Went over the current status of the implementation report. A number of small comments were made which were raised as actions. The group agreed to update the naming conventions for prov-constraints tests to include success or failure in the names. A discussion was had about the questionnaire. The group agreed to split the questionnaire into three different ones so that they could be seen on one complete page. The group discussed the use of google forms to implement the questionnaire and concerns about whether industry would be able to use this. Stephan agreed to look at the use of the W3C WBS system with the help of Paul. The group agreed that the questionaire should only ask about recommended serializations (e.g. PROV-N, PROV-O, PROV-XML) and give a slot for other serializations.
Checked who of the group would be implementing constraints. Paul said that he would, Paolo said that he might and Graham said he would check with Jun. It was agreed to include a question about whether constraints were used within an implementation that is not a validator. It was agreed to focus on specific "unit" style tests instead of the broad examples because of the difficulty in identifying all the constraints an example may exercise.
The group agreed to release the Primer as a working draft synchronised with the candidate recommendations. Simon agreed to do a final editor's check. Luc agreed to produce a small javascript file to ensure that prov documents are consistently cited by editors.
Discussed the prov-dc mapping. Ivan was unsure that we were viewing the correct version. Paul agreed to check this with Daniel. Simon and Craig agreed to review the document. The group confirmed that note's should use the prov namespace.
Paul discussed the important role that the FAQ seems to be playing as an outlet for best practice and intuition. He asked for volunteers to update the FAQ. The following members agreed to produce an FAQ entry. Simon - influence/involved, Tom - something, Curt - one, Tim - FOAF and PROV, Hook ISO linage and PROV, Paul - scruffy and proper.
The group discussed the problem of readers looking at the wrong specification first (e.g. starting with constraints not the primer) and thus being given a false impression. The group agreed that the overview was important from this perspective. It was agreed to add to the abstract of each document the following sentence: "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents." The group also revised in-situ the boilerplate about how to read documents. It was noted that we should be talking about the "PROV Family of Documents" not the "PROV family of specifications"
Ivan went over the steps going to Candidate Rec and then to Proposed Rec.
The group discussed how to encourage implementations. Paul agreed to write a section in the call for implementations that gives guidance to implementors defining why they should implement but also what they should return in the survey and why this is beneficial for them. Craig agreed to writing a motivating paragraph around use cases. The group agreed to the following schedule: Announcement of intention to go to CR, Nov. 27, 2012; Request for CR Publication Dec 4, 2012; Publication of CR of recs along with notes for prov-dc, prov-primer, prov-xml, prov-overview: Dec 11, 2012; End of CR period Feb. 1, 2013. As per the discussion on the day before the group agreed to put mentionOf in a separate note and also approved public responses for the primer.
13:27:29 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc ←
13:27:31 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
13:27:33 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be PROV
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be PROV ←
13:27:33 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(F2F)8:00AM scheduled to start 27 minutes ago
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(F2F)8:00AM scheduled to start 27 minutes ago ←
13:27:34 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
<pgroth> Meeting: F2F Meeting, Stata Center
13:27:34 <trackbot> Date: 10 November 2012
13:28:10 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/F2F4Schedule
13:28:25 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public ←
<pgroth>Guest: Laurent Lefort
13:36:01 <lebot> Zakim, do you come in on Saturdays?
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Timothy Lebo: Zakim, do you come in on Saturdays? ←
13:36:01 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, lebot.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, lebot. ←
13:37:52 <Luc> @Dong, we are waiting for Ivan to bring in the speakerphone
Luc Moreau: @Dong, we are waiting for Ivan to bring in the speakerphone ←
13:43:04 <pgroth> dong are you online?
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Paul Groth: dong are you online? ←
13:43:23 <lebot> Zakim, will the chairs be benevolent today?
Timothy Lebo: Zakim, will the chairs be benevolent today? ←
13:43:23 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, lebot.
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, lebot. ←
13:44:06 <Zakim> SW_(F2F)8:00AM has now started
Zakim IRC Bot: SW_(F2F)8:00AM has now started ←
13:44:13 <Zakim> +??P0
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0 ←
13:44:31 <GK> (Silence)
Graham Klyne: (Silence) ←
13:44:35 <smiles> zakim, ??P0 is me
Simon Miles: zakim, ??P0 is me ←
13:44:35 <Zakim> +smiles; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +smiles; got it ←
13:45:39 <pgroth> simon, dong can you get on skype
Paul Groth: simon, dong can you get on skype ←
13:46:13 <pgroth> we don't have a polycom right now
Paul Groth: we don't have a polycom right now ←
13:46:54 <pgroth> Topic: Implementation Report
Summary: Went over the current status of the implementation report. A number of small comments were made which were raised as actions. The group agreed to update the naming conventions for prov-constraints tests to include success or failure in the names. A discussion was had about the questionnaire. The group agreed to split the questionnaire into three different ones so that they could be seen on one complete page. The group discussed the use of google forms to implement the questionnaire and concerns about whether industry would be able to use this. Stephan agreed to look at the use of the W3C WBS system with the help of Paul. The group agreed that the questionaire should only ask about recommended serializations (e.g. PROV-N, PROV-O, PROV-XML) and give a slot for other serializations.
<pgroth> Summary: Went over the current status of the implementation report. A number of small comments were made which were raised as actions. The group agreed to update the naming conventions for prov-constraints tests to include success or failure in the names. A discussion was had about the questionnaire. The group agreed to split the questionnaire into three different ones so that they could be seen on one complete page. The group discussed the use of google forms to implement the questionnaire and concerns about whether industry would be able to use this. Stephan agreed to look at the use of the W3C WBS system with the help of Paul. The group agreed that the questionaire should only ask about recommended serializations (e.g. PROV-N, PROV-O, PROV-XML) and give a slot for other serializations.
13:47:04 <GK> Luc: this session will be about implementation report
Luc Moreau: this session will be about implementation report [ Scribe Assist by Graham Klyne ] ←
13:47:13 <GK> Thinks we'd like to do:
Graham Klyne: Thinks we'd like to do: ←
13:47:23 <GK> 1. update on where we are
Graham Klyne: 1. update on where we are ←
13:47:35 <GK> (Paul notices we're 15 minutes early)
Graham Klyne: (Paul notices we're 15 minutes early) ←
13:48:26 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt_Tilmes ←
13:48:39 <GK> OK… we'll restart in 15 minutes… maybe we'll have a speakerphone
Graham Klyne: OK… we'll restart in 15 minutes… maybe we'll have a speakerphone ←
13:48:41 <Luc> zakim, who is on the phone?
Luc Moreau: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
13:48:41 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see smiles, Curt_Tilmes ←
13:48:55 <GK> (Curt's experimenting with a mobile phone connected to Zakim)
Graham Klyne: (Curt's experimenting with a mobile phone connected to Zakim) ←
13:48:57 <smiles> yes
Simon Miles: yes ←
13:49:02 <Luc> zakim, who is on the call?
Luc Moreau: zakim, who is on the call? ←
13:49:02 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see smiles, Curt_Tilmes ←
13:49:14 <Zakim> +??P2
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P2 ←
13:49:16 <GK> I hear you!
Graham Klyne: I hear you! ←
13:49:42 <Dong> ??P2 is me
Trung Huynh: ??P2 is me ←
13:49:54 <Dong> zakim, ??P2 is me
Trung Huynh: zakim, ??P2 is me ←
13:49:54 <Zakim> +Dong; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Dong; got it ←
13:51:40 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes
Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes ←
13:53:29 <Luc> scribe: GK
(Scribe set to Graham Klyne)
13:53:37 <Luc> chair: Luc
13:56:39 <Zakim> + +1.617.715.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.617.715.aaaa ←
13:56:53 <ivan> zakim, this is f2f
Ivan Herman: zakim, this is f2f ←
13:56:53 <Zakim> ivan, this was already SW_(F2F)8:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ivan, this was already SW_(F2F)8:00AM ←
13:56:54 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
13:56:55 <Zakim> ok, ivan; that matches SW_(F2F)8:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, ivan; that matches SW_(F2F)8:00AM ←
13:56:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa ←
13:56:55 <Zakim> On IRC I see ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain ←
13:58:30 <GK> Restarting...
Restarting... ←
13:58:38 <GK> Session about implementation report
Session about implementation report ←
13:58:43 <GK> Would like to:
Would like to: ←
13:58:49 <GK> 1. update from Paul
1. update from Paul ←
13:59:42 <GK> concerned about getting to end of implementation phase, then finding features are not implemented
concerned about getting to end of implementation phase, then finding features are not implemented ←
14:00:00 <GK> would like to have advance indication of what people will implemented
would like to have advance indication of what people will implemented ←
14:00:38 <GK> 2. review what we'll do for constraints; in particular what we do for constraints
2. review what we'll do for constraints; in particular what we do for constraints ←
14:00:43 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations ←
14:01:16 <GK> Paul: talking about "gathering implementation evidence"
Paul Groth: talking about "gathering implementation evidence" ←
14:01:36 <GK> 3 parts (see page at link above)
3 parts (see page at link above) ←
14:01:57 <GK> Overall happy with framework as described
Overall happy with framework as described ←
14:02:16 <GK> Ivan: what are the arrows on table 2?
Ivan Herman: what are the arrows on table 2? ←
14:02:59 <GK> Paul: link to implementation blue arrows consumes, green arrows produces term
Paul Groth: link to implementation blue arrows consumes, green arrows produces term ←
14:03:05 <GK> s/Paul?Dong/
s/Paul?Dong/ (warning: replacement failed) ←
14:03:35 <Luc> action: Dong to describe blue and green arrows in implementation report document
ACTION: Dong to describe blue and green arrows in implementation report document ←
14:03:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-138 - Describe blue and green arrows in implementation report document [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-138 - Describe blue and green arrows in implementation report document [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17]. ←
14:03:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:03:49 <GK> Paul: more questions?
Paul Groth: more questions? ←
14:04:45 <GK> Ivan: minor thing… use usual W3C editorial style - do we intend to publish as note? (Looks like it might be one) Clarify that implementation report does not need to be published as TR.
Ivan Herman: minor thing… use usual W3C editorial style - do we intend to publish as note? (Looks like it might be one) Clarify that implementation report does not need to be published as TR. ←
14:05:20 <Dong> ok, I'll change it to a note
Trung Huynh: ok, I'll change it to a note ←
14:05:24 <Luc> action: pgroth to change the respec style for implementation report
ACTION: pgroth to change the respec style for implementation report ←
14:05:24 <trackbot> Created ACTION-139 - Change the respec style for implementation report [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-139 - Change the respec style for implementation report [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17]. ←
14:05:31 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:05:44 <pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/testcases/constraints/process.html
Paul Groth: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/testcases/constraints/process.html ←
14:06:11 <GK> Paul: prov constraints process document… idea to outlines process for testing constraints
Paul Groth: prov constraints process document… idea to outlines process for testing constraints ←
14:06:25 <GK> format for test case files (sect 2.1)
format for test case files (sect 2.1) ←
14:06:56 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
14:07:07 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
14:07:14 <GK> identifier… constraint identifiers are embodied in the test case identifier
identifier… constraint identifiers are embodied in the test case identifier ←
14:07:34 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller] ←
14:07:41 <Luc> q-
Luc Moreau: q- ←
14:07:43 <GK> Luc: some of the constraints will be renumbered following removal of mentionOf
Luc Moreau: some of the constraints will be renumbered following removal of mentionOf ←
14:07:49 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
14:07:49 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa, [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa, [IPcaller] ←
14:07:50 <Zakim> On IRC I see zednik, jcheney, pgroth, ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see zednik, jcheney, pgroth, ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain ←
14:08:00 <pgroth> action: dong check constraints are matching to the updated document
ACTION: dong check constraints are matching to the updated document ←
14:08:00 <trackbot> Created ACTION-140 - Check constraints are matching to the updated document [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-140 - Check constraints are matching to the updated document [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17]. ←
14:08:30 <GK> GK: are constraint numbers fragile for this?
Graham Klyne: are constraint numbers fragile for this? ←
14:08:59 <GK> Paul: wanted automated reporting of test case coverage.
Paul Groth: wanted automated reporting of test case coverage. ←
14:09:07 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:09:12 <GK> Ivan: change respec style for this document too
Ivan Herman: change respec style for this document too ←
14:09:35 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
14:10:09 <GK> Paul: hasn't really been reviewed as yet. Need some early review.
Paul Groth: hasn't really been reviewed as yet. Need some early review. ←
14:10:13 <ivan> zakim, aaaa has SamCoppens TomDN laurent hook Curt pgroth Luc jcheney ivan GK lebot CraigTrim
Ivan Herman: zakim, aaaa has SamCoppens TomDN laurent hook Curt pgroth Luc jcheney ivan GK lebot CraigTrim ←
14:10:13 <Zakim> +SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim; got it ←
14:10:26 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
14:10:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa, [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa, [IPcaller] ←
14:10:27 <Zakim> +1.617.715.aaaa has SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim
Zakim IRC Bot: +1.617.715.aaaa has SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim ←
14:10:27 <Zakim> On IRC I see zednik, jcheney, pgroth, ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see zednik, jcheney, pgroth, ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain ←
14:10:54 <GK> Luc: would like to identify reviewers; preferebly developers; mostly not on call.
Luc Moreau: would like to identify reviewers; preferebly developers; mostly not on call. ←
14:11:06 <Dong> The sound on the phone line is broken, I have to rely on the scribe :(
Trung Huynh: The sound on the phone line is broken, I have to rely on the scribe :( ←
14:11:08 <hook> this one in respec.js? : var respecConfig = { specStatus: "ED", // specification status (e.g. WD, LCWD, NOTE, etc.).
Hook Hua: this one in respec.js? : var respecConfig = { specStatus: "ED", // specification status (e.g. WD, LCWD, NOTE, etc.). ←
14:11:37 <GK> jcheney: happy to look at this; biggest problem is managing data as number of test cases grows
James Cheney: happy to look at this; biggest problem is managing data as number of test cases grows ←
14:12:10 <zednik> zakim [IPcaller] is zednik
Stephan Zednik: zakim [IPcaller] is zednik ←
14:12:20 <GK> Luc: need to be clear if test case is expected to succeed; currently in table, but should be in name for automated testing?
Luc Moreau: need to be clear if test case is expected to succeed; currently in table, but should be in name for automated testing? ←
14:12:30 <GK> Paul: I'm happy with that.
Paul Groth: I'm happy with that. ←
14:13:09 <ivan> �hook: 'unofficial' or 'base' could be used
Ivan Herman: �hook: 'unofficial' or 'base' could be used ←
14:13:22 <GK> Dong: prefer using identifer to directory for different outcomes (pass/fail/etc.)
