14:34:25 RRSAgent has joined #prov 14:34:25 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/08-prov-irc 14:34:27 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:34:27 Zakim has joined #prov 14:34:29 Zakim, this will be 14:34:29 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:34:30 Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 14:34:30 Date: 08 September 2011 14:34:35 Zakim, this will be PROV 14:34:36 ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 26 minutes 14:34:49 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.08 14:34:57 Chair: Luc Moreau 14:35:02 Scribe: Paolo Missier 14:35:16 Topic: Admin 14:41:54 satya has joined #prov 14:48:43 paolo has joined #prov 14:53:51 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 14:53:58 +??P3 14:54:05 zakim, ??P3 is me 14:54:05 +paolo; got it 14:55:32 Curt has joined #prov 14:55:55 + +1.443.987.aaaa 14:56:12 zakim, +1.443.987.aaaa is me 14:56:12 +Curt; got it 14:56:17 Yogesh has joined #prov 14:56:22 +Luc 14:57:40 + +1.540.449.aabb 14:58:01 zakim, +1.540 is me 14:58:03 +Yogesh; got it 14:58:06 + +44.789.470.aacc 14:58:07 @paolo, everything is set up for you, thanks for scribing 14:58:16 ok 14:58:18 Zakim, +44.789.470.aacc is me 14:58:18 +stain; got it 14:58:25 (as I told you last week) 14:59:37 Vinh has joined #prov 15:00:11 + +1.315.723.aadd 15:00:19 tlebo has joined #prov 15:00:31 + +1.937.343.aaee 15:00:35 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:00:35 On the phone I see paolo, Curt, Luc, Yogesh, stain, +1.315.723.aadd, +1.937.343.aaee 15:00:45 zakim, +1.937.343.aaee is me 15:00:48 smiles has joined #prov 15:00:51 zakim, I am aadd 15:00:54 +Vinh; got it 15:00:59 perhaps wait 1 more minute, I was thrown off the conference bridge twice 15:01:08 +tlebo; got it 15:01:19 zakim, +1.315.723.aadd is me 15:01:25 Zakim, who is noisy? 15:01:46 sorry, tlebo, I do not recognize a party named '+1.315.723.aadd' 15:01:48 +Kingsley_Idehen 15:01:56 Zakim, Kingsley_Idehen is OpenLink_Software 15:01:58 +??P5 15:02:00 Stian, how about sip? works fine for me 15:02:04 Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 15:02:05 Zakim, mute me 15:02:08 stain, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: paolo (34%), Kingsley_Idehen (15%), Luc (43%) 15:02:22 Edoardo has joined #prov 15:02:32 +OpenLink_Software; got it 15:02:33 paolo: I got in the third time nicely. :-) Using Skype. It threw me out after saying hello.. 15:02:37 MacTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG -- http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/ -- 2011-09-08 telecon agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.08 (MacTed) 15:02:38 +??P34 15:02:39 YolandaGil has joined #prov 15:02:55 Lena has joined #prov 15:02:56 +MacTed; got it 15:03:02 MacTed should now be muted 15:03:09 +??P55 15:03:23 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-09-01 15:03:28 +[ISI] 15:03:28 PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Sep 01 telecon 15:03:28 topic: admin 15:03:32 jcheney has joined #prov 15:03:34 +Sandro 15:03:42 +1 15:03:43 +1 15:03:45 +1 15:03:47 +1 15:03:48 +1 15:03:53 +1 15:03:59 +1 15:04:00 +??P0 15:04:11 RESOLVED the minutes of Sep 01 telecon 15:04:14 zakim, ??P0 is me 15:04:24 zednik has joined #prov 15:04:30 TOPIC: Named graphs requirements 15:04:30 dcorsar has joined #prov 15:04:38 topic: Named graphs requirements 15:04:40 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph 15:04:48 +??P9 15:04:56 +jcheney; got it 15:04:58 +??P10 15:05:29 satya? 