14:50:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:50:32 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/17-prov-irc
14:50:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:50:34 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:50:36 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:50:36 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:50:37 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:50:37 <trackbot> Date: 17 May 2012
14:50:37 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV 
14:50:37 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
14:50:46 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.05.17
14:51:36 <Luc> Chair: Moreau
14:51:44 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public
14:51:49 <Luc> zakim, who is here?
14:51:49 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has not yet started, Luc
14:51:50 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro
14:52:03 <Luc> Regrets: Paul Groth, Tom DeNies
14:52:17 <Luc> Regrets: Paul Groth, Tom DeNies, Paolo Missier
14:57:34 <Paolo_> Paolo_ has joined #prov
14:57:54 <smiles> smiles has joined #prov
14:58:01 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:58:08 <Zakim> +??P16
14:59:01 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
14:59:10 <Zakim> + +1.315.330.aaaa
14:59:13 <Zakim> -??P16
14:59:19 <tlebo> zakim, I am aaaa
14:59:19 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
14:59:54 <Zakim> +Luc
15:00:13 <Curt> Curt has joined #prov
15:00:20 <Zakim> +??P21
15:00:21 <Luc> Scribe: simon miles
15:00:30 <Luc> zakim, who is on the call?
15:00:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see tlebo, Luc, ??P21
15:01:04 <Luc> topic: admin
15:01:31 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
15:01:46 <Zakim> +[OpenLink]
15:01:56 <GK1> GK1 has joined #prov
15:01:58 <MacTed> Zakim, [OpenLink] is temporarily me
15:01:59 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:02:00 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:02:06 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:02:51 <Luc> proposed: to accept minute of last week's teleconference 
15:03:06 <jcheney> jcheney has joined #prov
15:03:19 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-05-10
15:03:20 <tlebo> +1
15:03:21 <Curt> 0 (not present)
15:03:23 <smiles> +1
15:03:26 <MacTed> +1
15:03:38 <Zakim> + +44.131.467.aabb
15:03:54 <Luc> resolved: minutes of last week's teleconference
15:03:54 <MacTed> Zakim, who's here?
15:03:54 <Zakim> On the phone I see tlebo, Luc, ??P21, Curt_Tilmes, MacTed (muted), +44.131.467.aabb
15:03:57 <Zakim> On IRC I see jcheney, GK1, Curt, tlebo, smiles, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, stain, trackbot, sandro
15:04:09 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open
15:04:10 <smiles> Luc: Action review
15:04:20 <GK1> oops, sorry, still getting audio together
15:04:30 <GK> GK has joined #prov
15:04:40 <smiles> Luc: Action on Sandro regarding emailing emailing announcements to W3C mail list
15:04:49 <jun> jun has joined #prov
15:04:54 <tlebo> I just sent my review
15:05:02 <smiles> Luc: Actions on Tim, Graham to review constraints doc - talk about later
15:05:05 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
15:05:14 <Luc> Topic: PAQ release
15:05:41 <smiles> Graham?
15:05:41 <Zakim> +??P49
15:05:44 <Luc> graham?
