00:00:00 <scribenick> PRESENT: msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, MarkusK_, Rinke, baojie, Zhe, Achille, Michael Schneider, Alan Ruttenberg, Christine
17:52:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/19-owl-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/19-owl-irc ←
17:52:30 <pfps> Zakim, this will be owlwg
Peter Patel-Schneider: Zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:52:30 <Zakim> ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pfps; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 8 minutes ←
17:52:40 <pfps> RRSAgent, make records public
Peter Patel-Schneider: RRSAgent, make records public ←
17:55:35 <msmith> zakim, this will be owlwg
Michael Smith: zakim, this will be owlwg ←
17:55:35 <Zakim> ok, msmith; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, msmith; I see SW_OWL()1:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes ←
17:55:45 <msmith> ScribeNick: msmith
(Scribe set to Michael Smith)
17:55:57 <msmith> RRSAgent, make records public
RRSAgent, make records public ←
17:56:29 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has now started ←
17:56:39 <Zakim> +msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: +msmith ←
17:56:59 <Zakim> +IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: +IanH ←
17:57:17 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
17:57:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH ←
17:57:18 <Zakim> On IRC I see ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
17:57:57 <Zakim> +Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: +Evan_Wallace ←
17:58:01 <Rinke> (I cannot dial in, but will try to follow as much as I can on IRC)
Rinke Hoekstra: (I cannot dial in, but will try to follow as much as I can on IRC) ←
17:58:51 <Zakim> +??P10
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10 ←
17:59:01 <uli> zakim, ??P10 is me
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P10 is me ←
17:59:01 <Zakim> +uli; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +uli; got it ←
17:59:05 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
17:59:05 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
17:59:48 <Zakim> +Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: +Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
18:00:14 <Zakim> +??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P12 ←
18:00:17 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
18:00:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ??P12
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, ??P12 ←
18:00:20 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, ??P12 is me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, ??P12 is me ←
18:00:20 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
18:00:23 <Zakim> +bcuencagrau; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bcuencagrau; got it ←
18:01:10 <msmith> ianh: regrets from Ivan, Alan
Ian Horrocks: regrets from Ivan, Alan ←
18:01:15 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
18:01:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau ←
18:01:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
18:01:21 <Zakim> +??P13
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13 ←
18:01:24 <Zakim> +Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: +Sandro ←
18:01:30 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P13 is me#
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P13 is me# ←
18:01:30 <Zakim> +me#; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +me#; got it ←
18:01:30 <msmith> Topic: Admin
18:01:37 <IanH> zakim, who is here?
Ian Horrocks: zakim, who is here? ←
18:01:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, me#, Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, me#, Sandro ←
18:01:37 <bmotik> Zakim, ??P13 is me
Boris Motik: Zakim, ??P13 is me ←
18:01:40 <Zakim> On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see bmotik, bcuencagrau, MarkusK_, ewallace, Rinke, uli, IanH, msmith, RRSAgent, Zakim, pfps, baojie, trackbot, sandro ←
18:01:41 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:01:43 <Zakim> I already had ??P13 as me#, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P13 as me#, bmotik ←
18:01:44 <Zakim> sorry, bmotik, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bmotik, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you ←
18:02:00 <msmith> ianh: no agenda ammendments
Ian Horrocks: no agenda ammendments ←
18:02:02 <uli> last week's minutes look fine
Uli Sattler: last week's minutes look fine ←
18:02:02 <bmotik> Zakim, me# is bmotik
Boris Motik: Zakim, me# is bmotik ←
18:02:02 <Zakim> +bmotik; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +bmotik; got it ←
18:02:03 <Zakim> +Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: +Zhe ←
18:02:07 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:02:07 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
18:02:12 <pfps> last week's minutes look acceptable
Peter Patel-Schneider: last week's minutes look acceptable ←
18:02:15 <bcuencagrau> Zakim, mute me
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Zakim, mute me ←
18:02:15 <Zakim> bcuencagrau should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bcuencagrau should now be muted ←
18:02:17 <uli> oi!
Uli Sattler: oi! ←
18:02:24 <msmith> PROPOSED: Accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12
PROPOSED: Accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12 ←
18:02:25 <IanH> omit: PROPOSED: Accept Previous Minutes (12 November)
18:02:32 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
18:02:35 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:02:38 <Zhe> +1
18:02:41 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
18:02:44 <pfps> +1
18:02:48 <Rinke> +1
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 ←
18:02:50 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12
RESOLVED: Accept minutes of 2008-11-12 telecon at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12 ←
18:03:04 <pfps> F2F4 day 2 minutes are now OK (after Alan's cleanup)
Peter Patel-Schneider: F2F4 day 2 minutes are now OK (after Alan's cleanup) ←
18:03:10 <msmith> PROPOSED: Accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24
PROPOSED: Accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24 ←
18:03:12 <Zakim> +baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: +baojie ←
18:03:14 <IanH> +1
Ian Horrocks: +1 ←
18:03:19 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:03:19 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
18:03:21 <pfps> +1
18:03:25 <baojie> +1
18:03:26 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:03:26 <msmith> RESOLVED: Accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24
RESOLVED: Accept minutes of F2F4 Day 2 at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-10-24 ←
18:03:51 <msmith> subtopic: Pending Review Actions
18:03:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
18:04:01 <pfps> I think that the actions are OK (and some were OK last week)
Peter Patel-Schneider: I think that the actions are OK (and some were OK last week) ←
18:04:07 <msmith> ACTION-238 closed
ACTION-238 closed ←
18:04:08 <msmith> ACTION-242 closed
ACTION-242 closed ←
18:04:08 <msmith> ACTION-244 closed
ACTION-244 closed ←
18:04:08 <msmith> ACTION-246 closed
ACTION-246 closed ←
18:04:08 <trackbot> ACTION-238 Implement the resolutions from the 4F2F closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-238 Implement the resolutions from the 4F2F closed ←
18:04:08 <trackbot> ACTION-242 Will make a proposal regarding naming alignment between the functional syntax and RDF syntax based on the summary from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-242 Will make a proposal regarding naming alignment between the functional syntax and RDF syntax based on the summary from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Oct/0150.html closed ←
18:04:09 <trackbot> ACTION-244 Come up with an analysis of whether OWL 2 should include XMLLiteral closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-244 Come up with an analysis of whether OWL 2 should include XMLLiteral closed ←
18:04:13 <trackbot> ACTION-246 Convert review comments to editors notes (except rinke's) closed
Trackbot IRC Bot: ACTION-246 Convert review comments to editors notes (except rinke's) closed ←
18:04:25 <IanH> omit: Q?
18:04:29 <msmith> topic: Reviewing and Publishing
18:05:06 <msmith> ianh: dec 1 was tentative deadline for last call publishing. we are now getting close
Ian Horrocks: dec 1 was tentative deadline for last call publishing. we are now getting close ←
18:05:10 <IanH> omit: Q?
18:05:22 <msmith> ianh: last call checklist has been completed (excepting items already on agenda)
Ian Horrocks: last call checklist has been completed (excepting items already on agenda) ←
18:05:22 <sandro> q+ sotd
Sandro Hawke: q+ sotd ←
18:05:27 <msmith> ianh: any questions?
Ian Horrocks: any questions? ←
18:05:35 <IanH> omit: Q?
18:05:43 <sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4
Sandro Hawke: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 ←
18:05:44 <IanH> ack sandro
Ian Horrocks: ack sandro ←
18:05:52 <IanH> ack sotd
Ian Horrocks: ack sotd ←
18:06:04 <msmith> sandro: we should start on text describing status of documents
Sandro Hawke: we should start on text describing status of documents ←
18:06:08 <pfps> q+
18:06:17 <msmith> sandro: it should include changes from previous publish
Sandro Hawke: it should include changes from previous publish ←
18:06:25 <msmith> sandro: and some context for new documents
Sandro Hawke: and some context for new documents ←
18:06:31 <msmith> ianh: is this in each document?
