14:50:26 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:50:26 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/20-prov-irc
14:50:28 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:50:28 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #prov
14:50:30 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 
14:50:30 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:50:31 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:50:31 <trackbot> Date: 20 September 2012
14:50:33 <pgroth> Zakim, this will be PROV
14:50:33 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
14:50:51 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2012.09.20
14:50:58 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
14:51:10 <pgroth> Scribe: Tom De Nies
14:51:20 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
14:51:46 <pgroth> Regrets: James Cheney, Curt Tilmes, Ivan Herman
14:53:57 <Dong> Dong has joined #prov
14:54:57 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:55:04 <Zakim> +??P9
14:55:12 <pgroth> Zakim, ??P9 is me
14:55:12 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it
14:55:13 <Luc> Luc has joined #prov
14:58:04 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:58:26 <Luc> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:58:26 <Zakim> +Luc; got it
14:58:35 <Luc> zakim, who is on the call?
14:58:35 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc
14:59:10 <TomDN> TomDN has joined #prov
14:59:51 <Zakim> +??P11
15:00:00 <christine> christine has joined #prov
15:00:13 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:00:22 <jun> jun has joined #prov
15:00:23 <TomDN> zakim, ipcaller is me
15:00:23 <Zakim> +TomDN; got it
15:00:55 <TomDN> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:00:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, ??P11, TomDN
15:01:06 <pgroth> Zakim, who is loud?
15:01:06 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, pgroth.
15:01:11 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy?
15:01:21 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: TomDN (65%)
15:01:23 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software
15:01:24 <Zakim> +??P25
15:01:30 <MacTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:01:30 <Zakim> +MacTed; got it
15:01:32 <jun> zakim, ??P25 is me
15:01:32 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me
15:01:32 <Zakim> +jun; got it
15:01:34 <TomDN> yes
15:01:34 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted
15:01:50 <pgroth> Topic: Admin
15:02:37 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2012-09-13
15:02:46 <TomDN> pgroth: approval of last week's minutes
15:02:48 <pgroth> Minutes of the September 13, 2012 Telecon
15:02:58 <TomDN> +1
15:03:03 <Dong> +1
15:03:08 <jun> +1
15:03:37 <pgroth> accepted: Minutes of the September 13, 2012 Telecon
15:03:52 <zednik> zednik has joined #prov
15:04:31 <pgroth> Topic: Charter Extension
15:04:39 <TomDN> pgroth: we need scribes, please sign up in advance
15:04:47 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:05:03 <TomDN> pgroth: We are close to the end of the charter, but our extension request was approved
15:05:14 <pgroth>  http://www.w3.org/2011/01/prov-wg-charter
15:05:19 <Zakim> + +1.315.330.aaaa
15:05:29 <TomDN> ... initially, we wanted it up to April/May, but we got an extension to september 2013
15:05:57 <TomDN> ... However, we're still aiming to deliver everything according to the schedule agreed at F2F3
15:06:18 <pgroth> +q
15:06:19 <TomDN> ... We will make an updated timeline some time next week
15:06:21 <pgroth> q-
15:06:23 <pgroth> q?
15:06:37 <pgroth> Topic: FAQ
15:07:03 <TomDN> pgroth: Last week, we had an action to make an FAQ on PROV
15:07:12 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/PROV
15:07:19 <CraigTrim> CraigTrim has joined #PROV
15:07:24 <TomDN> ... Among others, the use of dc:hasPart for sub-activities is in there
15:07:55 <TomDN> ... the WG is invited to populate this FAQ
15:07:58 <pgroth> +q
15:08:00 <pgroth> q?
15:08:03 <pgroth> ack pgroth 
15:08:12 <pgroth> q?
15:08:45 <pgroth> q?
