IRC log of swdag2009prov on 2009-07-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

08:01:31 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swdag2009prov
08:01:31 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/07/02-swdag2009prov-irc
08:01:37 [danbri]
rrsagent, make logs public
08:01:49 [ivan]
rrsangent, set log public
08:02:53 [cpedrinaci]
cpedrinaci has joined #swdag2009prov
08:03:21 [danbri]
deb: proof markup lang
08:03:26 [danbri]
...a representation strategy
08:03:29 [danbri]
... another model is trust
08:03:38 [danbri]
... i distinguish between trust repres. and trust calc
08:03:48 [danbri]
... we have a small onto for saying whether i trust some party
08:03:57 [danbri]
... and separate strategy for figuring out who to trust
08:04:08 [danbri]
...eg. wikipedia authors constantly being re-edited
08:04:21 [danbri]
... vs constaintly being cited
08:04:40 [danbri]
deb: 3rd module is who/what/when/where
08:04:43 [danbri]
... repr sttrategy
08:04:48 [MarkusK_]
Proof Markup Language primer: http://inference-web.org/2007/primer/
08:04:48 [danbri]
... integrated recently with the OPM
08:04:55 [danbri]
... open prov model
08:04:59 [danbri]
... the opm challenge
08:05:00 [MarkusK_]
Open Provenance Model: http://openprovenance.org/
08:07:14 [ocorcho]
are two triples identical?
08:07:17 [SimonS]
SimonS has joined #swdag2009prov
08:07:36 [danbri]
danbri - asked deb whether they have tools for essentially claim graph analytics
08:07:46 [danbri]
... figuring out bigger pic from different accounts
08:07:49 [danbri]
deb - short answer - yes
08:07:54 [danbri]
... builds on owl, proof work
08:09:54 [cbaldassarre]
cbaldassarre has joined #swdag2009prov
08:10:49 [raphael]
raphael has joined #swdag2009prov
08:11:44 [danbri]
yolanda: ... workflow systems ...
08:12:12 [danbri]
... probs when algorithms aren't designed to deal with prov at all, or in a granular way
08:12:25 [dlm]
dlm has joined #swdag2009prov
08:12:36 [natasha]
natasha has joined #swdag2009prov
08:12:51 [natasha]
natasha has left #swdag2009prov
08:13:17 [danbri]
yolanda: escience paper... by paul groth
08:13:21 [dlm]
inference-web.org is a pointer to our general infrastructure that uses pml
08:13:39 [danbri]
presumably in http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/indices/a-tree/g/Groth:Paul_T=.html somewhere
08:13:49 [danbri]
yolanda: trust has to do with ... "is this coming from harry..."
08:13:54 [danbri]
..." is it really from harry"
08:13:58 [dlm]
http://inference-web.org/wiki/Publications has a reasonably complete set of publications on pml and
08:13:59 [danbri]
... trust can mean a lot more things
08:14:08 [danbri]
... i published about how trust can be associated with content
08:14:20 [dlm]
the owl ontologies are up and availabe from http://inference-web.org/wiki/Documentation
08:14:24 [JeffP]
JeffP has joined #swdag2009prov
08:14:52 [ivan]
topic: dagstuhl workshop discussion on provenance
08:15:08 [danbri]
yolanda: ... eg contracts with you for books (if i'm springer) ...
08:15:12 [danbri]
er, if you're springer
08:15:36 [danbri]
... how can ppl reason about specific pieces of content in a document
08:15:44 [danbri]
... we've used open prov model for that
08:15:48 [danbri]
ivan: q same as for deb
08:16:00 [danbri]
ivan: what part of the (whiteboard here) list does this cover?
