edit

Provenance Working Group Teleconference

Minutes of 24 January 2013

Agenda
http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.24
Seen
Curt Tilmes, Daniel Garijo, Graham Klyne, Hook Hua, James Cheney, Khalid Belhajjame, Luc Moreau, Paul Groth, Sam Coppens, Satya Sahoo, Simon Miles, Stephan Zednik, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Ted Thibodeau, Timothy Lebo, Tom De Nies, Trung Huynh
Regrets
Graham Klyne
Chair
Paul Groth
Scribe
Curt Tilmes
IRC Log
Original
Resolutions
  1. Minutes of Jan. 17, 2013 link
  2. http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-616 as a working group response link
  3. Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft conditional on addressing or noting blocking issues in the document link
Topics
  1. Admin

    Minutes were approved after a correction from Stian.

  2. WG Implementations

    We are getting more reports. For PROV-O we have now satisfied the exit criteria. For PROV-N Tom, Dong and Paolo were encouraged to get there implementations interchanging PROV-N with another implementation. All working group members were encouraged to submit reports.

  3. Public Response on wasQuotedFrom

    Simon summarised his response to ISSUE-616 about the description of wasQuotedFrom in the primer. The group approved the response.

  4. PROV-O outstanding issue on inferences

    The group discussed the issue of some inferences from prov-constraints being encoded in prov-o as an artefact of the prov-o design process. Tim agreed to do a survey of which constraints are currently proposed and to draft a response that gave a rationale behind the current design of prov-o for the encoding of inferences.

  5. Prov-Dictionary

    Tom went over the results of the prov-dictionary reviews and how they are addressing the issues. The group agreed to release as public working draft conditional on blocking issues being resolved or noted in the draft.

  6. PROV-xml

    The status of PROV-XML was discussed. The group primarily had a discussion of which identifier scheme should be used. A key outcome was a set of guidance for selecting approach, namely, that PROV-XML should work well with XML tooling, allow for "scruffy provenance" and be able to link to other prov serializations. The editors agreed to revisit the current solutions at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-XML_Identifiers. The editors requested that comments on the namespace solution be sent to the email list.

15:53:06 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-prov-irc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-prov-irc

15:53:08 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world

15:53:10 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be PROV

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be PROV

15:53:10 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes

15:53:11 <trackbot> Meeting: Provenance Working Group Teleconference
15:53:11 <trackbot> Date: 24 January 2013
15:53:14 <pgroth> zakim, this will be PROV

Paul Groth: zakim, this will be PROV

15:53:14 <Zakim> ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, pgroth; I see SW_(PROV)11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes

15:53:22 <pgroth> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.24
15:53:30 <pgroth> Chair: Paul Groth
15:53:37 <pgroth> Scribe: Curt Tilmes

(Scribe set to Curt Tilmes)

15:53:45 <pgroth> rrsagent, make logs public

Paul Groth: rrsagent, make logs public

15:54:04 <pgroth> Regrets: Graham Klyne
15:57:00 <Zakim> SW_(PROV)11:00AM has now started

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

15:57:07 <Zakim> +Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: +Curt_Tilmes

15:57:33 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

15:57:42 <pgroth> Zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Paul Groth: Zakim, [IPcaller] is me

15:57:43 <Zakim> +pgroth; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +pgroth; got it

15:58:31 <Curt> scribe: Curt
15:59:01 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

15:59:20 <Zakim> + +44.789.470.aaaa

Zakim IRC Bot: + +44.789.470.aaaa

15:59:20 <Luc> zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Luc Moreau: zakim, [IPcaller] is me

15:59:20 <Zakim> +Luc; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +Luc; got it

15:59:30 <stain> zakim, +44.789.470.aaaa is me

Stian Soiland-Reyes: zakim, +44.789.470.aaaa is me

15:59:30 <Zakim> +stain; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +stain; got it

16:00:41 <Zakim> +tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: +tlebo

16:00:49 <stain> minutes from last week, btw: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17

Stian Soiland-Reyes: minutes from last week, btw: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17

16:01:23 <Zakim> +??P8

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P8

16:01:29 <dgarijo> Zakim, ??P8 is me

Daniel Garijo: Zakim, ??P8 is me

16:01:29 <Zakim> +dgarijo; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +dgarijo; got it

16:01:30 <TallTed> TallTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG - http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/ - Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.24

Ted Thibodeau: TallTed has changed the topic to: Provenance WG - http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/ - Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2013.01.24

16:01:41 <Zakim> +OpenLink_Software

Zakim IRC Bot: +OpenLink_Software

16:01:46 <TallTed> Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me

16:01:46 <Zakim> +TallTed; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +TallTed; got it

16:01:47 <TallTed> Zakim, mute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute me

16:01:47 <Zakim> TallTed should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TallTed should now be muted

16:02:06 <pgroth> Topic: Admin

1. Admin

Summary: Minutes were approved after a correction from Stian.

<pgroth> Summary: Minutes were approved after a correction from Stian.
16:02:06 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aabb

16:02:13 <Zakim> +??P10

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P10

16:02:17 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17

Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17

16:02:21 <smiles> zakim, ??P10 is smiles

Simon Miles: zakim, ??P10 is smiles

16:02:21 <Zakim> +smiles; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +smiles; got it

16:02:22 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

16:02:25 <Curt> +1

+1

16:02:25 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

16:02:26 <stain> -1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: -1

16:02:27 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

16:02:32 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

16:02:34 <stain> All reviewers have submitted their report. All are fine for a new working draft to be released.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: All reviewers have submitted their report. All are fine for a new working draft to be released.

