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 <scribenick> PRESENT: Achille, Sandro, baojie, Rinke, MarkusK, m_schnei (muted), uli (muted), Zhe (muted), IanH (muted), bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, msmith, alan ruttenberg, Ivan (muted), JeffP, baojie, ivan, ewallace, jar, sandro
00:00:00 <scribenick> REGRETS: Bijan Parsia, JeffP, Carsten Lutz, Elisa Kendall, Evan Wallace
Scribe problem: the name 'Carsten Lutz' does not match any of the 50 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 Markus Stocker 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> CHAIR: alanr_
16:56:17 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/20-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/20-owl-irc ←
16:56:23 <sandro> RRSAgent, make record public
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, make record public ←
16:58:11 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
16:58:15 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P1 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P1 is me ←
16:58:15 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
16:58:23 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
16:58:23 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
16:58:38 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aaaa ←
16:59:45 <Zakim> +??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
17:00:19 <Zakim> +??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←
17:00:21 <Zakim> -??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: -??P3 ←
17:00:25 <Rinke> zakim, ??P4 is me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, ??P4 is me ←
17:00:25 <Zakim> +Rinke; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Rinke; got it ←
17:00:30 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:00:30 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:00:40 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
17:00:40 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
17:00:44 <Zakim> +??P3
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P3 ←
17:00:56 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
17:00:57 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
17:01:02 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
17:01:09 <Zakim> +??P7
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P7 ←
17:01:09 <m_schnei> zakim, ??P9 is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, ??P9 is me ←
17:01:10 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it ←
17:01:18 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:01:18 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:01:20 <uli> zakim, ??P7 is me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P7 is me ←
17:01:20 <Zakim> +uli; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it ←
17:01:22 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
17:01:24 <Zakim> + +1.603.897.aabb
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.603.897.aabb ←
17:01:25 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:01:25 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:01:30 <Zakim> +Ian_Horrocks
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ian_Horrocks ←
17:01:42 <Zhe> zakim, ++1.603.897.aabb is me
Zhe Wu: zakim, ++1.603.897.aabb is me ←
17:01:42 <Zakim> sorry, Zhe, I do not recognize a party named '++1.603.897.aabb'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, Zhe, I do not recognize a party named '++1.603.897.aabb' ←
17:01:44 <IanH> zakim, Ian_Horrocks is IanH
Ian Horrocks: zakim, Ian_Horrocks is IanH ←
17:01:44 <Zakim> +IanH; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH; got it ←
17:01:49 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
17:01:52 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P1 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P1 is me ←
17:01:52 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
17:01:55 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
17:01:56 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
17:02:01 <Zhe> zakim, +1.603.897.aabb is me
Zhe Wu: zakim, +1.603.897.aabb is me ←
17:02:01 <Zakim> +Zhe; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe; got it ←
17:02:04 <Zakim> +??P5
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P5 ←
17:02:09 <Zhe> zakim, mute me
17:02:09 <Zakim> Zhe should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should now be muted ←
17:02:23 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P5 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P5 is me ←
17:02:23 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
17:02:25 <uli> 41 hash on the phone?
Uli Sattler: 41 hash on the phone? ←
17:02:26 <IanH> Anyone know why zakim has started to identify me as "Ian_Horrocks"?
Ian Horrocks: Anyone know why zakim has started to identify me as "Ian_Horrocks"? ←
17:02:26 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
17:02:28 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
17:02:28 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
17:02:38 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
17:02:38 <Zakim> bmotik was already muted, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was already muted, bmotik ←
17:02:45 <uli> Ian, because she is polite?
Uli Sattler: Ian, because she is polite? ←
17:02:59 <Zakim> + +1.202.408.aacc
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.202.408.aacc ←
17:03:09 <IanH> Zakim being female would certainly account for a lot
Ian Horrocks: Zakim being female would certainly account for a lot ←
17:03:14 <Zakim> + +1.617.253.aadd
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.253.aadd ←
17:03:16 <uli> for example?
Uli Sattler: for example? ←
17:03:28 <IanH> Pedantry?
Ian Horrocks: Pedantry? ←
17:03:37 <alanr_> zakim, aadd is alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, aadd is alanr ←
17:03:37 <Zakim> +alanr; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +alanr; got it ←
17:03:42 <uli> naaa, if she was German, perhaps!
Uli Sattler: naaa, if she was German, perhaps! ←
17:03:51 <uli> does zakim flirt?
Uli Sattler: does zakim flirt? ←
17:03:55 <IanH> Zakim, mute me
Ian Horrocks: Zakim, mute me ←
17:03:55 <Zakim> IanH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should now be muted ←
17:04:25 <ivan> zakim, dial ivan-voip
Ivan Herman: zakim, dial ivan-voip ←
17:04:26 <Zakim> ok, ivan; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; the call is being made ←
17:04:27 <Zakim> +Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: +Ivan ←
17:04:40 <alanr_> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:04:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, +1.518.276.aaaa, Rinke, MarkusK, m_schnei (muted), uli (muted), Zhe (muted), IanH (muted), bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider,
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Sandro, +1.518.276.aaaa, Rinke, MarkusK, m_schnei (muted), uli (muted), Zhe (muted), IanH (muted), bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ←
17:04:43 <Zakim> ... msmith, alanr, Ivan
Zakim IRC Bot: ... msmith, alanr, Ivan ←
17:04:44 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, msmith, IanH, Zhe, bcuencagrau, m_schnei, MarkusK, uli, pfps, alanr_, RRSAgent, Rinke, baojie, Zakim, bmotik, ivan, ewallace, jar, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, msmith, IanH, Zhe, bcuencagrau, m_schnei, MarkusK, uli, pfps, alanr_, RRSAgent, Rinke, baojie, Zakim, bmotik, ivan, ewallace, jar, sandro, trackbot ←
17:04:53 <uli> perhaps there are several versions of zakim, like for satnav voices?
Uli Sattler: perhaps there are several versions of zakim, like for satnav voices? ←
17:04:55 <ivan> zakim, mute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, mute me ←
17:04:55 <Zakim> Ivan should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should now be muted ←
17:04:59 <baojie> Zakim, aaaa is baojie
Jie Bao: Zakim, aaaa is baojie ←
17:04:59 <Zakim> +baojie; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie; got it ←
17:05:03 <alanr_> zakim, who is here?
Alan Ruttenberg: zakim, who is here? ←
17:05:03 <Zakim> On the phone I see Sandro, baojie, Rinke, MarkusK, m_schnei (muted), uli (muted), Zhe (muted), IanH (muted), bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, msmith,
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see Sandro, baojie, Rinke, MarkusK, m_schnei (muted), uli (muted), Zhe (muted), IanH (muted), bmotik (muted), bcuencagrau (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, msmith, ←
17:05:06 <Zakim> ... alanr, Ivan (muted)
Zakim IRC Bot: ... alanr, Ivan (muted) ←
17:05:07 <Zakim> On IRC I see JeffP, msmith, IanH, Zhe, bcuencagrau, m_schnei, MarkusK, uli, pfps, alanr_, RRSAgent, Rinke, baojie, Zakim, bmotik, ivan, ewallace, jar, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see JeffP, msmith, IanH, Zhe, bcuencagrau, m_schnei, MarkusK, uli, pfps, alanr_, RRSAgent, Rinke, baojie, Zakim, bmotik, ivan, ewallace, jar, sandro, trackbot ←
17:05:29 <Rinke> the scribe isn't here
Rinke Hoekstra: the scribe isn't here ←
17:05:47 <Rinke> q+
Rinke Hoekstra: q+ ←
17:05:52 <Rinke> ack me
Rinke Hoekstra: ack me ←
17:05:53 <alanr_> ack Rinke
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Rinke ←
17:06:21 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:06:21 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:06:23 <sandro> scribe: sandro
(Scribe set to Sandro Hawke)
17:06:42 <Zakim> + +0122427aaee
Zakim IRC Bot: + +0122427aaee ←
17:06:49 <JeffP> zakim, aaee is me
17:06:49 <Zakim> +JeffP; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +JeffP; got it ←
17:06:50 <sandro> Alan: Shall we review POWDER (which uses OWL)? People, please look at this and see if it merits our attention.
