14:53:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:53:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-prov-irc
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> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.10.20
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> +[IPcaller]
14:55:58 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
14:55:58 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
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> +Luc
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> +Yogesh_Simmhan
14:58:04 <pgroth> cool :-)
14:58:45 <Zakim> +??P10
14:59:06 <GK> zakim, ??P10 is me
14:59:07 <Zakim> +GK; got it
14:59:11 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
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> +??P26
15:01:22 <Zakim> +stain
15:01:29 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
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> +[ISI]
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> +[IPcaller.a]
15:01:51 <jcheney> zakim, [IPCaller] is ne
15:01:51 <Zakim> +ne; got it
15:01:56 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]
15:02:09 <Zakim> +??P29
15:02:15 <stain> @kai does "probably" allow others to override..?
15:02:20 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
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> +[OpenLink]
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>    http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-10-13
15:03:16 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:03:17 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:03:25 <dgarijo> +1
15:03:26 <Curt> +1
15:03:26 <kai> +1
15:03:27 <tlebo> 0 (did not attend)
15:03:27 <StephenCresswell> +1
15:03:33 <Zakim> +??P35
15:03:34 <jcheney> 0 (dna)
15:03:41 <stain> 0 (not read them yet)
15:03:48 <YolandaGil> 0
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> +??P37
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Scribes
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> Topic: PROV-DM FPWD
15:05:22 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/18/first-draft-of-a-provenance-data-model-published/
15:05:26 <dgarijo> Khalid sends regrets
15:05:28 <StephenCresswell> ... there's a blog post from Ivan
15:05:35 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/
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> +Satya_Sahoo
15:06:30 <StephenCresswell> ... to get multiple perspectives
15:06:40 <pgroth> +q
15:06:43 <pgroth> ack pgroth
15:06:45 <pgroth> q?
15:06:49 <dgarijo> +q
15:06:51 <StephenCresswell> +q
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 public-prov-wg@w3.org
15:09:18 <Luc> ... it's standard text from w3c
15:09:32 <paolo> paolo has joined #prov
15:09:55 <Luc> q+
15:09:55 <pgroth> q?
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> +q
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   http://www.w3.org/Member/Mail/
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> +??P12
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> > public-prov-wg@w3.org: Your message has NOT been distributed to the list
15:12:47 <paolo> q+
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> q?
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> q+
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> +1
15:14:33 <YolandaGil> q+
15:14:40 <pgroth> q-
15:14:46 <pgroth> q+
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> q?
15:15:57 <StephenCresswell> ... some of the examples are hard to relate to 
15:16:38 <GK> Slightly related to this discussion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Oct/0156.html
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 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples
15:17:54 <dgarijo> @Yolanda +1
15:17:55 <pgroth> q?
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> q+
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> q+
15:20:16 <tlebo> RDF/XML :-(
15:20:17 <StephenCresswell> satya: linked data, bioinformatics, sensor data, has lots of examples 
15:20:39 <pgroth> q?
15:20:41 <StephenCresswell> ... maybe better than filesystem examples
15:20:43 <pgroth> ack satya
15:20:45 <satya> q-
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> q?
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> += http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples#Who_is_the_author_of_a_document
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> q?
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> +??P2
15:23:21 <StephenCresswell> ... eric and kai will be a contact 
15:23:34 <StephenCresswell> ... What will we do next?
15:23:45 <dgarijo> @tlebo: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/XGR-prov-20101214/#Analysis_of_The_State_of_the_Art
15:23:53 <StephenCresswell> ... one thing is to identify mailing lists
15:23:55 <tlebo> thx
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> q?
15:25:41 <StephenCresswell> ... What does the group think?
15:25:44 <dgarijo> @Satya: what does CS mean?
15:25:55 <satya> @Tim: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Analysis_of_Disease_Outbreak_Scenario
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> q?
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> +q
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> -stain
15:29:15 <Zakim> +stain
15:29:23 <paolo> have to leave, apologies
15:29:42 <Zakim> -paolo
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> q?
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> q?
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> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Reflections_from_RDF-WG_F2F2 : 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> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts
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> q?
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> q?
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> q?
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> q?
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> q?
15:41:57 <Luc> q+
15:41:58 <GK> q+ top suggest an approach to simplifyingpresentation of the D<M might be via the ontology
15:42:05 <pgroth> q?
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> q?
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> q+
15:43:30 <jcheney> +q
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> ...to 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> q?
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> q+
15:46:10 <StephenCresswell> GK: Shortcuts  may provide a less scary way to present examples
15:46:12 <stain> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#prov-dm-extensions  
15:46:20 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/#common-relations
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> q+
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> q+
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> q?
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> q?
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 : http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/
15:52:18 <tlebo> illustration of owl time: https://github.com/timrdf/csv2rdf4lod-automation/raw/master/doc/ontology-diagrams/owl-time.pdf
15:52:39 <stain> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#prov-dm-extensions 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> q?
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> q-
15:54:23 <pgroth> q?
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> q?
15:55:28 <tlebo> RDF examples for each construct are in the repository: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/components
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> q?
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: https://github.com/myGrid/scufl2/blob/master/scufl2-rdfxml/src/main/resources/uk/org/taverna/scufl2/rdfxml/xsd/scufl2.xsd produces https://github.com/myGrid/scufl2/blob/master/scufl2-rdfxml/src/test/resources/uk/org/taverna/scufl2/rdfxml/example/workflowBundle.rdf
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> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Oct/0142.html
15:58:54 <Zakim> -tlebo
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> +tlebo
15:59:24 <StephenCresswell> ... to having attributes as part of characterisation
15:59:46 <StephenCresswell> ... to aid interoperability
16:00:16 <pgroth> q?
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> -Yogesh_Simmhan
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> q+
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> -[ISI]
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> -??P35
16:03:03 <StephenCresswell> ... looking at provenance challenge, the attrs were introduced to enable conversion of information between different formats
16:03:08 <Zakim> -kai?
16:03:10 <Zakim> -dgarijo
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> q?
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> q?
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> -Satya_Sahoo
16:06:49 <Zakim> -stain
16:06:52 <Zakim> -tlebo
16:06:53 <Zakim> -??P37
16:06:53 <Zakim> -ne
16:06:56 <Zakim> -Luc
16:06:57 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
16:06:57 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:07:03 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
16:07:05 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:07:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-prov-minutes.html 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 http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-prov-minutes.html 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