Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 01 September 2011

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.01
Seen
Curt Tilmes, Daniel Garijo, David Corsar, Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti, Graham Klyne, Helena Deus, James McCusker, Jörn Hees, Luc Moreau, Paolo Missier, Sam Coppens, Sandro Hawke, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stephan Zednik, Stephen Cresswell, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Vinh Nguyen
Chair
Luc Moreau
Scribe
Stian Soiland-Reyes, Graham Klyne
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. the minutes of Aug 25 telecon link
  2. Edge labels contain a verb link
  3. To use past tense for verbs link
Topics
  1. Admin

    Minutes were approved. No outstanding action.

  2. Named graphs requirements

    we reviewed the list of requirements that have been identified for named graphs so far. It was agreed that this list will be finalized by next week (by Satya, Graham, Simon and Luc). Tentative date for call with RDF-WG is Sep 15, after our regular teleconference.

  3. Name for the standard

    A straw poll was conducted on current proposals for standard name. Results will be communicated by email. Final decision, hopefully, will be taken next week.

  4. Primer Document

    We reopened the issue of writing a Primer. It was felt that the model is not stable enough, and too much of a moving target, to be able to write a primer. However, developing an example in full would be beneficial. Simon will come back to the WG with a proposal.

  5. Adopting naming conventions

    Naming conventions for model/ontology were debated. It was agreed that edge labels should contain a verb and should be expressed in past sense. Actions on editors of the conceptual/formal models to update their documents accordingly.

  6. Provenance Ontology

    Satya provided an update on the ontology development. The issue of toplevel concepts was identified. It was agreed that a call should resolve such issues between conceptual model and ontology.

14:57:13 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-prov-irc

14:57:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:57:17 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be

14:57:17 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

14:57:18 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:57:18 <trackbot> Date: 01 September 2011
14:57:18 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV

Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV

14:57:18 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes

14:57:34 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.01
14:57:44 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
14:57:49 <Luc> Scribe: stain

(Scribe set to Stian Soiland-Reyes)

14:57:55 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public

14:58:04 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

14:58:11 <Zakim> +??P12

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12

14:58:18 <Zakim> + +1.443.987.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.443.987.aaaa

14:58:28 <Zakim> +??P32

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P32

14:58:48 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.238.059.aabb

14:58:58 <Luc> zakim, aabb is me

Luc Moreau: zakim, aabb is me

<luc>Topic: Admin

1. Admin

Summary: Minutes were approved. No outstanding action.

<luc>Summary: Minutes were approved. No outstanding action.
14:58:59 <Zakim> +Luc; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc; got it

14:59:09 <Zakim> + +1.216.368.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.216.368.aacc

14:59:15 <Luc> @stain, are you scribing?

Luc Moreau: @stain, are you scribing?

14:59:46 <satya> zakim, +1.216.368.aacc is me

Satya Sahoo: zakim, +1.216.368.aacc is me

14:59:56 <Zakim> +satya; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +satya; got it

15:00:06 <Luc> zakim, who is here?

Luc Moreau: zakim, who is here?

15:00:23 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P12, +1.443.987.aaaa, ??P32, Luc, satya

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P12, +1.443.987.aaaa, ??P32, Luc, satya

15:00:29 <Zakim> + +1.315.330.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.315.330.aadd

15:00:35 <Zakim> +??P57

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P57

15:00:35 <Luc> we don't seem to have a scribe

Luc Moreau: we don't seem to have a scribe

15:00:36 <Curt> zakim, +1.443.987.aaaa is me

Curt Tilmes: zakim, +1.443.987.aaaa is me

15:00:41 <Zakim> On IRC I see GK1, Curt, Edoardo, Zakim, RRSAgent, GK, Paolo, satya, Luc, MacTed, stain, sandro, trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see GK1, Curt, Edoardo, Zakim, RRSAgent, GK, Paolo, satya, Luc, MacTed, stain, sandro, trackbot

15:00:45 <Zakim> +??P75

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P75

15:00:57 <GK> zakim, ??P57 is me

Graham Klyne: zakim, ??P57 is me

15:01:01 <Zakim> +Curt; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt; got it

15:01:11 <Zakim> +??P78

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P78

15:01:15 <Zakim> +??P77

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P77

15:01:31 <Luc> Scribe: GK

(Scribe set to Graham Klyne)

15:01:33 <Zakim> -??P78

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P78

15:01:35 <Zakim> +GK; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +GK; got it

15:01:44 <stain> Luc: sorry I was late

Luc Moreau: sorry I was late [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:02:12 <Luc> stain: do you still want to scribe, we are starting ...

Stian Soiland-Reyes: do you still want to scribe, we are starting ... [ Scribe Assist by Luc Moreau ]

15:02:12 <stain> skype was not playing along

Stian Soiland-Reyes: skype was not playing along

15:02:59 <stain> Luc: Requirements for main draft

Luc Moreau: Requirements for main draft [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:03:07 <stain> Luc: Talk about provenance ontology

Luc Moreau: Talk about provenance ontology [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:03:17 <stain> Luc: suggests to drop document from agenda

Luc Moreau: suggests to drop document from agenda [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:03:29 <GK> Luc: accept minutes of Aug 25 telecon

Luc Moreau: accept minutes of Aug 25 telecon

15:03:31 <Luc> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Aug 25 telecon

Luc Moreau: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Aug 25 telecon

15:03:36 <Luc>  http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-08-25

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-08-25

15:03:37 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1

15:03:42 <Curt> +1

Curt Tilmes: +1

15:03:43 <Paolo> (wasn't there)

Paolo Missier: (wasn't there)

15:03:44 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1

15:03:47 <GK> 0 (not present)

0 (not present)

15:03:52 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.789.470.aaee

15:03:52 <stain> 0 (not present)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: 0 (not present)

15:03:53 <Edoardo> +1

Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1

15:03:55 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

15:03:56 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aaff

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.633.aaff

15:04:03 <StephenCresswell> +1

Stephen Cresswell: +1

15:04:12 <Zakim> +??P17

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17

15:04:15 <Luc> ACCEPTED: the minutes of Aug 25 telecon

RESOLVED: the minutes of Aug 25 telecon

15:04:18 <GK> Minutes accepted

Minutes accepted

15:04:29 <stain> Zakim, +44.789.470.aaee is me

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, +44.789.470.aaee is me

15:04:30 <GK> Luc: review actions

Luc Moreau: review actions

15:04:35 <GK> No outstanding actions

No outstanding actions

15:04:34 <Luc> TOPIC: Named graphs requirements

2. Named graphs requirements

Summary: we reviewed the list of requirements that have been identified for named graphs so far. It was agreed that this list will be finalized by next week (by Satya, Graham, Simon and Luc). Tentative date for call with RDF-WG is Sep 15, after our regular teleconference.

