None.
The minutes of last meeting were approved. The only open action is dealt with under agenda item 5. Volunteers are needed to scribe.
The document has been published. There is also a blog post by Ivan Herman. The WG is encouraged to spread the word to other communities, to blog, to tweet (#provwg), and to elicit comments to public-prov-wg@w3.org. Initial feedback is that it is too complex. Although the material may be inherently complex, there were suggestions that the document could be easier to understand if it presents the most commonly-used core material first, and to make some comparison with existing models such as OPM. It was also suggested that more realistic examples should be used instead of ones that seem contrived, and that showing its representation in RDF would help.
Kai reported on the recent Connection TF telcon, discussing what the future role of the TF would be. The proposal is firstly to collect mailing lists of interested communities, and secondly to reach out to specific groups through organising joint telcons involving appropriate WG members. It was agreed that this approach would help towards the Best Practice Cookbook deliverable from the charter, and that it would be preferable to begin that activity when friendlier documents have been produced - which would be around January 2012.
Tim reported on the RDF-WG F2F meeting. The WG has now resolved to make a distinction between the concepts RDF graph, graph container, and graph serialisation. This is helpful for us, but has led to a mismatch with the work of the SPARQL-WG. More interaction between the three WGs is required to ensure that the distinction is established and maintained. See Tim's explanation on wiki for details. The use of named graphs for accounts depends on this issue.
The status of the PROV-O document was discussed. The general consensus was that the document is ready for release if it contains all of the core concepts of the PROV-DM. It does not have to express all of the constraints at this stage. It should include some explanation of mapping of PROV-DM concepts, and some example of times associated with process executions.
Discussion on Entity Attributes
Graham reported that he and Jim Myers have reached consensus that having attributes as part of characterisation is worthwhile because it aids interoperability, and that it is not necessary to distinguish characterising and non-characterising attributes. It will be necessary to update document with this.
14:53:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-prov-irc ←
14:53:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
14:53:46 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be ←
14:53:46 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
Paul Groth: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
14:53:56 <Zakim> ok, pgroth, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
(Scribe set to Stephen Cresswell)
14:54:41 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public ←
14:55:07 <pgroth> Regrets: Paolo Missier, Reza B'Far, Ryan Golden
14:55:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:55:58 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
14:55:58 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:56:09 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPCaller] is me
Paul Groth: Zakim, [IPCaller] is me ←
14:56:10 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it ←
14:56:50 <Zakim> +Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc ←
14:57:06 <pgroth> hey graham, just out of curiosity why do you also have two irc names?
Paul Groth: hey graham, just out of curiosity why do you also have two irc names? ←
14:57:51 <GK1> @paul I'm using two machines .. let's me track the IRC while digging around for dicuments, etc. :)
Graham Klyne: @paul I'm using two machines .. let's me track the IRC while digging around for dicuments, etc. :) ←
14:58:03 <Zakim> +Yogesh_Simmhan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Yogesh_Simmhan ←
14:58:04 <pgroth> cool :-)
Paul Groth: cool :-) ←
14:58:45 <Zakim> +??P10
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10 ←
14:59:06 <GK> zakim, ??P10 is me
Graham Klyne: zakim, ??P10 is me ←
14:59:07 <Zakim> +GK; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +GK; got it ←
14:59:11 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt_Tilmes ←
14:59:56 <stain> hi, guys
Stian Soiland-Reyes: hi, guys ←
15:00:56 <Zakim> + +1.315.723.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.315.723.aaaa ←
15:01:09 <GK> Hi Stian
Graham Klyne: Hi Stian ←
15:01:10 <tlebo> Zakim, aaaa is tlebo
Timothy Lebo: Zakim, aaaa is tlebo ←
15:01:10 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it ←
15:01:20 <Zakim> +??P26
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P26 ←
15:01:22 <Zakim> +stain
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain ←
15:01:29 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
15:01:32 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy?
Paul Groth: Zakim, who is noisy? ←
15:01:35 <stain> note to self: always pause between the seven keys
Stian Soiland-Reyes: note to self: always pause between the seven keys ←
15:01:35 <kai> zakim, +??P26 is probably me.
Kai Eckert: zakim, +??P26 is probably me. ←
15:01:37 <Zakim> sorry, kai, I do not understand your question
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, kai, I do not understand your question ←
15:01:42 <Zakim> +[ISI]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[ISI] ←
15:01:43 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: stain (21%)
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: stain (21%) ←
15:01:43 <kai> zakim, ??P26 is probably me.
