Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 02 February 2012

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable
Seen
Daniel Garijo, Graham Klyne, Ivan Herman (W3C), James Cheney, Jun Zhao, Kai Eckert, Khalid Belhajjame, Luc Moreau, Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Sandro Hawke, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Ted Thibodeau, Timothy Lebo
Guests
Ivan Herman (W3C)
Chair
Luc Moreau
Scribe
Simon Miles, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Paolo Missier
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable link
Topics
  1. Introduction

    A status report was given by Luc. It was noted that good progress since the first f2f was made however there has been a slow down in progress because of redebating of issues and complexity. The group is deviating from the timetable and needs to re-adjust it's ambition and timetable. To address these concerns a new timetable was proposed and resolved. In terms of process, any content causing slippage from the timetable (i.e. issues not being resolved) will will be candidates for removal. The timetable will be extended by three months. The proper W3C processes will needed to be followed.

    1. Comments from Ivan

      Ivan gave his perspective. He encouraged the group to simplify focusing on the core semantic web and linked data community. He emphasized that we should focus on making prov-o OWL-RL compatible. He also noted that we should use turtle for examples as that facilitates uptake.

  2. Provenance Access and Query

    The current status of the prov-aq document was described. Paul gave an overview of six issues he had with the document. The major issues were editiorial in nature. A key outcome was that part of the document is best practice in nature (e.g. how to use sparql to query provenance, or embedd provenance in rdfa) and other parts are a specification (e.g. how to locate provenance). The editors agreed to try and make this distinction clear. A large amount of discussion was had on the definition of provenance services. In particular, there were concerns about not allowing service specific extensions that allow clients to define how much provenance information they want back. Essentially, the service definition should allow for extensibility. Two options were discussed for the definition of a protocol for provenance service either using a WSDL approach or a url pattern approach. The editors agreed to come up with a proposal for this protocol.

  3. Primer

    Simon presented the current status of the primer. A key reason for not progressing farther is the differences between prov-o and prov-dm once those issues are resolved further work can be done. Longer term there is a goal to tailor a primer to different communities. In gerneral, the group was happy abou the primer's status. A discussion was had about having a common way to graphically illustrate provenance graphs. It was agreed that having a common convention would be good. Finally, the importance of the primer as an entry point to the entiry family was discussed. There was consensus that the group should aim for a synchronous release with the other documents.

  4. Best practic document(s)

    The current best practices document describes how to extend the ontology to an application specific domain. Kai agreed to lead the development of a best practice document for using Dublin Core and Prov together. Danial, Graham and Simon agreed to help. It was agreed, not to reach out to people outside the group until the specifications have stabalized more. Ivan suggested that the Semantic Web wiki can be used to maintain examples coming from the group and best practices after the lifetime of the working group.

  5. PROV-DM

    Two topics were discussed in this session: accounts and identifiers. Accounts - The prime use of accounts was identified as being able to express the provenance of provenance. However, the current notion attempts to support more complex notions of multiple accounts, which adds complexity to the model. To address this complixty, the group agreed that accounts are going to be taken out and replace it with a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions. Identifiers - a key issue has been what identifiers denote in the data model. The group recognized that the key problem is that we were trying to address two use-cases. The term "scruffy" provenance was used to refer to using the prov-dm vocabulary with already exisiting web resources where the subject of a provenance assertion is just a URI. The term "proper" provenance was used to refer to the case where the thing should have a frozen characterisation. Both use cases were seen as being important. To address the use case of scruffy provenance instead the editors of prov-dm proposed to remove the distinction between entities and things in the document, which reflected these two use cases. There was consensus to move forward with the renaiming.

  6. PROV-O

    Concerns were raised about the ability to synchronize prov-o with prov-dm. In particular, about how to know what is changed and what is not in the prov-dm. A process was agreed on to facilate synchronization. An ontology that reflects the current WD-3 version would be produced for review. Because of the possibility of the change in accounts, the updated ontology does not need to reflect accounts. Again, it was encouraged that the ontology follow owl-rl.

08:14:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/02-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/02-prov-irc

08:14:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

08:14:37 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be

08:14:37 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

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

08:14:38 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
08:14:38 <trackbot> Date: 02 February 2012
08:14:47 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV

Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV

08:14:47 <Zakim> ok, Luc, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM already started

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM already started

08:15:16 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable
08:15:41 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni]

08:15:56 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone?

08:15:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.315.724.aaaa, [VrijeUni]

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see +1.315.724.aaaa, [VrijeUni]

08:16:17 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
08:16:24 <tlebo> zakim, aaaa is me

Timothy Lebo: zakim, aaaa is me

08:16:24 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it

08:17:13 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public

08:17:36 <Luc> scribe: Simon Miles

(Scribe set to Simon Miles)

08:17:52 <Luc> Topic: Introduction

1. Introduction

Summary: A status report was given by Luc. It was noted that good progress since the first f2f was made however there has been a slow down in progress because of redebating of issues and complexity. The group is deviating from the timetable and needs to re-adjust it's ambition and timetable. To address these concerns a new timetable was proposed and resolved. In terms of process, any content causing slippage from the timetable (i.e. issues not being resolved) will will be candidates for removal. The timetable will be extended by three months. The proper W3C processes will needed to be followed.

<pgroth> Summary: A status report was given by Luc. It was noted that good progress since the first f2f was made however there has been a slow down in progress because of redebating of issues and complexity. The group is deviating from the timetable and needs to re-adjust it's ambition and timetable. To address these concerns a new timetable was proposed and resolved. In terms of process, any content causing slippage from the timetable (i.e. issues not being resolved) will will be candidates for removal. The timetable will be extended by three months. The proper W3C processes will needed to be followed.
08:17:52 <smiles> Scribe: smiles
<pgroth> Guest: Ivan (ivan) Herman, W3C
08:18:38 <smiles> Luc: good morning

Luc Moreau: good morning

08:19:21 <smiles> Luc: round of introductions

Luc Moreau: round of introductions

08:19:41 <smiles> On the phone: Tim

On the phone: Tim

08:20:41 <tlebo> at the table: daniel, simon, khalid, ivan,

Timothy Lebo: at the table: daniel, simon, khalid, ivan,

08:20:42 <smiles> Ivan: introduces himself

Ivan Herman: introduces himself

08:21:43 <smiles> Luc: first, need to approve minutes of last call

Luc Moreau: first, need to approve minutes of last call

08:21:45 <pgroth> minutes  http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-01-26

Paul Groth: minutes http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-01-26

08:22:49 <pgroth> Proposed: accept minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon

PROPOSED: accept minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon

08:22:51 <khalidbelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

08:22:52 <dgarijo> +0 ( I wasn't there)

Daniel Garijo: +0 ( I wasn't there)

08:22:54 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

08:22:54 <Paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1

08:22:55 <kai> +1

Kai Eckert: +1

08:22:58 <jcheney> +1

James Cheney: +1

08:23:09 <smiles> +1

+1

08:23:41 <pgroth> accepted minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon

Paul Groth: accepted minutes of January 26, 2012 telecon

08:24:02 <smiles> Luc: welcome

Luc Moreau: welcome

08:24:42 <smiles> ... Have some observations from chairs to start

... Have some observations from chairs to start

08:24:47 <GK> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro

Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro

08:25:37 <smiles> ... From initial 17 words, we have made really good progress

... From initial 17 words, we have made really good progress

08:26:10 <smiles> ... However, deviation from timetable, was hoping to release last call at 9 months

... However, deviation from timetable, was hoping to release last call at 9 months

08:26:34 <smiles> ... See redebating of issues and drop in attendance

... See redebating of issues and drop in attendance

08:26:58 <smiles> ... We would like to address these

... We would like to address these

08:27:26 <smiles> ... Have some feedback, that the model is too complex

... Have some feedback, that the model is too complex

<pgroth> subtopic: Comments from Ivan

1.1. Comments from Ivan

Summary: Ivan gave his perspective. He encouraged the group to simplify focusing on the core semantic web and linked data community. He emphasized that we should focus on making prov-o OWL-RL compatible. He also noted that we should use turtle for examples as that facilitates uptake.

<pgroth> Summary: Ivan gave his perspective. He encouraged the group to simplify focusing on the core semantic web and linked data community. He emphasized that we should focus on making prov-o OWL-RL compatible. He also noted that we should use turtle for examples as that facilitates uptake.
08:28:45 <smiles> Ivan: concern is for use in semantic web community, realising most active part is linked data community

Ivan Herman: concern is for use in semantic web community, realising most active part is linked data community

08:29:17 <smiles> ... Complex OWL ontolgies are only niche areas

... Complex OWL ontolgies are only niche areas

08:30:41 <smiles> ... Experience with two past WGs, tried to be good for everyone, end up being ignored even though recognised useful topic

... Experience with two past WGs, tried to be good for everyone, end up being ignored even though recognised useful topic

08:31:30 <smiles> ... Also OWL2, technically good but uptake poor, triple stores use an implementable subset

... Also OWL2, technically good but uptake poor, triple stores use an implementable subset

08:35:28 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

08:35:29 <dgarijo> Ivan: maybe we have to think in profiles

Ivan Herman: maybe we have to think in profiles [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

08:35:39 <dgarijo> ... something simple that can be extended

Daniel Garijo: ... something simple that can be extended

08:36:01 <dgarijo> ... and it is more simple and reusable by the community

Daniel Garijo: ... and it is more simple and reusable by the community

08:36:15 <pgroth> ack proth

Paul Groth: ack proth

08:36:17 <dgarijo> pgroth: the concepts from DM are adopted from those places.

Paul Groth: the concepts from DM are adopted from those places. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

08:36:18 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

08:36:32 <dgarijo> ivan: is every concept of DM necessary?

Ivan Herman: is every concept of DM necessary? [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

08:36:55 <dgarijo> luc: there are interoperability issues that are not yet addressed

Luc Moreau: there are interoperability issues that are not yet addressed [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

08:37:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:37:36 <dgarijo> ivan: I took olaf and jun's voc as an example

Ivan Herman: I took olaf and jun's voc as an example [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

08:37:48 <dgarijo> ... when I look at it I say: I get i

Daniel Garijo: ... when I look at it I say: I get i

08:37:54 <dgarijo> t

Daniel Garijo: t

08:38:12 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

08:38:37 <smiles> Ivan: would prefer to have whole spec in terms of rdf, possibility of linked data profile

Ivan Herman: would prefer to have whole spec in terms of rdf, possibility of linked data profile

08:38:59 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:39:57 <GK> q+ to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability

Graham Klyne: q+ to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability

08:40:15 <stain> Ivan: PROV-O is simple - OWL-RL-like - Keep it like that!

Ivan Herman: PROV-O is simple - OWL-RL-like - Keep it like that! [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:40:20 <stain> Ivan: RDFS with a tiny bit of OWL

Ivan Herman: RDFS with a tiny bit of OWL [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:40:25 <dgarijo> +q

Daniel Garijo: +q

08:40:29 <smiles> ...with regards to prov-o, impression is that ontology is actually simple, which is good, but should be made clear that

...with regards to prov-o, impression is that ontology is actually simple, which is good, but should be made clear that

08:41:10 <smiles> ... this is owl-rl

... this is owl-rl

08:41:27 <stain> Ivan: Pleease, don't use RDF/XML

Ivan Herman: Pleease, don't use RDF/XML [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:41:32 <stain> stain: +1 +1 +1 +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 +1 +1 +1 [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:41:34 <tlebo> :-)

Timothy Lebo: :-)

08:41:59 <smiles> ... Please do not use rdf/xml, our concern is not owl reasoners and is not readable

... Please do not use rdf/xml, our concern is not owl reasoners and is not readable

08:42:43 <smiles> ...use a time ontology in provo, but it is a draft not followed up

...use a time ontology in provo, but it is a draft not followed up

08:42:47 <stain> Ivan: Turtle should hopefully be standardized by then

Ivan Herman: Turtle should hopefully be standardized by then [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:43:27 <GK> (I'm very sympathetic with don't use RDF, but I'd like to ask Ivan about where the wind is blowing w.e.

Graham Klyne: (I'm very sympathetic with don't use RDF, but I'd like to ask Ivan about where the wind is blowing w.e.

08:43:43 <GK> ... w.r.t. a preferred format for RDF interchange.)

Graham Klyne: ... w.r.t. a preferred format for RDF interchange.)

08:43:51 <smiles> ... Rdf group had discussion about time, pat hayes looking at time vocabulary, may be a way forward

... Rdf group had discussion about time, pat hayes looking at time vocabulary, may be a way forward

08:44:44 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

08:44:51 <Luc> ack luc

Luc Moreau: ack luc

08:44:55 <smiles> Luc: thanks for the input

Luc Moreau: thanks for the input

08:44:56 <GK> ack stain

Graham Klyne: ack stain

08:45:42 <tlebo> @GK, RDF__/XML__

Timothy Lebo: @GK, RDF__/XML__

08:45:48 <smiles> Ivan: reading provo at moment, have to go to dm, should be self standing owl docuement

Ivan Herman: reading provo at moment, have to go to dm, should be self standing owl docuement

08:46:07 <smiles> ...  Go to dm for details if needed

... Go to dm for details if needed

08:46:19 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

08:46:20 <GK> ack  GK

Graham Klyne: ack GK

08:46:21 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to respond to Luc's comment about interoperability

08:46:21 <smiles> ... Starting point owl document

... Starting point owl document

08:46:25 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

08:47:33 <smiles> GK: regarding interoperabiltiy, when creating standards cant solve every interoperability problem, have to start with big ones

Graham Klyne: regarding interoperabiltiy, when creating standards cant solve every interoperability problem, have to start with big ones

08:48:18 <Luc> q/

Luc Moreau: q/

08:48:21 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:48:32 <tlebo> ivan: "what exactly do you mean by XXXX"?

Ivan Herman: "what exactly do you mean by XXXX"? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ]

08:48:52 <GK> @tlebo s/XXXX/interoperability/

Graham Klyne: @tlebo s/XXXX/interoperability/

08:49:16 <Luc> ack dg

Luc Moreau: ack dg

08:49:19 <stain> tlebo: fast action on you :) (PROV-ISSUE-231)

Timothy Lebo: fast action on you :) (PROV-ISSUE-231) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:49:31 <Luc> ack pao

Luc Moreau: ack pao

08:49:50 <stain> in fact OWL-wise it's almost removed already as we've redeclared the few elements we're using.. we just need to change the prefix

Stian Soiland-Reyes: in fact OWL-wise it's almost removed already as we've redeclared the few elements we're using.. we just need to change the prefix

08:50:14 <GK> q+ to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address

08:50:36 <tlebo> @stian, I'm surprised I didn't submit the "NO RDF/XML" issue first :)

Timothy Lebo: @stian, I'm surprised I didn't submit the "NO RDF/XML" issue first :)

08:50:54 <GK> q+ to mention past experience (Internet fax)

Graham Klyne: q+ to mention past experience (Internet fax)

08:51:15 <smiles> Paolo: appreciate comments, accept simplification needed, but worried that taking Jun and Olafs document as ideal means not being as ambituous and not addressing wider community

Paolo Missier: appreciate comments, accept simplification needed, but worried that taking Jun and Olafs document as ideal means not being as ambituous and not addressing wider community

08:51:30 <Luc> in this WG, there is a lot of prior art which is not just linked data!

Luc Moreau: in this WG, there is a lot of prior art which is not just linked data!

08:51:49 <dgarijo> @tlebo: we discussed this. Weren't you and I supposed to add the exmaples in turtle?

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: we discussed this. Weren't you and I supposed to add the exmaples in turtle?

08:52:47 <dgarijo> now we have an additional motivation to convince satya :D

Daniel Garijo: now we have an additional motivation to convince satya :D

08:53:19 <smiles> Luc: paul and I feel that work around concepts in DM are blocking other work, so would like to conclude discussions on entities, identifiers etc.

Luc Moreau: paul and I feel that work around concepts in DM are blocking other work, so would like to conclude discussions on entities, identifiers etc.

08:53:23 <tlebo> @dgarijo, right, we never got consensus.

Timothy Lebo: @dgarijo, right, we never got consensus.

08:53:58 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

08:54:00 <smiles> ... Bandwidth to move to other stuff to make WG successful

... Bandwidth to move to other stuff to make WG successful

08:54:28 <smiles> ... With regards to timetable, should revise to reflect ambitions we have

... With regards to timetable, should revise to reflect ambitions we have

08:55:22 <smiles> ... But also adjust ambitions to timetable, drop concepts from initial charter

... But also adjust ambitions to timetable, drop concepts from initial charter

08:56:13 <smiles> ... Example use cases are not relevant to user communities

... Example use cases are not relevant to user communities

08:56:50 <smiles> ... E.g. Concept of entity is complex because trying to address all cases

... E.g. Concept of entity is complex because trying to address all cases

08:57:08 <smiles> ... Today 3PWD of DM being released

... Today 3PWD of DM being released

08:57:39 <smiles> ... Next should solve issues of entities, identifiers, accounts, alternateOf

... Next should solve issues of entities, identifiers, accounts, alternateOf

08:58:00 <smiles> ... Paul and I will propose simplification, dropping concepts

... Paul and I will propose simplification, dropping concepts

08:59:21 <smiles> ... Timetable as originally envisaged plus 3 months

... Timetable as originally envisaged plus 3 months

09:00:15 <smiles> Ivan: admin path has to be followed, if extended need to convince that have good plan to complete work, i.e. be far enough in pipeline

Ivan Herman: admin path has to be followed, if extended need to convince that have good plan to complete work, i.e. be far enough in pipeline

09:00:54 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

09:00:57 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

09:00:57 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address and to mention past experience (Internet fax)

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask what are the "high order bit" questions we need to address and to mention past experience (Internet fax)

09:00:58 <smiles> .. Managament tougher on this than used to be

.. Managament tougher on this than used to be

09:01:10 <Luc> ack luc

Luc Moreau: ack luc

09:01:18 <smiles> GK: is model too complex or overspecified?

Graham Klyne: is model too complex or overspecified?

09:01:45 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

09:01:55 <smiles> ... Corner cases can show where we can remove things from the spec

... Corner cases can show where we can remove things from the spec

09:02:36 <smiles> ... E.g. Identifiers issue may not arise if use rdf from start rather than asn

... E.g. Identifiers issue may not arise if use rdf from start rather than asn

09:03:05 <smiles> Luc: dont think this is incompatible with chairs view

Luc Moreau: dont think this is incompatible with chairs view

09:03:38 <smiles> GK: if we declare dm done, we may still come back to the issues

Graham Klyne: if we declare dm done, we may still come back to the issues

09:04:36 <smiles> Luc: declring dm done is wg saying done, not just editors

Luc Moreau: declring dm done is wg saying done, not just editors

09:04:54 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

09:04:58 <pgroth> ace paolo

Paul Groth: ace paolo

09:05:01 <pgroth> ack paolo

Paul Groth: ack paolo

09:05:06 <stain> but it's not easy for the WG to consider things done or not done when the editors are continually changing the draft without proper involvement of the WG

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but it's not easy for the WG to consider things done or not done when the editors are continually changing the draft without proper involvement of the WG

09:05:07 <smiles> pgroth: part of declaring done is anything possible to cut down

Paul Groth: part of declaring done is anything possible to cut down

09:05:29 <tlebo> q+ to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o

Timothy Lebo: q+ to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o

09:05:48 <stain> declaring it done is like declaring an API done - we can't go there before we've explored properly using it (otherwise we'll get the PROV version of the DOM API :) )

Stian Soiland-Reyes: declaring it done is like declaring an API done - we can't go there before we've explored properly using it (otherwise we'll get the PROV version of the DOM API :) )

09:05:58 <GK> @tlebo ack.

Graham Klyne: @tlebo ack.

09:06:13 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

09:06:48 <jcheney> q+ (dependencies, versioning, charter)

James Cheney: q+ (dependencies, versioning, charter)

09:06:57 <jcheney> q- (dependencies, versioning, charter)

James Cheney: q- (dependencies, versioning, charter)

09:07:22 <jcheney> q+ to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter

James Cheney: q+ to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter

09:08:18 <stain> would it be good to move DM to a more UML-like data model?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: would it be good to move DM to a more UML-like data model?

09:08:19 <dgarijo> paolo: you don't want to leave out part of the community because you'll miss an oportunity.

Paolo Missier: you don't want to leave out part of the community because you'll miss an oportunity. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

09:08:34 <dgarijo> tim: I find it difficult because RDF is a second citizen

Timothy Lebo: I find it difficult because RDF is a second citizen [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

09:08:46 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:08:49 <Luc> ack tle

Luc Moreau: ack tle

09:08:49 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o

Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say that the wg keeping RDF as a second class citizen has made it difficult to develop prov-o

09:08:59 <Luc> ack kh

Luc Moreau: ack kh

09:09:32 <stain> +1 to Paolo's suggestion - basically he was suggesting a more iterative process where PROV-O feeds into PROV-DM in a loop rather than the current one-way development

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 to Paolo's suggestion - basically he was suggesting a more iterative process where PROV-O feeds into PROV-DM in a loop rather than the current one-way development

09:09:34 <GK> BTW, notwithstanding my comments, I'm not opposed to having ASN, but I think it could be presented more simply, maybe with less specification detail.  Just saying.

Graham Klyne: BTW, notwithstanding my comments, I'm not opposed to having ASN, but I think it could be presented more simply, maybe with less specification detail. Just saying.

09:09:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:09:55 <dgarijo> khalid: instead of trying to simplify DM I'd leave as it is now and identify the concept that are difficult to represent in OWL and simplify them afterwards

Khalid Belhajjame: instead of trying to simplify DM I'd leave as it is now and identify the concept that are difficult to represent in OWL and simplify them afterwards [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

09:09:58 <Luc> ack jc

Luc Moreau: ack jc

09:09:58 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter

Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to say something about dependencies, versioning, charter

09:10:06 <smiles> @dgarijo i am back, will continue scribing

@dgarijo i am back, will continue scribing

09:10:27 <dgarijo> @smiles: ok!

Daniel Garijo: @smiles: ok!

09:10:30 <tlebo> +1 to parallel / two way development. all of the wg should be thinking in ASN and PROV-O. PROV-O can't just fall out of DM.

Timothy Lebo: +1 to parallel / two way development. all of the wg should be thinking in ASN and PROV-O. PROV-O can't just fall out of DM.

09:11:08 <smiles> jcheney: since dm developed first, been hard to keep ontology up, but was useful to start without owl details

James Cheney: since dm developed first, been hard to keep ontology up, but was useful to start without owl details

09:11:20 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

09:11:54 <tlebo> BTW, there's a very big difference between encoding in RDF and getting hung up in OWL.

Timothy Lebo: BTW, there's a very big difference between encoding in RDF and getting hung up in OWL.

09:11:56 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:12:16 <smiles> ... Point 2, for entities could now take rdf resources view, as alternateof etc controversial may not be part of stantdard

... Point 2, for entities could now take rdf resources view, as alternateof etc controversial may not be part of stantdard

09:12:30 <jcheney> PIL should      be applicable to any resource, not just for Semantic Web objects;     have a low entry point to facilitate widespread adoption, and makes it easy to do simple things;     have a small core model and allow for extensions (ie, profiles, integration of other more expressive/complementary vocabularies/frameworks);

James Cheney: PIL should be applicable to any resource, not just for Semantic Web objects; have a low entry point to facilitate widespread adoption, and makes it easy to do simple things; have a small core model and allow for extensions (ie, profiles, integration of other more expressive/complementary vocabularies/frameworks);

09:12:40 <smiles> ... Also, would be good to look at charter above

... Also, would be good to look at charter above

09:12:54 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:13:03 <tlebo> @jcheney "Semantic Web objects" are "any resource"

Timothy Lebo: @jcheney "Semantic Web objects" are "any resource"

09:13:39 <Luc> ack iv

Luc Moreau: ack iv

09:13:42 <jcheney> @tlebo: That was a quote from the charter, not my wording: http://www.w3.org/2011/01/prov-wg-charter#scope

James Cheney: @tlebo: That was a quote from the charter, not my wording: http://www.w3.org/2011/01/prov-wg-charter#scope

09:14:11 <tlebo> @jcheney, thx.

Timothy Lebo: @jcheney, thx.

09:14:14 <smiles> Ivan: on time, spent hour yesterday in rdf wg, ended up looking for simple proposal, else could contnue for couple of years

Ivan Herman: on time, spent hour yesterday in rdf wg, ended up looking for simple proposal, else could contnue for couple of years

09:14:23 <GK> We could follow@jcheney's suggestion - focus on just expressing provenance with an implicit assumption of  non-variability and punt the rest (my interpretation).  I think that would be a reasonable approach, as the the rest of the details could be filled in later.

Graham Klyne: We could follow@jcheney's suggestion - focus on just expressing provenance with an implicit assumption of non-variability and punt the rest (my interpretation). I think that would be a reasonable approach, as the the rest of the details could be filled in later.

09:14:24 <stain> it takes time even for us who have been in the WG since the beginning

Stian Soiland-Reyes: it takes time even for us who have been in the WG since the beginning

09:15:06 <smiles> Luc: definite views - linked data view, owl view, more than sw view

Luc Moreau: definite views - linked data view, owl view, more than sw view

09:15:31 <smiles> ... If reasonable, pragmatic can meet timetable

... If reasonable, pragmatic can meet timetable

09:16:29 <tlebo> (what was that example?)

Timothy Lebo: (what was that example?)

09:16:33 <GK> I don't think anyone said prov-o was 2nd class.  Rather, I thought the comment was that RDF syntax was 2nd class.

Graham Klyne: I don't think anyone said prov-o was 2nd class. Rather, I thought the comment was that RDF syntax was 2nd class.

09:16:35 <smiles> ... Work of PROVO team is not second class, need to work in way which makes ths clear

... Work of PROVO team is not second class, need to work in way which makes ths clear

09:17:54 <smiles> ... Meeting timettable may need dropping use cases, also should be based on prior art as standrdisation not research

... Meeting timettable may need dropping use cases, also should be based on prior art as standrdisation not research

09:17:55 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

09:17:57 <stain> (as a side-note - we went for OWL Time because we first wanted to say that we don't want to restrict how time is specified (like Plan and Role) - but then needed to have a realistic mapping to XSD DateTime - OWL Time allowed both - and also gave a way to talk about partially ordered events (as discussed, but perhaps not practicsed, in DM)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (as a side-note - we went for OWL Time because we first wanted to say that we don't want to restrict how time is specified (like Plan and Role) - but then needed to have a realistic mapping to XSD DateTime - OWL Time allowed both - and also gave a way to talk about partially ordered events (as discussed, but perhaps not practicsed, in DM)

09:18:20 <GK> I'm not convinced dropping "use cases" is enough.  I think we need to lower levels of specification detail in some areas.

