edit

Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 16 June 2011

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.16
Seen
Christine Runnegar, Daniel Garijo, David Corsar, Ed Summers, Edoardo Pignotti, Eric Stephan, Graham Klyne, Helena Deus, Ilkay Altintas, James Myers, James Cheney, Jun Zhao, Jörn Hees, Kai Eckert, Khalid Belhajjame, Luc Moreau, Olaf Hartig, Paolo Missier, Paul Groth, Ralph Hodgson, Sam Coppens, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stephan Zednik, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Thomas Francart, Timothy Lebo, Yogesh Simmhan, Yolanda Gil
Guests
Ralph Hodgson
Regrets
Paolo Missier, Kai Eckert, Graham Klyne, Helena Deus
Chair
Luc Moreau
Scribe
Daniel Garijo
IRC Log
Original
Resolutions
  1. minutes of last week's teleconference link
  2. A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it. link
  3. to use a notion of thing http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29 as an initial definition to allow definitions of other concepts link
Topics
  1. Admin

    The last minutes were accepted; actions-10 is now closed and action-11 is carried over. The vote that occurred during the week was noted. All are again encouraged to sign up to be scribes for future meetings.

  2. Connection TF Plan to F2F1

    Timetable was was discussed. Everyone is invited to create a documentation of some group that might be a connection by using the DCMI example and adjusts it if needed. A catalog of relevant initiatives will be collated for F2F1.

  3. Implementation and Test Cases TF Plan to F2F1

    It is proposed that potential applications (within or outside the WG) that may implement the standard are identified. Template needs to be finalized. Members are invited to contribute information to the wiki.

  4. PAQ TF Plan to F2F1

    Some proposals have already been submitted to the wiki. Further contributions are welcome. WG members are invited to review and comment on the proposals, by email or on the wiki.

  5. Model TF Plan to F2F1

    Curation is to start week commencing 22nd. WG members are invited to submit their definitions and comments on definitions.

  6. Model Task Force

    Consensus was reached on two proposals: a) Process executions start in the past, b) Initial definitions for the concept "Thing" and the relation "Invariant View or Perspective of". It was agreed that decisions are not final, but are a way to move forward to allows us to define other core concepts of the provenance interchange language.

<luc>GUEST: Ralph (ralphtq) Hodgson
14:50:17 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-prov-irc

14:50:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

14:50:22 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be

14:50:22 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot

14:50:23 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
14:50:23 <trackbot> Date: 16 June 2011
14:50:27 <Luc> Zakim, this will be PROV

Luc Moreau: Zakim, this will be PROV

14:50:28 <Zakim> ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, Luc; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes

14:50:50 <Luc> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.16
14:51:02 <Luc> Chair: Luc Moreau
14:51:24 <Luc> Regrets: Paolo Missier, Kai Eckert, Graham Klyne, Helena Deus
14:51:30 <Luc> rrsagent, make logs public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, make logs public

14:51:30 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

14:51:36 <Luc> scribe: dgarijo

(Scribe set to Daniel Garijo)

14:51:37 <Zakim> +??P34

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P34

14:51:48 <pgroth> Zakim, +??P34 is me

Paul Groth: Zakim, +??P34 is me

14:51:48 <Zakim> sorry, pgroth, I do not recognize a party named '+??P34'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, pgroth, I do not recognize a party named '+??P34'

14:51:58 <pgroth> Zakim, ??P34 is me

Paul Groth: Zakim, ??P34 is me

14:51:58 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it

14:52:40 <Zakim> + +44.238.059.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.238.059.aaaa

14:52:50 <Luc> zakim, aaaa is me

Luc Moreau: zakim, aaaa is me

14:52:50 <Zakim> +Luc; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc; got it

14:53:00 <Luc> zakim, who is here?

Luc Moreau: zakim, who is here?

14:53:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see pgroth, Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see pgroth, Luc

14:53:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see dgarijo, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, pgroth, edsu, sandro, trackbot, stain

Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see dgarijo, Zakim, RRSAgent, Luc, pgroth, edsu, sandro, trackbot, stain

14:54:19 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

14:54:35 <Luc> Topic: Admin

1. Admin

Summary: The last minutes were accepted; actions-10 is now closed and action-11 is carried over. The vote that occurred during the week was noted. All are again encouraged to sign up to be scribes for future meetings.

<luc>Summary: The last minutes were accepted; actions-10 is now closed and action-11 is carried over.  The vote that occurred during the week was noted. All are again encouraged to sign up to be scribes for future meetings.
14:54:56 <dgarijo> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Zakim, [IPcaller] is me

14:54:56 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it

14:56:38 <Zakim> +??P38

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P38

14:56:48 <stain> Zakim, ???P38 is me

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ???P38 is me

14:56:48 <Zakim> sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named '???P38'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named '???P38'

14:56:54 <stain> Zakim, ?P38 is me

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Zakim, ?P38 is me

14:56:54 <Zakim> sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named '?P38'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, stain, I do not recognize a party named '?P38'

14:57:06 <stain> Zakim: +??P38 is me
14:57:06 <Zakim> +??P39

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P39

14:57:14 <smiles> zakim, ??P39 is me

Simon Miles: zakim, ??P39 is me

14:57:14 <Zakim> +smiles; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +smiles; got it

14:57:28 <Zakim> +??P40

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P40

14:57:30 <Zakim> +??P41

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P41

14:58:23 <Zakim> -??P41

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P41

14:58:26 <dgarijo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.16

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.16

14:58:34 <Zakim> +??P41

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P41

14:58:36 <dgarijo> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2011.06.16
14:58:44 <jorn> Zakim: ??p41 is me
14:58:45 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aabb

14:58:51 <jorn> Zakim, ??p41 is me

Jörn Hees: Zakim, ??p41 is me

14:58:52 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

14:59:03 <tlebo> zakim, aabb is me

Timothy Lebo: zakim, aabb is me

14:59:04 <Zakim> +tlebo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo; got it

14:59:25 <jorn> zakim, who is noisy?

