Meeting Record

OWL Working Group

Minutes of 07 December 2007

Seen

Achille Fokoue, Alan Ruttenberg, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Bijan Parsia, Boris Motik, Deborah McGuinness, Evan Wallace, Ian Horrocks, Ivan Herman, James Hendler, Jeff Pan, Jeremy Carroll, Joanne Luciano, Markus Krötzsch, Michael Smith, Pascal Hitzler, Peter Patel-Schneider, Ratnesh Sahay, Rinke Hoekstra, Sandro Hawke, Uli Sattler, Unknown Meeting_Room, Unknown clu, Unknown thomassch, Zhe Wu

Chair

Ian Horrocks

Scribe

Jeff Pan, Evan Wallace, Michael Smith, Uli Sattler

IRC Log

Original

Resolutions

None.

Topics

Datatypes
OWL DL and OWL Full
Fragments - OWL Prime
Fragments: (Tractable) Fragments and other Fragment Proposals
F2F2

There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.

It may be helpful to

09:12:08 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/12/07-owl-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/12/07-owl-irc ←

09:12:16 <ivan> scribenick: JeffP

(Scribe set to Jeff Pan)

09:12:30 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public

Ivan Herman: rrsagent, set log public ←

09:12:36 <alanr> Major issue seems to be whether to use xsd datatype semantics

Alan Ruttenberg: Major issue seems to be whether to use xsd datatype semantics ←

09:12:51 <ivan> chair: Ian Horrocks

09:12:53 <JeffP> Topic: Datatypes

1. Datatypes

09:12:55 <jluciano> Alanr, let's meet when you get back

Joanne Luciano: Alanr, let's meet when you get back ←

09:13:06 <ivan> scribe: jeff

09:13:19 <JeffP> scribe: JeffP

09:14:31 <JeffP> Uli is presenting

Uli is presenting ←

09:15:17 <jluciano> are we starting with issue 25 as in the agenda?

Joanne Luciano: are we starting with ISSUE-25 as in the agenda? ←

09:15:35 <JeffP> OWL DL does not support user defined datatypes

OWL DL does not support user defined datatypes ←

09:16:00 <JeffP> uli: users want to represent internals

Uli Sattler: users want to represent intervals ←

09:16:19 <JeffP> ... and comparisons

... and comparisons ←

09:16:30 <Michael_Smith> s/internals/intervals/

09:16:34 <IanH> slides available at http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/owl1.1-datatypes.pdf

Ian Horrocks: slides available at http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/owl1.1-datatypes.pdf ←

09:16:45 <jluciano> thanks!

Joanne Luciano: thanks! ←

09:18:03 <JeffP> ... in OWL DL no inverse functional datatype properties

... in OWL DL no inverse functional datatype properties ←

09:18:44 <JeffP> ... not to mention composite keys (not even OWL Full supports this)

... not to mention composite keys (not even OWL Full supports this) ←

09:21:43 <jluciano> ??

Joanne Luciano: ?? ←

09:22:12 <jluciano> it got quiet (no audio yet) - I'm dependent on scribe

Joanne Luciano: it got quiet (no audio yet) - I'm dependent on scribe ←

09:26:01 <JeffP> boris: we might want to keep the unit mapping out of TBox

Boris Motik: we might want to keep the unit mapping out of TBox ←

09:27:10 <JeffP> jeremy: second

Jeremy Carroll: second ←

09:28:02 <sandro> Jeremy's triangles: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/jjc/

Sandro Hawke: Jeremy's triangles: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/jjc/ ←

09:29:44 <JeffP> sebastian: there are real world examples

Scribe problem: the name 'sebastian' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown sebastian: there are real world examples ←

09:29:59 <JeffP> ... that we need datatype mapping in the TBox

... that we need datatype mapping in the TBox ←

09:30:08 <JeffP> bijan:both needed

Bijan Parsia: both needed ←

09:31:48 <JeffP> uli: we have examples of seeing class subsumption checking based on datatype constraints

Uli Sattler: we have examples of seeing class subsumption checking based on datatype constraints ←

09:32:41 <JeffP> casten: it is difficult to choose one standard set, e.g. covering integers, rational, +, *, ...

Scribe problem: the name 'casten' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown casten: it is difficult to choose one standard set, e.g. covering integers, rational, +, *, ... ←

09:32:52 <JeffP> uli: as many as possible

Uli Sattler: as many as possible ←

09:33:46 <JeffP> jeremy: each simple example is easy

Jeremy Carroll: each simple example is easy ←

09:34:30 <JeffP> ... but have concern on having all of them, which makes it hard

... but have concern on having all of them, which makes it hard ←

09:35:59 <bijan> Sebatian's use case: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case

Bijan Parsia: Sebatian's use case: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case ←

09:36:12 <JeffP> sebastian: combining DL and data values are important and useful, there are many tasks that you could not solve if you treat datatypes externally

Unknown sebastian: combining DL and data values are important and useful, there are many tasks that you could not solve if you treat datatypes externally ←

09:42:41 <JeffP> alanr: do we want to detect the problematic cases?

(No events recorded for 6 minutes)

Alan Ruttenberg: do we want to detect the problematic cases? ←

09:43:31 <jluciano> what does alan mean by "detect"?

Joanne Luciano: what does alan mean by "detect"? ←

09:46:19 <JeffP> jeffp: there are existing works on datatype groups, a mechanism is already there

Jeff Pan: there are existing works on datatype groups, a mechanism is already there ←

09:46:29 <thomassch> Uli has just added "[Alan] add support to check whether this mechanism (second item of '3.') has been used 'safely'". Does this help?

Scribe problem: the name 'thomassch' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown thomassch: Uli has just added "[Alan] add support to check whether this mechanism (second item of '3.') has been used 'safely'". Does this help? ←

09:47:03 <JeffP> ... even in OWL DL, freely combinations are not possible, e.g. transitive properties are not allowed to used in number restrictions

... even in OWL DL, freely combinations are not possible, e.g. transitive properties are not allowed to used in number restrictions ←

09:47:13 <alanr> I mean during species validation, for example. Or via declarations of what features are used and flagging incompatible combinations

Alan Ruttenberg: I mean during species validation, for example. Or via declarations of what features are used and flagging incompatible combinations ←

09:47:43 <JeffP> jeremy: what happen if data in the user databases having both integers, rationals + and * ...

Jeremy Carroll: what happen if data in the user databases having both integers, rationals + and * ... ←

09:47:54 <Michael_Smith> link again http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case

Michael Smith: link again http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case ←

09:48:44 <JeffP> boris: we need some datatype profile

Boris Motik: we need some datatype profile ←

09:49:16 <JeffP> casten: second boris point

Unknown casten: second boris point ←

09:53:48 <JeffP> jeffp: two points: 1) profiling is a good idea, there have been work there such as datatype groups

Jeff Pan: two points: 1) profiling is a good idea, there have been work there such as datatype groups ←

09:54:16 <JeffP> ... and we could provide a list of feasible datatype groups

... and we could provide a list of feasible datatype groups ←

09:55:22 <JeffP> 2) if users have integers, rationals + and *, we could simply have type promotion, promoting integers into rational, and it is still decidable

2) if users have integers, rationals + and *, we could simply have type promotion, promoting integers into rational, and it is still decidable ←

09:56:09 <JeffP> alanr: maybe we could have a stroll poll on this

Alan Ruttenberg: maybe we could have a stroll poll on this ←

09:56:53 <JeffP> bijan: we all agree that some sort of datatypes are needed, no matter in OWL or RIF

Bijan Parsia: we all agree that some sort of datatypes are needed, no matter in OWL or RIF ←

09:57:19 <JeffP> ... many of our cases cannot be addressed by RIF

... many of our cases cannot be addressed by RIF ←

10:00:19 <JeffP> jeremy: transitive issue is different

Jeremy Carroll: transitive issue is different ←

10:05:43 <sandro> dlm, GiorgosStoilos - the minutes of your sessions yesterday are now available for cleanup on the wiki: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1_Minutes_Session_4

(No events recorded for 5 minutes)

Sandro Hawke: dlm, GiorgosStoilos - the minutes of your sessions yesterday are now available for cleanup on the wiki: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1_Minutes_Session_4 ←

10:06:15 <bijan> linear polynomial (in-)equations over the reals or cardinals with order relations,

Bijan Parsia: linear polynomial (in-)equations over the reals or cardinals with order relations, ←

10:06:25 <sandro> MarkusK - the minutes of your scribe session yesterday are now available on the wiki for you to clean up: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1_Minutes_Session_3

Sandro Hawke: MarkusK - the minutes of your scribe session yesterday are now available on the wiki for you to clean up: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1_Minutes_Session_3 ←

10:06:34 <bijan>  nonlinear multivariate polynomial (in-)equations over complex numbers,

Bijan Parsia: nonlinear multivariate polynomial (in-)equations over complex numbers, ←

10:07:07 <bijan> (from the racer manual: http://www.sts.tu-harburg.de/~r.f.moeller/racer/racer-manual-1-7-19.pdf )

Bijan Parsia: (from the racer manual: http://www.sts.tu-harburg.de/~r.f.moeller/racer/racer-manual-1-7-19.pdf ) ←

10:07:14 <bijan> page 11

Bijan Parsia: page 11 ←

10:08:26 <bijan> See page 47 and 48

Bijan Parsia: See page 47 and 48 ←

10:08:57 <bijan> e.g., (* real AN ) (AN of type real or complex)

Bijan Parsia: e.g., (* real AN ) (AN of type real or complex) ←

10:09:01 <MarkusK> Sandro - OK, I will check.

Markus Krötzsch: Sandro - OK, I will check. ←

10:14:05 <JeffP> jeffp: besides Racer, an extension of FaCT (FaCT-DG) also supports n-ary and datatype groups

(No events recorded for 5 minutes)

Jeff Pan: besides Racer, an extension of FaCT (FaCT-DG) also supports n-ary and datatype groups ←

10:14:26 <JeffP> uli: we could have some more general proposal, rather than specific ones

Uli Sattler: we could have some more general proposal, rather than specific ones ←

10:16:02 <JeffP> bijan: we don't have to require all our implementors to implement everything, so we should be flexible somehow

Bijan Parsia: we don't have to require all our implementors to implement everything, so we should be flexible somehow ←

10:16:21 <JeffP> uli: the 4th point: easy keys

Uli Sattler: the 4th point: easy keys ←

10:19:20 <JeffP> markusk: in foaf people use b-nodes rather than individuals, so the easy key might not solve the foat problem

Markus Krötzsch: in foaf people use b-nodes rather than individuals, so the easy key might not solve the foat problem ←

10:22:20 <bijan> What I meant: It's a bad idea to, in committee, to significantly and somewhat arbitrarily increase the implementation burden. But without adding a hook, implementors *can't* (compatibly) experiment

Bijan Parsia: What I meant: It's a bad idea to, in committee, to significantly and somewhat arbitrarily increase the implementation burden. But without adding a hook, implementors *can't* (compatibly) experiment ←

10:22:40 <bijan> So, let's add the hook and be cautious about how we fill in the hook

Bijan Parsia: So, let's add the hook and be cautious about how we fill in the hook ←

10:25:02 <JeffP> stall poll 1: many 1, no -1, four 0

straw poll 1: many 1, no -1, four 0 ←

10:25:36 <JeffP> s/stall/straw

10:26:00 <JeffP> straw poll 2: (all) 1

straw poll 2: (all) 1 ←

10:28:49 <JeffP> straw poll 3 (about 2-b): many 1, two (conditional) -1, six 0

straw poll 3 (about 2-b): many 1, two (conditional) -1, six 0 ←

10:34:40 <JeffP> straw poll 4 (n-ary datatype): twelve +1, six -1, five 0

(No events recorded for 5 minutes)

straw poll 4 (n-ary datatype): twelve +1, six -1, five 0 ←

10:39:49 <JeffP> straw poll 5(easy key): 22 +1, one -1

(No events recorded for 5 minutes)

straw poll 5(easy key): 22 +1, one -1 ←

10:41:55 <JeffP> boris: one profile proposal: a set of default profiles and allowing users to have arbitrary profiles

Boris Motik: one profile proposal: a set of default profiles and allowing users to have arbitrary profiles ←

10:42:51 <bmotik> or people would be able to define their own profiles

Boris Motik: or people would be able to define their own profiles ←

10:43:09 <bmotik> sorryJeff, I got confused here

Boris Motik: sorryJeff, I got confused here ←

10:44:52 <JeffP> Another go, boris' profile: a fixed set of profile and also allowing people to define their owl profiles

Another go, boris' profile: a fixed set of profile and also allowing people to define their owl profiles ←

10:45:09 <JeffP> alanr's proposal: a fixed set of profile

alanr's proposal: a fixed set of profile ←

10:47:50 <bijan> Note the current support for unary datatypes is already fragmenty: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pTmcCXR-dV6RpTEPxB0O-DQ

Bijan Parsia: Note the current support for unary datatypes is already fragmenty: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pTmcCXR-dV6RpTEPxB0O-DQ ←

10:49:25 <JeffP> straw poll on profiling on datatype: eighteen +1, four 0

straw poll on profiling on datatype: eighteen +1, four 0 ←

10:50:03 <thomassch> dmitry tsarkov introduced himself ...

Unknown thomassch: dmitry tsarkov introduced himself ... ←

10:50:15 <thomassch> ... email: tsarkov@cs.man.ac.uk

Unknown thomassch: ... email: tsarkov@cs.man.ac.uk ←

10:51:56 <JeffP> scribers should clean up yesterday's minutes by next telecon

scribers should clean up yesterday's minutes by next telecon ←

10:52:10 <JeffP> (by IanH and no objections)

(by IanH and no objections) ←

11:03:16 <jluciano> please let me know when audio is available. thanks!

(No events recorded for 11 minutes)

Joanne Luciano: please let me know when audio is available. thanks! ←

11:12:04 <Rinke> ScribeNick: Evan

(No events recorded for 8 minutes)

(Scribe set to Evan Wallace)

11:12:39 <IanH_> We now have Zakim connected for those who want to dial in.

Ian Horrocks: We now have Zakim connected for those who want to dial in. ←

11:13:24 <Evan> ScribeNick: Evan

11:14:55 <Evan> Topic: OWL DL and OWL Full

2. OWL DL and OWL Full

11:19:02 <Rinke> zakim, this will be owl

Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, this will be owl ←

11:19:02 <Zakim> ok, Rinke, I see SW_OWL(F2F)6:00AM already started

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Rinke, I see SW_OWL(F2F)6:00AM already started ←

11:19:35 <Rinke> ScribeNick: Evan

11:20:14 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call? ←

11:20:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see ??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see ??P0 ←

11:20:36 <Evan> Peter presenting

Peter presenting ←

11:20:45 <sandro> Zakim, ??P0 is Meeting_Room

Sandro Hawke: Zakim, ??P0 is Meeting_Room ←

11:20:45 <Zakim> +Meeting_Room; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Meeting_Room; got it ←

11:21:26 <Evan> Here's a brief description of how model theoretic semantics works

Here's a brief description of how model theoretic semantics works ←

11:22:20 <Evan> Peter: OWL DL has a fairly straightforward take on this

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: OWL DL has a fairly straightforward take on this ←

11:22:56 <Evan> Peter: OWL Full and RDF take a slightly weird take on this

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: OWL Full and RDF take a slightly weird take on this ←

11:24:14 <Evan> Peter: wherein properties and classes live in the world with real objects

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: wherein properties and classes live in the world with real objects ←

11:25:10 <Evan> Peter: Here are the differences between OWL DL and Full semantics

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: Here are the differences between OWL DL and Full semantics ←

11:26:23 <Evan> See "Two Model Theories" slide

See "Two Model Theories" slide ←

11:27:33 <Evan> Peter: things like rdf:type and owl:Class are not in the world in DL but are in Full

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: things like rdf:type and owl:Class are not in the world in DL but are in Full ←

11:28:42 <Evan> Alan: In OWL DL Universe what is the status of Ontologies?