Trung Huynh: prefer using identifer to directory for different outcomes (pass/fail/etc.) ←
14:13:24 <ivan> (per http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html)
Ivan Herman: (per http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/ReSpec.js/documentation.html) ←
14:14:05 <Luc> action: Dong to update naming convention to include success/failure of test
ACTION: Dong to update naming convention to include success/failure of test ←
14:14:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-141 - Update naming convention to include success/failure of test [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-141 - Update naming convention to include success/failure of test [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17]. ←
14:14:06 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:14:09 <Luc> q-
Luc Moreau: q- ←
14:14:28 <GK> Paul: last thing - questionnaire
Paul Groth: last thing - questionnaire ←
14:15:09 <GK> … idea was to ask implementers to fill out - whatthey support, and also other implementations with which they interoperate
… idea was to ask implementers to fill out - whatthey support, and also other implementations with which they interoperate ←
14:15:21 <GK> zednik: questionnaire is complete, has been reviewed
Stephan Zednik: questionnaire is complete, has been reviewed ←
14:15:35 <GK> … want another round, get some more implementers to fill it out
… want another round, get some more implementers to fill it out ←
14:15:42 <pgroth> @stephan can you add a link http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations#Gathering_Implementation_Evidenence
Paul Groth: @stephan can you add a link http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations#Gathering_Implementation_Evidenence ←
14:15:47 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:15:57 <GK> … discussion on mailing list about external vocabs using/extending prov
… discussion on mailing list about external vocabs using/extending prov ←
14:16:10 <GK> … ask these groups to fill out questionnair
… ask these groups to fill out questionnair ←
14:16:13 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
14:16:16 <Luc> ack iv
Luc Moreau: ack iv ←
14:16:48 <GK> Ivan: if I am an implementer, do I see what's in the Google doc?
Ivan Herman: if I am an implementer, do I see what's in the Google doc? ←
14:16:58 <GK> zednik: will add link to actial questionnaire
Stephan Zednik: will add link to actial questionnaire ←
14:17:06 <pgroth> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?pli=1&formkey=dGM4cXZYMk0xaFBDT2VyRV92YkY5WkE6MQ
Paul Groth: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?pli=1&formkey=dGM4cXZYMk0xaFBDT2VyRV92YkY5WkE6MQ ←
14:17:23 <GK> This is what implementers will see
This is what implementers will see ←
14:18:06 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
14:18:09 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
14:18:15 <Dong> I think we'll need a (wiki) page to explain the whole process of reporting an implementation (with links to all the relevant documents), which will be sent with the call for reports
Trung Huynh: I think we'll need a (wiki) page to explain the whole process of reporting an implementation (with links to all the relevant documents), which will be sent with the call for reports ←
14:18:55 <Dong> Perhaps, the questionnaire can have include a link to the explanation as well
Trung Huynh: Perhaps, the questionnaire can have include a link to the explanation as well ←
14:19:25 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
14:19:31 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
14:19:40 <GK> zednik: The first page collects information that controls information displayed on subsequent pages
Stephan Zednik: The first page collects information that controls information displayed on subsequent pages ←
14:19:42 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:20:14 <GK> Smiles: are tools like prov-python, ?, a framework of an application
Simon Miles: are tools like prov-python, ?, a framework of an application ←
14:20:16 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
Ivan Herman: zakim, who is here? ←
14:20:16 <Zakim> On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa, [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see smiles, Dong, +1.617.715.aaaa, [IPcaller] ←
14:20:17 <Zakim> +1.617.715.aaaa has SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim
Zakim IRC Bot: +1.617.715.aaaa has SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim ←
14:20:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see zednik, jcheney, pgroth, ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see zednik, jcheney, pgroth, ivan, laurent, TomDN, GK, smiles, CraigTrim, SamCoppens, Curt, hook, Luc, lebot, Dong, Zakim, RRSAgent, trackbot, stain ←
14:20:17 <Dong> Prov python is a framework
Trung Huynh: Prov python is a framework ←
14:20:47 <GK> zednik: they go down same path, so could combine these as single item.
Stephan Zednik: they go down same path, so could combine these as single item. ←
14:20:54 <ivan> q-
Ivan Herman: q- ←
14:21:28 <ivan> zakim, [IPcaller] is stain
Ivan Herman: zakim, [IPcaller] is stain ←
14:21:28 <Zakim> +stain; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it ←
14:22:12 <GK> Paul: we have four divisions… is the distinction between libraries, services, applications clear?
Paul Groth: we have four divisions… is the distinction between libraries, services, applications clear? ←
14:22:24 <hook> q+
14:22:46 <GK> zednik: distinction is not large - maybe not needed?
Stephan Zednik: distinction is not large - maybe not needed? ←
14:23:05 <smiles> I think some people might unnecessarily worry about the distinction if there are multiple options
Simon Miles: I think some people might unnecessarily worry about the distinction if there are multiple options ←
14:23:13 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
14:23:18 <GK> … also no sections for pure publishers of provenance. Or is that a service?
… also no sections for pure publishers of provenance. Or is that a service? ←
14:23:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:23:41 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
14:24:09 <GK> Hook: implementation type is single-choice, but some implementations may be more than one of these.
Hook Hua: implementation type is single-choice, but some implementations may be more than one of these. ←
14:24:19 <Luc> ack ho
Luc Moreau: ack ho ←
14:24:44 <GK> zednik: currently have to fill form multiple times; may want to change the questionnaire to clarify this.
Stephan Zednik: currently have to fill form multiple times; may want to change the questionnaire to clarify this. ←
14:25:01 <GK> … don't lnow if they can be handled in a single pass
… don't lnow if they can be handled in a single pass ←
14:25:14 <GK> Luc: MentionOf shoukd be removed from the questionnaire
Luc Moreau: MentionOf shoukd be removed from the questionnaire ←
14:25:22 <Luc> ack lu
Luc Moreau: ack lu ←
14:25:46 <GK> Paul: poiple would like to be able click on the questionnaire and see all the questions before filling out.
Paul Groth: poiple would like to be able click on the questionnaire and see all the questions before filling out. ←
14:26:39 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:26:40 <GK> … maybe have several different questionnaires for each kind of implementation. Click on link, see all questions, without having to branch within the form.
… maybe have several different questionnaires for each kind of implementation. Click on link, see all questions, without having to branch within the form. ←
14:26:47 <lebot> +1 to it's a barrier to "continue" in the survey.
Timothy Lebo: +1 to it's a barrier to "continue" in the survey. ←
14:26:47 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
14:26:50 <hook> q+
14:26:50 <GK> zednik: I think that's reasonable
Stephan Zednik: I think that's reasonable ←
14:27:11 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:27:39 <GK> q+ to ask if common questions across all questionnaiure tyopes can be auto-filled
q+ to ask if common questions across all questionnaiure tyopes can be auto-filled ←
14:27:49 <Luc> action: zednik to create 3/4 questionnaires instead of a single branching one (+ remove mention)
ACTION: zednik to create 3/4 questionnaires instead of a single branching one (+ remove mention) ←
14:27:49 <trackbot> Created ACTION-142 - Create 3/4 questionnaires instead of a single branching one (+ remove mention) [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-142 - Create 3/4 questionnaires instead of a single branching one (+ remove mention) [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-11-17]. ←
14:27:51 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:28:04 <Luc> ack ho
Luc Moreau: ack ho ←
14:28:19 <lebot> q?
Timothy Lebo: q? ←
14:28:26 <GK> hook: clarofy what is meant by publisher(?) in this context
Hook Hua: clarofy what is meant by publisher(?) in this context ←
14:28:33 <lebot> I added PROV-O to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations#Publishers
Timothy Lebo: I added PROV-O to http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations#Publishers ←
14:28:50 <GK> paul: anyone who creates provenance that appears somewhere on the web. (Following SKOS?)
Paul Groth: anyone who creates provenance that appears somewhere on the web. (Following SKOS?) ←
14:29:02 <lebot> q+ to ask if prov-o's prov-o is in "Publishers" like Curt
Timothy Lebo: q+ to ask if prov-o's prov-o is in "Publishers" like Curt ←
14:29:14 <GK> ack gk
ack gk ←
14:29:14 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask if common questions across all questionnaiure tyopes can be auto-filled
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask if common questions across all questionnaiure tyopes can be auto-filled ←
14:29:22 <Dong> q+ to ask about translating answers to the questionnaire to the exit criteria
Trung Huynh: q+ to ask about translating answers to the questionnaire to the exit criteria ←
14:29:54 <GK> zednik: don't know how it can be done
Stephan Zednik: don't know how it can be done ←
14:29:59 <Luc> ack lebo
Luc Moreau: ack lebo ←
14:29:59 <Zakim> lebot, you wanted to ask if prov-o's prov-o is in "Publishers" like Curt
Zakim IRC Bot: lebot, you wanted to ask if prov-o's prov-o is in "Publishers" like Curt ←
14:30:50 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:30:53 <GK> Tim: Does the provenance in PROV-O the document count as publishing
Timothy Lebo: Does the provenance in PROV-O the document count as publishing ←
14:30:58 <lebot> q-
Timothy Lebo: q- ←
14:31:45 <GK> Ivan: possible add provenance statement in ReSpec … that would be an implementation, also every published spec
Ivan Herman: possible add provenance statement in ReSpec … that would be an implementation, also every published spec ←
14:31:49 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:32:24 <GK> Dong: mapping answers from questionnaire to CR exit criteria
Trung Huynh: mapping answers from questionnaire to CR exit criteria ←
14:32:44 <pgroth> q_
Paul Groth: q_ ←
14:32:46 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
14:32:51 <Luc> ack don
Luc Moreau: ack don ←
14:32:51 <Zakim> Dong, you wanted to ask about translating answers to the questionnaire to the exit criteria
Zakim IRC Bot: Dong, you wanted to ask about translating answers to the questionnaire to the exit criteria ←
14:32:58 <GK> … need two implementations each feature. Can they be vocabs, or apps that consume/produce ?
… need two implementations each feature. Can they be vocabs, or apps that consume/produce ? ←
14:33:42 <GK> Paul: we need *pairs* of impl; vocabs count toward coverage, but not really qualifying as a member of a pair
Paul Groth: we need *pairs* of impl; vocabs count toward coverage, but not really qualifying as a member of a pair ←
14:33:51 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:34:01 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
14:34:29 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
14:34:52 <GK> Paul: we need applications that generate/consume every construct in each serialization
Paul Groth: we need applications that generate/consume every construct in each serialization ←
14:35:05 <GK> q+
q+ ←
14:35:37 <GK> q+ to say that I think consime/produce pairs for vocab terms - ensures devs agree about how the modelling works
q+ to say that I think consime/produce pairs for vocab terms - ensures devs agree about how the modelling works ←
14:36:26 <GK> Luc: hear something that bothers me - constraints don't need prodcue/conbsume pairs
Luc Moreau: hear something that bothers me - constraints don't need prodcue/conbsume pairs ←
14:36:32 <Luc> ack lu
Luc Moreau: ack lu ←
14:37:13 <Luc> ack gk
Luc Moreau: ack gk ←
14:37:13 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say that I think consime/produce pairs for vocab terms - ensures devs agree about how the modelling works
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say that I think consime/produce pairs for vocab terms - ensures devs agree about how the modelling works ←
14:37:14 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:37:39 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
14:38:20 <GK> Paul: my biggst concern. We need to get constraint test cases in order and ready to go. Wouldlike these available before/as we go to CR, before facing the the dragon\\\\\'director
Paul Groth: my biggst concern. We need to get constraint test cases in order and ready to go. Wouldlike these available before/as we go to CR, before facing the the dragon\\\\\'director ←
14:38:31 <Luc> ack iv
Luc Moreau: ack iv ←
14:40:05 <GK> Ivan: Director may ask: Why did we not use W3C facilities make the forms; data belongs to Google. Answer may be that form has branching structure ()but we just got rid of that). But data ownership may be a concern.
Ivan Herman: Director may ask: Why did we not use W3C facilities make the forms; data belongs to Google. Answer may be that form has branching structure ()but we just got rid of that). But data ownership may be a concern. ←
14:40:32 <GK> q+ to ask if it's enough to take a data dump and put it on W3C site
q+ to ask if it's enough to take a data dump and put it on W3C site ←
14:40:46 <GK> Ivan: some companies may have concerns about giving data to another company
Ivan Herman: some companies may have concerns about giving data to another company ←
14:40:57 <GK> q-
q- ←
14:41:20 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
14:41:47 <lebot> q?
Timothy Lebo: q? ←
14:41:59 <GK> Ivan: Once data ois stored by Google, it will stay there, can't be removed. But companies (and comany lawyers) will say "no way".
Ivan Herman: Once data ois stored by Google, it will stay there, can't be removed. But companies (and comany lawyers) will say "no way". ←
14:42:09 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
14:42:11 <lebot> but, won't google crawl the w3c-native results that we publish at w3.org?
Timothy Lebo: but, won't google crawl the w3c-native results that we publish at w3.org? ←
14:42:50 <GK> q+ can we have alternative of submitting a spreadsheet based on supplied template?
q+ can we have alternative of submitting a spreadsheet based on supplied template? ←
14:43:02 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:43:22 <pgroth> q+ to ask craig
Paul Groth: q+ to ask craig ←
14:43:23 <hook> q+
14:43:30 <GK> Ivan: Lawyers job is to be paranoid
Ivan Herman: Lawyers job is to be paranoid ←
14:43:51 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
14:43:51 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask craig
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to ask craig ←
14:43:52 <Zakim> +??P4
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4 ←
14:44:08 <Paolo> zakim, ??P4 is me
Paolo Missier: zakim, ??P4 is me ←
14:44:08 <Zakim> +Paolo; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +Paolo; got it ←
14:44:18 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:44:28 <GK> Paul: suggest consider using WBS. If it's easy, that's preferable, if it's hard we can argue the toss.
Paul Groth: suggest consider using WBS. If it's easy, that's preferable, if it's hard we can argue the toss. ←
14:44:54 <zednik> zakim, [IPcaller] is me
Stephan Zednik: zakim, [IPcaller] is me ←
14:44:54 <Zakim> sorry, zednik, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, zednik, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]' ←
14:45:14 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:45:52 <GK> Paul: I can help with WBS
Paul Groth: I can help with WBS ←
14:45:55 <Luc> action: zednik to look at wbs for the implementation questionnaire
ACTION: zednik to look at wbs for the implementation questionnaire ←
14:45:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-143 - Look at wbs for the implementation questionnaire [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-143 - Look at wbs for the implementation questionnaire [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-11-17]. ←
14:46:11 <GK> zednik: I'll look. Questionnaire just got simpler.
Stephan Zednik: I'll look. Questionnaire just got simpler. ←
14:46:15 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:46:33 <GK> Hook: concern may be w.r.t. public release of intellectual property.
Hook Hua: concern may be w.r.t. public release of intellectual property. ←
14:46:38 <jcheney> q+ to say what do sparql/xquery wgs do
James Cheney: q+ to say what do sparql/xquery wgs do ←
14:46:42 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:46:46 <Luc> ack hoo
Luc Moreau: ack hoo ←
14:47:05 <GK> q+ to ask if there should be an option for confidential submission
q+ to ask if there should be an option for confidential submission ←
14:47:27 <Curt> @gk -- results go into public implementation report
Curt Tilmes: @gk -- results go into public implementation report ←
14:47:27 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:48:12 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:48:12 <GK> q-
q- ←
14:48:32 <Luc> ack jc
Luc Moreau: ack jc ←
14:48:32 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to say what do sparql/xquery wgs do
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to say what do sparql/xquery wgs do ←
14:48:36 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:48:50 <GK> Luc: moving on...
