<trackbot> Date: 30 June 2011

<Luc> Scribe: Paolo Missier

Admin

<stain> hmmm

<stain> I'm the first participant??

<Luc> hi stain

<Luc> trackbot, start telcon

<trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 30 June 2011

<stain> Zakim: ??P4 is me

<stain> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-23-06 is not there

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.30

<Luc> PROPOSED: to accept the minutes of 23 Jun telecon

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-23-06

<stain> 404

<tfrancart> URL does not work

<paolo> +1

<stain> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-23 is correct

<pgroth> \me it's really echoy or is that me

<jorn> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-23

<paolo> the second link is fine

<jorn> +1

<SamCoppens> +1

<paolo> +1

<tfrancart> +1

<Lena> +!

<Lena> +1

<zednik> +1

<StephanCresswell> +1

<stain> 0 - not had a chance to read it :)

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open

<paolo> item: review open actions

<paolo> Simon will report in the context of the PQA TF

F2F Plan

<pgroth> please mute

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F1Timetable

<paolo> Luc: outline for the meeting has been drafted: 8 sessions, TF allocated to the sessions

<paolo> Luc: 4 sessions to model, 2 to PAQ Tf, 1 to connection and implementation

<paolo> content of sessions unspecified, to provide max flexibility

<paolo> agenda to be posted 1 day prior to meeting

Connection TF Plan to F2F1

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Connection_Proposal

<paolo> Eric: happy with current proposals

<paolo> more contributions welcome

<paolo> Yolanda suggests to categorize contributions

<paolo> Eric: will be at meeting

Implementation and Test Cases TF Plan to F2F1

<paolo> Elena: 32 entries, plan is to consolidate

<paolo> and compile them in terms of importance

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Unit_Test_Proposal

<pgroth> +q

<paolo> Elena: institutions vary geographically and by sector. Stats will be provided

<paolo> Paul: wiki should record where the survey was sent -- which lists.

<tfrancart> I distributed it to 3 of our partners/clients

<pgroth> it's already done

<paolo> Luc: can we post the form itself on the wiki, so we don't depend on googledocs

<Lena> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Implementation_and_Test_Cases_Task_Force

<stain> I see it

<Lena> Questionnaire: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Implementation_and_Test_Cases_Task_Force#W3C_Implementation_Stakeholder_Questionnaire

<paolo> Elena, Stephan will attend F2F remotely

Access and Query TF Plan to F2F1

<pgroth> stain?

<Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Access_and_Query_Proposal

<paolo> (sorry about that)

<Luc> Simon's report: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0477.html

<stain> I just wanted to say something about if we will have WebEx or something from the meeting to get a videolink

<paolo> Simon not in the call, report posted (see link)

<paolo> no comments from group

<paolo> Simon, Yogesh will both be at F2F

Model TF Plan to F2F1

<jun> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts

<jun> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Model_Proposal

<Luc> Scribe: Satya Sahoo

<satya> Paolo: Consolidated the discussion about provenance concepts into one page (link posted by Jun)

<satya> Paolo: All members of the TF contributed to the consolidation process

<satya> 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

<satya> Paolo: Goal of this work is to present an unified view of the provenance concepts for further discussions during the F2F

<pgroth> +q

<ralphtq> +q

<satya> Paul: When will TF decide to freeze the wiki page with consolidated provenance concepts

<satya> Paolo: The wiki page is relatively stable, currently minor changes are being made

<ralphtq> http://www.linkedmodel.org/doc/voag/1.0/

<pgroth> you just do it

<pgroth> :-)

<paolo> ralphtq: volunteers to join the TF

<paolo> model TF

<stain> just edit http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceTaskForces

<jun> respond to the mailing list:)

<satya> Ralph: How to join to the Model TF, have done previous work in modeling provenance issues

<Luc> Scribe: Paolo Missier

<paolo> Ralph: will not be at F2F, but will contribute his past work to the TF

<paolo> Luc: suggests Ralph to add his references to the Connection TF

<paolo> Luc: 17 concepts were listed in the charter, 8 of those have been addressed in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConsolidatedConcepts

<paolo> what should be done about the others?

