15:53:24 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rif
15:53:24 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/02/02-rif-irc
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 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/02-rif-minutes.html 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> +Mike_Dean
16:00:33 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:01:08 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds has joined #rif
16:01:36 <Zakim> +csma
16:01:50 <LeoraMorgenstern> LeoraMorgenstern has joined #rif
16:01:54 <Zakim> +??P22
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> +??P25
16:03:19 <Zakim> +[IBM]
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> +Sandro
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> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2010Jan/att-0023/rif-mins-19-Jan-2010.html
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> liaison
16:07:01 <csma> next item
16:07:16 <csma> zakim, take up agendum 2
16:07:17 <Zakim> +[NRCC]
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> +Gary
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> +MichaelKifer
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> agenda?
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> in
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> rif:IRI?
16:19:27 <Harold> Pl have a look at our 28 Nov 2009 email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2009Nov/0065.html
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> q+
16:21:27 <sandro> q-
16:21:35 <sandro> q+
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> q+
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> q-
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 "http://example.com/people#Mary"^^rif:iri and "http://example.com/people#John"^^rif:iri, respectively
16:27:39 <Harold> (http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#Overview)
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> (http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#Mapping_of_the_Rule_Language)
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> +1
16:32:37 <LeoraMorgenstern> +1`
16:32:39 <DaveReynolds> +1
16:32:39 <mdean> +1
16:32:40 <sandro> +1
16:32:48 <AdrianP> +1
16:33:00 <Gary> +0
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> s/retraction/refraction/g
16:36:33 <Zakim> -Harold
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> s/thead/thread/
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> -MichaelKifer
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> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-comments/2009Oct/0003.html
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> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Implementations
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> s/csma/Sandro/
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> -AdrianP
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> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC#Profiles_of_Imports
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> -ChrisW
17:24:23 <csma> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/AssertRetract
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> s/resttart/reassert/
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> +[IPcaller]
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> (obviously)
17:30:53 <csma> PROPOSED: approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/AssertRetract
17:31:06 <DaveReynolds> +1
17:31:11 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
17:31:13 <Gary> +1
17:31:17 <mdean> +1
17:31:21 <AdrianP> +1
17:31:23 <sandro> +1
17:31:32 <csma> RESOLVED: approve http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/AssertRetract
17:31:44 <mdean> short meeting next week
17:31:55 <mdean> next full meeting February 16
17:32:00 <Zakim> -AdrianP
17:32:03 <Zakim> -DaveReynolds
17:32:05 <Zakim> -Sandro
17:32:07 <Zakim> -Gary
17:32:13 <Zakim> +LeoraMorgenstern
17:32:38 <mdean> s/actions/actions with pre-defined syntaxes/
17:32:48 <Zakim> -LeoraMorgenstern
17:32:55 <csma> rrsagent, make minutes
17:32:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/02/02-rif-minutes.html 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 http://www.w3.org/2010/02/02-rif-minutes.html csma
17:34:13 <Zakim> -Mike_Dean
17:34:27 <csma> zakim, who is on the phone?
17:34:27 <Zakim> On the phone I see csma
17:34:33 <Zakim> -csma
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