<Luc>Summary: we reviewed the list of requirements that have been identified for named graphs so far. It was agreed that this list will be finalized by next week (by Satya, Graham, Simon and Luc).  Tentative date for call with RDF-WG is Sep 15, after our regular teleconference.
15:04:42 <GK> Luc: Named graph requirements

Luc Moreau: Named graph requirements

15:04:59 <stain> Luc: The RDF working group would like to have a telcon to hear our requirements

Luc Moreau: The RDF working group would like to have a telcon to hear our requirements [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:05:00 <GK> Luc: RDF WG would like teleconference to understand requirements.

Luc Moreau: RDF WG would like teleconference to understand requirements.

15:05:04 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph

15:05:06 <stain> Luc: A wiki page made by Satya

Luc Moreau: A wiki page made by Satya [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:05:12 <Zakim> +stain; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it

15:05:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:05:19 <GK> @Stian - are you taking over

@Stian - are you taking over

15:05:20 <satya> @Luc: Is there a tentative date for the telcon?

Satya Sahoo: @Luc: Is there a tentative date for the telcon?

15:05:26 <stain> @GK sure - if you mute your keyboard :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK sure - if you mute your keyboard :)

15:05:44 <Zakim> + +1.860.995.aagg

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.860.995.aagg

15:05:45 <GK> Done.

Done.

15:05:48 <Zakim> +??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21

15:05:59 <GK> Scribe: Stian

(Scribe set to Stian Soiland-Reyes)

15:06:06 <stain> Luc: 2011-09-15 The 15th of September as tentative date - after the normal telcon - extra 45 mins

Luc Moreau: 2011-09-15 The 15th of September as tentative date - after the normal telcon - extra 45 mins

15:06:11 <stain> Luc: But not yet decided

Luc Moreau: But not yet decided

15:06:26 <satya> me and Paul

Satya Sahoo: me and Paul

15:06:29 <stain> Luc: Who submitted the requirements of the wiki? Could authors indicate?

Luc Moreau: Who submitted the requirements of the wiki? Could authors indicate?

15:06:40 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:06:49 <Zakim> +??P27

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P27

15:06:54 <GK> q+

Graham Klyne: q+

15:06:56 <stain> Luc: Any other requirements? Simon?

Luc Moreau: Any other requirements? Simon?

15:06:59 <sandro> zakim, ??P27 is Sandro

Sandro Hawke: zakim, ??P27 is Sandro

15:06:59 <Zakim> +Sandro; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro; got it

15:06:59 <stain> smiles: All there

Simon Miles: All there

15:07:11 <stain> Satya: Wanted to add more points before telcon

Satya Sahoo: Wanted to add more points before telcon

15:07:16 <satya> q-

Satya Sahoo: q-

15:07:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:07:20 <stain> Luc: Also had some ideas - need to check if they are captured

Luc Moreau: Also had some ideas - need to check if they are captured

15:07:24 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

15:07:37 <Zakim> +??P41

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P41

15:07:46 <stain> GK: By email - nature of provenance. Two possible roles for named graphs - which might be quite specific

Graham Klyne: By email - nature of provenance. Two possible roles for named graphs - which might be quite specific

15:07:53 <stain> GK: 1) Handling of accounts

Graham Klyne: 1) Handling of accounts

15:07:54 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P41 is me

Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P41 is me

15:07:54 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it

15:08:04 <stain> GK: 2) Handling of contextual assertions of provenance

Graham Klyne: 2) Handling of contextual assertions of provenance

15:08:39 <stain> GK: See my response in email response to Luc

Graham Klyne: See my response in email response to Luc

15:08:54 <stain> GK: Need a way to encapsulate provenance statements to relate to a context

Graham Klyne: Need a way to encapsulate provenance statements to relate to a context

15:08:56 <Zakim> +??P42

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P42

15:09:03 <stain> GK: Suggest to not discuss this in this telcon as it can be complex

Graham Klyne: Suggest to not discuss this in this telcon as it can be complex

15:09:10 <jorn> Zakim: ??p42 is me
15:09:26 <stain> Luc: Could GK add this as a potential requirement on the wiki page?

Luc Moreau: Could GK add this as a potential requirement on the wiki page?

15:09:54 <stain> ACTION GK: Add potential contextual named raphs requirements to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph

ACTION GK: Add potential contextual named raphs requirements to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph

15:09:54 <trackbot> Created ACTION-37 - Add potential contextual named raphs requirements to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph [on Graham Klyne - due 2011-09-08].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-37 - Add potential contextual named raphs requirements to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvenanceRDFNamedGraph [on Graham Klyne - due 2011-09-08].

15:09:57 <Luc> TOPIC: Name for the standard

3. Name for the standard

Summary: A straw poll was conducted on current proposals for standard name. Results will be communicated by email. Final decision, hopefully, will be taken next week.

<Luc> Summary: A straw poll was conducted on current proposals for standard name. Results will be communicated by email. Final decision, hopefully, will be taken next week.
15:10:35 <stain> Luc: First draft to be released end of month - need a name for the model/language/etc. Proposals http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/NameSuggestions

Luc Moreau: First draft to be released end of month - need a name for the model/language/etc. Proposals http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/NameSuggestions

15:10:58 <stain> Luc: Straw poll here - but want to hear what people think about names

Luc Moreau: Straw poll here - but want to hear what people think about names

15:11:22 <satya> @Luc WE are counting PIF twice?

Satya Sahoo: @Luc WE are counting PIF twice?

15:11:39 <Zakim> + +1.937.343.aahh

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.937.343.aahh

15:11:51 <Luc>  1,1,1

Luc Moreau: 1,1,1

15:11:54 <stain> Luc: Particpants of the call have 3 votes - you can vote 3 on same name, 1 vote on 3 names, 3+1, etc

Luc Moreau: Particpants of the call have 3 votes - you can vote 3 on same name, 1 vote on 3 names, 3+1, etc

15:12:01 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:12:08 <Vinh> Zakim, +1.937.343.aahh is me

Vinh Nguyen: Zakim, +1.937.343.aahh is me

15:12:08 <Zakim> +Vinh; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Vinh; got it

15:12:48 <stain> Satya: Worried about double-counting PIF (#15, #16)

Satya Sahoo: Worried about double-counting PIF (#15, #16)

15:13:18 <stain> Satya: Suggest counting 15+16 as one

Satya Sahoo: Suggest counting 15+16 as one

15:13:28 <stain> Luc: 15+16 now merged on wiki

Luc Moreau: 15+16 now merged on wiki

15:13:33 <dgarijo> +3 to PIL

Daniel Garijo: +3 to PIL

15:13:36 <stain> Luc: Indicate which ones you are voting for now

Luc Moreau: Indicate which ones you are voting for now

15:13:43 <smiles> 11, 11, 15

Simon Miles: 11, 11, 15

15:13:45 <satya> 15, 15, 15

Satya Sahoo: 15, 15, 15

15:13:49 <Paolo> 3 14 15

Paolo Missier: 3 14 15

15:13:52 <Lena> 3, 10, 15

Helena Deus: 3, 10, 15

15:13:57 <Curt> 5 15 14

Curt Tilmes: 5 15 14

15:14:06 <dcorsar> 3, 5, 14

David Corsar: 3, 5, 14

15:14:08 <GK> 12, 13, 15

Graham Klyne: 12, 13, 15

15:14:08 <stain> 5, 10, 12

5, 10, 12

15:14:15 <dgarijo> (5, 5, 5)

