Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 03 February 2012

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable
Seen
Daniel Garijo, Graham Klyne, Guus Schreiber (W3C RDF WG Chair), Ivan Herman (W3C), James Cheney, Jun Zhao, Kai Eckert, Khalid Belhajjame, Luc Moreau, Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Sandro Hawke, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stephen Cresswell, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Timothy Lebo
Guests
Ivan Herman (W3C), Guus Schreiber (W3C RDF WG Chair)
Chair
Luc Moreau
Scribe
Daniel Garijo
IRC Log
Original and Editable Wiki Version
Resolutions
  1. For interoperability we catalogue existing implementations and which constructs of prov they use. Looking for at least two implementations of each construct. Furthermore, which pair of implementations can exchange prov (different pairs may exchange different constructs) link
Topics
  1. Prov-dm continued

    A discussion was had about had around ISSUE 207 on where start and end times should occur in the model. No decision was taken.

  2. prov-sem

    James presented a strawman proposal for a formal semantics of provenance. The group positively recieved the proposal and agreed to make it a deliverable of the project. The prov-sem was seen a mechanism to to encode proper provenance. Additionally, he presented the ProvRDF mappings page that provides a systematic means to map prov-dm to prov-o.

  3. Interoperability

    The discussion focused on interoprability of implementations and how the group would demonstrate interoprability. Guus suggested we look at the skos approach to demonstrating interoprability. A survey was taken of the group about who was planning on implementing the spec. 8 people said they had plans or were already under way. It was agreed that we would take a dual approach to demonstrating interoprability. One would be a survey of implementations that shows that every concept is used in at least two different implementations (like skos). The second would be to identify pairs of implementations that can excahnge provenance. The implementation task force would be activated to begin building test harnesses based on the examples cataloged by Tim.

  4. Planning

    The session focused on planning. To facilatate mapping of prov-o and prov-dm, the group agreed to adopt the use of the ProvRDF mappings page to synchronize the two documents after the ontology reached the level of prov-dm WD3. To facilate this usage, it was agreed to ensure that the ProvRDF mappings page was also aligned with prov wd3. It was agreed that the editors would draft an updated version of prov-aq to address all outstanding issues. Additionally, the group agreed to start producing an xml schema. The editors of the prov-dm agreed to draft an simplified introduction to it reflecting the groups desire for simplfication. Finally, Paul agreed to summarize the F2F for an email to the whole group as well as in a blog post.

08:12:31 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc

08:12:33 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

08:12:35 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be

08:12:35 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

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

08:12:36 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
08:12:36 <trackbot> Date: 03 February 2012
08:12:40 <Stian> tlebo: we get the same

Timothy Lebo: we get the same [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:12:42 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV

Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV

<pgroth> Guest: Ivan (ivan) Herman, W3C
<pgroth> Guest: Guus (guus) Schreiber, W3C RDF WG Chair
08:12:42 <Zakim> ok, Luc, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM already started

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

08:13:10 <ivan> zakim, who is there?

Ivan Herman: zakim, who is there?

08:13:10 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, ivan.

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

08:13:17 <ivan> zakim, who is on the call

Ivan Herman: zakim, who is on the call

08:13:17 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the call', ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who is on the call', ivan

08:13:23 <ivan> zakim, who is on the call?

Ivan Herman: zakim, who is on the call?

08:13:23 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P11

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P11

08:13:38 <ivan> is anybody on the call already?

Ivan Herman: is anybody on the call already?

08:13:40 <ivan> who is P11

Ivan Herman: who is P11

08:13:42 <ivan> ?

Ivan Herman: ?

08:13:46 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable
08:13:57 <tlebo> I don't know.

Timothy Lebo: I don't know.

08:14:07 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
08:14:12 <Luc> Scribe: dgarijo

(Scribe set to Daniel Garijo)

08:14:27 <ivan> tlebo:  you are not on zakim, right?

Timothy Lebo: you are not on zakim, right? [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ]

08:14:36 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public

08:15:01 <tlebo> it's 3:15 here

Timothy Lebo: it's 3:15 here

08:16:25 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, ??P11, in PROV_f2f()3:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, ??P11, in PROV_f2f()3:00AM

08:16:26 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

08:16:26 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.315.724.aaaa, [VrijeUni], tlebo, [IPcaller], +1.781.899.aabb, Sandro, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed, Ivan

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were +1.315.724.aaaa, [VrijeUni], tlebo, [IPcaller], +1.781.899.aabb, Sandro, Satya_Sahoo, MacTed, Ivan

08:16:49 <dgarijo> Luc: session on prov-dm

Luc Moreau: session on prov-dm

<pgroth> Topic: Prov-dm continued

1. Prov-dm continued

Summary: A discussion was had about had around ISSUE 207 on where start and end times should occur in the model. No decision was taken.

<pgroth> Summary: A discussion was had about had around ISSUE 207 on where start and end times should occur in the model. No decision was taken.
08:16:52 <ivan> zakim, this is prov

Ivan Herman: zakim, this is prov

08:16:52 <Zakim> ivan, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be prov".

Zakim IRC Bot: ivan, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be prov".

08:17:03 <ivan> zakim, this will be prov

Ivan Herman: zakim, this will be prov

08:17:03 <Zakim> ok, ivan; I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM scheduled to start 17 minutes ago

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM scheduled to start 17 minutes ago

08:17:16 <dgarijo> ... would like a clarification on the prov-o resolution yesterday

... would like a clarification on the prov-o resolution yesterday

08:17:31 <Stian> Zakim, start prov

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, start prov

08:17:31 <Zakim> I don't understand 'start prov', Stian

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'start prov', Stian

08:17:37 <dgarijo> ... prov-o team will have to remember that there are "concepts at risk"

... prov-o team will have to remember that there are "concepts at risk"

08:17:52 <dgarijo> ... there is an issue around wasAsociatedWith

... there is an issue around wasAsociatedWith

08:18:08 <dgarijo> ... whether the agent should be optional or not

... whether the agent should be optional or not

08:18:26 <dgarijo> ... those issues are inserted in the document

... those issues are inserted in the document

08:18:34 <tlebo> (Can I get onto a skyper that is NOT the scribe?)

Timothy Lebo: (Can I get onto a skyper that is NOT the scribe?)

08:18:48 <dgarijo> ... there is no point trying to encode this into prov-o

... there is no point trying to encode this into prov-o

08:19:13 <tlebo> Thanks, Khalid.

Timothy Lebo: Thanks, Khalid.

08:19:33 <Stian> Zakim, this is PROV_f2f

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, this is PROV_f2f

08:19:33 <Zakim> Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV_f2f".

Zakim IRC Bot: Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV_f2f".

08:19:40 <Stian> Zakim, this is PROV_f2f()3:00AM

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, this is PROV_f2f()3:00AM

08:19:40 <Zakim> Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV_f2f()3:00AM".

Zakim IRC Bot: Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV_f2f()3:00AM".

08:19:48 <Stian> future of AI..

Stian Soiland-Reyes: future of AI..

08:19:51 <dgarijo> ... in this session we want to solve a number of issues flagged in the tracker

... in this session we want to solve a number of issues flagged in the tracker

08:20:04 <dgarijo> ... in order to make some progress in the future version of the WD

... in order to make some progress in the future version of the WD

08:20:07 <tlebo> (Tim hears now)

Timothy Lebo: (Tim hears now)

08:20:34 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/raised

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/raised

08:20:45 <dgarijo> ... issue 207

... ISSUE-207

08:20:48 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/207

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/207

08:21:48 <dgarijo> ... when we talk about activities we say that there is a start event and an end event. The place holder with time is not with the event, but with the activity itself

... when we talk about activities we say that there is a start event and an end event. The place holder with time is not with the event, but with the activity itself

08:21:57 <dgarijo> ... There is a bit of inconsistency

... There is a bit of inconsistency

08:22:22 <dgarijo> ... can we move starttime with the start event

... can we move starttime with the start event

08:22:24 <GK> (This issue of start/end times is also alluded to in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/229)

Graham Klyne: (This issue of start/end times is also alluded to in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/229)

08:22:39 <dgarijo> ... can we move start/end away from the activity?

... can we move start/end away from the activity?

08:22:48 <dgarijo> ... feedback?

... feedback?

08:23:12 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:23:14 <tlebo> q+

Timothy Lebo: q+

08:23:15 <dgarijo> ... prov-o team, is that a big change for the ontology?

... prov-o team, is that a big change for the ontology?

08:23:15 <Stian> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

08:23:39 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

08:23:56 <dgarijo> tlebo: I like the proposal to make it consitent.

Timothy Lebo: I like the proposal to make it consitent.

08:24:31 <dgarijo> ... concerned about people wanting to add this directly to the activity. Would it be possible to have both?

... concerned about people wanting to add this directly to the activity. Would it be possible to have both?

08:24:50 <ivan> q+ to refer to a minor issue on time

Ivan Herman: q+ to refer to a minor issue on time

08:25:20 <dgarijo> luc: another example on scruffy vs not scruffy. From a data model view is not useful to have many placeholders for the same info

Luc Moreau: another example on scruffy vs not scruffy. From a data model view is not useful to have many placeholders for the same info

08:25:25 <ivan> ack tlebo

Ivan Herman: ack tlebo

08:25:31 <tlebo> +1 danger for inconsistency

Timothy Lebo: +1 danger for inconsistency

08:25:37 <dgarijo> ... risk for inconsistency

... risk for inconsistency

08:26:04 <dgarijo> ... is it just sintactic sugar?

... is it just sintactic sugar?

08:26:29 <dgarijo> tlebo: it reduces query time. You are running to a lot of practical reasons

Timothy Lebo: it reduces query time. You are running to a lot of practical reasons

08:26:39 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:26:43 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

08:26:43 <tlebo> and bnodes don't consolidate across merges.

Timothy Lebo: and bnodes don't consolidate across merges.

08:26:46 <Luc> ack stian

Luc Moreau: ack stian

08:27:23 <dgarijo> stian: a destruction event would complete the cycle.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: a destruction event would complete the cycle.

08:27:42 <dgarijo> ... activity and entity had start and end.

... activity and entity had start and end.

08:28:08 <dgarijo> ... it would be very good to relate these events

... it would be very good to relate these events

08:28:24 <dgarijo> ... without having necessarily to refer to time

... without having necessarily to refer to time

08:28:38 <Luc> why not say   id a Activity, aStartEvent ...

Luc Moreau: why not say id a Activity, aStartEvent ...

08:29:14 <GK> q+ to ask Can we separate the "proper" model from convenient "syntactic sugar"? I.e. formal model uses extra node, but "convenient" shortcut property used.  This convenience property might be introduced only in the ontology.

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask Can we separate the "proper" model from convenient "syntactic sugar"? I.e. formal model uses extra node, but "convenient" shortcut property used. This convenience property might be introduced only in the ontology.

08:29:38 <dgarijo> khalid: prov.dm has to be consistent. not having the notion of event would be a problem?

Khalid Belhajjame: prov.dm has to be consistent. not having the notion of event would be a problem?

08:29:48 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:29:51 <dgarijo> ... it would be a simpler ontology

... it would be a simpler ontology

08:29:58 <tlebo> e.g.    :activity prov:hasStart [ prov:inXSDDateTime "2012-02-03T03:27:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime ]; prov:hasEnd [ prov:inXSDDateTime "2012-02-03T03:37:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime ]

Timothy Lebo: e.g. :activity prov:hasStart [ prov:inXSDDateTime "2012-02-03T03:27:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime ]; prov:hasEnd [ prov:inXSDDateTime "2012-02-03T03:37:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime ]

08:30:12 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

08:30:41 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:30:45 <dgarijo> stian: if you want to associate anything extra to the event (how the time was measured) then you are not able to do so.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: if you want to associate anything extra to the event (how the time was measured) then you are not able to do so.

08:32:20 <GK> Hmmm... I'm sure PatH will do a spendid job, but isn't doing time out of scope for RDF group?

Graham Klyne: Hmmm... I'm sure PatH will do a spendid job, but isn't doing time out of scope for RDF group?

08:32:31 <dgarijo> ivan: 2 things: 1) this has been a discussion on the rdf group. What they come up with may be useful for you, so it might be good to postpone the resolution and reuse what they decide.

Ivan Herman: 2 things: 1) this has been a discussion on the rdf group. What they come up with may be useful for you, so it might be good to postpone the resolution and reuse what they decide.

08:33:21 <dgarijo> ... 2) Good to know that the ??? document is coming up.

... 2) Good to know that the ??? document is coming up.

08:33:41 <dgarijo> ... someone in the rdf working group was reviewing the changes

... someone in the rdf working group was reviewing the changes

08:34:11 <khalidbelhajjame> q?

Khalid Belhajjame: q?

08:34:22 <dgarijo> luc: would it be useful to share this feedback to the group?

Luc Moreau: would it be useful to share this feedback to the group?

08:34:26 <Luc> ack iv

Luc Moreau: ack iv

08:34:26 <Zakim> ivan, you wanted to refer to a minor issue on time

Zakim IRC Bot: ivan, you wanted to refer to a minor issue on time

08:34:29 <dgarijo> ivan: no problem

Ivan Herman: no problem

08:34:52 <tlebo> e.g. 2 "scruff") :activity prov:hasStart "2012-02-03T03:27:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime; prov:hasEnd "2012-02-03T03:37:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime .

Timothy Lebo: e.g. 2 "scruff") :activity prov:hasStart "2012-02-03T03:27:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime; prov:hasEnd "2012-02-03T03:37:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime .

08:35:01 <kai> ivan: if you use xsd dates which you should, look at the new draft, not the old document.

Ivan Herman: if you use xsd dates which you should, look at the new draft, not the old document. [ Scribe Assist by Kai Eckert ]

08:35:04 <dgarijo> smiles: don't see a problem for having support for both types of provenance.

Simon Miles: don't see a problem for having support for both types of provenance.

08:35:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:35:34 <Luc> ack sm

Luc Moreau: ack sm

08:35:36 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

08:35:36 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask Can we separate the "proper" model from convenient "syntactic sugar"? I.e. formal model uses extra node, but "convenient" shortcut property used.  This

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask Can we separate the "proper" model from convenient "syntactic sugar"? I.e. formal model uses extra node, but "convenient" shortcut property used. This

08:35:39 <Zakim> ... convenience property might be introduced only in the ontology.

Zakim IRC Bot: ... convenience property might be introduced only in the ontology.

08:35:44 <dgarijo> stian: having both makes interoperability difficult

Stian Soiland-Reyes: having both makes interoperability difficult

08:35:55 <dgarijo> graham: +1 to simon's point

Graham Klyne: +1 to simon's point

08:36:21 <ivan> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Feb/0039.html Alex Hall's review of the XSD 1.1 and the influence on RDF

Ivan Herman: -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-wg/2012Feb/0039.html Alex Hall's review of the XSD 1.1 and the influence on RDF

08:36:24 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

08:36:40 <dgarijo> ... having them in prov-o doesn't mean that they are in the dm

... having them in prov-o doesn't mean that they are in the dm

08:36:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:36:53 <Luc> ack pgr

Luc Moreau: ack pgr

08:36:57 <tlebo> +1 @pgroth, this truly does match our "qualified and unqualified" duality. "upgrade path"

Timothy Lebo: +1 @pgroth, this truly does match our "qualified and unqualified" duality. "upgrade path"

08:37:17 <tlebo> I think that makes a lot of sense.

Timothy Lebo: I think that makes a lot of sense.

08:37:21 <dgarijo> paul: +1 to that: in the ontology you have qualified and unqualified properties. So it is essentially the same thing

Paul Groth: +1 to that: in the ontology you have qualified and unqualified properties. So it is essentially the same thing

08:38:09 <tlebo> it's how I wrote http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Qualifed_Involvements_in_PROV-O

Timothy Lebo: it's how I wrote http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Qualifed_Involvements_in_PROV-O

08:38:15 <tlebo> (the "upgrade path")

Timothy Lebo: (the "upgrade path")

08:38:29 <dgarijo> ivan: the separation between simple/complicated qualifications is not visible in the document

Ivan Herman: the separation between simple/complicated qualifications is not visible in the document

08:38:50 <dgarijo> ... it is not highlighted

... it is not highlighted

08:38:57 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:38:57 <dgarijo> in the primer/prov-o

in the primer/prov-o

08:39:31 <Stian> but it's not that different from current syntax:   :activity prov:startedAt [ time:inXSDDateTime "2012-02-03T03:27:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime; ] ;   - as compared to upgrading to qualifiedX your shorthand does not add much

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but it's not that different from current syntax: :activity prov:startedAt [ time:inXSDDateTime "2012-02-03T03:27:09-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime; ] ; - as compared to upgrading to qualifiedX your shorthand does not add much

08:40:10 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

08:40:20 <dgarijo> luc: so we keep start /end for activities but no events?

Luc Moreau: so we keep start /end for activities but no events?

08:40:26 <jcheney> q+

James Cheney: q+

08:40:36 <dgarijo> activities can refer to time or to events

activities can refer to time or to events

08:41:02 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:42:01 <tlebo> +1 paul - the duality stays out of the DM, prov-o adds the duality (i.e. syntactic sugar)

Timothy Lebo: +1 paul - the duality stays out of the DM, prov-o adds the duality (i.e. syntactic sugar)

08:42:07 <GK> PGroth: duality only in the ontology, not in the DM

Paul Groth: duality only in the ontology, not in the DM [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

08:42:09 <dgarijo> paul: the prov-o has a duality that the dm doesn't have

Paul Groth: the prov-o has a duality that the dm doesn't have

08:42:12 <GK> +1 to paul

Graham Klyne: +1 to paul

08:42:16 <pgroth> @tlebo agree

Paul Groth: @tlebo agree

08:42:21 <tlebo> +1 @luc

Timothy Lebo: +1 @luc

08:42:29 <dgarijo> luc: for dm events have time and activities are related to events

Luc Moreau: for dm events have time and activities are related to events

08:43:45 <khalidbelhajjame> q?

Khalid Belhajjame: q?

08:44:09 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:44:24 <dgarijo> graham: give the basic voc and see how it evolves

Graham Klyne: give the basic voc and see how it evolves

08:44:33 <tlebo> @ivan, sorry, I meant prov:inXSDDateTime

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, sorry, I meant prov:inXSDDateTime

08:44:34 <Luc> ack ivan

Luc Moreau: ack ivan

08:44:42 <khalidbelhajjame> do we need to have time at all in prov-dm, wouldn't the notion of event be enough?

Khalid Belhajjame: do we need to have time at all in prov-dm, wouldn't the notion of event be enough?

08:44:45 <dgarijo> ivan: please don't use the 2006 WD of the ontology.

Ivan Herman: please don't use the 2006 WD of the ontology.