Alan Ruttenberg: Shall we review POWDER (which uses OWL)? People, please look at this and see if it merits our attention. ←
17:06:54 <sandro> topic: Vacations
17:07:13 <bmotik> I'll be away next week.
Boris Motik: I'll be away next week. ←
17:07:23 <sandro> Alan: Perhaps we should cancel a meeting? If you're going to miss one in the next few weeks, say so here and now.
Alan Ruttenberg: Perhaps we should cancel a meeting? If you're going to miss one in the next few weeks, say so here and now. ←
17:07:23 <Rinke> I will be away the first two weeks of september
Rinke Hoekstra: I will be away the first two weeks of september ←
17:07:25 <ivan> I will be out for a trip on the 10th of September
Ivan Herman: I will be out for a trip on the 10th of September ←
17:07:53 <sandro> Topic: Previous Minutes
17:08:01 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-08-13
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-08-13 ←
17:08:07 <pfps> no opinion on the minutes
Peter Patel-Schneider: no opinion on the minutes ←
17:08:11 <sandro> Alan: Any opinions?
Alan Ruttenberg: Any opinions? ←
17:08:22 <sandro> Alan: no one. :-(
Alan Ruttenberg: no one. :-( ←
17:08:26 <Rinke> I think they're fine, but I wrote them
Rinke Hoekstra: I think they're fine, but I wrote them ←
17:08:35 <IanH> I think they are fine too
Ian Horrocks: I think they are fine too ←
17:08:38 <sandro> Alan: so, we'll try again next week.
Alan Ruttenberg: so, we'll try again next week. ←
17:08:41 <IanH> And I didn't write them
Ian Horrocks: And I didn't write them ←
<sandro> Minutes of 13 August not yet approved
Minutes of 13 August not yet approved ←
17:08:44 <sandro> Topic: Pending Review Actions
17:08:50 <sandro> SubTopic: ACTION-176
17:08:50 <trackbot> ACTION-176 -- Peter Patel-Schneider to draft a comment on XML Schema Datatypes 1.1 draft -- due 2008-08-22 -- CLOSED
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-176 -- Peter Patel-Schneider to draft a comment on XML Schema Datatypes 1.1 draft -- due 2008-08-22 -- CLOSED ←
17:08:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/176
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/176 ←
17:09:25 <sandro> Alan: Peter, have you had a chance to review my comments?
Alan Ruttenberg: Peter, have you had a chance to review my comments? ←
17:09:28 <sandro> Peter: nope.
Peter Patel-Schneider: nope. ←
17:09:30 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:09:36 <alanr_> ack Ianh
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Ianh ←
17:09:57 <uli> omit: we can't hear you!
17:09:58 <alanr_> omit: not hearing you Ian
17:09:58 <IanH> zakim, unmute IanH
Ian Horrocks: zakim, unmute IanH ←
17:09:58 <Zakim> IanH should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should no longer be muted ←
17:10:50 <sandro> Ian: I thought it was done. We all seemed to agree it was okay..... The action was closed..... I was surprised the response hadn't been sent off.
Ian Horrocks: I thought it was done. We all seemed to agree it was okay..... The action was closed..... I was surprised the response hadn't been sent off. ←
17:11:09 <sandro> Alan: I had some questions on re-reading it. I'd appreciate at least look at them before sending it off.
Alan Ruttenberg: I had some questions on re-reading it. I'd appreciate at least look at them before sending it off. ←
17:11:13 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
17:11:22 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me
Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me ←
17:11:22 <Zakim> +Achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←
17:11:48 <sandro> ACTION: Alan to coordinate with Ian about the matter of ACTION-176
ACTION: Alan to coordinate with Ian about the matter of ACTION-176 ←
17:11:48 <trackbot> Created ACTION-196 - Coordinate with Ian about the matter of ACTION-176 [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-196 - Coordinate with Ian about the matter of ACTION-176 [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-08-27]. ←
17:11:58 <IanH> zakim, mute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, mute me ←
17:11:58 <Zakim> IanH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should now be muted ←
17:12:06 <sandro> subtopic: ACTION-177
17:12:10 <sandro> ACTION-177?
17:12:10 <trackbot> ACTION-177 -- Boris Motik to enact the resolution of ISSUE-126 (datatype system) in the spec -- due 2008-08-19 -- PENDINGREVIEW
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-177 -- Boris Motik to enact the resolution of ISSUE-126 (datatype system) in the spec -- due 2008-08-19 -- PENDINGREVIEW ←
17:12:10 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/177
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/177 ←
17:12:11 <pfps> note that the end of LC for the document is 12 September 2008
Peter Patel-Schneider: note that the end of LC for the document is 12 September 2008 ←
17:12:39 <sandro> ACTION-193?
17:12:39 <trackbot> ACTION-193 -- Michael Schneider to m_schnei to look into reverse mapping change for issue 136 -- due 2008-08-19 -- PENDINGREVIEW
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-193 -- Michael Schneider to m_schnei to look into reverse mapping change for ISSUE-136 -- due 2008-08-19 -- PENDINGREVIEW ←
17:12:39 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/193
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/193 ←
17:12:42 <sandro> ACTION-195?
17:12:42 <trackbot> ACTION-195 -- Alan Ruttenberg to look in to what happens with OWL-R ruleset applied to annotation properties with subproperty axioms -- due 2008-08-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-195 -- Alan Ruttenberg to look in to what happens with OWL-R ruleset applied to annotation properties with subproperty axioms -- due 2008-08-20 -- PENDINGREVIEW ←
17:12:42 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/195
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/195 ←
17:13:43 <sandro> Alan: ACTION-193 is later on agenda today; ACTION-195 will be talked about at some point in the future.
Alan Ruttenberg: ACTION-193 is later on agenda today; ACTION-195 will be talked about at some point in the future. ←
17:13:51 <sandro> topic: Due and Overdue Actions
17:14:15 <sandro> Alan: Bijan's not on call, so skip ACTION-170, ACTION-168, ACTION-174
Alan Ruttenberg: Bijan's not on call, so skip ACTION-170, ACTION-168, ACTION-174 ←
17:14:33 <sandro> Alan: Michael, can you adjust due date on ACTION-152, since you said you'd be late.
Alan Ruttenberg: Michael, can you adjust due date on ACTION-152, since you said you'd be late. ←
17:15:47 <m_schnei> I will adjust to the end of the week
Michael Schneider: I will adjust to the end of the week ←
17:15:53 <sandro> Alan: Thanks.
Alan Ruttenberg: Thanks. ←
17:15:55 <IanH> zakim, unmute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, unmute me ←
17:15:55 <Zakim> IanH was not muted, IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH was not muted, IanH ←
17:16:00 <baojie> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0195.html
Jie Bao: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0195.html ←
17:16:00 <sandro> ACTION-150?
17:16:00 <trackbot> ACTION-150 -- Jie Bao to initiate discussion with RIF WG and try to reach consensus -- due 2008-08-19 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-150 -- Jie Bao to initiate discussion with RIF WG and try to reach consensus -- due 2008-08-19 -- OPEN ←
17:16:00 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/150
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/150 ←
17:16:03 <Zakim> -m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: -m_schnei ←
17:16:36 <Zakim> +??P9
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9 ←
17:16:46 <m_schnei> zakim, ??P9 is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, ??P9 is me ←
17:16:46 <Zakim> +m_schnei; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +m_schnei; got it ←
17:16:52 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:16:52 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:17:17 <sandro> baojie: Axel revised the spec. We agreed to use rdf:text as the name of the thing. The semantics are almost the same. Boris is concerned about unicode composition issues. He proposed to use a new universe, as he did in datatype things.