15:05:31 + +1.518.633.aaff 15:05:38 Satya joined at 15:41 - but not on phone it seems 15:05:48 + +1.706.461.aagg 15:05:53 q+ 15:05:54 no comments on requirements 15:05:59 JimMcCusker has joined #prov 15:06:10 Zakim, who's here? 15:06:10 On the phone I see paolo, Curt, Luc, Yogesh, stain, tlebo, Vinh, MacTed (muted), ??P5, ??P34, ??P55, [ISI], Sandro, jcheney, ??P9, ??P10, +1.518.633.aaff, +1.706.461.aagg 15:06:14 On IRC I see JimMcCusker, dcorsar, zednik, jcheney, Lena, YolandaGil, Edoardo, smiles, tlebo, Vinh, Yogesh, Curt, paolo, satya, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, trackbot, stain, 15:06:16 ... sandro 15:06:23 q? 15:06:25 satya: reqs are completed, wiki page updated as of yesterday 15:06:28 There are requirements from the XG that were written at: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/images/3/3f/RDFNextStep_ProvXG-submitted.pdf 15:07:05 +??P50 15:07:19 paolo, are you scribing..? 15:07:38 yolanda: mentions reqs from the XG work, and those do not seem to have been included in the current iwki page 15:08:11 Luc: Yolanda invited to update the reqs page with content from the XG doc 15:08:14 q? 15:08:17 ack yola 15:08:25 Topic: name for the standard 15:08:31 topic: Name for the standard 15:08:55 Luc: shortlist of 3 identified last week 15:09:09 Luc: are there negative blockers amongst those? 15:09:20 q? 15:09:30 +q 15:09:37 I know PIF as http://ccs.mit.edu/pif/: The Process Interchange Format 15:09:47 that's a kind of blocker, yes 15:10:21 "This page was modified last by Jintae Lee on Nov. 17 '99 " 15:10:33 just realised: PAST is difficult to Google 15:10:35 "PLEASE NOTE: The PIF Project has been merged with the PSL (Process Specification Language) Project at NIST." 15:11:05 jorn has joined #prov 15:11:17 James: someone (Deb?) proposed avoiding names that are existing words, because it makes it harder to search for them 15:11:19 PIL sounds like a pill, which often has negative connotation. has 130MM results on Google. 15:11:19 PIF is a scoffing sound in American English, if not elsewhere. has 18MM results on Google. 15:11:19 PAST is a common word, which is itself problematic... 15:11:22 difficulty to search for the standard, e.g. "past" is already a word. 15:11:40 +??P63 15:11:48 zakim, ??p63 is me 15:11:48 +jorn; got it 15:11:48 PAS, then? 15:11:54 (but PASTm, PASTl etc. would be quite unique) 15:12:03 JimMcCusker: french word 15:12:12 true. 15:12:27 http://www.acronymfinder.com/PIF.html 15:12:27 http://www.acronymfinder.com/PIL.html 15:12:27 http://www.acronymfinder.com/PAST.html 15:12:39 yes, w3 has very high google rating 15:12:42 Tim: Deb concerned that existing words would make google searches less effective 15:12:47 q? 15:12:50 ack jch 15:13:15 q+ 15:13:19 satya: neg blocker for PIL: what we have is more than just a language 15:13:19 sandro, agree, and "prov:" is a good prefix as well 15:13:23 prov:Entity for instance 15:13:31 I also prefer PROV overall... 15:13:35 Zakim, unmute me 15:13:35 MacTed should no longer be muted 15:13:37 What does PROV expand to? 15:13:47 "provenance" 15:13:53 JimMcCusker, that's the problem! But we could say Provenance Standard 15:14:11 Ted: all 3 of them have overlaps with existing names/acronyms. large number of results on google for all of them 15:14:16 I also like PROV 15:14:26 q? 15:14:28 Ted: name needs not be an acronym 15:14:30 google; Prov (TM) Exam services 15:14:30 PROVenance standard? 15:14:33 +1 that name does not need to be an acronym 15:14:41 +1 for Ted -- no need to agonize over acronyms 15:14:42 Zakim, mute me 15:14:42 MacTed should now be muted 15:14:43 PROvenance Vocabulary (with apologies to Olaf) 15:15:08 take the red PIL 15:15:12 q? 15:15:16 of course... PROV gets 93MM Google results 15:15:17 Simon: "L" can stand for smt else than 'language" if we like the acronym 15:15:22 ack smiles 15:15:23 q+ 15:15:44 +q 15:15:48 q- 15:16:11 ack pao 15:16:21 q? 15:16:45 perhaps the problem is that we voted for both short and long name at the same time. 15:17:30 For instane WSDL is fairly recognizable on the internets - does not mean anything on its own, and pronounciation is something you learn at conferences 15:17:59 q+ 15:18:16 ack san 15:18:35 let's hire some marketers :-) 15:18:37 JimMcCusker would have voted for PROV 15:19:02 sandro: suggests doing +/- on each one. 15:19:20 ProvVoc - 21 results on Google. not an acronym. 