Alan Ruttenberg: In OWL DL Universe what is the status of Ontologies? ←

11:29:04 <Evan> Peter: There is a separate place for them because of annotations

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: There is a separate place for them because of annotations ←

11:29:51 <Evan> Peter: This description is about the spec. and not practice

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: This description is about the spec. and not practice ←

11:30:28 <Evan> Bijan: The things in the OWL Full universe are in there with a theory

Bijan Parsia: The things in the OWL Full universe are in there with a theory ←

11:31:25 <Evan> Peter: None of this matters in some sense

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: None of this matters in some sense ←

11:31:41 <Evan> Peter: What matters is the behavior which results

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: What matters is the behavior which results ←

11:31:56 <Evan> Peter: ...such as entailments

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: ...such as entailments ←

11:34:16 <Evan> Peter: Differences: It's possible to make assertions about the OWL vocabulary that change their interpretation

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: Differences: It's possible to make assertions about the OWL vocabulary that change their interpretation ←

11:35:25 <Evan> Jeremy to take over presenting

Jeremy to take over presenting ←

11:36:44 <Evan> Alan: question about the intention of compatibility to be entailments of DL and Full be identical

Alan Ruttenberg: question about the intention of compatibility to be entailments of DL and Full be identical ←

11:37:42 <Evan> Jeremy: for me the whole point is to get compatibility with RDF

Jeremy Carroll: for me the whole point is to get compatibility with RDF ←

11:40:39 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call? ←

11:40:39 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room ←

11:40:50 <sandro> jluciano, we are on the phone now, I believe.

Sandro Hawke: jluciano, we are on the phone now, I believe. ←

11:40:55 <Evan> Jeremy: A goal is "least surprise" for users of RDF when using OWL

Jeremy Carroll: A goal is "least surprise" for users of RDF when using OWL ←

11:42:59 <Evan> Jeremy: OWL annotations are intended to behave as RDF annotations

Jeremy Carroll: OWL annotations are intended to behave as RDF annotations ←

11:43:27 <Evan> Alan: There are implications for RDF annotations that users may not be aware of

Alan Ruttenberg: There are implications for RDF annotations that users may not be aware of ←

11:43:54 <Evan> Alan: I want to make a distinction between usage and consequences of the semantics

Alan Ruttenberg: I want to make a distinction between usage and consequences of the semantics ←

11:45:33 <Evan> Bijan: I don't understand what you mean by RDF triple-by-triple semantics

Bijan Parsia: I don't understand what you mean by RDF triple-by-triple semantics ←

11:46:44 <Evan> Jeremy: In the OWL 1.0 semantics there are correspondence theorems between OWL Full and DL Semantics

Jeremy Carroll: In the OWL 1.0 semantics there are correspondence theorems between OWL Full and DL Semantics ←

11:49:23 <Zakim> +Joanne_Luciano

Zakim IRC Bot: +Joanne_Luciano ←

11:49:29 <Evan> Jeremy listed Issues related to the FULL and DL differences

Jeremy listed Issues related to the FULL and DL differences ←

11:49:55 <Evan> such as 63, 76, 81, 69, 72, 55, 73

such as 63, 76, 81, 69, 72, 55, 73 ←

11:50:25 <Evan> Jeremy: Do we want to allow semantic subsetting for fragments

Jeremy Carroll: Do we want to allow semantic subsetting for fragments ←

11:51:19 <jluciano> is that Bijan speaking?

Joanne Luciano: is that Bijan speaking? ←

11:51:26 <Evan> Yes

Yes ←

11:51:55 <Evan> I failed to capture it however.

I failed to capture it however. ←

11:52:40 <Evan> Bijan: If we are going to support OWL Full do we need to support the full RDF umbrella

Bijan Parsia: If we are going to support OWL Full do we need to support the full RDF umbrella ←

11:52:46 <jluciano> He said something about if he wanted to reproduce what is in Jena, he'd like to have that info available to know what to reproduce

Joanne Luciano: He said something about if he wanted to reproduce what is in Jena, he'd like to have that info available to know what to reproduce ←

11:53:01 <Evan> Bijan: described in Jeremy presentation

Bijan Parsia: described in Jeremy presentation ←

11:53:38 <Evan> Jeremy: The semantic of RDF reification are essentially none

Jeremy Carroll: The semantic of RDF reification are essentially none ←

11:54:11 <Evan> Bijan: There exists somewhere in the known universe a Statement that includes: S, P, O

Bijan Parsia: There exists somewhere in the known universe a Statement that includes: S, P, O ←

11:55:10 <Evan> Jeremy: There is no clear statement in the specs for how reification can work interoperably from system to system

Jeremy Carroll: There is no clear statement in the specs for how reification can work interoperably from system to system ←

11:56:43 <Evan> Bijan: In the OWL full situation you have to interpret the reification syntax somehow

Bijan Parsia: In the OWL full situation you have to interpret the reification syntax somehow ←

11:57:35 <Evan> More discussion about how this can be done

More discussion about how this can be done ←

11:58:20 <Evan> Jeremy: Punning

Jeremy Carroll: Punning ←

11:59:49 <Evan> In some peoples mind the web arch specifies that a URI corresponds to a single meaning

In some peoples mind the web arch specifies that a URI corresponds to a single meaning ←

12:00:27 <Evan> Punning is weaker than OWL Full because it violates this principle

Punning is weaker than OWL Full because it violates this principle ←

12:01:48 <Evan> Jeremy: this seems to cause user confusion

Jeremy Carroll: this seems to cause user confusion ←

12:01:57 <Evan> Mapping rules

Mapping rules ←

12:03:26 <Evan> In my view, the mapping rules were the hardest part of the OWL Rec

In my view, the mapping rules were the hardest part of the OWL Rec ←

12:04:38 <Evan> Jeremy: The drivers behind the mapping rules in OWL 1.1 are different

Jeremy Carroll: The drivers behind the mapping rules in OWL 1.1 are different ←

12:05:28 <jluciano> who's speaking?

Joanne Luciano: who's speaking? ←

12:05:30 <Evan> Jeremy: ...and this will lead to considerable change and probably

Jeremy Carroll: ...and this will lead to considerable change and probably ←

12:05:43 <Evan> Boris Motik is speaking

Boris Motik is speaking ←

12:06:03 <Evan> Jeremy: ...issues later on.

Jeremy Carroll: ...issues later on. ←

12:06:30 <jluciano> What's he saying is one of the biggest problems?

Joanne Luciano: What's he saying is one of the biggest problems? ←

12:06:41 <Evan> Boris: In my opinion many of these problems are the result of

Boris Motik: In my opinion many of these problems are the result of ←

12:06:52 <jluciano> "these problems"???

Joanne Luciano: "these problems"??? ←

12:07:04 <Evan> Boris: ...shoe-horning everything in the same universe.

Boris Motik: ...shoe-horning everything in the same universe. ←

12:07:53 <Evan> Point for discussion later:

Point for discussion later: ←

12:08:04 <jluciano> please distribute (and reference here for later). which sldie # of URI / slide ref

Joanne Luciano: please distribute (and reference here for later). which sldie # of URI / slide ref ←

12:08:16 <jluciano> \me Thanks Peter.

Joanne Luciano: \me Thanks Peter. ←

12:09:06 <Evan> Boris: if we came up with an OWL Full that has a clean model theoritic framework

Boris Motik: if we came up with an OWL Full that has a clean model theoritic framework ←

12:09:17 <Evan> ...then we could fix this.

...then we could fix this. ←

12:09:46 <Evan> Alan:This would be a smaller OWL Full?

Alan Ruttenberg: This would be a smaller OWL Full? ←

12:10:21 <Evan> Bijan: Punning was intended to meet the goals of Full at least quarter way

Bijan Parsia: Punning was intended to meet the goals of Full at least quarter way ←

12:11:21 <Evan> Peter: The dogma in this case is the same syntax extension of RDF

Scribe problem: the name 'Peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown Peter: The dogma in this case is the same syntax extension of RDF ←

12:12:18 <Evan> Bernardo: The people who like OWL Full should really come up

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: The people who like OWL Full should really come up ←

12:12:34 <Evan> ...with features for OWL Full that they like and use

...with features for OWL Full that they like and use ←

12:12:48 <Evan> ...Then we could do some research.

...Then we could do some research. ←

12:13:48 <Evan> Ian: The point I wanted to make was how much of this proposed

Ian Horrocks: The point I wanted to make was how much of this proposed ←

12:14:01 <Evan> ...work will be part of the work of this WG?

...work will be part of the work of this WG? ←

12:14:28 <Evan> Boris: Cleaning this up would be a huge accomplishment for this group.

Boris Motik: Cleaning this up would be a huge accomplishment for this group. ←

12:15:28 <Evan> Alan: To my mind, it's not clear that cleaning up OWL Full is desirable to

Alan Ruttenberg: To my mind, it's not clear that cleaning up OWL Full is desirable to ←

12:15:39 <Evan> ... the Full/RDF community.

... the Full/RDF community. ←

12:16:10 <Evan> Jeremy: Dropping the comprehension principles seems like the

Jeremy Carroll: Dropping the comprehension principles seems like the ←

12:16:23 <Evan> ... smallest change that would be of value.

... smallest change that would be of value. ←

12:17:22 <Evan> Alan: Is this in scope for our group?  Strictly speaking I don't think so.

Alan Ruttenberg: Is this in scope for our group? Strictly speaking I don't think so. ←

12:18:03 <Evan> Ian: This kind of work just isn't in scope.

Ian Horrocks: This kind of work just isn't in scope. ←

12:18:19 <Evan> Bijan: Form an OWLED task force to look at this.

Bijan Parsia: Form an OWLED task force to look at this. ←

12:19:40 <Evan> Alan: We need to have a discussion about what compatibility means.

Alan Ruttenberg: We need to have a discussion about what compatibility means. ←

12:20:59 <Evan> Alan: If we allow OWL Full semantics changing that will affect backwards compatibility

Alan Ruttenberg: If we allow OWL Full semantics changing that will affect backwards compatibility ←

12:23:15 <Evan> Discussion of semantic fragments

Discussion of semantic fragments ←

12:25:33 <Evan> Alan: we have a delta now in the sublanguage entailments

Alan Ruttenberg: we have a delta now in the sublanguage entailments ←

12:26:04 <Evan> Bijan: finding some delta that makes sense that makes the languages

Bijan Parsia: finding some delta that makes sense that makes the languages ←

12:26:15 <Evan> ...as close as possible would be a good thing.

...as close as possible would be a good thing. ←

12:26:34 <Evan> Ian: If we are comfortable with this semantic subsetting then

Ian Horrocks: If we are comfortable with this semantic subsetting then ←

12:26:54 <Evan> ... we should be happy with the Full - DL differences

... we should be happy with the Full - DL differences ←

12:27:48 <Evan> Ian: One slight difference in Jeremy's proposal would be allowing

Ian Horrocks: One slight difference in Jeremy's proposal would be allowing ←

12:28:16 <Evan> ... more syntactic freedom but actually reducing the entailments

... more syntactic freedom but actually reducing the entailments ←

12:28:36 <Evan> ... by removing the comprehension principles for e.g.

... by removing the comprehension principles for e.g. ←

12:29:18 <Evan> Jeremy: HP might be happy with such a result if it is consistent

Jeremy Carroll: HP might be happy with such a result if it is consistent ←

12:29:37 <Evan> ... with some broader framework.

... with some broader framework. ←

12:31:26 <Evan> Jeremy: There are easy bits in the OWL 1.1 language.

Jeremy Carroll: There are easy bits in the OWL 1.1 language. ←

12:32:04 <Evan> ... getting those bits working are a bounded and achievable task.

... getting those bits working are a bounded and achievable task. ←

12:33:10 <Evan> Bijan: My experience is that users are concerned about not

Bijan Parsia: My experience is that users are concerned about not ←

12:33:46 <jluciano> can't hear Bijan

Joanne Luciano: can't hear Bijan ←

12:34:06 <jluciano> what did he say about channelling Jim?

Joanne Luciano: what did he say about channelling Jim? ←

12:34:08 <Evan> ... being able to process large numbers of RDF graphs

... being able to process large numbers of RDF graphs ←

12:34:15 <Evan> ...with DL reasoners.

...with DL reasoners. ←

12:34:51 <jluciano> #/me Sandro ... I'm a mac book pro user

Joanne Luciano: #/me Sandro ... I'm a mac book pro user ←

12:35:11 <Evan> ... Features like punning improves this situation.

... Features like punning improves this situation. ←

12:36:09 <Evan> Ian: I wonder how hard it would really be to extend the status quo

Ian Horrocks: I wonder how hard it would really be to extend the status quo ←

12:36:45 <Evan> ... with some acceptable differences.

... with some acceptable differences. ←

12:37:11 <Evan> Ian: This is a strawman for something that we could do.

Ian Horrocks: This is a strawman for something that we could do. ←

12:37:58 <Evan> Jeremy: I'd need to take this proposal back to HP before commenting on it.

Jeremy Carroll: I'd need to take this proposal back to HP before commenting on it. ←

12:41:10 <Evan> Bijan: I would like us to keep the political and the user requirements seperate

Bijan Parsia: I would like us to keep the political and the user requirements seperate ←

12:41:51 <Evan> Action: jeremy describe how punning and cardinality play poorly with each other

ACTION: jeremy describe how punning and cardinality play poorly with each other ←

12:41:51 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-47 - Describe how punning and cardinality play poorly with each other [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2007-12-14].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-47 - Describe how punning and cardinality play poorly with each other [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2007-12-14]. ←

12:42:48 <sandro> Jeremy: maybe we can say in the spec that punning is a concession to implementors, not a basic part of the semantics, that univocality is intended.

Jeremy Carroll: maybe we can say in the spec that punning is a concession to implementors, not a basic part of the semantics, that univocality is intended. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

12:43:36 <Evan> Ian: I'd like to see suggestions for concrete ways of moving forward to address these problems

Ian Horrocks: I'd like to see suggestions for concrete ways of moving forward to address these problems ←

12:44:03 <Evan> Jeremy: Why don't we start with Qualified Cardinality Description?

Jeremy Carroll: Why don't we start with Qualified Cardinality Description? ←

12:45:03 <Evan> PFPS: Someone made comment that Qualified Cardinality Descriptions leads to non-monitonicity

Peter Patel-Schneider: Someone made comment that Qualified Cardinality Descriptions leads to non-monitonicity ←

12:45:25 <Evan> ... and I remember finding it believable

... and I remember finding it believable ←

12:46:22 <sandro> trackbot-ng, list

Sandro Hawke: trackbot-ng, list ←

12:46:29 <sandro> trackbot-ng, help

Sandro Hawke: trackbot-ng, help ←

12:46:29 <trackbot-ng> See http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ for help (use the IRC bot link)

Trackbot IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ for help (use the IRC bot link) ←

12:46:34 <sandro> trackbot-ng, info

Sandro Hawke: trackbot-ng, info ←

12:46:51 <pfps> ACTION: pfps inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full

ACTION: pfps inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full ←

12:46:51 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - pfps

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - pfps ←

12:47:30 <Jeremy> action: jeremy attempt Wiki sketch of QCR semantics OWL Full

ACTION: jeremy attempt Wiki sketch of QCR semantics OWL Full ←

12:47:30 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-48 - Attempt Wiki sketch of QCR semantics OWL Full [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2007-12-14].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-48 - Attempt Wiki sketch of QCR semantics OWL Full [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2007-12-14]. ←

12:47:56 <pfps> ACTION: peter inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full

ACTION: peter inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full ←

12:47:56 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - peter

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - peter ←

12:47:56 <trackbot-ng> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ppatelsc, phaase)

Trackbot IRC Bot: Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ppatelsc, phaase) ←

12:48:27 <pfps> ACTION: peterpatel-schneider inform the WG on the absurdity of QCR / OWL Full

ACTION: peterpatel-schneider inform the WG on the absurdity of QCR / OWL Full ←

12:48:28 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - peterpatel-schneider

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - peterpatel-schneider ←

12:48:31 <Evan> action: ppatelsc inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full

ACTION: ppatelsc inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full ←

12:48:31 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-49 - Inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2007-12-14].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-49 - Inform the WG on absurdity of QCR / OWL Full [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2007-12-14]. ←

12:49:28 <Evan> Alan: on concrete actions...

Alan Ruttenberg: on concrete actions... ←

12:49:32 <sandro> Alan: How about we say: If you manage to game the system to have different meanings for a URI, you can't count on that

Alan Ruttenberg: How about we say: If you manage to game the system to have different meanings for a URI, you can't count on that [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

12:49:39 <Evan> ... we have a set of options

... we have a set of options ←

12:50:10 <Evan> Jeremy: a suggestion that Jeremy concentrate on OWL Full

Jeremy Carroll: a suggestion that Jeremy concentrate on OWL Full ←

12:50:43 <Evan> ... Semantics and drop out of User Facing Documents

... Semantics and drop out of User Facing Documents ←

12:51:16 <Evan> Alan: Any other specific proposals

Alan Ruttenberg: Any other specific proposals ←

12:51:42 <Evan> Ian: Let's try and extend where are now and see where we end up.

