14:43:03 RRSAgent has joined #prov 14:43:03 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-irc 14:43:05 RRSAgent, make logs world 14:43:05 Zakim has joined #prov 14:43:07 Zakim, this will be 14:43:07 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 14:43:08 Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference 14:43:08 Date: 06 September 2012 14:43:10 Zakim, this will be PROV 14:43:11 ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 17 minutes 14:43:22 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.09.06 14:44:01 rrsagent, make logs public 14:44:06 chair: Luc Moreau 14:44:14 Regrets: James Cheney 14:51:48 pgroth has joined #prov 14:53:05 Paolo has joined #prov 14:54:37 smiles has joined #prov 14:55:14 SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started 14:55:20 +??P11 14:55:51 zakim, ??P11 is me 14:55:53 +smiles; got it 14:57:11 scribe: simon miles 14:58:12 + +44.238.059.aaaa 14:58:17 Curt has joined #prov 14:58:26 zakim, +44.238.059.aaaa is me 14:58:28 +Luc; got it 14:58:41 TomDN has joined #prov 14:58:42 +??P4 14:58:47 +Curt_Tilmes 14:58:49 Zakim, ??P4 is me 14:58:49 +pgroth; got it 14:59:22 Dong has joined #prov 14:59:23 +Luc.a 14:59:33 zakim, who is on the call? 14:59:33 On the phone I see smiles, Luc, pgroth, Curt_Tilmes, Luc.a 15:00:39 khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov 15:00:48 + +329331aabb 15:00:53 topic: admin 15:00:59 zakim, +329 is me 15:00:59 +TomDN; got it 15:01:10 zakim, mute me 15:01:10 TomDN should now be muted 15:01:19 +??P7 15:01:22 satya has joined #prov 15:01:38 hook has joined #prov 15:01:39 +??P16 15:01:45 Luc: outlines agenda 15:01:50 zakim, ??P16 is me 15:01:50 +khalidBelhajjame; got it 15:01:59 SamCoppens has joined #prov 15:02:00 zednik has joined #prov 15:02:01 Zakim, who is loud? 15:02:01 I don't understand your question, pgroth. 15:02:04 zakim, who is noisy? 15:02:04 proposed: to approve Minutes of the Aug 9, 2012 Telecon 15:02:12 +Satya_Sahoo 15:02:15 TomDN, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (28%), khalidBelhajjame (19%) 15:02:19 + +1.818.731.aacc 15:02:20 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-08-09 15:02:24 +1 15:02:24 +1 15:02:32 +1 15:02:35 +1 15:02:36 +1 15:02:41 zakim, samcoppens is with tomdn 15:02:41 +samcoppens; got it 15:02:44 +1 15:02:45 +1 15:02:47 zakim, dial ivan-voip 15:02:47 ok, ivan; the call is being made 15:02:48 +Ivan 15:02:48 stainPhone has joined #prov 15:02:49 0 (not attended) 15:03:00 accepted: Minutes of the Aug 9, 2012 Telecon 15:03:07 0 15:03:10 +??P13 15:03:27 Luc: open actions for Paulo and Paul 15:03:35 GK has joined #prov 15:03:48 +??P3 15:03:51 zakim, ??p13 is me 15:03:51 +GK; got it 15:03:51 Paul: Not yet done overview slide for Wiki 15:03:57 +OpenLink_Software 15:04:02 Topic: F2F4 15:04:02 Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me 15:04:02 +MacTed; got it 15:04:04 Zakim, mute me 15:04:04 MacTed should now be muted 15:04:32 Luc: Idea to co-locate F2F4 with ISWC 15:04:38 November 9 - 10, 2012 15:04:44 + +44.789.470.aadd 15:05:04 ... available before ISWC workshops/tutorials, 9-10 15:05:17 q? 15:05:20 ... any blocking reasons against? 15:05:26 Zakim, +44.789.470.aadd is me 15:05:26 +stainPhone; got it 15:05:47 +q 15:05:50 q? 15:05:53 ack pg 15:05:53 Luc: Vote or just accept those dates? 15:06:06 -TomDN 15:06:09 Paul: Don't think we need a vote, but need sign-up page 15:06:16 yes 15:06:43 ACCEPTED: F2F4 will take place in Boston, on November 9 - 10, 2012 15:06:55 -??P7 15:06:56 +TomDN 15:07:00 Luc: details available later, but hosted at MIT 15:07:04 Zakim, mute me 15:07:04 TomDN should now be muted 15:07:07 +??P25 15:07:11 Ivan: at Computer Science 15:07:14 q? 15:07:15 Zakim, samcoppens is with tomdn 15:07:15 +samcoppens; got it 15:07:16 dgarijo has joined #prov 15:07:17 zakim, ??P25 is me 15:07:17 +Paolo; got it 15:07:24 Luc: questions about F2F4? 15:07:27 action: paul to set-up web page f2f4 15:07:27 Created ACTION-104 - Set-up web page f2f4 [on Paul Groth - due 2012-09-13]. 15:07:29 jun has joined #prov 15:07:33 topic: prov-constraints 15:07:40 Zakim, who is noisy? 