15:19:21 :-) 15:19:30 pronounced "provoke" 15:19:40 q? 15:19:53 i'm sure we'll get to the top of google with PIF or PROV, but not PAST, maybe not PIL. 15:19:58 Luc: how do we vote 15:20:11 q? 15:20:17 sandro: vote for/against until we get somewhere -- min the negatives 15:20:32 Votes for PIL 15:20:36 (and PIV has some real strong negatives.) 15:20:42 -1 15:20:43 -1 15:20:45 -1 15:20:46 -1 15:20:46 -1 15:20:47 -1 15:20:47 -1 15:20:48 -1 15:20:48 0 15:20:49 +1 15:20:49 0 15:20:53 0 15:20:53 0 15:20:56 -1 15:21:01 0 15:21:02 satya: -1 15:21:15 Votes for PAST 15:21:21 +1 15:21:21 -1 (google problems) 15:21:22 +1 15:21:22 -1 15:21:22 0 15:21:23 +1 15:21:23 -1 15:21:23 +1 15:21:25 0 15:21:26 0 15:21:27 0 15:21:28 -1 (word) 15:21:28 +1 15:21:30 0 15:21:31 -1 15:21:33 -1 15:21:48 Votes for PIF 15:21:51 -1 15:21:53 +1 15:21:53 +1 15:21:54 +1 15:21:54 0 15:21:55 +1 15:21:56 -1 15:21:58 +1 15:21:59 satya: +1 15:22:00 0 15:22:01 +1 15:22:01 0 15:22:01 +1 15:22:02 0 15:22:06 0 15:22:07 0 15:22:09 0 15:22:22 Votes for PROV 15:22:25 +1 15:22:26 +1 15:22:26 +1 15:22:27 +1 15:22:27 +1 15:22:27 +1 15:22:27 +1 15:22:28 -1 15:22:31 +1 15:22:32 0 15:22:33 0 15:22:35 +1 15:22:36 +1 15:22:36 + +1.509.554.aahh 15:22:36 +1 15:22:38 +1 15:22:39 +1 15:22:51 wow 15:23:11 Luc: strong support for PROV 15:23:15 PROVIDENCE 15:23:33 Luc: concern: mixup with providence... 15:23:37 q? 15:23:39 maybe we should call it PROV IL? 15:23:50 I don't get the providence mixup 15:23:51 I don't understand what is the problem with providence 15:24:03 would that not be the problem with any of the P* names? 15:24:18 Yeah, I use that as a joke when I give provenance talks... 15:24:29 I don't see a problem, Luc! 15:24:49 jorn - IL stands for? 15:25:03 Interchange Language :) 15:25:04 Luc: vote on PROV alone to see if there any negs 15:25:34 what kind of trademark does http://www.provexam.com/ have for 'prov' ? 15:25:36 Luc: how would this name be used in documents? 15:25:43 +q 15:25:49 foobar a prov:Entity 15:26:10 PROV IDM 15:26:14 Provenance Description and Interchange Framework? 15:26:20 +1 paolo 15:26:33 "The Prov Data Model" 15:26:38 "The Prov Data Model for Provenance Interchange" 15:26:43 q? 15:26:44 q- 15:27:00 -jorn 15:27:16 Luc: Simon still has a formal objection? 15:27:18 +??P19 15:27:37 + +1.915.747.aaii 15:27:43 Zakim: ??p19 is me 15:27:45 Paulo has joined #prov 15:27:48 "Provenance Rules On VVeb" 15:27:51 smiles: mostly on aesthetic grounds... 15:27:57 Zakim, ??p19 is me 15:27:57 +jorn; got it 15:28:06 smiles: wouldn't formally object though 15:28:29 +1 15:28:32 +1 15:28:34 +1 15:28:34 +1 15:28:35 +1 15:28:36 action to emails the WG announcing that PROV is the proposed name 15:28:36 Sorry, couldn't find user - to 15:28:41 +1 15:29:05 TOPIC: Primer Document 15:29:15 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Sep/0042.html 15:29:23 http://media.zibb.com/trademark/prov/30725511 should not be in conflict - "Education and entertainment" 15:29:29 (how exams are entertainment is beyond me) 15:29:53 smiles: primer should be released alongside the model doc 15:30:04 smiles: would generate better feedback to us 15:30:31 smiles: as the model is still evolving, the primer would not be complete at the time of release 15:30:54 +??P13 15:31:10 q? 15:31:17 smiles: would be good to have a "webby" example, doc-based like the jou example, to align well with the W3C setting where the doc belongs 15:31:22 q+ 15:31:27 Zakim, unmute me 15:31:27 MacTed should no longer be muted 15:32:02 ted: a "webby" example is good, but important also to have a completely non-webby example. Science domains, or others 15:32:16 q? 15:32:28 ack mac 15:32:33 smiles' proposal sounds reasonable, agree to not restrict to data journalism example 15:32:39 smiles: ok, but the initial release needs to appeal to people who will provide early feedback 15:32:39 