IRC log of prov on 2012-11-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:38:59 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #prov
14:38:59 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:39:01 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:39:01 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #prov
14:39:03 [Luc]
Zakim, this will be PROV
14:39:03 [Zakim]
ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 21 minutes
14:39:03 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be PROV
14:39:04 [trackbot]
Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:39:04 [trackbot]
Date: 01 November 2012
14:39:04 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 21 minutes
14:39:12 [Luc]
14:39:20 [Luc]
Chair: Luc Moreau
14:40:01 [Luc]
Regrets: Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Daniel Garijo, Curt Tilmes
14:40:16 [Luc]
rrsagent, make logs public
14:40:26 [Luc]
topic: Admin
14:56:52 [Paolo]
Paolo has joined #prov
14:57:07 [Zakim]
SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started
14:57:14 [Zakim]
14:57:15 [Zakim]
15:00:20 [tlebo]
tlebo has joined #prov
15:00:39 [Zakim]
15:00:42 [Zakim]
+ +1.315.330.aaaa
15:00:48 [MacTed]
MacTed has changed the topic to: PROV WG -- -- current agenda
15:00:49 [tlebo]
zakim, I am aaaa
15:00:49 [Zakim]
+tlebo; got it
15:01:01 [MacTed]
Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:01:01 [Zakim]
+MacTed; got it
15:01:02 [MacTed]
Zakim, mute me
15:01:02 [Zakim]
MacTed should now be muted
15:01:35 [Luc]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:01:35 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Luc, [IPcaller], MacTed (muted), tlebo
15:01:38 [Zakim]
15:01:51 [zednik]
zednik has joined #prov
15:01:53 [tlebo]
I'll scribe
15:02:00 [Luc]
scribe: tlebo
15:02:27 [tlebo]
luc: good afternoon.
15:02:30 [Zakim]
15:02:35 [jun]
jun has joined #prov
15:02:39 [tlebo]
... trying to close issues leading to F2F
15:02:51 [Luc]
Proposed: approve Minutes of the October 25, 2012 Telecon
15:02:55 [tlebo]
topic: admin issues
15:03:01 [Paolo]
15:03:02 [jun]
15:03:03 [tlebo]
proposed: approve last week's minutes
15:03:06 [zednik]
15:03:12 [tlebo]
15:03:20 [Zakim]
+ +1.818.731.aabb
15:03:23 [hook]
hook has joined #prov
15:03:24 [jcheney]
jcheney has joined #prov
15:03:41 [smiles]
smiles has joined #prov
15:03:47 [Zakim]
15:03:48 [Zakim]
15:03:51 [Luc]
Accepted: Minutes of the October 25, 2012 Telecon
15:03:59 [tlebo]
accepted: minutes approved.
15:04:10 [smiles]
zakim, ??P14 is me
15:04:10 [Zakim]
+smiles; got it
15:04:10 [tlebo]
topic: outstanding actions
15:04:31 [GK1]
GK1 has joined #prov
15:04:38 [tlebo]
tim has not done the cross referencing yet.
15:05:07 [tlebo]
tim: the cross referencing is editorial
15:05:23 [tlebo]
Stian's 118 can be closed
15:05:43 [tlebo]
121 - Tim's action on subclassing.
15:06:20 [Luc]
topic: exit criteria
15:06:22 [tlebo]
luc: not that we do NOT have a telecon next Thur., since F2F is Friday.
15:06:28 [Luc]
15:06:42 [tlebo]
luc: paul sent proposal to accept criteria.
15:06:47 [tlebo]
... all responses were positive.
15:07:01 [Luc]
15:07:01 [tlebo]
... can we record approval? any objections?
15:07:16 [Luc]
accepted: CR Exit Criteria defined at are approved
15:07:42 [tlebo]
luc: questionaire. Is it ready to submit to W3C management team?
15:07:55 [Zakim]
15:08:36 [tlebo]
zednik: trying to fix Paul's last issue on it. Implementation consuming external construct. Will address them today and get confirmation, will send it out.
15:08:54 [tlebo]
zednik: will try to finish it today.
15:09:23 [tlebo]
luc: will try to have an email vote ahead of the F2F
15:09:26 [Luc]
15:09:43 [Luc]
topic: Prov-o Issues
15:10:06 [Luc]
15:10:10 [Luc]
15:11:01 [tlebo]
349 can be closed
15:11:57 [tlebo]
479 can be clsoed b/c we are not using Trig.
15:12:09 [tlebo]
491 was Stian handling it.
15:12:35 [tlebo]
Luc: Tim to draft response and contact reviewer.
