IRC log of prov on 2011-10-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:53:42 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:53:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:53:44 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:53:45 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #prov
14:53:46 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be
14:53:46 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:53:47 [trackbot]
Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:53:47 [trackbot]
Date: 20 October 2011
14:53:55 [pgroth]
Zakim, this will be PROV
14:53:56 [Zakim]
ok, pgroth, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM already started
14:54:11 [pgroth]
14:54:15 [pgroth]
Chair: Paul Groth
14:54:22 [pgroth]
Scribe: Stephen Cresswell
14:54:41 [pgroth]
rrsagent, make logs public
14:55:01 [Yogesh]
Yogesh has joined #prov
14:55:02 [GK1]
GK1 has joined #prov
14:55:07 [pgroth]
Regrets: Paolo Missier, Reza B'Far, Ryan Golden
14:55:30 [tlbo]
tlbo has joined #prov
14:55:32 [StephenC]
StephenC has joined #prov
14:55:44 [GK]
GK has joined #prov
14:55:48 [tlebo]
tlebo has joined #prov
14:55:56 [Zakim]
14:55:58 [Zakim]
14:55:58 [Zakim]
14:56:04 [Luc]
Luc has joined #prov
14:56:09 [pgroth]
Zakim, [IPCaller] is me
14:56:10 [Zakim]
+pgroth; got it
14:56:26 [satya]
satya has joined #prov
14:56:32 [StephenCresswell]
StephenCresswell has joined #prov
14:56:50 [Zakim]
14:57:06 [pgroth]
hey graham, just out of curiosity why do you also have two irc names?
14:57:37 [Curt]
Curt has joined #prov
14:57:51 [GK1]
@paul I'm using two machines .. let's me track the IRC while digging around for dicuments, etc. :)
14:58:03 [Zakim]
14:58:04 [pgroth]
cool :-)
14:58:45 [Zakim]
14:59:06 [GK]
zakim, ??P10 is me
14:59:07 [Zakim]
+GK; got it
14:59:11 [Zakim]
14:59:56 [stain]
hi, guys
14:59:57 [dgarijo]
dgarijo has joined #prov
15:00:09 [jcheney]
jcheney has joined #prov
15:00:41 [kai]
kai has joined #prov
15:00:56 [Zakim]
+ +1.315.723.aaaa
15:01:09 [GK]
Hi Stian
15:01:10 [tlebo]
Zakim, aaaa is tlebo
15:01:10 [Zakim]
+tlebo; got it
15:01:20 [Zakim]
15:01:22 [Zakim]
15:01:29 [Zakim]
15:01:32 [zednik]
zednik has joined #prov
15:01:32 [pgroth]
Zakim, who is noisy?
15:01:35 [stain]
note to self: always pause between the seven keys
15:01:35 [kai]
zakim, +??P26 is probably me.
15:01:37 [Zakim]
sorry, kai, I do not understand your question
15:01:42 [Zakim]
15:01:43 [Zakim]
pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: stain (21%)
15:01:43 [kai]
zakim, ??P26 is probably me.
15:01:43 [Zakim]
+kai?; got it
15:01:45 [Zakim]
15:01:51 [jcheney]
zakim, [IPCaller] is ne
15:01:51 [Zakim]
+ne; got it
15:01:56 [Zakim]
15:02:09 [Zakim]
15:02:15 [stain]
@kai does "probably" allow others to override..?
15:02:20 [Zakim]
15:02:23 [kai]
probably ;-)
15:02:44 [dgarijo]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
15:02:44 [Zakim]
+dgarijo; got it
15:02:48 [kai]
Only zakim knows
15:02:55 [Zakim]
+ +1.518.633.aabb
15:03:03 [pgroth]
Topic: Admin
15:03:03 [Zakim]
15:03:08 [pgroth]
PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Oct 13 telecon
15:03:13 [MacTed]
Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
15:03:13 [Zakim]
+MacTed; got it
15:03:13 [YolandaGil]
YolandaGil has joined #prov
15:03:14 [pgroth]
15:03:16 [MacTed]
Zakim, mute me
15:03:17 [Zakim]
MacTed should now be muted
15:03:25 [dgarijo]
15:03:26 [Curt]
15:03:26 [kai]
15:03:27 [tlebo]
0 (did not attend)
15:03:27 [StephenCresswell]
15:03:33 [Zakim]
15:03:34 [jcheney]
0 (dna)
15:03:41 [stain]
0 (not read them yet)
15:03:48 [YolandaGil]
15:03:55 [Yogesh]
Yogesh has joined #prov
15:03:55 [edoardo]
edoardo has joined #prov
15:04:00 [pgroth]
ACCEPTED Minutes from last week
15:04:01 [Zakim]
15:04:02 [GK]
0 (not present)
15:04:11 [Christine]
Christine has joined #prov
15:04:20 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: reviewing action items
15:04:44 [pgroth]
15:04:52 [StephenCresswell]
... Satya's action item on all items from data model in ontology .. we'll come back to it
15:05:05 [StephenCresswell]
... scribes needed ...