Ian Horrocks: is this in each document? ←
18:06:51 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:06:54 <msmith> sandro: people should use the wiki link (provided above) and it will be put in the doc during publishing
Sandro Hawke: people should use the wiki link (provided above) and it will be put in the doc during publishing ←
18:07:07 <msmith> ianh: changes wrt last draft?
Ian Horrocks: changes wrt last draft? ←
18:07:10 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:07:17 <msmith> sandro: yes, last published working draft
Sandro Hawke: yes, last published working draft ←
18:07:37 <msmith> pfps: we have a problem with location of features document
Peter Patel-Schneider: we have a problem with location of features document ←
18:07:49 <msmith> sandro: yes, but it doesn't matter for publication
Sandro Hawke: yes, but it doesn't matter for publication ←
18:08:10 <msmith> ianh: yes, and all non-correct locations being redirected (or some other resolution)
Ian Horrocks: yes, and all non-correct locations being redirected (or some other resolution) ←
18:08:19 <sandro> zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: zakim, who is on the call? ←
18:08:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_ ←
18:08:27 <msmith> sandro: we need an action for this. we discussed it before and nothing happened
Sandro Hawke: we need an action for this. we discussed it before and nothing happened ←
18:08:45 <msmith> ianh: i can take an action. we also said requirements should occur in the name somewhere
Ian Horrocks: i can take an action. we also said requirements should occur in the name somewhere ←
18:09:16 <msmith> ianh: I remember "requirements and new features"
Ian Horrocks: I remember "requirements and new features" ←
18:09:46 <sandro> ACTION: ian consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document
ACTION: ian consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document ←
18:09:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-248 - Consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-248 - Consult with editors on title and clean up wiki location of requirement document [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26]. ←
18:09:57 <pfps> q-
18:10:22 <msmith> ianh: on Round 4 page, this is an action on each editor to handle their documents?
Ian Horrocks: on Round 4 page, this is an action on each editor to handle their documents? ←
18:10:27 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:10:29 <bmotik> I'll handle the documents I've been editing, no prolem.
Boris Motik: I'll handle the documents I've been editing, no prolem. ←
18:10:41 <Zakim> +[IBM]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IBM] ←
18:10:48 <Achille> Zakim, IBM is me
Achille Fokoue: Zakim, IBM is me ←
18:10:48 <Zakim> +Achille; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Achille; got it ←
18:10:49 <msmith> ianh: should we create actions explicitly? I will do so after the telecon (to avoid the time required now)
Ian Horrocks: should we create actions explicitly? I will do so after the telecon (to avoid the time required now) ←
18:11:34 <sandro> action: ian make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in
ACTION: ian make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in ←
18:11:34 <trackbot> Created ACTION-249 - Make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-249 - Make sure SOTD text on http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Round_4 gets filled in [on Ian Horrocks - due 2008-11-26]. ←
18:11:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:12:11 <msmith> subtopic: Other Considerations
18:12:16 <sandro> issue-145?
18:12:16 <trackbot> ISSUE-145 -- RESOLVED: Which serializations should have mime types and file extensions (and what should they be) -- CLOSED
Trackbot IRC Bot: ISSUE-145 -- RESOLVED: Which serializations should have mime types and file extensions (and what should they be) -- CLOSED ←
18:12:16 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/145
Trackbot IRC Bot: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/145 ←
18:12:21 <msmith> subsubtopic: ISSUE-145
18:12:32 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:12:37 <pfps> yay!
Peter Patel-Schneider: yay! ←
18:12:39 <msmith> ianh: I understand this to be resolved. Sandro considers himself the contact to IETF
Ian Horrocks: I understand this to be resolved. Sandro considers himself the contact to IETF ←
18:13:03 <sandro> action: sandro send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications
ACTION: sandro send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications ←
18:13:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-250 - Send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-250 - Send mime-type registrations in to IETF when we do last-call publications [on Sandro Hawke - due 2008-11-26]. ←
18:13:31 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:13:43 <sandro> Zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: Zakim, who is on the call? ←
18:13:43 <Zakim> On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli (muted), Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau (muted), bmotik (muted), Sandro, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille ←
18:13:43 <msmith> subsubtopic: Check with XML Schema WG on name of dateTime ...
18:13:46 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:13:59 <msmith> ianh: pfps has been point man with XML Schema WG
Ian Horrocks: pfps has been point man with XML Schema WG ←
18:14:27 <msmith> pfps: I just sent a message to someone in that WG, asking for pointer to final resolution.
Peter Patel-Schneider: I just sent a message to someone in that WG, asking for pointer to final resolution. ←
18:14:39 <msmith> pfps: I will ask about publication schedule
Peter Patel-Schneider: I will ask about publication schedule ←
18:15:02 <msmith> ianh: assuming no satisfactory answer on publication or datatype name. what's the plan?
Ian Horrocks: assuming no satisfactory answer on publication or datatype name. what's the plan? ←
18:15:15 <msmith> ianh: can we make the name of the datatype "at risk" or something?
Ian Horrocks: can we make the name of the datatype "at risk" or something? ←
18:15:15 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:15:22 <msmith> sandro: I think we can do that
Sandro Hawke: I think we can do that ←
18:15:32 <msmith> ianh: "subject to change", etc.
Ian Horrocks: "subject to change", etc. ←
18:15:51 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:15:53 <msmith> sandro: in general we want at risk to be binary (options are A or B), not be open ended
Sandro Hawke: in general we want at risk to be binary (options are A or B), not be open ended ←
18:16:02 <msmith> pfps: we can do that for the datatype name
Peter Patel-Schneider: we can do that for the datatype name ←
18:16:07 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:16:17 <bmotik> It already says that
Boris Motik: It already says that ←
18:16:31 <bmotik> It's not.
Boris Motik: It's not. ←
18:16:34 <bmotik> highlighted
Boris Motik: highlighted ←
18:16:36 <msmith> ianh: someone needs to make sure it is binary in document
Ian Horrocks: someone needs to make sure it is binary in document ←
18:16:42 <msmith> sandro: is it marked at risk?
Sandro Hawke: is it marked at risk? ←
18:16:49 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:16:53 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:16:53 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:16:54 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:16:58 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:16:58 <msmith> ianh: a couple other things are marked at risk
Ian Horrocks: a couple other things are marked at risk ←
18:17:19 <msmith> bmotik: is there a style for at risk? it's marked with an editor's note. is that sufficient
Boris Motik: is there a style for at risk? it's marked with an editor's note. is that sufficient ←
18:17:36 <msmith> sandro: take a look at the RIF BLD for a template
Sandro Hawke: take a look at the RIF BLD for a template ←
18:17:52 <msmith> bmotik: // reading from spec //
Boris Motik: // reading from spec // ←
18:18:07 <msmith> sandro: we should more formally call out "at risk"
Sandro Hawke: we should more formally call out "at risk" ←
18:18:25 <msmith> sandro: in the status of the document section
Sandro Hawke: in the status of the document section ←
18:18:54 <pfps> I made the change that the fallback is owl:dateTime
Peter Patel-Schneider: I made the change that the fallback is owl:dateTime ←
18:19:03 <msmith> ianh: we should explicitly say something about the outcome if the risked scenario comes to pass
Ian Horrocks: we should explicitly say something about the outcome if the risked scenario comes to pass ←
18:19:11 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:19:19 <msmith> ianh: take this offline
Ian Horrocks: take this offline ←
18:19:22 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:19:39 <pfps> q+
18:19:41 <msmith> bmotik: several other editorial notes are present. E.g., bug related to xs:decimal
Boris Motik: several other editorial notes are present. E.g., bug related to xs:decimal ←
18:19:43 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:12 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:20:13 <msmith> ianh: I suggest saying something more or less the same.
