14:42:52 RRSAgent has joined #prov 14:42:52 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/30-prov-irc 14:42:54 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:42:54 Zakim has joined #prov 14:42:56 Zakim, this will be 14:42:56 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:42:57 Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 14:42:57 Date: 30 June 2011 14:43:02 Zakim, this will be PROV 14:43:02 ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 17 minutes 14:43:15 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.30 14:43:24 Chair: Luc Moreau 14:43:29 Scribe: Paolo Missier 14:43:53 rrsagent, make logs public 14:43:55 Regrets: Daniel Garijo, Simon Miles, Yogesh Simmhan, James Cheney, Simon Dobson, Graham Klyne 14:44:15 TOPIC: Admin 14:55:27 zakim, who is here? 14:55:27 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has not yet started, Luc 14:55:27 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Luc, stain, sandro, trackbot 14:56:35 jun has joined #prov 14:56:39 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 14:56:46 +??P4 14:56:48 -??P4 14:56:50 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended 14:56:50 Attendees were 14:57:16 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 14:57:23 +??P4 14:57:28 hmmm 14:57:33 I'm the first participant?? 14:57:37 +Luc 14:57:40 hi stain 14:57:50 pgroth has joined #prov 14:57:50 zakim, +??P4 is me 14:57:50 sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named '+??P4' 14:58:04 +[Microsoft] 14:58:08 trackbot, start telcon 14:58:10 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:58:11 zakim, +??P4 is me 14:58:11 sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named '+??P4' 14:58:12 Zakim, this will be 14:58:12 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:58:13 Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 14:58:13 Date: 30 June 2011 14:58:24 Zakim, who is on the call? 14:58:24 On the phone I see ??P4, Luc, [Microsoft] 14:58:38 Zakim: ??P4 is me 14:58:42 paolo has joined #prov 14:58:42 jorn has joined #prov 14:58:45 Zakim, who is on the call? 14:58:45 On the phone I see ??P4, Luc, [Microsoft] 14:59:14 SamCoppens has joined #prov 14:59:15 Zakim, [Microsoft] is me 14:59:16 +pgroth; got it 14:59:34 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-23-06 is not there 14:59:41 +??P18 14:59:49 Lena has joined #prov 14:59:52 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.30 15:00:07 zednik has joined #prov 15:00:16 zakim, who is here? 15:00:16 On the phone I see ??P4, Luc, pgroth, ??P18 15:00:20 On IRC I see zednik, Lena, SamCoppens, jorn, paolo, pgroth, jun, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, stain, sandro, trackbot 15:00:28 + +1.646.389.aaaa 15:00:30 +??P26 15:00:36 + +1.832.386.aabb 15:00:38 zakim, ??P26 is me 15:00:39 Zakim, ??P4 is me 15:00:40 +paolo; got it 15:00:44 +stain; got it 15:01:00 +??P22 15:01:06 +??P33 15:01:15 +SamCoppens 15:01:16 tfrancart has joined #prov 15:01:30 zakim, ??p18 is me 15:01:30 +jorn; got it 15:02:20 - +1.646.389.aaaa 15:02:39 PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of 23 Jun telecon 15:02:42 StephenCresswell has joined #prov 15:02:45 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-23-06 15:02:58 404 15:03:02 URL does not work 15:03:05 +1 15:03:09 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-23 is correct 15:03:13 +[ISI] 15:03:14 \me it's really echoy or is that me 15:03:22 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-23 15:03:37 the secodn link is fine 15:03:38 + +1.518.633.aacc 15:03:53 +1 15:03:57 +1 15:03:57 +1 15:03:59 +1 15:04:00 +! 15:04:02 +1 15:04:04 s/secodn/second/ 15:04:07 +1 15:04:11 +1 15:04:14 0 - not had a chance to read it :) 15:04:26 YolandaGil has joined #prov 15:04:32 +??P51 15:04:36 +??P24 15:04:44 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open 15:04:44 dcorsar has joined #prov 15:04:48 zakim, please mute me 15:04:48 jorn should now be muted 15:04:51 + +1.650.386.aadd - is perhaps ralphtq? 15:04:51 item: review open actions 15:04:54 zakim, ??P24 is me 15:04:55 +jun; got it 15:05:10 ralphtq has joined #prov 15:05:20 Simon will report in the context of the PQA TF 15:05:31 + +1.509.375.aaee 15:05:47 TOPIC: F2F Plan 15:05:51 please mute 15:05:55 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F1Timetable 15:05:58 zakim, who is talking? 