Chatlog 2013-01-17

From Provenance WG Wiki
Revision as of 18:36, 20 January 2013 by Lmoreau (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

See original RRSAgent log or preview nicely formatted version.

Please justify/explain all edits to this page, in your "edit summary" text.

15:57:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
15:57:08 <RRSAgent> logging to
15:57:10 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
15:57:10 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
15:57:12 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be PROV
15:57:12 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM already started
15:57:13 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
15:57:13 <trackbot> Date: 17 January 2013
15:57:14 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV
15:57:14 <Zakim> ok, Luc, I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM already started
15:57:16 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
15:57:27 <Luc> Agenda:
15:57:31 <pgroth> pgroth has left #prov
15:57:38 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
15:57:44 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
15:58:44 <pgroth> pgroth has joined #prov
15:58:54 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:59:00 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aaaa
15:59:07 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
15:59:13 <Luc> zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me
15:59:14 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
15:59:24 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:59:26 <Zakim> +??P6
15:59:33 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P6 is me
15:59:34 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:59:35 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me
15:59:35 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
15:59:46 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:59:54 <dgarijo> Luc, if nobody volunteers, I can be the scribe
16:00:30 <Luc> it's very kind daniel, first, let's see if we can find somebody else,
16:00:39 <Luc> zakim, who is here?
16:00:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Curt_Tilmes, Luc, pgroth, dgarijo
16:00:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see zednik, Paolo, dgarijo, pgroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, Curt, Luc, TallTed, ivan, trackbot, stain
16:00:43 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:00:54 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
16:00:54 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
16:00:56 <Zakim> +Ivan
16:01:00 <Paolo> HI I have done it quite recently but can do it again
16:01:02 <Luc> zakim, who is noisy?
16:01:02 <Paolo> if needed
16:01:03 <Zakim> + +1.315.330.aabb
16:01:12 <Zakim> Luc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Ivan (2%)
16:01:14 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
16:01:20 <TallTed> TallTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG - - Agenda:
16:01:20 <tlebo> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:01:20 <Zakim> On the phone I see Curt_Tilmes, Luc, pgroth, dgarijo, [IPcaller], Ivan, +1.315.330.aabb
16:01:26 <tlebo> zakim, I am aabb
16:01:26 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
16:01:47 <Luc> scribe: tlebo
16:01:59 <Dong> Dong has joined #prov
16:02:05 <Luc> zakim, who is noisy?
16:02:16 <Zakim> Luc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Ivan (56%)
16:02:26 <tlebo> (I think this IRC client has dropped me before, so I might need to hand off to someone mid-stream)
16:02:33 <pgroth> ivan has the loudest keyboard ever
16:02:37 <ivan> zakim, mute me
16:02:37 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
16:02:42 <ivan> :-(
16:02:48 <tlebo> :-)
16:03:04 <khalidBelhajjame> khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov
16:03:19 <Zakim> +??P41
16:03:22 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
16:03:24 <Luc>
16:03:27 <dgarijo> 0 (I wasn't there)
16:03:28 <tlebo> proposed: approve minutes
16:03:29 <pgroth> Topic: Admin
16:03:40 <Luc> proposed: to approve last week's minutes
16:03:41 <ivan> +1
16:03:42 <tlebo> 0 (was not here)
16:03:48 <Curt> 0 (not present)
16:03:48 <Paolo> 0 (missed it)
16:03:49 <dgarijo> 0
16:03:52 <smiles> +1
16:03:56 <Dong> +1
16:03:57 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
16:04:11 <Luc> resolved:  last week's minutes
16:04:34 <tlebo> luc: action on Tim for cross referencing.
16:04:43 <Zakim> +??P22
16:04:46 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
16:04:48 <GK> GK has joined #prov
16:04:55 <hook> hook has joined #prov
16:05:05 <satya> satya has joined #prov
16:05:05 <tlebo> tim: I'll look at the cross reference.
16:05:06 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
16:05:06 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aacc
16:05:12 <TallTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
16:05:12 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it
16:05:15 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me
16:05:15 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted
16:05:17 <tlebo> luc: action on himself...
16:05:26 <tlebo> luc: action on Stephan for namespaces.
16:05:40 <tlebo> zednik: have looked at identifiers
16:06:05 <tlebo> pgroth: I've done all actions on me.
