IRC log of owl on 2009-04-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

16:56:29 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #owl
16:56:29 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/29-owl-irc
16:56:31 [bijan]
bijan has joined #owl
16:56:37 [IanH]
Zakim, this will be owlwg
16:56:37 [Zakim]
ok, IanH; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
16:56:51 [IanH]
IanH has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2009.04.29/Agenda
16:57:11 [msmith]
msmith has joined #owl
16:57:24 [DeborahM]
DeborahM has joined #owl
16:58:18 [IanH]
Has anyone else called in yet?
16:58:23 [bijan]
I did
16:58:28 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
16:58:28 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()1:00PM has not yet started, IanH
16:58:29 [Zakim]
On IRC I see DeborahM, msmith, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, zimmer, ivan, sebastian, trackbot
16:58:41 [schneid]
schneid has joined #owl
16:59:45 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
16:59:45 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()1:00PM has not yet started, IanH
16:59:46 [Zakim]
On IRC I see schneid, DeborahM, msmith, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, zimmer, ivan, sebastian, trackbot
17:00:09 [schneid]
I don't get feedback from Zakim
17:00:12 [pfps]
pfps has joined #owl
17:00:13 [baojie]
baojie has joined #owl
17:00:17 [schneid]
... and I am Scribe!
17:00:21 [uli]
uli has joined #owl
17:00:28 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:00:28 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()1:00PM has not yet started, IanH
17:00:29 [Zakim]
On IRC I see uli, baojie, pfps, schneid, DeborahM, msmith, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, zimmer, ivan, sebastian, trackbot
17:00:36 [bijan]
zakim, what time is it?
17:00:36 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, bijan.
17:00:42 [IanH]
zakim, this is owl
17:00:42 [Zakim]
ok, IanH; that matches SW_OWL()1:00PM
17:00:50 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:00:50 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +03539149aaaa, Ian_Horrocks, ??P26, ??P30, [IPcaller], pfps, ??P0, +1.202.408.aabb
17:00:52 [Zakim]
On IRC I see uli, baojie, pfps, schneid, DeborahM, msmith, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, zimmer, ivan, sebastian, trackbot
17:01:01 [Zhe]
Zhe has joined #owl
17:01:03 [schneid]
I'm redialling
17:01:07 [Zakim]
-[IPcaller]
17:01:33 [Zakim]
+ +1.518.276.aacc
17:01:41 [Zakim]
+ +1.603.897.aadd
17:01:51 [Zhe]
zakim, +1.603.897.aadd is me
17:01:51 [Zakim]
+Zhe; got it
17:01:57 [baojie]
Zakim, aacc is me
17:01:57 [Zakim]
+baojie; got it
17:01:57 [Zhe]
zakim, mute me
17:01:58 [Zakim]
Zhe should now be muted
17:02:15 [bijan]
zakim, ??p30 is me
17:02:16 [Zakim]
+??P17
17:02:19 [Zakim]
+bijan; got it
17:02:21 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:02:21 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +03539149aaaa, Ian_Horrocks, ??P26, bijan, pfps, ??P0, msmith, baojie, Zhe (muted), ??P17
17:02:25 [uli]
zakim, ??P0 is me
17:02:31 [schneid]
zakim, ??P17 is me
17:02:32 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Zhe, uli, baojie, pfps, schneid, DeborahM, msmith, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, zimmer, ivan, sebastian, trackbot
17:02:35 [Zakim]
+uli; got it
17:02:37 [Zakim]
+schneid; got it
17:02:41 [uli]
zakim, mute me
17:02:45 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
17:02:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.518.276.aaee
17:02:50 [schneid]
zakim, mute me
17:02:53 [Zakim]
schneid should now be muted
17:02:58 [IanH]
ScribeNick: schneid
17:03:03 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
17:03:04 [schneid]
zakim, unmute me
17:03:06 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
17:03:07 [Zakim]
+Ivan
17:03:09 [Zakim]
schneid should no longer be muted
17:03:16 [bmotik]
bmotik has joined #owl
17:03:17 [sebastian]
zakim, ??P26 is me
17:03:23 [ivan]
zakim, mute me
17:03:26 [Zakim]
+sebastian; got it
17:03:28 [Zakim]
Ivan should now be muted
17:03:29 [IanH]
zakim, who is here?