Ian Horrocks: I suggest saying something more or less the same. ←
18:20:16 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:20:23 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
18:20:23 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
18:20:29 <msmith> pfps: XML Schema WG has fixed this, they haven't published the fix
Peter Patel-Schneider: XML Schema WG has fixed this, they haven't published the fix ←
18:20:45 <msmith> pfps: I will ask for a pointer so that we can reuse their wording
Peter Patel-Schneider: I will ask for a pointer so that we can reuse their wording ←
18:21:27 <msmith> sandro: procedural threat - we can't normatively reference less mature specifications
Sandro Hawke: procedural threat - we can't normatively reference less mature specifications ←
18:21:51 <msmith> ianh: this is the point of the next item. can we point to XML Schema 1.1
Ian Horrocks: this is the point of the next item. can we point to XML Schema 1.1 ←
18:22:07 <msmith> sandro: we can for last call and CR, but not for PR and Rec
Sandro Hawke: we can for last call and CR, but not for PR and Rec ←
18:22:37 <pfps> q+
18:22:37 <msmith> sandro: this could require a different URI for the property if the XML Schema WG can't move fast enough
Sandro Hawke: this could require a different URI for the property if the XML Schema WG can't move fast enough ←
18:22:43 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:22:48 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:22:49 <msmith> sandro: this is bone-headed and we look for a workaround
Sandro Hawke: this is bone-headed and we look for a workaround ←
18:23:07 <msmith> pfps: we could squat on xsd:our-datetime if we know what it is
Peter Patel-Schneider: we could squat on xsd:our-datetime if we know what it is ←
18:23:18 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:23:48 <msmith> pfps: for decimal, they will be changing the minimal implementation text. we will copy it. if it changes, its ugly but we don't expect that to happen
Peter Patel-Schneider: for decimal, they will be changing the minimal implementation text. we will copy it. if it changes, its ugly but we don't expect that to happen ←
18:23:54 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:24:23 <msmith> subsubtopic: Freezing Features
18:24:38 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:24:44 <msmith> ianh: we have to decide that we're not going to introduce or change features at this point
Ian Horrocks: we have to decide that we're not going to introduce or change features at this point ←
18:24:55 <msmith> ianh: or we won't be able to keep our schedule
Ian Horrocks: or we won't be able to keep our schedule ←
18:25:00 <msmith> ianh: any objections to this?
Ian Horrocks: any objections to this? ←
18:25:08 <msmith> ianh: when are we going to freeze the documents?
Ian Horrocks: when are we going to freeze the documents? ←
18:25:09 <pfps> no objection from me
Peter Patel-Schneider: no objection from me ←
18:25:14 <uli> freeze, yes
Uli Sattler: freeze, yes ←
18:25:45 <msmith> sandro: any changes need to have more review. so, hopefully no more review
Sandro Hawke: any changes need to have more review. so, hopefully no more review ←
18:26:24 <msmith> sandro: there isn't a formal requirement to freeze for publishing. I make a snapshot (probably in the next few days)
Sandro Hawke: there isn't a formal requirement to freeze for publishing. I make a snapshot (probably in the next few days) ←
18:26:31 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:26:42 <msmith> sandro: I don't have a sense of the state editor's believe the documents to be in
Sandro Hawke: I don't have a sense of the state editor's believe the documents to be in ←
18:26:58 <msmith> ianh: I was expecting to say something like "by the end of this week"
Ian Horrocks: I was expecting to say something like "by the end of this week" ←
18:27:17 <msmith> ianh: then sandro can snapshot and we have one week for typos, etc.
Ian Horrocks: then sandro can snapshot and we have one week for typos, etc. ←
18:27:30 <msmith> sandro: ok, any changes after that require chair approval
Sandro Hawke: ok, any changes after that require chair approval ←
18:27:37 <pfps> fine by me
Peter Patel-Schneider: fine by me ←
18:27:39 <bmotik> Great!
Boris Motik: Great! ←
18:27:39 <bcuencagrau> Yes
Bernardo Cuenca Grau: Yes ←
18:27:39 <msmith> ianh: editors, is this ok?
Ian Horrocks: editors, is this ok? ←
18:27:41 <MarkusK_> yes
Markus Krötzsch: yes ←
18:27:47 <msmith> msmith: yes
Michael Smith: yes ←
18:28:02 <msmith> ianh: person that might object is mschnei
Ian Horrocks: person that might object is mschnei ←
18:28:20 <msmith> ianh: I will contact him after the telecon to confirm his consent
Ian Horrocks: I will contact him after the telecon to confirm his consent ←
18:28:38 <msmith> sandro: the one doc we're not republishing is primer. do we want to say something about that?
Sandro Hawke: the one doc we're not republishing is primer. do we want to say something about that? ←
18:29:01 <msmith> sandro: text that suggests we intend to update and publish it in the future.
Sandro Hawke: text that suggests we intend to update and publish it in the future. ←
18:29:04 <pfps> that sounds good to me
Peter Patel-Schneider: that sounds good to me ←
18:29:15 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:29:23 <msmith> sandro: Do I understand that correctly?
Sandro Hawke: Do I understand that correctly? ←
18:29:45 <msmith> sandro: maybe we put such text in the ref card status of document, since the docs are related
Sandro Hawke: maybe we put such text in the ref card status of document, since the docs are related ←
18:30:09 <msmith> topic: Issues
18:30:33 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:30:40 <msmith> subtopic: ISSUE-87
18:30:59 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:31:11 <msmith> ianh: I understood from minutes this was handled last week
Ian Horrocks: I understood from minutes this was handled last week ←
18:31:02 <uli> confirm
Uli Sattler: confirm ←
18:31:04 <bmotik> Yep
Boris Motik: Yep ←
18:31:27 <msmith> omit: PROPOSED resolve ISSUE-87 as in terms at http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-11-12#Mime_types
18:31:48 <pfps> omit: wrong section
18:31:52 <sandro> omit: if you put the colon after "proposed" then it gets nicely formatted.
18:32:04 <msmith> omit: PROPOSED close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience
18:32:27 <Zakim> +??P1
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1 ←
18:32:33 <schneid> zakim, ??P1 is me
Michael Schneider: zakim, ??P1 is me ←
18:32:33 <Zakim> +schneid; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +schneid; got it ←
18:32:37 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:32:37 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
18:32:46 <msmith> PROPOSED: close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience
PROPOSED: close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience ←
18:32:52 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
18:32:57 <pfps> +1 (ALU)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 (ALU) ←
18:32:59 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
18:33:00 <uli> +1 (Man)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Man) ←
18:33:00 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
18:33:04 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
18:33:05 <baojie> +1 (RPI)
18:33:07 <bmotik> +1 (Oxfrd)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
18:33:08 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:33:10 <Rinke> +1 (UvA)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (UvA) ←
18:33:11 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
18:33:13 <bmotik> s/Oxfrd/Oxford
18:33:24 <msmith> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience
RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-87 by adding rational datatype but marking it as at risk, pending implementation experience ←
18:33:31 <Zhe> +1
18:33:57 <msmith> ianh: mschnei is present now, revert to publishing discussion
Ian Horrocks: mschnei is present now, revert to publishing discussion ←
18:34:18 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
18:34:18 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
18:34:23 <msmith> ianh: we agreed to freeze docs by end of week, modulo minor errors being fixed. can you live with that?
Ian Horrocks: we agreed to freeze docs by end of week, modulo minor errors being fixed. can you live with that? ←
18:34:45 <msmith> schneid: I've just started some changes. Sunday?
Michael Schneider: I've just started some changes. Sunday? ←
18:35:09 <msmith> ianh: we need to freeze fairly soon. Can you accept Sunday?