08:16:13 [danbri]
yolanda: i divide things a bit differently
08:17:03 [danbri]
... we modularise for efficient query
08:17:29 [danbri]
danbri has changed the topic to: dagstuhl workshop discussion on provenance
08:17:39 [danbri]
paulo: dns as a source of prov info and trust
08:17:49 [danbri]
...when you open a web page, it's due to dns / domain names
08:18:04 [danbri]
... nobody can publish things in stanford.edu domain without being auth'd to do it
08:19:21 [danbri]
i need to think :)
08:21:30 [JeffP]
danbri: domain name might be only a first step
08:21:54 [JeffP]
yolanda: Paul T. Groth. A distributed algorithm for determining the provenance of data. In Proceedings of the fourth IEEE International Conference on e-Science (e-Science'08), 2008. http://www.isi.edu/~pgroth/papers/pgroth-dpquery.pdf
08:23:22 [JeffP]
dlm: there are different ways to provide answers for prov queries
08:24:44 [JeffP]
ivan: no way to trace from a URI to individuals
08:27:24 [JeffP]
yolanda: there can be many questions, but one might not always reduce it to a trust question
08:27:46 [danbri]
frank: i don't know re prov ... but sounds like you're all solving too many probs at once
08:29:27 [ivan]
rrsagent, draft minutes
08:29:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/07/02-swdag2009prov-minutes.html ivan
08:29:36 [danbri]
me: please look at OpenID and at the GRAPH construct in the W3C SPARQL standard - both key tech for prov
08:30:09 [danbri]
re sparql, see http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/#namedGraphs
08:30:19 [danbri]
example:
08:30:20 [danbri]
SELECT ?who ?g ?mbox
08:30:20 [danbri]
FROM <http://example.org/dft.ttl>
08:30:20 [danbri]
FROM NAMED <http://example.org/alice>
08:30:21 [danbri]
FROM NAMED <http://example.org/bob>
08:30:21 [danbri]
WHERE
08:30:21 [danbri]
{
08:30:24 [danbri]
?g dc:publisher ?who .
08:30:26 [danbri]
GRAPH ?g { ?x foaf:mbox ?mbox }
08:30:28 [danbri]
}
08:32:38 [danbri]
reminder - twitter notes can be found c/o http://twitter.com/#search?q=swdag2009
08:32:47 [danbri]
harry: also stream of work from database community
08:32:57 [danbri]
eg from Peter Buneman "where & why" paper
08:34:13 [danbri]
(/me wonders who is doing work with temporal logic here ... eg. what's state of world is, given some set of datestamped claims)
08:36:37 [danbri]
harry: ... red, green etc data flavours
08:36:49 [ivan]
(in the paper of James Cheney)
08:37:03 [ivan]
harry: Talis has some implementation in this area
08:37:25 [ivan]
... it makes diffs on rdf and reports there
08:37:49 [ivan]
... and Irini Fundlaki (sp?) did some work formalizing it
08:38:11 [ivan]
... these, in general, try to be simpler than the complex open prov. models
08:38:36 [JeffP]
yolanda: A paper on trust that introduces "content trust" as separate from "entity trust": Towards Content Trust of Web Resources, Yolanda Gil and Donovan Artz. Journal of Web Semantics, 5(4), 2007. http://www.isi.edu/~gil/papers/gil-artz-jws07.pdf Also a survey on trust in the semantic web: A Survey of Trust in Computer Science and the Semantic Web, Donovan Artz and Yolanda Gil. Journal of Web Semantics, 5(2), 2007. http://www.isi.edu/~gil/papers/jw
08:39:09 [danbri]
yolanda: resp to q of why ppl aren't tracking prov
08:39:23 [danbri]
...at least from kr world ... if you kept track of everthing , there's an efficiency overhead
08:39:37 [danbri]
... eg in our workflow system, everything is completely reproducible
08:39:56 [danbri]
...see above survey paper on trust
08:40:18 [danbri]
... reputation, trust metrics across entities, ... trust on information, ... info retrieval
08:40:50 [ivan]
danbri: I like to separate problems
08:40:56 [ivan]
... temporl logic is a hard problems
08:41:05 [ivan]
... LOD is full of time related problems
08:41:19 [ivan]
... how much work can we do without getting into temporal logic?