15:06:09 jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: stain (54%), Luc (63%), SamCoppens (9%), ??P51 (57%) 15:06:24 Luc: outline for the meeting has been drafted: 8 sessions, TF allocated to the sessions 15:06:51 Luc: 4 sessions to model, 2 to PAQ Tf, 1 to connection and implementation 15:07:11 content of sessions unspecified, to provide max flexibility 15:07:19 + +1.216.368.aaff 15:07:23 agenda to be posted 1 day prior to meeting 15:07:36 satya has joined #prov 15:07:54 q+ 15:07:55 q? 15:08:09 TOPIC: Connection TF Plan to F2F1 15:08:14 q- 15:08:32 q? 15:09:25 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Connection_Proposal 15:09:43 Eric: happy with current proposals 15:09:50 q? 15:09:54 more contributions welcome 15:10:16 Yolanda suggests to categorize contributions 15:10:23 Eric: will be at meeting 15:10:28 q? 15:10:39 TOPIC: Implementation and Test Cases TF Plan to F2F1 15:10:55 q? 15:11:14 Elena: 32 entries, plan is to consolidate 15:11:23 and compile them in terms of importance 15:11:29 + +1.217.417.aagg 15:11:36 q+ 15:11:42 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Unit_Test_Proposal 15:11:54 ack paolo 15:11:57 q? 15:13:00 q? 15:13:24 +q 15:13:27 Elena: institutions vary geographically and by sector. Stats will be provided 15:13:34 ack pgroth 15:13:59 Paul: wiki should record where the survey was sent -- which lists. 15:14:16 I distributed it to 3 of our partners/clients 15:14:39 -jorn 15:14:40 it's already done 15:14:51 Luc: can we post the form itself on the wiki, so we don't depend on googledocs 15:14:58 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Implementation_and_Test_Cases_Task_Force 15:15:01 +??P17 15:15:39 I see it 15:15:40 zakim, who is here? 15:15:40 On the phone I see stain, Luc, pgroth, paolo, +1.832.386.aabb, ??P22, ??P33, SamCoppens, [ISI], +1.518.633.aacc, ??P51, jun, ralphtq?, +1.509.375.aaee, +1.216.368.aaff, 15:15:43 ... +1.217.417.aagg, ??P17 15:15:45 On IRC I see satya, ralphtq, dcorsar, YolandaGil, StephenCresswell, tfrancart, zednik, Lena, SamCoppens, jorn, paolo, pgroth, jun, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, stain, sandro, trackbot 15:16:08 Questionnaire: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Implementation_and_Test_Cases_Task_Force#W3C_Implementation_Stakeholder_Questionnaire 15:16:09 Elena, Stephen will attend F2F remotely 15:16:16 q+ 15:17:02 q? 15:17:19 TOPIC: Access and Query TF Plan to F2F1 15:17:20 stain? 15:17:21 q- 15:17:26 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Access_and_Query_Proposal 15:17:27 s/Stephen/Stephan/g 15:17:30 (sorry about that) 15:17:31 Simon's report: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0477.html 15:17:40 I just wanted to say something about if we will have WebEx or something from the meeting to get a videolink 15:18:02 q? 15:18:14 Simon not in the call, report posted (see link) 15:18:18 q? 15:18:27 no comments from group 15:18:37 Simon, Yogesh will both be at F2F 15:18:39 TOPIC: Model TF Plan to F2F1 15:19:23 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts 15:19:31 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Model_Proposal 15:20:02 Scribe: Satya Sahoo 15:20:37 Paolo: Consolidated the discussion about provenance concepts into one page (link posted by Jun) 15:21:09 Paolo: All members of the TF contributed to the consolidation process 15:22:24 Paolo: the TF did not add to the definition of a concept. Each provenance concept has three sections: a consolidated definition, examples from the Data Journalism example, and outstanding issues related to the provenance concept 15:22:56 q? 15:23:02 Paolo: Goal of this work is to present an unified view of the provenance concepts for further discussions during the F2F 15:23:15 +q 15:23:20 +q 15:23:21 ack pgroth 15:23:50 q? 15:24:01 Paul: When will TF decide to freeze the wiki page with consolidated provenance concepts 15:24:44 Paolo: The wiki page is relatively stable, currently minor changes are being made 15:24:44 ack ralphtq 15:25:06 q? 15:25:25 http://www.linkedmodel.org/doc/voag/1.0/ 15:25:28 you just do it 15:25:30 :-) 15:25:54 ralphtq: volunteers to join the TF 15:25:56 model TF 15:26:00 just edit http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceTaskForces 15:26:10 respond to the mailing list:) 15:26:14 Ralph: How to join to the Model TF, have done previous work in modeling provenance issues 15:26:22 q+ 15:27:31 Scribe: Paolo Missier 15:27:42 q? 15:27:58 ack pgroth 15:28:08 Ralph: will not be at F2F, but will contribute his past work to the TF 15:28:33 Luc: suggests Ralph to add his references to the Connection TF 15:29:07 q? 15:29:10 Luc: 17 concepts were listed in the charter, 8 of those have been addressed in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts 15:29:10 q+ 15:29:12 q+ 15:29:17 what should be done about the others? 