17:03:31 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +03539149aaaa, Ian_Horrocks, sebastian, bijan, pfps, uli (muted), msmith, baojie, Zhe (muted), schneid, +1.518.276.aaee, Ivan (muted)
17:03:32 [schneid]
topic: role call
17:03:37 [Zakim]
On IRC I see bmotik, Zhe, uli, baojie, pfps, schneid, DeborahM, msmith, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, zimmer, ivan, sebastian, trackbot
17:03:39 [zimmer]
Zakim, +03539149aaaa is me
17:03:40 [sebastian]
zakim, mute me
17:03:42 [Zakim]
+zimmer; got it
17:03:46 [Zakim]
sebastian should now be muted
17:03:48 [Zakim]
+ +0186528aaff
17:03:52 [schneid]
topic: agenda amendments
17:03:52 [Achille]
Achille has joined #owl
17:04:01 [bmotik]
Zakim, +0186528aaff is me
17:04:01 [Zakim]
+bmotik; got it
17:04:04 [Zakim]
+[IBM]
17:04:05 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:04:08 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:04:14 [Zakim]
+??P22
17:04:15 [Achille]
zakim, ibm is me
17:04:16 [Zakim]
+Achille; got it
17:04:16 [schneid]
ian: QRG discussion at beginning, because some champions will have to leave soon
17:04:18 [christine]
christine has joined #owl
17:04:24 [msmith]
they are not so good
17:04:24 [schneid]
topic: previous minutes
17:04:24 [pfps]
minutes looked OK by me
17:04:35 [msmith]
q+
17:04:50 [bcuencagrau]
bcuencagrau has joined #owl
17:05:11 [msmith]
q-
17:05:12 [uli]
...perhaps Peter doesn't mind things petering out?
17:05:12 [schneid]
msmith: large parts have no scribing, only irc chat
17:05:25 [schneid]
christine: it was difficult to write at the end
17:05:47 [schneid]
ian: christine, could you again clean it up a bit
17:05:50 [schneid]
christine: i did
17:05:54 [Zakim]
+bmotik.a
17:06:00 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, bmotik.a is me
17:06:00 [Zakim]
+bcuencagrau; got it
17:06:06 [schneid]
christine: can anyone help me with clean up?
17:06:17 [pfps]
I don't think that there is anything particularly important missing.
17:06:20 [bcuencagrau]
Zakim, mute me
17:06:20 [Zakim]
bcuencagrau should now be muted
17:06:24 [schneid]
ian: trouble is that there is not much there to clean up
17:06:25 [msmith]
ok by me
17:06:32 [schneid]
ian: should we just accept them as they are?
17:06:46 [schneid]
ian: if no one objects, then accept them
17:06:59 [schneid]
topic: action item status
17:07:28 [schneid]
ian: peter did Action 332
17:07:50 [schneid]
ian: review of nf&r: next week
17:08:00 [schneid]
topic: documents and reviewing
17:08:09 [schneid]
ian: we got comment on rdf:text
17:08:13 [ivan]
q+
17:08:19 [ivan]
ack ivan
17:08:21 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:08:29 [IanH]
q?
17:08:30 [schneid]
... don't know perfectly how to deal with these comments
17:08:46 [bijan]
q+
17:08:49 [ivan]
zakim, unmute ivan
17:08:49 [Zakim]
Ivan was not muted, ivan
17:08:51 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:09:13 [schneid]
bijan: it's highly likely the sparql wg will have a comment on rdf:text
17:09:56 [schneid]
... i was talking to andy seaborne, who is main pusher, and he thinks that comment will not be LC regeneration comment
17:09:58 [Zakim]
-Ivan
17:10:07 [ivan]
zakim, dial ivan-voip
17:10:07 [Zakim]
ok, ivan; the call is being made
17:10:09 [Zakim]
+Ivan
17:10:13 [Zakim]
+Sandro
17:10:18 [sandro]
sandro has joined #owl
17:10:34 [schneid]
ian: hasn't andy seaborne reviewed it already
17:10:35 [sandro]
(sorry I'm late.)
17:10:43 [schneid]
bijan: yes, but not from the sparql perspective
17:11:22 [schneid]
... there may be thinks that are surprising to him, and that he did not thought about before
17:11:48 [schneid]
ian: who do we have to work on rdf:text
17:11:52 [bijan]
One thread: <http://www.w3.org/mid/49F6C028.1000006@deri.org>
17:11:55 [IanH]
q?