Jörn Hees: zakim, who is noisy?

14:59:36 <Zakim> jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (14%)

Zakim IRC Bot: jorn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Luc (14%)

15:00:00 <stain> (SIP on Android actually working)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: (SIP on Android actually working)

15:00:19 <Zakim> + +1.509.554.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.509.554.aacc

15:01:00 <Zakim> + +1.518.633.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.633.aadd

15:01:34 <Zakim> + +1.216.368.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.216.368.aaee

15:01:37 <ilkayaltintas> i'm calling via Skype so I don't know what my area code is

Ilkay Altintas: i'm calling via Skype so I don't know what my area code is

15:02:03 <Zakim> + +329331aaff

Zakim IRC Bot: + +329331aaff

15:02:13 <dgarijo> Luc: Welcome and review the tf drafts

Luc Moreau: Welcome and review the tf drafts

15:02:20 <Luc>    http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-09

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2011-06-09

15:02:37 <dgarijo> ... accept the minutes of last week's telecon

... accept the minutes of last week's telecon

15:02:41 <ericstephan> +1

Eric Stephan: +1

15:02:42 <dgarijo> dgarijo: +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

15:02:43 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

15:02:43 <SamCoppens> Zakim, +329331aaff is me

Sam Coppens: Zakim, +329331aaff is me

15:02:47 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1

15:02:48 <jun> +1

Jun Zhao: +1

15:02:48 <satya> Luc: Accept the minutes for last telcon

Luc Moreau: Accept the minutes for last telcon [ Scribe Assist by Satya Sahoo ]

15:02:49 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

15:02:49 <olaf> +1

Olaf Hartig: +1

15:02:51 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1

15:02:52 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1

15:02:53 <ilkayaltintas> +1

Ilkay Altintas: +1

15:02:55 <Zakim> + +49.302.093.aagg

Zakim IRC Bot: + +49.302.093.aagg

15:03:09 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

15:03:13 <olaf> zakim, aagg is me

Olaf Hartig: zakim, aagg is me

15:03:17 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SamCoppens; got it

15:03:21 <jun> zakim, IPcaller is me

Jun Zhao: zakim, IPcaller is me

15:03:21 <Luc> ACCEPTED: minutes of last week's teleconference

RESOLVED: minutes of last week's teleconference

15:03:29 <jorn> +1

Jörn Hees: +1

15:03:35 <jun> zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Jun Zhao: zakim, [IPcaller] is me

15:03:35 <Zakim> +??P29

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P29

15:03:41 <Luc> A process execution has a duration, i.e. it spans a time interval. Statements denoting this duration are optional.

Luc Moreau: A process execution has a duration, i.e. it spans a time interval. Statements denoting this duration are optional.

15:03:48 <dgarijo> Luc: record the votes that took place during the week

Luc Moreau: record the votes that took place during the week

15:03:52 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0244.html

Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2011Jun/0244.html

15:03:54 <stain> I didn't vote as I was not here last week - but neither was ilkayaltintas :)

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I didn't vote as I was not here last week - but neither was ilkayaltintas :)

15:03:57 <Zakim> +??P24

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P24

15:03:57 <dgarijo> ... on the mailing list

... on the mailing list

15:04:01 <Zakim> +olaf; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +olaf; got it

15:04:13 <Zakim> +jun; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jun; got it

15:04:22 <dgarijo> ... review actions

... review actions

15:04:27 <Zakim> sorry, jun, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, jun, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'

15:04:47 <Zakim> + +1.518.276.aahh

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.518.276.aahh

15:04:49 <dgarijo> ... 2 actions for the coordinators of tf

... 2 actions for the coordinators of tf

15:05:01 <dgarijo> Luc: were completed during the week

Luc Moreau: were completed during the week

15:05:03 <Zakim> -??P24

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P24

15:05:11 <jcheney> zakim, ??P24 is me

James Cheney: zakim, ??P24 is me

15:05:25 <dgarijo> Luc: the last item is that we are still need scribe volunteers

Luc Moreau: the last item is that we are still need scribe volunteers

15:05:26 <Zakim> +??P7

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P7

<luc>TOPIC: Connection TF Plan to F2F1

2. Connection TF Plan to F2F1

Summary: Timetable was was discussed. Everyone is invited to create a documentation of some group that might be a connection by using the DCMI example and adjusts it if needed. A catalog of relevant initiatives will be collated for F2F1.

<luc>Summary: Timetable was was discussed. Everyone is invited to create a documentation of some group that might be a connection by using the DCMI example and adjusts it if needed. A catalog of relevant initiatives will be collated for F2F1.
15:05:36 <dgarijo> Luc: Connection Task Force

Luc Moreau: Connection Task Force

15:05:38 <khalidbelhajjame> zakim, ??P7 is really me

Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, ??P7 is really me

15:05:42 <Zakim> +??P9

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P9

15:05:53 <Zakim> I already had ??P24 as ??P24, jcheney

Zakim IRC Bot: I already had ??P24 as ??P24, jcheney

15:06:04 <dgarijo> ericstephan: update on the Connection TF & time table

Eric Stephan: update on the Connection TF & time table

15:06:23 <Zakim> +khalidbelhajjame; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +khalidbelhajjame; got it

15:06:24 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Connection_Proposal

Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Connection_Proposal

15:06:30 <dgarijo> ericstephan: meeting yesterday

Eric Stephan: meeting yesterday

15:06:35 <Zakim> + +1.540.449.aaii

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.540.449.aaii

15:06:41 <dgarijo> ... developed a timetible

... developed a timetible

15:06:58 <Zakim> +[LC]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[LC]

