15:46:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:46:21 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/11/10-rif-irc
15:46:33 <csma> rrsagent, make log public
15:46:43 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
15:46:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/11/10-rif-minutes.html csma
15:47:21 <csma> Regrets: JosDeBruijn
15:48:20 <csma> Meeting: RIF telecon 10 November 2009
15:48:37 <csma> Chair: Christian de Sainte Marie
15:48:58 <csma> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Nov/0009.html
15:49:33 <csma> csma has changed the topic to: #rif 10 Nov RIF telecon; agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Nov/0009.html
15:50:32 <csma> clear agenda
15:50:53 <csma> agendum+ Admin
15:51:02 <csma> agendum+ liaisons
15:51:19 <csma> agendum+ Action review
15:51:28 <csma> agendum+ Public comments
15:51:45 <csma> agendum+ XML syntax for Import
15:51:57 <csma> agendum+ Implementations
15:52:11 <csma> agendum+ Test cases
15:52:26 <csma> agendum+ AOB (next telecon)
15:56:39 <ChrisW> ChrisW has joined #rif
15:57:56 <ChrisW> zakim, list agenda
15:57:56 <Zakim> I see 8 items remaining on the agenda:
15:57:57 <Zakim> 1. Admin [from csma]
15:57:57 <Zakim> 2. liaisons [from csma]
15:57:58 <Zakim> 3. Action review [from csma]
15:57:58 <Zakim> 4. Public comments [from csma]
15:57:59 <Zakim> 5. XML syntax for Import [from csma]
15:58:00 <Zakim> 6. Implementations [from csma]
15:58:00 <Zakim> 7. Test cases [from csma]
15:58:05 <Zakim> 8. AOB (next telecon) [from csma]
16:00:16 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:24 <Zakim> +??P14
16:00:34 <csma> zakim, ??P14 is me
16:00:41 <Zakim> +csma; got it
16:01:07 <mdean> mdean has joined #rif
16:01:07 <Zakim> +[IBM]
16:01:14 <Zakim> +Leora_Morgenstern
16:01:15 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarility me
16:01:15 <Zakim> I don't understand 'ibm is temporarility me', ChrisW
16:01:23 <ChrisW> zakim, ibm is temporarily me
16:01:23 <Zakim> +ChrisW; got it
16:01:33 <hak> hak has joined #rif
16:01:39 <Zakim> +Mike_Dean
16:01:50 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:01:54 <csma> scribe: Leora Morgenstern
16:01:59 <sandro> zakim not working for me.
16:02:15 <Zakim> +hak
16:02:18 <Zakim> +Sandro
16:02:28 <LeoraMorgenstern> just checking that I can scribe.
16:02:48 <csma> scribenick: LeoraMorgenstern
16:03:44 <Harold> Harold has joined #rif
16:03:48 <ChrisW> minutes of last telecon: http://www.w3.org/2009/10/27-rif-minutes.html
16:03:57 <AdrianP> AdrianP has joined #rif
16:04:25 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:04:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see csma, ChrisW, Leora_Morgenstern, Mike_Dean, hak (muted), Sandro
16:04:34 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
16:04:44 <hak> Note to the chair: I will have to leave at 8:30 PST - sorry -hak
16:05:11 <Harold>  zakim, [NRCC] is me
16:05:11 <Zakim> +Harold; got it
16:05:19 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has joined #rif
16:05:34 <sandro> zakim, take up item 1
16:05:34 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Admin" taken up [from csma]
16:05:34 <csma> next item
16:05:40 <Zakim> +??P11
16:05:50 <AdrianP> Zakim, ??P11 is me
16:05:50 <Zakim> +AdrianP; got it
16:06:09 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: Since the minutes for last week's minutes were posted today, we'll vote on them next meeting,.
16:06:11 <Zakim> + +1.631.833.aaaa
16:06:26 <MichaelKifer> zakim, aaaa is me
16:06:26 <Zakim> +MichaelKifer; got it
16:06:44 <csma> next item
16:06:46 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: We'll discuss OWL compatibility next week.
16:06:57 <ChrisW> ^week^meeting
16:07:11 <LeoraMorgenstern> news from liaisons: you finally spelled the word right!
16:07:48 <csma> next item
16:09:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: why is action 936 on me? I think it should be on Stella, since it concerns creating a new category for test cases.