Luc Moreau: moving on... ←
14:49:06 <GK> Luc: want to get a feel for which features people will implement
Luc Moreau: want to get a feel for which features people will implement ←
14:49:26 <GK> … have produced a Google doc to gather information (!)
… have produced a Google doc to gather information (!) ←
14:49:34 <Luc> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An15kLxkaMA3dEU1RHVFNnBvQTNrdzV1S3ZJd0ZjdFE
Luc Moreau: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An15kLxkaMA3dEU1RHVFNnBvQTNrdzV1S3ZJd0ZjdFE ←
14:51:25 <GK> Form isn't editable yet...
Form isn't editable yet... ←
14:51:34 <GK> … it should be now
… it should be now ←
14:52:38 <Paolo> q+
Paolo Missier: q+ ←
14:52:45 <lebot> POI - tracedTo is now wasInfluencedBy
Timothy Lebo: POI - tracedTo is now wasInfluencedBy ←
14:56:50 <Curt> @zednik -- take a look at the GCIS line in the spreadsheet -- edit as needed
Curt Tilmes: @zednik -- take a look at the GCIS line in the spreadsheet -- edit as needed ←
14:57:20 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
14:58:16 <GK> (people are filling in the document)
(people are filling in the document) ←
14:58:25 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
14:58:34 <pgroth> ack Paolo
Paul Groth: ack Paolo ←
14:58:51 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
14:59:07 <pgroth> yes
Paul Groth: yes ←
14:59:24 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:01:48 <pgroth> ack zednik
Paul Groth: ack zednik ←
15:02:01 <Luc> action: Dong to remove reference of prov-json in implementation report, and allow entry for "other serialization"
ACTION: Dong to remove reference of prov-json in implementation report, and allow entry for "other serialization" ←
15:02:01 <trackbot> Created ACTION-144 - Remove reference of prov-json in implementation report, and allow entry for "other serialization" [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-144 - Remove reference of prov-json in implementation report, and allow entry for "other serialization" [on Trung Dong Huynh - due 2012-11-17]. ←
15:02:04 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:03:39 <Dong> q+ to ask about the eligibility for PROV-JSON only implementations
Trung Huynh: q+ to ask about the eligibility for PROV-JSON only implementations ←
15:07:07 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:07:52 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:08:04 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:08:16 <Luc> ack dong
Luc Moreau: ack dong ←
15:08:16 <Zakim> Dong, you wanted to ask about the eligibility for PROV-JSON only implementations
Zakim IRC Bot: Dong, you wanted to ask about the eligibility for PROV-JSON only implementations ←
15:08:37 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
15:08:45 <GK> General discussion as people look at spreadsheet...
General discussion as people look at spreadsheet... ←
15:08:50 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:08:50 <ivan> ack pgroth
Ivan Herman: ack pgroth ←
15:09:18 <GK> (question from phone): do we have to support one of the specific formats to be included in the report?
(question from phone): do we have to support one of the specific formats to be included in the report? ←
15:09:50 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:09:53 <GK> Paul: no, we can include "other" than core serializations as evidence of use or/support for prov
Paul Groth: no, we can include "other" than core serializations as evidence of use or/support for prov ←
15:10:13 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:10:37 <Dong> How about NASA?
Trung Huynh: How about NASA? ←
15:10:39 <Luc> ack iv
Luc Moreau: ack iv ←
15:10:57 <GK> Ivan: implemenations listed so far are essentially from academic sources - not so many commercial implementations.
Ivan Herman: implemenations listed so far are essentially from academic sources - not so many commercial implementations. ←
15:11:14 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:11:15 <GK> Paul: we have some
Paul Groth: we have some ←
15:11:28 <GK> q+
q+ ←
15:12:25 <Dong> A few implementations from commercial company are currently listed here http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations
Trung Huynh: A few implementations from commercial company are currently listed here http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations ←
15:12:30 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:13:10 <Luc> ack gk
Luc Moreau: ack gk ←
15:13:13 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:14:32 <GK> GK: would distinguish implementation for live service from for-academic-paper production
Graham Klyne: would distinguish implementation for live service from for-academic-paper production ←
15:14:35 <Paolo> q+
Paolo Missier: q+ ←
15:14:52 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
15:15:12 <GK> Ivan: this might be a useful topic for the questionnaire: is their an intention to support the provenance application beyond a current research project?
Ivan Herman: this might be a useful topic for the questionnaire: is their an intention to support the provenance application beyond a current research project? ←
15:15:33 <GK> Paul: this could be hard to formulate appropriately.
Paul Groth: this could be hard to formulate appropriately. ←
15:15:39 <Curt> even the grad students developing a prototype always hope that their product will spin off and live on in the long term
Curt Tilmes: even the grad students developing a prototype always hope that their product will spin off and live on in the long term ←
15:15:50 <GK> q+
q+ ←
15:15:53 <GK> q-
q- ←
15:16:43 <GK> For demonstrating interoperable implementability, intended future deployment isn;t necessarily an issue, IMO
For demonstrating interoperable implementability, intended future deployment isn;t necessarily an issue, IMO ←
15:16:56 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:16:56 <pgroth> Q+
Paul Groth: Q+ ←
15:16:58 <GK> Paolo: how public is the list of intended implementations?
Paolo Missier: how public is the list of intended implementations? ←
15:17:02 <GK> Ivan: ity's public
Ivan Herman: it's public ←
15:17:20 <ivan> s/ity's/it's/
15:17:22 <pgroth> the thing that is public is this: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations
Paul Groth: the thing that is public is this: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvImplementations ←
15:17:30 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:17:48 <GK> Luc: we are not collecting commitments here and now - this is for WG planning, not public.
Luc Moreau: we are not collecting commitments here and now - this is for WG planning, not public. ←
15:17:49 <ivan> ack Paolo
Ivan Herman: ack Paolo ←
15:17:51 <Luc> ack pao
Luc Moreau: ack pao ←
15:17:53 <Dong> It's useful to include such information (e.g. future support, live service, etc.) in the report, but what is the impact it has on the exit criteria, I'm wondering
Trung Huynh: It's useful to include such information (e.g. future support, live service, etc.) in the report, but what is the impact it has on the exit criteria, I'm wondering ←
15:17:56 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:18:00 <GK> Luc: see link above.
Luc Moreau: see link above. ←
15:18:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:18:31 <pgroth> q+ to say I don't think it should be included
Paul Groth: q+ to say I don't think it should be included ←
15:18:40 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
15:18:55 <GK> zednik: we have a structure for the implementation report; are we happy putting this distinction between research/commercial in the report -m don't want to ask things that don';t go in the report
Stephan Zednik: we have a structure for the implementation report; are we happy putting this distinction between research/commercial in the report -m don't want to ask things that don';t go in the report ←
15:18:56 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:18:57 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say I don't think it should be included
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say I don't think it should be included ←
15:19:00 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:19:01 <GK> Paul: agree, shouldn't ask
Paul Groth: agree, shouldn't ask ←
15:19:08 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:19:21 <pgroth> @ivan we can battle :-)
Paul Groth: @ivan we can battle :-) ←
15:19:27 <GK> Luc: next sub-topic
Luc Moreau: next sub-topic ←
15:19:41 <GK> Constraints
Constraints ←
15:19:41 <pgroth> Topic: Constraints Implementation
Summary: Checked who of the group would be implementing constraints. Paul said that he would, Paolo said that he might and Graham said he would check with Jun. It was agreed to include a question about whether constraints were used within an implementation that is not a validator. It was agreed to focus on specific "unit" style tests instead of the broad examples because of the difficulty in identifying all the constraints an example may exercise.
<pgroth> Summary: Checked who of the group would be implementing constraints. Paul said that he would, Paolo said that he might and Graham said he would check with Jun. It was agreed to include a question about whether constraints were used within an implementation that is not a validator. It was agreed to focus on specific "unit" style tests instead of the broad examples because of the difficulty in identifying all the constraints an example may exercise.
15:19:42 <ivan> pgroth: it is an information we should have if the question comes
Paul Groth: it is an information we should have if the question comes [ Scribe Assist by Ivan Herman ] ←
15:19:59 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
15:20:08 <pgroth> raises hand
Paul Groth: raises hand ←
15:20:08 <jcheney> will try but may not have time
James Cheney: will try but may not have time ←
15:20:25 <GK> Luc: Would be good to knwo who is planning to implement any of the constraints features. "show of hands" to IRC please
Luc Moreau: Would be good to knwo who is planning to implement any of the constraints features. "show of hands" to IRC please ←
15:21:06 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:21:11 <Luc> ack to
Luc Moreau: ack to ←
15:21:13 <GK> Luc: thius could be intent to produce valid provenance, or to consume/assume/check it
Luc Moreau: thius could be intent to produce valid provenance, or to consume/assume/check it ←
15:21:14 <Paolo> I am planning to pursue the Datalog-based implementation which I started this year, although the extent to which that is possible using that particular framework still needs to be clarified
Paolo Missier: I am planning to pursue the Datalog-based implementation which I started this year, although the extent to which that is possible using that particular framework still needs to be clarified ←
15:21:38 <lebot> implementing constraints: perhaps.
Timothy Lebo: implementing constraints: perhaps. ←
15:21:40 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:21:50 <GK> Paul: will implement, don;t know if will pass all tests, due to levels of inference needed.
Paul Groth: will implement, don;t know if will pass all tests, due to levels of inference needed. ←
15:21:50 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:21:57 <Luc> ack
Luc Moreau: ack ←
15:22:15 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
15:22:16 <pgroth> ack shows
Paul Groth: ack shows ←
15:22:17 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:22:23 <zednik> q+
Stephan Zednik: q+ ←
15:22:35 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
15:23:05 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:23:06 <pgroth> good question
Paul Groth: good question ←
15:23:18 <GK> zednik: is there a distinction between validator or building a producer of valid prov? JHad assumed implementation must be a validator. True or false?
Stephan Zednik: is there a distinction between validator or building a producer of valid prov? JHad assumed implementation must be a validator. True or false? ←
15:23:32 <GK> (Luc checks exit criteria)
(Luc checks exit criteria) ←
15:23:33 <pgroth> so it must be a validator
Paul Groth: so it must be a validator ←
15:23:38 <pgroth> or something similiar
Paul Groth: or something similiar ←
15:23:39 <Luc> For each of the test cases defined by the working group, at least two independent implementations pass the tests and claim to conform to the document.
Luc Moreau: For each of the test cases defined by the working group, at least two independent implementations pass the tests and claim to conform to the document. ←
15:23:44 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:24:17 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:25:02 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:25:03 <GK> q+ to say that an important part of the constraints spec is that devs can understand it well enough to produce only valid prov
q+ to say that an important part of the constraints spec is that devs can understand it well enough to produce only valid prov ←
15:25:14 <Luc> ack gk
Luc Moreau: ack gk ←
15:25:14 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say that an important part of the constraints spec is that devs can understand it well enough to produce only valid prov
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to say that an important part of the constraints spec is that devs can understand it well enough to produce only valid prov ←
15:25:51 <zednik> q+ does a implementation of the constraints require consumption + check vs. constraints
Stephan Zednik: q+ does a implementation of the constraints require consumption + check vs. constraints ←
15:27:12 <zednik> @GK audio is breaking up while you are talking
Stephan Zednik: @GK audio is breaking up while you are talking ←
15:27:40 <Luc> ack ze
Luc Moreau: ack ze ←
15:28:34 <pgroth> q+ to say we implement some constraints
Paul Groth: q+ to say we implement some constraints ←
15:28:43 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:28:44 <jcheney> q+ to say there are guidelines we don't / can't easily check
James Cheney: q+ to say there are guidelines we don't / can't easily check ←
15:28:51 <Luc> ac pg
Luc Moreau: ac pg ←
15:28:58 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:28:58 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to say we implement some constraints
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to say we implement some constraints ←
15:29:01 <GK> I was saying that I think the interop report depends on good will - useful evidence may not necessarily be specific to exit criteria, or help to show uo spec defficiencies. So additional evidence that isn;t explicitly covered by the exit criteria may stil, be useful.
I was saying that I think the interop report depends on good will - useful evidence may not necessarily be specific to exit criteria, or help to show uo spec defficiencies. So additional evidence that isn;t explicitly covered by the exit criteria may stil, be useful. ←
15:29:29 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:29:38 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
15:29:43 <GK> ^^s/or help/but still help/
^^s/or help/but still help/ ←
15:29:47 <TomDN> -q
Tom De Nies: -q ←
15:30:00 <TomDN> +1 for what Paul just said
Tom De Nies: +1 for what Paul just said ←
15:30:08 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:30:11 <TomDN> (the "one line" thing)
Tom De Nies: (the "one line" thing) ←
15:30:11 <Luc> ack jch
Luc Moreau: ack jch ←
15:30:11 <Zakim> jcheney, you wanted to say there are guidelines we don't / can't easily check
Zakim IRC Bot: jcheney, you wanted to say there are guidelines we don't / can't easily check ←
15:30:42 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:30:53 <GK> Paul: we need to show we have two validators, but also some indication that there is prov being produced that satisfies the constraints
Paul Groth: we need to show we have two validators, but also some indication that there is prov being produced that satisfies the constraints ←
15:31:24 <GK> jcheney: there is useful information we can collect that it may not be sensible to try and formalize
James Cheney: there is useful information we can collect that it may not be sensible to try and formalize ←
15:31:44 <TomDN> How about: "For the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?"
Tom De Nies: How about: "For the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?" ←
15:32:22 <jcheney> i will try but can't promis anything (maybe work with Paolo)
James Cheney: i will try but can't promis anything (maybe work with Paolo) ←
15:32:55 <jcheney> Reza also said he thought orcal would implement (but caveat about oracle)
James Cheney: Reza also said he thought oracle would implement (but caveat about oracle) ←
15:32:56 <pgroth> action: zednik add a question to ask about use of constraints by applications (e.g. "or the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?")
ACTION: zednik add a question to ask about use of constraints by applications (e.g. "or the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?") ←
15:32:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-145 - Add a question to ask about use of constraints by applications (e.g. "or the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?") [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-145 - Add a question to ask about use of constraints by applications (e.g. "or the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?") [on Stephan Zednik - due 2012-11-17]. ←
15:33:03 <jcheney> s/orcal/oracle/
15:33:39 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:35:50 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:35:51 <GK> GK: expect to see implementations, producing and consuming, coming from the Wf4ever project. Also Jun is looking at further work to build and evaluate provenance data from other sources. Details not yet c,ear (to me), but expect something from this corner
Graham Klyne: expect to see implementations, producing and consuming, coming from the Wf4ever project. Also Jun is looking at further work to build and evaluate provenance data from other sources. Details not yet c,ear (to me), but expect something from this corner ←
15:36:10 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:36:27 <GK> Luc: how do we build the test cases? (?)
Luc Moreau: how do we build the test cases? (?) ←
15:36:39 <GK> Paul: I'd rather focus on implementation
Paul Groth: I'd rather focus on implementation ←
15:37:25 <GK> Luc: I'll volunteer (Dong?) and myself to convert validator tests to a general test suite.