08:41:57 [ivan]
carlos: there are some temporal algebra work
08:42:15 [ivan]
... i am not an expert in temporal reasoning
08:42:31 [ivan]
... an example
08:42:47 [ivan]
... what I had to do is a bit similar was for business process analyis
08:42:59 [ivan]
... you want to be able to reason what happened, when, implications, etc
08:43:11 [ivan]
... 'how many obejcts did we selll then and then'
08:43:34 [ivan]
... the approach was to define the notion of time point and intervals, and then one can use Alan's algebra to handle that
08:43:50 [ivan]
danbri: does this deal with open world issues?
08:43:57 [ivan]
carlos: in that domain it is closed
08:44:05 [ivan]
... it is based on keeping the time stamp
08:44:12 [ivan]
... check is based on time comparison
08:45:16 [cpedrinaci]
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/
08:45:37 [ivan]
MarkusK_: that can be very heavyweight stuff
08:46:13 [ivan]
... what i was wondering that we have a bunch of implementation issues depending locally
08:46:28 [ivan]
... i can do it on my local system
08:46:35 [ivan]
... but there is no general system
08:46:51 [ivan]
... there is no best practice
08:47:10 [ivan]
... eg in OWL2 you have the possibility to annotate individual statements
08:47:16 [ivan]
... i do not see many people using this
08:47:23 [ivan]
... there is a small insentive for this
08:47:34 [danbri]
(my worry: simple temporal situations ("dan painted the car red", "what colour is the car now?" hit horrible time and closed world and commonsense reasoning issues)
08:48:04 [ivan]
harry: there is a paper from Pat Hayes on time issues; he says it is easy to do if pick one, but in general it is very complex
08:48:48 [ivan]
deb: on the time issue, time has been axiomatized and there are reasoners
08:49:05 [ivan]
deb: markus' point: there will be some standards soon
08:49:17 [ivan]
... we are publishing pml with provenance
08:49:28 [danbri]
see http://www.springerlink.com/content/32m70342u4536453/
08:49:43 [ivan]
... it is time to push something like this to the standard body
08:49:51 [ivan]
frank: i am not sure where this temporal issue comes from
08:50:14 [ivan]
... all you want to do is to put a time stamp for a document, you do not need temporal logic for that
08:50:32 [ivan]
danbri: (see notes above from danbri)
08:50:33 [dlm]
we are now publishing provenance in pml for the tptp solution set (thousands of problems for theorem provers)
08:50:44 [dlm]
as well as provenance for data.gov in pml
08:50:52 [ivan]
carlos: because you have a the time stamp, you can reduce it to comparison, you do not need more
08:51:26 [ivan]
frank: you do not really need temporal logic to look at provenance statements
08:51:45 [JeffP]
steffen: Papers on RDF Querying Provenance - the conference version - B. Schüler, S. Sizov, S. Staab, Duc Thanh Tran. Querying for Meta Knowledge. In: Proc. of WWW-2008. http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~staab/Research/Publications/2008/WWW2008-MetaKnowledge.pdf - the long version - R. Dividino, S. Sizov, S. Staab, B. Schüler. Managing RDF with Meta Knowledge Awareness. In: Journal of Web Semantics. Special issue on "The Web of Data". To app
08:52:43 [ivan]
ian: we had a research project to integrate temporal logic with descriptioin logic, but we gave up because we did not really have a use case
08:53:19 [ivan]
... we really needed a timeline and comparison; it is pretty difficult to find a use case for a full blown temporal logic
08:55:49 [danbri]
another example --- as currently defined, foaf:schoolHomepage x,y triples never go stale, but foaf:workplaceHomepage x,y triples go stale after x stops working for the Org whose homepage is y ... how to annotate that in the foaf schema so that aggregators can exploit this
09:04:50 [danbri]
yolanda: argumentation markup language
09:04:59 [danbri]
... in face of conflicting evidence
09:06:32 [danbri]
note btw there was an Uncertainty Reasoning W3C incubator - http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/XGR-urw3-20080331/
09:11:09 [ivan]
rrsagent, draft minutes
09:11:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/07/02-swdag2009prov-minutes.html ivan
09:11:40 [danbri]
here are the use cases from the uncertainty guys: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/urw3/XGR-urw3-20080331/#usecases
09:13:16 [danbri]
deb: condition for success is modularity
09:13:22 [danbri]
... we found we had to do a modularisation
09:13:29 [danbri]
.. we needed some very lightweight pieces
09:13:38 [danbri]
... and complex explanation/justification pieces
09:13:53 [danbri]
... also stuff like "I trust x" ... or 2 steps thru social graph, etc
09:14:12 [danbri]
...modularity key to successsful charter, group, effort
09:14:20 [danbri]
carlos: what do we want from the group
09:14:24 [JeffP]
jeff: there are lots of work on uncertainty ontology and reasoning, we also have results on extenstions of OWL 2 profiles and have some implementations, such as ONTOSEARCH2: http://www.ontosearch.org/
09:14:49 [danbri]
...coming up with use cases, who produced this, whats qual of this data ,...
