15:42:35 RRSAgent has joined #prov 15:42:35 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/11/17-prov-irc 15:42:37 RRSAgent, make logs world 15:42:39 Zakim, this will be 15:42:39 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 15:42:39 Zakim, this will be PROV 15:42:40 Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 15:42:40 ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes 15:42:40 Date: 17 November 2011 15:42:50 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.11.17 15:43:00 Chair: Luc Moreau 15:43:05 Scribe: James Cheney 15:43:13 rrsagent, make logs public 15:52:49 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:52:49 apparently SW_(OWL)12:00PM has ended, Luc 15:52:50 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, Zakim, trackbot, sandro, stain 15:53:31 Zakim, this will be PROV 15:53:31 ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes 15:53:51 pgroth has joined #prov 15:56:03 Paolo has joined #prov 15:56:08 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 15:56:15 +??P2 15:56:21 zakim, ??P2 is me 15:56:21 +Paolo; got it 15:57:08 Curt has joined #prov 15:57:22 + +44.238.059.aaaa 15:57:37 zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me 15:57:37 +Luc; got it 15:58:26 satya has joined #prov 15:58:37 +Curt_Tilmes 15:58:44 +[IPcaller] 15:58:51 +Satya_Sahoo 15:59:07 Zakim, [IPCaller] is me 15:59:07 +pgroth; got it 15:59:31 GK1 has joined #prov 16:00:16 SamCoppens has joined #prov 16:00:36 GK has joined #prov 16:00:57 +??P19 16:01:06 christine has joined #prov 16:01:18 smiles has joined #prov 16:01:24 tlebo has joined #prov 16:01:40 +??P44 16:01:53 jcheney has joined #prov 16:01:58 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:02:02 + +1.518.276.aabb 16:02:18 +??P43 16:02:22 On the phone I see Paolo, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, pgroth, Satya_Sahoo, ??P19, ??P44, +1.518.276.aabb, ??P43 16:02:22 james, are you ready to scribe? 16:02:30 zakim, i may be ??p44 16:02:42 Yes 16:02:42 @jcheney, james, are you ready to scribe? 16:02:48 sorry, GK, I do not understand your question 16:02:52 +??P27 16:03:11 +[OpenLink] 16:03:14 +stain 16:03:16 zednik has joined #prov 16:03:19 -??P43 16:03:20 zakim, aabb is tlebo 16:03:20 Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me 16:03:21 zakim, mute me 16:03:28 +tlebo; got it 16:03:28 khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov 16:03:30 +MacTed; got it 16:03:32 MacTed should now be muted 16:03:35 F2F? 16:03:44 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.11.17 16:03:44 PROPOSED to accept the minutes of the Nov. 10 telecon 16:03:53 Topic: Review minutes of last wee's telecon 16:03:53 +1 16:03:54 +1 16:03:58 +1 16:04:00 +1 16:04:04 +1 16:04:11 0 16:04:16 (not there) 16:04:18 +??P52 16:04:22 +1 16:04:22 +1 16:04:27 YolandaGil has joined #prov 16:04:33 Accepted: the minutes of the Nov. 10 telecon 16:04:34 zakim, I am ??P52 16:04:34 +GK; got it 16:04:42 +Yolanda 16:04:51 Topic: Review actions 16:05:13 +[IPcaller] 16:05:24 topic: F2F2 16:05:26 + +329331aacc 16:05:33 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/46974/f2f2_options/results 16:05:36 Luc: Action to Satya still open 16:05:40 zakim, +329331aacc is me 16:05:40 +SamCoppens; got it 16:05:41 Topic: F2F2 16:05:52 jcheney it should be closed 16:06:03 not allowed :-( 16:06:12 @James, I think Luc said that the action is now closed 16:06:19 Do'h. 16:06:31 and probably easier to travel to from US 16:06:32 Luc: action to be closed [correction] 16:06:39 q? 16:06:43 +q 16:06:46 +??P63 16:06:52 Luc: Strong preference for Amsterdam Feb 2-3 16:06:57 Vinh has joined #prov 16:07:09 Paul: Will send information about travel to/from meeting place - close to airport 16:07:27 q+ 16:07:31 train from AMS to city centre is fairly fast as far as I remember 16:07:33 Action: pgroth to confirm F2F2 venue and make hotel suggestions 16:07:34 Created ACTION-43 - Confirm F2F2 venue and make hotel suggestions [on Paul Groth - due 2011-11-24]. 