Graham Klyne: I'm not convinced dropping "use cases" is enough. I think we need to lower levels of specification detail in some areas.

09:18:33 <smiles> ... Chairs will rely more on W3c processes

... Chairs will rely more on W3c processes

09:19:08 <smiles> Paul: have been too laid back so far, e.g. Issues open for months

Paul Groth: have been too laid back so far, e.g. Issues open for months

09:19:41 <smiles> Ivan: each rdf wg call starts with open issues, why not addressed

Ivan Herman: each rdf wg call starts with open issues, why not addressed

09:20:02 <smiles> Luc: we also do that, but do not enforce completion

Luc Moreau: we also do that, but do not enforce completion

09:20:29 <smiles> Ivan: once issue closed do not reopen unless there is new evidence

Ivan Herman: once issue closed do not reopen unless there is new evidence

09:20:30 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:20:51 <Luc> ack ivan

Luc Moreau: ack ivan

09:21:33 <smiles> Luc: never communicated to outsde world how to approach documents, e.g. Primer then provo

Luc Moreau: never communicated to outsde world how to approach documents, e.g. Primer then provo

09:21:46 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:22:17 <smiles> GK: what is conclusion?

Graham Klyne: what is conclusion?

09:22:58 <smiles> Luc: strategy driven by the timetable, milestones; can refine milestones over next two days

Luc Moreau: strategy driven by the timetable, milestones; can refine milestones over next two days

09:23:57 <smiles> GK: if we slip from new timetable, what is strategy to get back on track?

Graham Klyne: if we slip from new timetable, what is strategy to get back on track?

09:24:31 <smiles> Luc: where discussion does not reach consensus, remove from spec

Luc Moreau: where discussion does not reach consensus, remove from spec

09:24:58 <smiles> Paul: chairs can decide out of scope

Paul Groth: chairs can decide out of scope

09:25:19 <smiles> Ivan: easier to drop from charter rather than add

Ivan Herman: easier to drop from charter rather than add

09:25:40 <jcheney> q+ to ask about 17 concepts

James Cheney: q+ to ask about 17 concepts

09:25:50 <smiles> GK: agree that this is a concerete strategy

Graham Klyne: agree that this is a concerete strategy

09:26:54 <stain> The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal.  [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

Stian Soiland-Reyes: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

09:27:13 <stain> ^Luc's proposal

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ^Luc's proposal

09:27:45 <GK> +1

Graham Klyne: +1

09:27:56 <Stian> PROPOSED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case  of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal.   [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

PROPOSED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

09:27:59 <kai> +1

Kai Eckert: +1

09:28:00 <jcheney> +1

James Cheney: +1

09:28:00 <Stian> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

09:28:01 <smiles> +1

+1

09:28:02 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

09:28:02 <GK> +1

Graham Klyne: +1

09:28:03 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

09:28:07 <Paolo> +1

Paolo Missier: +1

09:28:16 <Stian> s/a //
09:28:34 <Stian> ACCEPTED The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case  of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal.   [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ACCEPTED The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

09:28:44 <Stian> RESOLVED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table  [1]. In case  of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate  for removal.    [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

RESOLVED: The strategy is to be time-driven along the proposed time table [1]. In case of slippage, the issue(s) causing slippage will be a candidate for removal. [1]http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F2Intro#Revisited_Timetable

09:28:48 <Stian> we'll do both

Stian Soiland-Reyes: we'll do both

09:29:05 <smiles> Khalid: +1 (not on irc)

Khalid Belhajjame: +1 (not on irc)

09:45:31 <Luc> q?

(No events recorded for 16 minutes)

Luc Moreau: q?

09:45:36 <Luc> ack jc

Luc Moreau: ack jc

09:45:36 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to ask about 17 concepts

Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to ask about 17 concepts

09:45:43 <tlebo> hello

Timothy Lebo: hello

09:45:46 <pgroth> hi

Paul Groth: hi

09:47:05 <GK1> hi

Graham Klyne: hi

09:47:10 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:47:17 <Stian> Scribe: Stian

(Scribe set to Stian Soiland-Reyes)

09:47:21 <khalidbelhajjame> Session on Provenance Access and Query

Khalid Belhajjame: Session on Provenance Access and Query

<pgroth> Topic: Provenance Access and Query

2. Provenance Access and Query

Summary: The current status of the prov-aq document was described. Paul gave an overview of six issues he had with the document. The major issues were editiorial in nature. A key outcome was that part of the document is best practice in nature (e.g. how to use sparql to query provenance, or embedd provenance in rdfa) and other parts are a specification (e.g. how to locate provenance). The editors agreed to try and make this distinction clear. A large amount of discussion was had on the definition of provenance services. In particular, there were concerns about not allowing service specific extensions that allow clients to define how much provenance information they want back. Essentially, the service definition should allow for extensibility. Two options were discussed for the definition of a protocol for provenance service either using a WSDL approach or a url pattern approach. The editors agreed to come up with a proposal for this protocol.

<pgroth> Summary: The current status of the prov-aq document was described. Paul gave an overview of six issues he had with the document. The major issues were editiorial in nature. A key outcome was that part of the document is best practice in nature (e.g. how to use sparql to query provenance, or embedd provenance in rdfa) and other parts are a specification (e.g. how to locate provenance). The editors agreed to try and make this distinction clear. A large amount of discussion was had on the definition of provenance services. In particular, there were concerns about not allowing service specific extensions that allow clients to define how much provenance information they want back. Essentially, the service definition should allow for extensibility. Two options were discussed for the definition of a protocol for provenance service either using a WSDL approach or a url pattern approach. The editors agreed to come up with a proposal for this protocol.
09:47:32 <Stian> pgroth: some issues to address.. GK, any?

Paul Groth: some issues to address.. GK, any?

09:47:45 <Stian> GK1: Mainly notes within the document, or issue list.

Graham Klyne: Mainly notes within the document, or issue list.

09:47:59 <Stian> pgroth: Have 6 issues

Paul Groth: Have 6 issues

09:48:08 <Stian> pgroth: 1) Have a current service description

Paul Groth: 1) Have a current service description

09:48:25 <Stian> ... Uses an IETF Draft spec on how we define the service description

... Uses an IETF Draft spec on how we define the service description

09:48:32 <Stian> GK: Template stuff

Graham Klyne: Template stuff

09:48:39 <Stian> GK: Close to becoming an IETF standard

Graham Klyne: Close to becoming an IETF standard

09:48:50 <Stian> pgroth: minor technical issue.. second was that we have to do multiple lookups

Paul Groth: minor technical issue.. second was that we have to do multiple lookups

09:49:01 <Stian> pgroth: you have to dereference the service specification, understand it, and then do the thing

Paul Groth: you have to dereference the service specification, understand it, and then do the thing

09:49:22 <Stian> pgroth: Luc suggested on Sparql. They define a WSDL document that defines the way you get SPARQL or not

Paul Groth: Luc suggested on Sparql. They define a WSDL document that defines the way you get SPARQL or not

09:49:33 <tlebo> WSDL died by SPARQL 1.1, no?

Timothy Lebo: WSDL died by SPARQL 1.1, no?

09:49:45 <Stian> pgroth: one suggestion is to revisit the service specification and concretize it as a WSDL specification

Paul Groth: one suggestion is to revisit the service specification and concretize it as a WSDL specification

09:49:56 <Stian> pgroth: and by very specific about the form of the URI should look like when you make a query

Paul Groth: and by very specific about the form of the URI should look like when you make a query

09:50:18 <Stian> GK: Have been doing other stuff

Graham Klyne: Have been doing other stuff

09:50:32 <pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/paq/prov-aq.html#provenance-services

Paul Groth: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/paq/prov-aq.html#provenance-services

09:50:38 <Stian> pgroth: section 4

Paul Groth: section 4

09:50:52 <Stian> GK: Was not initially convinced of the need for this section!

Graham Klyne: Was not initially convinced of the need for this section!

09:51:01 <Stian> GK: Need simplification or elimination

Graham Klyne: Need simplification or elimination

09:51:12 <Stian> GK: Are we just doing strategies in this session, or digging in?

Graham Klyne: Are we just doing strategies in this session, or digging in?

09:51:22 <Stian> Luc: Identify what we as the WG should work on

Luc Moreau: Identify what we as the WG should work on

09:51:28 <Stian> Luc: so we can say that we don't do anything more on this

Luc Moreau: so we can say that we don't do anything more on this

09:51:33 <Stian> pgroth: will go through the rest of my issues

Paul Groth: will go through the rest of my issues

09:51:42 <Stian> pgroth: issue of definition on provenance service

Paul Groth: issue of definition on provenance service

09:52:12 <Stian> pgroth: second issue, in the document we have access - how we go from a Resource to associated Provenance [Information] - section 1

Paul Groth: second issue, in the document we have access - how we go from a Resource to associated Provenance [Information] - section 1

09:52:32 <Stian> ... then we have queries, how they look like, guidance on sparql etc. One of my questions is wether or not they should be seprated into different documents

... then we have queries, how they look like, guidance on sparql etc. One of my questions is wether or not they should be seprated into different documents

09:52:58 <Stian> ... something that defines a query service documentation - might be super-simple. Maybe some patterns on how to use sparql. And then a query document, where's how you go from web resource to provenance.

... something that defines a query service documentation - might be super-simple. Maybe some patterns on how to use sparql. And then a query document, where's how you go from web resource to provenance.

09:53:38 <Stian> ... Third issue is.. we have, section 3 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#locating-provenance-information

... Third issue is.. we have, section 3 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#locating-provenance-information

09:53:38 <Luc> wsld2.0 interface for sparql protocol: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/

Luc Moreau: wsld2.0 interface for sparql protocol: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-protocol/

09:53:54 <Stian> ... we have resources represented as... X   hasprovenance service and has provenance. Duplicate.

... we have resources represented as... X hasprovenance service and has provenance. Duplicate.

09:54:01 <Stian> pgroth: would find that complicating

Paul Groth: would find that complicating

09:54:07 <Stian> GK1: was uneasy about that as well.

Graham Klyne: was uneasy about that as well.

09:54:14 <Stian> pgroth: Can we get rid of this duality

Paul Groth: Can we get rid of this duality

09:54:30 <Stian> pgroth: Fourth issue - PAQ does not say how to locate provenance information within RDFa

Paul Groth: Fourth issue - PAQ does not say how to locate provenance information within RDFa

09:54:41 <Stian> GK1: it's implicit in RDF - how to find it in RDF, then how to find it in RDFa?

Graham Klyne: it's implicit in RDF - how to find it in RDF, then how to find it in RDFa?

09:54:55 <Stian> pgroth: perhaps a simple example

Paul Groth: perhaps a simple example

09:55:02 <Stian> pgroth: should it be in the PAQ?

Paul Groth: should it be in the PAQ?

09:55:09 <Stian> pgroth: best practice? Or in PROV-O?

Paul Groth: best practice? Or in PROV-O?

09:55:45 <Stian> GK1: You mentioned best practice.. I thought this document was trying to also be best practice. We might review this.

Graham Klyne: You mentioned best practice.. I thought this document was trying to also be best practice. We might review this.

09:55:54 <Stian> pgroth: it's clear that there is specification.. for instance link headers

Paul Groth: it's clear that there is specification.. for instance link headers

09:56:06 <Stian> GK1: hoping we would go for registration of these with the IETF registry

Graham Klyne: hoping we would go for registration of these with the IETF registry

09:56:12 <Stian> pgroth: so this is a specification

Paul Groth: so this is a specification

09:56:39 <Stian> (I edited best practice document on the plane to say that an RDF document can be identified as a prov:Account if it simply says <> a prov:Account

(I edited best practice document on the plane to say that an RDF document can be identified as a prov:Account if it simply says <> a prov:Account

09:56:42 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

09:56:47 <Stian> (which should work also for RDFa)

(which should work also for RDFa)

09:56:56 <Stian> Luc: Original charter had this in

Luc Moreau: Original charter had this in

09:57:12 <Stian> Luc: we received feedback that we have too many implementations on the timetable, so downgraded to a note

Luc Moreau: we received feedback that we have too many implementations on the timetable, so downgraded to a note

09:57:16 <Stian> ^^ as a recommendation

^^ as a recommendation

09:57:24 <Stian> Luc: as a WG we can define what we are tryin to achieve here

Luc Moreau: as a WG we can define what we are tryin to achieve here

09:57:33 <Stian> GK1: Have been trying to follow what I get from the group

Graham Klyne: Have been trying to follow what I get from the group

09:57:38 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:58:01 <Stian> pgroth: broadly the document does strike the right balance between reusing what's there, and identifying how you reuse it. But it defines clearly how you should do X,Y,Z, which to me is a specification.

Paul Groth: broadly the document does strike the right balance between reusing what's there, and identifying how you reuse it. But it defines clearly how you should do X,Y,Z, which to me is a specification.

09:58:07 <Stian> pgroth: it's fine if a specification is built on other work

Paul Groth: it's fine if a specification is built on other work

09:58:23 <Stian> GK1: at this stage we didn't have a clear enough view of which areas we would use PROV to achieve interoperability

Graham Klyne: at this stage we didn't have a clear enough view of which areas we would use PROV to achieve interoperability

09:58:27 <Stian> pgroth: perhaps that's what we need to talk about

Paul Groth: perhaps that's what we need to talk about

09:58:59 <Stian> GK1: which aspects of interoperability is important. You mentioned splitting the document. To me this is not as much access vs query, but here is a baseline for basic interoperability vs here are some other things you can do if the basic mechanisms don't work

Graham Klyne: which aspects of interoperability is important. You mentioned splitting the document. To me this is not as much access vs query, but here is a baseline for basic interoperability vs here are some other things you can do if the basic mechanisms don't work

09:59:06 <Stian> pgroth: sounds like a  reasonable split

Paul Groth: sounds like a reasonable split

09:59:13 <Stian> ... The provenance services..

... The provenance services..

09:59:21 <Stian> GK1: the issue you raised.. this is what?

Graham Klyne: the issue you raised.. this is what?

09:59:27 <Stian> pgroth: PAQ does not have RDFa?

Paul Groth: PAQ does not have RDFa?

09:59:37 <Stian> pgroth: where does it belong.. we moved on to wether or not PAQ is a spec.

Paul Groth: where does it belong.. we moved on to wether or not PAQ is a spec.

09:59:49 <Stian> pgroth: seems consensus is that part of it is spec and others not

Paul Groth: seems consensus is that part of it is spec and others not

09:59:59 <Stian> Stian: like "This is informal section" etc?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: like "This is informal section" etc?

10:00:02 <Stian> pgroth: or splitting

Paul Groth: or splitting

10:00:16 <Stian> pgroth: Currently we're very entity focused

Paul Groth: Currently we're very entity focused

10:00:34 <Stian> pgroth: there's lots of other thins in PROV-DM and in the world that we might want to do provenance of

Paul Groth: there's lots of other thins in PROV-DM and in the world that we might want to do provenance of

10:00:42 <Stian> Luc: for instance, provenance of an activity!

Luc Moreau: for instance, provenance of an activity!

10:00:51 <Stian> GK1: my suggestion was a refactoring of those!

Graham Klyne: my suggestion was a refactoring of those!

10:01:22 <Stian> pgroth: first agree if we are talkina bout more than entities, if so, what can we do..

Paul Groth: first agree if we are talkina bout more than entities, if so, what can we do..

10:01:29 <Stian> pgroth: we are entity questions, but is that appropriate?

Paul Groth: we are entity focuseds, but is that appropriate?

10:01:33 <Stian> s/question/focused/
10:01:52 <Stian> pgroth: finally: There are some paragraphs where..

Paul Groth: finally: There are some paragraphs where..

10:02:03 <Stian> pgroth: section 2 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#accessing-provenance-information

Paul Groth: section 2 - http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/paq/prov-aq.html#accessing-provenance-information

10:02:06 <Stian> pgroth: second and last paragraph

Paul Groth: second and last paragraph

10:02:35 <Stian> pgroth: rewrite stuff "provided that such change does not contradict any previously retrieved information" - status about provenance - get rid and don't worry about there

Paul Groth: rewrite stuff "provided that such change does not contradict any previously retrieved information" - status about provenance - get rid and don't worry about there

10:02:47 <Stian> GK1: they were put in wether a provenance retrieved is changeable or not

Graham Klyne: they were put in wether a provenance retrieved is changeable or not

10:03:00 <Stian> GK1: initially it seemed to me that the intention was.. a dynamic resource, and a provenance resource

Graham Klyne: initially it seemed to me that the intention was.. a dynamic resource, and a provenance resource

10:03:11 <Stian> GK1: then you would not expect the provenance resource to update as the dynamic resource was

Graham Klyne: then you would not expect the provenance resource to update as the dynamic resource was

10:03:27 <Stian> GK1: but as what we talked about this morning changes, this might become redundant

Graham Klyne: but as what we talked about this morning changes, this might become redundant

10:03:46 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: the entity discussion made it useful - because now you talk about entity instead of resource

Khalid Belhajjame: the entity discussion made it useful - because now you talk about entity instead of resource

10:03:59 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: earlier we could not distinguish them

Khalid Belhajjame: earlier we could not distinguish them

10:04:25 <Stian> GK1: but do we need to hang so much on this discussion? It was probably an important discussion - but is this important for the presentation on how to access information about some resource?

Graham Klyne: but do we need to hang so much on this discussion? It was probably an important discussion - but is this important for the presentation on how to access provenance \0rmation about some resource?

10:04:31 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:04:33 <Stian> s/info/provenance \0/
10:04:47 <Stian> pgroth: Use the paq as saying 'There's some provenance info about this X over there'

Paul Groth: Use the paq as saying 'There's some provenance info about this X over there'

10:05:07 <Stian> pgroth: whatever is there - we don't say anything about it - you decide if it changes etc

Paul Groth: whatever is there - we don't say anything about it - you decide if it changes etc

10:05:13 <Stian> pgroth: that's my view - agnostic

Paul Groth: that's my view - agnostic

10:05:27 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

10:05:30 <Stian> GK1: works for me and close to where I came from. That's the web - here's some related info, go get it

Graham Klyne: works for me and close to where I came from. That's the web - here's some related info, go get it

10:05:54 <Stian> dgarijo: tried to write down some example from yesterday. When I am asserting provenance, I want to say some resource used another resource, do I use an entity or a resource?

Daniel Garijo: tried to write down some example from yesterday. When I am asserting provenance, I want to say some resource used another resource, do I use an entity or a resource?

10:06:00 <Stian> pgroth: that's a Data Model discussion!

Paul Groth: that's a Data Model discussion!

10:06:17 <Stian> pgroth: in PAQ we just say "There is some related provenance information - use this URL"

Paul Groth: in PAQ we just say "There is some related provenance information - use this URL"

10:06:39 <Stian> pgroth: Same for provenance service, here's a serrvice, here's a URL, give me some provenance back

Paul Groth: Same for provenance service, here's a serrvice, here's a URL, give me some provenance back

10:06:42 <Stian> pgroth: that's what I think we have!

Paul Groth: that's what I think we have!

10:06:51 <Stian> GK1: yes, that and more! That is my minimal model.

Graham Klyne: yes, that and more! That is my minimal model.

10:07:05 <Stian> GK1: I would have stopped there - perhaps say there's SPARQL for other stuff.

Graham Klyne: I would have stopped there - perhaps say there's SPARQL for other stuff.

10:07:14 <Stian> ivan: That's the only document I didn't have time to look at

Ivan Herman: That's the only document I didn't have time to look at

10:07:29 <Stian> ivan: ran out of time

Ivan Herman: ran out of time

10:07:31 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:07:46 <Stian> ivan: how does this relate to the approach as to what people do when they try to get metadata on dataset, using the VOID vocabulary?

Ivan Herman: how does this relate to the approach as to what people do when they try to get metadata on dataset, using the VOID vocabulary?

10:08:04 <Stian> ivan: VOID describes datasets. SPARQL (?) has another document on how to get information on a dataset

Ivan Herman: VOID describes datasets. SPARQL (?) has another document on how to get information on a dataset

10:08:15 <Stian> ivan: perhaps provenance not the same as VOID - not sure how they are related, but somehow they are both metadata

Ivan Herman: perhaps provenance not the same as VOID - not sure how they are related, but somehow they are both metadata

10:08:42 <Stian> ivan: there is a Sparql service description..

Ivan Herman: there is a Sparql service description..

10:08:50 <GK1> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-service-description-20100126/

Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-sparql11-service-description-20100126/

10:09:09 <Stian> ivan: that is only on a sparql service, here we are talking about any resource

Ivan Herman: that is only on a sparql service, here we are talking about any resource

10:09:12 <Stian> pgroth: I think that's different

Paul Groth: I think that's different

10:09:22 <Stian> ivan: I'm thinking of the mechanism to get there

Ivan Herman: I'm thinking of the mechanism to get there

10:09:38 <Stian> GK1: section 2

Graham Klyne: section 2

10:09:42 <Stian> > SPARQL services made available via the SPARQL Protocol should return a service description document at the service URL. This service description should be made available in an RDF serialization, and may be provided embedded in HTML by RDFa, or other RDF representations by using content negotiation.

> SPARQL services made available via the SPARQL Protocol should return a service description document at the service URL. This service description should be made available in an RDF serialization, and may be provided embedded in HTML by RDFa, or other RDF representations by using content negotiation.

10:10:06 <Stian> GK1: because we are looking at a resource, and we're trying to find information at a different resource

Graham Klyne: because we are looking at a resource, and we're trying to find information at a different resource

10:10:16 <Stian> GK1: you start with an URI of a service, you need to do an indirection to get there

Graham Klyne: you start with an URI of a service, you need to do an indirection to get there

10:10:31 <Stian> ivan: There is an additional discussion - too bad Sandro is not here as he's in both groups

Ivan Herman: There is an additional discussion - too bad Sandro is not here as he's in both groups

10:10:50 <Stian> ivan: We have a discussion to start a group on linked data patterns

Ivan Herman: We have a discussion to start a group on linked data patterns

10:10:53 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:11:01 <Stian> ivan: what came up was how in generaral do I get information about a resource

Ivan Herman: what came up was how in generaral do I get information about a resource

10:11:12 <Stian> ivan: that is one of the patterns, a general RESTful pattern for that

Ivan Herman: that is one of the patterns, a general RESTful pattern for that

10:11:53 <Stian> ivan: If I ask for a resource, then there is a HTTP header field , Related-To or something (Existing header)

Ivan Herman: If I ask for a resource, then there is a HTTP header field , Related-To or something (Existing header)

10:11:57 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:11:59 <Stian> GK1: there is a Link: header which we use

Graham Klyne: there is a Link: header which we use

10:12:15 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html

Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html

10:12:19 <Stian> ivan: perhaps it's the same conclusion.. Link header, yes.

Ivan Herman: perhaps it's the same conclusion.. Link header, yes.

10:12:26 <Stian> Stian: yes, so all we use is a new relation, rel=provenance

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes, so all we use is a new relation, rel=provenance

10:12:36 <Stian> (and provenance-service)

(and provenance-service)

10:12:39 <Stian> ivan: check section 2.2

Ivan Herman: check section 2.2

10:12:46 <tlebo> whcih doc?

Timothy Lebo: whcih doc?

10:12:52 <Stian> http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html

http://www.w3.org/2012/01/ldwg-charter.html

10:12:57 <tlebo> thx

Timothy Lebo: thx

10:13:03 <Stian> > Define a protocol to interact with Linked Data resources, following a REST approach ...

> Define a protocol to interact with Linked Data resources, following a REST approach ...

10:13:10 <Stian> how long?

how long?

10:13:11 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:13:14 <Stian> ivan: might take some time

Ivan Herman: might take some time

10:13:32 <Stian> GK1: is there a case for taking this piece of work, and combining. Similar goals.

Graham Klyne: is there a case for taking this piece of work, and combining. Similar goals.

10:13:41 <Stian> ivan: there should be a reference to provenance WG here

Ivan Herman: there should be a reference to provenance WG here

10:13:47 <pgroth> - Link: provenance-URI; rel="provenance"; anchor="entity-URI"

Paul Groth: - Link: provenance-URI; rel="provenance"; anchor="entity-URI"

10:13:51 <Stian> ivan: apologies for orbgetting that

Ivan Herman: apologies for orbgetting that

10:14:04 <Stian> pgroth: that's what we do - link header on resources, there's wher eyou get related provenance information

Paul Groth: that's what we do - link header on resources, there's wher eyou get related provenance information

10:14:10 <Stian> ivan: yes, that's very much in line

Ivan Herman: yes, that's very much in line

10:14:23 <Stian> pgroth: yes, but we have a clear semantic - you are getting back some *provenance* information

Paul Groth: yes, but we have a clear semantic - you are getting back some *provenance* information

10:14:33 <Stian> pgroth: you can generalize it to just some metadata and look at the data

Paul Groth: you can generalize it to just some metadata and look at the data

10:15:01 <Stian> pgroth: but GK1 pointed out that the priority is.. for us.. are we far enough along? Wait for this group? Or just define this, and later we say how they are compatible

Paul Groth: but GK1 pointed out that the priority is.. for us.. are we far enough along? Wait for this group? Or just define this, and later we say how they are compatible

10:15:11 <Stian> pgroth: Suggests that they will be compatible

Paul Groth: Suggests that they will be compatible

10:15:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:15:30 <Luc> ack sm

Luc Moreau: ack sm

10:15:36 <Stian> smiles: Slight concern with the simple provenance URI..

Simon Miles: Slight concern with the simple provenance URI..

10:15:55 <Stian> smiles: if someone is expecting that.. provenance data model allows you to record wast amount of information if you want to

Simon Miles: if someone is expecting that.. provenance data model allows you to record wast amount of information if you want to

10:16:14 <Stian> smiles: if I get provenance URI in header, and I Resolve it, and I get a wast amount of information.. how to deal with it?

Simon Miles: if I get provenance URI in header, and I Resolve it, and I get a wast amount of information.. how to deal with it?

10:16:22 <Stian> pgroth: sounds like a techie conversation we should have now.

Paul Groth: sounds like a techie conversation we should have now.

10:16:26 <Stian> GK1:  a kind of scoping conversation

Graham Klyne: a kind of scoping conversation

10:16:44 <Stian> Luc: we said from day 1 that provenance is a resource that has an URI

Luc Moreau: we said from day 1 that provenance is a resource that has an URI

10:16:54 <Stian> Luc: in entity view, you have a service, you run a querry

Luc Moreau: in entity view, you have a service, you run a querry

10:17:11 <Stian> Luc: when Sparql talks about sparql query results, they don't talk about them as resources. But of course you can view them as resources.

Luc Moreau: when Sparql talks about sparql query results, they don't talk about them as resources. But of course you can view them as resources.