16:02:47 <jcheney> 0 was away

James Cheney: 0 was away

16:02:57 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

16:03:16 <Luc> that was my understanding too

Luc Moreau: that was my understanding too

16:03:35 <Zakim> +jcheney

Zakim IRC Bot: +jcheney

16:03:44 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

16:03:55 <khalidBelhajjame> zakim, [IPcaller] is me

Khalid Belhajjame: zakim, [IPcaller] is me

16:03:55 <Zakim> +khalidBelhajjame; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +khalidBelhajjame; got it

16:04:27 <Curt> pgroth: Will edit minutes to indicate Stain not ready to approve release

Paul Groth: Will edit minutes to indicate Stain not ready to approve release

16:04:50 <Curt> pgroth: will delete the line about ready to release working draft

Paul Groth: will delete the line about ready to release working draft

16:04:53 <stain> Stain: had not said yes/no to it being released as WD (I don't remember that being mentioned at all) but I said no for it to be last working draft.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: had not said yes/no to it being released as WD (I don't remember that being mentioned at all) but I said no for it to be last working draft. [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

16:04:56 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17

Paul Groth: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/meeting/2013-01-17

16:05:04 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

16:05:13 <Zakim> +TomDN

Zakim IRC Bot: +TomDN

16:05:17 <pgroth> accepted: Minutes of Jan. 17, 2013

RESOLVED: Minutes of Jan. 17, 2013

16:05:32 <TomDN> Zakim, mute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, mute me

16:05:32 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted

16:05:34 <Zakim> +??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: +??P4

16:06:07 <pgroth> Topic: WG Implementations

2. WG Implementations

Summary: We are getting more reports. For PROV-O we have now satisfied the exit criteria. For PROV-N Tom, Dong and Paolo were encouraged to get there implementations interchanging PROV-N with another implementation. All working group members were encouraged to submit reports.

<pgroth> Summary: We are getting more reports. For PROV-O we have now satisfied the exit criteria. For PROV-N Tom, Dong and Paolo were encouraged to get there implementations interchanging PROV-N with another implementation. All working group members were encouraged to submit reports.
16:06:33 <Curt> pgroth: went through implementation reports, quite a few more submitted

Paul Groth: went through implementation reports, quite a few more submitted

16:06:45 <stain> I read the chat log - we agreed that we would in a later meeting vote if PROV-AQ would go out as a WD - not as LC

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I read the chat log - we agreed that we would in a later meeting vote if PROV-AQ would go out as a WD - not as LC

16:06:47 <Curt> ... we're ok with prov-o, need to check with prov-n to hit requirements

... we're ok with prov-o, need to check with prov-n to hit requirements

16:07:03 <Luc> paolo says that his implementation can consume prov-n

Luc Moreau: paolo says that his implementation can consume prov-n

16:07:11 <Curt> pgroth: with constraints, Paul is still working on one, should be ready to go before next week, not sure if there will be others

Paul Groth: with constraints, Paul is still working on one, should be ready to go before next week, not sure if there will be others

16:07:15 <stain> what about the clarkparsia one

Stian Soiland-Reyes: what about the clarkparsia one

16:07:19 <Curt> pgroth: may get one more, not sure

Paul Groth: may get one more, not sure

16:07:20 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

16:07:23 <Luc> maybe we can check he can consume prov-n generated by toolbox or Dong's store

Luc Moreau: maybe we can check he can consume prov-n generated by toolbox or Dong's store

16:07:24 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

16:07:38 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:07:51 <Curt> pgroth: are other reports expected?

Paul Groth: are other reports expected?

16:07:58 <Curt> Stephan and I will be submitting one

Stephan and I will be submitting one

16:07:59 <tlebo> I owe at least one :-)

Timothy Lebo: I owe at least one :-)

16:07:59 <Luc> GLD Org

Luc Moreau: GLD Org

16:08:01 <stain> I have my vocabulary to go in

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I have my vocabulary to go in

16:08:03 <Zakim> +Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: +Satya_Sahoo

16:08:16 <stain> PAV

Stian Soiland-Reyes: PAV

16:08:22 <Luc> +q

Luc Moreau: +q

16:08:29 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:08:37 <Curt> luc: paolo indicated he can consume prov-n

Luc Moreau: paolo indicated he can consume prov-n

16:08:55 <Curt> Luc: dong's tool exports prov-n, so we can check if those implementations can exchange prov-n

Luc Moreau: dong's tool exports prov-n, so we can check if those implementations can exchange prov-n

16:09:00 <TomDN> not yet

Tom De Nies: not yet

16:09:05 <TomDN> will do next week

Tom De Nies: will do next week

16:09:18 <Curt> pgroth: Tom, can your's work with prov-n?

Paul Groth: Tom, can your's work with prov-n?

16:09:37 <Luc> no he sent regrets

Luc Moreau: no he sent regrets

16:09:37 <Curt> pgroth: Try to get all reports in by next week to satisfy implementation requirements

Paul Groth: Try to get all reports in by next week to satisfy implementation requirements

16:09:59 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:10:00 <Curt> pgroth: We will follow up with Paolo and Dong to try to get a prov-n repot

Paul Groth: We will follow up with Paolo and Dong to try to get a prov-n repot

16:10:19 <Curt> pgroth: Keep encouraging others to submit

Paul Groth: Keep encouraging others to submit

16:10:22 <pgroth> Topic: Public Response on wasQuotedFrom

3. Public Response on wasQuotedFrom

Summary: Simon summarised his response to ISSUE-616 about the description of wasQuotedFrom in the primer. The group approved the response.

<pgroth> Summary: Simon summarised his response to ISSUE-616 about the description of wasQuotedFrom in the primer. The group approved the response.
16:11:33 <Curt> smiles: the primer was unclear in the direction of the wasQuotedFrom, sounded incorrect to the reviewer -- will revise the language in the primer

Simon Miles: the primer was unclear in the direction of the wasQuotedFrom, sounded incorrect to the reviewer -- will revise the language in the primer

16:11:54 <Curt> smiles: will also include something about collections, this might help explain the concepts

Simon Miles: will also include something about collections, this might help explain the concepts

16:12:10 <pgroth> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-616

Paul Groth: ISSUE-616">http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-616

16:12:23 <Curt> pgroth: several people expressed support for simon's proposed response already

Paul Groth: several people expressed support for simon's proposed response already

16:12:30 <Curt> pgroth: any objections?

Paul Groth: any objections?

