IRC log of rif on 2010-02-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:53:24 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:53:24 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:53:37 [csma]
rrsaganet, make log public
15:53:45 [csma]
rrsagent, make log public
15:54:25 [csma]
Regrets: StellaMitchell, JosDeBruijn
15:54:31 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:54:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
15:54:55 [csma]
zakim, clear agenda
15:54:55 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
15:55:11 [csma]
agendum+ admin
15:55:41 [csma]
agendum+ Liaisons
15:55:51 [csma]
agendum+ Actions review
15:56:12 [csma]
agendum+ Public comments
15:56:28 [csma]
agendum+ xml:base in RIF/XML
15:56:47 [csma]
agendum+ Changes in PRD
15:57:46 [csma]
agendum+ Implementations
15:58:09 [csma]
agendum+ Test cases
15:58:42 [csma]
agendum+ AOB (next meeting)
15:59:35 [mdean]
mdean has joined #rif
15:59:57 [lmorgens]
lmorgens has joined #rif
16:00:05 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has now started
16:00:12 [Zakim]
16:00:33 [LeoraMorgenstern]
LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:01:08 [DaveReynolds]
DaveReynolds has joined #rif
16:01:36 [Zakim]
16:01:50 [LeoraMorgenstern]
LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:01:54 [Zakim]
16:02:03 [csma]
Scribe: Mike Dean
16:02:16 [csma]
Scribenick: Mike_Dean
16:02:28 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:02:28 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Mike_Dean, csma, DaveReynolds
16:02:39 [AdrianP]
AdrianP has joined #rif
16:03:09 [Zakim]
16:03:19 [Zakim]
16:03:48 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, ??P25 is me (I think)
16:03:48 [Zakim]
I don't understand '??P25 is me (I think)', LeoraMorgenstern
16:04:01 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, ??P25 is me
16:04:05 [Zakim]
+LeoraMorgenstern; got it
16:04:21 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif
16:04:53 [Zakim]
16:05:04 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:05:04 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Mike_Dean, csma, DaveReynolds, LeoraMorgenstern, [IBM], Sandro
16:05:13 [mdean]
scribenick: mdean
16:05:17 [ChrisW]
zakim, ibm is temporarily me
16:05:17 [Zakim]
+ChrisW; got it
16:05:55 [LeoraMorgenstern]
zakim, mute me
16:05:55 [Zakim]
LeoraMorgenstern should now be muted
16:05:59 [csma]
16:06:14 [csma]
PROPOSED: approve minutes from Jan 19
16:06:19 [Harold]
Harold has joined #rif
16:06:35 [csma]
RESOLVED: approve minutes from Jan 19
16:06:46 [mdean]
no amendments to agenda
16:06:55 [mdean]
16:07:01 [csma]
next item
16:07:16 [csma]
zakim, take up agendum 2
16:07:17 [Zakim]
16:07:21 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Liaisons" taken up [from csma]
16:07:22 [Gary_Hallmark]
Gary_Hallmark has joined #rif
16:07:26 [mdean]
Sandro: SPARQL has a new round of working drafts
16:07:41 [Harold]
zakim, [NRCC] is me
16:07:41 [Zakim]
+Harold; got it
16:07:51 [mdean]
ChrisW: status of contacting OWL 2 RL people of implementing SWC
16:07:59 [Zakim]
16:08:04 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has joined #rif
16:08:09 [ChrisW]
action: chris to contact OWL2-RL folks about SWC
16:08:09 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-973 - Contact OWL2-RL folks about SWC [on Christopher Welty - due 2010-02-09].