10:17:16 <Stian> GK1: yes, if you use the GET form they are resources

Graham Klyne: yes, if you use the GET form they are resources

10:17:22 <tlebo> lost audio

Timothy Lebo: lost audio

10:17:32 <Stian> Luc: but in the document it is not presented as such..

Luc Moreau: but in the document it is not presented as such..

10:17:38 <Stian> Luc: in the sparql service description document

Luc Moreau: in the sparql service description document

10:17:55 <tlebo> sparql query results are resource _representations_, not resources themselves.

Timothy Lebo: sparql query results are resource _representations_, not resources themselves.

10:17:58 <tlebo> per AWWW

Timothy Lebo: per AWWW

10:18:00 <Stian> GK1: yes, the service is a resource, if you dereference it you get a service description - and the rest follows this. This is the web resource (?)

Graham Klyne: yes, the service is a resource, if you dereference it you get a service description - and the rest follows this. This is the web resource (?)

10:18:14 <Stian> Luc: we were talking about provenance information as a resource

Luc Moreau: we were talking about provenance information as a resource

10:18:24 <Stian> GK1: it's a different resource, provenance information resource

Graham Klyne: it's a different resource, provenance information resource

10:18:34 <Stian> GK1: key to the resource centric approach - you have to identify what those resources as

Graham Klyne: key to the resource centric approach - you have to identify what those resources as

10:18:49 <Stian> GK1: as Smiles say, there's not a predefined notion of 'provenance' - it's something I have to query

Graham Klyne: as Smiles say, there's not a predefined notion of 'provenance' - it's something I have to query

10:18:52 <Stian> ^^Luc

^^Luc

10:19:01 <tlebo> still silent on this end.

Timothy Lebo: still silent on this end.

10:19:06 <Stian> Luc: what is the provenance, resource, entity = always had the view that I need to run a query

Luc Moreau: what is the provenance, resource, entity = always had the view that I need to run a query

10:19:13 <Stian> Luc: I might not want a GB of provenance information

Luc Moreau: I might not want a GB of provenance information

10:19:22 <Stian> GK1:  a resource-centric approach might not have to be done like that.

Graham Klyne: a resource-centric approach might not have to be done like that.

10:19:33 <Stian> GK1: there's a resource view, and a service view - different levels

Graham Klyne: there's a resource view, and a service view - different levels

10:19:50 <Stian> GK1: web architecture is based around resources - if we design something for the web, we should try to keep this in mind

Graham Klyne: web architecture is based around resources - if we design something for the web, we should try to keep this in mind

10:19:53 <Stian> q+

q+

10:20:05 <Stian> Luc: pitching this as a resource - is not helping the presentation of the material

Luc Moreau: pitching this as a resource - is not helping the presentation of the material

10:20:23 <Stian> Luc: if we want as Simon says, to control what we get.. it sounds like a client would need to formulate a kind of query?

Luc Moreau: if we want as Simon says, to control what we get.. it sounds like a client would need to formulate a kind of query?

10:20:38 <Stian> Luc: when you have a provenance URI, which is in the header, you don't have that opportunity, the query has been formulated for you

Luc Moreau: when you have a provenance URI, which is in the header, you don't have that opportunity, the query has been formulated for you

10:20:49 <Stian> GK1: there's no reason that header is not a sparql header

Graham Klyne: there's no reason that header is not a sparql header

10:20:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:20:56 <Stian> Luc: but someone would have had to premade that query

Luc Moreau: but someone would have had to premade that query

10:20:59 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

10:21:09 <Stian> Khalid: Does not seciton 5 address this?

Khalid Belhajjame: Does not seciton 5 address this?

10:21:15 <Stian> smiles_: you might get a GB first..

Simon Miles: you might get a GB first..

10:21:24 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:21:24 <Stian> smiles_: imagine a user who is.. what do you get first

Simon Miles: imagine a user who is.. what do you get first

10:21:27 <Zakim> +tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo

10:21:38 <Stian> GK1: do we try to define how much information gets back when you dereference?

Graham Klyne: do we try to define how much information gets back when you dereference?

10:21:41 <tlebo> (still quiet)

Timothy Lebo: (still quiet)

10:21:41 <Stian> smiles_: either is a solution

Simon Miles: either is a solution

10:21:52 <pgroth> is anyone else on the phone?

Paul Groth: is anyone else on the phone?

10:22:02 <Stian> smiles_: one way is to do a query.. another way is to say there is a definite thing that comes back, that you can operate on

Simon Miles: one way is to do a query.. another way is to say there is a definite thing that comes back, that you can operate on

10:22:04 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone?

10:22:04 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo

10:22:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:22:18 <Stian> GK1: in a sense they are both in there, Paul's eariler comment, too many mechanism

Graham Klyne: in a sense they are both in there, Paul's eariler comment, too many mechanism

10:23:12 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:23:16 <Luc> ack stia

Luc Moreau: ack stia

10:23:39 <Stian> Stian: A provenance resource is not necessarily a whole provenance account (Which truly might be many GBs) - but Linked data allows you to have many resources that you have to follow the links to

Stian Soiland-Reyes: A provenance resource is not necessarily a whole provenance account (Which truly might be many GBs) - but Linked data allows you to have many resources that you have to follow the links to

10:24:09 <Stian> pgroth: (...) for the provenance combination - there might be other people that adds the ability to filter in the service information. FOr instance ?maxEntries=200

Paul Groth: (...) for the provenance combination - there might be other people that adds the ability to filter in the service information. FOr instance ?maxEntries=200

10:24:14 <Stian> pgroth: we should not preclude exactly this

Paul Groth: we should not preclude exactly this

10:24:18 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

10:24:26 <Stian> pgroth: but we don't have enough background material as to what that looks like

Paul Groth: but we don't have enough background material as to what that looks like

10:24:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:24:30 <Stian> Zakim: who is making noise?

Zakim IRC Bot: who is making noise?

10:24:32 <tlebo> back!

Timothy Lebo: back!

10:24:37 <kai> Thats me

Kai Eckert: Thats me

10:24:45 <kai> Probably :-)

Kai Eckert: Probably :-)

10:24:50 <Stian> pgroth: just write a paragraph that's says.. who couldn't standardize it

Paul Groth: just write a paragraph that's says.. who couldn't standardize it

10:24:55 <Stian> kai: no I meant if zakim heard us :)

Kai Eckert: no I meant if zakim heard us :)

10:25:02 <Stian> pgroth: if everyone uses a different mechanism to filter

Paul Groth: if everyone uses a different mechanism to filter

10:25:05 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:25:14 <Stian> smiles_: agree - we can't know how filtering might take place

Simon Miles: agree - we can't know how filtering might take place

10:25:22 <kai> I can't hear anything either.

Kai Eckert: I can't hear anything either.

10:25:32 <kai> Think we have to redial.

Kai Eckert: Think we have to redial.

10:25:35 <Stian> GK1: Sympathy with this - concern is that it is not the case.. we are defining another API. Rather than following a REST approach

Graham Klyne: Sympathy with this - concern is that it is not the case.. we are defining another API. Rather than following a REST approach

10:25:48 <Stian> ...

...

10:25:48 <tlebo> resolving URIs or submitting a URI to a service is a matter of perspective. The former paradigm reduces the "agency" of the server on the other end and minimizes the client's control. Calling a service permits the client to have more control by feeding parameters to control what comes back.

Timothy Lebo: resolving URIs or submitting a URI to a service is a matter of perspective. The former paradigm reduces the "agency" of the server on the other end and minimizes the client's control. Calling a service permits the client to have more control by feeding parameters to control what comes back.

10:26:25 <Stian> GK1: Roy Fielding is specific that there is a  (...) pure restful approach - much better with exchange of information (???)

Graham Klyne: Roy Fielding is specific that there is a (...) pure restful approach - much better with exchange of information (???)

10:26:48 <Stian> GK1: internally I feel it is the web way, or do we go through the route of making an API which is perhaps simpler/more specific..

Graham Klyne: internally I feel it is the web way, or do we go through the route of making an API which is perhaps simpler/more specific..

10:27:04 <tlebo> (at least now I know _who_ is talking. Just a bunch of bnodes for what they're saying...)

Timothy Lebo: (at least now I know _who_ is talking. Just a bunch of bnodes for what they're saying...)

10:27:22 <Stian> pgroth: in SPARQL protocol, I would just copy what they do. "Here's a WSDL 2.0 file that says input/output of this thing called query - a HTTP binding says how to do it with HTTP GET

Paul Groth: in SPARQL protocol, I would just copy what they do. "Here's a WSDL 2.0 file that says input/output of this thing called query - a HTTP binding says how to do it with HTTP GET

10:27:30 <Stian> GK1: which is what I attempted to do with tempaltes

Graham Klyne: which is what I attempted to do with tempaltes

10:27:41 <Stian> pgroth: doing this in SPARQL I don't have to look up service description, etc..

Paul Groth: doing this in SPARQL I don't have to look up service description, etc..

10:27:47 <Stian> GK1: this is the REST Tax coming in

Graham Klyne: this is the REST Tax coming in

10:27:54 <tlebo> BTW, nobody implemented the WSDL, all implementations used HTTP exclusively.

Timothy Lebo: BTW, nobody implemented the WSDL, all implementations used HTTP exclusively.

10:28:06 <Stian> GK1: one of the principles, the client should not know about the form of the URI used. It is the hyperengine as an engine of application state.

Graham Klyne: one of the principles, the client should not know about the form of the URI used. It is the hyperengine as an engine of application state.

10:31:43 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

10:34:06 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: what is the agreement?

Luc Moreau: what is the agreement? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:34:07 <Stian> Pgroth: Would argue for..

Paul Groth: Would argue for..

10:34:21 <Stian> pgroth: indirection that is currently in the document - not a good thing - not what people really want

Paul Groth: indirection that is currently in the document - not a good thing - not what people really want

10:34:30 <Stian> pgroth: they don't want to dereferene the service description and build a URI

Paul Groth: they don't want to dereferene the service description and build a URI

10:34:41 <Stian> pgroth: notion of well known URI vs WSDL - something to discuss

Paul Groth: notion of well known URI vs WSDL - something to discuss

10:34:42 <Stian> q+

q+

10:34:43 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: The notion of well known URI vs WSDL is something we should discuss

Paul Groth: The notion of well known URI vs WSDL is something we should discuss [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:34:48 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: I'm back :)

Khalid Belhajjame: I'm back :)

10:34:56 <khalidbelhajjame> @Stian ok :-)

Khalid Belhajjame: @Stian ok :-)

10:35:00 <Stian> pgroth: sepreate out document, call it an Provenance Service API.. perhaps lightweight

Paul Groth: sepreate out document, call it an Provenance Service API.. perhaps lightweight

10:35:04 <Stian> @Khalid thanks

@Khalid thanks

10:35:24 <Stian> ivan: when I saw the word 'query' I saw a red flag

Ivan Herman: when I saw the word 'query' I saw a red flag

10:35:37 <Stian> ivan: I saw Query in the title.. read the document I realised.. but the title suggest something else

Ivan Herman: I saw Query in the title.. read the document I realised.. but the title suggest something else

10:35:44 <Stian> ivan: that you can define a query language for provenance information

Ivan Herman: that you can define a query language for provenance information

10:35:53 <Stian> GK: so change the title to Access and SPARQL query?

Graham Klyne: so change the title to Access and SPARQL query?

10:35:59 <Stian> ivan: just Provenance Access

Ivan Herman: just Provenance Access

10:36:13 <Stian> pgroth: two things - provenance access, current service, and then there is the Locating Proveannce Information

Paul Groth: two things - provenance access, current service, and then there is the Locating Proveannce Information

10:36:28 <Stian> pgroth: how to embed thins in HTML etc.. that's location

Paul Groth: how to embed thins in HTML etc.. that's location

10:36:39 <Stian> pgroth: this conversation about how to access the information - we don't say anything about query

Paul Groth: this conversation about how to access the information - we don't say anything about query

10:36:45 <Stian> GK: can't we make references to sparql?

Graham Klyne: can't we make references to sparql?

10:36:58 <Stian> pgroth: that's a way to do it.. and what we said.. but I think that it's more looking at me as a Best PRactice

Paul Groth: that's a way to do it.. and what we said.. but I think that it's more looking at me as a Best PRactice

10:38:37 <Luc2> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:41:17 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

10:43:40 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

10:43:48 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

10:43:49 <Luc2> Ack stain

Luc Moreau: Ack stain

10:43:55 <Stian> pgroth: just writing some SPARQL query..

Paul Groth: just writing some SPARQL query..

10:44:00 <Stian> (??> Insert paste here)

(??> Insert paste here)

10:44:02 <Luc2> Ack st

Luc Moreau: Ack st

10:44:27 <Stian> Khalid: how to get information about entity.. getting the URI of the sparql query. Not inetersted in URI of entity (??)  (?)

Khalid Belhajjame: how to get information about entity.. getting the URI of the sparql query. Not inetersted in URI of entity (??) (?)

10:44:39 <Luc2> Ack kha

Luc Moreau: Ack kha

10:44:50 <Stian> GK: what you want is what you want.. what you get back is an URI that refers to some provenance

Graham Klyne: what you want is what you want.. what you get back is an URI that refers to some provenance

10:44:59 <Stian> GK: but what do you get back when dereferencing it - that's up to the service

Graham Klyne: but what do you get back when dereferencing it - that's up to the service

10:45:04 <Paolo> Q?

Paolo Missier: Q?

10:45:14 <Stian> GK: the second thing is that we can get back the ... (??)

Graham Klyne: the second thing is that we can get back the ... (??)

10:45:24 <Stian> pgroth: provenance information directly - option 1

Paul Groth: provenance information directly - option 1

10:45:30 <Stian> pgroth: big blob - could overwhelm you

Paul Groth: big blob - could overwhelm you

10:45:39 <Stian> pgroth: second is, we give you a URI that refers to that provenance information

Paul Groth: second is, we give you a URI that refers to that provenance information

10:45:43 <Stian> pgroth: those are the two options

Paul Groth: those are the two options

10:45:52 <Stian> GK: the third option - a URI for a SPARQL endpoint?

Graham Klyne: the third option - a URI for a SPARQL endpoint?

10:46:08 <Stian> ivan: as a user I have the choice of which SPARQL endpoint to use

Ivan Herman: as a user I have the choice of which SPARQL endpoint to use

10:46:26 <tlebo> is there objection to letting a client SPARQL the provenance service for the subset it wants?

Timothy Lebo: is there objection to letting a client SPARQL the provenance service for the subset it wants?

10:46:37 <Stian> GK: two deployments.. one is a SPARQL endpoint that fronts a bit of data - the second is a general engine where you can load data and then query it

Graham Klyne: two deployments.. one is a SPARQL endpoint that fronts a bit of data - the second is a general engine where you can load data and then query it

10:46:47 <Stian> ivan: then we have a different problem.. if we have a URI against a RDF resource

Ivan Herman: then we have a different problem.. if we have a URI against a RDF resource

10:46:58 <Stian> ivan: give me those SPARQL endpoints that can query that resource

Ivan Herman: give me those SPARQL endpoints that can query that resource

10:47:05 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

10:47:08 <Stian> ivan: not something this group can standardize

Ivan Herman: not something this group can standardize

10:47:16 <Zakim> + +1.781.899.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.781.899.aabb

10:47:23 <Stian> pgroth: down to a lightweight service description - if Graham agrees with this

Paul Groth: down to a lightweight service description - if Graham agrees with this

10:47:28 <Stian> pgroth: as the PAQ man!

Paul Groth: as the PAQ man!

10:47:54 <Stian> pgroth: to decide what that API/protocol should cater for - we currently have two .. descriptions

Paul Groth: to decide what that API/protocol should cater for - we currently have two .. descriptions

10:48:02 <Stian> pgroth: one gives provenance info, one that gives (?)

Paul Groth: one gives provenance info, one that gives (?)

10:48:05 <Stian> pgroth: resource view of the world

Paul Groth: resource view of the world

10:48:14 <Stian> pgroth: dereference

Paul Groth: dereference

10:48:25 <Stian> GK: discovery of provenance, provenance service endpoints

Graham Klyne: discovery of provenance, provenance service endpoints

10:48:33 <Stian> GK: context is a bit off..

Graham Klyne: context is a bit off..

10:48:37 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

10:48:42 <Stian> GK: simple case is focus on discovery of provenance URIs

Graham Klyne: simple case is focus on discovery of provenance URIs

10:48:48 <Stian> GK: would be happy if that is as far as I go

Graham Klyne: would be happy if that is as far as I go

10:49:02 <Stian> GK: provenance URI is something you dereference to get the provenance

Graham Klyne: provenance URI is something you dereference to get the provenance

10:49:13 <Stian> GK: it's a URI you dereference that gives 'a' provenance resource

Graham Klyne: it's a URI you dereference that gives 'a' provenance resource

10:49:39 <Stian> pgroth: what has been asked is  - if we go for this - do we allow (not define) extending that so you can make sure the client can say 'Don't vive me everything'

Paul Groth: what has been asked is - if we go for this - do we allow (not define) extending that so you can make sure the client can say 'Don't vive me everything'

10:49:57 <Stian> smiles_: in the API call.. if the rquest says "Give me provenance of this" - what is returned is the provenance URI

Simon Miles: in the API call.. if the rquest says "Give me provenance of this" - what is returned is the provenance URI

10:50:13 <Stian> ivan: Admin issue - Sandro  is on the call - understands Paul but noone else

Ivan Herman: Admin issue - Sandro is on the call - understands Paul but noone else

10:50:17 <tlebo> I skyped in via Daniel.

Timothy Lebo: I skyped in via Daniel.

10:50:27 <tlebo> much clearer than the telecon phone.

Timothy Lebo: much clearer than the telecon phone.

10:51:00 <Stian> can you hear us better now?

can you hear us better now?

10:51:17 <Stian> Sandro: Mainly using the IRC track

Sandro Hawke: Mainly using the IRC track

10:51:17 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

10:51:27 <Stian> Ivan: pgroth will call in on the other line to see if it works again

Ivan Herman: pgroth will call in on the other line to see if it works again

10:51:27 <tlebo> telecon phone is only useful for knowing the speaker, not what they are saying.

Timothy Lebo: telecon phone is only useful for knowing the speaker, not what they are saying.

10:54:09 <Stian> Luc: provenance-uri does not work for me.. say I found a resource, a provenance URI

Luc Moreau: provenance-uri does not work for me.. say I found a resource, a provenance URI

10:54:13 <Stian> Luc2: find with how we find it

Luc Moreau: find with how we find it

10:54:22 <kai> You could directly use Skype, maybe thats better

Kai Eckert: You could directly use Skype, maybe thats better

10:54:36 <Stian> Luc2: I download the provenance.. dereference.. then I navigate my grpah and find "Oh, there is an edge, activity mentioned in here"

Luc Moreau: I download the provenance.. dereference.. then I navigate my grpah and find "Oh, there is an edge, activity mentioned in here"

10:54:48 <Stian> Luc2: then I have a provenance URI..(?)

Luc Moreau: then I have a provenance URI..(?)

10:55:00 <Stian> GK: so you go back to the same step with the new URI

Graham Klyne: so you go back to the same step with the new URI

10:55:02 <kai> My ID is cirq-kai, if you want to give it a try

Kai Eckert: My ID is cirq-kai, if you want to give it a try

10:55:18 <Stian> ivan: you have an URI, that is a resource, you go and ask for the provenance of that URI

Ivan Herman: you have an URI, that is a resource, you go and ask for the provenance of that URI

10:55:28 <Stian> ivan: so in linked data, you find out what's there, and that's how you expose it

Ivan Herman: so in linked data, you find out what's there, and that's how you expose it

10:55:54 <Stian> Luc2: talkinga bout prior art.. some prior art that is not (?) (?)

Luc Moreau: talkinga bout prior art.. some prior art that is not (?) (?)

10:56:02 <Stian> Luc2: no prior art covered by this usecase

Luc Moreau: no prior art covered by this usecase

10:56:24 <Stian> Luc2: a protocol for provenance addresses, resolves this

Luc Moreau: a protocol for provenance addresses, resolves this

10:56:28 <Stian> ivan: what does that mean?

Ivan Herman: what does that mean?

10:56:37 <Stian> pgroth: what you might want to do is that there is some provenance-service

Paul Groth: what you might want to do is that there is some provenance-service

10:56:43 <Stian> pgroth: you pass it an identifier..

Paul Groth: you pass it an identifier..

10:56:50 <Stian> ivan: "Some provenance information" is vague to me

Ivan Herman: "Some provenance information" is vague to me

10:57:01 <Stian> pgroth: in these protocols.. if you say some query

Paul Groth: in these protocols.. if you say some query

10:57:10 <Stian> pgroth: now I don't think we can define that provenance query language

Paul Groth: now I don't think we can define that provenance query language

10:57:11 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone?

10:57:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [IPcaller], Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [IPcaller], Sandro

10:57:27 <Stian> pgroth: however we can define the protocol to say that here's a URL - give me provenance for that

Paul Groth: however we can define the protocol to say that here's a URL - give me provenance for that

10:57:34 <Stian> ivan: but Luc does not like that?

Ivan Herman: but Luc does not like that?

10:57:48 <Stian> pgroth: but you can extend that with non-standard service-specific query mechanisms if I want to

Paul Groth: but you can extend that with non-standard service-specific query mechanisms if I want to

10:57:58 <Stian> pgroth: two ways - linked data approach, dereference data information - get something back

Paul Groth: two ways - linked data approach, dereference data information - get something back

10:58:04 <Stian> pgroth: look through.. clear provenance service

Paul Groth: look through.. clear provenance service

10:58:30 <Stian> pgroth: give me information about this URI.. browsing through provenance info.. and then I know it's a provenance service, I could try to use the same with the other URI

Paul Groth: give me information about this URI.. browsing through provenance info.. and then I know it's a provenance service, I could try to use the same with the other URI

10:58:45 <Stian> ivan: so an extension point in the sysstem, where you cut put any query language, or SPARQL, or anything as additional thing

Ivan Herman: so an extension point in the sysstem, where you cut put any query language, or SPARQL, or anything as additional thing

10:58:57 <Stian> Luc2: but people implementing this, visualisation of PROV information

Luc Moreau: but people implementing this, visualisation of PROV information

10:59:08 <Stian> Luc2: javascript code, accessing bits of PROV information, visualising

Luc Moreau: javascript code, accessing bits of PROV information, visualising

10:59:27 <Stian> Luc2: I want my browser to be able to interact with the provenance provider and retrieve what is needed

Luc Moreau: I want my browser to be able to interact with the provenance provider and retrieve what is needed

10:59:46 <Stian> ivan: if the provenance provider also has a SPARQL endpoint, this can be handled, get back a URI, get a SPARQL query.. throw it in

Ivan Herman: if the provenance provider also has a SPARQL endpoint, this can be handled, get back a URI, get a SPARQL query.. throw it in

11:00:12 <Stian> Luc2: the provenance service COULD be a sparql endpoint

Luc Moreau: the provenance service COULD be a sparql endpoint

11:00:15 <Stian> (How can you tell?)

(How can you tell?)

11:00:33 <Stian> GK: given an entity URI.. don't try to provide.. access to ..(?)

Graham Klyne: given an entity URI.. don't try to provide.. access to ..(?)

11:00:52 <Stian> Khalid:  Given URI or place.. where provenance information might be.. (?)

Khalid Belhajjame: Given URI or place.. where provenance information might be.. (?)

11:01:02 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: but not trying to say which SPARQL endpoint...?

Khalid Belhajjame: but not trying to say which SPARQL endpoint...?

11:01:20 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: we are not trying to return to the user with SPARQL enpodint that provides access to the entity that the user is (?)

Khalid Belhajjame: we are not trying to return to the user with SPARQL enpodint that provides access to the entity that the user is (?)

11:01:31 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: you started discussion with (?) how to access provenance

Khalid Belhajjame: you started discussion with (?) how to access provenance

11:01:43 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: the user has an entity, represent and entity, you can find entity in this URI.. (?)

Khalid Belhajjame: the user has an entity, represent and entity, you can find entity in this URI.. (?)

11:02:06 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: if you want to query only parts of the provenance.. then you could use SPARQL - but given an entity URI we need a way to find which SPARQL endpoint that gives access to that

Khalid Belhajjame: if you want to query only parts of the provenance.. then you could use SPARQL - but given an entity URI we need a way to find which SPARQL endpoint that gives access to that

11:02:08 <tlebo> what is the current concern? that the two options in PAQ are too much,  or that it is inadequate?

Timothy Lebo: what is the current concern? that the two options in PAQ are too much, or that it is inadequate?

11:02:11 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: but now we say that is outside the scope

Khalid Belhajjame: but now we say that is outside the scope

11:02:19 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: but now we return back to this..

Khalid Belhajjame: but now we return back to this..

11:02:22 <Stian> q+

q+

11:02:24 <Stian> q?

q?

11:02:36 <sandro> (Alas, I can't hear the discussion, but one solution might be to provide access to the graphs an endpoint knows about, and have those graphs provide Link headers pointing to the endpoint.)

Sandro Hawke: (Alas, I can't hear the discussion, but one solution might be to provide access to the graphs an endpoint knows about, and have those graphs provide Link headers pointing to the endpoint.)

11:02:45 <tlebo> Zakim, what time is it there?

Timothy Lebo: Zakim, what time is it there?

11:02:45 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, tlebo.

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, tlebo.

11:02:50 <Stian> pgroth: we lost 30 minutes before this started

Paul Groth: we lost 30 minutes before this started

11:02:57 <sandro> (that way only clients who know SPARQL needs to know SPARQL.)

Sandro Hawke: (that way only clients who know SPARQL needs to know SPARQL.)

11:02:58 <jcheney> it's 12:00 here

James Cheney: it's 12:00 here

11:03:00 <dgarijo> it is 12:00

Daniel Garijo: it is 12:00

11:03:01 <Stian> pgroth: need a resolution on what we need to look at - bu tnot just look at it

Paul Groth: need a resolution on what we need to look at - bu tnot just look at it

11:03:18 <Stian> pgroth: a sheet is shown

Paul Groth: a sheet is shown

11:03:19 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

11:03:32 <kai> @Sandro: Can you use Skype? Call me or someone else on Skype, thats better.

Kai Eckert: @Sandro: Can you use Skype? Call me or someone else on Skype, thats better.

