14:46:10 RRSAgent has joined #prov 14:46:10 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/07/26-prov-irc 14:46:12 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:46:12 Zakim has joined #prov 14:46:14 Zakim, this will be 14:46:14 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:46:15 Zakim, this will be PROV 14:46:15 Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 14:46:15 Date: 26 July 2012 14:46:15 ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes 14:46:29 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.07.26 14:46:39 Chair: Luc Moreau 14:46:49 Scribe: Curt Tilmes 14:46:54 rrsagent, make logs public 14:47:14 Regrets: Graham Klyne 14:50:09 zakim, who is here? 14:50:09 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has not yet started, Luc 14:50:10 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, trackbot, stain, sandro 14:54:32 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 14:54:40 CraigTrim has joined #prov 14:55:23 Curt has joined #prov 14:56:23 Paolo has joined #prov 14:57:39 jun has joined #prov 14:58:21 smiles has joined #prov 14:59:56 TomDN has joined #prov 14:59:59 zakim, who is here? 14:59:59 On the phone I see no one 15:00:00 On IRC I see TomDN, smiles, jun, Paolo, Curt, CraigTrim, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, trackbot, stain, sandro 15:00:06 tlebo has joined #prov 15:00:14 hook has joined #prov 15:00:14 zakim, who is here? 15:00:16 On the phone I see no one 15:00:20 On IRC I see hook, tlebo, TomDN, smiles, jun, Paolo, Curt, CraigTrim, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, trackbot, stain, sandro 15:00:37 zakim, I'm on the phone. 15:00:37 I don't understand 'I'm on the phone', tlebo 15:00:43 @sandro, zakim does not seem to see anybody on the phone 15:01:12 sandro, are you present? 15:01:18 zednik has joined #prov 15:01:26 jcheney has joined #prov 15:02:01 christine has joined #prov 15:02:05 zakim, who is here? 15:02:05 On the phone I see no one 15:02:06 On IRC I see christine, jcheney, zednik, hook, tlebo, TomDN, smiles, jun, Paolo, Curt, CraigTrim, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, MacTed, trackbot, stain, sandro 15:02:17 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.07.26 15:02:39 Scribe: Curt 15:03:03 khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov 15:03:13 proposed: to approve minutes of last week's call 15:03:18 +1 15:03:19 +1 15:03:21 +1 15:03:23 +1 15:03:23 +0 (not present) 15:03:25 +1 15:03:28 0 (not here) 15:03:29 +1 15:03:30 +1 15:03:43 +1 15:03:51 accepted: to approve minutes of last week's call 15:04:05 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/actions/open 15:04:11 pgroth has joined #prov 15:04:22 Luc: two actions on paulo, 1 on paul 15:04:24 (previous meeting running late, sorry.) 15:04:38 @sandro, zakim does not seem to see anybody on the phone 15:05:04 Topic: PROV-DM/O/N LCWD 15:05:05 stain has joined #prov 15:05:21 Luc: documents were released as last call working draft 15:05:30 Luc: several announcements have been made about them 15:05:52 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/OutreachInformation 15:05:58 pgroth: emails have gone out, blog post about the release 15:06:25 pgroth: may want to refer to a specific blog post depending on outreach audience and focus 15:06:46 pgroth: Who will reach out and to where? 15:06:53 BTW I sent the announcement to the DataONE project "community" list 15:07:10 dagstuhl list(s)? 15:07:11 pgroth: Sent to several lists, Curt posted to several, others? 15:07:22 Anyone to pub-lifsci list? 15:07:23 ok 15:07:35 zakim, this is prov 15:07:35 sandro, this was already SW_(PROV)11:00AM 15:07:37 Luc: Yes, James, send to dagstuhl 15:07:37 ok, sandro; that matches SW_(PROV)11:00AM 15:07:41 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:07:41 On the phone I see no one 15:07:53 Luc: Jun, yes, please send there 15:07:53 provenance-challenge? 15:08:01 jun: I will 15:08:05 yeah 15:08:18 topic: prov-constraints 15:08:36 Luc: constraints released internally, check on reviews 15:08:43 q+ 15:08:43 Luc: Simon has submitted a review 15:08:46 me, tomorrow. 15:08:48 q? 15:08:59 stain: I will review, but I've just started reading it 15:09:12 q+ 15:09:12 stain: May not finish by friday 15:09:19 stain: probably need another week 15:09:27 q? 15:09:29 ack st 15:09:33 ack pg 15:09:44 pgroth: I will review, probably complete by tomorrow 15:09:50 https://github.com/pgroth/prov-constraints-validator-spin 15:09:54 pgroth: I will try to implement it 15:10:18 pgroth: questions on interactions between prov-n and constraints 15:10:29 pgroth: talk about those, or include in review? 