q+ 15:33:05 ted: agree, but that puts people in the web mindset and that may form a bias 15:33:31 Zakim, mute me 15:33:32 MacTed should now be muted 15:33:39 + +1.216.368.aajj 15:33:42 - +1.706.461.aagg 15:33:52 q- 15:33:53 q? 15:34:03 ericstephan has joined #prov 15:34:04 Stephan: agree with Ted: danger to be perceived as provenance /of/ the web rather than /on/ the web 15:34:13 +1 ted - some simple science (high school chemistry experiment?) example should be good 15:34:20 zakim, +1.216.368.aajj is me 15:34:20 +satya; got it 15:34:52 how about a simple scenario of the provenance of a physical object? example from library community? 15:34:53 Luc: primer not starte yet. too ambitious to release by the end of month? some authors are busy on all other docs at the same time 15:35:40 q+ 15:35:40 smiles: yes, timing is tight. delayed release is a plausible option 15:35:41 + +1.832.386.aakk 15:36:04 Luc @Sandro: can docs be released without primer? 15:36:34 sandro: early drafts of model docs without primer is fine if for limited time 15:36:42 q+ 15:36:43 what if we do some third party blog posts or something? 15:36:50 q? 15:36:57 ericP has joined #prov 15:37:01 ack sat 15:37:08 - +1.509.554.aahh 15:38:19 paolo: that people who would be writing the primer can instead focus on filling in a complete example and challenge our model 15:38:33 Luc: would be nice to see the ASN in use in the example 15:39:17 smiles: primer needs to be understandeable -- ASN may possibly make it harder? 15:39:32 + +1.509.554.aall 15:39:58 smiles: there prior comments on going bottom up with small examples rather than a large big one example from the start 15:40:30 q+ 15:40:41 ack pao 15:41:57 I like the flow of how instance how http://www.openannotation.org/spec/beta/ starts very simple 15:41:59 +1 15:42:01 I am interested Luc 15:42:05 I would not mind joining 15:42:09 after the release of the model document? 15:42:15 Luc: who would contribute to the primer? 15:42:20 +1 15:42:24 +1 15:42:25 Paolo after model / ontology doc 15:42:25 +1 with limited available time 15:42:25 I am willing to contribute (+1) 15:42:38 should not have more than say 3 authors 15:42:44 +1 after the connection informal report 15:42:45 -jorn 15:42:57 +??P19 15:43:03 zakim, ??p19 is me 15:43:03 +jorn; got it 15:43:03 @stian: few editors, but no hard limit on authors...? 15:43:13 agree 15:43:26 smiles: will put a structure up on the wiki then contact interested people 15:43:40 The diagrams at http://www.openannotation.org/spec/beta/ are very nice 15:43:52 topic: First Public Working Drafts 15:44:23 Luc @sandro: formal reqs prior to releasing docs as drafts:? 15:45:02 sandro: there's a page for that, but: need to get a persistent URL from W3C 15:45:04 @Tim: agree, can we try to use similar diagram format for the formal model draft? 15:45:38 sandro: doc needs to be validated for format / HTML -- respec should make that easy 15:45:44 luc: any editorial control? 15:45:45 I raised the question on namespace as well for the ontology - do we know what would make sense for now? 15:46:35 sandro: status of specs: a very briefly explanation of what the draft is about 15:46:58 @satya: very much so. I'll use it to base the diagrams I am doing for model documetn 15:47:07 Sandro: need a group resolution to publish, and need to point to it when requesting release 15:48:13 Here's the check list for publication: http://www.w3.org/Guide/transitions 15:49:31 +q 15:50:03 Paolo: release timetable as agreed: Sept 16th then Sept 29 for approval 15:50:24 satya: requesting sept 19th, then feedback cycle, then Sept 29th for approval 15:50:35 q+ 15:50:41 ack len 15:51:09 Lena: should we include security elements (authz) in the model/ontology? 