Ian Horrocks: Let's try and extend where are now and see where we end up. ←

12:52:34 <Evan> Alan: When do we evaluate when this approach is failing

Alan Ruttenberg: When do we evaluate when this approach is failing ←

12:52:45 <Evan> ... so that we can try another approach.

... so that we can try another approach. ←

12:53:06 <Evan> ... I want to have some ideas about where we would go if this

... I want to have some ideas about where we would go if this ←

12:53:12 <Evan> ... doesn't work.

... doesn't work. ←

12:53:34 <Evan> Jeremy: We have had two variants proposed today.

Jeremy Carroll: We have had two variants proposed today. ←

12:54:29 <Evan> ... Sacrifice backwards compatibility and work towards 1.1

... Sacrifice backwards compatibility and work towards 1.1 ←

12:57:13 <Evan> Bijan: We are spending a lot of time on this

Bijan Parsia: We are spending a lot of time on this ←

12:57:59 <Evan> ... I would like to know how much interest in this WG

... I would like to know how much interest in this WG ←

12:58:12 <sandro> If there were a task force, who would be on it -- Alan, Jeremy, Sandro

Sandro Hawke: If there were a task force, who would be on it -- Alan, Jeremy, Sandro ←

12:58:13 <Evan> ... with Full compatibility

... with Full compatibility ←

12:58:36 <Jeremy_> jeremy: variant 2 - peter - drop same syntax requirement, and allow OWL 1.1 DL to have different syntax from RDF

Jeremy Carroll: variant 2 - peter - drop same syntax requirement, and allow OWL 1.1 DL to have different syntax from RDF [ Scribe Assist by Jeremy Carroll ] ←

12:58:51 <Evan> Stawpoll

Stawpoll ←

12:59:09 <Evan> How many people want to use OWL Full for 1.1?

How many people want to use OWL Full for 1.1? ←

12:59:32 <jluciano> 2nd question... +1 (not listed yet)

Joanne Luciano: 2nd question... +1 (not listed yet) ←

13:00:10 <Evan> Jeremy rephrase: When using 1.1 do you want to use Full semantics?

Jeremy rephrase: When using 1.1 do you want to use Full semantics? ←

13:00:23 <jluciano> hard to hear on the phone

Joanne Luciano: hard to hear on the phone ←

13:00:34 <sandro> Q1- Are you a potential customer for OWL 1.1 Full -- you'll be using the document

Sandro Hawke: Q1- Are you a potential customer for OWL 1.1 Full -- you'll be using the document ←

13:00:43 <sandro> customer or reseller

Sandro Hawke: customer or reseller ←

13:00:45 <jluciano> OK, thanks, no :-)

Joanne Luciano: OK, thanks, no :-) ←

13:01:38 <jluciano> Q1 No.

Joanne Luciano: Q1 No. ←

13:01:54 <Evan> 5 in room

5 yes in room ←

13:02:25 <sandro> s/5 in room/5 yes in room/

13:02:39 <Evan> Q1 no 15

Q1 no 15 ←

13:03:10 <dlm> jim would also be in the positive count for that question

Deborah McGuinness: jim would also be in the positive count for that question ←

13:04:06 <Evan> q2 are you a potential customer for Bijan's description of patch-up

q2 are you a potential customer for Bijan's description of patch-up ←

13:04:23 <Evan> rules

rules ←

13:04:28 <sandro> Q2- Are you a potential customer/reseller of a specification of techniques for translation RDF graphs (in the spirit of OWL Full) to OWL 1.1 DL

Sandro Hawke: Q2- Are you a potential customer/reseller of a specification of techniques for translation RDF graphs (in the spirit of OWL Full) to OWL 1.1 DL ←

13:04:40 <sandro> Q2- Are you a potential customer/reseller of a specification of techniques for translating RDF graphs (in the spirit of OWL Full) to OWL 1.1 DL

Sandro Hawke: Q2- Are you a potential customer/reseller of a specification of techniques for translating RDF graphs (in the spirit of OWL Full) to OWL 1.1 DL ←

13:04:59 <jluciano> Q2 yes

Joanne Luciano: Q2 yes ←

13:05:26 <jluciano> Q2 +1

Joanne Luciano: Q2 +1 ←

13:05:35 <Evan> many in favor

many in favor ←

13:05:36 <sandro> Q2 yes except for 2 abstainers

Sandro Hawke: Q2 yes except for 2 abstainers ←

13:06:25 <sandro> LUNCH

Sandro Hawke: LUNCH ←

13:44:15 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aaaa

(No events recorded for 37 minutes)

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.603.897.aaaa ←

13:47:05 <Zhe> please connect to http://conference.oracle.com

Zhe Wu: please connect to http://conference.oracle.com ←

13:47:22 <sandro> huh?

Sandro Hawke: huh? ←

13:47:30 <Zhe> the conference id is:  96360063

Zhe Wu: the conference id is: 96360063 ←

13:47:38 <sandro> Um, no.

Sandro Hawke: Um, no. ←

13:47:42 <sandro> :-)

Sandro Hawke: :-) ←

13:49:24 <Zhe> this is for owlprime review

Zhe Wu: this is for owlprime review ←

13:49:42 <ivan>  jim, we are having lunch

Ivan Herman: jim, we are having lunch ←

13:49:48 <sandro> So, who are you talking to , Zhe?

Sandro Hawke: So, who are you talking to , Zhe? ←

13:49:51 <ivan> the session starts in 10 minutes

Ivan Herman: the session starts in 10 minutes ←

13:49:59 <ivan> with the fragment agenda item

Ivan Herman: with the fragment agenda item ←

13:50:02 <Zhe> I know that. I just want to send the ID out to the group

Zhe Wu: I know that. I just want to send the ID out to the group ←

13:50:05 <sandro> Zakim, aaaa is Zhe

Sandro Hawke: Zakim, aaaa is Zhe ←

13:50:05 <Zakim> +Zhe; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe; got it ←

13:50:22 <sandro> I doubt anyone but me is reading this.    :)

Sandro Hawke: I doubt anyone but me is reading this. :) ←

13:50:48 <Rinke> eh, not true ;)

Rinke Hoekstra: eh, not true ;) ←

13:53:08 <hendler> thanks Sandro - btw, are the logs being recorded somewhere?  We used to always put those in the irc topic so people could find them (and to make them member readable)

James Hendler: thanks Sandro - btw, are the logs being recorded somewhere? We used to always put those in the irc topic so people could find them (and to make them member readable) ←

13:57:35 <sandro> sandro has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1

Sandro Hawke: sandro has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1 ←

13:57:49 <sandro> sandro has changed the topic to: See http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1 for agenda, minutes, etc

Sandro Hawke: sandro has changed the topic to: See http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F1 for agenda, minutes, etc ←

13:58:20 <sandro> Jim, the minutes are linked from the agenda, meeting page, etc.     I put them there at the end of a session.

Sandro Hawke: Jim, the minutes are linked from the agenda, meeting page, etc. I put them there at the end of a session. ←

13:58:36 <sandro> the raw irc can be found by:

Sandro Hawke: the raw irc can be found by: ←

13:58:39 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?

Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←

13:58:39 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2007/12/07-owl-irc#T13-58-39

RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2007/12/07-owl-irc#T13-58-39 ←

13:59:46 <hendler> right, thanks - forgot RRSAgent - been a while :-)

James Hendler: right, thanks - forgot RRSAgent - been a while :-) ←

14:00:02 <sandro> understandable.

Sandro Hawke: understandable. ←

14:00:44 <sandro> I've been really wishing you were here.   Occasionally one of us channels you, "Jim would say.....", but it's hard to find out more details and try to convince you, when you're not here.

Sandro Hawke: I've been really wishing you were here. Occasionally one of us channels you, "Jim would say.....", but it's hard to find out more details and try to convince you, when you're not here. ←

14:01:01 <sandro> (that last session was about OWL Full.)

Sandro Hawke: (that last session was about OWL Full.) ←

14:05:00 <hendler> yeah - it's frustrating - I had wanted to come (although I suspect I'd of spent a lot of time fighting) -- I see "channeling Jim" in the logs a couple of times :-)

James Hendler: yeah - it's frustrating - I had wanted to come (although I suspect I'd of spent a lot of time fighting) -- I see "channeling Jim" in the logs a couple of times :-) ←

14:05:32 <hendler> Unfortunately, I have a telecon with Tim BL at 9:30, so was hoping to at least get some of the fragments talk in first...

James Hendler: Unfortunately, I have a telecon with Tim BL at 9:30, so was hoping to at least get some of the fragments talk in first... ←

14:07:10 <msmith> ScribeNick: msmith

(Scribe set to Michael Smith)

14:07:32 <Zhe> please connect to http://conference.oracle.com   using IE

Zhe Wu: please connect to http://conference.oracle.com using IE ←

14:07:41 <Zhe>  the conference id is:  96360063

Zhe Wu: the conference id is: 96360063 ←

14:07:45 <jluciano> Hi Jim.... another remoterer here - I'd gone to the airport but 2 minutes shy of 1 hr before flight and the closed checkin!

Joanne Luciano: Hi Jim.... another remoterer here - I'd gone to the airport but 2 minutes shy of 1 hr before flight and the closed checkin! ←

14:08:38 <msmith> Topic: Fragments - OWL Prime

3. Fragments - OWL Prime

14:09:07 <ivan> zakim, who is here?

Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←

14:09:07 <Zakim> On the phone I see Meeting_Room, Joanne_Luciano, Zhe

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Meeting_Room, Joanne_Luciano, Zhe ←

14:09:08 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, alanr, msmith, IanH, peterhaase, thomassch, Rinke, Zhe, Jeremy, clu, jluciano, Uli, pfps, GiorgosStoilos, Zakim, vit, sandro, bijan, RRSAgent, Battle, ivan,

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, alanr, msmith, IanH, peterhaase, thomassch, Rinke, Zhe, Jeremy, clu, jluciano, Uli, pfps, GiorgosStoilos, Zakim, vit, sandro, bijan, RRSAgent, Battle, ivan, ←

14:09:11 <Zakim> ... MarkusK, seanb, Ratnesh, pascalhitzler, hendler, trackbot-ng

Zakim IRC Bot: ... MarkusK, seanb, Ratnesh, pascalhitzler, hendler, trackbot-ng ←

14:09:15 <Zakim> + +1.518.472.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.472.aabb ←

14:09:26 <hendler> zakim, aabb is jhendler

James Hendler: zakim, aabb is jhendler ←

14:09:26 <Zakim> +jhendler; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jhendler; got it ←

14:10:14 <Jeremy> Hi zhe, I've turned off pop up blocker, where do I go?

Jeremy Carroll: Hi zhe, I've turned off pop up blocker, where do I go? ←

14:10:23 <Zhe> please connect to http://conference.oracle.com   using IE

Zhe Wu: please connect to http://conference.oracle.com using IE ←

14:10:36 <Zhe> you will see a join conference portlet

Zhe Wu: you will see a join conference portlet ←

14:11:42 <jluciano> Can you repeat that?

Joanne Luciano: Can you repeat that? ←

14:11:55 <msmith> the conference id is: 96360063

the conference id is: 96360063 ←

14:11:55 <Zhe> 96360063

Zhe Wu: 96360063 ←

14:13:04 <msmith> alanr: there is a proposal to have a joint OWL & RIF task force

Alan Ruttenberg: there is a proposal to have a joint OWL & RIF task force ←

14:13:12 <msmith> ... peter is there.  is there anyone else?

... peter is there. is there anyone else? ←

14:13:25 <msmith> ...uli is a second.

...uli is a second. ←

14:13:33 <msmith> sandro: I may sort of be on it for both

Sandro Hawke: I may sort of be on it for both ←

14:13:53 <msmith> bijan: I am liason to RIF and will continue to be

Bijan Parsia: I am liason to RIF and will continue to be ←

14:15:16 <Zhe> Jim, I just send a ppt to your rpi email address.

Zhe Wu: Jim, I just send a ppt to your rpi email address. ←

14:15:16 <hendler> slides would be better for archive purposes

James Hendler: slides would be better for archive purposes ←

14:15:24 <hendler> thanks

James Hendler: thanks ←

14:15:53 <msmith> jeremy is still working on getting the conference room connected

jeremy is still working on getting the conference room connected ←

14:16:18 <pfps> In future WG "events" it would be nice to get the infrastructure set up in advance!

Peter Patel-Schneider: In future WG "events" it would be nice to get the infrastructure set up in advance! ←

14:16:36 <jluciano> I can't connect to the oracle conferencing either

Joanne Luciano: I can't connect to the oracle conferencing either ←

14:17:28 <ivan> joanne, ian will send you the slids

Ivan Herman: joanne, ian will send you the slides ←

14:17:35 <ivan> s/slids/slides/

14:17:43 <jluciano> thanks!

Joanne Luciano: thanks! ←

14:17:43 <sandro> alanr apologizes for not setting this up during lunch.

Sandro Hawke: alanr apologizes for not setting this up during lunch. ←

14:18:23 <jluciano> I hope we'll not have to have alanr give up his lunch, then.

Joanne Luciano: I hope we'll not have to have alanr give up his lunch, then. ←

14:19:01 <msmith> agenda slide

agenda slide ←

14:19:04 <Zakim> +[IBM]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←

14:19:29 <sandro> Zakim, [IBM] is temporarily Achille

Sandro Hawke: Zakim, [IBM] is temporarily Achille ←

14:19:29 <Zakim> +Achille; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←

14:19:31 <IanH_> slides just sent to public-... list

Ian Horrocks: slides just sent to public-... list ←

14:19:49 <msmith> slide: oracle 10gR2 RDF

unserializable event: meeting.NextSlide

14:20:45 <msmith> some technical difficulties continue w.r.t slide presentation

some technical difficulties continue w.r.t slide presentation ←

14:22:04 <msmith> zhe: many ways to insert data.

Zhe Wu: many ways to insert data. ←

14:22:38 <msmith> ...in 10r2 we also support some inferencing and rules.  we use forward chaining approach

...in 10r2 we also support some inferencing and rules. we use forward chaining approach ←

14:23:13 <msmith> ...also query using a SPARQL-like syntax

...also query using a SPARQL-like syntax ←

14:23:21 <msmith> ... this was all in 2005

... this was all in 2005 ←

14:23:32 <msmith> slide 11gR1

slide 11gR1 ←

14:24:00 <msmith> zhe: this year new release with new features.  faster loading, owl reasoning with proof generation

Zhe Wu: this year new release with new features. faster loading, owl reasoning with proof generation ←

14:24:05 <Uli> \me Zhe, can you speak louder again, please?

Uli Sattler: \me Zhe, can you speak louder again, please? ←

14:24:21 <sandro> zakim, who is talking?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is talking? ←

14:24:23 <msmith> ... overhauled performance w.r.t. load and query

... overhauled performance w.r.t. load and query ←

14:24:31 <Zakim> sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Meeting_Room (52%), Zhe (32%), jhendler (33%)

Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Meeting_Room (52%), Zhe (32%), jhendler (33%) ←

14:24:40 <sandro> zakim, mute jhendler

Sandro Hawke: zakim, mute jhendler ←

14:24:40 <Zakim> jhendler should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: jhendler should now be muted ←

14:24:49 <msmith> ... just recently added Jena / Oracle adapter

... just recently added Jena / Oracle adapter ←

14:24:51 <sandro> hendler, I muted you.

Sandro Hawke: hendler, I muted you. ←

14:24:56 <msmith> ... joint with HP

... joint with HP ←

14:25:15 <msmith> new slide

new slide ←

14:25:16 <Zakim> -jhendler

Zakim IRC Bot: -jhendler ←

14:25:57 <msmith> zhe: subset of owl is supported

Zhe Wu: subset of owl is supported ←

14:26:10 <msmith> uli: i'm curious about what scalable and efficient means

Uli Sattler: i'm curious about what scalable and efficient means ←

14:26:20 <msmith> zhe: i will show some numbers later

Zhe Wu: i will show some numbers later ←

14:27:24 <msmith> ... re: what is supported - forward chaining rules implementation for fast query answer

... re: what is supported - forward chaining rules implementation for fast query answer ←

14:27:31 <msmith> slide "why?"

slide "why?" ←

14:29:15 <msmith> zhe: ... conclusion in ISWC 2006 paper was that existing reasoners had problems with large ABox data

Zhe Wu: ... conclusion in ISWC 2006 paper was that existing reasoners had problems with large ABox data ←

14:29:33 <Achille> q+

Achille Fokoue: q+ ←

14:29:37 <msmith> slide 7 - owl subsets supported

slide 7 - owl subsets supported ←

14:30:13 <msmith> zhe: rdfs++ added as a "minimal" extension to RDFS

Zhe Wu: rdfs++ added as a "minimal" extension to RDFS ←

14:30:50 <msmith> ...owl prime, what is now proposed as rdfs 3.0

...owl prime, what is now proposed as rdfs 3.0 ←

14:31:25 <msmith> slide - semantics characterized by entailment rules

slide - semantics characterized by entailment rules ←

14:31:41 <msmith> zhe: owl prime has ~50 rules

Zhe Wu: owl prime has ~50 rules ←

14:31:41 <pascalhitzler> does somebody know the exact literature reference for OWLPrime and can send it?