15:10:33 ok 15:10:36 q? 15:10:38 ack gro 15:10:41 I'll go over it again tomorrow as well, but don't have much time left in my schedule. 15:10:41 q? 15:10:42 Luc: Include those in the review 15:10:52 it is heavy going 15:11:12 topic: PROV-O PrimarySource 15:11:15 Luc: Thanks to reviewers -- it is not a straightforward document 15:11:28 We can do a lot to make it easier to understand - it was not straightforward to write either :) 15:11:33 (at least my parts) 15:11:43 tlebo: Comments on latest draft about naming inconsistency between prov-n and prov-o 15:11:49 @pgroth is that SPIN you mentioned? Matt Gamble suggested to use that to me for this purpose just 10 minutes ago ;) 15:12:01 @stain check out the github 15:12:02 tlebo: prov-n allowed to type the relation, prov-o uses a class 15:12:18 @stain it's working well 15:12:38 tlebo: proposal to rename class prov:Source to prov:PrimarySource prov:qualifiedSource to prov:qualifiedPrimarySource 15:12:52 q+ 15:13:02 tlebo: Rename will fix inconsistency 15:13:09 ack zed 15:13:42 q- 15:13:45 q+ 15:13:54 zednik: There might be some confusion, need to clarify that primary source isn't an entity, it is a relationship between entities 15:14:00 ack pg 15:14:11 q+ 15:14:17 pgroth: This isn't really a constraint, just an issue for validation / validator 15:14:43 ok good 15:14:45 ack pg 15:14:47 ack luc 15:14:49 q? 15:14:50 Luc: a derivation can't be an entity by definition 15:15:01 Proposal: Rename prov:Source to prov:PrimarySource, prov:qualifiedSource to prov:qualifiedPrimarySource 15:15:09 I'm glad that prov-c clarifies the confusion on Entity vs. PrimarySource (and Quotation and Revision) 15:15:10 @pgroth so https://github.com/pgroth/prov-constraints-validator-spin - looks good 15:15:11 +1 15:15:14 +1 15:15:17 +1 15:15:17 +1 15:15:18 +1 15:15:19 +1 15:15:22 +1 15:15:24 +1 15:15:27 +1 15:15:27 +1 15:15:36 +1 15:15:45 Accepted: Rename prov:Source to prov:PrimarySource, prov:qualifiedSource to prov:qualifiedPrimarySource 15:16:20 yes 15:16:38 Luc: Is such a rename part of the technical content of the spec? 15:16:49 sounds like an issue.. imagine changing name to after last call of HTML 15:17:01 sandro: Would anyone happy with the spec become unhappy because of this change? This trivial change is probably ok. 15:17:08 (or more like
to !) 15:17:19 sandro: Might want to take a closer look 15:17:36 we can pay a third party to complain about it ;) 15:17:53 +q 15:17:59 q? 15:18:14 Luc: It might introduce a large delay to re-do the last call, how should we handle this? 15:18:33 q? 15:18:39 sandro: I would think this is minor enough not to need a new last call, but we might need to look at it 15:18:51 @Sandro +1, don't do a new LC because of this! 15:19:00 pgroth: We are proposing this change to respond to comments 15:19:02 +1 @pgroth, we are responding to their comments. 15:19:28 ack pg 15:19:55 sandro: The issue is conformance, test cases, etc. You are allowed to make editorial changes and fix bugs, but not change design decisions. 15:19:55 it is a bug fix, aligning names 15:20:14 this is very bug-like. 15:20:45 Luc: We are just trying to fix the bug -- an inconsistency between the documents. 15:20:59 sandro: It seems crazy to delay things by 4 weeks for such a minor thing. 15:21:09 sandro: This seems like a reasonable exception 15:21:27 Luc: editors should implement this change and note it as a bug fix 15:21:38 Luc: We should keep good records about the approach 15:21:40 q? 15:21:45 Luc: Ok, Tim? 15:21:45 PROV-O latest draft has http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#changes-since-wd-prov-o-20120724 15:21:46 tlebo: yes 15:21:50 topic: Working Draft XML 15:22:06 Paolo has joined #prov 15:22:44 horrible home networking problems, can't hear a thing -- going to check out 15:22:46 zednik: Per email, there is an XML schema from Luc. Starting by reviewing that 15:22:50 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Jul/0362.html 15:23:17 zednik: Reviewing terms, creating examples similar to prov-o, mapping things to XML 15:23:39 zednik: providing feedback on XML schema's ability to support the examples 15:23:59 q? 15:24:03 zednik: A google spreadsheet is organizing activities and we will provide feedback on the terms 15:24:10 Luc: Are the terms assigned yet? 15:24:22 zednik: Not all are assigned yet, will get them assigned by the end of this week 15:25:04 zednik: Anyone that wants access to the spreadsheet, select "Request Access" and I'll grant it 15:25:08 Luc: Timeline? 