sandro]

:-) bmotik

17:32:51 [ivan]

zakim, mute me

17:32:53 [Zhe]

... question is if there are some risk, you will get incompatibility

17:32:54 [bmotik]

(Aside: For all I care, we can have a vote right now to change the value sopace of rdf:text)

17:32:58 [Zakim]

Ivan should now be muted

17:33:07 [Zhe]

... XML try to address it through namespaces.

17:33:31 [alanr]

q?

17:33:34 [bparsia]

zakim, unmute me

17:33:34 [Zakim]

bparsia should no longer be muted

17:33:35 [Zhe]

... here it seems that we are reusing an existing namespace

17:33:56 [Zhe]

bparsia: we should not worry about the "risk"

17:33:58 [schneid]

I will nevertheless wait another 24 hours with sending 52a, so people can check

17:34:17 [Zhe]

... dont' think there is a real risk that people stepping into OWL namespace

17:34:24 [alanr]

q?

17:34:27 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:34:48 [Zhe]

... given that the community has matured, there should not be a problem

17:35:13 [alanr]

q?

17:35:17 [alanr]

ack pfps

17:35:21 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

17:35:21 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

17:35:23 [uli]

Ivan, to make "a mountain out of a mole hole"?

17:35:26 [Zhe]

pfps: I agree with bijan on this.

17:35:27 [alanr]

ack sandro

17:35:32 [Zhe]

sandro: I see two questions

17:35:35 [bmotik]

q+

17:35:46 [Zhe]

... 1) on the issue that bijan addressed.

17:36:07 [Zhe]

... I think extensibility point is properly architected

17:36:19 [Zhe]

... 2) interop problem

17:36:27 [Zhe]

... 10 well defined datatypes

17:36:35 [Zhe]

... 5 are required by OWL

17:37:04 [Zhe]

... I suspect users will find their tool support mroe datatypes

17:37:11 [Zhe]

s/mroe/more

17:37:16 [bparsia]

?

17:37:22 [alanr]

q?

17:37:22 [Zhe]

... which creates interop problem

17:37:30 [bparsia]

q+

17:37:39 [bmotik]

Zakim, unmute me

17:37:39 [Zakim]

bmotik should no longer be muted

17:37:42 [alanr]

ack bmotik

17:37:45 [pfps]

q+

17:37:46 [Zhe]

... Tools use extension should get user attention/ok

17:37:58 [Zhe]

bmotik: a bit lost. is this about xml schema datatypes

17:38:26 [alanr]

q?

17:38:27 [pfps]

q-

17:38:37 [Zhe]

... you cannot define new datatypes in XML schema namespace anyway

17:38:40 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:38:42 [Zhe]

... don't see any issue

17:38:47 [jar]

q?

17:38:52 [Zhe]

bparsia: agree with boris

17:38:58 [Zhe]

... it is clearly SPECed

17:39:46 [Zhe]

... don't feel the need as a tool vendor that we need user permission to extend.

17:39:49 [alanr]

q?

17:39:55 [Zhe]

... haven't seen troubles in the past

17:40:52 [Zhe]

sandro: you don't think WG should give this advice

17:41:11 [Zhe]

bparsia: not sure it is a good advice

17:41:43 [pfps]

+1`

17:41:48 [Zhe]

... tool vendors should decide by themselves

17:42:08 [Zhe]

sandro: I am persuaded by bijan

17:42:15 [pfps]

In many cases there may be *no* user to warn.

17:42:27 [Zhe]

... the worst case is that extension is used unexpectedly

17:42:45 [bparsia]

q=

17:42:48 [bparsia]

q+

17:42:49 [Zhe]

Jonathan: it affects ontology consistency

17:42:57 [bmotik]

q+

17:43:13 [Zhe]

sandro: tool can tell you that this part is not OWL, it is extension

17:43:36 [Zhe]

... it is not our job to tell tools to pop up warnings

17:43:42 [jar]

q?

