14 Oct 2010


See also: IRC log


Jeff Waters & Don McGarry
Jeff Waters


<scribe> Scribe: Jeff Waters

<scribe> ScribeNick:jeffw

jeffw: Hi, Piotr, Eva, Marion

<eblomqvi> hi, I just called in... but I am in a room with a lot of people, so I will be quiet today :-) I'll listen and comment here if I want to say something

<eblomqvi> I'm at a conference :-)

<eblomqvi> WOP paper: accepted and final version submitted

<piotr_nowara> here's the link for a browseable version of my ontology: https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BzXIRCEQZ_BGZTQ0ZGEzZGMtYzMyZC00OWFhLWIzMjctZmE4ZmJmODAwNTdi&hl=en&authkey=CIP8rBU

Paper Submission and Ontology Model Problem Submissions

<eblomqvi> For WOP: we have to present the paper as a poster - I can draft it but then I would like your comments/ideas

<piotr_nowara> I'll put it on a web in the nearest future

jeffw: So the question is whether there is any particular issues we need to address

<eblomqvi> For teh problem proposals we are just waiting for the voting, and let's hope ours will be selected

<eblomqvi> no result yet

<eblomqvi> It will be available in the ceur-ws.org proceedings series, that is publicly available

<eblomqvi> I think so

<eblomqvi> but I can send to Piotr

<eblomqvi> ok, thanks Marion

jeffw: ok, Marion will send Piotr a copy of the paper so he can see it and review

<piotr_nowara> thank you!

<piotr_nowara> There's a link to mind-map(jpg file) summorizing my effort on criterion pattern: https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BzXIRCEQZ_BGMjFhNzc1ZjYtODQwMy00MDFkLWJmZjAtZTVhNzhmZDAyY2Jl&hl=en

Piotr's Model of Criteria utilizing Situation Pattern

<eblomqvi> I don't know if all of you saw my comments to Piotr (sent an hour ago)? I had some problems opening the ontologies/patterns in my tool... did you have the same problems?

<piotr_nowara> I use Protege 4.1 beta - maybe it's incompatible with other browser?

<eblomqvi> hmm, it seems there are some problems yes, I'll try to download Protege later then

@piotr_nowara: Criteria may be represented by situation patterns and it can be accompanied with requirement etc. Conclusion from last meeting a kind of modularization of criteria with different granularity could be created.

@piotr_nowara: So I stuck to that idea, my ontology you can see in the links that I've posted, it contains two patterns basic criteria and the simple ontology to cover most common use cases.

@piotr_nowara: So extension of basic requirements would be for more sophisticated use cases. I'd like to ask, sometime ago someone asked me for an ontology describing industry standards cause a domain expert wanted to provide a client with an automated tool to deploy the standard.

@piotr_nowara: The industry standard is complicated, so the semantic tool would help customer to align their business to the standard. The little example presented in the criterion example file contains a requirement from our original standard.

@piotr_nowara: So I'm trying to represent more components of the standard to vet my model. I tried to analyze the problem of criteria more deeply and more issues came out. Some domain specific criteria, like for starting an action, action purpose, etc.

@piotr_nowara: So if you would like to learn more about my idea of domain-related patterns you could check out the file I've shared with you, which contains a prototype pattern for describing actions.

@piotr_nowara: I would be interested in your feedback for what is right or wrong, someone could double-check me, my English might be misleading, so that's it for now.

<eblomqvi> thanks Piotr, I'll have a detailed look later as well, and give you more comments on the model!

jeffw: (summarized the model example)
... I found it interesting and I will include my little summary and comments a bit later in the notes when I'm not talking and trying to type notes at the same time

@piotr_nowara: Regarding metrics that supply ordering, we may just need to add more components to the situation to specify a preference for lower cost for purchasing a computer or whatever

@piotr_nowara: My criteria may work better for predefined requirements

<eblomqvi> I am listening, it is interesting! No, I think it is too long to write here... I'll write an e-mail

jeffw: So I could use what you've done to represent a "Process", but …. I'll comment more later down below

@piotr_nowara: my goal was to adopt some original criteria pattern for not only describing decision-making but for other purposes, so it was a good thing to do to expand the pattern and with some more percent criteria, and there may be many methods that are satisfying the general requirement and it could probably expand this knowledge base of this model with some specific methodologies

@piotr_nowara: and use them as a basis ...

marion_: I'm not sure which pattern you were talking about, but how do you represent icons and gestures in an ontology and connect icons to gestures
... this becomes important in general for linking components and reuse it as an agreed upon standard
... breaking components of patterns, and specializations of those patterns, and kind of an expansion of what we've we're doing now

jeffw: Piotr, we do need to consider the intellectual property rights of what you are "contributing" to the incubator, I will send you something

<eblomqvi> thanks you! bye

@piotr_nowara: I would be happy to consider signing a form to ensure my participation is consistent with the intellectual property rights, since my company is not now supporting my work in this area.

jeffw: Ok, I will find out what is needed and send you something via email. Thanks.
... Ok, we've run out of time, thanks everyone for participating. We can proceed to consider Piotr's model and Eva's contributions in light of our use cases and add to the modeling effort for discussion over e-mail and at our next meeting.
... (Here's my summary of the Piotr's model that I didn't have the ability to type earlier) The example has an "Action" (a1) that is to perform a software module check. The process or methods for executing this action include three criteria:
... (c1) checking the software through review; (c2) checking through simulation; and (c3) checking through testing. These criteria are "ActionMethodologyCriterion" where are a subclass of Criterion which is a subclass of Situation.
... Each criterion has a property that it "isCriterionOf" the action (a1). There are also "ActionSuccessCriterion" including (c4) determining that the intended function is correctly executed and (c5) determining that unintended functions are not executed.
... If anyone were to ask "says who?" about these criterion, we would point to the "Requirement" (req_13_6_4_2) which comes from an industry standard which says that "Each application software module should be checked through review, simulation and testing techniques to determine that the intended function is correctly executed and unintended functions are not executed."
... This requirement, req_13_6_4_2, has properties that it "setsCriterion" for each of the criteria (c1 through c5) and also that it "hasValidityFor" the action (a1).
... The "Requirement" class is a subclass of "CriterionSetter" which doesn't refer to a person, but rather the industry standard or other statement from which the criteria are derived.
... Anyway, that's a summary of how the criteria are tied to the action and the requirement is tied to the action and the criteria. The situation pattern is used to group the criteria and provide the mechanism for adding other components as needed.
... The situation pattern provides a concrete realization of what otherwise would be an implicit relationship of these various components.
... The pattern made me think of how I could use it with perhaps weights and numerical quantities to do both filtering (yes/no, boolean type determination of whether an option meets a criterion) but also for ordering the options that remain because perhaps some options meet the criteria better than others.
... Also the model made me think about how if the criteria are highly determined, that the "choice" is removed and the description of the criteria are similar to a description of steps in a pre-defined Process.
... I will consider this more and discuss over e-mail and prepare some contributions to add to the discussion for next meeting.

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2010/10/14 15:15:46 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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: Jeff Waters
Found ScribeNick: jeffw

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: ScribeNick eblomqvi jeffw marion marion_ marion__ piotr_nowara
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_15_Agenda
Got date from IRC log name: 14 Oct 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/10/14-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]