16:08:44 [mdean]
Sandro: SPARQL might be last round before Last Call
16:09:10 [mdean]
Sandro: started from a different place than RIF
16:09:13 [csma]
next item
16:09:27 [csma]
next item
16:09:29 [Zakim]
16:09:37 [csma]
zakim, take up item 3
16:09:37 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Actions review" taken up [from csma]
16:09:45 [Zakim]
+ +1.617.299.aaaa
16:09:57 [AdrianP]
Zakim, aaaa is me
16:09:57 [Zakim]
+AdrianP; got it
16:11:02 [mdean]
ChrisW recording action updates
16:11:37 [ChrisW]
close action-972
16:11:37 [trackbot]
ACTION-972 Update core, bld, and fld xml schema to reflect resolution on imports closed
16:16:16 [mdean]
close action-879
16:16:16 [trackbot]
ACTION-879 Contact SRI. closed
16:16:22 [mdean]
close action-880
16:16:22 [trackbot]
ACTION-880 Contact David Jones (Boeing). closed
16:17:18 [csma]
next item
16:17:29 [sandro]
zakim, close item 1
16:17:29 [Zakim]
agendum 1, admin, closed
16:17:30 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:17:31 [Zakim]
4. Public comments [from csma]
16:17:42 [sandro]
16:17:46 [mdean]
no new public comments
16:17:46 [ChrisW]
zakim, next item
16:17:51 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Public comments" taken up [from csma]
16:18:17 [csma]
zakim, close item 4
16:18:17 [Zakim]
agendum 4, Public comments, closed
16:18:18 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
16:18:19 [Zakim]
5. xml:base in RIF/XML [from csma]
16:18:22 [mdean]
no news on public comments
16:18:39 [csma]
next item
16:19:04 [mdean]
csma: public comment from Thomas Krekeler
16:19:12 [csma]
> = xml:base =
16:19:14 [csma]
> The xml:base specification ([4]) does not define on which URIs contained
16:19:16 [csma]
16:19:17 [csma]
> an XML document the resolving mechanism against their base URIs applies.
16:19:19 [csma]
> What about
16:19:20 [csma]
> * the 'type' attribute of 'Const',
16:19:22 [csma]
> * the content of the 'location' element,
16:19:23 [csma]
> * the content of the 'Const' element if its type is xsd:anyURI or
16:19:25 [csma]
16:19:27 [Harold]
Pl have a look at our 28 Nov 2009 email:
16:20:07 [mdean]
Harold: independently identified same problem in November
16:20:32 [mdean]
... Const only, per email, never got a reply
16:21:10 [mdean]
... up to spec, RIF handling of xml:base modeled after that in RDF spec
16:21:18 [sandro]
16:21:27 [sandro]
16:21:35 [sandro]
16:21:46 [mdean]
... Const is no longer used in location
16:22:05 [mdean]
Sandro: location is probably most important place to use xml:base
16:22:31 [mdean]
csma: makes perfect sense for location, unsure about Const
16:22:50 [mdean]
Harold: earlier also used Const for active iris
16:23:16 [mdean]
Sandro: in linked data, all IRIs point to real documents
16:23:45 [mdean]
Harold: we do allow relative IRIs
16:24:38 [mdean]
Harold: presentation base uses xml:base - only place we use an attribute
16:25:32 [mdean]
Sandro: BLD spec only mentions "relative" (twice) w.r.t. xml:base
16:25:42 [sandro]
sandro: I read the BLD spec to not saying anything about relative IRIs in the XML, and suggest that in PS->XML you use Base to expand it.
16:26:26 [DaveReynolds]
16:26:43 [sandro]
csma: lexical space of rif:iri is ABSOLUTE IRIs. So there is no point to xml:base.
16:26:57 [sandro]
zakim, who is talking?
16:27:06 [sandro]
16:27:10 [Zakim]
sandro, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: csma (60%), Sandro (17%)
16:27:12 [Harold]
""The Base directive provides yet another shortcut: it applies to all relative IRIs, such as "Mary"^^rif:iri and <John>. The Base directive expands these relative IRIs to ""^^rif:iri and ""^^rif:iri, respectively
16:27:39 [Harold]
16:28:16 [sandro]
DaveReynolds: the mapping from the XML syntax to the lexical space is where you do absolutizing.
16:28:28 [mdean]
DaveReynolds: no mention of xml:base is probably a bug
16:29:32 [Harold]
"While the Import directive is handled by the presentation-to-XML syntax mapping, the Prefix and Base directives are not. Instead, these directives should be handled by expanding the associated shortcuts (compact URIs)."
16:29:50 [Harold]
16:30:13 [mdean]
mapping from presentation to xml:base in text, but not in table
16:30:59 [sandro]
PROPOSED: We clarify that relative IRIs are allowed in RIF syntaxes (in Const rif:iri, datatypes, location, and profile), and that xml:base is used in making them absolute; the absolute form is seen and used internally, so that's the lexical space.
16:31:41 [sandro]
PROPOSED: We clarify that relative IRIs are allowed in RIF syntaxes (anywhere IRIs are allowed, including Const rif:iri, symbol spaces, location, and profile), and that xml:base is used in making them absolute; the absolute form is seen and used internally, so that's the lexical space.