Jie Bao: Axel revised the spec. We agreed to use rdf:text as the name of the thing. The semantics are almost the same. Boris is concerned about unicode composition issues. He proposed to use a new universe, as he did in datatype things. ←
17:17:27 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:17:33 <alanr_> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
17:17:34 <ivan> zakim, unmute me
Ivan Herman: zakim, unmute me ←
17:17:34 <Zakim> Ivan should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Ivan should no longer be muted ←
17:17:42 <sandro> Alan: So we'll just check in next week.
Alan Ruttenberg: So we'll just check in next week. ←
17:17:57 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
17:18:02 <alanr_> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
17:18:07 <sandro> Ivan: I don't understand this issue of Unicode. I know there are compound characters, but there are libraries around to handle them.
Ivan Herman: I don't understand this issue of Unicode. I know there are compound characters, but there are libraries around to handle them. ←
17:18:14 <baojie> Boris proposed to use Universal Character Set
Jie Bao: Boris proposed to use Universal Character Set ←
17:18:58 <sandro> Boris: The problem is that in unicode, there are several ways to represent certain characters, eg accented characters. That's why they have Normal Forms, etc maximally composed, maximally decomposed, etc.
Boris Motik: The problem is that in unicode, there are several ways to represent certain characters, eg accented characters. That's why they have Normal Forms, etc maximally composed, maximally decomposed, etc. ←
17:19:35 <sandro> Boris: I looked into how XML Schema handles this. Instead of Unicode, they use UCS. I think this is what we want. My proposal is to do exactly the same as XML Schema.
Boris Motik: I looked into how XML Schema handles this. Instead of Unicode, they use UCS. I think this is what we want. My proposal is to do exactly the same as XML Schema. ←
17:20:24 <sandro> Ivan: Okay. I'm a little bit uncertain about that. Maybe we need to check with XML Schema WG and I14N. I mean, XML uses unicode, right?
Ivan Herman: Okay. I'm a little bit uncertain about that. Maybe we need to check with XML Schema WG and I14N. I mean, XML uses unicode, right? ←
17:20:28 <baojie> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Integers.2C_Strings.2C_Language_Tags.2C_and_Node_IDs
Jie Bao: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Integers.2C_Strings.2C_Language_Tags.2C_and_Node_IDs ←
17:20:51 <sandro> Alan: Ivan, how about you coordinate in the rdf-text group about this, with Jie.
Alan Ruttenberg: Ivan, how about you coordinate in the rdf-text group about this, with Jie. ←
17:21:05 <sandro> ACTION-194?
17:21:05 <trackbot> ACTION-194 -- Ian Horrocks to come up with a proposal for conformance -- due 2008-08-20 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-194 -- Ian Horrocks to come up with a proposal for conformance -- due 2008-08-20 -- OPEN ←
17:21:05 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/194
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/194 ←
17:21:31 <sandro> Ian: it turned out to be more difficult than I expected, and I need a little more time.
Ian Horrocks: it turned out to be more difficult than I expected, and I need a little more time. ←
17:21:34 <sandro> ACTION-192
17:21:37 <sandro> ACTION-192?
17:21:37 <trackbot> ACTION-192 -- Diego Calvanese to come up with proposal for UNA + function in language by global restriction, with Mike or Evren -- due 2008-08-20 -- OPEN
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-192 -- Diego Calvanese to come up with proposal for UNA + function in language by global restriction, with Mike or Evren -- due 2008-08-20 -- OPEN ←
17:21:37 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/192
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/actions/192 ←
17:21:45 <IanH> zakim, mute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, mute me ←
17:21:45 <Zakim> IanH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should now be muted ←
17:21:56 <sandro> Mike: I haven't heard back from Diego yet.
Michael Smith: I haven't heard back from Diego yet. ←
17:22:05 <sandro> Topic: Quick Reference Card
17:22:19 <sandro> Alan: look at the great new Quick Reference Card!
Alan Ruttenberg: look at the great new Quick Reference Card! ←
17:22:24 <sandro> Alan: any comments?
Alan Ruttenberg: any comments? ←
17:22:25 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:22:29 <Rinke> q+
Rinke Hoekstra: q+ ←
17:22:30 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:22:36 <Rinke> ack me
Rinke Hoekstra: ack me ←
17:22:37 <alanr_> ack Rinke
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Rinke ←
17:23:00 <sandro> Rinke: The first thing I thought was: This is Great! Then I wondered why it's using the RDF syntax?!
Rinke Hoekstra: The first thing I thought was: This is Great! Then I wondered why it's using the RDF syntax?! ←
17:23:11 <alanr_> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
17:23:20 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:23:20 <Zakim> Rinke should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should now be muted ←
17:23:28 <sandro> Ivan: (1) It would be good to have an HTML version, somehow.
Ivan Herman: (1) It would be good to have an HTML version, somehow. ←
17:23:34 <alanr_> q+ to address html
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ to address html ←
17:23:45 <sandro> Ivan: (2) To Rinke -- many people will use this stuff in RDF only..
Ivan Herman: (2) To Rinke -- many people will use this stuff in RDF only.. ←
17:23:50 <Rinke> zakim, unmute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, unmute me ←
17:23:50 <Zakim> Rinke should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke should no longer be muted ←
17:23:54 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:24:01 <baojie> q+
17:24:01 <sandro> Ivan: Having both versions would be okay. I, personally, would just use the RDF version.
Ivan Herman: Having both versions would be okay. I, personally, would just use the RDF version. ←
17:24:12 <alanr_> ack baojie
Alan Ruttenberg: ack baojie ←
17:24:14 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:24:16 <pfps> q+
17:24:20 <sandro> Jie: Like Ivan says--- RDF is more close to what an End User wants to say.
Jie Bao: Like Ivan says--- RDF is more close to what an End User wants to say. ←
17:24:21 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
17:24:25 <IanH> zakim, unmute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, unmute me ←
17:24:25 <Zakim> IanH was not muted, IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH was not muted, IanH ←
17:24:36 <sandro> Alan: re: HTML -- yeah, we suggested they use PDF for now and move back to HTML later.
Alan Ruttenberg: re: HTML -- yeah, we suggested they use PDF for now and move back to HTML later. ←
17:24:44 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:24:45 <ivan> ack alanr_
Ivan Herman: ack alanr_ ←
17:24:46 <Zakim> alanr_, you wanted to address html
Zakim IRC Bot: alanr_, you wanted to address html ←
17:24:48 <Rinke> zakim, mute me
Rinke Hoekstra: zakim, mute me ←
17:24:48 <Zakim> Rinke was already muted, Rinke
Zakim IRC Bot: Rinke was already muted, Rinke ←
17:24:51 <alanr_> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:24:53 <ivan> ack IanH
Ivan Herman: ack IanH ←
17:25:22 <pfps> q-
17:25:28 <m_schnei> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:25:29 <uli> zakim, ack me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ack me ←
17:25:30 <Zakim> unmuting uli
Zakim IRC Bot: unmuting uli ←
17:25:30 <Zakim> I see m_schnei on the speaker queue
Zakim IRC Bot: I see m_schnei on the speaker queue ←
17:25:33 <ivan> ack uli
Ivan Herman: ack uli ←
17:25:35 <sandro> Ian: I am shocked, positively shocked to hear "RDF is what the end users want". If that's where we end up, then we've failed, because we'll have so few users!