15:13:25 [khalidBelhajjame]
khalidBelhajjame has joined #prov
15:13:27 [Zakim]
15:13:31 [CraigTrim]
CraigTrim has joined #PROV
15:13:44 [GK1]
zakim, ??p13 is me
15:13:44 [Zakim]
+GK1; got it
15:13:53 [tlebo]
Tim: I''l hunt down everthing there...
15:13:54 [GK]
GK has joined #prov
15:13:58 [Zakim]
+ +1.661.382.aacc
15:14:16 [CraigTrim]
zakim, aacc is me
15:14:17 [Zakim]
+CraigTrim; got it
15:15:46 [Luc]
Rephrasing in prov-dm:
15:15:53 [tlebo]
Tim: 552 is the only big issue, and I'll start it after this call.
15:16:31 [tlebo]
luc: new definitions include "relation"
15:17:37 [tlebo]
luc: change of text, but not of the ontology.
15:18:09 [tlebo]
tlebo: my approach will be to change the text.
15:18:41 [tlebo]
luc: draft response, group approves, convey change to commenter, and have acknowledgment before F2F.
15:19:04 [Luc]
15:19:16 [tlebo]
... can we vote, so that the acknowledgement can be sent to the commenter on Monday.
15:19:38 [Luc]
15:20:34 [tlebo]
tim: my impression was that it is just an announcement.
15:21:05 [tlebo]
luc: they are using wasInfluencedBy, but the rec suggest to use a subproperty.
15:21:55 [Luc]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:21:55 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Luc, [IPcaller], tlebo, [IPcaller.a], [IPcaller.aa], +1.818.731.aabb, [], smiles, GK1, CraigTrim
15:22:02 [tlebo]
tlebo: yes, we can look at their use and suggest to use a subproperty.
15:22:24 [Luc]
topic: PROV-Constraints issues
15:22:54 [Luc]
15:23:09 [tlebo]
jcheney: isssues were raised from the feedback last week.
15:23:41 [jcheney]
15:23:43 [tlebo]
... haven't heard any feedback beyond minor typos.
15:24:09 [tlebo]
... unless objection, would like to send the responses to the commenters.
15:24:19 [tlebo]
... two more issues that are leftover from last call. internal.
15:24:22 [Zakim]
15:24:25 [jcheney]
15:24:59 [tlebo]
... made propsoed change and considers it done. Do we need to send a formal response?
15:25:15 [jcheney]
15:25:16 [tlebo]
... the comment spread from issue on DM
15:25:24 [tlebo]
luc: we need to approve responses.
15:26:30 [Luc]
PROPOSED: The group endorses the responses to issue-556, issue-576, issue-582, issue-586, issue-587, issue-588, issue-584, issue-579, issue-585, issue-583, issue-580, issue-577, issue-578, issue-581
15:28:15 [tlebo]
jcheney: the constraints doc is not addressing how to implement them in OWL etc.
15:28:18 [tlebo]
15:28:38 [Luc]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:28:38 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Luc, tlebo, [IPcaller.a], [IPcaller.aa], +1.818.731.aabb, [], smiles, GK1, CraigTrim
15:28:49 [GK]
0 (not reviewed or followed discussion)
15:28:58 [smiles]
+1 (though I admit to not having read them all thoroughly...)
15:29:05 [khalidBelhajjame]
15:29:12 [zednik]
15:29:33 [Luc]
accepted: The group endorses the responses to issue-556, issue-576, issue-582, issue-586, issue-587, issue-588, issue-584, issue-579, issue-585, issue-583, issue-580, issue-577, issue-578, issue-581
15:29:43 [jun]
+0 (haven't been able to review)
15:31:01 [tlebo]
jcheney: I'll contact the commenters instead of Paul
15:31:12 [CraigTrim]
CraigTrim has joined #PROV
15:31:12 [tlebo]
luc: any other changes?
15:31:25 [tlebo]
jcheney: all that are necessary are done.
15:31:37 [tlebo]
... some quick issues to get feedback:
15:32:01 [jcheney]
15:32:28 [tlebo]
... 559 was a side effect, do we need to make a formal response?
15:32:47 [tlebo]
luc: was an internal comment.
15:32:54 [jcheney]
15:33:04 [satya]
satya has joined #prov
15:33:07 [tlebo]
jcheney: links between identifier fields.
15:33:08 [jcheney]
15:33:28 [Zakim]
15:33:46 [tlebo]
luc: i'll do it after the call
15:34:26 [tlebo]
... in responses, can you ask them to acknowledge and whether they are satisfied?
15:34:32 [Luc]
15:34:42 [Luc]
topic: prov-n issues
15:34:58 [Luc]
15:35:04 [tlebo]
luc: only 2 issues
15:35:39 [tlebo]
... ivan was fine, but we want to confirm...
15:36:05 [tlebo]
... namespace declarations and bundles. bundles do not "inherit" prefixes.