16:31:48 [mdean]
csma: also question about xml:lang - will send note to Harold and Michael
16:32:35 [ChrisW]
16:32:37 [LeoraMorgenstern]
16:32:39 [DaveReynolds]
16:32:39 [mdean]
16:32:40 [sandro]
16:32:48 [AdrianP]
16:33:00 [Gary]
16:33:04 [Harold]
0 (it's already quite clear)
16:33:08 [sandro]
RESOLVED: We clarify that relative IRIs are allowed in RIF syntaxes (anywhere IRIs are allowed, including Const rif:iri, symbol spaces, location, and profile), and that xml:base is used in making them absolute; the absolute form is seen and used internally, so that's the lexical space.
16:33:25 [mdean]
csma: not clear in PRD, at least
16:34:00 [mdean]
ACTION csma clarify in PRD
16:34:00 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-974 - Clarify in PRD [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2010-02-09].
16:34:50 [mdean]
action Sandro ask Axel to clarify xml:base in DTB
16:34:50 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-975 - Ask Axel to clarify xml:base in DTB [on Sandro Hawke - due 2010-02-09].
16:35:03 [csma]
next item
16:35:30 [mdean]
csma: PRD had 2 meetings since last RIF telecon
16:35:50 [mdean]
... agreed that retraction and conflict resolution in PRD had bugs
16:36:12 [mdean]
... didn't reflect how various rule systems work
16:36:27 [mdean]
... 1 big change in definition of retraction and conflict resolution
16:36:31 [Gary]
16:36:33 [Zakim]
16:37:01 [mdean]
... condition of rules are matched only after each execution block - should be after each atomic action
16:37:36 [mdean]
... consequence: modification can no longer be atomic
16:37:55 [mdean]
... expose intermediate state in PRD semantics
16:38:12 [mdean]
... clarify that modify is a compound action
16:39:06 [mdean]
... 3rd point: at least 1 case not accounted in rule instance - disjunctive condition where disjuncts differ by the value of some constant
16:39:28 [mdean]
... can't distinguish just by variable bindings
16:39:41 [mdean]
... not clear how to handle editorially
16:40:17 [mdean]
... normalization step may not be sufficient
16:40:40 [mdean]
Gary: read latest email - now believe it is sufficient
16:40:56 [mdean]
csma: least change to PRD spec
16:41:39 [mdean]
... correction - would like to not require another Last Call
16:42:25 [mdean]
... sure that it will work because it's less abstract and closer to existing engines and RETE algorithm
16:42:56 [mdean]
... less likely to cover non-RETE engine
16:43:19 [mdean]
... would like to use new action retract_all
16:43:44 [mdean]
... a real addition - not sure whether this would require Last Call
16:45:01 [mdean]
Gary: modify is retract_all followed by assert
16:45:18 [mdean]
csma: will talk to Mark Proctor later today
16:45:24 [mdean]
... still following thead
16:45:29 [mdean]
16:45:50 [mdean]
csma: do we need resolution or something else?
16:46:11 [mdean]
ChrisW: don't see how to avoid another Last Call
16:46:28 [mdean]
... would require changing implementations
16:47:18 [mdean]
ChrisW: could use shortest allowable time and try to catch up
16:47:31 [mdean]
Sandro: 3 weeks is the minimum
16:48:09 [mdean]
csma: new version should be finished by end of week
16:48:17 [mdean]
Sandro: need WG resolution to support publication
16:48:27 [mdean]
s/week/this week/
16:48:36 [mdean]
csma: have a version that's almost ready
16:49:02 [mdean]
... new definition of rule instance is quite complex
16:49:22 [mdean]
... Gary has much simpler version that should be used instead
16:49:31 [mdean]
... would only be an editorial change later
16:50:01 [mdean]
ChrisW: have a short telecon next Tuesday to pass resolution
16:50:13 [mdean]
... 15 minutes just to pass resolution
16:50:27 [mdean]
... can then publish Tuesday or Thursday
16:50:43 [mdean]
... 3 weeks from that date - early March
16:51:13 [mdean]
Sandro: don't need CR period - can skip given implementations
16:51:25 [mdean]
csma: need to complete implementations
16:51:33 [mdean]
ChrisW: try to get all specs in sync
16:51:46 [mdean]
Gary: remove modified no loop test case
16:52:02 [mdean]
Sandro: definiitely need test cases
16:52:10 [mdean]
csma: can work on test cases in parallel
16:52:43 [mdean]
ChrisW: pass all resolutions next week
16:53:03 [mdean]
... last call and updated test cases
16:53:29 [mdean]
csma: add RetractAll as well
16:54:08 [mdean]
action csma send email today regarding telecon next week
16:54:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-976 - Send email today regarding telecon next week [on Christian de Sainte Marie - due 2010-02-09].