17:12:00 [schneid]
ian: probably boris
17:12:26 [schneid]
ivan: axel is both editor of rdf:text and he is on the sparql wg
17:12:48 [bmotik]
q+
17:12:49 [schneid]
ivan: believes that axel is trying to take action on this
17:12:51 [bmotik]
Zakim, unmute me
17:12:51 [Zakim]
bmotik should no longer be muted
17:12:51 [IanH]
q?
17:12:55 [IanH]
ack bmotik
17:13:06 [schneid]
... and we can wait one more weak to see what happens
17:13:23 [schneid]
boris: axel has already made some smaller changes to the document
17:13:29 [bijan]
Him
17:13:40 [schneid]
ian: we already have a comment on rdf:text
17:13:42 [bmotik]
q+
17:13:47 [IanH]
ack bmotik
17:13:59 [schneid]
boris: i made an informal comment to him
17:14:16 [schneid]
... made clear that is personal response
17:14:25 [sandro]
(boris' reply to Michael was good, and a good thing to do.)
17:14:33 [schneid]
... this guy was complaining about the "#"
17:14:59 [IanH]
q?
17:15:27 [schneid]
... we maybe have to change the document to talk about qnames, but don't know how to do it exactly
17:15:30 [bijan]
q+
17:15:38 [IanH]
q?
17:15:40 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:15:50 [schneid]
ian: can we have some try in the wiki?
17:17:12 [schneid]
ian: we forgot about the agenda amendmend: QRG
17:17:35 [schneid]
topic: agenda amendment: qrg
17:17:37 [IanH]
q?
17:18:00 [schneid]
jie: peter made several comments, many editorial
17:18:58 [IanH]
q?
17:19:06 [schneid]
jie: links to other documents may be useful to new users
17:19:09 [bijan]
q+ to ask about why it would useful to users new to owl altogether
17:19:22 [schneid]
... specifically the links to the primer
17:20:14 [schneid]
ian: is the qrg close to ship?
17:20:17 [pfps]
QRG is missing some constructs, still, I think
17:20:21 [IanH]
q?
17:20:23 [schneid]
jie: the web version seems close
17:20:28 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:20:28 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to ask about why it would useful to users new to owl altogether
17:20:55 [IanH]
q?
17:21:17 [christine]
q
17:21:21 [IanH]
q?
17:21:37 [schneid]
jie: people coming from owl 1 will find helpful links to nf&r to understand the changes
17:21:40 [IanH]
q?
17:21:54 [bijan]
I'm against the links to Primer too
17:21:58 [pfps]
q+
17:22:01 [bijan]
But I was confused by what Jie said
17:22:01 [schneid]
christine: those links are useful
17:22:07 [IanH]
q?
17:22:27 [schneid]
... first they are harmless
17:22:37 [schneid]
... second helpful for navigation
17:22:48 [bijan]
Some of us don't think they are harmless
17:23:03 [schneid]
... we should focus on content of document, not so much on the links
17:23:22 [bijan]
(Links are part of the content as well.)
17:23:27 [baojie]
+q
17:23:34 [IanH]
ack pfps
17:23:40 [schneid]
ian: only trouble, there needs to be actual means for the links
17:24:14 [uli]
+1 to Peter: I thought these links would be "arguments"!
17:24:21 [schneid]
pfps: disagrees with christine, they are harmful, introduce bloat, and extra bits not natural structure of the document
17:24:28 [IanH]
ack baojie
17:24:47 [bijan]
Also, I think the "new" will get dated
17:24:49 [bijan]
q+
17:24:56 [IanH]
q?
17:24:57 [uli]
q+
17:25:08 [bijan]
q-
17:25:16 [bijan]
I'll just say that the "new" bits will get dated over time
17:25:23 [schneid]
jie: if we add the links... [help!]
17:25:33 [bijan]
They won't be "new", so it's bad to *highlight* them
17:25:50 [schneid]
ian: modulo links, are people currently happy with the document?
17:25:57 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
17:25:57 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
17:25:58 [IanH]
ack uli
17:26:25 [christine]
+q
17:26:31 [IanH]
q?
17:26:32 [baojie]
+q
17:26:48 [schneid]
uli: i'm a bit puzzled because of the links, since the qrg was designed to be printed to paper, used offline at desktop, where there are no links
17:27:09 [pfps]
I also do not like the top-level divisions, and have expressed this in the past
17:27:23 [bijan]
q+ I think I should say it
17:27:24 [IanH]
q?