16:12:45 <pgroth> accepted: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-616 as a working group response

RESOLVED: ISSUE-616">http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-616 as a working group response

16:12:55 <smiles> I'm happy to send it

Simon Miles: I'm happy to send it

16:13:14 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-O outstanding issue on inferences

4. PROV-O outstanding issue on inferences

Summary: The group discussed the issue of some inferences from prov-constraints being encoded in prov-o as an artefact of the prov-o design process. Tim agreed to do a survey of which constraints are currently proposed and to draft a response that gave a rationale behind the current design of prov-o for the encoding of inferences.

<pgroth> Summary: The group discussed the issue of some inferences from prov-constraints being encoded in prov-o as an artefact of the prov-o design process. Tim agreed to do a survey of which constraints are currently proposed and to draft a response that gave a rationale behind the current design of prov-o for the encoding of inferences.
16:13:41 <pgroth> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2013Jan/0016.html

Paul Groth: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2013Jan/0016.html

16:13:47 <Curt> pgroth: we responded to clarkparsia's issues, they were mostly fine with the responses except for one:

Paul Groth: we responded to clarkparsia's issues, they were mostly fine with the responses except for one:

16:14:03 <tlebo> do we have a start of a response to this?

Timothy Lebo: do we have a start of a response to this?

16:14:08 <Curt> pgroth: They are concerned we are encoded some constraints and not others and want to understand rationale

Paul Groth: They are concerned we are encoded some constraints and not others and want to understand rationale

16:15:02 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:15:08 <Curt> tlebo: The critique is understandable, queried James about constraints, plan is to analyze constraints and come up with a rationale for which ones are in and which ones aren't

Timothy Lebo: The critique is understandable, queried James about constraints, plan is to analyze constraints and come up with a rationale for which ones are in and which ones aren't

16:15:09 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:15:21 <tlebo> +1 to survey.

Timothy Lebo: +1 to survey.

16:15:29 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0104.html

Luc Moreau: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2013Jan/0104.html

16:15:31 <tlebo> where is our draft response?

Timothy Lebo: where is our draft response?

16:15:57 <Curt> Luc: not certain we need to change prov-o, the design had a hierarchy for influence

Luc Moreau: not certain we need to change prov-o, the design had a hierarchy for influence

16:16:14 <pgroth> This was our original response http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-612_.28Encoding_of_Constraints_in_OWL.29

Paul Groth: This was our original response ISSUE-612_.28Encoding_of_Constraints_in_OWL.29">http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicCommentsCR#ISSUE-612_.28Encoding_of_Constraints_in_OWL.29

16:16:36 <tlebo> are we updating the same response for this?

Timothy Lebo: are we updating the same response for this?

16:16:41 <tlebo> q+

Timothy Lebo: q+

16:16:47 <Curt> Luc: This hierarchy happens to include one of the constraints, but it isn't really included because it is a constraint, rather it is satisfied by the expression of the hierarchy

Luc Moreau: This hierarchy happens to include one of the constraints, but it isn't really included because it is a constraint, rather it is satisfied by the expression of the hierarchy

16:16:51 <pgroth> ack tlebo

Paul Groth: ack tlebo

16:17:06 <dgarijo> @tlebo: I'm not been following this thread very much, but wasn't prov-o aimed to be as simple as possible (owl-RL profile)?. If no further violations happen, we could add some..

Daniel Garijo: @tlebo: I'm not been following this thread very much, but wasn't prov-o aimed to be as simple as possible (owl-RL profile)?. If no further violations happen, we could add some..

16:17:10 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:17:11 <stain> +1 @Luc  -- if we are to remove all subproperty/subclass rules that might happen to be also a constraint/inference - then it would just become a very flat vocabulary and not an ontology.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 @Luc -- if we are to remove all subproperty/subclass rules that might happen to be also a constraint/inference - then it would just become a very flat vocabulary and not an ontology.

16:17:19 <SamCoppens> zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN

Sam Coppens: zakim, SamCoppens is with TomDN

16:17:19 <Zakim> +SamCoppens; got it

Zakim IRC Bot: +SamCoppens; got it

16:17:22 <satya> +1 @Daniel

Satya Sahoo: +1 @Daniel

16:17:23 <dgarijo> +1 to survey as well.

Daniel Garijo: +1 to survey as well.

16:17:34 <Curt> tlebo: Until we understand which are in, which are out, can't respond.  If we can describe a rationale that matches the implementation, that will be fine.

Timothy Lebo: Until we understand which are in, which are out, can't respond. If we can describe a rationale that matches the implementation, that will be fine.

16:17:39 <stain> We could however see the most obvious ones and see if they can go in without changing the design and OWL RL level - like revision-is-alternate-inference

Stian Soiland-Reyes: We could however see the most obvious ones and see if they can go in without changing the design and OWL RL level - like revision-is-alternate-inference

16:18:01 <dgarijo> yep.

Daniel Garijo: yep.

16:18:09 <Curt> pgroth: we didn't intend to include constraints in prov-o, we will create a new issue to address this

Paul Groth: we didn't intend to include constraints in prov-o, we will create a new issue to address this

16:18:24 <dgarijo> +q

Daniel Garijo: +q

16:18:33 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:18:33 <pgroth> ack dgarijo

Paul Groth: ack dgarijo

16:18:38 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:18:42 <Curt> dgarijo: are we planning to deliver a version with constraints?

Daniel Garijo: are we planning to deliver a version with constraints?

16:18:43 <Curt> pgroth: no

Paul Groth: no

16:18:56 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:19:10 <dgarijo> ok.

Daniel Garijo: ok.

16:19:14 <Curt> Luc: Back to modifying prov-o -- that would take us back to last call: we don't want to take that step lightly

Luc Moreau: Back to modifying prov-o -- that would take us back to last call: we don't want to take that step lightly

16:19:24 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

16:19:31 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

16:19:31 <Curt> tlebo: we'll search hard for a rule that describes the current implementation

Timothy Lebo: we'll search hard for a rule that describes the current implementation

16:19:54 <dgarijo> @stian : I can't hear you very well.