15:05:05 [pgroth]
15:05:22 [pgroth]
15:05:26 [dgarijo]
Khalid sends regrets
15:05:28 [StephenCresswell]
... there's a blog post from Ivan
15:05:35 [pgroth]
15:05:47 [StephenCresswell]
... is the official link to use
15:05:52 [pgroth]
Twitter hashtag: #provwg
15:06:17 [StephenCresswell]
... we want to encourage people to talk about on their blogs etc.
15:06:23 [Zakim]
15:06:30 [StephenCresswell]
... to get multiple perspectives
15:06:40 [pgroth]
15:06:43 [pgroth]
ack pgroth
15:06:45 [pgroth]
15:06:49 [dgarijo]
15:06:51 [StephenCresswell]
15:07:10 [pgroth]
ack dgarijo
15:07:12 [satya]
@Paul: Was there a question for me? Sorry I joined a bit late
15:07:18 [pgroth]
no satya
15:07:33 [StephenCresswell]
dgarijo: comments said that model was a bit complex, how are we going to make it more simple
15:07:44 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: a number of ways
15:07:46 [pgroth]
ack StephenCresswell
15:07:47 [GK]
q+ to note it may be the /presentation/ is seen as complex
15:08:22 [GK]
The comment address should be in the draft
15:08:35 [dgarijo]
maybe more examples? The comments also wanted to see the RDF serialization (prov-o).
15:08:36 [Luc]
they can subscribe to the mailing list
15:08:38 [StephenCresswell]
where should the comments go?
15:08:48 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: to the mailing list
15:08:56 [Lena]
Lena has joined #prov
15:08:59 [Luc]
instructions are at the beginning of document
15:09:13 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Do they normally have a separate mailing list?
15:09:17 [GK]
Doc requests comments to
15:09:18 [Luc]
... it's standard text from w3c
15:09:32 [paolo]
paolo has joined #prov
15:09:55 [Luc]
15:09:55 [pgroth]
15:09:57 [pgroth]
ack GK
15:09:57 [Zakim]
GK, you wanted to note it may be the /presentation/ is seen as complex
15:10:03 [satya]
@GK: agree
15:10:05 [stain]
@GK +1
15:10:08 [pgroth]
ack Luc
15:10:18 [StephenCresswell]
GK: It may be not the model that is complex, or is it just the presentation of the model that is complex?
15:10:27 [jcheney]
15:10:32 [dgarijo]
@GK yes, maybe I didn't express myself correctly, sorry.
15:10:44 [stain]
no, not publiclally subscribable. I was redirected to password-protected
15:10:46 [vinh]
vinh has joined #prov
15:10:59 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: We have to explore presentation first, and then maybe think about why the model is complex, but maybe it needs to be complex
15:11:15 [Zakim]
15:11:26 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's noisy?
15:11:28 [paolo]
zakim, ??p12 is me
15:11:28 [Zakim]
+paolo; got it
15:11:31 [StephenCresswell]
... thiinking about starting the data model with the most common relations
15:11:37 [Zakim]
MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: ??P12 (11%), ne (94%)
15:11:37 [satya]
@Luc: +1 we should concentrate on presentation but not try to modify the model itself to make it more readable
15:12:01 [stain]
@GK just needs some bass
15:12:02 [dcorsar]
dcorsar has joined #prov
15:12:07 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's here?