15:08:49 <TomDN> pgroth: This is at the Semantic Web activity wiki, which means that we can keep updating this, even after the WG is finished
15:08:55 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-XML
15:09:38 <TomDN> pgroth: There were a couple of issues that we didn't resolve last week, perhaps Stephan can go over them
15:10:00 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/493
15:10:23 <TomDN> pgroth: Where are we in issue 493?
15:10:41 <TomDN> zednik: Right now the schema reflects the DM completely
15:11:04 <TomDN> ... We didn't want to move away from the DM, so we haven't made any changes in the schema
15:11:51 <TomDN> ... We use RDF types, to respresent type information, as it is the most natural/intuitive way
15:12:13 <TomDN> ... We are still discussing.
15:12:30 <Luc> q+
15:12:34 <TomDN> pgroth: So each serialization can have its own type. Do we all agree to this?
15:12:55 <TomDN> zednik: Not sure, the telecon on monday was too small to tell if everyone agrees
15:13:13 <TomDN> Luc: We don't want to be too restrictive for these types
15:13:23 <TomDN> ... to avoid overconstraining things.
15:14:08 <TomDN> ... In the ontology, we use RDF types, which is fine for the RDF mapping, but I'm not sure what we should use in XML
15:14:10 <pgroth> q?
15:14:12 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:14:18 <TomDN> ... It would be up to the translator to determine this.
15:15:06 <TomDN> pgroth: Seems like a good idea, except that it would be problematic to convert PROV-XML to RDF, if the types don't agree
15:15:16 <Luc> in xml, we have prov:type and not xsd:type
15:15:26 <Luc> in xml, we have prov:type and not xsi:type
15:15:41 <TomDN> zednik: We don't have a complex type for agents that are also entities
15:15:55 <TomDN> ... e.g. "this is an entity with type agent"
15:16:23 <TomDN> pgroth: So the resolution would be to leave things as they are: loose like in the DM.
15:16:36 <TomDN> ... and leave typing up to the implementer
15:17:21 <TomDN> Luc: elaborates on "in xml, we have prov:type and not xsi:type"
15:17:30 <TomDN> ... which is an xml attribute
15:17:46 <TomDN> zednik: so you can only have one?
15:18:02 <TomDN> ... That is not the case in the DM or ontology
15:18:26 <pgroth> proposed: leave prov-dm to allow for loose types and each serialisation should define their own type system
15:18:29 <tlebo> tlebo has joined #prov
15:18:37 <tlebo> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:18:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc, ??P11, TomDN, MacTed (muted), jun, [IPcaller], +1.315.330.aaaa
15:18:40 <Luc> q+
15:18:45 <tlebo> zakim, I am aaaa
15:18:45 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it
15:18:58 <christine> zakim, ??P11 is me
15:18:58 <Zakim> +christine; got it
15:19:06 <pgroth> proposed: leave prov-dm to allow for loose types and each serialisation should adopt their own type representation
15:19:14 <TomDN> Luc: it would be better to say "should adopt their own type representation"
15:19:17 <TomDN> +1
15:19:19 <MacTed> +1
15:19:21 <Luc> q-
15:19:21 <zednik> +1
15:19:24 <Dong> +1
15:19:30 <tlebo> +1
15:19:49 <pgroth> accepted: leave prov-dm to allow for loose types and each serialisation should adopt their own type representation
15:20:04 <TomDN> pgroth: that resolves issue 493
15:20:09 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/551
15:20:11 <TomDN> issue 551?
15:20:44 <TomDN> zednik: Curt made some changes to the schema that resolved this
15:20:52 <Luc> I think it was a good solution to introduce this documentElement
15:21:26 <TomDN> ... It basically flattened out the schema
15:21:31 <zednik> div: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/b88f0f02344f
15:21:57 <TomDN> ... so you don't have a separate section for the relations
15:22:03 <Luc> q+
15:22:07 <TomDN> pgroth: Were there any objections?