16:06:22 <Zakim> +??P13
16:06:42 <Luc> topic: Implementations
<LUC>Summary: Paul reviewed all implementation surveys submitted so far. While the numbers look healthy, it was noted that 7 implementation reports were submitted by Southampton. Many implementers are known to have implemented PROV but have not submitted yet. Group members are strong invited to submit their reports. 
16:06:55 <tlebo> luc: paul went through surveys recently.
16:07:01 <pgroth>
16:07:02 <dgarijo> I've added all the remaining implementations that I had added in the wiki. Some of them today
16:07:09 <tlebo> pgroth: announced it via email
16:07:27 <TomDN> TomDN has joined #prov
16:07:32 <tlebo> ... reports from 9 organizations
16:07:58 <tlebo> ... southampton has 7 implementations.
16:08:01 <Zakim> +Ruben
16:08:13 <TomDN> Zakim, +Ruben is me
16:08:13 <Zakim> sorry, TomDN, I do not recognize a party named '+Ruben'
16:08:14 <tlebo> ... provo is good track; all constructs supported by 2 sep implementations.
16:08:21 <TomDN> Zakim, Ruben is me
16:08:21 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it
16:08:25 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has joined #prov
16:08:33 <tlebo> ... provo needs a pair of implmeentations to exchange.
16:08:39 <TomDN> Zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN
16:08:39 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it
16:08:44 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
16:08:44 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
16:08:47 <GK_> GK_ has joined #prov
16:08:55 <tlebo> ... it's easy to hit that min by having SH and Kings to exchange prov.
16:08:58 <GK_> Zakim, ??p13 is me
16:08:58 <Zakim> +GK_; got it
16:09:11 <tlebo> ... for prov-n it is less satisfying. only 2 orgs: SH and weblab.
16:09:22 <tlebo> ... tom and sam have prov-n implementations.
16:09:32 <tlebo> ... but do weblab actually support it?
16:09:42 <tlebo> ... they say openRDF sesame as the library (implies prov-o)
16:09:50 <Paolo> I am going to add implementation with prov-n support
16:09:52 <Luc> q+
16:09:55 <tlebo> ... need to rely on tom/sam implementation
16:09:55 <Paolo> (applications)
16:10:13 <tlebo> ... constraints: luc's implementation, but we need one more impl.
16:10:31 <pgroth> it's a good thing!
16:10:44 <tlebo> luc: # implementations on southampton, some on different languages.
16:10:46 <GK> GK has joined #prov
16:11:00 <tlebo> ... we can demonstrate language independence if not org independence.
16:11:15 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me
16:11:15 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted
16:11:18 <tlebo> ... TomDN implementing? isn't he using the provtoolbox?
16:11:46 <Paolo> q+
16:11:50 <tlebo> TomDN: not really using the toolbox.
16:12:09 <pgroth> ack Luc
16:12:15 <pgroth> ace paolo
16:12:18 <pgroth> ack paolo
16:12:27 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
16:12:27 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
16:12:31 <Luc> q+
16:12:35 <tlebo> Paolo: Tom's note, if I produce prov-n w/o provtoolbox then it counts as a new implementation.
16:12:44 <pgroth> ack luc
16:13:02 <tlebo> luc: ideally, we want full independence.
16:13:13 <tlebo> ... but we made the case that prov-n is aimed at human consumption.
16:13:19 <tlebo> ... so no need for interoperability.
16:13:46 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me
16:13:46 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted
16:13:49 <tlebo> pgroth: for prov-n, does TomDN consume prov info as prov-n?
16:13:50 <Luc> prov-dm contains examples of prov-dm, consumable by prov toolbox. So it's a pair!
16:14:01 <Luc> prov-dm contains examples of PROV-N, consumable by prov toolbox. So it's a pair!
16:14:19 <tlebo> TomDN: I read it == I evaluate. It generates it == write.
16:14:23 <GK> A precedent we might look at is the "human" syntax(es) for OWL - what do they do?
16:14:39 <Luc> @TomDN, can you validate your prov-n with my validator?
16:15:12 <tlebo> TomDN: I can produce a file from my tool as prov-n.
16:15:18 <Luc> @TomDN, can you paste your prov-n into
16:15:25 <tlebo> pgroth: we want to give TomDN's prov-n to luc's validator.