17:27:54 [IanH]
ack christine
17:28:23 [DeborahM]
q+
17:28:28 [schneid]
christine: question, is it the fact that we don't want to point to the nf&r?
17:28:44 [bijan]
q+ to talk against highlighting new features
17:28:51 [uli]
zakim, mute me
17:28:51 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
17:28:55 [pfps]
The NF&R pointers are bad in two ways - 1/ the "anchor" is distracting, 2/ the link itself is of very limited utility
17:29:07 [christine]
+q
17:29:23 [IanH]
q?
17:29:25 [schneid]
ian: there's no other purpose of the things in the document than pointing to the nf&r [fixme]
17:29:31 [IanH]
ack baojie
17:29:47 [bmotik]
akim, mute me
17:29:50 [bmotik]
Zakim, mute me
17:29:51 [Zakim]
bmotik should now be muted
17:30:04 [uli]
ok
17:30:11 [schneid]
jie: if we have www version with links, and pdf version without
17:30:12 [IanH]
q?
17:30:14 [christine]
+q
17:30:22 [schneid]
... that's technically doable
17:30:25 [pfps]
But the PDF version should have links! Just when printed they don't work.
17:30:26 [IanH]
ack DeborahM
17:30:42 [bijan]
It's easy with a stylesheet to target print vs. screen
17:30:44 [pfps]
q+ to remind us of the goals for QRG
17:30:47 [IanH]
q?
17:30:58 [schneid]
deb: my reading of the comments is that we have general agreement on the document's content
17:31:29 [schneid]
... editors think that there should be a web version with and pdf version without links
17:31:34 [uli]
sure - but I repeat Bijan's point: the NF&R links will 'outdate'?
17:31:41 [schneid]
... believe that more links in the web version are good
17:32:02 [IanH]
q?
17:32:06 [baojie]
ok
17:32:12 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:32:12 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to talk against highlighting new features
17:32:14 [pfps]
q-
17:32:15 [IanH]
q?
17:32:15 [pfps]
q+
17:32:47 [IanH]
q?
17:33:02 [IanH]
q?
17:33:07 [schneid]
bijan: highlighting new features is not a good idea for this document, because users should not care about this
17:33:24 [IanH]
q?
17:33:24 [schneid]
... so isn't the highlighting already harmful
17:33:33 [IanH]
ack christine
17:34:30 [IanH]
ack pfps
17:35:05 [sandro]
maybe time for a straw poll?
17:35:12 [schneid]
pfps: issue is that we should come up with a document that is a real recommendation for people
17:35:18 [IanH]
q?
17:35:27 [bijan]
I wonder if the authors could address my point that highlighting new things might be overall bad
17:35:27 [schneid]
... not to make all wg members happy
17:35:39 [bijan]
Because they overemphasize them
17:35:40 [IanH]
q?
17:35:46 [schneid]
... there are still missing features, e.g. datatype stuff [fixme]
17:36:08 [schneid]
... lot has changed
17:36:22 [IanH]
q?
17:36:28 [christine]
+q
17:36:30 [IanH]
q?
17:36:35 [schneid]
ian: what about overall structure?
17:36:39 [IanH]
q?
17:36:44 [IanH]
ack christine
17:37:01 [baojie]
+q
17:37:07 [IanH]
q?
17:37:17 [IanH]
ack baojie
17:37:20 [IanH]
q?
17:37:29 [schneid]
christine: question about functional syntax
17:37:36 [bijan]
I like the letters
17:37:42 [bijan]
Easier to pattern match
17:37:49 [bijan]
q+
17:37:55 [IanH]
q?
17:38:04 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:38:06 [pfps]
possibly missing features - datatype definitions
17:38:07 [christine]
OPE
17:38:16 [IanH]
q?
17:38:20 [baojie]
+1 to bijan
17:38:21 [schneid]
jie: "ce" makes printout larger [fixme]
17:38:31 [bijan]
MInor indeed
17:38:41 [schneid]
ian: all these things are editorial minor
17:38:44 [pfps]
the basic outline is acceptable
17:38:44 [IanH]
q?
17:39:07 [schneid]
ian: i don't hear anyone talking against general structure
17:39:20 [bijan]
q+
17:39:20 [IanH]
q?
17:39:24 [christine]
Evan is not there
17:39:30 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:39:36 [schneid]
ian: we should have a decision on the more concrete technical issues
17:39:51 [IanH]
q?