15:22:11 <TomDN> zednik: no
15:22:14 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:23:14 <TomDN> Luc: There was some refactoring of the schema that took place. All the attributes were placed in a single group "commonattributes"
15:23:47 <TomDN> zednik: We havent been able to talk about it in the group, so we should probably raise an issue about it
15:24:30 <pgroth> +q
15:24:33 <TomDN> sorry i missed that last
15:25:13 <TomDN> pgroth: I think we did have a resolution about how close you have to get to the DM in a serialization
15:25:48 <pgroth> ack pgroth 
15:26:01 <TomDN> ... If we favour something that's "natural" for RDF, we should do the same for XML
15:26:36 <TomDN> zednik: Since you can have attributes on almost anything, we grouped it as such
15:27:01 <TomDN> ... I think it's doable to revert, although it unsimplifies the schema.
15:27:01 <Luc> it's already done http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/rev/7c238aba1d07
15:27:10 <Luc> q+
15:28:09 <TomDN> Luc: the group commonattributes has been removed from the schema
15:28:10 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:28:13 <Luc> q-
15:28:39 <TomDN> pgroth: So how far are we away from a draft document?
15:28:51 <TomDN> zednik: So how ready/stable is the schema?
15:29:33 <TomDN> ... Well, Curt and I have been going through the issues. Most are resolved now, so it is pretty stable.
15:29:41 <Luc> there is still the type of identifiers to address
15:30:18 <TomDN> Zednik: So we are getting close to being able to start on the draft of the Note
15:30:30 <Luc> q+
15:30:34 <TomDN> pgroth: OK, we'll check back next week
15:30:37 <pgroth> ack Luc
15:30:44 <TomDN> Luc: Will there be a call on monday?
15:31:06 <TomDN> zednik: Curt can't make it, but I can, and will send out an email to ask if it's possible.
15:31:09 <Luc> q-
15:31:13 <pgroth> Topic: Resolving Public Issues
15:31:20 <dgarijo> dgarijo has joined #prov
15:31:31 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments
15:31:52 <Zakim> +??P12
15:31:56 <TomDN> pgroth: We need to clarify who is responsible for response to public comments.
15:32:08 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P12 is me
15:32:08 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it
15:32:12 <pgroth> q?
15:32:19 <TomDN> ... My tendency would be to have me or Luc do it.
15:32:22 <tlebo> q+
15:32:26 <TomDN> ... Any other suggestions?
15:33:10 <TomDN> tlebo: It would be best if we work at the response on the weekly telecons, and then consistently have the chairs formulate the response to the commenter
15:33:23 <christine> +1
15:33:33 <TomDN> pgroth: Any objections to this?
15:33:52 <tlebo> note: "formulate" -> "provide", naturally, the group would be formulating the response in our usual way.
15:33:59 <TomDN> pgroth: So it's agreed. Paul will handle the responses
15:34:50 <TomDN> Luc: There were no objections to the resolutions to the following issues:
15:35:33 <TomDN> ... (Lists the issues)
15:36:04 <TomDN> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments
15:36:24 <pgroth> accepted: the suggested resolutions in http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments to ISSUE-532, ISSUE-525, ISSUE-507, ISSUE-504, ISSUE-503, ISSUE-447 were accepted as responses by the working group. there were no objections to the resolutions on the mailing group only support
15:38:00 <pgroth> q?
15:38:05 <pgroth> ack tlebo 
15:38:11 <tlebo> q-
15:38:12 <TomDN> Luc: I'm happy to take feedback on the proposed responses now, but I will also follow the usual protocol, and ask for feedback on the mailinglist
15:38:35 <pgroth> q?
15:38:36 <TomDN> ... If there's no objections by next Thursday, those will be our responses.
15:38:49 <pgroth> s/Thursday/Tuesday
15:38:55 <TomDN> tnx 
15:38:56 <pgroth> q?
15:39:18 <dgarijo> thanks for the links, I'll have a look at the responses.