Kai Eckert: zakim, ??P26 is probably me. ←
15:01:43 <Zakim> +kai?; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +kai?; got it ←
15:01:45 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller.a] ←
15:01:51 <jcheney> zakim, [IPCaller] is ne
James Cheney: zakim, [IPCaller] is ne ←
15:01:51 <Zakim> +ne; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ne; got it ←
15:01:56 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller.a] ←
15:02:09 <Zakim> +??P29
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P29 ←
15:02:15 <stain> @kai does "probably" allow others to override..?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @kai does "probably" allow others to override..? ←
15:02:20 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
15:02:23 <kai> probably ;-)
Kai Eckert: probably ;-) ←
15:02:44 <dgarijo> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Daniel Garijo: Zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
15:02:44 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it ←
15:02:48 <kai> Only zakim knows
Kai Eckert: Only zakim knows ←
15:02:55 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.633.aabb ←
15:03:03 <pgroth> Topic: Admin
Summary: The minutes of last meeting were approved. The only open action is dealt with under agenda item 5. Volunteers are needed to scribe.
<StephenCresswell> summary: The minutes of last meeting were approved. The only open action is dealt with under agenda item 5. Volunteers are needed to scribe.
15:03:03 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[OpenLink] ←
15:03:08 <pgroth> PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Oct 13 telecon
Paul Groth: PROPOSED to accept the minutes of Oct 13 telecon ←
15:03:13 <MacTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me ←
15:03:13 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it ←
15:03:14 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-10-13
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-10-13 ←
15:03:16 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me ←
15:03:17 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted ←
15:03:25 <dgarijo> +1
Daniel Garijo: +1 ←
15:03:26 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
15:03:26 <kai> +1
Kai Eckert: +1 ←
15:03:27 <tlebo> 0 (did not attend)
Timothy Lebo: 0 (did not attend) ←
15:03:27 <StephenCresswell> +1
+1 ←
15:03:33 <Zakim> +??P35
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P35 ←
15:03:34 <jcheney> 0 (dna)
James Cheney: 0 (dna) ←
15:03:41 <stain> 0 (not read them yet)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 0 (not read them yet) ←
15:03:48 <YolandaGil> 0
Yolanda Gil: 0 ←
15:04:00 <pgroth> ACCEPTED Minutes from last week
Paul Groth: ACCEPTED Minutes from last week ←
15:04:01 <Zakim> +??P37
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P37 ←
15:04:02 <GK> 0 (not present)
Graham Klyne: 0 (not present) ←
15:04:20 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: reviewing action items
Paul Groth: reviewing action items ←
15:04:44 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Scribes
Paul Groth: 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
... Satya's action item on all items from data model in ontology .. we'll come back to it ←
15:05:05 <StephenCresswell> ... scribes needed ...
... scribes needed ... ←
15:05:05 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-DM FPWD
Summary: The document has been published. There is also a blog post by Ivan Herman. The WG is encouraged to spread the word to other communities, to blog, to tweet (#provwg), and to elicit comments to public-prov-wg@w3.org. Initial feedback is that it is too complex. Although the material may be inherently complex, there were suggestions that the document could be easier to understand if it presents the most commonly-used core material first, and to make some comparison with existing models such as OPM. It was also suggested that more realistic examples should be used instead of ones that seem contrived, and that showing its representation in RDF would help.
<StephenCresswell> summary: The document has been published. There is also a blog post by Ivan Herman. The WG is encouraged to spread the word to other communities, to blog, to tweet (#provwg), and to elicit comments to public-prov-wg@w3.org. Initial feedback is that it is too complex. Although the material may be inherently complex, there were suggestions that the document could be easier to understand if it presents the most commonly-used core material first, and to make some comparison with existing models such as OPM. It was also suggested that more realistic examples should be used instead of ones that seem contrived, and that showing its representation in RDF would help.
15:05:22 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/18/first-draft-of-a-provenance-data-model-published/
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/18/first-draft-of-a-provenance-data-model-published/ ←
15:05:26 <dgarijo> Khalid sends regrets
Daniel Garijo: Khalid sends regrets ←
15:05:28 <StephenCresswell> ... there's a blog post from Ivan
... there's a blog post from Ivan ←
15:05:35 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/ ←
15:05:47 <StephenCresswell> ... is the official link to use
... is the official link to use ←
15:05:52 <pgroth> Twitter hashtag: #provwg
Paul Groth: Twitter hashtag: #provwg ←
15:06:17 <StephenCresswell> ... we want to encourage people to talk about on their blogs etc.
