See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 11 June 2010
<YolandaGil> Christine: will you scribe today?
<kai> Its because I probably have to leave earlier
<kai> Now I have problems with both the France and the UK bridge, I can not enter the conference code
<YolandaGil> no problem, we just need someone to do it, you can do it anothe day
<YolandaGil> dial in and then press 0
<Jose_> upps, sorry Yolanda I didn't see that. I'm trying to connect to the UK bridge...
Yes. Assuming I can join the call. I just tried but it did not work.
<YolandaGil> that will connect you to an operator
<Luc> i can't join either
<jun> me neither, through the UK bridge
<smiles> same problem for me
<YolandaGil> i am contacting the w3c operator, hang on
<olaf> same problem
<kai> *0 or 0 is also not working
<YolandaGil> hang on, i'm trying to fix the bridge
<YolandaGil> i mean trying to *get someone* who can fix the bridge :)
<YolandaGil> Ok, the UK and France bridge are out
<YolandaGil> we either cancel the call until next week when this is reseolved
<YolandaGil> or everyone has to dial in to the US bridge
<pgroth> can we not just use the us bridge?
<YolandaGil> the W3c apologizes profusely
<YolandaGil> is the us bridge a problem for people?
<jcheney> ok I thunk
<jun> I will dial in by the us bridge
<kai> us worked for me
<jcheney> thunk/think :)
<Jose_> it's fine with me. But I'll have to leave early, anyway :-(
<smiles> I don't think I can do the US bridge, sorry - not in the office and v expensive international rates
Hi Yolanda. I have joined the call using the US number.
<YolandaGil> Simon: can you skype it?
<smiles> yes I'm gonna try, but might take a bit as skype is not set up (new laptop)
Yes I can scribe.
<jcheney> Does anyone else hear echoes?
Agenda for today - Provenance Vocabulary Mapping
<olaf> yes me
<Luc> yes, echo is terrible
<Dgarijo> I hear them
<DeborahMcG> really bad echo
<kai> +1 for bad echo
<Jose_> line dropping :-(
<pgroth> can everyone go on mute?
<pgroth> except for satya
<Jose_> who's on the phone?
Satya: OPM terms are the core set for the mapping work on the link
Yolanda: Why was OPM chosen?
Paul: At the Face to Face meeting, we thought it was a fairly simple model; community developed model - therefore a good place to start
Yolanda: Important to emphasize that it has been developed by the community
Satya: Mapping terms from other provenance vocabularies to the OPM terms
<pgroth> Luc do you want to do that :-)
Satya: Paolo and Simon please go over each of the provenance terms
<Luc> i can
Luc: I will not cover the history
of OPM - As a community we wanted to talk about dependancy
graphs and annotate them. We identified the nodes/edges those
graphs would support. We have artefacts generated and consumed
by processes. Entities control processes.
... Edges indicate dependencies between nodes.
... Last elements is the notion of account.
... These are not all the OPM concepts. Time, annotation, profile etc.
... At this stage they have not all been incorporated in the table.
<pgroth> I can answer that
Paul: To follow up - We left out some things like time, annotation and profiles because - necessary for OPM but not terms you use to describe provenance
Luc: If you want to be complete and map some dependencies in other models you may require sub-typing of OPM
<Luc> u wanted to translate model X to OPM
Satya: We asked the volunteers to define the mappings and select the terms they thought were closest to OPM terms
Luc: Q re process and
methodology. Your explanation Satya is very useful but this is
not reflected in the table - e.g. why provenir process is
broader than OPM - need to record and review
... We should provide justification of each entry in the term and this should be reviewed.
Satya: I agree. Perhaps add next reiteration.
Luc: Original justification column and review column.
Satya: Who should review?
Luc: Paul mentioned this table is already getting some visibility.
<Jose_> +1 to provenance of provenance work ;-)
Yolanda: What Satya is trying to do, I think, it to provide the information concisely. Agree we should make sure we capture the provenance of this work.
Luc and Satya: Take this up in next reiteration
<Luc> in OPM artifacts can also be decisions or justifications
[Satya explaining entries in Vocabulary Mappings Table]
Satya: Related match if not strictly broader
or not sure
Jun: Q for Satya and Luc - re
artifact and data part - what is covered by these two
... Does OPM only cover physical things? Does Provenir Data cover things other than what we normally think of as data?
Satya: Data collection is a specialisation of data
Jun: Should we include data collection - Provenir in the table?
