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
16:56:26 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/05/07-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/05/07-owl-irc ←
16:56:28 <trackbot-ng> RRSAgent, make logs public
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs public ←
16:56:30 <trackbot-ng> Zakim, this will be OWLWG
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be OWLWG ←
16:56:30 <Zakim> ok, trackbot-ng; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 56 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot-ng; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 56 minutes ago ←
16:56:31 <trackbot-ng> Meeting: OWL Working Group Teleconference
16:56:31 <trackbot-ng> Date: 07 May 2008
16:57:27 <pfps> pfps has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.05.07/Agenda
Peter Patel-Schneider: pfps has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.05.07/Agenda ←
16:57:55 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started ←
16:57:56 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
16:58:13 <Zakim> +Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke ←
16:58:15 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
16:58:15 <Zakim> +Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke ←
16:58:42 <Rinke> ScribeNick: Rinke
(Scribe set to Rinke Hoekstra)
16:59:09 <Zakim> +??P16
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P16 ←
16:59:34 <Ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
16:59:34 <Zakim> ok, Ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Ivan; the call is being made ←
16:59:35 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
16:59:38 <Zakim> +??P17
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←
16:59:48 <uli> zakim, ??P17 is me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P17 is me ←
17:00:00 <Zakim> +uli; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it ←
17:00:13 <Zakim> +IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH ←
17:00:22 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:00:22 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:01:04 <Zakim> +??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
17:01:22 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
17:01:27 <Zakim> +??P11
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P11 ←
17:01:31 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P9 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P9 is me ←
17:01:31 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
17:01:36 <Zakim> +msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: +msmith ←
17:01:36 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P11 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P11 is me ←
17:01:37 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
17:01:43 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
17:01:45 <m_schnei> zakim, ??P3 is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, ??P3 is me ←
17:01:45 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it ←
17:01:49 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:01:49 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:01:54 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
17:01:54 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
17:01:56 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:01:56 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:01:58 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is Achille
Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is Achille ←
17:01:58 <Zakim> +Achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←
17:02:25 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:02:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli (muted), IanH (muted), m_schnei (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli (muted), IanH (muted), m_schnei (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Achille ←
17:02:28 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, Achille, msmith, m_schnei, alanr, Ivan, bcuencagrau, jeremy_, uli, MarkusK, Rinke, IanH, Zakim, RRSAgent, pfps, sandro, Carsten, trackbot-ng
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, Achille, msmith, m_schnei, alanr, Ivan, bcuencagrau, jeremy_, uli, MarkusK, Rinke, IanH, Zakim, RRSAgent, pfps, sandro, Carsten, trackbot-ng ←
17:02:32 <Zakim> +Alan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Alan ←
17:02:55 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:04:03 <Zakim> +??P18
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P18 ←
17:04:05 <sandro> zakim, mute anyone trying to assign me an action item
Sandro Hawke: zakim, mute anyone trying to assign me an action item ←
17:04:05 <Zakim> I don't understand you, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand you, sandro ←
17:04:15 <bijan> zakim, ??p18 is me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, ??p18 is me ←
17:04:15 <Zakim> +bijan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bijan; got it ←
17:04:29 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:29 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:04:46 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:05:10 <JeremyCarroll> Zakim, IPcaller is me
Jeremy Carroll: Zakim, IPcaller is me ←
17:05:10 <Zakim> +JeremyCarroll; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +JeremyCarroll; got it ←
17:05:15 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:05:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli (muted), IanH (muted), m_schnei (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Achille, Alan, Sandro,
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli (muted), IanH (muted), m_schnei (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Achille, Alan, Sandro, ←
17:05:18 <Zakim> ... bijan (muted), JeremyCarroll
Zakim IRC Bot: ... bijan (muted), JeremyCarroll ←
17:05:19 <Zakim> On IRC I see bijan, bmotik, Achille, msmith, m_schnei, alanr, Ivan, bcuencagrau, JeremyCarroll, uli, MarkusK, Rinke, IanH, Zakim, RRSAgent, pfps, sandro, Carsten, trackbot-ng
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bijan, bmotik, Achille, msmith, m_schnei, alanr, Ivan, bcuencagrau, JeremyCarroll, uli, MarkusK, Rinke, IanH, Zakim, RRSAgent, pfps, sandro, Carsten, trackbot-ng ←
17:05:24 <Rinke> topic: Admin
17:05:30 <Rinke> roll call
roll call ←
17:05:33 <alanr> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:05:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli (muted), IanH (muted), m_schnei (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Achille, Alan, Sandro,
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli (muted), IanH (muted), m_schnei (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), msmith, Achille, Alan, Sandro, ←
17:05:37 <Zakim> ... bijan (muted), JeremyCarroll
Zakim IRC Bot: ... bijan (muted), JeremyCarroll ←
17:05:38 <Zakim> On IRC I see bijan, bmotik, Achille, msmith, m_schnei, alanr, Ivan, bcuencagrau, JeremyCarroll, uli, MarkusK, Rinke, IanH, Zakim, RRSAgent, pfps, sandro, Carsten, trackbot-ng
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bijan, bmotik, Achille, msmith, m_schnei, alanr, Ivan, bcuencagrau, JeremyCarroll, uli, MarkusK, Rinke, IanH, Zakim, RRSAgent, pfps, sandro, Carsten, trackbot-ng ←
17:05:51 <Rinke> alanr: any amendments?
Alan Ruttenberg: any amendments? ←
17:06:11 <pfps> what about the recent message sent out about next week?
Peter Patel-Schneider: what about the recent message sent out about next week? ←
17:06:35 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:06:56 <pfps> that was it
Peter Patel-Schneider: that was it ←
17:07:18 <Rinke> alanr: next week's TC cancelled, no chairs, DL workshop
Alan Ruttenberg: next week's TC cancelled, no chairs, DL workshop ←
17:07:31 <Rinke> alanr: any objections?
Alan Ruttenberg: any objections? ←
17:07:48 <pfps> presumably Zakim would be available
Peter Patel-Schneider: presumably Zakim would be available ←
17:07:54 <Rinke> alanr: F2F3 in Boston on july 28 and 29
Alan Ruttenberg: F2F3 in Boston on july 28 and 29 ←
17:08:07 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People ←
17:08:34 <Rinke> alanr: please put yourself on the list if you're planning to attend or not
Alan Ruttenberg: please put yourself on the list if you're planning to attend or not ←
17:08:51 <Rinke> pending review actions
pending review actions ←
17:09:06 <Rinke> previous minutes
previous minutes ←
17:09:15 <Rinke> alanr: needed some cleanup, heard from peter
Alan Ruttenberg: needed some cleanup, heard from peter ←
17:09:19 <IanH> I did some work on them
Ian Horrocks: I did some work on them ←
17:09:36 <Rinke> proposed: accept previous minutes
PROPOSED: accept previous minutes ←
17:09:41 <pfps> depends on whether jeremy is happy
Peter Patel-Schneider: depends on whether jeremy is happy ←
17:10:12 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
17:10:12 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2008/05/07-owl-irc#T17-10-12
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2008/05/07-owl-irc#T17-10-12 ←
17:10:15 <sandro> +0
Sandro Hawke: +0 ←
17:10:16 <pfps> ~0
17:10:24 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:10:24 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:10:25 <Rinke> +1
+1 ←
17:10:25 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:10:25 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:10:26 <Ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:10:27 <msmith> +1 to accept minutes
Michael Smith: +1 to accept minutes ←
17:10:27 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:10:33 <ewallace> +0 (wasn't present)
Evan Wallace: +0 (wasn't present) ←
17:10:37 <Rinke> resolved: accept previous minutes
RESOLVED: accept previous minutes ←
17:10:39 <JeremyCarroll> +0
Jeremy Carroll: +0 ←
17:10:39 <baojie> 0
17:10:58 <Rinke> alanr: if you weren't there you're actually a very good reviewer of the minutes: should be comprehensible
Alan Ruttenberg: if you weren't there you're actually a very good reviewer of the minutes: should be comprehensible ←
17:11:01 <Rinke> topic: pending review actions
17:11:12 <Rinke> action 131
17:11:28 <Rinke> alanr: implement decisions from the F2F2 for RDF mapping in particular
Alan Ruttenberg: implement decisions from the F2F2 for RDF mapping in particular ←
17:11:34 <Rinke> alanr: has obviously been done
Alan Ruttenberg: has obviously been done ←
17:12:04 <Rinke> alanr: solicit some reviewers to see whether this has been done (implementers, and someone involved in OWL Full)
Alan Ruttenberg: solicit some reviewers to see whether this has been done (implementers, and someone involved in OWL Full) ←
17:12:07 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:12:07 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
17:12:16 <Rinke> alanr: Michael? would you be willing to review
Alan Ruttenberg: Michael? would you be willing to review ←
17:12:29 <Rinke> m_schnei: well, hmm, ok, yes..
Michael Schneider: well, hmm, ok, yes.. ←
17:12:43 <Rinke> alanr: have the potential to affect owl full
Alan Ruttenberg: have the potential to affect owl full ←
17:12:53 <Rinke> sandro: would it be helpful to create a colour-coded diff
Sandro Hawke: would it be helpful to create a colour-coded diff ←
17:12:59 <bmotik> Don't really bother with a diff: it will be useless.