16:15:33 <tlebo> ... then we have a pair.
16:15:41 <Luc> or
16:16:00 <tlebo> pgroth: tom doens't use all of the constructs.
16:16:05 <tlebo> TomDN: no.
16:16:11 <tlebo> pgroth: extend to use other constructs?
16:16:14 <tlebo> TomDN: not easy.
16:16:27 <Luc> q+
16:16:32 <pgroth> ack Luc
16:16:47 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
16:16:47 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
16:16:58 <tlebo> Luc: prov-dm doc is an example of prov-n generation. so all statements can be validated by toolbox.
16:17:02 <tlebo> .. thus an interop pair
16:17:27 <tlebo> pgroth: we need to add it to the quesionnaire
16:17:33 <TomDN> (I will provide some rationale on my questionaire answers to explain the read/write answers
16:17:48 <tlebo> pgroth: we should do it as the WG
16:17:49 <GK> q+ to suggest looking in to how was handled
16:18:01 <Zakim> -GK_
16:18:06 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.aa]
16:18:07 <GK> Losrt my client
16:18:08 <tlebo> pgroth: we seem to have coverage on prov-n (with these steps)
16:18:23 <GK> Sorry lost connection
16:18:23 <Luc> q?
16:18:37 <Zakim> +??P13
16:18:46 <pgroth> q+ to say we need a pair for prov-o
16:18:46 <GK> zakim, ??p13 is me
16:18:47 <Zakim> +GK; got it
16:18:51 <tlebo> Luc: please submit the implementation reports.
16:18:58 <stain> Zakim, ??P13 is me
16:18:58 <Zakim> I already had ??P13 as GK, stain
16:19:08 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.aa]
16:19:19 <tlebo> GK: prov-n and interop -- find out what OWL WG did with their functional syntax.
16:19:22 <CraigTrim> CraigTrim has joined #PROV
16:19:25 <tlebo> ... it's similar role.
16:19:28 <Luc> q?
16:19:32 <ivan> unmute ivan
16:19:34 <Luc> ack gk
16:19:34 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to suggest looking in to how was handled
16:19:39 <ivan> zakim, unmute me
16:19:39 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted
16:20:15 <pgroth> i think we have a solution now for prov-n
16:20:15 <tlebo> ivan: i don't remember how function syntax was handled. it was just a specification language - not a cand rec requiement to parse it.
16:20:16 <Luc> q?
16:20:38 <tlebo> ... for OWL systems, they needed to exchange RDF/XML. the ONLY one.
16:20:39 <GK> That was my guess - I think PROV-N might be presented similarly?
16:20:45 <pgroth> Tom's implementation + validator  and prov-dm docs + validator
16:20:45 <Luc> q?
16:20:48 <Luc> ack pg
16:20:48 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say we need a pair for prov-o
16:21:03 <tlebo> pgroth: provo coverage is fine, we need some pairs.
16:21:09 <Zakim> +??P44
16:21:15 <tlebo> ... could simon and luc make that pair?
16:21:48 <tlebo> Luc: the service is available online. anyone can paste them in to validator or translator.
16:21:52 <tlebo> ... they can just report it.
16:21:56 <smiles> Luc - Can you give the URL again?
16:22:07 <stain> Zakim: ??P44 is me
16:22:11 <stain> Zakim, ??P44 is me
16:22:11 <Zakim> +stain; got it
16:22:11 <tlebo> pgroth: a pair isn't one directional?
16:22:22 <stain> Zakim, ??P44 is also khalidBelhajjame
16:22:22 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P44 is also khalidBelhajjame', stain
16:22:25 <tlebo> pgroth: simon, dump out provo and validate it?
16:22:34 <tlebo> smiles: yes, if it takes turtle
16:22:36 <ivan> zakim, mute me
16:22:36 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
16:22:50 <Luc>
16:23:01 <tlebo> Luc: anybody can do that.
16:23:04 <Luc> q?
16:23:04 <pgroth> constraints
16:23:04 <GK> I think producer -> consumer (one way) is OK - it shoews two developers read spec and had some common understanding
16:23:11 <pgroth> q+
16:23:30 <tlebo> pgroth: constraints. luc did them, pgroth is slowing working them.
16:23:41 <tlebo> ... obviously good to have more than 2
16:23:47 <tlebo> ... or even if other parts of implementations.