Ian Horrocks: we need to freeze fairly soon. Can you accept Sunday? ←
18:35:34 <msmith> schneid: yes, since RDF semantics is just second draft
Michael Schneider: yes, since RDF semantics is just second draft ←
18:35:44 <msmith> schneid: I can branch the doc and make larger changes on branch
Michael Schneider: I can branch the doc and make larger changes on branch ←
18:35:49 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:35:59 <msmith> ianh: reluctant to suggest a branch given problems with rqmts doc
Ian Horrocks: reluctant to suggest a branch given problems with rqmts doc ←
18:36:10 <msmith> schneid: ok, I will focus on the smaller changes
Michael Schneider: ok, I will focus on the smaller changes ←
18:36:24 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
18:36:24 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
18:36:51 <msmith> ianh: back to issues
Ian Horrocks: back to issues ←
18:36:56 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:37:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:37:18 <msmith> PROPOSED: remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html
PROPOSED: remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html ←
18:37:23 <Achille> +1 (IBM)
Achille Fokoue: +1 (IBM) ←
18:37:27 <sandro> +1 (W3C)
Sandro Hawke: +1 (W3C) ←
18:37:29 <MarkusK_> +1 (FZI)
Markus Krötzsch: +1 (FZI) ←
18:37:30 <msmith> msmith: +1 (C&P)
Michael Smith: +1 (C&P) ←
18:37:35 <bmotik> +1 (Oxford)
Boris Motik: +1 (Oxford) ←
18:37:36 <pfps> +1 (ALU)
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 (ALU) ←
18:37:37 <uli> +1 (Man)
Uli Sattler: +1 (Man) ←
18:37:45 <Zhe> +1 (ORACLE)
18:37:45 <ewallace> +1 (NIST)
Evan Wallace: +1 (NIST) ←
18:37:55 <Rinke> +1 (Uva)
Rinke Hoekstra: +1 (Uva) ←
18:37:58 <msmith> RESOLVED: Remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html
RESOLVED: Remove xsd:ENTITY, xsd:ID, and xsd:IDREF datatypes as in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0105.html ←
18:37:59 <baojie> +1 (RPI)
18:38:19 <msmith> ianh: last issue, proposal to simplify structure of annotations
Ian Horrocks: last issue, proposal to simplify structure of annotations ←
18:38:41 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:38:46 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:38:46 <Zakim> bmotik should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should no longer be muted ←
18:38:50 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:39:05 <msmith> bmotik: several aspects to this change
Boris Motik: several aspects to this change ←
18:39:30 <msmith> bmotik: first, introduce one class AnnotationValue to avoid AnnotationByIndividual AnnotationByLiteral ...
Boris Motik: first, introduce one class AnnotationValue to avoid AnnotationByIndividual AnnotationByLiteral ... ←
18:39:40 <msmith> bmotik: then unify the syntax
Boris Motik: then unify the syntax ←
18:40:22 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:40:35 <alanr> wondering about alternatives to "URI"
Alan Ruttenberg: wondering about alternatives to "URI" ←
18:40:35 <msmith> bmotik: second, currently you can have several annotation values per axiom. this is complex. I propose to require separate axioms for multiple annotations
Boris Motik: second, currently you can have several annotation values per axiom. this is complex. I propose to require separate axioms for multiple annotations ←
18:40:51 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:40:56 <msmith> ianh: this wouldn't change the RDF?
Ian Horrocks: this wouldn't change the RDF? ←
18:40:59 <pfps> sounds good to me
Peter Patel-Schneider: sounds good to me ←
18:41:10 <msmith> bmotik: correct, but it would make things more round-trippable
Boris Motik: correct, but it would make things more round-trippable ←
18:41:23 <uli> sounds fine to me too
Uli Sattler: sounds fine to me too ←
18:41:35 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
18:41:41 <alanr> only on IRC
Alan Ruttenberg: only on IRC ←
18:41:48 <msmith> ack alanr
ack alanr ←
18:41:49 <IanH> alan - go ahead
Ian Horrocks: alan - go ahead ←
18:41:56 <pfps> q?
18:42:03 <alanr> Sent mail re: using "URI" in annotations
Alan Ruttenberg: Sent mail re: using "URI" in annotations ←
18:42:14 <bmotik> I saw this e-mail, but I didn't understand it.
Boris Motik: I saw this e-mail, but I didn't understand it. ←
18:42:14 <ewallace> See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0120.html
Evan Wallace: See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0120.html ←
18:42:17 <alanr> and mentioned at f2f
Alan Ruttenberg: and mentioned at f2f ←
18:42:40 <IanH> Looks like a positive change to me. I'm still uncomfortable with the
Ian Horrocks: Looks like a positive change to me. I'm still uncomfortable with the ←
18:42:40 <IanH> URI as name for "entities which we may have different 'views' of".
Ian Horrocks: URI as name for "entities which we may have different 'views' of". ←
18:42:41 <IanH> Perhaps there is some variant of URI (that uses the term "view" in it)
Ian Horrocks: Perhaps there is some variant of URI (that uses the term "view" in it) ←
18:42:41 <IanH> that better expresses that it is something identified that we are
Ian Horrocks: that better expresses that it is something identified that we are ←
18:42:41 <alanr> We aren't annotating a URI, which is a syntactic element, we are annotating a resource, but without specifying a view
Alan Ruttenberg: We aren't annotating a URI, which is a syntactic element, we are annotating a resource, but without specifying a view ←
18:42:41 <IanH> talking about, rather than the identifier of that thing. i.e. in
Ian Horrocks: talking about, rather than the identifier of that thing. i.e. in ←
18:42:41 <IanH> productions about properties, we use ObjectProperty := URI, not
Ian Horrocks: productions about properties, we use ObjectProperty := URI, not ←
18:42:43 <IanH> ObjectPropertyURI := URI
Ian Horrocks: ObjectPropertyURI := URI ←
18:42:45 <IanH> possibilities: AnyView, AllViews, SomeView, Entity, Resource...
Ian Horrocks: possibilities: AnyView, AllViews, SomeView, Entity, Resource... ←
18:42:50 <alanr> tks
Alan Ruttenberg: tks ←
18:42:54 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:42:57 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
18:42:57 <Zakim> bmotik was not muted, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was not muted, bmotik ←
18:42:59 <alanr> Resource is most clear
Alan Ruttenberg: Resource is most clear ←
18:43:03 <pfps> ... but they are ... (wait for it) ... URIs (or at least IRIs)
Peter Patel-Schneider: ... but they are ... (wait for it) ... URIs (or at least IRIs) ←
18:43:11 <alanr> so is a property, then
Alan Ruttenberg: so is a property, then ←
18:43:25 <msmith> bmotik: I didn't understand this question.
Boris Motik: I didn't understand this question. ←
18:43:39 <pfps> oooh, good point
Peter Patel-Schneider: oooh, good point ←
18:43:54 <alanr> We have several views currently
Alan Ruttenberg: We have several views currently ←
18:43:54 <msmith> sandro: I believe he's saying that we're not talking about the URI, we're talking about the thing denoted by the URI
Sandro Hawke: I believe he's saying that we're not talking about the URI, we're talking about the thing denoted by the URI ←
18:44:00 <alanr> yes
Alan Ruttenberg: yes ←
18:44:11 <alanr> But we don't have a specific view
Alan Ruttenberg: But we don't have a specific view ←
18:44:19 <alanr> "view" is the language used by Boris
Alan Ruttenberg: "view" is the language used by Boris ←
18:44:31 <alanr> This annotation is to all the "views"
Alan Ruttenberg: This annotation is to all the "views" ←
18:44:32 <msmith> sandro: I think alanr is saying that using URI in the syntax is likely to mislead and that alternative names for the productions could be helpful
Sandro Hawke: I think alanr is saying that using URI in the syntax is likely to mislead and that alternative names for the productions could be helpful ←
18:44:38 <alanr> yes
Alan Ruttenberg: yes ←
18:44:48 <alanr> sorry - this is hard over text
Alan Ruttenberg: sorry - this is hard over text ←
18:44:52 <msmith> bmotik: entity is already used in the structural spec
Boris Motik: entity is already used in the structural spec ←
18:45:04 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:45:10 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:45:11 <pfps> the non-terminals could be "Resource" instead of "URI", a la RDF
Peter Patel-Schneider: the non-terminals could be "Resource" instead of "URI", a la RDF ←
18:45:16 <alanr> +1
Alan Ruttenberg: +1 ←
18:45:50 <pfps> no just for these things that are on the "URI"
Peter Patel-Schneider: no just for these things that are on the "URI" ←
18:45:56 <pfps> q+
18:45:58 <msmith> ianh: we're talking just about the proposal here.
