See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: jeffw
<scribe> scribenick: jeffw
jeffw: Welcome to the 13th meeting of the Decision Incubator. We are in the midst of modeling efforts to develop the decision format. Eva has done a very nice job applying patterns to develop the "core" components of a decision and we received some nice feedback this week from Piotr Nowara raising some good questions and supportive discussion. One of the main topics for our meeting today is to have Piotr on the line and with Eva, I'd like to suggest
the discussion. I'd like to get educated on the issues and how they impact our thinking.
jeffw: Hi Piotr, will you be dialing in?
<piotr_nowara> hello! sorry for being late. I'll join you in brief second
jeffw: No problem
<piotr_nowara> I got some tewchnical problems
jeffw: any students who will join us at your university Eva?
eblomqvi: perhaps in the spring, there is a masters program, so there may be some students at the appropriate level to assist with us assuming we can match interests
jeffw: I'm kind of excited about
our progress, we have some good use cases, we've identified
patterns addressing those and the major components of the
... Our paper provides a good summary of our goals, our progress and begins to lay a roadmap for where we are headed.
... So if we list out our patterns, it begins to be a matter of implementation and assigning who wants to work on what and then getting some implementations and integrating
... eva, I've been busy, sorry, have you had any updates to your work
eblomqvi: I did update some of
the core component portions of the wiki based on the discussion
with Piotr, and I intended to have some more examples, so some
... new versions of the existing components that were there and I updated the changes only listing the issues from last meeting and Piotr's comments
jeffw: ok, that's great, since Piotr may be struggling to connect, can you educate me on the one or two major issues and any resolution?
eblomqvi: there is a page listing the issues
eblomqvi: I kept the old files, I
just renamed the files "_Old", so you can see those if you
want, there is a list of the issues on the page
... description of the options versus realization of the options concept, we decided last time that realization may not be the best way to model this but rather the description
... then this was also one of the things Piotr remarked on when he provided his comments, so he was agreeing with our discussion that there might be a better way to model
... I changed the model and used the "description" pattern, more about abstract descriptions of concepts, now of course this is now up for discussion
... Piotr remarked this may be too much meta-modeling, and I agree that the description pattern it is usually used with "situation" and it appears at the meta level
... so perhaps this can interpreted as too abstract, so perhaps just forgetting this pattern, since the pattern is designed to help, explain something, to provide a higher level model
... if it's more of a confusion, if too abstract, then I agree with Piotr, that understanding with users is important, so perhaps we don't import this pattern, altough we may be following this same type of description
... So we could start to model some examples in meantime and decide if we need the pattern or not, so perhaps Piotr has comments on this as well
... The second issue was about criteria. Again, this is indicated more about choice of modeling, how do we model this, before I had modeled as an abstract concept
... but you can do it as an actual situation, it doesn't have so many abstract components, you need to say these critera are for these options, more on the level of modeling a dialog
... in the ontology the criteria is an abstract class of concept and that is what Pitor was arguing against, the criteria connects some values to the options, so for me it was an abstract concept to connect, subclass of concept
... Piotr was arguing it is a concrete situation where we are applying these values, so he was arguing that the criteria was a kind of situation, but we agreed on the properties that the criteria ...
... let's get Piotr's thoughts on this since he's on the line now
piotr_nowara: regarding the
options v. descriptons seems to make sense, but the descripton
pattern appears to be better to be more for meta-modeling, so
the question is should the options be treated abstractly?
... may be useful for different contexts of similar options, but given the use cases we have now, perhaps it could be more concrete
eblomqvi: Yes, I agree we shouldn't just add the pattern, it should be useful in some way, so perhaps the description pattern isn't appropriate, so I think you have a good point
jeffw: Is there a pattern here?
piotr_nowara: I'm not sure one exists
eblomqvi: I think the situation
pattern may fit, we are working sometimes top-down and
sometimes bottom-up, so if we don't find something, when we
model some real data or decisions we'll see if we need
... No, not the situation pattern, it doesn't really matter if we don't have a pattern at this moment, let's just leave it for now,
jeffw: so the consensus is let's just model some things, I do feel there is an implicit pattern there but it's maybe the one we're producing
eblomqvi: yes, but the abstract description of the option, is the one which may not need a pattern
piotr_nowara: criteria as a
subclass of the concept is the second issue, criteria is a kind
of measure and maybe the situation pattern applies
... I started on a criterion pattern and I need a model to determine how criteria are determined by something by like proposals
eblomqvi: piotr and I agreed on this and I wil make some updates on the model and if you have some example or model of what you are doing, I would like to see it and we can discuss it
piotr_nowara: when I succeed in my task of modeling the criteria, then I will share
jeffw: how does the situation pattern match the criteria need?