Boris Motik: Don't really bother with a diff: it will be useless. ←
17:13:07 <Rinke> m_schnei: differences are quite big
Michael Schneider: differences are quite big ←
17:13:13 <Rinke> m_schnei: will simply read it
Michael Schneider: will simply read it ←
17:13:22 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:13:22 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:13:28 <Rinke> alanr: Achille are you willing to take this on?
Alan Ruttenberg: Achille are you willing to take this on? ←
17:13:35 <Rinke> Achille: won't be able to do this in the next two weeks
Achille Fokoue: won't be able to do this in the next two weeks ←
17:13:45 <Rinke> alanr: that's no problem
Alan Ruttenberg: that's no problem ←
17:14:02 <Rinke> alanr: do you want to do this, and if so before when would you be able to do this?
Alan Ruttenberg: do you want to do this, and if so before when would you be able to do this? ←
17:14:06 <Rinke> Achille: maybe end of may?
Achille Fokoue: maybe end of may? ←
17:14:14 <Rinke> alanr: would be happy personally, if you're willing
Alan Ruttenberg: would be happy personally, if you're willing ←
17:14:18 <bijan> Do we have publication goals?
Bijan Parsia: Do we have publication goals? ←
17:14:59 <Zakim> +baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie ←
17:15:14 <Rinke> sandro: will action Achille and Michael
Sandro Hawke: will action Achille and Michael ←
17:15:30 <Rinke> sandro: all documents? or parts? due date?
Sandro Hawke: all documents? or parts? due date? ←
17:15:33 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:15:33 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
17:15:40 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:15:40 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:15:47 <sandro> ACTION: m_schnei to review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 20
ACTION: m_schnei to review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 20 ←
17:15:47 <trackbot-ng> Sorry, couldn't find user - m_schnei
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - m_schnei ←
17:15:53 <sandro> ACTION: schneider to review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 20
ACTION: schneider to review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 20 ←
17:15:53 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-147 - Review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 20 [on Michael Schneider - due 2008-05-14].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-147 - Review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 20 [on Michael Schneider - due 2008-05-14]. ←
17:16:02 <sandro> ACTION: achille to review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 30
ACTION: achille to review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 30 ←
17:16:02 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-148 - Review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 30 [on Achille Fokoue - due 2008-05-14].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-148 - Review the changes made as result of ACTION-131 due May 30 [on Achille Fokoue - due 2008-05-14]. ←
17:16:02 <Rinke> action 133
17:16:21 <Rinke> alanr: is actually related, and the review would include that action as well
Alan Ruttenberg: is actually related, and the review would include that action as well ←
17:16:33 <Rinke> alanr: if anyone disagrees that these actions aren't done, speak up
Alan Ruttenberg: if anyone disagrees that these actions aren't done, speak up ←
17:16:38 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Anonymous_Individuals
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Anonymous_Individuals ←
17:16:42 <Rinke> action 132
17:16:57 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives ←
17:17:20 <Rinke> action 129
17:17:21 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:17:21 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:17:40 <Rinke> alanr: you laid out the possible options, do you have any particular idea about this, bijan?
Alan Ruttenberg: you laid out the possible options, do you have any particular idea about this, bijan? ←
17:17:52 <Rinke> bijan: I didn't think that would be part of the action
Bijan Parsia: I didn't think that would be part of the action ←
17:18:31 <Rinke> alanr: what we should do at least is ask if people could respond to vent their ideas/opinions to the options listed by bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: what we should do at least is ask if people could respond to vent their ideas/opinions to the options listed by bijan ←
17:18:43 <pfps> how to effect the request?
Peter Patel-Schneider: how to effect the request? ←
17:18:49 <Rinke> bijan: didn't feel like iterating all examples, if someone feels like adding examples, please do!
Bijan Parsia: didn't feel like iterating all examples, if someone feels like adding examples, please do! ←
17:18:56 <Rinke> action 42
17:18:59 <Rinke> action 43
17:19:12 <Rinke> alanr: any update about this from jeremy, bijan, sandro?
Alan Ruttenberg: any update about this from jeremy, bijan, sandro? ←
17:19:19 <bijan> I wait upon a solution
Bijan Parsia: I wait upon a solution ←
17:19:35 <Rinke> sandro: no progress, willing to work on this, can't get it to the top of my queue
Sandro Hawke: no progress, willing to work on this, can't get it to the top of my queue ←
17:20:04 <Rinke> alanr: if anyone has test cases, please add them to the wiki
Alan Ruttenberg: if anyone has test cases, please add them to the wiki ←
17:20:08 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:20:08 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:20:16 <Rinke> bijan: if anyone could point me to a preferred format for this
Bijan Parsia: if anyone could point me to a preferred format for this ←
17:20:23 <Rinke> action 136
17:20:29 <Rinke> alanr: jeremy?
Alan Ruttenberg: jeremy? ←
17:20:50 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: don't know how much time is needed to discuss this, for next week is within the RIF timescale
Jeremy Carroll: don't know how much time is needed to discuss this, for next week is within the RIF timescale ←
17:20:55 <Rinke> alanr: no meeting next week
Alan Ruttenberg: no meeting next week ←
17:20:55 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:20:55 <Zakim> m_schnei was already muted, m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei was already muted, m_schnei ←
17:21:05 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: any chance to fit 5 minutes in toda?
Jeremy Carroll: any chance to fit 5 minutes in today? ←
17:21:16 <Rinke> alanr: I'll put it in as the first issue
Alan Ruttenberg: I'll put it in as the first issue ←
17:21:35 <Rinke> s/toda/today
17:21:43 <pfps> remember to refresh :-)
Peter Patel-Schneider: remember to refresh :-) ←
17:21:56 <Rinke> action 142
17:22:01 <bijan> Peter finished it before I could start
Bijan Parsia: Peter finished it before I could start ←
17:22:07 <Rinke> alanr: taken over by proposals from peter
Alan Ruttenberg: taken over by proposals from peter ←
17:22:13 <Rinke> alanr: let's close that
Alan Ruttenberg: let's close that ←
17:22:34 <Rinke> action 145
17:22:39 <Rinke> alanr: Jeremy?
Alan Ruttenberg: Jeremy? ←
17:22:42 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: forgot this
Jeremy Carroll: forgot this ←
17:22:45 <Rinke> action 146
17:22:49 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: working on this
Jeremy Carroll: working on this ←
17:22:53 <Rinke> action 144
17:23:16 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: this one has slipped my mind, and I am unlikely to push this forward
Jeremy Carroll: this one has slipped my mind, and I am unlikely to push this forward ←
17:23:30 <Rinke> alanr: does the current proposal satisfy our need in this area
Alan Ruttenberg: does the current proposal satisfy our need in this area ←
17:24:37 <Rinke> action 143
17:24:37 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
17:24:43 <Rinke> alanr: didn't get to that
Alan Ruttenberg: didn't get to that ←
17:24:48 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Primer#OWL_1_Species
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Primer#OWL_1_Species ←
17:24:51 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:24:51 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:24:56 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:25:00 <Rinke> bijan: one question about this last question
Bijan Parsia: one question about this last question ←
17:25:02 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
17:25:16 <bijan> OWL Lite was intended to be similar to EL++, DL Lite, or OWL-R but there were several problems with its design, most notably that it was not significantly easier to implement nor more robustly scalable than OWL DL. Thus, there wasn't a huge performance (or tool) benefit to staying inside OWL Lite. OWL Lite also could express things that were in OWL DL but in very indirect ways that were very surprising. For example, while the "complementOf" construct was not part of
Bijan Parsia: OWL Lite was intended to be similar to EL++, DL Lite, or OWL-R but there were several problems with its design, most notably that it was not significantly easier to implement nor more robustly scalable than OWL DL. Thus, there wasn't a huge performance (or tool) benefit to staying inside OWL Lite. OWL Lite also could express things that were in OWL DL but in very indirect ways that were very surprising. For example, while the "complementOf" construct was not part of ←
17:25:16 <bijan> OWL Lite is a subset of OWL DL 2 and OWL Full 2 but is no longer a recommended profile.
Bijan Parsia: OWL Lite is a subset of OWL DL 2 and OWL Full 2 but is no longer a recommended profile. ←
17:25:19 <Rinke> bijan: I thought I sent this email, I already have some text about the old species. I just put a pointer to it
Bijan Parsia: I thought I sent this email, I already have some text about the old species. I just put a pointer to it ←
17:25:25 <Rinke> bijan: (in the primer)
Bijan Parsia: (in the primer) ←
17:25:37 <Rinke> alanr: thought was that the particular wording that jeremy had was quite nice
Alan Ruttenberg: thought was that the particular wording that jeremy had was quite nice ←
17:25:57 <Rinke> alanr: if you think you have covered it, communicate this to jeremy
Alan Ruttenberg: if you think you have covered it, communicate this to jeremy ←
17:26:06 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:26:06 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:26:09 <Rinke> alanr: I'll put an editorial note to put in the text that he had
Alan Ruttenberg: I'll put an editorial note to put in the text that he had ←
17:26:11 <JeremyCarroll> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0028
Jeremy Carroll: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0028 ←
17:26:20 <Rinke> topic: rif compatibility
17:26:36 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: email linked from yesterday, mentioned a very few points. One point I forgot to put in the email
Jeremy Carroll: email linked from yesterday, mentioned a very few points. One point I forgot to put in the email ←
17:26:37 <IanH> Scribe assist: Jeremy said: 118N guys don't know much about SW; rely on him to advise; he believes that they will be happy with our current position (dealing with literals)
Ian Horrocks: Scribe assist: Jeremy said: 118N guys don't know much about SW; rely on him to advise; he believes that they will be happy with our current position (dealing with literals) ←
17:26:53 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: they use a generalised graphs something something bnodes literals
Jeremy Carroll: they use a generalised graphs something something bnodes literals ←
17:27:19 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: an RDF graph a subject is a bnode or uri, a predicate which is a uri, an obect which is a uri or literal
Jeremy Carroll: an RDF graph a subject is a bnode or uri, a predicate which is a uri, an obect which is a uri or literal ←
17:27:32 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:27:40 <Ivan> sparql dropped that!