Daniel Garijo: @stian : I can't hear you very well.

16:19:56 <Curt> stain: [mumble, mumble]

Stian Soiland-Reyes: [mumble, mumble]

16:20:12 <Curt> stain: opposed to adding new things to current prov-o

Stian Soiland-Reyes: opposed to adding new things to current prov-o

16:20:48 <Curt> pgroth: we don't intend to put constraints in prov-o, but are fine if someone else develops an ontology that does so

Paul Groth: we don't intend to put constraints in prov-o, but are fine if someone else develops an ontology that does so

16:20:55 <stain> sorry - I was suggesting to NOT add more to PROV-O - but make something on the side (another Note) with the OWL encodings of constraints - it could be based on the work that clarkparsia has already started if the licensing/sharing of that is OK.

Stian Soiland-Reyes: sorry - I was suggesting to NOT add more to PROV-O - but make something on the side (another Note) with the OWL encodings of constraints - it could be based on the work that clarkparsia has already started if the licensing/sharing of that is OK.

16:21:06 <Curt> pgroth: we will describe the rationale for why certain constraints happen to be in prov-o

Paul Groth: we will describe the rationale for why certain constraints happen to be in prov-o

16:21:12 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:21:22 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

16:21:39 <satya> +1 @paul, the original design aim of prov-o was a reference ontology, so we should be careful of adding new constructs

Satya Sahoo: +1 @paul, the original design aim of prov-o was a reference ontology, so we should be careful of adding new constructs

16:21:40 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

16:21:45 <Luc> scruffy provenance

Luc Moreau: scruffy provenance

16:22:01 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:22:14 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:22:26 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:22:29 <Curt> Luc: Tim -- when do you think it will be ready?

Luc Moreau: Tim -- when do you think it will be ready?

16:22:34 <Curt> tlebo: a couple of hours at most

Timothy Lebo: a couple of hours at most

16:22:35 <stain> Stian: to also add to rational "why we do NOT include some 'obvious' constraints like property functionality  --- basically to support expressing 'scruffy provenance' according to PROV-DM  which might not be PROV-Constraint valid

Stian Soiland-Reyes: to also add to rational "why we do NOT include some 'obvious' constraints like property functionality --- basically to support expressing 'scruffy provenance' according to PROV-DM which might not be PROV-Constraint valid [ Scribe Assist by Stian Soiland-Reyes ]

16:22:53 <Curt> Luc: Would be nice to draft response by Monday and send ASAP

Luc Moreau: Would be nice to draft response by Monday and send ASAP

16:22:59 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:23:51 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:23:56 <Curt> pgroth: There could be test cases for entailments -- would be fine if someone else supplied them

Paul Groth: There could be test cases for entailments -- would be fine if someone else supplied them

16:23:59 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:24:23 <Curt> Luc: not sure we would express them -- we are only concerned with validity of the provenance

Luc Moreau: not sure we would express them -- we are only concerned with validity of the provenance

16:24:40 <Dong> I wondering what would be the extra benefits of having such test cases for the working group?

Trung Huynh: I wondering what would be the extra benefits of having such test cases for the working group?

16:24:47 <Curt> pgroth: If someone invented the test case, we would look at it

Paul Groth: If someone invented the test case, we would look at it

16:25:06 <Curt> pgroth: More test cases that conform to the spec are welcome

Paul Groth: More test cases that conform to the spec are welcome

16:25:19 <Luc> +1

Luc Moreau: +1

16:25:26 <Dong> I'm afraid that we don't have enough bandwidth for this

Trung Huynh: I'm afraid that we don't have enough bandwidth for this

16:25:32 <Curt> pgroth: I'll write that up and send it out with the response on the prov-o

Paul Groth: I'll write that up and send it out with the response on the prov-o

16:25:33 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:25:49 <TomDN> Zakim, unmute me

Tom De Nies: Zakim, unmute me

16:25:49 <Zakim> TomDN should no longer be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should no longer be muted

16:25:51 <pgroth> Topic: Prov-Dictionary

5. Prov-Dictionary

Summary: Tom went over the results of the prov-dictionary reviews and how they are addressing the issues. The group agreed to release as public working draft conditional on blocking issues being resolved or noted in the draft.

<pgroth> Summary: Tom went over the results of the prov-dictionary reviews and how they are addressing the issues. The group agreed to release as public working draft conditional on blocking issues being resolved or noted in the draft.
16:26:25 <Curt> TomDN: Looked at all the reviews, 3 already incorporated, 1 more extensive one will go in

Tom De Nies: Looked at all the reviews, 3 already incorporated, 1 more extensive one will go in

16:26:38 <pgroth> Zakim, who is loud?

Paul Groth: Zakim, who is loud?

16:26:38 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, pgroth.

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand your question, pgroth.

16:26:43 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy?

Paul Groth: Zakim, who is noisy?

16:26:57 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 13 seconds I heard sound from the following: stain (7%)

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, listening for 13 seconds I heard sound from the following: stain (7%)

16:27:22 <stain> but I'm on mute..

Stian Soiland-Reyes: but I'm on mute..

16:28:10 <TomDN> Tom: All sections got good, extensive reviews

Tom De Nies: All sections got good, extensive reviews [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:11 <TomDN> Tom: Some remaining issues:

Tom De Nies: Some remaining issues: [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:13 <TomDN> Tom: 1. (Luc) In the notation hadDictionaryMember(d, e0, "k0"), key follows entity, whereas it precedes in derivedByInsertionFrom(d2, d1, {("k1", e3)}). Should this be made uniform? Is it worth the extra effort?

Tom De Nies: 1. (Luc) In the notation hadDictionaryMember(d, e0, "k0"), key follows entity, whereas it precedes in derivedByInsertionFrom(d2, d1, {("k1", e3)}). Should this be made uniform? Is it worth the extra effort? [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:15 <TomDN> Tom: 2. (Luc) http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-n/#extensibility  states: the predicate MUST be a qualifiedName with a non-empty prefix. However, we will be using the prov namespace. How do we proceed?