... we want to encourage people to talk about on their blogs etc. ←
15:06:23 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo ←
15:06:30 <StephenCresswell> ... to get multiple perspectives
... to get multiple perspectives ←
15:06:40 <pgroth> +q
Paul Groth: +q ←
15:06:43 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:06:45 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:06:49 <dgarijo> +q
Daniel Garijo: +q ←
15:06:51 <StephenCresswell> +q
+q ←
15:07:10 <pgroth> ack dgarijo
Paul Groth: ack dgarijo ←
15:07:12 <satya> @Paul: Was there a question for me? Sorry I joined a bit late
Satya Sahoo: @Paul: Was there a question for me? Sorry I joined a bit late ←
15:07:18 <pgroth> no satya
Paul Groth: no satya ←
15:07:33 <StephenCresswell> dgarijo: comments said that model was a bit complex, how are we going to make it more simple
Daniel Garijo: 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
Paul Groth: a number of ways ←
15:07:46 <pgroth> ack StephenCresswell
Paul Groth: ack StephenCresswell ←
15:07:47 <GK> q+ to note it may be the /presentation/ is seen as complex
Graham Klyne: q+ to note it may be the /presentation/ is seen as complex ←
15:08:22 <GK> The comment address should be in the draft
Graham Klyne: 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).
Daniel Garijo: 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
Luc Moreau: they can subscribe to the mailing list ←
15:08:38 <StephenCresswell> where should the comments go?
where should the comments go? ←
15:08:48 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: to the mailing list
Paul Groth: to the mailing list ←
15:08:59 <Luc> instructions are at the beginning of document
Luc Moreau: instructions are at the beginning of document ←
15:09:13 <StephenCresswell> GK: Do they normally have a separate mailing list?
Graham Klyne: Do they normally have a separate mailing list? ←
15:09:17 <GK> Doc requests comments to public-prov-wg@w3.org
Graham Klyne: Doc requests comments to public-prov-wg@w3.org ←
15:09:18 <Luc> ... it's standard text from w3c
Luc Moreau: ... it's standard text from w3c ←
15:09:55 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:09:55 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:09:57 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
15:09:57 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to note it may be the /presentation/ is seen as complex
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to note it may be the /presentation/ is seen as complex ←
15:10:03 <satya> @GK: agree
Satya Sahoo: @GK: agree ←
15:10:05 <stain> @GK +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK +1 ←
15:10:08 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: 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?
Graham Klyne: 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
James Cheney: +q ←
15:10:32 <dgarijo> @GK yes, maybe I didn't express myself correctly, sorry.
Daniel Garijo: @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/
Stian Soiland-Reyes: no, not publiclally subscribable. I was redirected to password-protected http://www.w3.org/Member/Mail/ ←
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
Luc Moreau: 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
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
15:11:26 <MacTed> Zakim, who's noisy?
Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's noisy? ←
15:11:28 <paolo> zakim, ??p12 is me
Paolo Missier: zakim, ??p12 is me ←
15:11:28 <Zakim> +paolo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +paolo; got it ←
15:11:31 <StephenCresswell> ... thinking about starting the data model with the most common relations
... thinking 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%)
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
Satya Sahoo: @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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK just needs some bass ←
15:12:07 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
Ted Thibodeau: 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,
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
Zakim IRC Bot: ... 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,
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
Zakim IRC Bot: ... pgroth, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro ←
15:12:34 <stain> > This is a response to a message apparently sent from your address to
Stian Soiland-Reyes: > This is a response to a message apparently sent from your address to ←
15:12:40 <paolo> +1 for a two-tier dissemination strategy
Paolo Missier: +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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: > public-prov-wg@w3.org: Your message has NOT been distributed to the list ←
15:12:47 <paolo> q+
Paolo Missier: q+ ←
15:12:49 <stain> so it does not work to email from the outside either
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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.
James Cheney: 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)
... (gone quiet) ←
15:12:52 <GK> q+ to say that I've been taking a shot at entioty/resource stuff
Graham Klyne: q+ to say that I've been taking a shot at entioty/resource stuff ←
15:12:56 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:13:01 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
15:13:05 <StephenCresswell> ... (I didn't hear anything)
... (I didn't hear anything) ←
15:13:05 <pgroth> ack paolo
Paul Groth: 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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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
Paolo Missier: Make distinction between core concepts and newer things ←
15:14:09 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:14:19 <StephenCresswell> ... people ask how it is different from OPM ... make distinction between top tier and second tier
... people ask how it is different from OPM ... make distinction between top tier and second tier ←
15:14:23 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
15:14:23 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say that I've been taking a shot at entioty/resource stuff
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say that I've been taking a shot at entioty/resource stuff ←
15:14:27 <YolandaGil> +1
Yolanda Gil: +1 ←
15:14:33 <YolandaGil> q+
Yolanda Gil: q+ ←
15:14:40 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
15:14:46 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: 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,
Graham Klyne: 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
... intend to contribute ←
15:15:09 <pgroth> ack YolandaGil
Paul Groth: ack YolandaGil ←
15:15:47 <tlebo> FROM @MacTed ASK WHERE { [ foaf:nick "Tall Ted" ] foaf:holdsAccount [ foaf:accountName "MacTed" ] } . }
Timothy Lebo: 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.