15:29:19 ack satya 15:29:33 Satya: pick up new concepts on only after the F2F 15:29:37 q- (ack satya) 15:29:43 ack stain 15:29:49 q? 15:30:01 Stian: agrees with Satya. We've got enough for the F2F 15:30:04 q+ 15:30:10 ack paolo 15:30:25 -??P17 15:30:36 q? 15:30:42 Paolo: Discussion in F2F will bring out new concepts that should be taken up next by Wg 15:30:44 +??P17 15:30:52 zakim, ??p17 is me 15:30:52 +jorn; got it 15:31:02 q? 15:31:11 Luc: no further defs will be added to the current list before the F2F 15:31:28 q? 15:31:34 TOPIC: Model Task Force 15:31:34 Luc: acknowledges the hard work of the Model TF! :-) 15:32:19 Luc: some terms still require consensus, it would help to make progress today 15:32:29 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0460.html 15:33:02 Luc: the idea is that PIL is an /assertion language/ 15:33:22 q? 15:33:25 idea socialized on the list but little feedback so far 15:33:32 q? 15:34:05 Jim Myers: that's fine, but what does that do for us? 15:34:51 Luc: recurrent theme is that there are "asserters" in our definitions. So we may as well make it explicit upfront 15:35:24 Jim: the idea of multiple witnesses that we agree on is aligned with this, so as a convenience that's fine 15:35:27 q+ 15:35:30 q+ 15:35:34 q? 15:35:37 ack satya 15:36:13 Satya: to follow up: if we see PIL in the RDF context, it follows naturally 15:36:23 stating the obvious isn't a bad thing ;-) 15:36:30 Luc: yes, but for a different serialization this may be less obvious 15:36:34 q+ 15:36:34 ok 15:37:01 Thomas: shouldn't we also define rules (inference) that come with assertions? 15:37:39 Luc: this idea has been circulated, we currently are agnostic regarding the types of assertions -- rules may well be included 15:37:43 @Thomas: Inference will require us to define the formal semantics of the PIL first 15:37:49 ack tfrancart 15:38:32 q+ 15:38:33 q? 15:39:25 ack paolo 15:39:52 ack satya 15:40:22 Satya: inference is a mechanism to produce new assertions, note that the Rule exchange language is standard with W3C 15:40:41 q? 15:40:42 +q 15:40:44 Satya: what is the rule language? we need a formal semantics for PIL before we can move on to rules 15:41:10 - +1.217.417.aagg 15:41:18 Ralph: can we have a reference to PIL? how about refutation, conjecture in addition to asertion 15:41:27 s/asertion/assertion 15:41:29 W3C Rule Interchange Format recommendation: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group 15:41:40 ack ralphtq 15:41:44 Luc: PIL is what we are defining. it's a codename 15:42:04 Luc: conjecture, refutation not part of charter but may well be discussed 15:42:05 q? 15:42:07 q+ 15:42:14 PROPOSED: PIL is an assertion language, which allows asserters to make assertions about stuffs and activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each other. 15:42:28 q- 15:42:29 +1 15:42:30 +1 15:42:32 +1 15:42:32 +1 15:42:35 +1 15:42:37 +1 15:42:42 +1 15:42:43 +1 15:42:44 +1 15:43:03 ACCEPTED: PIL is an assertion language, which allows asserters to make assertions about stuffs and activities in the real world (as they view it) and how they influence each other. 15:43:24 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0459.html 15:43:38 Luc: on the concept of Derivation 15:44:00 q? 15:44:05 Luc: any major objection to the proposal? (see link) 15:44:13 q? 15:44:29 PROPOSED: Derivation represents how stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A. 15:44:39 +1 15:44:44 +1 15:44:46 0 15:44:51 +1 15:44:53 +1 15:44:57 +1 15:45:01 q+ 15:45:02 +q 15:45:09 +1 15:45:11 q? 15:46:11 -jorn 15:46:12 q+ 15:46:26 +??P17 15:46:31 ack paolo 15:47:05 Stephan: just looked at proposal. is Derivation is a relation or a thing? 15:47:14 @Stephan - I agree, derivation is a property 15:47:22 it ought to be a relation 15:48:01 it sounds like a relation to me.. but which could also have deeper details (such as a link to a process execution) 15:48:06 q? 15:48:20 Luc: up for discussion at F2F. Others raised the issue 15:48:36 i guess it's just english 15:48:36 Stephan: are we also saying /how/ something was derived? 