16:23:59 <tlebo> ... 47 unit tests away from full coverage.
16:24:16 <tlebo> ... shoiuld be able to do it.
16:24:21 <tlebo> +1 :-)
16:24:35 <tlebo> luc: Paolo was working on partial constriants
16:24:44 <Luc> Regrets: jcheney
16:24:53 <TomDN> Does your implementation need to be completely finished by Jan. 31st?
16:24:57 <tlebo> Paolo: jun and I havent' worked on it.
16:25:07 <pgroth> @TomDN it's about the report really
16:25:17 <tlebo> Luc: when? by end of month?
16:25:20 <tlebo> Paolo: not by then.
16:25:26 <pgroth> +q to ask about stardog
16:25:29 <Luc> q?
16:25:31 <TomDN> @pgroth, thanks, that's what i thought
16:25:55 <tlebo> pgroth: we knwo there are implementations out there than what is reported.
16:26:04 <tlebo> ... we should all sign up to report implementations.
16:26:22 <tlebo> ... e.g. stardog is doing it.
16:26:27 <tlebo> ... approach individually.
16:26:50 <Luc> q?
16:26:52 <Luc> ack pg
16:26:52 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask about stardog
16:26:54 <tlebo> (I tried to poke the LInkedTV via twitter yesterday -- it's not coming out till Feb)
16:27:01 <pgroth> but there's also dbpedia, and qudt, etc
16:27:04 <Luc> topic: Response to public comments
16:27:08 <tlebo> zakim, who is making noise?
16:27:09 <pgroth> simon can you mute
16:27:12 <Luc>
16:27:18 <Zakim> tlebo, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (83%), ??P41 (28%)
16:27:30 <pgroth> zakim, mute ??P41
16:27:30 <Zakim> ??P41 should now be muted
16:27:30 <GK> (There's also the possibility of submitting "third party" reports for public implemenbtations)
16:27:43 <Luc> q?
16:27:47 <pgroth> @GK i didn't no that
16:27:52 <pgroth> s/no/know
16:28:00 <Luc> q?
16:28:09 <Luc> Proposed: the group endorses the responses to issues 611 and 612
16:28:14 <TomDN> +1
16:28:17 <ivan> +1
16:28:18 <khalidBelhajjame> +1
16:28:18 <tlebo> +1
16:28:19 <satya> +1
16:28:21 <zednik> +1
16:28:23 <stain> +1
16:28:26 <Dong> +q
16:28:26 <TallTed> +1
16:28:27 <GK> @paul - I don't *know* that, but I can't see any reason why now
16:28:34 <SamCoppens> +1
16:28:36 <Luc> q?
16:28:36 <dgarijo> +0 (I haven't reviewed them yet)
16:28:38 <hook> +1
16:28:39 <smiles> +1 (noting that I sent a suggestion just before this call)
16:28:41 <GK> +0
16:28:50 <Paolo> 0 haven't reviewed in detail
16:28:53 <Luc> Resolved: the group endorses the responses to issues 611 and 612
16:28:54 <Curt> +0 (haven't reviewed)
16:29:04 <stain> @TallTed what happened to McTed over New Year? :)
16:29:13 <tlebo> luc: who to respond to reviewers?
16:29:15 <Dong> q-
16:29:15 <pgroth> sure
16:29:17 <Luc> q?
16:29:21 <tlebo> Luc: : is it paul?
16:29:25 <tlebo> pgroth: I can do that.
16:29:33 <tlebo> ... we had a question about derivation.
16:29:57 <tlebo> ... wasQUotedFrom, not derivation.
16:30:08 <dgarijo> I think it was about the name of wasQuotedFrom.
16:30:12 <tlebo> (I think it's the same mix-up that "Tim vs. Stian+Daniel" had.
16:30:13 <stain> it was about the directionality - as I originally complained about it
16:30:23 <stain> he suggested hadQuoteFrom
16:30:27 <dgarijo> yep
16:30:35 <Luc> q?
16:30:57 <pgroth> action: pgroth to respond to public comments
16:30:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-162 - Respond to public comments [on Paul Groth - due 2013-01-24].
16:30:58 <Dong> @Luc and Tim: I've just remember that some PROV-O examples might need to be revised in ISSUE-611
16:31:02 <tlebo> luc: wasquotedFrom, can't recall.