15:07:01 <dgarijo> ... for the next 2 weeks we are going to gather info about ppossible connections

... for the next 2 weeks we are going to gather info about ppossible connections

15:07:05 <edsu> zakim, LC is edsu

Ed Summers: zakim, LC is edsu

15:07:17 <dgarijo> ... using the template provided by kai

... using the template provided by kai

15:07:17 <Yogesh> zakim, +1.540 is me

Yogesh Simmhan: zakim, +1.540 is me

15:07:24 <Zakim> +Yolanda

Zakim IRC Bot: +Yolanda

15:07:42 <dgarijo> ... search possible "clients" to use the PIL

... search possible "clients" to use the PIL

15:07:51 <Zakim> +edsu; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +edsu; got it

15:08:04 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:08:05 <dgarijo> Luc: have you identified contributors

Luc Moreau: have you identified contributors

15:08:09 <dgarijo> ... ?

... ?

15:08:10 <Zakim> +Yogesh; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Yogesh; got it

15:08:20 <dgarijo> ... have you an online template already?

... have you an online template already?

15:08:48 <dgarijo> ericstephan: if anybody has one possible connection please contact the connection task force

Eric Stephan: if anybody has one possible connection please contact the connection task force

15:08:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:08:52 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:08:55 <Zakim> + +1.915.603.aajj

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.915.603.aajj

15:08:58 <dgarijo> +q

+q

15:09:00 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

15:09:05 <Zakim> +??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P13

15:09:06 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:09:11 <Zakim> +??P10

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10

15:09:14 <dgarijo> pgroth: there is a template on the proposal page

Paul Groth: there is a template on the proposal page

15:09:16 <pgroth> q-

Paul Groth: q-

15:09:21 <YolandaGil> q?

Yolanda Gil: q?

15:09:27 <Luc> ack dgarijo

Luc Moreau: ack dgarijo

15:09:30 <dgarijo> q-

q-

15:09:30 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:10:09 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:10:24 <jorn> note irc being very laggy atm

Jörn Hees: note irc being very laggy atm

15:10:26 <dgarijo> YolandaGil: just wondering where to put the contributions?

Yolanda Gil: just wondering where to put the contributions?

15:10:47 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:10:57 <dgarijo> ericstephan: want to do a catalogue with one page per possible connection

Eric Stephan: want to do a catalogue with one page per possible connection

15:11:00 <pgroth> q-

Paul Groth: q-

15:11:06 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:11:12 <dgarijo> Luc: add the entrypoints to the page, so anyone can contribute

Luc Moreau: add the entrypoints to the page, so anyone can contribute

15:11:58 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:12:09 <dgarijo> ... as a wg, we want to see how our model relates to other initievives (DC, etc). Are we going to start that work?

... as a wg, we want to see how our model relates to other initievives (DC, etc). Are we going to start that work?

15:12:43 <dgarijo> ericstephan: the model is evolving right now, so for now  we will focus on possible collaborators

Eric Stephan: the model is evolving right now, so for now we will focus on possible collaborators

15:13:44 <dgarijo> Luc: that work would tell us which properties should the PIL tackle too

Luc Moreau: that work would tell us which properties should the PIL tackle too

15:13:59 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

15:14:16 <Zakim> +??P41

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P41

15:14:23 <dgarijo> ericstephan: yes, we'll be sensitive to that

Eric Stephan: yes, we'll be sensitive to that

15:14:23 <jorn> zakim, ??p41 is me

Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p41 is me

15:14:23 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

15:14:30 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:14:44 <dgarijo> ... to the needs of other communities

... to the needs of other communities

15:15:05 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:15:15 <dgarijo> Luc: it doesn't have to be a detailed analysis

Luc Moreau: it doesn't have to be a detailed analysis

15:15:22 <Luc> ack pgroth

Luc Moreau: ack pgroth

15:15:46 <dgarijo> pgroth: in the template there are already fields in the line of work proposed by Luc

Paul Groth: in the template there are already fields in the line of work proposed by Luc

15:16:23 <dgarijo> ericstephan: Kai has already tracked that

Eric Stephan: Kai has already tracked that

15:16:48 <dgarijo> Luc: who is going to contribute to what?

Luc Moreau: who is going to contribute to what?

15:17:22 <dgarijo> ericstephan: 5 people contributing to the call yesterday, with different ideas/areas/interests

Eric Stephan: 5 people contributing to the call yesterday, with different ideas/areas/interests

15:17:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:18:12 <Zakim> +??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P1

15:18:14 <dgarijo> ... if anyone is interested, you don't have to belong to the tf to participate or provide pointers

... if anyone is interested, you don't have to belong to the tf to participate or provide pointers

<luc>TOPIC: Implementation and Test Cases TF Plan to F2F1

3. Implementation and Test Cases TF Plan to F2F1

Summary: It is proposed that potential applications (within or outside the WG) that may implement the standard are identified. Template needs to be finalized. Members are invited to contribute information to the wiki.

15:18:35 <dgarijo> Luc: Implementation & test cases Task Force

Luc Moreau: Implementation & test cases Task Force

<luc>Summary: It is proposed that potential applications (within or outside the WG) that may implement the standard are identified. Template needs to be finalized. Members are invited to contribute information to the wiki.
15:18:42 <dgarijo> Luc: what is the situation?

Luc Moreau: what is the situation?

15:19:10 <dgarijo> zednik: yet to have a call.

Stephan Zednik: yet to have a call.

15:19:29 <dgarijo> ... to focus the direction/test cases / requirements

... to focus the direction/test cases / requirements

15:19:58 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:20:04 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:20:07 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:20:10 <Luc> ack pgroth

Luc Moreau: ack pgroth

15:20:13 <ericstephan> +q

Eric Stephan: +q

15:21:43 <dgarijo> pgroth: be able to identify provenance systems that already use provenance.