Pascal Hitzler: does somebody know the exact literature reference for OWLPrime and can send it? ←

14:32:13 <msmith> slide - applications of partial dl semantics

slide - applications of partial dl semantics ←

14:32:37 <pascalhitzler> similar for OWLSIF - literature reference ...

Pascal Hitzler: similar for OWLSIF - literature reference ... ←

14:33:11 <thomassch> BTW The pdf with these slides can be found under http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/DatabaseAndOntology/2007-10-18_AlanWu/RDBMS-RDFS-OWL-InferenceEngine--AlanWu_20071018.pdf :)

Unknown thomassch: BTW The pdf with these slides can be found under http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/DatabaseAndOntology/2007-10-18_AlanWu/RDBMS-RDFS-OWL-InferenceEngine--AlanWu_20071018.pdf :) ←

14:34:15 <msmith> slide - support semantics beyond owl prime

slide - support semantics beyond owl prime ←

14:35:27 <msmith> jeremy: question about example being supported directly in the future

Jeremy Carroll: question about example being supported directly in the future ←

14:35:32 <msmith> zhe: exactly

Zhe Wu: exactly ←

14:35:40 <Rinke> q?

Rinke Hoekstra: q? ←

14:36:40 <msmith> achille: question about updates to abox

Achille Fokoue: question about updates to abox ←

14:36:48 <msmith> zhe: i'll get to that later

Zhe Wu: i'll get to that later ←

14:36:57 <Rinke> ack Achille

Rinke Hoekstra: ack Achille ←

14:38:03 <msmith> slide 13 - advanced options

slide 13 - advanced options ←

14:39:55 <msmith> alanr: question about time, can we focus on questions now

Alan Ruttenberg: question about time, can we focus on questions now ←

14:40:12 <msmith> zhe: ok, i'll quickly browse remaining slides, then go to questions

Zhe Wu: ok, i'll quickly browse remaining slides, then go to questions ←

14:40:44 <bijan> BTW, the survey paper mentioned in the talk on slide 9 is at: http://www.mindswap.org/papers/2006/survey.pdf

Bijan Parsia: BTW, the survey paper mentioned in the talk on slide 9 is at: http://www.mindswap.org/papers/2006/survey.pdf ←

14:41:59 <bijan> It has more fine grained analyses, including in terms of AL, ALHF, SHIF, and SHOIN, on the one hand, and RDFS(DL), DL-Lite, EL++, and "non-tractable"

Bijan Parsia: It has more fine grained analyses, including in terms of AL, ALHF, SHIF, and SHOIN, on the one hand, and RDFS(DL), DL-Lite, EL++, and "non-tractable" ←

14:42:39 <bijan> It also discusses "repairable" OWL Full ontologies and (sketchily) how the non-repairable ones fall into OWL Full

Bijan Parsia: It also discusses "repairable" OWL Full ontologies and (sketchily) how the non-repairable ones fall into OWL Full ←

14:43:33 <bijan> It's not at all clear to me how to map the analyses in that paper to OWL Prime (in part because I don't understand OWL Prime)

Bijan Parsia: It's not at all clear to me how to map the analyses in that paper to OWL Prime (in part because I don't understand OWL Prime) ←

14:44:00 <msmith> slide - implementation in rules

slide - implementation in rules ←

14:44:12 <msmith> zhe: I want to stress that we did not handle one property at a time

Zhe Wu: I want to stress that we did not handle one property at a time ←

14:44:59 <hendler> paper also took a DL approach to the world, the raw data showed the great bulk of the stuff out there, pre-change, was low expressivity RDF or RDF with a little OWL - it's where the RDF 3.0 proposal came from

James Hendler: paper also took a DL approach to the world, the raw data showed the great bulk of the stuff out there, pre-change, was low expressivity RDF or RDF with a little OWL - it's where the RDF 3.0 proposal came from ←

14:45:46 <msmith> zhe: I'll jump to query answering slide

Zhe Wu: I'll jump to query answering slide ←

14:46:34 <msmith> ...that's all I wanted to cover, open for questions

...that's all I wanted to cover, open for questions ←

14:46:53 <bijan> Uhm...I don't knwo what you mean by "raw data" and "great bulk"

Bijan Parsia: Uhm...I don't knwo what you mean by "raw data" and "great bulk" ←

14:47:18 <msmith> ian: the tractable fragments doc describes fragments with known database mapping.  wondering why you didn't choose one of those

Ian Horrocks: the tractable fragments doc describes fragments with known database mapping. wondering why you didn't choose one of those ←

14:47:42 <bijan> In fact, I don't see that anything I said had anything to do with what fell into RDFS or not

Bijan Parsia: In fact, I don't see that anything I said had anything to do with what fell into RDFS or not ←

14:47:53 <msmith> zhe: we started by asking existing customers what they needed.  most told us they just needed simple extension into owl from rdf

Zhe Wu: we started by asking existing customers what they needed. most told us they just needed simple extension into owl from rdf ←

14:47:54 <bijan> The repair had mostly to do with the nominally owl full documents.

Bijan Parsia: The repair had mostly to do with the nominally owl full documents. ←

14:48:25 <msmith> ... pretty much the approach was driven by customers and need to implement efficiently

... pretty much the approach was driven by customers and need to implement efficiently ←

14:49:02 <bijan> In fact, if you look at table 2 and table 3, the second part of your assertion is at least questionable

Bijan Parsia: In fact, if you look at table 2 and table 3, the second part of your assertion is at least questionable ←

14:49:09 <msmith> ian: but, customers said you needed something small (rdf + a bit) which is exactly what the fragments are.  instead you chose a large fragment and implemented incompletely

Ian Horrocks: but, customers said you needed something small (rdf + a bit) which is exactly what the fragments are. instead you chose a large fragment and implemented incompletely ←

14:49:46 <msmith> zhe: so far, for those other fragments we have not found a complete rule set (except pdstar)

Zhe Wu: so far, for those other fragments we have not found a complete rule set (except pdstar) ←

14:49:58 <sandro> (I find the "small fragment" vs "large fragment" language very confusing, because I don't know what the metric is.    large number of terms?   large number of users?  large implementation effort needed?

Sandro Hawke: (I find the "small fragment" vs "large fragment" language very confusing, because I don't know what the metric is. large number of terms? large number of users? large implementation effort needed? ←

14:50:36 <bijan> Expressivity, I think

Bijan Parsia: Expressivity, I think ←

14:50:38 <bijan> """Of the 307 OWL Full documents that can be patched, 63% become OWL Lite documents, and just 37% become OWL DL. Two observations can be made. First, The majority (91%) of the OWL Full documents (from Table 2) can be turned into a decideable portions of the languages by adding type triples. Secondly, the majority of RDFS documents (95%) can transition to OWL easily by adding type triples and use OWL vocabulary instead of RDFS vocabulary."""

Bijan Parsia: """Of the 307 OWL Full documents that can be patched, 63% become OWL Lite documents, and just 37% become OWL DL. Two observations can be made. First, The majority (91%) of the OWL Full documents (from Table 2) can be turned into a decideable portions of the languages by adding type triples. Secondly, the majority of RDFS documents (95%) can transition to OWL easily by adding type triples and use OWL vocabulary instead of RDFS vocabulary.""" ←

14:50:44 <msmith> uli: I want to echo ian and point out that you don't allow intersection, but a clever user would have it

Uli Sattler: I want to echo ian and point out that you don't allow intersection, but a clever user would have it ←

14:51:00 <msmith> ...and to be complete complexity becomes a problem

...and to be complete complexity becomes a problem ←

14:51:11 <msmith> alan: they're not trying to be complete

Alan Ruttenberg: they're not trying to be complete ←

14:51:17 <pascalhitzler> the mentioned paper by ter Horst seems to be the following: Herman J. ter Horst, Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary, Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide WebVolume 3, Issues 2-3, , Selcted Papers from the International Semantic Web Conference, 2004 - ISWC, 2004, October 2005, Pages 79-115.

Pascal Hitzler: the mentioned paper by ter Horst seems to be the following: Herman J. ter Horst, Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary, Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide WebVolume 3, Issues 2-3, , Selcted Papers from the International Semantic Web Conference, 2004 - ISWC, 2004, October 2005, Pages 79-115. ←

14:51:17 <pascalhitzler> (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B758F-4H16P4Y-1/2/d039e4784b224e95aafca856ecfb1edb)

Pascal Hitzler: (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B758F-4H16P4Y-1/2/d039e4784b224e95aafca856ecfb1edb) ←

14:51:17 <pascalhitzler> Keywords: Ontology; Semantics; Entailment; Completeness; Computational complexity

Scribe problem: the name 'Keywords' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown Keywords: Ontology; Semantics; Entailment; Completeness; Computational complexity [ Scribe Assist by Pascal Hitzler ] ←

14:51:17 <sandro> Uil: Complete with respect to one reasoning problem is sound with respect to another.     [[ In OWL?  Really?? ]]

Scribe problem: the name 'Uil' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown Uil: Complete with respect to one reasoning problem is sound with respect to another. [[ In OWL? Really?? ]] [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

14:52:03 <msmith> boris: echo ian, observes that fragments exist which can be implemented with a set of complete rules

Boris Motik: echo ian, observes that fragments exist which can be implemented with a set of complete rules ←

14:52:45 <msmith> bernardo: i'm worried about soundness and worried about what "sound and complete" means here.  I don't understand the semantics

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: i'm worried about soundness and worried about what "sound and complete" means here. I don't understand the semantics ←

14:53:07 <msmith> ...b/c you haven't implemented the OWL semantics, you've chosen some of the OWL DL vocabulary

...b/c you haven't implemented the OWL semantics, you've chosen some of the OWL DL vocabulary ←

14:53:38 <bijan> From a spec perspective, this fragment seems to be *implementation* defined...which is a bit worrisome

Bijan Parsia: From a spec perspective, this fragment seems to be *implementation* defined...which is a bit worrisome ←

14:53:49 <msmith> zhe: we do care about completeness, but don't consider it critical

Zhe Wu: we do care about completeness, but don't consider it critical ←

14:54:15 <msmith> ... completeness is evaluated w.r.t. query answering for some benchmarks, etc.

... completeness is evaluated w.r.t. query answering for some benchmarks, etc. ←

14:54:34 <bijan> My test for this would be, without looking at thier rules or using your rule engine per se, can i write an implementation from a publically available description?

Bijan Parsia: My test for this would be, without looking at thier rules or using your rule engine per se, can i write an implementation from a publically available description? ←

14:54:41 <msmith> jeremy: what I hear from customers echos Zhe's comments.

Jeremy Carroll: what I hear from customers echos Zhe's comments. ←

14:54:58 <msmith> ...I note that much of the questioning is hostile

...I note that much of the questioning is hostile ←

14:55:00 <hendler> I would point out that DB communities tend to do language/sublanguage without model theories very comfortably

James Hendler: I would point out that DB communities tend to do language/sublanguage without model theories very comfortably ←

14:55:01 <msmith> alan: I agree

Alan Ruttenberg: I agree ←

14:55:18 <bijan> I would disagree with the assessment of tone...is it even relevant?

Bijan Parsia: I would disagree with the assessment of tone...is it even relevant? ←

14:55:24 <clu> I would strengthen Boris claim and say that most (if not all) other fragments admit forward chaining, which is sound and even complete,

Scribe problem: the name 'clu' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown clu: I would strengthen Boris claim and say that most (if not all) other fragments admit forward chaining, which is sound and even complete, ←

14:55:26 <clu> and the rules are easily derived.

Unknown clu: and the rules are easily derived. ←

14:55:36 <msmith> jeremy: that may be b/c much of the questioning is coming from members with different user groups

Jeremy Carroll: that may be b/c much of the questioning is coming from members with different user groups ←

14:55:44 <hendler> I also find that Web 3.0 companies, including the folks interacting with us on the billion triple challenge, also come from the perspective Zhe represents

James Hendler: I also find that Web 3.0 companies, including the folks interacting with us on the billion triple challenge, also come from the perspective Zhe represents ←

14:56:22 <hendler> http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2007/12/06/the-semantic-web-billion-triples-challenge-at-iswc-2008/

James Hendler: http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2007/12/06/the-semantic-web-billion-triples-challenge-at-iswc-2008/ ←

14:56:42 <msmith> ian: it wasn't intended to be hostile.  I was trying to understand whether Oracle would be interested in more well understood and explainable fragments

Ian Horrocks: it wasn't intended to be hostile. I was trying to understand whether Oracle would be interested in more well understood and explainable fragments ←

14:57:05 <sandro> Ian: DL Lite, not PD*

Ian Horrocks: DL Lite, not PD* [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

14:57:06 <msmith> ...e.g., dl-lite which can be implemented in a database system, and also in a rule system

...e.g., dl-lite which can be implemented in a database system, and also in a rule system ←

14:57:14 <clu> Same applied to EL++

Unknown clu: Same applied to EL++ ←

14:57:26 <clu> applied => applies

Unknown clu: applied => applies ←

14:57:59 <msmith> discussion of PD* soundness and completeness in a rule based implementation

discussion of PD* soundness and completeness in a rule based implementation ←

14:58:25 <hendler> fwiw, those fragments got little or no traction with the folks I consult for - they care about parallelizability and performance over the more understood stuf - their work is largely heuristic anyway

James Hendler: fwiw, those fragments got little or no traction with the folks I consult for - they care about parallelizability and performance over the more understood stuf - their work is largely heuristic anyway ←

14:58:25 <msmith> ian: the problem with PD* is that it doesn't implement a subset of OWL, it implements PD*

Ian Horrocks: the problem with PD* is that it doesn't implement a subset of OWL, it implements PD* ←

14:58:41 <msmith> jeremy: it depends on what you mean by fragment of OWL

Jeremy Carroll: it depends on what you mean by fragment of OWL ←

14:59:28 <msmith> alan: I hear interest in co-ordinating on database fragments with Oracle

Alan Ruttenberg: I hear interest in co-ordinating on database fragments with Oracle ←

14:59:30 <Uli> Zhe, I might have sounded hostile, which wasn't intended: some of us simply have a specific reading for certain words like "reasoner", and I couldn't see how this could be possible.

Uli Sattler: Zhe, I might have sounded hostile, which wasn't intended: some of us simply have a specific reading for certain words like "reasoner", and I couldn't see how this could be possible. ←

15:00:01 <msmith> bijan: to standardize a fragment, we need a well defined semantics that we can all understand

Bijan Parsia: to standardize a fragment, we need a well defined semantics that we can all understand ←

15:00:19 <bijan> Correction to scribe: I didn't say *semantics* I said *specification*

Bijan Parsia: Correction to scribe: I didn't say *semantics* I said *specification* ←

15:00:27 <Uli> Zhe, also, if you want to see how IntersectionOf can be simulated with someValues and AllValues, ask Carsten.

Uli Sattler: Zhe, also, if you want to see how IntersectionOf can be simulated with someValues and AllValues, ask Carsten. ←

15:00:31 <bijan> we need an *implementation independant* spec

Bijan Parsia: we need an *implementation independant* spec ←

15:00:31 <hendler> What I am arguing for is that there are some important communities out there to whom the fragments they care about are not those tied to Uli's definition of reasoner

James Hendler: What I am arguing for is that there are some important communities out there to whom the fragments they care about are not those tied to Uli's definition of reasoner ←

15:00:51 <msmith> Topic: Fragments: (Tractable) Fragments and other Fragment Proposals

4. Fragments: (Tractable) Fragments and other Fragment Proposals

15:01:16 <sandro> hendler, people are not really paying attention to IRC.

Sandro Hawke: hendler, people are not really paying attention to IRC. ←

15:01:17 <Uli> Jim, I appreciate this -- but "reasoner" was used on Zhe's slides, and i simply wanted to know in which sense.