Ivan Herman: sparql dropped that! ←
17:27:42 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: in their design they allow all three types in all three positions. This is a generalisation and quite an improvement, if you ask me
Jeremy Carroll: in their design they allow all three types in all three positions. This is a generalisation and quite an improvement, if you ask me ←
17:27:49 <Rinke> alanr: any impact on serialisation
Alan Ruttenberg: any impact on serialisation ←
17:27:58 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:28:07 <pfps> q+
17:28:09 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: it works with RDF graphs, it might mean that you can have a conclusion in RIF that can't be serialised
Jeremy Carroll: it works with RDF graphs, it might mean that you can have a conclusion in RIF that can't be serialised ←
17:28:14 <pfps> wait
Peter Patel-Schneider: wait ←
17:28:15 <bijan> Dropped what?
Bijan Parsia: Dropped what? ←
17:28:21 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:28:22 <Rinke> pfps: can we do this too?
Peter Patel-Schneider: can we do this too? ←
17:28:26 <sandro> +1 Peter
Sandro Hawke: +1 Peter ←
17:28:27 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: allright by me
Jeremy Carroll: allright by me ←
17:28:29 <m_schnei> if we allow generilized graphs, then we can have anonymous inverses directly mapped to RDF :)
Michael Schneider: if we allow generilized graphs, then we can have anonymous inverses directly mapped to RDF :) ←
17:28:42 <Rinke> pfps: surprised that alan isn't jumping up and down and screaming
Peter Patel-Schneider: surprised that alan isn't jumping up and down and screaming ←
17:29:08 <Rinke> pfps: destroys serialisability of everything
Peter Patel-Schneider: destroys serialisability of everything ←
17:29:14 <bijan> I'll note that Alan is among the public, so can comment
Bijan Parsia: I'll note that Alan is among the public, so can comment ←
17:29:29 <sandro> Peter: I'd like OWL to do this too -- to use generalized RDF graphs.
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: I'd like OWL to do this too -- to use generalized RDF graphs. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
17:29:44 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: at the end of the email, they have text about OWL2 that could be more neutral
Jeremy Carroll: at the end of the email, they have text about OWL2 that could be more neutral ←
17:29:47 <alanr> IIRC they don't have an RDF serialization at all
Alan Ruttenberg: IIRC they don't have an RDF serialization at all ←
17:29:51 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: about punning
Jeremy Carroll: about punning ←
17:30:19 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: I would suggest that this WG should make that comment, it's not for me to say that by myself
Jeremy Carroll: I would suggest that this WG should make that comment, it's not for me to say that by myself ←
17:30:33 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: the minimal review is that comment, along with some text like
Jeremy Carroll: the minimal review is that comment, along with some text like ←
17:30:41 <pfps> Well, actually, "go outside of RDF" - generalized RDF graphs are too limiting.
Peter Patel-Schneider: Well, actually, "go outside of RDF" - generalized RDF graphs are too limiting. ←
17:30:41 <Rinke> (...)
(...) ←
17:31:02 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: a very minor point, is that they haven't decided what sorts of entailments to include for RDF
Jeremy Carroll: a very minor point, is that they haven't decided what sorts of entailments to include for RDF ←
17:31:16 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: simple entailment, rdf entailment, rdfs entailment
Jeremy Carroll: simple entailment, rdf entailment, rdfs entailment ←
17:31:19 <m_schnei> I think the problem is that you cannot represent predicate bNodes in RDF/XML (?)
Michael Schneider: I think the problem is that you cannot represent predicate bNodes in RDF/XML (?) ←
17:31:21 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:31:26 <pfps> q+ to mention that this has already been raised to the RIF WG
Peter Patel-Schneider: q+ to mention that this has already been raised to the RIF WG ←
17:31:26 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: should say, don't bother thinking about RDF entailments
Jeremy Carroll: should say, don't bother thinking about RDF entailments ←
17:32:00 <bijan> q+ to ask about presentation syntax
Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask about presentation syntax ←
17:32:05 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: bulk of my comment is about a very silly thing actually... syntax is not standard
Jeremy Carroll: bulk of my comment is about a very silly thing actually... syntax is not standard ←
17:32:44 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: we might want to have some minor supportive text from the WG
Jeremy Carroll: we might want to have some minor supportive text from the WG ←
17:32:51 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:32:51 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to mention that this has already been raised to the RIF WG
Zakim IRC Bot: pfps, you wanted to mention that this has already been raised to the RIF WG ←
17:33:20 <Rinke> pfps: comment about the inscrutable syntax choices has been pointed out to them many times
Peter Patel-Schneider: comment about the inscrutable syntax choices has been pointed out to them several times ←
17:33:25 <Rinke> pfps: without much success
Peter Patel-Schneider: without much success ←
17:33:32 <bijan> ack bijan
Bijan Parsia: ack bijan ←
17:33:33 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to ask about presentation syntax
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to ask about presentation syntax ←
17:33:38 <ewallace> +1 on complaining as a wg about the ^^ syntax
Evan Wallace: +1 on complaining as a wg about the ^^ syntax ←
17:33:44 <pfps> s/many/several/
17:33:46 <Rinke> bijan: I understand this to be part of the presentation syntax
Bijan Parsia: I understand this to be part of the presentation syntax ←
17:34:03 <Rinke> sandro: yes
Sandro Hawke: yes ←
17:34:13 <Rinke> bijan: since it doesn't hit the wire, I don't care too much
Bijan Parsia: since it doesn't hit the wire, I don't care too much ←
17:34:33 <Rinke> bijan: it's unclear whether our WG should care too much, unless we want to synchronise our spec. styles
Bijan Parsia: it's unclear whether our WG should care too much, unless we want to synchronise our spec. styles ←
17:34:39 <Ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:34:51 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:34:51 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:34:52 <IanH> I'm inclined to agree with Bijan on this
Ian Horrocks: I'm inclined to agree with Bijan on this ←
17:35:13 <Rinke> Ivan: it may affect one point. If we want to harmonise on the profile, we will be forced to take over that syntax in our description and pay the price
Ivan Herman: it may affect one point. If we want to harmonise on the profile, we will be forced to take over that syntax in our description and pay the price ←
17:35:18 <Rinke> sandro: I strongly disagree
Sandro Hawke: I strongly disagree ←
17:35:29 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:35:33 <JeremyCarroll> q+
Jeremy Carroll: q+ ←
17:35:38 <Ivan> ack Ivan
Ivan Herman: ack Ivan ←
17:35:39 <Rinke> sandro: there's no grammar, you are not allowed to parse this syntax, it just helps to explain the semantics
Sandro Hawke: there's no grammar, you are not allowed to parse this syntax, it just helps to explain the semantics ←
17:35:41 <bijan> Though they claim that's not a writeable syntax, people always parse it
Bijan Parsia: Though they claim that's not a writeable syntax, people always parse it ←
17:35:43 <alanr> ack Ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Ivan ←
17:35:46 <Rinke> alanr: AS was parsed in OWL 1
Alan Ruttenberg: AS was parsed in OWL 1 ←
17:35:54 <Rinke> sandro: WG said you shouldn't
Sandro Hawke: WG said you shouldn't ←
17:36:01 <Rinke> alanr: is his specified as such?
Alan Ruttenberg: is his specified as such? ←
17:36:05 <Rinke> sandro: yes
Sandro Hawke: yes ←
17:36:23 <Rinke> .. something about internationalised strings
.. something about internationalised strings ←
17:36:24 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
17:36:32 <alanr> ack JeremyCarroll
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeremyCarroll ←
17:36:38 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
17:36:49 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: sandro was arguing agains including a comment on this topic (deviation from norms in presentation syntax)
Jeremy Carroll: sandro was arguing agains including a comment on this topic (deviation from norms in presentation syntax) ←
17:36:50 <alanr> q+ bijan to oops
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ bijan to oops ←
17:36:52 <Rinke> sandro: agnostic
Sandro Hawke: agnostic ←
17:37:12 <alanr> q+ alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ alanr ←
17:37:14 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: many people have raised this, and it hasn't been taken notice of does suggest that it should be taken up as a WG issue
Jeremy Carroll: many people have raised this, and it hasn't been taken notice of does suggest that it should be taken up as a WG issue ←
17:37:19 <pfps> q+ to note that rdf:iri shows up in the RIF XML syntax
Peter Patel-Schneider: q+ to note that rdf:iri shows up in the RIF XML syntax ←
17:37:22 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:37:22 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
17:37:25 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: each WG has a task to take notice of other WG's
Jeremy Carroll: each WG has a task to take notice of other WG's ←
17:38:03 <Rinke> bijan: just to go back to ivan's point. I agree that it is not to be serialised. We do have an interest, it is generally good to have the specs harmonised: some harmony is beneficial to reader
Bijan Parsia: just to go back to ivan's point. I agree that it is not to be serialised. We do have an interest, it is generally good to have the specs harmonised: some harmony is beneficial to reader ←
17:38:20 <Rinke> bijan: it's still not a WG issue, jeremy is free to raise a last call issue
Bijan Parsia: it's still not a WG issue, jeremy is free to raise a last call issue ←
17:38:21 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
17:38:21 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to oops
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to oops ←
17:38:31 <sandro> Yeah -- it might make sense to have OWL and RIF rationalize their Presentation Syntaxes.