15:12:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P3, pgroth, Luc, Yogesh_Simmhan, GK, Curt_Tilmes, tlebo, kai?, stain, ne, [ISI], ??P29, dgarijo, +1.518.633.aabb, MacTed (muted), ??P35, ??P37, Satya_Sahoo,
15:12:10 [Zakim]
... paolo
15:12:11 [Zakim]
On IRC I see dcorsar, vinh, paolo, Lena, Christine, edoardo, Yogesh, YolandaGil, zednik, kai, jcheney, dgarijo, Curt, StephenCresswell, satya, Luc, tlebo, GK, GK1, Zakim, RRSAgent,
15:12:13 [Zakim]
... pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro
15:12:34 [stain]
> This is a response to a message apparently sent from your address to
15:12:40 [paolo]
+1 for a two-tier dissemination strategy
15:12:43 [stain]
> Your message has NOT been distributed to the list
15:12:47 [paolo]
15:12:49 [stain]
so it does not work to email from the outside either
15:12:50 [StephenCresswell]
jcheney: Paolo was giving view of this at conference, he said it may be good idea to start with a subset of ideas that are familiar through OPM etc.
15:12:50 [StephenCresswell]
... (gone quiet)
15:12:52 [GK]
q+ to say that I've been taking a shot at entioty/resource stuff
15:12:56 [pgroth]
15:13:01 [pgroth]
ack jcheney
15:13:05 [StephenCresswell]
... (I didn't hear anything)
15:13:05 [pgroth]
ack paolo
15:13:40 [stain]
ah, I just need to say it's allowed in the publication.. then it should be fine to post for outsiders, yes
15:13:45 [StephenCresswell]
Paolo: Make distinction between core concepts and newer things
15:14:09 [pgroth]
15:14:19 [StephenCresswell]
... people ask how it is different from OPM ... make distinction between top tier and second tier
15:14:23 [pgroth]
ack GK
15:14:23 [Zakim]
GK, you wanted to say that I've been taking a shot at entioty/resource stuff
15:14:27 [YolandaGil]
15:14:33 [YolandaGil]
15:14:40 [pgroth]
15:14:46 [pgroth]
15:14:55 [StephenCresswell]
GK: I've been starting to draft something about the issue of relationship between resources and entities, from developer perspective,
15:15:08 [StephenCresswell]
... intend to contribute
15:15:09 [pgroth]
ack YolandaGil
15:15:47 [tlebo]
FROM @MacTed ASK WHERE { [ foaf:nick "Tall Ted" ] foaf:holdsAccount [ foaf:accountName "MacTed" ] } . }
15:15:48 [StephenCresswell]
Yolanda: Was trying extract core ideas to write primer document.
15:15:52 [paolo]
15:15:57 [StephenCresswell]
... some of the examples are hard to relate to
15:16:38 [GK]
Slightly related to this discussion:
15:16:44 [GK]
Yolanda +1
15:16:45 [StephenCresswell]
... some of the the definitions , or how terms are used elsewhere in document, are confusing
15:17:12 [stain]
@YolandaGil +1
15:17:26 [tlebo]
+1 to stop making contrived examples when there are many real examples to handle
15:17:29 [satya]
@Yolanda +1
15:17:39 [StephenCresswell]
... may less contrived, more natural examples, more like the way we would use provenance, would help
15:17:53 [tlebo]
attempt of a list
15:17:54 [dgarijo]
@Yolanda +1
15:17:55 [pgroth]
15:18:10 [StephenCresswell]
... perhaps end-to-end example using linked data
15:18:46 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: Would help to get a reflection of the data model in RDF would help
15:19:00 [GK]
@pgroth: +1 helps to see examples in RDF, but these can still look complicated
15:19:18 [StephenCresswell]
... we should look at smaller things to help people understand what the data model says
15:19:20 [satya]
@Paul +1 and maybe with an intuitive example will help
15:19:24 [satya]
15:19:28 [pgroth]
ack pgroth
15:19:37 [StephenCresswell]
... it's nice to have the RDF as well as abstract syntax
15:20:05 [dgarijo]
we have some examples in RDF in the ontology document.