Paul Groth: be able to identify provenance systems that already use provenance.

15:22:10 <dgarijo> pgroth: Implementor: somebody that would include our model in the system

Paul Groth: Implementor: somebody that would include our model in the system

15:22:12 <Luc> ack ericstephan

Luc Moreau: ack ericstephan

15:22:20 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

15:22:21 <dgarijo> zednik: aka user

Stephan Zednik: aka user

15:22:52 <dgarijo> ericstephan: some of the work of the connection tf is connected to the use cases

Eric Stephan: some of the work of the connection tf is connected to the use cases

15:23:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:23:26 <dgarijo> ... maybe it is useful to detect potential clients

... maybe it is useful to detect potential clients

15:24:11 <dgarijo> zednik: we can do this, but it is not a big task.

Stephan Zednik: we can do this, but it is not a big task.

15:24:17 <dgarijo> Luc: it would be useful info to gather

Luc Moreau: it would be useful info to gather

15:24:49 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:24:50 <dgarijo> zednik: create a list of user who would be able to oncorpore the spec

Stephan Zednik: create a list of user who would be able to oncorpore the spec

15:25:32 <dgarijo> Luc: there is a bit of overlap between tf, but it is not necessarily a concern

Luc Moreau: there is a bit of overlap between tf, but it is not necessarily a concern

15:25:37 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:26:07 <dgarijo> Luc: next Item. Provenance access & query TF

Luc Moreau: next Item. Provenance access & query TF

15:26:12 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:26:21 <Luc> TOPIC: PAQ TF Plan to F2F1

4. PAQ TF Plan to F2F1

Summary: Some proposals have already been submitted to the wiki. Further contributions are welcome. WG members are invited to review and comment on the proposals, by email or on the wiki.

<luc>Summary: Some proposals  have already been submitted to the wiki. Further contributions are welcome. WG members are invited to review and comment on the proposals, by email or on the wiki.
15:26:31 <dgarijo> smiles: no comments about the template

Simon Miles: no comments about the template

15:26:48 <dgarijo> ... GK and Luc have added some proposals to the TF

... GK and Luc have added some proposals to the TF

15:26:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:26:58 <dgarijo> ... we need comments for the proposals

... we need comments for the proposals

15:27:24 <dgarijo> ... are they clear/not clear? please comment on them

... are they clear/not clear? please comment on them

15:27:26 <Zakim> -??P38

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P38

15:27:37 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:27:56 <dgarijo> ... send comments also to the mailing list

... send comments also to the mailing list

15:27:56 <Yogesh> q+

Yogesh Simmhan: q+

15:27:58 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:28:06 <Zakim> +??P8

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8

15:28:14 <stain> Zakim: +??P8 is me
15:28:15 <pgroth> yogesh?

Paul Groth: yogesh?

15:28:21 <Luc> ack yogesh

Luc Moreau: ack yogesh

15:28:43 <jun> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Access_and_Query_Proposal

Jun Zhao: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Access_and_Query_Proposal

15:28:47 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:29:30 <dgarijo> Luc: wiki or on the mailing list?

Luc Moreau: wiki or on the mailing list?

15:29:31 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

15:29:44 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

15:29:59 <pgroth> q-

Paul Groth: q-

15:30:14 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:30:20 <dgarijo> smiles: wiki, but no objections to mailing list

Simon Miles: wiki, but no objections to mailing list

15:30:25 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:31:03 <Luc> TOPIC: Model TF Plan to F2F1

5. Model TF Plan to F2F1

Summary: Curation is to start week commencing 22nd. WG members are invited to submit their definitions and comments on definitions.

<luc>Summary: Curation is to start week commencing 22nd.  WG members are invited to submit their definitions and comments on definitions.
15:31:04 <dgarijo> Luc: everybody can comment even if it is not on your tf

Luc Moreau: everybody can comment even if it is not on your tf

15:31:11 <dgarijo> Luc: Model TF

Luc Moreau: Model TF

15:31:19 <jun> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Model_Proposal

Jun Zhao: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F1_Model_Proposal

15:32:16 <dgarijo> satya: there were discussions on the mailing list

Satya Sahoo: there were discussions on the mailing list

15:32:19 <Zakim> +??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21

15:32:24 <dgarijo> ... people can comment on the wiki pages

... people can comment on the wiki pages

15:32:32 <jorn> zakim, ??p21 is me

Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p21 is me

15:32:32 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

15:32:37 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:32:42 <dgarijo> ... or send an email to the mailing list

... or send an email to the mailing list

15:33:41 <dgarijo> Luc: the curation process. It would be nice to have some comments as to why we are not adopting a definition. Is something you are planning to do?

Luc Moreau: the curation process. It would be nice to have some comments as to why we are not adopting a definition. Is something you are planning to do?

15:34:48 <dgarijo> khalid: group concepts that people have agreed on

Khalid Belhajjame: group concepts that people have agreed on

15:35:12 <Zakim> +??P60

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P60

15:35:19 <dgarijo> satya: for the f2f try to constraint the journalist example & the concepts that model the example

Satya Sahoo: for the f2f try to constraint the journalist example & the concepts that model the example

15:35:25 <stain> Zakim: +??P60 is me
15:36:18 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

15:36:37 <dgarijo> Luc: khalid proposed a definition of derivation. It would be useful to add comments why this def has been revised in terms of IVPT

Luc Moreau: khalid proposed a definition of derivation. It would be useful to add comments why this def has been revised in terms of IVPT

15:36:46 <dgarijo> pgroth: Jun's definition of derivation is a good model for tracking the updates of definitions

Paul Groth: Jun's definition of derivation is a good model for tracking the updates of definitions

15:36:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:36:55 <khalidbelhajjame> Ok,

Khalid Belhajjame: Ok,

15:37:02 <dgarijo> Luc: where to put these comments is up to you :)

Luc Moreau: where to put these comments is up to you :)

15:37:05 <Luc> ack pgroth

Luc Moreau: ack pgroth

15:37:19 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:38:00 <pgroth> +1 yes thank you coordinators

Paul Groth: +1 yes thank you coordinators

15:38:00 <Luc> TOPIC: Model Task Force

6. Model Task Force

Summary: Consensus was reached on two proposals: a) Process executions start in the past, b) Initial definitions for the concept "Thing" and the relation "Invariant View or Perspective of". It was agreed that decisions are not final, but are a way to move forward to allows us to define other core concepts of the provenance interchange language.

