IRC log of rif on 2009-05-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:00:11 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:00:11 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-rif-irc
15:00:27 [ChrisW]
oops
15:00:28 [Zakim]
+Mike_Dean
15:00:33 [Zakim]
+Hassan_Ait-Kaci
15:00:45 [Zakim]
-Hassan_Ait-Kaci
15:00:49 [ChrisW]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009May/0088.html
15:00:52 [ChrisW]
Meeting: RIF Telecon 19-May-2009 (Last Call Day)
15:00:59 [ChrisW]
Chair: Christian de Sainte-Marie
15:01:05 [AdrianP]
AdrianP has joined #rif
15:01:08 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:01:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
15:01:12 [Zakim]
+csma
15:01:17 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:01:29 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:29 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ChrisW, Mike_Dean, csma
15:01:44 [Zakim]
+Sandro
15:01:48 [Zakim]
+Hassan_Ait-Kaci
15:01:55 [Zakim]
+AxelPolleres
15:01:59 [StellaMitchell]
StellaMitchell has joined #rif
15:02:02 [cke]
cke has joined #RIF
15:02:16 [ChrisW]
Scribe: Hassan_Ait-Kaci
15:02:21 [ChrisW]
scribenick: hak
15:02:28 [Zakim]
+??P17
15:02:38 [AdrianP]
Zakim, ??P17 is me
15:02:38 [Zakim]
+AdrianP; got it
15:02:38 [LeoraMorgenstern]
LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
15:02:57 [AdrianP]
Zakim, mute me
15:02:57 [Zakim]
AdrianP should now be muted
15:03:00 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:03:00 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ChrisW, Mike_Dean, csma, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, AxelPolleres, AdrianP (muted)
15:03:09 [Zakim]
+Stella_Mitchell
15:03:25 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has joined #rif
15:03:28 [Zakim]
+Leora_Morgenstern
15:03:38 [ChrisW]
Regrets: PaulVincent JosDeBruijn
15:03:55 [Zakim]
+??P42
15:03:59 [csma]
http://www.w3.org/2009/05/12-rif-minutes.html
15:04:22 [csma]
PROPOSED: accept minutes of telecon May 12
15:04:29 [ChrisW]
zakim, ??p42 is cke
15:04:29 [Zakim]
+cke; got it
15:04:44 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:44 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ChrisW, Mike_Dean, csma, Sandro, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, AxelPolleres, AdrianP (muted), Stella_Mitchell, Leora_Morgenstern, cke
15:04:52 [Zakim]
+??P46
15:05:10 [csma]
RESOLVED: accept minutes of telecon May 12
15:05:33 [csma]
next item
15:05:48 [AxelPolleres]
q+
15:05:54 [ChrisW]
ack axel
15:05:58 [csma]
ack axel
15:06:44 [ChrisW]
rdf:text
15:06:59 [ChrisW]
discussing rdf:text
15:07:04 [hak]
Axel mentions discussions and a proposal and a coming conference about RDFX (?)
15:07:10 [ChrisW]
external LC comments from SPARQL WG
15:07:18 [sandro]
s/RDFX/rdf:text/
15:07:25 [ChrisW]
s/RDFX/rdf:text/
15:08:46 [hak]
Will have some impact (but only editorial) on RIF
15:09:08 [Harold]
Harold has joined #rif
15:09:18 [csma]
q?
15:09:28 [hak]
Sandro: not sure ... but worries about connections with how this maps back to RDF
15:10:02 [Zakim]
+[NRCC]
15:10:15 [Zakim]
+Gary
15:10:16 [hak]
Axel: if we come an agreement on a lexical form then there should be no problem ...
15:10:34 [Stella-MItchell]
Stella-MItchell has joined #rif
15:10:35 [hak]
CSAM: Question - is there any "at risk" things in there ?
15:10:48 [hak]
s/CSAM/CSMA/
15:11:33 [hak]
Sandro: every thing about rdf:text should marked at risk unless proven otherwise (Michael had strong opinions about that)
15:11:36 [Gary_Hallmark]
Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
15:11:40 [AxelPolleres]
I think we might want need to change
15:11:41 [AxelPolleres]
"A constant in a particular RIF symbol space has the following presentation syntax:
15:11:46 [AxelPolleres]
"literal"^^<symbolSpaceIri>"
15:12:18 [hak]
Sandro: might need to revert to RDF's plain literal ... but not sure at his stage
15:12:31 [AxelPolleres]
to three different representations, i.e. not having rdf:text represented the way we do it now but only using the RDF literal representation.