Daniel Garijo: (5, 5, 5)

15:14:20 <sandro> 10 15

Sandro Hawke: 10 15

15:14:34 <Edoardo_> 3, 5, 11

Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: 3, 5, 11

15:14:40 <stain> Luc: We'll count the votes offline and send an email and hope to progress from there

Luc Moreau: We'll count the votes offline and send an email and hope to progress from there

15:14:43 <Zakim> +??P29

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P29

15:14:51 <stain> echo, echo

echo, echo

15:14:56 <Zakim> -??P75

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P75

15:15:04 <Zakim> + +329331aaii

Zakim IRC Bot: + +329331aaii

15:15:07 <Paolo> zakim, ??P29 is me

Paolo Missier: zakim, ??P29 is me

15:15:07 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Paolo; got it

15:15:18 <zednik> 5, 5, 15

Stephan Zednik: 5, 5, 15

15:15:20 <Luc> TOPIC:  Primer Document

4. Primer Document

Summary: We reopened the issue of writing a Primer. It was felt that the model is not stable enough, and too much of a moving target, to be able to write a primer. However, developing an example in full would be beneficial. Simon will come back to the WG with a proposal.

<luc>Summary: We reopened the issue of writing a Primer. It was felt that the model is not stable enough, and too much of a moving target, to be able to write a primer. However, developing an example in full would be beneficial.  Simon will  come back to the WG with a proposal.
15:15:45 <SamCoppens> zakim, +329331aaii is me

Sam Coppens: zakim, +329331aaii is me

15:15:45 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SamCoppens; got it

15:16:06 <stain> Luc: Discussed this 4 weeks ago, and said not to do a primer at that stage. Paolo and Luc as editors of model documents tries to illustrate the model - but also to specify it. It's difficult to do both in same document.

Luc Moreau: Discussed this 4 weeks ago, and said not to do a primer at that stage. Paolo and Luc as editors of model documents tries to illustrate the model - but also to specify it. It's difficult to do both in same document.

15:16:34 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:16:40 <stain> Luc: GK commented that this is not so useful - it's time to get on with a Primer document. Simon has expressed interest on worker on primer.

Luc Moreau: GK commented that this is not so useful - it's time to get on with a Primer document. Simon has expressed interest on worker on primer.

15:16:41 <GK> q+ to say that I think a 50,000 foot view belongs in the model, not a separate primer

Graham Klyne: q+ to say that I think a 50,000 foot view belongs in the model, not a separate primer

15:16:56 <stain> Luc: Would you want to work on a primer - and what do you expect?

Luc Moreau: Would you want to work on a primer - and what do you expect?

15:17:04 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:17:33 <stain> GK: I commented that a 50k feet view would belong in the model. Don't seem to be completely clear in consensus in what model contains, so uncertain about doing a primer now while model still in flux.

Graham Klyne: I commented that a 50k feet view would belong in the model. Don't seem to be completely clear in consensus in what model contains, so uncertain about doing a primer now while model still in flux.

15:17:33 <satya> +1 for GK's point

Satya Sahoo: +1 for GK's point

15:18:09 <stain> GK: Also said that example was not useful - the complexity was such that it was as hard to understand to example as the message

Graham Klyne: Also said that example was not useful - the complexity was such that it was as hard to understand to example as the message

15:18:32 <Luc> ack GK

Luc Moreau: ack GK

15:18:32 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say that I think a 50,000 foot view belongs in the model, not a separate primer

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say that I think a 50,000 foot view belongs in the model, not a separate primer

15:18:38 <stain> GK: Perhaps that example would fit better in a primer - but still seed need for a overview in the model

Graham Klyne: Perhaps that example would fit better in a primer - but still seed need for a overview in the model

15:18:50 <Luc> ack smiles

Luc Moreau: ack smiles

15:19:01 <stain> smiles: example sounds good to include in the primer

Simon Miles: example sounds good to include in the primer

15:19:16 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:19:18 <stain> smiles: more clarity step by step - say why things are done how they are. Might be reasonable to start with a simpler example

Simon Miles: more clarity step by step - say why things are done how they are. Might be reasonable to start with a simpler example

15:19:56 <stain> smiles: high-level view on model, agree with GK. High-level in model doc, but also in the primer in more non-normative terms.

Simon Miles: high-level view on model, agree with GK. High-level in model doc, but also in the primer in more non-normative terms.

15:20:20 <stain> smiles: A high-level description in the model document might easily always be normative - easier to suggest how to interpret model in the primer

Simon Miles: A high-level description in the model document might easily always be normative - easier to suggest how to interpret model in the primer

15:20:53 <stain> satya: Agree with previous, primer has 3 functions. 1. Simple example. How would model elements be used in non-normative description.

Satya Sahoo: Agree with previous, primer has 3 functions. 1. Simple example. How would model elements be used in non-normative description.

15:21:18 <stain> Satya: 2: How would this be modelled in OWL/RDF, bits of ontology doc.  3: How would it be accessed - elements of query document.

Satya Sahoo: 2: How would this be modelled in OWL/RDF, bits of ontology doc. 3: How would it be accessed - elements of query document.

15:21:23 <GK> q+ to say I think the RDF modelling should be NORMATIVE, else we don't have a usable spec

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think the RDF modelling should be NORMATIVE, else we don't have a usable spec

15:21:28 <stain> Satya: Then give overall overview of how to handle provenance information

Satya Sahoo: Then give overall overview of how to handle provenance information

15:21:54 <stain> Satya: Now is not the optimal point for working on primer - look at it in the end of september when draft is published and discussed issues have settled

Satya Sahoo: Now is not the optimal point for working on primer - look at it in the end of september when draft is published and discussed issues have settled

15:21:57 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:22:01 <Paolo> +1 for starting after initial model doc has been released

Paolo Missier: +1 for starting after initial model doc has been released

15:22:01 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya

15:22:08 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

15:22:08 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think the RDF modelling should be NORMATIVE, else we don't have a usable spec

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think the RDF modelling should be NORMATIVE, else we don't have a usable spec

15:22:20 <Zakim> - +1.860.995.aagg

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.860.995.aagg

15:22:41 <stain> GK: The representation in RDF should be a normative output - assumed that abstract model -> RDF would become part of model document.

Graham Klyne: The representation in RDF should be a normative output - assumed that abstract model -> RDF would become part of model document.

15:23:01 <stain> Luc: Answer - No. RDF representation not in model document.

Luc Moreau: Answer - No. RDF representation not in model document.

15:23:07 <Zakim> + +1.860.995.aajj

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.860.995.aajj

15:23:12 <stain> Luc: It would be in the formalisation document led by (?)