Tom De Nies: 2. (Luc) http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-n/#extensibility states: the predicate MUST be a qualifiedName with a non-empty prefix. However, we will be using the prov namespace. How do we proceed? [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:17 <TomDN> Tom: 3. (Luc) PROV-O: should qualifiedInsertion and qualifiedRemoval imply qualifiedDerivation? If yes, how do we specify this? Through a sub-property? Does that break anything?

Tom De Nies: 3. (Luc) PROV-O: should qualifiedInsertion and qualifiedRemoval imply qualifiedDerivation? If yes, how do we specify this? Through a sub-property? Does that break anything? [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:19 <TomDN> Tom: 4. (Paolo) PROV-O: clarify delta with REC ontology

Tom De Nies: 4. (Paolo) PROV-O: clarify delta with REC ontology [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:21 <TomDN> Tom: 5. (James) Do we need inference 7 to guarantee completeness when a dictionary is derived by insertions/removals from an empty dictionary?

Tom De Nies: 5. (James) Do we need inference 7 to guarantee completeness when a dictionary is derived by insertions/removals from an empty dictionary? [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:22 <TomDN> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/dictionary/prov-dictionary.html#insertion-removal-membership-inference

Tom De Nies: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/dictionary/prov-dictionary.html#insertion-removal-membership-inference

16:28:24 <TomDN> Tom: 6. Stian has lots of blocking issues, and I haven't had time to address them all.

Tom De Nies: 6. Stian has lots of blocking issues, and I haven't had time to address them all. [ Scribe Assist by Tom De Nies ]

16:28:25 <TomDN> Most are relatively easy to fix or have been fixed already. Most work will be to create the downloadable grammar, ontology and xml schema.

Tom De Nies: Most are relatively easy to fix or have been fixed already. Most work will be to create the downloadable grammar, ontology and xml schema.

16:28:27 <TomDN> Propose we vote for publication as FPWD under the condition that all Stian's blockers are addressed, and that (placeholder) links are placed in the document, where the grammar, ontology and xml schema will become available next week.

Tom De Nies: Propose we vote for publication as FPWD under the condition that all Stian's blockers are addressed, and that (placeholder) links are placed in the document, where the grammar, ontology and xml schema will become available next week.

16:28:28 <stain> q+ To suggest just adding note on the PROV-N namespace/extension for 1WD

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ To suggest just adding note on the PROV-N namespace/extension for 1WD

16:28:40 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy

Paul Groth: Zakim, who is noisy

16:28:40 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is noisy', pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who is noisy', pgroth

16:28:50 <pgroth> Zakim, who is noisy?

Paul Groth: Zakim, who is noisy?

16:29:02 <Zakim> pgroth, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: pgroth (4%), ??P4 (4%)

Zakim IRC Bot: pgroth, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: pgroth (4%), ??P4 (4%)

16:29:07 <Luc> given this is fpwd, grammar/schema/ontology can be released later

Luc Moreau: given this is fpwd, grammar/schema/ontology can be released later

16:29:32 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

16:29:32 <Zakim> stain, you wanted to suggest just adding note on the PROV-N namespace/extension for 1WD

Zakim IRC Bot: stain, you wanted to suggest just adding note on the PROV-N namespace/extension for 1WD

16:29:58 <Curt> stain: Sorry about big list of blockers, but renaming can remain as now, other yellow boxes noting changes would be ok

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Sorry about big list of blockers, but renaming can remain as now, other yellow boxes noting changes would be ok

16:30:27 <Curt> pgroth: Note where discussion is still underway or big changes are to come

Paul Groth: Note where discussion is still underway or big changes are to come

16:30:59 <pgroth> Proposed: Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft

PROPOSED: Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft

16:31:06 <TomDN> +1

Tom De Nies: +1

16:31:06 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

16:31:07 <khalidBelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

16:31:08 <satya> +1

Satya Sahoo: +1

16:31:16 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

16:31:16 <Dong> +1

Trung Huynh: +1

16:31:19 <hook_> +1

Hook Hua: +1

16:31:21 <SamCoppens> +1

Sam Coppens: +1

16:31:26 <TomDN> conditional :)

Tom De Nies: conditional :)

16:31:28 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

16:31:29 <tlebo> +1

Timothy Lebo: +1

16:31:31 <Curt> stain: is FPWD conditional on my blockers?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: is FPWD conditional on my blockers?

16:32:02 <pgroth> Proposed: Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft conditional on addressing or noting blocking issues in the document

PROPOSED: Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft conditional on addressing or noting blocking issues in the document

16:32:03 <Curt> pgroth: they will be addressed or noted

Paul Groth: they will be addressed or noted

16:32:04 <stain> +1

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1

16:32:08 <khalidBelhajjame> +1

Khalid Belhajjame: +1

16:32:09 <Curt> +1

+1

16:32:10 <TomDN> +1

Tom De Nies: +1

16:32:11 <dgarijo> +1

Daniel Garijo: +1

16:32:12 <smiles> +1

Simon Miles: +1

16:32:13 <jcheney> +1

James Cheney: +1

16:32:14 <hook_> +1

Hook Hua: +1

16:32:15 <stain> q-

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q-

16:32:30 <pgroth> Accepted: Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft conditional on addressing or noting blocking issues in the document

RESOLVED: Release Prov-dictionary as first public working draft conditional on addressing or noting blocking issues in the document

16:32:38 <TomDN> and sam :)

Tom De Nies: and sam :)

16:32:55 <pgroth> Topic: PROV-xml

6. PROV-xml

Summary: The status of PROV-XML was discussed. The group primarily had a discussion of which identifier scheme should be used. A key outcome was a set of guidance for selecting approach, namely, that PROV-XML should work well with XML tooling, allow for "scruffy provenance" and be able to link to other prov serializations. The editors agreed to revisit the current solutions at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-XML_Identifiers. The editors requested that comments on the namespace solution be sent to the email list.