17:44:11 [Zhe]

bparsia: Pellet has a mode that approximates things that it cannot handle

17:44:25 [jar]

q+ jar

17:44:41 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:44:49 [Zhe]

... we define what is mandatory, and what will happen given an OWL ontology

17:44:53 [alanr]

ack bmotik

17:45:02 [Zhe]

... for things beyond, it is not our job to define behavior

17:45:14 [pfps]

q+

17:45:30 [Zhe]

bmotik: in non-default mode, HermiT can approximate and does it best

17:45:31 [alanr]

ack jar

17:45:32 [bparsia]

And, if the spec told me not to do that? I would ignore that spec

17:45:32 [sandro]

sandro: I'm okay with the situation where a consumer system simply detects the situation where an extension is used and either gives a clear error message or (as per Bijan) offers to try some approximations. The right social/market forces are in play to avoid fragmenting the market, I think.

17:45:47 [Zhe]

Jonathan: looking at conformance doc

17:45:58 [pfps]

The question at hand is how to answer AR66, which states: I believe that it is our intention that implementation specific datatype maps don't define behavior for, e.g. future datatypes added to XML Schema (or datatypes we have rejected). AFAIK, there is no proscription against this and I would like to have there be.

17:46:03 [Zhe]

pfps: I don't see how the current discussion is relevant to the Agenda

17:46:04 [bmotik]

Zakim, mute me

17:46:04 [Zakim]

bmotik should now be muted

17:46:11 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

17:46:11 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

17:46:47 [sandro]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Conformance_and_Test_Cases#Datatype_Map_Conformance

17:47:05 [Zhe]

sandro: I pointed out that was in error,

17:47:33 [Zhe]

alanr: Jonathan do you have more comments?

17:47:54 [sandro]

FWIW I think it was real error to every accept "comments" from WG members... :-/ They should be issues instead.

17:48:03 [Zhe]

GRDDL TM1 17 GRDDL

17:48:07 [bparsia]

ship it

17:48:11 [ivan]

ship it

17:48:14 [alanr]

+1

17:48:14 [Zhe]

alanr: everyone comfortable?

17:48:22 [pfps]

+1

17:48:46 [Zhe]

alanr: RM1

17:48:52 [schneid]

zakim, unmute me

17:48:52 [Zakim]

schneid should no longer be muted

17:48:54 [Zhe]

... michael, have you sent the response out?

17:49:15 [Zhe]

schneid: the second was drafted by peter, I am out of it

17:49:20 [schneid]

zakim, mute me

17:49:20 [Zakim]

schneid should now be muted

17:49:29 [pfps]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Responses_to_Last_Call_Comments clearly indicates that a 2nd response has been sent

17:49:48 [Zhe]

Topic: Technical Issues

17:50:07 [Zhe]

alanr: xsd:dateTimeStamp, shall we follow XML schema

17:50:20 [bparsia]

?

17:50:26 [bmotik]

Zaakim, unmute me

17:50:30 [bmotik]

Zakim, unmute me

17:50:30 [Zakim]

bmotik should no longer be muted

17:50:30 [alanr]

ack bmotik

17:50:41 [alanr]

q?

17:50:50 [alanr]

ack pfps

17:50:57 [bparsia]

+1 to my other self

17:51:02 [ivan]

+1 to boris

17:51:06 [Zhe]

bmotik: the issue is that the current SPEC use a prioteray handling of dataTime,

17:51:12 [Zhe]

... we should align with XML schema

17:51:13 [alanr]

q+ to ask why timezone but not the other elements of the 7 tuple

17:51:28 [Zhe]

... change is not that big. the only thing is that timezone is disjoint

17:51:30 [sandro]

q+

17:51:39 [bmotik]

Zakim, mute me

17:51:39 [Zakim]

bmotik should now be muted

17:51:43 [Zhe]

... don't think users will get lots of problems

17:51:51 [ivan]

ack alanr

17:51:51 [Zakim]

alanr, you wanted to ask why timezone but not the other elements of the 7 tuple

17:52:00 [bmotik]

Zakim, unmute me

17:52:00 [Zakim]

bmotik should no longer be muted

17:52:02 [Zhe]

alanr: I have a question, XML schema has 7 tuple,

17:52:06 [alanr]

q?