15:07:47 +??P7 15:07:50 pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (54%) 15:07:57 Zakim, ??P7 is me 15:07:57 +dgarijo; got it 15:07:58 Luc: At last telecon, we looked at remaining technical issues on the document 15:08:00 (I assume MIT is easily accessible from the ISWC and/or downtown location?) 15:08:02 +??P27 15:08:09 zakim, ??p27 is me 15:08:09 +jun; got it 15:08:23 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Aug/0228.html 15:08:24 @gk yes, metro from downtown 15:08:25 ... work was done over August 15:08:44 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/releases/WD-prov-constraints-20120911/Overview.html 15:08:46 ... distributed link above for feedback (seems good so far) 15:08:53 Zakim, who is noisy? 15:09:05 pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (73%), Paolo (89%) 15:09:12 Zakim, mute Paolo 15:09:12 Paolo should now be muted 15:09:28 sorry -- new VOIP client 15:09:37 ... before formal vote, is there any comment on the document? 15:09:38 q? 15:09:47 q+ 15:09:52 q? 15:10:18 Ivan: one thread of discussion on terminology alignment of "top-level bundles". What is current status? 15:10:53 Luc: Top-level bundle introduced in PROV-N, not part of PROV-DM 15:11:02 q+ 15:11:09 ... it is the structure of the complete document you would write in PROV-N 15:11:09 ack ivan 15:11:27 ... "top-level bundle" was not adequate term, because it is not a bundle 15:11:50 ... James suggested talking about a "PROV document" instead, and this is adopted in PROV Constraints 15:12:10 ... PROV documents can contain PROV statements or bundles 15:12:30 ... In context of PROV-N, will propose that will align terminology to also use PROV document 15:12:30 ack ivan 15:12:55 stian: Thank you to the editor for addressing the issues I raised 15:13:10 Luc: Also thank you and other reviewers for quality of reviews 15:13:12 q? 15:13:14 ack st 15:13:30 PROPOSED: publish PROV-Constraints as Last Call Working Draft 15:13:41 +1 15:13:42 +1 15:13:44 +1 15:13:46 +1 15:13:49 +1 (University of Manchester) 15:13:51 +1 (IBBT) 15:13:53 +1 (NASA) 15:13:55 +1 Newcastle University 15:13:57 +1 (RPI) 15:13:57 +1 (VU University Amsterdam) 15:13:57 +1 (IBBT) 15:13:58 +1, Invited expert (CWRU) 15:13:58 (invited expert, King's College London) 15:13:59 +1 Oxford U 15:14:03 +1 (IE) 15:14:07 (OpenLink Software) 15:14:08 +1 (UPM) 15:14:12 +1 (University of Southampton) 15:14:25 (univ of Manchester as well) 15:14:33 +1 15:14:41 Accepted: to publish PROV-Constraints as Last Call Working Draft 15:14:51 +q 15:15:24 Luc: When are we going to release the document? And what is the review period? 15:15:27 q- 15:15:46 q+ 15:15:57 ... Editors do not intend to make any changes, can prepare for release next Tuesday pending webmaster approval 15:16:05 ... Release date 11 September 15:16:27 ... Propose review period closes 10 October 15:17:05 +10000 to Paul 15:17:09 Paul: Have to also consider some blog post to go with document, it is heavy duty and needs context to interpret 15:17:22 ... Who will write the post? 15:17:59 Luc: Paolo, would you have bandwidth to draft blog entry? 15:18:00 zakim, unmute me 15:18:00 Paolo should no longer be muted 15:18:02 q+ 15:18:10 q+ 15:18:39 i can then polish 15:18:46 Paolo: Can try to first draft something tomorrow 15:18:53 q? 15:18:53 Luc: I could then work on it on Monday 15:19:06 Paul: That's fine and can also run by me 15:19:08 ack pgro 15:19:09 q- 15:19:54 q? 15:19:56 nice one everyone 15:20:00 q+ 15:20:02 Luc: Any other comments on constraints? 15:20:30 Ivan: Reminder that we should finalise the timetable tomorrow 15:20:51 ack iv 15:21:17 Ivan: should become synchronised with other documents 15:21:21 topic: Implementing constraints with SW technologies 15:21:58 Paul: We have noticed that there is discussion around implementing constraints using SW tech 15:22:08 ... great, but not part of the WG's responsibility 15:22:50 ... should be done by individuals if interested, but implementation should not be done in WG time, cannot respond to all questions 15:22:56 q+ 15:23:00 ... encouraged but outside WG 15:23:37 q+ 15:23:45 ack ivan 15:23:46 I agree with Paul here, but I also note that we'll need interoperable implementations for REC track progress? 