<pgroth> Summary: The status of PROV-XML was discussed. The group primarily had a discussion of which identifier scheme should be used. A key outcome was a set of guidance for selecting approach, namely, that PROV-XML should work well with XML tooling, allow for "scruffy provenance" and be able to link to other prov serializations. The editors agreed to revisit the current solutions at  http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-XML_Identifiers. The editors requested that comments on the namespace solution be sent to the email list.
16:32:56 <TomDN> zakim, mute me

Tom De Nies: zakim, mute me

16:32:56 <Zakim> TomDN should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: TomDN should now be muted

16:33:41 <Curt> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-XML_Identifiers

http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/Prov-XML_Identifiers

16:34:19 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

16:34:22 <Curt> hook_: wiki document summarizes options and differences between them

Hook Hua: wiki document summarizes options and differences between them

16:36:03 <Luc> ID is now workable since we can have multiple assertions about a given resource in a same document (whether wihtin a same bundle or different bundles)

Luc Moreau: ID is now workable since we can have multiple assertions about a given resource in a same document (whether wihtin a same bundle or different bundles)

16:36:59 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

16:37:16 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: +[IPcaller]

16:37:55 <zednik> I have joined, sorry for the late arrival

Stephan Zednik: I have joined, sorry for the late arrival

16:38:17 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:38:18 <stain> q+

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+

16:38:23 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:39:23 <pgroth> maybe stephan can respond

Paul Groth: maybe stephan can respond

16:39:28 <Curt> Luc: Why assume we need uniqueness of identifiers, we need to have multiple assertions about a given resource resource in the same document

Luc Moreau: Why assume we need uniqueness of identifiers, we need to have multiple assertions about a given resource resource in the same document

16:40:04 <zednik> q+

Stephan Zednik: q+

16:40:13 <Curt> hook_: We don't have a requirement, but the uniqueness implemented by an XML would be useful, but not a hard requirement

Hook Hua: We don't have a requirement, but the uniqueness implemented by an XML would be useful, but not a hard requirement

16:40:41 <Curt> Luc: if you use xs:ID, it would require uniqueness

Luc Moreau: if you use xs:ID, it would require uniqueness

16:40:43 <pgroth> ack zednik

Paul Groth: ack zednik

16:41:07 <Curt> zednik: looked at how parsers expect the document to act -- they expect identifiers to be unique.

Stephan Zednik: looked at how parsers expect the document to act -- they expect identifiers to be unique.

16:41:22 <Curt> zednik: is this something we desire or do not?

Stephan Zednik: is this something we desire or do not?

16:41:42 <Curt> hook_: ID/IDREF are the normal, recommended ways to handle identifiers

Hook Hua: ID/IDREF are the normal, recommended ways to handle identifiers

16:42:03 <pgroth> ack stain

Paul Groth: ack stain

16:42:19 <Curt> stain: XML identifiers are useful for the external (non provenance) world

Stian Soiland-Reyes: XML identifiers are useful for the external (non provenance) world

16:43:00 <Curt> stain: But for provenance, we need to express certain things

Stian Soiland-Reyes: But for provenance, we need to express certain things

16:43:26 <Luc> good point stian

Luc Moreau: good point stian

16:43:31 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:43:38 <Curt> stain: Do you want to force things to be explicitly identified in that manner?  It isn't required in the other forms

Stian Soiland-Reyes: Do you want to force things to be explicitly identified in that manner? It isn't required in the other forms

16:43:38 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:44:09 <Curt> Luc: We can express a usage between an activity and an entity without declaring them.

Luc Moreau: We can express a usage between an activity and an entity without declaring them.

16:44:35 <Curt> pgroth: we could also use prov:ref?

Paul Groth: we could also use prov:ref?

16:44:35 <stain> also some XML libraries will parse the xml:idref as if the referenced element was actually inserted there - like a symlink

Stian Soiland-Reyes: also some XML libraries will parse the xml:idref as if the referenced element was actually inserted there - like a symlink

16:44:45 <hook_> q+

Hook Hua: q+

16:44:55 <pgroth> ack hook_

Paul Groth: ack hook_

16:44:59 <Zakim> -smiles

Zakim IRC Bot: -smiles

16:45:16 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:45:24 <stain> @pgroth - ah, so you propose a hybrid approach where you could fall back to prov:ref to be 'loose'?

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @pgroth - ah, so you propose a hybrid approach where you could fall back to prov:ref to be 'loose'?

16:45:25 <Curt> hook_: You may want to declare activities/entities without the constraints on ids.  How can we validate the trace without a formal identification?

Hook Hua: You may want to declare activities/entities without the constraints on ids. How can we validate the trace without a formal identification?

16:45:33 <stain> q+ it's not the job of the XML parser to do PROV validation

Stian Soiland-Reyes: q+ it's not the job of the XML parser to do PROV validation

16:45:39 <stain> it's not the job of the XML parser to do PROV validation

Stian Soiland-Reyes: it's not the job of the XML parser to do PROV validation

16:45:57 <Curt> Luc: That is the job of PROV-CONSTRAINTS.

Luc Moreau: That is the job of PROV-CONSTRAINTS.

16:46:40 <Curt> Luc: With constraints, you can infer those things for validity, but we also want to allow "scruffy" provenance

Luc Moreau: With constraints, you can infer those things for validity, but we also want to allow "scruffy" provenance

16:47:16 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aabb

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.731.aabb

16:47:25 <Curt> Luc: With ID, you are making a schema for a 'normal form' of provenance, but we aren't really describing that in the other documents

Luc Moreau: With ID, you are making a schema for a 'normal form' of provenance, but we aren't really describing that in the other documents

16:47:30 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:47:32 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:47:42 <Zakim> + +1.818.731.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: + +1.818.731.aacc

16:48:00 <Curt> stain: You can still use IDs to identify things outside of PROV

Stian Soiland-Reyes: You can still use IDs to identify things outside of PROV

16:48:46 <Curt> zednik: We haven't tried something like that

Stephan Zednik: We haven't tried something like that

16:48:55 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:49:00 <satya> * sorry, have to leave for a meeting

Satya Sahoo: * sorry, have to leave for a meeting

16:49:08 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:49:10 <Zakim> -Satya_Sahoo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Satya_Sahoo

16:49:12 <Curt> pgroth: Some good feedback of the limitations to the approaches -- could you revisit the question?