<luc> Summary: Consensus was reached on two proposals: a) Process executions start in the past, b)   Initial definitions for the concept "Thing" and the relation "Invariant View or Perspective of".  It was agreed that decisions are not final, but are a way to move forward to allows us to define other core concepts of the provenance interchange language.
15:38:33 <dgarijo> Luc: properties to gather consensus

Luc Moreau: properties to gather consensus

15:38:45 <Luc> A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past.

Luc Moreau: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past.

15:38:47 <dgarijo> Luc: paul sent a proposal to vote

Luc Moreau: paul sent a proposal to vote

15:39:29 <dgarijo> Luc: it would be nice to reach consensus here

Luc Moreau: it would be nice to reach consensus here

15:39:58 <dgarijo> Luc: suggestion by Simon to add additional info to the definition

Luc Moreau: suggestion by Simon to add additional info to the definition

15:40:33 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:41:00 <Luc> A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the position of any assertion made about it.

Luc Moreau: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the position of any assertion made about it.

15:41:21 <jcheney> q+

James Cheney: q+

15:41:25 <dgarijo> Luc: should it be rephrased?

Luc Moreau: should it be rephrased?

15:41:28 <Luc> ack jcheney

Luc Moreau: ack jcheney

15:41:32 <Zakim> + +1.650.386.aakk

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.650.386.aakk

15:42:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:42:05 <dgarijo> jcheney: if we approve this now is it going to be definitive or just agreeing on terminology as a starting point

James Cheney: if we approve this now is it going to be definitive or just agreeing on terminology as a starting point

15:42:07 <dgarijo> ... ?

... ?

15:42:10 <pgroth> q+ to respond to that

Paul Groth: q+ to respond to that

15:42:16 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:42:19 <dgarijo> ... maybe it will contraint us later

... maybe it will contraint us later

15:42:40 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:42:44 <Luc> ack pgroth

Luc Moreau: ack pgroth

15:42:44 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to respond to that

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to respond to that

15:43:06 <Christine> +q

Christine Runnegar: +q

15:43:22 <jcheney> q-

James Cheney: q-

15:43:27 <dgarijo> pgroth: to get a set of terminology to agree in the beggining. Doesn't mean that we can't change it later, but just to understand us right now

Paul Groth: to get a set of terminology to agree in the beggining. Doesn't mean that we can't change it later, but just to understand us right now

15:43:32 <dgarijo> Luc: agrees

Luc Moreau: agrees

15:43:48 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

15:43:57 <Luc> ack Christine

Luc Moreau: ack Christine

15:44:15 <Christine> -q

Christine Runnegar: -q

15:44:16 <YolandaGil> Why don't you make these plans explicit, ie, say somewhere when will you allow a cycle of revisions to the model

Yolanda Gil: Why don't you make these plans explicit, ie, say somewhere when will you allow a cycle of revisions to the model

15:44:21 <Christine> q-

Christine Runnegar: q-

15:44:24 <dgarijo> Christine: might be more useful to separate process execution in the past from the one is now occurring

Christine Runnegar: might be more useful to separate process execution in the past from the one is now occurring

15:44:27 <dgarijo> Luc: why?

Luc Moreau: why?

15:44:38 <pgroth> Yolanda, good point

Paul Groth: Yolanda, good point

15:44:54 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:44:54 <dgarijo> Christine: it would make it easier to understand by the community.

Christine Runnegar: it would make it easier to understand by the community.

15:45:13 <Luc> ack Christine

Luc Moreau: ack Christine

15:45:43 <dgarijo> introduction of Ralph Hodgson a future new memeber for the group.

introduction of Ralph Hodgson a future new memeber for the group.

15:45:46 <pgroth> welcome, ralph

Paul Groth: welcome, ralph

15:46:03 <dgarijo> has not joined yet

has not joined yet

15:46:15 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:46:34 <pgroth> absolutely

Paul Groth: absolutely

15:46:46 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya

15:46:53 <satya> ...from the time instant any assertion is made about it

Satya Sahoo: ...from the time instant any assertion is made about it

15:47:03 <dgarijo> satya: small modification to de definition

Satya Sahoo: small modification to de definition

15:47:16 <dgarijo> ... simon's definition

... simon's definition

15:47:43 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:47:46 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

15:47:49 <dgarijo> Luc: anyone has any problems with that?

Luc Moreau: anyone has any problems with that?

15:47:55 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:48:02 <Zakim> +??P21

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P21

15:48:08 <jorn> zakim, ??p21 is me

Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p21 is me

15:48:08 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

15:48:36 <jorn> zakim, aakk is maybe ralphtq

Jörn Hees: zakim, aakk is maybe ralphtq

15:48:36 <Zakim> I don't understand 'aakk is maybe ralphtq', jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'aakk is maybe ralphtq', jorn

15:48:44 <dgarijo> satya: time dimension is always involved

Satya Sahoo: time dimension is always involved

15:48:50 <jorn> zakim, aakk maybe is ralphtq

Jörn Hees: zakim, aakk maybe is ralphtq

15:48:50 <Zakim> I don't understand 'aakk maybe is ralphtq', jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'aakk maybe is ralphtq', jorn

15:49:00 <smiles> A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it.