Sandro Hawke: Yeah -- it might make sense to have OWL and RIF rationalize their Presentation Syntaxes. ←
17:38:34 <Rinke> bijan: we should focus on things that really impact our work
Bijan Parsia: we should focus on things that really impact our work ←
17:38:44 <alanr> ack alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: ack alanr ←
17:38:51 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:38:51 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:38:51 <Rinke> bijan: not on just 'icky' stuf
Bijan Parsia: not on just 'icky' stuff ←
17:38:55 <Rinke> s/stuf/stuff
17:39:13 <Rinke> alanr: there's no show stoppers here. 1) don't waste your time on rdf 2) presentation syntax isn't standard
Alan Ruttenberg: there's no show stoppers here. 1) don't waste your time on rdf 2) presentation syntax isn't standard ←
17:39:34 <Rinke> alanr: we could send a note saying that we think you have done a good job etc. etc.
Alan Ruttenberg: we could send a note saying that we think you have done a good job etc. etc. ←
17:39:45 <sandro> q+ to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes?
Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes? ←
17:39:51 <Rinke> alanr: reading both specs shouldn't be confusing, it would help to have a common syntax for readability reasons
Alan Ruttenberg: reading both specs shouldn't be confusing, it would help to have a common syntax for readability reasons ←
17:40:01 <pfps> http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#XML_Serialization_Syntax_for_RIF-BLD shows the syntax
Peter Patel-Schneider: http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/BLD#XML_Serialization_Syntax_for_RIF-BLD shows the syntax ←
17:40:02 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
17:40:02 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to note that rdf:iri shows up in the RIF XML syntax
Zakim IRC Bot: pfps, you wanted to note that rdf:iri shows up in the RIF XML syntax ←
17:40:08 <Rinke> alanr: just show our interest on this issue, but no requirement
Alan Ruttenberg: just show our interest on this issue, but no requirement ←
17:40:17 <alanr> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
17:40:17 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes?
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes? ←
17:40:22 <Rinke> pfps: the syntax is not just in the presentation but also in the RIF-BLD
Peter Patel-Schneider: the syntax is not just in the presentation but also in the RIF-BLD ←
17:40:23 <sandro> ack
Sandro Hawke: ack ←
17:40:31 <Rinke> sandro: I'm not sure what to make of that
Sandro Hawke: I'm not sure what to make of that ←
17:40:38 <Rinke> alanr: it's beyond presentation syntax
Alan Ruttenberg: it's beyond presentation syntax ←
17:40:48 <Rinke> sandro: I don't know what the concern is in RIF-BLD
Sandro Hawke: I don't know what the concern is in RIF-BLD ←
17:41:00 <Rinke> sandro: don't know if there's a problem with rif:iri
Sandro Hawke: don't know if there's a problem with rif:iri ←
17:41:30 <Rinke> sandro: my understanding is that RIF does not use IRIs as symbols (As owl and rdf). Instead it has a data mapping to go from IRIs to the arbitrary resources they stand for
Sandro Hawke: my understanding is that RIF does not use IRIs as symbols (As owl and rdf). Instead it has a data mapping to go from IRIs to the arbitrary resources they stand for ←
17:41:54 <Rinke> sandro: esp. michael kiefer preferred to do it like this
Sandro Hawke: esp. michael kiefer preferred to do it like this ←
17:42:03 <Rinke> alanr: do you think that's something we should be commenting on?
Alan Ruttenberg: do you think that's something we should be commenting on? ←
17:42:15 <Rinke> pfps: that's a good question... if we wanna fight, sure... but expect to fight
Peter Patel-Schneider: that's a good question... if we wanna fight, sure... but expect to fight ←
17:42:26 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
17:42:54 <Rinke> alanr: my proposal is that we don't wan to fight, but say very clearly what we feel, and go on the record. Without saying that they *have* to fix the issue in the way we propose
Alan Ruttenberg: my proposal is that we don't wan to fight, but say very clearly what we feel, and go on the record. Without saying that they *have* to fix the issue in the way we propose ←
17:43:17 <sandro> q+ to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes?
Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes? ←
17:43:21 <Rinke> alanr: if peter doesn't mind writing up the note (removing jeremy's irritation etc.)
Alan Ruttenberg: if peter doesn't mind writing up the note (removing jeremy's irritation etc.) ←
17:43:27 <pfps> i don't have any idea of what should be said in a communication to the RIF WG
Peter Patel-Schneider: i don't have any idea of what should be said in a communication to the RIF WG ←
17:43:39 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:43:42 <alanr> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
17:43:42 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes?
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask how much effort / delay OWL-WG would be willing to tollerate on unifying Presentation Syntaxes? ←
17:43:46 <IanH> I'm not sure if I can promise to remove Jeremy's irritation ;-)
Ian Horrocks: I'm not sure if I can promise to remove Jeremy's irritation ;-) ←
17:43:53 <JeremyCarroll> "We request one change [concerning description of OWL2] and have two other comments [RDF entailment & presentation syntax]"
Jeremy Carroll: "We request one change [concerning description of OWL2] and have two other comments [RDF entailment & presentation syntax]" ←
17:44:24 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to respond to Sandro
Jeremy Carroll: q+ to respond to Sandro ←
17:44:32 <Rinke> sandro: one other comment, if you can say where it's actually harmful that would be good. If you want to have them change it, you should be clear on how much you would want this WG (owl) to slow down
Sandro Hawke: one other comment, if you can say where it's actually harmful that would be good. If you want to have them change it, you should be clear on how much you would want this WG (owl) to slow down ←
17:44:53 <bijan> But then that's a jeremy comment and not an OWLWG comment
Bijan Parsia: But then that's a jeremy comment and not an OWLWG comment ←
17:44:54 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: it's not about RIF and OWL but about the specs that are already out there!
Jeremy Carroll: it's not about RIF and OWL but about the specs that are already out there! ←
17:45:08 <ewallace> Do we care about Jeremy's item 17 (text about OWL 2 and punning)?
Evan Wallace: Do we care about Jeremy's item 17 (text about OWL 2 and punning)? ←
17:45:18 <JeremyCarroll> q+
Jeremy Carroll: q+ ←
17:45:24 <Rinke> alanr: strawpoll, action to a couple of people, simply to write up some documentation in a neutral tone about what we saw and what we thought
Alan Ruttenberg: strawpoll, action to a couple of people, simply to write up some documentation in a neutral tone about what we saw and what we thought ←
17:45:37 <sandro> +1 to alan's proposal
Sandro Hawke: +1 to alan's proposal ←
17:45:55 <Ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:45:57 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: we'll go on to the straw poll
Jeremy Carroll: we'll go on to the straw poll ←
17:45:57 <JeremyCarroll> +1
Jeremy Carroll: +1 ←
17:46:02 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
17:46:03 <Rinke> STRAWPOLL
STRAWPOLL ←
17:46:04 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
17:46:07 <pfps> ~0
17:46:09 <Rinke> Rinke: +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:46:12 <MarkusK> 0
Markus Krötzsch: 0 ←
17:46:13 <bcuencagrau> 0
17:46:15 <uli> 0
Uli Sattler: 0 ←
17:46:15 <m_schnei> +epsilon (I still need more information on this)
Michael Schneider: +epsilon (I still need more information on this) ←
17:46:18 <MartinD> 0
Martin Dzbor: 0 ←
17:46:19 <msmith> 0
Michael Smith: 0 ←
17:46:21 <bijan> +1 to any response...I certainly wouldn't block arbitrary complaints to some other working group :)
Bijan Parsia: +1 to any response...I certainly wouldn't block arbitrary complaints to some other working group :) ←
17:46:43 <Rinke> alanr: neutral and positive mix...
Alan Ruttenberg: neutral and positive mix... ←
17:47:09 <Rinke> alanr: keep this action open?