16:54:45 [csma]
next item
16:55:19 [mdean]
csma: where are we, what are we missing
16:55:39 [mdean]
... happy with current BLD implementations?
16:55:57 [mdean]
Sandro: partial test report from Gary
16:56:38 [mdean]
will provide test report for SILK - mixed results
16:56:53 [mdean]
... SILK translated to FLORA 2
16:57:00 [mdean]
csma: no test results from Ontoprise
16:57:21 [mdean]
... no news from Jos deRoo
16:57:50 [mdean]
... STI Innsbruck not planning to do any more - no test report
16:58:11 [mdean]
Sandro: need implementation reports, but test results not required
16:58:27 [mdean]
csma: but more credible with (even partial) test results
16:58:53 [mdean]
... PRD has IBM/ILOG and Oracle
16:59:05 [mdean]
... will ask Mark Proctor about JBoss
16:59:36 [AdrianP]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
16:59:36 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Mike_Dean, csma, DaveReynolds, LeoraMorgenstern (muted), ChrisW, Sandro, Gary, MichaelKifer, AdrianP
17:00:04 [mdean]
... Core covered by BLD and PRD
17:01:01 [mdean]
... FLD has Core Answer Set Programming Dialect and SILK Dialect
17:01:12 [mdean]
... partial implementations of DTB
17:01:27 [mdean]
... in IBM
17:01:36 [mdean]
... Gary implements about 3/4 of DTB
17:02:27 [mdean]
Gary: new builtins will be added to product and used by translator
17:02:42 [mdean]
... translator will be sample or open source - not yet sure of release details
17:02:54 [MichaelKifer]
I have to leave for a meeting.
17:03:03 [Zakim]
17:03:15 [mdean]
csma: CTIC will do open source DTB library
17:03:28 [mdean]
s/library/Java library/
17:03:36 [mdean]
... ready in 1 or 2 weeks
17:03:46 [mdean]
... see rif-dev email
17:04:03 [mdean]
csma: main problem is still SWC
17:04:10 [mdean]
... need to get implementation
17:04:27 [mdean]
Sandro: specifically talking about OWL portion
17:04:37 [mdean]
s/portion/portion of SWC/
17:05:01 [mdean]
Sandro: Eye probably counts for RDF
17:05:22 [mdean]
ChrisW: Cleveland Clinic also counts for RDF
17:05:43 [mdean]
DaveReynolds: would need more than OWL RL
17:05:53 [mdean]
csma: exit criteria only requires one profile
17:06:37 [mdean]
csma: FuXi implementation report says it includes OWL 2 RL
17:06:42 [csma]
17:06:49 [mdean]
Sandro: test results would make this more clear
17:07:00 [mdean]
DaveReynolds: implementation report for OWL 2 RL
17:07:20 [mdean]
... not the same as implementating OWL profile in SWC
17:07:33 [mdean]
Sandro: should check owl:imports tests
17:07:50 [mdean]
csma: sandro has existing action
17:08:29 [sandro]
17:08:57 [mdean]
Sandro: consider Pellet or HermIT
17:09:24 [mdean]
... already explored Jena and Oracle
17:09:40 [DaveReynolds]
What about SHER?
17:10:14 [mdean]
... from IBM
17:10:48 [mdean]
ChrisW: SHER team has evaporated
17:11:14 [mdean]
csma: seems to be hybrid reasoning - nobody knows how to implement
17:11:20 [mdean]
17:11:50 [mdean]
ChrisW: not that hard - people just don't care
17:12:03 [mdean]
... DL and rule combinations
17:12:44 [mdean]
Sandro: lots of people have implemented SWRL
17:13:13 [mdean]
mdean: SweetRules, Pellet, Protege (using Jess), ...