15:12:44 [hak]
Sandro: might be more than syntax ... semantics may be also
15:13:28 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has joined #rif
15:13:51 [hak]
Sandro: if we get rid of 'rdf:text' then we need to support sepcial handling iof RFD plain literal in all RIF dialects because they are not data types (RDF plain literals)
15:14:02 [hak]
s/sepcial/special/
15:14:10 [hak]
s/iof/if/
15:14:27 [hak]
CSMA: then we need MK's input
15:14:32 [Zakim]
+MichaelKifer
15:14:44 [hak]
Chris: don't understand the issue here
15:15:26 [hak]
Sandro: let me put it another way ... We sould need to specify what RDF literals map to ... but what ?
15:15:39 [hak]
s/sould/would/
15:16:08 [hak]
Sandro: not clear ... but we need to be cautious there ... need a fallback position
15:16:10 [DaveReynolds]
q+
15:16:52 [hak]
MK: if we can't use it then users must be aware they they's have to invent their own semantics
15:17:13 [csma]
ack dave
15:17:23 [hak]
Sandro: ok - let's just use 'rdf:text'
15:17:50 [AxelPolleres]
q+ to answer Dave
15:17:55 [hak]
DaveReynolds: just introduce the data type for
15:18:12 [csma]
PROPOSED: rdf:text will be marked at risk in DTB
15:18:15 [hak]
'rdf:text' and that could be the target of semantics
15:18:42 [hak]
Sandro: no need to be more precise
15:19:12 [csma]
q?
15:19:20 [csma]
ack axel
15:19:20 [Zakim]
AxelPolleres, you wanted to answer Dave
15:19:27 [hak]
CSMA: cites CORE and DTB? where such issues might have an impact
15:19:51 [ChrisW]
do we need an action here?
15:19:53 [csma]
s/CORE/SWC/
15:19:55 [hak]
Axel: people did not like the lexical view ... need to explain
15:20:08 [csma]
PROPOSED: rdf:text will be marked at risk in DTB
15:20:14 [sandro]
+1
15:20:15 [ChrisW]
+1
15:20:17 [DaveReynolds]
+1
15:20:20 [hak]
+1
15:20:26 [AxelPolleres]
s/lexical view/lexical space with trailing @/
15:20:31 [MichaelKifer]
0
15:20:31 [Harold]
+1
15:20:38 [cke]
0
15:20:40 [AxelPolleres]
0
15:20:44 [AdrianP]
+1
15:21:02 [csma]
RESOLVED: : rdf:text will be marked at risk in DTB
15:21:11 [hak]
s/they they/that they/
15:21:19 [sandro]
action: axel mark rdf:text at risk in DTB
15:21:20 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-815 - Mark rdf:text at risk in DTB [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-05-26].
15:21:48 [csma]
next itm
15:21:53 [csma]
next item
15:22:52 [ChrisW]
close action-813
15:22:55 [trackbot]
ACTION-813 Find clarification on year-from-duration from XPATH wg closed
15:23:52 [hak]
close action-812
15:23:52 [trackbot]
ACTION-812 Define cast from xmlliteral to streing closed
15:24:03 [hak]
close action-811
15:24:03 [trackbot]
ACTION-811 Check that all RIF datatypes have a canonical representation closed
15:24:38 [hak]
close action-809
15:24:38 [trackbot]
ACTION-809 Respond to harolds comments closed
15:24:53 [Stella-MItchell]
done
15:25:02 [hak]
close action-792
15:25:02 [trackbot]
ACTION-792 Add note in test case document that negative tests 'go down' and positive tests "go up" closed
15:27:34 [ChrisW]
close action 810 (completed by Harold)
15:27:40 [ChrisW]
close action-810 (completed by Harold)
15:27:50 [ChrisW]
close action-810
15:27:51 [trackbot]
ACTION-810 Draft a paragraph describing the status of the presentation syntax closed
15:28:05 [AdrianP]
Core and PRD already have a modular schema. Only BLD would need to be refactored
15:28:28 [cke]
I prefer to have a resolution to track the decision
15:29:04 [sandro]
sandro: fine, as long as we have an editor's note saying that ...
15:29:33 [hak]
close action-774
15:29:33 [trackbot]
ACTION-774 Review FLD closed
15:29:44 [hak]
close action-773
15:29:44 [trackbot]
ACTION-773 Review BLD closed
15:29:52 [hak]
close action-772
15:29:52 [trackbot]
ACTION-772 Review swc closed
15:30:15 [sandro]
PROPOSED: The LC drafts will have the 'flat' schemas, with an editors note saying we expect to refactor the schemas in the future (to use "include"), but do not expect to change which XML instance documents will be valid.