08:45:17 <dgarijo> @kahlid: the events (usage, for instance) have time..

@kahlid: the events (usage, for instance) have time..

08:45:17 <GK> ^^ == time ontology (?)

Graham Klyne: ^^ == time ontology (?)

08:45:19 <Stian> is a start/end event in the universe of discourse?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: is a start/end event in the universe of discourse?

08:45:26 <Stian> we'll clone the few things from time: we're currently using

Stian Soiland-Reyes: we'll clone the few things from time: we're currently using

08:45:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:45:30 <tlebo> @ivan, thanks, will mirror them into prov namespace.

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, thanks, will mirror them into prov namespace.

08:46:06 <tlebo> @stain, YOU were using the 2006 time >:-{

Timothy Lebo: @stain, YOU were using the 2006 time >:-{

08:46:20 <Stian> Yes! But it was a good placeholder!

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Yes! But it was a good placeholder!

08:46:24 <Stian> better than nothing at all

Stian Soiland-Reyes: better than nothing at all

08:46:31 <dgarijo> jcheney: had some issues about events too. Would it be ok if we don't make any formal determinations until I solved those?

James Cheney: had some issues about events too. Would it be ok if we don't make any formal determinations until I solved those?

08:46:59 <Stian> @tlebo - will you do the job to update the OWL file? Should be almost just a search replace of &time;

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @tlebo - will you do the job to update the OWL file? Should be almost just a search replace of &time;

08:47:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:47:16 <Luc> ack jc

Luc Moreau: ack jc

08:47:27 <tlebo> @stian sure

Timothy Lebo: @stian sure

08:47:29 <dgarijo> luc: not enough resolution

Luc Moreau: not enough resolution

08:47:30 <Stian> thanks :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: thanks :)

08:48:31 <Stian> That's http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-Start-End

Stian Soiland-Reyes: That's http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#record-Start-End

08:48:41 <tlebo> @stian http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/232

Timothy Lebo: @stian http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/232

08:49:50 <dgarijo> luc: wasStartedBy as a subproperty of wasAssociatedWith. Woudln't it better to have a start/end event?

Luc Moreau: wasStartedBy as a subproperty of wasAssociatedWith. Woudln't it better to have a start/end event?

08:50:14 <GK> q+ to ask if start/end should be inherrent in an event or part of relation between event and some activity (or something)?

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask if start/end should be inherrent in an event or part of relation between event and some activity (or something)?

08:50:15 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:50:32 <Stian> this starts sounding like Tim's "events are a kind of activity" argument - if agents can be associated with a start event, etc

Stian Soiland-Reyes: this starts sounding like Tim's "events are a kind of activity" argument - if agents can be associated with a start event, etc

08:51:21 <dgarijo> GK: Is event the right place to make the association? Event is more like a timestamp

Graham Klyne: Is event the right place to make the association? Event is more like a timestamp

08:51:35 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

08:52:07 <dgarijo> we had 4 types of events

we had 4 types of events

08:53:28 <Stian> is it now not just 2 events? Creation and Destruction

Stian Soiland-Reyes: is it now not just 2 events? Creation and Destruction

08:53:29 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

08:53:29 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask if start/end should be inherrent in an event or part of relation between event and some activity (or something)?

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask if start/end should be inherrent in an event or part of relation between event and some activity (or something)?

08:54:04 <dgarijo> khalid: disagrees with GK. The event type is the start of an activity.

Khalid Belhajjame: disagrees with GK. The event type is the start of an activity.

08:54:21 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:54:26 <Luc> ack khalid

Luc Moreau: ack khalid

08:54:29 <Stian> (far out there) if an activity was created (ie. started) - then that could have been caused by another activity (that of an agent)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (far out there) if an activity was created (ie. started) - then that could have been caused by another activity (that of an agent)

08:54:41 <tlebo> q+

Timothy Lebo: q+

08:55:15 <dgarijo> tim: disagrees with wasStartedBy being a specialization of association

Timothy Lebo: disagrees with wasStartedBy being a specialization of association

08:55:42 <dgarijo> ... starting an activity is like being responsible for it

... starting an activity is like being responsible for it

08:56:16 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

08:56:32 <dgarijo> luc: we really don't have start and end of activities right now.

Luc Moreau: we really don't have start and end of activities right now.

08:56:39 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

08:56:41 <dgarijo> ... responsability is another topic

... responsability is another topic

08:56:59 <dgarijo> ... I just didn't want to go there now.

... I just didn't want to go there now.

08:57:23 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:57:27 <dgarijo> ... coming back to the original proposal, those records represent events

... coming back to the original proposal, those records represent events

08:57:48 <dgarijo> tim: are we talking about agents or events starting the activity

Timothy Lebo: are we talking about agents or events starting the activity

08:57:52 <khalidbelhajjame> I think that there are two points here that we need to reflect on separatly: i)- do we need to encode the start/end of activities as events? ii)- do we still need to have wasStartedBy to specify that an egent was responsible for startng an activity

Khalid Belhajjame: I think that there are two points here that we need to reflect on separatly: i)- do we need to encode the start/end of activities as events? ii)- do we still need to have wasStartedBy to specify that an egent was responsible for startng an activity

08:57:56 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

08:58:37 <dgarijo> pgroth: wasstartedBY vs wasStartedAT

Paul Groth: wasstartedBY vs wasStartedAT

08:58:56 <dgarijo> ... people are confused by both.

... people are confused by both.

08:58:58 <jcheney> what about just "started" and "ended"?

James Cheney: what about just "started" and "ended"?

08:59:21 <Stian> (also far out) if Generation/Usage/Started/Ended are activities, then agents can be associated/responsible just like with other activities

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (also far out) if Generation/Usage/Started/Ended are activities, then agents can be associated/responsible just like with other activities

08:59:33 <jcheney> you can name the agent in a "started" record, or not.

James Cheney: you can name the agent in a "started" record, or not.

08:59:42 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

08:59:44 <Stian> jcheney: make sense

James Cheney: make sense [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

08:59:45 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

08:59:51 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

09:00:01 <Luc> ack smil

Luc Moreau: ack smil

09:00:08 <dgarijo> smiles: +1 to tim and gk

Simon Miles: +1 to tim and gk

09:00:40 <dgarijo> ... you don't want to attach the agent to the event

... you don't want to attach the agent to the event

09:01:11 <jcheney> perhaps could define "wasStartedBy" as "evt was a start event for activity" and "agent was associated with evt"

James Cheney: perhaps could define "wasStartedBy" as "evt was a start event for activity" and "agent was associated with evt"

09:01:15 <Paolo> +1 for smiles, GK however that leaves wasGeneratedBy as an anomaly -- that /does/ require a generator to be expressed

Paolo Missier: +1 for smiles, GK however that leaves wasGeneratedBy as an anomaly -- that /does/ require a generator to be expressed

09:01:21 <jcheney> i think this = simon's proposal too

James Cheney: i think this = simon's proposal too

09:01:25 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:01:39 <dgarijo> paolo: agrees with smiles

Paolo Missier: agrees with smiles

09:01:48 <GK> q+ to ask are "events" things that are referenced explicitly by records, are they implicit (and used in the explanation of) relationships between other things (e.f. entity wasGeneratedBy activity)

Graham Klyne: q+ to ask are "events" things that are referenced explicitly by records, are they implicit (and used in the explanation of) relationships between other things (e.f. entity wasGeneratedBy activity)

09:01:59 <dgarijo> ... generation doesn't stand for itself

... generation doesn't stand for itself

09:02:06 <dgarijo> ... you just need a generator

... you just need a generator

09:02:20 <jcheney> could decompose generation into "event created" and "activity performed event"

James Cheney: could decompose generation into "event created" and "activity performed event"

09:02:25 <Stian> there was a seperate proposal to allow wasGenerated() without activity (to record entity start time)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: there was a seperate proposal to allow wasGenerated() without activity (to record entity start time)

09:03:06 <dgarijo> luc: would the agent be optional

Luc Moreau: would the agent be optional

09:03:22 <tlebo> +1 keep them separate, let one assert either or both.

Timothy Lebo: +1 keep them separate, let one assert either or both.

09:03:43 <Stian> (assuming we have destruction) - can an agent die before the activity start event - but still be responsible for starting?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (assuming we have destruction) - can an agent die before the activity start event - but still be responsible for starting?

09:04:39 <Stian> (I would argue yes)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (I would argue yes)

09:04:41 <dgarijo> ivan: why make it simple if you can make it complicated?

Ivan Herman: why make it simple if you can make it complicated?

09:05:13 <khalidbelhajjame> ?q

Khalid Belhajjame: ?q

09:05:19 <khalidbelhajjame> q?

Khalid Belhajjame: q?

09:05:19 <Stian> q?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q?

09:05:24 <Paolo> q-

Paolo Missier: q-

09:05:26 <dgarijo> luc: issue not entirely finished yet

Luc Moreau: issue not entirely finished yet

09:05:29 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

09:05:29 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask are "events" things that are referenced explicitly by records, are they implicit (and used in the explanation of) relationships between other things (e.f.

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask are "events" things that are referenced explicitly by records, are they implicit (and used in the explanation of) relationships between other things (e.f.

09:05:32 <Zakim> ... entity wasGeneratedBy activity)

Zakim IRC Bot: ... entity wasGeneratedBy activity)

09:06:08 <dgarijo> GK: there is a confusing about where the events are situated in the dm

Graham Klyne: there is a confusing about where the events are situated in the dm

09:06:22 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

09:06:42 <dgarijo> ... are events in the domain of discourse? or even the entities?

... are events in the domain of discourse? or even the entities?

09:07:20 <Stian> diagram at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#prov-dm-overview

Stian Soiland-Reyes: diagram at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/ProvenanceModel.html#prov-dm-overview

09:07:39 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:07:43 <Luc> ack pao

Luc Moreau: ack pao

09:07:59 <dgarijo> paolo: start and end record and then the activity record

Paolo Missier: start and end record and then the activity record

09:08:29 <dgarijo> ... you can't assert an activity record until the end of it

... you can't assert an activity record until the end of it

09:08:55 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

09:08:59 <tlebo> q+ to say that adding all of the optionals will make it more difficult to map to prov-o (or anything)

Timothy Lebo: q+ to say that adding all of the optionals will make it more difficult to map to prov-o (or anything)

09:08:59 <Stian> ig activities are entities, then start/end events are same for both. currently  wasGeneratedBy can say who started it - but currently says that the starter/creator was an activity (which is currently disjoint from agent)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ig activities are entities, then start/end events are same for both. currently wasGeneratedBy can say who started it - but currently says that the starter/creator was an activity (which is currently disjoint from agent)

09:09:11 <Stian> but why can activities only be created by agents, and entities only by activities?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but why can activities only be created by agents, and entities only by activities?

09:09:50 <GK> FWIW, CIDOC CRM uses events to mediate between other things, and events are considered to have duration, not be instantaneous.  Just saying.

Graham Klyne: FWIW, CIDOC CRM uses events to mediate between other things, and events are considered to have duration, not be instantaneous. Just saying.

09:10:00 <Stian> If I create a document, as an agent I am (responsible for) generating it

Stian Soiland-Reyes: If I create a document, as an agent I am (responsible for) generating it

09:10:20 <dgarijo> luc: we are talking about exchanging prov info, at the moment of exchange you know the traces.

Luc Moreau: we are talking about exchanging prov info, at the moment of exchange you know the traces.

09:10:44 <tlebo> -1 @paolo

Timothy Lebo: -1 @paolo

09:11:12 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:11:40 <dgarijo> tim: problem with the optionals when doing the mappings to prov-o

Timothy Lebo: problem with the optionals when doing the mappings to prov-o

09:11:49 <dgarijo> ... smaller constructs are easier

... smaller constructs are easier

09:12:24 <GK> tlebo: for formal description, prefers more smaller constructs that can be linked together without optional bits.  (was that right?)

Timothy Lebo: for formal description, prefers more smaller constructs that can be linked together without optional bits. (was that right?) [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

09:12:24 <tlebo> q-

Timothy Lebo: q-

09:12:29 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

09:12:47 <Stian> +1 tlebo

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 tlebo

09:13:02 <dgarijo> luc: your proposal paolo, is not addressing our current issue.

Luc Moreau: your proposal paolo, is not addressing our current issue.

09:13:23 <dgarijo> ... it is mantaining the inconsistency

... it is mantaining the inconsistency

09:13:39 <GK> @tlebo I think your point argues for making events explicit in the model.  Just saying.

Graham Klyne: @tlebo I think your point argues for making events explicit in the model. Just saying.

09:13:41 <Stian> Stian: There are two kinds of optionals in DM - the "Don't know now" implied optional, and the "Not applicable" (null) optional - in mapping to OWL we would need to distinguish between these

Stian Soiland-Reyes: There are two kinds of optionals in DM - the "Don't know now" implied optional, and the "Not applicable" (null) optional - in mapping to OWL we would need to distinguish between these [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

09:14:12 <tlebo> @GK I'm ok with that. Generation and Usage are the events.

Timothy Lebo: @GK I'm ok with that. Generation and Usage are the events.

09:14:25 <dgarijo> luc: a start record is not a representation of an event

Luc Moreau: a start record is not a representation of an event

09:15:18 <dgarijo> ... something could argue about starting events not being on the data model

... something could argue about starting events not being on the data model

09:15:20 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

09:15:25 <Stian> every entity has an (implied) generation event - but every activity does not (currently) have an implied started event

Stian Soiland-Reyes: every entity has an (implied) generation event - but every activity does not (currently) have an implied started event

09:15:41 <dgarijo> ... geenration events are on de UoD and start events are not

... geenration events are on de UoD and start events are not

09:15:53 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:15:54 <tlebo> q+ to propose startedAt(activity, time) + endedAt(activity, time)   and wasStartedBy(activity, agent)

Timothy Lebo: q+ to propose startedAt(activity, time) + endedAt(activity, time) and wasStartedBy(activity, agent)

09:16:20 <Stian> tlebo: +1 - that's Simon's proposal

Timothy Lebo: +1 - that's Simon's proposal [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

09:16:34 <dgarijo> jcheney: instead of startedBy say started

James Cheney: instead of startedBy say started

09:16:37 <tlebo> @stian, then +1 simon.

Timothy Lebo: @stian, then +1 simon.

09:16:40 <Stian> if you say wasStartedBy - we know it was at startedAt

Stian Soiland-Reyes: if you say wasStartedBy - we know it was at startedAt

09:16:50 <Stian> tlebo: but do ask it :)

Timothy Lebo: but do ask it :) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

09:16:50 <dgarijo> ... combining the event and the agent

... combining the event and the agent

09:17:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:17:24 <Luc> ack kh

Luc Moreau: ack kh

09:17:49 <dgarijo> khalid: what info should we attach to those events?

Khalid Belhajjame: what info should we attach to those events?

09:17:58 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

09:18:02 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

09:18:45 <Stian> .. and role etc

Stian Soiland-Reyes: .. and role etc

09:19:09 <dgarijo> ... when expressing event we attach the info necessary in that event

... when expressing event we attach the info necessary in that event

09:19:22 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:19:25 <dgarijo> ... that would make the model complex

... that would make the model complex

09:19:46 <tlebo> I see Khalid's argument for "inconsistent" treatment for the start/end and use/generation...

Timothy Lebo: I see Khalid's argument for "inconsistent" treatment for the start/end and use/generation...

09:20:23 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:20:27 <GK> Good question, Khalid.  Don't know.

Graham Klyne: Good question, Khalid. Don't know.

09:20:29 <tlebo> wondering if the "upgrade path" duality is going to surface soon.

Timothy Lebo: wondering if the "upgrade path" duality is going to surface soon.

09:20:31 <dgarijo> ... is it worth decoupling things or simplifying the concept by attaching optional things to use/generation.

... is it worth decoupling things or simplifying the concept by attaching optional things to use/generation.

09:20:33 <khalidbelhajjame> ack kha

Khalid Belhajjame: ack kha

09:20:37 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg

09:20:52 <dgarijo> pg: nice summary.

Paul Groth: nice summary.

09:21:19 <dgarijo> ... events are good to express what we have in the model

... events are good to express what we have in the model

09:22:00 <tlebo> activity hadQualifiedStart would parallel event hadQualifiedGeneration

Timothy Lebo: activity hadQualifiedStart would parallel event hadQualifiedGeneration

09:22:03 <dgarijo> ... do we need constructs of events to express our provenance?

... do we need constructs of events to express our provenance?

09:22:07 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

09:22:08 <Stian> ie. are events in universal discourse or not

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ie. are events in universal discourse or not

09:22:35 <tlebo> no construct with is ..... an event ?

Timothy Lebo: no construct with is ..... an event ?

09:22:40 <dgarijo> luc: currently there is no construct of an event.

Luc Moreau: currently there is no construct of an event.

09:22:53 <GK> q+ to respond to paul: we don't *need* new constructs - can can get by without them - but is it *easier* to describe/understand by introducing the extra concepts.

Graham Klyne: q+ to respond to paul: we don't *need* new constructs - can can get by without them - but is it *easier* to describe/understand by introducing the extra concepts.

09:24:32 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

09:24:38 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:24:39 <Zakim> +??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0

09:24:44 <Zakim> -??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P0

09:24:45 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

09:24:45 <Zakim> Attendees were

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were

09:24:51 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:24:57 <dgarijo> luc: this issue is stil not finiched

Luc Moreau: this issue is stil not finiched

09:24:58 <tlebo> hey!

Timothy Lebo: hey!

09:25:07 <Stian> Evil zakim!

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Evil zakim!

09:25:08 <GK> q+ to respond to paul: we don't *need* new constructs - can can get by without them - but is it *easier* to describe/understand by introducing the extra concepts.

Graham Klyne: q+ to respond to paul: we don't *need* new constructs - can can get by without them - but is it *easier* to describe/understand by introducing the extra concepts.

09:25:24 <Stian> perhaps in that little minute we had our chance to call in to zakim

Stian Soiland-Reyes: perhaps in that little minute we had our chance to call in to zakim

09:25:38 <tlebo> startedAt(activity, time) + endedAt(activity, time) and wasStartedBy(activity, agent)

Timothy Lebo: startedAt(activity, time) + endedAt(activity, time) and wasStartedBy(activity, agent)

09:25:49 <dgarijo> tlebo: higlight the distinction of wasstartedBy (agent), and wasStartedAt(time).

Timothy Lebo: higlight the distinction of wasstartedBy (agent), and wasStartedAt(time).

09:26:00 <dgarijo> ... this events are already modeled

... this events are already modeled

09:26:11 <jcheney> And we were already considering renaming "QualifiedInvolvement" to "Event"...

James Cheney: And we were already considering renaming "QualifiedInvolvement" to "Event"...

09:26:11 <dgarijo> ... through the qualifiedInvolvement.