Luc Moreau: I'll volunteer (Dong?) and myself to convert validator tests to a general test suite. ←
15:37:45 <Dong> Yes
Trung Huynh: Yes ←
15:38:13 <lebot> how does this differ from http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/examples ?
Timothy Lebo: how does this differ from http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/file/tip/examples ? ←
15:38:18 <Luc> action: GK to talk to Jun about implementation of constraints and specifically test cases
ACTION: GK to talk to Jun about implementation of constraints and specifically test cases ←
15:38:18 <trackbot> Created ACTION-146 - Talk to Jun about implementation of constraints and specifically test cases [on Graham Klyne - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-146 - Talk to Jun about implementation of constraints and specifically test cases [on Graham Klyne - due 2012-11-17]. ←
15:38:20 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:39:11 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:39:16 <Curt> You're also looking for examples both of success and failure
Curt Tilmes: You're also looking for examples both of success and failure ←
15:39:26 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
15:40:20 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:40:24 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
15:40:30 <GK> q+ to ask if implementers of validators if they can report which constraints are validated by their systems, as a way to get a view of coverage
q+ to ask if implementers of validators if they can report which constraints are validated by their systems, as a way to get a view of coverage ←
15:40:33 <Curt> separate "unit" tests from "integration" tests
Curt Tilmes: separate "unit" tests from "integration" tests ←
15:40:53 <Luc> it's about to review
Luc Moreau: it's about to review ←
15:40:54 <Curt> some are focused on success/failure of a few particular tests
Curt Tilmes: some are focused on success/failure of a few particular tests ←
15:41:03 <jcheney> q+ to advocate small test cases
James Cheney: q+ to advocate small test cases ←
15:41:05 <Curt> some are more comprehensive
Curt Tilmes: some are more comprehensive ←
15:41:12 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:42:01 <Luc> ack gk
Luc Moreau: ack gk ←
15:42:01 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to ask if implementers of validators if they can report which constraints are validated by their systems, as a way to get a view of coverage
Zakim IRC Bot: GK, you wanted to ask if implementers of validators if they can report which constraints are validated by their systems, as a way to get a view of coverage ←
15:42:58 <Luc> that's what I produced
Luc Moreau: that's what I produced ←
15:43:03 <Curt> edge cases
Curt Tilmes: edge cases ←
15:43:11 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
15:43:15 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
15:43:32 <GK> jcheney: small constraint-focused tests are probably more useful than big multi-constraint provenance data
James Cheney: small constraint-focused tests are probably more useful than big multi-constraint provenance data ←
15:43:49 <zednik> @GK, yes, the constraint branch of the survey allows the user to specify constraint coverage
Stephan Zednik: @GK, yes, the constraint branch of the survey allows the user to specify constraint coverage ←
15:44:32 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:44:50 <jcheney> q-
James Cheney: q- ←
15:44:58 <GK> @zednik I was thinking about having the *validators* report the constraint tests invoked by test data presented
@zednik I was thinking about having the *validators* report the constraint tests invoked by test data presented ←
15:45:34 <zednik> @GK that would be a nice feature of a validator
Stephan Zednik: @GK that would be a nice feature of a validator ←
15:45:59 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:46:01 <Luc> ack pg
Luc Moreau: ack pg ←
15:46:04 <jcheney> @ivan agree we need realistic examples too (for scalability etc.) not just corner cases
James Cheney: @ivan agree we need realistic examples too (for scalability etc.) not just corner cases ←
15:46:04 <Dong> @zednik, I think we're not going to ask people to fill the constraint questionnaire, but submit the results of the tests as per 1.2 in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/testcases/constraints/process.html
Trung Huynh: @zednik, I think we're not going to ask people to fill the constraint questionnaire, but submit the results of the tests as per 1.2 in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/testcases/constraints/process.html ←
15:46:38 <Curt> use simple identifiers, and put a structured comment with a list of constraints exercised at the top of each test case, use a script to pull those comments into a matrix to embed in the report
Curt Tilmes: use simple identifiers, and put a structured comment with a list of constraints exercised at the top of each test case, use a script to pull those comments into a matrix to embed in the report ←
15:46:39 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:46:40 <zednik> @Dong, but does submitting the results of tests give us an idea of supported coverage?
Stephan Zednik: @Dong, but does submitting the results of tests give us an idea of supported coverage? ←
15:46:40 <GK> Luc: useful to have tests marked with constraints they aer supposed to exercise, separately from examples that are additional data that can be used for testing/discussion
Luc Moreau: useful to have tests marked with constraints they aer supposed to exercise, separately from examples that are additional data that can be used for testing/discussion ←
15:46:42 <Luc> ack luc
Luc Moreau: ack luc ←
15:47:42 <Dong> @zednik, that's why we need to catalogue the test cases against specific constraints
Trung Huynh: @zednik, that's why we need to catalogue the test cases against specific constraints ←
15:48:14 <GK> Luc: what do we need to prepare for the CR teleconference?
Luc Moreau: what do we need to prepare for the CR teleconference? ←
15:48:23 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:49:33 <GK> Luc: propose to bootstrap the process with a few examples, then ask for volunteers to bulk out
Luc Moreau: propose to bootstrap the process with a few examples, then ask for volunteers to bulk out ←
15:51:20 <GK> … concern that as test case author and developer, test cases fro not properly independent
… concern that as test case author and developer, test cases fro not properly independent ←
15:52:17 <GK> Ivan: would be concerned if you were the *only* implementer, but if other implementers do similar, and than merge test cases, then there's a reasonable level of cross-checking that takes place.
Ivan Herman: would be concerned if you were the *only* implementer, but if other implementers do similar, and than merge test cases, then there's a reasonable level of cross-checking that takes place. ←
15:52:22 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:52:27 <Paolo> nothing substantial
Paolo Missier: nothing substantial ←
15:52:39 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
15:52:46 <CraigTrim> q+
Craig Trim: q+ ←
15:52:55 <Paolo> my focus is to explore the boundaries of what can be supported using a particular implementation model
Paolo Missier: my focus is to explore the boundaries of what can be supported using a particular implementation model ←
15:53:44 <GK> @paul: even if you just use Luc's test cases, that's effectively an independent review of those tests
@paul: even if you just use Luc's test cases, that's effectively an independent review of those tests ←
15:53:50 <Luc> ack jch
Luc Moreau: ack jch ←
15:53:50 <Paolo> (very hard to follow James BTW)
Paolo Missier: (very hard to follow James BTW) ←
15:53:58 <Paolo> yes
Paolo Missier: yes ←
15:54:02 <Paolo> thanks
Paolo Missier: thanks ←
15:54:31 <Paolo> I was planning to start from Luc's test suite
Paolo Missier: I was planning to start from Luc's test suite ←
15:54:37 <Paolo> I would be happy to use that
Paolo Missier: I would be happy to use that ←
15:54:39 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:54:43 <Luc> ack cr
Luc Moreau: ack cr ←
15:55:38 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:55:38 <GK> q+
q+ ←
15:56:12 <pgroth> ack GK
Paul Groth: ack GK ←
15:56:52 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
15:56:54 <Curt> That would help with example development too...
Curt Tilmes: That would help with example development too... ←
15:56:54 <Paolo> I will prob skip the next session but this was useful thanks
Paolo Missier: I will prob skip the next session but this was useful thanks ←
15:57:29 <GK> Session ends. Resume at 11:15, to discuss Primer
Session ends. Resume at 11:15, to discuss Primer ←
15:57:38 <Zakim> -Paolo
Zakim IRC Bot: -Paolo ←
15:57:43 <Dong> bye all
Trung Huynh: bye all ←
15:58:33 <zednik> signing off for the day, bye all
Stephan Zednik: signing off for the day, bye all ←
15:58:49 <Zakim> -stain
Zakim IRC Bot: -stain ←
16:04:13 <Zakim> -Dong
(No events recorded for 5 minutes)
Zakim IRC Bot: -Dong ←
16:17:20 <pgroth> Topic: Primer
(No events recorded for 13 minutes)
Summary: The group agreed to release the Primer as a working draft synchronised with the candidate recommendations. Simon agreed to do a final editor's check. Luc agreed to produce a small javascript file to ensure that prov documents are consistently cited by editors.
<pgroth> Summary: The group agreed to release the Primer as a working draft synchronised with the candidate recommendations. Simon agreed to do a final editor's check. Luc agreed to produce a small javascript file to ensure that prov documents are consistently cited by editors.
16:17:35 <pgroth> Scribe: CraigTrim
(Scribe set to Craig Trim)
16:18:08 <CraigTrim> pg: Primer - in particular the status and what we want to do about
Paul Groth: Primer - in particular the status and what we want to do about ←
16:18:32 <pgroth> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html
Paul Groth: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/primer/Primer.html ←
16:18:33 <CraigTrim> smiles: big changes in draft; primarily to clarify/fix problems, but more extensive work on samples
Simon Miles: big changes in draft; primarily to clarify/fix problems, but more extensive work on samples ←
16:18:49 <pgroth> craig use tab :-)
Paul Groth: craig use tab :-) ←
16:18:53 <pgroth> so pgroth
Paul Groth: so pgroth ←
16:19:01 <pgroth> or smiles
Paul Groth: or smiles ←
16:20:21 <ivan> (there is a funny empty arrowhead on the figure right before section 3.6)
Ivan Herman: (there is a funny empty arrowhead on the figure right before section 3.6) ←
16:20:56 <CraigTrim> smiles: simon made various corrections suggested by Ivan - what prov-n means for arguments,
Simon Miles: simon made various corrections suggested by Ivan - what prov-n means for arguments, ←
16:21:09 <ivan> (missing arrowhead on the figure right before 3.9, pointing at ex:compile)
Ivan Herman: (missing arrowhead on the figure right before 3.9, pointing at ex:compile) ←
16:21:36 <CraigTrim> smiles: also at some point want to include something on collection - this would be useful in primer (show relationship between web page and image on web page)
Simon Miles: also at some point want to include something on collection - this would be useful in primer (show relationship between web page and image on web page) ←
16:21:49 <CraigTrim> smiles: this will be moved to next working draft, but not on this one
Simon Miles: this will be moved to next working draft, but not on this one ←
16:22:36 <CraigTrim> smiles: two issues raised on primer; implements and informedBy - this might go into the appendix and one issue (now resolved) but need stephan to close, about delegation
Simon Miles: two issues raised on primer; implements and informedBy - this might go into the appendix and one issue (now resolved) but need stephan to close, about delegation ←
16:22:52 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:22:54 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:22:55 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
16:23:01 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
16:24:15 <CraigTrim> pgroth: prov-dm should be normative
Paul Groth: prov-dm should be normative ←
16:24:40 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:25:07 <CraigTrim> pgroth: Is this ready for the CR doc as is?
Paul Groth: Is this ready for the CR doc as is? ←
16:25:09 <CraigTrim> smiles: yes
Simon Miles: yes ←
16:25:11 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:25:32 <CraigTrim> pgroth: let's vote on releasing as working draft now - as we did yesterday for CR
Paul Groth: let's vote on releasing as working draft now - as we did yesterday for CR ←
16:25:36 <CraigTrim> pgroth: add editor's check
Paul Groth: add editor's check ←
16:25:40 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
16:25:53 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
16:25:56 <pgroth> action: smiles editor's check on the primer
ACTION: smiles editor's check on the primer ←
16:25:56 <trackbot> Created ACTION-147 - Editor's check on the primer [on Simon Miles - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-147 - Editor's check on the primer [on Simon Miles - due 2012-11-17]. ←
16:25:58 <ivan> ack Luc
Ivan Herman: ack Luc ←
16:26:20 <CraigTrim> Luc: as part of this editorial action, bibliography needs updating because it doesn't have right editors from some specs
Luc Moreau: as part of this editorial action, bibliography needs updating because it doesn't have right editors from some specs ←
16:26:28 <CraigTrim> Luc: do we need to use short URIs?
Luc Moreau: do we need to use short URIs? ←
16:26:36 <ivan> q-
Ivan Herman: q- ←
16:26:37 <CraigTrim> ivan: yes - it's more consistent
Ivan Herman: yes - it's more consistent ←
16:26:59 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:27:05 <CraigTrim> Luc: I will produce a javascript file that has bibliographic entries - and we can share this across
Luc Moreau: I will produce a javascript file that has bibliographic entries - and we can share this across ←
16:27:28 <Luc> action: Luc to produce js file with biblio entries for prov documents
ACTION: Luc to produce js file with biblio entries for prov documents ←
16:27:28 <trackbot> Created ACTION-148 - Produce js file with biblio entries for prov documents [on Luc Moreau - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-148 - Produce js file with biblio entries for prov documents [on Luc Moreau - due 2012-11-17]. ←
16:27:34 <CraigTrim> smiles: do we want an ack. on public comments by robert prior to deployment?
Simon Miles: do we want an ack. on public comments by robert prior to deployment? ←
16:27:40 <CraigTrim> pgroth: not necessarily if we have sent out a reply
Paul Groth: not necessarily if we have sent out a reply ←
16:27:52 <CraigTrim> pgroth: in particular if we've tried to address his comments somewhere
Paul Groth: in particular if we've tried to address his comments somewhere ←
16:27:55 <CraigTrim> pgroth: this is also a note
Paul Groth: this is also a note ←
16:28:09 <CraigTrim> smiles: can I set a deadline for which the WG can say they are happy with the responses?
Simon Miles: can I set a deadline for which the WG can say they are happy with the responses? ←
16:28:21 <CraigTrim> pgroth: WG will say that it's fine ...
Paul Groth: WG will say that it's fine ... ←
16:28:37 <CraigTrim> smiles: will send a reminder
Simon Miles: will send a reminder ←
16:29:01 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:29:33 <pgroth> proposed: release primer as working draft synchronized with CR given that all editorial actions are complete
PROPOSED: release primer as working draft synchronized with CR given that all editorial actions are complete ←
16:29:40 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
16:29:41 <TomDN> +1
Tom De Nies: +1 ←
16:29:42 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
16:29:44 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
16:29:45 <lebot> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:29:46 <SamCoppens> +1
Sam Coppens: +1 ←
16:29:47 <hook> +1
16:29:50 <smiles> +1
Simon Miles: +1 ←
16:29:54 <CraigTrim> +1
+1 ←
16:30:06 <pgroth> accepted: release primer as working draft synchronized with CR given that all editorial actions are complete
RESOLVED: release primer as working draft synchronized with CR given that all editorial actions are complete ←
16:30:34 <Zakim> -smiles
Zakim IRC Bot: -smiles ←
16:30:50 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-DC
Summary: Discussed the prov-dc mapping. Ivan was unsure that we were viewing the correct version. Paul agreed to check this with Daniel. Simon and Craig agreed to review the document. The group confirmed that note's should use the prov namespace.
<pgroth> Summary: Discussed the prov-dc mapping. Ivan was unsure that we were viewing the correct version. Paul agreed to check this with Daniel. Simon and Craig agreed to review the document. The group confirmed that note's should use the prov namespace.