15:05:59 <GK> zakim, ??P49 is me
15:06:01 <Zakim> +GK; got it
15:06:01 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:06:03 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:06:08 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:06:11 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:06:17 <khalidbelhajjame> khalidbelhajjame has joined #prov
15:06:29 <Zakim> +??P50
15:06:31 <Zakim> +??P44
15:06:38 <jun> zakim, ?P44 is me
15:06:40 <Zakim> sorry, jun, I do not recognize a party named '?P44'
15:06:42 <Christine> Christine has joined #prov
15:06:49 <jun> zakim, ??P44 is me
15:06:51 <smiles> GK: PAQ has not been edited in past week, so not ready for release yet
15:07:05 <Zakim> +jun; got it
15:07:09 <smiles> GK: Publication release not yet requested to his knowledge
15:07:17 <smiles> Luc: Please agree release date soon
15:07:22 <Luc> topic: other documents
15:07:37 <Zakim> +??P51
15:07:37 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:07:43 <Zakim> +??P6
15:07:48 <khalidbelhajjame> zakim, ??P51 is me
15:07:49 <Zakim> +Sandro
15:08:02 <smiles> Luc: For PROV-DM, have made a number of changes, closed many issues
15:08:26 <Zakim> -??P6
15:08:32 <smiles> ... some issues still outstanding, listed in the agenda so people who raised them can talk to them: Khalid, Yolanda, Graham, Tim
15:08:36 <Zakim> +khalidbelhajjame; got it
15:08:39 <GK> Issue 88 can be closed as far as I'm concerned
15:08:44 <Zakim> +??P3
15:08:57 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P3 is me
15:08:57 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:08:57 <smiles> ... For PROV-N, implemented optional identifier changes, made grammar linkable for navigation, simplified presentation
15:09:04 <smiles> ... soon ready for review
15:09:18 <GK> Just closed issue 88
15:09:21 <smiles> ... For PROV-CONSTRAINTS, no progress, waiting for feedback?
15:09:25 <smiles> jcheney: confirms
15:09:35 <Luc> @graham, thanks
15:09:57 <smiles> tlebo: PROV-O, been closing issues, two requests for review before closing
15:10:25 <smiles> ... added cross-references for terms within HTML document
15:10:34 <smiles> ... latest draft linked on agenda
15:10:42 <smiles> ... feedback on the cross-references welcome
15:10:48 <Luc> q?
15:10:50 <smiles> ... on track for release June 1
15:11:13 <Luc> q?
15:11:22 <satya> satya has joined #prov
15:11:25 <smiles> smiles: PROV-Primer, not much to report from last week
15:11:28 <Luc> topic: collections organization
15:11:29 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo
15:11:31 <smiles> Luc: any comments on progress?
15:11:55 <smiles> Topic: restructuring documents for collections
15:12:21 <smiles> Luc: Several reviewers felt section of PROV-O on collections was long, and made appear more important than they are
15:12:39 <smiles> ... Paul suggested separating the collections out of the PROV-O document
15:12:54 <smiles> ... Separately, Graham suggested restructuring DM
15:13:10 <smiles> ... Last week, requested concrete proposals for restructuring
15:13:21 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDM_Proposal_for_restructuring
15:14:13 <smiles> GK: Proposal is in some ways quite radical, and is focused around separating central provenance patterns from those for specific processes
15:14:57 <smiles> ... The rationale is to achieve (1) separate core provenance patterns from specific applications, for comprehensibility of core idea
15:15:51 <Zakim> -??P50
15:15:54 <smiles> ... (2) Maximising interoperability with other systems doing provenance-like things
15:17:03 <smiles> ... other models including provenance seem to include core matching the core DM patterns
15:17:42 <MacTed> apropos of GK's "core" patterns...  this came to my eyes today -- http://linkedevents.org/ontology/
15:17:43 <smiles> ... (3) Minimising ontological commitment of users of model, so core embodies little semantics but captures essentials of traceability
15:18:15 <smiles> ... Core: entity, activity, agent
15:18:45 <smiles> Luc: Your proposal is to break DM document in two?
15:18:48 <smiles> GK: Yes
15:18:51 <Luc> q?
15:19:08 <Luc> paolo?
15:19:15 <Luc> just on irc? paolo?