11:03:40 <Stian> GK: 1) Discover provenance URI from the resource provider.   Link: <link> etc

Graham Klyne: 1) Discover provenance URI from the resource provider. Link: <link> etc

11:03:50 <tlebo> ^^ from HTTP header

Timothy Lebo: ^^ from HTTP header

11:04:00 <Stian> ... 2) Locatiing provenance information via a 3rd party service -- Provenance service

... 2) Locatiing provenance information via a 3rd party service -- Provenance service

11:04:13 <Stian> GK: difference is that 1) is that the resource provider knows about, 2) is independent service

Graham Klyne: difference is that 1) is that the resource provider knows about, 2) is independent service

11:04:33 <Stian> GK: 3) Using SPARQL to query provenance - more Best Practice side - not anything about discovering SPARQL endpoint

Graham Klyne: 3) Using SPARQL to query provenance - more Best Practice side - not anything about discovering SPARQL endpoint

11:04:40 <Stian> pgroth: so we should drop 3 or move 3 out

Paul Groth: so we should drop 3 or move 3 out

11:04:44 <Stian> ivan: it's just informative

Ivan Herman: it's just informative

11:05:01 <Stian> pgroth: think we should focus on 1 and 2 - explicit

Paul Groth: think we should focus on 1 and 2 - explicit

11:05:09 <Stian> pgroth: MAke it.. this is a protocol

Paul Groth: MAke it.. this is a protocol

11:05:16 <Stian> pgroth: it is not defined as such

Paul Groth: it is not defined as such

11:05:32 <Stian> pgroth: WSDL option, pattern option  etc.. just decide on one and talk about it

Paul Groth: WSDL option, pattern option etc.. just decide on one and talk about it

11:05:43 <Stian> GK: also decide what scope is. Here in 2) scope is a bit wide

Graham Klyne: also decide what scope is. Here in 2) scope is a bit wide

11:05:54 <Stian> pgroth: should just say 'Here is a provenance service - here's something for an entity'

Paul Groth: should just say 'Here is a provenance service - here's something for an entity'

11:06:09 <Stian> pgroth: only constrait is that we make it open for extensibility - would solve Smiles' problem

Paul Groth: only constrait is that we make it open for extensibility - would solve Smiles' problem

11:06:24 <Stian> pgroth: up to other people to define how to extend it - could be extended with filters etc

Paul Groth: up to other people to define how to extend it - could be extended with filters etc

11:06:27 <Stian> smiles: *(??)

Simon Miles: *(??)

11:06:38 <Stian> smiles: In the HTPT header from provider you can say that a provenance service is here

Simon Miles: In the HTPT header from provider you can say that a provenance service is here

11:06:47 <Stian> pgroth: that's in scope - saying how to locate provenance service provider - that's 2)

Paul Groth: that's in scope - saying how to locate provenance service provider - that's 2)

11:06:53 <Stian> pgroth: provenance-service headers

Paul Groth: provenance-service headers

11:07:09 <Stian> smiles: the provider can talk about 3rd party services?

Simon Miles: the provider can talk about 3rd party services?

11:07:17 <Stian> luc: If he so wishes..

Luc Moreau: If he so wishes..

11:07:20 <Stian> q-

q-

11:07:22 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

11:07:40 <Stian> Luc: So 3) SPARQL queries is just best practice

Luc Moreau: So 3) SPARQL queries is just best practice

11:07:46 <Stian> GK: yes, just says how to use what exists

Graham Klyne: yes, just says how to use what exists

11:08:23 <Stian> Luc: And then saying that we are.. two different topics  a) Defining a protocol - form and shape of protocol needs to be specified.   b) Is about locating.. much what we have, with headers etc.. f

Luc Moreau: And then saying that we are.. two different topics a) Defining a protocol - form and shape of protocol needs to be specified. b) Is about locating.. much what we have, with headers etc.. f

11:08:29 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller]

11:08:32 <Stian> GK: For resource providers to give location of provenance

Graham Klyne: For resource providers to give location of provenance

11:08:39 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

11:08:41 <Stian> pgroth: biggest is defining this proctocol

Paul Groth: biggest is defining this proctocol

11:09:01 <Stian> GK: biggest thing is coming to consensus about.. pure REST, part REST.. perhaps this is not the irght time for this discussion

Graham Klyne: biggest thing is coming to consensus about.. pure REST, part REST.. perhaps this is not the irght time for this discussion

11:09:04 <Stian> Luc: Lunch discission?

Luc Moreau: Lunch discission?

11:09:21 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

11:10:23 <Stian> - TODO: SUmmarise the decission above

- TODO: SUmmarise the decission above

11:10:29 <Stian> We're trying to call in again now

We're trying to call in again now

11:10:44 <tlebo> my telecon phone went silent again.

Timothy Lebo: my telecon phone went silent again.

11:10:50 <Stian> PAQ discussion finished

PAQ discussion finished

11:11:11 <sandro> (perfect timing -- PAQ was probably where I had the most expertise.  Ah well.)

Sandro Hawke: (perfect timing -- PAQ was probably where I had the most expertise. Ah well.)

11:11:13 <kai> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Kai Eckert: Zakim, who is on the phone?

11:11:13 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo

11:11:26 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni.a]

11:11:27 <Stian> --- I'll now paste in some chat log from earlier

--- I'll now paste in some chat log from earlier

11:11:30 <Stian> 2012-02-02 PROV F2F notes

2012-02-02 PROV F2F notes

11:11:30 <Stian> ---

---

11:11:30 <Stian> In practice, the application does not interpret the WSDL - but the user does.

In practice, the application does not interpret the WSDL - but the user does.

11:11:30 <Stian> pgroth: The REST API.. Banging on Yahoo's REST API.. look at URI templates, replace this with a parameter,

Paul Groth: The REST API.. Banging on Yahoo's REST API.. look at URI templates, replace this with a parameter,

11:11:33 <Stian> GK: This is not a REST API according to Roy Fielding

Graham Klyne: This is not a REST API according to Roy Fielding

11:11:36 <Stian> pgroth: But this is what the world does

Paul Groth: But this is what the world does

11:11:38 <Stian> Luc: What is the pragmatic solution?

Luc Moreau: What is the pragmatic solution?

11:11:41 <Stian> Ivan: WSDL is independently form this coice.. you could also (ugh) build a SOAP interface to the same service.

Ivan Herman: WSDL is independently form this coice.. you could also (ugh) build a SOAP interface to the same service.

11:11:44 <Stian> GK: If we fix the form of the URI we are forcing a certain API.

Graham Klyne: If we fix the form of the URI we are forcing a certain API.

11:11:46 <Stian> Ivan: This is an option.. you use the URI of the resource, the return header, there is a reference to X... OR you use the REST API.. or you WSDL allows this - use the mechanism of well known URIs.

Ivan Herman: This is an option.. you use the URI of the resource, the return header, there is a reference to X... OR you use the REST API.. or you WSDL allows this - use the mechanism of well known URIs.

11:11:50 <Stian> Ivan: There is an RFC that says "This is the way you can construct a well known URI. This group can propose that"

Ivan Herman: There is an RFC that says "This is the way you can construct a well known URI. This group can propose that"

11:11:53 <Stian> Pgroth: Between the WSDL solution and well known URIs.. not good for our case. In the politics, people who have set up provenance services, they have all kinds of .. "ugly" URIs.

Paul Groth: Between the WSDL solution and well known URIs.. not good for our case. In the politics, people who have set up provenance services, they have all kinds of .. "ugly" URIs.

11:11:53 <tlebo> +1 @GK - uri templates are bad REST practice.

Timothy Lebo: +1 @GK - uri templates are bad REST practice.

11:11:56 <Stian> Ivan: that means that.. not advodating here - that means mechanism itself of putting a provenance on a sort of URI that is related to the other URI - if this is true, then the mechanism widely used - is not interoperability - we can propose somethin that uses same approach, but standardize it. We can register the well-known-URI pattern with the IETF.

Ivan Herman: that means that.. not advodating here - that means mechanism itself of putting a provenance on a sort of URI that is related to the other URI - if this is true, then the mechanism widely used - is not interoperability - we can propose somethin that uses same approach, but standardize it. We can register the well-known-URI pattern with the IETF.

11:12:01 <Stian> GK: My proposal allows you to encode this practice..

Graham Klyne: My proposal allows you to encode this practice..

11:12:04 <Stian> Ivan: Keep the old one, keep a redirection.. still a case.

Ivan Herman: Keep the old one, keep a redirection.. still a case.

11:12:06 <Stian> GK: A tension that is putting wind behind the URI Template stuff.

Graham Klyne: A tension that is putting wind behind the URI Template stuff.

11:12:09 <Stian> Luc: How can we move forward?

Luc Moreau: How can we move forward?

11:12:11 <Stian> Pgroth: Would argue for..

Paul Groth: Would argue for..

11:12:12 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

11:12:14 <Stian> Luc: SQL query would be different, but could still be a provenance service

Luc Moreau: SQL query would be different, but could still be a provenance service

11:12:16 <Stian> GK: If we define a protocol we need to scope it.. These are the thins we do.. There are options. If we try to say, this is what we recommend. Then we n

Graham Klyne: If we define a protocol we need to scope it.. These are the thins we do.. There are options. If we try to say, this is what we recommend. Then we n

11:12:19 <Stian> Ivan: The scope of this WG should only be 'How to get to the provenance information' Full stop!

Ivan Herman: The scope of this WG should only be 'How to get to the provenance information' Full stop!

11:12:20 <GK> @tlebo: I understood templates to be *good* REST practice

Graham Klyne: @tlebo: I understood templates to be *good* REST practice

11:12:22 <Stian> GK: That's what I initially wanted

Graham Klyne: That's what I initially wanted

11:12:25 <Stian> Ivan: Anything beyond that is not scope of WG. SPARQL or what not. How to get it!

Ivan Herman: Anything beyond that is not scope of WG. SPARQL or what not. How to get it!

11:12:27 <Stian> GK: How to get it from several starting points.

Graham Klyne: How to get it from several starting points.

11:12:30 <Stian> GK: You might have URI for your source.. how do you get provenance from the provider of that resource. that's where Link: etc came in.

Graham Klyne: You might have URI for your source.. how do you get provenance from the provider of that resource. that's where Link: etc came in.

11:12:31 <tlebo> @pgroth, describe your URI template filling in some "service description" and I'd be fine with it.

Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, describe your URI template filling in some "service description" and I'd be fine with it.

11:12:33 <Stian> GK: then other requirements, third-party provenance. Other people provide thrust-assessments about your data.

Graham Klyne: then other requirements, third-party provenance. Other people provide thrust-assessments about your data.

11:12:33 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

11:12:36 <Stian> Ivan: HTTP header is not restricted to the same URI?

Ivan Herman: HTTP header is not restricted to the same URI?

11:12:36 <GK> They allow the client to follow information provided by the server.

Graham Klyne: They allow the client to follow information provided by the server.

11:12:38 <Stian> GK: But you need to know where to start. Provenance service came in here..

Graham Klyne: But you need to know where to start. Provenance service came in here..

11:12:41 <Stian> Pgroth: Where do you get provenance from.. In many cases, if you look around what people who have done provenance, most if it stuck in some Provenance Service.  Another way to do so is like in Dublin Core - just have a little graph/document that describe some provenance.

Paul Groth: Where do you get provenance from.. In many cases, if you look around what people who have done provenance, most if it stuck in some Provenance Service. Another way to do so is like in Dublin Core - just have a little graph/document that describe some provenance.

11:12:45 <Stian> Pgroth: Put it in a service - then you need to say "Hey, service, I am interested in provenance about X"

Paul Groth: Put it in a service - then you need to say "Hey, service, I am interested in provenance about X"

11:12:48 <Stian> Pgroth: And most services provide you a way to query to not get the provenance of the world. But there is not a single well-defined way to do so.

Paul Groth: And most services provide you a way to query to not get the provenance of the world. But there is not a single well-defined way to do so.

11:12:51 <Stian> Pgroth: We should just say here's where you get some provenance. If it is in a document, related resource, you can go straight to it.

Paul Groth: We should just say here's where you get some provenance. If it is in a document, related resource, you can go straight to it.

11:12:54 <Stian> pgroth: just being pedantic.

Paul Groth: just being pedantic.

11:12:56 <Stian> SmileS: what's relation between the API and a SPARQL query. If I get the resource.. what does that mean?

Simon Miles: what's relation between the API and a SPARQL query. If I get the resource.. what does that mean?

11:13:00 <Stian> Pgroth: One thing we might say is, we need a query language.. we have a draft query language.. we come up with some patterns on how to use SPARQL to query, but that's only an informative thing.

Paul Groth: One thing we might say is, we need a query language.. we have a draft query language.. we come up with some patterns on how to use SPARQL to query, but that's only an informative thing.

11:13:01 <GK> Sure, you ned to know where to start, but that'simp;licit in REST.

Graham Klyne: Sure, you ned to know where to start, but that'simp;licit in REST.

11:13:04 <Stian> SmileS: So does it need sparql in the API?

Simon Miles: So does it need sparql in the API?

11:13:06 <Stian> Ivan: No, not int he API. The Service either gives me a whole graph - and I can do what I like with the graph. Outside scope. Or I get an URI to the provenance information.

Ivan Herman: No, not int he API. The Service either gives me a whole graph - and I can do what I like with the graph. Outside scope. Or I get an URI to the provenance information.

11:13:09 <Stian> Ivan: I can use that URI in a SPARQL service. In any case the query is done on the .... might be a different SPARQL engine.

Ivan Herman: I can use that URI in a SPARQL service. In any case the query is done on the .... might be a different SPARQL engine.

11:13:12 <Stian> Pgroth: Does not ..(?)

Paul Groth: Does not ..(?)

11:13:15 <Stian> SmileS: so what you get back from the API is..

Simon Miles: so what you get back from the API is..

11:13:17 <Stian> Pgroth: Provenance information

Paul Groth: Provenance information

11:13:20 <Stian> Smiles: Representation or URI?

Simon Miles: Representation or URI?

11:13:21 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

11:13:22 <Stian> Pgroth/Luc: We need to decide on that.

Pgroth/Luc: We need to decide on that.

11:13:25 <Stian> ------------- END OF PASTE

------------- END OF PASTE

11:13:27 <Stian> (those are from various points above that needs to ve moved around)

(those are from various points above that needs to ve moved around)

11:13:30 <Stian> Luc: Two questions

Luc Moreau: Two questions

11:13:32 <Stian> Luc: For the primer - what are the next steps, what do we need to continue

Luc Moreau: For the primer - what are the next steps, what do we need to continue

11:13:35 <Stian> TOPIC: Primer

3. Primer

Summary: Simon presented the current status of the primer. A key reason for not progressing farther is the differences between prov-o and prov-dm once those issues are resolved further work can be done. Longer term there is a goal to tailor a primer to different communities. In gerneral, the group was happy abou the primer's status. A discussion was had about having a common way to graphically illustrate provenance graphs. It was agreed that having a common convention would be good. Finally, the importance of the primer as an entry point to the entiry family was discussed. There was consensus that the group should aim for a synchronous release with the other documents.

<pgroth> Summary: Simon presented the current status of the primer. A key reason for not progressing farther is the differences between prov-o and prov-dm once those issues are resolved further work can be done. Longer term there is a goal to tailor a primer to different communities. In gerneral, the group was happy abou the primer's status. A discussion was had about having a common way to graphically illustrate provenance graphs. It was agreed that having a common convention would be good. Finally, the importance of the primer as an entry point to the entiry family was discussed. There was consensus that the group should aim for a synchronous release with the other documents.
11:13:37 <Stian> smiles: two thins that we thought would need to be done

Simon Miles: two thins that we thought would need to be done

11:13:40 <Stian> smiles: fill in missing parts - DM things we want to introduce in primer

Simon Miles: fill in missing parts - DM things we want to introduce in primer

11:13:42 <Stian> smiles: some impression this morning that we keep things breef - use Turtle in examples

Simon Miles: some impression this morning that we keep things breef - use Turtle in examples

11:13:45 <Stian> smiles: if we're happy with that we stick with that

Simon Miles: if we're happy with that we stick with that

11:13:48 <Stian> smiles: the reason we have not progressed.. PROV-DM and PROV-O differences - those need to be matched up

Simon Miles: the reason we have not progressed.. PROV-DM and PROV-O differences - those need to be matched up

11:13:51 <Stian> smiles: had to raise issues on PROV-O for those

Simon Miles: had to raise issues on PROV-O for those

11:13:53 <Stian> smiles: derivation, notes.. assocation with.. alternateof, specialisationof, account

Simon Miles: derivation, notes.. assocation with.. alternateof, specialisationof, account

11:13:57 <Stian> smiles: some of these controversial

Simon Miles: some of these controversial

11:14:02 <Stian> smiles: longer term - primer should make sure communities that are to read the documents would all be compatible with it

Simon Miles: longer term - primer should make sure communities that are to read the documents would all be compatible with it

11:14:14 <Stian> smiles: how to start with the document - now i takes some lines of starting up.. entities attributes

Simon Miles: how to start with the document - now i takes some lines of starting up.. entities attributes

11:14:25 <Stian> smiles: but if people are just citing things.. is it easy for them to pick up and use?

Simon Miles: but if people are just citing things.. is it easy for them to pick up and use?

11:14:33 <Stian> smiles: workflow people, how do we address those?

Simon Miles: workflow people, how do we address those?

11:14:37 <Stian> smiles: pathways through documents

Simon Miles: pathways through documents

11:14:48 <Stian> ivan: q+

Ivan Herman: q+

11:14:52 <Stian> q+ ivan

q+ ivan

11:15:04 <Stian> q?

q?

11:15:06 <Stian> q- ivan

q- ivan

11:15:14 <Stian> ivan: this is the first doc I Read, and i understood it

Ivan Herman: this is the first doc I Read, and i understood it

11:15:20 <Stian> ivan: my comments are minor - like

Ivan Herman: my comments are minor - like

11:15:32 <Stian> ... bothered my why you use namespace ex1

... bothered my why you use namespace ex1

11:15:37 <Stian> ... in my mind I dropped 1

... in my mind I dropped 1

11:15:44 <Stian> smiles: the reason was that there might be more than one example

Simon Miles: the reason was that there might be more than one example

11:15:52 <Stian> smiles: one example to show everything.. and to not confuse it

Simon Miles: one example to show everything.. and to not confuse it

11:16:04 <Stian> ivan: thins you define as entity.. is not anywhere else, like article

Ivan Herman: thins you define as entity.. is not anywhere else, like article

11:16:19 <Stian> ivan: when I made my own drawings.. for me, when I have an activty, it's an active thing

Ivan Herman: when I made my own drawings.. for me, when I have an activty, it's an active thing

11:16:25 <Stian> ivan: for me the natural thing of that is to use a word

Ivan Herman: for me the natural thing of that is to use a word

11:16:33 <Stian> ivan: you use aggregated - and i use aggregate

Ivan Herman: you use aggregated - and i use aggregate

11:16:44 <Stian> smiles: in concern using provenance.. you can describe arbitrary processes

Simon Miles: in concern using provenance.. you can describe arbitrary processes

11:16:46 <Paolo> Q+

Paolo Missier: Q+

11:16:52 <Stian> smiles: what provenance is used for is the *past*  - so past tense

Simon Miles: what provenance is used for is the *past* - so past tense

11:16:59 <Stian> ivan: it's a personal thing..

Ivan Herman: it's a personal thing..

11:17:06 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

11:17:11 <Stian> ivan: that's how I hit these huge predicate names in PROV-O

Ivan Herman: that's how I hit these huge predicate names in PROV-O

11:17:16 <Stian> ivan: prov:wasGeneratedBy

Ivan Herman: prov:wasGeneratedBy

11:17:27 <Stian> ivan: on a diagram it does not look good

Ivan Herman: on a diagram it does not look good

11:17:40 <Stian> ivan: found section on revision and derivation very shallow

Ivan Herman: found section on revision and derivation very shallow

11:17:46 <Stian> ivan: could follow everything before that

Ivan Herman: could follow everything before that

11:17:54 <Stian> ivan: wasEventuallyDerivedFrom

Ivan Herman: wasEventuallyDerivedFrom

11:18:04 <Stian> smiles: it's still being developed by the other task forces

Simon Miles: it's still being developed by the other task forces

11:18:05 <Stian> smiles: agree

Simon Miles: agree

11:18:13 <Stian> ivan: abstract notation.. skipped that

Ivan Herman: abstract notation.. skipped that

11:18:21 <Stian> ivan: different discussion

Ivan Herman: different discussion

11:18:40 <Stian> ivan: easily, in terms of figures.. an RDF Graph with part of that in the primer would be helpful

Ivan Herman: easily, in terms of figures.. an RDF Graph with part of that in the primer would be helpful

11:18:48 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:18:50 <Stian> ivan: the diagram that you put up in the beginning section 2

Ivan Herman: the diagram that you put up in the beginning section 2

11:18:54 <Stian> ivan: is a copy of th eone in DM

Ivan Herman: is a copy of th eone in DM

11:19:06 <Stian> ivan: bu tnot sure if you use the terms in the diagram in the rest of the example..

Ivan Herman: bu tnot sure if you use the terms in the diagram in the rest of the example..

11:19:13 <Stian> Luc: synchronization issue

Luc Moreau: synchronization issue

11:19:24 <Stian> ivan: does not need a full diagram of ontology in primer

Ivan Herman: does not need a full diagram of ontology in primer

11:19:27 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:19:37 <Stian> smiles: is the overall what you expected from a primer?

Simon Miles: is the overall what you expected from a primer?

11:19:44 <Stian> ivan: yes, this was my entry point

Ivan Herman: yes, this was my entry point

11:19:48 <Stian> ivan: I can use these diagrams

Ivan Herman: I can use these diagrams

11:19:53 <Stian> ivan: works very well

Ivan Herman: works very well

11:20:04 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

11:20:11 <Luc> ack paol

Luc Moreau: ack paol

11:20:18 <Stian> Paolo: Question was if diagram or graphical notation explains some things

Paolo Missier: Question was if diagram or graphical notation explains some things

11:20:21 <Stian> Paolo: what notation to use

Paolo Missier: what notation to use

11:20:30 <Stian> ivan: I would do RDF graph - examples are in turtle

Ivan Herman: I would do RDF graph - examples are in turtle

11:20:48 <Stian> Paolo: my original point - if I give this to half my colleagues - they would be happy to see this as technology/notation independeny

Paolo Missier: my original point - if I give this to half my colleagues - they would be happy to see this as technology/notation independeny

11:20:54 <Stian> Paolo: RDF all over the primer might scare..

Paolo Missier: RDF all over the primer might scare..

11:21:12 <Stian> Paolo: important tha tthis is the first dive in.. then not alienate people who are not interested in RDF

Paolo Missier: important tha tthis is the first dive in.. then not alienate people who are not interested in RDF

11:21:17 <Stian> ivan: ok, so part of overall discussion

Ivan Herman: ok, so part of overall discussion

11:21:28 <Stian> ivan: other possibility is to do what OWL primer does.. with the buttons

Ivan Herman: other possibility is to do what OWL primer does.. with the buttons

11:21:49 <Stian> ivan: if I look at OWL primers I always click Turtle syntax - but friends of mine probably clicks Manchester syntax

Ivan Herman: if I look at OWL primers I always click Turtle syntax - but friends of mine probably clicks Manchester syntax

11:21:53 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:22:00 <Stian> pgroth: agree on this

Paul Groth: agree on this

11:22:18 <Stian> pgroth: if other syntaxes like XML-native, JSON come up.. they can fit in

Paul Groth: if other syntaxes like XML-native, JSON come up.. they can fit in

11:22:29 <Stian> ivan: ok, then even RDF/XML if you really want to

Ivan Herman: ok, then even RDF/XML if you really want to

11:22:50 <Stian> pgroth: a graphical notation in OPM

Paul Groth: a graphical notation in OPM

11:22:56 <Stian> (?)

(?)

11:23:09 <Stian> Luc: not notation, illustration

Luc Moreau: not notation, illustration

11:23:17 <Stian> pgroth: illustrate graphically provenance

Paul Groth: illustrate graphically provenance

11:23:19 <GK> Is this discussion of using ASN a first consensus point to test our earlier discussion.  Is this group trying to be technology-independent, or are we defining a specification for the Semantic Web?

Graham Klyne: Is this discussion of using ASN a first consensus point to test our earlier discussion. Is this group trying to be technology-independent, or are we defining a specification for the Semantic Web?

11:23:43 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:23:44 <Stian> pgroth: (..) or are we trying to just put data as RDF and produce figures?

Paul Groth: (..) or are we trying to just put data as RDF and produce figures?

11:24:14 <Stian> ivan: could look at diagram at file:///home/stain/src/provenance-wg/prov/primer/Primer.html#intuitive-overview-of-prov-dm and think of it as RDF

Ivan Herman: could look at diagram at file:///home/stain/src/provenance-wg/prov/primer/Primer.html#intuitive-overview-of-prov-dm and think of it as RDF

11:24:28 <Luc> ack pgr

Luc Moreau: ack pgr

11:24:29 <Stian> ivan: there is not standard RDF Graph notation.. but if I add some kind of typing

Ivan Herman: there is not standard RDF Graph notation.. but if I add some kind of typing

11:24:36 <Stian> ivan: and from the shape I see it's an activity, agent, etc

Ivan Herman: and from the shape I see it's an activity, agent, etc

11:24:42 <Stian> ivan: then I have some kind of notation that is understandable by others

Ivan Herman: then I have some kind of notation that is understandable by others

11:24:54 <Stian> ivan: type information info RDF graph - explicitly, obscures everything

Ivan Herman: type information info RDF graph - explicitly, obscures everything

11:25:01 <Stian> smiles: Does it have to be fixed to th eRDF graph

Simon Miles: Does it have to be fixed to th eRDF graph

11:25:20 <Stian> smiles: like in PROV-O some thins are more complicated then thay need to be in a diagram - wher eyou ahve n-ary relationships

Simon Miles: like in PROV-O some thins are more complicated then thay need to be in a diagram - wher eyou ahve n-ary relationships

11:25:46 <Stian> ivan: perhaps same technique of syntax switching can also be used for graphics

Ivan Herman: perhaps same technique of syntax switching can also be used for graphics

11:25:53 <Stian> Stian: but it's hard enough already to update the diagrams

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but it's hard enough already to update the diagrams

11:26:02 <Stian> Paolo: was just meant like a classic ER diagram

Paolo Missier: was just meant like a classic ER diagram

11:26:14 <Stian> Paolo: I would support the idea of a suggested graphical illustration

Paolo Missier: I would support the idea of a suggested graphical illustration

11:26:17 <Stian> Paolo: first thing people do..

Paolo Missier: first thing people do..