17:52:07 [Zhe]

... how is that aligned

17:52:32 [Zhe]

bmotik: the 7 tuple can map to a particular time

17:52:38 [alanr]

q+ to clarify that this means we can't have functional properties with dateTimeStamps as values?

17:52:43 [sandro]

boris: you can map 7-tuple to time-on-timeline, with different time line for each time zone.

17:52:45 [Zhe]

... you cannot tell the difference

17:52:52 [ivan]

ack sandro

17:53:00 [Zhe]

sandro: this is sounding like a bug in XML schema

17:53:04 [bmotik]

q+

17:53:08 [pfps]

q+

17:53:18 [bparsia]

I recommend avoiding timezones in ontologies ;)

17:53:22 [bparsia]

Preprocess!

17:53:24 [Zhe]

... the point is to reason different times in different zones

17:53:28 [alanr]

q?

17:53:36 [pfps]

the are equal, just not identical

17:53:37 [alanr]

ack alanr

17:53:37 [Zakim]

alanr, you wanted to clarify that this means we can't have functional properties with dateTimeStamps as values?

17:53:40 [Zhe]

... not what I want as a user

17:53:54 [pfps]

nope

17:54:04 [ivan]

ack bmotik

17:54:08 [Zhe]

alanr: so the consequence is that we cannot have a functional property with a dateTime as its range?

17:54:35 [Zhe]

bmotik: if you have a FP p, two values pointing to the same time point in two zones,

17:54:39 [bparsia]

Discussion of identity vs. equality I just wrote: <http://www.w3.org/mid/0E611C17-39DC-4509-8002-3E684C345C45@cs.manchester.ac.uk>

17:54:43 [Zhe]

... they violate the constraint

17:55:13 [pfps]

q-

17:55:24 [Zhe]

... XML schema wants to keep this time zone information in the value space

17:55:33 [bparsia]

q+ to propose at riskiness

17:55:43 [alanr]

q+ to ask one last question - why con consider this extralogical and answer queries against syntax

17:55:52 [Zhe]

... because they have functions to compare, it is not a bug in my opinion

17:55:55 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:55:56 [Zakim]

bparsia, you wanted to propose at riskiness

17:56:02 [Zhe]

sandro: I agree now it is not a bug

17:56:10 [sandro]

(in xml schema)

17:56:16 [Zhe]

bparsia: two principles, 1) to align with XML schema

17:56:17 [sandro]

sandro: but it's a pain for users.

17:57:24 [ivan]

+1 to bijan, make the choices clear and put it into the document as a feedback request from the community

17:57:28 [IanH]

Seems similar to the numerics: could imagine arguments on both sides but being consistent with XML schema sounds like the winning argument.

17:57:31 [alanr]

ack alanr

17:57:31 [Zakim]

alanr, you wanted to ask one last question - why con consider this extralogical and answer queries against syntax

17:57:31 [msmith]

+1 to bparsia

17:57:35 [IanH]

And +1 to Bijan

17:57:36 [Zhe]

... it is always possible to normalize all timestamp values with respect to timezones

17:57:40 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

17:57:40 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

17:58:04 [Zhe]

alanr: boris, why do we need to put it in the valuespace?

17:58:39 [Zhe]

bmotik: for the case RIF wants to implement some functions (give back timezones)

17:59:03 [bparsia]

One can do that as a preprocessing phase..if you wanted that

17:59:09 [alanr]

q?