Uli Sattler: Jim, I appreciate this -- but "reasoner" was used on Zhe's slides, and i simply wanted to know in which sense. ←

15:01:30 <msmith> bernardo presenting from slides in person

bernardo presenting from slides in person ←

15:02:05 <hendler> Bijan - agree with needing a spec, but I'd point out most programming languages get by just fine with operational semantics - in fact, since you implement Pellet in JAva, in a certain sense you're trusting that they get it right in some sense -

James Hendler: Bijan - agree with needing a spec, but I'd point out most programming languages get by just fine with operational semantics - in fact, since you implement Pellet in JAva, in a certain sense you're trusting that they get it right in some sense - ←

15:02:24 <msmith> bernardo: motivation of owl-lite was easier owl.  b/c owl dl and full are rich and complex.

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: motivation of owl-lite was easier owl. b/c owl dl and full are rich and complex. ←

15:02:46 <msmith> ...problem is owl-lite is broken b/c it doesn't address interactions between constructors

...problem is owl-lite is broken b/c it doesn't address interactions between constructors ←

15:03:02 <Uli> Jim, I guess what we would like to see is a consensus of what we mean by "Tool/reasoner X supports feature Y"

Uli Sattler: Jim, I guess what we would like to see is a consensus of what we mean by "Tool/reasoner X supports feature Y" ←

15:03:30 <IanH_> Bernardo's talk in email and at http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/F2F-Fragments.pdf

Ian Horrocks: Bernardo's talk in email and at http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/F2F-Fragments.pdf ←

15:03:55 <msmith> bernardo: most features held out of owl-lite can be recovered through "back doors"

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: most features held out of owl-lite can be recovered through "back doors" ←

15:03:56 <bijan> First, I'm not saying anything about the specification style....but at the moment we don't have a clear spec. I don't know where to start other than by looking at Oracle's implementation

Bijan Parsia: First, I'm not saying anything about the specification style....but at the moment we don't have a clear spec. I don't know where to start other than by looking at Oracle's implementation ←

15:03:56 <hendler> Uli, how do we show "Java" supports "begin/end loops"?  that seems to be something in the real world that we could model for some (not all) of our work

James Hendler: Uli, how do we show "Java" supports "begin/end loops"? that seems to be something in the real world that we could model for some (not all) of our work ←

15:04:39 <msmith> bernardo: existing document includes fragments which

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: existing document includes fragments which ←

15:04:44 <hendler> this is the point!!  thw Owl language features all have operational semantics that are good enough for many people in many situations - so when Oracle says we support X, why do we need more than that

James Hendler: this is the point!! thw Owl language features all have operational semantics that are good enough for many people in many situations - so when Oracle says we support X, why do we need more than that ←

15:04:48 <bijan> Second, there are differences between programming languages and ontology/data modeling languages. I hear your point, but find the analogy rather unconvincing.

Bijan Parsia: Second, there are differences between programming languages and ontology/data modeling languages. I hear your point, but find the analogy rather unconvincing. ←

15:04:57 <Uli> Jim, I would never dream of trying to do this - but i would like to try to say what it means for a reasoner to support feature X

Uli Sattler: Jim, I would never dream of trying to do this - but i would like to try to say what it means for a reasoner to support feature X ←

15:04:58 <msmith> .... are well understood, documented, etc.

.... are well understood, documented, etc. ←

15:05:01 <bijan> A precursor to OWL Lite giving some of the rationale: http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/~sst/is/WebOntologyLanguage/harmelen.htm

Bijan Parsia: A precursor to OWL Lite giving some of the rationale: http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/~sst/is/WebOntologyLanguage/harmelen.htm ←

15:05:30 <bijan> Er...precursor discussion

Bijan Parsia: Er...precursor discussion ←

15:05:39 <hendler> What I'm arguing is that RDFS 3.0, or OWL Prime, might be better looked at less as ontology languages (leave that to OWL DL) then as useful data analysis languages

James Hendler: What I'm arguing is that RDFS 3.0, or OWL Prime, might be better looked at less as ontology languages (leave that to OWL DL) then as useful data analysis languages ←

15:06:03 <msmith> bernardo: we don't expect users to go over recent literature on tractable fragments, so wanted a single document

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: we don't expect users to go over recent literature on tractable fragments, so wanted a single document ←

15:06:05 <bijan> But I don't see why "useful data analysis langauges" don't need a clear spec

Bijan Parsia: But I don't see why "useful data analysis langauges" don't need a clear spec ←

15:06:10 <hendler> this is what my nose is rubbed in when I attend the Sem Tech conference and places like that

James Hendler: this is what my nose is rubbed in when I attend the Sem Tech conference and places like that ←

15:06:27 <hendler> bijan - the question is what is the definition of a clear spec.

James Hendler: bijan - the question is what is the definition of a clear spec. ←

15:06:43 <msmith> bernardo: most of the languages I will describe are "families" of languages, we decided to keep 1 from each

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: most of the languages I will describe are "families" of languages, we decided to keep 1 from each ←

15:06:49 <bijan> Furthermore, model theory is pretty easy way to specify something...at the moment, no one has proposed anythign else

Bijan Parsia: Furthermore, model theory is pretty easy way to specify something...at the moment, no one has proposed anythign else ←

15:06:51 <Zhe> if there is a set of rules defined as those in RDFS spec, is that clear?

Zhe Wu: if there is a set of rules defined as those in RDFS spec, is that clear? ←

15:07:01 <msmith> bernardo: 1st is EL family

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: 1st is EL family ←

15:07:07 <bijan> Zhe, perhaps

Bijan Parsia: Zhe, perhaps ←

15:07:13 <bijan> note that they are informative

Bijan Parsia: note that they are informative ←

15:07:14 <msmith> ...used in bio-medical already

...used in bio-medical already ←

15:07:29 <bijan> But I would be interested in looking at such

Bijan Parsia: But I would be interested in looking at such ←

15:07:33 <Zhe> they may be informative, however, that is how most people understand semantics

Zhe Wu: they may be informative, however, that is how most people understand semantics ←

15:07:40 <hendler> but there are no model theories for many things, and model theory is not the only way to spec other things - like these rule-based examples

James Hendler: but there are no model theories for many things, and model theory is not the only way to spec other things - like these rule-based examples ←

15:07:44 <Uli> Zhe, we would call this "operational semantics" or such like and would be split about how clear this is

Uli Sattler: Zhe, we would call this "operational semantics" or such like and would be split about how clear this is ←

15:07:45 <bijan> Understand != spec

Bijan Parsia: Understand != spec ←

15:07:53 <msmith> bernardo: stress that these fragments are not academic exercises, there are direct applications to existing ontologies

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: stress that these fragments are not academic exercises, there are direct applications to existing ontologies ←

15:08:04 <bijan> Again, my test is can I write an interoperable implementation without looking at your implementation

Bijan Parsia: Again, my test is can I write an interoperable implementation without looking at your implementation ←

15:08:13 <Uli> +1 Bijan's inequality

Uli Sattler: +1 Bijan's inequality ←

15:08:17 <bijan> At least my first test

Bijan Parsia: At least my first test ←

15:08:30 <hendler> i.e. Inverse(A,B) IFF  s A p -> p B s

James Hendler: i.e. Inverse(A,B) IFF s A p -> p B s ←

15:08:37 <msmith> bernardo: 2nd is DL-Lite family

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: 2nd is DL-Lite family ←

15:08:39 <hendler> seems like a fine definition of inverse

James Hendler: seems like a fine definition of inverse ←

15:08:42 <Zhe> if we agree on a set of rules, then interoperability is not an issue

Zhe Wu: if we agree on a set of rules, then interoperability is not an issue ←

15:08:49 <bijan> Not at all since I don't know what you -> means

Bijan Parsia: Not at all since I don't know what you -> means ←

15:08:55 <msmith> ... designed for large number of instances in database technology

... designed for large number of instances in database technology ←

15:08:58 <bijan> Zhe, no

Bijan Parsia: Zhe, no ←

15:09:04 <bijan> Not clear at all

Bijan Parsia: Not clear at all ←

15:09:18 <bijan> For example, i might no use those rules *in* my implementation

Bijan Parsia: For example, i might no use those rules *in* my implementation ←

15:09:24 <Zhe> using Hendler's example rule,

Zhe Wu: using Hendler's example rule, ←

15:09:27 <bijan> I might want to use a very different technique

Bijan Parsia: I might want to use a very different technique ←

15:09:37 <Zhe> if we agree on that, then we are interoperable

Zhe Wu: if we agree on that, then we are interoperable ←

15:09:56 <bijan> Is that rule controposable?

Bijan Parsia: Is that rule controposable? ←

15:10:04 <Uli> The reading of rules, for example, differ in whether you have contraposition or not

Uli Sattler: The reading of rules, for example, differ in whether you have contraposition or not ←

15:10:07 <bijan> Was it meant as <->?

Bijan Parsia: Was it meant as <->? ←

15:10:20 <hendler> Bijan, that is either easily defined, or can be left to philosophers trying to write PhDs, in the real world, lots og languages work this way - but if you want something better - okay, we'll use SCL

James Hendler: Bijan, that is either easily defined, or can be left to philosophers trying to write PhDs, in the real world, lots og languages work this way - but if you want something better - okay, we'll use SCL ←

15:10:27 <Uli> and whether you "apply" it to all named individuals or to *all* individuals

Uli Sattler: and whether you "apply" it to all named individuals or to *all* individuals ←

15:10:31 <bijan> hendler, that's not true

Bijan Parsia: hendler, that's not true ←

15:10:50 <bijan> But c'mon, that wasn't even a partial spec

Bijan Parsia: But c'mon, that wasn't even a partial spec ←

15:10:57 <bijan> And it was of one of the easiest bits

Bijan Parsia: And it was of one of the easiest bits ←

15:10:58 <msmith> bernardo: approach is similar to what zhe described, do work in tbox, then pass to database system for query answering

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: approach is similar to what zhe described, do work in tbox, then pass to database system for query answering ←

15:10:58 <bijan> Inverse

Bijan Parsia: Inverse ←

15:10:59 <Uli> so, I agree that your defintion of inverse seems clear, but when you want to implement it,  there are questions coming up

Uli Sattler: so, I agree that your defintion of inverse seems clear, but when you want to implement it, there are questions coming up ←

15:10:59 <Achille> could someone send  Bernardo's presentation to the public mailing list?

Achille Fokoue: could someone send Bernardo's presentation to the public mailing list? ←

15:11:02 <bijan> Consider complementOf

Bijan Parsia: Consider complementOf ←

15:11:06 <hendler> ok, KIF

James Hendler: ok, KIF ←

15:11:11 <bijan> English would do

Bijan Parsia: English would do ←

15:11:12 <hendler> I agree with Zhe

James Hendler: I agree with Zhe ←

15:11:29 <hendler> complementOf not in RDFS 3.0 for precisely that reason

James Hendler: complementOf not in RDFS 3.0 for precisely that reason ←

15:11:30 <Zakim> -Meeting_Room

Scribe problem: the name 'Meeting_Room' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Zakim IRC Bot: -Meeting_Room ←

15:11:36 <bijan> It was in OWL Prime

Bijan Parsia: It was in OWL Prime ←

15:11:38 <ivan> Achille: this is done

Achille Fokoue: this is done [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ] ←

15:11:47 <sandro> room is calling back.

Sandro Hawke: room is calling back. ←

15:11:48 <Zhe> i could not hear anything

Zhe Wu: i could not hear anything ←

15:11:49 <Uli> Again, I find englisch often clearer than things like "->' or such like

Uli Sattler: Again, I find englisch often clearer than things like "->' or such like ←

15:11:52 <Evan> Or did you mean CLIF from the ISO standard, Common Logic

Evan Wallace: Or did you mean CLIF from the ISO standard, Common Logic ←

15:11:58 <hendler> English ok w/me

James Hendler: English ok w/me ←

15:12:11 <msmith> carsten: reiterate bernardo, but contrast with zhe's approach.  dl-lite change the ontology to use database technology, not change the database technology

Scribe problem: the name 'carsten' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown carsten: reiterate bernardo, but contrast with zhe's approach. dl-lite change the ontology to use database technology, not change the database technology ←

15:12:12 <Zakim> -Zhe

Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←

15:12:13 <pascalhitzler> would be nice to get a literature reference to OWLPrima - the description on the slides was not clear enough

Pascal Hitzler: would be nice to get a literature reference to OWLPrima - the description on the slides was not clear enough ←

15:12:29 <pascalhitzler> I could find nothing on the web defining OWLPrime

Pascal Hitzler: I could find nothing on the web defining OWLPrime ←

15:12:29 <bijan> In any case, I'm asking for a spec. We can beat on the spec and if we find problems we find problems

Bijan Parsia: In any case, I'm asking for a spec. We can beat on the spec and if we find problems we find problems ←

15:12:30 <sandro> Zhe, we are dialing back in.

Sandro Hawke: Zhe, we are dialing back in. ←

15:12:35 <bijan> If we don't we don't

Bijan Parsia: If we don't we don't ←

15:12:36 <msmith> alan: another difference is in oracle you can query for classes, in dl-lite only instances

Alan Ruttenberg: another difference is in oracle you can query for classes, in dl-lite only instances ←

15:12:37 <Zakim> +Zhe

Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe ←

15:12:37 <Achille> I am no longer hearing anything on the phone

Achille Fokoue: I am no longer hearing anything on the phone ←

15:12:40 <hendler> but anyway, the point I'm making is not to oppose model theory - but the problem is to get the model heory right we have to put restrictions on the languge that some of us cannot live with easily

James Hendler: but anyway, the point I'm making is not to oppose model theory - but the problem is to get the model heory right we have to put restrictions on the languge that some of us cannot live with easily ←

15:12:56 <bijan> I don't know that that's true

Bijan Parsia: I don't know that that's true ←

15:13:02 <Zhe> I just did. still I hear nothing

Zhe Wu: I just did. still I hear nothing ←

15:13:07 <bmotik> Pascal, pD* has been described here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/366474250nl35412/

Boris Motik: Pascal, pD* has been described here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/366474250nl35412/ ←

15:13:07 <msmith> bernardo: you can do tbox reasoning, but designed for abox answering.

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: you can do tbox reasoning, but designed for abox answering. ←

15:13:09 <Uli> Jim, I disagree:

Uli Sattler: Jim, I disagree: ←

15:13:09 <sandro> WE ARE STILL DISCONNECTED

Sandro Hawke: WE ARE STILL DISCONNECTED ←

15:13:13 <hendler> this is why OWL LITE is a subset of DL - not of Full, so there is no fragments for Full - which is what i often get asked for

James Hendler: this is why OWL LITE is a subset of DL - not of Full, so there is no fragments for Full - which is what i often get asked for ←

15:13:16 <Achille> should we dial in again

Achille Fokoue: should we dial in again ←

15:13:24 <sandro> NO ONLY THE MEETING ROOM NEEDS TO REDIAL

Sandro Hawke: NO ONLY THE MEETING ROOM NEEDS TO REDIAL ←

15:13:26 <Zakim> +??P11

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←

15:13:28 <Uli> Jim, model theorey doesn't restrict things?

Uli Sattler: Jim, model theorey doesn't restrict things? ←

15:13:32 <Zhe> it is working now

Zhe Wu: it is working now ←

15:13:37 <sandro> Zakim, ??P11 is Meeting_Room

Sandro Hawke: Zakim, ??P11 is Meeting_Room ←

15:13:37 <Zakim> +Meeting_Room; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Meeting_Room; got it ←

15:13:41 <bijan> I'm very skeptical about it, but Id on't knwo because I don't know what the current fragment actually *is*

Bijan Parsia: I'm very skeptical about it, but Id on't knwo because I don't know what the current fragment actually *is* ←

15:13:43 <sandro> CAN YOU HEAR US NOW?

Sandro Hawke: CAN YOU HEAR US NOW? ←

15:13:46 <Achille> yes

Achille Fokoue: yes ←

15:13:50 <Achille> thanks!

Achille Fokoue: thanks! ←

15:13:52 <jluciano> yes

Joanne Luciano: yes ←

15:14:01 <hendler> Uli, so we could define the langauge fragment based on other concerns and then dfine it via model theory - that doesn't bother me at all - I'd be fine with that

James Hendler: Uli, so we could define the langauge fragment based on other concerns and then dfine it via model theory - that doesn't bother me at all - I'd be fine with that ←

15:14:06 <msmith> bernardo: I picked the particular dl-lite language b/c it is between rdfs schema and owl dl

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: I picked the particular dl-lite language b/c it is between rdfs schema and owl dl ←

15:14:16 <msmith> ... next is Horn-SHIQ

... next is Horn-SHIQ ←

15:14:23 <bijan> But I'm open to being convinced otherwise...but I'm more convincable by a proof of concept (at least) than high level discussion

Bijan Parsia: But I'm open to being convinced otherwise...but I'm more convincable by a proof of concept (at least) than high level discussion ←

15:14:29 <msmith> ...can reason without disjunctions

...can reason without disjunctions ←

15:14:35 <Zhe> is there a scalable implementation of dl-lite? commercial tool?