Paul Groth: Some good feedback of the limitations to the approaches -- could you revisit the question?

16:49:53 <Curt> Luc: There are other options, in the schema we had prov:ref with xsd:QName, we could define them as in prov-n, that would work find with XSD2

Luc Moreau: There are other options, in the schema we had prov:ref with xsd:QName, we could define them as in prov-n, that would work find with XSD2

16:50:12 <Curt> Luc: Consider that other option

Luc Moreau: Consider that other option

16:50:43 <Luc> ---- ex:001

Luc Moreau: ---- ex:001

16:50:51 <Curt> Luc: If we require an identifier to be an xsd:QName, we can't use many URIs

Luc Moreau: If we require an identifier to be an xsd:QName, we can't use many URIs

16:50:53 <stain> some URIs can't be qname - even if you do an xmlns for it - as a qname can't have a 0-length local name

Stian Soiland-Reyes: some URIs can't be qname - even if you do an xmlns for it - as a qname can't have a 0-length local name

16:51:12 <stain> like...  http://example.com/

Stian Soiland-Reyes: like... http://example.com/

16:51:22 <hook_> q+

Hook Hua: q+

16:51:28 <pgroth> ack hook_

Paul Groth: ack hook_

16:52:10 <Curt> hook_: I see the need for "scruffy", the XML community uses ID/IDREF, but is there something we can use that is simple, but also allows scruffy

Hook Hua: I see the need for "scruffy", the XML community uses ID/IDREF, but is there something we can use that is simple, but also allows scruffy

16:52:35 <Curt> hook_: perhaps the XPointers can enable the scruffiness, pointing to non-existent items

Hook Hua: perhaps the XPointers can enable the scruffiness, pointing to non-existent items

16:52:49 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:52:50 <pgroth> q+

Paul Groth: q+

16:53:03 <stain> xpointer can select on anything ("has 3 children"), xpath needs element/id

Stian Soiland-Reyes: xpointer can select on anything ("has 3 children"), xpath needs element/id

16:53:14 <Luc> yes

Luc Moreau: yes

16:53:14 <Curt> pgroth: QNames are widely used in XML community, right?

Paul Groth: QNames are widely used in XML community, right?

16:53:19 <pgroth> ack pgroth

Paul Groth: ack pgroth

16:53:48 <Curt> pgroth: where do we want to go with this?  need a decision soon

Paul Groth: where do we want to go with this? need a decision soon

16:54:20 <Curt> pgroth: Look at other options, come up with rationale for why you think one is the best and we can discuss on the mailing list

Paul Groth: Look at other options, come up with rationale for why you think one is the best and we can discuss on the mailing list

16:54:32 <Curt> pgroth: You are leaning toward ID/IDREF with XPointer?

Paul Groth: You are leaning toward ID/IDREF with XPointer?

16:54:34 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

16:54:50 <Curt> zednik: It fits best with XML community, but difficult constraints for provenance

Stephan Zednik: It fits best with XML community, but difficult constraints for provenance

16:54:57 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

16:55:02 <Curt> hook_: Need to take into account need for scruffy provenance

Hook Hua: Need to take into account need for scruffy provenance

16:55:09 <stain> +1 - the PROV identifiers are like the open-world semantic web identifiers - they don't identify elements in an XML document, but things and activities in the world

Stian Soiland-Reyes: +1 - the PROV identifiers are like the open-world semantic web identifiers - they don't identify elements in an XML document, but things and activities in the world

16:55:41 <Curt> Luc: If I write my provenance in XML, can I use the XPointer to refer to entities in RDF?  Does this require everything to be in XML?

Luc Moreau: If I write my provenance in XML, can I use the XPointer to refer to entities in RDF? Does this require everything to be in XML?

16:56:13 <tlebo> Why would RDF people bother with Xlink and Xpointers?

Timothy Lebo: Why would RDF people bother with Xlink and Xpointers?

16:56:18 <Curt> hook_: Are there implementations of RDF that can use XLink/XPointers?

Hook Hua: Are there implementations of RDF that can use XLink/XPointers?

16:56:23 <zednik> +1 to tlebo

Stephan Zednik: +1 to tlebo

16:56:39 <khalidBelhajjame> +1 to tlebo

Khalid Belhajjame: +1 to tlebo

16:56:43 <zednik> +q

Stephan Zednik: +q

16:56:50 <Curt> pgroth: You have some feedback on identifiers, can you take another look at it and come back with a new proposal or recommendation?

Paul Groth: You have some feedback on identifiers, can you take another look at it and come back with a new proposal or recommendation?

16:56:53 <pgroth> ack zednik

Paul Groth: ack zednik

16:57:23 <Curt> zednik: We can come up with some constraints to drive the search for a solution: "scruffy" must be allowed, must be compatible with PROV-O provenance

Stephan Zednik: We can come up with some constraints to drive the search for a solution: "scruffy" must be allowed, must be compatible with PROV-O provenance

16:57:28 <stain> --- xlink:href can target anything with an URI, not just XML elements - it's just like HTML's <a href> for XML

Stian Soiland-Reyes: --- xlink:href can target anything with an URI, not just XML elements - it's just like HTML's <a href> for XML

16:57:57 <Luc> prov-dm says that qualified names can be mapped to uri

Luc Moreau: prov-dm says that qualified names can be mapped to uri

16:58:03 <Curt> zednik: We'll capture the constraints, which will probably eliminate ID/IDREF

Stephan Zednik: We'll capture the constraints, which will probably eliminate ID/IDREF

16:58:31 <Curt> pgroth: Other constraint is to work well with XML tools

Paul Groth: Other constraint is to work well with XML tools

16:58:49 <Curt> pgroth: There might not be a solution that satisfies all of those, we need a rationale for a choice

Paul Groth: There might not be a solution that satisfies all of those, we need a rationale for a choice

16:58:54 <hook_> q+

Hook Hua: q+

16:59:01 <pgroth> ack hook_

Paul Groth: ack hook_

16:59:04 <stain> @Luc - so there could be two different qnames resulting in same URI - right.  So if this is to be understood by regular XML tools you would have to represent everything as full URIs

Stian Soiland-Reyes: @Luc - so there could be two different qnames resulting in same URI - right. So if this is to be understood by regular XML tools you would have to represent everything as full URIs

16:59:21 <Curt> hook_: Constraints may be mutually exclusive, which is the most important? scruffy?