Yolanda Gil: Was trying extract core ideas to write primer document. ←
15:15:52 <paolo> q?
Paolo Missier: q? ←
15:15:57 <StephenCresswell> ... some of the examples are hard to relate to
... 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
Graham Klyne: Slightly related to this discussion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Oct/0156.html ←
15:16:44 <GK> Yolanda +1
Graham Klyne: Yolanda +1 ←
15:16:45 <StephenCresswell> ... some of the the definitions , or how terms are used elsewhere in document, are confusing
... some of the the definitions , or how terms are used elsewhere in document, are confusing ←
15:17:12 <stain> @YolandaGil +1
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @YolandaGil +1 ←
15:17:26 <tlebo> +1 to stop making contrived examples when there are many real examples to handle
Timothy Lebo: +1 to stop making contrived examples when there are many real examples to handle ←
15:17:29 <satya> @Yolanda +1
Satya Sahoo: @Yolanda +1 ←
15:17:39 <StephenCresswell> ... may less contrived, more natural examples, more like the way we would use provenance, would help
... 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
Timothy Lebo: attempt of a list http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples ←
15:17:54 <dgarijo> @Yolanda +1
Daniel Garijo: @Yolanda +1 ←
15:17:55 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:18:10 <StephenCresswell> ... perhaps end-to-end example using linked data
... 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
Paul Groth: 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
Graham Klyne: @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
... 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
Satya Sahoo: @Paul +1 and maybe with an intuitive example will help ←
15:19:24 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
15:19:28 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:19:37 <StephenCresswell> ... it's nice to have the RDF as well as abstract syntax
... 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.
Daniel Garijo: we have some examples in RDF in the ontology document. ←
15:20:11 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:20:16 <tlebo> RDF/XML :-(
Timothy Lebo: RDF/XML :-( ←
15:20:17 <StephenCresswell> satya: linked data, bioinformatics, sensor data, has lots of examples
Satya Sahoo: linked data, bioinformatics, sensor data, has lots of examples ←
15:20:39 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:20:41 <StephenCresswell> ... maybe better than filesystem examples
... maybe better than filesystem examples ←
15:20:43 <pgroth> ack satya
Paul Groth: ack satya ←
15:20:45 <satya> q-
Satya Sahoo: q- ←
15:21:16 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: We have the example that we all agreed on previously ... data journalism example
Paul Groth: 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?
Satya Sahoo: @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.
Luc Moreau: 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)
Graham Klyne: +1 (need examples that demonstrate simple ideas) ←
15:21:51 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:21:53 <StephenCresswell> ... concentrate on some simple things that everyone would need to say e.g. authorship, quote relation
... concentrate on some simple things that everyone would need to say e.g. authorship, quote relation ←
15:21:53 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:22:17 <pgroth> Topic: Connection Task Force
Summary: Kai reported on the recent Connection TF telcon, discussing what the future role of the TF would be. The proposal is firstly to collect mailing lists of interested communities, and secondly to reach out to specific groups through organising joint telcons involving appropriate WG members. It was agreed that this approach would help towards the Best Practice Cookbook deliverable from the charter, and that it would be preferable to begin that activity when friendlier documents have been produced - which would be around January 2012.
<StephenCresswell> summary: Kai reported on the recent Connection TF telcon, discussing what the future role of the TF would be. The proposal is firstly to collect mailing lists of interested communities, and secondly to reach out to specific groups through organising joint telcons involving appropriate WG members. It was agreed that this approach would help towards the Best Practice Cookbook deliverable from the charter, and that it would be preferable to begin that activity when friendlier documents have been produced - which would be around January 2012.
15:22:22 <tlebo> += http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples#Who_is_the_author_of_a_document
Timothy Lebo: += 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
Satya Sahoo: We can revisit some of the example scenarios from the PROV XG also ←
15:22:41 <tlebo> @satya, pointer to XG's list?
Timothy Lebo: @satya, pointer to XG's list? ←
15:22:47 <dgarijo> @satya: well, the first one wasn't the data journalism example?
Daniel Garijo: @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,
Kai Eckert: We have telecon discussing what we will do with connection TF, ←
15:22:54 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:23:01 <StephenCresswell> ... so far we have informal rep ... more or less finished
... so far we have informal rep ... more or less finished ←
15:23:09 <StephenCresswell> ... it should be a living document
... it should be a living document ←
15:23:09 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
15:23:21 <StephenCresswell> ... eric and kai will be a contact
... eric and kai will be a contact ←
15:23:34 <StephenCresswell> ... What will we do next?