15:30:44 [hak]
close action-771
15:30:44 [trackbot]
ACTION-771 Review DTB closed
15:31:17 [cke]
+1
15:31:21 [sandro]
+1
15:31:29 [hak]
+1
15:31:29 [ChrisW]
+1
15:31:45 [Gary]
+1
15:31:51 [AdrianP]
0
15:31:56 [AdrianP]
Zakim, unmute me
15:31:56 [Zakim]
AdrianP should no longer be muted
15:32:01 [DaveReynolds]
0
15:32:10 [mdean]
0
15:32:30 [Harold]
0.25
15:32:37 [MichaelKifer]
0
15:32:49 [AxelPolleres]
+1
15:33:51 [hak]
Axel: a flat XML scheme won't interfere with our design
15:34:03 [cke]
XML instance documents will be preserved, it's our objective
15:34:09 [csma]
RESOLVED: The LC drafts will have the 'flat' schemas, with an editors note saying we expect to refactor the schemas in the future (to use "include"), but do not expect to change which XML instance documents will be valid.
15:34:14 [hak]
s/Axel/Harold/
15:34:29 [hak]
close action-769
15:34:29 [trackbot]
ACTION-769 Review PRD closed
15:34:32 [AdrianP]
yes we need to take care about the maintenance of the flat schemas which are mostly copy and paste
15:34:36 [hak]
close action-768
15:34:36 [trackbot]
ACTION-768 Review Core closed
15:35:07 [hak]
close action-740
15:35:07 [trackbot]
ACTION-740 Accomodate casting functions in a well defined manner closed
15:35:53 [Harold]
A 'flattening' of schemas should NOT lead to any divergence between schemas in the same 'inheritance line' such as the FLD---BLD---Core line and the PRD---Core line.
15:36:07 [ChrisW]
axel?
15:36:26 [Stella-MItchell]
continued
15:37:57 [ChrisW]
agreed - discuss later
15:38:38 [ChrisW]
leave it open
15:39:31 [ChrisW]
still pending
15:40:20 [csma]
next item
15:40:42 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 4
15:40:42 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "DTB" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:41:39 [csma]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009May/0072.html
15:42:55 [ChrisW]
why not?
15:43:10 [cke]
If slot names are not fixed strings, what can they be? Can someone give an example?
15:43:43 [hak]
CSAM: summarizing Gary's and Dave's worries wrt frames (non constant fields, wher variables/terms can occur)
15:43:49 [cke]
Localized names of course make sense
15:43:56 [hak]
s/CSAM/CSMA/
15:44:45 [hak]
MK: do not see the problem ... simply restrict it - Frames are general enough to express this
15:45:12 [csma]
q?
15:45:17 [cke]
In most PR engines, the names are valid identifiers, which are composed of some specific characters
15:45:25 [hak]
CSMA: need to translate a frame whose slot is a list (say) ... what does it mean ?
15:45:36 [AxelPolleres]
"Mark rdf:text at risk in DTB" (ACTION-815) is done from my side (status now set to pending review)
15:45:57 [hak]
MK: it will the same done by the systems for which it makes sense to have such slots
15:46:44 [hak]
s/will the/will be interpreted/
15:46:55 [hak]
s/same/same way as /
15:47:11 [sandro]
gary: it's a chore, but I think it's fine.
15:47:17 [cke]
I will have to mangle the names. Can someone make a case why the names should be generalized?
15:47:19 [hak]
Gary: it is possible but a pain to handle such quirks
15:47:42 [ChrisW]
did we deal with this: 1. PRD prohibits member (#) in rule heads. Core allows it. I think
15:47:42 [ChrisW]
Core must follow PRD here.
15:47:57 [hak]
DaveReynolds: integers as slots in frames are not really an issue
15:48:34 [hak]
CSMA: Core does not have numbers at all
15:48:48 [sandro]
The alphabet of the presentation language of RIF-Core is the alphabet of the RIF-BLD presentation language with the exclusion of the symbol ## (subclass) and the set of symbols ArgNames (used for named-argument uniterms).
15:48:58 [sandro]
(quoting)
15:49:19 [hak]
Gary and Sandro: really ... what CORE does not have is subclasses not numbers
15:49:22 [ChrisW]
zakim, who is talking?