11:26:24 <Stian> Paolo: pictures on slides, etc

Paolo Missier: pictures on slides, etc

11:26:29 <Stian> Paolo: suggest at least

Paolo Missier: suggest at least

11:26:39 <Stian> Luc: Graphical illustration.. we do not mean that kind of picture

Luc Moreau: Graphical illustration.. we do not mean that kind of picture

11:26:50 <Stian> Luc: We mean an instance of a graph

Luc Moreau: We mean an instance of a graph

11:26:54 <Stian> Luc: PROV-DM has something like that

Luc Moreau: PROV-DM has something like that

11:27:23 <Stian> ivan: but then it can be correct.. I can look at the picture.. if it's a circle, then it's not just a resource, but with some type information

Ivan Herman: but then it can be correct.. I can look at the picture.. if it's a circle, then it's not just a resource, but with some type information

11:27:27 <Stian> ivan: that would be perfect

Ivan Herman: that would be perfect

11:27:42 <Stian> Luc: some edges in this illustrations are not properties

Luc Moreau: some edges in this illustrations are not properties

11:28:01 <Stian> Luc: like wasGeneratedBy or Used might be an instance

Luc Moreau: like wasGeneratedBy or Used might be an instance

11:28:03 <tlebo> @luc, they are predicates

Timothy Lebo: @luc, they are predicates

11:28:07 <Stian> Paolo: it can have additional elements

Paolo Missier: it can have additional elements

11:28:13 <tlebo> their qualified forms are classes.

Timothy Lebo: their qualified forms are classes.

11:28:19 <Stian> Luc: it was used..

Luc Moreau: it was used..

11:29:34 <Stian> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html#graphical-illustration

http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html#graphical-illustration

11:29:50 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:29:50 <Stian> pgroth: so an illustration of the graph should be easily represented as RDF

Paul Groth: so an illustration of the graph should be easily represented as RDF

11:29:58 <Stian> Paolo: 10 people doing same graph in different ways

Paolo Missier: 10 people doing same graph in different ways

11:30:03 <Stian> Luc: we should as a WG be consistent

Luc Moreau: we should as a WG be consistent

11:30:09 <Stian> ivan: so not take my slides public..?

Ivan Herman: so not take my slides public..?

11:30:19 <Stian> Luc: Oh, that's fine, but not in the PROV document

Luc Moreau: Oh, that's fine, but not in the PROV document

11:30:28 <Stian> ivan: these slides people will copy!

Ivan Herman: these slides people will copy!

11:30:40 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:30:49 <Stian> ivan: my picture is just ovals in colours - would not work in generral!

Ivan Herman: my picture is just ovals in colours - would not work in generral!

11:31:00 <Stian> @ivan can we have a sneak-view of this..? :)

@ivan can we have a sneak-view of this..? :)

11:31:08 <Stian> Paolo: illustration of different perspectives

Paolo Missier: illustration of different perspectives

11:31:17 <Stian> smiles: if we can stick at one example, that is a good thing, makes it simpler

Simon Miles: if we can stick at one example, that is a good thing, makes it simpler

11:31:30 <Stian> smiles: why we though we need more than one example, is that it might be contrived to fit every concept into the same example

Simon Miles: why we though we need more than one example, is that it might be contrived to fit every concept into the same example

11:31:33 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:31:38 <dgarijo> +q

Daniel Garijo: +q

11:31:46 <Stian> Paolo: might flow into Best Practices document with several examples

Paolo Missier: might flow into Best Practices document with several examples

11:32:05 <Stian> dgarijo: I see that you use the QualifiedInvolvement in the example, but not talk about it in the primer

Daniel Garijo: I see that you use the QualifiedInvolvement in the example, but not talk about it in the primer

11:32:06 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:32:09 <Stian> smiles: See what you mean

Simon Miles: See what you mean

11:32:10 <Luc> ack d

Luc Moreau: ack d

11:32:17 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

11:32:18 <Stian> smiles: as PROV-O has changed duing development

Simon Miles: as PROV-O has changed duing development

11:32:22 <GK> q+ to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points

11:32:29 <Stian> dgarijo: can be confusing with class vs. property

Daniel Garijo: can be confusing with class vs. property

11:32:29 <Luc> ack kh

Luc Moreau: ack kh

11:32:39 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: Notion of role in the primer?  (???)(

Khalid Belhajjame: Notion of role in the primer? (???)(

11:33:11 <Stian> Stian: yes, roles have become downplayed for general attributes later

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes, roles have become downplayed for general attributes later

11:33:19 <Stian> (We had EntityInRole rather than QualifiedInvolvement)

(We had EntityInRole rather than QualifiedInvolvement)

11:33:46 <Stian> smiles: roles were more explicit before, now evolved with various qualifications

Simon Miles: roles were more explicit before, now evolved with various qualifications

11:33:58 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: perhaps it's best to keep it, explain roles which are more important (?)

Khalid Belhajjame: perhaps it's best to keep it, explain roles which are more important (?)

11:34:07 <Stian> smiles: add something about roles being just one way to qualify

Simon Miles: add something about roles being just one way to qualify

11:34:22 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

11:34:22 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask if the focus on one example fits well with the focused examples used for specific points

11:34:30 <Stian> GK: about single example.. was impressed with how the examples were introduced

Graham Klyne: about single example.. was impressed with how the examples were introduced

11:34:32 <tlebo> @stian, which shifted from describing the (EntityInRole) more characterized Entity to describing the (QualifiedInvolvement) triple between the Activity and the Entity.

Timothy Lebo: @stian, which shifted from describing the (EntityInRole) more characterized Entity to describing the (QualifiedInvolvement) triple between the Activity and the Entity.

11:34:36 <Stian> GK: if we force it to single example we might loose this!

Graham Klyne: if we force it to single example we might loose this!

11:34:46 <Stian> GK: so push this to make sure we keep the simple ocus in incremental development

Graham Klyne: so push this to make sure we keep the simple ocus in incremental development

11:34:53 <Stian> ---Lunch has arrived

---Lunch has arrived

11:34:58 <Stian> with 3 freeriders

with 3 freeriders

11:35:03 <Stian> (?)

(?)

11:35:18 <Stian> smiles: point is that focus on common relations.. properties.. wassummaryof etc

Simon Miles: point is that focus on common relations.. properties.. wassummaryof etc

11:35:26 <Stian> smiles: thinking of document from librarian perspective

Simon Miles: thinking of document from librarian perspective

11:35:42 <Stian> smiles: record of activities.. make you start to read, see if this is relevant to me

Simon Miles: record of activities.. make you start to read, see if this is relevant to me

11:35:48 <Stian> smiles: so both kind of communities are encouraged

Simon Miles: so both kind of communities are encouraged

11:35:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:36:32 <Stian> smiles: last release in January.. suggests that in 6 times for something that addresses different communities.. on the way changes with intermediate releases to keep up to date

Simon Miles: last release in January.. suggests that in 6 times for something that addresses different communities.. on the way changes with intermediate releases to keep up to date

11:36:39 <Stian> ivan: so primer is a Note?

Ivan Herman: so primer is a Note?

11:36:43 <Stian> Stian: yes, informative

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes, informative

11:37:10 <Stian> Luc: if we simplify DM.. then alignment iwth primer is important - it's the first entry point - we should pitch it like that

Luc Moreau: if we simplify DM.. then alignment iwth primer is important - it's the first entry point - we should pitch it like that

11:37:27 <Stian> Luc: so it must be align with our changes -b ut can be incomplete and say not cover collections

Luc Moreau: so it must be align with our changes -b ut can be incomplete and say not cover collections

11:37:45 <Stian> Luc: but if core thins change, then we must update primer

Luc Moreau: but if core thins change, then we must update primer

11:37:55 <Stian> smiles: so instead of primer folks lagging behind..

Simon Miles: so instead of primer folks lagging behind..

11:38:02 <Stian> smiles: treat it as a change request (?)

Simon Miles: treat it as a change request (?)

11:38:14 <Stian> Luc: align with milestones of DM and O

Luc Moreau: align with milestones of DM and O

11:38:20 <Stian> Luc: even if not 100% synced

Luc Moreau: even if not 100% synced

11:38:36 <Stian> smiles: if PROV-O is finished 1 week before deadline, we need to know what is updated or not

Simon Miles: if PROV-O is finished 1 week before deadline, we need to know what is updated or not

11:39:15 <Stian> Stian: so it's good with cross-taskforce mixing here, like myself is in PROV-O and Primer - Paolo is in DM and Primer

Stian Soiland-Reyes: so it's good with cross-taskforce mixing here, like myself is in PROV-O and Primer - Paolo is in DM and Primer

11:39:30 <tlebo> 35 minutes for lunch?

Timothy Lebo: 35 minutes for lunch?

11:39:34 <tlebo> thx

Timothy Lebo: thx

11:39:43 <Stian> MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 GMT  (~35 mins)

MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 CEST (~35 mins)

11:39:49 <Stian> s/GMT/CEST
11:39:53 <Stian> MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 CET  (~35 mins)

MEETING ADJOURNED UNTIL 13:15 CET (~35 mins)

11:41:02 <Zakim> -[VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[VrijeUni.a]

12:18:58 <Stian> TOPIC: Best practic document(s)

(No events recorded for 37 minutes)

4. Best practic document(s)

Summary: The current best practices document describes how to extend the ontology to an application specific domain. Kai agreed to lead the development of a best practice document for using Dublin Core and Prov together. Danial, Graham and Simon agreed to help. It was agreed, not to reach out to people outside the group until the specifications have stabalized more. Ivan suggested that the Semantic Web wiki can be used to maintain examples coming from the group and best practices after the lifetime of the working group.

<pgroth> Summary: The current best practices document describes how to extend the ontology to an application specific domain. Kai agreed to lead the development of a best practice document for using Dublin Core and Prov together. Danial, Graham and Simon agreed to help. It was agreed, not to reach out to people outside the group until the specifications have stabalized more. Ivan suggested that the Semantic Web wiki can be used to maintain examples coming from the group and best practices after the lifetime of the working group.
12:19:12 <pgroth> we will try to talk again

Paul Groth: we will try to talk again

12:19:22 <pgroth> try to phone in again

Paul Groth: try to phone in again

12:19:26 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

12:19:28 <Paolo> TOPIC best practice

Paolo Missier: TOPIC best practice

12:19:35 <Stian> Scribe: Paolo

(Scribe set to Paolo Missier)

12:19:40 <Paolo> Luc; what should be there?

Luc; what should be there?

12:19:54 <Paolo> should SPARQL queries be best practice?

should SPARQL queries be best practice?

12:20:02 <Paolo> Stian: started writing a section on serialization

Stian Soiland-Reyes: started writing a section on serialization

12:20:03 <Zakim> +tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo

12:21:02 <Paolo> Luc: but is this part of PROV-O instead?

Luc Moreau: but is this part of PROV-O instead?

12:21:12 <Paolo> dgarijo: all examples from PROV-O have been placed in the BP

Daniel Garijo: all examples from PROV-O have been placed in the BP

12:21:39 <dgarijo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html

Daniel Garijo: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html

12:21:57 <Paolo> Luc: should be connected to interoperability problem

Luc Moreau: should be connected to interoperability problem

12:22:27 <Paolo> Stian: BP is a good place for some limited hints at interop

Stian Soiland-Reyes: BP is a good place for some limited hints at interop

12:23:03 <Paolo> Paul: BP should clarify for example the kind of reasoning that one is expected to be able to understand

Paul Groth: BP should clarify for example the kind of reasoning that one is expected to be able to understand

12:24:07 <Paolo> Paul: interop is not a proper BP issue

Paul Groth: interop is not a proper BP issue

12:24:49 <Paolo> Paul:  examples of BP: working with DC, working with OpenID, working with Creative Commons

Paul Groth: examples of BP: working with DC, working with OpenID, working with Creative Commons

12:26:03 <Paolo> Kai: DC is directly related in describing the provenance of things

Kai Eckert: DC is directly related in describing the provenance of things

12:26:37 <Paolo> Paul: it's about clarifying the relationship b/w DC terms and PROV terms

Paul Groth: it's about clarifying the relationship b/w DC terms and PROV terms

12:27:57 <Paolo> Paul: create mappings to that translators can be automatically built

Paul Groth: create mappings to that translators can be automatically built

12:28:18 <Paolo> Kai: fine, and volunteers to take responsibility to work on these mappings

Kai Eckert: fine, and volunteers to take responsibility to work on these mappings

12:28:28 <Paolo> Daniel joins in!

Daniel joins in!

12:28:34 <Paolo> and Simon joins, too!!

and Simon joins, too!!

12:28:46 <Paolo> and Graham!!!

and Graham!!!

12:29:18 <Paolo> Kai: can we have some initial examples to bootstrap the process

Kai Eckert: can we have some initial examples to bootstrap the process

12:29:24 <pgroth> Action: kai to bootstrap dc best practice

ACTION: kai to bootstrap dc best practice

12:29:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-53 - Bootstrap dc best practice [on Kai Eckert - due 2012-02-09].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-53 - Bootstrap dc best practice [on Kai Eckert - due 2012-02-09].

12:29:28 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

12:29:52 <Paolo> Khalid, Daniel: example mappings to SKOS exist and can be used as examples

Khalid, Daniel: example mappings to SKOS exist and can be used as examples

12:30:08 <Paolo> Luc: what are the scope and objectives  of this activity?

Luc Moreau: what are the scope and objectives of this activity?

12:30:29 <Paolo> GK: start with illustrative mappings initially

Graham Klyne: start with illustrative mappings initially

12:30:41 <Paolo> smiles: simpler DC -> PROV

Simon Miles: simpler DC -> PROV

12:32:06 <Paolo> Ivan: practically, some of these mappings should belong in the PROV-O ontology

Ivan Herman: practically, some of these mappings should belong in the PROV-O ontology

12:32:45 <Paolo> (that is, if the mappings are simple and just involve subClassOf etc.)

(that is, if the mappings are simple and just involve subClassOf etc.)

12:33:41 <Paolo> Ivan: whenever these mappings are clear and OWL-expressible, they should be put in PROV-O

Ivan Herman: whenever these mappings are clear and OWL-expressible, they should be put in PROV-O

12:36:33 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni.a]

12:36:48 <pgroth> meeting room is back on zakim

Paul Groth: meeting room is back on zakim

12:37:23 <Paolo> Luc: need expectation management -- be realistic wrt timeline

Luc Moreau: need expectation management -- be realistic wrt timeline

12:38:04 <Paolo> Luc; having mappings is a nice proposition but it may be beyond what we can achieve realistically. Start small initially, then reassess

Luc; having mappings is a nice proposition but it may be beyond what we can achieve realistically. Start small initially, then reassess

12:38:40 <Paolo> Paul:  need someone to drive the creative commons effort

Paul Groth: need someone to drive the creative commons effort

12:38:57 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

12:39:23 <Stian> I've added a template section 2 for Kai et al in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I've added a template section 2 for Kai et al in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html

12:39:44 <Paolo> Kai: from the Connection TF POV, connections should be established with CC people. Awaiting the results of this meeting before we can engage them so we have a concrete baseline for collaboration

Kai Eckert: from the Connection TF POV, connections should be established with CC people. Awaiting the results of this meeting before we can engage them so we have a concrete baseline for collaboration

12:40:36 <Paolo> Paul: idea still valid but to be postponed until last WD, before last call

Paul Groth: idea still valid but to be postponed until last WD, before last call

12:40:44 <Paolo> Luc: to be revisited after WD5 is out

Luc Moreau: to be revisited after WD5 is out

12:42:01 <Paolo> Kai: only engage people when we know we have a real chance

Kai Eckert: only engage people when we know we have a real chance

12:42:18 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

12:42:29 <Luc2> Ack I

Luc Moreau: Ack I

12:42:52 <dgarijo> Paolo: what do you mean by retorical structures?

Paolo Missier: what do you mean by retorical structures? [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

12:43:11 <Paolo> Paul: engaging HCLS group on "rethorical structures"  (SWAN etc.). keen on identify provenance issues

Paul Groth: engaging HCLS group on "rethorical structures" (SWAN etc.). keen on identify provenance issues

12:43:40 <Paolo> Paul: wil talk to them before end of Feb., using the primer

Paul Groth: wil talk to them before end of Feb., using the primer

12:43:44 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

12:48:15 <Paolo> Khalid: is there a place in the doc suite when you can go deeper into some topics that have been determined to be not mature enough for PROV?

Khalid Belhajjame: is there a place in the doc suite when you can go deeper into some topics that have been determined to be not mature enough for PROV?

12:48:35 <Paolo> Luc: not precluded but no requirement in the charter to do that

Luc Moreau: not precluded but no requirement in the charter to do that

12:49:17 <Paolo> Luc: any need to have a collections-howto in the BP?

Luc Moreau: any need to have a collections-howto in the BP?

12:49:25 <Paolo> Stian, Paolo: yes

Stian, Paolo: yes

12:50:26 <Paolo> Stian, Paolo to contribute such examples

Stian, Paolo to contribute such examples

12:50:57 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

12:52:45 <Paolo> initially to go into the BP doc

initially to go into the BP doc

12:53:04 <Paolo> Luc: is BP a single doc?

Luc Moreau: is BP a single doc?

12:53:38 <Paolo> or should it be modular

or should it be modular

12:53:58 <Paolo> ivan: a note has no constraints on form

Ivan Herman: a note has no constraints on form

12:55:00 <Paolo> no formal publication, it can be a web page but careful as it has to be maintained past the end of the project

no formal publication, it can be a web page but careful as it has to be maintained past the end of the project

12:55:28 <Paolo> Ivan: the SW wiki can be used to maintain live examples over time

Ivan Herman: the SW wiki can be used to maintain live examples over time

12:56:10 <Paolo> Paul: good to have some "stamp" on the examples so that's a good technical solution

Paul Groth: good to have some "stamp" on the examples so that's a good technical solution

12:56:23 <Paolo> Ivan: so use the WG wiki to develop, then migrate to SW wiki

Ivan Herman: so use the WG wiki to develop, then migrate to SW wiki

12:59:19 <Paolo> Luc: the current "best practices" doc is currently an extension of prov-o, it should be made to stand on its own

Luc Moreau: the current "best practices" doc is currently an extension of prov-o, it should be made to stand on its own

13:00:00 <Stian> so we will dismantle http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html and use mainly wiki pages (sparql example, collections) and separate notes (Dublin Core, ontology extensions)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: so we will dismantle http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/bestpractices/BestPractices.html and use mainly wiki pages (sparql example, collections) and separate notes (Dublin Core, ontology extensions)

13:00:08 <tlebo> hello

Timothy Lebo: hello

13:00:39 <tlebo> I'm on Zakim

Timothy Lebo: I'm on Zakim

13:00:48 <Stian> Zakim: who is on?
13:00:51 <Stian> Zakim, who is on?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, who is on?

13:00:51 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, Stian.

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, Stian.

13:01:03 <Stian> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, who is on the phone?

13:01:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], tlebo, [VrijeUni.a]

13:01:27 <Paolo> Topic: PROV-DM

5. PROV-DM

Summary: Two topics were discussed in this session: accounts and identifiers. Accounts - The prime use of accounts was identified as being able to express the provenance of provenance. However, the current notion attempts to support more complex notions of multiple accounts, which adds complexity to the model. To address this complixty, the group agreed that accounts are going to be taken out and replace it with a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions. Identifiers - a key issue has been what identifiers denote in the data model. The group recognized that the key problem is that we were trying to address two use-cases. The term "scruffy" provenance was used to refer to using the prov-dm vocabulary with already exisiting web resources where the subject of a provenance assertion is just a URI. The term "proper" provenance was used to refer to the case where the thing should have a frozen characterisation. Both use cases were seen as being important. To address the use case of scruffy provenance instead the editors of prov-dm proposed to remove the distinction between entities and things in the document, which reflected these two use cases. There was consensus to move forward with the renaiming.

<pgroth> Summary: Two topics were discussed in this session: accounts and identifiers. Accounts - The prime use of accounts was identified as being able to express the provenance of provenance. However, the current notion attempts to support more complex notions of multiple accounts, which adds complexity to the model. To address this complixty, the group agreed that accounts are going to be taken out and replace it with a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions.  Identifiers - a key issue has been what identifiers denote in the data model. The group recognized that the key problem is that we were trying to address two use-cases. The term "scruffy" provenance was used to refer to using the prov-dm vocabulary with already exisiting web resources where the subject of a provenance assertion is just a URI. The term "proper" provenance was used to refer to the case where the thing should have a frozen characterisation. Both use cases were seen as being important. To address the use case of scruffy provenance instead the editors of prov-dm proposed to remove the distinction between entities and things in the document, which reflected these two use cases. There was consensus to move forward with the renaiming.
13:01:46 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

13:02:04 <Paolo> Paul chairs

Paul chairs

13:02:28 <Paolo> Paul issues on identifiers should be addressed in a pragmatic way

Paul issues on identifiers should be addressed in a pragmatic way

13:02:55 <Paolo> Paul: need to avoid corner cases

Paul Groth: need to avoid corner cases

13:03:07 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:04:00 <Paolo> Luc: issue: {entity, thing, attributes, identifiers}. not specific to PROV-DM, see Paul's blog example

Luc Moreau: issue: {entity, thing, attributes, identifiers}. not specific to PROV-DM, see Paul's blog example

13:04:20 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/

Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/

13:04:49 <Paolo> Luc: first issue to address here; account.

Luc Moreau: first issue to address here; account.

13:05:47 <Paolo> Luc: prime use for accounts is provenance of provenance

Luc Moreau: prime use for accounts is provenance of provenance

13:07:13 <Paolo> Luc: initially accounts were meant to express provenance of provenance (PoP). When written in prov-dm, the concept became broader

Luc Moreau: initially accounts were meant to express provenance of provenance (PoP). When written in prov-dm, the concept became broader

13:07:53 <Paolo> Luc: provenance of accounts not ready for std because of outstanding issues,

Luc Moreau: provenance of accounts not ready for std because of outstanding issues,

13:08:04 <Paolo> however PoP req. can be addressed

however PoP req. can be addressed

13:08:09 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:08:19 <Stian> do we need provenance of provenance accounts, or provenance of individual provenance records?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: do we need provenance of provenance accounts, or provenance of individual provenance records?

13:08:41 <GK1> My view: if the sole requirement is provenance of provenance, then I don't think account is needed.  I thought the requirement was to capture and compare differing accounts of the same process, and enable some level of reasoning over this different accounts.

Graham Klyne: My view: if the sole requirement is provenance of provenance, then I don't think account is needed. I thought the requirement was to capture and compare differing accounts of the same process, and enable some level of reasoning over this different accounts.

13:08:43 <Stian> the second one is the hard one - first is the easy (GK) one

Stian Soiland-Reyes: the second one is the hard one - first is the easy (GK) one

13:08:43 <Paolo> @Stian the latter

@Stian the latter

13:08:47 <khalidbelhajjame> +q (Is the ability of expressing provenance of provenance the only thing that motivated the notion of Account ?)

Khalid Belhajjame: +q (Is the ability of expressing provenance of provenance the only thing that motivated the notion of Account ?)

13:09:42 <Stian> I thought account was essential to different views and different granularities of what has happened

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I thought account was essential to different views and different granularities of what has happened

13:10:32 <tlebo> +1 @stian

Timothy Lebo: +1 @stian

13:10:44 <GK1> (Provenance of individual provenance records: this sounds a bit like the old discussion of RDF reification vs named graphs)

Graham Klyne: (Provenance of individual provenance records: this sounds a bit like the old discussion of RDF reification vs named graphs)

13:10:48 <Paolo> Luc: propose to discard account records and just assume there is a mechanism for naming a "bundle of assertions". The specification of such mechanism is out of scope for us

Luc Moreau: propose to discard account records and just assume there is a mechanism for naming a "bundle of assertions". The specification of such mechanism is out of scope for us

13:10:52 <Stian> and different entity characterisations

Stian Soiland-Reyes: and different entity characterisations

13:10:56 <GK1> @stian me too

Graham Klyne: @stian me too

13:11:01 <dgarijo> @Stian: +1

Daniel Garijo: @Stian: +1

13:11:33 <tlebo> naming "bundle of assertions" sounds reasonable (and seems to agree with the 4 +1s here)

Timothy Lebo: naming "bundle of assertions" sounds reasonable (and seems to agree with the 4 +1s here)

13:11:51 <Paolo> Luc: with this, we won't be able to express many things related to accounts, these will not be addressed

Luc Moreau: with this, we won't be able to express many things related to accounts, these will not be addressed

13:12:00 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

13:12:02 <Paolo> Luc: the very name "account" could be dropped

Luc Moreau: the very name "account" could be dropped

13:12:30 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:12:31 <kai> q+

Kai Eckert: q+

13:12:40 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

13:12:41 <Stian> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

13:12:42 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

13:12:43 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

13:13:26 <Paolo> smiles: supportive of proposal. But useful cases include granularity of provenance, should something be put in the best practice doc, or elsewhere?

Simon Miles: supportive of proposal. But useful cases include granularity of provenance, should something be put in the best practice doc, or elsewhere?

13:13:29 <GK1> q+ to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply

Graham Klyne: q+ to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply

13:14:22 <Stian> I think tlebo has done a rdf reification meta-provenance example

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I think tlebo has done a rdf reification meta-provenance example

13:14:29 <Stian> but that's quite RDF-specific of course

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but that's quite RDF-specific of course

13:14:40 <tlebo> (which example?)

Timothy Lebo: (which example?)

13:14:42 <Stian> no?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: no?

13:14:53 <Stian> you do so many cool things I thought you had ;)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: you do so many cool things I thought you had ;)

13:15:06 <kai> Actually I did that ;-)

Kai Eckert: Actually I did that ;-)

13:15:12 <tlebo> I haven't written an example in my life.

Timothy Lebo: I haven't written an example in my life.

13:15:31 <tlebo> @kai, link?

Timothy Lebo: @kai, link?

13:15:41 <tlebo> what do we want to do?

Timothy Lebo: what do we want to do?

13:15:44 <Paolo> Luc: "finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement.

Luc Moreau: "finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement.

13:16:12 <Paolo> Paul: there is prior art from OPM but not enough to standardize it.

Paul Groth: there is prior art from OPM but not enough to standardize it.

13:16:18 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:16:22 <pgroth> ack kai

Paul Groth: ack kai

13:16:27 <tlebo> what is "it" that we want to do?

Timothy Lebo: what is "it" that we want to do?

13:16:29 <Paolo> smiles:  just be careful we don't prevent this from being addressed/added later

Simon Miles: just be careful we don't prevent this from being addressed/added later

13:16:46 <GK1> ?? ""finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement."  is this a recursive requirement for accounts?

Graham Klyne: ?? ""finding the provenance of X in this account" is still a requirement." is this a recursive requirement for accounts?