... 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
Daniel Garijo: @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
... one thing is to identify mailing lists ←
15:23:55 <tlebo> thx
Timothy Lebo: thx ←
15:24:15 <StephenCresswell> ... we don't want to be seen as the people who actually communicate with all these connections
... 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
Satya Sahoo: @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
... it would just add another step to communications ←
15:24:45 <StephenCresswell> ... We brainstormed on what else we could provide
... 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.
Daniel Garijo: @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
... We thought about organising additional telecons ←
15:25:25 <StephenCresswell> ... we other groups, e.g. creative commons
... we other groups, e.g. creative commons ←
15:25:31 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:25:41 <StephenCresswell> ... What does the group think?
... What does the group think? ←
15:25:44 <dgarijo> @Satya: what does CS mean?
Daniel Garijo: @Satya: what does CS mean? ←
15:25:55 <satya> @Tim: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Analysis_of_Disease_Outbreak_Scenario
Satya Sahoo: @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
Paul Groth: Still a lot to do in engaging with other groups ←
15:26:13 <satya> @daniel: computer science
Satya Sahoo: @daniel: computer science ←
15:26:14 <Luc> q+ to mention the best practice deliverable
Luc Moreau: q+ to mention the best practice deliverable ←
15:26:21 <StephenCresswell> ... e.g. kai involved with DC group
... e.g. kai involved with DC group ←
15:26:26 <dgarijo> @satya: thx!
Daniel Garijo: @satya: thx! ←
15:26:27 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:26:47 <StephenCresswell> Luc: In charter we have Best Practive deliverable
Luc Moreau: In charter we have Best Practive deliverable ←
15:27:38 <StephenCresswell> ... would involve technical work on how integrate e.g. creative commons work
... would involve technical work on how integrate e.g. creative commons work ←
15:27:42 <YolandaGil> +q
Yolanda Gil: +q ←
15:27:45 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:27:45 <Zakim> Luc, you wanted to mention the best practice deliverable
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
Kai Eckert: That's sort of thing what we might discuss on new telcons ←
15:28:39 <pgroth> ack YolandaGil
Paul Groth: ack YolandaGil ←
15:28:52 <StephenCresswell> kai: What can be our role where we are not bridge persons?
Kai Eckert: What can be our role where we are not bridge persons? ←
15:28:56 <Zakim> -stain
Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←
15:29:15 <Zakim> +stain
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain ←
15:29:23 <paolo> have to leave, apologies
Paolo Missier: have to leave, apologies ←
15:29:42 <Zakim> -paolo
Zakim IRC Bot: -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
Yolanda Gil: 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
... we need to set up discussions in these separate areas ←
15:30:26 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: 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
... 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
Paul Groth: 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
Yolanda Gil: 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.
Paul Groth: seems reasonable to wait for primer etc. ←
15:32:40 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:32:53 <Luc> we should use the w3c teleconference system for those calls, and we need to book them ahead
Luc Moreau: we should use the w3c teleconference system for those calls, and we need to book them ahead ←
15:33:05 <Luc> +1 for January
Luc Moreau: +1 for January ←
15:33:14 <StephenCresswell> yolanda: maybe we can schedule for later ... e.g. December, January
Yolanda Gil: maybe we can schedule for later ... e.g. December, January ←
15:33:24 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-O
Summary: Tim reported on the RDF-WG F2F meeting. The WG has now resolved to make a distinction between the concepts RDF graph, graph container, and graph serialisation. This is helpful for us, but has led to a mismatch with the work of the SPARQL-WG. More interaction between the three WGs is required to ensure that the distinction is established and maintained. See Tim's explanation on wiki for details. The use of named graphs for accounts depends on this issue.
<StephenCresswell> summary: Tim reported on the RDF-WG F2F meeting. The WG has now resolved to make a distinction between the concepts RDF graph, graph container, and graph serialisation. This is helpful for us, but has led to a mismatch with the work of the SPARQL-WG. More interaction between the three WGs is required to ensure that the distinction is established and maintained. See Tim's explanation on wiki for details. The use of named graphs for accounts depends on this issue.
15:33:33 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: January seems best.