Luc Moreau: It would be in the formalisation document led by (?)

15:23:13 <Paolo> RDF repr should be somewhere but not in the conceptual model doc

Paolo Missier: RDF repr should be somewhere but not in the conceptual model doc

15:23:42 <stain> @Paolo - yes - it should be formal, but not neccessarily part of the conceptual model

@Paolo - yes - it should be formal, but not neccessarily part of the conceptual model

15:23:57 <stain> Luc: Illustrations can be done in RDF and/or the abstract .. - but not by end of September

Luc Moreau: Illustrations can be done in RDF and/or the abstract .. - but not by end of September

15:24:12 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:24:16 <Zakim> -??P42

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P42

15:24:24 <stain> GK: If this is to be useful on the web we need something to interoperate between application, and at least one normative format like RDF would be required

Graham Klyne: If this is to be useful on the web we need something to interoperate between application, and at least one normative format like RDF would be required

15:24:35 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya

15:24:37 <Zakim> - +1.860.995.aajj

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.860.995.aajj

15:24:39 <stain> Luc: The normative spec will be included in the doc made by Satya

Luc Moreau: The normative spec will be included in the doc made by Satya

15:24:51 <Paolo> @GK mapping to RDF /is/ normative but in the ontology doc

Paolo Missier: @GK mapping to RDF /is/ normative but in the ontology doc

15:25:13 <stain> Satya: The Ontology is the normative representation of the model. The illustrative RDF should corresponding to the normative OWL

Satya Sahoo: The Ontology is the normative representation of the model. The illustrative RDF should corresponding to the normative OWL

15:25:17 <Zakim> + +1.860.995.aakk

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.860.995.aakk

15:25:24 <stain> Satya: Illustrated examples would be by the normative RDF format

Satya Sahoo: Illustrated examples would be by the normative RDF format

15:25:24 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:25:29 <GK> I'm Ok with the normative mappingt to RD being in the ontology doc

Graham Klyne: I'm Ok with the normative mappingt to RD being in the ontology doc

15:25:59 <stain> Luc: Is the feeling to wait until end of September?

Luc Moreau: Is the feeling to wait until end of September?

15:26:04 <Lena> me + stephan have defined the primer to be on our task force

Helena Deus: me + stephan have defined the primer to be on our task force

15:26:10 <stain> Luc: Example is to have an example explained - ultimately a primer view

Luc Moreau: Example is to have an example explained - ultimately a primer view

15:26:10 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:26:13 <Lena> but we need the model to be described first

Helena Deus: but we need the model to be described first

15:26:16 <stain> q+

q+

15:26:24 <GK> I think when to start the primer depends on whoever wants to do the work :)

Graham Klyne: I think when to start the primer depends on whoever wants to do the work :)

15:26:31 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya

15:26:34 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:26:44 <stain> Satya: Could be useful as Smiles would work on primer, if he participates more with the other 3 groups and identify content that can be migrated to the primer later

Satya Sahoo: Could be useful as Smiles would work on primer, if he participates more with the other 3 groups and identify content that can be migrated to the primer later

15:26:53 <Lena> i agree with graham that it would be a wild goose hunt to produce a primer while the  model is a shifting target

Helena Deus: i agree with graham that it would be a wild goose hunt to produce a primer while the model is a shifting target

15:27:18 <stain> Satya: Not a separate wiki page!

Satya Sahoo: Not a separate wiki page!

15:27:34 <stain> Satya: Do as comments as part of provenance.. query.. task force wiki page

Satya Sahoo: Do as comments as part of provenance.. query.. task force wiki page

15:27:46 <Luc> ack st

Luc Moreau: ack st

15:28:13 <GK> If start primer now, I think it should start as an proper draft document.  +1 to not creating yet another wiki page.

Graham Klyne: If start primer now, I think it should start as an proper draft document. +1 to not creating yet another wiki page.

15:28:38 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo

15:28:54 <stain> Stian: If we don't have a primer, will there for the initial draft be an overview document that shows a quick introduction of what the model/ontology is, etc.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: If we don't have a primer, will there for the initial draft be an overview document that shows a quick introduction of what the model/ontology is, etc.

15:29:01 <stain> Paolo: If someone works on primer now, should shadow the other work

Paolo Missier: If someone works on primer now, should shadow the other work

15:29:14 <stain> Paolo: Should start work on a complete example - iterative process

Paolo Missier: Should start work on a complete example - iterative process

15:29:31 <stain> @GK +1

@GK +1

15:29:37 <stain> Paolo: Would inform the primer

Paolo Missier: Would inform the primer

15:29:52 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:29:57 <stain> Paolo: See mutual benefits from Smiles and others shadowing

Paolo Missier: See mutual benefits from Smiles and others shadowing

15:30:01 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:30:04 <Zakim> +??P3

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3

15:30:11 <stain> Luc: Paolo suggests working on complete example - a new example to design, or data journalism example?

Luc Moreau: Paolo suggests working on complete example - a new example to design, or data journalism example?

15:30:19 <jorn> zakim, ??p3 is me

Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p3 is me

15:30:19 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

15:30:21 <stain> Paolo: Data J example not used in conceptual model docs

Paolo Missier: Data J example not used in conceptual model docs

15:30:38 <GK> I'd say several examples:  simple to complex, chosen to illusrate and/or test different points.

Graham Klyne: I'd say several examples: simple to complex, chosen to illusrate and/or test different points.

15:30:38 <stain> Paolo: If it is a good example, but no constraints

Paolo Missier: If it is a good example, but no constraints

15:30:53 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:30:56 <stain> @GK, agree - show different bits instead of a massive example to learn first

@GK, agree - show different bits instead of a massive example to learn first

15:30:57 <satya> @Paolo: :)

Satya Sahoo: @Paolo: :)

15:31:11 <stain> Paolo: Should anyway be a different example from the model document

Paolo Missier: Should anyway be a different example from the model document

15:31:47 <stain> smiles: an example section in the concept model document and formal document, and in access document - and then someone to edit those sections so that they are explained. Would that make sense?

Simon Miles: an example section in the concept model document and formal document, and in access document - and then someone to edit those sections so that they are explained. Would that make sense?

15:31:58 <stain> Paolo: Not quite - something complementary

Paolo Missier: Not quite - something complementary

15:32:02 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:32:05 <Luc> ack smil

Luc Moreau: ack smil

15:32:21 <stain> Paolo: That the model is sound and explain it, but a different model. Primer should not be part of the other documents.

Paolo Missier: That the model is sound and explain it, but a different model. Primer should not be part of the other documents.