Satya: Need to clarify with OPM people
Luc: An artifact in OPM can be digital, physical or it can be conceptual. OPM artifacts used for data, data sets, files, etc, physical objects and concepts e.g. the fact that there is a decision or an idea. No restriction about artifact.
Jun: Thank you for this confirmation.
Jose: My impression is that some part of the mismatch is probably the specificity gap of the language. Is there the required specificity for this? e.g. broad match
<Luc> I agree that creating a formal mapping would take us ages.
Paul: Our job was not to define an exact perfect mapping between all these vocabularies. More to give a space to how the vocabularies connect to each other. Could use more complicated language or problematic. But beyond the scope of this group's work.
<Luc> For justifications, I would be happy to see examples of why concepts are broader narrower
Jose: I think this is the right approach, but we should also consider whether we want to go further.
Paul: Not possible in the time we have.
<Luc> along the lines of what Satya said: one can have nested processes, the other cannot
Satya: Could be an extension of the incubator group
<Jose_> +1 to that
Jose: Agree. Reasonable.
Scribe correction "complicated language or programmatic"
<Luc> precede_by is temporal, wasTriggeredBy is causal
<pgroth> what should we do next?
Yolanda: How should we precede
with the discussion of the mapping?
... I was hoping for a more detailed discussion in the calls which would feed into a report.
... Was one example enough (Provenir)?
<Luc> Did we encounter concepts we could not map to OPM?
[Paul recapped suggestions from Luc]
Yolanda: Perhaps we could record some of these Qs and As on the wiki
Kai: Perhaps we need to clarify
our purpose for the mapping. I agree we should collect some
information for our reasoning. I am interested in vocabularies
and some general information about how they are related so
people can choose between them.
... This can be the starting point.
<ssahoo2> +1 for recording the Q and A on wiki
Kai: More would probably be out of scope.
Jose: Geography map - coverage by each vocabulary would be useful.
Luc: We have to pragmatic here.
It is 11 June. Group finishes in September. We could use all
time on vocabulary mapping. We want to do a good job
... Mapping should inform the technology survey we are going to do.
<Jose_> Exactly! That's what I meant
<ssahoo2> The wiki has a list of terms from other provenance vocabularies that are not modeled in OPM
Luc: Happy to assist with review
<smiles> * zakim, unmute me
<smiles> sorry i must have a microphone problem
Yolanda: We want a coherent
report and coherent set of products.
... We want mappings and core terminology to be tied to the 3 scenarios we have.
<smiles> Just wanted to say that it would be helpful to give a few specific examples for concepts in each vocabulary, so that the overlaps are clear, e.g. OPM artifacts include "file", "statue"; data in provenir includes "file", "statue"
Yolanda: We want to have a good sense of commonalities and themes or provenance. Keep the scenarios in mind to define what we need.
<smiles> * zakim, mute me
<smiles> yes, sorry - microphone problems
Yolanda: Suggest we have an
official call on this effort at a different time. Weekly for
the next 3 or 4 weeks to wrap this up? Would that be agreeable?
e.g. 11 am Thursdays Boston time
... I will set up the bridge for these calls.
<Luc> can I say that the table is becoming very big and we can't print it?
Satya: We need someone from PML
to help us in defining the mappings.
... SWAN has been reviewed
Yolanda: 9 vocabularies. Try 3 per week.
<Luc> Some of us are at IPAW
Yolanda: Who will prepare for
discussion next week?
... Maybe start the following Thursday?
<Jose_> following Thursday better, yes
... Thank you. This was very productive. Sometimes we need to discuss the process.
... Will you finish the scribing?
<YolandaGil_> trackbot, end telcon
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Christine Inferring Scribes: Christine WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. Default Present: Yolanda, +1.619.524.aaaa, +1.937.775.aabb, +30281039aacc, +1.937.775.aadd, +1.518.608.aaee, [IPcaller], kai?, Dgarijo?, +49.302.093.aaff, +49.356.7.aagg, jcheney, +44.238.059.aahh, olaf, smiles, Irini, YolandaGil_ Present: Yolanda +1.619.524.aaaa +1.937.775.aabb +30281039aacc +1.937.775.aadd +1.518.608.aaee [IPcaller] kai? Dgarijo? +49.302.093.aaff +49.356.7.aagg jcheney +44.238.059.aahh olaf smiles Irini YolandaGil_ WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 11 Jun 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/11-prov-xg-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]