09:14:58 [danbri]
...which are the pieces of info that we need to capture
09:15:18 [danbri]
... can expect such a group to do this
09:15:49 [danbri]
ivan: approach we took yesterday ... to (a) come up with a few items that we still identify as major research items in this area
09:15:54 [danbri]
3 or 4 research items for jim's list
09:16:12 [danbri]
...at same time, ... listed very practical things that we can do now, simply because there is a need
09:16:34 [danbri]
... if the practical outcome is that this group push for a w3c incubator group, that's a good outcome, though other outcomes are fine
09:16:42 [danbri]
... msg to the community on what things can practically be done
09:16:53 [danbri]
... eg yesterday, that guus will push thru a whitepaper on vocab hosting issues
09:17:03 [danbri]
... if we can achieve these two things, then we did something
09:17:20 [danbri]
aside- see also http://www.gridprovenance.org/ GRID work
09:17:32 [danbri]
ivan: if we do an incubator group, ... who does it, who does the charter, etc
09:17:37 [danbri]
... could laucnh eg in sept
09:34:22 [ivan]
---- break----
09:36:11 [ivan]
collecting research issues:
09:36:38 [ivan]
1- what is the basic level of trust? What is the minimal units on the Web
09:37:46 [ivan]
2- what aspects of trust are directly of concern for the (semantic) web architecture
09:38:42 [ivan]
deb's refinement: are they any of them separable
09:39:39 [ivan]
3. how to present all this to the user (eg for large scale problems)
09:39:41 [danbri]
a bit out of scope maybe, but i have some bbc+openid+foaf use cases sketched in this presentation: http://www.slideshare.net/danbri/bbc-semweb-panel-where-does-openid-fit-in
09:40:05 [dlm]
presentation vs. representation vs. storage of the provenance information
09:40:23 [ivan]
4. control of the information (and the tradeoff between 3 and 4)
09:40:24 [dlm]
also, does presentation differ based on different contexts
09:41:27 [ivan]
5. explanation, what is happening in a larger context
09:42:30 [ivan]
carlos: between 1 and 2, how would all these pieces apply to the semantics web
09:43:08 [ivan]
6. crypto and semantic web
09:43:23 [ivan]
practical things:
09:49:12 [ivan]
Deb will set up an (initial) wiki to collect information on provenanceweb.org
09:49:36 [ivan]
Yolanda will start up the charter work with Ivan's and Dan's help
09:49:47 [ivan]
rrsagent, draft minuites
09:49:47 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft minuites', ivan. Try /msg RRSAgent help
09:49:57 [ivan]
rrsagent, draft minutes
09:49:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/07/02-swdag2009prov-minutes.html ivan
09:54:32 [danbri]
danbri has joined #swdag2009prov
10:01:22 [dlm]
dlm has joined #swdag2009prov
10:01:25 [danbri]
danbri has joined #swdag2009prov
10:13:44 [cpedrinaci]
cpedrinaci has joined #swdag2009prov
11:06:42 [cpedrinaci]
cpedrinaci has joined #swdag2009prov