Alan Ruttenberg: keep this action open? ←
17:47:11 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: yes
Jeremy Carroll: yes ←
17:47:23 <Rinke> topic: issues
17:47:32 <Rinke> Proposals to Resolve Issues
Proposals to Resolve Issues ←
17:47:37 <Rinke> alanr: 15 minutes max
Alan Ruttenberg: 15 minutes max ←
17:47:43 <Rinke> alanr: on issues
Alan Ruttenberg: on issues ←
17:47:48 <Rinke> issue 85
17:47:53 <Ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:48:05 <Rinke> alanr: proposed to close as postponed, better use a better annotation syntax
Alan Ruttenberg: proposed to close as postponed, better use a better annotation syntax ←
17:48:19 <JeremyCarroll> q-
Jeremy Carroll: q- ←
17:48:30 <Rinke> alanr: Alan Rector, who is the champion on this, was fine to postpone
Alan Ruttenberg: Alan Rector, who is the champion on this, was fine to postpone ←
17:48:39 <alanr> ack JeremyCarroll
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeremyCarroll ←
17:48:54 <Rinke> Ivan: we did not officially approve jeremy's last point as a comment to the RIF group and the text they use regarding owl 2
Ivan Herman: we did not officially approve jeremy's last point as a comment to the RIF group and the text they use regarding owl 2 ←
17:49:16 <Rinke> alanr: my idea was that the action would address this, and we would have some text that we could approve
Alan Ruttenberg: my idea was that the action would address this, and we would have some text that we could approve ←
17:49:37 <alanr> ack Ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Ivan ←
17:49:43 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: perhaps approve on a draft via email, and send this draft before the deadline, vote on this post hoc
Jeremy Carroll: perhaps approve on a draft via email, and send this draft before the deadline, vote on this post hoc ←
17:49:44 <m_schnei> why do we only have /one/ week?
Michael Schneider: why do we only have /one/ week? ←
17:49:48 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: on the next telecone
Jeremy Carroll: on the next telecone ←
17:50:05 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:50:06 <Rinke> alanr: any questions abbout issue 85
Alan Ruttenberg: any questions abbout ISSUE-85 ←
17:50:07 <JeremyCarroll> RIF's timeline includes deciding whether they are ready for last call or not soon
Jeremy Carroll: RIF's timeline includes deciding whether they are ready for last call or not soon ←
17:50:28 <Rinke> Proposed: to resolve ISSUE 83 as per http://www.w3.org/mid/61CBB11D-607F-40E0-AA1B-620C48E7E587%2540comlab.ox.ac.uk
PROPOSED: to resolve ISSUE-83 as per http://www.w3.org/mid/61CBB11D-607F-40E0-AA1B-620C48E7E587%2540comlab.ox.ac.uk ←
17:50:37 <pfps> +1 .................. (waiting for the proposal)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 .................. (waiting for the proposal) ←
17:50:40 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:50:40 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:50:41 <JeremyCarroll> 0
Jeremy Carroll: 0 ←
17:50:45 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
17:50:45 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:50:46 <Ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
17:50:46 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:50:46 <Rinke> +1
+1 ←
17:50:47 <ewallace> 0
Evan Wallace: 0 ←
17:50:48 <MartinD> +1
Martin Dzbor: +1 ←
17:50:48 <MarkusK> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
17:50:51 <sandro> 0
Sandro Hawke: 0 ←
17:50:52 <msmith> +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
17:50:52 <JeremyCarroll> 0 (haven't been following this one)
Jeremy Carroll: 0 (haven't been following this one) ←
17:50:53 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:51:04 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
17:51:12 <Rinke> resolved: to resolve ISSUE 83 as per http://www.w3.org/mid/61CBB11D-607F-40E0-AA1B-620C48E7E587%2540comlab.ox.ac.uk
RESOLVED: to resolve ISSUE-85?! as per http://www.w3.org/mid/61CBB11D-607F-40E0-AA1B-620C48E7E587%2540comlab.ox.ac.uk ←
17:51:23 <m_schnei> still RIF - wouldn't this be something for after last call? then they belive they are fine, and ask others for input
Michael Schneider: still RIF - wouldn't this be something for after last call? then they belive they are fine, and ask others for input ←
17:51:28 <Rinke> issue 97
17:51:38 <uli> s/83/85?!
17:52:01 <alanr> s/83/85/
17:52:46 <Rinke> alanr: question of whether or not the actual XSLT transformation needed to be there, or whether the GRDDL could simply point to the mapping
Alan Ruttenberg: question of whether or not the actual XSLT transformation needed to be there, or whether the GRDDL could simply point to the mapping ←
17:52:53 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:52:53 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:53:11 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#txforms
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#txforms ←
17:53:11 <Rinke> alanr: trick that I proposed does not actually work, as GRDDL does require an XSLT
Alan Ruttenberg: trick that I proposed does not actually work, as GRDDL does require an XSLT ←
17:53:21 <bijan> As noted above, each GRDDL transformation specifies a transformation property, a function from XPath document nodes to RDF graphs. This function need not be total; it may have a domain smaller than all XML document nodes. For example, use of xsl:message with terminate="yes" may be used to signal that the input is outside the domain of the transformation.
Bijan Parsia: As noted above, each GRDDL transformation specifies a transformation property, a function from XPath document nodes to RDF graphs. This function need not be total; it may have a domain smaller than all XML document nodes. For example, use of xsl:message with terminate="yes" may be used to signal that the input is outside the domain of the transformation. ←
17:53:21 <bijan> Developers of transformations should make available representations in widely-supported formats. XSLT version 1[XSLT1] is the format most widely supported by GRDDL-aware agents as of this writing, though though XSLT2[XSLT2] deployment is increasing. While technically Javascript, C, or virtually any other programming language may be used to express transformations for GRDDL, XSLT is specifically designed to express XML to XML transformations and has some good safety c
Bijan Parsia: Developers of transformations should make available representations in widely-supported formats. XSLT version 1[XSLT1] is the format most widely supported by GRDDL-aware agents as of this writing, though though XSLT2[XSLT2] deployment is increasing. While technically Javascript, C, or virtually any other programming language may be used to express transformations for GRDDL, XSLT is specifically designed to express XML to XML transformations and has some good safety c ←
17:53:22 <Ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:53:40 <Rinke> bijan: If I look at the GRDLL document it does not specify that you have to have an XSLT, it just mentions that you should have a transformation
Bijan Parsia: If I look at the GRDLL document it does not specify that you have to have an XSLT, it just mentions that you should have a transformation ←
17:53:55 <Rinke> bijan: I would just like to have some textual support for your claim
Bijan Parsia: I would just like to have some textual support for your claim ←
17:54:10 <alanr> ack Ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Ivan ←
17:54:34 <Rinke> Ivan: bijan is right in terms of the recommendation. In fact, the GRDDL spec does not require the XSLT.
Ivan Herman: bijan is right in terms of the recommendation. In fact, the GRDDL spec does not require the XSLT. ←
17:54:38 <sandro> can't hear Ivan very well --- distant echos or something.
Sandro Hawke: can't hear Ivan very well --- distant echos or something. ←
17:54:43 <bijan> q+
Bijan Parsia: q+ ←
17:54:52 <sandro> (Ivan, it sounds like you're in a cathedral)
Sandro Hawke: (Ivan, it sounds like you're in a cathedral) ←
17:55:15 <bijan> See: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/no-dtd/ for why having speced retrievable thigns is a bad idea
Scribe problem: the name 'See' does not match any of the 53 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 Christine Golbreich Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Diego Calvanese Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Héctor Pérez Urbina Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Jie Bao Joanne Luciano Jonathan Rees Kendall Clark Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Michael Schneider Michel Dumontier 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 See: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/no-dtd/ for why having speced retrievable thigns is a bad idea [ Scribe Assist by Bijan Parsia ] ←
17:55:39 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:55:40 <Rinke> alanr: one of the objections to doing this was that we would have two normative rdf mappings. What we thought we could do is to assign an action to someone who would be happy to create an XSLT, and only publish it as a note of the wg
Alan Ruttenberg: one of the objections to doing this was that we would have two normative rdf mappings. What we thought we could do is to assign an action to someone who would be happy to create an XSLT, and only publish it as a note of the wg ←
17:55:48 <pfps> q+
17:55:50 <JeremyCarroll> q+
Jeremy Carroll: q+ ←
17:55:55 <IanH> zakim, unmute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, unmute me ←
17:55:55 <Zakim> IanH should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should no longer be muted ←
17:56:01 <Rinke> alanr: would avoid any confusion about the status, and be friendly to anyone who would like to use that technology
Alan Ruttenberg: would avoid any confusion about the status, and be friendly to anyone who would like to use that technology ←
17:56:34 <Rinke> bijan: bad idea that the WG does implementation (especially as there are competing implementations such as the OWL API)
Bijan Parsia: bad idea that the WG does implementation (especially as there are competing implementations such as the OWL API) ←
17:56:51 <Rinke> bijan: best practice is to include it in their software
Bijan Parsia: best practice is to include it in their software ←
17:57:20 <alanr> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:57:26 <Ivan> ack bijan
Ivan Herman: ack bijan ←
17:57:35 <bijan> http://hsivonen.iki.fi/no-dtd/
Bijan Parsia: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/no-dtd/ ←
17:57:47 <Rinke> IanH: I find bijan's arguments quite persuasive on this. If it's not actually part of the GRDDL spec, I'm not sure why we're doing it
Ian Horrocks: I find bijan's arguments quite persuasive on this. If it's not actually part of the GRDDL spec, I'm not sure why we're doing it ←
17:57:52 <alanr> a+
Alan Ruttenberg: a+ ←
17:57:53 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
17:58:06 <Rinke> IanH: I'm not quite sure what would be the note... algorithm? transformation?
