<trackbot> Date: 12 November 2010

Yolanda: Discussing report. Needs to go into official format.

Paul: Report would benefit from an overall introduction.

[Discussion of structure of report]

Yolanda: Need to explain the need for provenance at the beginning.

Paulo: Final report needs to be consistent with text in wiki.

Yolanda: The information does not have to be presented in the same way. Want a structure that is helpful for people new to provenance.
... Christine volunteered to edit the final report. In doing this she can also provide the perspective of a reader new to provenance.

Paul: Suggest move paragraphs re statistics in terms on dimensions in provencance dimensions in the importance of provenance

Yolanda: We might be missing use cases of provenance so a bit worried about having statistics. The most useful statistic is that they highlight a variety of things.

Paulo: Why are we only focusing on the 3 use cases?

Yolanda: Because they have coverage over the dimensions and the use cases - to exemplify the issues.

<jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/State_of_the_Art_Report is done

Jim: State of the Art Report is now done.
... If just a list Paul suggested just point to wiki page. Do we expand more?

<ssahoo2> I agree - brief description of vocabularies is good

<jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Final_Report_Draft#Relevant_technologies

<DGarijo> +q

<ssahoo2> I think it is redundant to certain extent

<ssahoo2> I think removing the repeated vocabularies will be helpful

<pgroth> agree

<smiles> yes

[? Re relevant technologies - list in an appendix]

[Events related to provenance - important to show that there is a lot of activity but perhaps move to an appendix]

<DGarijo> -q

Yolanda: Suggest listing recurring series

<ssahoo2> agree

Yolanda: Might merge with literature survey

<pgroth> looks good

[Consensus - provenance voculabury is in the right section]

Jim: Current technology discussion - longer or shorter?

Yolanda: Concern - here we only cite a few - but have mentioned lots of references elsewhere
... perhaps put a pointer and say it is not an exhaustive list (qualifier)

Paul; Could remove inline references because just examples and reference elsewhere

Paul: I don't think the big table is particularly useful in this report.

<DGarijo> don't remove it, move it to the bibliography page.

<pgroth> yes

<DGarijo> great

Simon: Roadmap - different sections written by different authors
... Is there something people particularly want to see in this section?

Yolanda: Recommendations - are actually high-level, not comprehensive, most pressing ones we extracted - in short-term/long-term priority section - could say see these recurring themes ...core set of concepts

<pgroth> So you should introduce the recommendations

<pgroth> :-)

The group analysed the scenarios and looking at the scenarios - were some themes recurring and important - following 3 very important that provenance should address

<pgroth> yeah akk!

<pgroth> :-

<pgroth> :-)

<pgroth> eliminate all C-Attr

<pgroth> :-)

<SamCoppens> ok

Yolanda: Provenance in Web Architecture - could add something that Olaf drafted
... Only a couple of telecons left. How to most effectively draft a charter?
... Temporal constraint to finish by 30 November 2010.

<pgroth> +q

Paul: Suggest upload draft on the wiki and people provide comments there.

<DGarijo> +1 to the third idea. It is allways better start from something rather than start a new charter.

<ssahoo2> I think an interactive version of the Luc+Paul charter with deadline for putting in all comments and then have a telcon to discuss the comments would be helpful

Yolanda: Yes, follow that approach

<YolandaGil> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Proposal_for_a_Working_Group_on_Provenance

Paulo: Better to have a more collectively drafted document.

Yolanda: Understand that Paul is asking us to suggest changes via the wiki.
... Maybe a call next week might be useful - to converge faster

Paul: Think collectively rewriting document is faster.

<pgroth> amen, specifics are good

<pgroth> sure

<pgroth> cool

<YolandaGil> Paulo will work on sending out a list of concrete issues that would be good to change in the charter put forward by Luc and Paul, perhaps having Jim's help

<YolandaGil> We expect that many items in this list will be agreable, but will also be better able to identify what needs to be further discussed.

<YolandaGil> Paulo will circulate this list by early next week so we can discuss by email and if needed have a telecon before the weekly group's telecon next Friday.

<YolandaGil> We need to do as much work as possible since we have 2 weeks left.

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.


WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: DGarijo Jim Paul Paulo SamCoppens Simon Yolanda YolandaGil jcheney joined pgroth prov-xg smiles ssahoo2 trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 12 Nov 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/11/12-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