13:16:54 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:17:24 <Paolo> Kai: agree we don't need accounts. in DC there is a "description set" that contains statements

Kai Eckert: agree we don't need accounts. in DC there is a "description set" that contains statements

13:17:33 <Stian> @tlebo is this not an example? http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/7f0d26e48556/ontology/examples/ontology-extensions/commerce/commerce.ttl disagrees

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @tlebo is this not an example? http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/7f0d26e48556/ontology/examples/ontology-extensions/commerce/commerce.ttl disagrees

13:17:39 <Stian> (not reification though)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (not reification though)

13:18:07 <Paolo> but there is still a need to name a bundle of records. it may or may not be an "account"

but there is still a need to name a bundle of records. it may or may not be an "account"

13:18:42 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

13:19:09 <Paolo> Kai: there is a risk of creating something that cannot be implemented using the current RDF

Kai Eckert: there is a risk of creating something that cannot be implemented using the current RDF

13:19:12 <Stian> can accounts/bundles/ex overlap? Kai mentions an account 'for provenance of X' - then it might overlap (but not completely) with 'provenance of Y'

Stian Soiland-Reyes: can accounts/bundles/ex overlap? Kai mentions an account 'for provenance of X' - then it might overlap (but not completely) with 'provenance of Y'

13:19:22 <GK1> @paolo sure.  This is actually what we (Wf4Ever) are doing for annotations in ROs.  It's just being able to distinguish resources.

Graham Klyne: @paolo sure. This is actually what we (Wf4Ever) are doing for annotations in ROs. It's just being able to distinguish resources.

13:19:50 <Paolo> Luc: not clear that we need named graphs

Luc Moreau: not clear that we need named graphs

13:20:03 <pgroth> ack Stian

Paul Groth: ack Stian

13:20:09 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

13:20:12 <Paolo> @GK: sorry that was the continuation of Kai's note... not my own!

@GK: sorry that was the continuation of Kai's note... not my own!

13:20:15 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

13:21:10 <kai> Using reification for metametadata: http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/index.php/pubs/article/view/973

Kai Eckert: Using reification for metametadata: http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/index.php/pubs/article/view/973

13:21:15 <Paolo> Khalid: is PoP really the only requirement? should it include "is this set of assertions consistent as a whole?"

Khalid Belhajjame: is PoP really the only requirement? should it include "is this set of assertions consistent as a whole?"

13:21:33 <tlebo> (I just missed the last few minutes)

Timothy Lebo: (I just missed the last few minutes)

13:21:42 <tlebo> no more NGs?

Timothy Lebo: no more NGs?

13:21:57 <Paolo> Luc: but that can still be done, having identified a bundle. does not require an account record in the model

Luc Moreau: but that can still be done, having identified a bundle. does not require an account record in the model

13:22:12 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:22:12 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say re proposal, I think we can be even simpler: provenance is a resource, and hence the same mechanisms for ascribing provenance apply

13:23:03 <Paolo> GK: if we only need PoP then there is no need for accounts. other req is granularity/different perspective. For time reasons, we can defer the latter

Graham Klyne: if we only need PoP then there is no need for accounts. other req is granularity/different perspective. For time reasons, we can defer the latter

13:23:21 <Paolo> GK: but if possible, it's a useful requirement to include

Graham Klyne: but if possible, it's a useful requirement to include

13:23:42 <tlebo> +1 "no need for accounts", as long as we keep "provenance" as a resource that is a "bundle of statements".

Timothy Lebo: +1 "no need for accounts", as long as we keep "provenance" as a resource that is a "bundle of statements".

13:25:07 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:25:32 <pgroth> ack ivan

Paul Groth: ack ivan

13:25:32 <Paolo> Kai: the resource that represents a bundle of provenance assertions, can that be assigned a class, and wouldn't it be an "account"?

Kai Eckert: the resource that represents a bundle of provenance assertions, can that be assigned a class, and wouldn't it be an "account"?

13:26:31 <GK1> q+ to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ...

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ...

13:26:33 <Paolo> Ivan: warning -- named graph discussion in the RDF group is still ongoing, but it's not advisable to build any dependency to it in PROV

Ivan Herman: warning -- named graph discussion in the RDF group is still ongoing, but it's not advisable to build any dependency to it in PROV

13:27:26 <tlebo> q+ to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL 1.1 spec.

Timothy Lebo: q+ to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL 1.1 spec.

13:28:34 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:28:34 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ...

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I don't think this is ACTUALLY DEPENDENT ON RDF GROUP " - named graphs" ...

13:29:08 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

13:29:17 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

13:29:49 <Paolo> Tim:  concurs that there is no such dependency

Timothy Lebo: concurs that there is no such dependency

13:29:51 <pgroth> ack tlebo

Paul Groth: ack tlebo

13:29:51 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL

Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say that we can use sd:NamedGraph (sd:name sd:graph) for what we need. We don't need RDF 1.1 wg b/c they need to reconcile with the same (now closing) SPARQL

13:29:54 <Zakim> ... 1.1 spec.

Zakim IRC Bot: ... 1.1 spec.

13:29:57 <GK1> (cf. ORE)

Graham Klyne: (cf. ORE)

13:30:47 <Paolo> smiles: agree that bundling does not require a provenance-specific concept

Simon Miles: agree that bundling does not require a provenance-specific concept

13:30:56 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:31:00 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

13:31:50 <Paolo> Paul: PoP is clearly required, it's important to give a signal that it has been addressed

Paul Groth: PoP is clearly required, it's important to give a signal that it has been addressed

13:32:06 <GK1> @pgroth +1 - yes, indeed, let ppl know it's possible without new mechanism

Graham Klyne: @pgroth +1 - yes, indeed, let ppl know it's possible without new mechanism

13:33:05 <Paolo> Paul: "a bundle of provenance" would be good enough

Paul Groth: "a bundle of provenance" would be good enough

13:33:22 <GK1> For "bundle of provenance" we could talk about "a provenance resource"?

Graham Klyne: For "bundle of provenance" we could talk about "a provenance resource"?

13:33:31 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:35:47 <GK1> q+ to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any

13:35:49 <tlebo> q+ to ask if "nesting" bundles stays

Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask if "nesting" bundles stays

13:35:56 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:36:20 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

13:36:32 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:36:32 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I don't really mind about assigning the name "account" - it seems as good as any

13:36:46 <tlebo> +1 keeping name "account"

Timothy Lebo: +1 keeping name "account"

13:36:51 <pgroth> ack tlebo

Paul Groth: ack tlebo

13:36:51 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to ask if "nesting" bundles stays

Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to ask if "nesting" bundles stays

13:36:53 <Paolo> GK: do we need to name these bundles?

Graham Klyne: do we need to name these bundles?

13:37:02 <pgroth> repeat

Paul Groth: repeat

13:37:25 <Paolo> Tim: does nesting of bundles stay?

Timothy Lebo: does nesting of bundles stay?

13:37:40 <GK1> q+ to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting.  Not prohibited, not defined.

Graham Klyne: q+ to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting. Not prohibited, not defined.

13:37:53 <tlebo> no

Timothy Lebo: no

13:37:55 <khalidbelhajjame> I think bundle is a better name than acocunt if we are only after expressing the provenance of a possibly random collection of provenance assertions

Khalid Belhajjame: I think bundle is a better name than acocunt if we are only after expressing the provenance of a possibly random collection of provenance assertions

13:37:57 <Paolo> Luc: no

Luc Moreau: no

13:37:59 <tlebo> happy it's gone :-)

Timothy Lebo: happy it's gone :-)

13:38:12 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:38:12 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting.  Not prohibited, not defined.

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say that, for now, we say nothing about nesting. Not prohibited, not defined.

13:38:23 <Paolo> GK: we are agnostic wrt nesting

Graham Klyne: we are agnostic wrt nesting

13:38:42 <tlebo> (btw, one could "nest" themselves using void:subset)

Timothy Lebo: (btw, one could "nest" themselves using void:subset)

13:39:49 <tlebo> (btw, one could achieve "nesting" in their own modeling by using void:subset)

Timothy Lebo: (btw, one could achieve "nesting" in their own modeling by using void:subset)

13:39:51 <Paolo> Luc: why do we name it?

Luc Moreau: why do we name it?

13:40:00 <Paolo> Kai: because people expect it

Kai Eckert: because people expect it

13:40:09 <GK1> I lean to the idea that naming it makes it easier to discuss.

Graham Klyne: I lean to the idea that naming it makes it easier to discuss.

13:40:42 <Paolo> Kai: just define a new class that is unrelated to the rest of provenance. ProvenanceStatementSet?

Kai Eckert: just define a new class that is unrelated to the rest of provenance. ProvenanceStatementSet?

13:41:10 <GK1> q+ to say naming and defining a class are different issues...

Graham Klyne: q+ to say naming and defining a class are different issues...

13:41:40 <tlebo> why not just all it Provenance ?

Timothy Lebo: why not just call it Provenance ?

13:41:46 <tlebo> s/all/call/
13:42:20 <Paolo> Stian: isn't this a topic for PROV-AQ?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: isn't this a topic for PROV-AQ?

13:43:33 <Paolo> Luc: the "hasProvenance" property is not in -O or -DM, currently only in -AQ

Luc Moreau: the "hasProvenance" property is not in -O or -DM, currently only in -AQ

13:43:45 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

13:43:45 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:43:47 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say naming and defining a class are different issues...

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say naming and defining a class are different issues...

13:43:57 <tlebo> - aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject and inverse of foaf:topic .

Timothy Lebo: - aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject and inverse of foaf:topic .

13:44:02 <Paolo> GK: name and class are different issues

Graham Klyne: name and class are different issues

13:44:21 <Stian> sounds like it is an 'outer' type for perhaps 'any' kind of provenance resource..   aq:hasProvenance [ a aq:Provenance ]    - a prov:Account (if we need it) can be a subclass of aq:Provenance

Stian Soiland-Reyes: sounds like it is an 'outer' type for perhaps 'any' kind of provenance resource.. aq:hasProvenance [ a aq:Provenance ] - a prov:Account (if we need it) can be a subclass of aq:Provenance

13:44:31 <Stian> which is PROV provenance or even PROV-O provenance

Stian Soiland-Reyes: which is PROV provenance or even PROV-O provenance

13:44:31 <Paolo> GK; in favour of former but against the latter

GK; in favour of former but against the latter

13:44:45 <tlebo> @stian, I like.

Timothy Lebo: @stian, I like.

13:44:57 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

13:44:59 <Paolo> GK: risk of over-specification

Graham Klyne: risk of over-specification

13:45:28 <tlebo> q+ to ask of aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject

Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask of aq:hasProvenance is subproperty of dcterms:subject

13:45:54 <dgarijo> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-provenance

Daniel Garijo: http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-provenance

13:46:08 <Stian> yaay

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yaay

13:46:12 <Stian> our work is futile!

Stian Soiland-Reyes: our work is futile!

13:46:20 <dgarijo> :D

Daniel Garijo: :D

13:46:23 <tlebo> (modulo the directionality...)

Timothy Lebo: (modulo the directionality...)

13:46:30 <Stian> oh look, theres dcterms:created and dcterms:created as well

Stian Soiland-Reyes: oh look, theres dcterms:created and dcterms:created as well

13:46:48 <pgroth> @tlebo is your question on this topic?

Paul Groth: @tlebo is your question on this topic?

13:47:07 <tlebo> @pgroth, I guess the topic drifted.

Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, I guess the topic drifted.

13:47:11 <GK1> http://purl.org/dc/terms/ProvenanceStatement

Graham Klyne: http://purl.org/dc/terms/ProvenanceStatement

13:47:11 <GK1> Label - Provenance Statement

Graham Klyne: Label - Provenance Statement

13:47:11 <GK1> Definition - A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of a resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation.

Graham Klyne: Definition - A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of a resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation.

13:47:12 <pgroth> ok

Paul Groth: ok

13:47:23 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

13:47:57 <Paolo> Luc: issue of introducing a class can be postponed

Luc Moreau: issue of introducing a class can be postponed

13:48:49 <Stian> an attempt to do meta-provenance with RDF reification: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig

Stian Soiland-Reyes: an attempt to do meta-provenance with RDF reification: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig

13:49:01 <Stian> notably I did not find a way to link an rdfg:Graph with an rdf:Statement - which sounds quite essential

Stian Soiland-Reyes: notably I did not find a way to link an rdfg:Graph with an rdf:Statement - which sounds quite essential

13:49:01 <pgroth> Guidance to editors: revisit the document dropping the notion of account records and make it consistent

Paul Groth: Guidance to editors: revisit the document dropping the notion of account records and make it consistent

13:49:12 <Stian> args

Stian Soiland-Reyes: args

13:49:19 <tlebo> @Stian rdf:Bag!

Timothy Lebo: @Stian rdf:Bag!

13:49:46 <GK1> q+ to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible.

Graham Klyne: q+ to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible.

13:49:52 <Paolo> Luc:  on "relationships across accounts"  -- entity e1 described in account1 wasGeneratedBy entity e2 in account 2

Luc Moreau: on "relationships across accounts" -- entity e1 described in account1 wasGeneratedBy entity e2 in account 2

13:50:25 <tlebo> if you want to relate two resources, assert a triple between them :-)

Timothy Lebo: if you want to relate two resources, assert a triple between them :-)

13:50:26 <Paolo> Luc: would still like to be able to say this but not enough prior art, so suggest to accept that it's out of sope

Luc Moreau: would still like to be able to say this but not enough prior art, so suggest to accept that it's out of scope

13:50:30 <Paolo> s/sope/scope
13:50:32 <pgroth> guidance to editors: not trying to express relations across accounts

Paul Groth: guidance to editors: not trying to express relations across accounts

13:50:53 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:51:08 <smiles_> I think it was ProvenanceStatement class from DC I was thinking of

Simon Miles: I think it was ProvenanceStatement class from DC I was thinking of

13:51:16 <tlebo> +1 cross-accounts is out of scope (I'll just handle it with RDF)

Timothy Lebo: +1 cross-accounts is out of scope (I'll just handle it with RDF)

13:51:27 <khalidbelhajjame> +q (So entities may exists without being associated within an account)

Khalid Belhajjame: +q (So entities may exists without being associated within an account)

13:51:46 <Stian> that's q+, khalidbelhajjame :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: that's q+, khalidbelhajjame :)

13:51:51 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

13:51:54 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:51:54 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible.

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to suugest: add to guidance for editors that the description of this idea should be as simple as possible.

13:51:55 <kai> @smiles: Yes, but that's just the range of dct:provenance, not something like the bundle that we had in mind.

Kai Eckert: @smiles: Yes, but that's just the range of dct:provenance, not something like the bundle that we had in mind.

13:53:02 <GK1> q+ to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again

13:53:21 <tlebo> [ dcterms:description "I have a blue shirt on. I hit Joe yesterday. He has a bruise today."; rdf:type prov:Provenance ] .

Timothy Lebo: [ dcterms:description "I have a blue shirt on. I hit Joe yesterday. He has a bruise today."; rdf:type prov:Provenance ] .

13:53:48 <ivan> ack GK1

Ivan Herman: ack GK1

13:54:04 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:54:04 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think we're confusing the language with the domain again

13:54:53 <Paolo> Luc: second issue

Luc Moreau: second issue

13:55:05 <smiles_> @kai OK, but Im not sure I see the difference, really. arent they just 'data describing the provenance'? Probably not an important matter, anyway, except maybe for the mapping to DC

Simon Miles: @kai OK, but Im not sure I see the difference, really. arent they just 'data describing the provenance'? Probably not an important matter, anyway, except maybe for the mapping to DC

13:55:46 <Paolo> Luc (sorry) about identifiers

Luc (sorry) about identifiers

13:56:29 <Stian> flip chart:   :post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul

Stian Soiland-Reyes: flip chart: :post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul

13:56:30 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:56:30 <tlebo> am I flipchartless?

Timothy Lebo: am I flipchartless?

13:56:35 <smiles_> post wasAttributedTo Paul

Simon Miles: post wasAttributedTo Paul

13:56:36 <kai> @smiles: probably just some text, if people are using it. But could become interesting if it could be used to point to PROV data. Will have a look at it in context of the mapping.

Kai Eckert: @smiles: probably just some text, if people are using it. But could become interesting if it could be used to point to PROV data. Will have a look at it in context of the mapping.

13:56:38 <Stian> I turtlized it

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I turtlized it

13:56:47 <Paolo> @Stian flipchart real time scribing!

@Stian flipchart real time scribing!

13:56:57 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/

Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2011/10/23/5-simple-provenance-statements/

13:57:21 <tlebo> @ivan dont' forget the @prefix defs.

Timothy Lebo: @ivan dont' forget the @prefix defs.

13:57:53 <dgarijo> @prefix ex: <http://www.example.org/> @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/>  ex:post prov:wasAttributedTo ex:Paul. ex:Paul a foaf:Person.

Daniel Garijo: @prefix ex: <http://www.example.org/> @prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> ex:post prov:wasAttributedTo ex:Paul. ex:Paul a foaf:Person.

13:58:08 <tlebo> Zakim, turn off these smiley faces.

Timothy Lebo: Zakim, turn off these smiley faces.

13:58:08 <Zakim> I don't understand 'turn off these smiley faces', tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'turn off these smiley faces', tlebo

13:58:11 <Paolo> Paul: central problem is: describing provenance is solvable if we are allowed to mint new IDs whenever we want

Paul Groth: central problem is: describing provenance is solvable if we are allowed to mint new IDs whenever we want

13:58:47 <Paolo> Paul: but we have an obligation to use existing IDs for existing resources

Paul Groth: but we have an obligation to use existing IDs for existing resources

13:58:50 <tlebo> but we have specializationOf!

Timothy Lebo: but we have specializationOf!

13:59:02 <Paolo> Paul which makes it complicated

Paul which makes it complicated

13:59:03 <GK1> Where's this requirement?

Graham Klyne: Where's this requirement?

13:59:03 <tlebo> and alternateOf

Timothy Lebo: and alternateOf

13:59:32 <Paolo> @Tim I suspect those are in the endangered list...

@Tim I suspect those are in the endangered list...

14:00:08 <Paolo> Luc: reusing a URI not enough anyways, because we want to identify specific perspectives on the resources

Luc Moreau: reusing a URI not enough anyways, because we want to identify specific perspectives on the resources

14:00:16 <smiles_> q+

Simon Miles: q+

14:00:23 <tlebo> +1 Luc

Timothy Lebo: +1 Luc

14:00:43 <Paolo> Luc: concept of {entity, thing, attributes} not well defined

Luc Moreau: concept of {entity, thing, attributes} not well defined

14:00:45 <tlebo> identifyied specific perspectives can be associated to their less specific things with speicalizationOf

Timothy Lebo: identifyied specific perspectives can be associated to their less specific things with speicalizationOf

14:01:30 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

14:01:32 <GK1> q+ to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK.  But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic resources angle.

Graham Klyne: q+ to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK. But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic resources angle.

14:01:40 <Paolo> smiles: should the example ":post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul" be augmented to highlight mutable resources, ie., the blog was later edited

Simon Miles: should the example ":post prov:wasAttributedTo :Paul" be augmented to highlight mutable resources, ie., the blog was later edited

14:02:02 <pgroth> ack smiles_

Paul Groth: ack smiles_

14:02:37 <Paolo> Ivan: time was spent yesterday in the RDF group on mutability of URI-identified resources

Ivan Herman: time was spent yesterday in the RDF group on mutability of URI-identified resources

14:02:50 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

14:02:55 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK.  But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say the notion of entity is not *completely* defined, but I think that's OK. But maybe we can duck the issue and approach it from a best parctices for dynamic

14:03:00 <Zakim> ... resources angle.

Zakim IRC Bot: ... resources angle.

14:03:31 <tlebo> a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov:specializationOf a third.

Timothy Lebo: a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov:specializationOf a third.

14:03:39 <tlebo> a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov: specializationOf a third.

Timothy Lebo: a "mutable URI" is actually THREE URIs. Two that are prov: specializationOf a third.

14:03:42 <Stian> :account1 can say something else about :post than :account2  - and :account2 might be the same provenance resource retrieved 2 days later

Stian Soiland-Reyes: :account1 can say something else about :post than :account2 - and :account2 might be the same provenance resource retrieved 2 days later

14:04:03 <Stian> the problems have then moved to identifying those accounts ..

Stian Soiland-Reyes: the problems have then moved to identifying those accounts ..

14:04:08 <Paolo> GK: we can duck the entity mutablity issue, by ways of best practices i.e., adding timestamps to provenance statements

Graham Klyne: we can duck the entity mutablity issue, by ways of best practices i.e., adding timestamps to provenance statements

14:04:20 <Paolo> Ivan: these issues are not provenance-specific

Ivan Herman: these issues are not provenance-specific

14:04:27 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

14:04:33 <Stian> memento URIs, tag URIs as well

Stian Soiland-Reyes: memento URIs, tag URIs as well

14:04:36 <Paolo> q?

q?

14:04:56 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

14:04:57 <GK1> Ivan: re dynamic resources and provenance "the group knows there are issues, but these are not provenance specific"

Ivan Herman: re dynamic resources and provenance "the group knows there are issues, but these are not provenance specific" [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

14:05:18 <Stian> luc can't identify the problem with identifying entities

Stian Soiland-Reyes: luc can't identify the problem with identifying entities

14:05:19 <Paolo> @tim not sure  prov:specializationOf is the right way to track mutability of resources

@tim not sure prov:specializationOf is the right way to track mutability of resources

14:05:43 <Stian> I think it's a straight forward way

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I think it's a straight forward way

14:05:57 <GK1> q?

Graham Klyne: q?

14:06:02 <GK1> q+

Graham Klyne: q+

14:06:55 <tlebo> @paolo, I think specializationOf is the only way to make sense of Entity.

Timothy Lebo: @paolo, I think specializationOf is the only way to make sense of Entity.

14:07:00 <Stian> In <account35>:   <account35#post> a prov:Entity, prov:Agent, foaf:Person;   prov:specializationOf <http://example.com/Paul.foaf>

Stian Soiland-Reyes: In <account35>: <account35#Paul> a prov:Entity, prov:Agent, foaf:Person; prov:specializationOf <http://example.com/Paul.foaf>

14:07:03 <Stian> tlebo: +1

Timothy Lebo: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:07:13 <Stian> s/#post/#Paul/
14:07:43 <Stian> we don't need timestamps etc - that is metaprovenance that can be expressed in the provenance of the entity <account35>

Stian Soiland-Reyes: we don't need timestamps etc - that is metaprovenance that can be expressed in the provenance of the entity <account35>

14:08:30 <GK1> q+ to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later how to deal with dynamic resources

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later how to deal with dynamic resources

14:08:39 <smiles_> q+

Simon Miles: q+

14:09:13 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

14:09:13 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think we've just wandered into the same old weeds here... can't we just duck the issue initially by focusing on static resources, then explain (much) later

14:09:17 <Zakim> ... how to deal with dynamic resources

Zakim IRC Bot: ... how to deal with dynamic resources

14:09:52 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

14:09:57 <Paolo> GK OPMV got around the problem by assuming resources are static

GK OPMV got around the problem by assuming resources are static

14:10:01 <tlebo> @pgroth, blog posters don't care which level of specializationOf that they are talking about - which is fine until someone starts assuming that the Entity that they were referring to is at an incorrect level of characterization.

Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, blog posters don't care which level of specializationOf that they are talking about - which is fine until someone starts assuming that the Entity that they were referring to is at an incorrect level of characterization.

14:10:57 <tlebo> we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.

Timothy Lebo: we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.

14:11:01 <kai> q+ to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice.

Kai Eckert: q+ to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice.

14:11:28 <Stian> tlebo: +1

Timothy Lebo: +1 [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:11:44 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/

Daniel Garijo: http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/

14:11:51 <Stian> kai: that's a logical conclusion from what we agreed in the morning!

Kai Eckert: that's a logical conclusion from what we agreed in the morning! [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:11:54 <tlebo> first rule of Cool URIs.... You don't talk about Cool URIs.

Timothy Lebo: first rule of Cool URIs.... You don't talk about Cool URIs.

14:12:50 <Stian> one that has changed: <http://megaupload.com/>

Stian Soiland-Reyes: one that has changed: <http://megaupload.com/>

14:13:28 <tlebo> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111215/> prov: specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> .

Timothy Lebo: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111215/> prov: specializationOf <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> .

14:13:51 <GK1> http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html

Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html

14:14:42 <Stian> and <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> prov:alternativeOf <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html>  (they have a common specialization which we haven't given a URI)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: and <http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/> prov:alternativeOf <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/model/ProvenanceModel.html> (they have a common specialization which we haven't given a URI)

14:15:16 <GK1> @stian but we *could* mint a URI

Graham Klyne: @stian but we *could* mint a URI

14:15:20 <Stian> Luc writing:

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Luc writing:

14:15:25 <Stian> entity(post)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: entity(post)

14:15:33 <tlebo> @stian, my transcription hero.

Timothy Lebo: @stian, my transcription hero.

14:16:12 <Stian> entity(post, [ author="..", title="...", ??="..", time="..."] )

Stian Soiland-Reyes: entity(post, [ author="..", title="...", ??="..", time="..."] )

14:17:01 <Stian> he's pointing at 'post' in the last line - and the whole line

Stian Soiland-Reyes: he's pointing at 'post' in the last line - and the whole line

14:17:43 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

14:18:03 <Paolo> Luc: conclusion is that we are actually identifying the resource, not the entity

Luc Moreau: conclusion is that we are actually identifying the resource, not the entity

14:18:07 <tlebo> luc wants owl:keys (compound keys) to identify two named things - which is very different from URI identifying

Timothy Lebo: luc wants owl:keys (compound keys) to identify two named things - which is very different from URI identifying

14:19:08 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

14:19:10 <Stian> tlebo to get on the queue

Stian Soiland-Reyes: tlebo to get on the queue

14:19:51 <Paolo> smiles: agree with Tim and GK -- no particular problems. in the example, Post is a resource

Simon Miles: agree with Tim and GK -- no particular problems. in the example, Post is a resource

14:20:36 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

14:20:37 <Paolo> smiles: resources have implicit characterization -- minimally it's just identified by a URI, and that alone makes it an entity

Simon Miles: resources have implicit characterization -- minimally it's just identified by a URI, and that alone makes it an entity

14:20:40 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

14:21:07 <Stian> smiles_: "...., a resource is an entity"

Simon Miles: "...., a resource is an entity" [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:21:09 <Stian> @smiles +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @smiles +1

14:21:47 <tlebo> we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.

Timothy Lebo: we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.

14:21:56 <Stian> <http://megaupload.org/> prov:wasAttributedTo <http://example.com/theGuyWhoWasArrested> .

Stian Soiland-Reyes: <http://megaupload.org/> prov:wasAttributedTo <http://example.com/theGuyWhoWasArrested> .