Simon Miles: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it.

15:49:10 <dgarijo> smiles: posts a suggestion to the definition

Simon Miles: posts a suggestion to the definition

15:49:27 <stain> what is 'the past' ?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: what is 'the past' ?

15:49:44 <Luc> PROPOSED: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it.

PROPOSED: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it.

15:49:44 <ralphtq> I am the person that asked about joining the call

Ralph Hodgson: I am the person that asked about joining the call

15:49:57 <ralphtq> my email is rhodgson@topquadrant.com

Ralph Hodgson: my email is rhodgson@topquadrant.com

15:49:57 <dgarijo> Luc: vote on this proposal

Luc Moreau: vote on this proposal

15:49:58 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1

15:50:02 <jun> +1

Jun Zhao: +1

15:50:03 <jorn> +1

Jörn Hees: +1

15:50:04 <khalidbelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

15:50:04 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1

15:50:04 <dgarijo> dgarijo: +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

15:50:05 <stain> 0

Stian Soiland-Reyes: 0

15:50:05 <jcheney> +1

James Cheney: +1

15:50:07 <olaf> +1

Olaf Hartig: +1

15:50:09 <Yogesh> +1

Yogesh Simmhan: +1

15:50:10 <dcorsar> +1

David Corsar: +1

15:50:11 <smiles> +1 (though probably could still be phrased better)

Simon Miles: +1 (though probably could still be phrased better)

15:50:13 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

15:50:14 <Edoardo> +1

Edoardo Pignotti: +1

15:50:17 <ilkayaltintas> +1

Ilkay Altintas: +1

15:50:18 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1

15:50:18 <tfrancart> 0

Thomas Francart: 0

15:50:27 <JimM> +1  - provenance is past tense

James Myers: +1 - provenance is past tense

15:50:32 <YolandaGil> +1

Yolanda Gil: +1

15:50:39 <Christine> Christine: not voting (the definition would benefit from some rephrasing for clarity)

Christine Runnegar: not voting (the definition would benefit from some rephrasing for clarity) [ Scribe Assist by Christine Runnegar ]

15:50:39 <jorn> zakim, aakk may be ralphtq

Jörn Hees: zakim, aakk may be ralphtq

15:50:39 <Zakim> +ralphtq?; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +ralphtq?; got it

15:50:48 <Luc> ACCEPTED: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it.

RESOLVED: A process execution has either completed (occurred in the past) or is occurring in present (partially complete). In other words, the start of a process execution is always in the past, from the instant referred to by any assertion made about it.

15:50:56 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:51:22 <dgarijo> Luc: discussion on resources and IVPT

Luc Moreau: discussion on resources and IVPT

15:51:37 <Luc>  1. We began definitions using resources, but were not progressing, because there is no universal definition of resource, and challenge with dealing with stateful resources 2. Two weeks ago, we decided to separate web architecture discussions from model discussions 3. We recognized that from a provenance viewpoint, we needed something that was stable/invariant/immutable, though we recognized that absolute immutability didn't really exist.  Hence, we introduced the

Luc Moreau: 1. We began definitions using resources, but were not progressing, because there is no universal definition of resource, and challenge with dealing with stateful resources 2. Two weeks ago, we decided to separate web architecture discussions from model discussions 3. We recognized that from a provenance viewpoint, we needed something that was stable/invariant/immutable, though we recognized that absolute immutability didn't really exist. Hence, we introduced the

15:51:44 <dgarijo> ... would like to paste a small summary of the discussions from the mailing list

... would like to paste a small summary of the discussions from the mailing list

15:52:16 <dgarijo> ... 1 duscussion on resources, but got stuck

... 1 duscussion on resources, but got stuck

15:52:42 <ralphtq> my work is on the web as VOAG - Vocabulary of Attribution and Governance (this currently includes some Provenance concepts) - see http://www.linkedmodels.org/doc/voag/1.0

Ralph Hodgson: my work is on the web as VOAG - Vocabulary of Attribution and Governance (this currently includes some Provenance concepts) - see http://www.linkedmodels.org/doc/voag/1.0

15:52:42 <dgarijo> ... there is no universal agreement on resource, and the state of the resources.

... there is no universal agreement on resource, and the state of the resources.

15:52:56 <dgarijo> ... then we separated the discussions

... then we separated the discussions

15:53:06 <dgarijo> ... arch/model

... arch/model

15:53:14 <Luc> 3. We recognized that from a provenance viewpoint, we needed something that was stable/invariant/immutable, though we recognized that absolute immutability didn't really exist.  Hence, we introduced the idea of "Invariant View or Perspective on Thing" (IVPT)

Luc Moreau: 3. We recognized that from a provenance viewpoint, we needed something that was stable/invariant/immutable, though we recognized that absolute immutability didn't really exist. Hence, we introduced the idea of "Invariant View or Perspective on Thing" (IVPT)

15:53:39 <dgarijo> ... we recognised that we needed to have something immutable to assert provenance

... we recognised that we needed to have something immutable to assert provenance

15:53:46 <ralphtq> I finish my introduction with this link to my web page - I am the second person listed - http://www.topquadrant.com/company/mgmt.html

Ralph Hodgson: I finish my introduction with this link to my web page - I am the second person listed - http://www.topquadrant.com/company/mgmt.html

15:53:54 <Luc> 4. Last WE's discussions between Jim and I were about whether IVPT was a type on its own, distinct from other things

Luc Moreau: 4. Last WE's discussions between Jim and I were about whether IVPT was a type on its own, distinct from other things

15:54:16 <dgarijo> ... idea of IVPT. Generation in terms of IVPT

... idea of IVPT. Generation in terms of IVPT

15:54:43 <dgarijo> ... IVPT as a new concept, different than anything that we had

... IVPT as a new concept, different than anything that we had

15:54:51 <Luc> 5. I was convinced  by Jim's argument that there is only a concept of "thing" with properties that are stable with respect to other things.  So IVPT is not a separate type, but a relationship between types.