Ian Horrocks: I'm not quite sure what would be the note... algorithm? transformation? ←
17:58:09 <bijan> I'm fine with us having pointers to implementations
Bijan Parsia: I'm fine with us having pointers to implementations ←
17:58:35 <Rinke> pfps: there is a competing implementation of the transformation (to XSLT)... the one we're writing
Peter Patel-Schneider: there is a competing implementation of the transformation (to XSLT)... the one we're writing ←
17:59:31 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: I wanted to take issue with bijan on the web retrievable issue. If you do object to this, you should have made an objection to the GRDDL spec. As it's actually a recommendation, there is a reason to take note of this
Jeremy Carroll: I wanted to take issue with bijan on the web retrievable issue. If you do object to this, you should have made an objection to the GRDDL spec. As it's actually a recommendation, there is a reason to take note of this ←
17:59:45 <bijan> It's still expensive for the w3c
Bijan Parsia: It's still expensive for the w3c ←
17:59:51 <bijan> It's still expensive for the client
Bijan Parsia: It's still expensive for the client ←
18:00:04 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: we can rely on the W3C of things not going away
Jeremy Carroll: we can rely on the W3C of things not going away ←
18:00:16 <bijan> q+ to ask where grddl *mandates* web retrievability
Bijan Parsia: q+ to ask where grddl *mandates* web retrievability ←
18:00:42 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
18:00:47 <alanr> ack JeremeyCarroll
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeremeyCarroll ←
18:00:47 <sandro> JeremyCarroll: point to TWO GRDDL transforms -- one in XSLT (informative), one being the english spec (normative). It would be clear and helpful.
Jeremy Carroll: point to TWO GRDDL transforms -- one in XSLT (informative), one being the english spec (normative). It would be clear and helpful. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:00:55 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: my proposal would be that we could have two links, one to the actual spec (normative) and the xslt which is not normative (with a note on the top)
Jeremy Carroll: my proposal would be that we could have two links, one to the actual spec (normative) and the xslt which is not normative (with a note on the top) ←
18:01:00 <Rinke> alanr: chair hat off
Alan Ruttenberg: chair hat off ←
18:01:10 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:01:11 <JeremyCarroll> q-
Jeremy Carroll: q- ←
18:01:13 <Rinke> alanr: I relate my understanding of what the point of this is
Alan Ruttenberg: I relate my understanding of what the point of this is ←
18:01:30 <Rinke> alanr: same understanding as Jeremy's.
Alan Ruttenberg: same understanding as Jeremy's. ←
18:02:05 <Rinke> alanr: the intention is that the XSLT is published, cached and then used to actually transform stuff to rdf/xml from xml. The spirit of this is that we put an XSLT transform there
Alan Ruttenberg: the intention is that the XSLT is published, cached and then used to actually transform stuff to rdf/xml from xml. The spirit of this is that we put an XSLT transform there ←
18:02:09 <uli> ...this is about why we want an XSLT transform
Uli Sattler: ...this is about why we want an XSLT transform ←
18:02:33 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:02:53 <Rinke> alanr: do not think it's damaging, do not think it should be blocked
Alan Ruttenberg: do not think it's damaging, do not think it should be blocked ←
18:03:15 <Rinke> alanr: one of my objections to OWL/XML was resolved by adopting GRDDL
Alan Ruttenberg: one of my objections to OWL/XML was resolved by adopting GRDDL ←
18:03:24 <Ivan> ack alanr
Ivan Herman: ack alanr ←
18:03:31 <bijan> My worry about adding grddl was assuage by my reading of the recommendation which ensured that we didnt' ahve to supply xslt!
Bijan Parsia: My worry about adding grddl was assuage by my reading of the recommendation which ensured that we didnt' ahve to supply xslt! ←
18:03:36 <JeremyCarroll> +1 to Alan - just pointing to the Mapping doc would not address my concerns about OWL/XML
Jeremy Carroll: +1 to Alan - just pointing to the Mapping doc would not address my concerns about OWL/XML ←
18:03:44 <Rinke> alanr: and if we're not staying in the spirit of this, then I question whether we want the OWL/XML syntax
Alan Ruttenberg: and if we're not staying in the spirit of this, then I question whether we want the OWL/XML syntax ←
18:03:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:03:59 <Rinke> alanr: continue next week?
Alan Ruttenberg: continue next week? ←
18:04:00 <bijan> I would have objected to the grddl requirement if I knew there was secret extra-recommendation requriements!
Bijan Parsia: I would have objected to the grddl requirement if I knew there was secret extra-recommendation requriements! ←
18:04:21 <Rinke> bijan: I don't see anything in the GRDDL spec that says that you have to retrieve something from the web
Bijan Parsia: I don't see anything in the GRDDL spec that says that you have to retrieve something from the web ←
18:04:29 <sandro> alan: If we're not going to support GRDDL in the live-on-the-web spirit, then that's new information, and I might object to having the XML format for OWL.
Alan Ruttenberg: If we're not going to support GRDDL in the live-on-the-web spirit, then that's new information, and I might object to having the XML format for OWL. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:04:53 <Rinke> bijan: I see the value of a web-retrievable transformation. We are not in that circumstance where we need that
Bijan Parsia: I see the value of a web-retrievable transformation. We are not in that circumstance where we need that ←
18:05:23 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
18:05:23 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
18:05:28 <Rinke> bijan: do people objecting to OWL/XML prefer to get some transformation somewhere from the web? I don't think this is a starter
Bijan Parsia: do people objecting to OWL/XML prefer to get some transformation somewhere from the web? I don't think this is a starter ←
18:05:37 <Rinke> IanH: defer this until next week
Ian Horrocks: defer this until next week ←
18:05:55 <Rinke> sandro: quick show of hands if anyone seconds Bijan's perspective
Sandro Hawke: quick show of hands if anyone seconds Bijan's perspective ←
18:05:55 <bijan> and the reason i didn't give a formal objection to GRDDL was because I had no idea that it would be read this way!
Bijan Parsia: and the reason i didn't give a formal objection to GRDDL was because I had no idea that it would be read this way! ←
18:06:17 <Rinke> sandro: strawpoll about retrievable but non-normative XSLT
Sandro Hawke: strawpoll about retrievable but non-normative XSLT ←
18:06:27 <alanr> note=actual transform
Alan Ruttenberg: note=actual transform ←
18:06:31 <alanr> if there is a note
Alan Ruttenberg: if there is a note ←
18:06:33 <Rinke> IanH: is this about publishing a note, or is the note a uri that points to it, or describes it
Ian Horrocks: is this about publishing a note, or is the note a uri that points to it, or describes it ←
18:06:49 <bijan> In fact, people can add their own grddl property to *thier* owl/xml that points to whichever transformation function they want?
Bijan Parsia: In fact, people can add their own grddl property to *thier* owl/xml that points to whichever transformation function they want? ←
18:06:50 <sandro> strawpoll: JJC's proposal for non-normative
STRAWPOLL: JJC's proposal for non-normative ←
18:06:51 <JeremyCarroll> suggestion: strawpoll that we have retievable and non-normative XSLT pointed to from OWL/XML namespace
Scribe problem: the name 'suggestion' does not match any of the 53 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 Christine Golbreich Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Diego Calvanese Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Héctor Pérez Urbina Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Jie Bao Joanne Luciano Jonathan Rees Kendall Clark Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Michael Schneider Michel Dumontier 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 suggestion: strawpoll that we have retievable and non-normative XSLT pointed to from OWL/XML namespace [ Scribe Assist by Jeremy Carroll ] ←
18:06:54 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: in the OWL/RDF there's a bit of code that points to a GRDDL transform
Jeremy Carroll: in the OWL/RDF there's a bit of code that points to a GRDDL transform ←
18:07:04 <Rinke> alanr: don't have time for this (chair hat on)
Alan Ruttenberg: don't have time for this (chair hat on) ←
18:07:09 <Rinke> topic: general discussion
18:07:24 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:07:24 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:07:27 <Rinke> alanr: Peter's updated proposal, Boris' comments on this
Alan Ruttenberg: Peter's updated proposal, Boris' comments on this ←
18:07:43 <Rinke> alanr: didn't grab this from the web
Alan Ruttenberg: didn't grab this from the web ←
18:08:12 <Rinke> pfps: latest proposal is to publish by location, do versioning by publishing in multiple spots. Implement this by writing this in section 3 of the syntax document
Peter Patel-Schneider: latest proposal is to publish by location, do versioning by publishing in multiple spots. Implement this by writing this in section 3 of the syntax document ←
18:08:17 <sandro> Peter: import by location; multiple versions = multiple locations; ....
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: import by location; multiple versions = multiple locations; .... [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:08:33 <Rinke> bmotik: the idea is to somehow split the imports from the actual locations where the ontologies are published
Boris Motik: the idea is to somehow split the imports from the actual locations where the ontologies are published ←
18:08:42 <Rinke> bmotik: question is, where is an ontology actually located?
Boris Motik: question is, where is an ontology actually located? ←
18:09:15 <Rinke> bmotik: an ontology can have an ontology uri, and optionally a versioning uri. If it has any of these uris it should be published at a location that is equal to either one of these uri's
Boris Motik: an ontology can have an ontology uri, and optionally a versioning uri. If it has any of these uris it should be published at a location that is equal to either one of these uri's ←
18:09:38 <Rinke> bmotik: imports points to a particular location, this location can be either equal to the ontology uri or the version uri that you want to import
Boris Motik: imports points to a particular location, this location can be either equal to the ontology uri or the version uri that you want to import ←
18:09:49 <Rinke> bmotik: this procedure can be overriden for the purposes of caching
Boris Motik: this procedure can be overriden for the purposes of caching ←
18:09:58 <sandro> pretty clear
Sandro Hawke: pretty clear ←
18:10:04 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:10:07 <Rinke> alanr: any questions from anybody?