16:09:18 <StellaMitchell> StellaMitchell has joined #rif
16:09:51 <LeoraMorgenstern> close action-933
16:09:51 <trackbot> ACTION-933 Add the syntax for location and profile to agenda of next telecon closed
16:10:06 <Zakim> +StellaMitchell
16:10:37 <Gary_Hallmark> Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
16:10:39 <Zakim> +Gary
16:11:39 <ChrisW> Michael, see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2009Sep/0009.html
16:11:40 <LeoraMorgenstern> close action-929
16:11:40 <trackbot> ACTION-929 Send http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_WL2 closed
16:11:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> close action-909
16:11:58 <trackbot> ACTION-909 Check into XML syntax for PRD test cases closed
16:15:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> close action-936
16:15:20 <trackbot> ACTION-936 Move that test case to new category closed
16:16:13 <AdrianP> Zakim, mute me
16:16:13 <Zakim> AdrianP should now be muted
16:18:06 <LeoraMorgenstern> stella, gary: lots of discussion regarding running test cases.
16:18:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: would be good for Gary to send implementation report regarding difficultites.
16:19:14 <LeoraMorgenstern> close action-934
16:19:14 <trackbot> ACTION-934 Send implementation report closed
16:20:13 <hak> continued
16:20:59 <csma> next item
16:21:03 <LeoraMorgenstern> next item
16:21:18 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Public_Comments
16:22:24 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action on Michael to draft reply to public comment CD2
16:22:24 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on
16:22:36 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action on Mkifer to draft reply to public comment CD2
16:22:36 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - on
16:22:46 <csma> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2009Sep/0006.html
16:22:54 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action Mkifer to draft reply to public comment CD2
16:22:54 <trackbot> Created ACTION-937 - Draft reply to public comment CD2 [on Michael Kifer - due 2009-11-17].
16:24:05 <LeoraMorgenstern> Michael: will also try to look at public comment AR4, but it's really mostly about XML
16:24:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action Harold to draft reply to public comment AR4
16:24:26 <trackbot> Created ACTION-938 - Draft reply to public comment AR4 [on Harold Boley - due 2009-11-17].
16:25:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action Mkifer to draft reply to public comment CD3
16:25:44 <trackbot> Created ACTION-939 - Draft reply to public comment CD3 [on Michael Kifer - due 2009-11-17].
16:25:59 <LeoraMorgenstern> Michael: Not sure what Damasio is saying.
16:27:11 <LeoraMorgenstern> Stella: Ryazanov's complaint, about tests not conforming to the XML schema, is no longer true, since tests have changed.
16:27:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: Will have to first resolve syntax issue on our side, and then respond to Ryazanov that syntax has been fixed.
16:28:35 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action csma to draft reply for AR5
16:28:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-940 - Draft reply for AR5 [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-11-17].
16:29:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> Action mkifer to draft reply to EM3 (David Mott: question on FLD)
16:29:31 <trackbot> Created ACTION-941 - Draft reply to EM3 (David Mott: question on FLD) [on Michael Kifer - due 2009-11-17].
16:31:02 <LeoraMorgenstern> action csma to draft reponse to TK3 (Thomas Krekeler)
16:31:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-942 - Draft reponse to TK3 (Thomas Krekeler) [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-11-17].
16:32:31 <LeoraMorgenstern> action chrisw to send an email to jos regarding Ian Horrock's public comment regarding discussion of OWL
16:32:31 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - chrisw
16:32:32 <csma> next item
16:33:04 <LeoraMorgenstern> action cwelty to send email to Jos regarding Ian Horrock's public comments on discussion of OWL 
16:33:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-943 - Send email to Jos regarding Ian Horrock's public comments on discussion of OWL  [on Christopher Welty - due 2009-11-17].
16:33:07 <AdrianP> Zakim, unmute me
16:33:07 <Zakim> AdrianP should no longer be muted
16:33:20 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2009-04-16#resolution_7http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/meeting/2009-04-16#resolution_7
16:36:36 <LeoraMorgenstern> harold: seems to have misunderstood the resolution.
16:36:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> harold: does not support it.
16:37:06 <AdrianP> we could make locator a type tag "Locator"
16:37:22 <AdrianP> then we don't violate the syntax design principle of RIF
16:38:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> harold: I would have asked for a discussion of this point. (Note: clarify what it is: I (lm) am missing the point here.)