Hook Hua: Constraints may be mutually exclusive, which is the most important? scruffy?

16:59:43 <Curt> pgroth: We want to enable adoption by the XML community, that should be number 1

Paul Groth: We want to enable adoption by the XML community, that should be number 1

16:59:49 <Luc> @stain yes, it's possible. XML tools don't map them to uris but a prov processor would

Luc Moreau: @stain yes, it's possible. XML tools don't map them to uris but a prov processor would

16:59:51 <stain> I guess the question is how much PROV 'tooling' do we imagine would be purely XML based - like using XPointers to find the activity that made an entity that tihs other entity was derived from

Stian Soiland-Reyes: I guess the question is how much PROV 'tooling' do we imagine would be purely XML based - like using XPointers to find the activity that made an entity that tihs other entity was derived from

16:59:52 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

16:59:58 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

17:00:01 <Curt> pgroth: what do others think about that?

Paul Groth: what do others think about that?

17:00:03 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

17:00:25 <Curt> Luc: We didn't discuss the schema namespace reorg -- I have some questions about that

Luc Moreau: We didn't discuss the schema namespace reorg -- I have some questions about that

17:00:35 <zednik> q+

Stephan Zednik: q+

17:00:44 <Curt> pgroth: Let's discuss the namespace reorg next week

Paul Groth: Let's discuss the namespace reorg next week

17:00:56 <stain> perhaps we can  make more example documents

Stian Soiland-Reyes: perhaps we can make more example documents

17:00:57 <Curt> zednik: Could also put questions on mailing list and also discuss next week

Stephan Zednik: Could also put questions on mailing list and also discuss next week

17:01:09 <Curt> pgroth: Enough guidance for now?

Paul Groth: Enough guidance for now?

17:01:11 <Curt> zednik: yes

Stephan Zednik: yes

17:01:24 <Luc> q+

Luc Moreau: q+

17:01:30 <zednik> q-

Stephan Zednik: q-

17:01:32 <Curt> pgroth: Those are the two big issues: identifiers and namespace?

Paul Groth: Those are the two big issues: identifiers and namespace?

17:01:34 <pgroth> ack zednik

Paul Groth: ack zednik

17:01:36 <pgroth> ack Luc

Paul Groth: ack Luc

17:01:51 <Zakim> -TomDN

Zakim IRC Bot: -TomDN

17:01:53 <Curt> Luc: We haven't resolved the ordering issue, subtyping either

Luc Moreau: We haven't resolved the ordering issue, subtyping either

17:01:54 <zednik> q+

Stephan Zednik: q+

17:01:59 <Curt> Luc: Still several other issues

Luc Moreau: Still several other issues

17:02:01 <pgroth> ack zednik

Paul Groth: ack zednik

17:02:24 <Curt> zednik: Subtyping -- we modified the schema to address that, extending elements with new elements

Stephan Zednik: Subtyping -- we modified the schema to address that, extending elements with new elements

17:03:04 <Luc> @zednik: can you point to this message on primary source?

Luc Moreau: @zednik: can you point to this message on primary source?

17:03:16 <Curt> pgroth: We want to wrap this up, resolving final issues

Paul Groth: We want to wrap this up, resolving final issues

17:03:20 <zednik> @Luc I will look

Stephan Zednik: @Luc I will look

17:03:22 <pgroth> q?

Paul Groth: q?

17:03:28 <Luc> thank

Luc Moreau: thank

17:03:29 <Curt> pgroth: Remember to get in implementation reports

Paul Groth: Remember to get in implementation reports

17:03:32 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo

17:03:35 <dgarijo> bbye

Daniel Garijo: bbye

17:03:36 <Zakim> -TallTed

Zakim IRC Bot: -TallTed

17:03:41 <Dong> thanks, bye

Trung Huynh: thanks, bye

17:03:42 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc

17:03:42 <Zakim> -pgroth

Zakim IRC Bot: -pgroth

17:03:42 <Zakim> -jcheney

Zakim IRC Bot: -jcheney

17:03:47 <pgroth> rrsagent, set log public

Paul Groth: rrsagent, set log public

17:03:49 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller]

17:03:52 <pgroth> rrsagent, draft minutes

Paul Groth: rrsagent, draft minutes

17:03:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-prov-minutes.html pgroth

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-prov-minutes.html pgroth

17:03:56 <pgroth> trackbot, end telcon

Paul Groth: trackbot, end telcon

17:03:56 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees

17:03:56 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Curt_Tilmes, pgroth, Luc, stain, tlebo, dgarijo, TallTed, +1.818.731.aabb, smiles, jcheney, khalidBelhajjame, TomDN, Satya_Sahoo,

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Curt_Tilmes, pgroth, Luc, stain, tlebo, dgarijo, TallTed, +1.818.731.aabb, smiles, jcheney, khalidBelhajjame, TomDN, Satya_Sahoo,

17:03:59 <Zakim> ... SamCoppens, [IPcaller], +1.818.731.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: ... SamCoppens, [IPcaller], +1.818.731.aacc

17:03:59 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes

17:03:59 <Zakim> -??P4

Zakim IRC Bot: -??P4

17:03:59 <Zakim> -stain

Zakim IRC Bot: -stain

17:04:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes

17:04:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-prov-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/01/24-prov-minutes.html trackbot

17:04:05 <Zakim> - +1.818.731.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.818.731.aacc

17:04:05 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye

17:04:05 <RRSAgent> I see no action items

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items



Formatted by CommonScribe