Meeting Record

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

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see DougL, Sandro, Ratnesh, jjc (muted), Rinke, Alan, msmith, Ivan, bcuencag, bmotik, ??P17, bmotik.a, ??P19 ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Zhe, bmotik, ivan, IanH, uli, jjc, alanr_, MarkusK, msmith, Ratnesh, RRSAgent, Zakim, bcuencag, DougL, Rinke, sandro, pfps, trackbot-ng ←

First-time scriber, so feel free to type in your comment-summary if I garble it or fail to scribe it. ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see DougL, Sandro, Ratnesh, jjc (muted), Rinke, Alan, msmith, Ivan, bcuencag (muted), bmotik (muted), IanH (muted), MarkusK (muted), Zhe, bmotik.aa, Evan_Wallace ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ewallace, Zhe, bmotik, ivan, IanH, uli, jjc, alanr_, MarkusK, msmith, Ratnesh, RRSAgent, Zakim, bcuencag, DougL, Rinke, sandro, pfps, trackbot-ng ←

Zakim IRC Bot: jjc, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Sandro (30%), Ratnesh (8%), bmotik.aa (9%) ←

Uli Sattler: ...the system still thinks that Bernardo is me...but this is wrong! ←

Michael Smith: +0, noting the minutes still contain queue management and zakim clutter ←

Alan Ruttenberg: ACTION-52: added test guidelines: link added with draft instructions. respond to this please ←

Deborah McGuinness: We'd be better off with named ontologies, and should indicate it's a "best practice". ←

Jeremy Carroll: concern about further diversion from owl full and its family members. ←

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: don't have to right now, allow unnamed ones, so what the hell? ←

Alan Ruttenberg: if the imports task force shows unexepctred divergence then we would have new information to revisit this issue [ Scribe Assist by Unknown jjc ] ←

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: summarizing the issue: proposal to make owl datarange unnec. wrt backwards compatibility ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see DougL, Sandro, Ratnesh, jjc, Rinke, Alan, msmith, Ivan, bcuencag (muted), IanH (muted), MarkusK (muted), Zhe, bmotik.aa (muted), Evan_Wallace, pfps (muted), ←

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see dlm, JeffP, ewallace, Zhe, bmotik, ivan, IanH, uli, jjc, alanr_, MarkusK, msmith, Ratnesh, RRSAgent, Zakim, bcuencag, DougL, Rinke, sandro, pfps, trackbot-ng ←

Sandro Hawke: +0 don't know enough about how the discussion will go, to have an opinion ←

Boris Motik: "services" are instances, take instances of people,... the value of the property is not a particular person but the class Person. ←

Alan Ruttenberg: is there an expectations that monkey species statements flow to monkeys? ←

...Monkeys eat bananas meaning that EACH instance does this, and Monkeys is itself an instance of Species(Type) ←

Unknown q: what about using annotations? [ Scribe Assist by Alan Ruttenberg ] ←

Uli Sattler: ...but this will be taken care of with annotation spaces/other extended annotation mechanisms ←

Zakim IRC Bot: jjc, you wanted to ask for clarification of boris's annotation use case ←

Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to ask about annotation properties versus data/object punning ←

Ivan Herman: Dublin Core had to worry about this with e.g. different ways to identify a person ←

Markus Krötzsch: +1 to Boris: punnig "metamodelling" does not require complex logical consequences ←

Boris Motik: in these examples, people are just stating things, and using idiosyncratic code to reason with those assertions. ←

Zakim IRC Bot: alanr_, you wanted to ask about annotation properties versus data/object punning and to mention logical consequences ←

Alan Ruttenberg: people want to restrict domains and ranges on class properties ←

...Can someone compare data and object property punning to the use of annotation properties (pro or con)? ←

Boris Motik: when it comes to annotation-spaces, they require this type of punning. ←

...given an annotation in the original ontology, you need punning because in the new ontology it might be one of two or more types. ←