Luc Moreau: 5. I was convinced by Jim's argument that there is only a concept of "thing" with properties that are stable with respect to other things. So IVPT is not a separate type, but a relationship between types.

15:55:15 <Luc> but a relationship between things.

Luc Moreau: but a relationship between things.

15:55:22 <dgarijo> ... So IVPT is not a separate type, but a relationship between things

... So IVPT is not a separate type, but a relationship between things

15:55:22 <Luc> 6. We came up with the definition http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29

Luc Moreau: 6. We came up with the definition http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29

15:55:47 <dgarijo> ... have a Luc at this definition and provide feedback

... have alookat this definition and provide feedback

15:56:08 <dgarijo> s/ Luc /look
15:56:30 <dgarijo> Luc: it is my perspective

Luc Moreau: it is my perspective

15:56:49 <Christine> What do you mean by "identity" in this context?

Christine Runnegar: What do you mean by "identity" in this context?

15:57:13 <dgarijo> ... using invariant properties and mutable properties

... using invariant properties and mutable properties

15:57:22 <dgarijo> ... first definition of thing

... first definition of thing

15:57:49 <dgarijo> ... relationship between things

... relationship between things

15:57:51 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:57:56 <ralphtq> I raise my hand to speak about SBFI and distinctions between Perspective, Viewpoint and Aspect

Ralph Hodgson: I raise my hand to speak about SBFI and distinctions between Perspective, Viewpoint and Aspect

15:57:57 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

15:57:57 <dgarijo> ... a thing can be invariant from another

... a thing can be invariant from another

15:57:58 <pgroth> christine

Paul Groth: christine

15:57:59 <Christine> q+

Christine Runnegar: q+

15:58:19 <dgarijo> Christine: whta is identity in this context?

Christine Runnegar: what is identity in this context?

15:58:30 <jorn> s/whta/what
15:58:35 <jorn> s/whta/what/
15:58:42 <dgarijo> Luc: to me, it's the ability to distinguish 2 entities

Luc Moreau: to me, it's the ability to distinguish 2 entities

15:58:45 <Zakim> -Yolanda

Zakim IRC Bot: -Yolanda

15:59:11 <ralphtq> SBFI stands for Structure, Behavior, Function adn Interface/Interaction - dimensions that characterize a system + BDI - Beliefs, Desires and Intentions

Ralph Hodgson: SBFI stands for Structure, Behavior, Function adn Interface/Interaction - dimensions that characterize a system + BDI - Beliefs, Desires and Intentions

15:59:21 <dgarijo> Christine: identity is diferent from identification

Christine Runnegar: identity is diferent from identification

15:59:25 <Luc> he collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing is definitively recognizable or known:

Luc Moreau: he collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing is definitively recognizable or known:

16:00:01 <ralphtq> DOCLE ontology defines endurants and perdurants - are you wanting to be that deep about the nature of the world?

Ralph Hodgson: DOCLE ontology defines endurants and perdurants - are you wanting to be that deep about the nature of the world?

16:00:03 <dgarijo> Luc: identity: the collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing is definitively recognizable or known

Luc Moreau: identity: the collective aspect of the set of characteristics by which a thing is definitively recognizable or known

16:00:05 <ralphtq> DOLCE

Ralph Hodgson: DOLCE

16:00:16 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:00:20 <pgroth> +q

Paul Groth: +q

16:00:20 <Christine> q-

Christine Runnegar: q-

16:00:27 <Luc> ack pgroth

Luc Moreau: ack pgroth

16:01:00 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:01:06 <satya> @Christine: Can we limit the scope of the definition to the journalism example for now?

Satya Sahoo: @Christine: Can we limit the scope of the definition to the journalism example for now?

16:01:11 <dgarijo> pgroth: reasonable, but concerned that it might be to deepas a definitio.

Paul Groth: reasonable, but concerned that it might be to deepas a definitio.

16:01:23 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:01:27 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:01:36 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:01:38 <ralphtq> q+

Ralph Hodgson: q+

16:01:43 <JimM> q+

James Myers: q+

16:01:54 <Christine> Paul, understand the need to reach consensus on language for definition

Christine Runnegar: Paul, understand the need to reach consensus on language for definition

16:02:01 <dgarijo> Luc: not trying to get a final def today

Luc Moreau: not trying to get a final def today

16:02:35 <dgarijo> Luc: but process exectution, generation, etc will refer to thing

Luc Moreau: but process exectution, generation, etc will refer to thing

16:02:46 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:02:47 <satya> q+

Satya Sahoo: q+

16:02:50 <Christine> Perhaps we just need to briefly explain "identity" as it is used here

Christine Runnegar: Perhaps we just need to briefly explain "identity" as it is used here

16:02:55 <Luc> ack ralphtq

Luc Moreau: ack ralphtq

16:02:58 <dgarijo> ... we should get agreement asap, but not necessarily today

... we should get agreement asap, but not necessarily today

16:03:29 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:03:30 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

16:03:47 <Zakim> +??P0

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0

16:03:48 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:04:04 <jorn> zakim, ??p0 is me

Jörn Hees: zakim, ??p0 is me

16:04:04 <Zakim> +jorn; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +jorn; got it

16:04:27 <dgarijo> ralph: entity/thing. The DOLCE ontology has concepts to model some of the concepts endurants/perdurants

Ralph Hodgson: entity/thing. The DOLCE ontology has concepts to model some of the concepts endurants/perdurants

16:04:45 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:05:01 <dgarijo> ... viewpoints helps with the notion of identity

... viewpoints helps with the notion of identity

16:05:09 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:05:19 <dgarijo> ... because it is driven by context.