15:20:11 [pgroth]
15:20:16 [tlebo]
15:20:17 [StephenCresswell]
satya: linked data, bioinformatics, sensor data, has lots of examples
15:20:39 [pgroth]
15:20:41 [StephenCresswell]
... maybe better than filesystem examples
15:20:43 [pgroth]
ack satya
15:20:45 [satya]
15:21:16 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: We have the example that we all agreed on previously ... data journalism example
15:21:16 [satya]
@Paul: I guess I am saying a non-computer science example may help?
15:21:21 [Luc]
we have always said this example was a placeholder ... if someone has a better one, than let's use it. The data journalism is too long for prov-dm document.
15:21:25 [GK]
+1 (need examples that demonstrate simple ideas)
15:21:51 [pgroth]
15:21:53 [StephenCresswell]
... concentrate on some simple things that everyone would need to say e.g. authorship, quote relation
15:21:53 [pgroth]
ack pgroth
15:22:17 [pgroth]
Topic: Connection Task Force
15:22:22 [tlebo]
15:22:22 [satya]
We can revisit some of the example scenarios from the PROV XG also
15:22:41 [tlebo]
@satya, pointer to XG's list?
15:22:47 [dgarijo]
@satya: well, the first one wasn't the data journalism example?
15:22:48 [StephenCresswell]
kai: We have telecon discussing what we will do with connection TF,
15:22:54 [pgroth]
15:23:01 [StephenCresswell]
... so far we have informal rep ... more or less finished
15:23:09 [StephenCresswell]
... it should be a living document
15:23:09 [Zakim]
15:23:21 [StephenCresswell]
... eric and kai will be a contact
15:23:34 [StephenCresswell]
... What will we do next?
15:23:45 [dgarijo]
15:23:53 [StephenCresswell]
... one thing is to identify mailing lists
15:23:55 [tlebo]
15:24:15 [StephenCresswell]
... we don't want to be seen as the people who actually communicate with all these connections
15:24:24 [satya]
@Daniel: agree but maybe we should avoid CS jargon - since many of our targeted users are non-CS
15:24:29 [StephenCresswell]
... it would just add another step to communications
15:24:45 [StephenCresswell]
... We brainstormed on what else we could provide
15:24:51 [dgarijo]
@tlebo: 5.3.1, 5.3.2 and 5.3.3 are the 3 3 scenario.
15:25:05 [StephenCresswell]
... We thought about organising additional telecons
15:25:25 [StephenCresswell]
... we other groups, e.g. creative commons
15:25:31 [pgroth]
15:25:41 [StephenCresswell]
... What does the group think?
15:25:44 [dgarijo]
@Satya: what does CS mean?
15:25:55 [satya]
15:25:58 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: Still a lot to do in engaging with other groups
15:26:13 [satya]
@daniel: computer science
15:26:14 [Luc]
q+ to mention the best practice deliverable
15:26:21 [StephenCresswell]
... e.g. kai involved with DC group
15:26:26 [dgarijo]
@satya: thx!
15:26:27 [pgroth]
15:26:47 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: In charter we have Best Practive deliverable
15:27:38 [StephenCresswell]
... would involve technical work on how integrate e.g. creative commons work
15:27:42 [YolandaGil]
15:27:45 [pgroth]
ack Luc
15:27:45 [Zakim]
Luc, you wanted to mention the best practice deliverable
15:28:05 [StephenCresswell]
kai: That's sort of thing what we might discuss on new telcons
15:28:39 [pgroth]
ack YolandaGil
15:28:52 [StephenCresswell]
kai: What can be our role where we are not bridge persons?
15:28:56 [Zakim]
15:29:15 [Zakim]
15:29:23 [paolo]
have to leave, apologies
15:29:42 [Zakim]
15:29:44 [StephenCresswell]
yolanda: There are not many people on connection TF, and it is too daunting to look at technical integration at all these areas ourselves
15:30:08 [StephenCresswell]
... we need to set up discussions in these separate areas
15:30:26 [pgroth]
15:31:00 [StephenCresswell]
... telcons would be vehicle to get more people participating, and the outcome from calls would move us towards best practice deliverables
15:31:20 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: seems like a good way forwards
15:32:12 [StephenCresswell]
yolanda: Maybe people will be scared off by prov-dm document, and maybe we should hold off until we have more accessible documents
15:32:33 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: seems reasonable to wait for primer etc.