15:32:56 <stain> smiles: Not the impression I got from others - they suggest it was too early, just wanted better examples in the normative documents

Simon Miles: Not the impression I got from others - they suggest it was too early, just wanted better examples in the normative documents

15:32:57 <GK> q+ to ask simon what he feels about this

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask simon what he feels about this

15:33:06 <GK> q-

Graham Klyne: q-

15:33:16 <stain> smiles: not much in either way

Simon Miles: not much in either way

15:33:26 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:33:27 <stain> smiles: someone can work on the example within the context of the existing docs

Simon Miles: someone can work on the example within the context of the existing docs

15:33:57 <stain> Luc: Then to replace the example section with something different? Don't want two examples in conceptual model doc

Luc Moreau: Then to replace the example section with something different? Don't want two examples in conceptual model doc

15:34:18 <stain> smiles: expect several examples in the primer. add more text to existing examples to explain and clarify at this stage

Simon Miles: expect several examples in the primer. add more text to existing examples to explain and clarify at this stage

15:34:21 <GK> +1 independent choice of what goes in model document

Graham Klyne: +1 independent choice of what goes in model document

15:34:46 <stain> Luc: have a problem with File example does not cover all the concepts

Luc Moreau: have a problem with File example does not cover all the concepts

15:34:54 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:34:54 <stain> Luc: Would be useful with an example that highlights all concepts

Luc Moreau: Would be useful with an example that highlights all concepts

15:35:08 <stain> smiles: raise issues in that regard - edit the example

Simon Miles: raise issues in that regard - edit the example

15:35:17 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya

15:35:28 <GK> Is it appropriate/necessary for the model document to have examples covering *all* aspects?

Graham Klyne: Is it appropriate/necessary for the model document to have examples covering *all* aspects?

15:35:40 <stain> satya: in the primer document with should have one example, and use this in all the documents.

Satya Sahoo: in the primer document with should have one example, and use this in all the documents.

15:36:05 <stain> satya: would DataJournalism example be better, Luc?

Satya Sahoo: would DataJournalism example be better, Luc?

15:36:23 <GK> If model document is formal description, that should cover the essential content, methinks

Graham Klyne: If model document is formal description, that should cover the essential content, methinks

15:36:25 <stain> Luc: DataJ example is fairly long, does not expose all concepts either

Luc Moreau: DataJ example is fairly long, does not expose all concepts either

15:36:54 <stain> satya: Try to create snapshot examples for each model, in provenance ontology group we discussed this. Then do bottom-up approach for each element - then consolidate as one big example

Satya Sahoo: Try to create snapshot examples for each model, in provenance ontology group we discussed this. Then do bottom-up approach for each element - then consolidate as one big example

15:36:59 <Lena> +1 for bottom-up!

Helena Deus: +1 for bottom-up!

15:37:00 <zednik> q+

Stephan Zednik: q+

15:37:16 <stain> Luc: Worried about changing at this late stage before going first public draft

Luc Moreau: Worried about changing at this late stage before going first public draft

15:37:51 <stain> satya: keep file scenario, but what we have in mind, we write in down in the conceptual model, as it evolves, keep append it to the top scenario

Satya Sahoo: keep file scenario, but what we have in mind, we write in down in the conceptual model, as it evolves, keep append it to the top scenario

15:37:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:38:07 <stain> zednik: what are we compiling all into one example?

Stephan Zednik: what are we compiling all into one example?

15:38:18 <stain> zednik: may have a complicated, silly example if we merge everything into one

Stephan Zednik: may have a complicated, silly example if we merge everything into one

15:38:21 <Lena> +1 for stephan's comment

Helena Deus: +1 for stephan's comment

15:38:23 <Luc> ack zedn

Luc Moreau: ack zedn

15:38:24 <stain> @zednik +1

@zednik +1

15:38:25 <zednik> q-

Stephan Zednik: q-

15:38:35 <satya> @Stephan - good point!

Satya Sahoo: @Stephan - good point!

15:38:40 <GK> @zednik +1

Graham Klyne: @zednik +1

15:38:51 <stain> Luc: So we're not quite clear yet - think a bit more and come up with a concrete proposal for next telcon

Luc Moreau: So we're not quite clear yet - think a bit more and come up with a concrete proposal for next telcon

15:38:51 <Paolo> @zednik +1  -- conceptual model already has two separate scenarios

Paolo Missier: @zednik +1 -- conceptual model already has two separate scenarios

15:39:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:39:07 <Paolo> (file editing, Royal Society)

Paolo Missier: (file editing, Royal Society)

15:39:27 <stain> ACTION smiles: Make proposal on how to proceed on primer material

ACTION smiles: Make proposal on how to proceed on primer material

15:39:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-38 - Make proposal on how to proceed on primer material [on Simon Miles - due 2011-09-08].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-38 - Make proposal on how to proceed on primer material [on Simon Miles - due 2011-09-08].

15:39:38 <Luc> TOPIC: Adopting naming conventions

5. Adopting naming conventions

Summary: Naming conventions for model/ontology were debated. It was agreed that edge labels should contain a verb and should be expressed in past sense. Actions on editors of the conceptual/formal models to update their documents accordingly.

<luc>Summary: Naming conventions for model/ontology were debated. It was agreed that edge labels should contain a verb and should be expressed in past sense.  Actions on editors of the conceptual/formal models to update their documents accordingly.
15:39:56 <stain> Luc: Did not reach consensus last week on past vs present tense

Luc Moreau: Did not reach consensus last week on past vs present tense

15:40:18 <stain> Luc: Look at what we said on the edges - some confusion last week. Proposal in the agenda

Luc Moreau: Look at what we said on the edges - some confusion last week. Proposal in the agenda

15:40:28 <dgarijo> can we post the proposal please?

Daniel Garijo: can we post the proposal please?

15:40:34 <Luc> proposed: Edge labels contain a verb

PROPOSED: Edge labels contain a verb

15:40:49 <stain> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.01#Adopting_naming_conventions

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.09.01#Adopting_naming_conventions

15:40:49 <Luc> isUsedBy, isControlledBy, isDerivedFrom, hasParticipants

Luc Moreau: isUsedBy, isControlledBy, isDerivedFrom, hasParticipants

15:41:04 <dgarijo> +q

Daniel Garijo: +q

15:41:08 <stain> Luc: Example of what form of verbs we would have

Luc Moreau: Example of what form of verbs we would have

15:41:35 <stain> dgarijo: agree on having verb in the edge - but would strongly disagree on 'isUsedBy'

Daniel Garijo: agree on having verb in the edge - but would strongly disagree on 'isUsedBy'

15:41:48 <stain> dgarijo: an artifact is used by a process and produced by a process

Daniel Garijo: an artifact is used by a process and produced by a process

15:42:03 <stain> Luc: not suggesting these actual labels - but the general principle

Luc Moreau: not suggesting these actual labels - but the general principle

15:42:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:42:16 <Luc> ack dg

Luc Moreau: ack dg

15:42:21 <stain> Luc: Not proposing domain/range direction now - just that the term contains a verb

Luc Moreau: Not proposing domain/range direction now - just that the term contains a verb

15:42:24 <stain> q+

q+

15:43:13 <GK> This is an area where I think a 50,000 foot view would help

Graham Klyne: This is an area where I think a 50,000 foot view would help

15:43:36 <stain> Luc: Model document lists all labels.. but we're trying to adopt a convention if verb is explicit

Luc Moreau: Model document lists all labels.. but we're trying to adopt a convention if verb is explicit

15:43:39 <GK> To see all the names related as a composite structure ... see if they make sense together

Graham Klyne: To see all the names related as a composite structure ... see if they make sense together

15:44:02 <stain> Stian: Not sure if we'll get too much of isSomethingBy - could get a bit convoulted vs. 'something'

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Not sure if we'll get too much of isSomethingBy - could get a bit convoulted vs. 'something'

15:44:15 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

15:44:24 <stain> GK: This is where a bird eye view would help - a diagram showing classes and relationships - although simplified

Graham Klyne: This is where a bird eye view would help - a diagram showing classes and relationships - although simplified

15:44:46 <satya> @GK: you mean a visualization of the model?