Alan Ruttenberg: any questions from anybody? ←
18:10:11 <alanr> ack bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bijan ←
18:10:12 <bijan> old
Bijan Parsia: old ←
18:10:13 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to ask where grddl *mandates* web retrievability
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to ask where grddl *mandates* web retrievability ←
18:10:15 <bijan> q-
Bijan Parsia: q- ←
18:10:21 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
18:10:21 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
18:10:23 <JeremyCarroll> +1 it's very elegant
Jeremy Carroll: +1 it's very elegant ←
18:10:23 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
18:10:33 <bmotik> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0025.html
Boris Motik: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0025.html ←
18:10:51 <Rinke> alanr: have you thought about forward moving, if we decide to have something more involved as regards version information, does this preclude that?
Alan Ruttenberg: have you thought about forward moving, if we decide to have something more involved as regards version information, does this preclude that? ←
18:11:11 <Rinke> bmotik: no, don't think so. You can actually encode additional information in the uri
Boris Motik: no, don't think so. You can actually encode additional information in the uri ←
18:11:41 <Rinke> bmotik: this is completely orthogonal.. you could abstract the whole thing by saying that you need some way of comparing two version uri's.
Boris Motik: this is completely orthogonal.. you could abstract the whole thing by saying that you need some way of comparing two version uri's. ←
18:11:48 <JeremyCarroll> q+
Jeremy Carroll: q+ ←
18:11:58 <alanr> ack uli
Alan Ruttenberg: ack uli ←
18:11:58 <uli> ack uli
Uli Sattler: ack uli ←
18:12:01 <Rinke> bmotik: you could encode numerical information and do comparison etc.
Boris Motik: you could encode numerical information and do comparison etc. ←
18:12:08 <Rinke> uli: I was wondering in a similar direction
Uli Sattler: I was wondering in a similar direction ←
18:12:20 <Rinke> uli: this mechanism would also allow me to always retrieve the latest version?
Uli Sattler: this mechanism would also allow me to always retrieve the latest version? ←
18:12:29 <Rinke> bmotik: the latest version is always at the location of the ontology uri
Boris Motik: the latest version is always at the location of the ontology uri ←
18:12:54 <Rinke> bmotik: when you create a next version, this current version goes somewhere else, and the new version gets put at the location
Boris Motik: when you create a next version, this current version goes somewhere else, and the new version gets put at the location ←
18:12:56 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
18:12:56 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
18:13:11 <uli> lovely
Uli Sattler: lovely ←
18:13:25 <Rinke> bmotik: if you want to import the latest version, you just point to the ontology uri.
Boris Motik: if you want to import the latest version, you just point to the ontology uri. ←
18:13:26 <alanr> ack JeremyCarroll
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeremyCarroll ←
18:13:50 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: this is very simple to spec, excellent, strong support
Jeremy Carroll: this is very simple to spec, excellent, strong support ←
18:13:56 <sandro> q+ to ask if you can have a updated-version version-URI (latest in the 4.x series, latest in the 5.x series) ?
Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask if you can have a updated-version version-URI (latest in the 4.x series, latest in the 5.x series) ? ←
18:14:42 <Rinke> alanr: it is still my intention to write a note offering this more complicated thing that shows that the simple mechanism doesn't handle this. Could we keep an issue open explaining use cases that I have, just to say that there's still an issue here
Alan Ruttenberg: it is still my intention to write a note offering this more complicated thing that shows that the simple mechanism doesn't handle this. Could we keep an issue open explaining use cases that I have, just to say that there's still an issue here ←
18:14:48 <sandro> and to ask about override / caching.....
Sandro Hawke: and to ask about override / caching..... ←
18:14:56 <pfps> q+ to talk about WG process
Peter Patel-Schneider: q+ to talk about WG process ←
18:15:01 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:15:05 <alanr> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
18:15:05 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask if you can have a updated-version version-URI (latest in the 4.x series, latest in the 5.x series) ?
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask if you can have a updated-version version-URI (latest in the 4.x series, latest in the 5.x series) ? ←
18:15:08 <Rinke> alanr: easy to get out of sync in the obo
Alan Ruttenberg: easy to get out of sync in the obo ←
18:15:12 <Rinke> alanr: no way to repair that
Alan Ruttenberg: no way to repair that ←
18:15:42 <uli> ...but this would require a version-naming scheme?
Uli Sattler: ...but this would require a version-naming scheme? ←
18:15:44 <Rinke> sandro: have you thought of mechanisms where you would have double version mechanisms, i.e. latest in 4.x latest in 5.x
Sandro Hawke: have you thought of mechanisms where you would have double version mechanisms, i.e. latest in 4.x latest in 5.x ←
18:16:04 <Rinke> sandro: main production releases, beta releases, major / minor releases (latest of some obsolete version etc.)
Sandro Hawke: main production releases, beta releases, major / minor releases (latest of some obsolete version etc.) ←
18:16:11 <pfps> if you have multiple version URIs, something along these lines can be done
Peter Patel-Schneider: if you have multiple version URIs, something along these lines can be done ←
18:16:24 <uli> I think that this proposal was oblivious to how versions are numbered/named
Uli Sattler: I think that this proposal was oblivious to how versions are numbered/named ←
18:16:26 <Rinke> bmotik: multiple ontology uri's, multiple default locations... this could be added, but in the existing proposal this is not captured
Boris Motik: multiple ontology uri's, multiple default locations... this could be added, but in the existing proposal this is not captured ←
18:16:29 <JeremyCarroll> That can be done with this: latest, versionInfo = latest4, versionInfo = latest4.2 versionInfo = latest4.3
Jeremy Carroll: That can be done with this: latest, versionInfo = latest4, versionInfo = latest4.2 versionInfo = latest4.3 ←
18:16:34 <JeremyCarroll> q+
Jeremy Carroll: q+ ←
18:16:41 <alanr> ack pfps
Alan Ruttenberg: ack pfps ←
18:16:41 <Zakim> pfps, you wanted to talk about WG process
Zakim IRC Bot: pfps, you wanted to talk about WG process ←
18:16:59 <bmotik> -q
Boris Motik: -q ←
18:17:11 <Rinke> pfps: a previous version allows for multiple version uris, which I think would allow multiple branching, slightly more complex... don't know whether it's worthwile allowing this
Peter Patel-Schneider: a previous version allows for multiple version uris, which I think would allow multiple branching, slightly more complex... don't know whether it's worthwile allowing this ←
18:17:32 <Rinke> pfps: the WG decides things, and then people give in or object. What is this thing about having a minority report?
Peter Patel-Schneider: the WG decides things, and then people give in or object. What is this thing about having a minority report? ←
18:17:35 <alanr> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:17:49 <alanr> ack JeremyCarroll
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeremyCarroll ←
18:18:00 <IanH> Very hard to hear now!
Ian Horrocks: Very hard to hear now! ←
18:18:09 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:18:13 <IanH> Better!
Ian Horrocks: Better! ←
18:18:15 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: I'm pretty sure that sandro's use case is covered by this. I'm happy to take up an action to describe multiple versioning using this scheme
Jeremy Carroll: I'm pretty sure that sandro's use case is covered by this. I'm happy to take up an action to describe multiple versioning using this scheme ←
18:19:07 <Rinke> sandro: to recast what I think Alan was wanting to do, was say: let's go ahead with something like this, but have some text in the spec or issues list that explains to people who wants something they need, that we don't provide. This can be consensus text
Sandro Hawke: to recast what I think Alan was wanting to do, was say: let's go ahead with something like this, but have some text in the spec or issues list that explains to people who wants something they need, that we don't provide. This can be consensus text ←
18:19:17 <JeremyCarroll> a postponed issue would be acceptable to me
Jeremy Carroll: a postponed issue would be acceptable to me ←
18:19:25 <Rinke> pfps: I thought I heard something about a separate note about this particular issue
Peter Patel-Schneider: I thought I heard something about a separate note about this particular issue ←
18:19:52 <JeremyCarroll> q+ to mention more capability
Jeremy Carroll: q+ to mention more capability ←
18:20:04 <Rinke> alanr: what I was saying was that having something more stronger is not something we have consensus about, but we could have something in a note that describes a more elaborate scheme
Alan Ruttenberg: what I was saying was that having something more stronger is not something we have consensus about, but we could have something in a note that describes a more elaborate scheme ←
18:20:14 <Rinke> alanr: didn't think this was controversial
Alan Ruttenberg: didn't think this was controversial ←
18:20:17 <alanr> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
18:20:33 <Rinke> alanr: as sandro said, we could have some text about this, that could be taken up
Alan Ruttenberg: as sandro said, we could have some text about this, that could be taken up ←
18:20:37 <sandro> Alan: Good idea to document what this mechanism does NOT support.