15:23:58 Ivan: Agreed that deliverables need to be delivered, but if work is done WG might decide to publish in W3C Notes and could be valuable 15:24:15 @Paul, agreed. With Jun and Stian, we decided to specify the constraints (that are speciable within OWL), outside the context of the working group 15:24:35 q? 15:24:39 Luc: Yes, are very keen for implementation of constraints using SW tech, but concerned about using WG bandwidth and mission creep 15:24:49 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGM4cXZYMk0xaFBDT2VyRV92YkY5WkE6MQ 15:24:59 q+ 15:25:01 zednik: Added constraints implementation section to implementation questionanire 15:25:07 ack zednik 15:25:27 .. not intended to be saying we will be creating these implementation, but part of implementation report 15:26:33 +q 15:26:33 Paolo: Agree not done on WG time, but cannot claim have reference implementation without compliance validator 15:26:39 q? 15:26:42 q+ 15:26:42 ack pao 15:26:56 ack pg 15:27:13 mute paolo 15:27:18 Zakim, mute pa 15:27:18 Paolo should now be muted 15:27:51 Paul: Implement both specs, and if don't have implementations then spec can't be approved as recommendation 15:27:51 @paolo, yes, our (khalid/jun) intent is to do what can practically be done in owl 15:27:55 q? 15:27:57 agree -- and that's why Khalid's qualification worried me 15:28:28 q+ 15:28:33 As owl is not a constraint language 15:28:34 ack satya 15:28:37 satya: When talking about implementations/validators, are we talking about conforming to PROV-O or to constraints? 15:28:39 Hmmm... I thought we needed (interoperable) implementations of each feature rather than a "reference implementation" 15:28:41 Just to clarify, within OWL, we will not aim to implement all constraints but only the one that are easy to express within OWL 15:28:56 @gk +1 15:29:00 Luc: We are talking about conforming to constraints, validity is not in scope of WG 15:29:04 @paolo, my understanding that exploring OWL for the implementation is our first step, to see what can be implemented in OWL and what can't 15:29:16 q? 15:29:33 ack ivan 15:29:50 Ivan: What we in general need is not a reference implementation of everything, but interoperable implementation for each feature 15:30:22 @ khalidBelhajjame, jun I am doing the same in the deductive programming space, but there are unknown -- hence the difficulty to committing to a deliverable 15:30:27 ... but more general point, what do we really mean by the implementation of the particular document or the whole PROV enivronment? 15:30:46 ... no fixed rules, but need to show world this is not just a paper exercise and can be put into practice 15:31:05 ... not clear what this means for constraints document in relation to other documents 15:31:13 q? 15:31:16 q+ 15:31:25 ... will need to be clear when we present to the management 15:31:57 Luc: Not discussed yet, and may be an item of discussion of implementation report skeleton 15:32:15 stainMobile has joined #prov 15:32:15 ... WG will have to identify features to implement in constraints document (e.g. type checking) 15:32:35 ... Question is then how we demonstrate whether this is implemented properly 15:32:45 ... In my own implementation, am using test cases 15:32:53 q- 15:33:07 Ivan: For me, test cases is very much what I would like to see 15:33:15 Luc: Discussion of test cases are in scope of WG 15:33:16 q? 15:33:58 Luc: We want to come up with an agreement that we will not spend WG time defining constraints in SW technologies 15:34:00 @stefan can I get edit access to the implementation questionnaire? 15:34:00 PROPOSED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed 15:34:03 (Test cases are a good way to illustrate the consequences of specified features.) 15:34:30 q? 15:34:38 +1 15:34:39 -stainPhone 15:34:46 +1 15:34:49 seems reasonable 15:34:49 +1 15:34:52 +1 15:34:52 +1 15:34:52 +1 15:34:55 +1 15:34:58 +1 15:34:58 +1 15:34:59 +1 15:34:59 +1 15:34:59 +1 15:35:13 +1 15:35:22 ACCEPTED: The Working Group will not formalize constraints with Semantic Web technologies, but implementations of constraints by group members are welcomed 15:35:49 topic: Public Comments 15:36:09 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/ 15:36:49 Paul: We had a number of public comments, one needs cutting up, some we've started discussing 15:37:19 ... All can be handled, but maybe we should readvertise to get more comments 15:37:30 should we take the opportunity to ask for feedback as we release prov-constraints? 