Action 42 Improve examples for rich annotations / Bijan Parsia
Action 156 Respond to the email along the lines Bijan suggests above / Alan Ruttenberg
action 158 Create first draft of requirements Document / Evan Wallace
action 161 Top and Bottom Role in various Profiles / Uli Sattler
action 162 Investigate top/bottom roles in DL-Lite / Diego Calvanese
action 165 Investigate easy keys in DL-Lite / Diego Calvenese
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
00:00:00 <ewallace> PRESENT: ivan, MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, alan ruttenberg, JeffP, m_schnei, zhe
Scribe problem: the name 'Carsten' does not match any of the 48 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 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 Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu
00:00:00 <ewallace> CHAIR: IanH
00:00:00 <ewallace> REGRETS: Peter Patel-Schneider, Elisa Kendall, AchilleFokoue
16:48:43 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-irc ←
16:48:53 <Rinke> Zakim, this will be owl
Rinke Hoekstra: Zakim, this will be owl ←
16:48:53 <Zakim> ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 48 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Rinke; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 48 minutes ago ←
16:49:13 <Rinke> RRSAgent, make records public
Rinke Hoekstra: RRSAgent, make records public ←
16:54:49 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has now started ←
16:54:56 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
16:55:06 <bijan> zakim, ??P9 is me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, ??P9 is me ←
16:55:06 <Zakim> +bijan; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bijan; got it ←
16:55:12 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
16:55:12 <Zakim> sorry, bijan, muting is not permitted when only one person is present
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bijan, muting is not permitted when only one person is present ←
16:56:38 <Zakim> + +31.20.525.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +31.20.525.aaaa ←
16:56:44 <Rinke> zakim, aaaa is me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, aaaa is me ←
16:56:44 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
16:56:46 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
16:56:46 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
16:58:00 <Zakim> +calvanese
Zakim IRC Bot: +calvanese ←
16:58:02 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
16:58:10 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
16:58:12 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
16:58:12 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
16:58:14 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P12 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P12 is me ←
16:58:14 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
16:58:17 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
16:58:17 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
16:58:51 <Zakim> + +49.351.463.3.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +49.351.463.3.aabb ←
16:59:00 <Carsten> zakim, +aabb is me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, +aabb is me ←
16:59:00 <Zakim> sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named '+aabb'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Carsten, I do not recognize a party named '+aabb' ←
16:59:01 <Zakim> +??P14
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P14 ←
16:59:08 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P14 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P14 is me ←
16:59:08 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
16:59:13 <Carsten> zakim, aabb is me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, aabb is me ←
16:59:13 <Zakim> +Carsten; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Carsten; got it ←
16:59:20 <Carsten> zakim, mute me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, mute me ←
16:59:20 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted ←
16:59:26 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
16:59:26 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
16:59:52 <Zakim> +IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH ←
17:00:03 <Zakim> +??P17
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P17 ←
17:00:11 <Zakim> +baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie ←
17:00:24 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:00:24 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ??P17, baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ??P17, baojie ←
17:00:25 <ratnesh> zakim, ??P17 is ratnesh
Ratnesh Sahay: zakim, ??P17 is ratnesh ←
17:00:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot ←
17:00:29 <Zakim> +ratnesh; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +ratnesh; got it ←
17:00:29 <Zakim> + +0190827aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +0190827aacc ←
17:00:38 <Zakim> +msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: +msmith ←
17:00:43 <MartinD> zakim, aacc is me
Martin Dzbor: zakim, aacc is me ←
17:00:43 <Zakim> +MartinD; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +MartinD; got it ←
17:00:53 <MartinD> zakim, mute me
Martin Dzbor: zakim, mute me ←
17:00:53 <Zakim> MartinD should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: MartinD should now be muted ←
17:01:26 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:02:19 <ewallace> scribeNick: ewallace
(Scribe set to Evan Wallace)
17:02:30 <ewallace> Topic: admin
17:02:34 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:02:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ratnesh, baojie, MartinD (muted), msmith,
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bijan (muted), Rinke, Evan_Wallace, calvanese (muted), bmotik (muted), Carsten (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), IanH, ratnesh, baojie, MartinD (muted), msmith, ←
17:02:37 <Zakim> ... MarkusK
Zakim IRC Bot: ... MarkusK ←
17:02:38 <Zakim> On IRC I see ivan, MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ivan, MarkusK, msmith, ratnesh, IanH, bmotik, bcuencagrau, Carsten, MartinD, calvanese, bijan, RRSAgent, Zakim, Rinke, sandro, baojie, ewallace, trackbot ←
17:03:03 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
17:03:03 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
17:03:05 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
17:03:42 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
17:03:49 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:03:57 <m_schnei> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
17:03:58 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it ←
17:04:02 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:02 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:04:05 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:05 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:04:13 <Zakim> + +1.617.278.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.278.aadd ←
17:04:17 <alanr> zakim, aadd is alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, aadd is alanr ←
17:04:17 <Zakim> +alanr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr; got it ←
17:04:21 <ewallace> Zakim, this will be owlwg
Zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:04:21 <Zakim> ok, ewallace; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 64 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ewallace; I see SW_OWL()12:00PM scheduled to start 64 minutes ago ←
17:04:26 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:26 <Zakim> sorry, ivan, I don't know what conference this is
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, ivan, I don't know what conference this is ←
17:04:31 <ivan> ???
Ivan Herman: ??? ←
17:04:50 <Rinke> zakim, this is owl
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, this is owl ←
17:04:50 <Zakim> ok, Rinke; that matches SW_OWL()12:00PM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Rinke; that matches SW_OWL()12:00PM ←
17:04:52 <ewallace> subtopic: accept previous minutes
17:04:54 <msmith> the scribee thinks they look good
Michael Smith: the scribee thinks they look good ←
17:05:01 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
17:05:02 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
17:05:17 <IanH> PROPOSED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25
PROPOSED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25 ←
17:05:20 <msmith> +1 to accept 2008-06-25 minutes
Michael Smith: +1 to accept 2008-06-25 minutes ←
17:05:23 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:05:26 <calvanese> +1
Diego Calvanese: +1 ←
17:05:26 <MartinD> +1
Martin Dzbor: +1 ←
17:05:27 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:05:28 <ewallace> +1
+1 ←
17:05:30 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:05:34 <Zakim> +JeffP
Zakim IRC Bot: +JeffP ←
17:05:48 <ewallace> RESOLVED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25
RESOLVED: accept previous minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-06-25 ←
17:05:49 <JeffP> +1
17:06:20 <ewallace> subTopic: Action Items status
17:07:02 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Pending Review Actions
17:07:05 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: Action 163 Update the structural spec according to the resolution of ISSUE 21 and ISSUE 24 / Boris Motick
17:07:07 <ewallace> Act 163 completed
Act 163 completed ←
17:07:10 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Due and overdue Actions
17:07:15 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: Action 42 Improve examples for rich annotations / Bijan Parsia
17:07:29 <bijan> Done and closed
Bijan Parsia: Done and closed ←
17:07:50 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:07:50 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:08:42 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System
Michael Smith: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System ←
17:08:50 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System#Simple_Syntax_Example
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System#Simple_Syntax_Example ←
17:08:51 <ewallace> Action-42 done
17:08:51 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 156
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 156 ←
17:09:20 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: Action 156 Respond to the email along the lines Bijan suggests above / Alan Ruttenberg
17:09:25 <ewallace> continued
continued ←
17:09:46 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 157 Confer with chairs list about how to get more information about what we need to do wrt accessibility / Alan Ruttenberg
17:10:03 <ewallace> continued
continued ←
17:10:03 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:10:03 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:10:34 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 158 Create first draft of requirements Document / Evan Wallace
17:10:42 <ewallace> done and closed
done and closed ←
17:11:00 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 159 Work wih M_schnei to collect, propose how to address issues in making rdf list vocabulary / Alan Ruttenberg
17:11:02 <ewallace> continued
continued ←
17:11:02 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 159
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 159 ←
17:11:10 <calvanese> zakim, unmute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, unmute me ←
17:11:11 <Zakim> calvanese should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should no longer be muted ←
17:11:12 <m_schnei> i step back from 159
Michael Schneider: i step back from 159 ←
17:11:15 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 161 Top and Bottom Role in various Profiles / Uli Sattler
17:11:17 <ewallace> action 161 continued
ACTION-161 continued ←
17:11:17 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 161
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - 161 ←
17:11:48 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 162 Investigate top/bottom roles in DL-Lite / Diego Calvanese
17:11:57 <bmotik> OK, I'll just add it right away.
Boris Motik: OK, I'll just add it right away. ←
17:12:47 <ewallace> Diego will write up what his investigation revealed and send to WG
Diego will write up what his investigation revealed and send to WG ←
17:12:59 <bijan> Subject line containing ACTION-Number will be found by tracker
Bijan Parsia: Subject line containing ACTION-Number will be found by tracker ←
17:15:01 <ewallace> jeffP: cmt on inconsistancy
Jeff Pan: cmt on inconsistancy ←
17:15:32 <bcuencagrau> you need the data to have the inconsistency
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: you need the data to have the inconsistency ←
17:16:03 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 165 Investigate easy keys in DL-Lite / Diego Calvenese
17:16:20 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:16:20 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:16:30 <ewallace> Diego: Easy keys are compatible with key notion in DL-Lite
Diego Calvanese: Easy keys are compatible with key notion in DL-Lite ←
17:16:54 <ewallace> Diego: we need to restict these keys in the same way
Diego Calvanese: we need to restict these keys in the same way ←
17:17:11 <ewallace> Diego: the keys cannot be subtyped
Diego Calvanese: the keys cannot be subtyped ←
17:17:16 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
17:17:16 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
17:17:28 <Zakim> +Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe ←
17:17:35 <Zhe> Zakim, mute me
17:17:35 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should now be muted ←
17:17:53 <ewallace> diego to write up how easy-keys could be used in DL-lite
diego to write up how easy-keys could be used in DL-lite ←
17:18:01 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
17:18:03 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
17:18:53 <ewallace> msmith: asked if we described unique names assumption in the profile document
Michael Smith: asked if we described unique names assumption in the profile document ←
17:18:57 <msmith> I see, I didn't realize this had changed
Michael Smith: I see, I didn't realize this had changed ←
17:19:21 <ewallace> Boris: it is described
Boris Motik: it is described ←
17:19:38 <ewallace> subsubsubtopic: action 164 Send email re: suggestions for unnamed individuals *in addition* to bnodes / Alan Ruttenberg
17:19:39 <calvanese> zakim, mute me
Diego Calvanese: zakim, mute me ←
17:19:39 <Zakim> calvanese should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: calvanese should now be muted ←
17:19:47 <ewallace> done
done ←
17:19:53 <ewallace> topic: Issues
17:19:54 <ewallace> subtopic: Other Issue Discussions
17:20:42 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Issue 16 Entity Annotations
17:20:42 <alanr_> could we get a review of what the issue was?
Alan Ruttenberg: could we get a review of what the issue was? ←
17:21:17 <bijan> Peter's not here, and he's the issue raiser?
Bijan Parsia: Peter's not here, and he's the issue raiser? ←
17:21:41 <ewallace> IanH: the issue was - could you annotate annotations?
Ian Horrocks: the issue was - could you annotate annotations? ←
17:22:32 <ewallace> boris: problem - you can annotate entity annotations, because they are axioms, but not other kinds of annotation, because they are not axioms
Boris Motik: problem - you can annotate entity annotations, because they are axioms, but not other kinds of annotation, because they are not axioms ←
17:23:07 <ewallace> ... peter proposed various solutions, including one where annotations could contain a set of other annotations
... peter proposed various solutions, including one where annotations could contain a set of other annotations ←
17:24:35 <ewallace> boris: having an axiom that contains another axiom is hard in RDF
Boris Motik: having an axiom that contains another axiom is hard in RDF ←
17:25:04 <ewallace> ... my proposal is to can the issue because both proposed solutions are quite hard
... my proposal is to can the issue because both proposed solutions are quite hard ←
17:25:24 <ewallace> alanr: I wonder if the question might go away with rich annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: I wonder if the question might go away with rich annotations ←
17:26:01 <ewallace> ... there are motivating use cases for this
... there are motivating use cases for this ←
17:26:27 <bijan> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data:_URI_scheme
Bijan Parsia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data:_URI_scheme ←
17:26:29 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Reification_Alternatives ←
17:26:41 <ewallace> alanr: How is the reification in one of the proposed solutions harder than where we have done this elsewhere?
Alan Ruttenberg: How is the reification in one of the proposed solutions harder than where we have done this elsewhere? ←
17:26:58 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:26:58 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:28:00 <alanr_> Mcdermott was convincing to me....
Alan Ruttenberg: Mcdermott was convincing to me.... ←
17:28:13 <alanr_> one + level of indirection
Alan Ruttenberg: one + level of indirection ←
17:29:31 <ewallace> bijan: may need to recommend how to construct annotations for meta-annotations
Bijan Parsia: may need to recommend how to construct annotations for meta-annotations ←
17:29:55 <ewallace> bijan: set up your structure of annotations so that you always reify in a nice way
Bijan Parsia: set up your structure of annotations so that you always reify in a nice way ←
17:30:05 <ewallace> ... we could work out the pattern for this
... we could work out the pattern for this ←
17:30:06 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:30:06 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:30:39 <ewallace> alan: the idea of structuring annotations works for new annotation but not for old rdf annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: the idea of structuring annotations works for new annotation but not for old rdf annotations ←
17:30:47 <bijan> data: uris could solve this
Bijan Parsia: data: uris could solve this ←
17:30:51 <bijan> But they are ugly
Bijan Parsia: But they are ugly ←
17:30:57 <bijan> Literals as well
Bijan Parsia: Literals as well ←
17:31:40 <ewallace> ianH: are annotations inside annotations asserted in the KB?
Ian Horrocks: are annotations inside annotations asserted in the KB? ←
17:32:45 <ewallace> boris: the problem is that there is no way in rdf to say this axiom contains an axiom
Boris Motik: the problem is that there is no way in rdf to say this axiom contains an axiom ←
17:33:04 <ewallace> ... as soon as its in a bag of triples in rdf it is asserted
... as soon as its in a bag of triples in rdf it is asserted ←
17:33:43 <bijan> there's a queue!
Bijan Parsia: there's a queue! ←
17:33:45 <ewallace> ... can't tell after whether the triple occured at the top level or inside another triple
... can't tell after whether the triple occured at the top level or inside another triple ←
17:34:59 <ewallace> alan: I'd be happy to work through the example with Boris over email
Alan Ruttenberg: I'd be happy to work through the example with Boris over email ←
17:35:15 <alanr_> Note: I will have to leave at 2pm.
Alan Ruttenberg: Note: I will have to leave at 2pm. ←
17:35:44 <ewallace> bijan: this problem of not having syntactic context is something I considered
Bijan Parsia: this problem of not having syntactic context is something I considered ←
17:36:17 <ewallace> ... people who are tracking this should look at the reification table
... people who are tracking this should look at the reification table ←
17:36:33 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:36:33 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:37:30 <ewallace> skipping Issue 67
17:37:54 <ewallace> subsubtopic: issue 126 Normative datatypes
17:38:35 <ewallace> alan: it seemed like there was clear consensus on an underlying Real datatype
Alan Ruttenberg: it seemed like there was clear consensus on an underlying Real datatype ←
17:38:41 <msmith> q+ to disagree on type promotion
Michael Smith: q+ to disagree on type promotion ←
17:38:56 <ewallace> ... and floating point is promoted to this for reasoning
... and floating point is promoted to this for reasoning ←
17:39:16 <bijan> +1 to disagree with type promotion
Bijan Parsia: +1 to disagree with type promotion ←
17:39:35 <ewallace> ... there was a question on whether or not non-numeric values of float like +inf were also promoted
... there was a question on whether or not non-numeric values of float like +inf were also promoted ←
17:40:14 <ewallace> msmith: I agree we want an underlying real datatype, but disagree promoting xsd: float
Michael Smith: I agree we want an underlying real datatype, but disagree promoting xsd: float ←
17:40:15 <alanr_> is it clear what "promotion" means? Perhaps Boris should explain.
Alan Ruttenberg: is it clear what "promotion" means? Perhaps Boris should explain. ←
17:40:15 <bijan> I also thing Reals shouldn't have NaN. Those aren't reals! Why make a clean datatype and then crude it up!
Bijan Parsia: I also thing Reals shouldn't have NaN. Those aren't reals! Why make a clean datatype and then crude it up! ←
17:40:38 <alanr_> the argument is that floats are there to represent machine computations.
Alan Ruttenberg: the argument is that floats are there to represent machine computations. ←
17:40:39 <ewallace> ... don't understand the point of having both xsd:float and xsd:decimal
... don't understand the point of having both xsd:float and xsd:decimal ←
17:41:03 <alanr_> This is an important use case for Science Commons
Alan Ruttenberg: This is an important use case for Science Commons ←
17:41:04 <alanr_> 1+
Alan Ruttenberg: 1+ ←
17:41:10 <alanr_> not 1+
Alan Ruttenberg: not 1+ ←
17:41:16 <MartinD> +1
Martin Dzbor: +1 ←
17:41:42 <ewallace> boris: promotion means to restrict float values
Boris Motik: promotion means to restrict float values ←
17:42:06 <ewallace> boris: I'm pretty happy with ditching float and double, but this will look bad
Boris Motik: I'm pretty happy with ditching float and double, but this will look bad ←
17:42:12 <bijan> "Ditching"? Isn't it that we "aren't adding"
Bijan Parsia: "Ditching"? Isn't it that we "aren't adding" ←
17:42:23 <ewallace> boris: you might want to store these in an efficient way
Boris Motik: you might want to store these in an efficient way ←
17:42:50 <bijan> Floats aren't continuous
Bijan Parsia: Floats aren't continuous ←
17:42:52 <Carsten> +1000
Unknown Carsten: +1000 ←
17:42:55 <bijan> I'm confused
Bijan Parsia: I'm confused ←
17:43:17 <ewallace> boris: I would bet if we keep the continuous aspects of float, then now implementation will be correct
Boris Motik: I would bet if we keep the continuous aspects of float, then now implementation will be correct ←
17:43:20 <bijan> It's arbitrary sized decimals
Bijan Parsia: It's arbitrary sized decimals ←
17:43:34 <MarkusK> yes, I also think that xsd:decimal supports no exponent notation
Markus Krötzsch: yes, I also think that xsd:decimal supports no exponent notation ←
17:44:01 <bijan> It can't !
Bijan Parsia: It can't ! ←
17:44:13 <bijan> There's too much here
Bijan Parsia: There's too much here ←
17:44:16 <alanr_> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#decimal ←
17:44:20 <bijan> Can we chunk the discussion a littl
Bijan Parsia: Can we chunk the discussion a littl ←
17:44:52 <ewallace> boris: a possible way out is to define an owl:float and owl:real
Boris Motik: a possible way out is to define an owl:float and owl:real ←
17:45:15 <bijan> http://www.java2s.com/Code/Oracle/Data-Type/IS-NAN.htm
Bijan Parsia: http://www.java2s.com/Code/Oracle/Data-Type/IS-NAN.htm ←
17:45:28 <ewallace> alan: wrt continuous aspect:
Alan Ruttenberg: wrt continuous aspect: ←
17:45:33 <MarkusK> (for the minutes) xsd:float also has non-numerical values, NaN and infinite
Markus Krötzsch: (for the minutes) xsd:float also has non-numerical values, NaN and infinite ←
17:46:17 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:46:17 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
17:47:08 <ewallace> alan: effect on floats, the only consequence to considering them real would be
Alan Ruttenberg: effect on floats, the only consequence to considering them real would be ←
17:47:26 <ewallace> ...
... ←
17:47:46 <ewallace> alan: asked some folk, they would prefer real
Alan Ruttenberg: asked some folk, they would prefer real ←
17:47:53 <m_schnei> (for the minutes, too) IEEE floats also have +/- 0, do xsd:float have too?
Michael Schneider: (for the minutes, too) IEEE floats also have +/- 0, do xsd:float have too? ←
17:48:05 <ewallace> alan: also asked about +-inf and NaN
Alan Ruttenberg: also asked about +-inf and NaN ←
17:48:18 <ewallace> alan: they considered these to be essential
Alan Ruttenberg: they considered these to be essential ←
17:48:46 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:48:46 <Zakim> bijan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should no longer be muted ←
17:48:57 <ewallace> alan: the objective is to be able to transmit and contain numeric data in an OWL file
Alan Ruttenberg: the objective is to be able to transmit and contain numeric data in an OWL file ←
17:49:18 <ewallace> bijan: the first step I have is if we are going to talk about something with a binary rep.
Bijan Parsia: the first step I have is if we are going to talk about something with a binary rep. ←
17:49:50 <ewallace> bijan: we can't avoid rounding, we can't separate the value space from the representation
Bijan Parsia: we can't avoid rounding, we can't separate the value space from the representation ←
17:49:53 <alanr_> OWL does not produce new floats in the course of reasoning.
Alan Ruttenberg: OWL does not produce new floats in the course of reasoning. ←
17:50:40 <ewallace> ianH: it seems to me that we are proposing in owl to have a virtual float that is continuous
Ian Horrocks: it seems to me that we are proposing in owl to have a virtual float that is continuous ←
17:50:59 <alanr_> So precision issues are external to OWL - OWL would not disturb any precision or do any rounding.
Alan Ruttenberg: So precision issues are external to OWL - OWL would not disturb any precision or do any rounding. ←
17:51:09 <ewallace> bijan: so you are just treating the float rep as an idiosyncratic rep of reals
Bijan Parsia: so you are just treating the float rep as an idiosyncratic rep of reals ←
17:51:31 <ewallace> boris: the value space is the set of real numbers between the min and max of float
Boris Motik: the value space is the set of real numbers between the min and max of float ←
17:52:30 <alanr_> Ian asked my question
Alan Ruttenberg: Ian asked my question ←
17:53:12 <alanr_> 2.0 float is not considered different than int float
Alan Ruttenberg: 2.0 float is not considered different than int float ←
17:53:46 <Carsten> zakim, unmute me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, unmute me ←
17:53:46 <Zakim> Carsten should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should no longer be muted ←
17:54:02 <ewallace> carsten: I like this proposal
Unknown Carsten: I like this proposal ←
17:54:24 <ewallace> ... either dropping float completely, or treating them as reals for reasoning
... either dropping float completely, or treating them as reals for reasoning ←
17:54:51 <alanr_> no float predicate, I think.
Alan Ruttenberg: no float predicate, I think. ←
17:54:54 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:54:54 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
17:55:14 <ewallace> boris: floats are a subset of reals
Boris Motik: floats are a subset of reals ←
17:55:49 <ewallace> carsten: treat float as a property of a real number?
Unknown Carsten: treat float as a property of a real number? ←
17:56:04 <msmith> q+ to ask about the benefit of this proposal
Michael Smith: q+ to ask about the benefit of this proposal ←
17:56:13 <ewallace> boris: the reason for doing this is so that you can ship data around as reals
Boris Motik: the reason for doing this is so that you can ship data around as reals ←
17:56:22 <Carsten> perfect
Unknown Carsten: perfect ←
17:56:27 <Carsten> zakim, mute me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, mute me ←
17:56:27 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted ←
17:56:28 <alanr_> consider: oracle than answers between a and b, how many values. For float we decide to answer: Infinity , always
Alan Ruttenberg: consider: oracle than answers between a and b, how many values. For float we decide to answer: Infinity , always ←
17:56:29 <bijan> One question at a time!
Bijan Parsia: One question at a time! ←
17:56:32 <bijan> Please!@
Bijan Parsia: Please!@ ←
17:56:43 <alanr_> q+ to mention nan as data bottom
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to mention nan as data bottom ←
17:56:46 <bijan> I wanted to respond to the carsten questiona nd now we're off track
Bijan Parsia: I wanted to respond to the carsten questiona nd now we're off track ←
17:56:54 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:56:54 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
17:56:57 <ewallace> boris: if you have something like 1 / 0 then the ontology is unsatisfiable
Boris Motik: if you have something like 1 / 0 then the ontology is unsatisfiable ←
17:59:13 <ewallace> bijan: there are 3 options for the predicate thing
Bijan Parsia: there are 3 options for the predicate thing ←
17:59:38 <alanr_> comment: Lexical float doesn't work - because of defined rounding.
Alan Ruttenberg: comment: Lexical float doesn't work - because of defined rounding. ←
17:59:42 <ewallace> ... no predicate
... no predicate ←
18:02:31 <ewallace> alan: we want to capture the result of an experiment and that may include NaN values
Alan Ruttenberg: we want to capture the result of an experiment and that may include NaN values ←
18:02:55 <Zakim> -alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr ←
18:02:59 <Zakim> alanr_, you wanted to mention nan as data bottom
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr_, you wanted to mention nan as data bottom ←
18:03:03 <ewallace> ... they don't care about how many discrete values between here and there
... they don't care about how many discrete values between here and there ←
18:03:27 <bijan> the �value space�s of all �primitive� datatypes are disjoint (they do not share any values)
Bijan Parsia: the �value space�s of all �primitive� datatypes are disjoint (they do not share any values) ←
18:03:32 <ewallace> msmith: people using XSD already make the choice between xsd:float and xsd:decimal
Michael Smith: people using XSD already make the choice between xsd:float and xsd:decimal ←
18:03:36 <bijan> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#rf-fund-facets
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#rf-fund-facets ←
18:03:50 <bijan> (double and decimal are primitive datatypes in xsd)
Bijan Parsia: (double and decimal are primitive datatypes in xsd) ←
18:03:59 <ewallace> ... given the fact that they chose xsd:float, we ought to respect the choice
... given the fact that they chose xsd:float, we ought to respect the choice ←
18:04:00 <Zakim> msmith, you wanted to ask about the benefit of this proposal
Zakim IRC Bot: msmith, you wanted to ask about the benefit of this proposal ←
18:04:22 <bijan> q+ to point to 4.2
Bijan Parsia: q+ to point to 4.2 ←
18:04:38 <bijan> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
18:04:38 <Zakim> bijan was not muted, bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan was not muted, bijan ←
18:04:44 <ewallace> boris: the reason that float is not put under decimal in xsd may be because of the 3 special values
Boris Motik: the reason that float is not put under decimal in xsd may be because of the 3 special values ←
18:05:12 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to point to 4.2
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to point to 4.2 ←
18:05:19 <JeffP> the spec is somehow inconsistent
Jeff Pan: the spec is somehow inconsistent ←
18:05:19 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#equal
Michael Smith: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#equal ←
18:06:07 <ewallace> bijan: the spec says the value spaces of float and decimal are disjoint
Bijan Parsia: the spec says the value spaces of float and decimal are disjoint ←
18:06:44 <alanr> Does it actually say they are disjoint, or does it not say they have a shared value space (negation or naf)
Alan Ruttenberg: Does it actually say they are disjoint, or does it not say they have a shared value space (negation or naf) ←
18:06:54 <msmith> it says disjoint
Michael Smith: it says disjoint ←
18:06:57 <ewallace> subsubtopic: Issue 131 Single OWL-R profile
18:07:07 <Zhe> yes
18:07:18 <Zhe> let boris go first
18:07:38 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me
18:07:38 <Zakim> Zhe should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should no longer be muted ←
18:07:52 <ewallace> boris: the problem with OWL R profile is that OWL R full version is not a syntactic fragment
Boris Motik: the problem with OWL R profile is that OWL R full version is not a syntactic fragment ←
18:08:43 <ewallace> ... the idea is to have basically 1 OWL R profile
... the idea is to have basically 1 OWL R profile ←
18:09:18 <ewallace> boris: if the ontology is written in triples it is in OWL R if it is parseable as OWL R
Boris Motik: if the ontology is written in triples it is in OWL R if it is parseable as OWL R ←
18:10:00 <ewallace> Zhe: Yes. I do agree with Boris on this. It seems a bit odd to have these two versions.
Zhe Wu: Yes. I do agree with Boris on this. It seems a bit odd to have these two versions. ←
18:10:14 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:10:14 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
18:10:17 <ewallace> ... I see the value of combining the syntactic restriction into the profile
... I see the value of combining the syntactic restriction into the profile ←
18:10:51 <ewallace> Michael Schneider: regarding confusion - it is not confusing from an rdf point of view because
Michael Schneider: regarding confusion - it is not confusing from an rdf point of view because ←
18:11:04 <ewallace> ... any sublanguage is a semantic sublanguage
... any sublanguage is a semantic sublanguage ←
18:11:09 <bijan> q+ to talk about user perspective
Bijan Parsia: q+ to talk about user perspective ←
18:11:16 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:11:16 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
18:11:17 <ewallace> ... I don't share the argument.
... I don't share the argument. ←
18:11:36 <ewallace> boris: I think what is confusing is from an ontology point of view.
Boris Motik: I think what is confusing is from an ontology point of view. ←
18:11:57 <ewallace> ... you don't know what it means. You can't interpret it in an unambiguous way.
... you don't know what it means. You can't interpret it in an unambiguous way. ←
18:12:08 <Zakim> bijan, you wanted to talk about user perspective
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan, you wanted to talk about user perspective ←
18:12:17 <bijan> I'm still on the queue!
Bijan Parsia: I'm still on the queue! ←
18:12:20 <bijan> No no!
Bijan Parsia: No no! ←
18:12:25 <ewallace> ... what is the point also from a user's perspective, when the meaning is ill-defined.
... what is the point also from a user's perspective, when the meaning is ill-defined. ←
18:12:57 <ewallace> bijan: In my experience users find the semantic subsetting confusing.
Bijan Parsia: In my experience users find the semantic subsetting confusing. ←
18:13:20 <bcuencagrau> zakim, unmute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, unmute me ←
18:13:20 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should no longer be muted ←
18:13:20 <bijan> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
18:13:21 <Zakim> bijan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bijan should now be muted ←
18:13:26 <ewallace> ... In our spec.s, all the other profiles are syntactic subsets
... In our spec.s, all the other profiles are syntactic subsets ←
18:13:50 <ewallace> bernardo: I totally agree with Bijan on this. The purpose of OWL R is to define a language
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: I totally agree with Bijan on this. The purpose of OWL R is to define a language ←
18:14:11 <ewallace> ... that is easily implementable using production rules.
... that is easily implementable using production rules. ←
18:14:35 <ewallace> ... What people real care about is this ability to implement the reasoning using a rule engine.
... What people real care about is this ability to implement the reasoning using a rule engine. ←
18:14:36 <bcuencagrau> zakim, unmute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, unmute me ←
18:14:36 <Zakim> bcuencagrau was not muted, bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau was not muted, bcuencagrau ←
18:14:40 <bcuencagrau> zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, mute me ←
18:14:40 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
18:14:53 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:14:53 <Zakim> m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei ←
18:14:54 <bijan> Yes
Bijan Parsia: Yes ←
18:14:57 <JeffP> y
18:15:24 <ewallace> IanH: to M_schnei - what if they use some rdfs syntax and no rdfs interpretation is made
Ian Horrocks: to M_schnei - what if they use some rdfs syntax and no rdfs interpretation is made ←
18:15:34 <ewallace> ... wouldn't the user be surprised?
... wouldn't the user be surprised? ←
18:15:42 <Rinke> +q to ask about relation with DLP
Rinke Hoekstra: +q to ask about relation with DLP ←
18:16:37 <ewallace> Michael Schneider: you would restrict the reasoning to rdf in a tool like Jena, you would be explicitly aware of this
Michael Schneider: you would restrict the reasoning to rdf in a tool like Jena, you would be explicitly aware of this ←
18:17:05 <ewallace> Michael Schneider: run the reasoning and see what inference graph is produced
Michael Schneider: run the reasoning and see what inference graph is produced ←
18:17:24 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:17:24 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
18:17:26 <ewallace> ... you of course have to know which reasoner you are using
... you of course have to know which reasoner you are using ←
18:18:23 <ewallace> Bijan: you will still be able to do the RDF style reasoning
Bijan Parsia: you will still be able to do the RDF style reasoning ←
18:18:59 <Zakim> Rinke, you wanted to ask about relation with DLP
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke, you wanted to ask about relation with DLP ←
18:19:06 <ewallace> ... In OWL-land people are used to having certain syntax indicate the reasoning features in the interpretation
... In OWL-land people are used to having certain syntax indicate the reasoning features in the interpretation ←
18:19:30 <bijan> (DLP and hornSHIQ are also syntactic fragments)
Bijan Parsia: (DLP and hornSHIQ are also syntactic fragments) ←
18:19:34 <ewallace> rinke: when we started we had DLP, and hornSHIQ and others
Rinke Hoekstra: when we started we had DLP, and hornSHIQ and others ←
18:20:08 <ewallace> ... How will this impact people who use DLP like stuff
... How will this impact people who use DLP like stuff ←
18:20:17 <m_schnei> Motivation for OWL R was RDFS 3.0 / OWL-Prime
Michael Schneider: Motivation for OWL R was RDFS 3.0 / OWL-Prime ←
18:20:30 <ewallace> boris: HornSHIQ was dropped because there were too many fragments
Boris Motik: HornSHIQ was dropped because there were too many fragments ←
18:20:37 <bijan> And a champion in the working group :)
Bijan Parsia: And a champion in the working group :) ←
18:20:48 <ewallace> ... we just kept those that had larger user bases
... we just kept those that had larger user bases ←
18:21:04 <m_schnei> All the fragments in the beginning were *DL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments
Michael Schneider: All the fragments in the beginning were *DL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments ←
18:21:34 <bijan> All the fragments in the beginning were *OWL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments
Bijan Parsia: All the fragments in the beginning were *OWL* fragments --> HENCE syntactic fragments ←
18:21:39 <ewallace> Boris: what remains is OWL R. You can still use production rules or other similar tools for it.
Boris Motik: what remains is OWL R. You can still use production rules or other similar tools for it. ←
18:21:59 <bijan> OWL lite is a syntactic fragment of OWL DL which is a syntactic fragment of OWL Full
Bijan Parsia: OWL lite is a syntactic fragment of OWL DL which is a syntactic fragment of OWL Full ←
18:22:04 <m_schnei> Full fragements are always semantic fragments, they are always applyable on every RDF graph
Michael Schneider: Full fragements are always semantic fragments, they are always applyable on every RDF graph ←
18:22:14 <ewallace> Boris: We are just saying there is a syntactic check that can indicate which profile is being used.
Boris Motik: We are just saying there is a syntactic check that can indicate which profile is being used. ←
18:22:43 <bijan> OWL DL and OWL Lite *are* fragments of full. What you say is false. And I'll stop the back chat ;)
Bijan Parsia: OWL DL and OWL Lite *are* fragments of full. What you say is false. And I'll stop the back chat ;) ←
18:22:44 <ewallace> Zhe: Oracle is planning to support this profile in the future and it is probable that we
Zhe Wu: Oracle is planning to support this profile in the future and it is probable that we ←
18:23:06 <ewallace> ... will include the capability to bypass the syntax check.
... will include the capability to bypass the syntax check. ←
18:23:29 <ewallace> ivan: what I would like to understand is if we go with Boris' proposal and I'm in RDF-land
Ivan Herman: what I would like to understand is if we go with Boris' proposal and I'm in RDF-land ←
18:23:35 <ewallace> ... what exactly do I lose?
... what exactly do I lose? ←
18:24:01 <ewallace> IanH: I guess you lose the ability to consider some graphs as OWL R.
Ian Horrocks: I guess you lose the ability to consider some graphs as OWL R. ←
18:24:31 <ewallace> IanH: Like if you include SomeValuesFrom constructs.
Ian Horrocks: Like if you include SomeValuesFrom constructs. ←
18:25:04 <ewallace> Boris: you don't lose anything. The rules will work exactly as they are. You don't lose any
Boris Motik: you don't lose anything. The rules will work exactly as they are. You don't lose any ←
18:25:55 <ewallace> ... expressive power. The syntax forbidden doesn't have rules for the corresponding reasoning.
... expressive power. The syntax forbidden doesn't have rules for the corresponding reasoning. ←
18:26:22 <ewallace> bijan: in a way the fragment is saying these are the things we know how to do something interesting with.
Bijan Parsia: in a way the fragment is saying these are the things we know how to do something interesting with. ←
18:27:08 <m_schnei> what is with the RDFS axiomatic triples?
Michael Schneider: what is with the RDFS axiomatic triples? ←
18:27:21 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me
18:27:21 <Zakim> Zhe was not muted, Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe was not muted, Zhe ←
18:27:22 <bcuencagrau> zakim, unmute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, unmute me ←
18:27:23 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should no longer be muted ←
18:27:26 <ewallace> Zhe: to Ivan's point, expressivity is not lost. Just some ontologies will be rejected, if syntactic checking is on.
Zhe Wu: to Ivan's point, expressivity is not lost. Just some ontologies will be rejected, if syntactic checking is on. ←
18:27:50 <ewallace> bernardo: we have an additional benefit from specifying this as a syntactic fragment
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: we have an additional benefit from specifying this as a syntactic fragment ←
18:28:25 <bcuencagrau> zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: zakim, mute me ←
18:28:25 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
18:28:26 <ewallace> ... you can know if you are in the fragment.
... you can know if you are in the fragment. ←
18:28:40 <ewallace> subtopic: Additional other business
18:28:41 <ewallace> None
None ←
18:28:42 <ewallace> Meeting Adjourned
Meeting Adjourned ←
18:29:13 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
18:29:17 <Zakim> -Carsten
Zakim IRC Bot: -Carsten ←
18:29:18 <Zakim> -JeffP
Zakim IRC Bot: -JeffP ←
18:29:19 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
18:29:19 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
18:29:20 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
18:29:21 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
18:29:23 <Zakim> -MarkusK
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK ←
18:29:25 <Zakim> -ratnesh
Zakim IRC Bot: -ratnesh ←
18:29:25 <ewallace> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
18:29:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-minutes.html ewallace
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/07/02-owl-minutes.html ewallace ←
18:29:27 <Zakim> -MartinD
Zakim IRC Bot: -MartinD ←
18:29:29 <Zakim> -bijan
Zakim IRC Bot: -bijan ←
18:29:31 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:29:33 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
18:29:35 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:29:37 <Zakim> -calvanese
Zakim IRC Bot: -calvanese ←
18:29:39 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:29:41 <Zakim> -m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: -m_schnei ←
18:29:43 <ewallace> rrsagent, make log world-readable
rrsagent, make log world-readable ←
18:29:56 <ewallace> rrsagent, make log public
rrsagent, make log public ←
18:30:55 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
18:30:56 <Zakim> SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()12:00PM has ended ←
18:30:57 <Zakim> Attendees were bijan, +31.20.525.aaaa, Rinke, calvanese, Evan_Wallace, bmotik, +49.351.463.3.aabb, bcuencagrau, Carsten, IanH, baojie, ratnesh, +0190827aacc, msmith, MartinD,
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were bijan, +31.20.525.aaaa, Rinke, calvanese, Evan_Wallace, bmotik, +49.351.463.3.aabb, bcuencagrau, Carsten, IanH, baojie, ratnesh, +0190827aacc, msmith, MartinD, ←
18:30:59 <Zakim> ... MarkusK, Ivan, Sandro, m_schnei, +1.617.278.aadd, alanr, JeffP, Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: ... MarkusK, Ivan, Sandro, m_schnei, +1.617.278.aadd, alanr, JeffP, Zhe ←
Formatted by CommonScribe