15:20:02 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Collections
15:20:13 <smiles> tlebo: Other proposal (linked above) from Paolo
15:20:57 <smiles> ... collections and dictionaries taken out of PROV-O, classes and properties, and put into separate PROV-O-C document
15:21:03 <smiles> ... aim to simplify PROV-O
15:21:06 <Paolo> sorry guys text only, 
15:21:10 <Paolo> and very unstable
15:21:37 <smiles> ... PROV-O team discussed on Monday, preferred to focus on the content of PROV-O rather than deconstructing
15:21:40 <Paolo> thanks smiles for minuting
15:21:44 <tlebo> I can fit http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#description-collections-terms into 1.25 screens.  http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#description-qualified-terms takes up 4 screens.  http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#description-starting-point-terms takes up 1.5 screens
15:21:48 <Luc> @paolo, it's ok, tim filling in
15:22:31 <smiles> ... Have responded to reviews by simplifying content on collections
15:22:35 <Paolo> yes I know Tim questions the motivation for this ripping exercise
15:22:57 <smiles> ... PROV-O team prefers to keep collections in PROV-O document
15:23:16 <Paolo> we seemed to agree that it's for the prov-o team to pursue this if they want
15:23:30 <smiles> Luc: After last telecon, Paul and Luc considered logistics of taking collections out of existing documents to make new document
15:24:08 <smiles> ... short of editors and bandwidth, and goes beyond scope of original charter to give application specific extensions
15:24:36 <smiles> ... that is why Paolo suggested just extracting from PROV-O
15:25:17 <smiles> ... Tim, are you proposing not separating, as length concerns are already being addressed?
15:25:20 <smiles> tlebo: Yes
15:25:28 <tlebo> (and that was the agreement of the prov-o team)
15:25:41 <Luc> q?
15:25:56 <smiles> Luc: We have proposals to not do anything on restructuring or Graham's proposal
15:26:04 <tlebo> q+
15:26:55 <smiles> tlebo: From explaining to other people, people latch onto those core concepts
15:27:06 <smiles> ... (as in section 1 of Graham's document)
15:28:24 <smiles> tlebo: What about components (organisational structure of current draft)?
15:28:36 <Curt> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/#data-model-components
15:28:46 <smiles> GK: Tried to stick with existing material, suggest grouped in different way
15:28:51 <Luc> ack tlebo
15:28:52 <tlebo> q-
15:29:30 <smiles> Luc: Structure proposed is more or less what we had two iterations ago, but sections in one document
15:29:40 <smiles> ... but had reviews critical of this separation
15:29:57 <smiles> ... so decided to reorganise to remove distinction of core and extension
15:30:23 <Paolo> Paolo has joined #prov
15:30:32 <smiles> ... seems to be going back, and when we get to justifying what is core, what is extension, we will have difficulties
15:31:01 <smiles> ... Second, have had feedback from people outside WG who found component structure useful
15:31:18 <smiles> ... so reluctant to abandon it if we split document
15:31:44 <smiles> ... Third, if restructure PROV-DM, then have to do the same in other documents
15:32:11 <smiles> ... lead to a multiplication of documents, as scary as large number of concepts in current model
15:32:17 <MacTed> what is background of these outside readers?  philosophers, scientists, programmers, other?  experience and grounding matters to whether the current structure is easy to understand...
15:33:00 <smiles> ... There are sub-types, e.g. wasRevisionOf subtype of wasDerivedFrom, and could make more explicit in structure of DM
15:33:47 <smiles> ... For example, derivations in section 6.3.1, could then have subsections for subtypes
15:34:01 <smiles> ... (4.3.1 not 6.3.1)
15:34:53 <smiles> ... or explicit marker for terms that are core, e.g. communication is not primitive as can be described in terms of generation and usage
15:35:40 <Luc> q?
15:35:43 <satya> q+
15:36:36 <smiles> satya: As MacTed wrote above, who are the readers of the documents? which reviewers?
15:36:44 <MacTed> q+
15:36:48 <satya> q-
15:37:00 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me
15:37:00 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted
15:37:01 <smiles> Luc: In this case, researchers he works with who've implemented data model, felt component structure helped
15:37:44 <smiles> MacTed: That kind of feedback is not very useful, need more kinds of audience
15:37:59 <smiles> ... in favour of GK's restructuring
15:38:24 <smiles> ... for PROV-O, does not seem to have discerned what is a sub-class of what, what are the overarching elements
15:38:51 <smiles> ... there really are core concepts, and refinement of those
15:39:26 <tlebo> perhaps if we organized http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDM_Proposal_for_restructuring#Provenance_core_concepts by components?