Zhe Wu: is there a scalable implementation of dl-lite? commercial tool? ←

15:14:38 <Uli> Jim, what would you define via model theory? The fragment or its semantics?

Uli Sattler: Jim, what would you define via model theory? The fragment or its semantics? ←

15:14:42 <msmith> ...and low complexity for query answering

...and low complexity for query answering ←

15:14:44 <bijan> Zhe, to the first, yes

Bijan Parsia: Zhe, to the first, yes ←

15:14:47 <bijan> To the second, no

Bijan Parsia: To the second, no ←

15:14:50 <hendler> so Oracle has implemented OWL prime - what did I miss?

James Hendler: so Oracle has implemented OWL prime - what did I miss? ←

15:14:50 <bijan> QuOnto

Bijan Parsia: QuOnto ←

15:14:52 <bijan> (Not yet)

Bijan Parsia: (Not yet) ←

15:14:59 <Uli> Zhe, yes ther is, I think: search for Quonto

Uli Sattler: Zhe, yes ther is, I think: search for Quonto ←

15:15:02 <bijan> Implementation != specification

Bijan Parsia: Implementation != specification ←

15:15:08 <hendler> Uli - whichever you want - I'm not going to need to read that document anyway ;-)

James Hendler: Uli - whichever you want - I'm not going to need to read that document anyway ;-) ←

15:15:27 <bijan> And this is true for programming langauges as well

Bijan Parsia: And this is true for programming langauges as well ←

15:15:45 <Zhe> Uli: what kind of tool? what is the scalability?

Uli Sattler: what kind of tool? what is the scalability? [ Scribe Assist by Zhe Wu ] ←

15:15:46 <Uli> Jim, I think we simply disagree what it means to *implement* a fragment

Uli Sattler: Jim, I think we simply disagree what it means to *implement* a fragment ←

15:15:52 <bijan> There are langauges defined by *specs* (including Java, Common Lisp, C, C++) and those defined by *implementation* Perl, Python

Bijan Parsia: There are langauges defined by *specs* (including Java, Common Lisp, C, C++) and those defined by *implementation* Perl, Python ←

15:15:53 <msmith> bernardo: other fragments dlp as a bridge to rules

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: other fragments dlp as a bridge to rules ←

15:15:57 <bijan> (at least historically)

Bijan Parsia: (at least historically) ←

15:16:09 <msmith> ... but it may be more "hacky" that horn-shiq

... but it may be more "hacky" that horn-shiq ←

15:16:24 <bijan> So, frankly, I don't want to port Oracles implementation. That's probably not even legal

Bijan Parsia: So, frankly, I don't want to port Oracles implementation. That's probably not even legal ←

15:16:33 <Uli> Zhe, it is as scalable as it can get:

Uli Sattler: Zhe, it is as scalable as it can get: ←

15:16:34 <hendler> fine - I want a fragment of OWL that is defined by *specs*

James Hendler: fine - I want a fragment of OWL that is defined by *specs* ←

15:16:43 <bijan> I want a specification sufficient for independant implementation

Bijan Parsia: I want a specification sufficient for independant implementation ←

15:16:58 <Uli> Zhe, because it translates queries into SQL queries and leaves everything in the DB.

Uli Sattler: Zhe, because it translates queries into SQL queries and leaves everything in the DB. ←

15:17:03 <msmith> bernardo: questions for wg

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: questions for wg ←

15:17:07 <clu> Zhe:  I understand that you would like to do forward chaining. A lot of fragments can be captured in a sound

Zhe Wu: I understand that you would like to do forward chaining. A lot of fragments can be captured in a sound [ Scribe Assist by Unknown clu ] ←

15:17:09 <clu>          (and even complete) way with this technique. I would like to learn what is your idea of tractability and

Unknown clu: (and even complete) way with this technique. I would like to learn what is your idea of tractability and ←

15:17:10 <clu>          scalability. Is it forward chaining per se, or is it a rule set that does not produce too many new facts?

Unknown clu: scalability. Is it forward chaining per se, or is it a rule set that does not produce too many new facts? ←

15:17:11 <msmith> ....1 do we fix owl lite

....1 do we fix owl lite ←

15:17:11 <bijan> But jim, if the specs happen to do it by model theory and capture the language you want, what do you care?

Bijan Parsia: But jim, if the specs happen to do it by model theory and capture the language you want, what do you care? ←

15:17:23 <msmith> ....2 does that mean select one of these fragments

....2 does that mean select one of these fragments ←

15:17:34 <msmith> ....3 or do we present a menu of fragments?

....3 or do we present a menu of fragments? ←

15:17:43 <bijan> If the specs are clear enough for me I don't necessarily require model theory ( though it helps so we can understand the relation to existing OWL specs)

Bijan Parsia: If the specs are clear enough for me I don't necessarily require model theory ( though it helps so we can understand the relation to existing OWL specs) ←

15:17:55 <msmith> bernardo: not in slides - do we want semantic subsets of owl full?

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: not in slides - do we want semantic subsets of owl full? ←

15:18:07 <hendler> bijan - the poiunt is I don't care - and I said that - what I care is what is in the fragment first, how to define it second

James Hendler: bijan - the poiunt is I don't care - and I said that - what I care is what is in the fragment first, how to define it second ←

15:18:22 <msmith> ....e.g., owl full versions of these fragments? do we care about complexity of the full fragments?  about compatibility?

....e.g., owl full versions of these fragments? do we care about complexity of the full fragments? about compatibility? ←

15:18:22 <Zhe> Clu: the scability and performan requires are determined by the market.

Scribe problem: the name 'Clu' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown Clu: the scability and performan requires are determined by the market. [ Scribe Assist by Zhe Wu ] ←

15:18:26 <bijan> How do you know what's *in the fragment* without a definitio of what the fragmetn is?

Bijan Parsia: How do you know what's *in the fragment* without a definitio of what the fragmetn is? ←

15:18:32 <bijan> What's the difference?

Bijan Parsia: What's the difference? ←

15:18:49 <Zhe> Clu: people are asking for hundreds of millions of triples and beyond

Unknown Clu: people are asking for hundreds of millions of triples and beyond [ Scribe Assist by Zhe Wu ] ←

15:18:52 <sandro> zakim, who is muted?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is muted? ←

15:18:52 <Zakim> I see no one muted

Zakim IRC Bot: I see no one muted ←

15:18:59 <sandro> zakim, who is on the phone?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the phone? ←

15:18:59 <Zakim> On the phone I see Joanne_Luciano, Achille, Zhe, Meeting_Room

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Joanne_Luciano, Achille, Zhe, Meeting_Room ←

15:19:10 <sandro> hendler, please stop talkin on IRC.

Sandro Hawke: hendler, please stop talkin on IRC. ←

15:19:24 <hendler> Bijan - you're arguing circularly - but I can cut through it - I have created a wiki page with a description of exactly which language features I want to include  - how to define it in a spec is something I'm happy to discuss

James Hendler: Bijan - you're arguing circularly - but I can cut through it - I have created a wiki page with a description of exactly which language features I want to include - how to define it in a spec is something I'm happy to discuss ←

15:19:28 <msmith> ivan: request to drop side conversations

Ivan Herman: request to drop side conversations ←

15:19:36 <msmith> ... and focus

... and focus ←

15:19:54 <sandro> Jim, we're talkin in the room now, and need to focus on this discussion in the voice channel, so no more chatter on IRC, please.

Sandro Hawke: Jim, we're talkin in the room now, and need to focus on this discussion in the voice channel, so no more chatter on IRC, please. ←

15:20:00 <msmith> alan: little time, can we start with semantic subset of owl full?

Alan Ruttenberg: little time, can we start with semantic subset of owl full? ←

15:20:37 <msmith> ian: semantic subset means no change to syntax, but sanction smaller set of conclusions

Ian Horrocks: semantic subset means no change to syntax, but sanction smaller set of conclusions ←

15:21:13 <hendler> q

James Hendler: q ←

15:21:19 <hendler> q+

James Hendler: q+ ←

15:21:20 <alanr> gocha

Alan Ruttenberg: gocha ←

15:21:20 <msmith> jeremy: example is pd*, which specifies what semantic rules are thrown away

Jeremy Carroll: example is pd*, which specifies what semantic rules are thrown away ←

15:21:33 <hendler> q-

James Hendler: q- ←

15:21:35 <msmith> peter: pd* throws away *parts* of rules

Scribe problem: the name 'peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown peter: pd* throws away *parts* of rules ←

15:21:47 <msmith> ian: this is picky

Ian Horrocks: this is picky ←

15:22:02 <sandro> hendler, are you able to call on the phone?

Sandro Hawke: hendler, are you able to call on the phone? ←

15:22:09 <hendler> sandro, no.

James Hendler: sandro, no. ←

15:22:12 <msmith> alan: how comfortable are people with this type of fragment

Alan Ruttenberg: how comfortable are people with this type of fragment ←

15:22:22 <msmith> ... does anyone want to say this is a lousy idea.

... does anyone want to say this is a lousy idea. ←

15:22:30 <jluciano> hendler, type what you want us to speak for you

Joanne Luciano: hendler, type what you want us to speak for you ←

15:22:34 <msmith> peter: yes, its lousy b/c you can be arbitrarily picky

Scribe problem: the name 'peter' is ambiguous. It could be any of: Peter Patel-Schneider Peter Haase . Either change the name used or insert a 'PRESENT: ...' line to restrict the active names.

Unknown peter: yes, its lousy b/c you can be arbitrarily picky ←

15:22:34 <hendler> what kind of fragment?

James Hendler: what kind of fragment? ←

15:22:47 <msmith> ian: its a lousy idea b/c it blows away the idea of interoperability

Ian Horrocks: its a lousy idea b/c it blows away the idea of interoperability ←

15:23:17 <sandro> Alan is chairing this session.

Sandro Hawke: Alan is chairing this session. ←

15:23:39 <jluciano> hendler, do you have access to the slides?

Joanne Luciano: hendler, do you have access to the slides? ←

15:23:47 <msmith> bijan: qualm that methodological design principles are "unclear"

Bijan Parsia: qualm that methodological design principles are "unclear" ←

15:24:16 <msmith> ...guidance for making decisions seem more arbitrary, a dangerous rat-hole

...guidance for making decisions seem more arbitrary, a dangerous rat-hole ←

15:24:40 <msmith> ... would rather people say they are incomplete than building incompleteness into fragments

... would rather people say they are incomplete than building incompleteness into fragments ←

15:25:18 <msmith> jeremey: in response to ian, any semantic subsetting would need to be clear that it is a subset of spec and an explicit, agreed semantic subset

Jeremy Carroll: in response to ian, any semantic subsetting would need to be clear that it is a subset of spec and an explicit, agreed semantic subset ←

15:26:12 <msmith> ...e.g., oracle and hp would agree on semantic subset and interop on at-least the semantic subset

...e.g., oracle and hp would agree on semantic subset and interop on at-least the semantic subset ←

15:26:19 <jluciano> to Hendler: fragments of OWL 1.1, which: are the result of years of research, have “nice” computational properties, are already supported by tools

Joanne Luciano: to Hendler: fragments of OWL 1.1, which: are the result of years of research, have “nice” computational properties, are already supported by tools ←

15:26:24 <msmith> s/jeremey/jeremy/

15:26:45 <sandro> +1 Jeremy -- "incompleteness" is fine When It's In A Specified Fragment, that is implementated in multiple places, etc.

Sandro Hawke: +1 Jeremy -- "incompleteness" is fine When It's In A Specified Fragment, that is implementated in multiple places, etc. ←

15:26:48 <msmith> alan: if we call this fragment or conformance level, it seems useful

Alan Ruttenberg: if we call this fragment or conformance level, it seems useful ←

15:26:57 <jluciano> to hendler: cover most existing ontologies

Joanne Luciano: to hendler: cover most existing ontologies ←

15:27:12 <msmith> ...that baseline entailments are necessary, but additional entailments may be ok

...that baseline entailments are necessary, but additional entailments may be ok ←

15:27:52 <Zhe> q+

Zhe Wu: q+ ←

15:27:53 <msmith> bijan: if we shift from language fragments to reasoner conformance I'm more comfortable

Bijan Parsia: if we shift from language fragments to reasoner conformance I'm more comfortable ←

15:27:55 <hendler> But there are fragments which are not included that have all those things as well - Oracle Prime being a perfect example

James Hendler: But there are fragments which are not included that have all those things as well - Oracle Prime being a perfect example ←

15:27:56 <sandro> Bijan: "Reasoner Conformance" might be a more useful notion here than "Language Fragments".

Bijan Parsia: "Reasoner Conformance" might be a more useful notion here than "Language Fragments". [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

15:28:15 <alanr> Jim, please call in if you want to participate

Alan Ruttenberg: Jim, please call in if you want to participate ←

15:28:21 <jluciano> to hendler: Fragment Goals: suggest possible fixes to OWL Lite, inform the OWL community about recent research results, help users & tool designers

Joanne Luciano: to hendler: Fragment Goals: suggest possible fixes to OWL Lite, inform the OWL community about recent research results, help users & tool designers ←

15:28:24 <msmith> ...I have examples of people specifying this at a tool level.

...I have examples of people specifying this at a tool level. ←

15:28:48 <msmith> jeremy: i'd be happy with such a rewording. i don't see it as notable

Jeremy Carroll: i'd be happy with such a rewording. i don't see it as notable ←

15:28:57 <msmith> alan: does such a distinction help others

Alan Ruttenberg: does such a distinction help others ←

15:29:10 <msmith> some affiermation to alan in room

some affiermation to alan in room ←

15:30:00 <msmith> zhe: ?

Zhe Wu: ? ←

15:30:21 <msmith> alan: he said it would be useful to say we support same entailments

Alan Ruttenberg: he said it would be useful to say we support same entailments ←

15:31:26 <msmith> ian: more comfortable defining conformance that fragments

Ian Horrocks: more comfortable defining conformance that fragments ←

15:31:55 <Zhe> q-

Zhe Wu: q- ←

15:32:02 <IanH_> ian: and jeremy's suggestion sounds like standardising implementations

Ian Horrocks: and jeremy's suggestion sounds like standardising implementations [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ] ←

15:32:18 <alanr> Jim, you still there. Hard to follow the IRC. I can read what you write if you want to respond.

Alan Ruttenberg: Jim, you still there. Hard to follow the IRC. I can read what you write if you want to respond. ←

15:32:31 <msmith> bernardo: users are comfortable with incomplete reasoning.  swoop offering rdfs reasoner as a choice is an example of this

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: users are comfortable with incomplete reasoning. swoop offering rdfs reasoner as a choice is an example of this ←

15:32:45 <pascalhitzler> +1 to bernardo

Pascal Hitzler: +1 to bernardo ←

15:32:57 <msmith> ...more comfortable with that than trying to specify semantic subsets

...more comfortable with that than trying to specify semantic subsets ←

15:33:23 <msmith> jeff: i agree with bernardo and others.

Jeff Pan: i agree with bernardo and others. ←

15:33:38 <msmith> ... implementation does not specify fragment.

... implementation does not specify fragment. ←

15:33:45 <pascalhitzler> bernardo also stressed the importance of a clear semantics as reference ...

Pascal Hitzler: bernardo also stressed the importance of a clear semantics as reference ... ←

15:34:36 <msmith> boris: i just looked at pd* , this seems like definition.  I think it is a useful fragment if evaluated a certain way.

Boris Motik: i just looked at pd* , this seems like definition. I think it is a useful fragment if evaluated a certain way. ←

15:35:18 <msmith> ian: i didn't say pd* was bad, that we'd be standardizing an implementation.  it was a reaction to jeremey's comments on what hp and oracle might do

Ian Horrocks: i didn't say pd* was bad, that we'd be standardizing an implementation. it was a reaction to jeremey's comments on what hp and oracle might do ←

15:36:08 <msmith> sandro: owl is unique to me b/c it doesn't specify what the tools do, people read into that.   specifying the tools would be useful.  as a customer I expect that and would like it

Sandro Hawke: owl is unique to me b/c it doesn't specify what the tools do, people read into that. specifying the tools would be useful. as a customer I expect that and would like it ←

15:36:41 <jluciano> what's "pd*"?