Alan Ruttenberg: what about the annotation properties in Owl 1.0 -- still okay? still there? ←

Uli Sattler: not really, because in OWL1.0 we cannot pose any restrictions on this! ←

...in what sense is that not enough, why do we need to use punning for that now, suddenly? ←

Markus Krötzsch: +1 to uli: annotation properties cannot be used with enough OWL features ←

Jeremy Carroll: let's record these various use cases (DougL: on the wiki, not having the scribe record them all in real time!) ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-70 - Put his use case for punning onto a wiki page [on Markus Krötzsch - due 2008-01-30]. ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-71 - Put his use case for punning onto a wiki page [on Boris Motik - due 2008-01-30]. ←

ACTION: Alan to put his use case for punning onto a wiki page (for reasoning associated with punned properties, and the question about object data property punning vs annotation properties) ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-72 - Put his use case for punning onto a wiki page (for reasoning associated with punned properties, and the question about object data property punning vs annotation properties) [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-01-30]. ←

Rinke Hoekstra: very late +1 on uli's earlier remark on annotation properties and restrictions ←

Alan Ruttenberg: q+ alanr to ask for use cases for restrictions on punned object/data properties ←

Evan Wallace: UML has association class, a natural way to talk about properties of relations. ←

Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to ask for use cases for restrictions on punned object/data properties ←

ACTION: Evan action to describe UML association class on the wiki, w.r.t. punning discussions ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-73 - Action to describe UML association class on the wiki, w.r.t. punning discussions [on Evan Wallace - due 2008-01-30]. ←

Alan Ruttenberg: use cases where people want to do logical inference not just recording the assertions, please. ←

Michael Smith: describing another case, may be the same as Markus' essentially. ←

Next question: would dropping some/all punning help? impact on owl-full, on number of new vocab terms used,... etc. ←

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.

Jeremy Carroll: ISSUE-65, 69, and 68 are relevant: for each issue, the intro. of punning introduces new difficulties. ←

...the owl DL and owl FULL gap is widened more than it would otherwise be, by allowing punning. ←

(Jeremy, send me an elaboration of this point and I will insert it into the minutes) ←

Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to try to separate increase in vocabulary motivations in to the two parts ←

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: disagree: if you're not limiting yourself to OWL DL, why should you care? ←

... Complicated mapping rules are worth it, if it makes the conversion of triples into ontology easier. ←

Boris Motik: why not allow a few more properties here and there, what is bad about that? ←

Peter Patel-Schneider: the mapping rules have been changed to make OWL DL parsing much easier, at a small expense - the driving factor is thus not punning, but parsing (as has been said before) ←

Zakim IRC Bot: alanr_, you wanted to try to separate increase in vocabulary motivations in to the two parts ←

Alan Ruttenberg: tried to separate 2 issues. Incr. vocab makes the parsing of triples easier and deterministic. ←

...allowing obj/data polymorphism makes it more of a requirement than an option. ←

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.

Jeremy Carroll: to answer Boris: larger vocabularies means more work and may actually drive off other potential OWL users. ←

Uli Sattler: Jeremy, but these users will use tools to write ontologies, so perhaps they won't need to bother ←

Jonathan Rees: here's what i heard (of course i'm a newcomer) that I liked: Why not allow punning between class/property/individual, but not between dataproperty/objectproperty ? ←

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: using rdf + a litle bit of owl means what, exactly? you're probably not in owl-dl any longer. ←

Rinke Hoekstra: just a thought, but if this dl-specific vocab is confusing to rdf/full users, couldn't we introduce a different namespace for dl vocab? ... ah, but that introduces yet other syntactic bloat ←

Unknown Suggestion: document describing OWL for RDFers [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ] ←

Peter Patel-Schneider: a user of RDFS++ should have a document written for them (but maybe not by the WG) ←

Uli Sattler: I repeat my guess that these users will use tools to write ontologies, so perhaps they won't need to bother ←

Ivan Herman: agree with Jeremy; I'm afraid of bloating the number of things a user needs to learn. ←

...most users use some editing tool; for them, learning more is a major issue. ←

Uli Sattler: looking to the future, fewer and fewer people will be using standard editors to ←

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.