15:25:28 zednik: Need to consult group, haven't nailed down complete schedule yet, but some examples are underway 15:26:07 dgarijo has joined #prov 15:26:18 Luc: We agreed on a deadline to have the notes ready for last call review internally by ~mid-November 15:26:21 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An15kLxkaMA3dEtpbTNlNEQ4eGJqQUtKVXFVekFxR1E#gid=0 15:27:03 Luc: To do that, by a month earlier, we need to have a completed schema, agree on it by September 15:27:09 Luc: Need examples by end of August 15:27:31 zednik: Try to get examples produced by mid-august so we can discuss and revise if needed 15:27:55 Luc: Paul/Luc will be on holiday second half of august 15:28:10 sandro: Someone else can chair if neither co-chair is available 15:28:41 q? 15:28:51 Luc: In the next week or two we should agree on the time line. While paul/luc are away, the regular telecon could be used to discuss the XML and examples 15:28:57 topic: Preparing the Call for Implementation 15:29:12 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations 15:29:29 or know about 15:29:49 Luc: Inviting members of the group to add implementations you are aware of to that wiki page 15:30:27 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria 15:30:34 Luc: paul and I are drafting the charter extension request -- need that page as evidence of uptake of the spec 15:31:28 Luc: We need to identify a set of features that must be implemented by two implementations 15:31:58 Luc: We need to start thinking about the exit criteria now, so we are ready when we want to move to candidate rec. 15:32:08 q? 15:32:16 Luc: How should we address this? 15:32:25 q+ 15:32:35 ack zedn 15:33:11 +q 15:33:14 zednik: To clarify -- we need to identify a set of features that must be implmemented. Is that of all features, or some minimal set? 15:33:44 Luc: We will look at each feature and want to list which implementations 'support' that feature. 15:33:54 (But it could be different implementations for each feature) 15:34:00 Luc: We want to get at least two implementations for each feature 15:34:16 Luc: We also want to get a pair, including a producer and a consumer for each feature 15:34:18 but what is a 'feature'? How granular? 15:34:31 q? 15:34:43 ack pg 15:35:19 q? 15:35:20 q+ 15:35:24 pgroth: We should enumerate features based on section -- we should put up a wiki page to gather the list 15:35:34 ack ze 15:35:53 zednik: We had the same issue of enumerating features for the XML review -- that list may be incomplete, but may be useful for this 15:36:06 zednik: Others are invited to review that list and see if any are missing 15:36:30 Luc: That is a reasonable approach -- we should also list features that are document specific 15:36:50 Luc: Each CR will have its own list of features (many of course will be the same) 15:36:54 sure 15:36:58 the rules 15:37:09 q? 15:37:16 q+ 15:37:18 Luc: For constraints, e.g. each constraint will become a listed feature 15:37:32 pgroth: Agreed, that was just a for starting point 15:38:24 q? 15:38:29 ack pgr 15:38:32 pgroth: We need to support the full vocabulary. 15:38:49 use the exit criteria page? 15:38:55 ok 15:38:56 Luc: Paul, will you create the starting point page and we'll discuss on email in the coming weeks? 15:39:04 The RDF semantics is a recommendation - what were its exit criteria? 15:39:06 q? 15:39:15 q+ 15:39:26 jcheney, all of RDF was done together, not separately. 15:39:51 q+ 15:39:58 zednik: I've started a form in google docs for a questionairre on the implementation/support/etc. 15:40:21 ack zedn 15:40:23 zednik: I'll share the form and request feedback by today or tomorrow 15:41:03 that's fine for constraints 15:41:07 sandro: Other groups have done this with executable test cases, each test case is a feature, machine readable results were used to determine coverage 15:41:13 q+ 15:41:16 maybe 15:41:18 q- 15:41:19 ack san 15:41:21 http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html 15:41:35 zednik: SKOS is the model we are trying to follow 15:41:50 q? 15:41:53 thanks 15:41:57 I think this approach is cool! 15:42:39 Luc: Constraints may be handled differently -- we might want graphs that violate or are compliant with the spec 15:42:44 q? 15:42:49 ack zed 15:42:51 q- 15:42:54 q? 15:44:47 rrsagent, set log public 15:44:51 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:44:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/07/26-prov-minutes.html Luc 15:44:56 trackbot, end telcon 15:44:56 Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help 15:47:06 khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov 15:48:42 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended 15:48:43 Attendees were