17:39:57 [msmith]
+1 to bijan's suggestion
17:40:09 [IanH]
q?
17:40:09 [christine]
what suggestion ?
17:40:11 [schneid]
bijan: want's to hear from editors about suggestion /not/ to highlight new features
17:40:26 [IanH]
q?
17:40:29 [msmith]
I agree with the suggestion that new features should not be highlighted in QRG
17:40:34 [sandro]
+1 to not having the new-feature high-lighting.
17:40:37 [IanH]
q?
17:40:38 [uli]
me too
17:40:39 [schneid]
bijan: if you are using this card for two years, do you still care about new features being highlighted
17:40:41 [christine]
but keep (N) ?
17:40:51 [pfps]
this document is a QRG to *OWL 2* so highlighting the differences only detracts from its utility
17:41:01 [IanH]
q?
17:41:25 [IanH]
q?
17:41:35 [DeborahM]
my summary of what i heard is (1) make sure we address pfps's content suggestions, possibly a suggestion from uli on a small reorganization, (3) leave short names for the momentbut possibly expand if working group decide
17:41:41 [DeborahM]
q+
17:42:23 [IanH]
q?
17:42:28 [pfps]
uli's suggestion would require a reordering of the document and a redo of the sections, but little more, I thin
17:42:48 [IanH]
ack DeborahM
17:42:50 [Zhe]
it is such a subjective matter :)
17:42:59 [christine]
what about linking to NF&R for new features instead of Primer ?
17:43:30 [ivan]
q+
17:43:32 [IanH]
q?
17:43:40 [IanH]
ack ivan
17:43:56 [bijan]
Or one could have a toggle
17:43:59 [schneid]
deb: sees a point with bijan's argument, bold too much, but no mentioning of new features is too less, either
17:44:00 [pfps]
-1 to separate list on web version
17:44:07 [bijan]
q+ to suggest a toggle
17:44:13 [IanH]
q?
17:44:14 [DeborahM]
+1 to ivan (with that list including links)
17:44:17 [schneid]
ivan: what about only having mentioning the new features on the web version
17:44:28 [uli]
-1 to even more docs
17:44:33 [IanH]
q?
17:44:39 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:44:39 [Zakim]
bijan, you wanted to suggest a toggle
17:44:42 [IanH]
q?
17:44:51 [pfps]
-1 to toggling
17:44:58 [schneid]
bijan: what about making the highlighting toggleable?
17:45:11 [IanH]
q?
17:45:14 [IanH]
q?
17:45:38 [christine]
+1 Ivan
17:46:06 [IanH]
q?
17:46:11 [bijan]
I can live with it
17:46:20 [pfps]
q+
17:46:23 [baojie]
ok with it
17:46:25 [IanH]
ack pfps
17:46:30 [DeborahM]
i can live with ivan's or bijan's suggestion
17:46:41 [schneid]
ian: ivan's proposal sounds most acceptable to most of us
17:46:54 [msmith]
I agree with pfps, but can live with the suggestion.
17:47:06 [bmotik]
I agree with peter here.
17:47:10 [schneid]
pfps: new'ness is not a point for this particular document
17:47:10 [bijan]
I agree with pfps, but am with msmith
17:47:18 [christine]
+q
17:47:22 [bmotik]
In a year from now, all features will be old (and dusty).
17:47:24 [IanH]
q?
17:47:25 [pfps]
q+
17:47:32 [bijan]
q+
17:47:37 [pfps]
q-
17:47:39 [IanH]
ack christine
17:48:25 [IanH]
q?
17:49:02 [DeborahM]
i have to run now. if we vote for ivan's suggestion i vote +1 for that but can also support bijan's toggling proposal
17:49:09 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:49:24 [IanH]
q?
17:50:11 [Zakim]
- +1.518.276.aaee
17:50:14 [schneid]
bijan: prefers toggle, because it's weird to have information in the web version which is not in the paper version, when the paper version is the real target document
17:50:25 [IanH]
q?
17:50:27 [pfps]
I've been most in favour of making this document something that lives in the WG web pages, and is not a TR at all.
17:50:34 [IanH]
q?
17:50:44 [schneid]
... having a separate list is getting into other doucments responsibility
17:51:00 [bijan]
q+
17:51:07 [IanH]
q?
17:51:20 [schneid]
pfps: it's meant to be a simple document, but with toggles
17:51:35 [IanH]
q?