15:49:32 [Zakim]
ChrisW, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: MichaelKifer (23%), csma (13%)
15:49:39 [ChrisW]
zakim, mute MichaelKifer
15:49:39 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should now be muted
15:49:47 [Stella-MItchell]
see section 2.3 in core too
15:49:49 [hak]
Sandro: confirms that numbers are in core but not class membership
15:50:01 [csma]
q?
15:50:10 [hak]
s/core/CORE/
15:50:48 [csma]
next item
15:50:55 [ChrisW]
zakim, take up item 4
15:50:55 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "DTB" taken up [from ChrisW]
15:51:34 [hak]
DTB reviewers ?
15:52:25 [hak]
Chris: there were issues about lists
15:52:55 [hak]
Chris: prefers cons-like lists to numerical index
15:53:27 [DaveReynolds]
+1 to put in append
15:53:41 [hak]
Sandro: indexed lists are useful for efficient insertion ...
15:54:07 [csma]
q?
15:54:33 [ChrisW]
add an append function to DTB for lists
15:55:14 [ChrisW]
...instead of having numerical indexes that go past the end of the list
15:55:28 [sandro]
Sandro: the reason for the rule about too-high-indexes being reduced is that it lets you use insert-before like append.
15:56:19 [Gary]
I think append(list, element) = concatenate(list, make-list(element))
15:56:33 [AxelPolleres]
There is a statement in DTB Sec 1.2.1:
15:56:33 [AxelPolleres]
* rif:iri (http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri, ... ... ... A rif:iri
15:56:33 [AxelPolleres]
constant must be interpreted as a reference to one and the same
15:56:34 [AxelPolleres]
object regardless of the context in which that constant occurs.
15:57:01 [sandro]
true, Gary
15:57:22 [hak]
Chris: issue is about what an IRI means
15:57:25 [MichaelKifer]
zakim, unmute me
15:57:25 [Zakim]
MichaelKifer should no longer be muted
15:57:27 [AdrianP]
there was also the question about naming of primitive datatypes
15:58:30 [hak]
Axel: objects to the relevance of this issue at that place in the STB cocument
15:58:38 [hak]
s/STB/DTB/
15:59:33 [hak]
Sandro: prefers omitting this explanation as it is confusing
15:59:59 [hak]
Dave: is shappy with dropping it as well
16:00:22 [hak]
MK: could add that IRI's interpretation is not afected
16:00:31 [hak]
s/afected/affected/
16:00:54 [hak]
Chris: adding this comment in FLD would be also useful
16:00:59 [hak]
MK: agreed
16:01:12 [hak]
s/shappy/happy/
16:01:17 [ChrisW]
Chris is shappy, too
16:02:07 [hak]
Axel: already dropped the text from the DTB document
16:02:12 [AxelPolleres]
Here two more TODOs which are less clear:
16:02:12 [AxelPolleres]
* Speaking of "primitive datatypes" should be avoided
16:02:12 [AxelPolleres]
We call our datatypes "primitive" but this is not in compliance with
16:02:12 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#dt-primitive
16:02:12 [AxelPolleres]
since we also use "primitive" for what are actually "ordinary" datatypes following XSD. I suggest we just speak about datatypes.
16:02:13 [AxelPolleres]
* in my BLD review, I suggested that the Base Directive should refer to *absolute* iri:
16:02:15 [AxelPolleres]
"where iri is a unicode string in the form of an *absolute* IRI
16:02:17 [AxelPolleres]
[RFC-3987]."
16:02:45 [AdrianP]
I would propose to call it simple datatypes
16:04:24 [ChrisW]
action: axel rename "primitive" datatypes to datatypes
16:04:24 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-816 - Rename "primitive" datatypes to datatypes [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-05-26].
16:05:57 [sandro]
agreed, iri in base should be absolute (absolutely)
16:06:07 [csma]
q?
16:06:28 [ChrisW]
michael is back one issue
16:08:49 [sandro]
MichaelKifer, I think XML has "complex types" not "complex datatypes". datatypes seems to be the same as "simple types"
16:10:23 [ChrisW]
PROPOSED: extend meeting by 30 minutes
16:10:47 [Stella-MItchell]
I can scribe at end
16:10:54 [csma]
RESOLVED: extend meeting by 30 minutes
16:11:38 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#primitive-vs-derived
16:12:16 [AxelPolleres]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#rf-defn
16:13:49 [hak]
Discussion about nuances on data types and primitive types ... and whether adding an explanation confuses more
16:14:07 [hak]
MK: ok let me think about how to rephrase this ...