16:39:30 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: is there anyone else who thinks the statement is ambiguous?
16:39:50 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: the implications probably weren't understood.
16:41:14 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: overturning the resolution on the argument that we didn't understand the implications is a dangerous precedent.
16:42:36 <Zakim> -hak
16:42:36 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: if true that we didn't understand some implication, that is a reason to re-open it. I don't know if that's the case here.
16:42:46 <StellaMitchell> re: ambiguous - when I first went back and read the resolution I misunderstood it - thought BLD was aligned with the decision
16:43:31 <AdrianP> I think it would be the only place where the role tag contains some content
16:43:50 <AdrianP> so we cannot omit role tags in the syntax
16:43:51 <ChrisW> +1 continue discussing
16:43:52 <AdrianP> +1
16:43:54 <StellaMitchell> +1 revisit
16:43:57 <Harold> +1
16:43:57 <mdean> +1
16:43:57 <sandro> +0.5 okay to talk about it more
16:43:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> +1
16:44:00 <MichaelKifer> +1
16:44:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> harold: I would like to write up the dilemma, send it in email, and we can then read it, and discuss it at the next telecon.
16:45:14 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: Please put in email the explanation of the implication.
16:46:41 <ChrisW> action: Harold to summarize issue of imports argument and propose a solution
16:46:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-944 - Summarize issue of imports argument and propose a solution [on Harold Boley - due 2009-11-17].
16:46:48 <csma> next item
16:46:49 <LeoraMorgenstern> action csma put this discussion on the agenda for next time
16:46:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-945 - Put this discussion on the agenda for next time [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-11-17].
16:46:53 <ChrisW> action: csma to put syntax of imports on next agenda
16:46:53 <trackbot> Created ACTION-946 - Put syntax of imports on next agenda [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-11-17].
16:47:26 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: Have we received implementation reports?
16:47:34 <ChrisW> close action 945
16:47:40 <ChrisW> close action-945
16:47:40 <trackbot> ACTION-945 Put this discussion on the agenda for next time closed
16:47:57 <Harold> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Implementations
16:49:02 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: we should  have 6 BLD implementations (some are already available)
16:49:42 <csma> q?
16:49:51 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: and 3 PRD implementations (one from ilog)
16:50:50 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: 1 SWC implementation, 2 Core implementations, 
16:51:34 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: for DTB, do we need one implementation of each built-in and datatype?
16:52:07 <LeoraMorgenstern> chris: exit criteria says we'll have two implementations of each built-in
16:52:24 <LeoraMorgenstern> chris: but they need not be independent
16:52:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: We have one implementation of DTB, but it's just a syntax validator, which may not really count.
16:52:58 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: Though at least it would pass all the syntax tests.
16:55:17 <LeoraMorgenstern> chris: must check fuxi and ontoprise regarding implementation of (??? SWC???)
16:56:22 <LeoraMorgenstern> [why? fuxi mentions OWL, but ontoprise just is listed for BLD ??]
16:57:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> mdean: should have something by the end of the month.
16:57:33 <LeoraMorgenstern> michael: same for me.
16:59:25 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: at RULE-ML challenge, there was something that showed RIF compatibility (was showing translation to PRD among other things)
16:59:53 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: May not count as a PRD implementation, because based on an old spec, but I encouraged them to post on wiki, and update.
17:00:29 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: But this points to the possibility that there are other people who may be working on implementations.
17:01:49 <Harold> Re DTB implementations, I think we need just one implementation of each built-in, since the Java snippet implementing a built-in is modularly separated from the Java snippets implementing other built-ins. Also, its conformance to the DTB spec can be modularly tested. So everyone can just copy and paste the Java snippets into their own implementation. 
17:03:46 <LeoraMorgenstern> Discussion on how close implementors are to implementations.
17:04:05 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: Currently no test results from anyone but Gary. No idea on how conformant any of them are.
17:04:38 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: test results from jos de roo on DTB. Not in right format, but there are results.
17:04:39 <StellaMitchell> Jos De Roo's are not our test cases, are they?
17:04:49 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: We'll add column on test results to implementation page.
17:04:53 <StellaMitchell> not just format, but they are different tests
17:05:22 <LeoraMorgenstern> Leora: Do we know if anyone is using our test cases, or their own?
17:05:38 <LeoraMorgenstern> action csma to send email to implementors asking for test results.