15:32:40 [pgroth]
15:32:53 [Luc]
we should use the w3c teleconference system for those calls, and we need to book them ahead
15:33:05 [Luc]
+1 for January
15:33:14 [StephenCresswell]
yolanda: maybe we can schedule for later ... e.g. Decemeber, January
15:33:24 [pgroth]
Topic: PROV-O
15:33:33 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: January seems best.
15:33:45 [tlebo] : one good (3 terms), two bad (conflating GraphContainer and Graph; sd:name doesn't identify), one opportunity (reconciling SPARQL-WG, RDF-WG, PROV-WG)
15:34:26 [StephenCresswell]
tlebo: Some feedback on F2F (named graphs)
15:34:42 [StephenCresswell]
... they have resolved to distinguish
15:34:51 [StephenCresswell]
graph containers and graph serialisations
15:34:58 [tlebo]
15:35:30 [StephenCresswell]
... the clear distinction will help proposal
15:35:51 [StephenCresswell]
... they have some problem with the SPARQL WG
15:36:20 [StephenCresswell]
... vocabularies used to identify graph doesn't identify graph container
15:36:30 [StephenCresswell]
... needs to be solved in SPARQL WG
15:36:36 [pgroth]
15:37:03 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: Any impression on whether we just have to wait?
15:37:16 [StephenCresswell]
tlebo: We need to be more proactive than that
15:37:43 [satya]
@Tim: thanks! The distinction between g-snap and g-box seems to be special importance to this WG
15:37:47 [satya]
@tim: agree
15:37:50 [pgroth]
15:37:54 [StephenCresswell]
... we need to interact more to make sure the clear distinction is established and maintained
15:38:29 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Concerned that we become dependent on what SPARQL WG say
15:39:19 [StephenCresswell]
tlebo: Problem is that they have established RDF vocab to talk about endpoints, graphs etc., and they fail to make distinction
15:39:19 [Luc]
there was a suggestion by Sandro to express the data journalism example, and trying to use some form of name graph, and learn from that
15:39:37 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Their problem or ours?
15:39:48 [pgroth]
15:40:10 [AndroUser]
AndroUser has joined #prov
15:40:11 [StephenCresswell]
tlebo: Ours. They could continue to ignore it and they would meet their aims.
15:40:26 [pgroth]
15:40:39 [pgroth]
Topic: Update PROV-O
15:40:47 [StephenCresswell]
tlebo: Discussion on named graphs for accounts is stalled by these problems.
15:41:00 [dgarijo]
hmm, if we cannot use named graphs as accounts then we will have to include "accounts" on the ontology.
15:41:10 [dgarijo]
once again.
15:41:32 [StephenCresswell]
satya: Luc joined ontology call and had suggestions before release of documents.
15:41:48 [Zakim]
+ +1.509.375.aacc
15:41:50 [pgroth]
15:41:57 [Luc]
15:41:58 [GK]
q+ top suggest an approach to simplifyingpresentation of the D<M might be via the ontology
15:42:05 [pgroth]
15:42:12 [StephenCresswell]
... on data model, it might make sense to withhold prov-o until readablity of dm doc is improved
15:42:24 [stain]
@Luc +1 - let's do an agile first version
15:42:33 [stain]
with lots of bugs :)
15:42:37 [pgroth]
15:42:38 [GK]
q+ to suggest an approach to simplifying presentation of the DM might be via the ontology
15:42:41 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: Would be worried to dealy prov-o document, we need serialisation, for primer etc.
15:42:52 [pgroth]
ack Luc
15:43:12 [StephenCresswell]
satya: we can go ahead and release
15:43:18 [pgroth]
15:43:30 [jcheney]
15:43:31 [tlebo]
PROV-O is not the RDF serialization?
15:43:33 [pgroth]
ack GK
15:43:33 [Zakim]
GK, you wanted to suggest an approach to simplifying presentation of the DM might be via the ontology
15:43:37 [StephenCresswell] clarify, prov-o is not the RDF serialisation
15:44:24 [tlebo]
so, PROV-O is RDF serialization + axioms?
15:44:31 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Maybe leave data model as it is, but look at ways through ontology and RDF representation, to make the simple things easy to say.
15:44:58 [pgroth]
15:45:08 [StephenCresswell]
satya: Agree. Think we have covered the mapping of all the terms in data model.