15:37:51 q? 15:38:01 Luc: comments? 15:38:04 in particular on advertising? 15:38:34 +q 15:38:36 Luc: Now we've released constraints document, we can take the opportunity to go back to groups and individuals to get feedback on that 15:38:52 q? 15:38:59 ... then editors need to go through comments one by one and address 15:39:00 ack pgroth 15:39:16 ... Ivan, you said RDF group would give us feedback but not received yet 15:39:41 Ivan: Will prompt again, have discussion paper but not yet dealt with 15:39:51 q? 15:39:51 talking to guus is difficult 15:40:18 Luc: Once constraints document out, easy to get back to them 15:40:27 sure 15:40:29 q? 15:40:37 zakim, who is noisy? 15:40:40 topic: Implementation Report Skeleton 15:40:48 pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (30%) 15:40:57 Luc: Now time to think about structure of this report 15:41:15 ... identifying kinds of feedback expected from implementors 15:41:31 stainMobile has joined #prov 15:41:56 zednik: Have gone through and updated skeleton, Paolo will update actual questionairres 15:42:11 s/Paolo/Paul 15:42:11 s/Paolo/Paul 15:42:47 Paul: Currently based on SKOS, If we decide we need to test cases that might change this 15:42:51 q? 15:43:21 Luc: Have you received feedback on questionnaire? 15:43:31 zednik: Not yet, but good opportunity to now re-ask 15:43:51 @Paul: I can help with the implementation report as well 15:43:57 Luc: Will make clear in minutes summary, please send an email again with link to questionnaire 15:44:09 q? 15:44:44 action on Paul to draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires 15:44:44 Sorry, couldn't find user - on 15:44:49 +q 15:44:55 action on pgroth to draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires 15:44:55 Sorry, couldn't find user - on 15:45:07 hook has joined #prov 15:45:08 action: pgroth draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires 15:45:08 Created ACTION-105 - Draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires [on Paul Groth - due 2012-09-13]. 15:45:28 q? 15:45:40 Paul: Ivan, have Google questionnaire, does it need to be a W3C poll? 15:45:40 ack pgr 15:46:01 Ivan: Questionnaire is just for activity of group, not deliverable? 15:46:28 Paul: Yes. Easy to collect by web poll 15:46:49 ok 15:46:51 ... Will copy part of result of poll into implementation report 15:46:55 q? 15:47:03 Ivan: Yes, that's OK. How you collected data is your business 15:47:13 ok 15:47:30 stainMobile has joined #prov 15:47:58 Ivan: RDFa had many tests, running on site outside of W3C, but results collected into static page on W3C as implementation report 15:48:06 yes 15:48:13 q? 15:48:26 q? 15:48:40 Topic:PROV-XML 15:49:03 Luc: Some emails sent, issues raised, what is the progess? 15:49:30 zednik: Split up DM terms and encoded in XML schema, published and raised issues 15:49:42 ... Reza has been working on implementation at Oracle 15:50:38 ... also interested in constraints, and had a side discussion on this, decided not to pursue as part of WG but instead side-activity at Oracle or NASA for implementation report 15:51:00 ... looked into Schematron and XSD inadequate for expressing constraints 15:51:16 Schematrons have been used by ISO working groups for constraints checks 15:51:23 ... For schema, implemented almost all terms and should not be too many issues raised 15:51:27 q+ 15:51:28 q? 15:51:53 ack cur 15:52:06 @curt +1 15:52:09 Curt: Most of the issues are minor inconsistencies, and inclined to take from DM and make XML match, even copying non-normative language 15:52:40 q? 15:52:42 We also tried to sync the XML examples with the PROV-DM examples. 15:52:45 Luc: Schema was still a bit behind DM, and issues raised are good 15:53:14 hook: We also tried to make XML examples match one-to-one those in DM document 15:53:31 +q to ask about prove xml html 15:53:33 q? 15:53:39 ... this forces us to make sure DM is in sync with XSD (and PROV-O) 15:54:03 Paul: Is editors draft of document on XML up to date, can be looked at? Or just XSD? 15:54:09 ok 15:54:13 agreed -- not ready 15:54:15 zednik: XSD up to date, not the document 15:54:15 ack pg 15:54:16 pgroth, you wanted to ask about prove xml html 15:54:48 Luc: When can say have version 1 of XML schema? 