Satya Sahoo: @GK: you mean a visualization of the model?

15:44:47 <dgarijo> we have generated an overview of the ontology if that's what you mean, Graham: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/images/a/ad/GlobalSchema.png

Daniel Garijo: we have generated an overview of the ontology if that's what you mean, Graham: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/images/a/ad/GlobalSchema.png

15:44:59 <stain> GK: Considering terms in isolation - then it's difficult as you loose the context in which they will work

Graham Klyne: Considering terms in isolation - then it's difficult as you loose the context in which they will work

15:45:03 <Zakim> +??P27

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P27

15:45:05 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

15:45:20 <satya> @Daniel +1

Satya Sahoo: @Daniel +1

15:45:26 <Zakim> +??P3

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3

15:45:34 <jorn> zakim, ??p3 is me

Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p3 is me

15:45:34 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

15:45:46 <stain> Luc: in emails - Instead of isComplementOf - then say complement?  hasParticipants -> participants

Luc Moreau: in emails - Instead of isComplementOf - then say complement? hasParticipants -> participants

15:45:54 <stain> Luc: Satya reacted that this was not useful

Luc Moreau: Satya reacted that this was not useful

15:45:58 <stain> Luc: Two conventions

Luc Moreau: Two conventions

15:46:14 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:46:17 <stain> Luc: what label conventions do we adopt

Luc Moreau: what label conventions do we adopt

15:46:26 <stain> ack stain

ack stain

15:46:51 <Luc> proposed: Edge labels contain a verb

PROPOSED: Edge labels contain a verb

15:46:58 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

15:46:59 <satya> +!

Satya Sahoo: +!

15:47:01 <StephenCresswell> +1

Stephen Cresswell: +1

15:47:02 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1

15:47:03 <GK> (Truth is, I don't feel strongly about the naming convention)

Graham Klyne: (Truth is, I don't feel strongly about the naming convention)

15:47:06 <Curt> +1

Curt Tilmes: +1

15:47:11 <Lena> +1

Helena Deus: +1

15:47:11 <GK> +0.5

Graham Klyne: +0.5

15:47:14 <smiles> 0

Simon Miles: 0

15:47:15 <stain> 0

0

15:47:21 <Paolo> +1 don't feel very strongly either

Paolo Missier: +1 don't feel very strongly either

15:47:36 <Luc> ACCEPTED: Edge labels contain a verb

RESOLVED: Edge labels contain a verb

15:47:37 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1

15:47:42 <Edoardo_> +1

Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1

15:48:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:48:05 <stain> Luc: If we have a verb - then we need to decide on the tense - like present or past

Luc Moreau: If we have a verb - then we need to decide on the tense - like present or past

15:48:11 <dgarijo> +1 to PAST tense

Daniel Garijo: +1 to PAST tense

15:48:14 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:48:18 <Edoardo_> +1 past

Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1 past

15:48:21 <Paolo> Past tense

Paolo Missier: Past tense

15:48:32 <Luc> ack smi

Luc Moreau: ack smi

15:48:34 <dgarijo> since provenance is describing things that have already happened

Daniel Garijo: since provenance is describing things that have already happened

15:48:43 <satya> +1 for past tense

Satya Sahoo: +1 for past tense

15:48:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:49:07 <stain> +1 to present

+1 to present

15:49:09 <Curt> The other issue was whether to always include the "is" or not.

Curt Tilmes: The other issue was whether to always include the "is" or not.

15:49:15 <Curt> instead of "foo isControlledBy bar" just use "foo controlledBy bar" instead of "foo isControlledBy bar" just use "foo controlledBy bar" instead of "foo isControlledBy bar" just use "foo controlledBy bar"

Curt Tilmes: instead of "foo isControlledBy bar" just use "foo controlledBy bar" instead of "foo isControlledBy bar" just use "foo controlledBy bar" instead of "foo isControlledBy bar" just use "foo controlledBy bar"

15:49:23 <GK> (Next question: convention for passive or active voice?  Slightly TIC)

Graham Klyne: (Next question: convention for passive or active voice? Slightly TIC)

15:49:32 <stain> Luc: Just voted to have a verb

Luc Moreau: Just voted to have a verb

15:49:39 <stain> Curt: "controlled by" has a verb

Curt Tilmes: "controlled by" has a verb

15:49:42 <GK> "controlled" is a verb

Graham Klyne: "controlled" is a verb

15:49:46 <stain> @GK right

@GK right

15:50:07 <stain> ?: "used by" has a verb

?: "used by" has a verb

15:50:22 <stain> GK: Sounds like passive or active voice

Graham Klyne: Sounds like passive or active voice

15:50:58 <stain> Luc: "Used"  is a verb - "I used X" - but "X used by I"..

Luc Moreau: "Used" is a verb - "I used X" - but "X used by I"..

15:51:04 <stain> GK: Yes - it's a verb, but in passive voice

Graham Klyne: Yes - it's a verb, but in passive voice

15:51:15 <stain> ?: Implicit or explicit verb

?: Implicit or explicit verb

15:51:40 <GK> Sorry, that;'s the *active* voice

Graham Klyne: Sorry, that;'s the *active* voice

15:51:47 <stain> Luc: "used by" is not a verb - just "used\'

Luc Moreau: "used by" is not a verb - just "used\'

15:52:07 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:52:13 <stain> @GK, Perhaps passive is good as provenance is describing what went on

@GK, Perhaps passive is good as provenance is describing what went on

15:52:32 <stain> Luc: Unsure how to progress

Luc Moreau: Unsure how to progress

15:52:41 <stain> q+ Can we say this is a separate proposal?

q+ Can we say this is a separate proposal?