16:07:35 q- 16:07:39 StephenCresswell has joined #prov 16:07:42 ack sat 16:08:00 Satya: Logistics. Letters from Paul/university for visa purposes? 16:08:17 Paul: Will include this in the visit information 16:08:24 Scribe: jcheney 16:08:38 q? 16:08:41 Vinh_ has joined #prov 16:08:54 +sandro 16:08:59 + +1.937.343.aadd 16:09:12 zakim, +1.937.343.aadd is me 16:09:12 +Vinh_; got it 16:09:14 we need a new fight for F2F now that both EntityInRole and IVPof is gone 16:09:22 q? 16:09:38 video conferencing 16:09:40 Luc: Paul, will there be university facilities? 16:09:44 Paul: Still checking 16:09:51 Luc: Can people call in? 16:09:53 Paul: Yes 16:10:06 q? 16:10:12 Paul: Internet also, video conferencing maybe 16:10:18 topic: PAQ document 16:10:39 graham? 16:10:44 Luc: Status update from Graham pr Paul 16:10:49 +[ISI] 16:10:56 -Yolanda 16:11:13 Graham: Changes from last week 16:11:27 Paul: Defining provenance service section moved to same place as provenance URI 16:11:35 Zakim, [ISI] is really me 16:11:35 +YolandaGil; got it 16:12:09 Graham: Clarify that entity-uri can use any scheme, need not be dereferenceable 16:12:41 Graham: Text discussing fact that provenance informatio may not be stable (!) as logn as it doens't contradict previous assertions 16:12:51 Luc: Plans further changes? 16:12:55 q+ 16:13:03 Graham: Title discussion; author list 16:13:03 @gk: the problem was example of section 6 which said entity -uri will be dereferenced 16:13:35 Luc: Last week decided to hold vote; needs to be recorded for W3C publication 16:13:44 Graham: happy for vote to proceed 16:13:59 pgroth: Likewise; still some open issues but feedback good 16:14:44 Luc: Think we should go ahead 16:15:13 Graham: Email discussion? 16:15:20 q? 16:15:24 q- 16:15:27 Luc: Email discussion not helping; need to talk 16:15:30 q+ 16:16:14 smiles: Happy with document release, still a lot of TODOs though 16:16:32 kai has joined #prov 16:16:34 (@gk, you are coming through somewhat distorted...) 16:16:42 -1 for removing the ToDos 16:16:54 GK: TODOs not unusual, but can clean up first 16:17:14 +[IPcaller.a] 16:17:20 q? 16:17:23 so formatting 16:17:24 ack sm 16:17:25 smiles: OK if we make sure people understand that document is still early stage; partly about aesthetics/readability 16:17:27 zakim, +[IPcaller.a] is me. 16:17:27 sorry, kai, I do not recognize a party named '+[IPcaller.a]' 16:17:32 zakim, [IPcaller.a] is me. 16:17:32 +kai; got it 16:18:10 gk: Unlikely to be able to do this until next week 16:18:18 Luc: Compliance with W3C requirements? 16:18:23 gk: Not yet 16:19:09 +q 16:20:33 smiles: Pending issues in 4.1.2; meaning of annotations unclear 16:20:42 q+ 16:21:19 ack pgr 16:21:42 pgroth: Suggest we put all TODOs and notes in boxes - won't change actual text 16:21:55 +1 clarification via formatting cleanup 16:22:05 pgroth: as part of cleanup 16:22:33 notes used to good effect in PROV-DM as well -- there's a DIV class for it 16:22:44 @GK, your voice is *VERY* distorted 16:22:52 gk: Pulling out placeholder TODOs may make things less readable 16:22:52 yes 16:23:03 gk: Plan to do a pass and handle easy cases 16:23:23 q? 16:23:31 proposed: 'To Release PAQ document as a first public working draft' 