17:51:38 [schneid]
bijan: is this particular thing such a problem?
17:51:40 [IanH]
ack bijan
17:52:01 [schneid]
pfps: toggle would need additional space
17:52:08 [IanH]
q?
17:52:15 [schneid]
bijan: there is already additional stuff in the web version
17:52:21 [IanH]
q?
17:52:43 [schneid]
bijan: but links to nf&r in print version do not make much sense in genaral
17:53:11 [ivan]
I am o.k. with bijan
17:53:12 [christine]
+q
17:53:16 [schneid]
bijan: deb said she can live with both bijan's and ivan's suggestion
17:53:20 [IanH]
q?
17:53:46 [schneid]
christine: decision will affect nf&r
17:53:53 [bijan]
How does it affect NF&R?
17:54:05 [ivan]
q+
17:54:10 [ivan]
ack christine
17:54:13 [uli]
christine, toggle means 'switch-offable'
17:54:17 [IanH]
q?
17:54:17 [uli]
and switch-onable
17:54:18 [pfps]
the decision should be made today, as after we make the decision the document has to be fixed up
17:54:42 [uli]
(1) toggle (2) extra list
17:54:49 [uli]
(3) as it is
17:55:01 [christine]
how make switc-offable ?
17:55:02 [uli]
(4) throw all refs to new features away
17:55:06 [msmith]
4,1,2,3
17:55:15 [bijan]
4,1,-,-
17:55:22 [baojie]
2,1,3
17:55:26 [schneid]
4,1,2,3
17:55:26 [bmotik]
4,-,-,-
17:55:27 [pfps]
4,-,-,-
17:55:27 [zimmer]
1, 3, 4, 2
17:55:33 [bcuencagrau]
4,2,1,3
17:55:33 [sandro]
2,1,3
17:55:34 [ivan]
2143
17:55:38 [christine]
1
17:55:40 [Zhe]
2, 3, 1, 4
17:55:42 [uli]
4,1,2
17:55:43 [IanH]
4,2,1,3
17:55:51 [Achille]
2,1
17:56:23 [uli]
we could have a togglable extra list?
17:56:35 [uli]
we can!
17:56:38 [schneid]
ian: no one wan't leave things as they are
17:57:19 [IanH]
q?
17:57:27 [schneid]
ian: we have either throw everything away or have the list
17:57:37 [schneid]
bijan: second choice often toggle
17:58:06 [schneid]
ian: struggles with quick and dirty statistical analysis
17:58:22 [schneid]
ian: nobody likes 3
17:58:33 [ivan]
214
17:58:34 [pfps]
4--
17:58:37 [bmotik]
4--
17:58:41 [bijan]
4,1,-
17:58:41 [msmith]
4,1,2
17:58:41 [uli]
4,1,2
17:58:42 [sebastian]
4,2,1
17:58:44 [baojie]
21-
17:58:45 [bcuencagrau]
4,2,1
17:58:45 [Zhe]
214
17:58:46 [zimmer]
1 4
17:58:48 [sandro]
strawpoll: (1) toggle, (2) extra list, (4) throw all refs to new features away
17:58:49 [IanH]
4,2,1
17:58:50 [schneid]
4,1,2
17:58:56 [sandro]
241
17:58:58 [Achille]
2, 1
17:59:12 [christine]
1 2
17:59:29 [schneid]
ian: a bit more split between 4 and 2, but sees bijan's point
17:59:42 [IanH]
q?
18:00:32 [IanH]
q?
18:00:42 [IanH]
ack ivan
18:01:01 [bijan]
Actually, I don't care anymore :)
18:01:16 [christine]
+q
18:01:22 [schneid]
ivan: whether it is 1 or 2, there's no big difference, so bijan's proposal would be fine
18:01:27 [bmotik]
I won't lie down in the road.
18:01:28 [bijan]
What do they prefer, 1 or 2?
18:01:43 [bmotik]
I guess 2
18:01:49 [bijan]
Ok, fine
18:01:51 [bijan]
I go for it
18:02:05 [IanH]
ack christine
18:02:23 [uli]
christine, open a new connection?