Ian Horrocks: I am shocked, positively shocked to hear "RDF is what the end users want". If that's where we end up, then we've failed, because we'll have so few users! ←
17:25:36 <IanH> zakim, mute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, mute me ←
17:25:36 <Zakim> IanH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should now be muted ←
17:25:39 <Rinke> I just tried to respond to Ivan that I think RDF is fine, but indeed having the other syntaxes is even better
Rinke Hoekstra: I just tried to respond to Ivan that I think RDF is fine, but indeed having the other syntaxes is even better ←
17:26:05 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:26:18 <alanr_> ack m_schnei
Alan Ruttenberg: ack m_schnei ←
17:26:19 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:26:19 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
17:26:21 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:26:21 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:26:24 <sandro> Uli: I'd like the guide a little more structured. So classes aren't next to restrictions, etc. The way it is now, it took me a long time to figure out Where Is What, and Why is something Where?
Uli Sattler: I'd like the guide a little more structured. So classes aren't next to restrictions, etc. The way it is now, it took me a long time to figure out Where Is What, and Why is something Where? ←
17:26:40 <sandro> m_schnei: The original OWL 1 guide had ONLY RDF.
Michael Schneider: The original OWL 1 guide had ONLY RDF. ←
17:26:43 <m_schnei> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/ ←
17:26:47 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:26:47 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:27:13 <sandro> Alan: Regarding "only RDF", Jie, could you bring back to these folks that there was some concern about this, and maybe that there be an alternative versions?
Alan Ruttenberg: Regarding "only RDF", Jie, could you bring back to these folks that there was some concern about this, and maybe that there be an alternative versions? ←
17:27:39 <sandro> ACTION: Jie to explore options for Quick Reference having (also) other OWL syntaxes
ACTION: Jie to explore options for Quick Reference having (also) other OWL syntaxes ←
17:27:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-197 - Explore options for Quick Reference having (also) other OWL syntaxes [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-197 - Explore options for Quick Reference having (also) other OWL syntaxes [on Jie Bao - due 2008-08-27]. ←
17:28:08 <sandro> Topic: Proposals To Resolve Issues
17:28:21 <sandro> subtopic: ISSUE-111 -- There's no way to signal the intended semantics of an OWL document
17:28:38 <alanr_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html
Alan Ruttenberg: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html ←
17:29:02 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:29:31 <sandro> PROPOSED: Resolve issue-111 as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html
PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-111 as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html ←
17:29:34 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:29:39 <alanr_> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:29:40 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:29:40 <msmith> +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
17:29:41 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:29:42 <MarkusK> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
17:29:44 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:29:44 <Zhe> +1
17:29:47 <baojie> =1
17:29:54 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
17:29:54 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
17:29:56 <sandro> +1
+1 ←
17:30:01 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:30:06 <pfps> +1, although it is rather strange to refer to a message that talks about RPI abstaining
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1, although it is rather strange to refer to a message that talks about RPI abstaining ←
17:30:20 <baojie> +1
17:30:24 <sandro> RESOLVED: Resolve issue-111 as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html
RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-111 as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html ←
17:30:40 <m_schnei> So this same^3 triple will *not* go into the Full spec
Michael Schneider: So this same^3 triple will *not* go into the Full spec ←
17:30:44 <Rinke> no
Rinke Hoekstra: no ←
17:30:57 <pfps> I'll add something to the primer
Peter Patel-Schneider: I'll add something to the primer ←
17:31:12 <sandro> ACTION: pfps to implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer
ACTION: pfps to implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer ←
17:31:12 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - pfps
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find user - pfps ←
17:31:17 <sandro> ACTION: peter to implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer
ACTION: peter to implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer ←
17:31:18 <trackbot> Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - peter
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - peter ←
17:31:18 <trackbot> Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ppatelsc, phaase)
Trackbot IRC Bot: Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. ppatelsc, phaase) ←
17:31:26 <sandro> ACTION: ppatelsc to implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer
ACTION: ppatelsc to implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer ←
17:31:26 <trackbot> Created ACTION-198 - Implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-198 - Implement resolution to ISSUE-111 in Primer [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-27]. ←
17:31:37 <sandro> subtopic: Issue-16 -- Entity annotations status
17:31:48 <sandro> (Ian temp chairing)
(Ian temp chairing) ←
17:32:01 <IanH> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html
Ian Horrocks: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html ←
17:32:44 <alanr_> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
17:32:52 <sandro> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-16 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html allowing annotations on annotations everywhere
PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-16 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html allowing annotations on annotations everywhere ←
17:33:00 <alanr_> I like this proposal, with the following caveats.
Alan Ruttenberg: I like this proposal, with the following caveats. ←
17:33:00 <alanr_> 1) The resolution of the proposal should speak to the serialization of annotations on annotations but not imply a resolution on the semantics or pragmatics of annotation properties. That issue is still under discussion.
Alan Ruttenberg: 1) The resolution of the proposal should speak to the serialization of annotations on annotations but not imply a resolution on the semantics or pragmatics of annotation properties. That issue is still under discussion. ←
17:33:00 <alanr_> 2) The proposal continues a practice of reifying without including the original triple that has not been resolved by the working group. That matter would be resolved separately.
Alan Ruttenberg: 2) The proposal continues a practice of reifying without including the original triple that has not been resolved by the working group. That matter would be resolved separately. ←
17:33:02 <sandro> Alan: I sent an e-mail responose....
Alan Ruttenberg: I sent an e-mail responose.... ←
17:33:07 <sandro> alan: now in IRC
Alan Ruttenberg: now in IRC ←
17:33:28 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
17:33:36 <IanH> ack alanr_
Ian Horrocks: ack alanr_ ←
17:34:10 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
17:34:12 <pfps> q+
17:34:20 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
17:34:21 <ivan> ack pfps
Ivan Herman: ack pfps ←
17:34:24 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
17:35:03 <sandro> pfps: I don't think it precludes any furthur changes.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I don't think it precludes any further changes. ←
17:35:15 <sandro> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-16 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html allowing annotations on annotations everywhere, with caveats as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0159.html
PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-16 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html allowing annotations on annotations everywhere, with caveats as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0159.html ←
17:35:18 <ivan> s/furthur/further/
17:35:34 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
17:35:34 <alanr_> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
17:35:34 <pfps> +1 :-)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 :-) ←
17:35:34 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
17:35:35 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
17:35:36 <MarkusK> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
17:35:37 <msmith> +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
17:35:38 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
17:35:40 <JeffP> +1
17:35:44 <Zhe> +1
17:35:44 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
17:35:45 <bcuencagrau> +1
17:35:48 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:36:02 <sandro> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-16 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html allowing annotations on annotations everywhere, with caveats as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0159.html
RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-16 as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0060.html allowing annotations on annotations everywhere, with caveats as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0159.html ←
17:36:29 <pfps> I can make the changes, outside of syntax
Peter Patel-Schneider: I can make the changes, outside of syntax ←
17:36:57 <pfps> ok
17:37:16 <sandro> ACTION: ppatelsc to implement resolution to ISSUE-16 (except for syntax diagrams)
ACTION: ppatelsc to implement resolution to ISSUE-16 (except for syntax diagrams) ←
17:37:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-199 - Implement resolution to ISSUE-16 (except for syntax diagrams) [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-199 - Implement resolution to ISSUE-16 (except for syntax diagrams) [on Peter Patel-Schneider - due 2008-08-27]. ←
17:37:41 <sandro> ACTION: boris to implement syntax diagram changes due to resolution of ISSUE-16
ACTION: boris to implement syntax diagram changes due to resolution of ISSUE-16 ←
17:37:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-200 - Implement syntax diagram changes due to resolution of ISSUE-16 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-200 - Implement syntax diagram changes due to resolution of ISSUE-16 [on Boris Motik - due 2008-08-27]. ←
17:37:54 <IanH> zakim, mute me
Ian Horrocks: zakim, mute me ←
17:37:54 <Zakim> IanH should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: IanH should now be muted ←
17:37:56 <sandro> subtopic: Issue-136 -- Allow the use of owl:members with owl:AllDifferent
17:38:48 <sandro> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-136, Allow the use of owl:members with owl:AllDifferent per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0129.html
PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE-136, Allow the use of owl:members with owl:AllDifferent per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0129.html ←
17:38:49 <Rinke> Was msmith satisfied with this answer http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0189.html ?