Paul Groth: 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)
Timothy Lebo: 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)
Timothy Lebo: Some feedback on F2F (named graphs) ←
15:34:42 <StephenCresswell> ... they have resolved to distinguish
... they have resolved to distinguish ←
15:34:51 <StephenCresswell> graph containers and graph serialisations
graph containers and graph serialisations ←
15:34:58 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts
Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Using_named_graphs_to_model_Accounts ←
15:35:30 <StephenCresswell> ... the clear distinction will help proposal
... the clear distinction will help proposal ←
15:35:51 <StephenCresswell> ... they have some problem with the SPARQL WG
... they have some problem with the SPARQL WG ←
15:36:20 <StephenCresswell> ... vocabularies used to identify graph doesn't identify graph container
... vocabularies used to identify graph doesn't identify graph container ←
15:36:30 <StephenCresswell> ... needs to be solved in SPARQL WG
... needs to be solved in SPARQL WG ←
15:36:36 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:37:03 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: Any impression on whether we just have to wait?
Paul Groth: Any impression on whether we just have to wait? ←
15:37:16 <StephenCresswell> tlebo: We need to be more proactive than that
Timothy Lebo: 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
Satya Sahoo: @Tim: thanks! The distinction between g-snap and g-box seems to be special importance to this WG ←
15:37:47 <satya> @tim: agree
Satya Sahoo: @tim: agree ←
15:37:50 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:37:54 <StephenCresswell> ... we need to interact more to make sure the clear distinction is established and maintained
... 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
Graham Klyne: 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
Timothy Lebo: 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
Luc Moreau: 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?
Graham Klyne: Their problem or ours? ←
15:39:48 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:40:11 <StephenCresswell> tlebo: Ours. They could continue to ignore it and they would meet their aims.
Timothy Lebo: Ours. They could continue to ignore it and they would meet their aims. ←
15:40:26 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:40:39 <pgroth> Topic: Update PROV-O
Summary: The status of the PROV-O document was discussed. The general consensus was that the document is ready for release if it contains all of the core concepts of the PROV-DM. It does not have to express all of the constraints at this stage. It should include some explanation of mapping of PROV-DM concepts, and some example of times associated with process executions.
<StephenCresswell> summary: The status of the PROV-O document was discussed. The general consensus was that the document is ready for release if it contains all of the core concepts of the PROV-DM. It does not have to express all of the constraints at this stage. It should include some explanation of mapping of PROV-DM concepts, and some example of times associated with process executions.
15:40:47 <StephenCresswell> tlebo: Discussion on named graphs for accounts is stalled by these problems.
Timothy Lebo: 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.
Daniel Garijo: 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.
Daniel Garijo: once again. ←
15:41:32 <StephenCresswell> satya: Luc joined ontology call and had suggestions before release of documents.
Satya Sahoo: Luc joined ontology call and had suggestions before release of documents. ←
15:41:48 <Zakim> + +1.509.375.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.509.375.aacc ←
15:41:50 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:41:57 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:41:58 <GK> q+ top suggest an approach to simplifyingpresentation of the D<M might be via the ontology
Graham Klyne: q+ top suggest an approach to simplifyingpresentation of the D<M might be via the ontology ←
15:42:05 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:42:12 <StephenCresswell> ... on data model, it might make sense to withhold prov-o until readablity of dm doc is improved
... 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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: @Luc +1 - let's do an agile first version ←
15:42:33 <stain> with lots of bugs :)
Stian Soiland-Reyes: with lots of bugs :) ←
15:42:37 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:42:38 <GK> q+ to suggest an approach to simplifying presentation of the DM might be via the ontology
Graham Klyne: 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 delay prov-o document, we need serialisation, for primer etc.
Luc Moreau: Would be worried to delay prov-o document, we need serialisation, for primer etc. ←
15:42:52 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:43:12 <StephenCresswell> satya: we can go ahead and release
Satya Sahoo: we can go ahead and release ←
15:43:18 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:43:30 <jcheney> +q
James Cheney: +q ←
15:43:31 <tlebo> PROV-O is not the RDF serialization?
Timothy Lebo: PROV-O is not the RDF serialization? ←
15:43:33 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
15:43:33 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suggest an approach to simplifying presentation of the DM might be via the ontology
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
...to clarify, prov-o is not the RDF serialisation ←
15:44:24 <tlebo> so, PROV-O is RDF serialization + axioms?
Timothy Lebo: 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.
Graham Klyne: 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?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:45:08 <StephenCresswell> satya: Agree. Think we have covered the mapping of all the terms in data model.
Satya Sahoo: 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
Daniel Garijo: @GK: Paul already proposed some shortcut fucntions ←
15:45:46 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:46:10 <StephenCresswell> GK: Shortcuts may provide a less scary way to present examples
Graham Klyne: Shortcuts may provide a less scary way to present examples ←
15:46:12 <stain> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#prov-dm-extensions
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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
Daniel Garijo: 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?