17:59:17 [Zhe]

... anyone use XQuery with OWL will find it difficult

17:59:37 [bparsia]

q+

17:59:37 [bmotik]

q+

17:59:45 [bparsia]

zakim, unmute me

17:59:45 [Zakim]

bparsia should no longer be muted

17:59:46 [Zhe]

sandro: RIF is struggling with this and will have identity operator and equality operator

17:59:47 [alanr]

ack bparsia

17:59:53 [ivan]

ack bparsia

18:00:02 [sandro]

s/will/will probably/

18:00:13 [alanr]

q+ to ask why we couldn't use equality across OWL

18:00:16 [Zhe]

bparsia: unlike RIF, we don't have luxury to have two operators because counting defines on top of identity

18:00:24 [sandro]

bparsia: OWL doesn't have the luxury of two operators, since counting works with identity.

18:00:34 [Zhe]

... am scared to use equality

18:00:45 [alanr]

q?

18:00:58 [alanr]

ack bmotik

18:00:59 [ivan]

ack bmotik

18:01:00 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

18:01:01 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

18:01:16 [Zhe]

bmotik: don't think this is crucial for users

18:01:27 [bparsia]

I agree with boris to some extent

18:01:38 [alanr]

q?

18:01:39 [bparsia]

It's work aroundable

18:01:52 [jar]

q+ jar to wonder about calendar merging

18:02:03 [Zhe]

... it is not that often that two (same) values use different zones

18:02:09 [sandro]

boris: Come on -- how many users will actually want to use a use functional properties to say there is one time, and then provide the time in multiple time zones?

18:02:12 [alanr]

q?

18:02:20 [alanr]

ack alanr

18:02:20 [Zakim]

alanr, you wanted to ask why we couldn't use equality across OWL

18:02:38 [IanH]

Let's vote now!

18:02:39 [bparsia]

zakim, unmute me

18:02:39 [Zakim]

bparsia should no longer be muted

18:02:41 [sandro]

sandro: I think it'll a real problem, boris, but I think it's a very small issue and I'd like to move on?

18:03:38 [Zhe]

bparsia: we cannot put this under user control with respect to counting

18:03:51 [jar]

q- jar

18:04:02 [Zhe]

alanr: why cannot we use equality in OWL as the single choice

18:04:45 [Zhe]

bparsia: we discussed and decided to go with XML schema identity

18:05:07 [sandro]

bparsia: This all comes back to us having to chose between XS Identity and XS Equality as our Identity, and the compelling evidence is on the side of XS Identity.

18:05:31 [Zhe]

... tools can normalize xsd:dateTimeStamp values in different zones

18:05:32 [alanr]

PROPOSED: OWL will use the standard XML Schema definition of xsd:dateTimeStamp (i.e., time zones are carried into the semantics of OWL). We will mark this "at risk" and solicit feedback on the choice.

18:05:35 [sandro]

bparsia: Tools can route around this, by comparing them as identiical if they need to -- let's be conservative and consistent.

18:05:48 [bparsia]

zakim, mute me

18:05:48 [Zakim]

bparsia should now be muted

18:06:17 [Zhe]

bmotik: dateTime should be the same

18:06:37 [pfps]

we need to resolve the "at risk" later

18:06:37 [bparsia]

I don't care

18:06:38 [alanr]

+1

18:06:38 [IanH]

Minimising "at risk" has to be good.

18:06:40 [bparsia]

I'm fine not

18:06:48 [pfps]

0

18:06:51 [ivan]

0

18:06:54 [Rinke]

0

18:06:55 [bparsia]

Are we voting?

18:06:55 [bmotik]

I'd prefer just being done with this.

18:06:56 [Zhe]

0

18:07:02 [bmotik]

I.e., no at risk.

18:07:04 [bparsia]

-1

18:07:07 [uli]

no at risk

18:07:08 [bcuencag2]

0

18:07:10 [MarkusK_]

0

18:07:11 [schneid]

0

18:07:20 [alanr]

PROPOSED: OWL will use the standard XML Schema definition of xsd:dateTimeStamp (i.e., time zones are carried into the semantics of OWL).

