IRC log of prov on 2012-07-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

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