16:15:07 [sandro]
PROPOSED: base directive will take absolute IRI
16:15:08 [sandro]
+1
16:15:13 [ChrisW]
+1
16:15:20 [sandro]
MichaelKifer: it's that way already.
16:15:24 [DaveReynolds]
+1
16:15:30 [hak]
+1
16:15:44 [AdrianP]
+1
16:15:46 [csma]
RESOLVED: base directive will take absolute IRI
16:15:48 [sandro]
RESOLVED: base directive will take (or maybe already does take) absolute IRI
16:16:17 [sandro]
action: axel make sure base takes absolute IRI in DTB
16:16:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-817 - Make sure base takes absolute IRI in DTB [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-05-26].
16:16:18 [ChrisW]
action: axel to make base directive iris absolute
16:16:18 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-818 - Make base directive iris absolute [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-05-26].
16:16:31 [sandro]
action-817 closed
16:16:31 [trackbot]
ACTION-817 Make sure base takes absolute IRI in DTB closed
16:16:50 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION-817 is done.
16:17:07 [AxelPolleres]
ACTION-816 is done.
16:17:24 [csma]
O
16:17:35 [hak]
Sandro: prefers 'append list' but not strongly
16:17:45 [sandro]
PROPOSED: add append as a new list-builtin and remove ceiling of list indexes.
16:17:52 [AdrianP]
+1
16:17:56 [hak]
0
16:17:59 [ChrisW]
0
16:18:00 [Gary]
+1
16:18:01 [mdean]
+1
16:18:02 [sandro]
+0.75
16:18:13 [cke]
+1
16:18:14 [Harold]
0
16:18:20 [AxelPolleres]
0 not sure whether not redundant still
16:18:23 [DaveReynolds]
+1
16:18:34 [sandro]
RESOLVED: add append as a new list-builtin and remove ceiling of list indexes.
16:18:34 [csma]
RESOLVED: : add append as a new list-builtin and remove ceiling of list indexes.
16:18:35 [MichaelKifer]
0
16:18:39 [ChrisW]
action: sandro to add append to DTB
16:18:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-819 - Add append to DTB [on Sandro Hawke - due 2009-05-26].
16:19:03 [csma]
*PROPOSED:* Publish DTB as last call. draft.
16:19:31 [csma]
*PROPOSED:* Publish DTB [4] as last call. draft, pending completion of all actions
16:20:02 [hak]
MK: there is an issue about short names ... need to check with Axel ... should be moved out
16:20:13 [hak]
Axel: not see a problem
16:20:14 [ChrisW]
"The short name of a symbol space is an NCName, typically the character sequence after the last '/' or '#' in the symbol space IRI (similar to the XML local name part of a QName). "
16:21:29 [hak]
MK: problem is with symbol space for short names
16:21:51 [hak]
Axel: where do you suggest we put them ?
16:22:37 [hak]
MK: they should not be in the definition of the symbol space ... the problem is that short names in BLD and FLD do not coincide then
16:23:16 [hak]
ChrisW: do not understand what the issue is
16:23:39 [hak]
CSMA: nothing references them - why do we have them ?
16:23:58 [hak]
ChrisW: they are not formal - just a handy thing
16:24:17 [hak]
Axel: need them for other sections
16:24:46 [hak]
ChrisW: just list all the datatypes and their short names there
16:25:17 [hak]
Axel: we can do why MK suggests cleaning up the definition
16:25:35 [hak]
MK: yes but move them to the preamble
16:26:08 [hak]
CSMA: are any of these short names different from the names of the datatypes ?
16:26:13 [hak]
Axel: no
16:26:51 [hak]
ChrisW: I still do not understand the issue ! they are just handy things
16:27:32 [hak]
MK: yest but they need to have the same specs wrt to symbol spaces in both FLD and DTB - they do not now
16:27:52 [hak]
s/yest/yes/
16:28:12 [DaveReynolds]
So put Chris' proposed text in 1.3
16:28:12 [hak]
MK: we need them only for datatypes .. just move them to the section there
16:28:29 [hak]
ChrisW: finds this inconvenient
16:28:59 [hak]
because of editorial reasons ... why makes it longer just to match another document
16:29:46 [ChrisW]
scribe: Stella-MItchell
16:30:04 [Stella-MItchell]
yes
16:30:15 [Zakim]
-Hassan_Ait-Kaci
16:31:25 [ChrisW]
action: axel to move the shortnames out of the definition of symbol spaces, and remove shortnames for iri and local
16:31:26 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-820 - Move the shortnames out of the definition of symbol spaces, and remove shortnames for iri and local [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-05-26].