Alan Ruttenberg: Good idea to document what this mechanism does NOT support. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
18:21:17 <Rinke> bmotik: add a section about this, something similar to the 'oh, you could override the location in some way'
Boris Motik: add a section about this, something similar to the 'oh, you could override the location in some way' ←
18:21:48 <Rinke> bmotik: gives people an idea on how to use this versioning. We could easily capture what should or could be added... what tools might want to do with this
Boris Motik: gives people an idea on how to use this versioning. We could easily capture what should or could be added... what tools might want to do with this ←
18:22:18 <Rinke> bmotik: once we see what this looks like, it might be easier to comment on this. Unless anyone really objects, we could put this into the spec, and see how people feel about this
Boris Motik: once we see what this looks like, it might be easier to comment on this. Unless anyone really objects, we could put this into the spec, and see how people feel about this ←
18:22:18 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:22:21 <alanr> ack JeremyCarroll
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeremyCarroll ←
18:22:21 <Zakim> JeremyCarroll, you wanted to mention more capability
Zakim IRC Bot: JeremyCarroll, you wanted to mention more capability ←
18:22:56 <IanH> OWL 3 -- nooooooooooo!
Ian Horrocks: OWL 3 -- nooooooooooo! ←
18:23:01 <Rinke> JeremyCarroll: OWL2 is an improvement on OWL1 and that's the basic idea. OWL2 imports+versioning is an improvement on OWL1, but OWL3 will (hopefully) be an improvement on OWL1
Jeremy Carroll: OWL2 is an improvement on OWL2 and that's the basic idea. OWL2 imports+versioning is an improvement on OWL2, but OWL3 will (hopefully) be an improvement on OWL2 ←
18:23:01 <alanr> ack alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: ack alanr ←
18:23:05 <Rinke> s/OWL1/OWL2
18:23:25 <Rinke> alanr: seems that this proposal is as far as the normative spec goes
Alan Ruttenberg: seems that this proposal is as far as the normative spec goes ←
18:23:44 <m_schnei> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:23:50 <Rinke> alanr: what I'm suggesting is that there's some work that has been done about use cases.. would be nice to have a record of this
Alan Ruttenberg: what I'm suggesting is that there's some work that has been done about use cases.. would be nice to have a record of this ←
18:24:03 <Rinke> alanr: like what boris is saying.
Alan Ruttenberg: like what boris is saying. ←
18:24:10 <sandro> OWL3, coming soon to a theater near you.
Sandro Hawke: OWL3, coming soon to a theater near you. ←
18:24:16 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:24:16 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
18:24:20 <alanr> q+ m_schnei
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ m_schnei ←
18:24:24 <alanr> ack m_schnei
Alan Ruttenberg: ack m_schnei ←
18:24:27 <Rinke> alanr: if I have time for a note, then we could discuss this at a later point
Alan Ruttenberg: if I have time for a note, then we could discuss this at a later point ←
18:24:38 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:25:05 <Rinke> m_schnei: why have a normative part about this? Why not define the imports just as the imports closure
Michael Schneider: why have a normative part about this? Why not define the imports just as the imports closure ←
18:25:09 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:25:09 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
18:25:14 <alanr> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
18:25:14 <Rinke> m_schnei: and just leave out the files stuff
Michael Schneider: and just leave out the files stuff ←
18:25:42 <Rinke> bmotik: we actually started from that position. The member submission said exactly that... quite a few people objected. Are we prepared to backpaddle?
Boris Motik: we actually started from that position. The member submission said exactly that... quite a few people objected. Are we prepared to backpaddle? ←
18:25:46 <sandro> (I think Normative is important.)
Sandro Hawke: (I think Normative is important.) ←
18:26:06 <Rinke> alanr: strawpoll about this? General feeling about this proposal is that it's a positive step forward
Alan Ruttenberg: strawpoll about this? General feeling about this proposal is that it's a positive step forward ←
18:26:09 <bijan> +1 to normative
Bijan Parsia: +1 to normative ←
18:26:38 <sandro> zakim, list attendees
Sandro Hawke: zakim, list attendees ←
18:26:38 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli, IanH, bcuencagrau, msmith, bmotik, m_schnei, Achille, Alan, Sandro, bijan, JeremyCarroll,
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli, IanH, bcuencagrau, msmith, bmotik, m_schnei, Achille, Alan, Sandro, bijan, JeremyCarroll, ←
18:26:42 <Rinke> STAWPOLL: are people comfortable having boris put in the changes that he suggested?
Scribe problem: the name 'STAWPOLL' does not match any of the 53 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 Christine Golbreich Conrad Bock Deborah McGuinness Diego Calvanese Doug Lenat Elisa Kendall Enrico Franconi Evan Wallace Evren Sirin Fabian Neuhaus Fabien Gandon Giorgos Stamou Giorgos Stoilos Héctor Pérez Urbina Ian Horrocks Ivan Herman Jeff Pan Jeremy Carroll Jie Bao Joanne Luciano Jonathan Rees Kendall Clark Markus Krötzsch Martin Dzbor Michael Sintek Michael Smith Michael Schneider Michel Dumontier 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 STAWPOLL: are people comfortable having boris put in the changes that he suggested? ←
18:26:42 <Zakim> ... Evan_Wallace, baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: ... Evan_Wallace, baojie ←
18:26:53 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
18:26:55 <Rinke> +1
+1 ←
18:26:55 <msmith> +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
18:26:55 <m_schnei> +1 on informative, -0.5 on normative (really my own opinion)
Michael Schneider: +1 on informative, -0.5 on normative (really my own opinion) ←
18:26:56 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:26:57 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
18:26:57 <MarkusK> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:26:57 <uli> +1 to the lovely proposal
Uli Sattler: +1 to the lovely proposal ←
18:26:57 <bijan> +1
Bijan Parsia: +1 ←
18:26:58 <pfps> +1 (surprise)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 (surprise) ←
18:26:58 <bmotik> +1 (unsurprisingly :-)
Boris Motik: +1 (unsurprisingly :-) ←
18:27:00 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
18:27:01 <ewallace> 0
Evan Wallace: 0 ←
18:27:04 <Ivan> +1; I wonder whether having several version infos is not better than just one
Ivan Herman: +1; I wonder whether having several version infos is not better than just one ←
18:27:07 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:27:08 <JeremyCarroll> +1 on normative
Jeremy Carroll: +1 on normative ←
18:27:23 <sandro> Present: Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli, IanH, bcuencagrau, msmith, bmotik, m_schnei, Achille, Alan, Sandro, bijan, JeremyCarroll, Evan_Wallace, baojie
18:27:25 <Rinke> alanr: strong support from doing this
Alan Ruttenberg: strong support for doing this ←
18:27:35 <Rinke> alanr: put action on boris, ready to close
Alan Ruttenberg: put action on boris, ready to close ←
18:27:42 <uli> s/from/for
18:27:51 <bmotik> ACTION: bmotik2 to Implement the imports proposal as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0025.html
ACTION: bmotik2 to Implement the imports proposal as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0025.html ←
18:27:51 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-149 - Implement the imports proposal as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0025.html [on Boris Motik - due 2008-05-14].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-149 - Implement the imports proposal as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0025.html [on Boris Motik - due 2008-05-14]. ←
18:28:07 <Rinke> alanr: thank you TF for putting effort on this?
Alan Ruttenberg: thank you TF for putting effort on this? ←
18:28:11 <Rinke> alanr: aob?
Alan Ruttenberg: aob? ←
18:28:21 <Rinke> bmotik: defer this action to next week, because of the workshop
Boris Motik: defer this action to next week, because of the workshop ←
18:28:23 <uli> bye bye
Uli Sattler: bye bye ←
18:28:39 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
18:28:40 <JeremyCarroll> bye bye
Jeremy Carroll: bye bye ←
18:28:41 <Rinke> alanr: UFDTF expect to have a telecon on monday
Alan Ruttenberg: UFDTF expect to have a telecon on monday ←
18:28:42 <Zakim> -Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille ←
18:28:43 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
18:28:43 <Zakim> -uli
Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←
18:28:44 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
18:28:44 <Zakim> -MarkusK
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK ←
18:28:44 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
18:28:44 <bijan> I'm traveling on monday
Bijan Parsia: I'm traveling on monday ←
18:28:45 <Rinke> alanr: adjourn
Alan Ruttenberg: adjourn ←
18:28:46 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
18:28:47 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:28:49 <Zakim> -bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: -bijan ←
18:28:51 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:28:54 <Zakim> -JeremyCarroll
Zakim IRC Bot: -JeremyCarroll ←
18:28:56 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
18:28:59 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
18:29:14 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:29:16 <Zakim> -Alan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Alan ←
18:29:22 <Zakim> -m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: -m_schnei ←
18:29:24 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended ←
18:29:25 <Zakim> Attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli, IanH, bcuencagrau, msmith, bmotik, m_schnei, Achille, Alan, Sandro, bijan, JeremyCarroll, Evan_Wallace, baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were Peter_Patel-Schneider, Rinke, MarkusK, Ivan, uli, IanH, bcuencagrau, msmith, bmotik, m_schnei, Achille, Alan, Sandro, bijan, JeremyCarroll, Evan_Wallace, baojie ←
18:29:47 <sandro> Rinke, I'll have the draft on the wiki in a couple of minutes.
Sandro Hawke: Rinke, I'll have the draft on the wiki in a couple of minutes. ←
18:29:57 <Rinke> ok great
ok great ←
18:34:25 <sandro> Ok, Rinke, it's ready.
Sandro Hawke: Ok, Rinke, it's ready. ←
18:34:37 <Rinke> I'll have a look.. thanks!
I'll have a look.. thanks! ←
18:40:54 <Rinke> looks good, thanks.
(No events recorded for 6 minutes)
looks good, thanks. ←
18:40:55 <Rinke> bye
bye ←
Formatted by CommonScribe