15:36:32 [Luc]
15:36:32 [tlebo]
15:36:33 [GK]
15:36:55 [GK]
15:37:19 [Luc]
ack tl
15:37:26 [tlebo]
@gk probably would have stated it better...
15:38:02 [tlebo]
gk: same point as Tim, you were responding to URIs of entities
15:38:11 [tlebo]
luc: do we need to revise?
15:38:23 [jcheney]
Currently says: "The scope of a namespace declaration directly occurring in a document is the document itself, excluding the bundles it may contain."
15:38:25 [tlebo]
... one benefit is that bundles are totally distinct.
15:38:52 [jcheney]
This forces you to repeat prefixes in common cases, including many natural-looking examples in prov-dm
15:39:00 [Luc]
15:39:40 [Luc]
15:40:04 [Luc]
15:40:12 [Luc]
scribe: smiles
15:40:15 [jcheney]
15:40:33 [tlebo_]
tlebo_ has joined #prov
15:40:53 [GK]
I was saying that I thought the current design is maybe sub-optimal for human use, but not fatally flawed.
15:41:04 [tlebo_]
tlebo_ has joined #prov
15:41:21 [Luc]
15:41:23 [smiles]
jcheney: Missed original change to excluding namespaces in top-level bundle; changing the scope to include the namespaces from top-level might not break anything?
15:41:54 [smiles]
Luc: Would need to get advice on whether this is only an editorial change
15:42:08 [smiles]
... How strongly do you feel about this?
15:42:55 [tlebo]
tlebo has joined #prov
15:43:01 [smiles]
jcheney: There are situations where it is useful to think of bundles as independent and copy-paste without worrying about top-level, but using namespace without repeating declaration throughout a document is common
15:43:45 [smiles]
... Natural expectation is that if you state something then embedded scopes would include that thing
15:44:05 [tlebo]
FWIW, Turtle and Trig permits the prefixes to be defined once and used in any of many "bundle".
15:44:06 [smiles]
Luc: Are we willing to go ahead with change even if it is not just editoral, i.e. back to LC
15:44:26 [tlebo]
This is not worth going back to Last Call for.
15:44:37 [smiles]
jcheney: It is something that people will anyway notice and complain about in implementation
15:44:44 [GK]
Maybe ask Ivan if this would need to redo last call. It seems a small change, albeit technical.
15:44:56 [ivan]
if I may, just on IRC...
15:45:02 [ivan]
this is not a design change
15:45:09 [Luc]
thanks ivan
15:45:18 [ivan]
this is a change in a syntactic sugar
15:45:25 [Luc]
15:45:35 [ivan]
it would influence implementations, but that is not the issue for LC
15:45:53 [smiles]
Luc: Given the above, it would be good to know the WG's preference
15:46:05 [Luc]
show of hand: allow scope of prefix declarations
15:46:40 [tlebo]
+1 because that's how it's done in Turtle/Trig, -1 b/c PROV-N is for examples in Recs :-)
15:46:59 [smiles]
satya: Please clarify question
15:47:13 [GK]
+0.5 to top-level namespaces visible in contained bundles in PROV-N (next question: can they be redefined in inner bundles?)
15:47:22 [jcheney]
See namespace scope rules in
15:47:23 [hook_]
hook_ has joined #prov
15:47:44 [smiles]
Luc: Currently in PROV-N, when declaring prefix at top level and want to re-use in nested bundle, have to redeclare prefix in bundle
15:47:48 [jcheney]
Currently, this is illegal:
15:47:53 [jcheney]
document prefix ex <> bundle ex:b1 entity(ex:e1, ...someattr1...) entity(ex:e1, ...someattr2...) endBundle endDocument
15:48:05 [jcheney]
because ex is not re-declared inside the bundle
15:49:02 [smiles]
Luc: @GK, yes, prefixes could be redefined in inner bundles
15:49:24 [jcheney]
15:49:42 [smiles]
jcheney: Suggest just changing sentence in PROV-N from "excluding the bundles it may contain" to "including..."
15:50:07 [tlebo]
reusing throughout and allowing redefinition in inner bundles would make it much more useful for humans to read and write.
15:50:13 [smiles]
... People have been writing examples that assume the proposed change without realising
15:50:14 [GK]
Seems to me easier to change the text than the examples
15:50:16 [Luc]
proposed: change scope of prefix declaration so that it includes bundles
15:50:30 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #prov
15:50:36 [satya]
+1 to change text
15:50:38 [smiles]
15:50:41 [GK]
15:50:46 [jcheney]
15:50:53 [ivan]
15:50:54 [jun]
15:50:56 [tlebo]
15:51:01 [zednik]
15:51:10 [Luc]
accepted: change scope of prefix declaration so that it includes bundles
15:51:31 [smiles]
Luc: Next issue: MIME types
15:51:44 [smiles]
Luc: @GK, did you look at changes implemented?