16:23:47 +1 16:23:48 +1 16:23:50 +1 16:23:51 +1 (with those minor edits) 16:23:51 +1 16:23:53 +1 16:23:55 +1 16:23:57 +1 16:24:09 +1 -- will go along with the editors' decision 16:24:33 q? 16:24:35 +1 16:24:35 +1 16:24:35 +1 16:24:37 +1 16:24:59 accepted: 'To Release PAQ document as a first public working draft' 16:25:20 @Paul: I cab do a quick pass through the @@ after this telecon 16:25:43 q? 16:25:44 @GK cool 16:25:49 ACTION GK need to write "status of this document para" 16:25:50 Created ACTION-44 - Need to write "status of this document para" [on Graham Klyne - due 2011-11-24]. 16:25:56 topic: prov-o 16:25:57 Luc: need to do pass to meet W3C formal publication requirements 16:26:02 TOPIC: Prov-O 16:26:06 (oops :) 16:26:40 Satya: Status update; updating HTML and OWL file to incorporate QualifiedInvolvement, update diagrams 16:27:06 q? 16:27:08 ... Ontology call agrees that current version handles qualification information closer to prov-dm 16:27:24 ... Going through issues; happy to take questions or move forward to FPWD 16:27:31 q? 16:28:00 i haven't 16:28:06 me neither 16:28:09 Luc: Haven't had time to review yet; 16:28:10 I have not had a chance either I'm afraid 16:28:22 could we vote on it next week? 16:28:26 q+ 16:28:32 I didn't have time to review properly ... but I don't object to its release 16:28:33 @paul +1 16:28:35 q? 16:28:39 Luc: Possible vote next week? 16:29:07 q- 16:29:07 Paul: We could proceed as with PAQ - one week comment/review period before possible vote 16:29:10 q? 16:29:10 I would actually like to get a chance to see it in detail before it goes out 16:29:42 Luc: PROV-DM has changed; should we coordinate releases? 16:30:04 q+ 16:30:09 Luc, good point 16:30:27 @simon: this reminds me that my ASN rendering of examples in the primer need realigning with the new PROV-DM terminology 16:30:39 +q 16:30:40 I think it would be good to have coordinated, aligned releases of PROV-DM and PROV-O 16:30:53 ack pgroth 16:31:23 Luc: In prov-O which version of Prov-DM is being referenced? 16:31:33 Zakim, who's noisy 16:31:33 I don't understand 'who's noisy', MacTed 16:31:37 q? 16:31:38 Zakim, who's noisy? 16:31:48 MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (10%), Satya_Sahoo (84%), stain (79%) 16:31:49 Satya: Probably somewhere in between. Have tried to cover changes discussed on mailing list. 16:31:56 Mostly aligned with the first released working draft 16:31:58 stain can you mute? 16:32:02 sorry 16:32:07 ... but coordinated doesn't necessarily mean simultaneous release? 16:32:29 Satya: As Paul said, if we keep changing prov-o to sync with prov-dm then may need to wait for prov-dm. 16:32:42 q? 16:32:47 ack kh 16:33:11 Khalid: When is next release of prov-dm? 16:33:46 Luc: Would like to release prov-dm soon, 2-3 weeks. Needs review. 16:34:16 ... Could release FPWD of PROV-O next week and 2nd release syncd with PROV-DM 16:34:25 q+ 16:34:29 Satya: Makes sense, but there will always be time lag 16:34:50 q? 16:35:04 ack pg 16:35:18 q+ 16:35:35 pgroth: PROV-O not an exact reflection of PROV-DM FPWD. Somewhere in between 16:36:14 ... This is fine but need to pick out important changes and reflect them, e.g. renaming PE -> activity 16:36:34 q? 16:36:37 Noooo, I will have to redo all the diagrams because of that change :-) 16:36:42 ... More complicated changes can wait; may make it look more synchronized 16:36:43 lol 16:37:33 Paolo: Linking releases good, gives strong signal, but danger of lag - snags may throw everything off track 16:37:55 q? 16:37:56 +1 16:37:57 ... Would like to see well-defined PROV-DM schedule with PROV-O following 16:37:59 ack pa 16:38:28 Satya: Updating prov-o to model constraints fed back into prov-dm. 16:38:41 Paolo: Overall effect of linking two is dangerous. 