<paolo> Satya: pick up new concepts on only after the F2F

<paolo> Stian: agrees with Satya. We've got enough for the F2F

<satya> Paolo: Discussion in F2F will bring out new concepts that should be taken up next by Wg

<paolo> Luc: no further defs will be added to the current list before the F2F

Model Task Force

<paolo> Luc: acknowledges the hard work of the Model TF! :-)

<paolo> Luc: some terms still require consensus, it would help to make progress today

<Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0460.html

<paolo> Luc: the idea is that PIL is an /assertion language/

<paolo> idea socialized on the list but little feedback so far

<paolo> Jim Myers: that's fine, but what does that do for us?

<paolo> Luc: recurrent theme is that there are "asserters" in our definitions. So we may as well make it explicit upfront

<paolo> Jim: the idea of multiple witnesses that we agree on is aligned with this, so as a convenience that's fine

<paolo> Satya: to follow up: if we see PIL in the RDF context, it follows naturally

<pgroth> stating the obvious isn't a bad thing ;-)

<paolo> Luc: yes, but for a different serialization this may be less obvious

<satya> ok

<paolo> Thomas: shouldn't we also define rules (inference) that come with assertions?

<paolo> Luc: this idea has been circulated, we currently are agnostic regarding the types of assertions -- rules may well be included

<satya> @Thomas: Inference will require us to define the formal semantics of the PIL first

<paolo> Satya: inference is a mechanism to produce new assertions, note that the Rule exchange language is standard with W3C

<ralphtq> +q

<paolo> Satya: what is the rule language? we need a formal semantics for PIL before we can move on to rules

<paolo> Ralph: can we have a reference to PIL? how about refutation, conjecture in addition to assertion

<satya> W3C Rule Interchange Format recommendation: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group

<paolo> Luc: PIL is what we are defining. it's a codename

<paolo> Luc: conjecture, refutation not part of charter but may well be discussed

<Luc> 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.

<satya> +1

<stain> +1

<tfrancart> +1

<zednik> +1

<paolo> +1

<dcorsar> +1

<SamCoppens> +1

<ralphtq> +1

<Lena> +1

<Luc> 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.

<Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0459.html

<paolo> Luc: on the concept of Derivation

<paolo> Luc: any major objection to the proposal? (see link)

<Luc> 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.

<stain> +1

<jun> +1

<tfrancart> 0

<satya> +1

<dcorsar> +1

<SamCoppens> +1

<zednik> +q

<ralphtq> +1

<paolo> Stephan: just looked at proposal. is Derivation is a relation or a thing?

<satya> @Stephan - I agree, derivation is a property

<paolo> it ought to be a relation

<stain> it sounds like a relation to me.. but which could also have deeper details (such as a link to a process execution)

<paolo> Luc: up for discussion at F2F. Others raised the issue

<pgroth> i guess it's just english

<paolo> Stephan: are we also saying /how/ something was derived?

<satya> @Stephan: The how part is not covered in derivation (my POV)

<pgroth> the transformation of stuff from?

<Luc> 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.

<paolo> Ralph: derivation is a transformation, but a reified relationship

<jorn> one could always reificate more information onto the derivation statement, couldn't one?

<paolo> Ralph: affected by: opens up derivation in a bigger notion, not sure about the term "affect"

<paolo> Luc: first sentence about high level idea of what Derivation is, clearly it's not formal

<Luc> ack

<stain> What if we add "In PIL, a thing B is..."

<paolo> Luc: second part triesd to explain what Derviation means wrt the constructs of the language. Says how Derivation can influence some properties

<stain> +1

<jun> +1

<jorn> +1

<paolo> +1

<SamCoppens> +1

<zednik> +0 (undecided, I want to see in a use case example)

<ralphtq> +1

<Lena> 0

<tfrancart> 0 : not sure why it refers only to "invariant properties" ?