15:40:11 <TomDN> Luc: We have addressed about 10 of the 35 issues about the DM. I'm planning to draft responses next week
15:40:56 <pgroth> Topic: Prov-o issues
15:41:32 <TomDN> pgroth: Last week, on Monday, we tried to clean up some issues in PROV-O, and defined some actions
15:41:45 <TomDN> ... We will walk through them here
15:41:54 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/491
15:42:13 <Luc> stian?
15:42:25 <TomDN> ... Stian was going to handle ACTION-107, I will follow up on this with him
15:42:46 <tlebo> the trig example.
15:42:48 <TomDN> issue 479?
15:42:53 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/479
15:43:25 <MacTed> issue-479?
15:43:25 <trackbot> ISSUE-479 -- cite TriG for examples -- open
15:43:25 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/479
15:44:04 <TomDN> ... Satya was going to take ACTION-108. No changes have been made yet, will follow up.
15:44:18 <TomDN> (tnx macted, forgot the hyphen)
15:44:59 <TomDN> pgroth: Next one is ACTION-109 on issue-349
15:45:23 <TomDN> Jun: I took over David's actions
15:45:31 <TomDN> ... and ACTION-109 is done.
15:45:54 <TomDN> issue-349?
15:45:54 <trackbot> ISSUE-349 -- examples for each term in cross-reference section -- open
15:45:54 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/349
15:46:30 <TomDN> pgroth: There were two more actions for this issue: ACTION-110 and ACTION-111 for Satya and Stian
15:46:30 <dgarijo> we reviewed the examples to check that they were updated with the latest DM
15:46:49 <TomDN> tlebo: I've seen no changes to the examples yet.
15:47:12 <TomDN> ... also. ACTION-112 was on the same issue
15:47:34 <pgroth> daniel?
15:47:35 <TomDN> pgroth: last one was on Daniel, ACTION-113 about issue 446
15:47:40 <dgarijo> I have lost connection
15:47:43 <TomDN> issue-446?
15:47:43 <trackbot> ISSUE-446 -- prov:involvee not documented in PROV-O -- open
15:47:43 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/446
15:47:44 <tlebo> daniels' action 113 is "prov:involvee not documented in PROV-O"
15:47:50 <dgarijo> I have restarted the discussions
15:47:57 <dgarijo> with Kai, Simon and Michael
15:48:09 <dgarijo> we plan to address his comments next week
15:48:16 <Zakim> -dgarijo
15:48:34 <Zakim> +??P12
15:48:45 <TomDN> pgroth: Tim, do you need help on closing any other issues?
15:49:15 <TomDN> tlebo: Yes, could use help with issue 461 
15:49:20 <TomDN> issue-461?
15:49:20 <trackbot> ISSUE-461 -- provo cross reference inadequate in printed form -- raised
15:49:20 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/461
15:49:43 <TomDN> ... Would be nice if someone could take over this one.
15:50:15 <TomDN> pgroth: Someone needs to talk to Graham to identify what he needs
15:50:22 <TomDN> jun: I can do that
15:50:55 <dgarijo> +q
15:51:19 <TomDN> pgroth: It would be good to know all the remaining issues on PROV-O
15:51:39 <TomDN> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/products/10
15:52:18 <TomDN> tlebo: 349 is closed
15:52:40 <TomDN> ... Not sure about 446, 479 and 491
15:53:29 <TomDN> daniel: What happened with the issues about the figures?
15:54:04 <TomDN> tlebo: There's no formal issue, but it is being looked into
15:54:21 <pgroth> ack dgarijo 
15:54:22 <TomDN> ... now waiting on review of the changes made in the draft
15:54:40 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
15:54:58 <TomDN> pgroth: 552 was an external comment about subclasses
15:55:12 <Luc> issue-552?
15:55:12 <trackbot> ISSUE-552 -- Check subclass definitions in prov-o -- raised
15:55:12 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
15:55:12 <TomDN> ... Is this a DM issue or PROV-O issue?