16:31:00 <CraigTrim> pgroth: this is important mapping
Paul Groth: this is important mapping ←
16:31:03 <Zakim> +??P0
Zakim IRC Bot: +??P0 ←
16:31:12 <smiles> zakim, ??P0
Simon Miles: zakim, ??P0 ←
16:31:12 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P0', smiles
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand '??P0', smiles ←
16:31:15 <CraigTrim> pgroth: who has worked on this mapping? anyone?
Paul Groth: who has worked on this mapping? anyone? ←
16:31:15 <smiles> zakim, ??P0 is me
Simon Miles: zakim, ??P0 is me ←
16:31:15 <Zakim> +smiles; got it
Zakim IRC Bot: +smiles; got it ←
16:32:05 <CraigTrim> pgroth: update - luc & I have read through it the other day - we think all content is there but the doc needs quite a bit of review and sculpting in terms of the text
Paul Groth: update - luc & I have read through it the other day - we think all content is there but the doc needs quite a bit of review and sculpting in terms of the text ←
16:32:22 <CraigTrim> pgroth: lot of informal language ... there needs to be a check that lang is more like a spec - more precision
Paul Groth: lot of informal language ... there needs to be a check that lang is more like a spec - more precision ←
16:32:30 <CraigTrim> pgroth: are all mappings in fact correct?
Paul Groth: are all mappings in fact correct? ←
16:32:39 <CraigTrim> pgroth: think most of them are, but need to check them through
Paul Groth: think most of them are, but need to check them through ←
16:32:53 <CraigTrim> pgroth: so would like another round of review - a second round prior to working draft
Paul Groth: so would like another round of review - a second round prior to working draft ←
16:33:10 <CraigTrim> Luc: we want to check if mapping to prov is correct - we had identified a couple of issues
Luc Moreau: we want to check if mapping to prov is correct - we had identified a couple of issues ←
16:33:16 <CraigTrim> Luc: then someone to help with some of the english
Luc Moreau: then someone to help with some of the english ←
16:33:33 <CraigTrim> pgroth: comments we had include ns for dc-prov not correctly entered, needs to be cleared that it's the prov ns
Paul Groth: comments we had include ns for dc-prov not correctly entered, needs to be cleared that it's the prov ns ←
16:33:44 <CraigTrim> pgroth: there is graph inside doc not compat with our doc style
Paul Groth: there is graph inside doc not compat with our doc style ←
16:34:14 <CraigTrim> pgroth: some naming is different - "publication activity" - activity is appended to the end of definitions
Paul Groth: some naming is different - "publication activity" - activity is appended to the end of definitions ←
16:34:22 <CraigTrim> pgroth: and again emphasizing informal use of lang
Paul Groth: and again emphasizing informal use of lang ←
16:34:27 <pgroth> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/6b795ed2e6c9/dc-note/Overview.html
Paul Groth: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/6b795ed2e6c9/dc-note/Overview.html ←
16:34:33 <CraigTrim> I can help
I can help ←
16:34:36 <smiles> I can review and help edit for style (I should have before)
Simon Miles: I can review and help edit for style (I should have before) ←
16:34:40 <Curt> I'll review the language/expression, but I'm not a DC expert..
Curt Tilmes: I'll review the language/expression, but I'm not a DC expert.. ←
16:34:40 <lebot> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
16:35:19 <CraigTrim> ivan: are we sure this URL is the latest version?
Ivan Herman: are we sure this URL is the latest version? ←
16:35:41 <CraigTrim> ivan: I had similar comments, and had replies that things were changed - so let's make sure we have the right draft
Ivan Herman: I had similar comments, and had replies that things were changed - so let's make sure we have the right draft ←
16:36:00 <CraigTrim> pgroth: will email and ask authors for most current version
Paul Groth: will email and ask authors for most current version ←
16:36:30 <CraigTrim> pgroth: I want this as working draft for candidate rec in time - and the version above not ready
Paul Groth: I want this as working draft for candidate rec in time - and the version above not ready ←
16:36:38 <CraigTrim> ivan: in mercurial there's a later version
Ivan Herman: in mercurial there's a later version ←
16:36:58 <ivan> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/ef08de088793/dc-note/Overview.html
Ivan Herman: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/ef08de088793/dc-note/Overview.html ←
16:37:07 <CraigTrim> ivan: this URL comes from mercurial
Ivan Herman: this URL comes from mercurial ←
16:37:58 <pgroth> action: pgroth check for the current version of dublin core mapping + then send email to tim and craig for review
ACTION: pgroth check for the current version of dublin core mapping + then send email to tim and craig for review ←
16:37:58 <trackbot> Created ACTION-149 - Check for the current version of dublin core mapping + then send email to tim and craig for review [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-149 - Check for the current version of dublin core mapping + then send email to tim and craig for review [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17]. ←
16:38:18 <Curt> Daniel changed the one on HG on Oct. 28
Curt Tilmes: Daniel changed the one on HG on Oct. 28 ←
16:39:23 <pgroth> accepted: short name for prov-dc is prov-dc and the namespace should be prov:
RESOLVED: short name for prov-dc is prov-dc and the namespace should be prov: ←
16:40:58 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:41:28 <CraigTrim> pgroth: on agenda - next thing is time tabling but I think in this primer (dc space) we should talk about FAQ
Paul Groth: on agenda - next thing is time tabling but I think in this primer (dc space) we should talk about FAQ ←
16:41:29 <pgroth> Topic: FAQ
Summary: Paul discussed the important role that the FAQ seems to be playing as an outlet for best practice and intuition. He asked for volunteers to update the FAQ. The following members agreed to produce an FAQ entry. Simon - influence/involved, Tom - something, Curt - one, Tim - FOAF and PROV, Hook ISO linage and PROV, Paul - scruffy and proper.
<pgroth> Summary: Paul discussed the important role that the FAQ seems to be playing as an outlet for best practice and intuition. He asked for volunteers to update the FAQ. The following members agreed to produce an FAQ entry. Simon - influence/involved, Tom - something, Curt - one, Tim - FOAF and PROV, Hook ISO linage and PROV, Paul - scruffy and proper.
16:41:39 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/PROV-FAQ
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/PROV-FAQ ←
16:42:56 <CraigTrim> pgroth: lot of responses gave to external reviewers that were quite informal
Paul Groth: lot of responses gave to external reviewers that were quite informal ←
16:43:00 <CraigTrim> pgroth: lot of intuition about the design of prov, in addition to modeling (how do you use constructs, best ways, etc)
Paul Groth: lot of intuition about the design of prov, in addition to modeling (how do you use constructs, best ways, etc) ←
16:43:04 <CraigTrim> pgroth: people want hints - best practices - about where to use constructs
Paul Groth: people want hints - best practices - about where to use constructs ←
16:43:07 <CraigTrim> pgroth: and design decisions that underly the entire spec (scruffy vs proper).
Paul Groth: and design decisions that underly the entire spec (scruffy vs proper). ←
16:43:26 <CraigTrim> pgroth: let's populate this FAQ with this info and it could evolve into best practices or another document ...
Paul Groth: let's populate this FAQ with this info and it could evolve into best practices or another document ... ←
16:43:38 <CraigTrim> pgroth: need contributions to updating/editing the FAQ with info - this is an easy task
Paul Groth: need contributions to updating/editing the FAQ with info - this is an easy task ←
16:43:42 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:43:47 <CraigTrim> pgroth: we want to sign up people for this task
Paul Groth: we want to sign up people for this task ←
16:43:52 <smiles> q+
Simon Miles: q+ ←
16:44:12 <CraigTrim> smiles: what is relation between FAQ and primer?
Simon Miles: what is relation between FAQ and primer? ←
16:44:25 <CraigTrim> smiles: we originally had a third section in primer for FAQ but was then removed
Simon Miles: we originally had a third section in primer for FAQ but was then removed ←
16:44:32 <CraigTrim> smiles: is this a good section for it to me, or should it remain elsewhere?
Simon Miles: is this a good section for it to me, or should it remain elsewhere? ←
16:44:47 <CraigTrim> pgroth: idea is that FAQ can be updated after primer. The primer will eventually become static
Paul Groth: idea is that FAQ can be updated after primer. The primer will eventually become static ←
16:44:55 <CraigTrim> pgroth: so making FAQ separate is a good idea
Paul Groth: so making FAQ separate is a good idea ←
16:45:12 <pgroth> ack smiles
Paul Groth: ack smiles ←
16:45:42 <CraigTrim> ivan: just to clarify - semantic web wiki - there will be a separate page for prov, as there is today for RDF
Ivan Herman: just to clarify - semantic web wiki - there will be a separate page for prov, as there is today for RDF ←
16:45:47 <CraigTrim> pgroth: already there
Paul Groth: already there ←
16:46:05 <CraigTrim> ivan: link this page in from home
Ivan Herman: link this page in from home ←
16:46:23 <CraigTrim> ivan: it's a more generic space that will remain a wiki for this community to update FAQ etc
Ivan Herman: it's a more generic space that will remain a wiki for this community to update FAQ etc ←
16:46:39 <CraigTrim> ivan: when WG closes, WG wiki will become read only - so community work can still happen on semantic web wiki
Ivan Herman: when WG closes, WG wiki will become read only - so community work can still happen on semantic web wiki ←
16:46:59 <CraigTrim> pgroth: any volunteers - just one FAQ entry?
Paul Groth: any volunteers - just one FAQ entry? ←
16:47:10 <lebot> q?
Timothy Lebo: q? ←
16:47:18 <smiles> I can write one for the influenced/involved difference
Simon Miles: I can write one for the influenced/involved difference ←
16:47:23 <TomDN> I'll do at least 1 entry :)
Tom De Nies: I'll do at least 1 entry :) ←
16:47:38 <TomDN> (How do I refer to other PROV bundles?) ;)
Tom De Nies: (How do I refer to other PROV bundles?) ;) ←
16:47:44 <Curt> I'll do at least 1..
Curt Tilmes: I'll do at least 1.. ←
16:47:47 <lebot> +1 for why we didn't use FOAF
Timothy Lebo: +1 for why we didn't use FOAF ←
16:48:34 <Curt> Hook will write one about ISO lineage vs. PROV
Curt Tilmes: Hook will write one about ISO lineage vs. PROV ←
16:49:36 <pgroth> accepted: Tim, Curt, Hook, Tom, Simon, Paul volunteer to create faq wiki entries
RESOLVED: Tim, Curt, Hook, Tom, Simon, Paul volunteer to create faq wiki entries ←
16:49:52 <ivan> (b.t.w., when we go to CR, I will also ask for a prov 'button' like the ones n http://www.w3.org/2007/10/sw-logos.html)
Ivan Herman: (b.t.w., when we go to CR, I will also ask for a prov 'button' like the ones n http://www.w3.org/2007/10/sw-logos.html) ←
16:50:28 <pgroth> Topic: Messaging on document reading
Summary: The group discussed the problem of readers looking at the wrong specification first (e.g. starting with constraints not the primer) and thus being given a false impression. The group agreed that the overview was important from this perspective. It was agreed to add to the abstract of each document the following sentence: "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents." The group also revised in-situ the boilerplate about how to read documents. It was noted that we should be talking about the "PROV Family of Documents" not the "PROV family of specifications"
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the problem of readers looking at the wrong specification first (e.g. starting with constraints not the primer) and thus being given a false impression. The group agreed that the overview was important from this perspective. It was agreed to add to the abstract of each document the following sentence: "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents." The group also revised in-situ the boilerplate about how to read documents. It was noted that we should be talking about the "PROV Family of Documents" not the "PROV family of specifications"
16:50:36 <Luc> @ivan, do you mean an official prov logo?
Luc Moreau: @ivan, do you mean an official prov logo? ←
16:51:04 <CraigTrim> pgroth: we have this issue where people read the constraints document first - before primer, before ontologies ... and they get scared
Paul Groth: we have this issue where people read the constraints document first - before primer, before ontologies ... and they get scared ←
16:51:13 <TomDN> Isn't that why we'll have PROV-OVERVIEW?
Tom De Nies: Isn't that why we'll have PROV-OVERVIEW? ←
16:51:29 <CraigTrim> pgroth: people go into wrong document - gives false impression
Paul Groth: people go into wrong document - gives false impression ←
16:51:39 <CraigTrim> pgroth: prov constriants for people writing validators ...
Paul Groth: prov constriants for people writing validators ... ←
16:51:46 <CraigTrim> pgroth: how do we get people to go to the right document?
Paul Groth: how do we get people to go to the right document? ←
16:52:03 <CraigTrim> pgroth: we have the purpose of each document in the header of each document
Paul Groth: we have the purpose of each document in the header of each document ←
16:52:11 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:52:22 <Curt> Link to the YouTube intro talk
Curt Tilmes: Link to the YouTube intro talk ←
16:52:24 <CraigTrim> q+
q+ ←
16:52:49 <smiles> "This is not the document to read first." :)
Simon Miles: "This is not the document to read first." :) ←
16:52:57 <pgroth> color coding - for type of user
Paul Groth: color coding - for type of user ←
16:52:59 <lebot> +1 @GK, easy to glaze over the top of every W3C doc b/c it's boilerplate.
Timothy Lebo: +1 @GK, easy to glaze over the top of every W3C doc b/c it's boilerplate. ←
16:53:02 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
16:53:06 <pgroth> ack CraigTrim
Paul Groth: ack CraigTrim ←
16:53:09 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-overview-20091027/
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-overview-20091027/ ←
16:53:09 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
16:53:16 <CraigTrim> ivan: this URL has overview for OWL
Ivan Herman: this URL has overview for OWL ←
16:53:18 <CraigTrim> ivan: OWL has similar issue
Ivan Herman: OWL has similar issue ←
16:53:44 <CraigTrim> ivan: toward end of document there is table with color coding to give 1 sentence on what various docs are for
Ivan Herman: toward end of document there is table with color coding to give 1 sentence on what various docs are for ←
16:53:59 <CraigTrim> ivan: having something like this will be important
Ivan Herman: having something like this will be important ←
16:54:15 <CraigTrim> ivan: does not have to be identical or as complicate to URL above, but use as guidance
Ivan Herman: does not have to be identical or as complicate to URL above, but use as guidance ←
16:54:24 <CraigTrim> ivan: this is starting point in terms of references
Ivan Herman: this is starting point in terms of references ←
16:54:45 <CraigTrim> pgroth: has already taken this action
Paul Groth: has already taken this action ←
16:54:45 <pgroth> Q?
Paul Groth: Q? ←
16:55:10 <CraigTrim> q+
q+ ←
16:55:17 <Luc> q+
Luc Moreau: q+ ←
16:55:20 <pgroth> ack CraigTrim
Paul Groth: ack CraigTrim ←
16:55:24 <pgroth> ac Luc
Paul Groth: ac Luc ←
16:55:26 <pgroth> ack Luc
Paul Groth: ack Luc ←
16:55:33 <ivan> Another example: http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/
Ivan Herman: Another example: http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/ ←
16:55:42 <CraigTrim> pgroth: we could have boilerplate, color coding, overview/table
Paul Groth: we could have boilerplate, color coding, overview/table ←
16:55:46 <CraigTrim> CraigTrim: not mutually exclusive
Craig Trim: not mutually exclusive ←
16:55:56 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:55:58 <CraigTrim> ivan: this URL above - similar approach, but also different than OWL
Ivan Herman: this URL above - similar approach, but also different than OWL ←
16:56:03 <CraigTrim> ivan: semi primer -
Ivan Herman: semi primer - ←
16:56:15 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:56:16 <CraigTrim> Luc: what changes should we make in our existing docs?