Ivan Herman: there will be users who create complex ontologies and will need future sophis. tools. ←

...but folksonomies staying at the DLP level is another more common situation. ←

...and those users will be around for many years, using EMACS eg and that's it. ←

Boris Motik: If they can learn to use vi, they can use the distinction between object and data properties :-) ←

,,,they won't be using Protege and similar tools that go way behond what they need. ←

Deborah McGuinness: stepping back a bit, to the general issue of adding more and more new constructs... ←

Michael Smith: To the final question, it is necessarily the case that additional features complicate user documentation. Certainly this is the case with OWA and lack of UNA. Like those cases, the complication is a trade-off between documentation complexity and meeting use cases ←

Rinke Hoekstra: Note that we are again talking about vocab... but this is a different issue than punning itself? ←

...TO handle that, maybe select fragments ahead of time to help them focus on a useful subset or two. ←

Ian Horrocks: Look at SQL -- who knows all of the language, but many users seem to manage. ←

Uli Sattler: And even for documentation, you could hide/fold in some of these, I guess. ←

ISSUE-94 Problem with roundtripping when going from functional-style syntax into RDF and back ←

Rinke Hoekstra: this is a replacement of ISSUE-2, as far as I understood the minutes of last week ←

If enough people want to discuss it, then tautologically it is WORTH discussing. ←

Alan Ruttenberg: think also about whether and to what extent round-tripping is a requirement. ←

Alan Ruttenberg: Note that it was resolved for reasons other than roundtripping - n^2 -> n size for encoding ←

Rinke Hoekstra: (please summarize what you are talking about, I am not following you.) ←

Peter Patel-Schneider: the issue is built-in annotation properties (and related stuff) like deprecation ←

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: let's not preserve deprecation, though versioning is still required. ←

Boris Motik: Even in OWL 1.0 deprecation was ignored, so we can ignore it in OWL 1.1 as well. ←

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: depr. is special, wierd,... just ignore it and see if something bad happens. ←

Uli Sattler: ...do we read this "who's screaming" with least or greatest fixpoint semantics? ←

Jeremy Carroll: if we do deprecate deprecation, then we better ask other groups whether there is some unintended bad synergy with what they are doing. ←

ACTION: Peter to write proposal to resolve 90 to drop deprecation and document in changes ←

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

ACTION: jeremy to edit references in syntax to address addison's bcp47 comment ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-74 - Edit references in syntax to address addison's bcp47 comment [on Jeremy Carroll - due 2008-01-30]. ←

ACTION: pfps to write proposal to resolve 90 to drop deprecation and document in changes ←

ACTION: Patel-Schneider to write proposal to resolve 90 to drop deprecation and document in changes ←

Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-75 - Write proposal to resolve 90 to drop deprecation and document in changes [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-01-30]. ←

Ontology properties are: owl:imports, owl:priorVersion, owl:backwardCompatibleWith, and owl:incompatibleWith. ←

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.

Alan Ruttenberg: leave it as it is, not an ontol. property; make it subservient to versioning. ←

Turning to The RDF to FS mapping does not provide a mapping for the owl:Ontology element to the Functional Style syntax ←

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I'm logging. I don't understand 'list attendees', sandro. Try /msg RRSAgent help ←

Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were DougL, Sandro, +1.312.052.aaaa, Rinke, Alan, jjc, msmith, Ratnesh, Ivan, bcuencag, MarkusK, Zhe, IanH, Evan_Wallace, pfps, Unknown1, JeffP, uli, dlm, bmotik ←

OWL Working Group

Minutes of 23 January 2008