14:22:08 <Stian> but that's not true anymore - it's now attributed to the department of justice

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but that's not true anymore - it's now attributed to the department of justice

14:22:22 <Stian> however that's up to each account when/what they are talking about

Stian Soiland-Reyes: however that's up to each account when/what they are talking about

14:23:11 <Paolo> @Stian timestamp, just add timestamps to the entity assertion

@Stian timestamp, just add timestamps to the entity assertion

14:23:28 <tlebo> specializationOf, then I'll die happy.

Timothy Lebo: specializationOf, then I'll die happy.

14:23:31 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

14:23:48 <Paolo> @stian isn't that what you do when you reference a web site by URL in a paper?  "accessed on..."

@stian isn't that what you do when you reference a web site by URL in a paper? "accessed on..."

14:24:12 <Paolo> q+

q+

14:24:17 <Stian> Paolo: yes, just some metaprovenance.. it could contain as much or little as possible.. such as "The web page when downloaded on my Samsung Nexus phone using Firefox"

Paolo Missier: yes, just some metaprovenance.. it could contain as much or little as possible.. such as "The web page when downloaded on my Samsung Nexus phone using Firefox" [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:24:29 <Stian> on saturday 15:02 from Uzbekistan

Stian Soiland-Reyes: on saturday 15:02 from Uzbekistan

14:24:54 <tlebo> @paolo, I think the "accessed on" is a great example for how one is creating an Entity that is a specializationOf some more abstract Entity.

Timothy Lebo: @paolo, I think the "accessed on" is a great example for how one is creating an Entity that is a specializationOf some more abstract Entity.

14:25:00 <Stian> but then within that account you can't have two different entities with the same URI

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but then within that account you can't have two different entities with the same URI

14:25:15 <Paolo> @Stian now you're telling us too much... is Uzbekistan a friend country

@Stian now you're telling us too much... is Uzbekistan a friend country

14:25:15 <GK1> q?

Graham Klyne: q?

14:25:20 <Stian> tlebo: and probably something that should be core to the web-bit of PROV.. like wasAttributedTo

Timothy Lebo: and probably something that should be core to the web-bit of PROV.. like wasAttributedTo [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:25:36 <Stian> the PAV ontology have a few things like that

Stian Soiland-Reyes: the PAV ontology have a few things like that

14:26:02 <Paolo> Kai: to propose to drop "entity"

Kai Eckert: to propose to drop "entity"

14:26:37 <GK1> q+ to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource

Graham Klyne: q+ to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource

14:27:42 <tlebo> -1. Entity introduces the important notion of "frozen characteristics", which is not provided by the current semweb.

Timothy Lebo: -1. Entity introduces the important notion of "frozen characteristics", which is not provided by the current semweb.

14:28:04 <Stian> I've always thought of prov:Entity as an rdf:Resource which is rdf:subject of some rdf:Statements - not the group of statements/attributes

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I've always thought of prov:Entity as an rdf:Resource which is rdf:subject of some rdf:Statements - not the group of statements/attributes

14:28:13 <Stian> tlebo: mmm

Timothy Lebo: mmm [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:28:14 <Paolo> q?

q?

14:28:38 <tlebo> q- I can't keep up with the in-voice pace.

Timothy Lebo: q- I can't keep up with the in-voice pace.

14:29:32 <Luc> Q+

Luc Moreau: Q+

14:29:33 <tlebo> q+ we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.

Timothy Lebo: q+ we're drifting up and down levels of specificity. If we just acknowledge that IT IS THERE and let people describe them (with specializationOf), we're set.

14:29:38 <Luc> Q+

Luc Moreau: Q+

14:29:49 <pgroth> ack kai

Paul Groth: ack kai

14:29:49 <Zakim> kai, you wanted to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice.

Zakim IRC Bot: kai, you wanted to propse dropping entities *duck and hide* -> move it to best practice.

14:29:56 <Stian> tlebo: yes, as Ivan points out, it's a general RDF problem - but (I believe) we need it now

Timothy Lebo: yes, as Ivan points out, it's a general RDF problem - but (I believe) we need it now [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:30:16 <smiles> I might say: An entity is a resource or a specific characterisation of a resource

Simon Miles: I might say: An entity is a resource or a specific characterisation of a resource

14:30:41 <smiles> @tlebo +1

Simon Miles: @tlebo +1

14:31:00 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

14:31:02 <tlebo> @ivan, I think so.

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, I think so.

14:31:07 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

14:31:23 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

14:31:47 <Stian> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig should be able to cover that (as long as the link between the prov:Account and rdf:Statement is a bit more obvious)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig should be able to cover that (as long as the link between the prov:Account and rdf:Statement is a bit more obvious)

14:31:59 <Stian> to identify entity records

Stian Soiland-Reyes: to identify entity records

14:32:43 <Stian> (that one mints <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig#assertion1> and #assertion2 )

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (that one mints <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/tip/ontology/examples/metaprovenance.trig#assertion1> and #assertion2 )

14:34:49 <GK1> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

14:34:49 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to respond to Ivan - does this "characerized resource" (e.g. by time) have the same URI as tbe uncharactierized resource

14:35:02 <tlebo> : tweet_1 prov:wasAttributedTo :mad_Tim . :mad_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> . : facebook_post_2 prov:wasAttributedTo :happy_Tim . :happy_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> .

Timothy Lebo: : tweet_1 prov:wasAttributedTo :mad_Tim . :mad_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> . : facebook_post_2 prov:wasAttributedTo :happy_Tim . :happy_Tim prov:specializationOf <http://purl.org/twc/id/person/TimLebo> .

14:35:25 <Paolo> q+

q+

14:36:19 <dgarijo> If you use the same identifier in the bundle, then you can't say that a post was derived from a previous version, because it would have the same uRI

Daniel Garijo: If you use the same identifier in the bundle, then you can't say that a post was derived from a previous version, because it would have the same uRI

14:36:39 <Stian> exactly

Stian Soiland-Reyes: exactly

14:37:05 <Stian> if you want to use two different characterisation *in the same account*, then they  need two URIs and are two entities

Stian Soiland-Reyes: if you want to use two different characterisation *in the same account*, then they need two URIs and are two entities

14:37:27 <Stian> you can then relate these using specializationOf etc.. but if you don't do it, then you don't need to worry about it

Stian Soiland-Reyes: you can then relate these using specializationOf etc.. but if you don't do it, then you don't need to worry about it

14:37:40 <dgarijo> but on the other side, it is unrelaistic to pretend that people are going to create a new entity for each version of the blog.

Daniel Garijo: but on the other side, it is unrelaistic to pretend that people are going to create a new entity for each version of the blog.

14:37:56 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

14:38:05 <tlebo> @dgarijo, they don't need to. They're just asserting it at a higher level of specificity.

Timothy Lebo: @dgarijo, they don't need to. They're just asserting it at a higher level of specificity.

14:38:22 <Stian> @luc +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @luc +1

14:38:34 <Stian> @luc this is the exact why we need account/bundle/xx

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @luc this is the exact why we need account/bundle/xx

14:38:59 <Paolo> q+ to ask Tim to push his specializationOf proposal

q+ to ask Tim to push his specializationOf proposal

14:40:37 <Paolo> jcheney careful about what is the first thing readers see when they approach PROV

jcheney careful about what is the first thing readers see when they approach PROV

14:41:05 <Paolo> jcheney then, how do you help people generate "cool provenance"

jcheney then, how do you help people generate "cool provenance"

14:41:06 <GK1> "Cool provenance" doesn't (what?)

Graham Klyne: "Cool provenance" doesn't (what?)

14:42:16 <tlebo> I'm wondering if Entities are effectively closing the open world assumption.

Timothy Lebo: I'm wondering if Entities are effectively closing the open world assumption.

14:42:26 <Paolo> Ivan: most readers will be happy with the primer examples -- no time deps

Ivan Herman: most readers will be happy with the primer examples -- no time deps

14:42:30 <tlebo> If that's the case, it's easy to explain :-)

Timothy Lebo: If that's the case, it's easy to explain :-)

14:42:48 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

14:42:55 <Stian> tlebo: (!)

Timothy Lebo: (!) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:42:56 <Paolo> Ivan: then if time dependencies are a concern, then we say how they are dealt with in a principled way

Ivan Herman: then if time dependencies are a concern, then we say how they are dealt with in a principled way

14:42:58 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

14:43:11 <tlebo> @stian what?

Timothy Lebo: @stian what?

14:43:50 <Paolo> Khalid: it's a "how to get people to use the model correctly" concern

Khalid Belhajjame: it's a "how to get people to use the model correctly" concern

14:44:04 <Luc> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

14:45:28 <Paolo> smiles: essentially support the specializationOf idea when additional context is needed

Simon Miles: essentially support the specializationOf idea when additional context is needed

14:45:30 <smiles> ack smiles

Simon Miles: ack smiles

14:45:47 <tlebo> +1 Simon's "and don't say how the specializtionOf is characterized"

Timothy Lebo: +1 Simon's "and don't say how the specializtionOf is characterized"

14:45:55 <GK1> I think the question is: when necessary, do we contextualize the thing described or the description?  I'm deeply uneasy with the latter approach.

Graham Klyne: I think the question is: when necessary, do we contextualize the thing described or the description? I'm deeply uneasy with the latter approach.

14:46:22 <Stian> agreed

Stian Soiland-Reyes: agreed

14:47:20 <Stian> that is specializationOf

Stian Soiland-Reyes: that is specializationOf

14:47:35 <Stian> almost

Stian Soiland-Reyes: almost

14:47:36 <Stian> :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: :)

14:48:18 <Paolo> @GK it's the former (the resource)

@GK it's the former (the resource)

14:49:03 <Stian> [a prov:State ] prov:frozen [ a prov:Thing ]

Stian Soiland-Reyes: [a prov:State ] prov:frozen [ a prov:Thing ]

14:49:09 <Stian> question is if prov:State == prov:Thing here

Stian Soiland-Reyes: question is if prov:State == prov:Thing here

14:49:19 <Stian> the old turtles-all-the-way-question

Stian Soiland-Reyes: the old turtles-all-the-way-question

14:49:41 <tlebo> aha! Back to F2F1's EntityState :-)

Timothy Lebo: aha! Back to F2F1's EntityState :-)

14:49:44 <Stian> yaay

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yaay

14:49:58 <GK1> @paolo - that's what we do now, but i think Ivan was proposing the other.

Graham Klyne: @paolo - that's what we do now, but i think Ivan was proposing the other.

14:50:06 <Stian> I'm putting up my old EntityState fan posters

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I'm putting up my old EntityState fan posters

14:53:31 <tlebo> naive web users _are_ making characterizations, it's just that they're not naming them.

Timothy Lebo: naive web users _are_ making characterizations, it's just that they're not naming them.

14:54:57 <tlebo> so Entity is becoming a Graph?

Timothy Lebo: so Entity is becoming a Graph?

14:56:54 <Stian> GK: "every resource is a characterisation"

Graham Klyne: "every resource is a characterisation" [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:57:02 <pgroth> entity is a resource

Paul Groth: entity is a resource

14:57:25 <tlebo> so, two ways to "freeze" a characterization: 1) mint a new URI under the abstract (and add specializationOf)    2) plop the description of the abstract into a graph and name it.

Timothy Lebo: so, two ways to "freeze" a characterization: 1) mint a new URI under the abstract (and add specializationOf) 2) plop the description of the abstract into a graph and name it.

14:58:27 <Paolo> @Tim I get (1) but not (2) :-)

@Tim I get (1) but not (2) :-)

14:58:57 <tlebo> @paolo, (2) is more like an account

Timothy Lebo: @paolo, (2) is more like an account

14:59:59 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:00:37 <tlebo> characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" }             and characterization_2 {  : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman"   }      (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier)

Timothy Lebo: characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" } and characterization_2 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman" } (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier)

15:01:47 <Paolo> Batman?!? :-)

Batman?!? :-)

15:02:20 <tlebo> 1)      characterization_1 foaf:name "Paolo"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier> .      and characterization_2 foaf:name "Batman"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier>

Timothy Lebo: 1) characterization_1 foaf:name "Paolo"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier> . and characterization_2 foaf:name "Batman"; prov :specializationOf <http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier>

15:02:45 <Paolo> @Tim so characterization_1  specializationOf http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier etc.?

@Tim so characterization_1 specializationOf http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier etc.?

15:03:06 <tlebo> (within 1, or 2?)

Timothy Lebo: (within 1, or 2?)

15:03:07 <Stian> uuuh

Stian Soiland-Reyes: uuuh

15:03:11 <Paolo> yes ok we crossed over

yes ok we crossed over

15:03:45 <tlebo> repeat 2)   : characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" }             and    : characterization_2 {  : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman"   }      (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier)

Timothy Lebo: repeat 2) : characterization_1 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Paolo" } and : characterization_2 { : paolo-missier foaf:name "Batman" } (where :paolo-missier is http://data.semanticweb.org/person/paolo-missier)

15:04:34 <Stian> Luc is enclosing entity(post) on flipover

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Luc is enclosing entity(post) on flipover

15:04:37 <Paolo> (1) is the more natural one for me

(1) is the more natural one for me

15:05:20 <tlebo> (2) loses the "anchor" of : paolo-missier being the characterized (and more abstract) thing.

Timothy Lebo: (2) loses the "anchor" of : paolo-missier being the characterized (and more abstract) thing.

15:06:35 <tlebo> list use cases?

Timothy Lebo: list use cases?

15:07:01 <tlebo> use case 1 is the linked data scruffies?

Timothy Lebo: use case 1 is the linked data scruffies?

15:07:11 <tlebo> use case 2 is the "provenance field" ?

Timothy Lebo: use case 2 is the "provenance field" ?

15:07:17 <Stian> yes

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes

15:07:37 <Stian> where in #2 you say deliberately "I'm thinking about 'entity-frozen-version'-thingie "

Stian Soiland-Reyes: where in #2 you say deliberately "I'm thinking about 'entity-frozen-version'-thingie "

15:07:40 <jcheney> q?

James Cheney: q?

15:07:42 <jcheney> q+

James Cheney: q+

15:08:01 <Stian> a kind of prov:FrozenEntity

Stian Soiland-Reyes: a kind of prov:FrozenEntity

15:08:06 <tlebo> and use cases 1 and 2 are NOT intended to mesh well correctly, right? (please!?)

Timothy Lebo: and use cases 1 and 2 are NOT intended to mesh well correctly, right? (please!?)

15:08:32 <Stian> tlebo: must be so - #1 is scruffy, and so can't mesh well

Timothy Lebo: must be so - #1 is scruffy, and so can't mesh well [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:08:37 <Stian> #1 does not mesh with #1' either

Stian Soiland-Reyes: #1 does not mesh with #1' either

15:08:41 <Zakim> +??P39

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P39

15:08:43 <tlebo> those scruffies!

Timothy Lebo: those scruffies!

15:09:03 <Stian> but.. are we then not inventing contextualised bnodes which happen to have URIs?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but.. are we then not inventing contextualised bnodes which happen to have URIs?

15:09:12 <Stian> which look very official but are not to be interpreted as such

Stian Soiland-Reyes: which look very official but are not to be interpreted as such

15:09:14 <Paolo> q-

q-

15:09:16 <pgroth> ack jcheney

Paul Groth: ack jcheney

15:10:08 <tlebo> I like where this is going, it pulls the "proper provenance folks" back into their field, leaving the common denominator to be the intersection of them and linked data.

Timothy Lebo: I like where this is going, it pulls the "proper provenance folks" back into their field, leaving the common denominator to be the intersection of them and linked data.

15:10:15 <dgarijo> then would we go back to the entity/entity state?

Daniel Garijo: then would we go back to the entity/entity state?

15:10:25 <Stian> no it's still an entity, just a more clearly defined one

Stian Soiland-Reyes: no it's still an entity, just a more clearly defined one

15:10:30 <GK1> Hmmm.... could be anm academic paper here, maybe:  a theory of "lifting rules" for provenance (cf. Guha thesis).

Graham Klyne: Hmmm.... could be anm academic paper here, maybe: a theory of "lifting rules" for provenance (cf. Guha thesis).

15:10:37 <tlebo> "proper provenance" would be an extension

Timothy Lebo: "proper provenance" would be an extension

15:10:58 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:11:06 <Stian> graceful provenance degradation

Stian Soiland-Reyes: graceful provenance degradation

15:11:42 <GK1> I think that if we follow Paul's proposal, entities go away (for now)

Graham Klyne: I think that if we follow Paul's proposal, entities go away (for now)

15:11:49 <Stian> mm

Stian Soiland-Reyes: mm

15:12:03 <Stian> instead of entities we just have owl:Thing  (any resource)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: instead of entities we just have owl:Thing (any resource)

15:12:07 <tlebo> Entity should be in the "proper provenance" extension of the prov rec. It should be subclass of rdfs:Resource .

Timothy Lebo: Entity should be in the "proper provenance" extension of the prov rec. It should be subclass of rdfs:Resource .

15:12:23 <Stian> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

15:12:34 <tlebo> we're making interoperability happen!

Timothy Lebo: we're making interoperability happen!

15:13:45 <Paolo> @tim can you clarify "proper provenance" in a sentence -- I'm still getting there...

@tim can you clarify "proper provenance" in a sentence -- I'm still getting there...

15:14:36 <GK1> @paolo suggest "proper provenance" is validly mergable provenance. (First cut)

Graham Klyne: @paolo suggest "proper provenance" is validly mergable provenance. (First cut)

15:15:56 <Paolo> @GK validly what?! :-)

@GK validly what?! :-)

15:15:58 <tlebo> "proper provenance" is the model that "provenance researchers" use to clearly distinguish the aspects that they find important (Luc in Boston and Luc Luc), while the rest of the world, aka "scruffies" would use (what remains in) the model to say some unclear things that they still find useful.

Timothy Lebo: "proper provenance" is the model that "provenance researchers" use to clearly distinguish the aspects that they find important (Luc in Boston and Luc Luc), while the rest of the world, aka "scruffies" would use (what remains in) the model to say some unclear things that they still find useful.

15:16:05 <GK1> q+ to run withj Paul's position

Graham Klyne: q+ to run withj Paul's position

15:16:25 <smiles> ack smiles

Simon Miles: ack smiles

15:16:42 <GK1> @paolo: logically valid

Graham Klyne: @paolo: logically valid

15:17:14 <Paolo> 2Tim ok got it. But Paul just zapped specializationOf which seems the right way to relate a "state" resource to its "original" resource

2Tim ok got it. But Paul just zapped specializationOf which seems the right way to relate a "state" resource to its "original" resource

15:17:24 <Zakim> -[VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[VrijeUni.a]

15:17:38 <Zakim> -??P39

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P39

15:17:40 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

15:17:41 <smiles> q?

Simon Miles: q?

15:17:54 <tlebo> @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model.

Timothy Lebo: @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model.

15:18:28 <tlebo> *what remains in Paul's new Radically Reduced Model

Timothy Lebo: *what remains in Paul's new Radically Reduced Model

15:19:13 <Zakim> +??P11

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11

15:19:49 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

15:20:25 <tlebo> it's a problem in general for any information system.

Timothy Lebo: it's a problem in general for any information system.

15:20:43 <Paolo> got kicked out

got kicked out

15:20:45 <Zakim> -??P11

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P11

15:21:07 <tlebo> RT @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model.

Timothy Lebo: RT @paolo, right, but specializationOf would be included in the "proper provenance" extension to what remains in the model.

15:21:28 <Zakim> +??P11

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11

15:22:31 <Zakim> +[VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[VrijeUni.a]

15:23:33 <pgroth> ?

Paul Groth: ?

15:23:35 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:23:38 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

15:23:38 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to run withj Paul's position

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to run withj Paul's position

15:23:58 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

15:24:13 <jcheney> q?

James Cheney: q?

15:24:39 <jcheney> q+

James Cheney: q+

15:24:47 <Paolo> smiles: a consequence of Paul's proposal is that attributes disappear

Simon Miles: a consequence of Paul's proposal is that attributes disappear

15:25:13 <dgarijo> +q

Daniel Garijo: +q

15:25:21 <Stian> q+ would attributes be any different from normal RDF properties in an RDF resource?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ would attributes be any different from normal RDF properties in an RDF resource?

15:25:31 <Stian> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

15:25:32 <Paolo> Paolo is confused about this

Paolo is confused about this

15:25:35 <Paolo> q+

q+

15:25:48 <pgroth> ack jcheney

Paul Groth: ack jcheney

15:26:30 <Paolo> James, Ivan: lots to remove from the doc, then reconstruct

James, Ivan: lots to remove from the doc, then reconstruct

15:26:50 <Paolo> Luc: but with no prior art, we are starting from scratch at a late stage in the process

Luc Moreau: but with no prior art, we are starting from scratch at a late stage in the process

15:27:37 <tlebo> what prior art is missing?

Timothy Lebo: what prior art is missing?

15:27:42 <Paolo> Paul: most of the model stays, we just need to define a new domain for most of the relations. domains are "looser"

Paul Groth: most of the model stays, we just need to define a new domain for most of the relations. domains are "looser"

15:28:04 <Paolo> Paul: need to be careful about the ramifications.

Paul Groth: need to be careful about the ramifications.

15:28:16 <Paolo> jcheney what we have now is largely consistent

jcheney what we have now is largely consistent

15:28:41 <pgroth> ack dgarijo

Paul Groth: ack dgarijo

15:28:49 <Paolo> jcheney strip material first, then see what we can do with what is left

jcheney strip material first, then see what we can do with what is left

15:29:00 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo

15:29:05 <Paolo> dgarijo: what happens to versions?

Daniel Garijo: what happens to versions?

15:29:36 <tlebo> Version isn't core, it can be phrased within core terms.

Timothy Lebo: Version isn't core, it can be phrased within core terms.

15:29:53 <GK> I thought we were exploring a possibility rather than trying to frame a proposal

Graham Klyne: I thought we were exploring a possibility rather than trying to frame a proposal

15:30:22 <Paolo> Luc: propose to remove distinction b/w entities and things, this is enough to address the scruffy provenance (SP)

Luc Moreau: propose to remove distinction b/w entities and things, this is enough to address the scruffy provenance (SP)

15:30:45 <Paolo> then address what more is required to formulate Proper Provenance (PP)

then address what more is required to formulate Proper Provenance (PP)

15:31:07 <kai> +1

Kai Eckert: +1

15:31:18 <tlebo> ProP

Timothy Lebo: ProP

15:31:26 <dgarijo> :D

Daniel Garijo: :D

15:31:38 <dgarijo> ProP-O

Daniel Garijo: ProP-O

15:31:43 <Paolo> and ScruP?

and ScruP?

15:32:57 <tlebo> Characterized things are things....

Timothy Lebo: Characterized things are things....

15:33:05 <GK> I think a formal semantics of "scruffy provenance" would be somewhat different from the current semantics, and either trivial or rather interesting.

Graham Klyne: I think a formal semantics of "scruffy provenance" would be somewhat different from the current semantics, and either trivial or rather interesting.

15:33:09 <tlebo> (so are turtles)

Timothy Lebo: (so are turtles)

15:34:09 <Stian> yes!

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes!

15:35:31 <tlebo> specializationOf and alternateOf leave RRM and go into ProP.

Timothy Lebo: specializationOf and alternateOf leave RRM and go into ProP.

15:36:45 <GK> q+ I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)

Graham Klyne: q+ I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)

15:36:50 <tlebo> - owl:sameAs does NOT serve save purpose as alternativeOf or specializationOf...

Timothy Lebo: - owl:sameAs does NOT serve same purpose as alternativeOf or specializationOf...

15:36:56 <tlebo> s/save/same/
15:37:03 <GK> q+ to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)

15:37:43 <Stian> tlebo: no, but the need for alternativeOf/specializationOf changes slightly if we reconstruct what kind of links we really need on ye Frozen thingies

Timothy Lebo: no, but the need for alternativeOf/specializationOf changes slightly if we reconstruct what kind of links we really need on ye Frozen thingies [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:37:46 <pgroth> ack Stian

Paul Groth: ack Stian

15:37:50 <Stian> q-

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q-

15:38:31 <tlebo> what is being said?

Timothy Lebo: what is being said?

15:38:50 <pgroth> @tlebo can you hear now?

Paul Groth: @tlebo can you hear now?

15:38:53 <tlebo> no

Timothy Lebo: no

15:38:56 <tlebo> just voices

Timothy Lebo: just voices

15:39:44 <tlebo> q+

Timothy Lebo: q+

15:40:00 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

15:40:10 <tlebo> q+ to ask for a recap of that last bit of discussion

Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask for a recap of that last bit of discussion

15:40:48 <Paolo> there are a few things I don't understand.

there are a few things I don't understand.

15:40:50 <Stian> Stian: I said had an old comment.. something like: I believe attributes on a prov:Entity is just like properties on an RDF resource within an RDF Graph, that is it is somehow valid within the scope of the graph. (ie. the prov:Account if you like). It is the general problem Ivan has talked about what that scope is.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I said had an old comment.. something like: I believe attributes on a prov:Entity is just like properties on an RDF resource within an RDF Graph, that is it is somehow valid within the scope of the graph. (ie. the prov:Account if you like). It is the general problem Ivan has talked about what that scope is. [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:41:04 <Paolo> 1) what exactly happens to specializationOf

1) what exactly happens to specializationOf

15:41:10 <Paolo> 2) what happens to attributes

2) what happens to attributes

15:41:12 <satya> Can't hear properly

Satya Sahoo: Can't hear properly

15:41:28 <tlebo> satya, hop onto a skyper

Timothy Lebo: satya, hop onto a skyper

15:41:36 <satya> ah ok

Satya Sahoo: ah ok

15:41:54 <dgarijo> I can call you on skype satya

Daniel Garijo: I can call you on skype satya

15:42:03 <satya> thanks Daniel!

Satya Sahoo: thanks Daniel!

15:42:30 <Stian> now everyone is mumbling

Stian Soiland-Reyes: now everyone is mumbling

15:42:38 <Stian> I can't hear anything either :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I can't hear anything either :)

15:42:41 <Stian> q?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q?

15:42:54 <tlebo> @stian, you're not there?

Timothy Lebo: @stian, you're not there?

15:43:09 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo

15:43:17 <Stian> Stian: propose to put a line, finish the queue, and then break

Stian Soiland-Reyes: propose to put a line, finish the queue, and then break [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:43:21 <Stian> NOTHING OUTSIDE QUEUE

Stian Soiland-Reyes: NOTHING OUTSIDE QUEUE

15:43:37 <Stian> Luc: Just 45 minutes left

Luc Moreau: Just 45 minutes left [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:43:55 <Stian> Luc: propose take 5 minutes brea, then include people on the phone in PROV-O talk

Luc Moreau: propose take 5 minutes brea, then include people on the phone in PROV-O talk [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:44:00 <tlebo> I guess I lost my window for a recap on the end of that discussion.