Luc Moreau: what changes should we make in our existing docs? ←
16:56:20 <CraigTrim> ivan: nothing ...
Ivan Herman: nothing ... ←
16:56:27 <CraigTrim> Luc: do we need to edit current specs?
Luc Moreau: do we need to edit current specs? ←
16:56:39 <CraigTrim> pgroth: you can leave boilerplate that is good guidance (assuming it's read)
Paul Groth: you can leave boilerplate that is good guidance (assuming it's read) ←
16:56:46 <CraigTrim> pgroth: but additionally - what would we add - if any?
Paul Groth: but additionally - what would we add - if any? ←
16:57:06 <CraigTrim> pgroth: key is to add overview doc - and we can also add additional sentence/feature in each doc
Paul Groth: key is to add overview doc - and we can also add additional sentence/feature in each doc ←
16:57:33 <pgroth> "The OWL 2 Document Overview describes the overall state of OWL 2, and should be read before other OWL 2 documents."
Paul Groth: "The OWL 2 Document Overview describes the overall state of OWL 2, and should be read before other OWL 2 documents." ←
16:57:34 <CraigTrim> ivan: for SPARQL and OWL ... they have at beginning boilerplate that lists docs
Ivan Herman: for SPARQL and OWL ... they have at beginning boilerplate that lists docs ←
16:57:47 <CraigTrim> ivan: in there they also list the reference to overview
Ivan Herman: in there they also list the reference to overview ←
16:57:50 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
16:58:00 <GK> q+
Graham Klyne: q+ ←
16:58:05 <GK> q-
Graham Klyne: q- ←
16:58:06 <CraigTrim> ivan: SPARQL had 11 docs, most were rec. Prov only has 4 rec, so somewhat simpler
Ivan Herman: SPARQL had 11 docs, most were rec. Prov only has 4 rec, so somewhat simpler ←
16:58:06 <pgroth> ack gk
Paul Groth: ack gk ←
16:58:18 <Luc> q?
Luc Moreau: q? ←
16:58:18 <CraigTrim> GK: SPARQL doc are all hyperlinked, but we don't have this in the primer
Graham Klyne: SPARQL doc are all hyperlinked, but we don't have this in the primer ←
16:58:26 <CraigTrim> GK: hyperlinks will make nav simpler
Graham Klyne: hyperlinks will make nav simpler ←
16:59:18 <CraigTrim> pgroth: in primer there is boilerplate for prov family specs ...
Paul Groth: in primer there is boilerplate for prov family specs ... ←
16:59:44 <CraigTrim> smiles: are boilerplates centrally managed, or up to each editor to manage?
Simon Miles: are boilerplates centrally managed, or up to each editor to manage? ←
17:00:00 <CraigTrim> Luc: maybe we should make this a common javascript addition?
Luc Moreau: maybe we should make this a common javascript addition? ←
17:00:09 <GK> It's also a bug in PROV-AQ (no hyperlinks in the "family of specifications)
Graham Klyne: It's also a bug in PROV-AQ (no hyperlinks in the "family of specifications) ←
17:00:40 <CraigTrim> ivan: this editorial check should be done by hand - javascript may just take more time and have to debug etc
Ivan Herman: this editorial check should be done by hand - javascript may just take more time and have to debug etc ←
17:00:45 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
17:01:05 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
17:01:14 <CraigTrim> jcheney: suggest we make one clean copy we are all happy then copy+paste
James Cheney: suggest we make one clean copy we are all happy then copy+paste ←
17:01:27 <smiles> +1 to jcheney's suggestion
Simon Miles: +1 to jcheney's suggestion ←
17:02:28 <CraigTrim> pgroth: first there is question - we need to update status to be correct and it must be consistent
Paul Groth: first there is question - we need to update status to be correct and it must be consistent ←
17:02:47 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/ ←
17:02:54 <CraigTrim> Luc: we have two sections in above URL
Luc Moreau: we have two sections in above URL ←
17:03:08 <CraigTrim> Luc: (1) that documents and (2) that talks about how to read ... specs
Luc Moreau: (1) that documents and (2) that talks about how to read ... specs ←
17:03:25 <CraigTrim> Luc: list must be updated ...
Luc Moreau: list must be updated ... ←
17:04:12 <CraigTrim> Luc: how do we order? maintain existing order? or adjust ... ?
Luc Moreau: how do we order? maintain existing order? or adjust ... ? ←
17:04:19 <CraigTrim> ivan: starts with dm
Ivan Herman: starts with dm ←
17:04:26 <CraigTrim> Luc: should start with recs
Luc Moreau: should start with recs ←
17:04:31 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:04:43 <CraigTrim> pgroth: I think primer should be order of operations vs the recs
Paul Groth: I think primer should be order of operations vs the recs ←
17:04:56 <CraigTrim> pgroth: I would have notations first - primer, then maybe dm, then notations, constraints and then the notes
Paul Groth: I would have notations first - primer, then maybe dm, then notations, constraints and then the notes ←
17:05:12 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:05:13 <CraigTrim> Luc: that is how to read the family ...
Luc Moreau: that is how to read the family ... ←
17:05:56 <TomDN> +q
Tom De Nies: +q ←
17:06:00 <CraigTrim> ivan: my instinct is similar to Paul's ... we want reader to start with primer or better yet overview then primer (assuming overview exists)
Ivan Herman: my instinct is similar to Paul's ... we want reader to start with primer or better yet overview then primer (assuming overview exists) ←
17:06:20 <CraigTrim> ivan: "specifications are ... " - but neither primer nor overview are specs
Ivan Herman: "specifications are ... " - but neither primer nor overview are specs ←
17:06:34 <CraigTrim> ivan: make it clear in each of those whether this is note or rec
Ivan Herman: make it clear in each of those whether this is note or rec ←
17:06:42 <pgroth> ack TomDN
Paul Groth: ack TomDN ←
17:06:55 <CraigTrim> TomDN: I agree with Paul re: order - this is least confusing
Tom De Nies: I agree with Paul re: order - this is least confusing ←
17:07:13 <hook> q+
17:07:13 <CraigTrim> TomDN: but if you want to make sure recommendations stand out - do color coding, or specifically mention - or something like that
Tom De Nies: but if you want to make sure recommendations stand out - do color coding, or specifically mention - or something like that ←
17:07:19 <TomDN> -q
Tom De Nies: -q ←
17:08:19 <pgroth> q+
Paul Groth: q+ ←
17:08:22 <pgroth> ack hook
Paul Groth: ack hook ←
17:08:28 <CraigTrim> hook: sounds like there are more facets to each description now
Hook Hua: sounds like there are more facets to each description now ←
17:08:36 <CraigTrim> hook: so maybe table format shows each doc name and intention, then color code rows
Hook Hua: so maybe table format shows each doc name and intention, then color code rows ←
17:08:41 <CraigTrim> ivan: that should go in overview
Ivan Herman: that should go in overview ←
17:08:48 <CraigTrim> ivan: but perhaps not in each rec
Ivan Herman: but perhaps not in each rec ←
17:08:52 <jcheney> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-overview-20091027/#Documentation_Roadmap
James Cheney: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-overview-20091027/#Documentation_Roadmap ←
17:08:54 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
17:09:07 <CraigTrim> ivan: in overview this is good entry point
Ivan Herman: in overview this is good entry point ←
17:09:08 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
17:09:21 <pgroth> ack Curt
Paul Groth: ack Curt ←
17:09:22 <CraigTrim> Curt: in one of the presentations there is a diagram of one of the relatoinships - and that would really help on overview
Curt Tilmes: in one of the presentations there is a diagram of one of the relatoinships - and that would really help on overview ←
17:09:31 <CraigTrim> ivan: I will review overview
Ivan Herman: I will review overview ←
17:09:41 <pgroth> "The OWL 2 Document Overview describes the overall state of OWL 2, and should be read before other OWL 2 documents."
Paul Groth: "The OWL 2 Document Overview describes the overall state of OWL 2, and should be read before other OWL 2 documents." ←
17:10:00 <CraigTrim> pgroth: we should add something like this to every abstract in every spec
Paul Groth: we should add something like this to every abstract in every spec ←
17:10:07 <CraigTrim> +1
+1 ←
17:10:08 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
17:10:42 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
17:11:24 <Curt> With the link to PROV-OVERVIEW in the sentence
Curt Tilmes: With the link to PROV-OVERVIEW in the sentence ←
17:11:29 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/ ←
17:11:31 <CraigTrim> pgroth: so do we refer to overall as ... ? "prov" .. ?
Paul Groth: so do we refer to overall as ... ? "prov" .. ? ←
17:11:35 <ivan> http://www.w3.org/2007/10/sw-logos.html
Ivan Herman: http://www.w3.org/2007/10/sw-logos.html ←
17:12:30 <CraigTrim> pgroth: "prov family"
Paul Groth: "prov family" ←
17:12:41 <pgroth> approved add sentence "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents."
Paul Groth: approved add sentence "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents." ←
17:12:49 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:13:04 <CraigTrim> Luc: is this something that can be used to say "this is prov compliant"
Luc Moreau: is this something that can be used to say "this is prov compliant" ←
17:13:44 <pgroth> accepted: add sentence "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents." in the last sentence of the abstract of each specification
RESOLVED: add sentence "The PROV Document Overview describes the overall state of PROV, and should be read before other PROV documents." in the last sentence of the abstract of each specification ←
17:14:08 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:14:26 <CraigTrim> Luc: will commit changes for review
Luc Moreau: will commit changes for review ←
17:15:06 <pgroth> action: pgroth remind simon what he's supposed to do
ACTION: pgroth remind simon what he's supposed to do ←
17:15:06 <trackbot> Created ACTION-150 - Remind simon what he's supposed to do [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-150 - Remind simon what he's supposed to do [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17]. ←
17:15:31 <Luc> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html
Luc Moreau: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/prov-dm.html ←
17:15:52 <Curt> That sentence should link to the PROV-OVERVIEW document.
Curt Tilmes: That sentence should link to the PROV-OVERVIEW document. ←
17:16:39 <CraigTrim> pgroth: "prov family of specifications" ... but some of these aren't specs - is that ok? or "prov family of documents"
Paul Groth: "prov family of specifications" ... but some of these aren't specs - is that ok? or "prov family of documents" ←
17:16:49 <CraigTrim> pgroth: so this latter phrase should be used everywhere
Paul Groth: so this latter phrase should be used everywhere ←
17:16:52 <CraigTrim> ivan: only in status section
Ivan Herman: only in status section ←
17:17:12 <CraigTrim> ivan: how committed are we for notes will be published later?
Ivan Herman: how committed are we for notes will be published later? ←
17:17:22 <CraigTrim> Luc: we have to be cautious
Luc Moreau: we have to be cautious ←
17:17:51 <CraigTrim> ivan: I think dc ... for first public draft - we can trust it will be there - so ok to add to list
Ivan Herman: I think dc ... for first public draft - we can trust it will be there - so ok to add to list ←
17:17:58 <CraigTrim> ivan: pending is dictionary ... ?
Ivan Herman: pending is dictionary ... ? ←
17:18:09 <CraigTrim> pgroth: only want to put things there that are first public working draft
Paul Groth: only want to put things there that are first public working draft ←
17:18:16 <CraigTrim> Luc: we hope dc will be there in time
Luc Moreau: we hope dc will be there in time ←
17:18:29 <CraigTrim> ivan: pending dictionary, semantics ...
Ivan Herman: pending dictionary, semantics ... ←
17:18:40 <CraigTrim> Luc: will see if I can get mention ready in time for CR
Luc Moreau: will see if I can get mention ready in time for CR ←
17:18:46 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:19:00 <TomDN> PROV-LINKING !
Tom De Nies: PROV-LINKING ! ←
17:19:01 <CraigTrim> pgroth: can we use another ... the name prov-mention is ... can we use something else?
Paul Groth: can we use another ... the name prov-mention is ... can we use something else? ←
17:19:21 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:20:11 <CraigTrim> pgroth: remaining is time-tabling and out reach - planning out reach
Paul Groth: remaining is time-tabling and out reach - planning out reach ←
17:20:36 <CraigTrim> Luc: have Ivan explain what's coming up ...
Luc Moreau: have Ivan explain what's coming up ... ←
17:20:37 <pgroth> Topic: Planning
Summary: Ivan went over the steps going to Candidate Rec and then to Proposed Rec.
<pgroth> Summary: Ivan went over the steps going to Candidate Rec and then to Proposed Rec.
17:20:45 <CraigTrim> ivan: CR then PR ... these are the foremost steps
Ivan Herman: CR then PR ... these are the foremost steps ←
17:20:59 <CraigTrim> ivan: this requires approval formally from director that everything is kosher and can be published
Ivan Herman: this requires approval formally from director that everything is kosher and can be published ←
17:21:30 <CraigTrim> ivan: prior to physically publishing doc ... we have to have call (2 chairs, Ivan and editors optional)
Ivan Herman: prior to physically publishing doc ... we have to have call (2 chairs, Ivan and editors optional) ←
17:21:37 <CraigTrim> ivan: and also on W3C side 2 or 3 ppl
Ivan Herman: and also on W3C side 2 or 3 ppl ←
17:21:48 <CraigTrim> ivan: a tranistion call to defend our case that we did everything necessary
Ivan Herman: a tranistion call to defend our case that we did everything necessary ←
17:22:08 <CraigTrim> ivan: we answered all comments and record of that .... a clean plan ... we have covered all outstanding issues etc
Ivan Herman: we answered all comments and record of that .... a clean plan ... we have covered all outstanding issues etc ←
17:22:12 <pgroth> q+ to ask about call for implementations?
Paul Groth: q+ to ask about call for implementations? ←
17:22:13 <CraigTrim> ivan: proves we are done - this must be well documented and presented
Ivan Herman: proves we are done - this must be well documented and presented ←
17:22:22 <CraigTrim> Luc: is there an actual presentation?
Luc Moreau: is there an actual presentation? ←
17:22:33 <CraigTrim> ivan: we have telco - on telco there is agenda - various points
Ivan Herman: we have telco - on telco there is agenda - various points ←
17:22:46 <CraigTrim> ivan: we list various links - in those links (eg to impl plan)
Ivan Herman: we list various links - in those links (eg to impl plan) ←
17:22:52 <CraigTrim> ivan: so there is a pattern for that
Ivan Herman: so there is a pattern for that ←
17:23:06 <CraigTrim> ivan: we have to find right time of about an hour .. 5 people ...