18:07:23 [sandro]

+1

18:07:24 [bmotik]

+1

18:07:24 [pfps]

+1 ALU

18:07:25 [ivan]

+1

18:07:25 [bparsia]

+1

18:07:27 [alanr]

0

18:07:31 [Zhe]

+1

18:07:32 [msmith]

+1

18:07:39 [MarkusK_]

0

18:07:42 [bcuencag2]

+1

18:07:45 [schneid]

0 (no opinion)

18:07:49 [Rinke]

+1

18:08:03 [uli]

+1

18:08:06 [alanr]

RESOLVED: OWL will use the standard XML Schema definition of xsd:dateTimeStamp (i.e., time zones are carried into the semantics of OWL).

18:08:22 [Zhe]

alanr: boris, we can discuss dateTime next week

18:08:27 [Zhe]

alanr: CURIEs

18:08:40 [bparsia]

zakim, unmute me

18:08:40 [Zakim]

bparsia should no longer be muted

18:09:00 [schneid]

q+ on question about relevance for RDF-Based Semantics

18:09:01 [sandro]

q+

18:09:09 [alanr]

ack schneid

18:09:10 [schneid]

zakim, unmute me

18:09:11 [Zakim]

schneid, you wanted to comment on question about relevance for RDF-Based Semantics

18:09:13 [Zakim]

schneid was not muted, schneid

18:09:30 [ivan]

none

18:09:30 [bparsia]

q+

18:09:38 [Zhe]

schneid: point from me is that what is the relevance to us

18:09:48 [pfps]

RDF-semantics should not be affected

18:09:49 [Zhe]

... CURIE is used only for representation purpose

18:10:01 [ekw]

ekw has joined #owl

18:10:02 [alanr]

ack bparsia

18:10:04 [ivan]

schneid: do not worry! Nothing

18:10:09 [Zhe]

... wonder what is the implication

18:10:23 [alanr]

ack sandro

18:10:24 [Zhe]

bparsia: we just change the references of CURIE.

18:10:27 [alanr]

q?

18:10:48 [Zhe]

sandro: this change does not affect RDF/XML

18:10:49 [ivan]

exactly

18:10:52 [alanr]

+1

18:10:53 [schneid]

zakim, mute me

18:10:53 [Zakim]

schneid should now be muted

18:11:00 [bmotik]

+q

18:11:10 [alanr]

ack bmotik

18:11:48 [ivan]

+1 to Boris

18:11:54 [alanr]

are we allowing abbreviations without namespace

18:11:55 [bparsia]

+1

18:11:57 [schneid]

schneid: RDF-Based Semantics refers to CURIE spec, but only uses CURIEs for presentational reasons, to have the particular IRIs in the document being presented in an abbreviated form

18:11:58 [alanr]

q?

18:12:34 [sandro]

q+

18:12:37 [Zakim]

+ +1.301.351.aabb

18:12:37 [Zhe]

alanr: are we allowing no colon

18:12:40 [ivan]

q+

18:12:54 [alanr]

ack sandro

18:12:56 [Zhe]

bparsia: we can choose to enforce it. will check with SPARQL

18:13:10 [ivan]

ack ivan

18:13:12 [alanr]

ack ivan

18:13:14 [Zhe]

sandro: having a no colon name is bad because it is hard to evolve

18:13:19 [ekw]

zakim, ++1.301.351.aabb is me

18:13:19 [Zakim]

sorry, ekw, I do not recognize a party named '++1.301.351.aabb'

18:13:21 [Zhe]

ivan: we should not have that

18:13:38 [bmotik]

q+

18:13:40 [Zhe]

alanr: do we want to wait for SPARQL comment?

18:13:41 [bmotik]

q-

18:13:49 [Zhe]

bmotik: SPARQL mandates it

18:14:02 [calvanese]

calvanese has joined #owl

18:14:10 [pfps]

let's go for PREFIX, just like SPARQL

18:14:17 [alanr]

+1

18:14:17 [bmotik]

q+

18:14:19 [ivan]

ship it:-)

18:14:24 [alanr]

ack bmotik

18:14:31 [ekw]

zakim, 1.301.351.aabb is me

18:14:31 [Zakim]

sorry, ekw, I do not recognize a party named '1.301.351.aabb'