16:31:17 <TomDN>
16:31:27 <hook> hook has joined #prov
16:31:29 <stain> I think we need another WG discussion on email about it
16:31:57 <TallTed> stain - just unifying my nick across a few spaces (Twitter, a couple of IRC nets, etc.) ...
16:32:03 <stain> if the term was confusing in the primer.. then it's confusing all over
16:32:04 <tlebo> q+ to note that we couldn't converge last time on the naming.
16:32:15 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aacc
16:32:44 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aadd
16:32:56 <tlebo> ECHO
16:32:57 <pgroth> echo madness
16:33:02 <stain> zakim, who is noisy?
16:33:06 <pgroth> simon
16:33:07 <Luc> q?
16:33:13 <Zakim> stain, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: tlebo (31%)
16:33:14 <pgroth> ack tlebo
16:33:16 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to note that we couldn't converge last time on the naming.
16:33:38 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
16:34:00 <smiles> @tlebo - Do you have a link to that email conversation?
16:34:01 <Luc> q?
16:34:10 <stain> but this email was from Chuck Norris - which sounds like a native speaker
16:34:11 <Luc> q?
16:34:15 <tlebo> smiles: I can dig up the ISSUE.
16:34:17 <stain> MORRIS
16:34:19 <stain> hihi
16:34:26 <smiles> OK
16:34:26 <dgarijo> @stian:lol
16:34:56 <Zakim> +??P32
16:35:15 <Luc> q?
16:35:17 <Paolo> zakim, ??P32 is me
16:35:17 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it
16:35:25 <Luc> topic: prov-dictionary
16:35:27 <tlebo> tlebo: I'll dig through them. thanks for the reminder
16:35:44 <TomDN> no
16:35:54 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me
16:35:54 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted
16:36:03 <tlebo> smiles: is the wasQuotedFrom naming discussion
16:36:13 <Paolo> deadline is 23rd, right?
16:36:31 <pgroth> fine with me
16:36:35 <tlebo> Luc: reviewers should give feedback by next wed.
16:36:41 <pgroth> paul
16:36:49 <smiles> @tlebo Thanks!
16:36:59 <TomDN> Paolo, Stian, James (maybe), Luc, and Paul,
16:37:02 <Luc> q?
16:37:11 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me
16:37:11 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted
16:37:12 <Luc> topic: prov-aq
16:37:38 <Luc> q?
16:37:41 <tlebo> GK: I've seen 4 reviews in
16:37:57 <tlebo> pgroth: tim, simon, luc, dong, stian
16:38:18 <tlebo> h!
16:38:22 <pgroth> your back
16:38:46 <tlebo> pgroth: all have reviewed.
16:38:54 <pgroth> shall i go
16:39:08 <pgroth> q+
16:39:11 <tlebo> GK: through 1.5 sets of comments.
16:39:15 <tlebo> ... most are editorial.
16:39:25 <tlebo> ... hoping to pick out those that are more than editorial.
16:39:42 <pgroth> that's not the main issue
16:39:45 <tlebo> ... issue on REST interface vs. simple convention for URI to retrieve prov.
16:40:04 <tlebo> pgroth: everyone but stian said doc can go LC
16:40:10 <stain> q+
16:40:17 <tlebo> ... stian has 8-9 blocking issues.
16:40:39 <Luc> q+
16:40:44 <Luc> ack pg
16:40:46 <tlebo> ... we should concentrate on blocking issues from stian.
16:40:46 <GK> Ah, I hadn't yet looked at those blocking issues from Stian
16:41:07 <tlebo> stain: my issues: it was heavy.
16:41:16 <Luc> q?
16:41:20 <Luc> ack sta
16:41:24 <tlebo> ... as a draft, fine. but not as final technical.
16:41:25 <stain> @GK sorry about that..
16:41:27 <Luc> ack luc
16:41:40 <tlebo> Luc: i'm fine wiht doc released as next WD.
16:41:58 <tlebo> ... I felt that feedback required changes, and so not last call.
16:42:02 <pgroth> q+
16:42:04 <tlebo> ... we don't have notion of last call in Note.
16:42:09 <tlebo> ... we're abusing that name.
16:42:20 <Luc> q?
16:42:21 <tlebo> ... as next draft, fine.
16:42:44 <tlebo> pgroth: we should distinguish between release and not wanting to do any more to it.