Joanne Luciano: what's "pd*"? ←

15:36:48 <Zhe> ina: it is not just hp and oracle, owlim, allegrograph as well

Scribe problem: the name 'ina' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown ina: it is not just hp and oracle, owlim, allegrograph as well [ Scribe Assist by Zhe Wu ] ←

15:36:53 <sandro> PD* is referred to in Zhe's presentation.

Sandro Hawke: PD* is referred to in Zhe's presentation. ←

15:37:10 <sandro> (from Herman ter Horst)

Sandro Hawke: (from Herman ter Horst) ←

15:37:15 <msmith> bijan: justifying discomfort - seems likely that over time fragments specified in such a way are likely to move

Bijan Parsia: justifying discomfort - seems likely that over time fragments specified in such a way are likely to move ←

15:37:53 <msmith> bernardo: on sandro's comment - we should specify reasoning services

Bernardo Cuenca Grau: on sandro's comment - we should specify reasoning services ←

15:38:46 <msmith> ... it's not in the spec for OWL DL.  for fragments the services descriptions would be uesful

... it's not in the spec for OWL DL. for fragments the services descriptions would be uesful ←

15:38:59 <msmith> sandro: i don't know what the terms are, the market decides

Sandro Hawke: i don't know what the terms are, the market decides ←

15:39:14 <msmith> ian: its difficult to imagine semantic subsets not drifting apart

Ian Horrocks: its difficult to imagine semantic subsets not drifting apart ←

15:39:30 <sandro> Sandro: It should be customer driven.  When they want to find on the shelf, those should be the things defined in the spec.

Sandro Hawke: It should be customer driven. When they want to find on the shelf, those should be the things defined in the spec. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

15:39:36 <msmith> ... it has been a success for owl that interoperability is so good, considering

... it has been a success for owl that interoperability is so good, considering ←

15:40:15 <msmith> jeremy: responding to standardizing tools - yes. there is value to user if they know different tools perform the same

Jeremy Carroll: responding to standardizing tools - yes. there is value to user if they know different tools perform the same ←

15:40:36 <msmith> ... this wg could provide appropriate conformance levels where vendors and user community come together

... this wg could provide appropriate conformance levels where vendors and user community come together ←

15:40:50 <sandro> +1 Jeremy: there is real value to the customers in knowing that a set of products will all do (at least) the same thing.      It would be a service to the community for this WG to provide that.

Sandro Hawke: +1 Jeremy: there is real value to the customers in knowing that a set of products will all do (at least) the same thing. It would be a service to the community for this WG to provide that. ←

15:41:01 <msmith> ... clear that motivations from academic community are useful, but they aren't the only motivations

... clear that motivations from academic community are useful, but they aren't the only motivations ←

15:41:11 <msmith> alan: no one is saying market is unimportant

Alan Ruttenberg: no one is saying market is unimportant ←

15:41:31 <msmith> uli: clarification on user needs?

Uli Sattler: clarification on user needs? ←

15:41:58 <msmith> jeremy: users need some sort of specification, but don't need to know behavior is exact

Jeremy Carroll: users need some sort of specification, but don't need to know behavior is exact ←

15:42:41 <msmith> alan: I want to poll for consensus on how to procede

Alan Ruttenberg: I want to poll for consensus on how to procede ←

15:42:47 <jluciano> +1

Joanne Luciano: +1 ←

15:42:48 <msmith> sandro: i don't understand

Sandro Hawke: i don't understand ←

15:43:09 <msmith> alan: I want to know if people think these fragments are useful

Alan Ruttenberg: I want to know if people think these fragments are useful ←

15:43:18 <msmith> ... defined as a minimum set of entailments

... defined as a minimum set of entailments ←

15:43:36 <msmith> bijan: reasoners can conform to the language to different degrees

Bijan Parsia: reasoners can conform to the language to different degrees ←

15:43:52 <Ratnesh> subset of language + conformance level, is something similar to the way current languages (e.g) doing, like, Deprecated apis + core language( and specialized apis)

Ratnesh Sahay: subset of language + conformance level, is something similar to the way current languages (e.g) doing, like, Deprecated apis + core language( and specialized apis) ←

15:43:55 <msmith> subsets of entailments == conformance levels

subsets of entailments == conformance levels ←

15:44:16 <msmith> alan: we should aim for something specified like pd*

Alan Ruttenberg: we should aim for something specified like pd* ←

15:44:22 <msmith> ian: declarative...

Ian Horrocks: declarative... ←

15:44:32 <msmith> alan: yes, declarative

Alan Ruttenberg: yes, declarative ←

15:45:18 <sandro> Q1 - The Working Group should (formally, precisely) define conformance levels, defining groups of reasoner which can do certain kinds of reasoning (all for a given OWL Fragment).

Sandro Hawke: Q1 - The Working Group should (formally, precisely) define conformance levels, defining groups of reasoner which can do certain kinds of reasoning (all for a given OWL Fragment). ←

15:45:30 <sandro> Q1 - The Working Group should (formally, precisely) define conformance levels, defining groups of reasoners which can do certain kinds of reasoning (all for a given OWL Fragment).

Sandro Hawke: Q1 - The Working Group should (formally, precisely) define conformance levels, defining groups of reasoners which can do certain kinds of reasoning (all for a given OWL Fragment). ←

15:45:45 <msmith> uli: we would later know e.g., what it would mean for a reasoner to conform to particular level?

Uli Sattler: we would later know e.g., what it would mean for a reasoner to conform to particular level? ←

15:45:52 <msmith> alan: yes.

Alan Ruttenberg: yes. ←

15:46:07 <msmith> jeff: what does conformance level mean?  is it in terms of benchmark?

Jeff Pan: what does conformance level mean? is it in terms of benchmark? ←

15:46:41 <msmith> uli: provides example

Uli Sattler: provides example ←

15:47:06 <IanH_> The Working Group should (formally, precisely) define conformance levels, defining minimum levels of inference that would be found?

Ian Horrocks: The Working Group should (formally, precisely) define conformance levels, defining minimum levels of inference that would be found? ←

15:47:57 <Zhe> q+

Zhe Wu: q+ ←

15:48:17 <msmith> carsten: degrees of incompleteness?

Unknown carsten: degrees of incompleteness? ←

15:48:17 <IanH_> The Working Group should (declaratively) define conformance levels, defining minimum levels of inference that would be found?

Ian Horrocks: The Working Group should (declaratively) define conformance levels, defining minimum levels of inference that would be found? ←

15:48:24 <msmith> alan: degree of completeness

Alan Ruttenberg: degree of completeness ←

15:48:25 <sandro> Q1 - The Working Group should (declaratively) define (one or more) conformance levels, defining minimum levels of inference which would be performed (for a given OWL Fragment).

Sandro Hawke: Q1 - The Working Group should (declaratively) define (one or more) conformance levels, defining minimum levels of inference which would be performed (for a given OWL Fragment). ←

15:48:27 <Achille> yes if we are talking about a declarative  way of defining minimum levels of inference

Achille Fokoue: yes if we are talking about a declarative way of defining minimum levels of inference ←

15:48:38 <msmith> ...fragments are syntactic fragments

...fragments are syntactic fragments ←

15:48:51 <msmith> ...conformance levels are distinct

...conformance levels are distinct ←

15:50:30 <msmith> jeff: there might be difference between alan's and uli's suggestions

Jeff Pan: there might be difference between alan's and uli's suggestions ←

15:50:41 <msmith> alan: distinction is unimportant now

Alan Ruttenberg: distinction is unimportant now ←

15:50:42 <Zhe> when we, as a group define confromance levels, it is very useful to look at current market

Zhe Wu: when we, as a group define confromance levels, it is very useful to look at current market ←

15:50:59 <Zhe> including HP, Oracle, AllegroGraph, OWLIM etc.

Zhe Wu: including HP, Oracle, AllegroGraph, OWLIM etc. ←

15:50:59 <msmith> alan: reads Q1 as above

Alan Ruttenberg: reads Q1 as above ←

15:51:20 <sandro> against: Jeff, Carsten, Ian

Scribe problem: the name 'against' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown against: Jeff, Carsten, Ian [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

15:51:28 <Achille> +1 ( for a declarative approach)

Achille Fokoue: +1 ( for a declarative approach) ←

15:51:32 <jluciano> joanne raises hand

Joanne Luciano: joanne raises hand ←

15:51:32 <sandro> abstain: none.

Scribe problem: the name 'abstain' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown abstain: none. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

15:51:38 <sandro> BREAK.

Sandro Hawke: BREAK. ←

15:51:48 <jluciano> joanne lowers hand

Joanne Luciano: joanne lowers hand ←

15:51:52 <sandro> for - lots and lots of hands

Sandro Hawke: for - lots and lots of hands ←

15:52:03 <sandro> for - lots and lots of hands

Sandro Hawke: for - lots and lots of hands ←

15:52:19 <sandro> in favor:  lots and lots of hands

Sandro Hawke: in favor: lots and lots of hands ←

15:52:30 <sandro> in favor -  lots and lots of hands

Sandro Hawke: in favor - lots and lots of hands ←

15:52:38 <sandro> zakim, what the heck are you doing?

Sandro Hawke: zakim, what the heck are you doing? ←

15:52:38 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, sandro.

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, sandro. ←

15:52:42 <Zhe> q-

Zhe Wu: q- ←

15:52:48 <jluciano> Joanne +1  h and       rais e      for last q.

Joanne Luciano: Joanne +1 h and rais e for last q. ←

15:52:53 <sandro> lots and lots of people raise their hands in favor.

Sandro Hawke: lots and lots of people raise their hands in favor. ←

15:52:59 <sandro> testing - something

Sandro Hawke: testing - something ←

15:53:03 <sandro> for - testing

Sandro Hawke: for - testing ←

15:53:11 <sandro> for - lots andlots of testing

Sandro Hawke: for - lots andlots of testing ←

15:53:15 <sandro> for - lots and lots of testing

Sandro Hawke: for - lots and lots of testing ←

15:53:19 <sandro> for - lots and lots of hands

Sandro Hawke: for - lots and lots of hands ←

15:53:29 <sandro> for - lots and lots of raised hands

Sandro Hawke: for - lots and lots of raised hands ←

15:53:37 <sandro> testing for - lots and lots of raised hands

Sandro Hawke: testing for - lots and lots of raised hands ←

15:53:42 <sandro> testing raised hands

Sandro Hawke: testing raised hands ←

15:54:20 <sandro> so I can talk about hands

Sandro Hawke: so I can talk about hands ←

16:36:57 <jluciano> good afternoon, welome back!

(No events recorded for 42 minutes)

Joanne Luciano: good afternoon, welome back! ←

16:37:53 <Uli> Jeremy: has resigned from UFDT, but

Jeremy Carroll: has resigned from UFDT, but [ Scribe Assist by Uli Sattler ] ←

16:38:05 <Uli> ... wants to cancel next monday?

Uli Sattler: ... wants to cancel next monday? ←

16:38:08 <msmith> scribenick: uli

(Scribe set to Uli Sattler)

16:38:23 <msmith> ScribeNick: Uli

16:39:01 <Uli> AlanR: will arrange next UFDT

Alan Ruttenberg: will arrange next UFDT ←

16:39:19 <Uli> ACTION on AlanR to arrange next UFDT meeting

ACTION on AlanR to arrange next UFDT meeting ←

16:39:32 <Uli> ACTION: on AlanR to arrange next UFDT meeting

ACTION: on AlanR to arrange next UFDT meeting ←

16:39:32 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - on

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - on ←

16:39:40 <jluciano> alan, contact me when you're back in town (and rested)

Joanne Luciano: alan, contact me when you're back in town (and rested) ←

16:40:30 <IanH_> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:40:39 <Uli> Sandro: has seen 7 sessions' minutes,  currently 57 pages and asks how to read to accept them

Sandro Hawke: has seen 7 sessions' minutes, currently 57 pages and asks how to read to accept them ←

16:40:56 <Uli> ... and asks the scribes, when cleaning them up, to add sub headers

... and asks the scribes, when cleaning them up, to add sub headers ←

16:41:10 <Uli> ... syntax is "===" for sub headers

... syntax is "===" for sub headers ←

16:41:10 <Evan> Action: AlanR to arrange next UFDT meeting

ACTION: AlanR to arrange next UFDT meeting ←

16:41:10 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - AlanR

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - AlanR ←

16:41:10 <IanH_> ack testing

Ian Horrocks: ack testing ←

16:41:15 <IanH_> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:41:24 <IanH_> ack raised

Ian Horrocks: ack raised ←

16:41:28 <IanH_> q?

Ian Horrocks: q? ←

16:42:03 <Uli> msmith: asks whether to serialize shuffled subdiscussions

Michael Smith: asks whether to serialize shuffled subdiscussions ←

16:42:22 <Uli> sandro: yes, please disentangle

Sandro Hawke: yes, please disentangle ←

16:42:34 <jluciano> please speak a little louder

Joanne Luciano: please speak a little louder ←

16:43:06 <jluciano> what did alanr just say?

Joanne Luciano: what did alanr just say? ←

16:43:06 <Uli> IanH: asks what to do with parallel discussions, esp. on the IRC

Ian Horrocks: asks what to do with parallel discussions, esp. on the IRC ←

16:43:16 <Uli> Sandro: keep them if they are relevant

Sandro Hawke: keep them if they are relevant ←

16:43:40 <Uli> sandro: scribes finish cleaning up this wednesday

Sandro Hawke: scribes finish cleaning up this wednesday ←

16:44:07 <Uli> Jeremy: wants to see actions & resolutions in the minutes

Jeremy Carroll: wants to see actions & resolutions in the minutes ←

16:44:40 <sandro> Yeah -- keep IRC threads in if they are topical.

Sandro Hawke: Yeah -- keep IRC threads in if they are topical. ←

16:45:15 <Uli> Bijan: subgroups affected by discussions at F2F should update their documents with pointers to minutes

Bijan Parsia: subgroups affected by discussions at F2F should update their documents with pointers to minutes ←

16:45:16 <jluciano> I'd like to see things fleshed out a little in the minutes -

Joanne Luciano: I'd like to see things fleshed out a little in the minutes - ←

16:45:32 <Uli> Jeremy: suggests to minimize effort on minutes

Jeremy Carroll: suggests to minimize effort on minutes ←

16:45:37 <jluciano> add links and pointers of a few definitions

Joanne Luciano: add links and pointers of a few definitions ←

16:45:45 <Uli> AlanR: asks for subjects for discussions

Alan Ruttenberg: asks for subjects for discussions ←

16:45:59 <jluciano> raise hand

Joanne Luciano: raise hand ←

16:46:00 <Uli> Bijan: non-OWL full issues with RDF mapping

Bijan Parsia: non-OWL full issues with RDF mapping ←

16:46:30 <Uli> AlanR: agrees with Bijan, mentions reification

Alan Ruttenberg: agrees with Bijan, mentions reification ←

16:47:29 <Uli> Bijan: axioms annotation asserted versus reified

Bijan Parsia: axioms annotation asserted versus reified ←

16:47:38 <Uli> AlanR: wants to see both

Alan Ruttenberg: wants to see both ←

16:48:05 <Uli> IanH: we already agreed that we should explore both assertions & reifications

Ian Horrocks: we already agreed that we should explore both assertions & reifications ←

16:48:37 <Uli> Sandro: what about b-nodes and reification

Sandro Hawke: what about b-nodes and reification ←

16:48:53 <Uli> Bijan: can we discuss now some RDF mapping issues?

Bijan Parsia: can we discuss now some RDF mapping issues? ←

16:49:04 <jluciano> raise hand

Joanne Luciano: raise hand ←

16:49:13 <Uli> msmith: has added such an issue wrt declarations

Michael Smith: has added such an issue wrt declarations ←

16:50:20 <Uli> bijan: impossible to determine signature in owl full

Bijan Parsia: impossible to determine signature in owl full ←

16:50:29 <Uli> ... under some conditions

... under some conditions ←

16:51:07 <sandro> alanr, jluciano is on the queue

Sandro Hawke: alanr, jluciano is on the queue ←

16:51:48 <jluciano> is that horridge?