16:32:08 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: michael, is this ok?
16:32:21 [Stella-MItchell]
mk: introduces forward reference
16:32:58 [Stella-MItchell]
cw: we can make acceptance of document contingent on resolving this
16:33:13 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish DTB as last call. draft, pending completion of all DTB actions.
16:33:24 [sandro]
+1
16:34:11 [LeoraMorgenstern]
I can volunteer.
16:34:30 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish DTB as last call. draft, pending completion of all DTB actions to the of Leora
16:34:35 [ChrisW]
action: leora to review pending DTB actions (815-820)
16:34:35 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-821 - Review pending DTB actions (815-820) [on Leora Morgenstern - due 2009-05-26].
16:34:44 [sandro]
+1
16:34:50 [cke]
+1
16:34:53 [ChrisW]
+1
16:34:55 [Harold]
+1
16:34:57 [MichaelKifer]
+1
16:35:00 [AdrianP]
+1
16:35:00 [LeoraMorgenstern]
+1
16:35:01 [Stella-MItchell]
+1
16:35:12 [DaveReynolds]
+1
16:35:30 [Gary]
+1
16:35:35 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish DTB as last call. draft, pending completion of all DTB actions
16:35:37 [mdean]
+1
16:35:50 [ChrisW]
good job, Axel!
16:35:58 [csma]
RESOLVED: Publish DTB as last call. draft, pending completion of all DTB actions
16:36:09 [csma]
next item
16:36:24 [cke]
me
16:37:53 [Stella-MItchell]
cke: I made some comments, and saw a response from Dave. The content looks fine to me
16:38:19 [Stella-MItchell]
yes, and Jos answered that too
16:38:34 [Stella-MItchell]
Gary: I address Stella's comments
16:38:59 [Stella-MItchell]
s/address/addressed/
16:39:30 [DaveReynolds]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009May/0069.html
16:39:35 [Stella-MItchell]
cw: issue about binding patterns for lists, from Jos
16:40:54 [Stella-MItchell]
sandro: jos proposed and gary and sandro seconded that binding patterns be changed, was that change made?
16:41:06 [Stella-MItchell]
gary: there is still an editor's note
16:41:38 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: to disallow using equality builtins to bind one variable
16:41:58 [AdrianP]
do we need to make change with respect to class membership in Core?
16:42:18 [sandro]
# the external predicate pred:list-contains has the valid binding pattern (b, u).
16:42:22 [AdrianP]
The Terms of RIF-Core are the terms of RIF-BLD with the exclusion of subclass terms and of terms with named arguments.
16:42:35 [DaveReynolds]
Adrian - I think it is currently consistent with the resolution
16:42:45 [AdrianP]
ok, great
16:43:17 [DaveReynolds]
What's inconsistent at the moment?
16:43:19 [ChrisW]
stella, your scribing is coming out as "emotes"
16:43:28 [ChrisW]
those don't get included in the record
16:43:44 [ChrisW]
(lines starting with *)
16:43:55 [Stella-MItchell]
ok, I typed them as emotes, but shouldn't have
16:43:59 [ChrisW]
tnx
16:44:08 [sandro]
PROPOSED: following editor's note in Core 6.1, all of the binding patterns with "u" for the equality predicates will be removed.
16:44:17 [Stella-MItchell]
alphabet of RIF-Core need to be udated to say that # is excluded
16:44:26 [Stella-MItchell]
s/udated/updated/
16:44:28 [AxelPolleres]
Action-820 is done, cf. http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB#Symbol_Spaces
16:44:51 [sandro]
This leaves just: pred:iri-string and pred:list-contains as having "u" binding patterns.
16:44:53 [DaveReynolds]
Stella - # is not excluded, it is only excluded in the head which is the resolution, and what Core says
16:45:13 [Stella-MItchell]
oh, right
16:45:41 [AdrianP]
yes, Core says Equality terms and class membership terms cannot occur in rule conclusions -- they are allowed only in rule premises.
16:46:22 [Stella-MItchell]
sandro: I think you can write much better rules with binding patterns b,u for list contains
16:46:31 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: gary, is it ok with you?