18:14:35 [ivan]

eliminate

18:14:35 [alanr]

eliminate references to spec, I think

18:14:38 [pfps]

use prefixed name, just like SPARQL

18:14:48 [ivan]

+1 to pfps

18:14:49 [Zhe]

alanr: I suggest not

18:14:52 [Zhe]

bmotic: agree

18:14:58 [Zakim]

+calvanese

18:15:00 [Zhe]

bparsia: agree as well

18:15:01 [schneid]

"abbreviated IRIs"

18:15:08 [pfps]

SPARQL syntax says IRIref ::= IRI_REF | PrefixedName

18:15:13 [Zhe]

bparia: don't know CURIE will continue

18:15:23 [alanr]

PROPOSED: OWL will not rely on CURIEs spec but will define it's own IRI abbreviation mechanism compatible with the one used by SPARQL

18:15:38 [pfps]

+1 ALU

18:15:39 [alanr]

+1

18:15:39 [bmotik]

+1

18:15:40 [ivan]

+1

18:15:41 [bparsia]

+1

18:15:43 [MarkusK_]

+1

18:15:43 [bcuencag2]

+1

18:15:44 [msmith]

+1

18:15:46 [Rinke]

+1

18:15:47 [uli]

+1

18:15:48 [schneid]

0

18:15:49 [zimmer]

+1

18:15:52 [sandro]

+0 (haven't studied it enough)

18:15:55 [ekw]

+0

18:16:00 [alanr]

RESOLVED: OWL will not rely on CURIEs spec but will define it's own IRI abbreviation mechanism compatible with the one used by SPARQL

18:16:06 [Zhe]

+1

18:16:32 [alanr]

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Naming

18:16:36 [sandro]

scribe: sandro

18:16:48 [sandro]

alan: Ian has written up how he understand we use Names

18:17:03 [calvanese]

zakim, mute me

18:17:03 [Zakim]

calvanese should now be muted

18:17:08 [sandro]

alan: Question 1 -- does thiis match your sense of the names

18:17:15 [Zhe]

Zhe has joined #owl

18:17:17 [sandro]

alan: Question 2 -- where and how should we document this.

18:17:18 [alanr]

q?

18:17:27 [Zhe]

I am back. thanks sandro!

18:17:29 [ivan]

q+

18:17:33 [alanr]

ack ivan

18:17:55 [alanr]

circular: OWL 2 ontology - any OWL 2 ontology

18:18:03 [sandro]

ivan: When the conf. document talks about "OWL 2 Full", it speaks of RDF graphs in general.

18:18:21 [sandro]

"# OWL 2 ontology - any OWL 2 ontology "

18:18:29 [bparsia]

Works for me

18:18:37 [sandro]

q?

18:18:38 [IanH]

As in, without qualification!

18:18:47 [pfps]

works fine for me "OWL 2 ontology" is any OWL 2 ontology

18:18:49 [bparsia]

As one of my phil prof sez: Circles are good if they are big enough

18:18:53 [bparsia]

That's big enough!

18:18:57 [uli]

me too

18:19:03 [sandro]

q+

18:19:14 [alanr]

q+ jar

18:19:18 [alanr]

ack sandro

18:19:27 [Zhe]

sandro: don't have a concrete proposal,

18:19:28 [ivan]

noooo:-(

18:19:45 [uli]

why?

18:19:55 [IanH]

q+

18:20:06 [alanr]

ack jar

18:20:19 [msmith]

+1 to sandro. the two of us can agree to not use the informal terminology :)

18:20:48 [alanr]

ack IanH

18:21:21 [alanr]

q+

18:21:56 [Zhe]

IanH: could you please put what you said in IRC?

18:22:12 [alanr]

+1

18:22:16 [sandro]

q+ to propose we explain the informal extended terminology, labeling it as "legacy"

18:22:35 [alanr]

ack alanr

18:22:39 [sandro]

ian: And we agree in the spec to minimize the use of the the informal tech.