Ivan Herman: we have to find right time of about an hour .. 5 people ... ←
17:23:17 <CraigTrim> ivan: means that timing this can be a challenge - so must prep
Ivan Herman: means that timing this can be a challenge - so must prep ←
17:23:34 <CraigTrim> ivan: to get to transition call there must be a call for all other working group chairs - tell them we declare ourselves ready
Ivan Herman: to get to transition call there must be a call for all other working group chairs - tell them we declare ourselves ready ←
17:23:48 <CraigTrim> ivan: tell them that we are going to impl and other working groups can object
Ivan Herman: tell them that we are going to impl and other working groups can object ←
17:24:15 <CraigTrim> ivan: this is the declaration of intent call ... and between this call and the transition call - there must be 5 biz days
Ivan Herman: this is the declaration of intent call ... and between this call and the transition call - there must be 5 biz days ←
17:24:24 <CraigTrim> ivan: this is how we calculate back our own timing
Ivan Herman: this is how we calculate back our own timing ←
17:24:42 <CraigTrim> this means if we say we want to publish on a given day in nov - then we have to come back ... a week or 2 weeks to be on safe side
this means if we say we want to publish on a given day in nov - then we have to come back ... a week or 2 weeks to be on safe side ←
17:24:48 <CraigTrim> ivan: to account for all readiness on our side
Ivan Herman: to account for all readiness on our side ←
17:25:01 <CraigTrim> ivan: we have to try to get date - then set date with webmaster that date of pub is OK
Ivan Herman: we have to try to get date - then set date with webmaster that date of pub is OK ←
17:25:26 <CraigTrim> ivan: when we call out to other WG - here it is - the document should not change after that point
Ivan Herman: when we call out to other WG - here it is - the document should not change after that point ←
17:25:30 <CraigTrim> ivan: that is point of readiness for docs
Ivan Herman: that is point of readiness for docs ←
17:25:41 <CraigTrim> ivan: only change is if we don't make it to proposed date, then things will change
Ivan Herman: only change is if we don't make it to proposed date, then things will change ←
17:25:48 <CraigTrim> pgroth: question about call for impl ...
Paul Groth: question about call for impl ... ←
17:25:53 <CraigTrim> ivan: this is official named CR
Ivan Herman: this is official named CR ←
17:26:12 <CraigTrim> ivan: you send out email to chairs - we intend to do CR - once the transition call happens and publication has happened
Ivan Herman: you send out email to chairs - we intend to do CR - once the transition call happens and publication has happened ←
17:26:21 <CraigTrim> ivan: then all members are told and it appears on home page
Ivan Herman: then all members are told and it appears on home page ←
17:26:25 <pgroth> ack pgroth
Paul Groth: ack pgroth ←
17:26:25 <Zakim> pgroth, you wanted to ask about call for implementations?
Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, you wanted to ask about call for implementations? ←
17:26:30 <CraigTrim> ivan: and we are looking for implementations
Ivan Herman: and we are looking for implementations ←
17:26:45 <CraigTrim> ivan: that will be W3C-side announcement of this
Ivan Herman: that will be W3C-side announcement of this ←
17:27:18 <CraigTrim> ivan: looking ahead for proposed rec - mechanism is set - proposed rec we will have same transition call to prove there has been an impl
Ivan Herman: looking ahead for proposed rec - mechanism is set - proposed rec we will have same transition call to prove there has been an impl ←
17:27:38 <CraigTrim> ivan: it is a similar mechanism - but at the end of PR, the team officially votes and members can agree yes or no to publish
Ivan Herman: it is a similar mechanism - but at the end of PR, the team officially votes and members can agree yes or no to publish ←
17:27:41 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
17:27:45 <CraigTrim> ivan: and we simply need enough votes
Ivan Herman: and we simply need enough votes ←
17:28:23 <CraigTrim> pgroth: what kinds of changes we can do between CR and PR?
Paul Groth: what kinds of changes we can do between CR and PR? ←
17:28:38 <CraigTrim> ivan: minimal
Ivan Herman: minimal ←
17:28:42 <CraigTrim> ivan: editorial can be done between PR and rec - even though this is stricter
Ivan Herman: editorial can be done between PR and rec - even though this is stricter ←
17:28:57 <CraigTrim> ivan: but beyond that guiding principle is that any change which would affect impl means we have to go back to last call
Ivan Herman: but beyond that guiding principle is that any change which would affect impl means we have to go back to last call ←
17:29:09 <CraigTrim> ivan: if we make a change that invalidates a validation process - we need that last call round again
Ivan Herman: if we make a change that invalidates a validation process - we need that last call round again ←
17:29:18 <CraigTrim> ivan: editorial change is ok
Ivan Herman: editorial change is ok ←
17:30:35 <CraigTrim> ivan: changes are a case by case basis - but basically, are impls changed? this is guiding principle
Ivan Herman: changes are a case by case basis - but basically, are impls changed? this is guiding principle ←
17:30:47 <jcheney> q+
James Cheney: q+ ←
17:30:53 <pgroth> ack jcheney
Paul Groth: ack jcheney ←
17:31:13 <CraigTrim> jcheney: for example in constraints doc where I think what I've written in clear - so putting more detail is OK
James Cheney: for example in constraints doc where I think what I've written in clear - so putting more detail is OK ←
17:31:26 <CraigTrim> ivan: yes - clarification is always ok - it helps implementation
Ivan Herman: yes - clarification is always ok - it helps implementation ←
17:32:09 <CraigTrim> ivan: let's set a date for the CR pub
Ivan Herman: let's set a date for the CR pub ←
17:35:31 <CraigTrim> jcheney: suggest that doc list be consistent in ordering
James Cheney: suggest that doc list be consistent in ordering ←
17:35:39 <CraigTrim> jcheney: eg read prov-n before constraints
James Cheney: eg read prov-n before constraints ←
17:36:02 <CraigTrim> ivan: re-ordering is a good idea
Ivan Herman: re-ordering is a good idea ←
17:40:40 <pgroth> start back at 1:30
Paul Groth: start back at 1:30 ←
18:34:16 <pgroth> Topic: Outreach & Planning
(No events recorded for 53 minutes)
Summary: The group discussed how to encourage implementations. Paul agreed to write a section in the call for implementations that gives guidance to implementors defining why they should implement but also what they should return in the survey and why this is beneficial for them. Craig agreed to writing a motivating paragraph around use cases. The group agreed to the following schedule: Announcement of intention to go to CR, Nov. 27, 2012; Request for CR Publication Dec 4, 2012; Publication of CR of recs along with notes for prov-dc, prov-primer, prov-xml, prov-overview: Dec 11, 2012; End of CR period Feb. 1, 2013. As per the discussion on the day before the group agreed to put mentionOf in a separate note and also approved public responses for the primer.
<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed how to encourage implementations. Paul agreed to write a section in the call for implementations that gives guidance to implementors defining why they should implement but also what they should return in the survey and why this is beneficial for them. Craig agreed to writing a motivating paragraph around use cases. The group agreed to the following schedule: Announcement of intention to go to CR, Nov. 27, 2012; Request for CR Publication Dec 4, 2012; Publication of CR of recs along with notes for prov-dc, prov-primer, prov-xml, prov-overview: Dec 11, 2012; End of CR period Feb. 1, 2013. As per the discussion on the day before the group agreed to put mentionOf in a separate note and also approved public responses for the primer.
18:34:45 <smiles> yes
Simon Miles: yes ←
18:35:01 <hook> pgroth: wrt to outreach, couple of things. need easier way/entry point for external implementors to know what we want them to do.
Paul Groth: wrt to outreach, couple of things. need easier way/entry point for external implementors to know what we want them to do. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:35:23 <hook> ... would be good to have text on guidance, why it is important, what they get in return.
Hook Hua: ... would be good to have text on guidance, why it is important, what they get in return. ←
18:36:13 <hook> pgroth: I'll give it a go. could add separate section for request for implementations.
Paul Groth: I'll give it a go. could add separate section for request for implementations. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:36:20 <pgroth> action: pgroth to add a section on implementing prov and why and how
ACTION: pgroth to add a section on implementing prov and why and how ←
18:36:20 <trackbot> Created ACTION-151 - Add a section on implementing prov and why and how [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-151 - Add a section on implementing prov and why and how [on Paul Groth - due 2012-11-17]. ←
18:36:51 <CraigTrim> q+
q+ ←
18:36:57 <hook> pgroth: anything we can do to encourage more implementations of PROV. Any ideas?
Paul Groth: anything we can do to encourage more implementations of PROV. Any ideas? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:37:31 <hook> CraigTrim: business to have use cases. want to target the enterprise. To help them in their line of business.
Craig Trim: business to have use cases. want to target the enterprise. To help them in their line of business. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:38:04 <hook> ... there are people in healthcare, auditing and compliance, risk management, military context for following rules of engagement
Hook Hua: ... there are people in healthcare, auditing and compliance, risk management, military context for following rules of engagement ←
18:38:18 <hook> ... legal and police work, logistical supply chains.
Hook Hua: ... legal and police work, logistical supply chains. ←
18:38:33 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
18:38:35 <ivan> q+
Ivan Herman: q+ ←
18:38:39 <hook> ... I can take this up. a paragraph of directed text of how it can help in this context.
Hook Hua: ... I can take this up. a paragraph of directed text of how it can help in this context. ←
18:38:40 <ivan> ack CraigTrim
Ivan Herman: ack CraigTrim ←
18:38:48 <hook> pgroth: would also help to have a template.
Paul Groth: would also help to have a template. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:39:41 <hook> ivan: would also be great if use case also has 1-2 sentences of why provenance is important and how the model we have is useful this way.
Ivan Herman: would also be great if use case also has 1-2 sentences of why provenance is important and how the model we have is useful this way. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:39:49 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/User_Requirements
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/User_Requirements ←
18:39:58 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Use_Cases#Original_Use_Cases_Proposed
Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki/Use_Cases#Original_Use_Cases_Proposed ←
18:40:22 <pgroth> action: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance
ACTION: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance ←
18:40:22 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find CraigTrim. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find CraigTrim. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>. ←
18:41:00 <pgroth> action: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance
ACTION: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance ←
18:41:00 <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find CraigTrim. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, couldn't find CraigTrim. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users>. ←
18:41:14 <lebot> https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users?login
Timothy Lebo: https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/users?login ←
18:41:19 <pgroth> action: Craig Trim to write a paragraph mot�ivating needs for provenance
ACTION: Craig Trim to write a paragraph mot�ivating needs for provenance ←
18:41:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-152 - Trim to write a paragraph mot�ivating needs for provenance [on Craig Trim - due 2012-11-17].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-152 - Trim to write a paragraph mot�ivating needs for provenance [on Craig Trim - due 2012-11-17]. ←
18:41:28 <hook> GK: what time frame are we looking at for this outreach material?
Graham Klyne: what time frame are we looking at for this outreach material? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:42:11 <hook> pgroth: ASAP, but we don't really have a deadline except for end of WG. But it would be useful to get this out to the implementors. To encourage adoption.
Paul Groth: ASAP, but we don't really have a deadline except for end of WG. But it would be useful to get this out to the implementors. To encourage adoption. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:42:19 <hook> ... we are not at point where specs are stable.
Hook Hua: ... we are not at point where specs are stable. ←
18:42:43 <hook> CraigTrim: has blog post with 1500 hit. on abridged prov primer.
Craig Trim: has blog post with 1500 hit. on abridged prov primer. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:42:59 <hook> ivan: would it be possible to make a copy of that?
Ivan Herman: would it be possible to make a copy of that? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:43:04 <lebot> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/OutreachInformation
Timothy Lebo: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/OutreachInformation ←
18:43:20 <hook> ... could give completed blog text to chairs.
Hook Hua: ... could give completed blog text to chairs. ←
18:43:28 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
18:43:32 <pgroth> ack ivan
Paul Groth: ack ivan ←
18:43:59 <hook> pgroth: we had a question on is there a simple implementation that we could do?
Paul Groth: we had a question on is there a simple implementation that we could do? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:44:59 <hook> ivan: Christine would like to have a webpage where I can fill out provenance form and it would produce PROV RDF and/or Turtle output.
Ivan Herman: Christine would like to have a webpage where I can fill out provenance form and it would produce PROV RDF and/or Turtle output. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:45:12 <hook> lebot: like the FOAF generator.
Timothy Lebo: like the FOAF generator. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:45:14 <lebot> http://www.ldodds.com/foaf/foaf-a-matic
Timothy Lebo: http://www.ldodds.com/foaf/foaf-a-matic ←
18:45:32 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
18:45:55 <pgroth> ack Curt
Paul Groth: ack Curt ←
18:46:02 <hook> ivan: from my own experience, going back band forth to find the right terms. would be useful for this example.
Ivan Herman: from my own experience, going back band forth to find the right terms. would be useful for this example. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:46:47 <hook> Curt: we had information modeling people working with scientists. would be useful to tie it all together.
Curt Tilmes: we had information modeling people working with scientists. would be useful to tie it all together. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:46:56 <lebot> q+
Timothy Lebo: q+ ←
18:47:19 <hook> ivan: for my use case, it's only me. but would still be a useful service.
Ivan Herman: for my use case, it's only me. but would still be a useful service. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:47:46 <pgroth> ack lebot
Paul Groth: ack lebot ←
18:47:51 <hook> lebot: could write web page with even 3 buttons to incrementally generate trace.
Timothy Lebo: could write web page with even 3 buttons to incrementally generate trace. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:48:02 <Curt> q+
Curt Tilmes: q+ ←
18:48:06 <pgroth> ack Curt
Paul Groth: ack Curt ←
18:48:35 <hook> Curt: we are working with Peter Fox and Marshall (Ma?), if lebot has ideas to help drive that, it would be useful.
Curt Tilmes: we are working with Peter Fox and Marshall (Ma?), if lebot has ideas to help drive that, it would be useful. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:49:04 <hook> Luc: what can we advertise on implementation?
Luc Moreau: what can we advertise on implementation? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:49:50 <hook> ivan: some WGs do not really make good use of it. anything that is relevant is ok.
Ivan Herman: some WGs do not really make good use of it. anything that is relevant is ok. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:50:09 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
18:50:12 <hook> pgroth: we can also do a blog post. i.e. a link to the tutorial material.
Paul Groth: we can also do a blog post. i.e. a link to the tutorial material. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:50:54 <hook> ivan: regarding timelines, what is a reasonable time that we an expect all of the documents to be ready?
Ivan Herman: regarding timelines, what is a reasonable time that we an expect all of the documents to be ready? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:52:17 <hook> Luc: my intent would be aiming for this week. complete the changes by 2012-11-21.
Luc Moreau: my intent would be aiming for this week. complete the changes by 2012-11-21. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:52:28 <hook> jcheney: 2-weeks would probably be doable.
James Cheney: 2-weeks would probably be doable. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:52:47 <hook> ivan: we should take whatever is realistic.
Ivan Herman: we should take whatever is realistic. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:53:37 <hook> lebot: 2-weeks is during Thanksgiving holiday for US folks.
Timothy Lebo: 2-weeks is during Thanksgiving holiday for US folks. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:54:21 <hook> pgroth: I have Overview document as well.
Paul Groth: I have Overview document as well. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:54:50 <hook> ivan: Nov 27th is Tussday. a good day to have the documents publication ready.
Ivan Herman: Nov 27th is Tussday. a good day to have the documents publication ready. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:55:41 <hook> pgroth: Overview currently does not exists. we also have DC, so have to check when Daniel is back. And XML is also new. Do these have more leeway?