16:38:45 q? 16:38:46 +q 16:38:46 q- 16:39:13 ack jch 16:39:28 jcheney: will have to converge eventually... 16:40:16 Luc: Could have section in preamble of PROV-O summarizing relation to FPWD of PROV-DM 16:40:28 +1 preamble noting "changes already made over there mean changes will be made here. here's a short list:..." 16:40:50 Satya: Would it enable us to make PROV-DM and PROV-O in lock step? 16:40:58 ... there will always be something to do 16:41:39 q+ 16:41:51 Zakim, unmte me 16:41:51 I don't understand 'unmte me', MacTed 16:41:55 Zakim, unmute me 16:41:55 MacTed should no longer be muted 16:41:59 q- 16:42:05 I think that this list can be useful for purposes other than prov-o, e.g., for the primer, paq, or simply to keep tracks of the changes made between releases 16:42:12 Luc: This is list of changes already made in prov-dm and will be implemented in prov-o 16:42:20 Satya: Can do this, need to keep it updated 16:42:26 q? 16:42:33 Zakim, mute me 16:42:33 MacTed should now be muted 16:43:00 +q 16:43:34 Luc: Will review and decide about moving towards FPWD 16:44:14 Khalid: can be useful if list is on wiki page also - changelog for prov-dm. 16:44:28 +1 -- this sort of list is relevant to all cross-dependent docs in parallel production... 16:44:33 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#changes-since-previous-version 16:44:34 Luc: Yes, it would be useful and already exists 16:44:34 @khalid ood idea 16:44:41 s/ood/good 16:45:01 q? 16:45:04 ack khal 16:45:05 thanks 16:45:25 TOPIC: PROV-PRIMER 16:45:57 smiles: First version available for review; has been extended recently with PROV-ASN examples in appendix 16:46:03 ... Comments welcome 16:46:21 tlebo has joined #prov 16:46:30 q+ 16:46:31 ... Concept illustrations focus on the apparently most stable things; more needs to be done for next version 16:46:52 Luc: Does this follow PROV-DM or PROV-O? In between? 16:47:01 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html 16:47:07 smiles: Following PROV-DM as of FPWD 16:47:14 q? 16:47:27 ... Worked examples include rdf/prov-o 16:47:38 q+ 16:47:39 Luc: Activities or process executions? 16:47:58 smiles: Have updated terminology to use "activity" 16:48:30 q? 16:48:35 ... ASN uses PEs, needs to be updated 16:48:40 ack pgr 16:48:49 q- 16:49:10 pgroth: Same question about PROV-O and PROV-DM: synchronization would be good, how much work to sync with PROV-O 16:49:12 @paul +1 16:49:15 @simon: yes I am the one who is lagging behind PROV-dM (shame) 16:49:45 ... Good to release to public to get this on radar, people may want to start implementing. 16:50:09 q? 16:50:15 q+ 16:50:17 I think the primer will help other people to review the rest of the specs 16:50:32 Simon: Agree releasing soon would be good, to find out if people find it readable, have't kept up with prov-o 16:50:40 ack sat 16:50:55 q+ to respond 16:51:04 satya: Right now primer does not have inference rules, qualified involvement. Planning to vote on prov-o next week. 16:51:13 ... Do you think we should delay prov-o pending changes? 16:51:17 I think it's just fine that the primer doesn't concern itself with the inferencde rules. It the vocab that's key. 16:51:31 @paul +1 16:51:40 pgroth: Primer doesn't have to represent everything. Ontology may not have to change, just rpimer 16:51:47 s/rpimer/primer/ 16:52:19 ... Revert activity to process execution? Review this week for possible vote next week? 16:52:20 q? 16:52:25 ack pgroth 16:52:27 pgroth, you wanted to respond 16:52:32 ack pro 16:53:27 Luc: Earlier hesitated to delay prov-o until primer ready. 