18:02:37 [zimmer]
ok for list at the end
18:02:59 [sandro]
strawpoll: list at end
18:02:59 [ivan]
+1
18:03:02 [bcuencagrau]
+1
18:03:03 [baojie]
+1
18:03:04 [sandro]
+1
18:03:09 [IanH]
0
18:03:09 [schneid]
-0.1
18:03:09 [zimmer]
+0.2
18:03:10 [uli]
0
18:03:10 [bijan]
+0
18:03:11 [sebastian]
0
18:03:11 [bmotik]
+1
18:03:12 [Achille]
0
18:03:13 [Zhe]
0
18:03:14 [msmith]
0
18:03:16 [pfps]
-0, as long as the list is very compact
18:03:30 [bijan]
Make it
18:03:31 [sandro]
0.5 point font, pfps.
18:03:46 [sandro]
("point five point" :-)
18:05:10 [IanH]
All emphasis on and links to new features to go from existing tables. A new short table to be added to the end of the document with list of new features and links to NF&R.
18:05:24 [pfps]
This looks fine.
18:05:27 [baojie]
ok
18:05:27 [ivan]
yep
18:05:44 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
18:05:44 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
18:06:08 [Zhe]
:_
18:06:11 [sandro]
s/to go/will be removed/
18:06:21 [msmith]
Christine, you may find IRC more reliable if you try a different client, instead of the w3 web cgi.
18:06:23 [pfps]
As far as I am concerned, this list could even go in the card, if there is space.
18:06:32 [bijan]
Yeah, me too
18:06:44 [sandro]
msmith, Christine can't read that!
18:07:26 [IanH]
PROPOSED: All emphasis on and links to new features will be removed from existing tables in QRG. A new short table to be added to the end of the document with list of new features and links to NF&R.
18:07:33 [uli]
zakim, mute me
18:07:33 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
18:07:36 [ivan]
+1
18:07:38 [pfps]
+0
18:07:45 [Zhe]
0
18:07:48 [baojie]
+1
18:07:49 [uli]
+1
18:07:51 [sebastian]
+0
18:07:52 [Achille]
0
18:07:52 [bijan]
+0
18:07:54 [msmith]
0
18:07:55 [zimmer]
0
18:07:57 [IanH]
0
18:07:59 [schneid]
-0
18:08:01 [bmotik]
+0
18:08:03 [christine]
0
18:08:04 [bcuencagrau]
0
18:08:10 [sandro]
+1
18:08:28 [IanH]
RESOLVED: ll emphasis on and links to new features will be removed from existing tables in QRG. A new short table to be added to the end of the document with list of new features and links to NF&R.
18:08:39 [baojie]
:)
18:08:44 [schneid]
ian: is very happy on the resolution
18:09:27 [schneid]
topic: last call comments on owl (revisited)
18:09:45 [uli]
I did
18:09:54 [uli]
zakim, unmute me
18:09:54 [Zakim]
uli should no longer be muted
18:10:05 [schneid]
ian: anyone other than peter and boris looked at umberto's comment
18:10:08 [uli]
zakim, mute me
18:10:08 [Zakim]
uli should now be muted
18:10:09 [IanH]
q?
18:10:13 [schneid]
uli: look fine
18:10:52 [IanH]
q?
18:11:12 [IanH]
q?
18:11:16 [schneid]
ian: christine, is nf&r ready to go?
18:11:23 [pfps]
NF&R is looking quite reasonable
18:11:43 [schneid]
christine: basically yes, but a few questions to peter's comments
18:11:59 [schneid]
ian: ok, please discuss offline
18:12:07 [sebastian]
zakim, unmute me
18:12:07 [Zakim]
sebastian should no longer be muted
18:12:13 [schneid]
subtopic: primer
18:12:32 [IanH]
q?
18:12:34 [bijan]
I'm working on it nwo
18:12:40 [schneid]
sebastian: we did quite some work on primer in the last week
18:12:46 [bijan]
Should be done tonight
18:13:06 [IanH]
q?
18:13:07 [pfps]
Primer needs reviewing
18:13:10 [schneid]
... there are some things to be done by bijan
18:13:18 [pfps]
.... not shipping
18:13:55 [schneid]
bijan: there will perhaps some disagreement about the granularity, but mostly editorial
18:14:01 [sebastian]
zakim, mute me
18:14:01 [Zakim]
sebastian should now be muted
18:14:04 [IanH]
q?
18:14:09 [schneid]
ian: volunteers for reviewing?
18:14:38 [msmith]
I can review by 13 May
18:14:44 [schneid]
... would be due 13 May
18:15:13 [pfps]
earlier reviews are much better, and more likely to be effective :-)
18:15:15 [schneid]
ian: will take it offline and ask, but msmith will be the number one
18:15:44 [schneid]
topic: implementation and testcases
18:15:47 [IanH]
q?