Rinke Hoekstra: Was msmith satisfied with this answer http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0189.html ? ←
17:38:59 <msmith> rinke, I won't object
Michael Smith: rinke, I won't object ←
17:39:06 <msmith> I'm not convinced this improves anythin
Michael Smith: I'm not convinced this improves anythin ←
17:39:16 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:39:16 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
17:39:22 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
17:39:48 <msmith> 0
Michael Smith: 0 ←
17:39:54 <IanH> 0
Ian Horrocks: 0 ←
17:39:56 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:39:58 <Rinke> 0
Rinke Hoekstra: 0 ←
17:39:58 <bcuencagrau> 0
17:39:59 <sandro> msmith: I don't think this solves anything, since we're adding something we don't expect people to use, but it's okay.
Michael Smith: I don't think this solves anything, since we're adding something we don't expect people to use, but it's okay. ←
17:40:02 <sandro> sandro: +0
Sandro Hawke: +0 ←
17:40:03 <baojie> 0
17:40:06 <JeffP> 0
17:40:07 <bmotik> 0
Boris Motik: 0 ←
17:40:07 <alanr_> 0
Alan Ruttenberg: 0 ←
17:40:09 <uli> 0
Uli Sattler: 0 ←
17:40:11 <pfps> +0
17:40:15 <Zhe> +0
17:40:18 <m_schnei> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
17:40:19 <MarkusK> 0
Markus Krötzsch: 0 ←
17:40:36 <sandro> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-136, Allow the use of owl:members with owl:AllDifferent per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0129.html
RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE-136, Allow the use of owl:members with owl:AllDifferent per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0129.html ←
17:40:51 <sandro> Alan: with the most ambivalent/neutral vote yet.
Alan Ruttenberg: with the most ambivalent/neutral vote yet. ←
17:41:17 <sandro> Topic: Issue 131 We should unify OWL-R DL and OWL-R Full profiles
17:41:31 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:42:06 <sandro> Alan: I'd like to hear the state of understanding on this.
Alan Ruttenberg: I'd like to hear the state of understanding on this. ←
17:42:07 <alanr_> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
17:42:10 <Zhe> zakim, unmute me
17:42:10 <Zakim> Zhe should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: Zhe should no longer be muted ←
17:42:22 <Zhe> q+
17:42:27 <sandro> Ivan: I am not sure this is a good time to discuss this. Ian's action (not yet done) is crucial for this issue.
Ivan Herman: I am not sure this is a good time to discuss this. Ian's action (not yet done) is crucial for this issue. ←
17:42:50 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:42:56 <m_schnei> +1 to Ivan: we have to settle on conformance
Michael Schneider: +1 to Ivan: we have to settle on conformance ←
17:43:01 <sandro> Ivan: My impression is that all the discussions, at the end, converge on conformance. Until then, I don't see what we would discuss.
Ivan Herman: My impression is that all the discussions, at the end, converge on conformance. Until then, I don't see what we would discuss. ←
17:43:27 <sandro> Alan: Ivan, if you have thoughts about this, how about helping Ian shape it....?
Alan Ruttenberg: Ivan, if you have thoughts about this, how about helping Ian shape it....? ←
17:43:31 <pfps> q+
17:43:38 <ivan> ack Zhe
Ivan Herman: ack Zhe ←
17:43:51 <sandro> Zhe: I agree with Ivan. The core problem is "conformance", and I think Ian is clear about my standing on that.
Zhe Wu: I agree with Ivan. The core problem is "conformance", and I think Ian is clear about my standing on that. ←
17:44:03 <sandro> Alan: Ian, do you concur?
Alan Ruttenberg: Ian, do you concur? ←
17:44:31 <pfps> q-
17:44:59 <sandro> Ian: Yes and no. I wanted conformance proposal done for this, but... it's clear to me that proposal for conformance for unified OWL-RL would be the same as for OWL-R-Full as it's now stated. How do you see conformance would be different?
Ian Horrocks: Yes and no. I wanted conformance proposal done for this, but... it's clear to me that proposal for conformance for unified OWL-RL would be the same as for OWL-R-Full as it's now stated. How do you see conformance would be different? ←
17:45:32 <baojie> Alan, Ian: now I'm confused about the poll for ISSUE -111. "REsolve issue-111 as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html" means that we are agreeing with Jim' objection, or agreeing the Bijan's proposal?
Jie Bao: Alan, Ian: now I'm confused about the poll for ISSUE -111. "REsolve ISSUE-111 as described in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Aug/0183.html" means that we are agreeing with Jim' objection, or agreeing the Bijan's proposal? ←
17:45:50 <sandro> Alan: Can Ivan and Zhe offer suggestions on e-mail on this?
Alan Ruttenberg: Can Ivan and Zhe offer suggestions on e-mail on this? ←
17:45:57 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:46:02 <sandro> Ivan: we would just be repeating things we've been through already?
Ivan Herman: we would just be repeating things we've been through already? ←
17:46:17 <alanr_> ack Ianh
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Ianh ←
17:46:19 <sandro> Ivan: I think that would be redundant.
Ivan Herman: I think that would be redundant. ←
17:46:43 <m_schnei> jie, our resolution of issue 111 means that the sameAs triple goes into the Primer and *not* into the Full spec
Michael Schneider: jie, our resolution of ISSUE-111 means that the sameAs triple goes into the Primer and *not* into the Full spec ←
17:46:47 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
17:46:54 <alanr_> ack ivan
Alan Ruttenberg: ack ivan ←
17:46:54 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
17:46:55 <sandro> Ian: Okay, we'll see what text I come up with.
Ian Horrocks: Okay, we'll see what text I come up with. ←
17:47:16 <m_schnei> jie, we agreed on the three points mentioned in this mail
Michael Schneider: jie, we agreed on the three points mentioned in this mail ←
17:47:17 <sandro> Ivan: Yes. Also, I am curious to see how final profile document will look.
Ivan Herman: Yes. Also, I am curious to see how final profile document will look. ←
17:47:20 <sandro> q+
q+ ←
17:47:28 <alanr_> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
17:47:41 <msmith> q+
Michael Smith: q+ ←
17:47:54 <alanr_> ack msmith
Alan Ruttenberg: ack msmith ←
17:48:01 <ivan> ack msmith
Ivan Herman: ack msmith ←
17:48:10 <pfps> empty :- OWLWG finishesat :_x
Peter Patel-Schneider: empty :- OWLWG finishesat :_x ←
17:48:50 <msmith> yes
Michael Smith: yes ←
17:49:06 <baojie> I think I misunderstood the poll (ISSUE-111). Per AC's instruction, RPI should abstain then.
Jie Bao: I think I misunderstood the poll (ISSUE-111). Per AC's instruction, RPI should abstain then. ←
17:49:10 <sandro> Sandro: What I'd really like to see is a couple of test cases here, around entailments and non-entailments in the OWL-RL profile on OWL-Full documnets.
Sandro Hawke: What I'd really like to see is a couple of test cases here, around entailments and non-entailments in the OWL-RL profile on OWL-Full documnets. ←
17:49:12 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:49:12 <Zakim> m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei was not muted, m_schnei ←
17:49:26 <sandro> Topic: Issue-116 Should Axiomatic Triples (be) added to OWL-R Full?