Joanne Luciano: is that horridge? ←

16:51:49 <Uli> MattH: reports on user complaints regarding declarations

Scribe problem: the name 'MattH' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown MattH: reports on user complaints regarding declarations ←

16:52:16 <msmith> the issue on this is ISSUE-89 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/89

Michael Smith: the issue on this is ISSUE-89 http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/89 ←

16:52:35 <Uli> JLuciano: asks for summary sections of minutes\

Joanne Luciano: asks for summary sections of minutes\ ←

16:53:00 <Uli> JLuciano: wants to discuss evaluation issues

Joanne Luciano: wants to discuss evaluation issues ←

16:53:05 <bijan> correction for scribe: it's that you can't specify a signature for an ontology without using the elements of that signature in an axiom or a declaration (which requires owl 11 terms)

Bijan Parsia: correction for scribe: it's that you can't specify a signature for an ontology without using the elements of that signature in an axiom or a declaration (which requires owl 11 terms) ←

16:53:34 <Uli> PeterPS: disagrees with JLucianos suggestions: scribes should never paraphrase

Scribe problem: the name 'PeterPS' does not match any of the 46 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Achille Fokoue Alan Ruttenberg Anne Cregan Bernardo Cuenca Grau Bijan Parsia Boris Motik Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman James Hendler Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Joanne Luciano Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Olivier Corby Pascal Hitzler Peter Haase Peter Patel-Schneider Ratnesh Sahay Rinke Hoekstra Sandro Hawke Steve Battle Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot

Unknown PeterPS: disagrees with JLucianos suggestions: scribes should never paraphrase ←

16:54:38 <Uli> AlanR: suggests to have summaries outside minutes

Alan Ruttenberg: suggests to have summaries outside minutes ←

16:54:51 <Uli> IanH: suggests to post summaries on the mailinlist

Ian Horrocks: suggests to post summaries on the mailinlist ←

16:55:34 <Uli> Sandro: add links to presentations in minutes

Sandro Hawke: add links to presentations in minutes ←

16:56:02 <Uli> IanH: suggests clean up/mark up other material as well

Ian Horrocks: suggests clean up/mark up other material as well ←

16:56:41 <Uli> Sandro: mentions that chairs could, if they wanted, blog meetings

Sandro Hawke: mentions that chairs could, if they wanted, blog meetings ←

16:57:19 <Uli> Jeremy: doesn't want do them

Jeremy Carroll: doesn't want do them ←

16:57:28 <sandro> or anyone else could blog meetings....   (ie summarize them).

Sandro Hawke: or anyone else could blog meetings.... (ie summarize them). ←

16:57:48 <Uli> AlanR: hasn't seen a lot about evaluation

Alan Ruttenberg: hasn't seen a lot about evaluation ←

16:58:32 <sandro> alanr, adenda+ F2F2 ?

Sandro Hawke: alanr, adenda+ F2F2 ? ←

16:59:01 <Uli> Jeremy: wants to give 2 examples reg. OWL Full compatibility

Jeremy Carroll: wants to give 2 examples reg. OWL Full compatibility ←

16:59:55 <Uli> ... first one: we have an OWL11 document with reified annotions, we safe and modify it....

... first one: we have an OWL11 document with reified annotions, we safe and modify it.... ←

17:00:58 <Uli> MattH: do we discuss punning or declaredAs?

Unknown MattH: do we discuss punning or declaredAs? ←

17:01:38 <bijan> SUBPROPERTYOF[op1,...,opn] expands to rdfs:subPropertyOf if OnlyOP(opi) = true for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and to owl11:subObjectPropertyOf otherwise;

Bijan Parsia: SUBPROPERTYOF[op1,...,opn] expands to rdfs:subPropertyOf if OnlyOP(opi) = true for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and to owl11:subObjectPropertyOf otherwise; ←

17:01:40 <Uli> Jeremy: is worried about (starts reading out from ..please provide link)

Jeremy Carroll: is worried about (starts reading out from ..please provide link) ←

17:01:50 <bijan> That's the text

Bijan Parsia: That's the text ←

17:02:23 <sandro> from http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs

Sandro Hawke: from http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs ←

17:02:43 <Uli> Jeremy: there are various rules like this one, and they are the wrong ones

Jeremy Carroll: there are various rules like this one, and they are the wrong ones ←

17:03:40 <Uli> Bijan: understand why: if we have r subproperty of s, and then i add a composition, then this addition would lead to different kind of serialization

Bijan Parsia: understand why: if we have r subproperty of s, and then i add a composition, then this addition would lead to different kind of serialization ←

17:04:07 <Uli> Bijan: suggests that using different syntax for SubPropertyOf would solve this issue

Bijan Parsia: suggests that using different syntax for SubPropertyOf would solve this issue ←

17:04:26 <Uli> Bijan: this is different from round tripping

Bijan Parsia: this is different from round tripping ←

17:05:46 <Uli> Jeremy: have some form of switch that safes an ontology in OWL11, then we shouldn't expect it to be safed in an OWL10 format unless i require this explicitly

Jeremy Carroll: have some form of switch that safes an ontology in OWL11, then we shouldn't expect it to be safed in an OWL10 format unless i require this explicitly ←

17:06:12 <Uli> MattH: asks whether the spec shouldn't specify this behaviour

Unknown MattH: asks whether the spec shouldn't specify this behaviour ←

17:06:46 <Uli> msmith: asks whether Jeremy wants to safe tools only in OWL10 if explicitly asked to do so

Michael Smith: asks whether Jeremy wants to safe tools only in OWL10 if explicitly asked to do so ←

17:07:17 <Uli> Jeremy: observes a subtle relationship between the 2 OWL syntaxes

Jeremy Carroll: observes a subtle relationship between the 2 OWL syntaxes ←

17:08:05 <Uli> IanH: comes back to AlanR, and points out that it would introduce nasty non-determinism wrt serialisation

Ian Horrocks: comes back to AlanR, and points out that it would introduce nasty non-determinism wrt serialisation ←

17:08:38 <Uli> ... and that our n-ary disjointness axioms would cause trouble

... and that our n-ary disjointness axioms would cause trouble ←

17:09:15 <Uli> AlanR: regards this as a bug

Alan Ruttenberg: regards this as a bug ←

17:09:35 <Uli> ... (to have these 2 possibilities for reading n-ary disjointness)

... (to have these 2 possibilities for reading n-ary disjointness) ←

17:10:27 <Uli> Bijan: sees an issue with the mapping, we need to decide what to do with it: deal with it or not

Bijan Parsia: sees an issue with the mapping, we need to decide what to do with it: deal with it or not ←

17:10:52 <Uli> ... and it would be nice to be clear on our decision in the spec

... and it would be nice to be clear on our decision in the spec ←

17:10:57 <Uli> ... asks for test cases

... asks for test cases ←

17:11:14 <Uli> AlanR: declarations fall into similar league

Alan Ruttenberg: declarations fall into similar league ←

17:11:30 <Uli> MattH: disagree - we can throw them in/out

Unknown MattH: disagree - we can throw them in/out ←

17:11:45 <Uli> msmith: points back to issue 89

Michael Smith: points back to ISSUE-89 ←

17:11:57 <Uli> AlanR: asks whether we like declarations

Alan Ruttenberg: asks whether we like declarations ←

17:12:28 <Uli> Bijan: mentions that we can have both, declarations and roundtripping, but with a different mapping

Bijan Parsia: mentions that we can have both, declarations and roundtripping, but with a different mapping ←

17:12:45 <Uli> oups - the last was MattH, not Bijan!

oups - the last was MattH, not Bijan! ←

17:13:15 <Uli> MattH: mentions discussions on the mailinglist, gives to Boris

Unknown MattH: mentions discussions on the mailinglist, gives to Boris ←

17:13:34 <Uli> Boris: explains that there are 2 readings of declarations

Boris Motik: explains that there are 2 readings of declarations ←

17:14:15 <Uli> ... what is the meaning of rdf:type? To be used as linting/simple syntactic check?

... what is the meaning of rdf:type? To be used as linting/simple syntactic check? ←

17:14:21 <sandro> Boris: the point of declarations is to performing 'linting'

Boris Motik: the point of declarations is to performing 'linting' [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

17:14:29 <sandro> Bijan: there are other use cases.

Bijan Parsia: there are other use cases. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←

17:14:41 <Uli> Bijan: adds that we can also throw out some "used terms"

Bijan Parsia: adds that we can also throw out some "used terms" ←

17:15:34 <Zakim> -Achille

Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille ←

17:15:36 <Uli> Boris: wants to distinguish declaredAs from type.

Boris Motik: wants to distinguish declaredAs from type. ←

17:16:11 <sandro> -Carsten

Sandro Hawke: -Carsten ←

17:16:33 <Uli> ... this will become tricky with imports. Since there is no notion of typing of RDF, things become problematic

... this will become tricky with imports. Since there is no notion of typing of RDF, things become problematic ←

17:17:07 <Uli> ... eg, do we need to re-declare when importing?

... eg, do we need to re-declare when importing? ←

17:17:40 <Uli> ... in the old spec, there was no difference between "class" and "declaration"

... in the old spec, there was no difference between "class" and "declaration" ←

17:18:10 <Uli> AlanR: there wasn't even a notion of an ontology containing an axiom

Alan Ruttenberg: there wasn't even a notion of an ontology containing an axiom ←

17:19:01 <Uli> Bijan: there is something about documents and ontologies (how to get one from the other)

Bijan Parsia: there is something about documents and ontologies (how to get one from the other) ←

17:19:30 <Uli> Jeremy: suggests to use lateral thinking to solve this: use a new way of imports, namely one where

Jeremy Carroll: suggests to use lateral thinking to solve this: use a new way of imports, namely one where ←

17:20:48 <Uli> ... we put import statements at the top of our ontologies and then all  declarations will be there!

... we put import statements at the top of our ontologies and then all declarations will be there! ←

17:21:17 <Uli> Boris: seems to agree that this will help tools - if i knew what the type of things are, i can use streaming mode

Boris Motik: seems to agree that this will help tools - if i knew what the type of things are, i can use streaming mode ←

17:21:50 <Uli> Bijan: if they come late, they can still be useful (eg to find typos), but they are most useful at the top

Bijan Parsia: if they come late, they can still be useful (eg to find typos), but they are most useful at the top ←

17:22:17 <Uli> Jeremy: suggests that we can do this via searching & process imports first

Jeremy Carroll: suggests that we can do this via searching & process imports first ←

17:22:54 <Uli> Boris: asks whether typed vocabulary will be obsolote - if yes, we can re-use it

Boris Motik: asks whether typed vocabulary will be obsolote - if yes, we can re-use it ←

17:23:50 <Uli> Boris: we can merge the notion of typing and declarations, but cleanly

Boris Motik: we can merge the notion of typing and declarations, but cleanly ←

17:24:09 <Uli> Jeremy: wouldn't it make a difference wrt model theory

Jeremy Carroll: wouldn't it make a difference wrt model theory ←

17:24:16 <Uli> Boris: no, it's all syntax

Boris Motik: no, it's all syntax ←

17:25:12 <Uli> MattH: we need orphaned entities rather than declarations

Unknown MattH: we need orphaned entities rather than declarations ←

17:26:11 <Uli> msmith: parphrases that we want to be clear whether rdf type is a declaration or ...?

Michael Smith: parphrases that we want to be clear whether rdf type is a declaration or ...? ←

17:26:32 <Uli> Boris: can we add a class to an ontology without adding an axiom?

Boris Motik: can we add a class to an ontology without adding an axiom? ←

17:27:03 <Uli> ... declarations are a way to mention an entity outside any axiom

... declarations are a way to mention an entity outside any axiom ←

17:27:48 <Uli> AlanR: asks whether in OWL11, can we have X owl:class Class?

Alan Ruttenberg: asks whether in OWL11, can we have X owl:class Class? ←

17:28:17 <Uli> Bijan: yes, it's in OWL Full, but it disappears in the OWL DL mapping

Bijan Parsia: yes, it's in OWL Full, but it disappears in the OWL DL mapping ←

17:29:20 <Uli> Sandro: wants to add next F2F meeting to agenda

Sandro Hawke: wants to add next F2F meeting to agenda ←

17:29:29 <Uli> Bijan: and XML syntax

Bijan Parsia: and XML syntax ←

17:30:00 <Uli> Bijan: wants to see from Boris examples explicating differences and consequences of both solutions

Bijan Parsia: wants to see from Boris examples explicating differences and consequences of both solutions ←

17:30:25 <Uli> AlanR: and we need to check our claims re. what appears/disappears in mappings

Alan Ruttenberg: and we need to check our claims re. what appears/disappears in mappings ←

17:30:58 <Uli> AlanR: wants to see backwards compatibility on the agenda

Alan Ruttenberg: wants to see backwards compatibility on the agenda ←

17:31:08 <sandro> Topic: F2F2

5. F2F2

17:31:25 <sandro> April 3-4

Sandro Hawke: April 3-4 ←

17:31:34 <Uli> PeterPS: April 3 and 4, in the Washington DC are, venue to be determined

Unknown PeterPS: April 3 and 4, in the Washington DC are, venue to be determined ←

17:31:53 <Uli> ... OWLED might be in the area, but perhaps not

... OWLED might be in the area, but perhaps not ←

17:32:14 <jluciano> where is Peter you talking about

Joanne Luciano: where is Peter you talking about ←

17:32:17 <Uli> ... one possibility is to make use of NIST, but access is restricted

... one possibility is to make use of NIST, but access is restricted ←

17:32:25 <jluciano> I might be able to host it at MITRE

Joanne Luciano: I might be able to host it at MITRE ←

17:32:37 <Uli> EvanW: access is a bit tricky, but only first time

Evan Wallace: access is a bit tricky, but only first time ←

17:32:41 <jluciano> Helooooo :-)

Joanne Luciano: Helooooo :-) ←

17:33:09 <Uli> PeterPS: downtown DC or near to NIST are possible to

Unknown PeterPS: downtown DC or near to NIST are possible to ←

17:33:48 <Uli> PeterPS: possibility to move 1 day earlier to make AlanRector happier

Unknown PeterPS: possibility to move 1 day earlier to make AlanRector happier ←

17:34:04 <jluciano> Who's the NIST person?

Joanne Luciano: Who's the NIST person? ←

17:34:35 <jluciano> hand up

Joanne Luciano: hand up ←

17:34:35 <Uli> JLuciano: has mentioned MITRE

Joanne Luciano: has mentioned MITRE ←

17:34:55 <Uli> PeterPS: says that access at MITRE is even more difficult than at NIST

Unknown PeterPS: says that access at MITRE is even more difficult than at NIST ←

17:35:48 <Uli> ... mentions that it will be busy and that we need to book Hotels early

... mentions that it will be busy and that we need to book Hotels early ←

17:36:07 <Uli> Bijan: offers to make use of C&P rooms

Bijan Parsia: offers to make use of C&P rooms ←

17:37:07 <Uli> PeterPS: reinforces the need to book hotels early

Unknown PeterPS: reinforces the need to book hotels early ←

17:37:43 <Uli> PeterPS: will come up with proposal together with Kendall Clark

Unknown PeterPS: will come up with proposal together with Kendall Clark ←

17:38:25 <jluciano> how many people?

Joanne Luciano: how many people? ←

17:39:07 <Uli> ACTION: on Peter to tell us by 2 weeks where F2F2 will be

ACTION: on Peter to tell us by 2 weeks where F2F2 will be ←

17:39:07 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - on

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - on ←

17:41:10 <pfps> ACTION: ppatelsc to tell us by 2 weeks where F2F2 will be

ACTION: ppatelsc to tell us by 2 weeks where F2F2 will be ←

17:41:11 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-50 - Tell us by 2 weeks where F2F2 will be [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2007-12-14].

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-50 - Tell us by 2 weeks where F2F2 will be [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2007-12-14]. ←

17:41:56 <Uli> AlanR: wants to talk about backwards compatibility

Alan Ruttenberg: wants to talk about backwards compatibility ←

17:42:36 <Uli> IanH: closes, thanks Sean Bechhofer for hosting

Ian Horrocks: closes, thanks Sean Bechhofer for hosting ←

17:42:39 <Zhe> bye

Zhe Wu: bye ←

17:42:48 <sandro> ADJOURN

Sandro Hawke: ADJOURN ←

17:43:32 <Zakim> -Meeting_Room

Zakim IRC Bot: -Meeting_Room ←

17:43:39 <Zakim> -Joanne_Luciano

Zakim IRC Bot: -Joanne_Luciano ←

17:43:44 <Zakim> -Zhe

Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←

17:43:45 <Zakim> SW_OWL(F2F)6:00AM has ended

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL(F2F)6:00AM has ended ←

17:43:47 <Zakim> Attendees were Meeting_Room, Joanne_Luciano, +1.603.897.aaaa, Zhe, +1.518.472.aabb, jhendler, Achille

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were Meeting_Room, Joanne_Luciano, +1.603.897.aaaa, Zhe, +1.518.472.aabb, jhendler, Achille ←

Formatted by CommonScribe