15:54:57 I'll address the issues I've raised by this weekend 15:55:02 zednik: Need to ensure no open issues, but pretty close 15:55:20 ... aim for Tuesday/Wednesday next week 15:55:25 action stephan to produce version 1 of xml schema 15:55:25 Sorry, ambiguous username (more than one match) - stephan 15:55:25 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. estephan, szednik) 15:55:36 action zednik to produce version 1 of xml schema 15:55:36 Created ACTION-106 - Produce version 1 of xml schema [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-09-13]. 15:56:10 Luc: Can come back to at next week's telecon 15:56:51 ... PROV-O spent long time looking at tools to convert their schema into HTML document 15:57:19 +q 15:58:01 Paul: On the editors draft, there is an XSD/HTML document, who created? 15:58:12 Luc: I created 15:58:18 q? 15:58:57 q+ 15:58:57 ack pgroth 15:59:01 Paul: We said that for the XML, we wouldnt worry about the verbiage around the schema, right? Just need schema 15:59:25 Luc: Want to minimise work, but need something readable. Can extract lots of text from DM document 15:59:53 sure 16:00:00 Luc: Paul and I will identify editor(s) for this document 16:00:00 q? 16:00:23 -Satya_Sahoo 16:00:27 ack cur 16:00:40 Curt: Considered adding links to anchors in XSD HTML document to link to DM, rather than copy 16:00:54 q? 16:01:13 hook has joined #prov 16:01:28 Luc: XML schema editors, are there specific issues you want to discuss? 16:01:32 -??P3 16:01:35 zednik_ has joined #prov 16:01:37 sorry, disconnected 16:01:59 +??P6 16:02:00 q? 16:02:41 zednik: Issue on representing prov:type 16:03:16 ... Type of prov:type is defined as a value (effectively a literal) 16:03:26 ... Consequence is that 42 is a prov:type, etc. 16:03:33 ... Is that what we want? 16:03:58 q? 16:04:06 stephan: could discuss prov:Agent vs. prov:Person too? (or is that resolved?) 16:04:11 ... In XSD would be xsd:anySimpleType, not constraints 16:04:22 +q 16:04:24 http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/493 16:05:17 Paul: QName would improve interop, but are there examples where you don't want than (Java package names?) 16:05:41 Luc: DM contains examples of types that are just strings 16:06:00 stainMobile has joined #prov 16:06:07 @curt raise as an issue 16:06:28 Luc: Will not resolve issue now, but is important as has potential impact on DM, so suggest continue over email and will revisit 16:06:37 bye 16:06:39 bye everyone 16:06:39 bye 16:06:40 Thanks, bye 16:06:41 -Paolo 16:06:42 bye 16:06:42 -TomDN 16:06:42 congrats - another last call 16:06:43 -dgarijo 16:06:43 -jun 16:06:44 bye 16:06:45 -Ivan 16:06:46 -Curt_Tilmes 16:06:46 bye 16:06:46 SamCoppens has left #prov 16:06:46 bye 16:06:48 -smiles 16:06:49 -pgroth 16:06:49 -Luc 16:06:51 -khalidBelhajjame 16:06:51 -MacTed 16:06:53 -??P6 16:06:56 rrsagent, set log public 16:06:59 - +1.818.731.aacc 16:07:01 -Luc.a 16:07:02 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:07:02 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-minutes.html Luc 16:07:06 trackbot, end telcon 16:07:06 Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help 16:09:51 trackbot, end meeting 16:09:51 Zakim, list attendees 16:09:51 As of this point the attendees have been smiles, Luc, Curt_Tilmes, pgroth, +329331aabb, TomDN, khalidBelhajjame, Satya_Sahoo, +1.818.731.aacc, samcoppens, Ivan, GK, MacTed, 16:09:55 ... stainPhone, Paolo, dgarijo, jun 16:09:59 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 16:09:59 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-minutes.html trackbot 16:10:00 RRSAgent, bye 16:10:00 I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-actions.rdf : 16:10:00 ACTION: paul to set-up web page f2f4 [1] 16:10:00 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-irc#T15-07-27 16:10:00 ACTION: pgroth draft implementation report skeleton based on Stephan's questionnaires [2] 16:10:00 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-prov-irc#T15-45-08