17:50:02 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:50:05 <sandro> m_schnei: This issue was raised in the split OWL-R situation. If the languages are unified, then the situation is unclear to me. It is very questionable whether the triples should go into the language.
Michael Schneider: This issue was raised in the split OWL-R situation. If the languages are unified, then the situation is unclear to me. It is very questionable whether the triples should go into the language. ←
17:50:23 <sandro> Ian: Which of the existing languages should the triples go into?
Ian Horrocks: Which of the existing languages should the triples go into? ←
17:50:58 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:51:09 <sandro> m_schnei: If there were an OWL-R-Full that were an extension to RDFS, then the triples would belong. With the unified language, without it being an RDFS extension, then I don't think the triples make sense any more, but it's hard to be sure.
Michael Schneider: If there were an OWL-R-Full that were an extension to RDFS, then the triples would belong. With the unified language, without it being an RDFS extension, then I don't think the triples make sense any more, but it's hard to be sure. ←
17:51:21 <sandro> Alan: Shall we postpone this as well?
Alan Ruttenberg: Shall we postpone this as well? ←
17:51:40 <sandro> Alan: Or will this help clarify the form of the unification/divergence of OWL-R
Alan Ruttenberg: Or will this help clarify the form of the unification/divergence of OWL-R ←
17:52:07 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:52:18 <sandro> Ian: As I keep trying to explain, the unified languages *is* OWL-R-Full, then given Michael's statement above, the triples should be in the unified language.
Ian Horrocks: As I keep trying to explain, the unified languages *is* OWL-R-Full, then given Michael's statement above, the triples should be in the unified language. ←
17:52:20 <JeffP> q+ to ask why the unified language is OWL R Full?
Jeff Pan: q+ to ask why the unified language is OWL R Full? ←
17:52:25 <alanr_> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:52:31 <ivan> ack IanH
Ivan Herman: ack IanH ←
17:52:43 <sandro> Ian: Really, this is an implementation technique, more than a profile. Do the implementors want to implement axiomatic triples?
Ian Horrocks: Really, this is an implementation technique, more than a profile. Do the implementors want to implement axiomatic triples? ←
17:52:47 <sandro> q?
q? ←
17:52:52 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:52:52 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:52:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
17:53:03 <Zhe> q+
17:53:16 <sandro> Alan: There's an issue where Ian and Michael are not seeing the same thing....... I'd like us to get on the same page on this.
Alan Ruttenberg: There's an issue where Ian and Michael are not seeing the same thing....... I'd like us to get on the same page on this. ←
17:53:18 <m_schnei> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
17:53:18 <Zakim> m_schnei should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should no longer be muted ←
17:53:25 <sandro> Alan: Michael, Ian says it shouldn't matter.
Alan Ruttenberg: Michael, Ian says it shouldn't matter. ←
17:54:25 <sandro> m_schnei: OWL-R-Full has always been an extension to RDFS. Completely specified by rules + RDFS. A reasoner would be Sound and Complete if it did exactly the rules + RDFS. This is NOT what we are talking about in the unified OWL-R language.
Michael Schneider: OWL-R-Full has always been an extension to RDFS. Completely specified by rules + RDFS. A reasoner would be Sound and Complete if it did exactly the rules + RDFS. This is NOT what we are talking about in the unified OWL-R language. ←
17:55:35 <IanH> No, No No!!!
Ian Horrocks: No, No No!!! ←
17:55:09 <IanH> q+
Ian Horrocks: q+ ←
17:55:17 <ivan> the second and third questions are the same imho
Ivan Herman: the second and third questions are the same imho ←
17:55:19 <sandro> Alan: Can we separate these?
Alan Ruttenberg: Can we separate these? ←
17:55:46 <sandro> m_schnei: I think the question is irrelevant if we unify. issue-116 is for me dependent on unificiation.
Michael Schneider: I think the question is irrelevant if we unify. ISSUE-116 is for me dependent on unificiation. ←
17:56:01 <alanr_> ack JeffP
Alan Ruttenberg: ack JeffP ←
17:56:01 <Zakim> JeffP, you wanted to ask why the unified language is OWL R Full?
Zakim IRC Bot: JeffP, you wanted to ask why the unified language is OWL R Full? ←
17:56:23 <sandro> JeffP: What does the Unified Language look like? Does it still have syntactic restrictions?
Jeff Pan: What does the Unified Language look like? Does it still have syntactic restrictions? ←
17:56:28 <m_schnei> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
17:56:28 <Zakim> m_schnei should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: m_schnei should now be muted ←
17:56:29 <alanr_> ack Zhe
Alan Ruttenberg: ack Zhe ←
17:57:01 <sandro> Zhe: I was under the impression that we decided to add the axiomatic triples at F2F3.
Zhe Wu: I was under the impression that we decided to add the axiomatic triples at F2F3. ←
17:57:21 <m_schnei> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
17:57:47 <sandro> Zhe: If conformance proposal is flexible, then adding rules/triples becomes an implementation issue.
Zhe Wu: If conformance proposal is flexible, then adding rules/triples becomes an implementation issue. ←
17:57:59 <alanr_> ack IanH
Alan Ruttenberg: ack IanH ←
17:58:01 <ivan> ack IanH
Ivan Herman: ack IanH ←
17:58:11 <sandro> ian: It's not much related to conformance.
Ian Horrocks: It's not much related to conformance. ←
17:58:25 <sandro> Ian: the question is, are people like Zhe happy to have these extra triples?
Ian Horrocks: the question is, are people like Zhe happy to have these extra triples? ←
17:58:39 <sandro> q+ to mention Jena's approach
q+ to mention Jena's approach ←
17:59:15 <sandro> Ian: In OWL-R-Full there would be some "this was complete" declaration, and in the unified case there would not be that. So the question is whether implementors want these triples.
Ian Horrocks: In OWL-R-Full there would be some "this was complete" declaration, and in the unified case there would not be that. So the question is whether implementors want these triples. ←
17:59:18 <JeffP> can someone answer my question?
Jeff Pan: can someone answer my question? ←
17:59:35 <sandro> Alan: This suggests a blog post might go out, to OWL-R implementors, getting feedback.
Alan Ruttenberg: This suggests a blog post might go out, to OWL-R implementors, getting feedback. ←
17:59:36 <m_schnei> q-
Michael Schneider: q- ←
17:59:41 <sandro> ack sandro
ack sandro ←
17:59:41 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to mention Jena's approach
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to mention Jena's approach ←
17:59:44 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:00:15 <msmith> there are many owl rule variants in Jena
Michael Smith: there are many owl rule variants in Jena ←
18:00:21 <uli> Jeff, no
Uli Sattler: Jeff, no ←
18:00:23 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:00:32 <JeffP> thanks, uli
18:00:49 <sandro> Sandro: I remember Jena having a user-switch about such triples. So maybe there is no right answer.
Sandro Hawke: I remember Jena having a user-switch about such triples. So maybe there is no right answer. ←
18:01:01 <ivan> jeff, you should really read the related email thread, it is one of the longest thread we had in the wg:-)
Ivan Herman: jeff, you should really read the related email thread, it is one of the longest thread we had in the wg:-) ←
18:01:02 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:01:05 <sandro> Topic: Issue 138 Name of dateTime datatype
18:01:13 <msmith> f2f strawpoll on this at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-07-29#Strawpoll_on_owl__3a_dateTime___2d_v__2d__xsd__3a_dateTime
Michael Smith: f2f strawpoll on this at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-07-29#Strawpoll_on_owl__3a_dateTime___2d_v__2d__xsd__3a_dateTime ←
18:01:15 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:01:35 <alanr_> ack bmotik
Alan Ruttenberg: ack bmotik ←
18:02:02 <sandro> bmotik: I think we should use owl:dateTime, since the semantics and value spaces are different.