Ian Horrocks: we're talking just about the proposal here. ←
18:46:05 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:46:07 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
18:46:23 <msmith> pfps: the only change would be for non-terminals ... are there any ... no
Peter Patel-Schneider: the only change would be for non-terminals ... are there any ... no ←
18:46:35 <msmith> ianh: I don't see any non-terminals with URI in them
Ian Horrocks: I don't see any non-terminals with URI in them ←
18:46:50 <IanH> Alan: we don't see any productions with URI in them anymore.
Alan Ruttenberg: we don't see any productions with URI in them anymore. [ Scribe Assist by Ian Horrocks ] ←
18:46:53 <msmith> pfps: URI annotation is gone, so changing URI annotation to Resource annotation isn't helpful
Peter Patel-Schneider: URI annotation is gone, so changing URI annotation to Resource annotation isn't helpful ←
18:46:58 <IanH> So we can't understand your point.
Ian Horrocks: So we can't understand your point. ←
18:47:17 <IanH> Alan?
Ian Horrocks: Alan? ←
18:47:17 <alanr> Will review and get back on email.
Alan Ruttenberg: Will review and get back on email. ←
18:47:18 <alanr> tks
Alan Ruttenberg: tks ←
18:47:32 <IanH> But we need to resolve it now.
Ian Horrocks: But we need to resolve it now. ←
18:47:42 <uli> tks?
Uli Sattler: tks? ←
18:47:45 <alanr> thanks
Alan Ruttenberg: thanks ←
18:47:48 <IanH> We have agreed to finalise documents by end of this week.
Ian Horrocks: We have agreed to finalise documents by end of this week. ←
18:48:15 <alanr> looking now
Alan Ruttenberg: looking now ←
18:48:24 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
18:48:30 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:48:33 <msmith> ianh: given alan is basically in favor...
Ian Horrocks: given alan is basically in favor... ←
18:48:43 <uli> q-
Uli Sattler: q- ←
18:48:53 <msmith> sandro: we should make the decision, alan can decide to amend the decision
Sandro Hawke: we should make the decision, alan can propose to amend the decision ←
18:48:58 <msmith> PROPOSED: simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html
PROPOSED: simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html ←
18:49:00 <sandro> s/decide/propose/
18:49:10 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
18:49:11 <alanr> e.g. AnnotationPropertyRange := 'PropertyRange' '(' axiomAnnotations AnnotationProperty URI ')'
Alan Ruttenberg: e.g. AnnotationPropertyRange := 'PropertyRange' '(' axiomAnnotations AnnotationProperty URI ')' ←
18:49:17 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
18:49:34 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
18:49:36 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
18:49:39 <bcuencagrau> +1
18:49:40 <schneid> 0
18:49:41 <pfps> +1
18:49:42 <Zhe> 0
18:49:42 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
18:49:42 <baojie> 0
18:49:47 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
18:49:51 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
18:50:05 <msmith> RESOLVED: Simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html
RESOLVED: Simplify structure of annotations as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0115.html ←
18:50:22 <msmith> ianh: we will talk to alan offline. to better understand his point
Ian Horrocks: we will talk to alan offline. to better understand his point ←
18:50:31 <sandro> (Alan, if you're not happy with this resolution, we can consider some ammendment.)
Sandro Hawke: (Alan, if you're not happy with this resolution, we can consider some ammendment.) ←
18:50:49 <alanr> ok
Alan Ruttenberg: ok ←
18:50:57 <msmith> subtopic: Deprecation
18:51:17 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:51:19 <msmith> ianh: after investigation, the deprecation problem seems to have gone away
Ian Horrocks: after investigation, the deprecation problem seems to have gone away ←
18:51:32 <uli> i agree
Uli Sattler: i agree ←
18:51:33 <msmith> ianh: does anyone have something to say?
Ian Horrocks: does anyone have something to say? ←
18:51:41 <msmith> ianh: no, ok. we move on.
Ian Horrocks: no, ok. we move on. ←
18:51:42 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:51:50 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:51:51 <alanr> yes, I am happy enough with current situation now.
Alan Ruttenberg: yes, I am happy enough with current situation now. ←
18:51:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:51:54 <msmith> subtopic: rdf:XMLLiteral
18:51:58 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:52:11 <msmith> bmotik: it is not necessarily difficult conceptually
Boris Motik: it is not necessarily difficult conceptually ←
18:52:32 <alanr> there is a possible connection with POWDER which refers to XML Literal
Alan Ruttenberg: there is a possible connection with POWDER which refers to XML Literal ←
18:52:37 <msmith> bmotik: it contains a design flaw - lexical space requires normalization
Boris Motik: it contains a design flaw - lexical space requires normalization ←
18:52:41 <sandro> yeah, wtf were the RDF Core folks thinking? :-(
Sandro Hawke: yeah, wtf were the RDF Core folks thinking? :-( ←
18:52:44 <msmith> q+
q+ ←
18:52:56 <alanr> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-powder-formal-20081114/#regexSemantics
Alan Ruttenberg: http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-powder-formal-20081114/#regexSemantics ←
18:53:06 <msmith> bmotik: it would be more useful if canonical form were for value space
Boris Motik: it would be more useful if canonical form were for value space ←
18:53:22 <msmith> q?
q? ←
18:53:32 <IanH> ack msmith
Ian Horrocks: ack msmith ←
18:54:23 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
18:54:31 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:54:50 <baojie> q+
18:54:59 <pfps> q+
18:55:02 <schneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
18:55:03 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:55:17 <msmith> msmith: I believe OWL 2 should support it. It is useful and can be supported. I think the canonicalization issue is for easy comparison
Michael Smith: I believe OWL 2 should support it. It is useful and can be supported. I think the canonicalization issue is for easy comparison ←
18:55:29 <msmith> ianh: what's the current state? it was in OWL 1 but isn't in OWL 2?
Ian Horrocks: what's the current state? it was in OWL 1 but isn't in OWL 2? ←
18:56:08 <msmith> bmotik: OWL 1 was contradictory. one spec (RDF?) said it is included. another spec (semantics) said only string & integer
Boris Motik: OWL 1 was contradictory. one spec (RDF?) said it is included. another spec (semantics) said only string & integer ←
18:56:25 <msmith> bmotik: we should probably make an estimation if this would make people object.