18:15:57 [IanH]
q?
18:16:02 [schneid]
ian: there is this validation tool issue
18:16:10 [IanH]
q?
18:16:11 [msmith]
q+
18:16:40 [IanH]
ack msmith
18:16:45 [schneid]
ian: seems to use the owl api for reading ontologies
18:17:12 [schneid]
msmith: we don't have anything for species validation
18:17:58 [schneid]
ian: we would like to have species validation for owl/xml [fixme]
18:18:19 [schneid]
ian: all i know is that some things are repaired away
18:18:59 [schneid]
ian: can we talk to owl api people to have some strict mode?
18:19:11 [msmith]
action bijan to talk with owlapi people about strict rdf/xml parsing
18:19:11 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-335 - Talk with owlapi people about strict rdf/xml parsing [on Bijan Parsia - due 2009-05-06].
18:19:12 [schneid]
topic: progress report
18:19:15 [msmith]
q+
18:19:15 [IanH]
q?
18:19:19 [IanH]
ack msmith
18:19:28 [bijan]
I wrote tests!
18:19:46 [schneid]
msmith: little bit of progress, new page on wiki showing results for pellet and hermit
18:19:57 [bijan]
Pointer to those tests?
18:20:01 [bijan]
result?
18:20:05 [pfps]
is there a link from the home page or LHS of the wiki to the current test status?
18:20:06 [schneid]
... some new tests, and some changed status
18:20:25 [schneid]
... new page showing coverage of the language
18:20:42 [msmith]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Suite_Status
18:20:53 [schneid]
ian: how many tests do we have now?
18:21:18 [schneid]
ian: do we have one test for each construct?
18:21:35 [bijan]
I have them
18:21:46 [msmith]
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Suite_Status
18:22:01 [schneid]
ian: what about results and putting on wiki?
18:22:15 [schneid]
bijan: that's what the status page is about
18:22:50 [schneid]
msmith: there is an "incomplete" result, including timeout etc
18:22:59 [schneid]
ian: what about "extra credit"?
18:23:22 [IanH]
q?
18:23:27 [schneid]
... looks better when exiting cr
18:23:47 [schneid]
bijan: we should make sure to cover all syntactic features
18:23:51 [msmith]
ok
18:23:55 [msmith]
q+
18:24:03 [IanH]
ack msmith
18:24:17 [bijan]
1 reasoner does it :)
18:24:36 [schneid]
msmith: how do we get "extra credit" testcases?
18:26:15 [schneid]
ian: let's defer syntactic tests: no time, no alanr
18:26:33 [schneid]
topic: aob
18:26:57 [Zhe]
bye
18:26:59 [Zakim]
-Sandro
18:27:00 [Zakim]
-bijan
18:27:01 [schneid]
ian: we're don
18:27:01 [Zakim]
-msmith
18:27:03 [Zakim]
-baojie
18:27:05 [zimmer]
bye
18:27:06 [Zakim]
-Achille
18:27:10 [sebastian]
Bye.
18:27:11 [Zakim]
-bcuencagrau
18:27:16 [Zakim]
-Zhe
18:27:31 [Zakim]
-zimmer
18:27:31 [IanH]
RRSAgent, make records public
18:27:38 [uli]
Ian, check the following link out (during dinner!):
18:27:47 [uli]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z19zFlPah-o
18:28:32 [Zakim]
-bmotik
18:28:38 [Zakim]
-Ian_Horrocks
18:28:43 [Zakim]
-Ivan
18:28:44 [Zakim]
-pfps
18:28:46 [Zakim]
-uli
18:28:56 [Zakim]
-sebastian
18:29:19 [Zakim]
-??P22
18:29:45 [Zakim]
-schneid
18:29:46 [Zakim]
SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
18:29:47 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ian_Horrocks, [IPcaller], pfps, +1.202.408.aabb, msmith, +1.518.276.aacc, Zhe, baojie, bijan, uli, schneid, +1.518.276.aaee, Ivan, sebastian, zimmer, bmotik,
18:29:49 [sandro]
insane, uli !
18:29:51 [Zakim]
... Achille, bcuencagrau, Sandro
18:41:27 [IanH]
RRSAgent, make records public
19:13:19 [sandro]
sandro has joined #owl
19:50:31 [uli]
uli has left #owl
20:31:26 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #owl