17:05:38 <trackbot> Created ACTION-947 - Send email to implementors asking for test results. [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-11-17].
17:06:11 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: how to proceed on DTB: ask everyone which datatype and built-in they are doing?
17:06:21 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: no, ask which ones they are *not* doing.
17:06:44 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: ask for specifics to ensure coverage of DTB
17:07:06 <StellaMitchell> maybe they should be split further
17:09:36 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: will ask in my email for more specific results for DTB
17:09:56 <csma> next item
17:11:20 <LeoraMorgenstern> gary: I have not seen a test case for list built ins.
17:11:45 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: test cases in spec, but not in test case suite
17:12:01 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: test case on having list in slot?
17:13:11 <Zakim> -Harold
17:14:54 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Assert
17:16:12 <StellaMitchell> Gary, the Assert* results are not in your results
17:21:05 <StellaMitchell> it seems like the group should follow its own "shoulds"
17:21:09 <LeoraMorgenstern> Sorry --- was off for a bit --- what is the problem here?
17:21:46 <LeoraMorgenstern> I can catch up with Stella later, and incorporate the problem with this test case into the minutes.
17:21:47 <StellaMitchell> why would we want to have a test case that illustrates bad practice?
17:22:02 <csma> PROPOSED: to approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Assert with a note saying that this is not good practice (since it is translatable in COre, it should be in Core)
17:22:21 <Gary> +1
17:22:27 <csma> +1
17:22:28 <AdrianP> +1
17:22:44 <StellaMitchell> no
17:23:05 <csma> RESOLVED: to approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Assert with a note saying that this is not good practice (since it is translatable in COre, it should be in Core)
17:23:09 <StellaMitchell> but I would be curious to hear the answer
17:23:23 <AdrianP> yes, will ad
17:24:01 <StellaMitchell> ok
17:24:30 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Retract
17:26:11 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: I would prefer not to combine print and retract; it is not the simplest retract case.
17:26:22 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: makes sense to just add the end of the second rule to be an assert rather than a print.
17:26:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: otherwise, we'd have to have a new print test case, and a new type (input/output), etc.
17:27:21 <ChrisW> i need to go, sorry
17:27:39 <Zakim> -ChrisW
17:27:49 <LeoraMorgenstern> sandro: I would add a second frame about John, and then make sure that is gone. Use a negative entailment test.
17:28:12 <sandro> ex:john[ex:name -> "Johnl"] 
17:28:28 <sandro> Not-Entailed: ex:john[ex:name -> "John"]
17:28:41 <sandro> Non-Conclusion
17:29:05 <sandro> NegativeEntailmentTest
17:29:37 <StellaMitchell> do you mind if I put the PS of Assert into Core syntax, or do you actually want it in PRD syntax?
17:30:06 <LeoraMorgenstern> I want to point out: I cannot scribe past 12:35, so we probably want to wrap up.
17:30:27 <LeoraMorgenstern> action csma to modify retract case.
17:30:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-948 - Modify retract case. [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2009-11-17].
17:31:47 <LeoraMorgenstern> csma: next telecon on nov 24
17:31:52 <Zakim> -StellaMitchell
17:31:54 <Zakim> -AdrianP
17:31:56 <Zakim> -Gary
17:31:57 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
17:31:59 <Zakim> -MichaelKifer
17:32:05 <MichaelKifer> MichaelKifer has left #rif
17:32:09 <csma> zakim, list attendees
17:32:09 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been csma, Leora_Morgenstern, ChrisW, Mike_Dean, hak, Sandro, Harold, AdrianP, +1.631.833.aaaa, MichaelKifer, StellaMitchell, Gary
17:32:18 <csma> rrsagnet, make minutes
17:32:35 <sandro> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:32:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/11/10-rif-minutes.html sandro
17:32:39 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:32:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/11/10-rif-minutes.html csma
17:35:04 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:35:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/11/10-rif-minutes.html csma
17:35:35 <Zakim> -Leora_Morgenstern
17:38:06 <Zakim> -Sandro
17:38:09 <Zakim> -csma
17:38:11 <Zakim> SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:38:13 <Zakim> Attendees were csma, Leora_Morgenstern, ChrisW, Mike_Dean, hak, Sandro, Harold, AdrianP, +1.631.833.aaaa, MichaelKifer, StellaMitchell, Gary
17:38:31 <sandro> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:38:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/11/10-rif-minutes.html sandro