16:53:37 ... Simon, suggesting that this is ready for FPWD? 16:53:48 q+ 16:53:55 q+ 16:53:59 ack yo 16:54:22 smiles: if there is consensus 16:54:53 YolandaGil: sandro, others - what should we do to relate to other W3C actvities or context? 16:54:57 q? 16:55:08 zakim, who is speaking 16:55:08 I don't understand 'who is speaking', jcheney 16:55:13 zakim, who is noisy? 16:55:19 q+ to say I found the primer very useful as is; helped me to get into issues in DM. I think early release could help get better feedback on other areas. 16:55:25 jcheney, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: sandro (85%) 16:55:50 sandro: hard to know what people will see - important to annonce and find reviewers/colleagues in target audience 16:56:00 ... semantic web people not already familiar with provenance? 16:56:20 Luc: Got good feedback from Tom Baker on Prov-DM, was keen to see updates 16:56:21 so are we saying an internal review 16:56:25 without fpwd 16:56:25 agree with the idea of a semi-internal review from a slightly less "primed" panel 16:56:26 q? 16:56:37 Yolanda: good suggestion - small group review 16:56:50 Luc: before FPWD? 16:56:59 Yolanda: Yes 16:57:30 q+ 16:57:42 jcheney: is primer a recommendation, and do we need to worry about FPWD status 16:57:52 we have to do FPWD and LC 16:57:55 Luc:Primer will be a Note 16:58:20 q- 16:58:21 sandro: Only difference is phrase that says that it is not intended to be recommendation track 16:58:24 q- 16:58:32 (Thanks, that answers my question!) 16:58:42 sandro: Otherwise process si the same 16:58:52 gk talk softer 16:58:53 try 10 cm away from mic 16:59:00 better 16:59:03 +1 16:59:14 gk: think primer is too useful to hold back on release. found reading helped understand discussion issues better. 16:59:29 ... if we can get primer out, it will help seed interest/understanding in other docs 16:59:30 q? 16:59:33 ack gk 16:59:33 GK, you wanted to say I found the primer very useful as is; helped me to get into issues in DM. I think early release could help get better feedback on other areas. 16:59:34 q+ 16:59:37 @GK, +1 16:59:44 ack pg 16:59:59 pgroth: is there a pseudo-way of making primer available pre FPWD? 17:00:22 sandro: can point people to respec version, circulate as editor's draft 17:00:50 smiles: editor's draft circulation sounds good 17:01:08 sandro: editor's draft has connotation of being "even more work in progress" 17:01:26 q? 17:01:32 Luc: likely to get feedback on all 3 - dm, o, primer 17:02:10 Luc: Suggested names for internal reviewers; next week, decide whether to release as ED or FPWD 17:02:35 q? 17:02:43 smiles: Pass on to sympathetic reviewers who will offer constructive feedback 17:03:00 q? 17:03:14 Luc: adjourned 17:03:14 -??P19 17:03:16 -Satya_Sahoo 17:03:17 -Vinh_ 17:03:17 -pgroth 17:03:17 -Paolo 17:03:18 -[IPcaller] 17:03:19 -kai 17:03:21 -sandro 17:03:23 -stain 17:03:25 luc shall we talk? 17:03:29 -MacTed 17:03:31 @pgroth, yes 17:03:36 -??P44 17:03:41 -YolandaGil 17:03:43 -SamCoppens 17:03:53 -tlebo 17:03:55 -Curt_Tilmes 17:03:59 @pgroth I'm editing the PAQ @@s as we chat... 17:04:01 -??P27 17:04:03 -Luc 17:04:27 -??P63 17:04:31 -GK 17:04:33 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended 17:04:35 Attendees were Paolo, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, Satya_Sahoo, pgroth, +1.518.276.aabb, stain, tlebo, MacTed, GK, Yolanda, [IPcaller], SamCoppens, sandro, Vinh_, YolandaGil, kai 17:58:40 GK has left #prov