... through the qualifiedInvolvement.

09:26:33 <dgarijo> ... by modeled is in the ontology.

... by modeled is in the ontology.

09:26:50 <dgarijo> ... generation and usage are qualifiedInvolvement

... generation and usage are qualifiedInvolvement

09:27:19 <dgarijo> pgroth: notion of transforming qualifiedInvolvement to Event

Paul Groth: notion of transforming qualifiedInvolvement to Event

09:27:47 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

09:27:48 <dgarijo> smiles: disagreed with tim

Simon Miles: disagreed with tim

09:27:53 <Zakim> +??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0

09:28:23 <dgarijo> ... it is just to describe the relationship, not the event.

... it is just to describe the relationship, not the event.

09:28:44 <dgarijo> ... proposes to separate wasStartedAt and wasStartedBy

... proposes to separate wasStartedAt and wasStartedBy

09:29:03 <dgarijo> khalid: would the agent be optional in wasStartedAt

Khalid Belhajjame: would the agent be optional in wasStartedAt

09:29:28 <Stian> so say prov:hadRole on an event is a bit strange.. did the event play a role? I thought the event was what happened when someone assumed the role

Stian Soiland-Reyes: so say prov:hadRole on an event is a bit strange.. did the event play a role? I thought the event was what happened when someone assumed the role

09:29:29 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:29:37 <Stian> I think QualifiedInvolvement could have duration

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I think QualifiedInvolvement could have duration

09:29:41 <Stian> for instance Usage

Stian Soiland-Reyes: for instance Usage

09:29:52 <Stian> I used the encyclopedia entity from 14:45 to 15:15

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I used the encyclopedia entity from 14:45 to 15:15

09:30:02 <Stian> and at 15:00 I generated the report

Stian Soiland-Reyes: and at 15:00 I generated the report

09:30:42 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:30:42 <Stian> 1~but that took me from 14:50 till 15:00

Stian Soiland-Reyes: 1~but that took me from 14:50 till 15:00

09:30:45 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

09:30:45 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to respond to paul: we don't *need* new constructs - can can get by without them - but is it *easier* to describe/understand by introducing the extra concepts.

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to respond to paul: we don't *need* new constructs - can can get by without them - but is it *easier* to describe/understand by introducing the extra concepts.

09:30:55 <tlebo> zakim!

Timothy Lebo: zakim!

09:31:08 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

09:31:11 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

09:31:23 <dgarijo> GK: do we need these new constructs? I don't think so

Graham Klyne: do we need these new constructs? I don't think so

09:32:02 <dgarijo> we shouldn't change the current model unless we do have a clear use case

we shouldn't change the current model unless we do have a clear use case

09:32:18 <dgarijo> luc: but what is it in the dm?

Luc Moreau: but what is it in the dm?

09:32:46 <dgarijo> gk: events are not surfaced as part of the dm, just as an explanation

Graham Klyne: events are not surfaced as part of the dm, just as an explanation

09:33:12 <Stian> formally the events have partial ordering which is defined in constraints - like usage time of entity >= generation time

Stian Soiland-Reyes: formally the events have partial ordering which is defined in constraints - like usage time of entity >= generation time

09:34:01 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:34:01 <tlebo> over taken by Activities.

Timothy Lebo: over taken by Activities.

09:35:06 <dgarijo> paolo: activities begin and end

Paolo Missier: activities begin and end

09:35:15 <dgarijo> ... what do you say about entity?

... what do you say about entity?

09:36:05 <dgarijo> ... if you ad the generatedBy and generatedAt you restore part of the consistency

... if you ad the generatedBy and generatedAt you restore part of the consistency

09:36:19 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:36:23 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo

09:37:14 <Paolo> hi Jun!

Paolo Missier: hi Jun!

09:37:44 <Stian> jun: our zakim bridge has gone bad .. do you want to skype in?

Jun Zhao: our zakim bridge has gone bad .. do you want to skype in? [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

09:37:50 <dgarijo> pgroth: the only issue is that we want some sort simetry/consistency across the model

Paul Groth: the only issue is that we want some sort simetry/consistency across the model

09:37:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:38:18 <dgarijo> luc: last part of the issue

Luc Moreau: last part of the issue

09:38:24 <pgroth> or jun are you on the bridge?

Paul Groth: or jun are you on the bridge?

09:38:37 <Stian> Zakim, who is on the phone?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, who is on the phone?

09:38:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P0

09:38:47 <dgarijo> ... something was started by something which is not clearly an agent

... something was started by something which is not clearly an agent

09:39:01 <Zakim> -??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P0

09:39:02 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

09:39:02 <Zakim> Attendees were

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were

09:39:02 <smiles> Just to say, I dont think my proposal implies any need for change in the ontology, as long as we dont interpret qualifiedinvolvement as an event

Simon Miles: Just to say, I dont think my proposal implies any need for change in the ontology, as long as we dont interpret qualifiedinvolvement as an event

09:39:32 <Stian> Zakim, list conferences

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, list conferences

09:39:32 <Zakim> I see no active conferences

Zakim IRC Bot: I see no active conferences

09:39:34 <Zakim> scheduled at this time is PROV_f2f()3:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: scheduled at this time is PROV_f2f()3:00AM

09:39:40 <Stian> zakim, this is PROV_f2f

Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, this is PROV_f2f

09:39:40 <Zakim> Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV_f2f".

Zakim IRC Bot: Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV_f2f".

09:39:53 <Stian> zakim, this is PROV

Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, this is PROV

09:39:53 <Zakim> Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started.  Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV".

Zakim IRC Bot: Stian, I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be PROV".

09:39:54 <tlebo> @smiles, can QualifiedInvolvment be a superclass of event?

Timothy Lebo: @smiles, can QualifiedInvolvment be a superclass of event?

09:39:56 <Stian> zakim, this is bob

Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, this is bob

09:39:56 <Zakim> sorry, Stian, I do not see a conference named 'bob' in progress or scheduled at this time

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Stian, I do not see a conference named 'bob' in progress or scheduled at this time

09:40:10 <dgarijo> ... a coment that starts an activity

... a coment that starts an activity

09:40:26 <dgarijo> ... the presence of an entity that started the activity

... the presence of an entity that started the activity

09:40:37 <dgarijo> ... we can't express that

... we can't express that

09:40:44 <dgarijo> ... it is a limitation

... it is a limitation

09:41:00 <pgroth> zakim, this with be PROV_f2f()

Paul Groth: zakim, this with be PROV_f2f()

09:41:00 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this with be PROV_f2f()', pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this with be PROV_f2f()', pgroth

09:41:17 <tlebo> #zakim #irc #prov #humor from @stian

Timothy Lebo: #zakim #irc #prov #humor from @stian

09:41:22 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV

Paul Groth: Zakim, this will be PROV

09:41:22 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM scheduled to start 101 minutes ago

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth; I see PROV_f2f()3:00AM scheduled to start 101 minutes ago

09:41:38 <tlebo> entities cause activities

Timothy Lebo: entities cause activities

09:41:55 <tlebo> (luc think people will want to say it)

Timothy Lebo: (luc think people will want to say it)

09:42:05 <smiles> @tlebo that doesnt seem intuitive to me. I would think the event is 'in' the relation between qualifiedinvolvement and timestamp, but not an explicit class

Simon Miles: @tlebo that doesnt seem intuitive to me. I would think the event is 'in' the relation between qualifiedinvolvement and timestamp, but not an explicit class

09:42:24 <dgarijo> +q

+q

09:42:44 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:42:46 <tlebo> @smiles, the QualifiedInvolvement is the reification (shhh!), so the timestamp on that _is_ in the relation.

Timothy Lebo: @smiles, the QualifiedInvolvement is the reification (shhh!), so the timestamp on that _is_ in the relation.

09:42:49 <Luc> ack dg

Luc Moreau: ack dg

09:43:05 <Stian> moving many of these shortcuts away from formal model means that their granularity might disappear from the provenance exchange

Stian Soiland-Reyes: moving many of these shortcuts away from formal model means that their granularity might disappear from the provenance exchange

09:43:13 <Stian> then something automatically becomes exapnded in DM

Stian Soiland-Reyes: then something automatically becomes exapnded in DM

09:43:15 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

09:43:40 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:44:04 <tlebo> what are we converging to?

Timothy Lebo: what are we converging to?

09:44:30 <jcheney> Can we identify some next actions and move on?

James Cheney: Can we identify some next actions and move on?

09:44:31 <dgarijo> dgarijo: agents are entities in the end, so we could see that the wasStartedBy allways as startedBy an entity

Daniel Garijo: agents are entities in the end, so we could see that the wasStartedBy allways as startedBy an entity

09:44:39 <smiles> @tlebo not sure i quite understand, but i think that matches what i was saying - we are reifying the relationship to say more about it, but the event is only one thing you might say about it...

Simon Miles: @tlebo not sure i quite understand, but i think that matches what i was saying - we are reifying the relationship to say more about it, but the event is only one thing you might say about it...

09:45:01 <jcheney> We are arguing with phantoms, need concrete proposals first.

James Cheney: We are arguing with phantoms, need concrete proposals first.

09:45:07 <GK> q+ to say this worries me a little because it seems to remove one of the core concepts from OPMV, which AFAICT is a fairly minimal provenance core based in real-world modelling experience

Graham Klyne: q+ to say this worries me a little because it seems to remove one of the core concepts from OPMV, which AFAICT is a fairly minimal provenance core based in real-world modelling experience

09:45:10 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:45:40 <dgarijo> khalid: we are using the same relationship for 2 different things

Khalid Belhajjame: we are using the same relationship for 2 different things

09:46:07 <dgarijo> ... control ordering, it is more like triggering the activity

... control ordering, it is more like triggering the activity

09:46:16 <GK> Khalid: startedBy vs triggered?

Khalid Belhajjame: startedBy vs triggered? [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

09:46:35 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:46:42 <Luc> ack kha

Luc Moreau: ack kha

09:46:55 <dgarijo> ... it would be less confusing if we had another relationship for this instead of the same

... it would be less confusing if we had another relationship for this instead of the same

09:47:18 <tlebo> @smiles, I see what you're saying.

Timothy Lebo: @smiles, I see what you're saying.

09:47:53 <tlebo> can anyone summarize what is going on?

Timothy Lebo: can anyone summarize what is going on?

09:47:56 <dgarijo> GK: It's a clever trick, but I'm a bit worried about. We might be losing some information.

Graham Klyne: It's a clever trick, but I'm a bit worried about. We might be losing some information.

09:48:30 <dgarijo> luc: in OPM you couldn't express the provenance of Agents.

Luc Moreau: in OPM you couldn't express the provenance of Agents.

09:48:46 <dgarijo> ... it was a fundamental shortcoming of that model

... it was a fundamental shortcoming of that model

09:48:57 <tlebo> luc: important that Agents be Entities so we can describe them.

Luc Moreau: important that Agents be Entities so we can describe them. [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ]

09:49:18 <tlebo> topic - Letting Entities make stuff happen (i.e., be Agents)

Timothy Lebo: topic - Letting Entities make stuff happen (i.e., be Agents)

09:49:33 <dgarijo> pgroth: GK wants agents to have responsability

Paul Groth: GK wants agents to have responsability

09:49:47 <dgarijo> ... or osmething

... or osmething

09:50:13 <tlebo> so we already have Entity wasDerivedFrom Entity. But we're now looking at Activities being caused by Entities?

Timothy Lebo: so we already have Entity wasDerivedFrom Entity. But we're now looking at Activities being caused by Entities?

09:50:41 <tlebo> e.g. "The" email that caused the flurry thread of email responses.

Timothy Lebo: e.g. "The" email that caused the flurry thread of email responses.

09:51:00 <dgarijo> ... wasStartedBy has a connotation of agency, and if we removed that we still have this connotation

... wasStartedBy has a connotation of agency, and if we removed that we still have this connotation

09:51:12 <Stian> wasTriggeredBy or wasStartedBecauseOfThePresenceOf (ugggu) is more the passive started usecase we are talking about

Stian Soiland-Reyes: wasTriggeredBy or wasStartedBecauseOfThePresenceOf (ugggu) is more the passive started usecase we are talking about

09:51:32 <tlebo> are we just defining a subclass of Activity that are those that generate entities derived from the specified Entity?

Timothy Lebo: are we just defining a subclass of Activity that are those that generate entities derived from the specified Entity?

09:51:39 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

09:51:40 <tlebo> q+ to ask are we just defining a subclass of Activity that are those that generate entities derived from the specified Entity?

Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask are we just defining a subclass of Activity that are those that generate entities derived from the specified Entity?

09:51:50 <khalidbelhajjame> How about wasEventuallyStartedBy :-)

Khalid Belhajjame: How about wasEventuallyStartedBy :-)

09:51:50 <GK> q-

Graham Klyne: q-

09:51:55 <Luc> ack gk

Luc Moreau: ack gk

09:53:22 <Stian> mmm... it's a kind of activity derivation, is it not.. "wasCausedBy"

Stian Soiland-Reyes: mmm... it's a kind of activity derivation, is it not.. "wasCausedBy"

09:53:28 <dgarijo> tim: clarification about the topic

Timothy Lebo: clarification about the topic

09:53:51 <dgarijo> luc: maybe it is a corner case..

Luc Moreau: maybe it is a corner case..

09:54:29 <dgarijo> tim: you want to associate that entity to some the activities that used it?

Timothy Lebo: you want to associate that entity to some the activities that used it?

09:54:37 <pgroth> signature is: wasStartedBy(Agent)

Paul Groth: signature is: wasStartedBy(Agent)

09:54:44 <dgarijo> luc: anything that started an activity is an agent

Luc Moreau: anything that started an activity is an agent

09:54:46 <Stian> and making an email an agent (and giving it responsibility) does sound quite far out

Stian Soiland-Reyes: and making an email an agent (and giving it responsibility) does sound quite far out

09:54:56 <pgroth> thus you infer the email as agent

Paul Groth: thus you infer the email as agent

09:55:03 <GK> Or -  there exists an activity that used the email and was initiated by some agent

Graham Klyne: Or - there exists an activity that used the email and was initiated by some agent

09:55:09 <dgarijo> ... so in this use case we would have the email as an agent

... so in this use case we would have the email as an agent

09:55:35 <jcheney> issue-207??

James Cheney: ISSUE-207??

09:56:19 <dgarijo> luc: issue: agent should be asserted and not inferred.

Luc Moreau: issue: agent should be asserted and not inferred.

09:56:22 <jcheney> issue-206??

James Cheney: ISSUE-206??

09:56:40 <Stian> yes - http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/206 is related

Stian Soiland-Reyes: yes - http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/206 is related

09:56:50 <GK> Hmmm... can we separate all the inference stuff from the basic data model definition?

Graham Klyne: Hmmm... can we separate all the inference stuff from the basic data model definition?

09:57:05 <dgarijo> luc: wrap up: we don't have a proposal on the table right now.

Luc Moreau: wrap up: we don't have a proposal on the table right now.

09:57:31 <Stian> if we can't agree - we propose strip/remove.  Removing the agent-constraint is a kind of removal.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: if we can't agree - we propose strip/remove. Removing the agent-constraint is a kind of removal.

09:57:39 <dgarijo> ... wasStartedBy between an activity and an Entity instead of an Agent, but there is not enough consensus.

... wasStartedBy between an activity and an Entity instead of an Agent, but there is not enough consensus.

09:57:48 <GK> @stian +1

Graham Klyne: @stian +1

09:58:11 <dgarijo> ... if we do it, it is not a specialization of an association

... if we do it, it is not a specialization of an association

09:58:20 <dgarijo> ... it is not clear.

... it is not clear.

09:58:26 <Stian> @luc: +1 - wasAssociatedWith to stay as responsibility and agent

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @luc: +1 - wasAssociatedWith to stay as responsibility and agent

09:58:33 <GK> @stian I think this leads back to Paul's "trick", but keeping the notion of agency in the model.

Graham Klyne: @stian I think this leads back to Paul's "trick", but keeping the notion of agency in the model.

09:58:41 <dgarijo> ... the other proposal is that we don't make any change.

... the other proposal is that we don't make any change.

09:59:24 <dgarijo> ... consequence: the email is regarded as an agent in the data model, which is not very "natural".

... consequence: the email is regarded as an agent in the data model, which is not very "natural".

10:01:13 <Stian> @GK which 'this'..? :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK which 'this'..? :)

10:01:50 <GK> @stian this == "strip/remove" the bits we don't agree about

Graham Klyne: @stian this == "strip/remove" the bits we don't agree about

10:02:15 <GK> Why is this linked to startedBy not being a subproperty of wasAssociatedWith?

Graham Klyne: Why is this linked to startedBy not being a subproperty of wasAssociatedWith?

10:02:27 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

10:02:34 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

10:02:35 <Zakim> Attendees were

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were

10:02:42 <Stian> @GK but is it not confusing if we have a semantic constrain in the DM, but don't reflect that in the PROV-O? Then you can express things n PROV-O that don't map (easily) to PROV-DM.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK but is it not confusing if we have a semantic constrain in the DM, but don't reflect that in the PROV-O? Then you can express things n PROV-O that don't map (easily) to PROV-DM.

10:02:45 <Stian> zakim is drunk

Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim is drunk

10:04:04 <stephenc> (I think that outburst from zakim was caused by me connecting to voip, and being the 1st participant, and hanging up)

Stephen Cresswell: (I think that outburst from zakim was caused by me connecting to voip, and being the 1st participant, and hanging up)

10:04:25 <tlebo> how long is this break?

Timothy Lebo: how long is this break?

10:04:32 <pgroth> 10 minutes

Paul Groth: 10 minutes

10:04:35 <tlebo> thx

Timothy Lebo: thx

10:04:39 <pgroth> maybe 15 minutes

Paul Groth: maybe 15 minutes

10:05:31 <tlebo> what about causedBy ?

Timothy Lebo: what about causedBy ?

10:06:09 <tlebo> Event wasDerivedFrom Event

Timothy Lebo: Entity wasDerivedFrom Entity

10:06:14 <tlebo> ack!

Timothy Lebo: ack!

10:06:22 <tlebo> s/Event/Entity/
10:06:23 <pgroth> no way

Paul Groth: no way

10:06:41 <tlebo> Activity wasCausedBy Email

Timothy Lebo: Activity wasCausedBy Email

10:06:54 <tlebo> Activity wasStartedBy EvilDoer

Timothy Lebo: Activity wasStartedBy EvilDoer

10:14:48 <tlebo> @sandro hi!

(No events recorded for 7 minutes)

Timothy Lebo: @sandro hi!

10:14:56 <tlebo> i'm no Skype now.

Timothy Lebo: i'm no Skype now.

10:15:01 <tlebo> zakim didn't like me this morning.

Timothy Lebo: zakim didn't like me this morning.

10:16:24 <tlebo> zakim, why aren't you answering your phone?

Timothy Lebo: zakim, why aren't you answering your phone?

10:16:24 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, tlebo.

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

10:20:44 <sandro> Zakim, what is the code?

Sandro Hawke: Zakim, what is the code?

10:20:44 <Zakim> the conference code is 77683 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 77683 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sandro

10:20:50 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has now started

10:20:57 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

10:21:00 <tlebo> @jcheney, I can't open http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/File:Prov-sem.pdf

Timothy Lebo: @jcheney, I can't open http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/File:Prov-sem.pdf

10:21:29 <tlebo> page says application/zip, but .pdf which is it?

Timothy Lebo: page says application/zip, but .pdf which is it?

10:23:15 <ivan_> zakim, this is prov

Ivan Herman: zakim, this is prov

10:23:15 <Zakim> ivan_, this was already PROV_f2f()3:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: ivan_, this was already PROV_f2f()3:00AM

10:23:17 <Zakim> ok, ivan_; that matches PROV_f2f()3:00AM

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan_; that matches PROV_f2f()3:00AM

10:23:50 <sandro> ivan_, are you folks calling in to Zakim now?

Sandro Hawke: ivan_, are you folks calling in to Zakim now?

10:23:51 <Zakim> +??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1

10:23:57 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:24:15 <Zakim> +tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo

10:24:26 <jcheney> Oops, uploaded keynote source.  Should work now.

James Cheney: Oops, uploaded keynote source. Should work now.

10:24:35 <tlebo> Hi, zakim!

Timothy Lebo: Hi, zakim!

10:24:45 <tlebo> Zakim, did you miss us?

Timothy Lebo: Zakim, did you miss us?

10:24:45 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, tlebo.

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

10:24:48 <Zakim> + +31.20.598.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +31.20.598.aaaa

10:24:56 <pgroth> we have moved to zakim

Paul Groth: we have moved to zakim

10:26:21 <Paolo> Jun are you on Zakim?

Paolo Missier: Jun are you on Zakim?

10:26:31 <Stian> zakim, who is on the phone?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, who is on the phone?

10:26:31 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, ??P1, tlebo, +31.20.598.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Sandro, ??P1, tlebo, +31.20.598.aaaa

10:26:35 <Paolo> zakim, who is on the phone?

Paolo Missier: zakim, who is on the phone?

10:26:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, ??P1, tlebo, +31.20.598.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Sandro, ??P1, tlebo, +31.20.598.aaaa

10:26:51 <jcheney> slides at: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/File:Prov-sem.pdf

James Cheney: slides at: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/File:Prov-sem.pdf

10:27:26 <khalidbelhajjame> Topic: prov-sem

2. prov-sem

Summary: James presented a strawman proposal for a formal semantics of provenance. The group positively recieved the proposal and agreed to make it a deliverable of the project. The prov-sem was seen a mechanism to to encode proper provenance. Additionally, he presented the ProvRDF mappings page that provides a systematic means to map prov-dm to prov-o.

<pgroth> Summary: James presented a strawman proposal for a formal semantics of provenance. The group positively recieved the proposal and agreed to make it a deliverable of the project. The prov-sem was seen a mechanism to to encode proper provenance. Additionally, he presented the ProvRDF mappings page that provides a systematic means to map prov-dm to prov-o.
10:27:33 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:27:33 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

10:27:36 <pgroth> slide 2

Paul Groth: slide 2

10:27:59 <tlebo> (btw, can't open the slides. Press on)

Timothy Lebo: (btw, can't open the slides. Press on)

10:28:25 <Stian> works in chrome

Stian Soiland-Reyes: works in chrome

10:29:01 <pgroth> slide 3

Paul Groth: slide 3

10:29:03 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: we need to be careful about the features that we include

James Cheney: we need to be careful about the features that we include [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:29:19 <tlebo> thx, have it in chrome

Timothy Lebo: thx, have it in chrome

10:29:40 <pgroth> slide 4

Paul Groth: slide 4

10:30:02 <Stian> sandro: ;')

Sandro Hawke: ;') [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

10:30:39 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: we have high level contructs, that can be used by people, vs. complex (and risk) approach

James Cheney: we have high level contructs, that can be used by people, vs. complex (and risk) approach [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:30:48 <Stian> I like this comparison.. PROV-DM ~= CISC  - PROV-O ~= RISC

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I like this comparison.. PROV-DM ~= CISC - PROV-O ~= RISC

10:31:08 <GK> I'm not sure the scruffy/proper axis is quite like CISC/RISC axis

Graham Klyne: I'm not sure the scruffy/proper axis is quite like CISC/RISC axis

10:31:22 <pgroth> slide 5

Paul Groth: slide 5

10:31:31 <tlebo> I would reverse the RISC analogy

Timothy Lebo: I would reverse the RISC analogy

10:32:27 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: approach: formally specifying the meaning of prov-dm, which can then facilitate the maping from prov-dm to prov-o

James Cheney: approach: formally specifying the meaning of prov-dm, which can then facilitate the maping from prov-dm to prov-o [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:32:34 <Stian> @tlebo, elaborate (briefly!)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @tlebo, elaborate (briefly!)

10:33:30 <tlebo> scruffies want fewer constructs for the common cases - RISC

Timothy Lebo: scruffies want fewer constructs for the common cases - RISC

10:33:37 <Stian> we've got many 'instructions' in DM, O has fewer instructions that can be used/combined to do (most of) what you do in DM

Stian Soiland-Reyes: we've got many 'instructions' in DM, O has fewer instructions that can be used/combined to do (most of) what you do in DM

10:33:41 <Stian> I agree

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I agree

10:33:46 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the benefit is that we can systematically map prov-dm to prov-o

James Cheney: the benefit is that we can systematically map prov-dm to prov-o [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:33:50 <GK> I see RDF vs PROV-DM like RISC vs CISC.  Either can be scruffy or proper.  IMHO

Graham Klyne: I see RDF vs PROV-DM like RISC vs CISC. Either can be scruffy or proper. IMHO

10:34:01 <pgroth> slide 6

Paul Groth: slide 6

10:34:24 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: what is the goal of the formal semantics?

James Cheney: what is the goal of the formal semantics? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:34:39 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: What are the metrics?

James Cheney: What are the metrics? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:34:45 <tlebo> test cases!

Timothy Lebo: test cases!

10:34:51 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: what process can be used for reconciling mismatches

James Cheney: what process can be used for reconciling mismatches [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:35:35 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

10:35:54 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman

James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman

10:36:16 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: there has been some changes

James Cheney: there has been some changes [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:36:40 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: prov-dm assertions are seen as formula

James Cheney: prov-dm assertions are seen as formula [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:37:04 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: prov-dm instance is seen as conjunction of formula

James Cheney: prov-dm instance is seen as conjunction of formula [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:38:00 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: terminology-wise, I use world as opposed to model to avoid confusion

James Cheney: terminology-wise, I use world as opposed to model to avoid confusion [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:38:36 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I speak about identifiers as variables in a logical formula

James Cheney: I speak about identifiers as variables in a logical formula [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:39:09 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I assume that there is a set of time instances that can be partially or totally ordered

James Cheney: I assume that there is a set of time instances that can be partially or totally ordered [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:39:11 <GK> @jcheyney re identifiers.  Suggest s/(or blank nodes in RDF)/(or nodes in RDF)/

Graham Klyne: @jcheyney re identifiers. Suggest s/(or blank nodes in RDF)/(or nodes in RDF)/

10:39:33 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I am also using intervals of time

James Cheney: I am also using intervals of time [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:40:14 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I am agnostic about what values are and what attributes are

James Cheney: I am agnostic about what values are and what attributes are [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:40:42 <pgroth> in section formulas

Paul Groth: in section formulas

10:40:57 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: A subset of records in prov-dm are represented as formulas

James Cheney: A subset of records in prov-dm are represented as formulas [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:41:19 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Formulas

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Formulas

10:41:30 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: there are two kinds of formulas: element_ and relation_formula

James Cheney: there are two kinds of formulas: element_ and relation_formula [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:41:48 <pgroth> section worlds

Paul Groth: section worlds

10:44:40 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: There are three layers: Things, Objects, Syntax

James Cheney: There are three layers: Things, Objects, Syntax [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:44:59 <pgroth> no khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: no khalidbelhajjame

10:45:07 <pgroth> Things, Social, Syntax

Paul Groth: Things, Social, Syntax

10:46:01 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Things

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Things

10:46:40 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: Things have a life time and attributes that can change over time

James Cheney: Things have a life time and attributes that can change over time [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:46:52 <Stian> (jcheney just updated formula of #things to talk about Things rather than Objects)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (jcheney just updated formula of #things to talk about Things rather than Objects)

10:47:50 <tlebo> ^^ rdf:type prov:Account .

Timothy Lebo: ^^ rdf:type prov:Account .

10:48:07 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: example: thing can change color over tme, e.g., from blue to red

James Cheney: example: thing can change color over tme, e.g., from blue to red [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:48:48 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: It is possible to have two things that have the same attributes and attribute values

James Cheney: It is possible to have two things that have the same attributes and attribute values [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:49:03 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: and have the same lifetime

James Cheney: and have the same lifetime [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:49:49 <khalidbelhajjame> Stian: are you distinguishing between known and unkniown attributes

Stian Soiland-Reyes: are you distinguishing between known and unkniown attributes [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:50:04 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I am not saying anything about that

James Cheney: I am not saying anything about that [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:50:58 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

10:51:11 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: Things may not be distinguishable by anything other than their identity

James Cheney: Things may not be distinguishable by anything other than their identity [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:51:45 <Stian> @jcheney: This is good stuff

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @jcheney: This is good stuff

10:51:46 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: Entities, Activities and Agenets are seen as Objects

James Cheney: Entities, Activities and Agenets are seen as Objects [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:52:12 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Entities ?

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Entities ?

10:52:22 <pgroth> Objects

Paul Groth: Objects

10:52:36 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: An entity is a representation of a thing during an interval

James Cheney: An entity is a representation of a thing during an interval [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:53:05 <Stian> (jcheney removed "of things" in "a set Objects of things" under #Objects)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (jcheney removed "of things" in "a set Objects of things" under #Objects)

10:53:41 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: The difference between things and entities is the time dependency

James Cheney: The difference between things and entities is the time dependency [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:53:56 <pgroth> highlighting entities

Paul Groth: highlighting entities

10:54:21 <khalidbelhajjame> Ivan: what's the reason between the distinction between entities and objects?

Ivan Herman: what's the reason between the distinction between entities and objects? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:54:34 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: That's what the DM says

James Cheney: That's what the DM says [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:54:41 <Stian> YESSSS

Stian Soiland-Reyes: YESSSS

10:55:29 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: activities and entities are disjoint

Luc Moreau: activities and entities are disjoint [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:55:53 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the difference between the thing and object is there because it is in the DM

James Cheney: the difference between the thing and object is there because it is in the DM [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:56:01 <GK> For the purpose of formalizing prov-dm (as is), is it important to have     "lifetime : Things -> Intervals"  ?

Graham Klyne: For the purpose of formalizing prov-dm (as is), is it important to have "lifetime : Things -> Intervals" ?

10:56:12 <Stian> the difference between *entity* and *object*

Stian Soiland-Reyes: the difference between *entity* and *object*

10:56:20 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the grouping of entities, activities and agent under object is there for typing purposes

James Cheney: the grouping of entities, activities and agent under object is there for typing purposes [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:57:17 <pgroth> in section Activities

Paul Groth: in section Activities

10:58:16 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: a given object does not necessarily have values for all attributes

Luc Moreau: a given object does not necessarily have values for all attributes [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:58:26 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: some values stand for missing

James Cheney: some values stand for missing [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

10:58:45 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I d rather go through the basics rather than trying to discuss everything

James Cheney: I d rather go through the basics rather than trying to discuss everything [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:00:25 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: because we separate things that varies from entities that are (fixed), we have a function that map the two

James Cheney: because we separate things that varies from entities that are (fixed), we have a function that map the two [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:01:07 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney:  examples: three entities can describe the same entity with possibly overlapping intervals

James Cheney: examples: three entities can describe the same entity with possibly overlapping intervals [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:01:15 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: events

James Cheney: events [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:01:39 <Stian> Activity disjoint from Entity prevents an Activity using/generating/etc another Activity, etc (so you can't say :discussing a prov:Activity .   :scribing a prov:Activity, prov:used :discussing  ) - you will need to make the entity :discussion (which is... generated by :discussing?)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Activity disjoint from Entity prevents an Activity using/generating/etc another Activity, etc (so you can't say :discussing a prov:Activity . :scribing a prov:Activity, prov:used :discussing ) - you will need to make the entity :discussion (which is... generated by :discussing?)

11:01:51 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: an activity is an object that comrises a set of events

James Cheney: an activity is an object that comrises a set of events [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:02:29 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: an activity is related to a collection of events

James Cheney: an activity is related to a collection of events [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:02:52 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: Events is a subset of Objects

James Cheney: Events is a subset of Objects [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:03:16 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: an event relates an activity to an entity

James Cheney: an event relates an activity to an entity [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:03:29 <dgarijo> @Stian: the phantom entity!

@Stian: the phantom entity!

11:03:33 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: an event is associated with a time

James Cheney: an event is associated with a time [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:04:09 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: events can be ordered based on the times associated with them

James Cheney: events can be ordered based on the times associated with them [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:04:14 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Events ?

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Events ?

11:04:23 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: start and end of activities are events

James Cheney: start and end of activities are events [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:04:24 <GK> This makes me realize my earlier focus of (some) discussion on "domain of discourse" wasn't quite right...

Graham Klyne: This makes me realize my earlier focus of (some) discussion on "domain of discourse" wasn't quite right...

11:05:09 <GK> @tlebo yes, I think so

Graham Klyne: @tlebo yes, I think so

11:05:18 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: Used relates an event to an entity

James Cheney: Used relates an event to an entity [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:06:00 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: to keep track of the different uses, we are associating the entity with the event

James Cheney: to keep track of the different uses, we are associating the entity with the event [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:06:11 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the "use" event

James Cheney: the "use" event [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:13:14 <Stian> @Paolo +1  (and that's why perhaps 'destruction' is wrong term)

(No events recorded for 7 minutes)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @Paolo +1 (and that's why perhaps 'destruction' is wrong term)

11:13:15 <khalidbelhajjame> Paolo: the disctuction of an entity does not means the disctuction of the tghing, but possibly thhe modification of the value of one of its attributes

Paolo Missier: the disctuction of an entity does not means the disctuction of the tghing, but possibly thhe modification of the value of one of its attributes [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:13:16 <pgroth> Section Semantics

Paul Groth: Section Semantics

11:13:28 <Stian> it's more 'end of characterisation' - which in some cases could be end of the thing

Stian Soiland-Reyes: it's more 'end of characterisation' - which in some cases could be end of the thing

11:13:44 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the identifiers are interpreted as objects not as things

James Cheney: the identifiers are interpreted as objects not as things [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:14:11 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: multiple identifiers may refer to the same object

James Cheney: multiple identifiers may refer to the same object [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:14:16 <Stian> so the identifier is an activity, entity, event or perhaps something else

Stian Soiland-Reyes: so the identifier is an activity, entity, event or perhaps something else

11:14:48 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: the identifiers are identifiers of descriptions as opposed to identifiers of things?

Luc Moreau: the identifiers are identifiers of descriptions as opposed to identifiers of things? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:14:58 <Stian> it's more like the identifier of objects in the universe of discourse

Stian Soiland-Reyes: it's more like the identifier of objects in the universe of discourse

11:15:34 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: yes, but I am not super-comfortable with it !

James Cheney: yes, but I am not super-comfortable with it ! [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:16:09 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: would use of perspective instead of description

Paul Groth: would use of perspective instead of description [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:17:46 <pgroth> in section satisfaction

Paul Groth: in section satisfaction

11:17:50 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: for each formula, we define relationships that says that a given formula is satisfied in a given world, given an interpretation

James Cheney: for each formula, we define relationships that says that a given formula is satisfied in a given world, given an interpretation [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:18:01 <GK> Interesting... I always read |= as "entails" (as opposed to "models")

Graham Klyne: Interesting... I always read |= as "entails" (as opposed to "models")

11:18:16 <Stian> did Objects require there to be at least 1 attribute - or just that the function gives those attributes which "Don't change?". I think the second - then easily all things can be objects

Stian Soiland-Reyes: did Objects require there to be at least 1 attribute - or just that the function gives those attributes which "Don't change?". I think the second - then easily all things can be objects

11:18:29 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: a conjuctions of formulas holds if the constituent formulas holds individually

James Cheney: a conjuctions of formulas holds if the constituent formulas holds individually [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:19:43 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Entity_Records

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Entity_Records

11:19:55 <khalidbelhajjame> Entity Records section

Khalid Belhajjame: Entity Records section

11:20:55 <Stian> @GK - well our world here is within the view of one particular account

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK - well our world here is within the view of one particular account

11:22:04 <Stian> and this means that entity records with the same ID (but different attribs) are mapped in the same space (which I think is intention of DM)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: and this means that entity records with the same ID (but different attribs) are mapped in the same space (which I think is intention of DM)

11:22:13 <tlebo> the scruffies tend to name (and reference) Things, not Entities.

Timothy Lebo: the scruffies tend to name (and reference) Things, not Entities.

11:22:33 <khalidbelhajjame> Activity Records section

Khalid Belhajjame: Activity Records section

11:23:28 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: an activity has a plan, and has a start and end times, which are literals

James Cheney: an activity has a plan, and has a start and end times, which are literals [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:23:34 <tlebo> (or, the broadest Entity that mirrors the Thing to the largest interval....)

Timothy Lebo: (or, the broadest Entity that mirrors the Thing to the largest interval....)

11:23:51 <GK> @stian ... er, yes, but I'm not sure of the motivation for this observation.  I was just trying to point out that this semantics was enforcing a certain level of invariance.

Graham Klyne: @stian ... er, yes, but I'm not sure of the motivation for this observation. I was just trying to point out that this semantics was enforcing a certain level of invariance.

11:24:13 <khalidbelhajjame> Generation section

Khalid Belhajjame: Generation section

11:25:01 <Stian> sorry - what is the obj here?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: sorry - what is the obj here?

11:25:38 <Stian> ah -it should be in Entities - right

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ah -it should be in Entities - right

11:27:47 <khalidbelhajjame> Spezialization section

Khalid Belhajjame: Spezialization section

11:28:20 <tlebo> please don't collapse to owl:sameAs.

Timothy Lebo: please don't collapse to owl:sameAs.

11:28:31 <Stian> @GK that's what our model says - if someone abuses the model then they can't expect the formal semantics to still work - in fact that they don't work should be a good hint to them that they've done something too scruffy

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK that's what our model says - if someone abuses the model then they can't expect the formal semantics to still work - in fact that they don't work should be a good hint to them that they've done something too scruffy

11:29:06 <GK> @stian indeed...

Graham Klyne: @stian indeed...

11:30:39 <stephenc> Is specializationOf reflexive? I think it needs to be stated whether or not (here and in prov-dm).

Stephen Cresswell: Is specializationOf reflexive? I think it needs to be stated whether or not (here and in prov-dm).

11:31:56 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

11:32:00 <GK> IMO, this definition of specialization actually allows us to let the DM define a "scruffy" usage, and then sets out the conditions under which the provenance can be combined in ways that we might want/expect to do....

Graham Klyne: IMO, this definition of specialization actually allows us to let the DM define a "scruffy" usage, and then sets out the conditions under which the provenance can be combined in ways that we might want/expect to do....

11:32:26 <GK> ... i.e. we can eliminate the thing/entity distinction in DM, but still keep this semantic model.

Graham Klyne: ... i.e. we can eliminate the thing/entity distinction in DM, but still keep this semantic model.

11:33:17 <Stian> .... and in some cases the two physical things could be the same entity?  ("The north-facing traffic light in StreetA crossing StreetB is red")

Stian Soiland-Reyes: .... and in some cases the two physical things could be the same entity? ("The north-facing traffic light in StreetA crossing StreetB is red")

11:34:03 <Paolo> @ stephenc: I think it should be stated it is reflexive

Paolo Missier: @ stephenc: I think it should be stated it is reflexive

11:35:50 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

11:35:57 <Stian> @stephenc reflexive is allowed here and implied because if 'if and only if'.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @stephenc reflexive is allowed here and implied because of 'of and only of'.

11:36:04 <Stian> s/if/of/
11:36:19 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: we could made the chances to collapse the distinction between things and entities, we map the entities to the semantics. This may give us the (formal) behaviour taht we want

Graham Klyne: we could made the chances to collapse the distinction between things and entities, we map the entities to the semantics. This may give us the (formal) behaviour taht we want [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:37:05 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the objective is to see if prov-sem is a good, and to specify the kinds of interactions that prov-sem can have with other documents

James Cheney: the objective is to see if prov-sem is a good, and to specify the kinds of interactions that prov-sem can have with other documents [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:37:10 <pgroth> last slide

Paul Groth: last slide

11:37:11 <GK> I think DM can describe both PropP and ScrufP (proper and scruffy provenance), and the semantics then tells us when the expressions can be treated formally as PropP.

Graham Klyne: I think DM can describe both PropP and ScrufP (proper and scruffy provenance), and the semantics then tells us when the expressions can be treated formally as PropP.

11:37:12 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: last slide

James Cheney: last slide [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:37:36 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney:  plan for next weeks, have something that we can show to other people, e.G., in Dagsthul

James Cheney: plan for next weeks, have something that we can show to other people, e.G., in Dagsthul [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:38:04 <GK> The upside for us... the DM can be radically simplified by deferring to this semantics for much of its formal content.

Graham Klyne: The upside for us... the DM can be radically simplified by deferring to this semantics for much of its formal content.

11:38:18 <ivan> q+

Ivan Herman: q+

11:38:28 <Stian> @GK +10

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @GK +10

11:38:45 <pgroth> ack gk

Paul Groth: ack gk

11:38:49 <pgroth> ack ivan

Paul Groth: ack ivan

11:40:05 <khalidbelhajjame> Ivan:the formal sem can be used to check if what is described (makes sense?)

Ivan Herman: the formal sem can be used to check if what is described (makes sense?) [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:40:47 <khalidbelhajjame> Ivan: OWL can be used to infer things (facts)

Ivan Herman: OWL can be used to infer things (facts) [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:40:50 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

11:40:52 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

11:41:10 <kai> q+

Kai Eckert: q+

11:41:12 <stephenc> @Stian, @Paolo It seems to depend on reflexivity of "contained in" in condition (3).  In prov-dm, I think it is still ambiguous, although I think Paolo and GK discussed it on mailing list and agreed.

Stephen Cresswell: @Stian, @Paolo It seems to depend on reflexivity of "contained in" in condition (3). In prov-dm, I think it is still ambiguous, although I think Paolo and GK discussed it on mailing list and agreed.

11:41:54 <GK> q+ to say... the DM can be radically simplified by deferring to this semantics for much of its formal content.

Graham Klyne: q+ to say... the DM can be radically simplified by deferring to this semantics for much of its formal content.

11:42:08 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: we may want to think about if prov-sem can hep in identifying inference rules in prov-dm or prov-o

James Cheney: we may want to think about if prov-sem can hep in identifying inference rules in prov-dm or prov-o [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:42:20 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: I have not written that yet

James Cheney: I have not written that yet [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:42:50 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

11:42:53 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: to the outside world we need to clarify that, and we need to use a different world than semantics

Ivan Herman: to the outside world we need to clarify that, or we need to use a different world than semantics [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:42:56 <pgroth> ace paolo

Paul Groth: ace paolo

11:42:59 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

11:43:08 <ivan> s/, and/, or/
11:43:16 <khalidbelhajjame> Paolo: there are constraints in DM that can be used to generate new assertions

Paolo Missier: there are constraints in DM that can be used to generate new assertions [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:43:24 <pgroth> ack kai

Paul Groth: ack kai

11:43:45 <khalidbelhajjame> Kai: in the dublin work, we have a work on use of OWL to check

Kai Eckert: in the dublin work, we have a work on use of OWL to check [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:45:27 <pgroth> ack gk

Paul Groth: ack gk

11:45:27 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say... the DM can be radically simplified by deferring to this semantics for much of its formal content.

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say... the DM can be radically simplified by deferring to this semantics for much of its formal content.

11:45:48 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: prov-sem can help us in simplifying the model

Graham Klyne: prov-sem can help us in simplifying the model [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:46:15 <Stian> ... but then we need to make it a REQ, right?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ... but then we need to make it a REQ, right?

11:46:23 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: and by having prov-sem, we can tell to people this is what it actuall means. In other words, use prov-dm as a tool

Graham Klyne: and by having prov-sem, we can tell to people this is what it actuall means. In other words, use prov-dm as a tool [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:47:00 <pgroth> q+ guus

Paul Groth: q+ guus

11:47:04 <tlebo> are we going to discuss http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF ?

Timothy Lebo: are we going to discuss http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF ?

11:47:07 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: prov-sem is a tool that allow us to explore the possibilities

Luc Moreau: prov-sem is a tool that allow us to explore the possibilities [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:47:25 <Stian> (PROV-SM could be made into an appendix to PROV-DM)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (PROV-SM could be made into an appendix to PROV-DM)

11:47:36 <tlebo> q?

Timothy Lebo: q?

11:47:47 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: it can also be used to avoid having things in prov-dm that can be clearly defined using prov-sem

Graham Klyne: it can also be used to avoid having things in prov-dm that can be clearly defined using prov-sem [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:47:59 <jcheney> @tlebo: I think we will look at ProvRDF after lunch, sorry

James Cheney: @tlebo: I think we will look at ProvRDF after lunch, sorry

11:48:20 <dgarijo> grama?

grama?

11:48:25 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: introduces guus, the chair of RDF working group

Paul Groth: introduces guus, the chair of RDF working group [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:48:28 <tlebo> @jcheney, after lunch is fine. I just wanted to know if it was on the agenda.

Timothy Lebo: @jcheney, after lunch is fine. I just wanted to know if it was on the agenda.

11:49:01 <khalidbelhajjame> Guus: for the semantics, we only went for things that we actually are sure are used, and tried to keep is simple

Guus Schreiber: for the semantics, we only went for things that we actually are sure are used, and tried to keep is simple [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:49:55 <khalidbelhajjame> Guus: maybe you can take a look when at how we specified SKOS semantics, that can be helpful

Guus Schreiber: maybe you can take a look when at how we specified SKOS semantics, that can be helpful [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:50:20 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable

11:50:21 <khalidbelhajjame> Ivan: there are some issues that we are in prov wg are interested in having feedback from the rdf working group

Ivan Herman: there are some issues that we are in prov wg are interested in having feedback from the rdf working group [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

11:50:28 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:F2F2Timetable

11:50:50 <tlebo> 40 minute break?

Timothy Lebo: 40 minute break?

11:52:02 <pgroth> yes

Paul Groth: yes

11:52:10 <pgroth> breaking until 1:30 our time

Paul Groth: breaking until 1:30 our time

11:53:01 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

12:31:59 <sandro> it's time, yes?

(No events recorded for 38 minutes)

Sandro Hawke: it's time, yes?

12:32:31 <tlebo> I think so

Timothy Lebo: I think so

12:33:24 <sandro> zakim, what is the code?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, what is the code?

12:33:24 <Zakim> the conference code is 77683 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 77683 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sandro

12:33:33 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

12:36:03 <khalidbelhajjame> Topic: Interoperability

3. Interoperability

Summary: The discussion focused on interoprability of implementations and how the group would demonstrate interoprability. Guus suggested we look at the skos approach to demonstrating interoprability. A survey was taken of the group about who was planning on implementing the spec. 8 people said they had plans or were already under way. It was agreed that we would take a dual approach to demonstrating interoprability. One would be a survey of implementations that shows that every concept is used in at least two different implementations (like skos). The second would be to identify pairs of implementations that can excahnge provenance. The implementation task force would be activated to begin building test harnesses based on the examples cataloged by Tim.

<pgroth> Summary: The discussion focused on interoprability of implementations and how the group would demonstrate interoprability. Guus suggested we look at the skos approach to demonstrating interoprability. A survey was taken of the group about who was planning on implementing the spec. 8 people said they had plans or were already under way. It was agreed that we would take a dual approach to demonstrating interoprability. One would be a survey of implementations that shows that every concept is used in at least two different implementations (like skos). The second would be to identify pairs of implementations that can excahnge provenance. The implementation task force would be activated to begin building test harnesses based on the examples cataloged by Tim.
12:36:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

12:36:18 <Luc> ack guus

Luc Moreau: ack guus

12:36:39 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: who is implementing the specs?

Luc Moreau: who is implementing the specs? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:36:57 <khalidbelhajjame> Stian, smiles:, Paul, Luc

Khalid Belhajjame: Stian, smiles:, Paul, Luc

12:37:02 <jcheney> +0.5

James Cheney: +0.5

12:37:08 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham also

Khalid Belhajjame: Graham also

12:37:52 <pgroth> export functionality from workflow systems

Paul Groth: export functionality from workflow systems

12:37:57 <khalidbelhajjame> Stian: workflow provenance export from Taverna

Stian Soiland-Reyes: workflow provenance export from Taverna [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:37:57 <pgroth> (wings, taverna)

Paul Groth: (wings, taverna)

12:38:06 <GK> (I'm expecting to implement code that reads and analyzes provenance information that is conformant with the model and semantics.)

Graham Klyne: (I'm expecting to implement code that reads and analyzes provenance information that is conformant with the model and semantics.)

12:38:07 <khalidbelhajjame> kai: Dublin

Kai Eckert: Dublin [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:38:08 <khalidbelhajjame> core

Khalid Belhajjame: core

12:38:28 <khalidbelhajjame> smiles: standalone library

Simon Miles: standalone library [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:38:53 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: implementing history of changes in wiki

James Cheney: implementing history of changes in wiki [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:39:21 <stephenc> We plan to use on open data projects - but initially at least it will be mapping from OPMV

Stephen Cresswell: We plan to use on open data projects - but initially at least it will be mapping from OPMV

12:39:49 <khalidbelhajjame> Paolo: datalog interpretation of prov-dm

Paolo Missier: datalog interpretation of prov-dm [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:40:17 <tlebo> My implementations: 1) switching from PML to prov-o for my tabular RDF converter, csv2rdf4lod 2) capturing provenance in a Linked Data evaluation framework, DataFAQs.

Timothy Lebo: My implementations: 1) switching from PML to prov-o for my tabular RDF converter, csv2rdf4lod 2) capturing provenance in a Linked Data evaluation framework, DataFAQs.

12:40:18 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: I'm expecting to implement code that reads and analyzes provenance information that is conformant with the model and semantics in the context of workflows and data quality

Graham Klyne: I'm expecting to implement code that reads and analyzes provenance information that is conformant with the model and semantics in the context of workflows and data quality [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:40:43 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: the use of prov in the context of smart energy management systems

Luc Moreau: the use of prov in the context of smart energy management systems [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:41:21 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: and scientific environment for editorial activities

Luc Moreau: and scientific environment for editorial activities [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:41:51 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

12:42:15 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: tracking data preparation procedures that are done on teh command line

Paul Groth: tracking data preparation procedures that are done on teh command line [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:43:34 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: two independent impelmentations that interoperatte?

Luc Moreau: two independent impelmentations that interoperatte? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:43:40 <GK> Interop - one implementation generates/writes, another reads/uses

Graham Klyne: Interop - one implementation generates/writes, another reads/uses

12:43:47 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: we need to talk about skos

Luc Moreau: we need to talk about skos [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:44:40 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: after recommendation, the next thing is to who that the 'thing' is implementable

Ivan Herman: after recommendation, the next thing is to who that the 'thing' is implementable [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:44:58 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: you have an API for javascript, and hope there are 2 or more implementations

Ivan Herman: you have an API for javascript, and hope there are 2 or more implementations [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:45:24 <Stian> perhaps what we are weak on is *consuming* provenance

Stian Soiland-Reyes: perhaps what we are weak on is *consuming* provenance

12:45:49 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: for thinsg like provenance, it is not clear, and it is up to the group to decide what it means to have interoperable implementations

Ivan Herman: for thinsg like provenance, it is not clear, and it is up to the group to decide what it means to have interoperable implementations [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:45:55 <ivan> -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html SKOS implementation report

Ivan Herman: -> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html SKOS implementation report

12:46:00 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: in the case for skos for examples:

Ivan Herman: in the case for skos for examples: [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:47:34 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: the criteria themeselves are not subject to public review

Ivan Herman: the criteria themeselves are not subject to public review [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:48:52 <Stian> several terms here are not used by anything, collection, mappingRelation, member, memberList, xl:label, ..

Stian Soiland-Reyes: several terms here are not used by anything, collection, mappingRelation, member, memberList, xl:label, ..

12:49:32 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: for every contruct in the vocabulary, they showed in skos, the implementations that made use of that construct

Paul Groth: for every contruct in the vocabulary, they showed in skos, the implementations that made use of that construct [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:49:41 <sandro> q+ to ask how this passed with Collection not implemented

Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask how this passed with Collection not implemented

12:50:49 <tlebo> My implementations: 1) switching from PML to prov-o for my tabular RDF converter, csv2rdf4lod 2) capturing provenance in a Linked Data evaluation framework, DataFAQs.

Timothy Lebo: My implementations: 1) switching from PML to prov-o for my tabular RDF converter, csv2rdf4lod 2) capturing provenance in a Linked Data evaluation framework, DataFAQs.

12:51:06 <jcheney> q+

James Cheney: q+

12:51:18 <Stian> Taverna-PROV-O is using it as RDF/XML, but not really linked data as it generates new (non-dereferencable) URIs for pretty much everything  (more like a file format)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Taverna-PROV-O is using it as RDF/XML, but not really linked data as it generates new (non-dereferencable) URIs for pretty much everything (more like a file format)

12:51:40 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

12:52:06 <tlebo> dereferencing all over my stuff :-)

Timothy Lebo: dereferencing all over my stuff :-)

12:52:39 <pgroth> ack sandro

Paul Groth: ack sandro

12:52:39 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask how this passed with Collection not implemented

Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask how this passed with Collection not implemented

12:52:40 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: it is preferable to have people who are not part of the wg, who implemented the model

Ivan Herman: it is preferable to have people who are not part of the wg, who implemented the model [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:52:57 <Stian> no - the SKOS issues there are used to track what was posted about the implementations

Stian Soiland-Reyes: no - the SKOS issues there are used to track what was posted about the implementations

12:53:22 <khalidbelhajjame> sandro: there are some contructs in skos that were not implenented by anybody, or very few

Sandro Hawke: there are some contructs in skos that were not implenented by anybody, or very few [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:54:12 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: vocabularies?

James Cheney: vocabularies? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:54:16 <pgroth> ack jcheney

Paul Groth: ack jcheney

12:54:33 <tlebo> so, a "data application"

Timothy Lebo: so, a "data application"

12:54:38 <Stian> Remember SKOS is meant to be used by/for vocabularies

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Remember SKOS is meant to be used by/for vocabularies

12:54:45 <Stian> PROV is not

Stian Soiland-Reyes: PROV is not

12:54:55 <tlebo> "Vocabulary": instance data using the skos vocab.

Timothy Lebo: "Vocabulary": instance data using the skos vocab.

12:54:56 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: vocabularies: a pile of vocabulary somewhere, services ?

James Cheney: vocabularies: a pile of vocabulary somewhere, services ? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:55:09 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: for example, a service that check the quality

Ivan Herman: for example, a service that check the quality [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:55:26 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: application is something used by people

James Cheney: application is something used by people [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:56:37 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: what it mean to have interoperability? I can take prov xml and output prov rdf?

Paul Groth: what it mean to have interoperability? I can take prov xml and output prov rdf? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:56:54 <sandro> producers and consumers, yes.

Sandro Hawke: producers and consumers, yes.

12:57:19 <khalidbelhajjame> graham: one impl generates statments, and another implementation that use and make sense of the thing output by the first impl

Graham Klyne: one impl generates statments, and another implementation that use and make sense of the thing output by the first impl [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:57:27 <tlebo> X out of Y functions that Tool T can do IS DONE based on the provenance provided by Tool S

Timothy Lebo: X out of Y functions that Tool T can do IS DONE based on the provenance provided by Tool S

12:57:55 <khalidbelhajjame> graham: not necessarily two impl from the same domain

Graham Klyne: not necessarily two impl from the same domain [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:58:03 <sandro> q+

Sandro Hawke: q+

12:58:07 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

12:58:19 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

12:58:23 <khalidbelhajjame> paolo: how do you ensure that the interpretation is doen correctly?

Paolo Missier: how do you ensure that the interpretation is doen correctly? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:58:24 <ivan> ack sandro

Ivan Herman: ack sandro

12:59:22 <khalidbelhajjame> sandro: you can have test suite that is used seperatly with the consumer and producer for propvenance, you don't have to have direct interoperability between two implementations

Sandro Hawke: you can have test suite that is used seperatly with the consumer and producer for propvenance, you don't have to have direct interoperability between two implementations [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

12:59:48 <sandro> too quiet

Sandro Hawke: too quiet

13:00:00 <tlebo> khalid: ??

Khalid Belhajjame: ?? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ]

13:00:06 <Stian> for instance - a REST service in Taverna could use PAQ to also ask for the provenance of the retrieved resource (which would need to come from a second implementation), and link retrieved entities to the workflow entities in its exported provenance. But how would that be measured?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: for instance - a REST service in Taverna could use PAQ to also ask for the provenance of the retrieved resource (which would need to come from a second implementation), and link retrieved entities to the workflow entities in its exported provenance. But how would that be measured?

13:00:42 <GK> I think the test suite approach works for features like inferences in consumers, but I'm not sure it applies to basic exchange.

Graham Klyne: I think the test suite approach works for features like inferences in consumers, but I'm not sure it applies to basic exchange.

13:01:02 <Stian> In Provenance Challenge there was a set of queries you should be able to answer

Stian Soiland-Reyes: In Provenance Challenge there was a set of queries you should be able to answer

13:01:03 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: I don't understand how test suite can help in our case

Paul Groth: I don't understand how test suite can help in our case [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:01:22 <sandro> q+

Sandro Hawke: q+

13:01:53 <Stian> say an implementation only exports wasDerivedFrom() records - then we need a derivation-query

Stian Soiland-Reyes: say an implementation only exports wasDerivedFrom() records - then we need a derivation-query

13:02:28 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

13:02:43 <ivan> ack sandro

Ivan Herman: ack sandro

13:02:46 <GK> Sandro's test case matches my consumer case (above), but doesn't test the producer.

Graham Klyne: Sandro's test case matches my consumer case (above), but doesn't test the producer.

13:04:11 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: all they did in skos it show that the vocabulary is used and the applications that make use of it

Paul Groth: all they did in skos it show that the vocabulary is used and the applications that make use of it [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:04:20 <Stian> but how do you know the different implementations actually interpreted the standard in an interoperable way?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but how do you know the different implementations actually interpreted the standard in an interoperable way?

13:04:48 <Stian> +1 sandro

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 sandro

13:05:15 <GK> Trouble is, SKOS have a very weak notion of correctness.

Graham Klyne: Trouble is, SKOS have a very weak notion of correctness.

13:05:17 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: what is the test suite for vocabulary

Paul Groth: what is the test suite for vocabulary [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:05:27 <tlebo> We could start with examples that cover the constructs....

Timothy Lebo: We could start with examples that cover the constructs....

13:05:50 <GK> @Paul +1

Graham Klyne: @Paul +1

13:05:52 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: if we have inferences, then it make sense to have test suite

Paul Groth: if we have inferences, then it make sense to have test suite [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:06:11 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q

13:06:15 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

13:06:17 <sandro> sandro: you probably cant test a vocab, so maybe build some scaffolding for each use case to test implementation of those use cases

Sandro Hawke: you probably cant test a vocab, so maybe build some scaffolding for each use case to test implementation of those use cases [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ]

13:06:26 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:06:28 <tlebo> pointers to real-world instance data and services?

Timothy Lebo: pointers to real-world instance data and services?

13:06:30 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

13:07:04 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/tr.html#RecsCR

Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/tr.html#RecsCR

13:07:06 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

13:07:13 <tlebo> interoperability - the minimal amount that you need to agree upon so that you don't need to agree to anything more.

Timothy Lebo: interoperability - the minimal amount that you need to agree upon so that you don't need to agree to anything more.

13:07:42 <Luc> Interoperability is a property referring to the ability of diverse systems and organizations to work together (inter-operate).

Luc Moreau: Interoperability is a property referring to the ability of diverse systems and organizations to work together (inter-operate).

13:07:44 <GK> "There is no requirement that a Working Draft have two independent and interoperable implementations to become a Candidate Recommendation" -- http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/tr.html#RecsCR

Graham Klyne: "There is no requirement that a Working Draft have two independent and interoperable implementations to become a Candidate Recommendation" -- http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/tr.html#RecsCR

13:07:49 <Luc> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability

Luc Moreau: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability

13:08:10 <sandro> formally it's just "a sufficient level of implementation experience" , noting: "There is no requirement that a Candidate Recommendation have two independent and interoperable implementations to become a Proposed Recommendation. However, such experience is strongly encouraged and will generally strengthen its case before the Advisory Committee."

Sandro Hawke: formally it's just "a sufficient level of implementation experience" , noting: "There is no requirement that a Candidate Recommendation have two independent and interoperable implementations to become a Proposed Recommendation. However, such experience is strongly encouraged and will generally strengthen its case before the Advisory Committee."

13:08:35 <Stian> but implementations are not required to perform queries?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but implementations are not required to perform queries?

13:08:46 <khalidbelhajjame> paolo: provenance is a graph, so we can check interoperability, by looking on how different impelementations will answer a set of queries, that are domain independant

Paolo Missier: provenance is a graph, so we can check interoperability, by looking on how different impelementations will answer a set of queries, that are domain independant [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:09:03 <khalidbelhajjame> q+

Khalid Belhajjame: q+

13:09:15 <Stian> I'm not going to implmenent any queries in Taverna-PROV - if you want to query, do a SPARQL

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I'm not going to implmenent any queries in Taverna-PROV - if you want to query, do a SPARQL

13:09:15 <ivan> ack Paolo

Ivan Herman: ack Paolo

13:09:24 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: but my application may not be able to answer any of those queries

Paul Groth: but my application may not be able to answer any of those queries [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:10:19 <GK> q+ to say w.r.t. Paul's implementation that he be able to provide a credible, substatiatable report that other applicatios have successfully consumed the produced provenance and performed useful functions with it.

Graham Klyne: q+ to say w.r.t. Paul's implementation that he be able to provide a credible, substatiatable report that other applicatios have successfully consumed the produced provenance and performed useful functions with it.

13:10:22 <khalidbelhajjame> smiles: there is an algorithm there that tries to match the queries and the answers given by the implementation?

Simon Miles: there is an algorithm there that tries to match the queries and the answers given by the implementation? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:11:00 <Stian> say a visualisation implementation - how do you 'query' that? You can say that you should be able to follow the derivation path, for instance.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: say a visualisation implementation - how do you 'query' that? You can say that you should be able to follow the derivation path, for instance.

13:11:09 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

13:12:05 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

13:12:05 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say w.r.t. Paul's implementation that he be able to provide a credible, substatiatable report that other applicatios have successfully consumed the produced

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say w.r.t. Paul's implementation that he be able to provide a credible, substatiatable report that other applicatios have successfully consumed the produced

13:12:08 <Zakim> ... provenance and performed useful functions with it.

Zakim IRC Bot: ... provenance and performed useful functions with it.

13:12:13 <pgroth> ack khalidbelhajjame

Paul Groth: ack khalidbelhajjame

13:12:43 <Stian> 'successful' and 'useful' difficult

Stian Soiland-Reyes: 'successful' and 'useful' difficult

13:12:54 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: here are other applications that were able consume the provenance produced by a given application

Graham Klyne: here are other applications that were able consume the provenance produced by a given application [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:13:49 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: identify applications that generate and make use of provenance within the context of the same domain

Luc Moreau: identify applications that generate and make use of provenance within the context of the same domain [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:14:12 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

13:14:14 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

13:14:17 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

13:14:26 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: if we can demonstrate that from within one of my applications that produced trust info, in teh context of a single application, can be used by other applications

Luc Moreau: if we can demonstrate that from within one of my applications that produced trust info, in teh context of a single application, can be used by other applications [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:14:40 <GK> (Single application != "interoperability", IMO)

Graham Klyne: (Single application != "interoperability", IMO)

13:14:59 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: second: we have two deliverables that are going into that direction that are owl-specific

Luc Moreau: second: we have two deliverables that are going into that direction that are owl-specific [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:15:35 <GK> If it works for OWL/RDF, that validates the model, IMO.

Graham Klyne: If it works for OWL/RDF, that validates the model, IMO.

13:15:42 <khalidbelhajjame> ivan: this is something that the group have to decide

Ivan Herman: this is something that the group have to decide [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:15:52 <sandro> ( re how SKOS got out of CR .... they set the bar very very low, and no one objected.   It looks like it helped that they then went so far over their bar.   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2009AprJun/0067 )

Sandro Hawke: ( re how SKOS got out of CR .... they set the bar very very low, and no one objected. It looks like it helped that they then went so far over their bar. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2009AprJun/0067 )

13:16:02 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: follow the map of skos, and follow the use of prov

Paul Groth: follow the map of skos, and follow the use of prov [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:16:26 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: we can build soem test cases to read provenance information, and answer simple queries

Paul Groth: we can build soem test cases to read provenance information, and answer simple queries [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:16:27 <Stian> perhaps PROV-ODM is on the level of vocabulary in SKOS - PROV-O is more on the level of implementations/protocols (except for pure use in OWL imports)   PROV-AQ is clearly implementation thing.  PROV-SEM - I don't know. Papers?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: perhaps PROV-ODM is on the level of vocabulary in SKOS - PROV-O is more on the level of implementations/protocols (except for pure use in OWL imports) PROV-AQ is clearly implementation thing. PROV-SEM - I don't know. Papers?

13:16:51 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

13:17:07 <GK> Paul: nice thought about test suite for checking provenance as a way to validate producers.

Paul Groth: nice thought about test suite for checking provenance as a way to validate producers. [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

13:17:10 <sandro> sounds like a prov validator, not a test suite.     useful, but different.

Sandro Hawke: sounds like a prov validator, not a test suite. useful, but different.

13:17:31 <GK> @sandro, yes, but it still validates the generator to some extent.

Graham Klyne: @sandro, yes, but it still validates the generator to some extent.

13:17:33 <khalidbelhajjame> Paolo: there are two levels, correctness and usefulness

Paolo Missier: there are two levels, correctness and usefulness [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:17:38 <Luc> PROV-SEM is not at level of REC

Luc Moreau: PROV-SEM is not at level of REC

13:17:53 <khalidbelhajjame> Paolo: usefulness is hard to show

Paolo Missier: usefulness is hard to show [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:18:09 <sandro> @gk, sure but it's not a test suite -- it's not input documents.

Sandro Hawke: @gk, sure but it's not a test suite -- it's not input documents.

13:18:11 <GK> @Paolo: it's arguable that usefulness is more important than correctness...

Graham Klyne: @Paolo: it's arguable that usefulness is more important than correctness...

13:18:45 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

13:18:46 <smiles> I dont think it is validation. The provenance must be correct before the test suite discussed can run, and the provenance could be used without the test suite passing

Simon Miles: I dont think it is validation. The provenance must be correct before the test suite discussed can run, and the provenance could be used without the test suite passing

13:18:50 <khalidbelhajjame> ack paolo

Khalid Belhajjame: ack paolo

13:20:20 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: we can do two things: one we show a variety of implementations that produce or consume provenance, then a smaller case, we should identify different people that there are two impls that use and consume provenance based on some (test suite?)

Paul Groth: we can do two things: one we show a variety of implementations that produce or consume provenance, then a smaller case, we should identify different people that there are two impls that use and consume provenance based on some (test suite?) [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:21:00 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

13:21:26 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:21:48 <GK> @Paul: I think there's a useful middle ground - which is to demonstrate applications based on exchange between independent implementations.

Graham Klyne: @Paul: I think there's a useful middle ground - which is to demonstrate applications based on exchange between independent implementations.

13:22:31 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: we have a task force who have been keen on gatherfing info on implementations

Paul Groth: we have a task force who have been keen on gatherfing info on implementations [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:22:53 <GK> q+ to suggest that the survey might be used as a basis for drawing success criteria

Graham Klyne: q+ to suggest that the survey might be used as a basis for drawing success criteria

13:23:04 <pgroth> ack GK

Paul Groth: ack GK

13:23:04 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suggest that the survey might be used as a basis for drawing success criteria

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to suggest that the survey might be used as a basis for drawing success criteria

13:23:08 <sandro> q+ to ask if you're thinking about 100% coverage or not

Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask if you're thinking about 100% coverage or not

13:23:23 <Luc> q+ cab we leverage Tim's suite of examples?

Luc Moreau: q+ cab we leverage Tim's suite of examples?

13:23:41 <khalidbelhajjame> Graham: maybe we can use the survey to draw the success criteria

Graham Klyne: maybe we can use the survey to draw the success criteria [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:23:43 <Luc> q+ to say can we leverage Tim's suite of examples?

Luc Moreau: q+ to say can we leverage Tim's suite of examples?

13:24:09 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/PROV_OWL_ontology_component_examples

13:24:31 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: in our survey of implementations, every concepts (rel) is used in at least 2 implementations

Paul Groth: in our survey of implementations, every concepts (rel) is used in at least 2 implementations [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:24:56 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: and on exchange on provenance, we try to cover most (if not all), the constructs of prov

Paul Groth: and on exchange on provenance, we try to cover most (if not all), the constructs of prov [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:25:02 <pgroth> ack sandro

Paul Groth: ack sandro

13:25:02 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask if you're thinking about 100% coverage or not

Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask if you're thinking about 100% coverage or not

13:25:04 <pgroth> ls

Paul Groth: ls

13:25:27 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

13:25:31 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

13:25:31 <Zakim> Luc, you wanted to say can we leverage Tim's suite of examples?

Zakim IRC Bot: Luc, you wanted to say can we leverage Tim's suite of examples?

13:25:33 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

13:25:36 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: If we can make use of Tim examples

Luc Moreau: If we can make use of Tim examples [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:26:12 <khalidbelhajjame> Paolo: a benchmark is an example, and a set of questions with known answers.

Paolo Missier: a benchmark is an example, and a set of questions with known answers. [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:26:37 <khalidbelhajjame> smiles: not domain dependant

Simon Miles: not domain dependant [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:26:56 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: not from the semantics, but rather the vocabulary

Luc Moreau: not from the semantics, but rather the vocabulary [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:27:17 <khalidbelhajjame> smiles: tracedTo is an example

Simon Miles: tracedTo is an example [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:27:22 <khalidbelhajjame> luc:: that is the only example we have

Luc Moreau: : that is the only example we have [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:29:23 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: the way to use the constraint is not i nteh specification. In particular, we are not specifying what we can infer

Luc Moreau: the way to use the constraint is not i nteh specification. In particular, we are not specifying what we can infer [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:29:23 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

13:29:28 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

13:30:02 <tlebo> a really bad draft at permitting tool makes to self-list their capabilities and quantifying the interoperabilities: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/How_to_convince_ourselves_that_PROV_facilitates_interoperability

Timothy Lebo: a really bad draft at permitting tool makers to self-list their capabilities and quantifying the interoperabilities: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/How_to_convince_ourselves_that_PROV_facilitates_interoperability

13:30:12 <tlebo> s/makes/makers/
13:30:34 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: ask Helena and Stephane to start this activity

Paul Groth: ask Helena and Stephane to start this activity [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:31:13 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: in other WGs, was there any test suite that were produced?

Luc Moreau: in other WGs, was there any test suite that were produced? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:31:58 <khalidbelhajjame> Ivan: there is a language for text reporting, and there are tools out there who consume the text produced by the tool

Ivan Herman: there is a language for text reporting, and there are tools out there who consume the text produced by the tool [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:32:19 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/test-description

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2006/03/test-description

13:32:45 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10/

Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10/

13:32:48 <tlebo> @ivan, link to that RDF tester?

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, link to that RDF tester?

13:33:45 <ivan> tlebo:  http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/

Timothy Lebo: http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/test-suite/ [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ]

13:33:50 <pgroth> Action: Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others)

ACTION: Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others)

13:33:50 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - Engage

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - Engage

13:33:52 <tlebo> thanks!

Timothy Lebo: thanks!

13:34:07 <pgroth> Action: pgroth Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others)

ACTION: pgroth Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others)

13:34:08 <trackbot> Created ACTION-54 - Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-54 - Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

13:34:18 <ivan> tlebo:  this is an RDFa tester, not RDF!!

Timothy Lebo: this is an RDFa tester, not RDF!! [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ]

13:34:32 <Stian> ( http://www.flightstats.com/go/Airport/delays.do?airportCode=AMS says now EXCESSIVE DELAYS )

Stian Soiland-Reyes: ( http://www.flightstats.com/go/Airport/delays.do?airportCode=AMS says now EXCESSIVE DELAYS )

13:37:13 <pgroth> Proposed: For interoperability we catalogue existing implementations and which constructs of prov they use. Looking for at least two implementations of each construct. Furthermore, which pair of implementations can exchange prov (different pairs may exchange different constructs)

PROPOSED: For interoperability we catalogue existing implementations and which constructs of prov they use. Looking for at least two implementations of each construct. Furthermore, which pair of implementations can exchange prov (different pairs may exchange different constructs)

13:37:32 <pgroth> Accepted: For interoperability we catalogue existing implementations and which constructs of prov they use. Looking for at least two implementations of each construct. Furthermore, which pair of implementations can exchange prov (different pairs may exchange different constructs)

RESOLVED: For interoperability we catalogue existing implementations and which constructs of prov they use. Looking for at least two implementations of each construct. Furthermore, which pair of implementations can exchange prov (different pairs may exchange different constructs)

13:39:08 <khalidbelhajjame> Intero-session closed

Khalid Belhajjame: Intero-session closed

13:52:35 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF

(No events recorded for 13 minutes)

James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF

13:52:37 <khalidbelhajjame> prov-sem session (cont.)

Khalid Belhajjame: prov-sem session (cont.)

13:54:06 <tlebo> others have gone through the pain, too :-)

Timothy Lebo: others have gone through the pain, too :-)

13:54:09 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: tried to systematize the translation prov-dm -> provo

James Cheney: tried to systematize the translation prov-dm -> provo [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:54:44 <khalidbelhajjame> section Translating element formulas

Khalid Belhajjame: section Translating element formulas

13:56:04 <tlebo> I think this should be at the bottom of prov-o HTML

Timothy Lebo: I think this should be at the bottom of prov-o HTML

13:56:45 <dgarijo> @tim: not a bad idea.

@tim: not a bad idea.

13:56:57 <Stian> we talked about using OWL annotations for notes

Stian Soiland-Reyes: we talked about using OWL annotations for notes

13:57:27 <tlebo> owl annotations are on single instances? I thought just on a triple.

Timothy Lebo: owl annotations are on single instances? I thought just on a triple.

13:57:53 <GK> (I was minded to suggest removing the stuff about Annotations, as being used primarily for provenance of accounts by my reading.)

Graham Klyne: (I was minded to suggest removing the stuff about Annotations, as being used primarily for provenance of accounts by my reading.)

13:58:04 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: what is the role if this?

Paul Groth: what is the role if this? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

13:59:04 <GK> Luc: how do we take this forward?

Luc Moreau: how do we take this forward? [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

13:59:45 <GK> (My answer to Luc might be that this is a matter for the editors.)

Graham Klyne: (My answer to Luc might be that this is a matter for the editors.)

14:00:06 <tlebo> q+

Timothy Lebo: q+

14:00:16 <khalidbelhajjame> Section Questions/Problems

Khalid Belhajjame: Section Questions/Problems

<pgroth> Topic: Planning

4. Planning

Summary: The session focused on planning. To facilatate mapping of prov-o and prov-dm, the group agreed to adopt the use of the ProvRDF mappings page to synchronize the two documents after the ontology reached the level of prov-dm WD3. To facilate this usage, it was agreed to ensure that the ProvRDF mappings page was also aligned with prov wd3. It was agreed that the editors would draft an updated version of prov-aq to address all outstanding issues. Additionally, the group agreed to start producing an xml schema. The editors of the prov-dm agreed to draft an simplified introduction to it reflecting the groups desire for simplfication. Finally, Paul agreed to summarize the F2F for an email to the whole group as well as in a blog post.

<pgroth> Summary: The session focused on planning. To facilatate mapping of prov-o and prov-dm, the group agreed to adopt the use of the ProvRDF mappings page to synchronize the two documents after the ontology reached the level of prov-dm WD3. To facilate this usage, it was agreed to ensure that the ProvRDF mappings page was also aligned with prov wd3. It was agreed that the editors would draft an updated version of prov-aq to address all outstanding issues. Additionally, the group agreed to start producing an xml schema. The editors of the prov-dm agreed to draft an simplified introduction to it reflecting the groups desire for simplfication. Finally, Paul agreed to summarize the F2F for an email to the whole group as well as in a blog post.
14:00:57 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

14:01:03 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:01:23 <GK> q+ to note This is uncontroversial as long s it's also uncontroversial that DM uses URIs to name entities, attributes, etc.

Graham Klyne: q+ to note This is uncontroversial as long s it's also uncontroversial that DM uses URIs to name entities, attributes, etc.

14:01:56 <Stian> tlebo: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-new-features/#Extended_Annotations perhaps

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-new-features/#Extended_Annotations perhaps [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:02:03 <Luc> ack tle

Luc Moreau: ack tle

14:02:34 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

14:02:34 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to note This is uncontroversial as long s it's also uncontroversial that DM uses URIs to name entities, attributes, etc.

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to note This is uncontroversial as long s it's also uncontroversial that DM uses URIs to name entities, attributes, etc.

14:02:54 <khalidbelhajjame> Luc: tim? you are supportive of this effort?

Luc Moreau: tim? you are supportive of this effort? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:03:39 <jcheney> Luc's question is how to integrate this into other things?

James Cheney: Luc's question is how to integrate this into other things?

14:04:02 <khalidbelhajjame> Tim: this is explicit form that should be used by the rest of the prov-o team

Timothy Lebo: this is explicit form that should be used by the rest of the prov-o team [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:04:10 <khalidbelhajjame> q+

Khalid Belhajjame: q+

14:04:35 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: what process would you suggest Tim?

Luc Moreau: what process would you suggest Tim? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:05:25 <khalidbelhajjame> Tim: the previous mappings can be translated just like James did

Timothy Lebo: the previous mappings can be translated just like James did [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:05:47 <tlebo> one step: DM editors ensure that all "left sides" are listed.

Timothy Lebo: one step: DM editors ensure that all "left sides" are listed.

14:05:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:06:15 <tlebo> a second step: PROV-O team sets the "right sides" in this notation

Timothy Lebo: a second step: PROV-O team sets the "right sides" in this notation

14:06:41 <GK> It seems to me this is a very effective way of bridging the DM presentation to RDF cognoscenti

Graham Klyne: It seems to me this is a very effective way of bridging the DM presentation to RDF cognoscenti

14:06:44 <dgarijo> some binary relationships are missing, like a used e, e wasGeneratedBy a.

some binary relationships are missing, like a used e, e wasGeneratedBy a.

14:06:56 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: translation rules, we should use each rule endorced by the wg

Luc Moreau: translation rules, we should use each rule endorced by the wg [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:07:13 <Luc> ack k

Luc Moreau: ack k

14:07:17 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

14:07:30 <Stian> and while editing, having these in the end of PROV-O is also good as it sh/would show what mappings were used in that particular version

Stian Soiland-Reyes: and while editing, having these in the end of PROV-O is also good as it sh/would show what mappings were used in that particular version

14:07:38 <tlebo> This is our status bar!

Timothy Lebo: This is our status bar!

14:07:53 <GK> Khalid: James' rute of translation, rather than translation for every construct, try to come up with translation pattern?

Khalid Belhajjame: James' rute of translation, rather than translation for every construct, try to come up with translation pattern? [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ]

14:08:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:08:09 <tlebo> remember the port of .... ?

Timothy Lebo: remember the port of .... ?

14:08:18 <pgroth> quote of tony hoare

Paul Groth: quote of tony hoare

14:08:24 <tlebo> thx

Timothy Lebo: thx

14:09:25 <GK> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/229 proposes (among other things) factoring out attributes in the DM.

Graham Klyne: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/229 proposes (among other things) factoring out attributes in the DM.

14:09:34 <khalidbelhajjame> Paul: we agreed on a proces on how the development of prov-o to first start with the ontology, do we need to add to that the additional effort to encode the rules that James illustrated?

Paul Groth: we agreed on a proces on how the development of prov-o to first start with the ontology, do we need to add to that the additional effort to encode the rules that James illustrated? [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:09:59 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

14:09:59 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:10:03 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

14:10:03 <smiles> q+

Simon Miles: q+

14:10:10 <dgarijo> +1 to the proposed process

+1 to the proposed process

14:10:12 <pgroth> ack smiles

Paul Groth: ack smiles

14:10:15 <khalidbelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

14:10:25 <Stian> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

14:11:00 <khalidbelhajjame> smiles: this can also be useful for the primer to understad what has been changed in prov-o and might affect the primer

Simon Miles: this can also be useful for the primer to understad what has been changed in prov-o and might affect the primer [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:11:43 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:12:20 <tlebo> q+ to ask DM'ers to ensure the "left side" list is complete and to add annotatiosn for "what out, this one is in danger of leaving" (at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF)

Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask DM'ers to ensure the "left side" list is complete and to add annotatiosn for "what out, this one is in danger of leaving" (at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF)

14:13:26 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: if there is a proposal for change, then it still should be raised as an issue

Luc Moreau: if there is a proposal for change, then it still should be raised as an issue [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:14:54 <khalidbelhajjame> paul: it should be up to the chairs of prov-dm and prov-o to raise change against the primer, when things change in either prov-dm or prov-o

Paul Groth: it should be up to the chairs of prov-dm and prov-o to raise change against the primer, when things change in either prov-dm or prov-o [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:14:54 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:15:09 <khalidbelhajjame> to raise issues not change :-)

Khalid Belhajjame: to raise issues not change :-)

14:15:11 <Luc> ack tl

Luc Moreau: ack tl

14:15:11 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to ask DM'ers to ensure the "left side" list is complete and to add annotatiosn for "what out, this one is in danger of leaving" (at

Zakim IRC Bot: tlebo, you wanted to ask DM'ers to ensure the "left side" list is complete and to add annotatiosn for "what out, this one is in danger of leaving" (at

14:15:14 <Zakim> ... http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF)

Zakim IRC Bot: ... http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF)

14:15:20 <Stian> we have in the PROV-O document just kept a flat changelog as http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html#changes-since-first-public-working-draft as well

Stian Soiland-Reyes: we have in the PROV-O document just kept a flat changelog as http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html#changes-since-first-public-working-draft as well

14:15:31 <GK> (I woudn't raise a second issue on the primer, but I won't argue the case if the respective editors are OK with it.)

Graham Klyne: (I woudn't raise a second issue on the primer, but I won't argue the case if the respective editors are OK with it.)

14:15:52 <khalidbelhajjame> jcheney: the translation rules specified is not complete yet

James Cheney: the translation rules specified is not complete yet [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:16:33 <GK> In line with other decisions, should we aim to align the rules with DM3, then let process track?

Graham Klyne: In line with other decisions, should we aim to align the rules with DM3, then let process track?

14:16:50 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: the issues that are raised in the tracker and in the prov-dm, and can be used by prov-o team to identify the constructs (relationships) at risk

Luc Moreau: the issues that are raised in the tracker and in the prov-dm, and can be used by prov-o team to identify the constructs (relationships) at risk [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:17:32 <tlebo> sounds great.

Timothy Lebo: sounds great.

14:18:15 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:18:21 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF will get into sync with DM WD3

Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF will get into sync with DM WD3

14:18:49 <khalidbelhajjame> luc: the translation rules seem to be a useful tool for synchronizing the updates

Luc Moreau: the translation rules seem to be a useful tool for synchronizing the updates [ Scribe Assist by Khalid Belhajjame ]

14:18:57 <tlebo> we can handle the various issues in PROV-O team.

Timothy Lebo: we can handle the various issues in PROV-O team.

14:19:24 <khalidbelhajjame> prov-sem ended

Khalid Belhajjame: prov-sem ended

14:20:02 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:20:06 <tlebo> the timetable for http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF is before I go to bed tonight :-)

Timothy Lebo: the timetable for http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvRDF is before I go to bed tonight :-)

14:21:08 <tlebo> two weeks from now, we have an OWL file for WD3

Timothy Lebo: two weeks from now, we have an OWL file for WD3

14:21:08 <tlebo> yes

Timothy Lebo: yes

14:21:10 <pgroth> 2 weeks for alignment of prov-o ontology to prov-dm wd3

Paul Groth: 2 weeks for alignment of prov-o ontology to prov-dm wd3

14:21:54 <tlebo> :-)

Timothy Lebo: :-)

14:21:58 <GK> I won't be available for the 17 Feb telecon.  Just saying.

Graham Klyne: I won't be available for the 17 Feb telecon. Just saying.

14:22:39 <tlebo> what about the owl file will we discusson the 16th?

Timothy Lebo: what about the owl file will we discus the 16th?

14:22:46 <tlebo> s/son//
14:22:58 <Paolo> .

Paolo Missier: .

14:23:09 <tlebo> ok

Timothy Lebo: ok

14:23:11 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:23:17 <stephenc> Very tempting to implement abstract syntax <=> rdf translation as prolog

Stephen Cresswell: Very tempting to implement abstract syntax <=> rdf translation as prolog

14:23:32 <tlebo> so, the action is just due by the 17.

Timothy Lebo: so, the action is just due by the 17.

14:23:42 <pgroth> Action: Michael Lang - Prov-o team will produce an updated owl file reflecting prov-dm wd3 by 17 Feb telecon

ACTION: Michael Lang - Prov-o team will produce an updated owl file reflecting prov-dm wd3 by 17 Feb telecon

14:23:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-55 - Lang - Prov-o team will produce an updated owl file reflecting prov-dm wd3 by 17 Feb telecon [on Michael Lang - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-55 - Lang - Prov-o team will produce an updated owl file reflecting prov-dm wd3 by 17 Feb telecon [on Michael Lang - due 2012-02-10].

14:24:17 <jcheney> @stephenc, yes, that's one of the next steps I had in mind.

James Cheney: @stephenc, yes, that's one of the next steps I had in mind.

14:28:15 <dgarijo> @tlebo, stian, khalid: are we supposed to include a complete example with the ontology?

@tlebo, stian, khalid: are we supposed to include a complete example with the ontology?

14:28:37 <dgarijo> it would help the review.

it would help the review.

14:29:05 <tlebo> satya doesn't want instance data in the owl file.

Timothy Lebo: satya doesn't want instance data in the owl file.

14:29:27 <dgarijo> :) well then an additional file..

:) well then an additional file..

14:29:36 <tlebo> so we'll need a second file. But better, I want to use an annotation property to point from provo classes to examples that use them.

Timothy Lebo: so we'll need a second file. But better, I want to use an annotation property to point from provo classes to examples that use them.

14:29:49 <khalidbelhajjame> @Daniel, not in the ontology. I understand that we will be focusing just on the ontology itself

Khalid Belhajjame: @Daniel, not in the ontology. I understand that we will be focusing just on the ontology itself

14:29:51 <tlebo> (and properties)

Timothy Lebo: (and properties)

14:29:51 <dgarijo> ahh ok.

ahh ok.

14:29:58 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:30:17 <dgarijo> @khalid, I know, not in the final version of the ontology. I was referring just for the review.

@khalid, I know, not in the final version of the ontology. I was referring just for the review.

14:31:10 <stephenc> @jcheney swi-prolog has direct rdf support.  Abstract syntax is already "deviant prolog" - so no parsers to write. It would also be easy to generate a latex version for the wiki from a prolog version of the mapping rule.

Stephen Cresswell: @jcheney swi-prolog has direct rdf support. Abstract syntax is already "deviant prolog" - so no parsers to write. It would also be easy to generate a latex version for the wiki from a prolog version of the mapping rule.

14:31:16 <Stian> tlebo: feel free :) (annotation properties)

Timothy Lebo: feel free :) (annotation properties) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:31:33 <jcheney> @stephenc What about sicstus :)

James Cheney: @stephenc What about sicstus :)

14:31:41 <tlebo> @ivan, do you have a handful of good vocab annotation vocabs? (like the ones Ian uses)?

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, do you have a handful of good vocab annotation vocabs? (like the ones Ian uses)?

14:31:56 <Stian> @khalidbelhajjame: I've checked in for our flight - seat 23F (window)  - perhaps you want to check in as well

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @khalidbelhajjame: I've checked in for our flight - seat 23F (window) - perhaps you want to check in as well

14:31:57 <stephenc> @jcheney It's not free!

Stephen Cresswell: @jcheney It's not free!

14:32:07 <pgroth> action: jcheney to update the provrdf rules and align it with prov wd3 by 16 Feb telecon

ACTION: jcheney to update the provrdf rules and align it with prov wd3 by 16 Feb telecon

14:32:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-56 - Update the provrdf rules and align it with prov wd3 by 16 Feb telecon [on James Cheney - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-56 - Update the provrdf rules and align it with prov wd3 by 16 Feb telecon [on James Cheney - due 2012-02-10].

14:32:19 <jcheney> True, but Edinburgh has a site license...

James Cheney: True, but Edinburgh has a site license...

14:32:27 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:32:37 <ivan> problem is: there are more:-)

Ivan Herman: problem is: there are more:-)

14:32:46 <ivan> the scientific community has some of those

Ivan Herman: the scientific community has some of those

14:32:53 <tlebo> @ivan, I'm always pleased when I run into them, but have never gathered up a list of them.

Timothy Lebo: @ivan, I'm always pleased when I run into them, but have never gathered up a list of them.

14:33:29 <tlebo> http://prefix.cc/vs for example

Timothy Lebo: http://prefix.cc/vs for example

14:33:51 <ivan> Tim, I do not have an exhaustive list. I think the best two are one coming form the Mass. General Hostpital (TIm Clark) and the other, I believe, from Lawrence LL. Will try to find a link

Ivan Herman: Tim, I do not have an exhaustive list. I think the best two are one coming form the Mass. General Hostpital (TIm Clark) and the other, I believe, from Los Alamos. Will try to find a link

14:34:35 <ivan> s/Lawrence LL/Los Alamos/
14:34:39 <ivan> that one is: http://www.openannotation.org/spec/beta/

Ivan Herman: that one is: http://www.openannotation.org/spec/beta/

14:35:36 <ivan> look at http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/ as well, there is a group looking into this

Ivan Herman: look at http://www.w3.org/community/openannotation/ as well, there is a group looking into this

14:35:57 <ivan> http://code.google.com/p/annotation-ontology/

Ivan Herman: http://code.google.com/p/annotation-ontology/

14:36:03 <ivan> problem - none of these are stable

Ivan Herman: problem - none of these are stable

14:36:19 <pgroth> action: pgroth draft review of potential public wd2 addressing all outstanding issues

ACTION: pgroth draft review of potential public wd2 addressing all outstanding issues

14:36:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-57 - Draft review of potential public wd2 addressing all outstanding issues [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-57 - Draft review of potential public wd2 addressing all outstanding issues [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

14:36:32 <tlebo> @ivan thanks!

Timothy Lebo: @ivan thanks!

14:40:02 <pgroth> action: pgroth write a summary email of f2f for the larger group

ACTION: pgroth write a summary email of f2f for the larger group

14:40:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-58 - Write a summary email of f2f for the larger group  [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-58 - Write a summary email of f2f for the larger group [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

14:40:21 <pgroth> action: pgroth write a blog post about current status on development

ACTION: pgroth write a blog post about current status on development

14:40:21 <trackbot> Created ACTION-59 - Write a blog post about current status on development [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-59 - Write a blog post about current status on development [on Paul Groth - due 2012-02-10].

14:43:59 <pgroth> action: luc kickstart discussion on xml schema

ACTION: luc kickstart discussion on xml schema

14:43:59 <trackbot> Created ACTION-60 - Kickstart discussion on xml schema [on Luc Moreau - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-60 - Kickstart discussion on xml schema [on Luc Moreau - due 2012-02-10].

14:46:03 <tlebo> I'm interesting in helping the XML (to write a GRDDL to rescue the XML into RDF) (and perhaps to write some example xpaths that exercise the XML) no xml schema experience, tons of xslt experience.

Timothy Lebo: I'm interesting in helping the XML (to write a GRDDL to rescue the XML into RDF) (and perhaps to write some example xpaths that exercise the XML) no xml schema experience, tons of xslt experience.

14:47:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

14:52:34 <Luc> q?

(No events recorded for 5 minutes)

Luc Moreau: q?

14:52:47 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

14:54:22 <Stian> I've got XSD experience, but don't think I have the bandwith

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I've got XSD experience, but don't think I have the bandwith

14:54:30 <Stian> can pretend I'm 'expert'

Stian Soiland-Reyes: can pretend I'm 'expert'

14:55:29 <GK> Our charter calls for:  D1. PIL Conceptual Model (REC), D2. PIL Formal Model (REC), D3. PIL Formal Semantics (NOTE), which are mapped to roughly: PROV-DM, PROV-O and semantics.  But there' a lot of formal-ish material in PROV-DM which doesn't really belong in PROV-O.  Should we try and factor away the inference/constraint material in PROV-DM from a basic and accessible description of the underlying model?

Graham Klyne: Our charter calls for: D1. PIL Conceptual Model (REC), D2. PIL Formal Model (REC), D3. PIL Formal Semantics (NOTE), which are mapped to roughly: PROV-DM, PROV-O and semantics. But there' a lot of formal-ish material in PROV-DM which doesn't really belong in PROV-O. Should we try and factor away the inference/constraint material in PROV-DM from a basic and accessible description of the underlying model?

14:57:11 <pgroth> action: jcheney to update prov-sem to be compatible with wd3

ACTION: jcheney to update prov-sem to be compatible with wd3

14:57:11 <trackbot> Created ACTION-61 - Update prov-sem to be compatible with wd3 [on James Cheney - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-61 - Update prov-sem to be compatible with wd3 [on James Cheney - due 2012-02-10].

14:57:18 <Stian> khalidbelhajjame: start your skype :)

Khalid Belhajjame: start your skype :) [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

14:59:22 <jcheney> That should be due February 23...

James Cheney: That should be due February 23...

15:00:00 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

15:01:07 <tlebo> luc: if we don't have things, there is not specOf and altOf ?

Luc Moreau: if we don't have things, there is not specOf and altOf ? [ Scribe Assist by Timothy Lebo ]

15:01:18 <tlebo> did I get that right?

Timothy Lebo: did I get that right?

15:01:35 <Zakim> +Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro

15:07:59 <dgarijo> luc: are "objects" descriptions?

(No events recorded for 6 minutes)

Luc Moreau: are "objects" descriptions?

15:08:37 <dgarijo> jcheney: for description I'm not sure about the connotations

James Cheney: for description I'm not sure about the connotations

15:08:45 <tlebo> @sandro, you there?

Timothy Lebo: @sandro, you there?

15:08:58 <GK> I think "description" is part of the ;language, not what we are describing.

Graham Klyne: I think "description" is part of the ;language, not what we are describing.

15:09:44 <dgarijo> luc: instead of objects should we talk about states of resources, or partial states of resources?

Luc Moreau: instead of objects should we talk about states of resources, or partial states of resources?

15:09:55 <GK> q+ to say I don't think we should be trying to describe this

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I don't think we should be trying to describe this

15:10:03 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:10:22 <dgarijo> jcheney: objects are kind of a weird middle level

James Cheney: objects are kind of a weird middle level

15:10:24 <GK> (this = how PROV-DM entoities relate to resources)

Graham Klyne: (this = how PROV-DM entoities relate to resources)

15:11:50 <tlebo> - awww:Resources are semiotic referents denoted and awww:identifiedBy URIs. Requesting the URI via HTTP will return a Resource Representation that describes the referent.

Timothy Lebo: - awww:Resources are semiotic referents denoted and awww:identifiedBy URIs. Requesting the URI via HTTP will return a Resource Representation that describes the referent.

15:12:06 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:13:06 <dgarijo> pgroth: yesterday we said: let's do thing and just continue from there. What would the ramifications be for the semantics?

Paul Groth: yesterday we said: let's do thing and just continue from there. What would the ramifications be for the semantics?

15:13:08 <GK> q+ to say I now think there are (1) things in the domain of discourse that may be identified in the semantic model, (2) things in domain of discourse that are referenced directly in the DM and (3) syntactic artifacts (and maybe other things) that are not referenced by any construct.  The consequence of this is that DM can refer to entities (alone) without reference to things, which are still explained in the semantics by reference to things.

Graham Klyne: q+ to say I now think there are (1) things in the domain of discourse that may be identified in the semantic model, (2) things in domain of discourse that are referenced directly in the DM and (3) syntactic artifacts (and maybe other things) that are not referenced by any construct. The consequence of this is that DM can refer to entities (alone) without reference to things, which are still explained in the semantics by reference to things.

15:13:49 <dgarijo> ivan: the different between thing and objects dissapear

Ivan Herman: the different between thing and objects dissapear

15:13:57 <dgarijo> s

s

15:15:59 <dgarijo> jcheney: in order to say that an attribute is true I have to measure the time of the assertion, that was part of the semantics

James Cheney: in order to say that an attribute is true I have to measure the time of the assertion, that was part of the semantics

15:16:39 <dgarijo> luc: Remove things and then rename objects into thing

Luc Moreau: Remove things and then rename objects into thing

15:16:46 <tlebo> "scruffiness" means that asserters name and refer to less specialized Entities, while the "propers" would object to that modeling because they think more specialized Entities should be named and referred to. For example, scruffies describe http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/ when propers would want them to describe  http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/

Timothy Lebo: "scruffiness" means that asserters name and refer to less specialized Entities, while the "propers" would object to that modeling because they think more specialized Entities should be named and referred to. For example, scruffies describe http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/ when propers would want them to describe http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-prov-dm-20111018/

15:18:09 <dgarijo> gk: the scruffiness is maybe isatisfaible

Graham Klyne: the scruffiness is maybe isatisfaible

15:19:03 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo

15:19:55 <Stian> I don't understand "over time" here

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I don't understand "over time" here

15:19:55 <dgarijo> khalid: when we have the things, then can they be mutable or not?

Khalid Belhajjame: when we have the things, then can they be mutable or not?

15:20:56 <tlebo> I hope people are not considering "web resources" to be exclusively computer files. I'm a web resource....

Timothy Lebo: I hope people are not considering "web resources" to be exclusively computer files. I'm a web resource....

15:21:33 <Stian> do you mean that someone says in a single graph:    :car a owl:Thing;  :colour :red .   :ColourFinder a prov:Activity ; prov:used :car .   :blue prov:wasGeneratedBy :ColourFinder; prov:wasDerivedFrom :car .

Stian Soiland-Reyes: do you mean that someone says in a single graph: :car a owl:Thing; :colour :red . :ColourFinder a prov:Activity ; prov:used :car . :blue prov:wasGeneratedBy :ColourFinder; prov:wasDerivedFrom :car .

15:21:51 <Stian> (assuming that colourfinder found the :colour attribute)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (assuming that colourfinder found the :colour attribute)

15:22:32 <dgarijo> gk: this doesn't talk about attirbutes other than the others that vary with time

Graham Klyne: this doesn't talk about attirbutes other than the others that vary with time

15:23:06 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo

15:23:36 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:23:39 <Luc> ack pg

Luc Moreau: ack pg

15:23:40 <sandro> tlebo, I'm not sure I agree.    I think "resource" can be anything, but if you're going to put the word "web" in there, it's short of "web-accessible".    not quite sure if that covers non-IR resources or not, but it only covers things with working IRIs.

Sandro Hawke: tlebo, I'm not sure I agree. I think "resource" can be anything, but if you're going to put the word "web" in there, it's short of "web-accessible". not quite sure if that covers non-IR resources or not, but it only covers things with working IRIs.

15:24:00 <sandro> (not sure if you have a working IRI or now)

Sandro Hawke: (not sure if you have a working IRI or not)

15:24:06 <sandro> s/now/not/
15:24:35 <dgarijo> paul: if we do what luc proposed, do we deal scruffiness?

Paul Groth: if we do what luc proposed, do we deal scruffiness?

15:24:47 <dgarijo> gk: what do you mean by scruffiness?

Graham Klyne: what do you mean by scruffiness?

15:25:22 <dgarijo> pgroth: if you use the semantics, it will come up and barf: you're not doing it right ->structured guidance.

Paul Groth: if you use the semantics, it will come up and barf: you're not doing it right ->structured guidance.

15:25:27 <tlebo> Web Resources disjointUnion (   non-Information-Resource    InformationResource    )

Timothy Lebo: Web Resources disjointUnion ( non-Information-Resource InformationResource )

15:25:38 <dgarijo> ... in RDF we do this all the time

... in RDF we do this all the time

15:26:04 <dgarijo> ... the intention is to make it easy to apply

... the intention is to make it easy to apply

15:27:20 <tlebo> Web Resource := anything denoted by a URI (though, happy to get corrected with a pointer to a doc)

Timothy Lebo: Web Resource := anything denoted by a URI (though, happy to get corrected with a pointer to a doc)

15:29:02 <tlebo> :Web_Resource owl:equivalentClass awww:Resource .

Timothy Lebo: :Web_Resource owl:equivalentClass awww:Resource .

15:29:43 <dgarijo> luc: maybe Paolo, james an luc should sit around the table, discuss and then come back

Luc Moreau: maybe Paolo, james an luc should sit around the table, discuss and then come back

15:30:03 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:30:44 <dgarijo> paul: the semantics is how you should do provenance, but it is fine if you don't do it

Paul Groth: the semantics is how you should do provenance, but it is fine if you don't do it

15:31:39 <GK> ack gk

Graham Klyne: ack gk

15:31:39 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I don't think we should be trying to describe this and to say I now think there are (1) things in the domain of discourse that may be identified in the

Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say I don't think we should be trying to describe this and to say I now think there are (1) things in the domain of discourse that may be identified in the

15:31:42 <dgarijo> luc: how can I map those assertions into the semantics. At the moment I don't see it, so it doesn't help

Luc Moreau: how can I map those assertions into the semantics. At the moment I don't see it, so it doesn't help

15:31:42 <Zakim> ... semantic model, (2) things in domain of discourse that are referenced directly in the DM and (3) syntactic artifacts (and maybe other things) that are not referenced by any

Zakim IRC Bot: ... semantic model, (2) things in domain of discourse that are referenced directly in the DM and (3) syntactic artifacts (and maybe other things) that are not referenced by any

15:31:42 <Zakim> ... construct.  The consequence of this is that DM can refer to entities (alone) without reference to things, which are still explained in the semantics by reference to things.

Zakim IRC Bot: ... construct. The consequence of this is that DM can refer to entities (alone) without reference to things, which are still explained in the semantics by reference to things.

15:32:32 <dgarijo> gk: we can take out a layer from the model without necessarily having to take it from the semantics

Graham Klyne: we can take out a layer from the model without necessarily having to take it from the semantics

15:34:18 <Stian> q?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q?

15:34:18 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:34:25 <dgarijo> luc: instead of droping entities in the data model, we drop things in the data model and we map them to the semantics

Luc Moreau: instead of droping entities in the data model, we drop things in the data model and we map them to the semantics

15:34:38 <pgroth> q+ ivan

Paul Groth: q+ ivan

15:34:45 <pgroth> q- ivan

Paul Groth: q- ivan

15:34:50 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q?

15:35:21 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+

15:35:29 <dgarijo> jcheney: there is no syntax for things (I don't think it is necessary).

James Cheney: there is no syntax for things (I don't think it is necessary).

15:36:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:36:34 <pgroth> ack Paolo

Paul Groth: ack Paolo

15:36:35 <dgarijo> paolo: makes perfect sense what gk said.

Paolo Missier: makes perfect sense what gk said.

15:37:00 <dgarijo> paolo: I don't see the need for that in the DM

Paolo Missier: I don't see the need for that in the DM

15:38:45 <dgarijo> luc: the scruffy version is objects/entities for which there is no lifetime defined?

Luc Moreau: the scruffy version is objects/entities for which there is no lifetime defined?

15:39:12 <dgarijo> luc: so none of this machinery works! they don't have lifetime

Luc Moreau: so none of this machinery works! they don't have lifetime

15:39:33 <tlebo> scruffies assert among Entities that are higher in the specializationOf chain

Timothy Lebo: scruffies assert among Entities that are higher in the specializationOf chain

15:39:45 <dgarijo> stian: how do you know it doesn't work? it is just not stated

Stian Soiland-Reyes: how do you know it doesn't work? it is just not stated

15:40:35 <Stian> :blogPost prov:wasAuthoredBy :paul   is fine as long as you don't also say  :paul prov:wasDerivedFrom :blogPost

Stian Soiland-Reyes: :blogPost prov:wasAuthoredBy :paul is fine as long as you don't also say :paul prov:wasDerivedFrom :blogPost

15:40:59 <dgarijo> paolo: we may not have inconsistencies, but we could have consequences.

Paolo Missier: we may not have inconsistencies, but we could have consequences.

15:41:47 <Stian> or say you use <http://www.example.com/paulsHomepage/> for both identifiers :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: or say you use <http://www.example.com/paulsHomepage/> for both identifiers :)

15:41:54 <dgarijo> luc: action to prov-dm editors: write a separate document to no longer talk about things in prov dm, just entities. Things will be the mechanism by which we'll provide some semantics.

Luc Moreau: action to prov-dm editors: write a separate document to no longer talk about things in prov dm, just entities. Things will be the mechanism by which we'll provide some semantics.

15:42:26 <dgarijo> ... we'l analyze the meaning of scruffy provenance vs more sofisticated and comlpete provenance

... we'l analyze the meaning of scruffy provenance vs more sofisticated and comlpete provenance

15:42:54 <dgarijo> paul: one conclusion is that people is keen on not having entities

Paul Groth: one conclusion is that people is keen on not having entities

15:43:02 <dgarijo> ... it simplifies the model

... it simplifies the model

15:43:21 <dgarijo> ... avoid using intervals, freezing, etc.

... avoid using intervals, freezing, etc.

15:43:25 <GK> @paul +lots!

Graham Klyne: @paul +lots!

15:43:31 <tlebo> :-)

Timothy Lebo: :-)

15:43:57 <dgarijo> paul: please take that under consideration.

Paul Groth: please take that under consideration.

15:44:19 <dgarijo> smiles: in the primer that's our approach

Simon Miles: in the primer that's our approach

15:44:41 <Stian> Satya Sahoo: "Attributes on an Entity SHOULD be consistent across all involvements of the entity in other provenance records"

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Satya Sahoo: "Attributes on an Entity SHOULD be true across all involvements of the entity in other provenance records"

15:44:52 <dgarijo> luc: we could tackle that after the second half of the dm, reduced to a minimum

Luc Moreau: we could tackle that after the second half of the dm, reduced to a minimum

15:45:16 <Stian> s/consistent/true/ or similar  (people don't like 'consistent')
15:45:19 <dgarijo> pgroth: I really like the interaction between semantics and dm

Paul Groth: I really like the interaction between semantics and dm

15:45:38 <dgarijo> luc:it confirms that semantics should be a note.

Luc Moreau: it confirms that semantics should be a note.

15:46:22 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:46:25 <dgarijo> luc: will go back to the working group in 2 weeks

Luc Moreau: will go back to the working group in 2 weeks

15:46:49 <Stian> KL1093 16:20 to Manchester was cancelled

Stian Soiland-Reyes: KL1093 16:20 to Manchester was cancelled

15:47:19 <dgarijo> @Stian :S

@Stian :S

15:48:38 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:49:33 <pgroth> action: luc to provide a preliminary simplified introduction to the data model 16 Jan

ACTION: luc to provide a preliminary simplified introduction to the data model 16 Jan

15:49:34 <trackbot> Created ACTION-62 - Provide a preliminary simplified introduction to the data model 16 Jan   [on Luc Moreau - due 2012-02-10].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-62 - Provide a preliminary simplified introduction to the data model 16 Jan [on Luc Moreau - due 2012-02-10].

15:49:58 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:50:24 <pgroth> luc: thanking everyone

Luc Moreau: thanking everyone [ Scribe Assist by Paul Groth ]

15:50:37 <dgarijo> pgroth: thanks to ivan

Paul Groth: thanks to ivan

15:50:49 <dgarijo> ... and to all.

... and to all.

15:51:03 <Stian> @dgarijo they seem to be recovering and flying out a few 14:00 flights now - me and Khalid are hopefully fine by 21 - but

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @dgarijo they seem to be recovering and flying out a few 14:00 flights now - me and Khalid are hopefully fine by 21 - but

15:51:52 <tlebo> bye bye :-)

Timothy Lebo: bye bye :-)

15:52:02 <pgroth> tlebo awesomeness!

Paul Groth: tlebo awesomeness!

15:52:05 <satya> @Daniel: Thanks Daniel again for hosting us!

Satya Sahoo: @Daniel: Thanks Daniel again for hosting us!

15:52:18 <Zakim> - +31.20.598.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: - +31.20.598.aaaa

15:52:19 <satya> bye

Satya Sahoo: bye

15:52:21 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

15:52:24 <Zakim> -Sandro

Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro

15:52:24 <tlebo> Thanks, @daniel!

Timothy Lebo: Thanks, @daniel!

15:52:28 <Zakim> -??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P1

15:52:29 <Zakim> PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: PROV_f2f()3:00AM has ended

15:52:29 <Zakim> Attendees were Sandro, tlebo, +31.20.598.aaaa, Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were Sandro, tlebo, +31.20.598.aaaa, Satya_Sahoo

15:52:32 <GK> Done!!!

Graham Klyne: Done!!!

15:53:14 <dgarijo> bye all

bye all

15:53:39 <Stian> http://www.flightstats.com/go/FlightStatus/flightStatusByAirport.do?airportCode=AMS&airportQueryType=0 for 16:00 says pretty much everything cancelled - at 14:00 there are 3 flights that went out

Stian Soiland-Reyes: http://www.flightstats.com/go/FlightStatus/flightStatusByAirport.do?airportCode=AMS&airportQueryType=0 for 16:00 says pretty much everything cancelled - at 14:00 there are 3 flights that went out

15:55:51 <pgroth> zakim, end telecon

Paul Groth: zakim, end telecon

15:55:51 <Zakim> I don't understand 'end telecon', pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'end telecon', pgroth

15:55:59 <pgroth> trackbot, end telecon

Paul Groth: trackbot, end telecon

15:55:59 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees

15:55:59 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is

15:56:07 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes

15:56:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-minutes.html trackbot

15:56:08 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> I see 10 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-actions.rdf :

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 10 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-actions.rdf :

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) [1]

ACTION: Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) [1]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T13-33-50

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T13-33-50

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) [2]

ACTION: pgroth Engage implementation task force to begin developing of a test harness around examples (from tim or others) [2]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T13-34-07

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T13-34-07

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Michael Lang - Prov-o team will produce an updated owl file reflecting prov-dm wd3 by 17 Feb telecon [3]

ACTION: Michael Lang - Prov-o team will produce an updated owl file reflecting prov-dm wd3 by 17 Feb telecon [3]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-23-42

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-23-42

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: jcheney to update the provrdf rules and align it with prov wd3 by 16 Feb telecon [4]

ACTION: jcheney to update the provrdf rules and align it with prov wd3 by 16 Feb telecon [4]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-32-07

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-32-07

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth draft review of potential public wd2 addressing all outstanding issues [5]

ACTION: pgroth draft review of potential public wd2 addressing all outstanding issues [5]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-36-19

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-36-19

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth write a summary email of f2f for the larger group  [6]

ACTION: pgroth write a summary email of f2f for the larger group [6]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-40-02

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-40-02

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth write a blog post about current status on development [7]

ACTION: pgroth write a blog post about current status on development [7]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-40-21

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-40-21

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: luc kickstart discussion on xml schema [8]

ACTION: luc kickstart discussion on xml schema [8]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-43-59

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-43-59

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: jcheney to update prov-sem to be compatible with wd3 [9]

ACTION: jcheney to update prov-sem to be compatible with wd3 [9]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-57-11

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T14-57-11

15:56:08 <RRSAgent> ACTION: luc to provide a preliminary simplified introduction to the data model 16 Jan   [10]

ACTION: luc to provide a preliminary simplified introduction to the data model 16 Jan [10]

15:56:08 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T15-49-33

RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/02/03-prov-irc#T15-49-33



Formatted by CommonScribe


This revision (#5) generated 2012-02-23 14:40:12 UTC by 'pgroth', comments: 'updated to add summaries'