16:43:08 <tlebo> ... address all comments, release a WD at a minimum. OR when we go PRec with other docs.
16:43:17 <tlebo> ... but can we get another iteration?
16:43:17 <Luc> q?
16:43:19 <hook> hook has joined #prov
16:43:22 <tlebo> ... before PR
16:43:25 <GK> @paul +1 review/revise as much as possible
16:43:32 <Luc> q?
16:43:32 <tlebo> ... we need two more itnerations on PAQ
16:43:55 <tlebo> Luc: we should be pragmatic about Notes and making it too perfect.
16:44:00 <GK> If the issues are substantive, I don't think they should be "offline"
16:44:09 <Luc> q?
16:44:30 <pgroth> @gk i was talking about scheduling
16:44:44 <GK> @paul Ah, OK.
16:44:46 <tlebo> Luc: do we vote? or do work and editors cycle?
16:44:57 <tlebo> pgroth: next week or following for WD.
16:45:01 <Luc> ack pg
16:45:11 <TomDN> (can be synced with dictionary then)
16:45:18 <tlebo> ... take off "final" terminology"
16:45:28 <Luc> q?
16:45:43 <Luc> topic: prov-xml
16:45:45 <tlebo> topic: prov-xml
16:46:02 <GK> Next week is likely busy for me.  I'll try to complete my pass through the reviews today.
16:46:25 <tlebo> luc: namespace, schema management, etc.
16:46:44 <tlebo> zednik: some feedback on original note. extended types was confusing with prov:type.
16:46:52 <tlebo> ... made native XML type for those.
16:47:30 <tlebo> ... identifiers: work natively for XML
16:47:33 <tlebo> ... id and idref
16:47:40 <tlebo> id uses xsi:id
16:47:54 <tlebo> ... base type of idRef -- xml tooling is familiar.
16:48:12 <tlebo> .. cannot start with numbers, other constraints.
16:48:24 <tlebo> ... it's native but doesn't work with our examples or URIs.
16:48:33 <tlebo> ... alternative: anyURI or QNames
16:48:34 <pgroth> @gk see where you can get and see what needs to be debated
16:48:44 <tlebo> ... not sure which would be better.
16:48:50 <tlebo> ... also xlinks and xpointers.
16:49:06 <GK> @paul - that's my plan - I'm making notes as I go.  I'll email you a copy when done.
16:49:13 <pgroth> @gk awesome
16:49:16 <ivan> q+
16:49:23 <tlebo> ... xpointers and xlinks might let us verify references existing.
16:49:28 <ivan> ack ivan
16:49:32 <tlebo> ... the group needs to read up on xlinks/xpointers.
16:49:35 <Luc> ack iv
16:49:46 <tlebo> ivan: how widely is xlink implemented?
16:50:03 <tlebo> ... do tools really do it? xlink is an unlucky standard.
16:50:10 <Luc> q?
16:50:23 <hook> q+
16:50:32 <tlebo> ... might not be worth adopting, could be more harm than good.
16:50:48 <tlebo> hook: xlinks ISO community uses them to reference external XML traces.
16:50:59 <tlebo> ... in bundles, can reference across bundles.
16:51:09 <tlebo> ... but good point on how much it's used.
16:51:15 <Luc> q?
16:51:22 <Luc> ack ho
16:51:31 <tlebo> ... we still need to look into xlinks.
16:51:50 <tlebo> Luc: have your changes surfaced to the WG?
16:52:00 <tlebo> ... some may want to get insight into your changes.
16:52:20 <tlebo> ... (are you using issue tracker?)
16:52:30 <Luc> q?
16:52:54 <tlebo> zednik: announced, but did not tag into ISSUE.
16:53:12 <Luc> q?
16:53:37 <tlebo> zednik: last modeling was valid.
16:53:55 <tlebo> Luc: namespace management issue
16:54:08 <tlebo> ... the namespace HTML is waiting on it.
16:54:30 <tlebo> zednik: seems like we're misusing xml namesapces.
16:54:49 <tlebo> ... the extension should have a different namespace.
16:54:58 <tlebo> ... including dictionary in new namespace
16:55:24 <tlebo> ... stian proposed an organization, but not ideal.
16:55:37 <tlebo> ... the xml schema should have different namespaces.
16:55:58 <TomDN> (didn't we vote on this a few months ago?)