15:52:41 <GK> Propose that editors come up with series of names and let the gropup comment

Graham Klyne: Propose that editors come up with series of names and let the gropup comment

15:52:47 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:52:48 <satya> @Stian: Well it depends, I think active and passive are both useful

Satya Sahoo: @Stian: Well it depends, I think active and passive are both useful

15:52:52 <Curt> +1 keep the explicit "is" verb, passive form, past tense

Curt Tilmes: +1 keep the explicit "is" verb, passive form, past tense

15:53:17 <GK> @smiles +1

Graham Klyne: @smiles +1

15:53:20 <stain> ?: Just a case of people being unclear with what is a verb or not - the previous proposal was accepted - we're moving on to past tense or not

?: Just a case of people being unclear with what is a verb or not - the previous proposal was accepted - we're moving on to past tense or not

15:53:44 <Luc> proposed: To use past tense for verbs

PROPOSED: To use past tense for verbs

15:53:51 <Paolo> q-

Paolo Missier: q-

15:53:51 <stain> Luc: Need to formulate a proposal

Luc Moreau: Need to formulate a proposal

15:53:51 <dgarijo> the thing is that I would not be sure how to say that a process Used an artifact with "used by", since that means that an artifact is Used by a process

Daniel Garijo: the thing is that I would not be sure how to say that a process Used an artifact with "used by", since that means that an artifact is Used by a process

15:53:55 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

15:54:19 <stain> Luc: What is dgarijo suggesting..?

Luc Moreau: What is dgarijo suggesting..?

15:54:19 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:54:24 <GK> Example is used rather than uses ?

Graham Klyne: Example is used rather than uses ?

15:54:40 <stain> dgarijo: what would be the name of the edge of 'used' with the verb?

Daniel Garijo: what would be the name of the edge of 'used' with the verb?

15:54:57 <stain> Luc: process "uses" an entity

Luc Moreau: process "uses" an entity

15:55:11 <stain> Luc: But proposal for past tense means "process used entity"

Luc Moreau: But proposal for past tense means "process used entity"

15:55:17 <GK> used vs wasUsedBy - both past tense, but different directions

Graham Klyne: used vs wasUsedBy - both past tense, but different directions

15:55:30 <stain> dgarijo: Why can't we use "control"

Daniel Garijo: Why can't we use "control"

15:55:34 <stain> @GK - exactly

@GK - exactly

15:55:47 <stain> @GK and last week we talked about temporal directions

@GK and last week we talked about temporal directions

15:56:06 <stain> dgarijo: liked better "wasControlledBy" - but someone would ask if we say "used" then why not "controlled"

Daniel Garijo: liked better "wasControlledBy" - but someone would ask if we say "used" then why not "controlled"

15:56:30 <stain> @GK the verb is good because it highlights exactly this direction

@GK the verb is good because it highlights exactly this direction

15:56:42 <Luc> proposed: To use past tense for verbs

PROPOSED: To use past tense for verbs

15:56:51 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1

15:56:51 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

15:56:51 <dgarijo> +1 to past tense

Daniel Garijo: +1 to past tense

15:56:52 <stain> +1

+1

15:56:52 <StephenCresswell> +1

Stephen Cresswell: +1

15:56:53 <Curt> +1

Curt Tilmes: +1

15:56:54 <GK> +1

Graham Klyne: +1

15:56:59 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1

15:57:02 <Edoardo_> +1

Edoardo (Edoardo, Edoardo_and_David) Pignotti: +1

15:57:05 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1

15:57:08 <Paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1

15:57:17 <Luc> accepted: To use past tense for verbs

RESOLVED: To use past tense for verbs

15:57:38 <satya> agree

Satya Sahoo: agree

15:57:39 <stain> Luc: Implications for Satya and Paolo/Luc to update documents to use past tense and verbs

Luc Moreau: Implications for Satya and Paolo/Luc to update documents to use past tense and verbs

15:57:40 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:57:51 <Zakim> -??P77

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P77

15:57:53 <Luc> topic: Provenance Ontology

6. Provenance Ontology

Summary: Satya provided an update on the ontology development. The issue of toplevel concepts was identified. It was agreed that a call should resolve such issues between conceptual model and ontology.

<luc>Summary: Satya provided an update on the ontology development.  The issue of toplevel concepts was identified. It was agreed that a call should resolve such issues between conceptual model and ontology.
15:57:53 <stain> @Luc shall I action that?

@Luc shall I action that?

15:57:54 <dgarijo> @Satya, didn't you already put everything in past tense in the ontology?

Daniel Garijo: @Satya, didn't you already put everything in past tense in the ontology?

15:57:59 <satya> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology

Satya Sahoo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology

15:58:12 <stain> Satya: No telcon on Monday, travelling/unavailable

Satya Sahoo: No telcon on Monday, travelling/unavailable

15:58:26 <stain> Satya: made example of file scenario

Satya Sahoo: made example of file scenario

15:58:33 <stain> satya: would like reviews and comments on this

Satya Sahoo: would like reviews and comments on this

15:58:53 <stain> satya: two objectives, define extension mechanism - how application can extend to model in their domain

Satya Sahoo: two objectives, define extension mechanism - how application can extend to model in their domain

15:59:02 <stain> satya: show how instances can be created using the ontology

Satya Sahoo: show how instances can be created using the ontology

15:59:31 <stain> satya: Pointed out that formal document includes RDF fragments showing encoding of the (?) scenario - welcome to have a look at this

Satya Sahoo: Pointed out that formal document includes RDF fragments showing encoding of the (?) scenario - welcome to have a look at this

15:59:35 <stain> satya: send comments as soon as possible

Satya Sahoo: send comments as soon as possible

15:59:47 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:00:03 <dgarijo> @stain it is the crime file scenario

Daniel Garijo: @stain it is the crime file scenario

16:00:05 <JimMcCusker> +q

James McCusker: +q

16:00:14 <stain> Luc: Would be useful to see the complete example encoded in RDF. In the document it's only shown a particular entity. Complete example?

Luc Moreau: Would be useful to see the complete example encoded in RDF. In the document it's only shown a particular entity. Complete example?

16:00:21 <stain> satya: yes - it's at..

Satya Sahoo: yes - it's at..

16:00:42 <satya> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#RDF_Graph_for_Crime_File_Scenario

Satya Sahoo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PIL_OWL_Ontology#RDF_Graph_for_Crime_File_Scenario

16:01:04 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

16:01:08 <dgarijo> the image: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/images/thumb/d/da/CrimeFileRDFGraph.png/900px-CrimeFileRDFGraph.png

Daniel Garijo: the image: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/images/thumb/d/da/CrimeFileRDFGraph.png/900px-CrimeFileRDFGraph.png

16:01:09 <stain> satya: not suggesting to include the full RDF into the document

Satya Sahoo: not suggesting to include the full RDF into the document

16:01:31 <stain> dgarijo: :(

Daniel Garijo: :(

16:01:51 <stain> JimMcCusker: IVPof and complement of seemsto have lost track of what is meant by those

James McCusker: IVPof and complement of seemsto have lost track of what is meant by those

16:02:08 <satya> @Stian: Daniel pointed to an auto generated diagram, we will re-structure that :)

Satya Sahoo: @Stian: Daniel pointed to an auto generated diagram, we will re-structure that :)

16:02:08 <stain> JimMcCusker: might want to put together a page to start usecases of what this construct is adressing

James McCusker: might want to put together a page to start usecases of what this construct is adressing

16:02:19 <stain> @satya - I tried to zoom!