<paolo> Paul: reminder; 0 abstain , -1 for reject, +1 for accept

<Luc> 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.

<Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0439.html

<paolo> Luc: need to have some education activity to make sure all the basic concepts are clear, including thing, invariant properties, etc.

<paolo> [sorry I missed Luc's sentences]

<Luc> 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.

<ralphtq> +q

<pgroth> In pil: "things" represent real-world stuffs and have properties modeling aspects of stuff states

<satya> Ralph: Many ontologies use the term "party" instead of agent

<ralphtq> instead of "Thing" not "Agent"

<paolo> Ralph: Can we replace "thing" with "party" in the def?

<Luc> 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.

<paolo> Luc: "thing" is used in the technical sense of PIL

<paolo> Satya: is linking an Agent to a process optional?

<paolo> Luc: def. is agnostic about it

<paolo> my skype crashed out

<paolo> sorry

<Luc> SCRIBE: Satya Sahoo

<satya> Paolo: Definition of Agent will be debated further

<satya> Paolo/Luc

<satya> Luc: Discussion on notion of Time in previous WG telcon

<Luc> 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":

<satya> Luc: Four events identified with respect to the concept of Time

<satya> Luc: Is WG in agreement on the ordering constraints illustrated by the four events?

<pgroth> mailing list is good

<satya> Stephan: Have comment on definition of Agent

<satya> Stian: w.r.t creation and use of a thing, are they associated with fixed point of time (?)

<satya> Luc: Stian's example of streaming video can be modeled as either as a series of Thing or a Thing

<satya> Stian: Agree with Luc's point

<ralphtq> q

<pgroth> ralph

<Luc> PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL

<satya> Ralph: Temporal logics has multiple ways of ordering, so there are more than four types of events

<satya> Ralph: Will provide reference to multiple ordering of events

<satya> Luc: This definition is similar to Lamport's paper

<Lena> (apologies, I need to leave)

<Luc> PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for defining the semantics of PIL

<Lena> +1

<ralphtq> +1

<stain> don't we need to agree on the constraints first?

<satya> Paul: Suggest removing "semantics"

<Luc> PROPOSED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for building an understanding of PIL

<satya> +1

<jun> 0 (feels a bit premature to propose these constraints; but fine with using them as a starting point)

<stain> +1

<tfrancart> +1

<zednik> +1

<dcorsar> +1

<jorn> 0

<stain> @jun as we're not voting on the constraints themselves they are not set in stone

<stain> zednik: who?

<jun> @stain, yes agreed

<Luc> ACCEPTED: we use the set of constraints as a starting point for building an understanding of PIL

<stain> Zakim: who?

<stain> Zakim: who is on the call?

<ralphtq> On the subject of temporal relationships, Allen defined 13 - I will post some references

<ralphtq> bye

<ralphtq> quit

<stain> I wanted to ask if there will be a videolink or webex from the f2f - or just telcon link

<pgroth> telcon only

<Luc> trackbot, end telcon

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/secodn/second/
Succeeded: s/Stephen/Stephan/g
Succeeded: s/asertion/assertion/
Found Scribe: Paolo Missier
Found Scribe: Satya Sahoo
Found Scribe: Paolo Missier
Found Scribe: Satya Sahoo

WARNING: 0 scribe lines found (out of 445 total lines.)
Are you sure you specified a correct ScribeNick?

Scribes: Paolo Missier, Satya Sahoo
Default Present: Luc, pgroth, +1.646.389.aaaa, +1.832.386.aabb, paolo, stain, SamCoppens, jorn, [ISI], +1.518.633.aacc, +1.650.386.aadd, jun
Present: Luc pgroth +1.646.389.aaaa +1.832.386.aabb paolo stain SamCoppens jorn [ISI] +1.518.633.aacc +1.650.386.aadd jun
Regrets: Daniel_Garijo Simon_Miles Yogesh_Simmhan James_Cheney Simon_Dobson Graham_Klyne
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.30
Found Date: 30 Jun 2011
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2011/06/30-prov-minutes.html
People with action items: