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 <Achille> PRESENT: bparsia (muted), IanH (muted), Ivan (muted), uli (muted), Achille, Alan Ruttenberg, Zhe (muted), Sandro, msmith, rob, bmotik, Carsten, Rinke, ewallace, baojie, Elisa, pfps
Scribe problem: the name 'Carsten' does not match any of the 49 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 Rob Shearer Sandro Hawke Suzette Stoutenburg Tommie Meyer Uli Sattler Vassilis Tzouvaras Vipul Kashyap Vit Novacek Vojtech Svatek Zhe Wu
00:00:00 <scribenick> REGRETS: Michael Schneider, Markus Krötzsch
00:00:00 <scribenick> CHAIR: alanr
17:18:48 <ivan> scribenick: Achille
(Scribe set to Achille Fokoue)
17:18:55 <ivan> scribe: Achille
17:04:35 <rob> Zakim, +??P40 is probably me.
Rob Shearer: Zakim, +??P40 is probably me. ←
17:04:41 <Zakim> sorry, rob, I do not understand your question
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, rob, I do not understand your question ←
17:04:55 <rob> zakim, +??P40 might be me
Rob Shearer: zakim, +??P40 might be me ←
17:05:08 <Zakim> I don't understand '+??P40 might be me', rob
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '+??P40 might be me', rob ←
17:05:13 <ivan> zakim, ??P40 is rob
Ivan Herman: zakim, ??P40 is rob ←
17:05:18 <Zakim> +rob; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +rob; got it ←
17:05:45 <rob> zakim, mute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, mute me ←
17:05:45 <Zakim> rob should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should now be muted ←
17:05:59 <Achille> alanr: no agenda amendments
Alan Ruttenberg: no agenda amendments ←
17:05:45 <Achille> alanr: PROPOSED: Accept previous minutes (July 16)
Alan Ruttenberg: PROPOSED: Accept previous minutes (July 16) ←
17:05:46 <IanH> They looked OK to me.
Ian Horrocks: They looked OK to me. ←
17:06:12 <IanH> They looked OK to me too
Ian Horrocks: They looked OK to me too ←
17:06:07 <msmith> the regrets are missing
Michael Smith: the regrets are missing ←
17:06:42 <Achille> alanr: let's wait for peter to decide to accept or reject the minutes
Alan Ruttenberg: let's wait for peter to decide to accept or reject the minutes ←
17:07:03 <ivan> zakim, bmotik_ is bmotik
Ivan Herman: zakim, bmotik_ is bmotik ←
17:07:03 <Zakim> sorry, ivan, I do not recognize a party named 'bmotik_'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, ivan, I do not recognize a party named 'bmotik_' ←
17:07:04 <Achille> alanr: An agenda for the F2F3 is at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_Agenda
Alan Ruttenberg: An agenda for the F2F3 is at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_Agenda ←
17:07:24 <Achille> alanr: Anything missing from the agenda for the F2F3?
Alan Ruttenberg: Anything missing from the agenda for the F2F3? ←
17:07:27 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:07:37 <Achille> topic: action items
17:08:05 <Achille> alanr: action 156 has been completed by Ian
Alan Ruttenberg: ACTION-156 has been completed by Ian ←
17:08:28 <Zakim> +Carsten
Zakim IRC Bot: +Carsten ←
17:08:36 <Carsten> zakim, mute me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, mute me ←
17:08:36 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted ←
17:08:49 <baojie> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0375.html
Jie Bao: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0375.html ←
17:08:50 <Achille> ewallace: action 167 done
Evan Wallace: ACTION-167 done ←
17:09:20 <rob> zakim, who is here
Rob Shearer: zakim, who is here ←
17:09:20 <Zakim> rob, you need to end that query with '?'
Zakim IRC Bot: rob, you need to end that query with '?' ←
17:09:26 <Achille> jie: i just sent an email summarizing the action at the last meeting of RIF WG
Jie Bao: i just sent an email summarizing the action at the last meeting of RIF WG ←
17:09:27 <Zakim> +??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
17:09:30 <rob> zakim, who is here?
Rob Shearer: zakim, who is here? ←
17:09:30 <Zakim> On the phone I see bparsia (muted), IanH (muted), Ivan (muted), uli (muted), Achille, alanr, Zhe (muted), Sandro, msmith, rob (muted), baojie, Evan_Wallace, Carsten (muted), ??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see bparsia (muted), IanH (muted), Ivan (muted), uli (muted), Achille, alanr, Zhe (muted), Sandro, msmith, rob (muted), baojie, Evan_Wallace, Carsten (muted), ??P3 ←
17:09:32 <Rinke> zakim, ??P3 is me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, ??P3 is me ←
17:09:34 <Zakim> On IRC I see Rinke, ewallace, bmotik, baojie, rob, sandro, alanr, Achille, Zhe, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, uli, bparsia, Carsten, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see Rinke, ewallace, bmotik, baojie, rob, sandro, alanr, Achille, Zhe, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, IanH, ivan, uli, bparsia, Carsten, trackbot ←
17:09:35 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:09:36 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
17:09:36 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:10:09 <Achille> alanr: What is your sense of the status for the RIF WG
Alan Ruttenberg: What is your sense of the status for the RIF WG ←
17:10:34 <Achille> jie: As far as this action is concerned, it is well on track
Jie Bao: As far as this action is concerned, it is well on track ←
17:11:15 <Achille> alanr: Micheal is not here for action 152
Alan Ruttenberg: Micheal is not here for ACTION-152 ←
17:11:27 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People ←
17:11:33 <bmotik> Zakim, bmotik is with Achille
Boris Motik: Zakim, bmotik is with Achille ←
17:11:33 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
17:11:36 <Achille> sandro: Add food restrictions on the F2F3 page at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People
Sandro Hawke: Add food restrictions on the F2F3 page at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/F2F3_People ←
17:11:55 <Achille> topic: Proposal to resolve issues
17:12:28 <IanH> doing it
Ian Horrocks: doing it ←
17:12:56 <Achille> alanr: issue 125 should be left for the primer not for the technical documents
Alan Ruttenberg: ISSUE-125 should be left for the primer not for the technical documents ←
17:13:07 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:13:07 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←
17:13:10 <alanr> ack bparsia
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bparsia ←
17:14:20 <Achille> bparsia: I think issue 125 should just be an editorial issue
Bijan Parsia: I think ISSUE-125 should just be an editorial issue ←
17:14:30 <IanH> PROPOSED: resolve issue with no change to serialisation but document this and other "interesting" equivalences in user facing documents
PROPOSED: resolve issue with no change to serialisation but document this and other "interesting" equivalences in user facing documents ←
17:14:49 <Achille> bparsia: I don't like the micro-management of this issue
Bijan Parsia: I don't like the micro-management of this issue ←
17:14:54 <IanH> zakim, unmute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, unmute me ←
17:14:54 <Zakim> IanH should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should no longer be muted ←
17:15:27 <ewallace> No!
Evan Wallace: No! ←
17:15:45 <Achille> ianh: I made the proposal as an easy way to fix the issue. Bijan would you prefer changing the serializarion
Ian Horrocks: I made the proposal as an easy way to fix the issue. Bijan would you prefer changing the serializarion ←
17:15:55 <Achille> bijan: no
Bijan Parsia: no ←
17:15:49 <bmotik> +1 to close
Boris Motik: +1 to close ←
17:15:58 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:15:58 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
17:16:14 <Achille> alanr: any opinion on this issue?
Alan Ruttenberg: any opinion on this issue? ←
17:16:41 <Achille> boris: in the syntax document, I have already mentioned some equivalences
Boris Motik: in the syntax document, I have already mentioned some equivalences ←
17:16:53 <Achille> boris: this could be just one additional line
Boris Motik: this could be just one additional line ←
17:17:05 <Achille> boris: I would like to close it
Boris Motik: I would like to close it ←
17:17:16 <Achille> boris: by adding it in the syntax document
Boris Motik: by adding it in the syntax document ←
17:17:02 <bparsia> I'm not saying I wouldn't put it in, but I think we should just close it
Bijan Parsia: I'm not saying I wouldn't put it in, but I think we should just close it ←
17:17:06 <bparsia> I don't care
Bijan Parsia: I don't care ←
17:17:08 <bparsia> Close it
Bijan Parsia: Close it ←
17:17:09 <bparsia> however
Bijan Parsia: however ←
17:17:19 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:17:19 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←
17:17:40 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:17:40 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
17:17:53 <Achille> parsia: I'm not going to argue further. I will not vote against it
Bijan Parsia: I'm not going to argue further. I will not vote against it ←
17:18:02 <alanr> Proposed: resolve issue with no change to serialisation but document this and other "interesting" equivalences in user facing documents
PROPOSED: resolve issue with no change to serialisation but document this and other "interesting" equivalences in user facing documents ←
17:18:08 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:18:10 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:18:11 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:18:15 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:18:15 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:18:17 <Achille> achille: +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
17:18:17 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
17:18:17 <Zhe> +1
17:18:23 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:18:26 <Carsten> +1
Unknown Carsten: +1 ←
17:18:29 <msmith> +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
17:18:47 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
17:19:20 <alanr> Resolved: resolve issue with no change to serialisation but document this and other "interesting" equivalences in user facing documents
RESOLVED: resolve issue with no change to serialisation but document this and other "interesting" equivalences in user facing documents ←
17:19:31 <Achille> topic: issue discussion
17:19:51 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:19:51 <Zakim> bparsia was already muted, bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was already muted, bparsia ←
17:20:03 <Achille> alanr: discussion on bijan's email on various options to N-ary datatypes
Alan Ruttenberg: discussion on bijan's email on various options to N-ary datatypes ←
17:20:21 <Achille> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0047.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0047.html ←
17:20:46 <Achille> alanr: what should be our direction for N-ary datatype support ?
Alan Ruttenberg: what should be our direction for N-ary datatype support ? ←
17:21:08 <Achille> alanr: I 'd like to add an option : "not to include N-ary datatype at all"
Alan Ruttenberg: I 'd like to add an option : "not to include N-ary datatype at all" ←
17:20:48 <bparsia> That was not included
Bijan Parsia: That was not included ←
17:21:26 <bparsia> I suspect manchester would object if we do not included the base hook
Bijan Parsia: I suspect manchester would object if we do not included the base hook ←
17:21:42 <Achille> alanr: what do implements think of N-ary datatypes?
Alan Ruttenberg: what do implements think of N-ary datatypes? ←
17:22:14 <bmotik> Achille: I don't think we have a good story whether we are going to implement this feature
Achille Fokoue: I don't think we have a good story whether we are going to implement this feature [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:22:24 <bmotik> Achille: The implementation is done by our colleagues in China
Achille Fokoue: The implementation is done by our colleagues in China [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:22:35 <bmotik> Achille: This doesn't seem as something that they'll implement soon
Achille Fokoue: This doesn't seem as something that they'll implement soon [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:22:48 <bmotik> Achille: It is quite complex and we do not have a clear path towards the implementation
Achille Fokoue: It is quite complex and we do not have a clear path towards the implementation [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:22:50 <rob> zakim, unmute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, unmute me ←
17:22:50 <Zakim> rob should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should no longer be muted ←
17:22:51 <alanr> ack rob
Alan Ruttenberg: ack rob ←
17:23:16 <Achille> rob: the use cases are not convincing
Rob Shearer: the use cases are not convincing ←
17:23:25 <Achille> rob: it is a low priority
Rob Shearer: it is a low priority ←
17:23:36 <Achille> rob: I do not particularly care about N-ary datatypes
Rob Shearer: I do not particularly care about N-ary datatypes ←
17:23:38 <Zakim> +Elisa_Kendall
Zakim IRC Bot: +Elisa_Kendall ←
17:23:41 <rob> zakim, mute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, mute me ←
17:23:42 <Zakim> rob should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should now be muted ←
17:23:42 <bparsia> More details on the use cases are coming; I've had meetings with various people and some examples
Bijan Parsia: More details on the use cases are coming; I've had meetings with various people and some examples ←
17:24:03 <Achille> msmith: from customers, we hear that it is interesting
Michael Smith: from customers, we hear that it is interesting ←
17:24:17 <Achille> msmith: it is a gap that i would like to close
Michael Smith: it is a gap that i would like to close ←
17:24:34 <Achille> boris: I have the feeling that this will be hard to implement
Boris Motik: I have the feeling that this will be hard to implement ←
17:24:46 <Achille> boris: I'm not convince of the usefulness of N-ary datatypes
Boris Motik: I'm not convince of the usefulness of N-ary datatypes ←
17:24:52 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:24:52 <Zakim> uli was not muted, uli
Zakim IRC Bot: uli was not muted, uli ←
17:25:00 <Achille> uli: two things
Uli Sattler: two things ←
17:25:16 <Achille> uli: various kinds of N-ary
Uli Sattler: various kinds of N-ary ←
17:25:35 <Achille> uli: linear inequations vs. simple comparison operators only
Uli Sattler: linear inequations vs. simple comparison operators only ←
17:25:47 <Achille> uli: I am now going to report from racer implementation
Uli Sattler: I am now going to report from racer implementation ←
17:26:00 <Achille> uli: they did it because of customer's requirements
Uli Sattler: they did it because of customer's requirements ←
17:26:20 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:26:21 <rob> zakim, unmute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, unmute me ←
17:26:21 <Achille> uli: they found it usefull and not very hard in practice
Uli Sattler: they found it usefull and not very hard in practice ←
17:26:23 <Zakim> rob was not muted, rob
Zakim IRC Bot: rob was not muted, rob ←
17:26:41 <Achille> rob: where are the success stories?
Rob Shearer: where are the success stories? ←
17:26:48 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:26:48 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
17:26:58 <Carsten> YES
Unknown Carsten: YES ←
17:27:14 <rob> zakim, mute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, mute me ←
17:27:14 <Zakim> rob should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should now be muted ←
17:27:15 <Achille> uli: I'll go back to racer folks to gather more info
Uli Sattler: I'll go back to racer folks to gather more info ←
17:27:16 <Carsten> zakim, unmute me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, unmute me ←
17:27:16 <Zakim> Carsten should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should no longer be muted ←
17:27:29 <rob> zakim, unmute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, unmute me ←
17:27:29 <Zakim> rob should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should no longer be muted ←
17:27:39 <Achille> carsten: they consider it very important
Unknown Carsten: they consider it very important ←
17:28:03 <rob> zakim, mute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, mute me ←
17:28:03 <Zakim> rob should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should now be muted ←
17:28:04 <ewallace> use cases from Product Modeling XG as well
Evan Wallace: use cases from Product Modeling XG as well ←
17:28:10 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:28:10 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:28:12 <Carsten> zakim, mute me
Unknown Carsten: zakim, mute me ←
17:28:12 <Zakim> Carsten should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Carsten should now be muted ←
17:28:15 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:28:15 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←
17:28:15 <Achille> carsten: I disagree on the lack of success stories
Unknown Carsten: I disagree on the lack of success stories ←
17:28:24 <bparsia> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case ←
17:28:57 <Achille> bparsia: I spent some time with Robert Stevens and Alan Rector to push for more examples
Bijan Parsia: I spent some time with Robert Stevens and Alan Rector to push for more examples ←
17:29:50 <Achille> bparsia: even with the simple examples (which could be handled by DL safe rules) , they want N-ary datatype
Bijan Parsia: even with the simple examples (which could be handled by DL safe rules) , they want N-ary datatype ←
17:30:25 <rob> but what do you expect to infer?
Rob Shearer: but what do you expect to infer? ←
17:30:25 <Achille> bparsia : this is particularly important for development time
bparsia : this is particularly important for development time ←
17:30:45 <Carsten> Sure this simple. There are tons of other features in OWL without *sophisticated* use cases
Unknown Carsten: Sure this simple. There are tons of other features in OWL without *sophisticated* use cases ←
17:30:52 <Achille> bparsia: the way it is done now is true precomputation
Bijan Parsia: the way it is done now is true precomputation ←
17:31:11 <Achille> bparsia: it does not work very well
Bijan Parsia: it does not work very well ←
17:31:53 <Achille> bparsia: the owl model becomes too complex in order to get his requirements in
Bijan Parsia: the owl model becomes too complex in order to get his requirements in ←
17:32:18 <Achille> bparsia: I'll send around his ontology soon
Bijan Parsia: I'll send around his ontology soon ←
17:32:25 <alanr> q+ to ask whether conversations prioritize level?
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to ask whether conversations prioritize level? ←
17:32:38 <Achille> bparsia: I was convinced by his use case
Bijan Parsia: I was convinced by his use case ←
17:32:44 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:32:44 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
17:33:08 <Achille> boris: we are not making progress by discussing what is the right use case
Boris Motik: we are not making progress by discussing what is the right use case ←
17:33:46 <Achille> boris: if we provide a hook to allow implementation to plug their own datatype implementation
Boris Motik: if we provide a hook to allow implementation to plug their own datatype implementation ←
17:34:09 <Achille> boris: it solves the problem and gives flexibility to implementors
Boris Motik: it solves the problem and gives flexibility to implementors ←
17:34:30 <Achille> boris: I understand that there are some issues related to interoperability
Boris Motik: I understand that there are some issues related to interoperability ←
17:35:17 <Achille> alanr: my sense is that, in OWL 1.0, there was no benefit with hook in the spec for datatype implementation
Alan Ruttenberg: my sense is that, in OWL 1.0, there was no benefit with hook in the spec for datatype implementation ←
17:36:02 <Achille> alanr: so I advocate to leave N-ary datatypes out of the spec, but they can be extensions
Alan Ruttenberg: so I advocate to leave N-ary datatypes out of the spec, but they can be extensions ←
17:36:06 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:36:06 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←
17:36:25 <Achille> alanr: Bijan could you live without inequations,i.e. with only comparisons?
Alan Ruttenberg: Bijan could you live without inequations,i.e. with only comparisons? ←
17:36:33 <Zakim> alanr, you wanted to ask whether conversations prioritize level?
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to ask whether conversations prioritize level? ←
17:36:39 <Achille> bijan: comparisons would be better than nothing
Bijan Parsia: comparisons would be better than nothing ←
17:37:13 <Achille> bparsia: there is already an implementation of linear inequations
Bijan Parsia: there is already an implementation of linear inequations ←
17:37:30 <Achille> bparsia: pellet intends to have something in the space
Bijan Parsia: pellet intends to have something in the space ←
17:37:50 <Achille> bparsia: so about 3 implementations will be available, and we can test interoperability
Bijan Parsia: so about 3 implementations will be available, and we can test interoperability ←
17:38:17 <Achille> bparsia: implementation should be encouraged - let's not raise the bar for implementation
Bijan Parsia: implementation should be encouraged - let's not raise the bar for implementation ←
17:38:30 <alanr> achille - record the 3 implementations?
Alan Ruttenberg: achille - record the 3 implementations? ←
17:38:52 <Achille> achille: pellet, racer , fact++
achille: pellet, racer , fact++ ←
17:39:14 <sandro> so ... Bijan is talking about an optional component of some sort ... something "standard" but not required in any profile. Interesting.
Sandro Hawke: so ... Bijan is talking about an optional component of some sort ... something "standard" but not required in any profile. Interesting. ←
17:39:16 <Zakim> +Jonathan_Rees
Zakim IRC Bot: +Jonathan_Rees ←
17:39:27 <alanr> zakim, Jonathan_Rees is alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, Jonathan_Rees is alanr ←
17:39:27 <Zakim> +alanr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr; got it ←
17:39:51 <Achille> bparsia: we should not worry too much about it before last call
Bijan Parsia: we should not worry too much about it before last call ←
17:39:54 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:39:54 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
17:41:12 <rob> I didn't see use cases where you get anything terribly useful as a result of implementing it.
Rob Shearer: I didn't see use cases where you get anything terribly useful as a result of implementing it. ←
17:41:24 <msmith> rob, which "it"
Michael Smith: rob, which "it" ←
17:41:24 <Zakim> -alanr
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr ←
17:41:33 <Achille> msmith: it seems to me that some people are not implementing N-ary because the trade off between ease of implementation/usefulness is not in favor of ease of implementation.
Michael Smith: it seems to me that some people are not implementing N-ary because the trade off between ease of implementation/usefulness is not in favor of ease of implementation. ←
17:41:35 <rob> n-ary datatypes of any kind.
Rob Shearer: n-ary datatypes of any kind. ←
17:41:42 <bparsia> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case
Bijan Parsia: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case ←
17:41:45 <msmith> rob, thanks
Michael Smith: rob, thanks ←
17:42:24 <Achille> topic: Issue 133: DL-Lite Profile modified to include UNA
17:42:24 <Achille> alanr: let's postpone issue 133 for when diego is around
Alan Ruttenberg: let's postpone ISSUE-133 for when diego is around ←
17:42:52 <Achille> topic: Issue 87: rational datatype
17:43:30 <bmotik> Achille: I haven't paid much attention to this proposal.
Achille Fokoue: I haven't paid much attention to this proposal. [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:43:46 <bmotik> Achille: We haven't seen a use case.
Achille Fokoue: We haven't seen a use case. [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:43:50 <rob> zakim, unmute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, unmute me ←
17:43:52 <Zakim> rob was not muted, rob
Zakim IRC Bot: rob was not muted, rob ←
17:44:23 <msmith> q+ to clarify what we're talking about
Michael Smith: q+ to clarify what we're talking about ←
17:44:46 <Achille> rob: allowing constant as rational would not change the semantics at all
Rob Shearer: allowing constant as rational would not change the semantics at all ←
17:45:03 <Achille> rob: if it is not in the XML schema, so maybe it is not important
Rob Shearer: if it is not in the XML schema, so maybe it is not important ←
17:45:25 <Achille> rob: defining rational as a value space seems insane
Rob Shearer: defining rational as a value space seems insane ←
17:45:49 <rob> zakim, mute me
Rob Shearer: zakim, mute me ←
17:45:49 <Zakim> rob should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: rob should now be muted ←
17:46:00 <bmotik> Achille: We care a lot about XML Schema.
Achille Fokoue: We care a lot about XML Schema. [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:46:31 <Zakim> msmith, you wanted to clarify what we're talking about
Zakim IRC Bot: msmith, you wanted to clarify what we're talking about ←
17:46:37 <bmotik> Achille: We are not entusiastic about rational numbers because they depart from XML Schema.
Achille Fokoue: We are not entusiastic about rational numbers because they depart from XML Schema. [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:47:25 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
17:47:25 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
17:47:43 <bparsia> http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/1006
Bijan Parsia: http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/1006 ←
17:47:51 <Achille> uli: I agree with mike that nobody even suggested a rational value space
Uli Sattler: I agree with mike that nobody even suggested a rational value space ←
17:47:53 <bparsia> (for a critique of thelack of rationals in xml schema)
Bijan Parsia: (for a critique of thelack of rationals in xml schema) ←
17:48:18 <Achille> uli: having rational constants could be very useful if we have comparisons
Uli Sattler: having rational constants could be very useful if we have comparisons ←
17:48:49 <rob> if you have that stuff then you have an implicit encoding for them, anyway
Rob Shearer: if you have that stuff then you have an implicit encoding for them, anyway ←
17:48:56 <Achille> uli: it could be useful in the context of comparisons
Uli Sattler: it could be useful in the context of comparisons ←
17:49:08 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:49:08 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:49:19 <Achille> bparsia: I do not want to solve equation in rational, but in reals
Bijan Parsia: I do not want to solve equation in rational, but in reals ←
17:49:29 <bparsia> zakim, muteme
Bijan Parsia: zakim, muteme ←
17:49:29 <Zakim> I don't understand 'muteme', bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'muteme', bparsia ←
17:49:34 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
17:49:34 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
17:50:01 <bparsia> Rational constants are much less serious than having a real value space, for sure
Bijan Parsia: Rational constants are much less serious than having a real value space, for sure ←
17:50:07 <Achille> topic: General Discussion
17:50:55 <Achille> alanr: I addressed the error caught by Peter on the annotation's proposal
Alan Ruttenberg: I addressed the error caught by Peter on the annotation's proposal ←
17:51:16 <bparsia> q+ to explain bundles
Bijan Parsia: q+ to explain bundles ←
17:51:22 <bparsia> zakim, umute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, umute me ←
17:51:22 <Zakim> I don't understand 'umute me', bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'umute me', bparsia ←
17:51:28 <Zakim> bparsia, you wanted to explain bundles
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia, you wanted to explain bundles ←
17:51:33 <Achille> alanr: we could start by some evaluation about if the proposal works and what to do if it does not
Alan Ruttenberg: we could start by some evaluation about if the proposal works and what to do if it does not ←
17:51:46 <Zakim> -rob
Zakim IRC Bot: -rob ←
17:52:15 <Achille> alanr: I thought that you had a name for an axiom
Alan Ruttenberg: I thought that you had a name for an axiom ←
17:52:34 <Achille> alanr: which means that you can have as many statements about the axiom as you want
Alan Ruttenberg: which means that you can have as many statements about the axiom as you want ←
17:52:53 <Achille> bijan: we do not want people to coin names for all axioms
Bijan Parsia: we do not want people to coin names for all axioms ←
17:53:06 <Achille> bijan: it has to be done by the implementation
Bijan Parsia: it has to be done by the implementation ←
17:53:22 <Achille> alanr: I believe my proposal achieve this same goal
Alan Ruttenberg: I believe my proposal achieve this same goal ←
17:53:33 <Achille> bijan: that's orthorgonal to space
Bijan Parsia: that's orthorgonal to space ←
17:53:43 <Achille> alanr: this proposal does not have spaces
Alan Ruttenberg: this proposal does not have spaces ←
17:54:03 <Achille> alanr: if there is a strong desire for spaces we can add it later
Alan Ruttenberg: if there is a strong desire for spaces we can add it later ←
17:54:19 <Achille> msmith: only one level of annotation?
Michael Smith: only one level of annotation? ←
17:54:33 <Achille> alanr: yes, for now only one level of annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: yes, for now only one level of annotations ←
17:54:57 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
17:54:57 <Zakim> bparsia was not muted, bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was not muted, bparsia ←
17:55:07 <Achille> alanr: Bijan, what is your sense about the effectiveness of this approach?
Alan Ruttenberg: Bijan, what is your sense about the effectiveness of this approach? ←
17:55:18 <Achille> bparsia: I do not know yet
Bijan Parsia: I do not know yet ←
17:55:54 <Achille> alanr: Peter has a strong concern about the idea of having two files
Alan Ruttenberg: Peter has a strong concern about the idea of having two files ←
17:56:07 <Achille> bijan: I agree with Peter
Bijan Parsia: I agree with Peter ←
17:56:42 <IanH> zakim, unmute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, unmute me ←
17:56:42 <Zakim> IanH should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should no longer be muted ←
17:56:46 <Achille> bparsia: People are in general opposed to multiple file solutions. It is a non-starter
Bijan Parsia: People are in general opposed to multiple file solutions. It is a non-starter ←
17:57:12 <Achille> alanr: the main reason to having them in separate files is to facilitate SPARQL queries
Alan Ruttenberg: the main reason to having them in separate files is to facilitate SPARQL queries ←
17:58:01 <Achille> bparsia: it is not substantially easier with a multiple file solution
Bijan Parsia: it is not substantially easier with a multiple file solution ←
17:58:30 <Achille> ianh: I agree with bijan. I remember similar issues raising in the context of DAML/OIL
Ian Horrocks: I agree with bijan. I remember similar issues raising in the context of DAML/OIL ←
17:59:01 <bmotik> Achille: I'm on the same page as Bijan.
Achille Fokoue: I'm on the same page as Bijan. [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
17:59:27 <Achille> Boris: I have not been able to see the proposal
Boris Motik: I have not been able to see the proposal ←
17:59:41 <Achille> Boris: I would prefer a single file in general
Boris Motik: I would prefer a single file in general ←
18:00:35 <Achille> alanr: we need bijan and boris to have a close look at the proposal
Alan Ruttenberg: we need bijan and boris to have a close look at the proposal ←
18:00:55 <Achille> bparsia: you should also contact Deborah
Bijan Parsia: you should also contact Deborah ←
18:01:05 <alanr> action: bparsia to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2
ACTION: bparsia to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 ←
18:01:05 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - bparsia
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - bparsia ←
18:01:15 <Achille> bparsia: she was interested in the issue
Bijan Parsia: she was interested in the issue ←
18:01:24 <alanr> action: bmotik to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2
ACTION: bmotik to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 ←
18:01:24 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - bmotik
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - bmotik ←
18:01:45 <alanr> action: alanr to ask Deb about nesting level of annotations on annotations.
ACTION: alanr to ask Deb about nesting level of annotations on annotations. ←
18:01:45 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - alanr ←
18:02:30 <Achille> topic: issue 16
18:02:53 <Achille> alanr: we should not discuss this issue since it is subsumed by rich annotation
Alan Ruttenberg: we should not discuss this issue since it is subsumed by rich annotation ←
18:03:12 <Achille> topic: issues of time and date related datatypes
18:03:16 <Rinke> action: alan to ask Deb about nesting level of annotations on annotations
ACTION: alan to ask Deb about nesting level of annotations on annotations ←
18:03:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-169 - Ask Deb about nesting level of annotations on annotations [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-07-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-169 - Ask Deb about nesting level of annotations on annotations [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-07-30]. ←
18:03:29 <Rinke> action: bijan to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2
ACTION: bijan to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 ←
18:03:29 <trackbot> Created ACTION-170 - Analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 [on Bijan Parsia - due 2008-07-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-170 - Analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 [on Bijan Parsia - due 2008-07-30]. ←
18:03:42 <Rinke> action: boris to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2
ACTION: boris to analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 ←
18:03:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-171 - Analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-07-30].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-171 - Analyze and comment on Annotation_System_2 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-07-30]. ←
18:03:58 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
18:03:58 <Zakim> bparsia was not muted, bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was not muted, bparsia ←
18:04:00 <alanr> ack bparsia
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bparsia ←
18:04:00 <Achille> alanr: most problems have to do with time zone and non-time zone datatypes
Alan Ruttenberg: most problems have to do with time zone and non-time zone datatypes ←
18:04:08 <ewallace> calendar elements are the problem mentioned in Boris' email
Evan Wallace: calendar elements are the problem mentioned in Boris' email ←
18:04:17 <Achille> bparsia: they are nonstarters
Bijan Parsia: they are nonstarters ←
18:05:01 <Achille> bparsia: there are so many ways to integrate the notion of time in owl. It is not clear that our solution will not be too constraining
Bijan Parsia: there are so many ways to integrate the notion of time in owl. It is not clear that our solution will not be too constraining ←
18:05:03 <alanr> q+ to make suggestion
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to make suggestion ←
18:05:05 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
18:05:05 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
18:05:53 <Achille> alanr: two levels of supports: 1) actual time point or interval 2) the second level are intervals
Alan Ruttenberg: two levels of supports: 1) actual time point or interval 2) the second level are intervals ←
18:06:27 <Zakim> alanr, you wanted to make suggestion
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to make suggestion ←
18:06:27 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
18:06:30 <Zakim> bparsia should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should no longer be muted ←
18:07:03 <Achille> bparsia: any implementers interested in supporting it?
Bijan Parsia: any implementers interested in supporting it? ←
18:07:24 <Achille> bparsia: it is not clear how to design a solution that fit XML schema
Bijan Parsia: it is not clear how to design a solution that fit XML schema ←
18:08:04 <Achille> alanr: we can do something close to owl real (a departure from XML schema)
Alan Ruttenberg: we can do something close to owl real (a departure from XML schema) ←
18:08:20 <Achille> boris: supporting xsd:dateTime is not trival
Boris Motik: supporting xsd:dateTime is not trival ←
18:08:41 <Achille> boris: supporting recurring intervals is even more complex
Boris Motik: supporting recurring intervals is even more complex ←
18:08:52 <bparsia> What about the simpler version: No support
Bijan Parsia: What about the simpler version: No support ←
18:09:10 <bparsia> THen the next simplest: treat them as strings (roughly) with colors
Bijan Parsia: THen the next simplest: treat them as strings (roughly) with colors ←
18:09:10 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
18:09:18 <Achille> alanr: it will be useful to support some simple manipulation with time instants
Alan Ruttenberg: it will be useful to support some simple manipulation with time instants ←
18:09:30 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
18:09:30 <Zakim> bparsia was not muted, bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was not muted, bparsia ←
18:09:32 <alanr> ack bparsia
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bparsia ←
18:09:47 <Achille> bparsia: there are simpler options:
Bijan Parsia: there are simpler options: ←
18:09:54 <Achille> bparsia: 1) do nothing
Bijan Parsia: 1) do nothing ←
18:10:21 <Achille> bparsia: 2) support them but in a very minimal way
Bijan Parsia: 2) support them but in a very minimal way ←
18:10:37 <Achille> bparsia: maybe just treat them as string
Bijan Parsia: maybe just treat them as string ←
18:10:54 <Achille> bparsia: i.e. no commitment to any temporal model
Bijan Parsia: i.e. no commitment to any temporal model ←
18:11:51 <msmith> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#dateTime
Michael Smith: http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#dateTime ←
18:12:00 <alanr> q+ to comment on tz
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to comment on tz ←
18:12:10 <Achille> boris: for instant, it could be doable . I am not sure xsd:dateTime is the right type (I do not really understand its value space)
Boris Motik: for instant, it could be doable . I am not sure xsd:dateTime is the right type (I do not really understand its value space) ←
18:12:30 <Achille> boris: with a fixed time zone, it could be easy to support
Boris Motik: with a fixed time zone, it could be easy to support ←
18:12:57 <Zakim> alanr, you wanted to comment on tz
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to comment on tz ←
18:13:13 <bmotik> Achille: I would like us to keep in sync as much as we can with XML Schema
Achille Fokoue: I would like us to keep in sync as much as we can with XML Schema [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
18:13:26 <bmotik> Achille: There are many existing implementations of XML Schema
Achille Fokoue: There are many existing implementations of XML Schema [ Scribe Assist by Boris Motik ] ←
18:13:31 <ewallace> TimeLine = Time Axis or Time Scale?
Evan Wallace: TimeLine = Time Axis or Time Scale? ←
18:13:33 <Achille> boris: I think we would have to go away from XML Schema
Boris Motik: I think we would have to go away from XML Schema ←
18:14:37 <alanr> xml schema: dateTime values are ordered by their ·timeOnTimeline· value.
Alan Ruttenberg: xml schema: dateTime values are ordered by their ·timeOnTimeline· value. ←
18:14:53 <Achille> bparsia: number case is a much easy case. I think we are less force in the case of time to depart from XML Schema
Bijan Parsia: number case is a much easy case. I think we are less force in the case of time to depart from XML Schema ←
18:15:28 <Achille> bparsia: i'm unclear what the constraints are and where we are going
Bijan Parsia: i'm unclear what the constraints are and where we are going ←
18:15:29 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
18:15:30 <Zakim> uli was not muted, uli
Zakim IRC Bot: uli was not muted, uli ←
18:16:25 <alanr> this is the sense that I intended - very easy way
Alan Ruttenberg: this is the sense that I intended - very easy way ←
18:16:30 <Achille> uli: Just remember some discussions we had, there are some simple usecases which can be supported if we had some datetime constants
Uli Sattler: Just remember some discussions we had, there are some simple usecases which can be supported if we had some datetime constants ←
18:16:44 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
18:16:44 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
18:16:53 <Rinke> I agree with uli
Rinke Hoekstra: I agree with uli ←
18:17:04 <Achille> alanr: there are serious questions about date time datatype
Alan Ruttenberg: there are serious questions about date time datatype ←
18:17:28 <Achille> alanr: do we think it is worth thinking about this issue further?
Alan Ruttenberg: do we think it is worth thinking about this issue further? ←
18:17:39 <msmith> +1 to think about this further
Michael Smith: +1 to think about this further ←
18:17:44 <Achille> alanr: or just a sentiment poll?
Alan Ruttenberg: or just a sentiment poll? ←
18:17:54 <Rinke> +1 to think further
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 to think further ←
18:18:07 <sandro> +1 more work for free is great! :-)
Sandro Hawke: +1 more work for free is great! :-) ←
18:18:08 <ewallace> +1 to generation of a proposal for simple time rep
Evan Wallace: +1 to generation of a proposal for simple time rep ←
18:18:13 <Zhe> +1 need more time
18:18:16 <Achille> achille: 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
18:18:19 <bmotik> 0
Boris Motik: 0 ←
18:18:20 <baojie> 0
18:18:21 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
18:18:23 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
18:18:26 <Elisa> +1 for the simple case
Elisa Kendall: +1 for the simple case ←
18:18:32 <bparsia> -1 to requesting more work of overloaded people...
Bijan Parsia: -1 to requesting more work of overloaded people... ←
18:18:33 <uli> +1 for a bit more thought
Uli Sattler: +1 for a bit more thought ←
18:18:51 <IanH> 0 not *too* much more thought
Ian Horrocks: 0 not *too* much more thought ←
18:18:58 <Achille> alanr: objection from bijan
Alan Ruttenberg: objection from bijan ←
18:19:23 <Achille> alanr: I'll leave it to uli and boris about how to proceed further
Alan Ruttenberg: I'll leave it to uli and boris about how to proceed further ←
18:19:53 <Achille> alanr: going back to the datatype issue: how and whether to support the float
Alan Ruttenberg: going back to the datatype issue: how and whether to support the float ←
18:21:10 <Achille> ewallace: I'm not prepare to talk about this issue today
Evan Wallace: I'm not prepare to talk about this issue today ←
18:21:23 <bparsia> zakim, unmute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, unmute me ←
18:21:23 <Zakim> bparsia was not muted, bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia was not muted, bparsia ←
18:21:48 <msmith> q+
Michael Smith: q+ ←
18:21:53 <Achille> bparsia: the proposal is just fine
Bijan Parsia: the proposal is just fine ←
18:22:02 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/mid/005b01c8e764$56a68a80$7212a8c0@wolf
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/mid/005b01c8e764$56a68a80$7212a8c0@wolf ←
18:22:36 <Achille> bparsia: we are supporting the more commun case and the more likely to be effective case
Bijan Parsia: we are supporting the more commun case and the more likely to be effective case ←
18:22:38 <bparsia> zakim, mute me
Bijan Parsia: zakim, mute me ←
18:22:38 <Zakim> bparsia should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bparsia should now be muted ←
18:23:05 <alanr> q+ to express uncertainty about whether range constraints are useful
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to express uncertainty about whether range constraints are useful ←
18:23:06 <Achille> msmith: I need a clarification from boris. would float acceptable in datatype restriction?
Michael Smith: I need a clarification from boris. would float acceptable in datatype restriction? ←
18:23:37 <Achille> boris: i do not see a problem in using it in description as long as it is not discrete
Boris Motik: i do not see a problem in using it in description as long as it is not discrete ←
18:23:57 <Achille> boris: can be supported for a few facets
Boris Motik: can be supported for a few facets ←
18:24:15 <Zakim> alanr, you wanted to express uncertainty about whether range constraints are useful
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr, you wanted to express uncertainty about whether range constraints are useful ←
18:25:27 <Achille> achille: alanr could you type your previous point. i did not get it
Achille Fokoue: alanr could you type your previous point. i did not get it ←
18:25:53 <Achille> achille: thanks!
Achille Fokoue: thanks! ←
18:27:23 <alanr> I am uncertain whether it makes sense to have a float datatype which is effectively faceted range on possible reals. Certainly think that lexical support support and checking is useful.
Alan Ruttenberg: I am uncertain whether it makes sense to have a float datatype which is effectively faceted range on possible reals. Certainly think that lexical support support and checking is useful. ←
18:26:22 <Achille> alanr: any question about the next f2f?
Alan Ruttenberg: any question about the next f2f? ←
18:26:33 <Zakim> -uli
Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←
18:26:34 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
18:26:34 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
18:26:36 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
18:26:37 <Zakim> -Elisa_Kendall
Zakim IRC Bot: -Elisa_Kendall ←
18:26:39 <Zakim> -bparsia
Zakim IRC Bot: -bparsia ←
18:26:41 <Zakim> -alanr.a
Zakim IRC Bot: -alanr.a ←
18:26:43 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
18:26:44 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
18:26:44 <Zakim> -Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: -Ivan ←
18:26:45 <Zakim> -Carsten
Zakim IRC Bot: -Carsten ←
18:26:47 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
18:26:55 <Zakim> -Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: -Rinke ←
18:27:19 <Achille> rrsagent, make log public
rrsagent, make log public ←
Formatted by CommonScribe