15:48:48 @Stephan: The how part is not covered in derivation (my POV) 15:49:16 the transformation of stuff from? 15:49:43 PROPOSED: Derivation expresses that some stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A. 15:49:53 ack zednik 15:50:22 Ralph: derivation is a transformation, but a reified relationship 15:50:36 one could always reificate more information onto the derivation statement, couldn't one? 15:50:58 Ralph: affected by: opens up derivation in a bigger notion, not sure about the term "affect" 15:51:46 Luc: first sentence about high level idea of what Derivation is, clearly it's not formal 15:52:22 ack 15:52:23 What if we add "In PIL, a thing B is..." 15:52:23 Luc: second part triesd to explain what Derviation means wrt the constructs of the language. Says how Derivation can influence some properties 15:52:24 q? 15:52:29 ack ralphtq 15:52:48 +1 15:52:56 +1 15:53:02 +1 15:53:05 +1 15:53:15 +1 15:53:34 +0 (undecided, I want to see in a use case example) 15:53:39 +1 15:53:46 0 15:53:55 0 : not sure why it refers only to "invariant properties" ? 15:53:56 Paul: reminder; 0 abstain , -1 for reject, +1 for accept 15:53:57 ACCEPTED: Derivation expresses that some stuff is transformed from, created from, or affected by other stuff. A thing B is derived from a thing A if the values of some invariant properties of B are at least partially determined by the values of some invariant properties of A. 15:54:06 q+ 15:54:18 q? 15:54:52 jorn has left #prov 15:55:00 jorn has joined #prov 15:55:48 q? 15:55:52 ack paolo 15:56:41 q? 15:57:08 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0439.html 15:57:10 Luc: need to have some education activity to make sure all the basic concepts are clear, including thing, invariant properties, etc. 15:57:37 [sorry I missed Luc's sentences] 15:57:54 PROPOSED: An agent is an active thing. It may be linked to a process execution, for example, by controlling it. Examples of agent include person, organization, and software agent. 15:58:08 +q 15:58:11 q? 15:58:43 q+ 15:58:58 q? 15:59:02 ack ralphtq 15:59:04 q? 15:59:08 In pil: "things" represent real-world stuffs and have properties modeling aspects of stuff states 15:59:37 Ralph: Many ontologies use the term "party" instead of agent 15:59:46 q? 15:59:50 ack paolo 15:59:55 instead of "Thing" not "Agent" 15:59:59 Ralph: Can we replace "thing" with "party" in the def? 15:59:59 PROPOSED: An agent is an active thing. It may be linked to a process execution, for example, by controlling it. Examples of agent include person, organization, and software agent. 16:00:33 Luc: "thing" is used in the technical sense of PIL 16:00:45 Satya: is linking an Agent to a process optional? 16:00:58 q+ 16:00:58 Luc: def. is agnostic about it 16:01:37 -paolo 16:01:45 -[ISI] 16:01:49 my skype crashed out 16:01:54 -??P17 16:01:58 sorry 16:01:59 SCRIBE: Satya Sahoo 16:02:03 -SamCoppens 16:02:16 +??P17 16:02:39 Paolo: Definition of Agent will be debated further 16:02:49 Paolo/Luc 16:03:32 Luc: Discussion on notion of Time in previous WG telcon 16:03:46 n PIL, there are different kinds of events: beginning of process execution, end of process execution, generation of thing, use of thing, which satisfy some ordering, according to relation "precede": 16:04:36 Luc: Four events identified with respect to the concept of Time 16:05:07 - +1.509.375.aaee 16:05:29 q? 16:06:02 q? 16:06:04 q+ 16:06:06 Luc: Is WG in agreement on the ordering constraints illustrated by the four events? 16:06:46 mailing list is good 16:06:47 q- 16:06:52 Stephan: Have comment on definition of Agent 16:06:56 ack stain 16:07:40 Stian: w.r.t creation and use of a thing, are they associated with fixed point of time (?) 16:09:04 Luc: Stian's example of streaming video can be modeled as either as a series of Thing or a Thing 16:09:25 q? 16:09:32 Stian: Agree with Luc's point 16:09:37 q 16:09:38 q? 16:09:44 q+ 16:09:49 ralph 16:10:31 PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL 16:10:53 q? 16:10:55 q+ 16:11:28 ack ralphtq 16:11:34 Ralph: Temporal logics has multiple ways of ordering, so there are more than four types of events 16:11:49 q? 16:12:13 Ralph: Will provide reference to multiple ordering of events 16:12:17 q? 16:12:28