Paul Groth: Overview currently does not exists. we also have DC, so have to check when Daniel is back. And XML is also new. Do these have more leeway? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:56:48 <hook> ivan: for the time being, only counting CRs. the documents will be ready by Nov 27th. pgroth and Luc to send out email to the chairs on the Monday. this means the transition call sometime Dec 4th. which means publication date to be set on Dec 6th.
Ivan Herman: for the time being, only counting CRs. the documents will be ready by Nov 27th. pgroth and Luc to send out email to the chairs on the Monday. this means the transition call sometime Dec 4th. which means publication date to be set on Dec 6th. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:57:19 <hook> ivan: what we have to do then in 1-2 weeks to have a feeling of where we are, and contact Ralph and Thomas.
Ivan Herman: what we have to do then in 1-2 weeks to have a feeling of where we are, and contact Ralph and Thomas. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:57:37 <hook> ... the other possibility is to put the publication date on 11th (Tuesday).
Hook Hua: ... the other possibility is to put the publication date on 11th (Tuesday). ←
18:57:51 <hook> pgroth: we should try to start getting the informal meeting already.
Paul Groth: we should try to start getting the informal meeting already. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:58:20 <hook> ivan: are we ready? the meeting should be on the 5th. it needs 5-working days in advance.
Ivan Herman: are we ready? the meeting should be on the 5th. it needs 5-working days in advance. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:58:38 <hook> pgroth: need to start now since busy schedules for pgroth and Luc.
Paul Groth: need to start now since busy schedules for pgroth and Luc. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:58:51 <hook> ivan: we need to find time between 5th and 10th.
Ivan Herman: we need to find time between 5th and 10th. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:59:02 <hook> pgroth: publication date on 11th is fine.
Paul Groth: publication date on 11th is fine. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:59:22 <hook> Luc: Tim, is it possible to have documents complete before Thanksgiving holiday?
Luc Moreau: Tim, is it possible to have documents complete before Thanksgiving holiday? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
18:59:49 <hook> lebot: will try to get things done sooner than later. have 3-4 day window before Thanksgiving. will work on DM and PROV-O.
Timothy Lebo: will try to get things done sooner than later. have 3-4 day window before Thanksgiving. will work on DM and PROV-O. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:00:04 <hook> lebot: could push to get it done by the 20th.
Timothy Lebo: could push to get it done by the 20th. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:00:42 <hook> ivan: we should not push for tight restrictions. let's be realistic. Let's aim for the 11th, so as soon as the mail goes out to the chairs, we can contact Thomas and Ralph.
Ivan Herman: we should not push for tight restrictions. let's be realistic. Let's aim for the 11th, so as soon as the mail goes out to the chairs, we can contact Thomas and Ralph. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:00:59 <hook> pgroth: we need to schedule it now.
Paul Groth: we need to schedule it now. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:01:23 <hook> ivan: we can write email. or simplest thing is setup a Doodle for that week.
Ivan Herman: we can write email. or simplest thing is setup a Doodle for that week. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:02:06 <hook> ivan: publication date is Tuesday 11th. setup Doodle for those 4 days prior.
Ivan Herman: publication date is Tuesday 11th. setup Doodle for those 4 days prior. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:02:59 <hook> pgroth: with publication date and CR on 11th, what about Notes?
Paul Groth: with publication date and CR on 11th, what about Notes? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:03:28 <hook> pgroth: should we aim for Dec 4th for publication request for Notes?
Paul Groth: should we aim for Dec 4th for publication request for Notes? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:03:41 <hook> Luc: do we need to have group resolution that we go for publication?
Luc Moreau: do we need to have group resolution that we go for publication? [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:04:30 <hook> ivan: the DC exists, needs beautifying. for first public draft is ok as is. have no problem voting for it now.
Ivan Herman: the DC exists, needs beautifying. for first public draft is ok as is. have no problem voting for it now. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:04:42 <hook> pgroth: we an do that on upcoming telecon or email.
Paul Groth: we an do that on upcoming telecon or email. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:05:22 <pgroth> accepted: proposed publication date of cr dec 11
RESOLVED: proposed publication date of cr dec 11 ←
19:06:05 <pgroth> accepted: request for publication of prov-dc, prov-primer, prov-overview dec 4 with pub date dec 11
RESOLVED: request for publication of prov-dc, prov-primer, prov-overview dec 4 with pub date dec 11 ←
19:06:17 <hook> ivan: CR publication request goes out Nov 27th. pgroth to setup Doodle on Dec 5-10.
Ivan Herman: CR publication request goes out Nov 27th. pgroth to setup Doodle on Dec 5-10. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:06:42 <pgroth> accepted: announce cr on Nov 27
RESOLVED: announce cr on Nov 27 ←
19:06:52 <hook> Luc: I will produce a bibliographic file. should include URIs of all the documents.
Luc Moreau: I will produce a bibliographic file. should include URIs of all the documents. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:06:57 <lebot> 20121211 is a good pile of digits
Timothy Lebo: 20121211 is a good pile of digits ←
19:07:21 <hook> ivan: will see with the web master if he is ok with the dates as well.
Ivan Herman: will see with the web master if he is ok with the dates as well. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:07:43 <hook> pgroth: we are fine with dates.
Paul Groth: we are fine with dates. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:08:22 <hook> Luc: from yesterday, "mentions" will be a Note.
Luc Moreau: from yesterday, "mentions" will be a Note. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:08:47 <hook> ivan: for CR we have one more date to finalize. will be part of CR call.
Ivan Herman: for CR we have one more date to finalize. will be part of CR call. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:09:33 <hook> Luc: there are no Constraints. will look at all of the implementations and compile the implementation report. then go through same exercise for PR.
Luc Moreau: there are no Constraints. will look at all of the implementations and compile the implementation report. then go through same exercise for PR. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:11:05 <hook> ivan: will go through same exercise for PR, but people can work on it sooner. but consider Christmas holiday break. the period after CR could be shortened if we plan ahead. could shoot for Friday, Feb 1st
Ivan Herman: will go through same exercise for PR, but people can work on it sooner. but consider Christmas holiday break. the period after CR could be shortened if we plan ahead. could shoot for Friday, Feb 1st [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:11:25 <pgroth> accepted: Feb 1, 2013 end of CR
RESOLVED: Feb 1, 2013 end of CR ←
19:11:41 <pgroth> q?
Paul Groth: q? ←
19:12:00 <hook> Luc: what happens when we are there, and a feature X does not have two implementation.
Luc Moreau: what happens when we are there, and a feature X does not have two implementation. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:12:10 <hook> ivan: that means that feature is useless and we remove it.
Ivan Herman: that means that feature is useless and we remove it. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:13:06 <hook> pgroth: we have a bigger issue with Constraints. bigger task to implement.
Paul Groth: we have a bigger issue with Constraints. bigger task to implement. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:13:34 <hook> ... already have Provtoolbox, can throw provenance at it and visualize. then that's two implementations.
Hook Hua: ... already have Provtoolbox, can throw provenance at it and visualize. then that's two implementations. ←
19:13:44 <hook> Luc: consumer has to be generic.
Luc Moreau: consumer has to be generic. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:14:10 <hook> ivan: don't have to be overly generic. it's the intention that counts.
Ivan Herman: don't have to be overly generic. it's the intention that counts. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:14:37 <hook> ... it forces us to think through all of the implementation issues.
Hook Hua: ... it forces us to think through all of the implementation issues. ←
19:15:25 <hook> Luc: we need a resolution for DC for first public draft. we don't have it.
Luc Moreau: we need a resolution for DC for first public draft. we don't have it. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:16:16 <hook> pgroth: we said we will need first acceptance of public draft in telecon...Nov 29th. or can do by email.
Paul Groth: we said we will need first acceptance of public draft in telecon...Nov 29th. or can do by email. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:16:34 <hook> ivan: I will be on travel on Nov 29th.
Ivan Herman: I will be on travel on Nov 29th. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:17:35 <hook> pgroth: we need to accept the "mentions" as a Note.
Paul Groth: we need to accept the "mentions" as a Note. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:18:11 <hook> ... (1) voting for documents and (2) we would create a Note for mentionOf.
Hook Hua: ... (1) voting for documents and (2) we would create a Note for mentionOf. ←
19:18:14 <Curt> and what should you call the mention note?
Curt Tilmes: and what should you call the mention note? ←
19:18:39 <pgroth> accepted: mentionOf will be put in a separate note as per action-135
RESOLVED: mentionOf will be put in a separate note as per ACTION-135 ←
19:19:55 <hook> pgroth: smiles, you sent mail to working group list for public comments responses.
Paul Groth: smiles, you sent mail to working group list for public comments responses. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:20:18 <hook> smiles: was sending reminder for repsonses.
Simon Miles: was sending reminder for repsonses. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:20:46 <hook> Luc: I thought it was for the eternal reviewers and not for the working group.
Luc Moreau: I thought it was for the eternal reviewers and not for the working group. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:20:55 <Luc> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#PROV_Primer_.28Draft.29
Luc Moreau: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#PROV_Primer_.28Draft.29 ←
19:20:55 <hook> smiles: as you like.
Simon Miles: as you like. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:21:26 <smiles> @lebot :)
Simon Miles: @lebot :) ←
19:23:08 <lebot> are we proposing to accept those responses?
Timothy Lebo: are we proposing to accept those responses? ←
19:23:10 <pgroth> proposed: the responses to public comments for primer ISSUE-561 ISSUE-562, ISSUE-563, ISSUE-564 are working group responses
PROPOSED: the responses to public comments for primer ISSUE-561 ISSUE-562, ISSUE-563, ISSUE-564 are working group responses ←
19:23:13 <lebot> +1
Timothy Lebo: +1 ←
19:23:14 <ivan> +1
Ivan Herman: +1 ←
19:23:14 <jcheney> +1
James Cheney: +1 ←
19:23:19 <Curt> +1
Curt Tilmes: +1 ←
19:23:19 <SamCoppens> +1
Sam Coppens: +1 ←
19:23:21 <CraigTrim> +1
+1 ←
19:23:23 <GK> +1
Graham Klyne: +1 ←
19:23:25 <hook> +1
19:24:14 <pgroth> accepted: the responses to public comments for primer ISSUE-561 ISSUE-562, ISSUE-563, ISSUE-564 are working group responses
RESOLVED: the responses to public comments for primer ISSUE-561 ISSUE-562, ISSUE-563, ISSUE-564 are working group responses ←
19:24:27 <hook> pgroth: smiles, you can make those changes.
Paul Groth: smiles, you can make those changes. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:24:35 <hook> smiles: changes made. so we are done.
Simon Miles: changes made. so we are done. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:25:18 <hook> Luc: looking at responses to public comment, an I invite the editors to check that everything is fine in terms of responses.
Luc Moreau: looking at responses to public comment, an I invite the editors to check that everything is fine in terms of responses. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:25:51 <hook> ... ISSUE-592. made resolution yesterday but need response.
Hook Hua: ... ISSUE-592. made resolution yesterday but need response. ←
19:26:04 <hook> lebot: will update and send out request for group response.
Timothy Lebo: will update and send out request for group response. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:26:44 <smiles> Bye, talk to you soon!
Simon Miles: Bye, talk to you soon! ←
19:26:45 <hook> pgroth: wrapping up, earlier than planned. thank you everyone.
Paul Groth: wrapping up, earlier than planned. thank you everyone. [ Scribe Assist by Hook Hua ] ←
19:27:06 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public
Paul Groth: rrsagent, set log public ←
19:27:12 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes
Paul Groth: rrsagent, draft minutes ←
19:27:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-minutes.html pgroth
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-minutes.html pgroth ←
19:27:21 <Zakim> -smiles
Zakim IRC Bot: -smiles ←
19:27:24 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon
Paul Groth: trackbot, end telcon ←
19:27:24 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←
19:27:24 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been smiles, Curt_Tilmes, Dong, SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim, stain, Paolo
Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been smiles, Curt_Tilmes, Dong, SamCoppens, TomDN, laurent, hook, Curt, pgroth, Luc, jcheney, ivan, GK, lebot, CraigTrim, stain, Paolo ←
19:27:32 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←
19:27:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-minutes.html trackbot
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←
19:27:33 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> I see 17 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-actions.rdf :
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see 17 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-actions.rdf : ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Dong to describe blue and green arrows in implementation report document [1]
ACTION: Dong to describe blue and green arrows in implementation report document [1] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-03-35
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-03-35 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to change the respec style for implementation report [2]
ACTION: pgroth to change the respec style for implementation report [2] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-05-24
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-05-24 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dong check constraints are matching to the updated document [3]
ACTION: dong check constraints are matching to the updated document [3] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-08-00
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-08-00 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Dong to update naming convention to include success/failure of test [4]
ACTION: Dong to update naming convention to include success/failure of test [4] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-14-05
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-14-05 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: zednik to create 3/4 questionnaires instead of a single branching one (+ remove mention) [5]
ACTION: zednik to create 3/4 questionnaires instead of a single branching one (+ remove mention) [5] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-27-49
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-27-49 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: zednik to look at wbs for the implementation questionnaire [6]
ACTION: zednik to look at wbs for the implementation questionnaire [6] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-45-55
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T14-45-55 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Dong to remove reference of prov-json in implementation report, and allow entry for "other serialization" [7]
ACTION: Dong to remove reference of prov-json in implementation report, and allow entry for "other serialization" [7] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T15-02-01
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T15-02-01 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: zednik add a question to ask about use of constraints by applications (e.g. "or the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?") [8]
ACTION: zednik add a question to ask about use of constraints by applications (e.g. "or the features that you implement, do you support the PROV-CONSTRAINTS?") [8] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T15-32-56
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T15-32-56 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: GK to talk to Jun about implementation of constraints and specifically test cases [9]
ACTION: GK to talk to Jun about implementation of constraints and specifically test cases [9] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T15-38-18
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T15-38-18 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: smiles editor's check on the primer [10]
ACTION: smiles editor's check on the primer [10] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T16-25-56
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T16-25-56 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Luc to produce js file with biblio entries for prov documents [11]
ACTION: Luc to produce js file with biblio entries for prov documents [11] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T16-27-28
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T16-27-28 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth check for the current version of dublin core mapping + then send email to tim and craig for review [12]
ACTION: pgroth check for the current version of dublin core mapping + then send email to tim and craig for review [12] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T16-37-58
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T16-37-58 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth remind simon what he's supposed to do [13]
ACTION: pgroth remind simon what he's supposed to do [13] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T17-15-06
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T17-15-06 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: pgroth to add a section on implementing prov and why and how [14]
ACTION: pgroth to add a section on implementing prov and why and how [14] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-36-20
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-36-20 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance [15]
ACTION: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance [15] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-40-22
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-40-22 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance [16]
ACTION: CraigTrim to write a paragraph motivating needs for provenance [16] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-41-00
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-41-00 ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Craig Trim to write a paragraph mot�ivating needs for provenance [17]
ACTION: Craig Trim to write a paragraph mot�ivating needs for provenance [17] ←
19:27:33 <RRSAgent> recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-41-19
RRSAgent IRC Bot: recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/11/10-prov-irc#T18-41-19 ←
Formatted by CommonScribe