16:46:52 [sandro]
PROPOSED: following editor's note in Core 6.1, all of the binding patterns with "u" for the equality predicates will be removed. (this leaves only pred:iri-string and pred:list-contains as (b, u))
16:46:59 [Stella-MItchell]
gary: (missed)
16:47:00 [sandro]
+1
16:47:09 [ChrisW]
+1
16:47:12 [DaveReynolds]
+1
16:47:13 [Gary]
+1
16:47:21 [sandro]
gary: I see list-contains as (b, u) as a challenge, but I think it's doable.
16:47:33 [mdean]
+1
16:47:51 [sandro]
RESOLVED: following editor's note in Core 6.1, all of the binding patterns with "u" for the equality predicates will be removed. (this leaves only pred:iri-string and pred:list-contains as (b, u))
16:48:32 [Stella-MItchell]
gary: core, definition of safeness in section 6.1, 4th bullet point...
16:49:05 [Stella-MItchell]
...confused by 2 c1's
16:49:14 [Stella-MItchell]
dave: no, it is c1 to cl
16:49:28 [Harold]
f1, ..., fl
16:49:41 [Stella-MItchell]
stella: my comment was on why CL was not used in the definition
16:49:46 [Stella-MItchell]
...Jos explained that part
16:50:50 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish Core as last call draft, pending completion of Core actions
16:51:04 [sandro]
action: Gary, change subscript "l" in 6.1 to something else (not so confused with "1") and have Jos proof-read the change.
16:51:04 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Gary,
16:51:13 [sandro]
action: Gary to change subscript "l" in 6.1 to something else (not so confused with "1") and have Jos proof-read the change.
16:51:13 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-822 - Change subscript "l" in 6.1 to something else (not so confused with "1") and have Jos proof-read the change. [on Gary Hallmark - due 2009-05-26].
16:51:17 [Stella-MItchell]
cw: we need actions for the updates still to be done
16:51:39 [AxelPolleres]
Can we close 816/818, they're done.
16:52:31 [Stella-MItchell]
daver: I just updated the binding patterns
16:52:49 [Stella-MItchell]
cw: who will review the recent core changes?
16:53:04 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish Core as last call draft, pending completion of Core actions.
16:53:12 [sandro]
+1
16:53:18 [DaveReynolds]
+1
16:53:19 [ChrisW]
+1 (IBM)
16:53:24 [mdean]
+1
16:53:27 [AdrianP]
+1
16:53:29 [Stella-MItchell]
+1
16:53:33 [Harold]
+1
16:53:35 [cke]
+1
16:53:38 [MichaelKifer]
+1
16:53:45 [AxelPolleres]
+1
16:53:48 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:53:48 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ChrisW, Mike_Dean, csma, Sandro, AxelPolleres, AdrianP, Stella_Mitchell, Leora_Morgenstern, cke, DaveReynolds, [NRCC], Gary, MichaelKifer
16:53:54 [LeoraMorgenstern]
+1
16:54:03 [Gary]
+1
16:54:21 [ChrisW]
zakim, can you vote?
16:54:21 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, ChrisW.
16:54:38 [csma]
RESOLVED: : Publish Core as last call draft, pending completion of Core actions.
16:54:41 [Stella-MItchell]
csma, sandro: Jos will still review core
16:55:17 [Stella-MItchell]
sandro: I'm debating going to management with having it be contingent on LC decisions being made next week
16:55:38 [AxelPolleres]
need to go.
16:56:03 [csma]
next item
16:56:24 [Stella-MItchell]
axel: I reviewed BLD
16:56:41 [Stella-MItchell]
Harold: I and Michael addressed Axel's comments
16:57:21 [Stella-MItchell]
axel: I didn't have time yet to check the implementation of the review
16:57:43 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: I also reviewed BLD, and just have one question about mapping of the condition language
16:58:13 [Stella-MItchell]
...empty argument element, rather than no element, when a predicate has no arguments
16:58:30 [cke]
yes ok for me
16:58:31 [Stella-MItchell]
...is this ok? gary, cke?
16:58:49 [Stella-MItchell]
s/predicate/predicate, function. builtin/
16:58:56 [Stella-MItchell]
gary: yes
16:59:00 [Stella-MItchell]
cke: yes
16:59:09 [cke]
so this should be specified in core.
17:00:13 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: Michael, question about type (anyURI or rif:iri) of locator for import
17:01:24 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: not consistent with what was decided at F2F13
17:01:44 [Stella-MItchell]
mk: I think the minutes from F2F13 are incorrect - the 2 resolutions are inconsistent
17:01:46 [MichaelKifer]
<"a"^^anyURI>
17:02:06 [csma]
RESOLVED: In the XML syntax (for Core, BLD, PRD), the xml-schema type of both arguments to import is an anyURI -- NOT rif Const element(s).