Boris Motik: we should probably make an estimation if this would make people object. ←
18:56:32 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:56:38 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
18:56:44 <msmith> bmotik: if there's a non-zero probability of this, then what's one more datatype
Boris Motik: if there's a non-zero probability of this, then what's one more datatype ←
18:57:02 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:57:09 <IanH> ack baojie
Ian Horrocks: ack baojie ←
18:57:29 <baojie> * owl:DataRange (alternative rdfs:Datatype)
Jie Bao: * owl:DataRange (alternative rdfs:Datatype) ←
18:57:29 <baojie> * owl:distinctMembers (alternative owl:members)
Jie Bao: * owl:distinctMembers (alternative owl:members) ←
18:57:35 <msmith> baojie: I believe we have suggested replacing rdfs:Datatype with owl:DataRange
Jie Bao: I believe we have suggested replacing rdfs:Datatype with owl:DataRange ←
18:57:49 <msmith> baojie: this is a different issue
Jie Bao: this is a different issue ←
18:58:05 <msmith> ianh: no, we're now on rdf:XMLLiteral
Ian Horrocks: no, we're now on rdf:XMLLiteral ←
18:58:08 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:58:17 <msmith> ianh: but I didn't understand the point on deprecation
Ian Horrocks: but I didn't understand the point on deprecation ←
18:58:30 <msmith> baojie: do we have a list of terms that will be deprecated?
Jie Bao: do we have a list of terms that will be deprecated? ←
18:58:34 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:58:41 <schneid> we only deprecate owl:DataRange at the moment
Michael Schneider: we only deprecate owl:DataRange at the moment ←
18:58:49 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
18:58:56 <msmith> ianh: it was suggested we do a backwards compatibility audit. is that what you mean?
Ian Horrocks: it was suggested we do a backwards compatibility audit. is that what you mean? ←
18:58:59 <msmith> baojie: yes.
18:59:36 <msmith> pfps: on OWL 1 built-in datatypes. It means if you implement it, you should implement in accordance with the spec
Peter Patel-Schneider: on OWL 1 built-in datatypes. It means if you implement it, you should implement in accordance with the spec ←
18:59:45 <msmith> pfps: it doesn't require implementation
Peter Patel-Schneider: it doesn't require implementation ←
18:59:55 <bmotik> +q
Boris Motik: +q ←
18:59:58 <msmith> ianh: so, for conformance it wasn't obligatory to support it
Ian Horrocks: so, for conformance it wasn't obligatory to support it ←
19:00:04 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
19:00:05 <msmith> pfps: yes.
Peter Patel-Schneider: yes. ←
19:00:13 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:00:15 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:00:15 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:00:22 <IanH> ack schneid
Ian Horrocks: ack schneid ←
19:00:33 <schneid> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/syntax.html#owl_built_in_datatypes
Michael Schneider: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/syntax.html#owl_built_in_datatypes ←
19:01:00 <msmith> schneid: re OWL 1 S&AS, I agree with pfps comments
Michael Schneider: re OWL 1 S&AS, I agree with pfps comments ←
19:01:31 <msmith> schneid: but its unclear if it is MUST or not.
Michael Schneider: but its unclear if it is MUST or not. ←
19:01:46 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:01:58 <msmith> schneid: but I think it wasn't really in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2
Michael Schneider: but I think it wasn't really in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2 ←
19:02:15 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:02:18 <msmith> ianh: I think it wasn't required in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2
Ian Horrocks: I think it wasn't required in OWL 1, and isn't required in OWL 2 ←
19:02:30 <msmith> bmotik: I think this depends on last call
Boris Motik: I think this depends on last call ←
19:02:31 <msmith> q+
q+ ←
19:02:35 <schneid> my email regarding rdf:XMLLiteral: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0112.html
Michael Schneider: my email regarding rdf:XMLLiteral: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Nov/0112.html ←
19:02:49 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:02:54 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:03:13 <msmith> bmotik: this is an easier datatype to implement. to msmith, why does lexical state assume document is normalized?
Boris Motik: this is an easier datatype to implement. to msmith, why does lexical state assume document is normalized? ←
19:03:57 <schneid> one can even create RDFS-inconsistent documents with non-canonicalized literals :)
Michael Schneider: one can even create RDFS-inconsistent documents with non-canonicalized literals :) ←
19:04:00 <msmith> ianh: I suggest tabling the discussion of sensibility of datatype
Ian Horrocks: I suggest tabling the discussion of sensibility of datatype ←
19:04:13 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:04:13 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:04:15 <pfps> +1
19:04:23 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:05:15 <msmith> msmith: can we say if implemented, it should be implemented in accordance with...
Michael Smith: can we say if implemented, it should be implemented in accordance with... ←
19:05:24 <pfps> +1 to putting this in conformance
Peter Patel-Schneider: +1 to putting this in conformance ←
19:05:30 <msmith> ianh: it could be said in the conformance document.
Ian Horrocks: it could be said in the conformance document. ←
19:05:32 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:05:38 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
19:05:39 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:05:44 <IanH> ack msmith
Ian Horrocks: ack msmith ←
19:05:48 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:06:07 <msmith> bmotik: why don't we add to Syntax
Boris Motik: why don't we add to Syntax ←
19:06:23 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:06:28 <msmith> ianh: that would make it mandatory, not optional
Ian Horrocks: that would make it mandatory, not optional ←
19:06:35 <msmith> bmotik: are there many that use it
Boris Motik: are there many that use it ←
19:06:47 <uli> i have seen a couple
Uli Sattler: i have seen a couple ←
19:06:50 <schneid> really? I have never seen it anywhere
Michael Schneider: really? I have never seen it anywhere ←
19:06:54 <alanr> I think there are people who use it. IIRC I've seen it in BioPAX files
Alan Ruttenberg: I think there are people who use it. IIRC I've seen it in BioPAX files ←
19:06:58 <alanr> am looking
Alan Ruttenberg: am looking ←
19:07:11 <schneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
19:07:17 <msmith> bmotik: I proposed adding 4.7 to syntax, adding rdf:XMLLiteral
Boris Motik: I proposed adding 4.7 to syntax, adding rdf:XMLLiteral ←
19:07:36 <msmith> ianh: I'd like to make it at risk, because we have little implementation experience
Ian Horrocks: I'd like to make it at risk, because we have little implementation experience ←
19:07:41 <bmotik> +1 to at risk
Boris Motik: +1 to at risk ←
19:07:42 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:07:44 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:07:44 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:07:49 <IanH> ack schneid
Ian Horrocks: ack schneid ←
19:08:05 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:08:05 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:08:09 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:08:09 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:09:00 <msmith> schneid: I don't like rdf:XMLLiteral because it is covered in the RDF semantics by several conditions. we would need to avoid conflicting with other specifications
Michael Schneider: I don't like rdf:XMLLiteral because it is covered in the RDF semantics by several conditions. we would need to avoid conflicting with other specifications ←
19:09:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:09:47 <msmith> ianh: wasn't this exactly the same problem in OWL 1
Ian Horrocks: wasn't this exactly the same problem in OWL 1 ←
19:09:57 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:10:24 <msmith> schneid: I believe it was only a suggestion in OWL 1, not mandatory
Michael Schneider: I believe it was only a suggestion in OWL 1, not mandatory ←
19:10:38 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:10:45 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:10:46 <msmith> ianh: but a semantics was specified. if supported, it had a specific semantics.
Ian Horrocks: but a semantics was specified. if supported, it had a specific semantics. ←
19:10:48 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:10:50 <Zakim> +??P0
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0 ←
19:11:02 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:11:02 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:11:24 <msmith> bmotik: rdf mt, section 3.1 suggests this is not a standard datatype. I'm not sure I understand how this impacts things.