17:14:13 [mdean]
Sandro: Jess is not better than OWL RL
17:14:33 [mdean]
... Pellet is most likely option - will contact Kendall Clark
17:15:09 [mdean]
DaveReynolds: issue is that SWC OWL-RIF mapping is different from RDF-RIF mapping
17:15:27 [mdean]
... requires different translator
17:15:29 [Zakim]
17:15:36 [mdean]
... coudn't work on until April or May
17:16:03 [mdean]
csma: don't have OWL RL profile in SWC, just OWL DL and OWL Full
17:16:43 [mdean]
Sandro: seemed to make sense at the time - don't recall reasoning
17:17:26 [mdean]
Sandro: should point to Wiki not CR in sidebar
17:18:17 [mdean]
ChrisW: more external than internal (Wiki) users
17:18:34 [csma]
17:19:23 [mdean]
Sandro: looking for OWL Direct
17:20:47 [mdean]
ACTION Sandro talk to Kendall about SWC implementation
17:20:48 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-977 - Talk to Kendall about SWC implementation [on Sandro Hawke - due 2010-02-09].
17:21:30 [mdean]
csma: lots of pending actions
17:22:18 [mdean]
... urgent if we don't want to leave SWC behind
17:22:51 [csma]
next item
17:23:10 [csma]
zakim, take up item 8
17:23:10 [Zakim]
agendum 8. "Test cases" taken up [from csma]
17:23:49 [mdean]
csma: Assert and AssertRetract test cases
17:23:55 [Zakim]
17:24:23 [csma]
17:25:46 [mdean]
csma: previously unsure about JRules implementation
17:25:57 [mdean]
... but no more objections
17:26:32 [mdean]
csma: Retract(?X) retracts all known assertions about ?X
17:26:49 [mdean]
... RetractAll is all values for one slot
17:27:07 [mdean]
Sandro: perhaps RetractValues rather than RetractAll
17:27:46 [mdean]
csma: if don't delete, then can resttart
17:28:16 [mdean]
17:29:09 [mdean]
Sandro: odd that there's no punctuation between Retract and Assert - never have atoms next to each other in BLD
17:29:25 [mdean]
... maybe OK for Action sequence
17:29:28 [MichaelKifer]
MichaelKifer has left #rif
17:29:36 [mdean]
csma: all use parentheses
17:29:57 [mdean]
... can only have reserved names
17:30:16 [Zakim]
17:30:17 [mdean]
Gary: not worse than AND or OR
17:30:24 [mdean]
... no commas anywhere in presentation syntax
17:30:32 [AdrianP]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
17:30:32 [Zakim]
+AdrianP; got it
17:30:41 [sandro]
I cannot keep straight all the different syntaxes and their variations.....
17:30:48 [mdean]
csma: closed list of actions
17:30:50 [sandro]
17:30:53 [csma]
PROPOSED: approve
17:31:06 [DaveReynolds]
17:31:11 [Zakim]
17:31:13 [Gary]
17:31:17 [mdean]
17:31:21 [AdrianP]
17:31:23 [sandro]
17:31:32 [csma]
RESOLVED: approve
17:31:44 [mdean]
short meeting next week
17:31:55 [mdean]
next full meeting February 16
17:32:00 [Zakim]
17:32:03 [Zakim]
17:32:05 [Zakim]
17:32:07 [Zakim]
17:32:13 [Zakim]
17:32:38 [mdean]
s/actions/actions with pre-defined syntaxes/
17:32:48 [Zakim]
17:32:55 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:32:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
17:33:02 [csma]
zakim, list attendees
17:33:02 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Mike_Dean, csma, DaveReynolds, LeoraMorgenstern, Sandro, ChrisW, Harold, Gary, MichaelKifer, +1.617.299.aaaa, AdrianP
17:33:10 [csma]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:33:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate csma
17:34:13 [Zakim]
17:34:27 [csma]
zakim, who is on the phone?
17:34:27 [Zakim]
On the phone I see csma
17:34:33 [Zakim]
17:34:34 [Zakim]
SW_RIF()11:00AM has ended
17:34:35 [Zakim]
Attendees were Mike_Dean, csma, DaveReynolds, LeoraMorgenstern, Sandro, ChrisW, Harold, Gary, MichaelKifer, +1.617.299.aaaa, AdrianP
17:56:11 [csma]
csma has left #rif
18:26:17 [ChrisW]
ChrisW has joined #rif