15:45:29 [dgarijo]
@GK: Paul already proposed some shortcut fucntions
15:45:46 [Luc]
15:46:10 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Shortcuts may provide a less scary way to present examples
15:46:12 [stain]
15:46:20 [dgarijo]
15:46:50 [StephenCresswell]
satya: Are we considering these things to be part of core data model or as extensions?
15:46:54 [GK]
My point was that the ontology could contain things not in the data model, or easier structures to represent DM structures
15:47:04 [pgroth]
ack pgroth
15:47:05 [stain]
15:47:07 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: I consider them part of the core
15:47:19 [GK]
.. i.e. not necessarily 1:1 correspondence between DM and O
15:47:35 [pgroth]
15:47:55 [StephenCresswell]
jcheney: Data model uses abstract syntax, ontology uses RDF, but describes constraints and specialisations
15:48:06 [GK]
I think the ontology effectively *does* define RDGF serialization
15:48:13 [pgroth]
the RDF falls out of the Ontology
15:48:27 [stain]
but not with any constraints of formats or implicit/explicit etc.
15:48:28 [StephenCresswell]
... but doesn't describe mapping to ontology
15:48:38 [stain]
I assume PAQ should come with some minimum serialisation expectations
15:48:48 [GK]
@pgroth yes that's what I meant to say :)
15:49:00 [stain]
so you could use PROV-O in Manchester Syntax if you like, but don't expect too many applications to understand it
15:49:01 [MacTed]
I don't understand "RDF serialization" nor "XML serialization" in this context. "RDF/XML serialization", yes. or Turtle, N-Triples, etc.
15:49:09 [StephenCresswell]
satya: We tried to model DM classes and provide definitions. What is mssing?
15:49:26 [pgroth]
zakim, who is noisy?
15:49:33 [stain]
XML serialisation CAN be a (restricted) RDF/XML serialisation
15:49:37 [Zakim]
pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: GK (28%), ne (23%), Satya_Sahoo (4%)
15:49:39 [GK]
ACtually it's 2-stage: model -> abstract RDDF (ontology does that), then given that RDF-syntax gives RDF/XML.
15:50:26 [StephenCresswell]
jcheney: There's a deliverable about serialisation, is that intended to be serialisation of the of the ontology, or the mapping from the DM to the ontology?
15:50:41 [pgroth]
15:50:44 [pgroth]
ack jcheney
15:50:46 [StephenCresswell]
satya: We will add some text on that.
15:51:05 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: On issue of time, there don't seem to be any time examples
15:51:16 [dgarijo]
we talked about reusing some time ontologies.
15:51:28 [StephenCresswell]
... e.g. workflow example, can we have time in there?
15:51:33 [pgroth]
15:51:41 [pgroth]
ack Luc
15:51:42 [StephenCresswell]
satya: We will add e.g. start and stop time of processes.
15:51:46 [dgarijo]
like :
15:52:18 [tlebo]
illustration of owl time:
15:52:39 [stain] I mean
15:52:53 [stain]
if you are required to understand the extensions if you are "PROV-DM compliant"
15:53:11 [StephenCresswell]
stain: Prov-DM extensions, are those something that we are required to understand?
15:53:16 [stain]
or if it is optional, so that although PROV-O should have these terms, you don't need to understand it to be PROV-O compliant
15:53:29 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: they are part of the data model
15:53:49 [dgarijo]
@Satya: entities?
15:53:59 [pgroth]
15:54:00 [StephenCresswell]
satya: What are the domain and range of the relations?
15:54:13 [pgroth]
ack stain
15:54:13 [GK]
15:54:21 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: entities
15:54:22 [pgroth]
15:54:23 [pgroth]
15:55:08 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: It would be good to reflect everything in the DM into the ontology
15:55:22 [StephenCresswell]
... not necessarily all the contraints
15:55:26 [pgroth]
15:55:28 [tlebo]
RDF examples for each construct are in the repository:
15:55:41 [tlebo]
not complete, not correct, but there :-)
15:55:42 [GK]
+1 need the vocabulary soonest, not nessecarily constraints
15:55:51 [StephenCresswell]
satya: Primary aim should be to get all the terms modelled,
15:56:13 [StephenCresswell]
... but if you don't define all the domain, range etc.