Boris Motik: rdf mt, section 3.1 suggests this is not a standard datatype. I'm not sure I understand how this impacts things. ←
19:11:26 <schneid> +1 to boris
Michael Schneider: +1 to boris ←
19:11:33 <christine> zakim, +??P0 is christine
Christine Golbreich: zakim, +??P0 is christine ←
19:11:33 <Zakim> sorry, christine, I do not recognize a party named '+??P0'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, christine, I do not recognize a party named '+??P0' ←
19:11:46 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:11:47 <msmith> bmotik: and it may change RDF interpretations
Boris Motik: and it may change RDF interpretations ←
19:12:01 <uli> zakim, ??P0 is christine
Uli Sattler: zakim, ??P0 is christine ←
19:12:01 <Zakim> +christine; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +christine; got it ←
19:12:11 <pfps> q+
19:12:16 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:12:17 <msmith> bmotik: maybe we shouldn't say anything
Boris Motik: maybe we shouldn't say anything ←
19:12:19 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
19:12:29 <bmotik> Zakim, mute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, mute me ←
19:12:29 <Zakim> bmotik should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik should now be muted ←
19:12:42 <msmith> pfps: bad news. at end of WebOnt, XMLLiteral was made mandatory
Peter Patel-Schneider: bad news. at end of WebOnt, XMLLiteral was made mandatory ←
19:12:51 <msmith> pfps: see S&AS C5
Peter Patel-Schneider: see S&AS C5 ←
19:13:15 <schneid> we're back at RDF Semantics :)
Michael Schneider: we're back at RDF Semantics :) ←
19:13:25 <msmith> msmith: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/#changes-since-PR
Michael Smith: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/#changes-since-PR ←
19:14:01 <msmith> sandro: maybe way to procede is to do it at risk and solicit more feedback
Sandro Hawke: maybe way to procede is to do it at risk and solicit more feedback ←
19:14:07 <uli> ...I will check what kind of "literal" I remember seeing
Uli Sattler: ...I will check what kind of "literal" I remember seeing ←
19:14:56 <msmith> ianh: I'd like it to be at risk, with default being take it out
Ian Horrocks: I'd like it to be at risk, with default being take it out ←
19:15:05 <msmith> sandro: I think we can do that
Sandro Hawke: I think we can do that ←
19:15:19 <schneid> peter, an RDF compatible datatype map has rdf:XMLLiteral in, anyway, with or without being explicit :)
Michael Schneider: peter, an RDF compatible datatype map has rdf:XMLLiteral in, anyway, with or without being explicit :) ←
19:16:03 <IanH> PROPOSED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems.
PROPOSED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems. ←
19:16:09 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
19:16:12 <bcuencagrau> +1
19:16:17 <pfps> +1
19:16:18 <uli> +1
Uli Sattler: +1 ←
19:16:20 <ewallace> +1
Evan Wallace: +1 ←
19:16:21 <Achille> +1
Achille Fokoue: +1 ←
19:16:22 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
19:16:22 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
19:16:24 <Zhe> +1
19:16:24 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
19:16:26 <baojie> +1
19:16:27 <schneid> -0.5
Michael Schneider: -0.5 ←
19:16:33 <alanr> BioPAX doesn't use XML Literal - it uses a string that is documented to be in XML format
Alan Ruttenberg: BioPAX doesn't use XML Literal - it uses a string that is documented to be in XML format ←
19:16:40 <alanr> 0
Alan Ruttenberg: 0 ←
19:17:06 <schneid> no, not an objection
Michael Schneider: no, not an objection ←
19:17:11 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:17:38 <alanr> like most it was probably arbitrary
Alan Ruttenberg: like most it was probably arbitrary ←
19:17:46 <IanH> RESOLVED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems.
RESOLVED: XML-Literal datatype is added to OWL 2 datatype map but marked at risk of being removed if there turn out to be implementation or semantic problems. ←
19:18:00 <sandro> yeah, alan, that's the patterns I see in most RDF.
Sandro Hawke: yeah, alan, that's the patterns I see in most RDF. ←
19:18:13 <schneid> ok
Michael Schneider: ok ←
19:18:13 <bmotik> ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed
ACTION: bmotik2 to Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed ←
19:18:13 <trackbot> Created ACTION-251 - Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed [on Boris Motik - due 2008-11-26].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-251 - Update the spec to include rdf:XMLLiteral and fix the annotations as proposed [on Boris Motik - due 2008-11-26]. ←
19:18:37 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:18:55 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:19:00 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:19:01 <msmith> subtopic: Alignment of Syntaxes
19:19:06 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:19:09 <pfps> q+
19:19:16 <bmotik> ZAkim, unmtue me
Boris Motik: ZAkim, unmtue me ←
19:19:16 <Zakim> I don't understand 'unmtue me', bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'unmtue me', bmotik ←
19:19:17 <msmith> ianh: it seems that few of the proposed changes had universal agreement
Ian Horrocks: it seems that few of the proposed changes had universal agreement ←
19:19:19 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:19:20 <bmotik> Zakim, unmute me
Boris Motik: Zakim, unmute me ←
19:19:20 <Zakim> bmotik was not muted, bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: bmotik was not muted, bmotik ←
19:20:04 <IanH> ack pfps
Ian Horrocks: ack pfps ←
19:20:15 <msmith> bmotik: reiterating... I think we are serving two communities with different expectations. conforming one syntax to another is not nice. I think we can unify ExistsSelf and leave it at that
Boris Motik: reiterating... I think we are serving two communities with different expectations. conforming one syntax to another is not nice. I think we can unify ExistsSelf and leave it at that ←
19:20:24 <alanr> q+
Alan Ruttenberg: q+ ←
19:20:25 <msmith> pfps: I agree with bmotik
Peter Patel-Schneider: I agree with bmotik ←
19:20:33 <IanH> Alan?
Ian Horrocks: Alan? ←
19:20:40 <msmith> ianh: alan and ivan aren't present, this is tricky to discuss
Ian Horrocks: alan and ivan aren't present, this is tricky to discuss ←
19:20:42 <alanr> I think the sentiment was that it was too hard to agree
Alan Ruttenberg: I think the sentiment was that it was too hard to agree ←
19:20:59 <uli> whose sentiment?
Uli Sattler: whose sentiment? ←
19:21:01 <alanr> However I don't agree with the idea that we serve 2 communities therefore things should be different
Alan Ruttenberg: However I don't agree with the idea that we serve 2 communities therefore things should be different ←
19:21:08 <schneid> q+
Michael Schneider: q+ ←
19:21:08 <IanH> OK, so Boris's proposal is only to change ExistsSelf
Ian Horrocks: OK, so Boris's proposal is only to change ExistsSelf ←
19:21:08 <alanr> Ivan, Myself - principal instigators
Alan Ruttenberg: Ivan, Myself - principal instigators ←
19:21:18 <alanr> Does't matter
Alan Ruttenberg: Does't matter ←
19:21:19 <IanH> Would you be OK with this
Ian Horrocks: Would you be OK with this ←
19:21:29 <uli> Alan, I think it's rather we serve 2 communities therefore things may not be unifiable
Uli Sattler: Alan, I think it's rather we serve 2 communities therefore things may not be unifiable ←
19:21:38 <alanr> I will say -1 without objection
Alan Ruttenberg: I will say -1 without objection ←
19:21:42 <alanr> (formal)
Alan Ruttenberg: (formal) ←
19:21:45 <pfps> many of the proposed changes change things from the OWL 1 abstract syntax, which seems to be rather less than optimal
Peter Patel-Schneider: many of the proposed changes change things from the OWL 1 abstract syntax, which seems to be rather less than optimal ←
19:21:50 <alanr> I think our job is to bring together communities
Alan Ruttenberg: I think our job is to bring together communities ←
19:22:00 <IanH> (Let's not get into the philosophy of who we serve.)
Ian Horrocks: (Let's not get into the philosophy of who we serve.) ←
19:22:02 <alanr> Names appeal to small segment
Alan Ruttenberg: Names appeal to small segment ←
19:22:13 <alanr> And seem to Boris taste rather to any standard
Alan Ruttenberg: And seem to Boris taste rather to any standard ←
19:22:16 <uli> sure - but we don't want to loose them through this bringing together business
Uli Sattler: sure - but we don't want to loose them through this bringing together business ←
19:22:39 <alanr> DL standard is logical notation
Alan Ruttenberg: DL standard is logical notation ←
19:22:47 <alanr> Add a syntax for that if desired
Alan Ruttenberg: Add a syntax for that if desired ←
19:22:56 <uli> ?