16:56:03 <Luc> q?
16:56:03 <pgroth> q+
16:56:18 <Luc> ack pg
16:56:37 <tlebo> pgroth: prov dictionary etc being in different docs doesn't mean it's not in the same thing.
16:56:54 <tlebo> ... (they are in same group, it's just broken up to aid understanding).
16:56:58 <Luc> zakim. who is noisy?
16:57:07 <Luc> zakim, who is noisy?
16:57:14 <tlebo> pgroth: from practice, developers do not like separate namespaces.
16:57:17 <Zakim> Luc, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: pgroth (90%)
16:57:30 <hook> hook has joined #prov
16:57:30 <tlebo> ... PROV namespace will included in RDFa automatically.
16:57:44 <ivan> s/RDFa/RDFa 1.1/
16:57:57 <tlebo> Luc: is nice to have one ns
16:58:24 <tlebo> Luc: a prov-xml dictionary namespace?
16:58:37 <TomDN> then we need a prov-links namespace as well
16:58:55 <GK> IMO, if any of the XML namespaces are different from the corresponding RDF, then they should *all* be different
16:59:10 <stain> q+
16:59:13 <GK> .. including the "core" namespace
16:59:31 <Curt> just do 2, core, and core + all extensions
16:59:51 <Luc> q?
16:59:52 <stain> exactly.. we do a single schema with only core, and one with core-everything
16:59:53 <tlebo> q+ to ask zednik where the motivation for different namespaces comes from
16:59:59 <Luc> ack st
17:00:25 <tlebo> stain: oen for core prov xml, one that is prov-everything xml schema. If you don't like either of those, then you're on your own.
17:00:26 <zednik> q+
17:00:43 <Luc> ack tl
17:00:43 <Zakim> tlebo, you wanted to ask zednik where the motivation for different namespaces comes from
17:01:57 <Luc> q+
17:02:27 <Curt> I'm ok with one schema with everything
17:02:46 <pgroth> q+ prov-xml is a note
17:02:57 <pgroth> i like that
17:02:57 <tlebo> q-
17:03:02 <zednik> q-
17:04:01 <tlebo> Luc: : single schema file with all terms that use one namespace, THEN half-way house of a single schema for just the core Rec terms.
17:04:03 <pgroth> q+ to say that it is a single namespace
17:04:20 <Luc> ack luc
17:04:33 <stain> I think this is mainly an artifact of XML Schema being very strict of linking schemas and namespaces - this is not a big deal in other ways to express XML schemas like Relax NG
17:05:03 <pgroth> ack pgroth
17:05:03 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say that it is a single namespace
17:05:25 <tlebo> pgroth: everyone should be able to paste the namespace to a browser and get all serializations documented.
17:05:34 <khalidBelhajjame> bye
17:05:34 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo
17:05:36 <Zakim> -tlebo
17:05:36 <Zakim> -Paolo
17:05:37 <Zakim> -??P22
17:05:37 <Zakim> -TomDN
17:05:37 <GK> Bye
17:05:37 <SamCoppens> bye
17:05:38 <dgarijo> bbye
17:05:39 <Zakim> -stain
17:05:40 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]
17:05:41 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
17:05:43 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aadd
17:05:44 <Zakim> -pgroth
17:05:45 <SamCoppens> SamCoppens has left #prov
17:05:46 <Zakim> -dgarijo
17:05:46 <Zakim> -Ivan
17:05:46 <tlebo> Luc: I am done scribing?
17:05:47 <ivan> ivan has left #prov
17:05:48 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public
17:05:50 <Zakim> -??P41
17:05:53 <Zakim> -TallTed
17:05:54 <Zakim> -GK
17:06:20 <GK> GK has left #prov
17:06:31 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:06:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate Luc
17:06:35 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon
17:06:35 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:06:36 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Curt_Tilmes, Luc, dgarijo, pgroth, [IPcaller], Ivan, +1.315.330.aabb, tlebo, Satya_Sahoo, +1.818.731.aacc, TallTed, TomDN, SamCoppens, GK_,
17:06:36 <Zakim> ... GK, stain, +1.818.731.aadd, Paolo
17:06:43 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:06:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate trackbot
17:06:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:06:44 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in :
17:06:44 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to respond to public comments [1]
17:06:44 <RRSAgent>   recorded in