17:02:11 [Stella-MItchell]
s/inconsistent/inconsistent with each other/
17:02:21 [csma]
RESOLVED: In RIFPS, we'll use <...> to delimit the IRI arguments to Import, Base, Prefix. (This syntax is the same as rif:iri Consts, but you can tell by the context.)
17:03:21 [Stella-MItchell]
csma: my comments are about the XML syntax
17:03:42 [Stella-MItchell]
mk: ok, I didn't understand that before
17:04:54 [sandro]
PROPOSED: Publish BLD as a second Last Call.
17:05:00 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish BLD as 2nd LC draft
17:05:04 [ChrisW]
+1 (IBM)
17:05:07 [sandro]
+1
17:05:07 [AdrianP]
+1
17:05:16 [Stella-MItchell]
+1
17:05:34 [Harold]
+1
17:05:42 [sandro]
second last call means last call, but it happens to be the second time it's been at last call.
17:05:47 [cke]
+1
17:05:49 [ChrisW]
action: axel review changes to BLD
17:05:49 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-823 - Review changes to BLD [on Axel Polleres - due 2009-05-26].
17:05:52 [MichaelKifer]
+1
17:06:00 [AxelPolleres]
+1 (pending review of my changes being implemented.)
17:06:11 [DaveReynolds]
+1 (pending Axel's review)
17:06:23 [csma]
PROPOSED: Publish BLD as a second Last Call, pending axel review that his request have been implemented
17:06:27 [Zakim]
-AdrianP
17:06:50 [csma]
RESOLVED: : Publish BLD as a second Last Call, pending axel review that his request have been implemented
17:06:55 [sandro]
right, LeoraMorgenstern --- "last call" just means "we think we're done", but you can always be corrected and find out you weren't really done.
17:07:04 [ChrisW]
good job harold/michael
17:07:12 [ChrisW]
good job dave, gary, adrian (with Core)
17:07:18 [Zakim]
-[NRCC]
17:07:20 [Zakim]
-Gary
17:07:20 [ChrisW]
adjourned
17:07:21 [Zakim]
-MichaelKifer
17:07:23 [Zakim]
-AxelPolleres
17:07:25 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has left #rif
17:07:25 [Zakim]
-Leora_Morgenstern
17:07:31 [Zakim]
-Stella_Mitchell
17:07:33 [DaveReynolds]
and especially Jos! (for Core)
17:07:33 [ChrisW]
zakim, list attendees
17:07:34 [Zakim]
-cke
17:07:37 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been ChrisW, Mike_Dean, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, csma, Sandro, AxelPolleres, AdrianP, Stella_Mitchell, Leora_Morgenstern, cke, DaveReynolds, [NRCC],
17:07:40 [Zakim]
... Gary, MichaelKifer
17:07:42 [ChrisW]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:07:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/05/19-rif-minutes.html ChrisW
17:07:45 [Zakim]
-DaveReynolds
17:07:52 [sandro]
zakim, who is here?
17:07:52 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ChrisW, Mike_Dean, csma, Sandro
17:07:53 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Gary, Stella-MItchell, Harold, LeoraMorgenstern, cke, AdrianP, RRSAgent, mdean, csma, hak, ChrisW, AxelPolleres, sandro, trackbot, Zakim
17:08:02 [sandro]
zakim, drop Mike_Deam
17:08:02 [Zakim]
sorry, sandro, I do not see a party named 'Mike_Deam'
17:08:10 [sandro]
zakim, who is here?
17:08:10 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ChrisW, Mike_Dean, csma, Sandro
17:08:12 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Gary, Stella-MItchell, Harold, LeoraMorgenstern, cke, AdrianP, RRSAgent, mdean, csma, hak, ChrisW, AxelPolleres, sandro, trackbot, Zakim
17:08:15 [sandro]
zakim, drop Mike_Dean
17:08:15 [Zakim]
Mike_Dean is being disconnected
17:08:16 [Zakim]
-Mike_Dean
17:13:28 [Zakim]
-Sandro
17:13:30 [Zakim]
-csma
17:13:50 [Zakim]
-ChrisW
17:13:51 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:13:52 [Zakim]
Attendees were ChrisW, Mike_Dean, Hassan_Ait-Kaci, csma, Sandro, AxelPolleres, AdrianP, Stella_Mitchell, Leora_Morgenstern, cke, DaveReynolds, [NRCC], Gary, MichaelKifer
18:56:12 [csma]
csma has left #rif