Uli Sattler: ? ←
19:23:02 <uli> for what?
Uli Sattler: for what? ←
19:23:04 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:23:06 <alanr> But i (personally) see no reason to differ as we do now
Alan Ruttenberg: But i (personally) see no reason to differ as we do now ←
19:23:07 <IanH> You mean you want *another* syntax?
Ian Horrocks: You mean you want *another* syntax? ←
19:23:22 <bmotik> -q
Boris Motik: -q ←
19:23:26 <alanr> I don't care. I'm objecting to the argument that the functional syntax is standard to some community
Alan Ruttenberg: I don't care. I'm objecting to the argument that the functional syntax is standard to some community ←
19:23:30 <alanr> q-
Alan Ruttenberg: q- ←
19:23:33 <IanH> ack alanr
Ian Horrocks: ack alanr ←
19:23:35 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:23:35 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:23:39 <IanH> ack schneid
Ian Horrocks: ack schneid ←
19:23:48 <bmotik> q+
Boris Motik: q+ ←
19:23:58 <uli> q+
Uli Sattler: q+ ←
19:24:00 <msmith> schneid: if we change existself I favor changing the RDF side
Michael Schneider: if we change existself I favor changing the RDF side ←
19:24:29 <msmith> schneid: so that it is consistent with other Restrictions in rdf
Michael Schneider: so that it is consistent with other Restrictions in rdf ←
19:24:35 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:24:45 <alanr> I think SOTD should solicit input and list the disagreement as one we couldn't agree on
Alan Ruttenberg: I think SOTD should solicit input and list the disagreement as one we couldn't agree on ←
19:25:04 <IanH> ack bmotik
Ian Horrocks: ack bmotik ←
19:25:08 <msmith> schneid: something like deprecation [ a owl:Restriction ; owl:onProperty :p ; owl:existSelf "true"^^xsd:boolean ]
Michael Schneider: something like deprecation [ a owl:Restriction ; owl:onProperty :p ; owl:existSelf "true"^^xsd:boolean ] ←
19:25:14 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:25:23 <msmith> bmotik: I wanted to propose something like :hasSelf
Boris Motik: I wanted to propose something like :hasSelf ←
19:25:29 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:25:29 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:25:47 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:25:56 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:25:56 <uli> ack /me
Uli Sattler: ack /me ←
19:25:59 <IanH> ack uli
Ian Horrocks: ack uli ←
19:26:53 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:27:02 <msmith> uli: disagree with Alan regarding the functional syntax. It is a different syntax because it doesn't have the restrictions of RDF
Uli Sattler: disagree with Alan regarding the functional syntax. It is a different syntax because it doesn't have the restrictions of RDF ←
19:27:08 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:27:21 <schneid> zakim, unmute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, unmute me ←
19:27:21 <Zakim> schneid should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should no longer be muted ←
19:27:39 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
19:27:39 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
19:27:54 <msmith> schneid: hasSelf, existSelf, doesn't matter much. I have more concern about similarity to other restrictions
Michael Schneider: hasSelf, existSelf, doesn't matter much. I have more concern about similarity to other restrictions ←
19:28:09 <IanH> q?
Ian Horrocks: q? ←
19:28:16 <schneid> zakim, mute me
Michael Schneider: zakim, mute me ←
19:28:16 <Zakim> schneid should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: schneid should now be muted ←
19:28:16 <msmith> ianh: other opinions on RDF form of existself?
Ian Horrocks: other opinions on RDF form of existself? ←
19:28:37 <bmotik> HasSelf is more symmetric
Boris Motik: HasSelf is more symmetric ←
19:28:45 <bmotik> with the rest of the FS
Boris Motik: with the rest of the FS ←
19:28:53 <msmith> ianh: I have preference to keeping one of the ones we have rather than pick a new one
Ian Horrocks: I have preference to keeping one of the ones we have rather than pick a new one ←
19:29:19 <uli> will this be the only choice?
Uli Sattler: will this be the only choice? ←
19:29:30 <uli> zakim, unmute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, unmute me ←
19:29:30 <Zakim> uli should no longer be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should no longer be muted ←
19:29:31 <msmith> ianh: I understand proposal to be to change both FS and RDFSyntax to be HasSelf. then change nothing else
Ian Horrocks: I understand proposal to be to change both FS and RDFSyntax to be HasSelf. then change nothing else ←
19:29:58 <uli> zakim, mute me
Uli Sattler: zakim, mute me ←
19:29:58 <Zakim> uli should now be muted
Zakim IRC Bot: uli should now be muted ←
19:30:00 <msmith> uli: in the sense that one could use either current RDF or FS for self restriction
Uli Sattler: in the sense that one could use either current RDF or FS for self restriction ←
19:30:25 <IanH> PROPOSED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else.
PROPOSED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else. ←
19:30:32 <bmotik> +1
Boris Motik: +1 ←
19:30:37 <schneid> +1
Michael Schneider: +1 ←
19:30:38 <pfps> +1
19:30:40 <bcuencagrau> +1
19:30:43 <ewallace> 0
Evan Wallace: 0 ←
19:30:44 <msmith> msmith: +1
Michael Smith: +1 ←
19:30:46 <MarkusK_> +1
Markus Krötzsch: +1 ←
19:30:46 <Achille> 0
Achille Fokoue: 0 ←
19:30:46 <alanr> -1 (but not formally objecting)
Alan Ruttenberg: -1 (but not formally objecting) ←
19:30:53 <baojie> 0
19:31:11 <uli> 0
Uli Sattler: 0 ←
19:31:16 <IanH> RESOLVED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else.
RESOLVED: Use HasSelf for self-restriction in both RDF and functions; don't change anything else. ←
19:31:17 <msmith> ianh: last chance to speak on this...
Ian Horrocks: last chance to speak on this... ←
19:32:00 <Zakim> -Evan_Wallace
Zakim IRC Bot: -Evan_Wallace ←
19:32:01 <Zakim> -baojie
Zakim IRC Bot: -baojie ←
19:32:02 <Zakim> -Achille
Zakim IRC Bot: -Achille ←
19:32:04 <msmith> ianh: End of Agenda. We're out of time. No additional business. Thanks. Next week we'll be frozen and ready to roll out docs.
Ian Horrocks: End of Agenda. We're out of time. No additional business. Thanks. Next week we'll be frozen and ready to roll out docs. ←
19:32:04 <Zakim> -bmotik
Zakim IRC Bot: -bmotik ←
19:32:05 <Zakim> -MarkusK_
Zakim IRC Bot: -MarkusK_ ←
19:32:06 <Zakim> -Peter_Patel-Schneider
Zakim IRC Bot: -Peter_Patel-Schneider ←
19:32:06 <Zakim> -bcuencagrau
Zakim IRC Bot: -bcuencagrau ←
19:32:07 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
19:32:08 <Zakim> -Zhe
Zakim IRC Bot: -Zhe ←
19:32:10 <Zakim> -msmith
Zakim IRC Bot: -msmith ←
19:32:13 <Zakim> -IanH
Zakim IRC Bot: -IanH ←
19:32:14 <Zakim> -christine
Zakim IRC Bot: -christine ←
19:32:16 <Zakim> -schneid
Zakim IRC Bot: -schneid ←
19:32:20 <uli> bye
Uli Sattler: bye ←
19:32:36 <Zakim> -uli
Zakim IRC Bot: -uli ←
19:32:37 <Zakim> SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_OWL()1:00PM has ended ←
19:32:38 <Zakim> Attendees were msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli, Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille, schneid, christine
Zakim IRC Bot: Attendees were msmith, IanH, Evan_Wallace, uli, Peter_Patel-Schneider, bcuencagrau, Sandro, bmotik, Zhe, baojie, MarkusK_, Achille, schneid, christine ←
Formatted by CommonScribe