eblomqvi: you can view it as you
apply this term onto this option for this particular decision,
so it can be viewed as a situation where you have applied a
criteria parameter to some options
... yes, we are talking about applying the criteria as opposed to what is the criteria when we talk about applying the situation pattern
<piotr_nowara> I got disconnected... I'll try to dial in again
jeffw: were there any other
issues discussed? (ok, sorry we lost you Piotr, I think we lost
Eva as well since here battery was dying)
... We lost Eva on chat as well. Piotr do you want to continue our discussion on chat or if not, we can end our telecon here
... Thanks, Eva and Piotr, for participating and all the great discussion and work on bringing our decision model to life.
... I'll go ahead and summarize thoughts on a couple other topics quickly, just to get them in the notes.
<piotr_nowara> Thank you! And once again: sorry for being late...
jeffw: As a side note, I
mentioned previously that I'd like to use some of our
documentation and some slightly rewritten portions of our
recently submitted paper to fill in the final report outline
that we have on the front page of our wiki.
... So that's a task for me and hopefully I will make some progress on that and we can discuss next time.
<eblomqvi> sorry, I lost the connection... I try to call again, even if just to say bye... I found a power plug :-)
jeffw: Hi, Eva, welcome back. I was just inquiring whether you and Piotr wanted to continue the discussion on chat.
<eblomqvi> sure, we could to that
jeffw: But I didn't see a
response from Piotr, so he may be having technical difficulties
or had to depart.
... So I went on to summarize a few thoughts on other topics
<eblomqvi> ok, should I call in again?
jeffw: One thing I wanted to note is if there any other major issues that you and Piotr discussed, but why don't we say given we don't have much time left on the call, that they are mentioned on the wiki page you pasted in earlier
<eblomqvi> yes, that's true, they are there
jeffw: Since we only have 5 minutes left, I'd say we can end the telecon here so you don't have to worry about getting things plugged in
<eblomqvi> and there were not any other major issues, just smal ones
jeffw: ok, great, again, thanks for all the excellent work, on the paper, on the models, on the discussion.
<eblomqvi> thank you!
<piotr_nowara> The last issue I wanted to discuss today was if need Concept class at all?
jeffw: We'll pick it up next time and I will bring some things to the table as well
<eblomqvi> yes, and we can continue the discussion via e-mail also! as we did recently
<eblomqvi> and then update the wiki accordingly
<piotr_nowara> that's the good idea!
<piotr_nowara> I'll stay in touch with you
<eblomqvi> do that! I look forward to the continued discussion
jeffw: ok, and Piotr, we can add
our combined thoughts and documenting on the wiki is easier for
people to track I think after our email discussions
... Thanks to both of you and we'll continue discussions on email and add to the wiki.
... Our time is up. Take care!
<eblomqvi> thanks! bye for now
jeffw: Here is just a note added
to our minutes as an overview of our decision components and
the potential patterns implied.
... Regarding the list of patterns, I realize that the patterns are derived from the use cases so these need to go hand-in-hand;
... however, we have some use cases and have suggested some patterns. Once patterns are identified, it is time to reuse previous implementations (from designontologypatterns.org) or to develop the implementation, then specialize as needed to address the use case.
One way to get a handle on the workload is to list out these patterns and begin to assign them to folks for reuse and specialization. We have the beginning list of patterns on our wiki at http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/decision/wiki/Final_Report_Decision_Components_And_Patterns.
On this wiki page, we mention the patterns which are implied by the basic components of the decision, which are (1) Question (Statement with Variable pattern); (2) Options (Filter and Aggregation/List patterns);
(3) Criteria and As (Normalizer, Weighting, Aggregation/List patterns); (4) Assessment (OrderedList pattern) which is the application of the Criteria to the Options; and (5) Choosing the Answer (Selection pattern)
jeffw: These are just suggested
components and potential patterns, but I like the idea of using
this page to document our components and the patterns that we
use as an overview and quick reference.
... This also could be a way to help manage design work from implementation work if we have people interested in helping at different levels of experience with the ontology development.
... Also this overview might help us to get a handle on how much work is left and help to schedule out the work given the time remaining. Of course, just documenting the use cases, the required decision components, and the applicable patterns is great progress as well.
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) Found Scribe: jeffw Inferring ScribeNick: jeffw Found ScribeNick: jeffw WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: eblomqvi jeffw piotr_nowara scribenick You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/decision/wiki/Decision_Mtg_13_Agenda Got date from IRC log name: 16 Sep 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/09/16-decision-xg-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]