... because it is driven by context.

16:05:41 <satya> @ralph: Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) has similar concepts called continuants/occurrent

Satya Sahoo: @ralph: Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) has similar concepts called continuants/occurrent

16:05:42 <dgarijo> ... desires to have a lightweight notion for provenance

... desires to have a lightweight notion for provenance

16:05:59 <pgroth> thanks ralph

Paul Groth: thanks ralph

16:06:12 <Luc> ack JimM

Luc Moreau: ack JimM

16:07:03 <dgarijo> JimM: we have the use cases and we are looking for the lightweight notion to cover the user cases.

James Myers: we have the use cases and we are looking for the lightweight notion to cover the user cases.

16:07:11 <Zakim> -pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth

16:07:16 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

16:07:27 <Zakim> -jorn

Zakim IRC Bot: -jorn

16:07:43 <satya> q-

Satya Sahoo: q-

16:08:07 <dgarijo> JimM: been trying to put consitent defs of all the concepts.

James Myers: been trying to put consitent defs of all the concepts.

16:08:18 <JimM> q-

James Myers: q-

16:08:36 <Luc> ack satya

Luc Moreau: ack satya

16:08:43 <dgarijo> satya: +1 to a lightweight notion to cover the use cases

Satya Sahoo: +1 to a lightweight notion to cover the use cases

16:08:53 <dgarijo> (+1 to that too)

(+1 to that too)

16:09:16 <Luc> Proposed: to use a notion of thing http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29  as an initial definition to allow definitions of other concepts

PROPOSED: to use a notion of thing http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29 as an initial definition to allow definitions of other concepts

16:09:32 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

16:09:37 <zednik> +1

Stephan Zednik: +1

16:09:38 <khalidbelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

16:09:39 <dgarijo> Luc: proposes to use the notion of thing on the wiki

Luc Moreau: proposes to use the notion of thing on the wiki

16:09:44 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

16:09:46 <dgarijo> 0

0

16:09:47 <jcheney> +1

James Cheney: +1

16:09:54 <JimM> +1

James Myers: +1

16:09:56 <tfrancart> +1

Thomas Francart: +1

16:09:57 <Edoardo> +1

Edoardo Pignotti: +1

16:10:01 <olaf> +1

Olaf Hartig: +1

16:10:09 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1

16:10:09 <ericstephan> +1

Eric Stephan: +1

16:10:12 <Yogesh> +1

Yogesh Simmhan: +1

16:10:18 <jun> +1

Jun Zhao: +1

16:10:18 <ilkayaltintas> +1

Ilkay Altintas: +1

16:10:28 <satya> 0

Satya Sahoo: 0

16:10:28 <ralphtq> +1

Ralph Hodgson: +1

16:10:30 <Christine> 0

Christine Runnegar: 0

16:11:09 <Luc> accepted: to use a notion of thing http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29  as an initial definition to allow definitions of other concepts

RESOLVED: to use a notion of thing http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ConceptInvariantViewOnThing#Definition_by_Jim_and_Luc_v2_.28in_progress.29 as an initial definition to allow definitions of other concepts

16:11:16 <dgarijo> Luc: we don't have unanimity

Luc Moreau: we don't have unanimity

16:11:41 <dgarijo> Luc: we really should back to this def once we have a consistent set of definitions

Luc Moreau: we really should back to this def once we have a consistent set of definitions

16:12:10 <Zakim> - +1.518.276.aahh

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.518.276.aahh

16:12:11 <Zakim> - +1.509.554.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.509.554.aacc

16:12:11 <Zakim> - +1.216.368.aaee

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.216.368.aaee

16:12:11 <Zakim> -jun

Zakim IRC Bot: -jun

16:12:11 <Zakim> -edsu

Zakim IRC Bot: -edsu

16:12:12 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q?

16:12:13 <Zakim> -khalidbelhajjame

Zakim IRC Bot: -khalidbelhajjame

16:12:16 <Zakim> -SamCoppens

Zakim IRC Bot: -SamCoppens

16:12:18 <Zakim> -dgarijo

Zakim IRC Bot: -dgarijo

16:12:19 <Zakim> -??P40

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P40

16:12:20 <dgarijo> Luc: now we can revise the other defs according to this one. Look forwardto see your contributions

Luc Moreau: now we can revise the other defs according to this one. Look forwardto see your contributions

16:12:21 <Zakim> - +1.915.603.aajj

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.915.603.aajj

16:12:23 <Zakim> -??P60

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P60

16:12:25 <Zakim> -olaf

Zakim IRC Bot: -olaf

16:12:27 <Zakim> -??P1

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P1

16:12:29 <Zakim> -smiles

Zakim IRC Bot: -smiles

16:12:33 <Zakim> -Yogesh

Zakim IRC Bot: -Yogesh

16:12:35 <Zakim> -??P13

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P13

16:12:38 <Zakim> -Ralph Hodgson

Zakim IRC Bot: -Ralph Hodgson

16:12:41 <ralphtq> yes

Ralph Hodgson: yes

16:12:43 <Zakim> -??P9

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P9

16:12:46 <Zakim> - +1.518.633.aadd

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.518.633.aadd

16:12:46 <Luc> daniel, i can do the necessary incantations and have it for you to edit on the wiki

Luc Moreau: daniel, i can do the necessary incantations and have it for you to edit on the wiki

16:13:07 <ralphtq> zakim - did you want to ask me something?

Ralph Hodgson: zakim - did you want to ask me something?

16:13:55 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, set log public

16:14:04 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, draft minutes

16:14:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-prov-minutes.html Luc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/06/16-prov-minutes.html Luc

16:14:10 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon

Luc Moreau: trackbot, end telcon

16:14:10 <trackbot> Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help



Formatted by CommonScribe