Satya Sahoo: 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
Graham Klyne: 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
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:47:05 <stain> q+
Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ ←
15:47:07 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: I consider them part of the core
Paul Groth: I consider them part of the core ←
15:47:19 <GK> .. i.e. not necessarily 1:1 correspondence between DM and O
Graham Klyne: .. i.e. not necessarily 1:1 correspondence between DM and O ←
15:47:35 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:47:55 <StephenCresswell> jcheney: Data model uses abstract syntax, ontology uses RDF, but describes constraints and specialisations
James Cheney: 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
Graham Klyne: I think the ontology effectively *does* define RDGF serialization ←
15:48:13 <pgroth> the RDF falls out of the Ontology
Paul Groth: the RDF falls out of the Ontology ←
15:48:27 <stain> but not with any constraints of formats or implicit/explicit etc.
Stian Soiland-Reyes: but not with any constraints of formats or implicit/explicit etc. ←
15:48:28 <StephenCresswell> ... but doesn't describe mapping to ontology
... but doesn't describe mapping to ontology ←
15:48:38 <stain> I assume PAQ should come with some minimum serialisation expectations
Stian Soiland-Reyes: I assume PAQ should come with some minimum serialisation expectations ←
15:48:48 <GK> @pgroth yes that's what I meant to say :)
Graham Klyne: @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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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.
Ted Thibodeau: 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?
Satya Sahoo: We tried to model DM classes and provide definitions. What is mssing? ←
15:49:26 <pgroth> zakim, who is noisy?
Paul Groth: zakim, who is noisy? ←
15:49:33 <stain> XML serialisation CAN be a (restricted) RDF/XML serialisation
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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%)
Zakim IRC Bot: 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.
Graham Klyne: 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?
James Cheney: 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?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:50:44 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
15:50:46 <StephenCresswell> satya: We will add some text on that.
Satya Sahoo: 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
Luc Moreau: On issue of time, there don't seem to be any time examples ←
15:51:16 <dgarijo> we talked about reusing some time ontologies.
Daniel Garijo: we talked about reusing some time ontologies. ←
15:51:28 <StephenCresswell> ... e.g. workflow example, can we have time in there?
... e.g. workflow example, can we have time in there? ←
15:51:33 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:51:41 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
15:51:42 <StephenCresswell> satya: We will add e.g. start and stop time of processes.
Satya Sahoo: We will add e.g. start and stop time of processes. ←
15:51:46 <dgarijo> like : http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/
Daniel Garijo: 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
Timothy Lebo: 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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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"
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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
Luc Moreau: they are part of the data model ←
15:53:49 <dgarijo> @Satya: entities?
Daniel Garijo: @Satya: entities? ←
15:53:59 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:54:00 <StephenCresswell> satya: What are the domain and range of the relations?
Satya Sahoo: What are the domain and range of the relations? ←
15:54:13 <pgroth> ack stain
Paul Groth: ack stain ←
15:54:13 <GK> ?
Graham Klyne: ? ←
15:54:21 <StephenCresswell> Luc: entities
Luc Moreau: entities ←
15:54:22 <pgroth> q-
Paul Groth: q- ←
15:54:23 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:55:08 <StephenCresswell> pgroth: It would be good to reflect everything in the DM into the ontology
Paul Groth: It would be good to reflect everything in the DM into the ontology ←
15:55:22 <StephenCresswell> ... not necessarily all the contraints
... not necessarily all the contraints ←
15:55:26 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:55:28 <tlebo> RDF examples for each construct are in the repository: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/ontology/components
Timothy Lebo: 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 :-)
Timothy Lebo: not complete, not correct, but there :-) ←
15:55:42 <GK> +1 need the vocabulary soonest, not nessecarily constraints
Graham Klyne: +1 need the vocabulary soonest, not nessecarily constraints ←
15:55:51 <StephenCresswell> satya: Primary aim should be to get all the terms modelled,
Satya Sahoo: 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.
... but if you don't define all the domain, range etc. ←
15:56:28 <StephenCresswell> ... people have problems creating the RDF
... people have problems creating the RDF ←
15:56:43 <GK> +1 domain and range are helpful for generating RDF
Graham Klyne: +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.
Paul Groth: Domain and range are mostly there anyway, the hierachies are not so important at this stage. ←
15:58:01 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:58:02 <StephenCresswell> satya: Agree, but OWL community won't like it.
Satya Sahoo: 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
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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
Summary: Graham reported that he and Jim Myers have reached consensus that having attributes as part of characterisation is worthwhile because it aids interoperability, and that it is not necessary to distinguish characterising and non-characterising attributes. It will be necessary to update document with this.
<StephenCresswell> summary: Graham reported that he and Jim Myers have reached consensus that having attributes as part of characterisation is worthwhile because it aids interoperability, and that it is not necessary to distinguish characterising and non-characterising attributes. It will be necessary to update document with this.