Boris Motik: I think we should use owl:dateTime, since the semantics and value spaces are different. ←
18:02:05 <ewallace> I would vote differently today than I did on the above strawpoll
Evan Wallace: I would vote differently today than I did on the above strawpoll ←
18:02:07 <msmith> q+
Michael Smith: q+ ←
18:02:15 <alanr_> ack msmith
Alan Ruttenberg: ack msmith ←
18:02:29 <sandro> bmotik: "This datatype is inspired by xsd:dateTime, but there are significant differences"
Boris Motik: "This datatype is inspired by xsd:dateTime, but there are significant differences" ←
18:02:33 <alanr_> also value space is different
Alan Ruttenberg: also value space is different ←
18:02:59 <sandro> bmotik: The syntactic form of literals is very similar, but the semantics are very different.
Boris Motik: The syntactic form of literals is very similar, but the semantics are very different. ←
18:03:10 <sandro> q+ to ask if we've pushed XSD-WG on this
q+ to ask if we've pushed XSD-WG on this ←
18:03:31 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:03:33 <sandro> bmotik: The identity is significantly different.
Boris Motik: The identity is significantly different. ←
18:03:38 <alanr_> ack sandro
Alan Ruttenberg: ack sandro ←
18:03:38 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask if we've pushed XSD-WG on this
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask if we've pushed XSD-WG on this ←
18:04:14 <JeffP> +1 sandro
18:06:51 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:07:20 <sandro> ACTION: Sandro review Peter's letter to XSD
ACTION: Sandro review Peter's letter to XSD ←
18:07:21 <trackbot> Created ACTION-201 - Review Peter's letter to XSD [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-201 - Review Peter's letter to XSD [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-08-27]. ←
18:07:46 <sandro> Sandro: we can't just go invent our own thing here. We have an obligation to coordination with XSD working group
Sandro Hawke: we can't just go invent our own thing here. We have an obligation to coordination with XSD working group ←
18:07:56 <IanH> Not worth discussing now
Ian Horrocks: Not worth discussing now ←
18:08:09 <sandro> alan: skipping issue-130 for now.
Alan Ruttenberg: skipping ISSUE-130 for now. ←
18:08:45 <sandro> topic: Issue 118 Should bNodes in OWL 2 DL have existential or skolem semantics? Boris' email (questions about NegativePropertyAssertion)
18:08:55 <sandro> (Ian chairing this section)
(Ian chairing this section) ←
18:08:59 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:09:02 <alanr_> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:09:12 <IanH> ack alanr_
Ian Horrocks: ack alanr_ ←
18:09:16 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:09:32 <sandro> alan: I've been trying to understand the question of of why NPAs are not included.
Alan Ruttenberg: I've been trying to understand the question of of why NPAs are not included. ←
18:10:08 <sandro> alan: We can say there's a PA with a bNode in it -- why can't we negate that? Boris and I disagreed about where the Exists was with respect to the Negation.
Alan Ruttenberg: We can say there's a PA with a bNode in it -- why can't we negate that? Boris and I disagreed about where the Exists was with respect to the Negation. ←
18:10:16 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:10:28 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:11:56 <sandro> bmotik: In OWL 1.0, if you had a (implicit) existential, you could always transform your ontology with bNodes to one which didn't have bNodes. But with Negative assertions, you can't do this any more. Exists-Not-..... How could you reason with that? We don't really know. If you prohibit bNodes in NPAs you have exactly as in OWL 1.0, which we know how to handle.
Boris Motik: In OWL 1.0, if you had a (implicit) existential, you could always transform your ontology with bNodes to one which didn't have bNodes. But with Negative assertions, you can't do this any more. Exists-Not-..... How could you reason with that? We don't really know. If you prohibit bNodes in NPAs you have exactly as in OWL 1.0, which we know how to handle. ←
18:12:02 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:12:08 <sandro> alan: not-exists is the other case.
Alan Ruttenberg: not-exists is the other case. ←
18:12:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:13:07 <sandro> bmotik: not-exists would change the approach. bnodes are quantified in front of the Entire Graph. So the negation is inside the existential.
Boris Motik: not-exists would change the approach. bnodes are quantified in front of the Entire Graph. So the negation is inside the existential. ←
18:13:22 <sandro> bmotik: not-exists wouldn't allow bnodes to span multiple assertions.
Boris Motik: not-exists wouldn't allow bnodes to span multiple assertions. ←
18:14:18 <sandro> alan: It probably doesn't matter for me....
Alan Ruttenberg: It probably doesn't matter for me.... ←
18:14:52 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: All in favor of this solutition to issue-118 ?
STRAWPOLL: All in favor of this solutition to ISSUE-118 ? ←
18:14:57 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
18:14:59 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
18:15:00 <baojie> 0
18:15:02 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:15:02 <pfps> +1
18:15:02 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
18:15:03 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
18:15:06 <Zhe> 0
18:15:07 <msmith> 0 (need to get back to speed on issue)
Michael Smith: 0 (need to get back to speed on issue) ←
18:15:09 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:15:09 <MarkusK> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:15:13 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
18:15:15 <alanr_> 0
Alan Ruttenberg: 0 ←
18:15:17 <m_schnei> 0
18:15:20 <sandro> sandro: +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:15:24 <JeffP> 0
18:16:03 <sandro> Ian: Perhaps we'll put this on the agenda for next week.
Ian Horrocks: Perhaps we'll put this on the agenda for next week. ←
18:16:14 <sandro> Topic: Issue 114 Which combinations of punning should be allowed?
18:16:16 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:16:37 <bmotik> +q
Boris Motik: +q ←
18:16:39 <pfps> q+
18:16:47 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
18:16:49 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:17:17 <alanr_> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:17:27 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:17:36 <sandro> Boris: In RDF you can pun everything with everything. We can't provide MORE. We need to provide a little less -- two-sorted-logic -- so I understood the proposal to be to leave the spec as it is.
Boris Motik: In RDF you can pun everything with everything. We can't provide MORE. We need to provide a little less -- two-sorted-logic -- so I understood the proposal to be to leave the spec as it is. ←
18:17:44 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:17:55 <sandro> Peter: maybe Alan meant close-issue-with-no-change.
Peter Patel-Schneider: maybe Alan meant close-issue-with-no-change. ←
18:17:56 <IanH> ack ivan
Ian Horrocks: ack ivan ←
18:18:19 <alanr_> will clarify
Alan Ruttenberg: will clarify ←
18:18:19 <IanH> ack alanr_
Ian Horrocks: ack alanr_ ←
18:18:24 <sandro> Ivan: I read it differently. I read it as punning between datatype property and object property would be allowed, but this was disallowed in some F2F.
Ivan Herman: I read it differently. I read it as punning between datatype property and object property would be allowed, but this was disallowed in some F2F. ←
18:18:38 <ivan> ah
Ivan Herman: ah ←
18:18:43 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:19:16 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:19:32 <pfps> q+
18:19:39 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:19:42 <ivan> in rdf you could have punning between an ontology uri and a class
Ivan Herman: in rdf you could have punning between an ontology uri and a class ←
18:19:46 <sandro> Alan: To be clear: I meant that we don't allow any more punning than RDF allows. The cases I'm wondering about .... Well, I'm looking for an affirmative change to the spec, to clarify this -- eg punning between ontology URIs and individual URIs. Punning between categories other than Properties/Classes/Individuals.
Alan Ruttenberg: To be clear: I meant that we don't allow any more punning than RDF allows. The cases I'm wondering about .... Well, I'm looking for an affirmative change to the spec, to clarify this -- eg punning between ontology URIs and individual URIs. Punning between categories other than Properties/Classes/Individuals. ←
18:19:56 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:00 <alanr_> don't understand what it means to pun dogs and cats
Alan Ruttenberg: don't understand what it means to pun dogs and cats ←
18:20:08 <alanr_> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:20:12 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:15 <sandro> Peter: You can pun individuals/ontologies/cats/dogs, etc in RDF. You can pun anything in RDF. To say we are restricting ourselves to RDF is to say nothing.