15:51:28 Lena: scope of model should be clear, i.e., authz out of scope 15:51:34 q+ 15:51:47 lena: conneg and authorization; survey results show people confuse provenance and authorization 15:51:54 ack pao 15:53:40 ack sm 15:54:43 smiles @lena: the authz issue is on whether we trust what happened in the past, may not be out of scope after all 15:54:54 q+ 15:55:17 luc: first working draft offers a first look at our work, so this can be raised as a missing element that should be added 15:55:31 ack satya 15:55:36 satya: important not to go into the derivation part of provenance in this group 15:55:55 Topic: Formal Model document 15:56:49 satya: updates will be made this week, only a few people attended previous meeting. 15:56:56 q+ 15:57:06 satya: entailments and extension mechanisms will be addressed next 15:57:27 (should Stian work from the main branch in mercuruial?) 15:57:34 satya: soliciting feedback at this stage, as Stian provided. 15:57:37 ack tl 15:57:52 satya: need to get the RDF encoding for the file crime scenario right as it is normative 15:58:25 -jorn 15:58:30 I just asked was if I should edit directly on the head branch or a sepearate feature branch 15:58:31 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology 15:59:06 q+ 15:59:24 ack paol 15:59:38 Monday US 12pm ET 16:00:05 @stain, I think that is a weak "yes", join the head branch. 16:00:24 satya: that was the time for the regular ontology call (skype) 16:00:59 +??P45 16:01:10 satya: no complete agreement on how to express entities. 16:01:45 -??P10 16:01:50 what is the id criteria to distinguish entities? (ref to the cars example) 16:03:17 satya: what are the distinguishing attributes for different entities that refer to the same characterized thing 16:03:45 -[ISI] 16:04:19 luc: there may be different perspectives about the "same car". each of them is asserted as an entity 16:04:38 +1 16:05:30 paolo @satya: long ago the URI used to be called a "surrogate key"... 16:05:39 - +1.915.747.aaii 16:05:57 - +1.832.386.aakk 16:06:10 Zakim, unmute me 16:06:10 MacTed should no longer be muted 16:06:12 q+ 16:07:01 -Yogesh 16:07:10 q+ 16:07:25 + +1.518.633.aamm 16:09:13 ack mac 16:09:23 ack jim 16:09:56 satya, I'll push my changes to the OWL file if that's OK. I've fixed the verbs and labels. 16:10:06 not touched the HTML but can do a search replace 16:10:10 -??P45 16:10:12 @Stian, thanks! 16:10:40 q? 16:11:15 satya: do you agree on making hadParticipant super-property of used and wasControlledBy ? 16:11:32 luc @smiles: would the car example be suitable for the primar? 16:12:02 smiles: potentially yes, to explain what we mean by entity etc, identifying attributes, etc. 16:12:06 q? 16:12:06 satya: that does not cover the case of compliments - some OWL expert can figure that out 16:12:09 @Stian: I had asserted that earlier, but some members want further discussion about it - so they are not related 16:12:21 -satya 16:12:22 -??P50 16:12:22 -paolo 16:12:24 - +1.509.554.aall 16:12:24 -Sandro 16:12:25 -??P9 16:12:25 -tlebo 16:12:26 -MacTed 16:12:30 -Curt 16:12:32 -Vinh 16:12:34 paolo, i will do the necessary incantation here 16:12:39 ok thanks 16:12:41 @Satya - ok, will leave that out 16:12:41 -Luc 16:12:42 bye 16:12:44 thanks for scribing 16:12:46 - +1.518.633.aamm 16:12:47 -jcheney 16:12:58 bye 16:12:58 -stain 16:13:02 rrsagent, set log public 16:13:11 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:13:11 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/08-prov-minutes.html Luc 16:13:12 ericstephan has left #prov 16:13:19 trackbot, end telcon 16:13:19 Zakim, list attendees 16:13:19 As of this point the attendees have been paolo, Curt, Luc, +1.540.449.aabb, Yogesh, stain, +1.315.723.aadd, Vinh, tlebo, MacTed, [ISI], Sandro, jcheney, +1.518.633.aaff, 16:13:20 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 16:13:20 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/08-prov-minutes.html trackbot 16:13:21 RRSAgent, bye 16:13:21 I see no action items 16:13:22 ... +1.706.461.aagg, jorn, +1.509.554.aahh, +1.915.747.aaii, satya, +1.832.386.aakk, +1.509.554.aall, +1.518.633.aamm