Timothy Lebo: I guess I lost my window for a recap on the end of that discussion.

15:44:11 <dgarijo> Tim and Satya are on Skype

Daniel Garijo: Tim and Satya are on Skype

15:44:19 <dgarijo> they can hear now well :)

Daniel Garijo: they can hear now well :)

15:44:31 <pgroth> who can not hear?

Paul Groth: who can not hear?

15:44:36 <satya> thanks again Daniel!

Satya Sahoo: thanks again Daniel!

15:44:42 <dgarijo> no prob

Daniel Garijo: no prob

15:45:15 <Stian> are we following the queue?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: are we following the queue?

15:45:59 <GK> My version of what happened in the last hour or so.  We considered a radical alternative approach to address a "scruffy" use case for provenance, and did not come to a clear conclusion of which way to jump.

Graham Klyne: My version of what happened in the last hour or so. We considered a radical alternative approach to address a "scruffy" use case for provenance, and did not come to a clear conclusion of which way to jump.

15:45:59 <dgarijo> summary - replace entity with thing in the document. Accounts are going to be taken out and now there is a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions.

Daniel Garijo: summary - replace entity with thing in the document. Accounts are going to be taken out and now there is a "bundle" for a set of provenance assertions.

15:46:02 <tlebo> so, Core, RRM, and ProP ?

Timothy Lebo: so, Core, RRM, and ProP ?

15:46:27 <tlebo> ivan: clearly separate sections in prov-dm for these three

Ivan Herman: clearly separate sections in prov-dm for these three [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ]

15:46:46 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

15:46:51 <dgarijo> 5 min break

Daniel Garijo: 5 min break

15:46:52 <Stian> ----- 5 minute break - then talk about PROV-O

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ----- 5 minute break - then talk about PROV-O

15:47:04 <GK> I think care is needed: if we address the scruffy use case as proposed, I think there are knock-on effects for the more formal uses.

Graham Klyne: I think care is needed: if we address the scruffy use case as proposed, I think there are knock-on effects for the more formal uses.

15:47:08 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

15:47:08 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I think there's more here than "just explaining it" (scruffy vs proper)

15:47:20 <Paolo> ack

ack

15:47:23 <Paolo> q?

q?

15:47:26 <Paolo> q-

q-

15:54:18 <tlebo> who is not physically at the meeting?

(No events recorded for 6 minutes)

Timothy Lebo: who is not physically at the meeting?

15:55:40 <dgarijo> satya, tim, yolanda, mcted, stephen, sandro, mike,

Daniel Garijo: satya, tim, yolanda, mcted, stephen, sandro, mike,

15:57:34 <tlebo> macted, are you tall ted from RDF 1.1 F2F2?

Timothy Lebo: macted, are you tall ted from RDF 1.1 F2F2?

15:58:18 <MacTed> tlebo - yes, that's me

Ted Thibodeau: tlebo - yes, that's me

15:59:26 <Paolo> TOPIC PROV-O

TOPIC PROV-O

15:59:27 <Stian> tlebo: oooh.. that's an entity!

Timothy Lebo: oooh.. that's an entity! [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

15:59:29 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

15:59:51 <smiles> q?

Simon Miles: q?

16:00:02 <tlebo> @paolo, scribed out? Is that like Paul's "interoperability-y" from earlier?

Timothy Lebo: @paolo, scribed out? Is that like Paul's "interoperability-y" from earlier?

16:00:07 <Stian> Satya and Tim - can you hear us?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Satya and Tim - can you hear us?

16:00:10 <tlebo> yes

Timothy Lebo: yes

16:00:17 <dgarijo> satya?

Daniel Garijo: satya?

16:00:19 <satya> yes - some mumbling

Satya Sahoo: yes - some mumbling

16:00:31 <Stian> Tim - can you talk?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Tim - can you talk?

16:01:18 <Paolo> Tim: it's been very difficult to make progress on it

Timothy Lebo: it's been very difficult to make progress on it

16:01:25 <GK> TOPIC: PROV-O

6. PROV-O

Summary: Concerns were raised about the ability to synchronize prov-o with prov-dm. In particular, about how to know what is changed and what is not in the prov-dm. A process was agreed on to facilate synchronization. An ontology that reflects the current WD-3 version would be produced for review. Because of the possibility of the change in accounts, the updated ontology does not need to reflect accounts. Again, it was encouraged that the ontology follow owl-rl.

<pgroth> Summary: Concerns were raised about the ability to synchronize prov-o with prov-dm. In particular, about how to know what is changed and what is not in the prov-dm. A process was agreed on to facilate synchronization. An ontology that reflects the current WD-3 version would be produced for review. Because of the possibility of the change in accounts, the updated ontology does not need to reflect accounts. Again, it was encouraged that the ontology follow owl-rl.
16:01:37 <Paolo> Tim:  with RDF encoding being a second class citizen

Timothy Lebo: with RDF encoding being a second class citizen

16:01:45 <smiles> q?

Simon Miles: q?

16:01:46 <Paolo> TL not good RDF-based examples

TL not good RDF-based examples

16:01:57 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[OpenLink]

16:02:12 <GK> TL: Problem to make progress with PROV-O - lacking sufficient raw content to make progress.

Timothy Lebo: Problem to make progress with PROV-O - lacking sufficient raw content to make progress. [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

16:02:12 <MacTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me

16:02:15 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

16:02:25 <Paolo> Tim: prov-DM not useful to approach the ontology, and so unable to make progress for past few weeks

Timothy Lebo: prov-DM not useful to approach the ontology, and so unable to make progress for past few weeks

16:03:16 <pgroth> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Paul Groth: Zakim, who is on the phone?

16:03:27 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +MacTed; got it

16:03:31 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed should now be muted

16:03:33 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

16:04:20 <Stian> Luc: Two aspects: a) writing ontology  b) writing the document

Luc Moreau: Two aspects: a) writing ontology b) writing the document [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

16:04:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see [VrijeUni], ??P11, [VrijeUni.a], MacTed (muted)

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see [VrijeUni], ??P11, [VrijeUni.a], MacTed (muted)

16:04:27 <Paolo> Luc: there are two aspects: writing ontologies and docs

Luc Moreau: there are two aspects: writing ontologies and docs

16:04:43 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

16:04:59 <Paolo> Tim: both cannot be done but not against the current DM as it's a moving target.

Timothy Lebo: both cannot be done but not against the current DM as it's a moving target.

16:05:45 <Paolo> q+

q+

16:05:47 <Paolo> q?

q?

16:06:27 <satya> @Paolo: Zakim is lagging in keeping up with speaker queue?

Satya Sahoo: @Paolo: Zakim is lagging in keeping up with speaker queue?

16:06:28 <Paolo> q+ to ask Tim what it would take for DM to be able to resume progress

q+ to ask Tim what it would take for DM to be able to resume progress

16:06:53 <Paolo> Satya: ontology cannot be built piecemeal

Satya Sahoo: ontology cannot be built piecemeal

16:07:15 <Paolo> Satya: it can only be modelled when DM is in mature state

Satya Sahoo: it can only be modelled when DM is in mature state

16:07:33 <Paolo> Satya: uncomfortable with the piecemeal approach

Satya Sahoo: uncomfortable with the piecemeal approach

16:07:55 <GK1> (I have a lot of sympathy with Tim et al -- it's hard to track DM -- especially after today's discussion)

Graham Klyne: (I have a lot of sympathy with Tim et al -- it's hard to track DM -- especially after today's discussion)

16:08:02 <Stian> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

16:09:01 <Paolo> Satya: as a consequence, current ontology is not a coherent whole

Satya Sahoo: as a consequence, current ontology is not a coherent whole

16:09:25 <tlebo> q+

Timothy Lebo: q+

16:09:53 <tlebo> q?

Timothy Lebo: q?

16:10:17 <satya> q-

Satya Sahoo: q-

16:10:22 <Paolo> q-

q-

16:10:26 <Paolo> q?

q?

16:10:49 <Stian> Luc: we should talk about process instead of technical issues here now  - if something in DM does not work, then that should be expressed [in the WG] and raised as issues

Luc Moreau: we should talk about process instead of technical issues here now - if something in DM does not work, then that should be expressed [in the WG] and raised as issues [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

16:10:58 <Paolo> Luc: need suggestions on how to proceed

Luc Moreau: need suggestions on how to proceed

16:11:19 <jcheney> q+ to point to ProvRDF mapping draft

James Cheney: q+ to point to ProvRDF mapping draft

16:11:30 <Stian> +1 the same, I have to re-read PROV-DM everytime I look at it

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 the same, I have to re-read PROV-DM everytime I look at it

16:11:33 <Paolo> Tim: every change to prov-o requires a fresh re-read of DM

Timothy Lebo: every change to prov-o requires a fresh re-read of DM

16:12:58 <Paolo> Tim: also, previous versions of prov-o are needed to rework each example for a new version

Timothy Lebo: also, previous versions of prov-o are needed to rework each example for a new version

16:13:56 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

16:14:35 <Paolo> GK: how long before you can complete ontology and doc once DM has been stabilized

Graham Klyne: how long before you can complete ontology and doc once DM has been stabilized

16:15:11 <Paolo> GK: propose to pause the -O work until DM is stable

Graham Klyne: propose to pause the -O work until DM is stable

16:16:17 <Paolo> q+

q+

16:16:25 <pgroth> ack tlebo

Paul Groth: ack tlebo

16:16:32 <tlebo> @GK, yes, I like your suggestion. after DM is "frozen", we could nail it in a couple of weeks. But what we _produce_ needs to be reviewed by the group AND considered for each subsequent change to DM.

Timothy Lebo: @GK, yes, I like your suggestion. after DM is "frozen", we could nail it in a couple of weeks. But what we _produce_ needs to be reviewed by the group AND considered for each subsequent change to DM.

16:16:32 <pgroth> ack satya

Paul Groth: ack satya

16:16:47 <Stian> tlebo: exactly - need to close the loop

Timothy Lebo: exactly - need to close the loop [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

16:16:57 <Stian> for instance we made QualifiedInvolvement - that has not influenced DM

Stian Soiland-Reyes: for instance we made QualifiedInvolvement - that has not influenced DM

16:17:06 <Paolo> Satya: the whole of the ontology is impacted whenever changes are made to -DM

Satya Sahoo: the whole of the ontology is impacted whenever changes are made to -DM

16:17:26 <tlebo> for each proposed change to DM, it's affect on PROV-O should be a first class citizen (not "prov-o" will figure it out)

Timothy Lebo: for each proposed change to DM, it's affect on PROV-O should be a first class citizen (not "prov-o" will figure it out)

16:17:33 <pgroth> but I thought QualifiedInvolvement was to support the relastions in DM

Paul Groth: but I thought QualifiedInvolvement was to support the relastions in DM

16:17:37 <Paolo> Satya: are we introducing contradictory concepts in the DM

Satya Sahoo: are we introducing contradictory concepts in the DM

16:17:48 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

16:17:54 <dgarijo> @Tim: I think that the core of the model has been "frozen" for some time: use, generation, association, activities and entities.

Daniel Garijo: @Tim: I think that the core of the model has been "frozen" for some time: use, generation, association, activities and entities.

16:18:02 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:18:39 <Paolo> Luc: some of the core concepts have been stable in DM for a long time

Luc Moreau: some of the core concepts have been stable in DM for a long time

16:19:20 <tlebo> there is a difference between "stable" and "stagnant"

Timothy Lebo: there is a difference between "stable" and "stagnant"

16:19:31 <tlebo> we've been stagnant, unfortunately.

Timothy Lebo: we've been stagnant, unfortunately.

16:20:00 <Paolo> Satya: difference between entities and entity records has an impact in -O

Satya Sahoo: difference between entities and entity records has an impact in -O

16:20:15 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:20:21 <pgroth> ack jcheney

Paul Groth: ack jcheney

16:20:21 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to point to ProvRDF mapping draft

Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to point to ProvRDF mapping draft

16:20:53 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF

James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF

16:21:03 <satya> @Tim, Stian: I also agree with "closing the loop" from DM->O->DM and so on

Satya Sahoo: @Tim, Stian: I also agree with "closing the loop" from DM->O->DM and so on

16:22:12 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:22:13 <MacTed> RDF isn't a syntax...  do you mean RDF/XML, RDFa, Turtle, N3....?

Ted Thibodeau: RDF isn't a syntax... do you mean RDF/XML, RDFa, Turtle, N3....?

16:22:43 <jcheney> @MacTed: No idea, just writing abstract triples.

James Cheney: @MacTed: No idea, just writing abstract triples.

16:23:03 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

16:23:12 <tlebo> a frozen DM will help.

Timothy Lebo: a frozen DM will help.

16:23:14 <ivan> ack Paolo

Ivan Herman: ack Paolo

16:23:16 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

16:23:41 <dgarijo> @tlebo: I thought that we were working with the releases of the dm.

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: I thought that we were working with the releases of the dm.

16:23:52 <dgarijo> @tlebo: as "frozen"

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: as "frozen"

16:24:13 <ivan> q-

Ivan Herman: q-

16:26:06 <pgroth> @MacTed - i'm sorry

Paul Groth: @MacTed - i'm sorry

16:26:10 <pgroth> it's been a nightmare

Paul Groth: it's been a nightmare

16:26:29 <pgroth> I have a speaker phone on but that seems to fall off

Paul Groth: I have a speaker phone on but that seems to fall off

16:27:44 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:28:17 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

16:28:35 <satya> Can't hear anything!

Satya Sahoo: Can't hear anything!

16:28:49 <tlebo> q+ to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o

Timothy Lebo: q+ to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o

16:28:53 <satya> oh Daniel lost connection I believe

Satya Sahoo: oh Daniel lost connection I believe

16:28:54 <tlebo> ( I can't hear anything)

Timothy Lebo: ( I can't hear anything)

16:29:14 <jcheney> out phone connection dropped!

James Cheney: out phone connection dropped!

16:29:23 <Paolo> Khalid: most of the -O time has been used in resolving mapping issues rather than in making updates wrt older versions

Khalid Belhajjame: most of the -O time has been used in resolving mapping issues rather than in making updates wrt older versions

16:29:33 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

16:29:37 <jcheney> khalid: most of prov-o telecon has been on how to model PROV-DM.

Khalid Belhajjame: most of prov-o telecon has been on how to model PROV-DM. [ Scribe Assist by James Cheney ]

16:29:48 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller]

16:30:22 <tlebo> q?

Timothy Lebo: q?

16:30:49 <dgarijo> khalid: most of the time on the prov-o telecons was spent on the n-ary relationships modeling.

Khalid Belhajjame: most of the time on the prov-o telecons was spent on the n-ary relationships modeling. [ Scribe Assist by Daniel Garijo ]

16:30:49 <Paolo> Khalid: mapping took a long time

Khalid Belhajjame: mapping took a long time

16:31:01 <Paolo> Khalid: but there was indeed some chasing

Khalid Belhajjame: but there was indeed some chasing

16:31:44 <satya> @Khalid +1

Satya Sahoo: @Khalid +1

16:31:46 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

16:31:48 <tlebo> +1 to reorganizing for a better story, instead of a dump of properties.

Timothy Lebo: +1 to reorganizing for a better story, instead of a dump of properties.

16:31:50 <tlebo> q?

Timothy Lebo: q?

16:31:58 <pgroth> ack tlebo

Paul Groth: ack tlebo

16:31:58 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o

Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to say we have a poor measure of "up to dateness" for prov-o

16:32:20 <Paolo> Tim: what would help is a measure of "up-to-dateness" and of coverage

Timothy Lebo: what would help is a measure of "up-to-dateness" and of coverage

16:32:48 <dgarijo> @tlebo: so basically, more feedback from the rest of the group?

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: so basically, more feedback from the rest of the group?

16:32:49 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:33:05 <Paolo> Tim: we don't have a good perception of the completeness of the work.

Timothy Lebo: we don't have a good perception of the completeness of the work.

16:33:18 <satya> @Tim: agree, we should have feedback on PROV-O also

Satya Sahoo: @Tim: agree, we should have feedback on PROV-O also

16:33:18 <Paolo> Tim: raising issues against the document is fine

Timothy Lebo: raising issues against the document is fine

16:33:50 <Paolo> Luc: there hasn't been any request for review of the draft

Luc Moreau: there hasn't been any request for review of the draft

16:35:05 <Paolo> Satya: got no feedback after first draft

Satya Sahoo: got no feedback after first draft

16:35:13 <tlebo> @satya, but that makes us the "target movers" :-)

Timothy Lebo: @satya, but that makes us the "target movers" :-)

16:37:14 <satya> @Tim ;)

Satya Sahoo: @Tim ;)

16:37:15 <Paolo> Tim: need feedback on current draft

Timothy Lebo: need feedback on current draft

16:37:18 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:38:11 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:38:18 <Paolo> Stian, dgarijo:  missed a clear iteration loop for -O, with stable milestones

Stian, dgarijo: missed a clear iteration loop for -O, with stable milestones

16:38:27 <Luc2> Q?

Luc Moreau: Q?

16:38:31 <tlebo> q+ to verify that latest WD of DM is coming out "today"?

Timothy Lebo: q+ to verify that latest WD of DM is coming out "today"?

16:38:44 <Paolo> Satya: next iteration should begin once DM is frozen

Satya Sahoo: next iteration should begin once DM is frozen

16:39:14 <tlebo> wanted to propose that we develop the complete OWL of the latest DM.

Timothy Lebo: wanted to propose that we develop the complete OWL of the latest DM.

16:39:22 <tlebo> is "latest" coming out today?

Timothy Lebo: is "latest" coming out today?

16:39:39 <Luc2> Yes, release today

Luc Moreau: Yes, release today

16:39:59 <satya> @Tim: good one :)

Satya Sahoo: @Tim: good one :)

16:42:32 <tlebo> 1) we catch up to WD3 2) we ask for review from wg

Timothy Lebo: 1) we catch up to WD3 2) we ask for review from wg

16:42:41 <Paolo> Paul:  propose that the PROV-O team attempts to reflect on the current -DM release

Paul Groth: propose that the PROV-O team attempts to reflect on the current -DM release

16:43:05 <Paolo> Paul: when done, it is released for feedback

Paul Groth: when done, it is released for feedback

16:43:23 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

16:43:27 <dgarijo> @Paul: +1

Daniel Garijo: @Paul: +1

16:43:50 <Paolo> Paul: then Paul will work to identify the further changes needed in view of the upcoming changes to PROV-DM that are happening starting tomorrow

Paul Groth: then Paul will work to identify the further changes needed in view of the upcoming changes to PROV-DM that are happening starting tomorrow

16:44:04 <tlebo> both

Timothy Lebo: both

16:44:17 <Paolo> Luc: what is the next PROV-O release:  ontology, doc?

Luc Moreau: what is the next PROV-O release: ontology, doc?

16:44:23 <satya> both

Satya Sahoo: both

16:44:54 <tlebo> for each construct: edit HTML, edit OWL.

Timothy Lebo: for each construct: edit HTML, edit OWL.

16:45:17 <pgroth> why not just ontology?

Paul Groth: why not just ontology?

16:45:36 <tlebo> b/c the axioms need an explanation and a connection back to DM.

Timothy Lebo: b/c the axioms need an explanation and a connection back to DM.

16:46:55 <Paolo> Paul: suggest to circulate ontology first, it's faster and nearly everyone in the group can understand and provide feedback

Paul Groth: suggest to circulate ontology first, it's faster and nearly everyone in the group can understand and provide feedback

16:46:55 <tlebo> @pgroth, makes sense.

Timothy Lebo: @pgroth, makes sense.

16:47:27 <jun> how about including some brief annotations in the ontology?

Jun Zhao: how about including some brief annotations in the ontology?

16:47:35 <pgroth> +1 jun

Paul Groth: +1 jun

16:47:40 <jun> @pgroth +1

Jun Zhao: @pgroth +1

16:48:34 <pgroth> ivan saying owl rl is important

Paul Groth: ivan saying owl rl is important

16:48:52 <tlebo> +1 @ivan, heavy semantics is undesired.

Timothy Lebo: +1 @ivan, heavy semantics is undesired.

16:48:54 <Paolo> Ivan: prov-o looks like an OWL-RL ontology

Ivan Herman: prov-o looks like an OWL-RL ontology

16:49:24 <Stian> what current document also does is show RDF examples (OK, in RDF/XML) which for myself is also a good way to visualise an ontology (Given only an OWL file, I would write down such examples)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: what current document also does is show RDF examples (OK, in RDF/XML) which for myself is also a good way to visualise an ontology (Given only an OWL file, I would write down such examples)

16:49:46 <tlebo> @stian, let's make an examples file, too.

Timothy Lebo: @stian, let's make an examples file, too.

16:49:51 <Paolo> Ivan and that's good news from the perspective of a path to implementation

Ivan and that's good news from the perspective of a path to implementation

16:49:53 <Stian> which is what Tim used to do back in the good days :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: which is what Tim used to do back in the good days :)

16:49:59 <Stian> yes

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes

16:50:18 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_components ?

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_components ?

16:50:19 <khalidbelhajjame> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-profiles/#OWL_2_RL

Khalid Belhajjame: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-profiles/#OWL_2_RL

16:50:39 <Paolo> Paul: (explains the process again -- see above)

Paul Groth: (explains the process again -- see above)

16:50:43 <satya> audio dropping intermittently

Satya Sahoo: audio dropping intermittently

16:50:44 <ivan> q=

Ivan Herman: q=

16:50:46 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

16:51:07 <satya> can't hear

Satya Sahoo: can't hear

16:51:27 <pgroth> ack ivan

Paul Groth: ack ivan

16:51:29 <satya> Paul can you please repeat?

Satya Sahoo: Paul can you please repeat?

16:51:35 <tlebo> +1^10

Timothy Lebo: +1^10

16:51:39 <Paolo> Luc: we have also agreed to coordinate the two groups in a specific confcall

Luc Moreau: we have also agreed to coordinate the two groups in a specific confcall

16:51:50 <pgroth> Process

Paul Groth: Process

16:51:55 <Paolo> Ivan:  please avoid RDF/XML, use Turtle itself

Ivan Herman: please avoid RDF/XML, use Turtle itself

16:52:04 <Stian> (in the document)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (in the document)

16:52:08 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

16:52:14 <MacTed> +1^1000 Turtle, -1^1000 RDF/XML   :-)

Ted Thibodeau: +1^1000 Turtle, -1^1000 RDF/XML :-)

16:52:18 <tlebo> http://prefix.cc/prov

Timothy Lebo: http://prefix.cc/prov

16:52:27 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o/

16:53:01 <satya> didn't hear anything in last 5 mins

Satya Sahoo: didn't hear anything in last 5 mins

16:53:07 <Paolo> @Satya Paul essentially repeated the process as I tried to capture earlier

@Satya Paul essentially repeated the process as I tried to capture earlier

16:53:08 <pgroth> are you on zakim

Paul Groth: are you on zakim

16:53:14 <tlebo> I can hear

Timothy Lebo: I can hear

16:53:26 <Paolo> @Satya we are trying to skype you back in

@Satya we are trying to skype you back in

16:53:46 <satya> ok thanks!

Satya Sahoo: ok thanks!

16:54:12 <tlebo> rdfa

Timothy Lebo: rdfa

16:54:20 <GK> Ivan: why not prov: instead of prov-o:

Ivan Herman: why not prov: instead of prov-o: [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

16:54:55 <tlebo> @ivan, hash or slash ;-)

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, hash or slash ;-)

16:55:04 <satya> yes, I can hear now!

Satya Sahoo: yes, I can hear now!

16:55:18 <ivan> tim, I let you decide that:-)

Ivan Herman: tim, I let you decide that:-)

16:55:20 <pgroth> Process-

Paul Groth: Process-

16:55:32 <ivan> actually? with a document of this size, I think slash is simpler

Ivan Herman: actually? with a document of this size, I think slash is simpler

16:55:34 <tlebo> +1 to process Paul outlined.

Timothy Lebo: +1 to process Paul outlined.

16:55:40 <pgroth> 1) prov-o team to reflect wd3 prov-dm only in an ontology

Paul Groth: 1) prov-o team to reflect wd3 prov-dm only in an ontology

16:55:54 <pgroth> 2) when complete prov-wg to review after notification

Paul Groth: 2) when complete prov-wg to review after notification

16:56:21 <tlebo> @ivan, size is big or small?

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, size is big or small?

16:56:21 <pgroth> 3) when new prov-dm becomes available chairs will compare and determine what they think is necessary to update

Paul Groth: 3) when new prov-dm becomes available chairs will compare and determine what they think is necessary to update

16:56:28 <ivan> By the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement)

Ivan Herman: By the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provo_(movement)

16:56:32 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

16:56:35 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

16:56:58 <ivan> tlebo:  what I meant is the number of terms in the ontology is relatively small

Timothy Lebo: what I meant is the number of terms in the ontology is relatively small [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ]

16:57:07 <tlebo> Thanks.

Timothy Lebo: Thanks.

16:57:14 <Luc2> Btw, without Account ....

Luc Moreau: Btw, without Account ....

16:57:35 <dgarijo> @Luc: we don't have account in prov-o right now.

Daniel Garijo: @Luc: we don't have account in prov-o right now.

16:58:32 <tlebo> mission - owl:Annotations and rdfs:comments galore in prov.owl

Timothy Lebo: mission - owl:Annotations and rdfs:comments galore in prov.owl

16:59:22 <pgroth> luc: don't spend cycles on modeling accounts

Luc Moreau: don't spend cycles on modeling accounts [ Scribe Assist by Paul Groth ]

16:59:39 <khalidbelhajjame> Alignment with prov-dm as released today minus accounts

Khalid Belhajjame: Alignment with prov-dm as released today minus accounts

16:59:53 <tlebo> lost sound

Timothy Lebo: lost sound

16:59:58 <tlebo> and your food is getting cold.

Timothy Lebo: and your food is getting cold.

17:00:13 <pgroth> we start at 9:00 cet

Paul Groth: we start at 9:00 cet

17:00:22 <pgroth> thanks!

Paul Groth: thanks!

17:00:24 <pgroth> thanks tlebo

Paul Groth: thanks tlebo

17:00:25 <tlebo> i get to sleep in tomorrow!

Timothy Lebo: i get to sleep in tomorrow!

17:00:26 <Zakim> -MacTed

Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed

17:00:30 <tlebo> ttyl, all.

Timothy Lebo: ttyl, all.

17:00:34 <satya> bye

Satya Sahoo: bye

17:00:36 <khalidbelhajjame> Tim, well deserved :-)

Khalid Belhajjame: Tim, well deserved :-)

17:01:50 <Zakim> -[VrijeUni.a]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[VrijeUni.a]



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#4) generated 2012-02-23 13:40:35 UTC by 'pgroth', comments: 'prov-dm summary now showing'