@satya - I tried to zoom!

16:02:48 <stain> Luc: perhaps an model issue, not ontology issue

Luc Moreau: perhaps an model issue, not ontology issue

16:02:55 <stain> Luc: important to raise such issues on the tracker

Luc Moreau: important to raise such issues on the tracker

16:02:56 <dgarijo> @stain: yes, maybe the rdf is better right now

Daniel Garijo: @stain: yes, maybe the rdf is better right now

16:03:09 <stain> Luc: discussion taking place - but difficult to understand what the problem is

Luc Moreau: discussion taking place - but difficult to understand what the problem is

16:03:12 <satya> @Stian: yes - we will create a separate diagram

Satya Sahoo: @Stian: yes - we will create a separate diagram

16:03:23 <Zakim> -??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P21

16:03:38 <stain> Luc: Jim Mayers does not like isComplementOf as a label - but it's not raised as an issue yet - but he seems happy with the definition

Luc Moreau: Jim Mayers does not like isComplementOf as a label - but it's not raised as an issue yet - but he seems happy with the definition

16:03:40 <satya> I also have issue with the "complement" label

Satya Sahoo: I also have issue with the "complement" label

16:04:25 <stain> JimMcCusker: what was talked about with complement-of seems very difficult from IVP-of

James McCusker: what was talked about with complement-of seems very difficult from IVP-of

16:04:27 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:04:32 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

16:04:47 <stain> Luc: Paolo and myself changed the definition to make them uniform

Luc Moreau: Paolo and myself changed the definition to make them uniform

16:05:06 <stain> Luc: is-complement-of had to be revised to match entity's definition - but believe it's still the same spirit of original def

Luc Moreau: is-complement-of had to be revised to match entity's definition - but believe it's still the same spirit of original def

16:05:08 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:05:16 <stain> Luc: Please raise this as tracker issues

Luc Moreau: Please raise this as tracker issues

16:05:28 <Zakim> +??P18

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18

16:05:28 <Luc> ack Ji

Luc Moreau: ack Ji

16:05:55 <stain> JimMcCusker: tasked to formalise this is-complement-of for the ontology group - it has been difficult to trace out

James McCusker: tasked to formalise this is-complement-of for the ontology group - it has been difficult to trace out

16:06:03 <stain> JimMcCusker: should ignore emails and look at the wiki?

James McCusker: should ignore emails and look at the wiki?

16:06:11 <stain> Luc: no - the conceptual model document

Luc Moreau: no - the conceptual model document

16:06:19 <stain> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html

16:06:33 <stain> Luc: but creating a set of complement-of usecases sounds good

Luc Moreau: but creating a set of complement-of usecases sounds good

16:06:37 <Luc> ack pao

Luc Moreau: ack pao

16:06:54 <stain> Paolo: is illustrated with figure in model

Paolo Missier: is illustrated with figure in model

16:07:00 <stain> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#concept-IVP-of

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#concept-IVP-of

16:07:16 <stain> Paolo: feels responsible for this - so will engage with any discussion

Paolo Missier: feels responsible for this - so will engage with any discussion

16:07:24 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:07:50 <stain> Luc: Satya - what are the key issues now with ontology?

Luc Moreau: Satya - what are the key issues now with ontology?

16:08:08 <stain> Luc: Last week you needed better understanding of model - is it better now?

Luc Moreau: Last week you needed better understanding of model - is it better now?

16:08:21 <stain> satya: no - need to respond to email. What are top level concepts?

Satya Sahoo: no - need to respond to email. What are top level concepts?

16:08:41 <stain> satya: we agreed ; two top-level concepts - but you suggest there could be more top level concepots

Satya Sahoo: we agreed ; two top-level concepts - but you suggest there could be more top level concepots

16:08:52 <stain> satya: perhaps Luc/Paolo to attend a telcon

Satya Sahoo: perhaps Luc/Paolo to attend a telcon

16:09:08 <Paolo> agree that we (two groups) should interact

Paolo Missier: agree that we (two groups) should interact

16:09:08 <stain> satya: fundamental - what are the top level concepts

Satya Sahoo: fundamental - what are the top level concepts

16:09:29 <stain> Luc: Example of Role,.. what is not entity and process execution

Luc Moreau: Example of Role,.. what is not entity and process execution

16:09:32 <stain> (?)

(?)

16:09:43 <dgarijo> and we are currently discussing the modeling of n-ary relationship with the role-trick you proposed, Satya

Daniel Garijo: and we are currently discussing the modeling of n-ary relationship with the role-trick you proposed, Satya

16:09:51 <stain> satya: process is a type of entity - def is a continuent, location, etc.

Satya Sahoo: process is a type of entity - def is a continuent, location, etc.

16:10:04 <stain> satya: sounds quite broad definition, defined in many upper level ontologies

Satya Sahoo: sounds quite broad definition, defined in many upper level ontologies

16:10:12 <stain> Luc: Should join next week's call

Luc Moreau: Should join next week's call

16:10:17 <stain> satya: Monday 12:00 eastern

Satya Sahoo: Monday 12:00 eastern

16:10:25 <Paolo> ok

Paolo Missier: ok

16:10:33 <stain> satya: could do separate if needed

Satya Sahoo: could do separate if needed

16:10:33 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:10:45 <Zakim> - +1.315.330.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.315.330.aadd

16:10:45 <stain> Thank you!

Thank you!

16:10:46 <Zakim> -satya

Zakim IRC Bot: -satya

16:10:47 <Zakim> -??P18

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P18

16:10:47 <GK> Bye

Graham Klyne: Bye

16:10:49 <Zakim> -Paolo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Paolo

16:10:51 <Zakim> - +1.860.995.aakk

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.860.995.aakk

16:10:51 <Zakim> -dgarijo

Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo

16:10:51 <Zakim> -SamCoppens

Zakim IRC Bot: -SamCoppens

16:10:52 <Zakim> -??P17

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P17

16:10:53 <stain> Luc, what do I do now?

Luc, what do I do now?

16:10:54 <Zakim> -Vinh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Vinh

16:10:55 <stain> ok, thnx

ok, thnx

16:10:57 <dgarijo> bye!

Daniel Garijo: bye!

16:11:02 <Zakim> -stain

Zakim IRC Bot: -stain

16:11:04 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc

16:11:05 <Zakim> -Curt

Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt

16:11:06 <Zakim> -GK

Zakim IRC Bot: -GK

16:11:09 <Zakim> -??P32

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P32

16:11:11 <Zakim> - +1.518.633.aaff

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.518.633.aaff

16:11:12 <Zakim> -??P27

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P27

16:11:38 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, set log public

16:11:43 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, draft minutes

16:11:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-prov-minutes.html Luc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/09/01-prov-minutes.html Luc

16:11:49 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon

Luc Moreau: trackbot, end telcon

16:11:49 <trackbot> Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#2) generated 2011-09-02 12:01:04 UTC by 'unknown', comments: 'Summaries written.'