15:39:26 <Luc> q?
15:39:30 <Luc> ack mact
15:39:56 <smiles> ... root primitives need to be clearly presented
15:40:25 <smiles> Luc: Agree that root primitives need to be clearly presented
15:40:28 <Luc> q?
15:40:37 <GK> q+ to say I'll respond oif there arter no other comments
15:41:43 <smiles> GK: Responding to Luc's point, looking at document two iterations ago, while separation of core from other concepts, too much other clutter so organisation wasn't serving purpose
15:42:31 <smiles> ... Added rationale to his proposal of separation of core pattern, with principles clear
15:43:19 <tlebo> q+ to ask what if graham incorporated components into his outline?
15:43:23 <smiles> ... With regard to restructuring other documents, don't see need to do so, just restructure DM, leave others as they are
15:43:34 <smiles> ... PROV-O already does the job of pulling out core patterns
15:43:45 <jcheney> q+ to say I need to leave at 5 so can we discuss the prov-constraints review briefly before spending the rest of the meeting debating restructuring
15:44:32 <smiles> ... Regarding changing presentation, mixing text on subtypes with supertypes would be exact opposite
15:44:39 <smiles> ... of what is intended
15:44:40 <tlebo> @jcheny, I'll  yield :-)
15:45:14 <smiles> ... To have to dig around in document for core ideas means much less likely specification would be deployed
15:45:22 <Luc> q?
15:45:22 <tlebo> q-
15:45:30 <GK> q-
15:45:46 <Luc> ack jcheney
15:45:46 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to say I need to leave at 5 so can we discuss the prov-constraints review briefly before spending the rest of the meeting debating restructuring
15:45:56 <Luc> topic: constraints document
15:46:08 <tlebo> go ahead, graham.
15:46:28 <jcheney> high-level impression is fine
15:46:41 <smiles> GK: Looked through constraints document, feels a lot tighter and has right approach
15:46:54 <smiles> ... definitions and inferences presented crisply
15:47:10 <smiles> ... may be able to make more comments later, but looking good
15:47:35 <smiles> tlebo: Biggest concern on last iteration was about getting into content
15:47:48 <tlebo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Dm-constraints_review_2012_May_17_by_Lebo
15:47:50 <smiles> ... this version is much better organised, natural to know where to go
15:48:20 <smiles> ... minor detailed comments sent (above)
15:49:17 <smiles> jcheney: Thanks, was really looking for high level impression, thanks for going through in more detail
15:49:27 <smiles> ... good to know happy with direction
15:49:59 <GK> I think the style of revised -CONSTRAINTS will nicely complement a less formal description of -DM
15:50:06 <tlebo> @jcheney, sorry, I missed your questions in the email :-)
15:50:16 <smiles> ... after last week had more specific questions, implicitly answered in Tim's comments, but please look at questions in email
15:51:16 <tlebo> @jcheney, I'll respond to the email questions after this meeting.
15:51:27 <smiles> ... will go through issues raised to see what can be closed
15:51:30 <Luc> q?
15:52:05 <Luc> Topic: Responsibility
15:52:18 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Renaming_the_concept_Responsibility
15:53:01 <smiles> tlebo: In definitions of assocation and attribution are responsibility, so name Responsibility is confusing and misnamed
15:53:34 <jcheney> I may have suggested "delegation" at some point
15:54:03 <smiles> ... Wiki page comments above to prompt discussion by email
15:54:16 <satya> is there an issue raised for responsibility?
15:54:37 <Luc> topic: bundles
15:54:46 <Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd6-bundle.html
15:55:03 <smiles> Luc: Circulated text addressing issues raised