15:56:28 [StephenCresswell]
... people have problems creating the RDF
15:56:43 [GK]
+1 domain and range are helpful for generating RDF
15:57:14 [StephenCresswell]
pgroth: Domain and range are mostly there anyway, the hierachies are not so important at this stage.
15:58:01 [pgroth]
15:58:02 [StephenCresswell]
satya: Agree, but OWL community won't like it.
15:58:18 [stain]
example of XSD which happen to produce RDF/XML: produces
15:58:23 [pgroth]
Topic: Discussion on Entity Attributes
15:58:33 [stain]
.. but you get strange double-nesting due to the property-class nature of RDF/XML
15:58:35 [GK]
15:58:54 [Zakim]
15:58:57 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Link is to one of most recent messages,
15:59:11 [StephenCresswell]
... discussion between GK and Jim has converged
15:59:15 [Zakim]
15:59:24 [StephenCresswell]
... to having attributes as part of characterisation
15:59:46 [StephenCresswell]
... to aid interoperability
16:00:16 [pgroth]
16:00:25 [StephenCresswell]
... Also agreed we don't have to distinguish between characterising and non-characterising attributes
16:00:33 [tlebo]
I haven't read the most recent emails on this, but the last time we talked about this, "characterizing attributes" were trying to reinvent owl.
16:00:33 [Zakim]
16:00:54 [Luc]
q+ to ask if you still consider that attributes still have a given value for some interval
16:00:58 [satya]
@tim: +1
16:00:58 [tlebo]
(sorry, call also dropped)
16:01:13 [stain]
should we do a proposal and vote?
16:01:39 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: Didn't mention whether a given attr has fixed value for some interval
16:01:43 [satya]
16:01:53 [tlebo]
all attributes are fixed in an entity, no?
16:02:10 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Any attr for entity is fixed for entity in what interval that entity exists.
16:02:26 [Zakim]
16:02:31 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Argument for interop came from jim.
16:02:32 [pgroth]
ack Luc
16:02:32 [Zakim]
Luc, you wanted to ask if you still consider that attributes still have a given value for some interval
16:02:33 [dgarijo]
gotta go, sry.
16:02:43 [Zakim]
16:03:03 [StephenCresswell]
... looking at provenance challenge, the attrs were introduced to enable conversion of information between different formats
16:03:08 [Zakim]
16:03:10 [Zakim]
16:03:19 [kai]
sorry, have to leave timely
16:03:37 [tlebo]
what is the brewing proposal we may vote on?
16:03:40 [StephenCresswell]
... the approach I was suggested could be seen as a dual to that
16:04:06 [StephenCresswell]
Luc: We will try to get that articulated so we can make the case in the doc.
16:04:28 [StephenCresswell]
... are there aspects of the document which conflict with what you agreed with Jim?
16:04:49 [StephenCresswell]
GK: Will clarify this.
16:04:53 [pgroth]
16:05:09 [pgroth]
ack satya
16:05:39 [StephenCresswell]
satya: What GK said is exactly what frames and slots do, and that carries over to OWL.
16:05:49 [tlebo]
just as PROV is avoiding the Time and Location discussions, it should also avoid being a schema language.
16:06:18 [pgroth]
16:06:42 [StephenCresswell]
satya: To make it clear, it would help you don't explicitly carry around attributes of entitty to be able to define it properly, that is done by typing information
16:06:48 [Zakim]
16:06:49 [Zakim]
16:06:52 [Zakim]
16:06:53 [Zakim]
16:06:53 [Zakim]
16:06:56 [Zakim]
16:06:57 [pgroth]
rrsagent, set log public
16:06:57 [Zakim]
16:07:03 [Zakim]
16:07:05 [pgroth]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:07:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate pgroth
16:07:11 [pgroth]
trackbot, end telcon
16:07:11 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:07:11 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been pgroth, Luc, Yogesh_Simmhan, GK, Curt_Tilmes, +1.315.723.aaaa, tlebo, stain, [ISI], kai?, ne, dgarijo, +1.518.633.aabb, MacTed,
16:07:12 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:07:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:07:13 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:07:13 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items
16:07:15 [Zakim]
... Satya_Sahoo, paolo, +1.509.375.aacc