15:55:27 <Luc> issue-523?
15:55:27 <trackbot> ISSUE-523 -- Data Model Section 5.3.5 -- open
15:55:27 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/523
15:56:01 <Luc> q+
15:56:09 <pgroth> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2012Sep/0000.html
15:56:25 <TomDN> tlebo: seems like a problem with the interpretation of the DM, so it is a PROV-O issue
15:56:27 <pgroth> ack Luc 
15:56:37 <christine> Thank you Paul, Luc and everyone. Apologies, I have to leave to chair a call starting on the hour.
15:56:46 <Zakim> -christine
15:56:54 <TomDN> Luc: I think there's a general problem about inheritance that we may want to revisit in the DM
15:57:18 <TomDN> ... , illustrated by issue 523, about influence
15:58:37 <TomDN> ... In the constraints, we say that IF wasDerivedFrom(b,a) THEN wasInfluencedBy(b,a)
15:59:02 <TomDN> ... So we may want to opt for inheritance, which is what PROV-O does
15:59:12 <pgroth> q+
15:59:28 <TomDN> ... and it works well for most ontologies I think. However, I am not sure if we'd also want it in PROV-XML
15:59:50 <TomDN> ... Would be nice to have feedback here.
15:59:52 <tlebo> +1 to what luc said
16:00:07 <TomDN> pgroth: Would that only apply to influence? or all of the DM?
16:00:20 <TomDN> Luc: I'm focusing on influence, currently
16:00:47 <tlebo> does "influence" == "relation" ?
16:01:13 <TomDN> pgroth: My only issue with that is: whether or not we would change the UML in correspondence with that
16:01:36 <TomDN> ... It may not be normative, but developers do use it for their implementations
16:01:38 <pgroth> ack pgroth 
16:01:50 <jun> [have to go now. will catch up on the minutes]
16:02:07 <Zakim> -jun
16:02:09 <TomDN> Luc: any subtype of influence can be used in any position of influence.
16:02:39 <TomDN> ... Perhaps "interface" would be better than inheritance
16:03:07 <TomDN> ... to indicate that all subtypes are all "influence"
16:04:11 <Luc> issue-552?
16:04:11 <trackbot> ISSUE-552 -- Check subclass definitions in prov-o -- raised
16:04:11 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
16:04:41 <TomDN> pgroth: For now, this issue should be considered together with issue-523
16:05:04 <TomDN> Luc: There's another issue in the DM, dealing with inheritance
16:05:21 <TomDN> ... So we should tackle these as a set.
16:05:51 <TomDN> Luc: Stephan, working with the XML schema, have you considered extension of types?
16:06:16 <pgroth> q?
16:06:22 <TomDN> zednik: It has come up, but we haven't looked into it. It should be done after the schema is stabilized.
16:06:58 <dgarijo> Sure
16:07:02 <Zakim> -MacTed
16:07:07 <TomDN> pgroth: Given the time, we will save the topic on notes for next week. 
16:07:11 <Zakim> -tlebo
16:07:12 <Zakim> -pgroth
16:07:13 <Zakim> -Luc
16:07:14 <TomDN> ok, tnx!
16:07:15 <Zakim> -??P12
16:07:16 <TomDN> bye
16:07:25 <Zakim> -TomDN
16:07:32 <pgroth> rrsagnet, set log public
16:07:40 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
16:07:52 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:07:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/20-prov-minutes.html pgroth
16:08:04 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
16:08:04 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
16:08:04 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:08:05 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended
16:08:05 <Zakim> Attendees were pgroth, Luc, TomDN, MacTed, jun, [IPcaller], +1.315.330.aaaa, tlebo, christine, dgarijo
16:08:05 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:08:12 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:08:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/20-prov-minutes.html trackbot
16:08:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:08:13 <RRSAgent> I see no action items