15:58:33 <stain> .. but you get strange double-nesting due to the property-class nature of RDF/XML
Stian Soiland-Reyes: .. 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
Graham Klyne: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Oct/0142.html ←
15:58:54 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
15:58:57 <StephenCresswell> GK: Link is to one of most recent messages,
Graham Klyne: Link is to one of most recent messages, ←
15:59:11 <StephenCresswell> ... discussion between GK and Jim has converged
... discussion between GK and Jim has converged ←
15:59:15 <Zakim> +tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo ←
15:59:24 <StephenCresswell> ... to having attributes as part of characterisation
... to having attributes as part of characterisation ←
15:59:46 <StephenCresswell> ... to aid interoperability
... to aid interoperability ←
16:00:16 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:00:25 <StephenCresswell> ... Also agreed we don't have to distinguish between characterising and non-characterising attributes
... 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.
Timothy Lebo: 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
Zakim IRC Bot: -Yogesh_Simmhan ←
16:00:54 <Luc> q+ to ask if you still consider that attributes still have a given value for some interval
Luc Moreau: q+ to ask if you still consider that attributes still have a given value for some interval ←
16:00:58 <satya> @tim: +1
Satya Sahoo: @tim: +1 ←
16:00:58 <tlebo> (sorry, call also dropped)
Timothy Lebo: (sorry, call also dropped) ←
16:01:13 <stain> should we do a proposal and vote?
Stian Soiland-Reyes: 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
Luc Moreau: Didn't mention whether a given attr has fixed value for some interval ←
16:01:43 <satya> q+
Satya Sahoo: q+ ←
16:01:53 <tlebo> all attributes are fixed in an entity, no?
Timothy Lebo: 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.
Graham Klyne: Any attr for entity is fixed for entity in what interval that entity exists. ←
16:02:26 <Zakim> -[ISI]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[ISI] ←
16:02:31 <StephenCresswell> GK: Argument for interop came from jim.
Graham Klyne: Argument for interop came from jim. ←
16:02:32 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: 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
Zakim IRC Bot: 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.
Daniel Garijo: gotta go, sry. ←
16:02:43 <Zakim> -??P35
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P35 ←
16:03:03 <StephenCresswell> ... looking at provenance challenge, the attrs were introduced to enable conversion of information between different formats
... looking at provenance challenge, the attrs were introduced to enable conversion of information between different formats ←
16:03:08 <Zakim> -kai
Zakim IRC Bot: -kai ←
16:03:10 <Zakim> -dgarijo
Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo ←
16:03:19 <kai> sorry, have to leave timely
Kai Eckert: sorry, have to leave timely ←
16:03:37 <tlebo> what is the brewing proposal we may vote on?
Timothy Lebo: 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
... 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.
Luc Moreau: 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?
... are there aspects of the document which conflict with what you agreed with Jim? ←
16:04:49 <StephenCresswell> GK: Will clarify this.
Graham Klyne: Will clarify this. ←
16:04:53 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:05:09 <pgroth> ack satya
Paul Groth: ack satya ←
16:05:39 <StephenCresswell> satya: What GK said is exactly what frames and slots do, and that carries over to OWL.
Satya Sahoo: 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.
Timothy Lebo: just as PROV is avoiding the Time and Location discussions, it should also avoid being a schema language. ←
16:06:18 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:06:42 <StephenCresswell> satya: To make it clear, it would help you don't explicitly carry around attributes of entity to be able to define it properly, that is done by typing information
Satya Sahoo: To make it clear, it would help you don't explicitly carry around attributes of entity to be able to define it properly, that is done by typing information ←
16:06:48 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo ←
16:06:49 <Zakim> -stain
Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←
16:06:52 <Zakim> -tlebo
Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←
16:06:53 <Zakim> -??P37
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P37 ←
16:06:56 <Zakim> -Luc
Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←
16:06:57 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, set log public ←
16:06:57 <Zakim> -MacTed
Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←
16:07:03 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes ←
16:07:05 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
Paul Groth: 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
RRSAgent IRC Bot: 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
Paul Groth: trackbot, end telcon ←
16:07:11 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: 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,
Zakim IRC Bot: 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
Trackbot IRC Bot: 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
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←
16:07:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
16:07:13 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items ←
16:07:15 <Zakim> ... Satya_Sahoo, paolo, +1.509.375.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: ... Satya_Sahoo, paolo, +1.509.375.aacc ←
Formatted by CommonScribe
This revision (#1) generated 2011-10-25 12:37:26 UTC by 'pgroth', comments: 'Topic summaries added and irc issues cleaned p'