18:22:51 [IanH]

q+

18:22:58 [alanr]

ack sandro

18:22:58 [Zakim]

sandro, you wanted to propose we explain the informal extended terminology, labeling it as "legacy"

18:22:59 [sandro]

alan: OWL 2 ontology == OWL 2 structure or RDF graph

18:23:17 [Zhe]

sandro: what about "legacy", deprecation is too strong

18:23:34 [pfps]

+1

18:23:38 [Zhe]

alanr: we agree that we will minimize in the spec

18:24:29 [alanr]

q+ to advocate that we explain these terms in the document overview

18:24:32 [alanr]

ack IanH

18:24:48 [Zhe]

IanH: we are consistent when using the term

18:25:03 [alanr]

q?

18:25:13 [Zhe]

sandro: I understand we should not say it. maybe we should imply

18:25:15 [pfps]

tender sensibilities will be bruised by Sandro's proposal

18:25:23 [sandro]

:-)

18:25:26 [Zhe]

IanH: won't be hostile to some wordsmithing

18:25:30 [alanr]

ack alanr

18:25:30 [Zakim]

alanr, you wanted to advocate that we explain these terms in the document overview

18:25:37 [sandro]

never tickle sleeping dragons?

18:25:59 [ivan]

q+

18:26:10 [alanr]

ack ivaan

18:26:16 [Zhe]

alanr: I like to see this in the document overview

18:26:23 [IanH]

+1 to Ivan

18:26:40 [sandro]

"We have avoided use of the term "OWL 2 Full", which is sometimes used to mean, ..., favoring separate terms for RDF Graph and RDF-Based Semantics"

18:26:44 [Zhe]

ivan: the current introduction is clear and the conformance is very clear

18:27:18 [pfps]

Sandro is again underestimating the tenderness of sensibilities

18:27:33 [IanH]

It's possible, but still suggest to take this off line

18:27:50 [Zhe]

alanr: haven't heard any objection,

18:28:04 [Zhe]

... make sure our usage in the document set follows this

18:28:10 [IanH]

Peter (very kindly) check schema conformance already

18:28:20 [IanH]

s/check/checked/

18:28:35 [Zakim]

-Ivan

18:28:53 [schneid]

bye

18:28:56 [Rinke]

bye

18:28:57 [Zakim]

-bcuencag2

18:28:58 [Zakim]

-msmith

18:28:59 [uli]

bye

18:28:59 [Zakim]

-alanr

18:29:01 [Zakim]

-bparsia

18:29:02 [MarkusK_]

bye

18:29:03 [Zakim]

- +1.301.351.aabb

18:29:03 [Zhe]

bye

18:29:04 [Zakim]

-Sandro

18:29:04 [Zakim]

-Rinke

18:29:10 [Zakim]

-bmotik

18:29:13 [Zakim]

-schneid

18:29:14 [zimmer]

bye

18:29:15 [Zakim]

-uli

18:29:16 [calvanese]

bye

18:29:18 [Zakim]

-MarkusK_

18:29:19 [Zakim]

-IanH

18:29:22 [Zakim]

-Peter_Patel-Schneider

18:29:26 [Zakim]

-Zhe

18:29:31 [Zakim]

-calvanese

18:29:39 [calvanese]

calvanese has left #owl

18:29:53 [Zakim]

-zimmer

18:29:55 [Zakim]

SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended

18:29:56 [Zakim]

Attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, bmotik, IanH, +0161868aaaa, Zhe, Sandro, Ivan, uli, bparsia, Rinke, msmith, bcuencag2, zimmer, schneid, MarkusK_, jonathan, +1.301.351.aabb,

18:29:59 [Zakim]

... calvanese

18:38:33 [msmith]

msmith has left #owl

19:55:37 [ekw]

ekw has joined #owl

20:51:32 [Zakim]

Zakim has left #owl

22:21:34 [ekw]

ekw has joined #owl

22:49:00 [sandro]

sandro has joined #owl

23:01:45 [IanH]

IanH has joined #owl

23:20:54 [IanH_]

IanH_ has joined #owl