Peter Patel-Schneider: You can pun individuals/ontologies/cats/dogs, etc in RDF. You can pun anything in RDF. To say we are restricting ourselves to RDF is to say nothing. ←
18:20:23 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:26 <sandro> Alan: What does it mean to say you can pun cats and dogs???
Alan Ruttenberg: What does it mean to say you can pun cats and dogs??? ←
18:20:29 <IanH> ack alanr_
Ian Horrocks: ack alanr_ ←
18:20:33 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:21:03 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:21:09 <Rinke> you can do punning between cats and dogs. Simply call your cat a dog, and you're done... right?
Rinke Hoekstra: you can do punning between cats and dogs. Simply call your cat a dog, and you're done... right? ←
18:21:12 <pfps> q+
18:21:21 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:21:33 <sandro> Alan: Punning means you have two things with the same name that are not the same thing. If you have two URIs, one URI for Cats, one for Dogs, ..... .... In OWL 2 punning ...
Alan Ruttenberg: Punning means you have two things with the same name that are not the same thing. If you have two URIs, one URI for Cats, one for Dogs, ..... .... In OWL 2 punning ... ←
18:21:40 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:21:48 <alanr_> q?
Alan Ruttenberg: q? ←
18:21:56 <sandro> Peter: So in that view, RDF has no punning. So you're saying there is no punning.
Peter Patel-Schneider: So in that view, RDF has no punning. So you're saying there is no punning. ←
18:22:18 <sandro> Ian: strawpoll about not making changes to spec.
Ian Horrocks: strawpoll about not making changes to spec. ←
18:22:35 <sandro> Alan: Let's not isolate folks.
Alan Ruttenberg: Let's not isolate folks. ←
18:22:58 <sandro> Ian: Just taking temperature
Ian Horrocks: Just taking temperature ←
18:23:21 <sandro> Ian: It doesn't decide anything, and we've done it before.
Ian Horrocks: It doesn't decide anything, and we've done it before. ←
18:24:27 <alanr_> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:24:33 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:24:36 <pfps> disallowed is object/data/annotation property *and* class/datatype punning, right
Peter Patel-Schneider: disallowed is object/data/annotation property *and* class/datatype punning, right ←
18:24:36 <sandro> Ian: Only punning disallowed is ObjectProperty/DataProperty right now. Other punning is allowed.
Ian Horrocks: Only punning disallowed is ObjectProperty/DataProperty right now. Other punning is allowed. ←
18:24:41 <Rinke> what would be disallowed beyond this, in alan's proposal?
Rinke Hoekstra: what would be disallowed beyond this, in alan's proposal? ←
18:24:50 <pfps> q+
18:24:57 <alanr_> ack alanr
Alan Ruttenberg: ack alanr ←
18:24:57 <sandro> Ian: I'd like to know what the other types of punning are and how they are interpeted.
Ian Horrocks: I'd like to know what the other types of punning are and how they are interpeted. ←
18:24:58 <ivan> ack alanr_
Ivan Herman: ack alanr_ ←
18:25:02 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:25:31 <sandro> q+
q+ ←
18:25:34 <sandro> ack pfps
ack pfps ←
18:25:37 <alanr_> I will send an email, as suggested
Alan Ruttenberg: I will send an email, as suggested ←
18:25:38 <ivan> ack pfps
Ivan Herman: ack pfps ←
18:25:44 <sandro> ack sandro
ack sandro ←
18:25:58 <bmotik> A description of what kinds of punning are allowed is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0211.html
Boris Motik: A description of what kinds of punning are allowed is here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0211.html ←
18:26:06 <bmotik> We've discussed this to the death already
Boris Motik: We've discussed this to the death already ←
18:26:43 <sandro> Sandro: Maybe some test cases would clarify it.
Sandro Hawke: Maybe some test cases would clarify it. ←
18:27:03 <sandro> STRAWPOLL: Should we close issue-114 without any changes to spec?
STRAWPOLL: Should we close ISSUE-114 without any changes to spec? ←
18:27:09 <pfps> +1
18:27:11 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:27:12 <bmotik> +100000
Boris Motik: +100000 ←
18:27:12 <msmith> +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
18:27:13 <alanr_> -1
Alan Ruttenberg: -1 ←
18:27:13 <MarkusK> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:27:14 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:27:16 <JeffP> -0 (not decided yet)
Jeff Pan: -0 (not decided yet) ←
18:27:24 <Rinke> +0.5
Rinke Hoekstra: +0.5 ←
18:27:25 <sandro> sandro: -0 (not decided yet)
Sandro Hawke: -0 (not decided yet) ←
18:27:26 <m_schnei> 0 (not interested in this discussion anymore)
Michael Schneider: 0 (not interested in this discussion anymore) ←
18:27:26 <Zhe> +0.5 (still wants to understand Alan's concerns)
Zhe Wu: +0.5 (still wants to understand Alan's concerns) ←
18:27:26 <ivan> 0
Ivan Herman: 0 ←
18:27:31 <baojie> 0 (not clear about the issue)
Jie Bao: 0 (not clear about the issue) ←
18:27:31 <Achille> 0.5
Achille Fokoue: 0.5 ←
18:27:44 <ewallace> +1 (but want Alan to clarify his concerns on email)
Evan Wallace: +1 (but want Alan to clarify his concerns on email) ←
18:28:02 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
18:28:13 <alanr_> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:28:20 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:28:25 <sandro> Ian: So, Alan, you have some work do to --- some explanation or test cases of what the concern is.
Ian Horrocks: So, Alan, you have some work do to --- some explanation or test cases of what the concern is. ←
18:28:52 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:28:55 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
18:28:57 <IanH> ack ivan
Ian Horrocks: ack ivan ←
18:28:59 <uli> q-
Uli Sattler: q- ←
18:29:01 <sandro> Ivan: The mail that Boris just posted was helpful. Somewhere in the primer, maybe, there should be a list of punning situations.
Ivan Herman: The mail that Boris just posted was helpful. Somewhere in the primer, maybe, there should be a list of punning situations. ←
18:29:22 <sandro> Ivan: The mail of Boris is just a table, which is technically fine, but as a user it's hard to follow.
Ivan Herman: The mail of Boris is just a table, which is technically fine, but as a user it's hard to follow. ←
18:29:57 <msmith> q+
Michael Smith: q+ ←
18:30:01 <msmith> q-
Michael Smith: q- ←
18:30:03 <ivan> ack alanr_
Ivan Herman: ack alanr_ ←
18:30:04 <sandro> Alan: I will try to give a use case and try to clarify my previous proposal, and re-read that message and ask quesitons. I think if we had somthing of this form in the documentation, this would satisfy my concern, which is clarity.
Alan Ruttenberg: I will try to give a use case and try to clarify my previous proposal, and re-read that message and ask quesitons. I think if we had somthing of this form in the documentation, this would satisfy my concern, which is clarity. ←
18:30:07 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:30:26 <ewallace> sounds like test case(s) is what is needed
Evan Wallace: sounds like test case(s) is what is needed ←
18:31:15 <alanr_> action: alan to have another try at proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases
ACTION: alan to have another try at proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases ←
18:31:15 <trackbot> Created ACTION-202 - Have another try at proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-08-27].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-202 - Have another try at proposal in the light of discussion with peter and come up with test cases [on Alan Ruttenberg - due 2008-08-27]. ←
18:30:27 <sandro> Ian: AOB?
Ian Horrocks: AOB? ←
18:31:13 <sandro> ADJOURN
ADJOURN ←
Formatted by CommonScribe