15:52:02 [smiles]
GK: No
15:52:20 [smiles]
Luc: Can you prioritise issue 573?
15:52:51 [smiles]
Luc: Everything else covered in PROV-N aside from two issues above
15:52:57 [Luc]
topic: PROV-DM issues
15:53:17 [Luc]
15:53:37 [smiles]
Luc: Two issues waiting for confirmation from reviewers on changes
15:53:48 [smiles]
... and issue 475 on mention
15:54:08 [smiles]
... every other change implemented and logged
15:54:29 [Luc]
15:54:43 [Luc]
15:54:52 [smiles]
Luc: Regarding issue 475, did not get response on issue
15:54:52 [jcheney]
15:55:31 [smiles]
Luc: GK suggested dropping this feature at risk
15:56:04 [smiles]
Luc: Conclusion of my response is that we want feedback from implementers
15:56:17 [smiles]
... As we exit CR phase, can look at suitability
15:56:36 [Luc]
15:56:46 [smiles]
Luc: Any feedback now?
15:56:50 [tlebo]
+1 to keep it in, marked as at risk.
15:57:22 [Luc]
15:57:39 [Luc]
15:57:41 [smiles]
Luc: Is the group satisfied with this answer, and to vote now?
15:57:55 [Luc]
15:58:11 [smiles]
... or vote by email?
15:58:11 [Luc]
15:58:26 [smiles]
+1 to vote by email
15:58:27 [zednik]
I like vote by email
15:58:36 [jcheney]
+1 email
15:58:38 [tlebo]
vote by email seems to be the resounding response. I know I could use a bit more time to work through it entirely.
15:59:18 [smiles]
Luc: Will send an email with a deadline
15:59:24 [Luc]
topic: prov-xml
16:00:06 [Zakim]
16:00:17 [smiles]
zednik: We have made significant changes to XML note, including table of features mapping PROV-DM to XSD, plus examples with excerpts of schema
16:00:40 [zednik]
16:00:46 [smiles]
... Now looking for feedback on the HTML
16:01:48 [smiles]
Luc: Thanks. There is an opportunity to release first WD of this doc with CRs of other specs. Will it be ready?
16:02:23 [smiles]
... Next week we would take a vote, discuss with W3C management to publish CRs, so two weeks for XML document before publishing
16:02:39 [hook]
hook has joined #prov
16:02:52 [smiles]
zednik: Probably get ready in two weeks, but need to address WG comments, ensure there is no gaps (e.g. bundles)
16:03:12 [smiles]
Luc: Would be nice to have review taking place during week
16:03:17 [Zakim]
- +1.818.731.aabb
16:03:24 [Luc]
16:03:32 [jcheney]
16:03:34 [smiles]
... Who is willing to review PROV-XML document?
16:03:45 [tlebo]
one what timeframe?
16:03:46 [Zakim]
+ +1.818.731.aadd
16:03:47 [hook]
hook has joined #prov
16:04:02 [tlebo]
thanks. Then no :-)
16:04:03 [smiles]
Luc: Feedback in time for F2F
16:04:19 [smiles]
... Question for reviewers: Can we release this document as a FPWD
16:05:06 [smiles]
Luc: Intent to include XML in primer. Feasible to include for release?
16:05:51 [smiles]
smiles: For primer, if given XML fragments, then quick job to add
16:06:07 [smiles]
zednik: Possibly, but need to look at examples in primer
16:06:20 [GK]
@luc - the text/provenance-notation MIME registration revisions look fine to me at
16:06:24 [hook]
might need to check latest fragments for bundles per recent updates
16:06:36 [Zakim]
16:06:37 [Zakim]
16:06:39 [Zakim]
16:06:45 [Zakim]
16:06:47 [Zakim]
16:06:50 [GK]
GK has left #prov
16:06:50 [Zakim]
- +1.818.731.aadd
16:06:51 [Zakim]
16:06:51 [Zakim]
16:07:16 [Zakim]
16:07:17 [Zakim]
SW_(PROV)11:00AM has ended
16:07:17 [Zakim]
Attendees were Luc, [IPcaller], +1.315.330.aaaa, tlebo, MacTed, +1.818.731.aabb, smiles, GK1, +1.661.382.aacc, CraigTrim, Satya_Sahoo, +1.818.731.aadd
16:07:18 [Luc]
rrsagent, set log public
16:07:22 [Luc]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:07:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Luc
17:47:57 [ivan]
ivan has joined #prov
17:57:57 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #prov
17:58:57 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #prov
17:59:15 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #prov
18:04:39 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #prov